There'll never be closure on whether God exists

Author: Fallaneze 5 years ago

Posts

Total: 554

#121

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.15.2019 08:10PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

"That there is no truth; that there is no absolute state of affairs no 'thing in itself This alone is Nihilism, and of the most extreme kind. " ~ Fredrich Nietzsche

#122

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 08:13PM

If you can't avoid attacking me personslly while you are complaining about me allegedly attacking you personally, you should probably just keep it to yourself.

Deflection. Next time try and put effort into your comments.

This introduction seemms pretty good.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/

This shows you have two different standards. Things you don't agree with you give a long winded link to. Things that you do agree with you sum it up with 4 words and a dictionary. This implies you try so hard to go out of your way not to use the same standards when comparing your belief in God and lets take this your defense of your position on nihilism which is a double standard fallacy. Do you have a response to the allegations?

#123

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 08:14PM

-->

@Mopac

"That there is no truth; that there is no absolute state of affairs no 'thing in itself This alone is Nihilism, and of the most extreme kind. " ~ Fredrich Nietzsche

So here I can simply state I don't confine to the most extreme kind but I won't. I will instead say can you demonstrate to me that I am comparable to the extreme kinds of nihilism? I'll wait.

#124

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.15.2019 08:31PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Yet, here you are identifying yourself with the doctrine of negation. I don't want want to talk about you.

Nihilism is atheism, pure and simple. The denial of absolute truth or ultimate reality

#125

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 08:56PM

-->

@Mopac

Yet, here you are identifying yourself with the doctrine of negation.

?
Neither I accepted what you said nor did does the link even state that. I am guessing I hit a brick wall in your brain and you have gone through your dialogue tree.

Nihilism is atheism, pure and simple. The denial of absolute truth or ultimate reality

Demonstrate how they are inherent to one another.

I'll wait like I'll wait for every single other claim you have yet to demonstrate. At this point there is undeniable "truth" that you are incompetent. Guess some people are too far gone.

#126

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.15.2019 10:13PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

As you are a nihilist, it would be foolish of me to try and prove anything to you. It takes an awful lot of denial to come to the nihilistic conclusion.

Besides, if I did prove something to you and you believed it, you would cease to be a nihilist.

#127

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 10:55PM

-->

@Mopac

As you are a nihilist, it would be foolish of me to try and prove anything to you. It takes an awful lot of denial to come to the nihilistic conclusion.

Still hasn't answered my questions. Ad-homs and pretty much calls me the denier. Deflecting from his well stale position that God exists because the definitions said so. No what caused the big bang no infinite regression can't be possible angle instead defaults to 3-4 words. This clearly reeks of anti-intellecutalism and note this isn't an ad-hom because it is the best representation of your position.

Besides, if I did prove something to you and you believed it, you would cease to be a nihilist.

Could I not change my mind? Could I not change my username?

How about you, what would it take for you to state God is not real?

#128

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.15.2019 11:05PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

What you call intellectual is simply creation. The Ultimate Reality is God, not an explanation.

Why is The Ultimate Reality God? Because that is what we mean by God. Can you think of anythingg else more worthy to be called God? Of course you can't, but it matters little. This is what we mean by God.

There is nothing even comparable to God. I tell you, God can not be circumscribed, not even by the mind. I believe in The Incomprehensible God. The One True God. The Supreme and Ultimate Reality.

#129

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 11:17PM

What you call intellectual is simply creation. The Ultimate Reality is God, not an explanation.

So God is not creation in your mind. Okay you have just admitted it is nothing. People who even think about it in their mind are wrong. Glad to know that.

Why is The Ultimate Reality God? Because that is what we mean by God. Can you think of anythingg else more worthy to be called God? Of course you can't, but it matters little. This is what we mean by God.

You are not demonstrated anything nor providing evidence. I can simply say what you said in the way I want it to be. There is no argument to counter to even talk about. This is just your opinion not supported by anything.

There is nothing even comparable to God. I tell you, God can not be circumscribed, not even by the mind. I believe in The Incomprehensible God. The One True God. The Supreme and Ultimate Reality.

You can't even lie about willing to change your mind. Why should I be willing to change my mind when you haven't even stated you would or told me how I would go about doing it.

