How could you tell?

[KCfromNC]

I asked a simple question.

It seems to me you are thinking too hard.

I, a Christian, believe the God of the Bible is the Greatest Conceivable Being.

In other words, there is no Being Greater than He is.

I can conceive of a being greater - one who is the same as your god but also has a hit hard rock album. You can't argue that a being with valid music industry sales figures is lesser than someone who has none.

But again, unless you want to discuss how a being like your god plus the ability and willingness to deceive is somehow less powerful than your god without that willingness, you're in the wrong thread.

 

[Davian]

How could you tell?

I don't believe that deities are anything other than characters in books, so the answer I provided was, no, theists cannot tell. I do not have that conundrum.

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

I can conceive of a being greater - one who is the same as your god but also has a hit hard rock album. You can't argue that a being with valid music industry sales figures is lesser than someone who has none.

Since the God I worship is the one responsible for making humans with the very ability to make music, this Being you reference is actually none other than the one I worship.

For which is greater?

The ability to make a hit hard rock album, or the ability to make a person who has the capacity to make a hit hard rock album?

Obviously the latter. I know of no musician however talented he may be who can create a man literally by speaking him into existence.

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

I don't believe that deities are anything other than characters in books, so the answer I provided was, no, theists cannot tell. I do not have that conundrum.

Your error lies in speaking for others, something you cannot do regarding what their personal relationships consist of.

 

[KCfromNC]

Since the God I worship is the one responsible for making humans with the very ability to make music, this Being you reference is actually none other than the one I worship.

Which album did your god record? Please be specific. And then, please provide evidence that your god is the reason people are able to make music. Until then, it sounds like you're just making stuff up.

When you're finished there, want to discuss how a being like your god plus the ability and willingness to deceive is somehow less powerful than your god without that willingness?

 

[Davian]

Then you ARE telling.

Don't put words in my mouth. That is not what I was saying.

An atheist is one who CAN tell that there is no God.

Really? In your words, how would an atheist determine that there is no God?

 

[juvenissun]

Since you could convince yourself of the truth and also the false, I don't see how this helps you.

I mean, it's an appropriate answer, but it doesn't solve the dilemma of being able to determine the truth from lies.

I don't see any dilemma. You ponded on a question for a long enough time, then you CAN made a decision. If you do not make any, that is because you do not want to, not because you can not.

 

[Non sequitur]

I asked a simple question.

It seems to me you are thinking too hard.

I, a Christian, believe the God of the Bible is the Greatest Conceivable Being.

In other words, there is no Being Greater than He is.

Therefore, I believe God is Good and cannot be anything other than Good.

Why? Because Goodness is a great making property. The Greatest Conceivable Being could not lack Goodness and still be the Greatest Conceivable Being.

I do not believe evilness is a great making property, but rather, Goodness.

These conclusions should be self-evident to anyone in their right mind.

We've been over this; falsified ontological argument, circular reasoning and ad hominem.

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

Which album did your god record?

I never said He did. I said He created humans with the ability to make music.

Please be specific. And then, please provide evidence that your god is the reason people are able to make music. Until then, it sounds like you're just making stuff up.

Evidence that God is the reason people are able to make music would be asking for evidence that God exists which is a totally different topic and thus a red herring.

When you're finished there, want to discuss how a being like your god plus the ability and willingness to deceive is somehow less powerful than your god without that willingness?

I have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Non sequitur]

I don't see any dilemma. You ponded on a question for a long enough time, then you CAN made a decision. If you do not make any, that is because you do not want to, not because you can not.

You see no dilemma in not being able to tell if a deity was lying?

My decision is irrelevant (although there seems to be a big problem with me not giving mine). I asked a question.

Your solution of how you could tell was convincing yourself. That doesn't answer how you could tell, just how you did.

What tools could you use that could tell if a deity was lying?

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

You see no dilemma in not being able to tell if a deity was lying?

My decision is irrelevant (although there seems to be a big problem with me not giving mine). I asked a question.

Your solution of how you could tell was convincing yourself. That doesn't answer how you could tell, just how you did.

What tools could you use that could tell if a deity was lying?

The question you are asking is with regards to how one obtains knowledge of God who is a person.

Paramountly, one obtains knowledge of God through the same means that anyone obtains knowledge about any other person. Cultivating a relationship with Him is how we know God. We do not know Him via abstract, vain reasonings and formulas.

We know Him via a personally cultivated two way relationship. But in order to take part in this, one must have faith that what God has revealed about Himself is true. Either Christ is True or He is not. If God came to earth, then Christ is everything we would expect Him to be.

But Christ also lets us know we are sinful and cannot be in right relationship with Him until a fundamental change occurs.

We must be born again before we can know God in the intimate sense.

