On 1/19/2015 6:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
My belief in God is trivial. All machine introspecting are confronted to it, and from
outside, in the metatheory, we can see that they can confused it (correctly, or not)
with truth.
The problem of the aristotelians is that they often take for granted the physical
reality, which is comprehensible when doing physics, but when doing theology, the
physical universe is an hypothesis, and as such, there are no evidences for it.
That's fine, but it has no bearing on the relation of atheism to Christianity.
Then you should have no problem with using god for definition of god larger than the
abramanic god.
The only problem with using god for definition of god (large or small) is that it's
circular. You repeatedly write things like above, "My belief in God is trivial. All
machine introspecting are confronted to it, and from outside, in the metatheory, we can
see that they can confused it (correctly, or not) with truth." Where God is "it", but
there is no definition. The closest I've seen to you defining your god is "the unprovable
truths of an axiomatic system" or "the fundamental basis of all being". The former is
former is fairly clear and I can see how a self-referential system could "confront it".
The latter may be a description without a referent and I don't see why a self-referential
system would necessarily "confront it".
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
