On the illogical concept that God is an impossibility

Speaking yesterday to an old friend who is a christian, I asked him why belives that his God, the Christian God, needs to be worshiped? Of what significance is being humble before this entity? Of what use is the servitude of a species he supposedly created? If this being possessed the power of creation and desired worshippers, why not merely make us into his loyal slaves?

He explained that as parents bear their children, take care of them, do they, even if subconsciously, expect some form of gratitude from their children. I
therefore asked why he assocites human qualities to this being of which he cannot possibily understand within the confines of the reality of now, as it
disobeys every law we have come to accept as fact. He replied that it is quite simply right that man worships his creator for the gift of life,e tc etc..

But this is not really what interests me, what I find interesting is the assignment of human qualities to a thing to comprehend, even if in our imaginations, that thing. Any concept that we as humans recognize is only communicable through the shared experiences of men, and therefore, no concept can be communicated that cannot satisfy the set of collective experiences that we as humans share. Thus, the concept and precept of a being that created us, cares for our being, and demand that we worship him as a result is only realizable because it satisfies the set of possible human experiences. Therefore, not only is God's realization within our world possible, it is illogical to assert to assert that his/its existence is impossible.

By our nature, and therefore by definition, we cannot contemplate that which is impossible for it cannot be realized within our collective experience-- as it paradoxical that being impossible and therefore nonexistent within any human experience, it possible that within the set of all experiences by man that is both shared and not shared, this very same impossible is possible. We cannot and must not assert with the belief of zealot that God does not exist or that his.its existence is impossible, for surely any analytical mind can recognize that is surely not the case. It is very possible that there is a God and that this God is the image of the Christian God.


--certainly expansion can be provided if so desired.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

For starters you are assuming as most religious persons do that "god" is only father to humanity and not the universe in general.

Human concepts of God are way to limiting......and just being possible does not make it actual.....to personify an entity is to render it with human qualities and failings thus limiting what MAY be to the realms of our narrow perspective.

For example the book of revelations suggests that God is insane by any definition and this I find very hard to comprehend how persons can worship insanity.

The thread posed by PM that talks of end times mentions Allah reversing the planets rotation so that the sun rises in the west. I can only ask that if this is the sort of insane entity people worship then no wonder the planet is in deep shit.

God is not made in the image of man but we tend to think he is.

The good book states that man was and I repeat was ( past tense) made in God's image....it never states that man IS ( present tense) in Gods image.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, for starters you are assuming that I am a "religious" person merely because I started this thread. That is an incorrect assumption. Secondly, it is irrevelant if the god, God, GoD is father to merely ants, the same principle applies.

I disagree. Your assertion assumes that rendering this entity with human qualities will necessarily make it limited in abstraction or defintion. I disagree. I think that man's concept of a God-- a creator, etc is very varied and rich. I have not asserted that the ability to perceive this being or entity makes it actual, I say that it makes it possible, which goes against the general belief of most of my peers that God simply does not exist.

It is quite irrelevant and would like not to have the thread be about subjective takes on the presentation of God in any religion. Even if this being is insane from your perspective, it chnages nothing about it possibility of existing.

Keep your attacks to yourself. I do not care why they worship it or what your view of insanity is. It is not why i started this thread.

You know this becuase?

I do not see the relevance.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

God is only declared an impossibility because our definition of God makes this so. This in no way impacts on whether God exists or not.

The reason I posted the above was to attempt to make this point.....and obviously failed in doing so.....

 

Well you know, the universe had to get here somehow. If someone or something didn't create it then it somehow created itself. But if it (the universe) was just a fluke of the laws of physics, then how did those laws of physics, that allowed for such a fluke, get there?

All will be known grasshopper, but first snatch the pebble from my hand.

 

I did not intend to iimply that you were religious only that you are making an assumption that a God is only father to humans...as most religious persons do.

By limiting God to our earthy understanding we are limiting the possibility of his existance.

By giving God insane qualities we are rendering his existance impossible because he would not be insane thus he can not conform to our insane notion of him. "An insane God is impossible"

as argued above and insane god is impossible but a sane god is possible

the human race is pretty insane and well, if God was as insane we wouldn't be here posting in forums

“ The good book states that man was and I repeat was ( past tense) made in God's image....it never states that man IS ( present tense) in Gods image. ”

I do not see the relevance.

You state that

Why this God is a the image of a Christian God, thus insane by being an image of humanity is impossible...

 

all we have to stand by is what He gives us.



as for why God is referred to as He, and not She, I don't know.. but I find it better than being called "It" (Just on the topic of assigning human qualities)

P.S. God is neither male nor female. God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit.

 

Sure anything is possible. So? Doesn't mean its remotely likely. Questions of probability are more relevant than questions of possibility.

As a sidebar, what the hell is a 'spirit'? Besides the kind that get you drunk...

 

The Supernatural being. Also known to the less ignorant as the Godhead.

