Logic against the Existence of God? YEAH RIGHT!

A

ASHOOR

Administrator
Staff member
Reading online, I came across a page, that lists the logic for and against the existence of God. One of the interesting points against the existence of God or at least against his perfection and ability to do everything was the following, which I want you to read and try to dismantle or solve:

-Can God create a stone that he can't left?
If you answer with a "Yes", then that means there is something God can't do, which is the lefting of the stone. So he is not perfect and can't do evertthing.

If you answer with a "NO", that means there is something which God can't do, which is the 'creating of a stone which he can't left."


Now this is a matter of logic, and not science or religion. One easy answer to the above is to acknowledge that God is above logic, although he does conform to logic. God created everything, including logic, so he is above it. Moreover, logic only makes sense to us humans and shouldn't matter a lot to God, because his infinite wisdom is too much even for our humanly wisdom and logic.

I am interested in hearing your answer to the above logical claim.

I am not questioning the existence of God or anything, nor is it the purpose of this post, but I just want to arm myself with knoweldege that can help me with any debate about the existence of God. Of course faith is based on beleiving without seeing, but this is also a matter of religious logic.
 
k sorry i kno this has nothing to do with ur question at all ..... but what if i believe that he can lift the stone...
 
I don't think it means anything more than "believing in God as perfect and all-mighty" which is what I beleive in 100%.

ASHOOR
 
Alchemist, I love your use of logic when engaging in debates and replies on this forum, and I would love to see where you are going with this thread. I hope your question was a step to your resolution of the question I posed.

ASHOOR
 
well i understand the question, but it just seems so rhetorical ... cuz you can manipulate words to make them come out the way you want them to....

the best example i can come up with now is the one we used to use as kids ..... you'd ask someone "does your mom know you're gay" .... if they say "NO" ... then you can reply saying "ooh she doesn't know" implying that the person is still gay,regardless... if they reply saying "YES" ... then the question is answered straight ....

its just the wording of the question that tricks the reader into seeing it differently ...


the way i see it .... to the question you asked.. if i answer "NO" then im believing that he cant create it.... who created it then?
if we are to believe that GOD is all powerful and created everything, then the stone was already created by him...



the question that always used to get me was .....
did God create man, or did man create God?
 
Excellent reply, and I love your emphasis on how the question uses language and structuring to get the answer it desires.

its just the wording of the question that tricks the reader into seeing it differently ...
Click to expand...

ASHOOR
 
If you are a pure logician, the argument holds well. But the question of gods existence transcends all logic, reason, and human boundary. So logic itself is not enough to prove or disprove the existence of this higher deity. Logic and reality are not congruent. There must be a different premise to support an argument for or against the existence of god.
 
That was a really nice answer Iraqi. Good job.

My opinion:

God does not comply with logic. God is simply not logical. For logic insists on cause and effect, and God has no cause, he is the uncaused cause. A total logician as you put it cannot comply with the existence of God as his doctrine is in conflict with the idea of a divine mover that belittles our human science of reasoning.
 
Is he therefore the creater of himself? Or does he exist outside all things as well? If this is the case, and time began with God, what was there before time? for even a beginning requires a place in time to be deemed a beginning. Extra-temporal objects are metaphysically questionable as can be seen here. If you believe God represents an infinite, everlasting entity in reality, check out Leibniz's arguments in favour of this. But also check out the many arguments against... for there are many, and the prime one being that with infinity, the matter of 'purpose' is lost...
 
You guys are missing the falacy in this question. God is not able to do something against His nature, or the nature he created.

This question is the same as asking "Can God make a square circle?" It's the same thing. The question itself is illogical and therefore invalid.
 
I know His nature as the Bible lays it out for us to understand.

For instance, God can not lie.
God is love
God is just
God is merciful
God is jealous

Would you like more?
 
What do you think about this: God's first angel was Lucifer, which later became satan, and the epitome of evil. If Lucifer was God's creation, and now defines evil, does this in turn mean the root of all evil is also God?
 
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.
 
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.
Click to expand...

You would be surprised as to how many Christians argue against this very point. I'm glad you are knowledgeable of it though. Saves me arguing further. :mrgreen:
 
MJaY said:
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.
Click to expand...

You would be surprised as to how many Christians argue against this very point. I'm glad you are knowledgeable of it though. Saves me arguing further. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Amen brother.
 
MJay,

This is precisely the problem. An infinite God transcending all dimensions of the universe still begs the question: where did God from? For if the argument holds the universe is the effect and God is the cause..then what caused God? I do not like this argument or intelligent design. It is based on cause and effect.

