<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> If the universe has always been here that would mean we can regress backwards to infinity (because we had to traverse all the previous time to get to the present) but we know this is impossible just like it's impossible to start counting and count to infinity. [/b][/quote] black it sounds like you're stating one of zeno's fallacious paradoxes. First, your analogy doesn't hold. you make analogy between: (1) the infinitely existing universe. (2) a person starting to count, and counting to infinity. the disanalogy is that (2) has a start, but (1) doesn't. Second, even if your analogy did hold, why can't a person start counting and count to infinity? all they have to do is start couting, and never stop counting. of course there'll never be a point when the counter actually gets to infinity, like "one million trillion, one million trillion and one, ... infinity!", but that doesn't establish anything, 'cos infinity isn't like numbers [/b][/quote] Rooster, that was the point. It doesn't hold, using something we understand (numbers, sequences of events, whatever) it was shown that since we have a starting point (which is all we need to count or traverse something) we haven't counted to infinity (the universe hasn't always existed). The only other alternative is that it started sometime in the past. I guess in short I'm saying that if you claim that the universe has always existed you're saying the second because we have a starting point in the present but yes you're correct in that this doesn't hold, we're left with the conclusion that the universe began to exist at some point. [/b][/quote] i missed your point about going backwards. so there is analogy between (a) a person starting to count and counting to infinity, & (b) the universe stretching back from this moment in time for an infinite time into the past. i shoulda realised this was the point you were making. but i dont see how you answer my second argument. you conclude that the universe had a starting point, and that its time-span has been finite - but i dont see how youve established this. how does the universe's present existence prove that it has only existed for a finite time?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> The jury has been out for centuries and is still out on who the biggest illiusionist and con person is between the believer and scientist. Both in their dogmatic, deluded world foolishly and pompously think they own the truth and justification to postulate on the genesis and end of life. Unbridled balderdash, amusing though. [/b][/quote] arent you a physics scholar?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> but i dont see how you answer my second argument. you conclude that the universe had a starting point, and that its time-span has been finite - but i dont see how youve established this. how does the universe's present existence prove that it has only existed for a finite time? [/b][/quote] Because the alternative is that we've completed the sequence, we've actually reached infinity is the alternative, we've traversed an infinite number of events to get to the present. This doesn't make sense so what other options do we have than to say that the universe has not always existed and began to exist at some point in the past.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Rooster and others, I BELIEVE IN SCIENCE, contrary to popular opinion. In fact I believe that spirituality in many senses is a HIGHER form of science. The God that I believe in is the ULTIMATE scientist. I love astromomy (ask me ANYTHING about the universe), biology, chemistry. In fact I'm highly qualified in science and enjoy the human pursuit of science. I believe that science leads to understanding God and I wouldn't be surprised to find out one day soon, that ALL scientists will unanimously come to the conclusion that THERE MUST BE A GOD. I just believe that there are certain aspects of modern science (eg quantum physics and evolution) that are CREATED in the attempt to try to disprove a creator and are actually built upon the wrong premise...thusly not truly scientific. Science is good, and true science doesn't conflict with the Bible. For example....the Bible says "let every seed bring forth after its kind". In SCIENCE we see that apple seeds produce apples, mangos produce mangos...fishes produce fishes, chimps produce chimps and humans produce...HUMANS!! This SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE is empirical (unlike Evolutionary THEORY) and is backed up by the Bible and SUGGESTS CREATION. No evidence that humans were generated by something that wasn't human, no testable evidence...no evidence of any kind...JUST ASSUMPION. That's not REAL science. Just ONE example of many! The Sly one has Spoken!! [/b][/quote] this is the biggest load of shit i have ever read and wtf is astromomy, slystaff the science guy??
