Gods infinity problem.
God requires infinite knowledge.
If infinities do not exist there can only be a finite amount of knowledge.
If infinities do exist there can be no inifinite knowledge.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
What evidence do you have that any deity would require infinite knowledge?
@Hoser Re: "What evidence do you have that any deity would require infinite knowledge?"
...*raging tirade*.... Mother#%$&#$% son-of-a%#$&**%# Howdy-Doody-lookin' #$%#$!&&%%#$# creampie eating #%&##!$!$%%&#$ piece of %&#$#%&#$%!!!! After MONTHS of waiting, I JUST GOT my new irony meter delivered yesterday! And YOU just caused it to completely IMPLODE with that one statement! What the ##$$#!&&%!#$%&????? Do you have ANY idea how close you came to causing a singularity in my KITCHEN??? That meter started collapsing in on itself to the point I just KNEW it was reaching the critical mass of becoming a black hole. Thankfully, I was able to get the damn thing unplugged just a split-second before it reached infident density. Thanks a lot, asshole! And I somehow doubt this will be covered under the warranty. No way they could have foreseen the device getting used around somebody of your caliber.... *raging cuss fit continues*... #!$%%%&**#$!$%##$!&&%&&#%!&$%.....
Bazinga
Aye Homer.... a person (myself and others [can’t speak for all]) has the ability to “imagine”...
Difference?!?!? An atheist would like some form of evidence to ground them in reality (you know, physical reality - not lala land)...
Theist, just “feels” his/her imagination is right and is the evidence (can’t speak for all, just those that have not been able to offer up any evidence grounded in physical reality).
One assumes he's talking about the Abrahamic deity(s). The core doctrine of those religions has always claimed their deity is omniscient.
You simply discard doctrinal teachings rather than defend them of course, but this doesn't evidence a deity. Indeed you disprove the christian deity your profile asserts belief in with each new post.
I'm not sure what you believe in, but its demonstrably not christianity.
What evidence do you have that any deity would require infinite knowledge? Please feel free to illustrate where some sort of infinity paradox would occur thereof.
Since you've repeated the question, I will link my previous answer that you have ignored...
https://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/gods-infinity-problem...
You didn't answer the question you just babbled something about literalism, so I reasked it.
Hint:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism
Of course I answered it, sadly I can't dumb it down for you. It was clear the thread question was addressing the Abrahamic deity(s), as those religion's core doctrine has traditionally claimed their deity to be omniscient for centuries.
I was being polite, and trying to avoid stating plainly what a particularly stupid question yours was, to address to an atheist, but it seems you have forced my hand.
An atheist, by definition holds no beliefs about a god, so asking an atheist to prove why a god must possess a certain characteristic takes a spectacular level of stupidity, even more so when anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Abrahamic religions knows their core doctrine has assigned their deity(s) that characteristic for centuries.
As I said, you refute your profile claim that you're a Christian more with every new post. It's a little sad you can't understand this, but that's hardly my fault.
FYI, I never once mentioned literalism in my post, so well done.
Are you on any medication?
I'm not the strawman you are looking for. Nor are Christians who don't ascribe to some sort of Biblical literalism to some point to create some sort of infinity paradox. Now answer the question.
What evidence do you have that any deity would require infinite knowledge? Please feel free to illustrate where some sort of infinity paradox would occur thereof.
@Homer
I have, twice.
I made no such claim, so another irony overload there for you to talk of a straw man, in the same post you use the fallacy. And FYI again...I never mentioned literalism, you made that non sequitur, so you're really on fire here champ.
The paradox stems from centuries of religious doctrine, just why you're unable to grasp the simplest points is unclear, maybe some tuition in basic English comprehension might help you?
Why would I need to evidence a claim I have never made? Again I refer you to my previous answers, though sadly it is as usual pearls before swine. The claim does not originate from atheism, but from the core doctrine of centuries of Abrahamic religion. Is this sinking through that mahogany pate of yours at all, and penetrating the gloopy mess within?
You really ought to consider some English comprehension lessons you know.
For instance, all you had to do was state the question didn't apply to you, because despite claiming to be a christian, this core doctrinal teaching is yet another you've decided to ignore, as addressing it requires cogent rational effort, when you favour glib vapid hand waving, to dismiss such questions.
Everyone would have understood precisely what you'd said then, and having read your posts would be reasonably sure it was true.
Instead your stroppy repetitive demand, that atheists evidence a theistic claim is embarrassing even by your previous efforts.
Ah well I did try, maybe this is something the bible got right, the education of fools is folly.
