Why the hell God designed Survival and death in existence?

[k-ahmadzadeh]

@Atb210201 Such a stupid and arrogant epic phrase without any meaning. You need to teach yourself a bit analytic philosophy and basic rules of formal logic.

[Davino]

10 hours ago, zurew said:

Why couldn't an omnipotent God create a universe with different laws of physics ,where he just spawn humans into existence without any need for evolution or for death to occur?

On a relative sense everything can spawn from God's Mind

From Absolute Infinity to exist it must be Infinite Intelligence

Such mechanics are Perfect, not random or modifiable, in the most existential sense

For example Impermanence, Shape-shifting, Consciousness, Truth, Reality, Love, Perfection, Intelligence

This are what allow existence to be and what existence actually is

You cannot change nature's existence you are trying to do so with the tools existence is

10 hours ago, zurew said:

What is the contradiction in saying a universe can exist with humans in it where there is no death?

Because literally continuity is a myth

There's nothing "solid"

Everything is a metaphysical Soup of Infinity potential, otherwise called Consciousness

It's the unmoved mover, the uncaused cause

It is happening now and it will continue to do so

Let alone your conceptual fantasies and open your eyes and see

Forms perish

That's the Nature of Reality

Reality is Formless and it can manifest all Forms within it all distinctions

A 3D Infinite boundless Aware Intelligent Sentient Field

That can permutate ITSELF in every possible way

This IS GOD

TADAAAAAAAAAAA

[zurew]

12 hours ago, Davino said:

On a relative sense everything can spawn from God's Mind

From Absolute Infinity to exist it must be Infinite Intelligence

Such mechanics are Perfect, not random or modifiable, in the most existential sense

For example Impermanence, Shape-shifting, Consciousness, Truth, Reality, Love, Perfection, Intelligence

This are what allow existence to be and what existence actually is

You cannot change nature's existence you are trying to do so with the tools existence is

Having both of these features at the same time seems to be a contradiction on its face (Impermanence, Shape-shifting).  There might not be a contradiction entailed, but I  need to know  what you mean by impermanence first.

12 hours ago, Davino said:

Because literally continuity is a myth

There's nothing "solid"

Everything is a metaphysical Soup of Infinity potential, otherwise called Consciousness

It's the unmoved mover, the uncaused cause

It is happening now and it will continue to do so

Let alone your conceptual fantasies and open your eyes and see

Forms perish

That's the Nature of Reality

Reality is Formless and it can manifest all Forms within it all distinctions

A 3D Infinite boundless Aware Intelligent Sentient Field

That can permutate ITSELF in every possible way

This IS GOD

TADAAAAAAAAAAA

I don't grant you that being in form necessarily presupposes being bounded by time and therefore necessarily being subject to change.

 

There is no getting around this, you either need to bite the bullet that God could create something like heaven, where no one dies and can be in permanent bliss (unless you can show whats the contradiction entailed by the creation of Heaven or by something similar to heaven where death isn't logically necessary) or you can go with a set of metaphysical constraints that you put on God, but then the big bullet  that you need to  bite is that the existence of God (as you outined it) is not logically necessary ( which would mean that there are possible worlds that can exist  - independent from the  existence of God you are talking about ).

What you guys always miss and this (includes Leo as well), is that as long as you don't demonstrate or establish why God is logically necessary, you can talk about metaphysics as much as you want, but you guys showing how 1 specific version of metaphysics can explain the world, from that doesn't follow that other types of metaphysics wouldn't be capable to do the same, if not more.

This is why  if you want to rule out all other possible metaphysical explanations, the way you do that is by spelling out a contradiciton (in this case spelling out such a contradiction thats entailed by all other types of metaphysics except the one you think is true). 

Obviously this task is incredibly hard if not close to impossible (but this is where real philosophy begins in my view), and this is where all of you guys get completely lost (including Leo) and none of you can successfuly make the argument. The way you get out from this burden is by toning down the confidence in your claims and not claiming that the God you are talking about is logically necessary but only claim that your metaphysics is better compared to other metaphysics (when it comes to a set of theoretical virtues or whatever virtues you want to use to differentiate between different types of metaphysics).

 

Edited November 5 by zurew