2018

>2018
>not being a theist, still tipping the fedora

youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68

Other urls found in this thread:

philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-ontological-argument/the-modal-ontological-argument/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>[premise 5]
>not [conclusion]

You're going to have a pretty rough time convincing any atheist of (1)

If people are interested in stuff like this, you should see philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-ontological-argument/the-modal-ontological-argument/ for further reading.

I don't get Premise three; how would God existing in SOME possible worlds prove that he existed in ALL?

>God is omnipresent

i dont agree with premise 2 as god is supposedly outside our plane of existence. changing worlds wont affect wether there can be a god beyond our worlds.

That... Still doesn't follow.

When trying to simply prove the existence of something, you can't go assuming properties of said thing that may or may not exist.

Which god?

>What is the difference between invisible,untouchable being and non-existent at all?

Because if an omnipresence is a possible characteristics for a God. Then an omnipresent God exists due to OP's pic.

>if it is possible God exists, then God exists

Christfags, everyone.

2455th

I think it's more that God can be said to exist in all worlds if he exists in some. Because we can never know if its our world or the other he exists in

If omnipresent beings existence is possible in SOME worlds then his existence is possible in all worlds

Post yfw God has been watching you shove dragon dildos up your butt since you were 14.

I though Christians didn't believe in the Multiverse

>you can't go assuming properties of said thing that may or may not exist.

they exist by definition. If you define a planet which doesnt have oxygen, its beings will be anaerobic.

if you define a position in that society as most powerfull in the gov, that position is presidential or smht.

if you define an entitiy as most powerfull, that being is God.

Yes you can idiot
If I go looking for a blue frog, not knowing whether or not it exists, I am assuming it will have blue skin.
Likewise, if I go looking for something omnipresent, not knowing whether or not it exists, I am assuming it will be omnipresent

OP didn't say anything about Christianity.

Went completely off the rails at premise 3.

Premise 1: it's possible that God doesn't exist.

You don't need that theory to prove this arguement, just possibility. Where there is possibilty, then the absolute exists.

Wrong.

And who cares about Muslim and kike trash?
From the relevant religions only Abrahamics have autistic monotheism

>Be god
>"Hate" sinners
>Create sinners anyway
>Send sinners to hell even though he made them that way
What was his endgame?

It is also possible that He does, therefore He does because He is omnipotent.

Premise 1: it's possible you didn't read the sticky.

he doesn't hate sinners

I swear to God, every single atheist argument is based on completely non-sequitors that they themselves have invented. it's the only way you losers can "get one over" on the creator of the universe. have fun burning in hell you repulsive shit.

>Be God
>Hate SIN
>Create humans, perfect in every way, but with free will
>Free will and the devil bring us away from God
FTFY

Free will,
If he wants his creations to have free will, he has to let them decide if they want to sin.

If he doesn't hate sinners then why does he sentence them to eternal damnation?

>Multiverse

its only for hypothesis testing.

>It is also possible that He does, therefore He does because He is omnipotent.

this doesnt follow. Platinga makes the argument the other way - it goes on the way that universe requires an omnipotent being.

Because he hates SIN and we had every chance and warning LOL

I'm assuming you Christianity. Eternal doesn't exactly mean forever, it means where there is no time. There is a resurrection in real time and everyone will come back from hell and heaven to live on earth again.

To send himself to save himself from himself.

>Free will
>Choice to sin
>sin
>get punished

>Free will and the devil bring us away from God
Why did he create the devil? Why did he create evil? God created the universe and everything in it, so he is responsible for the shitty parts to you know.

Then why doesn't he cleanse sinners of sin instead of sending them to hell?

How do you get to 3?

>Premise 2: If it is possible for leprechauns to exist, then leprechauns exist in some possible worlds.
what did he mean by this?

He didn't. The devil chose to oppose God. God did not make him oppose him.

He did cleanse us of our sin.... That's what Jesus was for. Cmon dude

Sounds to me like God is just whining about what other people do with their time. He's basically Sup Forums but an even bigger since he's been whining since forever.

I'm well over my 'atheist-phase' but OP's pic is really just a silly linguistic trick. It barely even makes sense. You're just going to annoy people with that.

Because with free will comes consequences.

But in that case how can you give these proposals trying to prove through possibility an absolute when there in no clear definition of what is meant by "God"?

