Ontological Proof There is No God

[Diogenes]

One can prove there is no god as described in the Bible from reason alone.

God is, by definition according to Christian theology, perfect, all knowing and all powerful. This god has no needs or desires. 'He' is complete unto himself. He is perfect.

Since he is already perfect any change is a change from perfection.

Therefore God not only had no desire to create 'man,' no need to create man, the creation of any fundamental change to the universe, to existence itself, would constitute a change from perfection. Any change from an absolutely perfect state must be a change from perfection to a lesser state, therefore God did not create man since to do so would imply he was not previously perfect.

That homo sapiens exists is therefore proof there was no preexisting and perfect God.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to Miles in post #21]

When I use radiology, I mean radiology in the broadest sense possible, the science of all radiation found with the Electromagnetic Spectrum. Radiology as it is found on Wikipedia is really just a specialized way of using the word radiology.

So when there is a (powerful) photon emitter that shoots out beams of radio waves, whatever the frequency, not intended for human ears at all, the reflection of these radio waves can be picked up by a radar-dish with a radio-wave detector. Now, at the edges of what is produced at the facility of the radar site by radio astronomy, one can make a new analysis of these specific signals and get some of the same radiation signature that ghosts emit. That God in you is actually detectable as a matter of fact. God in you, whatever the nature, has the same "radio"/"radiological" signature as God out there at the fringes of the Universe.

After so long, I fail to remember the specific frequencies for both the radio waves used to scan the Universe farthest possible and the special "radiological" interpretation, whatever this frequency, of this area on the printed sheet of paper from the radar-dish of astronomy. You know, how one decided to take those signals and make them visible to the human eye and then realize that we have found God way out there at the edges of the Universe. God/Heaven is a honeycomb-shaped thing.

Radiology (one version, mine) -> science of all the Electromagnetic Spectrum and not only the medical uses.

Now then?

[2ndRateMind]

There may be only one perfect orange, one perfect apple... and there is only one perfect God. This is a problem the medieval scholastics created. "God" is absolute perfection. Any deviation represents something other than perfection.
This is why God creating the Earth and its multitude of imperfect beings would mean God was either not perfect before such creation, or his creation made him imperfect. 'God,' BTW, agrees:

'And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.”'
Genesis 6:6-7

I am not contending that God is perfect or that he even exists. He does not. That is the point of this topic. If this so called 'God' is perfect, then 'He' does not exist. If 'He' did, he would do no more.
Having reached perfection 'He' would stop. This is the point, this notion of a 'perfect God' is absurd, just as is the notion of a perfect triangle. A perfect triangle only exists as a construct, an idea. A perfect triangle does not exist except as a geometric ideal.
This notion of a 'perfect god' does not exist except as a theological idea.

You appear to be missing my point.

There are many ways for a triangle to be perfectly triangular. Whey can't we also say there are many ways for God to be perfectly Godly?

Just for the sake of pernicketyness, here, simply stated, is St Anselm's ontological argument: Consider a being greater than which nothing can be conceived. Since such a being is greater if it exists than if it doesn't, it must exist.

Best wishes, 2RM.

For the purposes of debate, I ought to say I am not entirely persuaded by St Anselm. He seems to me to confuse quality (how great a thing is) with quantity (how many instances of it occur in the universe). It is entirely possible to conceive of the the greatest possible unicorn, but that does not make unicorns exist.

So far as I understand the status quo, God hides Himself from those who do not love Him, and do not want a relationship with Him, and reveals Himself to those that do love Him, and do want that relationship. Accordingly, my suspicion is that to attempt to 'prove' or 'disprove' God are projects doomed to faliure.

Best wishes, 2RM.

...One could also use this argument to prove the existence of the Starship Enterprise...

Only if the Starship Enterprise is the greatest of all possible starships!

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Kylie]

There may be only one perfect orange, one perfect apple... and there is only one perfect God. This is a problem the medieval scholastics created. "God" is absolute perfection. Any deviation represents something other than perfection.
This is why God creating the Earth and its multitude of imperfect beings would mean God was either not perfect before such creation, or his creation made him imperfect. 'God,' BTW, agrees:

'And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.”'
Genesis 6:6-7

I am not contending that God is perfect or that he even exists. He does not. That is the point of this topic. If this so called 'God' is perfect, then 'He' does not exist. If 'He' did, he would do no more.
Having reached perfection 'He' would stop. This is the point, this notion of a 'perfect God' is absurd, just as is the notion of a perfect triangle. A perfect triangle only exists as a construct, an idea. A perfect triangle does not exist except as a geometric ideal.
This notion of a 'perfect god' does not exist except as a theological idea.

You appear to be missing my point.

There are many ways for a triangle to be perfectly triangular. Whey can't we also say there are many ways for God to be perfectly Godly?

Just for the sake of pernicketyness, here, simply stated, is St Anselm's ontological argument: Consider a being greater than which nothing can be conceived. Since such a being is greater if it exists than if it doesn't, it must exist.

Best wishes, 2RM.

For the purposes of debate, I ought to say I am not entirely persuaded by St Anselm. He seems to me to confuse quality (how great a thing is) with quantity (how many instances of it occur in the universe). It is entirely possible to conceive of the the greatest possible unicorn, but that does not make unicorns exist.

So far as I understand the status quo, God hides Himself from those who do not love Him, and do not want a relationship with Him, and reveals Himself to those that do love Him, and do want that relationship. Accordingly, my suspicion is that to attempt to 'prove' or 'disprove' God are projects doomed to faliure.

Best wishes, 2RM.

...One could also use this argument to prove the existence of the Starship Enterprise...

Only if the Starship Enterprise is the greatest of all possible starships!

Best wishes, 2RM.

Well of course, that's why they chose it to make a TV show!

[Inquirer]

One can prove there is no god as described in the Bible from reason alone.

God is, by definition according to Christian theology, perfect, all knowing and all powerful. This god has no needs or desires. 'He' is complete unto himself. He is perfect.

Since he is already perfect any change is a change from perfection.

Therefore God not only had no desire to create 'man,' no need to create man, the creation of any fundamental change to the universe, to existence itself, would constitute a change from perfection. Any change from an absolutely perfect state must be a change from perfection to a lesser state, therefore God did not create man since to do so would imply he was not previously perfect.

That homo sapiens exists is therefore proof there was no preexisting and perfect God.

I don't see a single quote from either the OT or NT, just paraphrasing.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to Miles in post #21]

When I use radiology, I mean radiology in the broadest sense possible, the science of all radiation found with the Electromagnetic Spectrum. Radiology as it is found on Wikipedia is really just a specialized way of using the word radiology.

So when there is a (powerful) photon emitter that shoots out beams of radio waves, whatever the frequency, not intended for human ears at all, the reflection of these radio waves can be picked up by a radar-dish with a radio-wave detector. Now, at the edges of what is produced at the facility of the radar site by radio astronomy, one can make a new analysis of these specific signals and get some of the same radiation signature that ghosts emit. That God in you is actually detectable as a matter of fact. God in you, whatever the nature, has the same "radio"/"radiological" signature as God out there at the fringes of the Universe.

After so long, I fail to remember the specific frequencies for both the radio waves used to scan the Universe farthest possible and the special "radiological" interpretation, whatever this frequency, of this area on the printed sheet of paper from the radar-dish of astronomy. You know, how one decided to take those signals and make them visible to the human eye and then realize that we have found God way out there at the edges of the Universe. God/Heaven is a honeycomb-shaped thing.

Radiology (one version, mine) -> science of all the Electromagnetic Spectrum and not only the medical uses.

Now then?

"I find the evidence is compelling for my thing, it's just I lost it."

I can't escape thinking a dog ate it.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #45]

You sure have the method, the bones of how to get there. I’m inclined to think the dog ate your new science book.
Remember, Joey, if you’re uncertain, you can just ask the omniscient AI computers what the truth is! This is not digestible for the dog, though. What in the World are you feeding your dog?