Strong atheism attempts to logically demonstrate God cannot exist. Here by God I refer to the God of Bible and Quran, et all, the God of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Mormonism etc. The God that is derived from supposed revelations from God, that supposedly gives us trustworthy revelations about the nature and the attributes of God. Basically this God is supposedly omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and creator of this material Universe.
Omnigenesis is a name I have created to label this argument. It means creator of all, not just creating the Universe, but all specific events that take place in this material Universe. Each specific event to its smallest part.
If God contemplates creating the Universe, God must choose a specific initial state of creation she will use. A Universe cannot be created without doing so. From any given starting point the actual Universe is created from, God, being perfectly omniscient, will know the future in perfect detail, A claim that is standard theology and is part of many Christian denominations creeds and catechisms.
Because of God's perfect knowledge of the future, God's choice of an initial state of creation entails, perfect knowledge of the future which entails that the nature of the Universe is deterministic in the hardest sense of that word. A state of determinancy means no sentient being created by God in this Universe can have free will even in principle. Each act or thought of any possible sentient being is determined solely by God's choice of an initial state of creation by God, who makes all choices, personally and purposefully.
If God so creates a world and then decides to modify this creation and change simply is effectively a new initial starting point of a new creation and omnigenesis obtains, whether God does this once a century or a billion times a second
Thus all acts of moral evil in the Universe are God's choice and creation and only God's creation.
But God is defined as being good, totally good and absolutely good. But God creates all moral evil and thus is not good.
Contradiction. The OEC omni-everything creator God is logically self contradictory and impossible.
It is sometimes argued that we cannot understand good in this context, good maybe something complex in ways we cannot understand. This is not true. God has sub-goodnesses specifically referred to in Bible and Quran. God IS righteous, God IS just, God IS compassionate, God IS merciful. If God creates Jane to be a saintly person who will spend eternity in heaven in eternal bliss, but creates John as a rapist and murderer, damned to eternal torment, God is obviously not just, nor compassionate, nor merciful. If God does not have all sub-goodnesses, God is not as defined, good in any way.
Compatibilism. It is often said that we can have free will and yet God can still know the future, this is called compatibilism.
But obviously, if God is personally and purposefully for all actions and acts that happen, we have no free will,compatibilism cannot logically exist.
Omnigenesis as an proposition demonstrates God as defined by Bible, Quran et al as creator and omniscient is logically impossible. Omnigenesis eliminates all theodicies. Greater Good theodicies, Soul Building theodicies, Perfect World theodicies and more.
Thus the atheist may safely conclude that the class of OEC gods is logically impossible, and all religions that supposedly by trustworthy revelations tell us God is perfectly good,perfectly omniscient and creator of all are also false.
There are dogmatic claims to be found in Bible and Quran, God predetermines all, makes us either elect or reprobate, foreknows all, leads who Allah will lead and leads astray who he will lead astray etc.
But Omnigenesis cuts deeper, its takes top level attributes, creation of all and omniscience , knowing the future in full details, is all we need to demonstrate God logically as defined is impossible and self contradictory as a concept.
To counter this argument all that can be done is to abandoning standard claims of omniscience but doing that is abandoning revelation and abandon 2 millennium of dogmas, implying that all claims of revelation may likewise be suspect and need demonstration of being true, rather then relying on mere claims of revelation or inspiration or being claimed to be trustworthy by centuries of supposed religious authorities. All religious dogmas are suspect until strongly demonstrated correct and the burden of proof is on the theists to do that
William C. Barwell 10-21-2013
Omnigenesis is a name I have created to label this argument. It means creator of all, not just creating the Universe, but all specific events that take place in this material Universe. Each specific event to its smallest part.
If God contemplates creating the Universe, God must choose a specific initial state of creation she will use. A Universe cannot be created without doing so. From any given starting point the actual Universe is created from, God, being perfectly omniscient, will know the future in perfect detail, A claim that is standard theology and is part of many Christian denominations creeds and catechisms.
Because of God's perfect knowledge of the future, God's choice of an initial state of creation entails, perfect knowledge of the future which entails that the nature of the Universe is deterministic in the hardest sense of that word. A state of determinancy means no sentient being created by God in this Universe can have free will even in principle. Each act or thought of any possible sentient being is determined solely by God's choice of an initial state of creation by God, who makes all choices, personally and purposefully.
If God so creates a world and then decides to modify this creation and change simply is effectively a new initial starting point of a new creation and omnigenesis obtains, whether God does this once a century or a billion times a second
Thus all acts of moral evil in the Universe are God's choice and creation and only God's creation.
But God is defined as being good, totally good and absolutely good. But God creates all moral evil and thus is not good.
Contradiction. The OEC omni-everything creator God is logically self contradictory and impossible.
It is sometimes argued that we cannot understand good in this context, good maybe something complex in ways we cannot understand. This is not true. God has sub-goodnesses specifically referred to in Bible and Quran. God IS righteous, God IS just, God IS compassionate, God IS merciful. If God creates Jane to be a saintly person who will spend eternity in heaven in eternal bliss, but creates John as a rapist and murderer, damned to eternal torment, God is obviously not just, nor compassionate, nor merciful. If God does not have all sub-goodnesses, God is not as defined, good in any way.
Compatibilism. It is often said that we can have free will and yet God can still know the future, this is called compatibilism.
But obviously, if God is personally and purposefully for all actions and acts that happen, we have no free will,compatibilism cannot logically exist.
Omnigenesis as an proposition demonstrates God as defined by Bible, Quran et al as creator and omniscient is logically impossible. Omnigenesis eliminates all theodicies. Greater Good theodicies, Soul Building theodicies, Perfect World theodicies and more.
Thus the atheist may safely conclude that the class of OEC gods is logically impossible, and all religions that supposedly by trustworthy revelations tell us God is perfectly good,perfectly omniscient and creator of all are also false.
There are dogmatic claims to be found in Bible and Quran, God predetermines all, makes us either elect or reprobate, foreknows all, leads who Allah will lead and leads astray who he will lead astray etc.
But Omnigenesis cuts deeper, its takes top level attributes, creation of all and omniscience , knowing the future in full details, is all we need to demonstrate God logically as defined is impossible and self contradictory as a concept.
To counter this argument all that can be done is to abandoning standard claims of omniscience but doing that is abandoning revelation and abandon 2 millennium of dogmas, implying that all claims of revelation may likewise be suspect and need demonstration of being true, rather then relying on mere claims of revelation or inspiration or being claimed to be trustworthy by centuries of supposed religious authorities. All religious dogmas are suspect until strongly demonstrated correct and the burden of proof is on the theists to do that
William C. Barwell 10-21-2013
Cheerful Charlie
If I saw a man beating a tied up dog, I couldn't prove it was wrong, but I'd know it was wrong.
- Attributed to Mark Twain
If I saw a man beating a tied up dog, I couldn't prove it was wrong, but I'd know it was wrong.
- Attributed to Mark Twain
![[Image: book_5035.jpg&w=300&h=451]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.newreleasetuesday.com%2Fthum_creater%2FphpThumb.php%3Fsrc%3D..%2Fimages%2Fbooks_img%2Fbook_5035.jpg%26amp%3Bw%3D300%26amp%3Bh%3D451)
