(February 7, 2018 at 9:57 pm)Cyberman Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 9:37 pm)SteveII Wrote: If God exists, he does so necessarily (as in could not have been otherwise). Because of this, it makes no sense to ask what it the explanation of God. Either he always did exist or he does not. The question is: are there reasons to think that God does exist? I gave three categories of reasons. Incontrovertible proof? No. Reasons? Yes.

You're palming a card here. You went from 'if "God" exists then it must exist' to 'if "God" must exist then it does exist' without so much as a pause for breath.

What is the justification for entertaining the concept at all? Btonze- and Iron-age man lacked our understanding of the nature of reality and our tools to investigate it, at least to the degree that we can. They can be forgiven for seeing gods, demons, spirits etc in every shadow and every tree. We haven't had the luxury of such an excuse for the last couple of centuries.

Not so. Your first sentence summarized the Ontological Argument. That's hard to understand so I don't bring it up. I don't think anything in the referenced post claims that God must exist. I was making the point that if he does, he needs no explanation. 

Justification? I outlined the reasons I have. Others would have had a different set of reasons since the beginning of humans. Regarding Jesus, even an iron-age man knows when someone heals the lame, raises the dead, walks on water, and is crucified, buried, and rises again. When you see that, one should pay attention to the message. Regarding today, personal experience and witnessing/believing the testimony of others is probably the single most powerful reason for belief.

(February 7, 2018 at 10:19 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 9:40 pm)Grandizer Wrote: And if the universe/cosmos exists, it does so necessarily (it could not have been otherwise, especially if we include multiverses in the picture). We have clear evidence the universe exists. God, on the other hand, we have virtually nil evidence of.

Inductive arguments, by the way, doesn't mean you can invoke entities out of nowhere.

No, there is no logical reason that the physical universe/cosmos/multiverse exists necessarily.

This is simply not true at all.   Quite the opposite, in fact.  The universe existing necessarily is the only logical explanation, IMO.

Quote:Necessarily' means "could not have been otherwise".

correct.

Quote:We can all conceive of a state of affairs (a possible world) where nothing at all exists

We could conceive of that world, sure. But it wouldn’t be nothing. Nothing cannot “be”, or, “have been” any type of world, or any kind of thing, lol. Absolute nothingness is a logically incoherent concept, try as we might.  Any “state of affairs” would not be nothing.  It would be some kind of state...with affairs.  ‘Absolute nothing’, is simply an expression of the human mind attempting to comprehend, ‘not any of this’.  

Quote:Since we can conceive of both possible worlds as being broadly logically possible

We may instinctively attempt to conceive of “nothing” as a way to maintain logical continuity within this ‘cause and effect’ type of experience we’re used to, but “nothing”, described as any kind of thing, is by definition something, not nothing. And, non-existence, by definition, cannot exist.

Ya’ll get any of that? 😝

(February 7, 2018 at 10:40 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 9:57 pm)Cyberman Wrote: You're palming a card here. You went from 'if "God" exists then it must exist' to 'if "God" must exist then it does exist' without so much as a pause for breath.

What is the justification for entertaining the concept at all? Btonze- and Iron-age man lacked our understanding of the nature of reality and our tools to investigate it, at least to the degree that we can. They can be forgiven for seeing gods, demons, spirits etc in every shadow and every tree. We haven't had the luxury of such an excuse for the last couple of centuries.

Not so. Your first sentence summarized the Ontological Argument. That's hard to understand so I don't bring it up. I don't think anything in the referenced post claims that God must exist. I was making the point that if he does, he needs no explanation.

The Modal Ontological Argument is a bit tricky to grasp at the start, but once you understand what the argument really is saying, you realize it's just a vacant argument that says nothing about whether God actually/likely exists or not. All it is is that if God is possible, then he must exist. Valid argument, but empty as fuck.

It's like arguing for the proof of a mathematical conjecture by saying that if such a conjecture is possibly true, then it is necessarily true, because it can't be true in one possible world while false in another. But that's not how proofs are done in the realm of mathematics.

(February 7, 2018 at 10:27 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 10:19 pm)SteveII Wrote: No, there is no logical reason that the physical universe/cosmos/multiverse exists necessarily. 'Necessarily' means "could not have been otherwise". We can all conceive of a state of affairs (a possible world) where nothing at all exists and another state of affairs where they do.

And yet I can conceive of God not existing in one possible world yet existing in another. So that's not how you argue against metaphysical necessity of an entity.

Suppose the cosmos is all that there can possibly be, with all possibilities actualized (via multiple universes and multiverses), then going with modal logic, there is no possible world where such a cosmos is not a thing.

Enough special pleading.

You are conceiving a logical contradiction. If God exists in one possible world, then he exists in all possible worlds. If he fails to exist in one possible world, he does not exist in any possible worlds. These are two sets that are bound together by logic. All or nothing. You can't mix them without creating a contradiction. That's why I phrased it "If God exists, he exists necessarily". 

Regarding your cosmos, we can still logically conceive of a possible world where there is not anything. It is logically compatible with a possible world where it does exist. Therefore the cosmos is not a necessary entity (if it does exist it could not have failed to exist).

(February 7, 2018 at 4:46 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 4:44 pm)Cyberman Wrote: How do you know what jesus did?

I believe the people who wrote about it.

Jerk.

(February 7, 2018 at 10:54 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 10:27 pm)Grandizer Wrote: And yet I can conceive of God not existing in one possible world yet existing in another. So that's not how you argue against metaphysical necessity of an entity.

