Does God exist? (7 Viewers)

[Sighduck]

"... a reproductive community of populations (reproductively isolated from others) that occupies a specific niche in nature."

"... the smallest groups that are consistently and persistently distinct and distinguishable by ordinary means."

1. A species is the smallest cluster of organisms that possesses at least one diagnostic character. This character may be morphological, biochemical or molecular and must be fixed in reproductively cohesive units. It is important to realize that this reproductive continuity is not used in the same way as in the BSC. Phylogenetic species may be reproductive communities. Reproductively compatible individuals need not have the diagnostic character of a species. In this case, the individuals need not be conspecific.
2. A species must be monophyletic and share one or more derived character. There are two meanings to monophyletic (de Queiroz and Donoghue 1988, Nelson 1989). The first defines a monophyletic group as all the descendants of a common ancestor and the ancestor. The second defines a monophyletic group as a group of organisms that are more closely related to each other than to any other organisms. These distinctions are discussed in Baum 1992 and de Queiroz and Donoghue 1990.

correct me if i'm wrong, but wouldn't these definitions mark black and white people as deffirent species?

 

[Will Shakespear]

not rly

if you take the phylogenetic species concept to its extreme, then every individual can be called a species, lol

also, nice quote mining, you left out this bit:

Three comments must be made about this definition. First, "ordinary means" includes any techniques that are widely available, cheap and relatively easy to apply. These means will differ among different groups of organisms. For example, to a botanist working with angiosperms ordinary means might mean a hand lens; to an entomologist working with beetles it might mean a dissecting microscope; to a phycologist working with diatoms it might mean a scanning electron microscope. What means are ordinary are determined by what is needed to examine the organisms in question.
Second, the requirement that species be persistently distinct implies a certain degree of reproductive continuity. This is because phenetic discontinuity between groups cannot persist in the absence of a barrier to interbreeding.
Third, this definition places a heavy, though not exclusive, emphasis on morphological characters. It also recognizes phenetic characters such as chromosome number, chromosome morphology, cell ultrastructure, secondary metabolites, habitats and other features.

there's no persistent differences between black and white people once you put them together - they interbreed and the morphological differences are lost

 

[tommykins]

oh noes! ppl that know science! wot does ido.

 

[mirakon]

God cannot be a physical reality. That much is certain. There is no material God. However an immaterial itnerpretation cannot be discounted immediately. But please do not try to prove the physical reality of a Biblical God, because that. unfortunately for you. is impossible

 

[thongetsu]

wow 1015 pages... does anyone actually read past page 3?(being optimistic)

 

[tommykins]

i've read around 98% of the pages

 

[moll.]

wow 1015 pages... does anyone actually read past page 3?(being optimistic)

Change to 50 posts per page, stupid. All teh kewl kids doet.
It's only up to page 305 for me.

 

[Name_Taken]

God cannot be a physical reality. That much is certain. There is no material God. However an immaterial itnerpretation cannot be discounted immediately. But please do not try to prove the physical reality of a Biblical God, because that. unfortunately for you. is impossible

Umm... may I ask why this is the case?

 

[mirakon]

Umm... may I ask why this is the case?

Simply put, to create something, one has to be external to it. God created time and space, and is thus external to it. As being a physical reality means being defined by space-time and as God is external space-time, is thus not defined by it and cannot be a physical reality.

Furthermore, suppose a Biblical God exists. Now take the case where I am someone who is a non-believer, two cases arise:

Case 1: I provoke God
Case 2: I don't provoke God

If Case 1, then this means that as I have provoked God, I have influenced, or brought about a change in God, which undermines the definition he is omnipotent.

If Case 2, then this means that God would punish me for being a non-believer, without provocation, which undermines God's omnibenevolence.

So a Biblical God cannot be omnipotent and omnibenevolent at the same time. However by definition a Biblical God is both. Yet this is a contradiction.

