Turn on thread page Beta

A little logic about god to go among the cr*p.. watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What have you applied to oxford for?
    Not sure if thats a subject specific question or a more general one , but ppe, st peters
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, Ive probably missed a lot of the argument here as I havent really read past page 2, just been out to the shop. This is going to be very quickly written so it may not read all that well..

    (Original post by JayJay)
    No. Unless you can say that there is no possible state of affairs in which an omnibenevolent God can create a world where there is evil (i.e. that it contradicts the very essence of God in the same way as a triangle could not be 190 degrees), you are in no position to claim that you have disproved God, least of all appeal to logic to do so.
    First of all, I am not trying to disprove god, as stated before it is not the intention of this piece of logic. The essence of god is also not an issue here, you are making it the issue. If you were completely oblivious to all religious matters and knew nothing of 'the essence of god', this would appear completely logical to you. Try not to think outside of what is written. A god who is able and willing to prevent all evil would equal a world with no evil. That is logical, right?

    (Original post by JayJay)
    What ablout Soul Making, what about Free Will, what about the Augustinian Theodicy. You have to show that all of these have no qualitative value before making such a statement. And don't you dare appeal to intuition to do so. .
    None of the above mentioned are relevant here. The Augustinian theodicy says that man is responsible for evil by being led astray by Satan. As I said above, all that matters here is what is written and if followed using the laws of propositional logic each step is COMPLETELY LOGICAL (afterall, it is out of a maths text book )

    (Original post by JayJay)
    You must answer why a God who allows evil must by definition be malevolent.
    Malevolence is, by definition, 1) having or exhibiting ill will or wishing harm to others, or 2) having an evil or harmful influence. If god is able to prevent evil but chooses not to, god is by definition, malevolent.


    (Original post by JayJay)
    pot, kettle, black.
    lol. :rolleyes:

    If you really wish me to I will dig out my lectures notes (if I brought them home with me..) and explain it the way that the lecturer did using DeMorgans laws, truth tables and such.

    Im gonna go eat now aswell, so give me time to reply after you flame me
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JayJay)
    something of a blanket statement without justification? what about the help that religion gives people in overcoming the trials and tribulations of every day life. what about the concept that even if god did not exist, religion itself would have value. you can't just make blanket statements like that without backing them up.
    All the major religions have the same aim behind them.. they all strive for morality- this I don't have a problem with.

    But what I do have a problem with is the fact that nearly all religions dwell on the insignificant facts that can't be proven. And people fight and argue over these when theres no evidence causing far more problems in the world.

    I believe that you don't have to belong to a certain religion to have faith.. and there's no point anyway- if they are all basically asking for the same thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris_)
    Ok, Ive probably missed a lot of the argument here as I havent really read past page 2, just been out to the shop. This is going to be very quickly written so it may not read all that well..



    First of all, I am not trying to disprove god, as stated before it is not the intention of this piece of logic. The essence of god is also not an issue here, you are making it the issue. If you were completely oblivious to all religious matters and knew nothing of 'the essence of god', this would appear completely logical to you. Try not to think outside of what is written. A god who is able and willing to prevent all evil would equal a world with no evil. That is logical, right?



    None of the above mentioned are relevant here. The Augustinian theodicy says that man is responsible for evil by being led astray by Satan. As I said above, all that matters here is what is written and if followed using the laws of propositional logic each step is COMPLETELY LOGICAL (afterall, it is out of a maths text book )



    Malevolence is, by definition, 1) having or exhibiting ill will or wishing harm to others, or 2) having an evil or harmful influence. If god is able to prevent evil but chooses not to, god is by definition, malevolent.




    lol. :rolleyes:

    If you really wish me to I will dig out my lectures notes (if I brought them home with me..) and explain it the way that the lecturer did using DeMorgans laws, truth tables and such.

