Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
05-08-2002, 03:57 PM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 2,608
|
Does...God...Exist...?
DOES…..GOD…..EXIST…..?
1. Does: (d¾z) v. Third person singular present tense of do1. 2. God: 1. God.a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions. b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being. c. Christian Science. “Infinite Mind; Spirit; Soul; Principle; Life; Truth; Love” (Mary Baker Eddy). 2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality. 3. Exist: ex·ist (¹g-z¹st“) intr.v. ex·ist·ed, ex·ist·ing, ex·ists. 1. To have actual being; be real. 2. To have life; live. In the definitions for “God” and “exist” we find a common term: BEING. 4. Being: (b“¹ng) n. 1. The state or quality of having existence. See Synonyms at existence. 2.a. Something, such as an object, an idea, or a symbol, that exists, is thought to exist, or is represented as existing. b. The totality of all things that exist. 3.a. A person: “The artist after all is a solitary being” (Virginia Woolf). b. All the qualities constituting one that exists; the essence. (A.) The common conceptualization of God is that of a BEING. The qualification for BEING is EXISTENCE. GOD, defined as a BEING requires EXISTENCE to BE. No EXISTENCE…no GOD. One cannot argue that EXISTENCE requires a GOD. (B.) GOD,however defined, requires EXISTENCE as a necessary qualification of BEING. It can therefore be seen that EXISTENCE has all power over GOD. Hence GOD cannot be omnipotent because EXISTENCE is a NECESSARY qualification of BEING. (C.) The reciprocal of EXISTENCE is NON-EXISTENCE Nothing outside of EXISTENCE exists. God is defined as a BEING which requires EXISTENCE to be so defined. Hence, GOD cannot be omnipresent which would entail a BEING’S presence both within and outside of EXISTENCE. (D.) No BEING outside of EXISTENCE can be known or is knowable. Hence, GOD cannot be omniscient which would entail a knowledge of that which cannot be known. EXISTENCE IS THE SUPERSTRUCTURE OF WHICH A BEING DEFINED AS GOD IS ONLY A SUBSET. All that EXISTS can be categorized as either ABSTRACT or CONCRETE Only those elements of EXISTENCE that are PERCEPTUALLY verified can be categorized as CONCRETE and thus, be established to have actual being. (see definition of existence above) God is the conceptualization of an idea of an abstractBEING that is thought to exist or represented as having EXISTENCE. God currently exists only as an abstract concept whose being has yet to be properly defined without contradiction within the superstructure of EXISTENCE Likewise, this UNIVERSE is an abstract conceptualization of a concrete actuality within the superstructure of EXISTENCE. That an abstract conceptualization of a BEING defined as GOD is responsible for the CREATION of this UNIVERSE, within the superstructure of EXISTENCE, has been neither verified or dis-proven and remains a theoretical premise among many. |
05-08-2002, 09:58 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 571
|
NO... HE... DOESN'T
1. NO. A negative response, asserting that the statement in question is false. 2. HE. Masculine pronoun, often used when the gender of entity in question is unknown. In this case, 'HE' refers to God. 3. DOESN'T. Contraction for does not, reaffirming the NO. |
05-09-2002, 05:02 AM | #3 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 2,608
|
Quote:
rw: Ah, but there does exist an abstract concept designated as GOD which does exist as such. Therefore, both 1 and 3 above are incorrect. However, in all fairness, since neither atheist or theist are disputing over an abstract concept but a literal BEING the only correct answer to this question would have to be... YES...and....NO... but thanks for playing. Pick up your prize at the door and please come again. |
|
05-09-2002, 06:13 AM | #4 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
|
jinga! post imedeletiwa
[ May 09, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]</p> |
05-09-2002, 06:14 AM | #5 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
|
For some people, God exists.
For me, though, he doesn't exist (That would be NO - by ur criteria) U see, God is like a dream. Some people have them some don't. U cant see them, but some can see them. Dreams are not biochemical reactions in the brain are they? (I thought they are the result of biochemical reactions, not the reactions themselves). We just need the right (bio)chemicals. |
05-09-2002, 06:22 AM | #6 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Ill
Posts: 6,577
|
Hi IntenSity
That's an interesting response. What I've noticed is, it's like that 'stone soup' story. That even if God didn't exist you could get people to do all sorts of things just because they believe He does. The belief itself is very powerful. (The 'stone' soup story is the one where the one person says "I'm making stone soup - could you just give me a carrot/potato/bit of meat to go in it" etc etc and the person ends up making this delicious soup just out of a stone! ) So...I'm not saying God doesn't exist. I am saying that whether God does or doesn't, the belief that He does is very motivating to many people. love Helen |
05-09-2002, 06:27 AM | #7 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southeast of disorder
Posts: 6,829
|
Quote:
<strong> Quote:
|
||
05-09-2002, 08:54 AM | #8 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 2,608
|
Quote:
Question: Would such a biochemical reaction within the brain produce a dream if that brain was completely void of any conceptual data? For instance, the brain of an un-born child? |
|
05-09-2002, 08:57 AM | #9 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 2,608
|
Quote:
Very good analogy, very good. You continue to amaze me. Question: Is the value of such a motivational belief worth the lives of those lost in the Twin Towers incident? Can such motivation actually become detrimental to humanity? |
|
05-09-2002, 09:05 AM | #10 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 2,608
|
Hi Philo,
Quote:
However, it is apparent that everyone appears to hold a slightly different conceptualization of this god, so, in one respect, you are correct. As soldiers of fortune we can't attack the ideas associated with the concept until we know which particular conceptualization is being presented. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|