This whole belief of causality is based on no factual priori, but is a product of empirical experience in which familiar judgements are deduced from our interaction with the physical world. You may, hypothetically speaking, play 1000 soccer games and in all of those 1000 soccer games you score a goal when you attempted it. But who is to say you will score the goal again in the 1001st game? How do you really know? Is it based on fact, or those past experiences in the 1000 games where you striked a goal?
 
Iraqi_Irani_Al-Farabi said:
MJay,

This is precisely the problem. An infinite God transcending all dimensions of the universe still begs the question: where did God from? For if the argument holds the universe is the effect and God is the cause..then what caused God? I do not like this argument or intelligent design. It is based on cause and effect.

This whole belief of causality is based on no factual priori, but is a product of empirical experience in which familiar judgements are deduced from our interaction with the physical world. You may, hypothetically speaking, play 1000 soccer games and in all of those 1000 soccer games you score a goal when you attempted it. But who is to say you will score the goal again in the 1001st game? How do you really know? Is it based on fact, or those past experiences in the 1000 games where you striked a goal?
Click to expand...

Iraqi,
The Question "Where did God come from?" is asked a lot. Let me explain it to you this way. It's difficult to think in these term, but you must try.

The universe and all that is in it has a beginning, and will have an end. It exists temporally. God does not. God is eternal. Has not beginning and no end. Therefore, God did not "come from anywhere". God simply is, and forever will be.
 
ashoor said:
Reading online, I came across a page, that lists the logic for and against the existence of God. One of the interesting points against the existence of God or at least against his perfection and ability to do everything was the following, which I want you to read and try to dismantle or solve:

-Can God create a stone that he can't left?
If you answer with a "Yes", then that means there is something God can't do, which is the lefting of the stone. So he is not perfect and can't do evertthing.

If you answer with a "NO", that means there is something which God can't do, which is the 'creating of a stone which he can't left."


Now this is a matter of logic, and not science or religion. One easy answer to the above is to acknowledge that God is above logic, although he does conform to logic. God created everything, including logic, so he is above it. Moreover, logic only makes sense to us humans and shouldn't matter a lot to God, because his infinite wisdom is too much even for our humanly wisdom and logic.

I am interested in hearing your answer to the above logical claim.

I am not questioning the existence of God or anything, nor is it the purpose of this post, but I just want to arm myself with knoweldege that can help me with any debate about the existence of God. Of course faith is based on beleiving without seeing, but this is also a matter of religious logic.
Click to expand...

This is not an argument at all. It has 'false alternatives', which is not considered an argument. It only gives you two choices. YES or NO. Politicians use this alot to get their way during debates/formal/public speaking. Even tho it may look like an argument, you have to realize it doesn't give the opposing side a fair chance to rebutt, b/c either answer would prove them wrong. It's manipulated by the person raising the question already knowing what the result of the situation will be
 
Iraqi, you have just discarded a vital process in knowledge acquisition by humans. Inductive reasoning is the most common method of aquiring knowledge in this world. It consists of the quantity of observation.. as you said, Iraqi, what do you believe the colour of swans to be ? If you observed 1000 swans, and they were all white.. Would you not (would anyone not) conclude that swans are white. This forms the core of most scientific classifications and the such around the world. If we did not do this, everything would be utterly random and by chance. (Not that I mind that :))

Deductive reasoning:

Examples

Valid:

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

The picture is above the desk.
The desk is above the floor.
Therefore the picture is above the floor.

Invalid:

Every criminal opposes the government.
Everyone in the opposition party opposes the government.
Therefore everyone in the opposition party is a criminal.
Click to expand...

To acquire knowledge using this method is highly convincing and coherant with true form. I mention all of this because we cannot, with our reasoning/rationality, whether it be via inductive reasoning or deductive reasoning, ascertain the existence of a God though logical processes. That is the primary point. As you said he exists outside of time. Extra-temporal. However, if God just is, what is God's purpose?
 
Senalko said:
MJaY said:
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.
Click to expand...

You would be surprised as to how many Christians argue against this very point. I'm glad you are knowledgeable of it though. Saves me arguing further. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I would Certainly argue this Point, not becuase i Disagree with it, but becuase i actually Agree with it.... :mrgreen: , NOW is there any logic in what i said?? NOT realy.. but let me explain...

Without a doubt, GOD is the Creator of all things... Period.... GOD Created Evil, GOD created us and the universe, GOD Created Satan and all the angels thereafter....

What alot of christians fail to understand is that YOU should not use GOD's logic in trying to put a meaning to Human Logic......Cuase by doing so, YOU are walking into a very Dangerious path in Underlining GOD's true characters of LOVE, Just and peace....

