As simple as possible to summarize the best way you can, first, please. Feel free to expand after, or just say whatever you want lol. Honest question.

  • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I believe in God because I don’t believe knowledge is possible without a transcendent being. (e.g. the impossibility of the contrary) Otherwise you are dealing with infinite regress or axiomatic circularity. Materialism breaks down with origin theories. Metaphysics aren’t substantial yet exist. Math and logic aren’t descriptors of the world but integral to how the world is structured. The Orthodox view is that these principles are a reflection of the divine mind.

    (I am an Orthodox Christian)

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      If so, your definition of ‘God’ is so far removed from what most people take God to mean as to just invite linguistic debates over debates over the thing itself.

        • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Did you edit your comment to say you were a Christian or did I just miss that? If so, I apologise, your conception of God is quite likely similar to most Christians! I do fail to see how the argument for a transcendent being predicates the Christian God specifically, though, no offense intended.

          • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            I did edit to say I was a Christian because I realized that would probably make things clearer.

            The argumentation for the Christian god goes beyond what I posted here but builds on the concept. No offense taken.