 

I find this thread kind of pointless, very little is impossible if you give it enough time, you only think its impossible because of the limits of your mind(im sure theres a japanese proverb similar to this), its not impossible that a pink elephant can exist (either somewhere in the universe or perhaps in a past/future universe if its possible), i wasnt aware of anyone that actually believes a god is impossible, just that its unlikely, and isnt it equally likely that it is impossible as it is possible?

 

What is a spirit exactly? Can you describe it? What does it look like? Can it take a shape? Can it think? Or feel? Or touch? It's funny how preconceived notions of god are just generalized imagination.

 

Or perhaps we know of God from what He chooses to tell us?

Hmm.. maybe you should look at it that way.


Good night for now.

 

Quantum Quack:

I do not see where in my post that this implication is made. Also, that "limiting" the uderstanding of God to our eathly understanding makes no sense. We are incapable of any other. It also does not suggest that this limits it's possibility whatsoever.

huh? How does God being "insane render it's/his existence impossible? That conclusion cannot be reached.

Huh? I stated that it was possible that God could be in the Christian image. I could very well have stated he could be the Muslim God. Why do you keep asserting that an "insane" God makes his existence impossible? It does not translate at all.

If our definition of God makes it impossible, then it impacts whether God exists or not because one, you are using a defintion of God, and two have declared that def. an impossibility. In what way do our definition(s) make God impossible?

fading Captain:

No, anything is not possible, as anything includes sets that lies outside our ability to imagine, comprehend, etc. Why is probability more relevant in this instance? There is a doctrine that says that there is not God, or creator of any kind, and that the existence of this being is an impossibility-- this thread is mostly directed at that.

Lemming3k

Time is not an issue here, and even then, the passage of time--even as it approaches infinity, does not necessarily imply that most things become impossible... Yes, there are people who find all current conceptions of God to be impossible. And no it is not equally like it is impossible as it is possible because possibility exists within the realm of human experiences and impossibility does not.

 

"No, anything is not possible, as anything includes sets that lies outside our ability to imagine, comprehend, etc. "

You have deemed that set as impossible? Was the current known geometry of the universe impossible 1000 years ago when it was not imagined or comprehended by a single human being? I maintain that anything is possible but I am not sure its important to your assertion.

"Why is probability more relevant in this instance? There is a doctrine that says that there is not God, or creator of any kind, and that the existence of this being is an impossibility-- this thread is mostly directed at that."

Saying something has a one in quintillion chance of occuring compared to saying it is impossible is a relatively minor point. Is something remotely likely to exist? Thats seems to be a better question. My point is that I may technically disagree with a doctrine that says a creator is impossible, we reach the same conclusion...

 

In the realm of human experiences? It was my understanding it is impossible for the world to be flat, it is impossible that the moon is made of cheese, it is impossible there can be a bottomless crater on the earth(if it had no bottom it become a hole not a crater

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

). Are these not conclusions we have drawn from human experiences?

 

If God created us and desired us to worship him, it's possible, actually likely, he would give mankind intutition of who he is. I worship who I believe is perfection; this happens to be the God of Christianity.

 

No man has seen God. Not even a fool can claim so.

The Christ was made a little lower than the angels to die for the sins of rebels like you and me.

I can't answer "Can it think? Or feel? Or touch?" since those are VERY unclear questions.

As for Medicine Woman's inane reply about "the spirit" manifesting "in other human beings like Mother Teresa, Todd Beamer, Anne Frank, Princess Diana, etc."

That simply shows how proud and conceited you are. Consider Deity to be supremely superior, NOT relenting to mankind.

Ignorance.

 

fading Captain

If within the collective experience of humankind it was impossible, then yes, it was impossible. The set of all possible things cannot include anything, else the notion of impossibility is moot. Something that cannot exist or is not realizable only achieves that status through our collective experience, as it shapes and defines what we discover to possible through new realizations. If you say an infinite series of fishes within bowls within bowls with fishes with bowls, etc fish N is merely a fish within a bowl if it is what it comprehends or can experience. The notion of the series is an impossibility within the dimensions in which fish N operates.

Is something remotely likely to exist? This is a good question, but also a subjective to one’s definition of remote. I do not think that the notion of a God as believed by the major religions remotely exists, but I think the notion of a creator, even if accidental, does.

Lemming

No, it is not impossible that the world is flat, nor is it impossible that there exists a bottomless crater on the earth. The realization of the world is simply that—a realization, this realization does not transcend proving itself. As Kant would say, “Experience is by no means the only field to which our understanding can be confined”.

 

Because if he was Insane he would have destroyed his creation ages ago.

So therefore God is not the insane entity that all those good books suggest that he is.
Therfore a christian God is an impossibility.
Therefore an islamic god is an impossibility.

But by the same token this does not make a Sane God an impossibility.

BTW I don't wish to offend those people who have a deep and personal relationship with what they identify as God. This I respect. How ever if they wish to argue issues of sanity using these holy books then I think they would fail.