Philosophy Now Forum

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:
The point being that no one can believe in God and be a philosopher at once?

It is not possible to prove or disprove the existence of God. If you have an absolute belief in God's existence you have not aquired it through philosophy.

Jaded Sage wrote:I just called God by it's other name: benevolence.

It would be far less confusing if you could stick to calling God "God".

As far as I can tell, calling it benevolence would get rid of confusion.

Jaded Sage wrote: As far as I can tell, calling it benevolence would get rid of confusion.

So why didn't you call your topic "Proof of benevolence"? You strike me as being someone who has difficulty focusing on the subject at hand.

God = Benevolence??

Has there ever been a better stated example of an oxymoron?

Dubious wrote:God = Benevolence??

Has there ever been a better stated example of an oxymoron?

I'm dubious.

Harbal wrote:So why didn't you call your topic "Proof of benevolence"?

Because it didn't occur to me that anyone might need a proof of benevolence, whereas, many do appear to need a proof of God.

Jaded Sage wrote:

Harbal wrote:So why didn't you call your topic "Proof of benevolence"?

Because it didn't occur to me that anyone might need a proof of benevolence,

I have to confess that I have never felt the need for it.

Jaded Sage wrote:whereas, many do appear to need a proof of God.

Even though I don't need that, either, I would be interested to hear it.

Wyman wrote:

Dubious wrote:God = Benevolence??

Has there ever been a better stated example of an oxymoron?

I'm dubious.

...my default position on philosophy forums.

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:whereas, many do appear to need a proof of God.

Even though I don't need that, either, I would be interested to hear it.

You're in luck. I might have just provided it on the very first post.

1 John 4:8 defines God as love, so God is love.

If love exists, then God exists.
Love exists, therefore God exists.

Love ≡ God
Love ∴ God

Jaded Sage wrote: You're in luck. I might have just provided it on the very first post.

1 John 4:8 defines God as love, so God is love.

If love exists, then God exists.
Love exists, therefore God exists.

Love ≡ God
Love ∴ God

That's exactly the kind of luck I have when I buy a ticket on the lottery.

Jaded Sage wrote:

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:
I would argue that anyone without a firm practice of benevolence is not employing a love of wisdom.

You complained about a lack of philosophy and I commented on it but rather than sticking to the point you just go of at a tangent about something else.

The point being that no one can believe in God and be a philosopher at once? I just called God by it's other name: benevolence.

WHooahh- Well how very un-philosophical of you.

Jaded Sage wrote:

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:whereas, many do appear to need a proof of God.

Even though I don't need that, either, I would be interested to hear it.

You're in luck. I might have just provided it on the very first post.

1 John 4:8 defines God as love, so God is love.

If love exists, then God exists.
Love exists, therefore God exists.

Love ≡ God
Love ∴ God

Surely you know that this is just rubbish?

God is Evil
If evil exists then god exists.
evil does in fact exist
Therefore god is in fact evil.

Dubious wrote:

Wyman wrote:

Dubious wrote:God = Benevolence??

Has there ever been a better stated example of an oxymoron?

I'm dubious.

...my default position on philosophy forums.

You were supposed to say:

No, I'm Dubious
Why?
Because I chose that name first.
What name?
I'm Dubious.
About what?

Gödel! Gödel! Gödel!

Like this?
From:
Definition 1: x is God-like if and only if x has as essential properties those and only those properties which are positive
Definition 2: A is an essence of x if and only if for every property B, x has B necessarily if and only if A entails B
Definition 3: x necessarily exists if and only if every essence of x is necessarily exemplified
Axiom 1: Any property entailed by—i.e., strictly implied by—a positive property is positive
Axiom 2: If a property is positive, then its negation is not positive.
Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive
Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily positive
Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive
Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being necessarily P is positive.
Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e., possibly exemplified.
Corollary 1: The property of being God-like is consistent.
Theorem 2: If something is God-like, then the property of being God-like is an essence of that thing.
Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being God-like is exemplified.

Theorem 3 in other words: God exists! (And maybe this is sound.)

Jaded Sage wrote: You're in luck. I might have just provided it on the very first post.

1 John 4:8 defines God as love, so God is love.

If love exists, then God exists.
Love exists, therefore God exists.

Hi JS -- Your post has inspired me to follow-through on creating a thread I've been planning on: "Seeking courageous answers from theists". I hope you will participate by answering the first few questions I have asked there, as I would very much like to hear your answers. Thank you.

Wyman wrote:
You were supposed to say:

No, I'm Dubious
Why?
Because I chose that name first.
What name?
I'm Dubious.
About what?

Sounds a lot like the beginning of who's on first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTcRRaXV-fg