Wednesday, March 18, 2015


Posted this as a reply to a friend- It was originally a reply to on old professor. It is in a premature state but the overall point is here. Please read with this information in mind.


The philosophers God, aptly named God 4.0, with the four characteristics (omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omni-benevolent) attributed to it’s definition is an easily refuted God (I’ll explain why in a moment). These attributes are the same basic attributes defining God within most of today's theistic texts. So if arguments for God 4.0 are deemed logical, then, at least on a fundamental level, there would have to be some plausibility given to the accuracy of at least one of the texts. Likewise, if it is determined that God 4.0, the foundation for all these textual deities, is impossible, then all the Gods of all the texts are also impossible. If determining any single attribute contradictory, then this also deems all the Gods of text, false. Determining one attribute contradictory does not, however, disprove a God entirely, simply a God with that attribute. But as I am about to show, all the attributes are easily refuted. 

Thursday, January 1, 2015

A tricky question

I once answered this question:

If you don't believe in choices, and that everything is determined, then why do you try to convince others to "choose" that there is no such thing as choice?

and I felt my answer to be accurate but long winded, and not as to the point as I would have liked, so this a a more clear follow up attempt.