 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
January 15th, 2003 09:12 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Logical flaws
|
Whether or not one believes in a God is irrelevent when making arguments as to whether or not that God can exist. For this reason, I will leave it a mystery as to my personal beliefs, and will proceed to make notes about your online essays in the context of logic alone, not upon a method of what many of my Christian friends call "apologetics". For the record, I will state that I personally think that your logical arguments are some of the most flawed that I have ever seen. If you so wish to disprove the idea of God, and monotheism in general, you should present arguments that the believers have not heard before. After much thought, here is where I personally find your logic to err:
1. "God Contradicts the Free Will of all Living Beings Including Itself"
a. The idea that God has no choice as to wrong presupposes that wrong and right are independent of that God. If God and the nature of God is the definition of "right" or "good", then "choosing" wrong is merely a contradiction of reality, rather than a different choice as to what reality presents. Thus God has free will to define whatever he thinks is "good", and thus has more free will than any other being.
b. Once again, you are presupposing. What if God exists outside of what we call time? If God exists at all moments at once, and independent of what we call "time" then this argument is immediatly refuted on the basis that the concept upon which it is based becomes arbitrary.
c. This topic is addressed above.
d. Once again, if God is the defining factor of reality then what he is by his own nature determines what "good" and "right", then we can logically assume that anything that is "wrong" is merely a departure from his will. Also, you seem to suggest that free will and the lack thereof are the same by saying that the definition of free will is the ability to turn from God. This is a logical fallacy, and assumes that predisposing something to choose good at all times is giving it free will.
"Logic is More Powerful than God"
I attempted once to use this argument on a Christian, and was immediatly shown the ways in which it was flawed. The Bible does not seperate the two ideas of "logic" and of "God". The Bible actually calls God "logos"- logic itself. This goes back to the argument that I presented before that if the defining factor in the universe is God, then nothing can be more powerful than him because all definitions end with the nature of that God.
"Morals"
This is the biggest mistake, I think, on your entire site, because you suggest that nothing can be known as true, which means that the logic you use is completely subjective as well. Personally, I would pull this off your site as quickly as possible to avoid making a fool out of yourself. The entire purpose of the site is completely destroyed if nothing is sure. Why then are you trying to convince people?
In conclusion:
There are many more powerful arguments than the ones that you present. The arguements on this site occasionally become tiresome because many of them have been exhausted and debated constantly throughout the years, and have now for the most part been dismissed. I have many Christian friends who could logically refute nearly every message on this site. Many cannot. Attempt to find out what monotheists believe before refuting their arguments.
-Steerpike
ktz555@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
From:  vexen |
Date:
May 30th, 2003 01:01 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Re: Logical flaws
|
1a)
If goodness is an inherent property of God and it's actions, then such a being is not free to choose to do wrong. If it is as you say, then such a being is still not free and is being stating what is rignt and wrong for us, semantically, but it's choices have no absolute or universal impact, and whether or not a god abides by such arbitrary choices is superfluous and irrelevent.
b)
I didn't understand your point - what argument was you challenging?
d)
It seems to me that the introduction of God to the philosophy of free will and natural ethics makes the subject inherently flawed - because the idea of God directing what is "right" and "wrong" is homocentric and not universal, whereas God is purely universal. Example: God created life, most of which eats other life (for example, some insects murder their partner after mating, as part of the natural process), yet simultaneously says "Murder is wrong". The solution is to keep in mind that we need to differentiate between what is "universally" wrong, and what is merely wrong for mankind. God's "inherent" morality doesn't apply universally -- it is apparently as if there is no "inherent" nature of God that affects the real world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
May 30th, 2003 12:13 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Good try
|
Your first argument is flawed, and when reading an article, when the first thing said is wrong, it makes people either not want to read the rest or not listen to the rest even if it is done well. You see, you say God has no free will because he knows what He will do in the future and therefore cannot change it; however, God does not exist in Physical form, and according to the science and math of physics (mainly einsteins relativity) if you take mass away, time becomes undefined, therefore God is unaffected by time, and therefore has no future, past, or present.
