God Officially Declared 'Never Existed' by Vatican

[Zeno]

Vatican City (AP) In a long awaited anointment, The Vatican publicly acknowledged for the first time that God is a hoax. “It is the consensus of the College of Cardinals that the God Hoax not be perpetuated anymore and that The Vatican come clean and admit that God never existed in the first place. It has been a great run and we have had some fun times and immense influence but it is time for The Vatican to move on to even bigger and better things”, said Cardinal Vito Sardinia. It has been rumored recently that The Vatican has been seriously considering hostile takeovers of numerous very large multinational corporations and branching out into oil production, shipping, R&D companies, and even into the production of nuclear arms. The Vatican’s Science arm would not comment on the nuclear question and the only response that Cardinal Vito Sardinia gave when queried on the same subject was a fleeting smirk.

[wacki]

You have absolutely no fear of going to hell, do you?

Very funny post btw.

[ToneLoc]

Yeqh right, and someone discovered a brain into GWB's cranium too?
April's fool /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Utah]

For if he existed he would be governed by the laws of existence - time, space, etc. An omnipotent god cannot be subject to any laws by definition.

[bholdr]

"For if he existed he would be governed by the laws of existence - time, space, etc. An omnipotent god cannot be subject to any laws by definition."

...that's the neat thing about being God- you can ignore those little paradoxes, 'cause you're GOD.

not that i believe in him/her/it either...

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
For if he existed he would be governed by the laws of existence - time, space, etc. An omnipotent god cannot be subject to any laws by definition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because God created time, space, etc, and as such they are dependent on him, not the other way around.

[Zygote]

what about this one.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent according to judeo-christian religions. In addition, all these religions agree that there is evil in the world. Also, these religions advocate that for a human to allow evil when he/she has the power, knowledge, and good will to stop it is wrong. If god is held to at least the same moral standard as humans, how can god allow evil?

[PoBoy321]

God doesn't allow evil, he allows free will. Evil is a product of free will.

[Utah]

"Because God created time, space, etc, and as such they are dependent on him, not the other way around."

He cannot live in time or space because he would be subject to the laws of time and space. If he is not governed by the laws of time then he cannot exist in time. It cant be any other way.

I am not saying that god doesnt exist (for lack of a better word). I am simply saying that our concepts of him are completely off and that we cannot describe or think of him in common conventions.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]

He cannot live in time or space because he would be subject to the laws of time and space. If he is not governed by the laws of time then he cannot exist in time. It cant be any other way.



[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
God doesn't allow evil, he allows free will. Evil is a product of free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

common response, however, there are still a few problems.

-God, being omnipotent and omniscient, could alter the natural order in such a way that the alterations would remain undetectable to human scrutiny. If god is faced with the dillema of needing to allow evil for the sake of the natural order, god is still responsible for creating this dilemma.
-God has intervened in the past to prevent evil. In fact, god is meant to intervene. Surely prayers aren't only for the afterlife? If i'm not mistaken, most people pray for things within their lifetimes, but how could go fulfill these wishes if he is not meant to intervene?
-God could prevent only mass amounts of evil.
-Our will is comprised already by the fact that there are laws and boundaries.

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He cannot live in time or space because he would be subject to the laws of time and space. If he is not governed by the laws of time then he cannot exist in time. It cant be any other way.



[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[/ QUOTE ]

By definition, you are wrong.

Man cannot put a limitation on God, none at all. Logic is irrelevant when dealing with God. He is not bound by anything because He is God.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
Man cannot put a limitation on God

[/ QUOTE ]
To say say God exists places a limitation on him. That is the point.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
-God, being omnipotent and omniscient, could alter the natural order in such a way that the alterations would remain undetectable to human scrutiny. If god is faced with the dillema of needing to allow evil for the sake of the natural order, god is still responsible for creating this dilemma.

[/ QUOTE ]

It isnt for the sake of natural order. Its for the sake of allowing mankind free will.

[ QUOTE ]
God has intervened in the past to prevent evil. In fact, god is meant to intervene. Surely prayers aren't only for the afterlife? If i'm not mistaken, most people pray for things within their lifetimes, but how could go fulfill these wishes if he is not meant to intervene?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well at least you admit He exists. /images/graemlins/smile.gif God is meant to do anything, he intervenes when He sees fit.

