Hypothetical Question for Christians

[bigthinker]

I added more to my post. The point being that if it's up to whomever is being asked, it'd be easy for them to reconcile.

Well, of course. I reckon that's part of the point.
The beauty of beliefs is that they don't have to be internally consistent.

 

[Algor]

In your answer you are literally rejecting logic.
In other words, in spite of logic, you'd believe anyways.

Why isn’t he just rejecting his own characterization of God?

 

[bigthinker]

Why isn’t he just rejecting his own characterization of God?

Quite likely he's already done that, already worked through it.
Atheists, especially former believers find belief interesting.

 

[Lt. Columbo]

If I could prove to your satisfaction that there was a logical contradiction in the concept of an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect being, would you become an atheist?

There's no "right" or "wrong" answer, here. I am just asking how you'd react to a proof like that.

Thanks.

I might feel mildly disappointed – I like the concept of an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect being. Other than that, however, it would have little effect on me. That’s because, I don’t believe a being capable of creating the Universe and life need be omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. No, I wouldn’t become an atheist.

 

[bigthinker]

I might feel mildly disappointed – I like the concept of an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect being. Other than that, however, it would have little effect on me. That’s because, I don’t believe a being capable of creating the Universe and life need be omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. No, I wouldn’t become an atheist.

Would you believe in the actual existence of unicorns without evidence?

 

[Eightcrackers]

If you could demonstrate you had a path to ultimate absolute justified knowledge, I would believe everything you could prove.

However, since I am already convinced this is a logical impossibility, this hypothetical is known to me as impossible.

How do you know?
Do you have the "path to ultimate absolute justified knowledge"?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

you aren't seriously asking for an explanation are you?
The OP asks if the believer, after the logical contradiction has been proved to their satisfaction, would then become an atheist.

No it doesn't. Read it again. God is not a concept. Your big thinking failed you again.

 

[bigthinker]

No it doesn't.

Yes it does.

Read it again. God is not a concept. Your big thinking failed you again.

You aren't thinking. Or is it a reading comprehension issue?

 

[Furion]

If I could prove to your satisfaction that there was a logical contradiction in the concept of an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect being, would you become an atheist?

Atheism is the belief "there is no God"

Atheists can argue over that, and that's ok, you desire to know what I think so don't shoot the messenger.

It is stated in many ways, usually as a goad or a declarative statement.

Here is an example. An atheist declaring there is no Creator. Lots of declarative statements like this are made around here by atheists and I notice them when I see them.

Nobody. Nobody existed TO create it.

I first need to figure out whether you, the atheist, are putting forth a coherent argument towards your claim, and that you actually subscribe to what you say. That means something to me.

I think you do believe through your philosophical methodology that the OP is true, you can prove what you pose as a hypothetical. If not you personally then someone a little better than you perhaps.

In this instance all you would accomplish is tearing down some version of thought where someone imagines this omni-God you declare is illogical. I don't believe your claims in the first place, and that's your biggest issue here with me.

It gets me nowhere towards atheism.

So I would say No, your argument doesn't get me to atheism.

There's no "right" or "wrong" answer, here. I am just asking how you'd react to a proof like that.

Thanks.

Welcome.

 

[bigthinker]

Atheism is the belief "there is no God"

Nope. Wrong answer.

Atheists can argue over that, and that's ok, you desire to know what I think so don't shoot the messenger.

It is stated in many ways, usually as a goad or a declarative statement.

Here is an example. An atheist declaring there is no Creator. Lots of declarative statements like this are made around here by atheists and I notice them when I see them.



I first need to figure out whether you, the atheist, are putting forth a coherent argument towards your claim, and that you actually subscribe to what you say. That means something to me.

I think you do believe through your philosophical methodology that the OP is true, you can prove what you pose as a hypothetical. If not you personally then someone a little better than you perhaps.

In this instance all you would accomplish is tearing down some version of thought where someone imagines this omni-God you declare is illogical. I don't believe your claims in the first place, and that's your biggest issue here with me.

It gets me nowhere towards atheism.

So I would say No, your argument doesn't get me to atheism.


Welcome.

Basically, even if the logical contradiction was proved to you -to your satisfaction you would deny logic and believe anyways.

It seems to me that the OP is about belief and believing rather than being about the nature of God.

Essentially: if you were convinced that an idea were illogical, would you reject or hang on to that idea?

 

[bigthinker]

God is not a concept.

Support that statement with evidence. Demonstrate that God is not a concept.
Demonstrate that God exists outside of your imagination.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Demonstrate that God is not a concept.

Demonstrate that He is. Then demonstrate that your thinking is big.

 

[bigthinker]

God is not a concept.

Support that statement with evidence. Demonstrate that God is not a concept.
Demonstrate that God exists outside of your imagination.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Demonstrate that God is not a concept.

Demonstrate that He is.

Your fake big thinking is really failing you today.

 

[bigthinker]

Demonstrate that He is.

You -with the help of your God are demonstrating that your God is imaginary.

You understand there is a difference between a concept of a thing and the thing itself right?
given an apple on a table, the concept of the apple is not the apple. The two have different properties.

Is it the same with your God? if so, what are differences between the God you think about and God itself -in what ways are the two distinguishable?

I predict that you will fail to cite any meaningful differences. Oh you might make excuses or try to childishly goad me into engaging your simple-minded hang up with my user name but you will fail to present any differences and will fail (again) to present evidence that your God is not imaginary.

Let's see what you do.

 

[bigthinker]

Demonstrate that He is.

Yes, thank you for making my case. Your failure is my argument.

Your fake big thinking is really failing you today.

Obviously you're struggling. Try thinking instead, for once.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Let's see what you do.

Whatta ya mean "Let's see what [I'll] do?"I'll answer you like I always do and you'll come back with nothing. God is a Person Whose presence I experience. He is no more a concept than is my earthly father.

DEMONSTRATE that your next-door-neighbor is not just a concept.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Try thinking instead, for once.

You're repeating yourself. Running out of big thoughts?

 

[Howie]

In your answer you are literally rejecting logic.
In other words, in spite of logic, you'd believe anyways.

What logic is he rejecting?

 

[Eightcrackers]

What logic is he rejecting?

The hypothetical logical demonstration that his god is impossible.

"If logic were to prove my god impossible, I would still believe."