navigation
Home
Blog
About me
Site options



logically incompatible properties of the abrahamic god


for the following arguments to work,your debate partner has to agree on the following things:
god is:
1.perfect
2.transcendent
3.immutable
4.omipresent
5.all-just
6.all-mercifull
7.nonphysical
8.omniscient
9.personal
10.free
11.all-loving
12.the creator

this should be fairly easy if your partner is a muslim or christian,because these are some characteristics described to god bu both the quaran and the bible


all-mercifull vs all-just


justice is giving one the punishment he/she deserves
mercy is giving one less punidhment than he/she deserves


so the argument consists of the following premises:
1.(if god exists),god is an all-mercifull judge
2.(if god exists),god is an all-just judge
3.justice is giving one the punishment he/she deserves
4.mercy is giving one less punidhment than he/she deserves
5.it is impossible to give someone both the exact punishment he/she deserves and also a punishment lesser than he/she deserves
6.therefore,it is imposible that an all-just god can be all-mercifull


creator vs perfect


1.(if god exists),he is perfect
2.(if god exists),he created the universe
3.to create something,it would require one to have a (desire,wish,need,want) to do so
4.if god is perfect,he doesnt have any (desires,wishes,needs,wants)
5.therefore a perfect god wouldnt be able to create the universe


omniscient vs perfect


1.(if god exists),he is perfect
2.(if god exists),he is omniscient
3.if god was perfect,it would mean he has no desire to do evil
4.since he has no desire to do evil,he does not know how it feels to have a desire to do evil
5.if god was omnipresent,he would know everything
6.therefore,god cant be perfect and omnoscient at the same timr


transcendence and immutability vs creator


1.(if god exists),he created the universe
2.(if god exists),he is immutable
3.(if god exists),he is transcendent
4.being immutable means you are not affected by things
5.being transcendent means being outside space and time
6.creating the universe requires a timespan where one starts and where one finishes
7.creating something requires you to have a desire to do so
8.since creating something requires time,a transcendent being could not have created the universe
9.creating the universe requires him to have a desire to do so,and after he is finished he would have lost the desire to do so
10.therefore his desire would change ig he built the universe
11.an immutable being cant be affected by things,so his desire wouldnt change
12.therefore,an immutable being couldnt be the creator of the universe


i know that i should have split these argument,but meh.


omniscience vs immutability


1.(if god exists),he is omniscient
2.(if god exists),he is immutabe
3.omniscience requires one to know everything(including future,past,present)
4.what is past,present and future keep changing
5.so in order to be correct, a being needs to know different things at different times
6.so it requires change
7.immutability prevents one from being affected by things
8.therefore an omniscient being cannot be immutable

explaining premise 5:

take for example,a man is building a fence

one year from now,this might be past because the action is finished
now,it is present

so, an omnipresent being would know today "that man is building a fence now" and next year "that man built a fence last year"


all-loving vs immutable


1.(if god exists),he is all-loving
2.(if god exists),he is immutable
3.immutable means mot being affected by things
4.to be loving,it requires you to be affected by events,beings,etc.
5.therefore,an immutable being cannot be loving,especially not all-loving


transcendent vs omnipresent


1.(if god exists),he is transcendent
2.(if god exists),he is omnipresent
3.omnipresence requires you to be everywhere
4.this includes in space
5.transcendence means only being outside space and time
6.therefore,a transcendent being cannot be omnipresent


personal vs transcendent


1.(if god exists),he is transcendent
2.(if god exists),he is personal
3.being transcendent means outside space and time
4.personal beings perform actions
5.personal beings need to be in space and time to perform actions
6.since god is outside space and time,he cannot perform actions
7.therefore god cannot be both transcendent and a personal being


personal vs non-physical


1.(if god exists),he is personal
2.(if god exists),he is non-physical
3.(if god exists),as far as we know, a personal being requires a brain
4.brains are physical
5.since brains are physical,non-physical beings cant have brains
6.(from premise 3 and 5) therefore a non-physical being cannot be personal


omnipresence vs personal


1.(if god exists),he is a personal god(as in: god is like a personal being with emotions and stuff)
2.(if god exists),he is omnipresent
3.being omnipresent contradicts what we know about personhood or personal beings
4.therefore an omnipresent being cannot be personal


yeah yeah,this argument is shitty,i know...


free will vs omniscience


1.(if god exists),he is omniscient
2.(if god exists),he is free (as in : he has free will)
3a.an omniscient being knows everything
3b.knowing everything includes knowing the future and his future actions
4.a free being can do whatever he wants
5.if he knows his future actions,he cannot decide to not do it,otherwise he would be wrong. if a proposition is true,then it cannot be false. so if x knows he will do y,then he cannot choose to not do it
6.being free means you have to have a number of options you can choose from
7.therefore ,omniscient being cannot have free will


You are the 73th visitor























































Duck hunt