This is actually easy for James to disprove, and unfortunately for him, that is the main problem with his argument, there are laws which can neither be created nor destroyed by any being, which transcend a creator, which makes the creator part a moot point. The creator cannot create creation itself… so then the deists just say the creator is creation itself, as I pointed out earlier, the creator would have to create its own desire to create, so this argument doesn’t work because it has regress. Which means either you have an infinite chain of creators or you have something coming from nothing at all. You have eternal laws that transcend a creator through regress, which means it cannot be the creator of these laws. James is deifying impossibility and possibility, and he actually hasn’t demonstrated why they should be deified, he simply asserts it, but he hasn’t actually plowed through his reasoning. I could just as easily state that God is an empty coffee cup in my apartment, and there’s an empty coffee cup in my apartment, therefor God exists. That’s as far as James has actually presented this argument. And if he can see that, perhaps he can reformulate to present it more articulately.
OK, but this “Creator” is not the sort of creator that an atheist couldn’t believe in while still consistently calling themselves an atheist? Alright then.
What do you suspect would happen if you initially proposed a God-concept that an atheist could disbelieve in while calling themselves an atheist??
Quite the contrary.
If you were in that space (already impossible by definition), nothing at all would be possible. The fact is that such a “space” is an oxymoron that cannot ever be the state of reality.
Really? Think about that.
Can you do it right now?
If not, is it really possible? Or merely “theoretically possible under the right circumstances”?
By definition, if the circumstances are not befitting, is it still possible?
… by definition, no it is not = impossible.
Thus there is a reason why something cannot possibly happen: the conditions are not right.
God is the actual real situation, the determiner of what you can or cannot do at every moment. And that situation was created by the fact that some things are impossible.
Quite the contrary.
God is the reason that at any one given moment, you can’t.
There never was a situation where “anything could occur”. Such was always a deception, a lure into worship, into magic.
Also there is no entity which is the fundamental reality … other than Impossibility.
Once anything is impossible, possible existence, thus certain existence, immediately appears, as whatever was left.
Huh?
A) it is certainly impossible that God is Satan (literally by definition of the two).
B) God is NOT any one particular thing that is impossible, nor any combination thereof. God is the very existence of impossibility itself.
What some people do not understanding regarding the need for the impossible in order to have the possible can be exampled by the sum of all frequencies. If you add up all radio frequencies from zero to infinity, you end up with no frequency at all. Every frequency is cancelled by the others. And in order to actually get a signal, some signal must be removed or forbidden from the list.
Equally if truly all things were possible, every possibility would be countered by its opposite. The end result would be no possibility at all, because there would be nothing preventing everything from cancelling everything. There could be no universe at all.
In the case of the physical universe, substance exists only because it is impossible to add affects (specifically EMR) faster than infinitely fast. And because of that, light can only travel as fast as it does. If it was possible to add EMR faster than infinitely fast, light would travel infinitely fast and the entire universe would be the sum of all frequencies = nothing at all.
A stationary subatomic particle is a spec of random ultra-minuscule EMR noises, Affectance, that are crossing in literally every possible direction, resulting in no motion of the particle as every bit of potential motion is cancelled by its opposite. For the particle to move, some of the noise within must be removed so as to allow the possibility of motion without it being canceled by opposition. If all noise is removed except the noise that was traveling in one particular direction, the particle would be traveling at the speed of light … and no longer be a particle.
Socially speaking, the story of creation mentions the formation of Adham, the first Man(ager). The word “Ahdam” literally means the damming up of free spirit, causing some actions to be improbable if not impossible. In effect, it was the advent of enforceable law. And from that formation of restrictions (likened to God, in “the image of God”), Paradise was maintained … for a while. But then the liberals tempted Eve and all hell broke loose as laws became unenforceable = chaos, struggle, and loss.
Nothing in the universe can be established or remain stable for any length of time at all except by inherent limits placed within it.
Yes, they are that stupid. What could one sane man do against a legion of apes?
Especially if those apes have jububwu on their side.
Actually no, God is usually defined as the totality of all things. One cannot create something without being connected to it. If Satan was not created by god, nor connected to God, nor under God’s power, then that contradicts most definitions of god.
But God as the “limit to possibility” and the “impossibility itself” means that “God exists as that limit” and beyond that limit, right?
