Atheists: What would be evidence of God’s existence?

[Tiberius]

It does end up that way because what the deity knows what you will do = what you will do since the deity cannot be wrong.

And if the deity can't be wrong, then I have no choice but to do what he has foreseen that I will do.

We WILL end up doing only do what the deity knows we will do because what what we will do = what the deity knew we would do,
but BEFORE we made a choice we could have made another choice and that choice would have been = to what the deity knew we would do.

Except that doesn't work.

Let's say I'm going to do something on Friday.

On Monday, God already knows what I will do.

But if I don't decide to do it until Wednesday, then that means that on Tuesday I could still have made another choice.

But that violates the idea that God knew on Monday.

 

[Tiberius]

God owns naked bodies not clothes.

Dude, if you want to have a conversation to me, speak in understandable English.

I'm not going to respond to this gibberish.

 

[Tiberius]

This sort of reasoning only works if we assume there are no limits to human understanding. Which is rather an arrogant assumption to make, don’t you think?

No matter how good the finest human minds may be at playing chess, for example, the game is played on a two dimensional board. But we do not live in a two, or three, or even four dimensional universe. So your declaration of check mate is meaningless, because even if God does play chess, He is not constrained by your limitations; the question is, can you transcend the limitations you have imposed on your self?

I don't see how that is a valid analogy.

If God plays chess, then it must be confined to a two dimensional surface. If he plays anything else, it's not chess.

And you are asking me to transcend the laws of logic.

 

[Spirit of Light]

So you believe things to be real without having proof?

I have verification that is personal to me, that does not mean you would see it as verification to you

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don't see how that is a valid analogy.

If God plays chess, then it must be confined to a two dimensional surface. If he plays anything else, it's not chess.

And you are asking me to transcend the laws of logic.

That’s exactly what I’m asking you to do, or at least to consider, yes.

You can neither prove nor disprove God using reason or logic. And logic is not built on irrefutable laws, only constructs which it must be possible to transcend. Logic and reason begin to encounter their limits, for example, when we consider the true, non linear nature of time.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Dear oh dear...If it knows what I will do before I do it, then I have no choice but to do it, how can this simple fact be so hard for anyone to grasp?

It is very easy for me to "grasp".
"You have no choice" means that you will choose what God knows.

That is obvious. You have stated "If G-d knows what I will do before I do it", so unless G-d doesn't know, what do you expect?
You are just repeating a statement "I have no choice" that does NOT mean that you are not free to choose.

It is simply designed to confuse what is necessarily true.

 

[muhammad_isa]

And if the deity can't be wrong, then I have no choice but to do what he has foreseen that I will do.

You are purely stating the obvious
If G-d knows that you will choose 'A', then how can you choose anything else?
You have already stated that G-d can't be wrong.
If you choose 'B', then you have contradicted yourself.

i.e. it is necessarily true due to the first premise .. nothing to do with being free to choose or not

..but then, that doesn't matter to you, does it?
You are only trying to confuse us all .. rather than clarify the issue.

 

[RestlessSoul]

That's nonsense sorry, Tiberius is using sound reasoning, which is all any of us can utilise. If a deity knew beforehand what choices we will make then we would axiomatically have no choices.



Hilarious, you accuse Tiberius of arrogance for using human reason, they in the same post profess to know what an omniscient deity knows and thinks, and all without the pretence of any objective evidence. Now that is arrogance.

You are making assumptions about the nature of time, causality, determinism and randomness, all of which have been called into question by Quantum theory over the last 100 years. I suggest you do some research into Retrocausality, The Transactional Interpretation of QM, and the recent Di Biagio/Dona/Rovelli paper on the arrow of time in operational formulations of quantum theory, before you start applying axioms to the order of causality.

The arrow of time in operational formulations of quantum theory

I know you love a quote, so here's one from Carlo Rovelli which might help you adjust some of your assumptions;

"...the incessant happening which wearies the world is not ordered along a timeline, is not measured by a giant clock ticking. It does not even form a four dimensional geometry. It is a boundless and disorderly network of events."

I have no idea what an omniscient deity "thinks" btw, nor have I ever claimed to do so. I do not pretend, nor even aspire, to know the mind of God.

 

[rational experiences]

If we came from the eternal being that first applied a status research. Then would you not demonstrate the same motivation ....
Yet realise the origin motivation research caused destruction?

So could you realise the status as the being who never left. Or would you be notified as the being who had left?

Being consciously aware the human status.

Is not any sun star planet or space status.

We are the aware being.

We know we are not the highest status.

Our teaching said God gave us dominion.

 

[Sheldon]

That’s exactly what I’m asking you to do, or at least to consider, yes.

You can neither prove nor disprove God using reason or logic. And logic is not built on irrefutable laws, only constructs which it must be possible to transcend. Logic and reason begin to encounter their limits, for example, when we consider the true, non linear nature of time.