[ QUOTE ]
Our will is comprised already by the fact that there are laws and boundaries.

[/ QUOTE ]

We dont have to follow those laws or stay within boundaries.

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
Man cannot put a limitation on God, none at all. Logic is irrelevant when dealing with God. He is not bound by anything because He is God.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why do so many people presume to tell us what God is thinking?


GG

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
hen why do so many people presume to tell us what God is thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Bible
2. The Church.

Those are the sources of tell us what God is "thinking".

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hen why do so many people presume to tell us what God is thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Bible
2. The Church.

Those are the sources of tell us what God is "thinking".

[/ QUOTE ]

One can buy into the first source (Bible) as it is purportedly divinely inspired. But the second? Is every pastor of every church divinely inspired? Or is there some identifiable subset that is so inspired?

All sorts of people tell us that "God says this" or "God wants us to do such-and-such" or "God hates this" or whatever, with no Biblical justification. How can they possibly comprehend and explain an infinite mind?

[Next we'll ask how we know the Bible to be divinely inspired.]

On a side note, does anybody think we should have a religion forum?


GG

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Is every pastor of every church divinely inspired? Or is there some identifiable subset that is so inspired?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am Catholic and it is part of our beliefs that the Church is integral to the understanding of scripture and of course believe that the Pope is God's representative on Earth.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]

It isnt for the sake of natural order. Its for the sake of allowing mankind free will.


[/ QUOTE ]

Like i noted throughout the post, our freewill is comprised all the time. Even if you disagree with this, god, being omnipotent and omniscient, could still prevent evil without disrupting free will.



[ QUOTE ]
Well at least you admit He exists.


[/ QUOTE ]

No i don't admit he exists. I was refering to what religions advocate.

[ QUOTE ]
God is meant to do anything, he intervenes when He sees fit.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is fine, but then god is responsible for allowing evil and cannot be benovlent and, therefore, the biblical god cannot exist.



[ QUOTE ]


We dont have to follow those laws or stay within boundaries.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? When did you break the laws of nature?

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Like i noted throughout the post, our freewill is comprised all the time. Even if you disagree with this, god, being omnipotent and omniscient, could still prevent evil without disrupting free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im assuming you compromised. Im not following how this is so. At any rate, if our choices are robbed of any consequences, how is this not circumventing free will.

[ QUOTE ]
That is fine, but then god is responsible for allowing evil and cannot be benovlent and, therefore, the biblical god cannot exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

We've already addressed this point. Evil is the result of actions of men exercising free will.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]


Im assuming you compromised. Im not following how this is so. At any rate, if our choices are robbed of any consequences, how is this not circumventing free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Comprised what? God could've forced a heart-attack on hitler, for example. also, God has already made clear that it is okay to circumvent one's free will so i dont know why you hang on this.



[ QUOTE ]
We've already addressed this point. Evil is the result of actions of men exercising free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe you missed my point. if you were walking by a burning house and there is baby trapped inside. lets assume you have the power to save the baby and the knowledge that you can do so safely. If you were benevolent, you would be obligated to save the baby. Considering i chose not to save the baby, i would be committing a wrongdoing. Saving hte baby may comprimise the baby's free will according to you, but i am still obligated to do so. If god is held to at least the same moral standard as humans, why is god not required to intervene and prevent evil when he clearly has the power knowledge and good will. he cant have all these characteristics and consistently choose not to intervene.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
You have absolutely no fear of going to hell, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

None at all.

-Zeno

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Saving hte baby may comprimise the baby's free will according to you, but i am still obligated to do so

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a completely nonsensical argument. How is rescuing a baby from a fire violating its free will?

Anyhow, free will is part of the essence of humanity. Without, we are no better than an animal or a robot. As a result of free will humans commit evil acts. So can we agree that evil done by humans is a result of the existence of free will, without which we wouldnt be humans? Then we can address the issue of suffering, that is, Why does God allow evil that is not the result of human will.

[gasgod]

Then it follows that only the Catholic church can know what God is thinking, and that all others are just guessing?