Suppose the cosmos is all that there can possibly be, with all possibilities actualized (via multiple universes and multiverses), then going with modal logic, there is no possible world where such a cosmos is not a thing.

Enough special pleading.

You are conceiving a logical contradiction. If God exists in one possible world, then he exists in all possible worlds. If he fails to exist in one possible world, he does not exist in any possible worlds. These are two sets that are bound together by logic. All or nothing. You can't mix them without creating a contradiction. That's why I phrased it "If God exists, he exists necessarily". 

Regarding your cosmos, we can still logically conceive of a possible world where there is not anything. It is logically compatible with a possible world where it does exist. Therefore the cosmos is not a necessary entity (if it does exist it could not have failed to exist).

And yet you yourself are conceiving a logical contradiction. I'll refer you to LadyForCamus's response for this one.

(February 7, 2018 at 10:48 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: We may instinctively attempt to conceive of “nothing” as a way to maintain logical continuity within this ‘cause and effect’ type of existence we’re used to, but “nothing”, described as any kind of thing, is by definition, something, not nothing.

Ya’ll get any of that? 😝

Yes it's simple, nothing is not a thing and therefore is not a possible state of affairs. nothing is not an alternative to something.

(February 7, 2018 at 11:24 pm)possibletarian Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 10:48 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: We may instinctively attempt to conceive of “nothing” as a way to maintain logical continuity within this ‘cause and effect’ type of existence we’re used to, but “nothing”, described as any kind of thing, is by definition, something, not nothing.

Ya’ll get any of that?  😝

Yes it's simple, nothing is not a thing and therefore is not a possible state of affairs. nothing is not an alternative to something.

 
Roo-bear gets it.  ❤️

(February 7, 2018 at 10:19 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 9:40 pm)Grandizer Wrote: And if the universe/cosmos exists, it does so necessarily (it could not have been otherwise, especially if we include multiverses in the picture). We have clear evidence the universe exists. God, on the other hand, we have virtually nil evidence of.

Inductive arguments, by the way, doesn't mean you can invoke entities out of nowhere.

No, there is no logical reason that the physical universe/cosmos/multiverse exists necessarily. 

Then there's no logical reason that the physical universe/cosmos/multiverse exists necessarily.  What's the problem?

(February 7, 2018 at 1:21 pm)possibletarian Wrote:

(February 7, 2018 at 1:23 am)Godscreated Wrote: I know the reality of the God of the Bible, He has proved Himself to me in unique ways, ways I know you want accept, but then they were meant for me.

So in your mind then, unless you can show otherwise

In my mind and soul/heart. I do not have to prove God to you, God hasn't ever called anyone to do so, it is God's job to show you He is real, it's up to you to desire this.

Quote:I'm not stupid I know you don't, but what you believe doesn't change a thing, God is real. If they/you didn't have a problem then why would you even bother talking to Christians. Denial can be a powerful thing, something that usually leads to bad things no matter the subject. Besides not believing in something is still a belief system.

pt Wrote:Denial in what exactly ? you are not showing evidence of anything to deny.
To not believe in some cannot be a belief system that's just utterly stupid.

God of coarse. I haven't the evidence you require, God isn't going to give you physical evidence either. He will give you the evidence you need if you want it.

Clever with the words as atheist like to do to skirt around the subject. Let's say this, your belief is that God is not real, thus a belief system, small and unfounded but a belief ststem nevertheless.

Quote:Prove it's just in my mind, this is a claim I here from atheist all the time and yet none have given an ounce of proof. Generally when a great change comes over someone there is someone behind that change.

pt Wrote:Have you any evidence that it is anything other than in your own mind ?  It's not a claim atheists make it's a default stance when people say they believe in invisible untestable things.  Just like when people see ghosts, flying pigs, unicorns, and believe in a multitude of other gods.

Yes plenty, as I've said God has given me much evidence of His reality and as I said it was meant for me because I asked. Oh yes it is a claim. I do not know anyone who has seen those things or claimed they have.

pt Wrote:What would your default position be if someone said they had invisible, unprovable unicorns in their back garden, but that you couldn't prove they were just in his mind, and you hadn't provided a shred of evidence. ?  You can apply that kind of stupidity to anything.

I haven't said anything close to that and what you posted above is what's stupid. You and the other atheist here like to play the if game, it's a waste of time because it's not something likely to happen to anyone. I will say this though how do you know an invisible unicorn is in your back yard if you haven't seen it, invisible things are difficult for anyone to see.

Quote:  I want even bother trying to explain to you what hard things can come into a Christians life. I will say this to you, we have God almighty to lean on when troubles over whelm us.

pt Wrote:And also people who don't believe manage through troubles, your life looks exactly like you believe there is a god, but in fact there simply is not a god.

I used to believe with the fervour you now do, but truly, it's simply not real I was duped just as you are being duped now.

  Yeah, like many here do, going to psychiatrist who have different answers for different people, saying what ever might fit the time and situation. You are calling on that belief system again by claiming you know there's no God, and yet you haven't provided one ounce of evidence there's not one. 

 You never believed as I do, if you had you would not deny the living God. Guess what no one duped me or even tried to get me to believe, I came to it because God called me. Oh yes I was taken to church as a child but no one ever pressured me into believing. The delusion you live with is that your belief system is right and you have no proof it's right, neither physical or spiritual.

GC