- May 4, 2012
Okay, fine. I do see the behaviour a lot from the atheists on the forum.I am an agnostic atheist. I don't assume there is no God. If there is one, then I think it is unlikely that there is a God in the Christian/Muslim/Hindu sense. i.e. religions are made up. So I don't believe in the current religions but God could exist.
I don't assume that God exists from a knowledge standpoint. I believe it because it's the most likely scenario that makes sense and because He has proven Himself to me. It is what I would want to be true. I could be wrong about His power and what it is He wants but I'm not going to dwell on the subject as it doesn't make any difference to my current life.I also make no assumptions whilst as soon as someone makes the assumption that God exists then they need to make tons of other assumptions. Assumptions about his power, what he can do, what he can't do, what he has done, and what difference it makes to our lives.
There are two schools of thought. The traditional Christian one which holds that God can do anything within the laws of logic and the traditional Muslim one that God transcends logic and can make 1+1 equal 3. I take omnipotence to mean anything that's logically possible. I also don't see experiment and trial as an impediment to omniscience.The problem here is that you're saying that something illogical like God is limited by the own logic that it created. If you're a God and created the very matter and bonds/forces between everything, then why would you be limited in the amount of control you have over it? It would be like the God had only one shot at things and had to just make do with its creation instead of reworking things until he got it perfect. Omnipotent would mean that he knows all future outcomes as well of his creation and thus this is the best he could do it seems.
Don't confuse the laws of nature with logic. I see logic as something that exists outside of any reality that is always true. Aside from what we do know we don't know what universes are possible. An imperfect creation is also not an argument against creation. If it accomplishes its purpose then being good enough is satisfactory. If all you care about is getting to work for example then a few missing paint chips on your car won't make a difference to you.