|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 14:33:05 [Permalink]
|
Before discussing one true god, one true religion, you should establish that there is a god or gods in the first place. Otherwise the discussion is a non-starter. Dude already asked this a few posts up, but this is very important and needs to be addressed.
I do not think this can be established logically. But I would love to be shown that I'm wrong. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 02/16/2008 14:34:02 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 02/16/2008 : 15:29:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Varius
In the conversation Socrates denounces the worship of the Greek gods on the bases that if multiple gods such as Zeus and Apollo did exist we would see the conflict of their attempts to get mortals to worship them all around us. |
Sure. The Greek gods had such foibles that it should be obvious if they exist. And all other gods that humans have named and defined have similar faults such that if they did once exist, they don't seem to anymore.
None of this, of course, disproves the existence of any god which doesn't have these quirks. But by largely being undetectable, how would anyone know that they've found the "one True god?" |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 20:04:36 [Permalink]
|
| You never see God(s). That leaves two basic possibilities, either there are no God(s) or she/they are undetectable. So using logic you cannot prove if there is 1 God, 43 Gods, infintiy Gods or no Gods. |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Varius
New Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 20:09:29 [Permalink]
|
| [This assumes that they actually care if they have worshipers. It certainly doesn't apply to any god who is apathetic in this aspect. |
As far as I can tell if the Greek gods were in fact the one true gods and that Homer along with the other classic Greek poet's depiction of these gods were correct then I would have to say that yes they would care if they had worshipers due to the fact as Dave points out | [“Sure. The Greek gods had such foibles that it should be obvious if they exist. And all other gods that humans have named and defined have similar faults such that if they did once exist, they don't seem to anymore. |
Examples would include Apollo making fun of Zeus because he had more worshipers than any of other gods or Dianna making the life of one human difficult just to get back at the other and so on and so on.
| [You seem so convinced that we would actually be able to see gods fighting. Why is this so? |
In some cases if the Greek gods were real I don't think I would be able to see them fighting because they would exist on a higher level and plane that my limited ability would not be able to comprehend. However, as I stated before I would believe that such gods as motioned before would indeed make themselves know to men and women just for the seer fact of competing with the other gods.
| [Before discussing one true god, one true religion, you should establish that there is a god or gods in the first place. Otherwise the discussion is a non-starter. Dude already asked this a few posts up, but this is very important and needs to be addressed. |
I don't really want to establish a one true God at this time because I am trying to be as non bias as possible. This is only an assumption on my part and I will ask the question for I may be wrong ,but to take at least a few steps in an attempt to find some light is worth it in my opinion.
The previous conversations have showed so far that if there is a supreme being their can be only one God and not many gods or goddess (unless some one wants to add more to the argument if so I would love to talk about it and look further). If their was indeed one true God wouldn't He or for that matter She show us some evidence that they are the one true God seeing that we are the most intelligent things on the earth?
So for instance lets say that we put away all science along with personal bias for a moment and just think on the concept in the same way that we would with advanced math for example: Much of advanced math is done by the concept or idea ( the logic behind it) and is latter proved or is used to solve a problem before it is every used to relate to that problem. And this is why I want help from skeptics such as you because I am only one man and make mistakes as we all do but I think thou I may not be sure that If we can use the concept of what a true God would be if their was we could eliminate multiple factors. I may be on to something with this thought of pure logic or reason but who knows I may be full of it and be a complete idiot with too much time to think on my hands.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 20:44:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Varius
The previous conversations have showed so far that if there is a supreme being their can be only one God and not many gods or goddess (unless some one wants to add more to the argument if so I would love to talk about it and look further). |
You missed my point. The Greek gods are but one set of examples of how gods might act. Yes, they were interested (to some extent) in one-upping each other for number of worshippers, but because they don't exist doesn't mean that some other large group of gods who don't compete for worshippers doesn't exist. The Norse gods don't seem to have given a damn about how many people worshipped them, but they had other problems.
Here: there are five gods - Alex, Barb, Charlie, Dale and Evan - who created humans by tweaking primate DNA towards intelligence, and now use us humans as playthings in a game in which only they, the gods, know all the rules. If we humans pick one of them - let's pick Charlie for example - and help her reach her goal in the game (whatever it is), she will reward us after our death in some unknown way. Simply worshipping the one you pick will not suffice, as their goals are far more complex than simple-minded obedience (they don't really care, anyway, as they don't have human-like egos that need stroking). I also happen to know that per the rules of their game (Charlie revealed this knowledge to me) they are each allowed to "inspire" one person per lunar month by "implanting" thoughts of some sort or another (sometimes they go too far with someone who isn't ready and it results in psychosis). And they spend the rest of their time generally laughing amongst themselves about the horrible things we do to each other.
