Observer of dreams Posted December 13, 2006 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 39 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 314 Content Per Day: 0.05 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/08/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted December 13, 2006 lol you guys r funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnAQuest Posted December 13, 2006 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 10 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) The metaphysical scientists have created a sophisticated computer program to determine which, if any, of the characteristics we nomally associate with God, are intrinsically necessary to any "god." I took an interactive quiz once to see what were the essential characteristics of God. It turned out that there were really only two necessary assumptions about "god." 1. God Is not dependent on anything. 2. God is free to do whatever he pleases. The rest of the things commonly associated with God are matters of faith, not provable fact. Nevertheless, I have been conditioned to believe what I have read in the Bible. And some of the assertions I might make based on the Bible can prove incompatible with Draygomb's paradox. But if you truly separate the hard metaphysical science from the faith aspect, then there is really no question that Dragomb himself had a little bit of faith. He believed that his paradox would mess with my mind. However, his points and the Bible's points do not seem mutually exclusive. Besides, if I were trying to decide whether to believe in God or not, I would not base my decision on a seeming no-win paradox, but rather the evidence I saw in other believers. Now God, as I know Him, being completely independent and free to do whatever He pleases, has chosen to create humans in time and actively pursue a relationship with them. That may have been his express purpose in even creating time. Without time, one cannot pursue. And if God had created humans without time, He would only have more creatures whom he could not pursue and to whom His pursuit would be meaningless, since they could not make decisions whether or not to have a relationship with Him. I realize that I have put my two-cents in at the end of the discussion and not the climax. But I'm almost certain I won't be the last because as long as this thread's open to comment, someone will want to comment just to show off. And I think the mods would be quite reasonable in leaving this debate open because it is a healthy debate. It relies on each man's defensiveness to start him thinking in the other direction. It's a challenge. And for those of us who just can't pass up a good challenge, at least it's a healthy one. Edited December 13, 2006 by OnAQuest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted January 23, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2007 (edited) To those who don't know me, you can read my thread in Worthy Welcome. I'll start with a paradox that has resisted for a long time and hasn't been broken yet - to my knowledge. It's called Draygomb's Paradox, from the nickname of the poster who thought it up. The guidelines do not allow me to link to the original forum. I have thought about it a great deal but I could never figure out how to break it. So I thought maybe it's my bias and I should ask some believers to try break it; it's much more natural if I, an atheist, am the one who defends it. As things are now, it seems too easy because if it can't be broken then that paradox breaks all the religions that define their god as the Conscious First Cause, but I can only say it's valid Oh when I write "god" -- not capitalized -- I mean any god of any religion. Don't take it as disrespect. Ok let's go on. Here is the paradox, letter by letter as it was posted on "that forum". It isn't copyrighted. Draygomb's paradox Without Time God didn't have enough Time to decide to create Time. God is defined as The Conscious First Cause - The First Cause is That which caused Time. Consciousness is that which lets one make a decision. A Decision is the action of changing ones mind from undecided to decided. Time is the measure of change. Premises: Something which is caused can't be required by that which causes it. Conclusions: Time is required for Change. A Decision is a Change. Decisions require Time. Consciousness can't let one make a decision without Time. Consciousness requires Time. God is Conscious. God requires Time. God can't be the cause of Time if God requires Time. God isn't the cause of Time. God isn't The First Cause. If God isn't The Conscious First Cause then God doesn't exist. God doesn't exist. Scope Here Draygomb defines god in a way that is maybe a little unusual. We see all the time refutations based on incompatibilities between, say, omnipotence and omniscience so in a discussion we usually talk about God or other gods that have those properties. However Draygomb's paradox is about consciousness and time, so all he needs is the minimal definition of a god: the Conscious First Cause (CFC from now on). This guarantees that the paradox will work on, well, all the religions that count. It doesn't disprove the Greek religon or statements like "Pizza is god!!" () but that's it. In any case, it's obvious that any god that doesn't fit the definition given by Draygomb is not affected. Additional info Just in case you have missed it, there are a few assumptions hidden in plain sight here and there. - God created ex nihilo - Time had a beginning They may or may not help you to break the paradox. They didn't help me. Draygomb also posted this, which may or may not help you: Common Rebuttals And Why They Fail God Isn?t Conscious Why Worship Something That Can?t Even Know You Exist God Isn?t TFC Why Worship A Fellow Caused Being TFC Doesn?t Exist ie Time Has Always Existed Infinite Causal Regression has been disproved That leaves us with Finite Looping Time Which Means All Of Time Has Always Existed Thus Nothing Could Have Been Created No Creation = No Creator God Transcends Logic Which Is Just A Fancy Way Of Saying God Is Illogical And Can?t Exist Change Doesn?t Require Time Change Does Require Time Go Look It Up God Doesn?t Need To Change To Make The Conscious Decision To Create Time If God Doesn?t Change When Making A Decision Then No Decision Was Really Made Our Time Is An Offshoot Of God?s Time Then The Real First Cause Of Our Time Is TFC Of God?s Time God Transcends Time If God is Always aware of every Moment of Time Then All Of Time Has Always Existed Thus Nothing Could Have Been Created No Creation = No Creator I don't know why he capitalizes everything, I hate it. Well, that's it. Let the chair throwing commence The argument seems to confuse the concept of time with linear actual time. God can exist in an eternal state which is 'continual time' (things always have been happening there, are happening, and always will be happening) and from there created this universe with its linear timespan. Going back to the concept of time, which is a perceived change, it could just as well be argued that time requires conciousness, in the conceptual sense. The paradox is difficult because we really don't have a very good definition for time, period. What, exactly IS time? From dictionary.com: (there are many definitions there, but this one seems to best fit our paradox): the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another. So does time require a 'regarder'? Does time require 'relations'? Under this definition, yes. Events require multiple 'things' which could be phyisical or metaphysical, like conciousness. So even if nothing is physically present, time can exist. So for time to exist, you at least need relations, which must have always been occuring, like a triune God (father, son, holy spirit, who metaphysically sepearate, but one in will and purpose, the way I see it) so relations can occur. And of course, so can 'regarding'. Time requires God. -Time is required for Change. Relations. Change is required for time. -A Decision is a Change. Assuming nothing physically yet exists, Decision is the only Change. -Decisions require Time. Assuming nothing physically yet exists, Time requires Decisions... -Consciousness can't let one make a decision without Time. Regarder. Perceiver. Time requires conciousness. -Consciousness requires Time. See above. -God is Conscious. Yes. -God requires Time. Perceiver required. Time requires God. -God can't be the cause of Time if God requires Time. God is continually making time, by what he does. And in order for time to exist, it needs a God. -God isn't the cause of Time. God is the cause of time by continually creating it. -God isn't The First Cause. God is the First Cause. -If God isn't The Conscious First Cause then God doesn't exist. God, by continually making time, is the first cause of time. -God doesn't exist. God MUST exist. (there are some things we don't understand.... i'm not sitting here gloating that i've successfully broken the paradox, but i feel i gave it a pretty decent shot!) Edited January 23, 2007 by tdrehfal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts