The foremost example is their belief that God, being a creator, must also have a creator. I don't understand what they do not get about "supernatural" and "eternal". Supernatural means God is not bound by the laws of nature, God does not need a physical origin like all natural things do because God is not a natural entity. Secondly, how can something preceed God if God is eternal and timeless? The most basic math is that nothing can equal more than infinite. There can be nothing older, stronger, or larger than infinite. I can understand your reasons for disbelief, but how can you not comprehend any supernatural deity?
2007-05-15 14:48:12 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I comprehend what you SAY is true about it, I just think it's illogical and unfounded.
It's like, I understand that in the universe created by Tolkein, there are hobbits and giant spiders and magical rings. I just don't see any reason to believe those things are objectively true.
2007-05-15 15:30:40 · answer #1 · answered by N 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why do Christians (far and wide) have no comprehension of logic and make-believe?
The foremost example is their undying belief in a made-up entity that nobody living or dead has ever seen, heard, talked to, or has any concrete evidence of whatsoever. If they eventually outgrow Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, I don't understand what they do not get about God being a fairytale as well!
I also don't understand how Christians can point fingers at Wiccan magick as being the work of Satan, but at the same time ask you to believe all their excuses about their "magic" God!
What really gets me are their assertions like, "How can something preceed God if God is eternal and timeless?" and state it as a scientifically proven fact! Throwing in mathematical comparisons of the infinite to temporal existence, physical strength and size also shows an amazingly fragile grasp of reality. They might as well state "Two plus two equals CAULIFLOWER!"
Something so supposedly "infinite" MUST exist, they say, and in the next breath tone it down to a convenient entity with human emotions, gender, and fallibility. Not my idea of an all-powerful being! more like a fairytale meant to keep naughty people in line with the threat of eternal pain and torture at the hands of a benevolent God.
2007-05-15 15:14:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
So can you believe Hindu gods are the true gods and your christian god is bogus? No? Why not? if you can believe in one Fantasy storybook, why not believe in a more colourful fantasy storybook?
How do you know this god of your's is eternal and timeless? Because you think he is or because he think he is? If you think he does not need a creator, why do you think other things need creators? Your thinking is one tracked towards believing everything in the book called a bible and using that as a rational, then rationalise the bible with the bible. The basic math is nothing can be more than infinity? Right, now try secondary math, you would know there is no such thing as infinity, there is always a infinity + 1.
If you can comprehend supernatural deity, try praying to Hindu gods, Chinese Gods, American's Gods, Pagan Gods .... .etc etc .....
2007-05-15 14:52:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I expect I understand infinity better than you do. For example, are you aware that there are different orders of infinity? The set of real numbers has a infinite cardinality that is greater than the cardinality of the set of integers. In fact, there are an infinite number of different infinities.
I fully understand what you mean by supernatural. I understand what you are trying to claim. I just absolutely disagree that it is a meaningful claim, and I think you are deluding yourself to believe that it is meaningful.
But suppose I grant you for the sake of argument that there was a supernatural creator, just to explain the original cause problem. What does that buy you? It in no way proves that the Bible is true. If you want to believe in the God of the Bible, you need a much better argument, and preferably one not contradicted by evidence from the natural world.
2007-05-15 15:06:24 · answer #4 · answered by Jim L 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, to take your second point first, we only have your word to go on that God is timeless and eternal. Why should I believe that? There is no evidence that he even exists, let alone has existed forever. As for the supernatural, I understand the idea of the supernatural very well. I just don't believe it exists outside of fiction. So again, why should I believe that there is a supernatural god to whom the laws of the universe don't apply when I don't believe in anything supernatural. There is no evidence whatsoever that anything exists outside the laws of nature, therefore there is no evidence of god.
It doesn't matter that you want to call god supernatural. I say that he isn't, and that nullifies your entire argument.
2007-05-15 14:57:26 · answer #5 · answered by Jensenfan 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Actually, Cantor showed that their are infinities of different sizes. The supernatural, in this case meaning greater than the natural numbers, is not so incomprehensible. You'll find that their are a lot of people who can see through your hollow arguments. Why can't naturalistic systems be eternal? We know that in the extremes of the universe, our expectations break down. Saying it has to be God or supernatural, is an intellectual cop out.
2007-05-15 15:12:23 · answer #6 · answered by novangelis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What makes you think we don't?
Your comments make it clear that you don't understand these arguments. For example, I have never heard an atheist say "God, being a creator, must also have a creator". I think you're hearing atheists respond to the theists' claim that "everything must have a creator and therefore there must be a god", and you're misinterpreted it in the way that you posted in your question.
The rest of your "question" is nothing more than question-begging. You clearly don't understand these things well enough to have a well-formed viewpoint, and your assumption that others' disagreement indicates "no comprehension" is simply arrogance.
2007-05-15 14:53:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Without external context to provide reason for being, the more complex something is the more unlikely it is. Therefore hypothesizing an infinitely ( and infinitely unlikely ) complex god as the reason for the origin of complexity is absurd.
I do believe reality is based on something infinite and timeless but it is simple necessary tautological mathematics, not your infinitely complex, illogical, hateful, vengeful god which primitive superstitious humans created in their own image. Nor do I believe anything is created.
2007-05-15 15:01:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope. I'm a Taoist. I have a comprehension of the Tao, but that is not a deity.
In my view, deities are symbols, metaphors, and archetypes... representations of energies, an attempt to define the undefinable. But I do believe in spiritual energy.
2007-05-15 15:02:02 · answer #9 · answered by KC 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Just because athiests don't believe in the supernatural doesn't mean they don't comprehend it...
Maybe they fact that they DO comprehend it is why they don't beliive it...because it makes no logical sense...
Most athiests are logical people... (and therefore understand the "basic math" of nothing is bigger than infinity...)
....
2007-05-15 14:56:15 · answer #10 · answered by smokefanTS20 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