this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
60 points (80.0% liked)
Asklemmy
48143 readers
708 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't believe gods exist.
I know the Abrahamic god doesn't exist.
How do you know that?
Because it has conflicting attributes.
Something tells me you are doing armchair exegesis. Give me an example.
I am genuinely curious what these conflicting attributes are in your view.
But also, from a dialectical lens, contradiction exists in all things in our own observable reality, from the lowest levels of the concept of movement to the highest levels of the organization of human society. Why would a seeming contradiction be proof that God cannot exist?
That's the nature of a contradiction. 2 or more mutually exclusive attributes can't exist together.
But contradiction exists everywhere in our understanding of nature and the universe.
This would also make god imperfect.
Just for the sake of argument... According to what standard? Yours? Why should we follow your standard?
My standard is logic, reason, and evidence.
Why shouldn't you follow my standard?
From my other comment:
Assuming you don't believe in God...
Basically you're in no position to determine whether God is imperfect or not if you can't justify the tools you use to make that assessment.
Prove it exists, then we'll worry about if it's perfect.
I just did using the transcendental argument. God is the necessary precondition for universals such as logic and reason. They exist therefore God exists and these universal metaphysics are a reflection of his divine mind.
What is the epistemic justification for your world view? Make sure not to use universals or subjective experience because the former is in question and the latter is arbitrary.
You didn't prove it, you made another claim that you have to prove.
What is the standard of proof for the transcendental?
Emperical evidence.
It needs to be testable and reproducible.
There's no evidence that souls and spirits even exist.
Okay. What's the evidence that logic or math exists?
They're testable and reproducible.
Any number of mathematicians can work a problem, and if done correctly will reach the same result.
The same goes for logic.
You can't use the thing in question to prove that it exists.
So you can't use the bible to prove god exists, eh?
Math is just our understanding of how the universe works. Logic is just our description of how to correctly reason.
I'm not using the Bible. I'm using the Transcendental Argument.
Okay. If these things are just descriptors then they aren't universally true. If they exist and are universally true then you have no account for how that is the case. Either way you are using immaterial, metaphysical concepts to make the case that things that are immaterial and metaphysical don't exist.
I don't believe it would. Perfection can, and insofar as perfection exists in our reality does, exist alongside perceived contradiction as contradiction exists in all things.
Also, that's fallacious logic to think that imperfection doesn't make the thing imperfect.
The god that the isrealites originally worshipped was a rather weak storm god.
Somehow over the centuries, its cult has conflated it into some all powerful entity.
If it were to stay in its original manifestation, I still wouldn't believe it existed, but I would take a more agnostic approach to it - as I do with gods from other myths.