Suppose a Muslim told me that he knew what God was thinking, and cited the Koran and his religion's doctrine to support that belief? Which should I believe?

My point is that once you posit an omnipotent god, you must necessarily assert that only your religion can interpret and explain the infinite mind of God. The only other choice seems to be asserting that an infinite God exists, and cannot be known by any finite being.


GG

[gasgod]

[ QUOTE ]
God doesn't allow evil, he allows free will. Evil is a product of free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never seen a non-circular definition of "Free Will". Can you provide one?


GG

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Then it follows that only the Catholic church can know what God is thinking, and that all others are just guessing?

Suppose a Muslim told me that he knew what God was thinking, and cited the Koran and his religion's doctrine to support that belief? Which should I believe?

My point is that once you posit an omnipotent god, you must necessarily assert that only your religion can interpret and explain the infinite mind of God. The only other choice seems to be asserting that an infinite God exists, and cannot be known by any finite being.


GG

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldnt say we know what he is thinking per se. I believe he tells us through the Bible and through his chosen representatives. I do agree with you in the sense that it woulb be silly to not believe your religion had the best answers to these types of questions.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]

That is a completely nonsensical argument. How is rescuing a baby from a fire violating its free will?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do'nt think it is, but wasn't it you who said that god can't intervene because he would be comprimising our free will?

[ QUOTE ]

Anyhow, free will is part of the essence of humanity. Without, we are no better than an animal or a robot. As a result of free will humans commit evil acts. So can we agree that evil done by humans is a result of the existence of free will, without which we wouldnt be humans? Then we can address the issue of suffering, that is, Why does God allow evil that is not the result of human will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, we aren't much better than animals and many animals have the same or similar kind of will as we do.

Anyways, This has nothing to do with my argument. God is OBSERVING evil occur in our world without INTERVENING (i.e. putting hitler in a cage or force a heartattack etc.) If i am obligated to save the baby, why is god not obligated to save us? If i stood by and watched the baby burn i would be considered sinful. If god is benevolent, how can god consistantly stand by and watch us burn?

[vulturesrow]

Your basic argument is that the existence of evil is incompatible with an omnipotent, omnicscient, and benovolent God, because he chooses not to intervene.

Please correct me if Im wrong.

The basic answer to this I will give to you is courtesy of St Augustine from Enichiridion XI:

'Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.' This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.'

So your answer to moral evil is the free will argument. Your answer to physical evil is the above.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
The basic answer to this I will give to you is courtesy of St Augustine from Enichiridion XI:

'Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.' This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.'

So your answer to moral evil is the free will argument. Your answer to physical evil is the above.

[/ QUOTE ]

So your argument is that god creates evil so there can be more appreciating for good, correct?

The problem is this still doesn't show why evil is necessary. God could've created a world that did not need evil for there too be good.

God, according to you, is faced with a dillema: I can't create good without creating evil. God put himself in that dillema and set those premises. God unnecessarily created evil and is, therefore, not benevolent.

Some questions:
why do we look down upon evil rather than embrace it, if it is so necessary for good?

why aren't we allowed to ever use evil if it truly produces good?

i thought you said that we had free will and god cannot comprimise that? So is god responsible for the holocaust, or is it human will?

Lastly, you are trying to tell me that the world would not be good without God having produced the holocaust? To say the world can't appreaciate good without mass amounts of evil is ludicrous.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
So your argument is that god creates evil so there can be more appreciating for good, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. God doesnt 'create' evil. Evil isnt a thing.

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is this still doesn't show why evil is necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt say it was necessary.

[ QUOTE ]
God could've created a world that did not need evil for there too be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

He did. See the Creation story in Genesis. The choices of Adam and Eve brought evil.

[ QUOTE ]
why do we look down upon evil rather than embrace it, if it is so necessary for good?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I never said it was necessary. Reread the quote from Augustine. I cant put it any plainer than that.

[ QUOTE ]
why aren't we allowed to ever use evil if it truly produces good?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a pretty wide open question. Ever heard the term necessary evil? It has to do with intent.