James, I’ve been thinking about you, and your theories.
I simply can’t find anything wrong with them…mathetmatically.
However…
Your theory of god…
It’s table talk. Coffee talk. Where’s the adventure.
Where’s the promise of eternal Heaven? The Glory? It’s so very flat.
In fact, you might not even call it a god at all, because it has zero properties of a god.
Put it this way, if your theories of the universe are true, and your god is true…there is zero point in living. Perhaps this is why the government tried to cover the truth up. Because its just so…hollow, once you find the end of the tunnel…there’s nothing left to explore.
“Without the culinary arts, life would be unbearable.”
Yet at some point, one must remember the very purpose of eating, experiencing spice isn’t it, despite the report of the spoiled. How long was it before molecular biology could be certain of exactly what delightful foods and drugs were doing more good than harm? Molecular biology is not very inspiring. It is “flat”, dull, and cold. But at some point, one must face the stark and dark reality so as to establish a foundation for life to prosper, not merely waste away in delightful, inspiring, yet pointless fantasies.
It has the properties of:
Creator, Immutable, unmoved, unrelenting, omnipotent, and supremely respectable. Literally everything bows to God the Creator. Belief is not required. And a mild understanding of it is all that has ever raised any architecture or nation. All order is founded upon the breath and shadow of the impossible.
Beyond merely the creating, to seek the truly impossible is to come fully understand the possible and even the miraculous, making the possible far more probable when needed or desired.
The true goal of life is to maximize IJOT. But who of you even knows what that means?
- Find the fundamental truths (what fundamentally can and cannot be done, e.i. “God”)
- Find the precise purpose of trying/living, the foundation of inspiration (IJOT).
- Find out how to utilize truth to ensure that purpose (How to Live).
Man is merely at stage (1). But one day soon will need to cop a clue to (2) so that there might be hope for (3).
If great things are to come, great foundations are required. There is no greater, immutable foundation than the impossible from which all of the possible can arise.
Man - Stop getting ahead of yourself.
I agree that hard work must be done to create great things.
One must set aside fantasy delusions, like god, and get science done.
But what must be done?
First thing is to change the human DNA.
That will first of all, make humans more intelligient, so they can move on to the other stages, and really accomplish great things.
And just maybe, with New DNA theyll stop blowing each other and running their dumb mouths for once.
So first kill off all of the “bad DNA people”.
Then figure out what was possible.
Since the entire world is basically "bad DNA people’ that is not an option.
Way i see it, people walk into machines and get their DNA upgraded.
Anyone who doesnt, is a retard, by definition. And who wants to be a retard? There would be no laws forcing anyone to upgrade their DNA. Some people would choose not to for religious reasons, and they would end up retards, since they already are retards. And who would vote for a retard, or give them a job as a CEO? (Now I know politicians and CEOs are retards, but this is only because the current people in power are retards.)
So, if for instance, the entire power system did not upgrade their DNA, they would have no advantage over the populace, and no power. They would easily be overtaken by the superior DNA’ers.
For instance, the Illuminati, once they upgrade their DNA, would not be so evil minded.
Lastly, figure out why you were messing with it all to begin with.
How do you know good from bad? Bible told you so? Intuition? Hollywood?
What if it turns out that being more intelligent or having a larger penis is actually a bad thing?
Emmm… yeah. That is about like expecting North Korea to march into South Korea and convert them with their good manners.
Who designs the “good” DNA upgrade? Microsoft? Ever gotten a Microsoft upgrade? Does the suffering ever end?
“If you aren’t using Windows-8, you are obviously a retard … by definition.”
And some people could choose to not upgrade their Win95 or NT … retards.
Yes, obviously Microsoft has superior DNA. That is why they are so kind and wise.
We are not talking about upgrading Windows XP, to Windows Vista. We are talking about Windows DOS, vs. Windows 7.
Your latest argument was that we need to buckle down and abandon fantasy.
And now, you make absurd claims like “what if intelligence turns out to be a bad thing?”
Get serious, dude.
That has always been so very, very easy for me. And yet to you:
Maybe it isn’t me who needs to get more actually serious.
I have been there, done that. When are you (or anyone) going to catch up so that real progress can eventually be made?