    Im gonna go eat now aswell, so give me time to reply after you flame me
    The essence of God clearly is an issue or you wouldn't have brought up his benevolance and power at all. You haven't answered my main point which is basically, explain how point 4 is logical. Explain to me why, evil in the universe and an Omnibenevolant and Omnipotent God cannot exist simultaneously. You can argue this intuitively I'm sure, but logically, you cannot. The reason you cannot is because benevolance and power don't NECESSARILY (i.e. logically) have to extinguish evil.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    The essence of God clearly is an issue or you wouldn't have brought up his benevolance and power at all. You haven't answered my main point which is basically, explain how point 4 is logical. Explain to me why, evil in the universe and an Omnibenevolant and Omnipotent God cannot exist simultaneously. You can argue this intuitively I'm sure, but logically, you cannot. The reason you cannot is because benevolance and power don't NECESSARILY (i.e. logically) have to extinguish evil.
    By contrast, if one of God's predicates was never allowing evil to occur then your argument would be logical.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elle)
    All the major religions have the same aim behind them.. they all strive for morality- this I don't have a problem with.

    But what I do have a problem with is the fact that nearly all religions dwell on the insignificant facts that can't be proven. And people fight and argue over these when theres no evidence causing far more problems in the world.

    I believe that you don't have to belong to a certain religion to have faith.. and there's no point anyway- if they are all basically asking for the same thing.
    The problem I have with religion is that it it does as much harm as it does good. I agree that it 'brainwashes', so to speak, certain people (not all) into racists and bigots. For example, take the priest (I cant quite recall his name or exact location right now) who wishes to erect a statue of a gay teenager who was murdered several years ago, and enscribe the plaque ''died and went to hell for defying god's will'', or something of that nature. This is an extreme example, but similar, less extreme events occur everyday due to religion, and this is why I have a problem.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, Ive probably missed a lot of the argument here as I havent really read past page 2, just been out to the shop. This is going to be very quickly written so it may not read all that well..



    First of all, I am not trying to disprove god, as stated before it is not the intention of this piece of logic. The essence of god is also not an issue here, you are making it the issue. If you were completely oblivious to all religious matters and knew nothing of 'the essence of god', this would appear completely logical to you. Try not to think outside of what is written. A god who is able and willing to prevent all evil would equal a world with no evil. That is logical, right?

    No. You have to tell me why. If this world were a "hedonistic paradise from which all pain and suffering were excluded”, then the consequences of this would be very far reaching. For example, no-one could ever injure anyone else: the murderers knife would turn to paper or the bullets to thin air; the bank safe, robbed of a million dollars, would miraculously become filled with another million dollars fraud, deceit, conspiracy and treason would somehow leave the fabric of society undamaged. In such a world there would be no real needs or dangers. In a world devoid both of dangers to be avoided and rewards to be won we may assume that there would have been virtually no development of the human intellect and imagination, and hence of either the sciences or the arts, and hence of human civilization or culture. Now i have just shown you a possible scenario where an all good God would want evil in the world. Now show me how that is false.


    None of the above mentioned are relevant here. The Augustinian theodicy says that man is responsible for evil by being led astray by Satan. As I said above, all that matters here is what is written and if followed using the laws of propositional logic each step is COMPLETELY LOGICAL (afterall, it is out of a maths text book )

    No. It is not completely logical. If i can show you a counterexample, your logic is clearly flawed. I cannot show you a counterexample to.

    Socrates is a man
    All men are mortal
    Socrates is mortal.

    I cannot show you how Socrates, being a man can be immortal, because I can show you no example of an immortal man. I however have shown you an example of why God might be justified in permitting evil. Now you have to show the logical contradiction in my argument. You can't just say God would clearly want this. It wont wash. How is any counterexample irrelevant? I am showing you how God can be good and allow evil. I am not showing you how God could also be Carl Douglas. I am showing you something directly relevant to what you are talking about.


    Malevolence is, by definition, 1) having or exhibiting ill will or wishing harm to others, or 2) having an evil or harmful influence. If god is able to prevent evil but chooses not to, god is by definition, malevolent.

    Yes, and perhaps with good reason. Show me the logical contradiction between a God who allows certain malevolences for a greater good, and a God who is omnibenevolent, when, to not allow those malevolences may result in a worse outcome.

    If you really wish me to I will dig out my lectures notes (if I brought them home with me..) and explain it the way that the lecturer did using DeMorgans laws, truth tables and such.

    You can if you want, but unless you can show the logical contradiction in my argument (and there is potentially one- but you aint close), then logic is not on your side.