[ QUOTE ]
i thought you said that we had free will and god cannot comprimise that? So is god responsible for the holocaust, or is it human will?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously a result of human choices.

[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, you are trying to tell me that the world would not be good without God having produced the holocaust?

[/ QUOTE ]

God didnt produce it. Human choice did.

[ QUOTE ]
To say the world can't appreaciate good without mass amounts of evil is ludicrous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except I didnt say that. Reread the quote from Augustine.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
No. God doesnt 'create' evil. Evil isnt a thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

God allows evil when he could prevent it and is, therefore, largely responsible for the existance of evil.

[ QUOTE ]
I didnt say it was necessary.


[/ QUOTE ]

If evil is not necessary, then, back to my old question, WHY DOES GOD ALLOW EVIL???? How can a benevolent god unnecessarily allow evil?

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i thought you said that we had free will and god cannot comprimise that? So is god responsible for the holocaust, or is it human will?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Obviously a result of human choices.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why does god sit back and do nothing other than watch the human race suffer then?

[ QUOTE ]
God didnt produce it. Human choice did.


[/ QUOTE ]

God did not prevent it. If the american government knew 9/11 was going to happen on 9/10 and chose to do nothing, even if they had the power to stop it, america becomes largely responsible for the 9/11 deaths. Do you see how they compare?

[vulturesrow]

It seems at this point you are being deliberately obtuse.

Let me rehash in the simplest terms possible.

Moral evil, that is evil that is the result human choice, is not prevented by God because that would be removing human free will, which would essentially reduce us to the equivalent of a robot.

Physical evil, that is to say suffering endured, happens for several reasons. I will stay away from the theological arguments for now. The philosophical answer is that your premises contain the answer. If evil exists, and God is omni-everything, than evil serves some greater good that we cannot fathom because we arent omni-everything.


Incidentally, how do you define evil without an objective measure of that evil?

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
For if he existed he would be governed by the laws of existence - time, space, etc. An omnipotent god cannot be subject to any laws by definition.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, an omnipowerful one can.

[Utah]

I couldnt find a definition of omnipowerful. However, the omni means all. So, I am guessing the phrase means all powerful. An all powerful god cannot exist for the same reasons.

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
I couldnt find a definition of omnipowerful. However, the omni means all. So, I am guessing the phrase means all powerful. An all powerful god cannot exist for the same reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you are wrong. An all powerful God cannot be bound by any limitations by definition.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
moral evil, that is evil that is the result human choice, is not prevented by God because that would be removing human free will, which would essentially reduce us to the equivalent of a robot.


[/ QUOTE ]

you keep missing points that i've already mentioned. God, for example, split the sea and drowned the egyptian pharaoh and his amry. This isn't comprimising pharaoh's and his army's will? Why couldn't he do something similar to hitler?

Also, we can still have free will without having evil. God could put hitler in a cage, he would have the same will (and not be a robot) but cannot harm anyone else.

[ QUOTE ]
Physical evil, that is to say suffering endured, happens for several reasons. I will stay away from the theological arguments for now. The philosophical answer is that your premises contain the answer. If evil exists, and God is omni-everything, than evil serves some greater good that we cannot fathom because we arent omni-everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

useless argument and can only be valued as a copout.

[ QUOTE ]
Incidentally, how do you define evil without an objective measure of that evil?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't define evil. I am simply trying to show that judeo christian religions set the measure of evil in a way that is incompatible with the God they define.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
An all powerful God cannot be bound by any limitations by definition.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh...that is exactly my point. Existence is a limitation and thus an omnipowerful god cannot exist because he cannot be bound be the rules of existence. Additionally, god cannot live in time and space either as he would be bound by the rules of time and space.

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
An all powerful God cannot be bound by any limitations by definition.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh...that is exactly my point. Existence is a limitation and thus an omnipowerful god cannot exist because he cannot be bound be the rules of existence. Additionally, god cannot live in time and space either as he would be bound by the rules of time and space.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true, and OMNIPOWERFUL God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him. You cannot put any limitations on God, He is not bound by the rules of existance or time or space, He is GOD.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, that is my central point. Existence is a limititation. Think about it for a minute.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, that is my central point. Existence is a limititation. Think about it for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've doned goned right over my head...

