Is there such a thing as New Atheism?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The problem is the claim that there is only one god hypothesis. The most general version "God created the Universe" cannot be falsified. It makes no predictions. The god hypothesis subscribed to by fundamentalist Christians can be falsified and has been - there was no global flood that wiped out all but eight people, for example.
Yep. I can subscribe to that one.
Some are, some aren't.
See above. There is not just one god hypothesis. However, all the ones that are falsifiable probably haver been falsified.
Can omniscient god predict everything that omnipotent god can do? No, otherwise omnipotent god can't change its mind.
Yes.This is manifestly true.
I can't answer that because I only have experience of the one I live in. A tentative "yes in principle" to both of those.
 Manifestly true.
Yes.

Thanks for that and with most boxes ticked or half ticked, you are eligible for the New Atheist club Horseman number 2986704.

Some interesting ideas I am unfamiliar with.
I'd be interested in your take as to how knowing everything prevents you from changing your mind about say, how you act.

[jeremyp]

Some interesting ideas I am unfamiliar with.
I'd be interested in your take as to how knowing everything prevents you from changing your mind about say, how you act.

Let's say I am omnipotent and omniscient. Being omniscient, I know I'm going to have pizza for tea tonight. However, being omnipotent, I could change my mind and decide to go out for a curry instead. But if I have a curry, it would mean I wasn't omniscient because I predicted I would have pizza.

It's logically impossible to be both omniscient and omnipotent.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Let's say I am omnipotent and omniscient. Being omniscient, I know I'm going to have pizza for tea tonight. However, being omnipotent, I could change my mind and decide to go out for a curry instead. But if I have a curry, it would mean I wasn't omniscient because I predicted I would have pizza.

It's logically impossible to be both omniscient and omnipotent.

Seems sound but you know me Jeremy....why have you introduced prediction here when prediction is not the same as knowledge?

[jeremyp]

Seems sound but you know me Jeremy....why have you introduced prediction here when prediction is not the same as knowledge?

Surely knowing what is going to happen in the future counts as knowledge.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Surely knowing what is going to happen in the future counts as knowledge.

Sounds more like prediction than knowledge......if you put it like that.

What if all futures were your past? You would be on safer ground "knowing the future" then.

[Sebastian Toe]

Sounds more like prediction than knowledge......if you put it like that.

What if all futures were your past? You would be on safer ground "knowing the future" then.

Prediction that is 100% accurate 100% of the time = really, really lucky?

[jeremyp]

Sounds more like prediction than knowledge......if you put it like that.

What if all futures were your past? You would be on safer ground "knowing the future" then.

If you know everything, that must include (for example) the winners of the 2019 FA Cup, otherwise, you don't know everything, only things that have already happened.

[SteveH]

If you know everything, that must include (for example) the winners of the 2019 FA Cup, otherwise, you don't know everything, only things that have already happened.

Arguably, things that have already happened are everything. Things that have yet to happen don't exist yet.
This should be in the "Omnis" thread.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you know everything, that must include (for example) the winners of the 2019 FA Cup, otherwise, you don't know everything, only things that have already happened.

I think that's reasonable, however there is a laddie floating about the forum who is usually quick to point out at moments like this that there is no such thing as ''now''.....does that change things I wonder?

I also take it from what you say that you are not counting a fourth omni.....omnipresence. Would I be right in that?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Arguably, things that have already happened are everything. Things that have yet to happen don't exist yet.
This should be in the "Omnis" thread.

Yes that also sounds reasonable.

[jeremyp]

Arguably, things that have already happened are everything. Things that have yet to happen don't exist yet.
This should be in the "Omnis" thread.

Nonsense. If I ask you “do you know who is going to win the FA Cup in 2019” and you say “I don’t know” then you clearly do not know everything.

[SteveH]

Nonsense. If I ask you “do you know who is going to win the FA Cup in 2019” and you say “I don’t know” then you clearly do not know everything.

I wrote "arguably" deliberately, because I don't necessarily agree (but I don't necessarily disagree either).

