h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I believe in God. I believe it is not possible to prove God's existence and I also believe it is not possible to prove God's non-existence! An interesting entry, aiming obviously to be objective. Excellent

while I respect your right to believe in god, and I think you are right about proving or disproving god's existance, that isn't really relavant.

If you believe in god you will not usually accept evidence to the contrary, and if you don't, you won't usually accept evidence of existance.

What you can do, is say "if god exists, what limits must he have".

While that is not a popular question with the religious (of any religion), it is possible to come up with some answers that prove that there are some limits on what god can do.

These limits are built into the structure of the universe, and are thus a little difficult to avoid.

Yes, Xyroth, hence the stone question. Can God make a stone so heavy God can't lift it? I've encountered that question - and the answer is limits - there are limits to the *logic* of a question. Also, perhaps God has self-imposed limits?

The more important question there is, 'Why would he want to?'

Yes, that's what I was thinking of, and wanted to put - I just didn't remember.. that's why the 'stone' question as someone called it, isn't really a good one.

Surely the perfection of God implies that He would make only perfect decisions. Therefore, since God does not decide to perform an action would imply that the action was imperfect in nature, thus to do so would deny His being a God. In effect, God is limited, not by ability but by virtue of being God.
- Jordan

That is a very good point, Jordan.

(Gets all happy and looks at his feet)

of course, it does pre-suppose the perfection of god.

"oh dear" says god, and disappears in a puff of logic. douglas adams

It seems to me that what is required is a leap of faith, it is true that if there was a god who was perfect he would only make perfect actions, though this means we must assume that whatever happens is the result of a guiding power, and not entirely random, for instance the death of a creature, while seeming an imperfect event, is perhaps actually perfect. And, as we are not perfect beings, would therefore not understand the action as being perfect. In conclusion we have to decide whether we believe that there is a guiding light, in which case all actions are explainable, all decisions made by an unfathomable logic which is beyond our ability to understand, on the other hand, if we assume there is no god, then we can say that all is, or at some time will be explainable, and imperfect events are merely the result of things and creatures which arent perfect, therefore not infallible

There was a minister who compared our understanding of the "why" of things, to an ant crawling along the edge of the pulpit - the ant can't have any idea that there are people just above where she is crawling, and if her nest is disturbed, she has no explanation for it, if she is aware of people, she can have no idea of their motive...

Not that God is necessarily to us as we are to the ant...I believe God's relationship to us is more personal, more "knowing".

Hi People!

Just wondering - how does the perfection of God deny his existance? I can't see any reason that this should be...

Anyway, I'm suprised that debate on the issue isn't more heated, especially in h2g2!

Your's Truly,

Jordan

Yes, Jordan, I don't see how the perfection of God denies God's existence! Rather the reverse,I would have thought...

but the comments in this thread about the proof of god's existance come from the devout citing his perfection as proof of his existance.

This is not only dubious, but isn't actually sensible from a logical point of view.

what they are saying is that MY god must be perfect, I accept that he is, and therefore he is, and therefore he exists.

This is obviously rubbish.

setting down a framework, we don't currently have any evidence that can reliably be used either to prove or disprove the existance of god.

What we do have is quite a lot of scientific evidence that puts limits upon the actions of any god that does exist, because those limits are fundamental to the system in which they are embedded (ie the universe).

god may or may not exist.
if he does, either he must obey the same limits in the system or not.
if he does obey them, then this limits his power, and this he is not omnipotent.

But why ought God be constrained by limits that He put on the *inhabitants* of his Universe? Just because we build an ant farm (loan from Della! ) which constrains what is inside does not mean that we are constrained by the same rules. And even if God is constrained by the laws of Physics, it still does not provide proof of his non-existence - Adam and Eve were perfect humans, but they were restricted by Physics (just because they broke the Commandment given them does not mean that they were imperfectly in nature, but in action - recall that Lucifer himself was an angel).
Anyway, that's just my opinion!

- Jordan

xyroth, I do not believe it is or ever will be possible to *prove* the existence of God - conversely, it is not possible to*prove* God's non-existence!

I believe that God is constrained by the limits of the system (universe) because God chooses to be so constrained - to play by the rules God set up Godself. I was debating this with Jimmy last night,and I think he was surprised to discover that I agree with him, that God does *not* micro-manage the creation! Personally, I believe humans have a lot *more* free will than many are happy with!

"humans have a lot *more* free will than many are happy with!"

yes, I aggree. The point where I disagree with them is where they then go on to try and limit my free will because they can't cope with it.

but that is a different conversation.

Yes, xyroth, that hacks me off too.

Hmmm.It seems as if this is a tricky little peice of work, you can't deny that. But I think that whatever god/ess you are aware of will only make itself apparent to you in it's own way. he writer seemed to miss an important philosophy, that gods are simply dreams/ideas, and when they are 'given' enough conciousness they walk out into the waking world to fufill their function. as for the creation of the universe, I wouldn't even bother to explain that one! After all, have *you* ever tried to exlain yourself to an ant or a cockroach? We can get by fine withought knowing the answere to that question, there are somethings that are not for humanity to have, nor is it their place to give it to us.
Ah well. oh dear, I think I've offended some people! Qonh forbid that they should waste their lives away at trying to answer me! dear, they get so *angry* sometimes.
Oni

You say "there are somethings that are not for humanity to have", and you might be correct. but let it be because we can't ask the right questions, or understand the answers, not because some person has said "don't ask that".

And don't worry, I don't get offended.