[jaxmike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, that is my central point. Existence is a limititation. Think about it for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Existence is whatever God wants it to be. Think about it for a minute. You CANNOT, by DEFINITION, but ANY RESTRICTION on an OMNIPOWERFUL being.

[Zeno]

Well, this thread seems to have resurrected itself and, since the discussion is spiraling every upward into a vortex of metaphysical hooey; I must admit that I am admirably pleased with the overall outcome of my little April fool post.

-Yahweh, the non-existent blob.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him

-------------------------------------------------------------

Uh, that is my central point. Existence is a limititation. Think about it for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure if this is germane, but interestingly, according to Buddhist metaphysics there are four classes of things:

Those that:

A: Exist

B: Do not exist

C: Both exist and do not exist

D: Neither exist nor not exist

The matrix of the above four represents a principle which may be expanded.

Also, there might be more to this than meets the eye: after all, imaginary numbers have a use even if they "do not exist". They do exist in the sense that they can be fruitfully used in equations and problems, and perhaps in other ways.

Just maybe, there is a "use" for imaginary logical states. Maybe there is more to this than meets the eye.

Maybe God can both exist and not exist (or whatever). I don't see how but that doesn't mean it is absolutely impossible--it is only impossible as far as my understanding (which means to say, I think it is probably unlikely but cannot be sure). I doubt we can really know.

Also, the more narrowly we define God the less likely our definition is correct. And this suggests that the widest possible definition--infinities--may be the most likely to be accurate. And strange things can happen at infinity (or no limitations).

[Phat Mack]

Wendell P. Bloyd


THEY first charged me with disorderly conduct,
There being no statute on blasphemy.
Later they locked me up as insane
Where I was beaten to death by a Catholic guard.
My offense was this:
I said God lied to Adam, and destined him
To lead the life of a fool,
Ignorant that there is evil in the world as well as good.
And when Adam outwitted God by eating the apple
And saw through the lie,
God drove him out of Eden to keep him from taking
The fruit of immortal life.
For Christ’s sake, you sensible people,
Here’s what God Himself says about it in the book of Genesis:
“And the Lord God said, behold the man
Is become as one of us” (a little envy, you see),
“To know good and evil” (The all-is-good lie exposed):
“And now lest he put forth his hand and take
Also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever:
Therefore the Lord God sent Him forth from the garden of Eden.”
(The reason I believe God crucified His Own Son
To get out of the wretched tangle is, because it sounds just like Him.)

see Jesus was a hoax

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeqh right, and someone discovered a brain into GWB's cranium too?
April's fool /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

....wouldn't they first have to discover a cranium?

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
God CANNOT have limitations placed upon Him

-------------------------------------------------------------

Uh, that is my central point. Existence is a limititation. Think about it for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure if this is germane, but interestingly, according to Buddhist metaphysics there are four classes of things:

Those that:

A: Exist

B: Do not exist

C: Both exist and do not exist

D: Neither exist nor not exist

The matrix of the above four represents a principle which may be expanded.

Also, there might be more to this than meets the eye: after all, imaginary numbers have a use even if they "do not exist". They do exist in the sense that they can be fruitfully used in equations and problems, and perhaps in other ways.

Just maybe, there is a "use" for imaginary logical states. Maybe there is more to this than meets the eye.

Maybe God can both exist and not exist (or whatever). I don't see how but that doesn't mean it is absolutely impossible--it is only impossible as far as my understanding (which means to say, I think it is probably unlikely but cannot be sure). I doubt we can really know.

Also, the more narrowly we define God the less likely our definition is correct. And this suggests that the widest possible definition--infinities--may be the most likely to be accurate. And strange things can happen at infinity (or no limitations).

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, Thomas Aquinas' conception of God is that he is pure Esse, or existence. What is limiting about existence is potential-- something can or cannot be something. But since God is pure act, he is the actualizing principle that brings other potential things into being.

One consequence of this view acknowledged by Aquinas is that you cannot make quidditative statements about God-- all you can say are negative things. God is not finite, God is not bound by time, etc. Negative statements are all we can really know about God, according to TA.