Sorry but you're creating a god of the gaps polemic, using an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. If something is unfalsifiable that doesn't mean we should make assumptions about it, it means it is meaningless and we should move on, and that is what the scientific method does, it rejects all unfalsifiable claims as unscientific.

 

[Sheldon]

It is very easy for me to "grasp".
"You have no choice" means that you will choose what God knows.

Good to know, but I wasn't asking you, I was asking TB as she doesn't understand is still making contradictory claims.

 

[Sheldon]

You are just repeating a statement "I have no choice" that does NOT mean that you are not free to choose.

"You have no choice" means that you will choose what God knows.

Ah, not just TB then, oh dear. IF a deity existed and knew what I would do before I do it, that would mean I had no other choices.

Incidentally didn't you say this deity could stop us if it wanted? That would make it complicit in every crime ever committed. Then again it is claimed to have created parasites and diseases that cause unimaginable suffering, so I'm just glad there isn't a shred of objective evidence for any such deity.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ah, not just TB then, oh dear. IF a deity existed and knew what I would do before I do it, that would mean I had no other choices.

Incidentally didn't you say this deity could stop us if it wanted? That would make it complicit in every crime ever committed. Then again it is claimed to have created parasites and diseases that cause unimaginable suffering, so I'm just glad there isn't a shred of objective evidence for any such deity.

Can you provide object evidence, that you are glad? Or is it something else?

 

[Sheldon]

You are making assumptions about the nature of time, causality, determinism and randomness,

No, that's not true, I have made no such assumptions at all.

all of which have been called into question by Quantum theory over the last 100 years.

I have not said otherwise.

I suggest you do some research into Retrocausality, The Transactional Interpretation of QM, and the recent Di Biagio/Dona/Rovelli paper on the arrow of time in operational formulations of quantum theory, before you start applying axioms to the order of causality.

Or better still you can link the peer reviewed work that concludes it has any objective evidence for any deity? As I suspect you're simply citing scientific work and tacking your belief on as a false conclusion.

The arrow of time in operational formulations of quantum theory

I know you love a quote, so here's one from Carlo Rovelli which might help you adjust some of your assumptions;

That's not true, I made no assumptions, they are your assumptions that theists like to pretend are essential in order to disbelieve in unevidenced deities. Whether I love a quote or not depends on the quote, and the context.

"...the incessant happening which wearies the world is not ordered along a timeline, is not measured by a giant clock ticking. It does not even form a four dimensional geometry. It is a boundless and disorderly network of events."

I have no idea what that means sorry, perhaps you can explain why you think it remotely evidenced any deity? Then link the peer reviewed work that reaches that conclusion?

I have no idea what an omniscient deity "thinks" btw, nor have I ever claimed to do so. I do not pretend, nor even aspire, to know the mind of God.

Oh really?

even if God does play chess, He is not constrained by your limitations;

That looks like a claim about the mind of a deity to me?

 

[Sheldon]

Can you provide object evidence, that you are glad? Or is it something else?

I've no idea what you mean sorry, or what it has to do with my post.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I have verification that is personal to me, that does not mean you would see it as verification to you

Rational reasoning does not work that way.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Rational reasoning does not work that way.

For you no, that is possible. I see my belief as personal and it means how I understand those verifications are ment for me to understand.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Ah, not just TB then, oh dear. IF a deity existed and knew what I would do before I do it, that would mean I had no other choices.

Ha ha, you are so funny

What does that mean "you had no other choices"?
Of COURSE you had other choices .. are you saying that blue would magically disappear and you wouldn't know that it was there, because you chose red?

No .. the reason you will chose red is because God knew you wanted to. You said so yourself .. "IF a deity existed and knew what I would do"

 

[muhammad_isa]

You make no sense.

If god, or anyone else, knows with certainty what ones decisions will be then that necessarily means that existence (all of it) is deterministic.
This in turn means that "free will" is necessarily an illusion.

This is a presupposition based on intuition.
That is because our perception of time is a sense of something we call
"the present" apparently moving along an arrow of time.

However, you say my explanation "makes no sense".
You will have to show me why..

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ha ha, you are so funny

What does that mean "you had no other choices"?
Of COURSE you had other choices .. are you saying that blue would magically disappear and you wouldn't know that it was there, because you chose red?

No .. the reason you will chose red is because God knew you wanted to. You said so yourself .. "IF a deity existed and knew what I would do"

Either you are really misunderstanding what he is saying, or you aren't being rational.

If god, or anyone else, can know with certainty what the future is then free choice is necessarily an illusion, as that would make reality completely deterministic.

It would mean that it was already determined even before I were born that one day I would be born and that on this day I would be writing this post.

Every decision ever made by everyone, including non-human animals, would have lead to this reality where I was writing this post.

If my parents would have decided against having sex on the night of my conception, then that would have altered the future and I wouldn't have been born. Someone else would have. Or might have. Not me any way.

So, in summary, if it CAN be known what the future brings, then reality is deterministic.
And in a fully deterministic reality, "free will" can't exist. At best, the illusion thereof can exist.