God, Religion and Logic

[philosopher]

Assuming God exists, and ignoring the lack of evidence for said deity:

If God is almighty, can he make a rock so heavy he cannot carry it?

Obviously this is a contradiction and therefore we must assume that Logic is above God, and God is subject to the Rules of Logic.

It also answers a lot of the questions people have about the evil world which God created:

God made the best possible world for us, but it has its side effects. All the other alternative worlds either have no life at all (hence no observers making these other universes uninteresting) or too simple or too short-living life, we live in a universe which has the only conditions for high civilizations to arise.

Of course this come with a lot of side-effects like bad bacteria eating your internal organs, cancer, poor genes and other defects. But it is the price we have to pay - the rules of logic kicks in.

And then there's the question about the "Holy Scripture"- The Bible, Quran etc.
They are obviously written by man and for man with human ideas. Not God's ideas.

So... what are God's ideas? All we have to do is look around us:

What about morality? Look around you: Would YOU like someone to strangle your family and stealing your stuff? Of course not.
What happens if we murder and steal from each other? Revenge. Unrest. War.

So let's agree not to murder and steal from each other.

Now, what about accusations? Would you like to be accused of something you never did? No, and that's why we need a state/civilized society with a fair trial.

What if you unwillingly caused harm, or caused harm due to reasons you could not help/do anything about (ie. hallucinating and seeing a monster threatening your family, instead you killed some of your family members).

Would you like to be forgiven (maybe with conditions you undergo treatment)? I bet you vote for that one, instead of The Electric Chair.

What if you or your family members get sick/disabled (for prolonged periods/permanently)? Would you like to be subjugated to other people's desires to control you/them (ie: "Work whatever you can, or you get no money, and we don't care wether you'll have to spend 90-100 % of your remaining strength in your body to work")?

Or would you like some decency and fair treatment and providing the best possible options for a normal life as possible regardless of the disability?

I bet if you're in that situation yourself, you'd vote for the latter.

And that's why Christian morality matters:

Fair treatment.
Forgiveness.
Giving to the poor/disabled.

You do not need the Bible to tell you that.

[HexHammer]

Assuming God exists, and ignoring the lack of evidence for said deity:

If God is almighty, can he make a rock so heavy he cannot carry it?

Obviously this is a contradiction and therefore we must assume that Logic is above God, and God is subject to the Rules of Logic.

It also answers a lot of the questions people have about the evil world which God created:

God made the best possible world for us, but it has its side effects. All the other alternative worlds either have no life at all (hence no observers making these other universes uninteresting) or too simple or too short-living life, we live in a universe which has the only conditions for high civilizations to arise.

Of course this come with a lot of side-effects like bad bacteria eating your internal organs, cancer, poor genes and other defects. But it is the price we have to pay - the rules of logic kicks in.

And then there's the question about the "Holy Scripture"- The Bible, Quran etc.
They are obviously written by man and for man with human ideas. Not God's ideas.

So... what are God's ideas? All we have to do is look around us:

What about morality? Look around you: Would YOU like someone to strangle your family and stealing your stuff? Of course not.
What happens if we murder and steal from each other? Revenge. Unrest. War.

So let's agree not to murder and steal from each other.

Now, what about accusations? Would you like to be accused of something you never did? No, and that's why we need a state/civilized society with a fair trial.

What if you unwillingly caused harm, or caused harm due to reasons you could not help/do anything about (ie. hallucinating and seeing a monster threatening your family, instead you killed some of your family members).

Would you like to be forgiven (maybe with conditions you undergo treatment)? I bet you vote for that one, instead of The Electric Chair.

What if you or your family members get sick/disabled (for prolonged periods/permanently)? Would you like to be subjugated to other people's desires to control you/them (ie: "Work whatever you can, or you get no money, and we don't care wether you'll have to spend 90-100 % of your remaining strength in your body to work")?

Or would you like some decency and fair treatment and providing the best possible options for a normal life as possible regardless of the disability?

I bet if you're in that situation yourself, you'd vote for the latter.

And that's why Christian morality matters:

Fair treatment.
Forgiveness.
Giving to the poor/disabled.

The evidence are rooted in the proof of the prophets that they have to be accurate, else they would be stoned to death so no, it's not really hokus pokus.

For my own part for decades I've encountered really bad luck, I had no one else to blame but god, so I cursed his name ...in less than 1 h I got 4 black cats crossing my way, next day I fell on my bike.

What you say has already been written in the bible by Jesus, so why waste your breath on repeating?!?!

[Age]

Assuming God exists, and ignoring the lack of evidence for said deity:

OK let us make the assumption that God exists. Now, that I have done this, what do you now want me to assume that so called "God thing" is and does?

If God is almighty, can he make a rock so heavy he cannot carry it?

Why do you want me to assume that this "God thing" is a 'he'? Do you have some bias to the male of a species?

