Hacker News Reader

Comment by benterix | Hacker News Reader

> Even in high school it was obvious to me that "god is omniscient" is a scientific statement, not a metaphysical / religious claim.

It's a bit more complex than that. You could say "god is omniscient" is a proposition in logic but you need some axioms first. "God as defined in the Bible" might be a good start (although not too easy as Bible is self-contradictory in many places and doesn't provide a clear definition of God).

View on HN

> a clear definition of God

The God of the Bible offers a profound reply to the question "Who are You?" He replies "I AM that I AM" as if He is not readily definable.

There are many characteristics of this God that spelled out in detail; His desire for truth and justice, His love for the widow and orphan, His hatred of evil and injustice, His power and glory, and His plan for this world. So even if His whole is blurry, there are aspects of His character and abilities that are spelled out in detail.

Is it enough for a metaphysical debate? I have no idea.

Some things are spelled out, claimed or alluded to, then later contradicted. It would be interesting for an AI to analyze the claims and the actions, then see if those attributes hold true, or if God is a contradictory character, one that is still hard to define with absolutes.

I think God makes sense as a character, but only if you see him as a "person" with desires, flaws and some character development. If you treat him like some omnipotent, omniscient, unchanging, immutably good being (as some religious people like to do) you get into lots of contradictions

I'd be curious to hear about some of these contradictions. I've seen giant lists floating around, but after checking into some of them they seem spurious at best. I'm curious to know if you have something concrete?

It's hard to know what you find spurious. Much of religious apologetics involves dismissing every criticism as spurious. Given that multiple authors over long periods of time wrote these religious texts, contradictions do arise, or at least conflicting themes.

I can think of counter examples to the attributes you gave earlier, but if you've read the texts and have not found them yourself, it is unlikely any logical or philosophical analysis would be persuasive.

You don't need any giant lists - earlier someone mentioned the love for widows and children, and yet this didn't seem to apply to random peoples who at a given time were the enemies of Israelites and were ordered to be murdered, including all women and children, no exceptions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com