Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
July 18, 2011 at 2:56 pm (This post was last modified: July 18, 2011 at 2:58 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(July 18, 2011 at 12:34 pm)Godschild Wrote: God is far beyond our understanding, if He wasn't then He would not be God,
Can't possibly know, therefore there is no reason to call anything god.
Even more so, since calling anything god by that definition would automatically preclude the caller from understanding what he is calling even if what he is calling is as easily understood as the concept of "bullshit". But I suppose that is precisely why theists are eager to make noises about "god".
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(July 18, 2011 at 2:45 pm)Judas BentHer Wrote: If god is beyond our understanding, then no thing written by lesser damned by his will being could ever comprehend a god's revelations. Thus there is no choosing to relate to that which is beyond our limited mortal intellect. Divine Simplicity; god dumbing itself down so as to relate to the people he created damned from birth and then elects to save from himself, if only they believe that hand out is evidence of his love. Which is impossible because he's beyond our understanding.
I do love it when they do this and they only seem to say this when the debate about God's existence gets into defining his character. Otherwise, they will fully claim to not only know the will of God, but to be living examples of it.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
July 18, 2011 at 9:09 pm (This post was last modified: July 18, 2011 at 9:32 pm by Trog31.)
(July 18, 2011 at 12:34 pm)Godschild Wrote: You are correct in saying God does not change and that His plan does not change, you miss the point though, God is perfect and thus His plan is perfect so there is no need of change. As for your map analogy you again have missed the mark, true a map is a guide but it takes some intellegence to understand the map, one also must be conscious of how a map works and have the will to us it. The complexity of the map has nothiing to do with how it is preceived, a complex map is a complex map and it is complex because it's designer made it that way, if the designer gives enough instruction to go with said map then the complexity becomes manageable for all that have the will to accept it and learn, thus having less problems following the map to one's finial destination. God therefore is more complex than the one desiring to follow His plan and he will take on the attributes of God so he can successfully follow the plan, therefore the relationship he has with God can be as simple or as complex as he desires. God is far beyond our understanding, if He wasn't then He would not be God, therefore God has revealed himself in a manner that everyone can relate to if they choose to do so, this revelation of God to man is called "divine simplicity."
Hmmm I don't think I communicated very clearly.
Try this:
The terms "Simple" and "Complex" are subjective.
They make a statement about the OBSERVER and not the OBJECT
For example: An internal combustion engine is viewed by
two people. The first one sees it as extremely complex and unknowable
The second one sees it as a simple device easily broken down and rebuilt.
The object itself has not changed, doesn't require anything magical or a divine will
You made my point exactly when you said "God is far beyond our understanding,
if He wasn't then He would not be God" God is beyond YOUR understanding
and that's why you attribute what you do to him, but how you see YOUR god
is unique to YOUR perception of him, just like the engine.
Something isn't complex because god made it that way, it's complex because
you SEE it that way. God doesn't need to be involved at all.
If you see the universe as complex, that's your PERCEPTION
it has nothing to do with the actual thing and it certainly doesn't infer a need for an
omniscient consciousness.
Because YOU see something as complex doesn't confer any meaning whatsoever to
what you are looking at.
If I look at the universe and say "It's so simple" what need is there for God?
You are correct in saying God does not change and that His plan does not change, you miss the point though, God is perfect and thus His plan is perfect so there is no need of change. As for your map analogy you again have missed the mark, true a map is a guide but it takes some intellegence to understand the map, one also must be conscious of how a map works and have the will to us it. The complexity of the map has nothiing to do with how it is preceived, a complex map is a complex map and it is complex because it's designer made it that way, if the designer gives enough instruction to go with said map then the complexity becomes manageable for all that have the will to accept it and learn, thus having less problems following the map to one's finial destination. God therefore is more complex than the one desiring to follow His plan and he will take on the attributes of God so he can successfully follow the plan, therefore the relationship he has with God can be as simple or as complex as he desires. God is far beyond our understanding, if He wasn't then He would not be God, therefore God has revealed himself in a manner that everyone can relate to if they choose to do so, this revelation of God to man is called "divine simplicity."
Hmmm I don't think I communicated very clearly.
Try this:
The terms "Simple" and "Complex" are subjective.
They make a statement about the OBSERVER and not the OBJECT
For example: An internal combustion engine is viewed by
two people. The first one sees it as extremely complex and unknowable
The second one sees it as a simple device easily broken down and rebuilt.
The object itself has not changed, doesn't require anything magical or a divine will
You made my point exactly when you said "God is far beyond our understanding,
if He wasn't then He would not be God" God is beyond YOUR understanding
and that's why you attribute what you do to him, but how you see YOUR god
is unique to YOUR perception of him, just like the engine.
Something isn't complex because god made it that way, it's complex because
you SEE it that way. God doesn't need to be involved at all.
If you see the universe as complex, that's your PERCEPTION
it has nothing to do with the actual thing and it certainly doesn't infer a need for an
omniscient consciousness.
Because YOU see something as complex doesn't confer any meaning whatsoever to
what you are looking at.
If I look at the universe and say "It's so simple" what need is there for God?
If you look at the universe and say "it's so simple," then one need for God would be to show you how crazy you are. I do see the universe as complex and I bet I'm not the only one, yes it has everything to do with the actual thing (universe), the universe is extremely complex even if you do not believe it is, your perception of the universe makes it no less complex. God is complex because He is omniscient,omnipresent and omnipotent and yet it is through these that we are able to see and understand God and His plan, that is of coarse what our finite minds can perceive. You are actually proof that God is complex, you deny what you can not understand, you reject the divine simplicity of because you think it is to simple. God has not tried to hide Himself from you, me or anyone yet so many do not see Him, maybe it's because they are looking for something more than simplicity, I don't know, that is just the way it looks to me.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
(July 19, 2011 at 3:06 am)Godschild Wrote: If you look at the universe and say "it's so simple," then one need for God would be to show you how crazy you are. I do see the universe as complex and I bet I'm not the only one, yes it has everything to do with the actual thing (universe), the universe is extremely complex even if you do not believe it is, your perception of the universe makes it no less complex.