And then why are proposing the hypothetical IF this "male" is almighty?

You are the one who asked us to assume some "God-thing" exists. I have absolutely no idea what your concept of this "God-thing", so it is up to you to tell us what this "God-thing" is and what "It" does, which includes if "It" is almighty or not. So, is this "God-thing" almighty or not?

Do you get idea of what I am getting at?

Obviously this is a contradiction and therefore we must assume that Logic is above God, and God is subject to the Rules of Logic.

It also answers a lot of the questions people have about the evil world which God created:

God made the best possible world for us, but it has its side effects. All the other alternative worlds either have no life at all (hence no observers making these other universes uninteresting) or too simple or too short-living life, we live in a universe which has the only conditions for high civilizations to arise.

Of course this come with a lot of side-effects like bad bacteria eating your internal organs, cancer, poor genes and other defects. But it is the price we have to pay - the rules of logic kicks in.

And then there's the question about the "Holy Scripture"- The Bible, Quran etc.
They are obviously written by man and for man with human ideas. Not God's ideas.

So... what are God's ideas? All we have to do is look around us:

What about morality? Look around you: Would YOU like someone to strangle your family and stealing your stuff? Of course not.
What happens if we murder and steal from each other? Revenge. Unrest. War.

So let's agree not to murder and steal from each other.

Some might say that you are just 'trying to' "justify" some obviously wrong behavior just because some other behavior has already happened. Is this what you are 'trying to do'?

Can we also agree to not Revenge. Unrest. War. if, and when, we murder and steal from each other also?

Or, is this just not a possibility, from your perspective?

Now, what about accusations? Would you like to be accused of something you never did? No, and that's why we need a state/civilized society with a fair trial.

What if you unwillingly caused harm, or caused harm due to reasons you could not help/do anything about (ie. hallucinating and seeing a monster threatening your family, instead you killed some of your family members).

Would you like to be forgiven (maybe with conditions you undergo treatment)? I bet you vote for that one, instead of The Electric Chair.

What if you or your family members get sick/disabled (for prolonged periods/permanently)? Would you like to be subjugated to other people's desires to control you/them (ie: "Work whatever you can, or you get no money, and we don't care wether you'll have to spend 90-100 % of your remaining strength in your body to work")?

Or would you like some decency and fair treatment and providing the best possible options for a normal life as possible regardless of the disability?

I bet if you're in that situation yourself, you'd vote for the latter.

And that's why Christian morality matters:

Fair treatment.
Forgiveness.
Giving to the poor/disabled.

You do not need the Bible to tell you that.

[philosopher]

Why do you want me to assume that this "God thing" is a 'he'? Do you have some bias to the male of a species?

Most people refer to "god" as a male-deity, I'm only playing on the terms of "most people". It really doesn't matter to me. Feel free to replace "he" with "it" if you like.

And then why are proposing the hypothetical IF this "male" is almighty?

You are the one who asked us to assume some "God-thing" exists. I have absolutely no idea what your concept of this "God-thing", so it is up to you to tell us what this "God-thing" is and what "It" does, which includes if "It" is almighty or not. So, is this "God-thing" almighty or not?

Do you get idea of what I am getting at?

Nothing is almighty.
Not even said deity.

That's my point.

God is a benevolent deity, at the very least a personification of an idea of true goodness.

True goodness is to avoid all evil. Evil - as I define it - intentionall causing (or attempting) harm.

Examples:

An executioner pulling the trigger to the electric chair causing the inmate to get fried alive is evil (regardless of how many innocent people the inmate murdered).

Though, A doctor giving poison to a patient to cure an illness (in case the patient agreed to the cure OR was unable to respond) is not evil.

God is - at the very least - a personification of an idea involving avoidance of intentional harm and embetterment of the lives of the majority of humans and other animals.

Some might say that you are just 'trying to' "justify" some obviously wrong behavior just because some other behavior has already happened. Is this what you are 'trying to do'?

Can we also agree to not Revenge. Unrest. War. if, and when, we murder and steal from each other also?

Or, is this just not a possibility, from your perspective?

Maybe. It depends on the circumstances. It is a very difficult topic.

[Age]

quote=Age post_id=418882 time=1565486811 user_id=16237]
Why do you want me to assume that this "God thing" is a 'he'? Do you have some bias to the male of a species?

Most people refer to "god" as a male-deity, I'm only playing on the terms of "most people". [/quote]

'Most people' referred to earth being the centre of the Universe. Is it always wise to 'play' on the terms that "most people" use?

The reason "most people" have still not worked out what 'God' actually refers to, is because "most people" keep referring to 'God' in and with incorrect terms, and then these incorrect terms keep getting 'played' and 'replayed'.
This then helps to reinforce a belief or disbelief in 'God'.

Is it really a wise thing to do to keep referring to 'any thing' in, or with, incorrect terms?

It really doesn't matter to me. Feel free to replace "he" with "it" if you like.

