When theists say that God exists independently of the material world, are they saying he's an abstract thing like numbers, words, formulas, concepts, etc? I get this impression when they use presuppositional apologetics. Perhaps I'm wrong. I'm willing to admit that in this case. But if they are saying God is an abstract thing, then I could make this argument:

If something is abstract, then it does not exist apart from the human mind.
God is abstract.
Therefore, God does not exist apart from the human mind.

No?

He wasn't nearly as abstract when we didn't have the technology to explore the whole world and space beyond. This is just moving the goalposts. He's above the clouds. No, he's in space. No, he's in some spiritual plane that can't be accessed from our world. Whatever contortions you have to do to keep religion alive, get to twisting.

Perhaps abstraction IS god

Maybe the universe is god, but we already have a name for it, so why call it god? I believe that's called pantheism, which I don't see much point in.

Some will say God is the ground of all being or the like, and if they really believe that, it's close enough to atheism as makes no difference. I don't think most of the people who argue for an abstract God really believe it, it's just trying to get their foot into the door of reasonability and they're comfortable with just their toe in.

@Tea Er, no. Abstract things CAN, on several views, exist entirely apart from the human mind. The position known as mathematical Platonism alone makes your argument unsound at premise 1.

(January 16, 2014 at 10:46 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: @Tea Er, no. Abstract things CAN, on several views, exist entirely apart from the human mind. The position known as mathematical Platonism alone makes your argument unsound at premise 1.

Can the visions of your "mind's eye" exist apart from your mind? Imagine a box. Now, if you were to die, does that box you imagined still exist?

How does imagination differ from abstract objects? It seems to me that abstract objects are merely products of our imagination that we create to more easily understand the word and achieve things in it.

To a mathematical Platonist, mathematical objects (numbers and such) are not dependent on the human (or any other) mind in order to exist.

(January 17, 2014 at 1:29 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: To a mathematical Platonist, mathematical objects (numbers and such) are not dependent on the human (or any other) mind in order to exist.

And? You gave a statement, not an argument.

That's because mathematical Platonism is a very complex ontological topic which I have neither the patience nor interest in unpacking. Regardless, it does invalidate your premise because you take on a burden of proof of demonstrating premise 1's soundness, which you did not do. And given the existence of a well-developed position in this topic- which is in fact the most popular position on the topic- I have little to no reason to think premise 1 is true in your argument.

And this as someone who is an atheist, mind you.