The Definition of God

Gost7584,

Hmm, we’ll see.

OK. So by the exact same reasoning we must conclude that God who must be vastly more complex since he was able to create the complexity of DNA, must have been created. This must be true since by your reasoning ordered complexity cannot come into being by chance and that it must have been the result of an intelligent designer.

In which case please tell us who created God?

Hmm, invisible things being clearly seen! Kinda sounds like an oxymoron?

Wonderful image, almost a rival for the Lord of the Rings stories.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What you are tying to say is a logical fallacy. Think about this:

Nothing cannot create anything. Since there is something in existence it is reasonable to conclude that nothing never existed.
There never was nothing. It never existed.
Nothing cannot exist. To say that nothing exists is a contradictory in terms and descriptions. --if it exists it must be something. Nothing therefore cannot exist. Nothing never existed. There always was something.

The creator of something, simply always was.

Exodus 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

A designer was needed to design the something into extremely complex forms, like DNA molecules, for example. Random chance is not design. The designer always was.---God is His name.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ghost3784,

Put more simply – if there was a time when nothing existed then would not have been anything to start everything. Hence something must have always existed.

I have used this reasoning many times and I am glad you understand it.

And equally valid would be the statement that the universe has always existed and we know the universe exists and nothing to indicate a god can exist. We also know from physics that it appears nothing can be created or destroyed indicating that the universe has always existed.

If you want to argue that complexity MUST have an intelligent designer then you cannot arbitrarily apply that claim to the universe and not apply it to something even more complex like a god. If you insist that complexity must be designed then you are forced to accept that God must have been designed. That also leads us to ponder the issues of the designer of the designer of the designer, etc, etc.

A random bible quote offers absolutely no support for your claim that a god is a first cause.

And how did something even more complex like God arise, by random chance? But cellular biology and chemistry doesn’t suggest that anything complex arises by random chance.

Go back to your science classes and examine your studies on molecular compounds for example. And look at the periodic table again. You should be able to understand how elements form into more complex forms naturally by their attractive and repulsive forces. Complexity simply doesn’t occur by random chance but is inevitable.

Is God complex? If you answer yes then you are forced to conclude from your own reasoning that he must have been designed since nothing complex can arise by random chance.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

He's not that smart.....

 

Again, if it is not logical, is it necessarily illogical?

 

Something which is illogical is necessarily not logical, but something not logical is not necessarily illogical.​

 

But the definition of illogical is not logical...

 

As I said, something which is illogical is necessarily not logical!

 

But you also said something not logical is not neccessarily illogical...

 

Yes. It is a fallacy to assume that something not logical is necessarily illogical.

Here's an example of a similar fallacy:

"In the strictest sense, a logical fallacy is the incorrect application of a valid logical principle or an application of a nonexistent principle:

Most Rimnars are Jornars.
Most Jornars are Dimnars.
Therefore, most Rimnars are Dimnars. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

 

NO its not...can you give an example of something not logical that isn't illogical?

 

silence​

 

So you can't give an example...

The definition of illogical is not logical, its not a fallacy to assume that everything not logical is illogical becuase thats what the word illogical means...its like saying its a fallacy to believe that something inaccurate is not accurate...

 

No. That was the example. Silence is not logical nor illogical.

No. Illogical means that it is necessarily not logical. But not logical is not necessarily illogical. As I said, silence is neither.


So if God is something which cannot be proven or disproven by means of logical reasoning, and silence is not logical nor illogical, then.........

 

Silence isn't an argument...it cannot be logical nor illogical, nor not logical and logical nor illogical and logical

Now if you said something like "silence existing" then it would be different

No, not logical neccessarily means illogical, and illogical neccessarily means not logical...its the definition

Then your argument is still flawed, but then it means the existence of God is unknown...

 

your wrong dude give it up

 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/illogical
link to the defination of illogical

 

Thanks for the definition...it only re-confirms what I said

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Try harder

 

um no it doesn't.

 

Yes it does...the only difference is that it says "contrary" to logic, and the word contrary is a negation, a negative word, like not, so illogical is not logical