We can always Say " well GOD created evrything, thus any Questions asked will always have the same answer... the Answer is " well GOD created Evil, he created good, he created everything... Full stop "

When you are dealing with human logic, U need to expand your horizon than just be satisfied with " GOD makes everything, who are we to question it? "....

In Human Logic, and the best way to answer this Question is to Answer it for its real reason why Evil happens and who is responsible for it.....

EVIL on earth is the work of the Devil... everything Evil on earth comes from Stan... everything Evil we do on earth comes from our own Temptation from the DEVIL.. NOT GOD.....

GOD Does not Tempt us with Evil..... GOD does not enjoy watching people suffer in pain.. GOD loves the world so muchhhhh, he shares with us our Pain, he shares with us all of our hard times.. he is the Master of Pain... he himself had to endure the Pain that NO human being Can ever imagine to feel.....

Also, EVIL happens on earth becuase of man's seperation from GOD, as a result of SIN... the SIN that all started with Adam and eve not listening to GOD's instructions.....As a result of it, All human beings Are doomed " NOT fit enough for God's kindom" and no matter how much we try to be good or make up for it, Nothing can ever change the Fact that We live under a Curse.. a Curse that is due to SIN, SIN that is due to Satan and his existance on earth....

for that reason, GOD sent in his only SON, so he can make it possile for us to beat this SIN, and open the door for us to be accepted by GOD... that is the True character of a Loving, forgiving GOD....NOT the Evil GOD that creates EVIL and purposly hits people with it....

One of my Brothers at another site, Hit the Nail when he Quoted from the bible what it turly Said:

James 1:13 "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed in his own desire"
Click to expand...

Eddie, I am not disagreeing with you at all, but only challenging you to think this through a little more. I agree with ALMOST everything you said above. But why question to you is, how would you explain what happened to Job? Did God not send Satan after him?
 
Guys I am really thrilled at your great answers to this thread. Even more, your knowledge of logic and its application makes a lot of sense, and make me beleive you are not just throwing an answer out of nowhere.

Beleive it or not, the question I posed, and the answers I got strengthened my faith in God even more.

And like most of you said, I really beleive the question I presented, makes very little sense and is more of a linguistic trick.

ASHOOR
 
MJaY said:
Iraqi, you have just discarded a vital process in knowledge acquisition by humans. Inductive reasoning is the most common method of aquiring knowledge in this world. It consists of the quantity of observation.. as you said, Iraqi, what do you believe the colour of swans to be ? If you observed 1000 swans, and they were all white.. Would you not (would anyone not) conclude that swans are white. This forms the core of most scientific classifications and the such around the world. If we did not do this, everything would be utterly random and by chance. (Not that I mind that :))

Deductive reasoning:

Examples

Valid:

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

The picture is above the desk.
The desk is above the floor.
Therefore the picture is above the floor.

Invalid:

Every criminal opposes the government.
Everyone in the opposition party opposes the government.
Therefore everyone in the opposition party is a criminal.
Click to expand...

To acquire knowledge using this method is highly convincing and coherant with true form. I mention all of this because we cannot, with our reasoning/rationality, whether it be via inductive reasoning or deductive reasoning, ascertain the existence of a God though logical processes. That is the primary point. As you said he exists outside of time. Extra-temporal. However, if God just is, what is God's purpose?
Click to expand...


My point still stands. I will not say all swans are white because I saw one thousands white swans. I believe them to be white because there is a biologically scientific explanation for it. You cannot rationalize God on the basis of perception and empiricism.

Not everything we see is as it appears to be. The moon appears to be the size of a coin, but science has proven to us that it is not. This by and in itself proves that observation is not sufficient by itself in order to make a coherent conclusion. Truth is not absolute, but only relevant to the way we perceive it. Nietzsche went so far as to even say all our senses are deceiving.

I am not bringing the question of logic into hand. I am simply saying if you are to rationalize the existence of God on the basis of cause and effect, then there is a flaw. Because you are not relating it to a universal law of cause and effect, you are deducing a conclusion based upon empirical knowledge, not a factual priori. If there is an equation which can determine everytime that you will score a goal at the soccer games, then this is different.

As a matter of fact, to believe God is the cause of the universe is very logical by and in itself. But as we know logic is not always in parallel with reality.

Now with your example, the reason I know the picture is above the floor is because I can measure it and make a numerical conclusion, instead of relativizing it to the position of the desk. We know for a fact that picture is above the floor because we have scientific tools that allow us to make such a conclusion.


Our knowledge is very limited. Its not about logic. I am simply stating you are making judgements which have no solid foundation. Say ok 'this is all we know as mortals'. But if you do that, you will have to say it with a certain percentage of uncertainty. Call this logic if you must, but its not logic of dialectics. It is logic that questions the foundation of your own logic and reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top