Lobstrosity

Well that's a piss-poor refutation. All you've said, as Wyz_sub10 has already pointed out, is that if you define something as God then it is God. What if you define the IPU as:
infinite (whatever the hell that means)
unlimited
independent
sovereign
omnipotent (properly defined)
omniscient
IMMORAL

Now, does he get to be a new "God"? He's clearly not the same as the Judeo-Christian God, but he's a god nonetheless.

Furthermore, God has free will. This means he can make whatever decisions he wants. If you have two separate gods, they they will be able to make separate decisions. God A and God B may both be infinite, unlimited, independent, sovereign, omnipotent, and omniscient, but they also may want different things.
God A != God B.

xian

but such a definition of God is not the Greatest Possible Being. God is the GPB. THere is only one definition to such a being. Among an infinite amount of potential deities, there exists only one that is the GPB. THe IPU argument is futile.

sorry, i responded

couldn't resist.

Shadowy Man

So, not only do you believe in God, but you are a liar as well.

Shadowy Man

So even granting that a "Greatest Possible Being", whatever that is supposed to mean, exists, how do we know that what one group says about it is more valid than what another group says about it.

For example. According to Christians, this "Greatest Possible Being" created a son to sacrifice for the sins of mankind. According to Jews, this "Greatest Possible Being" didn't. These are incompatible viewpoints.

Do we even known anything about this "Greatest Possible Being"?


Oh.. and P.S. Does the existence of a "Greatest Possible Being" rule out the existence of "Almost the Greatest Possible Being"? You state that "Among the infinite amount of potential deities, there exists only one that is the GPB." So maybe the IPU exists, but it isn't quite as "Great" as your GPB.

Abacus

I'm better.

xian

ad-hominem fallacy. irrelevant.

Hawkingfan

That's a subjective statement. To YOU it is the GPB. What about to other people? How about good old Satan? To many he is the greatest possible being. Satanism is not that far from hedonism (it is quite fun). It is a religion of the flesh and earthly pleasures, not of the spirit. A being who believes in sexual desires and earthly delights is much more of a "great being" to me than the one who is not. It's a matter of opinion. (Keep in mind I don't believe in Satan either).

xian

the IPU is a finite being, making it infinitely inferior to the GPB.

and before you say the IPU is infinite, remember the law of noncontradiction. It is philosophically impossible for 2 infinite beings to co-exist. iF you think that philosophically such a proposition is possible, please logically explain how it could be.

Lobstrosity

So all you've said is that there's only one definition of a Judeo-Christian "God." How does this have any bearing on the existence of any other gods? Furthermore, why can't two Judeo-Christian Gods exist that fit the definition but still differ in how they wield their "free will" (or do you maintain that God has absolutely no choice in what he does because he is constrained to act as a GPB and there is only one such way to fit that definition)? What if JCGA wants to make humans while JCGB wants to make some alien race in another galaxy. JCGA decides that he needs a Jesus. JCGB decides that he doesn't need a Jesus because he's chosen a different path for his creations to follow. You have two JC gods that are not identical.
JCGA != JCGB.

Your arguments basically don't convey any information, nor do they refute anything. It's like some extended foray into how to dodge the issue by using semantics.

Mageth

It is philosophically impossible for 2 infinite beings to co-exist. iF you think that philosophically such a proposition is possible, please logically explain how it could be.

Why don't you explain why it's "philosophically impossible?"