    Im gonna go eat now aswell, so give me time to reply after you flame me

    take time to eat logically
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Damn you make it hard to quote you by replying like that... :rolleyes:

    You are obviously looking at this from a different viewpoint to me, and it is hard to explain my viewpoint without a way of showing you what my viewpoint is. You are looking at this as me trying to disprove god's existence, which I am not. It's just a series of statements that logically follow each other. You've probably never dealt with propositional logic so it will probably seem strange to you, and fairly pointless. Thinking about it now, I don't know why I even posted this because from a practical sense it is completely flawed, as you have correctly identified. I may aswell have posted a regular logical statement, it's just that this one is a little more interesting and I knew that it would provoke discussion

    I will try and explain the way you are supposed to look at these statements below.

    When looking at a statement of this nature we must not look at anything outside of the statement. We must only look at the fact that god is malevolent because we know nothing of his situation, and nothing of why he would let evil happen. We have to assume/conclude that he is being malevolent. We do not consider that god maybe letting evil happen for the greater good, it is not relevant in this kind of statement. If we were talking about a 'god' of another planet and we were unaware of the situation on this planet we would have to assume that this 'god' is malevolent because he lets evil happen when he could prevent it if he so wished. Quite inpractical and illogical taken in a real situation, but following the correct laws/rules it is correct. Like I said, thinking now I dont know why I posted it because it's quite obvious that people are not going to read it in the correct context.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nafisa)
    Come on everyone, does noone have any faith
    Why should anyone have faith? Faith (in terms of faith-based religion) is an illogical belief in something without evidence for it. It's just pulling an idea out of a hat and believing in it. You can have faith in anything you like, but it doesn't make it true or correct. :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rahaydenuk)
    Why should anyone have faith? Faith (in terms of faith-based religion) is an illogical belief in something without evidence for it. It's just pulling an idea out of a hat and believing in it. You can have faith in anything you like, but it doesn't make it true or correct. :rolleyes:
    Have you done any propositional logic at uni rahayden? I think you're doing the same course as me so I would assume you have to take a discrete maths module..

    If you have, can you just confirm that my original statement is correct please.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris_)
    Seeing as there's so many monotonously boring threads today, I thought Id give you something to think about. I read this somewhere recently and thought I would share it with you. It's a little flawed but is correct according to the laws of propositional loigic.

    If god is unable to prevent evil, then god is impotent.

    If god is unwilling to prevent evil, then god is malevolent.

    If god exists, then according to the bible, god is neither impotent nor malevolent.

    If god is neither impotent nor malevolent then there is no evil.

    There is evil.

    Therefore, god does not exist.


    I think it's pretty common so you may have seen it before.
    finally someone knows the truth
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris_)
    If god is unable to prevent evil, then god is impotent.
    If God is impotenet, how was Jesus born?

    (sorry if this joke has laready been made).
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    If God is impotenet, how was Jesus born?

    (sorry if this joke has laready been made).
    we dont no whether he was born
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris_)
    Seeing as there's so many monotonously boring threads today, I thought Id give you something to think about. I read this somewhere recently and thought I would share it with you. It's a little flawed but is correct according to the laws of propositional loigic.

    If god is unable to prevent evil, then god is impotent.

    If god is unwilling to prevent evil, then god is malevolent.

    If god exists, then according to the bible, god is neither impotent nor malevolent.

    If god is neither impotent nor malevolent then there is no evil.

    There is evil.

    Therefore, god does not exist.


    I think it's pretty common so you may have seen it before.
    "If God did not exist, it would be necessary for man to create him." - Voltaire. Says it all I think. God is the creation of malicious politicians. Mankind has always been cunning, and there have always been a good few suckers going around too. There is just no such thing as God.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eric bischoff)
    we dont no whether he was born
    It was a joke.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    It was a joke.
    i no i was making it more mad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    "If God did not exist, it would be necessary for man to create him." - Voltaire. Says it all I think. God is the creation of malicious politicians. Mankind has always been cunning, and there have always been a good few suckers going around too. There is just no such thing as God.
    if there is such thing as god who made him.Did a hand just appear and start making a body?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    It was a joke.
    Yeah, except there problem is that it went down in folklore leaving a lot of people believing it to be true. I have only one question... What was the punchline? Someone PM this to me please. My time is up already. Have fun
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    Yeah, except there problem is that it went down in folklore leaving a lot of people believing it to be true. I have only one question... What was the punchline? Someone PM this to me please. My time is up already. Have fun
    time up for what?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    Maybe Ganesh's trunk is Jesus' leg!
    lol, thats a good one
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.