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nonsense. If I ask you “do you know who is going to win the FA Cup in 2019” and you say “I don’t know” then you clearly do not know everything.

But Steve has raised a good point. If the future does not exist.How can we have knowledge of it.

Hence my distinction between prediction and knowledge.

So logic about this depend on your premise about time.

[jeremyp]

But Steve has raised a good point. If the future does not exist.How can we have knowledge of it.

We can't have knowledge of it, but we are talking about an omniscient god.

Is it your belief that the Christian god cannot predict the future? Where does that leave all the books about prophets in the Bible?

[SteveH]

Prediction and knowing are two different things. Based on past experience, I can predict pretty confidently that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I won't know it will until it does. God, if God exists, could predict much more accurately than me, and much further ahead, because of God's absolute knowledge of the present and past.

[jeremyp]

because of God's absolute knowledge of the present and past.

So why would he not have absolute knowledge of the future? It seems to me Christians haven't really thought out what the omni's really mean.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

We can't have knowledge of it, but we are talking about an omniscient god.

I'm glad you noticed

Is it your belief that the Christian god cannot predict the future?

It is my belief that

1: It is God who decides if there is a future

2: If existence can only be attributed to what has been and what is now, then the idea of God's omniscience being dependent on ''knowing the future'' is not logical.

3: If there is a future then God, by dint of OMNIPRESENCE, would know the future rather than predict the future which itself would be at most a supremely informed opinion made in ''a present''.


4: It might seem that God has at least suggested a bit of a future. Due to omnipresence he would be in any future.

Where does that leave all the books about prophets in the Bible?

1:If God is omnipresent then he can divulge knowledge to those to whom he wishes.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So why would he not have absolute knowledge of the future? It seems to me Christians haven't really thought out what the omni's really mean.

They are part of the philosophical treatment of God.

There is the difference between a theology embarked on from a base of religious experience and conviction and philosophy.


In your model Jeremy, Christians propose a God of the Omnis and weary old philosophers have had to come in and put them straight.


I don't think Christians started with a God of the omnis, they might have considered them in the height of the scholastic period but even Anselm talks about God being 'the most' rather than ''the omni'' and Aquinus abruptly finishes his philosophical take on God and returns to his religious life.


The atheist demolition of the God of the omnis is therefore IMHO a strawman argument.

[SteveH]

I think the omnis come from ancient Greek philosophy, rather than the Bible. Greek philosophy had a big influence on the development of Christian theology, not all of it good.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes I think a more pertinent question than 'Do Christians understand the Omnis?' is 'Do new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheists/atheists understand the beliefs they have actually been observed coming out with?'

[Gordon]

Yes I think a more pertinent question than 'Do Christians understand the Omnis?' is 'Do new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheists/atheists understand the beliefs they have actually been observed coming out with?'

No idea: why don't you find a new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheist/atheist and ask them?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No idea: why don't you find a new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheist/atheist and ask them?

The cheeky wee atheist labeller dodging around trying to avoid getting one hisself is easy to spot Gordon. He's the one doing the dodging...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No idea: why don't you find a new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheist/atheist and ask them?

Catch us if you ca-a-an, catch us if you ca-a-an.


Ha Ha Ha.

[Stranger]

I don't think Christians started with a God of the omnis, they might have considered them in the height of the scholastic period but even Anselm talks about God being 'the most' rather than ''the omni'' and Aquinus abruptly finishes his philosophical take on God and returns to his religious life.


The atheist demolition of the God of the omnis is therefore IMHO a strawman argument.

Unless you are saying that no groups of Christians believe in the god of the omnis (good luck with that), and that it was made up by atheists, it can't be a straw man.

[Gordon]

The cheeky wee atheist labeller dodging around trying to avoid getting one hisself is easy to spot Gordon. He's the one doing the dodging...

So do you know of someone who is a new/modern/contemporary/bright/militant/campaigning/public antitheist/atheist - and a dodger too you say?