I find a lot of the arguments on this page to be unresearched and easily refutable arguments. If the author would actually study Christian Doctrine and Theology, as well as Creation Science and such, almost everything on this page seems to fade into childish arguments that most first year theology students can counter. People need to actually learn about something before they write about it.
lostcow16@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: vexen |
Date:
May 30th, 2003 12:52 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Re: Good try
|
If a god is outside of time, it's thoughts are static, it's nature is unchanging, then such a god makes no choices and feels no emotion, and does not makes choices over time, or consider things, but is a completely instant and autonomous being... such a being also has no free will. Free will depends on a change of mind over time.
Please continue to question and debate, but I wouldn't disregard an argument without debating it first, as most these pages and essays are not in-depth, but merely introductions to the arguments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: vexen |
Date:
August 1st, 2003 03:39 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
|
1) What's with the caps lock? http://www.vexen.co.uk/notes/capslock.htmlNot sure why I'm giving you that URL, but it's some basic advise on how to communicate in written text. Big hint: Caps lock doesn't help. 2) The website I recomment frequently for people wanting to read about Christianity is http://www.religioustolerance.org because they give all points of view, and actively avoid missing out any major areas of Christianity (whereas if I gave out the address of some USA or evangelical Christian group, the poor reader would think that Christians were all gay-bashing, hateful people who care more about peoples' sexuality than they care about god). 3) Yes, an atheist can be a Satanist. I am a Satanist, and have been for some nine years, but, I do not believe in gods. Go figure. I believe that "Satan" as a concept is the best personified meta-figure possible to represent reality, the universe, life and death. 4) I give out information on many things (such as solipsism), but just because I do so isn't grounds for assuming I'm a solipsist. So although that's not a good assumption to make, in this case you are right that I'm a Satanist. Erm: http://www.vexen.co.uk/vexen/satanist.htmland my site on Satanism contains my testimony: http://www.dpjs.co.uk/testimonies/vexen.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
September 5th, 2003 03:09 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
I am outer here!
|
By Allah!
When reading I thought this was the work of Satan, and Mr Vixen has admitted it.
Shatan was created by God in the first place, and cast out. Allah will preparing the fires of hell for people like you. How anyone who claims to be a Satanist can not believe in God escapes me. An Athiest is someone who does not believe in dieties at all, including Satan. By accepting Satan, you accept that God is your enemy. But as God (Allah) created Satan in the first place, remember that God is bigger than Satan. Satan leaves false promises to his followers, but at the time of judgement, when God balances up your deeds, Satan will leave you to your fate with Allah.
There are 7 levels of Hell, and the 7th level is the level reserves for Satanists.
You do have a chance to redeem yourself, and accept Allah. For Allah is most merciful and most kind. Do it now, and you will be accepted into the gardens of Heaven - do not and you will suffer the most ghastly punishment for eternity. Allah gives you the choice. Its your limited 'free will' that you are talking about.
May Allah guide you to the right path. Amin.
Yakoub Purches
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: vexen |
Date:
September 29th, 2003 06:18 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Re: I am outer here!