 

[zaxmacks]

Simply put, to create something, one has to be external to it. God created time and space, and is thus external to it. As being a physical reality means being defined by space-time and as God is external space-time, is thus not defined by it and cannot be a physical reality.

Furthermore, suppose a Biblical God exists. Now take the case where I am someone who is a non-believer, two cases arise:

Case 1: I provoke God
Case 2: I don't provoke God

If Case 1, then this means that as I have provoked God, I have influenced, or brought about a change in God, which undermines the definition he is omnipotent.

If Case 2, then this means that God would punish me for being a non-believer, without provocation, which undermines God's omnibenevolence.

So a Biblical God cannot be omnipotent and omnibenevolent at the same time. However by definition a Biblical God is both. Yet this is a contradiction.

Where in the bible does it say that God is omnibenevolent?

 

[Name_Taken]

Where in the bible does it say that God is omnibenevolent?

Yeah, He is kind and forgiving beyond what we could be capable of, but He dispenses justice when it is required.

 

[mirakon]

Where in the bible does it say that God is omnibenevolent?

James 1:13
When tempted, no one should say, For God cannot be tempted by evil'

But wait

John 5:19 (NIV)
We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.

So Biblical God is evil and yet cannot be tempted by evil? Contradiction much?

 

[zaxmacks]

James 1:13
When tempted, no one should say, For God cannot be tempted by evil'

But wait

John 5:19 (NIV)
We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.

So Biblical God is evil and yet cannot be tempted by evil? Contradiction much?

How exactly does that say that God is omnibenevolent?

Also, if you look at the verse 18 in 1 John 5, you'll see that "the evil one" is not God. It refers to them as two separate entities.

 

[zaxmacks]

Yeah, He is kind and forgiving beyond what we could be capable of, but He dispenses justice when it is required.

That's my understanding of it. Not everyone deserves to be saved, but God does save some.

 

[mirakon]

How exactly does that say that God is omnibenevolent?

Also, if you look at the verse 18 in 1 John 5, you'll see that "the evil one" is not God. It refers to them as two separate entities.

1 John 4:8
God is love.

If God is love, then is he not incapable of hate, and evil? Is he not then omnibenevolent?

Psalms 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

This implies God as perfect, which implies omnibenevolence as a vital characteristic of the Biblical God.

 

[Sokolov]

 

[Titburger]

1 John 4:8
God is love.

If God is love, then is he not incapable of hate, and evil? Is he not then omnibenevolent?

Psalms 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

This implies God as perfect, which implies omnibenevolence as a vital characteristic of the Biblical God.

Doesn't that depend on what you imply perfect to mean?

 

[Name_Taken]

James 1:13
When tempted, no one should say, For God cannot be tempted by evil'

But wait

John 5:19 (NIV)
We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.

So Biblical God is evil and yet cannot be tempted by evil? Contradiction much?

Ahh... May I just point out that the "evil one" is Satan, not God, and he (Satan) is referred to by that name at several points throughout the Bible.

1 John 4:8
God is love.

If God is love, then is he not incapable of hate, and evil? Is he not then omnibenevolent?

Psalms 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

This implies God as perfect, which implies omnibenevolence as a vital characteristic of the Biblical God.

Lolwut.

God is perfect, God loves us, and God is incapable of evil or sin, or even temptation. Hate is an example of a sin.

I don't get what you're trying to say...

 

[mirakon]

Ahh... May I just point out that the "evil one" is Satan, not God, and he (Satan) is referred to by that name at several points throughout the Bible.



Lolwut.

God is perfect, God loves us, and God is incapable of evil or sin, or even temptation. Hate is an example of a sin.

I don't get what you're trying to say...

So you believe God is omnibenevolent?

 

[Name_Taken]

So you believe God is omnibenevolent?

I believe He is incapable of evil, and He is morally perfect, which I believe is probably a more appropriate term to omnibenevolence. But, yes, He is wholly pure and good, if you will, and incapable of evil.