I would ask the same question of a Biblical literalist. "What evidence do you have that any deity would require infinite knowledge to the point of creating some sort of infinity paradox?"
The literalist would come up with some sort of an answer about the answer would be beyond the compression of man or something of that sort.
Those who aren't so literal would question if those people who wrote the books of the Bible were really looking to convey their concept of God's knowledge to the level of paradox.
@Homer
The concept that a deity is omniscient need not be limited to biblical literalists. Again this has been a core tenet of christian and Muslim doctrine for centuries.
Personally I think it's arguing the details of unicorn husbandry, as it strikes me as another futile exercise to try and falsify one piece of core religious doctrine, when a) theists will simply roll past it as they always do, and b) no one can demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity anyway. Like arguing about what colour invisible unicorns are.
@Sheldon...nah... it’s like my boys “getting into it” on some video game backstory.
It’s imaginative “playtime”.
@Hoser Re: "I would ask the same question of a Biblical literalist."
Good! Then go find one and ask him/her. After all, THEY are the ones who believe in that nonsense. As an atheist, though, I don't give a flying floogle-fart one way or the other. You might as well be asking us to provide evidence of whether or not Leprechauns carry a lucky rabbit's foot in their watch pocket. Get a damn clue already... *rolling eyes*...
@ Tin-Man
This reminds me of an episode of "The Big Bang Theory" where the protagonists debate whether Superman could beat Batman.
Who gives a shit arguing about something disconnected from reality?
@homersimpsondoh
Without the claim of a god, there would not be a paradox.
Do you have any objective evidence of your version of a god, or any version of a god for that matter?
No.
Huh, nothing has changed with you...you still believe that something exists in reality, without objective evidence of it actually existing in reality. You fail at basic human reason...which, as with each post you make, frames nicely your level of delusion.
I love how shel pointed this out to you, and you couldn't acknowledge it...that's called cognitive dissonance. It seems you have the complete delusional package.
ROTFLMAO. Too funny
Without the assertion of a requirement infinite knowledge, there would not be a paradox as well.
So I asked a question.
But you are the one asserting non-existent things...LOL.
I didn't reassert it in this thread to ask the question. The guy said "God requires infinite knowledge."
Forgive me for asking him why.
@homersimpsondoh
So you want me to forget that you fail at reason? Try not failing at reason, and I will try not to think you are deluded.
LOL
I don't really care what you remember or forget.
I just had a question about a statement the OP made, so I asked it.
Do you not know that what you say, do and believe, defines you in the eyes of others?
I have been around just long enough to always keep in mind people that fail at things, as to prevent myself or others from the damage caused by irrational people...Just like you. I can not forget that you fail miserably at basic reason. I try to steer clear of people who have irrational belief's, to limit the damage caused by them.
I guess, in your world of not caring, if you found a cockroach in your burger, you would go back to the same burger joint, for your next meal. I guess that's ok for some people, but its not for me.
I remember for my own good, and I care for the good of humanity.
You believe in things that are not evidenced in reality, and do not see anything wrong with that...as everything that comes from you, because of this failure, is suspect.
Good for you! Avoid me at all costs. Avoid all who believe in a creator. Run down bunny holes all you wish about whatever you are going on about because I'm a theist.
I'm just trying to question the guy's assertion here, in this thread, on topic.
@ Homer
That is not what he said. He was talking about avoiding irrational people.
You should know better Homer, engaging in dishonest debate tactics. You seem capable of using more ethical methods in your debating.
Why do you stoop so low? Is it just in your nature?
I got from the monkey that he considers theists by definition to be irrational because they believe without objective evidence. Did I misconstrue? Or are some theists out there that show God evidenced in reality to a point where the monkey gives them that nodding head thing that monkeys do when they excitedly agree?
And none of this gets to the op's assertion nor my question about it!
@ Homer
"I got from the monkey that he considers theists by definition to be irrational because they believe without objective evidence. Did I misconstrue?"
I checked back to the post you replied to (#24) an nowhere in that post did he even mention the word "theist". In fact, I read every post he made in this thread, and at no time did he connect theism to being irrational. All of his posts described his position on only one thing, irrational people.
And I'm understanding he considers theists to be irrational because theists can't objectively evidence their beliefs. And that's pretty much laid out in the next sentence of my post that you didn't quote? Why didn't you quote that part?
@ Homer
"And that's pretty much laid out in the next sentence of my post that you didn't quote? Why didn't you quote that part?"
At no time in this thread did he make the connection between theists and irrationality. If you disagree, then please point me to the thread.
Two times in a row of chopping up the quote. Let's just ask the monkey what he thinks without playing games here!
Pages