(October 25, 2019 at 6:17 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(October 24, 2019 at 4:02 pm)mordant Wrote: I never said that "without limits" is either a coherent or real concept; it is simply the god concept that many theists have. Omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenvolent, etc. Their god is fabulized enough so that it can't just be a glorified version of themselves. And yet ... of course, it still is. It is basically what they WISH they could be ... non-contingent, non-dependent, and not lacking for sufficient knowledge and confidence and potency.
So that is the concept I critique.
Hmm although I agree that the idea of "without limits" might represent very lightly the beliefs of many theists, I also think that these are concepts that are very easy to strawman. For example, if you say that if God is without limits, then He should be able to create a square circle, I would say you've created a caricature. I think the infinite and the very large are very difficult for the human mind to comprehend. There are many paradoxes, such as Zeno's arrows, whose premises revolve around infinity, and I don't think that's a coincidence. I think gloves and masks are required when talking about such things, because our minds are not bound by reality and its very easy for them to imagine "square circle" scenarios as if they mapped onto the real world. So I think that even if all the omnis are true and real attributes of a true and real God, it would still be easy either misunderstand or make unrealistic.
That is a fair point.
I can tell you that "the omnis" were true and real so far as I and my compatriots were concerned, when I was a fundagelical. At least in dogmatic, theological terms. But in everyday real life, we were still obliged to function, and it can be argued that we did not live 100% according to our beliefs. We might have SAID god is immutable and unchanging, yet we prayed to him to change what was clearly his mind on certain issues (e.g., "you are to have fatal cancer for no particular reason you are aware of"). We might have SAID god is omnipresent and omniscient, yet we would inform him of our needs as if he wasn't already aware of them. We might have SAID god was omnipotent and omnibenevolent and blesses the righteous (= "us") and yet we resorted to doctors and various best practices like safe driving because "god helps those who help themselves".
So if our positions were easy to ridicule perhaps it is because we took them, at least theoretically, to ridiculous ends that we ourselves didn't fully embrace or believe. And because it could not be empirically shown that we lived more fortunate, salubrious, or charmed lives compared to random controls.