Okay, but i replaced "he" with "it" years ago anyway. Thank you for giving me the freedom to choose though. But seriously if I proposed to you that 'It' actually is almighty, then would you have absolutely any idea of what 'It' was that I was actually referring to?

This brings us to a great point.

Instead of 'playing' on the terms "most people" use, how about we just look at the actual and real Truth of things here first?

If you agree to this, then the truth is you do not accept that a 'God' exists, which comprises of the terms, which "you" or "most people" use, from the definitions that you yourself give and use for those terms, correct? (you may have to read that more than once to understand it).

If that is correct, then this can very easily, simply, and quickly be resolved. That is; if "you", or "any one else" for that matter, Truly does want to resolve, and understand, any perceived "problem" or issue here.

To resolve this issue just takes changing some of the definitions you use, for some of those terms that "you" and "most people" use. Changing the definitions to some of the terms used, changes the terms into correct terms. It really is that simple.

Defining God as a "he" may not yet be an obviously incorrect term, and one that is best to never be used, but learning and understanding WHY 'God' was referred to as a 'he', and is still referred to as a 'he', by "most people", will then explain why it is an incorrect term.

And then why are proposing the hypothetical IF this "male" is almighty?

You are the one who asked us to assume some "God-thing" exists. I have absolutely no idea what your concept of this "God-thing", so it is up to you to tell us what this "God-thing" is and what "It" does, which includes if "It" is almighty or not. So, is this "God-thing" almighty or not?

Do you get idea of what I am getting at?

From what you have written below you completely missed the mark of what I was getting at.

Nothing is almighty.

To me, something is almighty. This can even be proven.

So why the clear and distinct descrepancy between us two?

Does it just come down to the sole fact that we are both using different definitions for the term 'almighty'?

Until we clarify with each other what we are both really saying and meaning, then we will never know. AND, when, and if, we clarify with each other, then we will KNOW how and why so called "problems" and issues arise and exist anyway.

Not even said deity.

But this is just what you believe is true. You are just like those "others" who believe other things, like; an almighty diety does exist.

Why do some believe one thing while some believe the direct opposite?

Does it just come down to what I suggested above?

That's my point.

Let me see if I understand your point correctly; you believe some thing like an almighty diety does not exist. Am I correct?

God is a benevolent deity, at the very least a personification of an idea of true goodness.

Do you believe God exists?

If no, then why are you now saying "God is a ..."?

If, however, you do believe God does exist, then WHY?

True goodness is to avoid all evil. Evil - as I define it - intentionall causing (or attempting) harm.

If you eat meat, are you intentionally causing harm?
If you drive a polluting car, are you intentionally causing harm?
When you put the trash out, are you intentionally causing harm?

Without giving it much thought yet, I define;
Bad. - intentionally causing harm and/or damage.
Wrong - unintentionally causing harm and/or damage.
Evil. - missing the mark.

Examples:

An executioner pulling the trigger to the electric chair causing the inmate to get fried alive is evil (regardless of how many innocent people the inmate murdered).

Though, A doctor giving poison to a patient to cure an illness (in case the patient agreed to the cure OR was unable to respond) is not evil.

God is - at the very least - a personification of an idea involving avoidance of intentional harm and embetterment of the lives of the majority of humans and other animals.

Why only the "majority" of humans and other animals?

Why not ALL humans and other animals?

Also, why not ALL of earth and the rest of ALL the Universe?

Some might say that you are just 'trying to' "justify" some obviously wrong behavior just because some other behavior has already happened. Is this what you are 'trying to do'?

Can we also agree to not Revenge. Unrest. War. if, and when, we murder and steal from each other also?

Or, is this just not a possibility, from your perspective?

Maybe. It depends on the circumstances.

Picking and choosing what circumstances when to do 'good' or not, does not sound like a real and full description nor definition of what 'goodness' is. If 'goodness' involves the avoidance of intentional harm for the embetterment, then I would say that this means for everyone and just some. But then again if 'you' are going to be picking and choosing what circumstances and what people you want to do good and right for, and, what circumstances and what people you accept for doing bad and wrong for, then really di you truly care about what is Truly right and wrong in Life.

To be picking and choosing when to do good and right is to be 'trying to' to "justify" ones own bad and wrong thoughts and behaviors.

It is a very difficult topic.

But, to me, this is an extremely very simple and very easy topic to contemplate, understand, and re-solve.

All it takes is just the the coming together, peacefully, to discuss, accept, and agree on the definitions that we are going to use for the terms and the words we do use. This process is the solution to re-solving this "issue", as well as just about all other "issues" also.

[Dontaskme]

Assuming God exists, and ignoring the lack of evidence for said deity:

If God is almighty, can he make a rock so heavy he cannot carry it?

Yes, God can do anything, he carries the rock in his mind metaphorically speaking.

And the mind is weightless.

.