Comments on: Is God Alive? http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/ The Common Lawyer, Now in Blog Form Fri, 02 Jul 2010 00:45:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Bruce http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/comment-page-1/#comment-850 Bruce Fri, 21 May 2010 03:52:31 +0000 http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=162#comment-850 That's an interesting idea. If fine-tuning holds as a requirement for life to exist in the universe, then the fine-tuner cannot be considered 'alive' in the same sense that we use the word, because the alive-fine-tuner would precede the finely-tuned conditions. Now, I can see that there may be some loopholes, such as, fine-tuning is only required for our type of life, and that God is alive but is a different type of life. But if this is true, then that leaves open the possibility that there are other types of life that do not require the same finely-tuned conditions that we require. I think the more accurate way to think of the monotheistic God would have to be as not a living being, if he is to be an eternal and immutable being. You could throw more wrinkles into the story by saying that God perhaps is not eternal and not immutable. Maybe God did start to "live" at some point, and maybe God could "die" at some point, which would seem to be the requirements for calling God a living god. I don't think that most monotheists are willing to consider this sort of handicapping the Supreme Being though. Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts. That’s an interesting idea. If fine-tuning holds as a requirement for life to exist in the universe, then the fine-tuner cannot be considered ‘alive’ in the same sense that we use the word, because the alive-fine-tuner would precede the finely-tuned conditions.

Now, I can see that there may be some loopholes, such as, fine-tuning is only required for our type of life, and that God is alive but is a different type of life. But if this is true, then that leaves open the possibility that there are other types of life that do not require the same finely-tuned conditions that we require.

I think the more accurate way to think of the monotheistic God would have to be as not a living being, if he is to be an eternal and immutable being. You could throw more wrinkles into the story by saying that God perhaps is not eternal and not immutable. Maybe God did start to “live” at some point, and maybe God could “die” at some point, which would seem to be the requirements for calling God a living god. I don’t think that most monotheists are willing to consider this sort of handicapping the Supreme Being though.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

]]> By: SteveC http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/comment-page-1/#comment-464 SteveC Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:18:44 +0000 http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=162#comment-464 I'm looking forward to getting more information about this topic, don't worry about negative opinions. I’m looking forward to getting more information about this topic, don’t worry about negative opinions.

]]> By: Patrick Oden http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/comment-page-1/#comment-177 Patrick Oden Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:41:04 +0000 http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=162#comment-177 That's an interesting idea. If fine-tuning holds as a requirement for life to exist in the universe, then the fine-tuner cannot be considered 'alive' in the same sense that we use the word, because the alive-fine-tuner would precede the finely-tuned conditions. Now, I can see that there may be some loopholes, such as, fine-tuning is only required for our type of life, and that God is alive but is a different type of life. But if this is true, then that leaves open the possibility that there are other types of life that do not require the same finely-tuned conditions that we require. I think the more accurate way to think of the monotheistic God would have to be as not a living being, if he is to be an eternal and immutable being. You could throw more wrinkles into the story by saying that God perhaps is not eternal and not immutable. Maybe God did start to "live" at some point, and maybe God could "die" at some point, which would seem to be the requirements for calling God a living god. I don't think that most monotheists are willing to consider this sort of handicapping the Supreme Being though. Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts. That’s an interesting idea. If fine-tuning holds as a requirement for life to exist in the universe, then the fine-tuner cannot be considered ‘alive’ in the same sense that we use the word, because the alive-fine-tuner would precede the finely-tuned conditions.

Now, I can see that there may be some loopholes, such as, fine-tuning is only required for our type of life, and that God is alive but is a different type of life. But if this is true, then that leaves open the possibility that there are other types of life that do not require the same finely-tuned conditions that we require.

I think the more accurate way to think of the monotheistic God would have to be as not a living being, if he is to be an eternal and immutable being. You could throw more wrinkles into the story by saying that God perhaps is not eternal and not immutable. Maybe God did start to “live” at some point, and maybe God could “die” at some point, which would seem to be the requirements for calling God a living god. I don’t think that most monotheists are willing to consider this sort of handicapping the Supreme Being though.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

]]> By: Cafeeine http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Cafeeine Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:49:34 +0000 http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=162#comment-145 I've been carrying the same train of thought lately, considering the argument for the existence of God from a finely-tuned Universe. The argument begins with the premise that our Universe has some constants that make it possible for it, and consequently life to exist. These require a 'fine tuner' who must exist the influence of these constants. The initial premise does not logically follow if God is considered to be 'alive'. I’ve been carrying the same train of thought lately, considering the argument for the existence of God from a finely-tuned Universe.

The argument begins with the premise that our Universe has some constants that make it possible for it, and consequently life to exist. These require a ‘fine tuner’ who must exist the influence of these constants. The initial premise does not logically follow if God is considered to be ‘alive’.

]]>