Can you logically disprove the existence of these many gods (the Alphabet Gods - AGs) in favor of a single god? Everything about the AGs comports well with reality as we can measure it, unlike the Greek gods (who should be royally pissed at all us non-believers) or the Norse Gods (whose snake is nowhere to be found). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Varius
New Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 21:01:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by furshur
You never see God(s). That leaves two basic possibilities, either there are no God(s) or she/they are undetectable. So using logic you cannot prove if there is 1 God, 43 Gods, infintiy Gods or no Gods.
|
Thanks furshur you sparked an idea about a commit that I had forgotten that may help prove my point.  I tried to find the quote for this statement and who it came from it was in one of my philosophy books but I couldn't find it so I will just use the base of what was said to give light to the argument mentioned above. You can conceive the largest mathematical number last time I checked it was a one followed by 100 thousand zeros but it never stops you can constantly think of a new number, the argument goes on to say is it odd or even and this is the point that I want to make to this statement the largest number is theoretically undetectable because we can constantly add one to it however we have prove that it does indeed exist in theory even though it is infanite. maybe it can be said of a God as well? If we applied logic Don't know just a thought. |
|
|
|
Varius
New Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 21:10:28 [Permalink]
|
| Let me think on that one for awhile dave Ive got a big day tomorrow and have got some work to attend to I may miss a day or two to post a reply. |
|
|
|
Varius
New Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 21:48:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
[quote]Originally posted by Varius
Can you logically disprove the existence of these many gods (the Alphabet Gods - AGs) in favor of a single god? Everything about the AGs comports well with reality as we can measure it, unlike the Greek gods (who should be royally pissed at all us non-believers) or the Norse Gods (whose snake is nowhere to be found).
|
This is my last post for the night I promise.
Ok let's look on the gods that Dave has created. There is Alex, Barb, Charlie, Dale, and Evan whose sole purpose is to use me and Dave and all other people as playthings. Based on pure logic can I logically disprove their existence? Well lets see maybe we can build on something simple to answer the question of something complicated: If we are to use logic we must in turn use reason or in other words find the motive for the action, decision, feeling, or beliefs. if I build on something simple I can work my way up to an answer: by the commit “the gods know all the rules” does that imply that we as humans have no divine inspiration of finding or knowing them since they do/ do not want to be found or like you said “inspire one person per lunar month by implanting thoughts of some sort or another.” I'm not trying to find error with your set mythology-Religion that you have created (I like the concept) but I think I need some more definitions of understanding of your world so I can relate it to this one in which I can logically relate too. Make sense? I think I need to know the intentions of were you want me to go with this question I hope I make myself clear? |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2008 : 22:14:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Varius
Based on pure logic can I logically disprove their existence? |
Nononono. Let's lower the bar. Can you logically prove (that's your standard, not mine) that a "one true god" scenario is just more likely to be reality than my AGs?| I'm not trying to find error with your set mythology-Religion that you have created (I like the concept) but I think I need some more definitions of understanding of your world so I can relate it to this one in which I can logically relate too. Make sense? |
Yeah, it makes sense, but you don't get any more details. I have supplied you with all the knowledge that the gods have chosen to bestow upon me. I have given you, in essence, the AG's version of the Bible. Everything else about them must be deduced or inferred from my earlier post and our knowledge of the world around us.| I think I need to know the intentions of were you want me to go with this question I hope I make myself clear? |
You appeared to be trying to make a case for "one true god" by showing a single example of many gods which, through logical analysis, can be shown to not exist. That's what is called a "hasty generalization." Just because one set of "many gods" can be shown to be false doesn't mean that all possible sets of "many gods" are false. I've given you another set of "many gods" - my AGs - which fail to be demonstrably false as the Greek gods are, and am simply asking you for a logical reason why we should abandon our belief in the AGs in favor of some "one true god." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
recurve boy
Skeptic Friend
Australia
53 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2008 : 03:48:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Varius
Thanks furshur you sparked an idea about a commit that I had forgotten that may help prove my point. I tried to find the quote for this statement and who it came from it was in one of my philosophy books but I couldn't find it so I will just use the base of what was said to give light to the argument mentioned above. You can conceive the largest mathematical number last time I checked it was a one followed by 100 thousand zeros but it never stops you can constantly think of a new number, the argument goes on to say is it odd or even and this is the point that I want to make to this statement the largest number is theoretically undetectable because we can constantly add one to it however we have prove that it does indeed exist in theory even though it is infanite. maybe it can be said of a God as well? If we applied logic Don't know just a thought.
|
You are probably thinking of the googol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googol
As you just pointed out. There is no such thing as the "largest number". They were always infinite. Though at one point I think the googol was the largest number with a name.