Two ways. One of our given attributes of God is omnipresence. The other way is if he can exist in some worlds, how can we be positive our world is not one of those worlds. Statistically it would be safe to assume our world is included. It's the same logic people use for simulation theory really

>God did not make him oppose him.
But if God couldn't stop the devil from spreading evil and sin then God is not all powerful.

>God is omnipresent
>Leprechauns are not
ffs

It's better than arguments based of a fictional book.

the jump from premise 2 to premise 3 isn't making sense to me. maybe i'm a brainlet. someone explain.
plus, this all banks on multiverse which is a hypothetical scenario.

Did you watch the video? Leprechauns are contingent, not a necessity.

it doesn't make sense.

This isn't fun for any of us. Theologians have answered these questions literally a million times. If you don't like the answers thats on you.

God could easily end existence right now if he wanted to. But that would destroy us, his beloved, and without free will we are just automaton which he also doesn't want.

God rejoices when we choose to follow him.

Well if he is omnipresent, and therefore in all world's, how are they separate worlds.

All of this basically amounts to "it's possible god exists therefore he exists", sophism at its best.

>( ( ( FREE WILL ) ) )

God is omnipresent. If he is in some worlds he is in all. OR

If God is in some worlds but we cannot ascertain which worlds those are, the smart man accepts his world probably falls under that category.

You're looking at the concept of damnation in a very modern Evangelical sense.
The concept is separation. If you choose to turn away from God you are separated from him when you die. Theologians and philosophers who pondered and debated the significance of this see this as terrifying for the abstract nature of it. To be separated from all that is good, from light, from life, its to be lost in abyss. Abyss is linguistically linked back to the term pit, and this ties us into the root of the term. Hell, the pit, is the place for discarded things. It in essence is nothingness. You cease to be when you die. Your soul is as if it were unmade.

Hell isn't Evangelical fire and brimstone. It isn't medieval paintings of little red devils. Those things existed to tell a story that is lost when you look at it when a literal interpretation.

Christians have a definition, I'm not sure if other religions do. I think Christians use Aristotle's (?) theory of God.

>there must necessarily be alternate universes with all possibilities played out

>calls conclusion a premise

>When trying to prove whether or not there are worms in the apple, you can't go assuming the worms in the apple will have worm-like properties
keep wearing that flag, it's a good indicator of your iq

>reddit spacing
You know what to do.

Why not just go with one premise: "God exists."

Why didn't he create humans with free will but without sin? Why did he even give us free will to begin with if he just sends you to eternal damnation if you don't think the way he does?

Was free will just a divine meme? How is it free will if you get punished for exercising it?

God is omnipresent
Thus, existing in some possible worlds MEANS existing in every possible world.

god is for fags

>How do you get to 3?

omnipotence as a defining trait of God.

>but OP's pic is really just a silly linguistic trick.

its the strongest logical argument in existence.

error at "God could and would destroy Satan"

Because fedoraniggers need (((proof))) because they are so (((rational))) and (((logical))).

Sorry for separating my clauses retard.

Because the downside of free will is we can choose to live away from God (sin). You have the free will to choose to shoot someone... and you can still get punished for it what kind of retarded questions are you asking dude

I believe in god.

But I don't understand how you could be so moronic you think that image constitutes any kind of valid logic.

Maybe if retards like you stopped using shitty arguments for his existence, more people would believe?

This assumes we're all agreeing on the same god.

They’re not separate to Him, but they’re separate from us in the sense that we don’t know them. Thus, if we knew them, they would not be separate

Premise 3 is quite a leap.
>Ontological Argument for the Existence of God.
Shorter version:
>If it's possible God exists, then God must exist.
Suitable for 1000 year old logic systems, when people thought humors were fluids in the body that determined your health and mood.

>Free will ->> Choices ->> Consequences

By the same logic

>It is possible that God does not exist
>If it is possible that God does not exist, then God does not exist in some possible worlds
>If God does not exist in some possible worlds, then God exists in no possible worlds
>If God exists in no possible worlds, then God does not exist in the actual world
>If God does not exist in the actual world, God does not exist.

Conclusion: God may or may not exist.

>Because the downside of free will is we can choose to live away from God
If God hates if we go our own way then why did he even give us the option to? Why did he give us the option to commit sin if he hates it so much?

"Free will" and "committing evil" are somehow mutually exclusive to Christians? He could have given us free will but make us not inherently tempted to commit sin.

I'd love to hear the definition of god.
*popcorn*

I don't care what you call it.

>leprechauns wear green suits
>God does not
wow because the properties are different that means the premise makes sense! thanks user you really cleared that up

The first premise is the only one that could make sense.