OK so because I do not see what you see I am crazy
and becasue you do not see what I see you are sane.
If a million people believe something, does that make it truth?
Truth is objective. Belief is subjective
(July 19, 2011 at 3:06 am)Godschild Wrote: God is complex because He is omniscient,omnipresent and omnipotent and yet it is through these that we are able to see and understand God and His plan, that is of coarse what our finite minds can perceive. You are actually proof that God is complex, you deny what you can not understand, you reject the divine simplicity of because you think it is to simple. God has not tried to hide Himself from you, me or anyone yet so many do not see Him, maybe it's because they are looking for something more than simplicity, I don't know, that is just the way it looks to me.
You BELIEVE he is omniscient, and omni-everything but that does not make it true.
I think you contradict yourself when you say that we are able to see and understand God
and his plan (what our finite minds can perceive). If God's plan is infinitely complex and
impossible to understand, ANY finite knowledge (no matter how vast) would amount to nothing.
To presume you understand ANYTHING about an infinitely complex being and plan is folly
I agree with your last statement "I don't know..."
Preceisely what I said- It is the way you see it, and others see it differently.
You see the universe as complex and insist that is the reason for god.
I do not see the universe as complex and therefore I do not see the reason for god
Because something is impossible for you, does not mean it is impossible for everyone.
To presuppose something (X is complex because I cannot understand it)
and then use that supposition to validate a claim (I cannot understand X therefore there must be
an infinite being) does nothing to support your position because the corollary
is just as true (X is not complex because I can understand it and therefore
there is no infinite being necessary for X to exist)
Quote:I do see the universe as complex and I bet I'm not the only one
So what? Argumentum ad populum (argument by consensus) a common logical fallacy much loved by apologists.
Perhaps I've misunderstood. .IE Trog argues there is no such thing as objective complexity, that the notion is relative. You argue the the contra position (?)
I agree with Trog in principle. However, I think that a god with the infinite attributes of the Abrahamic god cannot even be discussed in any meaningful way. That is not to say that ANY god may not be described or discussed. Eg the ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans had no trouble. After all,there is as much credible evidence (ie none) for the existence of say Osiris, Zeus and Deus Sol Invictus as there is for YHWH.
Quote:I do see the universe as complex and I bet I'm not the only one
So what? Argumentum ad populum (argument by consensus) a common logical fallacy much loved by apologists.
Perhaps I've misunderstood. .IE Trog argues there is no such thing as objective complexity, that the notion is relative. You argue the the contra position (?)
I agree with Trog in principle. However, I think that a god with the infinite attributes of the Abrahamic god cannot even be discussed in any meaningful way. That is not to say that ANY god may not be described or discussed. Eg the ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans had no trouble. After all,there is as much credible evidence (ie none) for the existence of say Osiris, Zeus and Deus Sol Invictus as there is for YHWH.
The statement I put in red seems to be discussed quite a bit, if there is no real understanding of God then how is it there is an entire book written about Him over many centuries by many different authors. Are you saying there is no such thing as divine simplicity or that God is to complex for one to understand or both. I understand God, not because I have the ability to understand an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent being, but because He being those things can give me an understanding of Himself, thus the complexity of God is made divinely simplistic for us because He is so complex.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Quote:I do see the universe as complex and I bet I'm not the only one
So what? Argumentum ad populum (argument by consensus) a common logical fallacy much loved by apologists.
Perhaps I've misunderstood. .IE Trog argues there is no such thing as objective complexity, that the notion is relative. You argue the the contra position (?)
I agree with Trog in principle. However, I think that a god with the infinite attributes of the Abrahamic god cannot even be discussed in any meaningful way. That is not to say that ANY god may not be described or discussed. Eg the ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans had no trouble. After all,there is as much credible evidence (ie none) for the existence of say Osiris, Zeus and Deus Sol Invictus as there is for YHWH.
True enough. If you ascribe infinite "anything" to a being then no finite knowledge about that quality
is meaningful (as I said earlier)
That the universe is not infinite and follows specific rules that can be understood by finite beings, flies in the face
that a perfect and infinite being created it. My point was simply to say that using a personal perception as
a proof or disproof of god has no value. The only thing that can be ascribed to personal perception is belief.
Truth is proveable but not always believable.
other gods besides Yahweh were never ascibed "infinite" qualities and so they didn't have the problem of requiring
conformity to perfection. The problem with a perfect being is that all qualities are equally valid - even the contradictory ones.
Perfectly Complex and Perfectly Simple. Perfectly Good and Perfectly Evil, Perfectly Just and Perfectly Cruel etc etc.
To be less than perfect in any quality violates the definition of "perfect being".
The abrahamatic followers thought they were resolving the "my gods bigger than your god" problem by making theirs
perfect, but that puts it into a nasty hornet's nest of absurd qualities.
July 19, 2011 at 6:53 am (This post was last modified: July 19, 2011 at 8:06 am by Anomalocaris.)
Just to give the prepetrators of walls of bullshit text about complexity of god a lifeline with which they might conceivably pull their rambling closer to respectability, let me point out that complexity is as quantifiable as mass and energy, and is therefore fundamentally not subjective. If something is indeed infinitely complex, then a very large magnitude of complexity for it ought to be measurable for some detectable part of that thing, and firm indication that the measured complexity will get inexorably larger still if we were to expand the measurement to include other parts. Will they take the lifeline?