|
1) Some Satanists believe in a single evil God, and not in a god and a satan. http://www.dpjs.co.uk/god.htmlSome atheists like me accept Satan as the best symbol of reality. http://www.dpjs.co.uk/satan.htmlSome atheists may be accept Satan as a being same as there are atheists who believe in ghosts 2) Why would a good god prepare the fires of hell for anyone? Wouldn't a most-forgiving god forgive everyone, and put everyone in paradise regardless of their imperfection? (If God is good, all people must go to heaven: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/universalism.html) 3) You haven't convinced me that Allah exist or that I need to accept it. Why doesn't Allah itself tell me about itself, rather than Yakoub Purches posting LiveJournal comments? Is your God shy, or ashamed of itself, or what? 4) I don't have free will to believe in things that are explained badly to me. If someone explains this "God" idea to me well, then, maybe I'll have a chance to believe! For now, all I see is illogical inconsistency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
September 29th, 2003 05:29 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
some very interesting points you make
|
But, think about this. You say that God could not exist because he is benevolent, and, being so could not make evil. Well, God didnt make evil, because evil is not a thing. Evil is the absence of something, so it is not something, so, God didnt make it. Your using what is known as duality, meaning there has to be 2 sides to everything. You cant bring God down to something finite like that. And, God does have free will, he chooses not to do "evil", because if he did, he would go against his character and the universe would cease to exist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: vexen |
Date:
November 4th, 2003 04:56 am (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Re: comment
|
Er... great... I come across thousands of numbers every day, and sometimes 666 comes up to! But, so does 256, my favorite number! Nearly once a day I can find something that equals 256.
You don't have to believe in God to be a Satanist. Otherwise, like, we wouldn't be Satanists but some other-religion-ist, like a devil-worshipping Christian or something.
I think the greatest trick God ever done was convince everyone he was good!
So if you really worship god, be very, very careful, ok!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
February 9th, 2004 01:55 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
2. Evil and suffering contradict existence of a benevolent god
|
The Biblical account is, simply stated, that God created man with a free will. He endowed us with the ability to make choices. Choices without consequences are not choices at all. If someone asked me if I wanted cake or icecream and I replied "icecream please", but they replied "too bad, you can't have icecream", then my choice had no meaning, there was no consequence at all. Therefore God gave us a free will and let our choices have consequences, in other words, He did not make us robots. Man (Adam first, but each of us do the same)chose to sin. The consequence of sin is death. God told Adam and Eve that on the day that they eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they would surely die. Death and pain and evil were brought into our world through sin, that we have chosen to engage in. The amount of evil in our world is compounded by the amount of sin. God did not bring evil and suffering into the world, HE gave us a perfect world, we brought sin and death into this world. The claim that Natural disasters are a form of evil is inherently flawed. If this world were the end of existence then it would seem that natural disasters are evil that man has no control of or effect on. However, this is not the case. Innocent people, new born babies even, have been killed in disasters - why? God has a plan for all our lives. THose innocent babies are now in heaven, in the presence of God. God's ways are not are ways. God can use tribulations in our lives to strengthen our character. Satan thought that the ultimate victory for evil had been won when Christ was crucified, but God used the death of His one and only Son, the sacrifice of His innocent life, to pay for the sins of all humanity. God loved us, and does love us, so much, that He gave His only Son to save mankind from our own bad choices. WE chose sin, WE brought sin and evil into our world; HE chose righteousness and love, HE has given us redemption. God is love!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
February 27th, 2004 06:38 am (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Interesting points...
|
hi Vivi..
I would sincerely admit that what ever has been debated is quite interesting and that Vexan has done a good job in saying that there is no God. However, I DO believe there IS a God. I do not wish to go into further debate or argues. Just this, if I were to choose with my ignorance, I would rather believe that there isn't and in fact is easier. However, I would request you all to put the question or biousness of whether God exist or not aside and look into facts from an objective view point. The Bible contains too much truth about the past, present and the future which is happening now in front of our very own eyes. If there is no God in the end, there is nothing to lose. Still, I sincerely urge you all to give yourself a chance to look into without prejudice what the Bible has. For if God IS real, ' it is written for man once to die and then the judgement.' There is no harm giving yourself to know God even if you stil think that He doesn't exist. Yes, if God is loving , He will not bear to sent you to hell yet, God is a holy and just God where sin has to be punish. If I would to create a religious book, I will never have written something like the Bible. For it is not the way or truth that humans want to associate themselves with. However, the Word of God is written by inspiration of God and it only states the truth whether men accept it or not.