The others are pure nonsense, why the possibility of the existence of God implies it exists in some possible worlds?(premise 2)

>implying people could ever be annoyed by cute little theists trying to logically prove the existence of something they actively need ‘faith’ to believe. Faith definition: belief without evidence.

premise 3 is nigger-tier witchdoctor "logic"

Because he loves us... A parent gives their child the option to live the life they want, even if it goes against what the parent believes.

>He could have given us free will but make us not inherently tempted to commit sin
How so would you go about doing that? And if you are living within God's dream for you there is not temptation of sin, sin cannot exist where God does. I've known pastors who unironically claimed to have not sinned that day, and they were telling the truth.

In addition, there are several different religions with several different gods and all of them teach that it's blasphemy to worship any other gods. So you can't pray to all of them, and if you pray to one of them then it's a crapshoot at best.

Did you just assume my gods properties?! Bigot!

But the OP's premises are stupid, they are not a proof at all since the very first premise requires that God exists for the rest to work, so why not shorten it to "God exists".

Look up Aristotle's definition or Thomas Aquinas version. I'm not a theologian.

so this line of thinking necessitates an infinite amount of non-repeating worlds, right?

Premise 3 is faulty. In an infinite multi-verse there exists universes where God does not exist. Therefore God can not exist in all universes.

>Oof
a whole another level of bigotry

this is simply a high quality logical argument. Faith is not based on them, but comes "by hearing and accepting the Word of God". Logical reasoning has its place still.

>But I don't understand how you could be so moronic you think that image constitutes any kind of valid logic.

Im sorry, but you are a brainlet.

>why the possibility of the existence of God implies it exists in some possible worlds?(premise 2)

since it must exist SOMEWHERE. And by definition of its OMNIPOTENCE that existence must translate to other worlds.

see apparently it's because he's omnipresent. because somehow that makes the possibility of him existing automatically mean that he does in fact exist

The logic is deeply flawed. You can't use separate universes and their latent possibility of having a god or not as a mean to determine where he is, then concluding by "they were all one all along".
It completely circular.

Multiverse, yes.

that's not funny, andrew

>since it must exist SOMEWHERE.
...and you came to that conclusion how exactly?

>A parent gives their child the option to live the life they want, even if it goes against what the parent believes
I don't think my parents love me enough to sentence me a to an eternity of damnation and suffering for going against their values.

>How so would you go about doing that?
Well, seeing as how I would be an all-powerful deity, creator of all things, present at all times and all-knowing of the past, present, and future, I would be aware that my creation, Satan, would eventually defy me and cause my perfect human race to be sinners, and not create him to begin with.

According to Christians, humans are inherently good and have free will, but Satan drives them to commit sin. So I would just get rid of Satan? Not rocket science here.

But it was not laid out, and the Sucidal-user said that Christianity was not a factor in play.

For a "thought experiment" to work, you need to define your base elements, which in this case are
>God
and
>Different worlds
What is meant by these constructs?
If both of these are hypothetical, then you can't prove actual truths.
In this case you are trying to use your model(Many worlds) to prove existence of God as a actual truth. To do so, your model should be an actual truth itself, you can not get actual truth from two hypotheticals. So you should give reference to a previous discussion where the Truth of Different Worlds was proven before you can use said model to argue the existence of God.

I'm more inclined to believe that if there were such thing as an omnipotent being that transcends space and time, it would be more along the lines of a Lovecraftian type being; something so powerful that it would care about us as much as we care about the molecules on the petal of a flower. Even our complete anihilation would be of no concern to them.

I studied some theology and the third premise is the key problem:
-Existence>Non existence : "God can exist, therefor God exist". It's pretty easy to confute, 'cause if the premise "existence>non existence" is false, we get a universe where God may o may not exist. And accordig to Occam, this situation is pretty much a dead end for theism.
-Do I believe in God? Yes, I do.
-Does God intervene in human affairs? No
-Is it all powerful? Yes, It is.
-It is "good"? I don't think it makes any sense to even describe it with human reason.
God manifested itself with creation, that's it, no more, no less.

you do not understand how the multiverse works. there are infinite parallel universes. you do not know what infinite means. think of the following: infinite even numbers. that would go to infinity, but would NEVER include 1 or 3 because they are odd numbers. infinite does not mean all possibilities are played out. get it now?

And that takes away Free will. Congratulations, if your choices are limited you don't have free will.