Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Keep trying. See if you can get your wheels to go all the way down to the ground.Leonardo DeCaprio?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Truth: either God exists or He don't.
- Thread starter capumetu
- Start date
37818
Active Member
God says. But our different presuppositions gets in the way. Maybe the principle of Occam's razor will help us out.
Which would probably suggest you are both wrong.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
God says that your understanding is correct and my understanding is incorrect?
37818
Active Member
Make that case.
There is Existence which has no origin.
37818
Active Member
Indeed God says what we should believe.
I said "But our different presuppositions gets in the way. Maybe the principle of Occam's razor will help us out."
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
There is regardless of whether you posit a god (or gods) or not - hence Occam supports no god(s).
If no God exists, the the universe is an existence with no origin.
If God exists, then God is an existence with no origin.
Either way, there is an existence with no origin. But we know the universe exists, so Occam would suggest we do NOT assume the existence of a God as well.
37818
Active Member
You do not have the same meaning for God as do. So how does that make your argument meaningful? We have diiffernent presuppositions.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
It doesn't matter what 'god' means, it doesn't change the fact that there is "existence with no origin" regardless of whether it exists or not.
37818
Active Member
What is contingent on existing is never God. Your two arguments start with what I personally reject as as bad type argument.
With all "God exists" arguments start off, that exisrence exists. An effectively denies God by failing to use God's fundamentla identity - being the uncaused Existence.
37818
Active Member
Then you do not use a meaningless word. I use word "God" to mean "the Existence with no origin."
So you literally cannot think of the possibility that no God exists?
In that case, how do you know this 'uncaused Existence' has intelligence? How do you know there isn't more than one? How do you know it isn't the same as the universe?
Yes, existence exists. But that does NOT mean there is an intelligent agent that exists. And it is the intelligent agent that is called God.
Otherwise, the universe is 'existence itself' and the whole discussion is trivialized.
So, the universe?
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Then it's an all but meaningless word, that could refer to just the bubble of space-time we are in or some sort of larger multiverse as well as its more transitional religious meanings.
37818
Active Member
Yeah, if you are a pantheist.
Everything is not uncaused Existence. Only the Existence having no origin. Any single thing in the universe is not everything.
37818
Active Member
This is nutty. Multiverse. If universe means everything it includes any kind of multiverse.Then it's an all but meaningless word, that could refer to just the bubble of space-time we are in or some sort of larger multiverse as well as its more transitional religious meanings.
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
God says lots of things.
How would Occam's razor help us out?
Occam's razor is the principle that, of two explanations that account for all the facts, the simpler one is more likely to be correct. It is applied to a wide range of disciplines, including religion, physics, and medicine.
Occam's razor | Origin, Examples, & Facts | Britannica
Not-knowing is not not-being.