.. Do allow yourself to take a 'second look' at the Bible before this life past..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: gpuffin |
Date:
July 19th, 2004 08:40 am (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
God didn't create thought and the ability to create
|
God cannot have created thought, being able to think, the act of thinking, conceptualizing, mentally conceiving, imagining, dreaming, whatever you want to call it, because...
In order to create this ability, firstly for his own use, he would have initially had to go through a some sort of a thinking/reasoning (guessing?) process in order to arrive any conclusion at all, possibly along the lines of "What do I need to do first in order to create everything" and without having first created the process/ability of thought for himself, he can't think what needs to be done.
It may be that thoughts/concepts, and hence the ability to produce thoughts/concepts, already existed within God in "non-time" prior to him creating everything, including "all that is seen and unseen", as a sort of inbuilt, fitted-as-standard feature of God's nature, it begs the question, what else is excluded from "everything"? (Apart from God, as a courtesy, otherwise he'd responsible for creating himself)
Therefore wholly abstract thoughts, concepts, or "ideas" must exist beyond God, or "before" God, or not be dependent on God, otherwise thoughts would not exist.
If God's ability to create, or by any other means otherwise be the source of all things is included in "Everything" (otherwise, it's not in everything and by definition everything includes all things) then how did God create, or become the source of, within himself, the ability to create?
Either this ability is inbuilt in his nature, and did not specifically need creating by God - it's there already - in which case God didn't create everything - or he needed to specifically create it and/or cause himself to become the source of this ability - but without the preexisting ability to create and/or cause himself to become a source of anything, how did he create it?
conclusion - God isn't the source of the ability to create, or cannot create.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[[[Everybody dont haf to go trough school to be wise and smart. A human with strong will and faith really means what he says and it is his opinion!
WE ARE EVERYBODY LOST SOULS SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH AND SOME SORT OF MEANING OF THIS COMPRESSED LIFE!]]]
Hello Mr. or Ms. anonomous.
My perspective is controversial, but personally, I don’t consider faith to be belief.
If I state that “I believe in ‘x’”, then ‘x’ would necessarily need to be intelligible to me.
For instance, how would one believe in Jabberwocky or flubnubs?
However, this is not true for faith. I define faith as a stifling of doubt that ‘x’ is not wrong. If one has “perfect faith” then one has “perfectly” suppressed all doubt that ‘x’ could not be wrong and this would necessarily make ‘x’ seem that it MUST be true, even if it is unintelligible, based on fallacious reasoning, contradictory, ridiculous or blatantly and provably false, etc.
I think faith destroys one’s ability for critical analysis and short-circuits one’s ability to discard untruths. If one’s definition of an untruth is ‘something that doesn’t match what I have faith in’, then one does not have any legitimate means of discarding untruths at all.
I consider it a neurotic pathology.
My opinion: Faith eats the mind.
The Vampire
LOGOS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date:
January 2nd, 2005 08:33 am (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
Much of your logic is ill, but your web site is interesting and has merit
|
Vexen,
You need to review your conclusions, as several (but not all) are illogical. It seems that some of your website was done without editing. For example, you speak of an "imminent" god. I believe that you really meant "eminent."
I did like several of your questions and points. Why does evil exist is a great question, especially if one presupposes that God is all good. Why would an all-good god create or even allow evil? If all knowing and he creates a being who he knows will eventually rebel against him (i.e., Lucifer) what does that say about god?
I think that the terror, pain, and suffering being levied upon the world by those who identify themselves as Muslims is making many nonreligious people hate religion even more. It will only be a matter of time before the rest of the world runs out of patience for this so-called "peaceful" religion and drops a big, fat, and dirty nuke (read: thousands of years of residual radiation) on Mecca (which should pretty much undermine their belief in Islamic supremacy). Then the preponderance of people will be nonreligious and there will, in my opinion, be a momentum toward this view. Sound preposterous? Time will tell...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
happy
If god created all...(which he didnt)