I'll ask another question. What God are you talking about? The multiple Gods of Hindus or the Biblical God. Please tell me how you get to that.

#130

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.15.2019 11:17PM

-->

@Mopac

Above.

#131

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.15.2019 11:52PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

The God I am talking about is The Supreme and Ultimate Reality. I could not deny this God's existence, in fact, because ultimately it is real. What else can be said to be real? Like this? Not like God.

Eternal life is to know The Only True God, and the one sent, Jesus Christ.

#132

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

10.16.2019 09:24PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Deflecting from his well stale position that God exists because the definitions said so.

Also known as, "the ontological argument". Spinoza makes an airtight case.

No what caused the big bang no infinite regression can't be possible angle instead defaults to 3-4 words.

Also known as, "the logical necessity". Kant makes an airtight case.

Unfortunately neither Spinoza's nor Kant's solutions are compatible with the modern concept of "YHWH".

#133

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.16.2019 09:50PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Also known as, "the ontological argument". Spinoza makes an airtight case.

Are you saying the argument is good?

Can you present it as well?

Also known as, "the logical necessity". Kant makes an airtight case.

Are you saying the argument is good?

Can you present the case?

Unfortunately neither Spinoza's nor Kant's solutions are compatible with the modern concept of "YHWH".

So they can't make a case for the current interpretation of the Biblical God?

#134

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.16.2019 10:18PM

-->

@3RU7AL

@TheRealNihilist

Neither of you have an orthodox understanding of our God, so I find these statements from both of you to be presumptuous...

"Unfortunately neither Spinoza's nor Kant's solutions are compatible with the modern concept of "YHWH"."

"So they can't make a case for the current interpretation of the Biblical God?"

Neither of you understand the "modern concept of "YHWH""(Which in itself is a puzzling string of words), nor do any of you understand the Orthodox interpretation of the biblical God.

But I am still interested in hearing 3ru7al's take on Spinoza and Kant proving God.

#135

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

10.17.2019 12:23PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Also known as, "the ontological argument". Spinoza makes an airtight case.
Are you saying the argument is good?
Can you present it as well?

Spinoza makes his case in his masterpiece, Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata. [LINK]

(IFF) god = omnipotent and omniscient and omnipresent (AND) (IFF) god = real (THEN) everything that is real must necessarily be god (or parts of god).

This is a purely ontological argument. You define god, then you link that definition to reality by equating the two, which logically means you've just defined reality as god (and god as reality).

It also works if you examine the Catholic concept of "Ex Nihilo". (IFF) no-thing existed before god and no-thing existed parallel to god (AND) god is the sole creator of all things (THEN) all things must be created out of god-itself. That is-to-say, everything must be made of god-stuff, since there is no other material other than god, as per the primary statement.

Also known as, "the logical necessity". Kant makes an airtight case.
Are you saying the argument is good?
Can you present the case?

Kant makes his case in his masterpiece, Critique of Pure Reason. [LINK] and slightly more in-depth [LINK]

(IFF) you don't know everything (THEN) there are things you don't know.

(IFF) a human mind is incapable of knowing everything (THEN) there are things you will never know.

The things you will never know are NOUMENON.

What happened "before" the Big Bang is NOUMENON.

What is the fundamental mechanism that "causes" phenomenal reality?

NOUMENON.

Can't we reverse engineer what we observe in order to decipher the underlying mechanism?

NOPE.

Unfortunately neither Spinoza's nor Kant's solutions are compatible with the modern concept of "YHWH".
So they can't make a case for the current interpretation of the Biblical God?

Nobody can. All definitions of "YHWH" are incoherent.

The closest you get are, as Mopac likes to say, "god is the ultimate reality" (which is NOUMENON). But Mopac objects to the word NOUMENON.

And even if you define god as NOUMEON (ein sof, magnum mysterium, ultimate reality) it still doesn't explain all that "rule-book" stuff.

I mean, if god is unknowable, then how could bronze age fiction writers compose a rule-book about it? [LINK]

#136

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.17.2019 12:30PM

-->

@3RU7AL

(IFF) you don't know everything (THEN) there are things you don't know.

(IFF) a human mind is incapable of knowing everything (THEN) there are things you will never know.

How can this be a case for deism? For all we know there is simply a causal reality before the Big Bang that explains everything without the need for a single entity to start it all.

