do you believe there is a GOD?

[Sithis]

<p>Why does a God who makes “arbitrary” decisions = a God who does not exist?</p>

[solostrad]

<p>everything in the universe can be explained through science. Where is your god, is he/she/it a tangible being? I think not
even if a god does exist, look at all of the pain, suffering, death, violence, and tensions brought about by organized religion throughout history. Its not worth it if you ask me.</p>

[HarveyLewis]

<p>

@solostrad/Descartes

I think not

and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.</p>

<p>(I’m sorry, I just love that joke)</p>

[gotakun]

<p>

@silence_kit

yeah it does. first premise & axiom (at least the way im using those words) are synonyms.

They are not synonyms. If an argument is based on true axioms, it is valid. If it’s based on theoretical premises, its conclusions have no validity. Correct me if I’m wrong (anyone). (Also, again, I know even axioms can be disputed, but the level of certainty is on a completely different scale than arbitrary, theoretical premises.)</p>

<p>

Call me out if I’m mischaracterizing what’s going on. My first point, which you agree with, is:</p>

<p>-You can be religious and have a perfectly consistent belief system (aka be logical)

While it is possible, I don’t think it’s even remotely common. The belief system surely is not anything like mainstream religion and may necessarily not even include the belief in a god. The literal, ambiguous interpretation of the statement is possible, but I don’t personally feel it relates to the religion we’ve been discussing thus far. If your purpose is to prove that even a Christian belief system can be consistent, please be explicit about that, and I’ll address the inconsistencies in Christian beliefs. If it is to say that some religion somewhere can be consistent, you’re probably right, but it’s a meaningless statement.</p>

[schaden]

<p>My religion worships the God of the God that created the God that created the universe.</p>

[pkmntrainerharry]

<p>who created the God of the God that created the God that created the universe?</p>

[schaden]

<p>Me of course!</p>

[gotakun]

<p>Then who created you?</p>

[ikillers]

<p>“If we didn’t have any senses, would math exist?”</p>

<p>Yes.</p>

[archi92]

<p>How come this thread ends up in the college life section?</p>

[inteluim053]

<p>Yes, I do believe in God and His miracles. He’s never let me down and got me through some tough times. :)</p>

[peter_parker_1]

<p>^ I used to believe in Santa Claus, too.</p>

<p>But joking aside, to answer Sithis’ question</p>

<p>“Why would a God who makes arbitrary decisions mean there is no God?”</p>

<p>Well, I guess I will answer that with a question.</p>

<p>What is the difference between no God at all, and having a God who makes absolutely arbitrary/ random decisions?</p>

<p>Both are imperceptible - and neither really govern or control the universe at all. Both have no bearing on anything and are exactly the same in all ways. What is a God who has no physical being, and has no mind? He is nothing.</p>

[futurenyustudent]

<p>I’m pastafarian. It’s about as plausible as Christianity and pastafarian heaven has a beer volcano.</p>

[amarkov]

<p>

What is the difference between no God at all, and having a God who makes absolutely arbitrary/ random decisions?</p>

<p>Both are imperceptible - and neither really govern or control the universe at all. Both have no bearing on anything and are exactly the same in all ways.

</p>

<p>You’re walking along the street, and you see a house with a tree fallen on top of it. Now, it’s possible that the tree hasn’t been removed just because there’s nobody there to move it. But it’s also possible that there is someone there, and they just decided not to move the tree because they thought it was cool.</p>

<p>Just because you can’t tell the difference between those situations, does that mean there is no difference?</p>

[jasonInNy]

<p>you guys are wasting time.</p>

<p>So what if there is or isnt a god? Are you going to get to shake his hand, do business with him, or play Call of Duty MW 2 with him?</p>

<p>NO!!!</p>

[amarkov]

<p>I dunno, I’m going to be seriously disappointed if there’s no Call of Duty in heaven.</p>

[silence_kit]

<p>

And you can’t really reason about math,

</p>

<p>lol, tell that to the zillions of math professors all over the world and see what response you get.</p>

<p>

take basic facts from…? i’m not familiar with the philosophy of math. but i don’t see how you can figure out math without reality.

</p>

<p>you get to choose the basic facts & assume them to be true. this is how all logical reasoning takes place. you have to start from somewhere.</p>

<p>

i reject that god’s existence can be taken as a given.

</p>

<p>i do too, but it doesn’t make the christian’s argument any less logical.</p>

<p>

in your definition of axioms/premises, you can take any axioms you want to be true, and reason logically within the boundaries of the axiom you made true.

</p>

<p>yes. this is how reasoning works. note: you are free to not accept the premises! however, once you do this, you are not free to criticize the christian for being illogical just because you don’t want to play his game.</p>

<p>

it really comes down to the example i gave earlier. believing in god is logical if my believing in the green dragon in my garage is logical.

</p>

<p>right. however, the green dragon example is more absurd because you can easily verify by observation whether the dragon is in your garage or not. Assuming the existence of god is way less silly, because there isn’t a way to show that he doesn’t exist through observation if you craft him appropriately.</p>

[silence_kit]

<p>

since accepting ‘there is a god’ without evidence/observation is as ridiculous as accepting ‘there is a green dragon in my garage’

</p>

<p>i don’t think it is as ridiculous for reasons i stated above. also, you do reasoning on things not ‘derived’ (im using this word loosely–science by no means is deductive reasoning) from observation all of the time. mathematics, what is right and what is wrong, politics (closely related), among other things are a few examples.</p>

[silence_kit]

<p>

They are not synonyms. If an argument is based on true axioms, it is valid. If it’s based on theoretical premises, its conclusions have no validity. Correct me if I’m wrong (anyone). (Also, again, I know even axioms can be disputed, but the level of certainty is on a completely different scale than arbitrary, theoretical premises.)

</p>

<p>

true axioms

</p>

<p>this doesn’t really mean anything. axioms are true by definition. you can not choose to not accept them, but then your problem with the argument IS NOT that it isn’t logical. </p>

<p>you can assume other premises and then logically show that that axiom is inconsistent with the others, BUT if the christian has thought out his position well, he probably won’t agree to those. so your beef with him isn’t that he is being illogical–it is just that you two have different opinions and are unwilling to come to terms.</p>

<p>

If your purpose is to prove that even a Christian belief system can be consistent, please be explicit about that, and I’ll address the inconsistencies in Christian beliefs. If it is to say that some religion somewhere can be consistent, you’re probably right, but it’s a meaningless statement.

</p>

<p>let me invent an artificial latin phrase for this situation(as you are so fond of doing) gotten by using an online latin translator: *vos coepi is<a href=“you%20started%20it”>/i</a>.</p>

<p>you, throughout this thread and the last have asserted that religion is illogical without actually pointing to inconsistencies in the theology. mostly you have just been raising a fuss about how unwilling you are to believe in god. This isn’t good enough to show that religion is illogical. The burden is on you to back up your claim.</p>

<p>If you can come up with these inconsistences (THIS is what you need to show that religion is illogical), I will be more than willing to argue about them provided that they are about christianity. I’m not really familiar with other religions.</p>

[silence_kit]

<p>

An axiom is something that is self-evident.

</p>

<p>yes. something that is self-evident is something assumed to be true without proof. This doesn’t mean that everybody has to do it–you are free to accept or reject axioms. however, within that logical system, this decision to accept/reject is not a logical one. This is just your opinion.</p>

<p>as an example, I’ll take math: the definition of a vector space doesn’t NOT become an axiom of linear algebra just because i raise a big stink about it in the first lecture and decide to not agree with it.</p>