Is God impossible?

[Aupmanyav]

Impossible. Where from does it arise? Who begets it?

 

[Aiviu]

I say maybe.

... if for no other reason than when we ask a question and have no information to help us come up with an answer, the default answer is always "maybe": it could be yes or no, but we don't have enough information yet to tell which.

So could God be impossible? The answer is yes... until someone gives a good reason to believe that God is possible.

Does anyone have such a reason?

No, the answer always stays "maybe". On a scale from 1 to 10; how close are you to know? You cant know the answer if you even dont know its scale.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Sure. Platonic metaphysics show that a Form of Consciousness is required. An immaterial, eternal, independent, conscious being is worth being called God. So God is not only likely, but required.

This argument means that god is an assumption based on a theory of knowledge.
It does not mean that god factually exists - only that it's required in your particular logical paradigm.

 

[columbus]

Even with a Deist model it still must be shown that we didn't just wind up here through random chance.

No it doesn't. In the deist model everything ever was contained in the original Creation. Randomness is not necessary or even implied. We are an emergent property of nature and reality.
If anything, deism implies less randomness than standard theism. God doesn't randomly change His Mind about stuff like humans do.
Tom

 

[Fool]

I'll let people use whatever definition they want as long as they're consistent. For instance, I'm not going to accept someone who defines "God" as "the universe" to try to use this definition to establish that a miracle-weilding, scripture-writing God exists or is possible.

i have to concede you have good insight. if there is this universe, or god, then he has to be omnipresent within self and not separate from self. that would be a disconnect between self and it's environ. nothing can exist apart from the Absolute. one can better understand the macrocosm by trying to understand the microcosm of self.

gnōthi seauton

Love it's self is a miracle, a work of love.

miracle

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
Sun Tzu, The Art of War

 

[LuisDantas]

A Deistic god, by definition, would not bother intervening or making himself known, right?
So whatever worth you derive from that idea would be entirely self-given.

Quite so.

It's not the existence of the god that gives worth or meaning to life, it's our choice to see it as such.

Ditto.

EDIT: We are imbuing this invisible unknown with qualities and attributes that we find appealing - there's no confirmation for any of our suggestions about the nature or character of god, making the assumption that it exists.

Isn't that the proper way of treating Gods?

See what I'm saying? The existence of a Deistic god, if we are honest with ourselves, could just as easily be confirmation of a diabolical plot to ensure that everything dies...

It is very much all in the eye of the beholder, indeed.

 

[George-ananda]

Is God impossible?

I would say that unless someone makes falsifiable claims about God, then we can never say impossible.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Sure. Platonic metaphysics show that a Form of Consciousness is required. An immaterial, eternal, independent, conscious being is worth being called God. So God is not only likely, but required.

I wouldn't use Greek philosophers. They were logical, but that applied that logic towards a reality they didn't understand.

Consider medicine. They had a very logical way of diagnosing and treating the sick. . . But as logical as it was, it's destructive.

Humorism - Wikipedia

Applying only pure reason to anything without some kind of enpricical understanding is mastubatory nonsense.

So yeah, classical theism falls into this category.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'll let people use whatever definition they want as long as they're consistent. For instance, I'm not going to accept someone who defines "God" as "the universe" to try to use this definition to establish that a miracle-weilding, scripture-writing God exists or is possible.

In that case, no, God is not impossible. But he is also far too arbitrarily defined to be of much relevance.

Outside of the strictly personal scope it is actually useless at best, often all-out destructive.

 

[Acim]

Does anyone have such a reason?

Yes, I do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is God impossible?

I would say that unless someone makes falsifiable claims about God, then we can never say impossible.

But can't we say "maybe impossible" until facts come to light one way or the other?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, I do.

... and it is...?

 

[Reggie Miller]

with Love all things are possible because Love is divine

| - Science of Relationships

With God all things are possible and nothing shall be impossible.

--Jesus

 

[Acim]

... and it is...?

Let's go back to what you were saying on p.1 where you said: "If your God doesn't exist objectively" - can you think of anything that truly exists objectively? Let's have that discussion first, such that the reason will be more clear.

 

[fallingblood]

But can't we say "maybe impossible" until facts come to light one way or the other?

I would say this. I'm a theist, but I would say the existence of G-d is maybe impossible.

I come more from a history background. In history, anything is possible. But not everything is probable. When something has more evidence, the probability of that event increases. With G-d, we obviously have no evidence, so the probability that G-d exists is extremely low. The most probable answer is that G-d doesn't exist. I don't like absolutes though, and without evidence, I think saying impossible would be a step to far.

However, various versions of G-d can be said to be virtually impossible. The classical concept of G-d, a G-d who is all loving, and all powerful, can't exist once the problem of evil is introduced.

 

[Fool]

With God all things are possible and nothing shall be impossible.

--Jesus

Love is God.

If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?


Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.

 

[George-ananda]

But can't we say "maybe impossible" until facts come to light one way or the other?

Technically yes, but it just seems like word play that doesn't say or change anything. Doesn't 'maybe impossible' still also imply 'possible'? Can't we say anything unproven about nature "maybe impossible"?

 

[Jumi]

What type of God are we talking about again?

 

[Reggie Miller]

What type of God are we talking about again?

One that is either possible or impossible?

 

[LuisDantas]

One that is either possible or impossible?

Like my righteous claim to the throne of Denmark?