#137

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

10.17.2019 12:57PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

(IFF) you don't know everything (THEN) there are things you don't know.

(IFF) a human mind is incapable of knowing everything (THEN) there are things you will never know.
How can this be a case for deism? For all we know there is simply a causal reality before the Big Bang that explains everything without the need for a single entity to start it all.

It's a case for the logical necessity (NOUMENON).

There must be some-thing (not a no-thing) and theists try to argue that this logically-necessary-some-thing is their version of god (although it only "proves" a DEISTIC god (ontologically) because this argument does not make any attempt to tie the logical necessity to their particular god(s).

#138

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.17.2019 02:41PM

-->

@3RU7AL

....still doesn't explain all that "rule-book" stuff.

I mean, if god is unknowable, then how could bronze age fiction writers compose a rule-book about it?

The purpose of the law of Moses and the whole covenent was to raise up a nation of priests with The Law of God written on their hearts.

God's essence is unknowable, but we know God through the uncreated energy that fills all things.

Let me put it another way. You don't need to know The Truth in order to know how to direct yourself towards it.

#139

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.17.2019 06:54PM

-->

@3RU7AL

It's a case for the logical necessity (NOUMENON).

Are you saying it is necessary for the deistic argument?

#140

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 14,582

3RU7AL

10.18.2019 11:39AM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Are you saying it is necessary for the deistic argument?

The case for a logical-necessity is the only case for DEISM.

#141

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

TheRealNihilist

10.18.2019 01:13PM

-->

@3RU7AL

The case for a logical-necessity is the only case for DEISM.

Okay I understand.

#142

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

10.18.2019 04:16PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Deism is simply the Latin equivalent of the Greek word "Theism".

Deism became a popular way during the so called "enlightenment " era for those who believed in God but not necessarily any religion or tradition about God. Because of this, the word has been taken to exclusively refer to belief in God but no religion rather than this being a particular form of deism.

Theism and Deism are the same thing.

Hint

Greek word for God is Theos. Theism. Get it?

Latin word for God is Deity. Deism. Get it?

An argument for the existence of God would be a different argument than making a case for say, Christianity, Islam,.etc.

#143

ebuc

Debates: 0

Posts: 4,922

ebuc

10.18.2019 04:49PM

-->

@3RU7AL

There is no cosmic source { @ }, only local ignorance { * ^ * }.

https://www.sciencealert.com/penrose-b-mode-hawking-points-sign-previous-universe-in-conformal-cyclic-cosmology

..."If our Universe happened to be locked in an eternal heartbeat of expansion and collapse, black holes would leave an impression. And it could look just like a number of swirls recently detected in the faint echo of light at the edge of space."....

Our finite, occupied space Universe is the only perpetual-motion-machine ergo a synergeticaly combination of structural { /\ closed } and systemic { Y open } integrity.

14 days later

#144

ethang5

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

ethang5

11.02.2019 11:09AM

-->@Fallaneze

There'll never be closure on whether God exists.
It's an open ended question and we will never truly know the answer.

You are letting yourself be fooled by an illusion.

For very many people, the question does get settled. But new people are always coming into the system.

Closure happens to individuals, not to groups. Your implication is that anything short of total and instantaneous closure is not closure."

Very many people find closure and truly know the answer. Would "closure" to you be everyone coming to a similar conclusion at the same time? Is that even possible?

#145

Reece101

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,973

Reece101

11.04.2019 09:11AM

-->

@Mopac

I whole heartedly disagree.

The Ultimate Reality by necessity exists. The position that there is no ultimate reality has no ground to stand on.

There is an ultimate reality, and you don’t know it. None of us do.

#146

Mopac

Debates: 4

Posts: 8,050

Mopac

11.04.2019 12:57PM

-->

@Reece101

There is an ultimate reality, and you don’t know it. None of us do.

"The perfect mind is the one that through genuine faith knows in supreme ignorance the supremely unknowable, and gazing on the universe of his handiwork has received from God comprehensive knowledge of His providence and judgement in it, as far as allowable to men." ~Saint Maximus the confessor.

We know that The Ultimate Reality exists, as you can even say. So we have the existence of God as common ground at least.

#147

Reece101

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,973