So this philosopher needs to stop trying to use analogies outside his expertise. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2008 : 20:21:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Varius
I have met 3 people in my life time of pagan beliefs who seemed very nice and in no way would I label them or associate them as atheist! |
This may be a result of the law of unintended (grammatical) consequences, and if so, consider the following observation withdrawn; it seems, to me, that there is a definite hierarchy, with pagan being superior to atheist. Care to comment?
Originally posted by Ricky
The largest number used in mathematics is Graham's number. It's an upper bound for a certain problem. Written in scientific notation, the exponent is larger than the number of atoms in the universe.
|
Thanks Ricky. For thems that care: (from Wikipedia)
Graham's number, named after Ronald Graham, is a large number often described as the largest finite number that has ever been seriously used in a mathematical proof. Guinness World Records even listed Graham's number as the World Champion largest number. It is too large to be written in scientific notation because even the digits in the exponent would exceed the number of atoms in the observable universe so it needs its own special notation to write down. In addition, Graham's number is much larger than other well known large numbers such as a googol and a googolplex, and even larger than Skewes' number and Moser's number, other well-known large numbers.
|
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
| Edited by - JohnOAS on 02/17/2008 20:24:07 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2008 : 20:53:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JohnOAS
This may be a result of the law of unintended (grammatical) consequences, and if so, consider the following observation withdrawn; it seems, to me, that there is a definite hierarchy, with pagan being superior to atheist. Care to comment? |
I will, if that's okay.
The word "pagan" (lowercase P) means nothing more than "not a Christian, Muslim or Jew." Hindus are as pagan as atheists in that regard, and so the "heirarchy" would be of only two levels: judaic religions on one level and everyone else (pagans) on the other.
With an uppercase P, "Pagan" usually refers to the "Neo-Pagan" movement which centers strongly on Wiccans and modern Druids. As such, they're at least relgious, which can't generally be said of atheists. In the "how can you not believe in anything?" folks' eyes, capital-P Paganism is surely a step above atheism. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 03:51:25 [Permalink]
|
Varius.....
After this train ran off the track to Nazi Germany, and then you re-railed it, you said| I want to open up a new debate to continue to see if indeed there is a one true God or true Religion. |
Also.....
| The next topic I want to bring into question on a one true God or religion debate is the subject of multiple gods and is their possibility for such beliefs based on pure logic. |
In order to even get intelligently started on such a discussion, I think you need to decide upon and intellectualize this: Is the very concept of a God, or of multiple Gods, a valid conceptualization to make? Is it mandatory, necessary, important, or useful to any other conceptualizations or thought processes that are necessary or useful to conduct your existential (physical) and cognitive (mental) life?
Rule out thought play or mental masturbation for the moment, these are valid justifications for God-think, but not essential reasons to devote serious thought to the existence of a Deity or Deities.
If you can order the importance of Deity Cognition to the rest of your total intellectualization processes, it may help you in the process of thinking about God(s) rationally and logically. "Critically", in the parlance of SFN and similar forums.
There is seriousness and significant (perhaps great) urgency in God thinking, if you have a firm feeling that God(s) is/are important to your life. If the feeling of importance is very strong, there may be irrational (emotional) overtones or interrupts in your God thinking, and logic and reason may not prevail. For example, God Think accompanied by a belief in Heaven or Hell afterlife, can quickly lose all objectivity, logic and reason. You really want to go to heaven and really don't want to go to Hell! Your concept of and belief in God is very quickly not governed by logic and reason, but by the emotion of fear!
However, if you can honestly decide that the existence and nature of God (and Heaven/Hell) is not high on your Things to Think About Frequently; when the occasion (like now) comes to think about God, you can do so largely dispassionately and a great deal more objectively.
If you have been carefully taught (as in Oscar Hammerstein's ageless lyrics from South Pacific).....:
You've got to be taught to hate and fear,
You've got to be taught from year to year,
It's got to be drummed in your dear little ear—
You've got to be carefully taught
.....to believe in Heaven, Hell, the Devil, and God; it is quite difficult to not be emotional about these matters - eternal joy and eternal damnation; and many never shake it off, in fact they get it reinforced throughout their entire lives by messages in church. Most Creationists and ID conformists are this way, and their theological argumentation reflects it.
If you are capable of thinking and discussing God and corollary subject matter dispassionately without fear or anger or much affect of any type, you can probably learn a great deal about a variety of pro-God, anti-God, and don't have a clue positions on Dieties. Come to this party with strong emotional convictions about the importance of God(s) to your life, and you may engage in a lot of argumentation, but you will leave unchanged, no matter how logical or persuasive your debate partners may be. Come with a true feeling of 'don't much care whether there is or isn't' and you may learn a great deal about various ways to think about The Deity Question!
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
true religion ?