Only those who are born again can speak about knowing God in the sense that I am using the term. Only those who have been born again can actually speak about knowing that God is Good because they have the proof of this in the form of experiential relations.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

In an attempt to bring the thread back to its original OP, I pose a question to anyone willing to attempt an answer:

What attributes would a Being necessarily possess if this Being were to be considered the Greatest Being that we could imagine?

In other words, humans are mortal i.e. we die. Would the greatest being we could imagine be mortal, or immortal?

Humans exist in time and age over time. Would the greatest being we could imagine exist in time and age over time?

Humans can cease to exist. Would the greatest being we could imagine ever cease to exist?

Humans are sometimes good and sometimes evil acting. Sometimes we lie, cheat, steal, for selfish reasons that end up hurting others etc. etc. Could the greatest being we could imagine ever have the desire to do evil? It seems to me that the answers to these questions are obvious.

What do you think?

The question has insufficient data - please define 'greatest'. Unless we know what the word means, we cannot decide whether 'can cease to exist' is greater than 'can't cease to exist', or 'is good' is greater than 'is bad' (never mind the whole question of what 'good' even means).

The question also feels very much like a trap leading into the very clever, but very erroneous, ontological argument.

 

[Non sequitur]

The question you are asking is with regards to how one obtains knowledge of God who is a person.

Paramountly, one obtains knowledge of God through the same means that anyone obtains knowledge about any other person. Cultivating a relationship with Him is how we know God. We do not know Him via abstract, vain reasonings and formulas.

We know Him via a personally cultivated two way relationship. But in order to take part in this, one must have faith that what God has revealed about Himself is true. Either Christ is True or He is not. If God came to earth, then Christ is everything we would expect Him to be.

But Christ also lets us know we are sinful and cannot be in right relationship with Him until a fundamental change occurs.

We must be born again before we can know God in the intimate sense.

Only those who are born again can speak about knowing God in the sense that I am using the term. Only those who have been born again can actually speak about knowing that God is Good because they have the proof of this in the form of experiential relations.

You realize the only was you arrived at that is circular reasoning.

Can you offer how you could tell if a deity was telling the truth, without using fallacies?

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

You realize the only was you arrived at that is circular reasoning.

Can you offer how you could tell if a deity was telling the truth, without using fallacies?

Negative.

It was arrived at via experiencing God personally.

If you told me you know your girlfriend is an honest woman and that she has never lied to you and that is how you know she is trustworthy, you would think me quite mad if I said that conclusion was arrived at via circular reasoning.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Negative.

It was arrived at via experiencing God personally.

If you told me you know your girlfriend is an honest woman and that she has never lied to you and that is how you know she is trustworthy, you would think me quite mad if I said that conclusion was arrived at via circular reasoning.

Err, that is circular reasoning.

"I know my girlfriend is honest because she told me she was honest, and I know she's honest because she told me so, so I can be confident that she always tells the truth because she told me she always tells the truth, and if she always tells the truth then she must be truthful when she said she always tells the truth..."

Circular.

 

[HitchSlap]

Err, that is circular reasoning.

"I know my girlfriend is honest because she told me she was honest, and I know she's honest because she told me so, so I can be confident that she always tells the truth because she told me she always tells the truth, and if she always tells the truth then she must be truthful when she said she always tells the truth..."

Circular.

Why do theists have such a hard time understanding this?

 

[Non sequitur]

Negative.

It was arrived at via experiencing God personally.

If you told me you know your girlfriend is an honest woman and that she has never lied to you and that is how you know she is trustworthy, you would think me quite mad if I said that conclusion was arrived at via circular reasoning.

Well, she could have never lied to you, that you know of. Now, if you said she couldn't lie, because her inherent property is the inability to lie (that you arrived because she told you, others, etc), then that would be circular reasoning.

Can you use the same methods to determine if your girlfriend was lying as you could a deity? If so, then your analogy stands and is logical.

How could you tell if that God was lying to you, in those personal experiences?

 

[Non sequitur]

Why do theists have such a hard time understanding this?

Special pleading. (Which, humorously, ends back up at circular reasoning...)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Why do theists have such a hard time understanding this?

For some, it's genuinely the foundation of their belief, which makes me sad. Give me good old fashioned foaming-at-the-mouth Creationists any day!

 

[Yamaha06R6Guy]

Err, that is circular reasoning.

"I know my girlfriend is honest because she told me she was honest, and I know she's honest because she told me so, so I can be confident that she always tells the truth because she told me she always tells the truth, and if she always tells the truth then she must be truthful when she said she always tells the truth..."

Circular.

Err.....no

It is not circular because I am concluding she is trustworthy by virtue of experiencing her faithfulness over time not because she says she is trustworthy.