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> this is the biggest load of shit i have ever read [/b][/quote] See...this is why I cannot discuss anything with you and why I am slow to respond to your posts. I can't believe that I have wasted so much time in even responding to your idiocy. Perhaps evolution has some merit, after all you can be used as evidence of it. Perhaps your mother and father are primitive primates after all. Run along, little monkey, and please don't tire me any further. Stick to topics with Sugar Shane...that is all that you are good for (and even then you are "challenged"). The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> this is the biggest load of shit i have ever read [/b][/quote] See...this is why I cannot discuss anything with you and why I am slow to respond to your posts. I can't believe that I have wasted so much time in even responding to your idiocy. Perhaps evolution has some merit, after all you can be used as evidence of it. Perhaps your mother and father are primitive primates after all. Run along, little monkey, and please don't tire me any further. Stick to topics with Sugar Shane...that is all that you are good for (and even then you are "challenged"). The Sly One has Spoken!! [/b][/quote] :YeahRight: no your slow to get to my posts because your a moron, still havent come up with anything for that link huh?? "the dating methods are fallible, i dont have any proof but since they dont coincide with what my theory is then they must be" -YOU thats ok, evolution is wack and creationism is where its at, the BIBLE says so (as if it would say anything different :YeahRight: ) just peep the sig
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Because the alternative is that we've completed the sequence, we've actually reached infinity is the alternative, we've traversed an infinite number of events to get to the present. This doesn't make sense [/b][/quote] why doesnt it makes sense to say that the universe has traversed an infinite time-span? are you saying that no sequence can truly be infinite?
In regards to an earlier atheist, God is supposed to be omnipotent. If He is omnipotent, then He can create a rock so big that He can't pick it up. If He cannot make a rock like this, then He is not omnipotent. If He can make a rock so big He can't pick it up, then He isn't omnipotent either. Either way demonstrates that God cannot do something. Therefore God is not omnipotent. Therefore God does not exist. Is this logical? A little. However, the problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate. What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else. For example, I have human nature. I can run. But, I cannot outrun a lion. My nature simply does not permit it. My ability to run is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself. Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Therefore, He cannot cease to exist without violating His own nature. The point is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. Therefore, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, not being able to do this does not mean He is not God nor that He is not omnipotent. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything consistent with His nature and consistent with His desire within the realm of His unlimited and universal power which we do not possess. This does not mean He can violate His own nature. If He did something inconsistent with His nature, then He would be self contradictory. If God were self contradictory, He would not be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like make a rock so big He can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self contradiction. Since truth is not self contradictory, as neither is God, if He were not true, then He would not be God. But God is true and not self contradictory, therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature. Another way to look at it is realize that in order for God to make something so big He couldn't pick it up, He would have to make a rock bigger than Himself. Since He is infinite in size, He would have to make something that would be bigger than Himself. Since it is His nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, He cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than He. Also, since a rock, by definition, is not infinitely big, then it isn't logically possible to make a rock, something that is finite in size, be infinite in size (no longer a rock) since only God is infinite in size. At dictionary.com, a rock is defined as a "Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. a) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material. b) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak. c) A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust." A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that the rock must be so big that God cannot pick it up is to say that the rock is no longer a rock. What the critics are asking is that God become self contradictory as a proof He doesn't exist. Their assertion is illogical from the start. So what they are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. They want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid.
I believe in science, and I believe in God. The two do not contradict one another. I searched, and struggled for many years on this question. I scientifically came to the conclusion that there must be a God. How? I believe the Big Bang does indeed explain how the universe came into being, but one major question was left unanserwed that pointed to a God. Scientist say four major forces came together to cause the Big Bang, gravity, magnetism, mass, and an "unknown force" (we won't even go there.) My question is this: Where did they come from? The only answer I could come up with was some kind of super powerful force that brought these forces together could only be described as "God". I am not alone in that belief. Nitzche, Einstein, Newton, and even Oppenheimer all subscribed to that belief. The all powerful force that brought the other forces together to cause the Big Bang simply by defintion had to be "God". That is why I don't think the Bible and science contadict one another. Look at Genisis and what it is describing, it matches the various stages of evolution perfectly if you forget the time involved ( and after all, is not a thousand years like a day ......). Einstein was once asked if he believed in God, and he replied "I believe in the God of Nitzche." So do I. I find religious arguments that go against scientific evidence rediculous simply because science and the Bible, if a contradiction seems to exists, only exists because religious fanatics fail to understand the majesty and scope of the symbolism of the scriptures. Because I do believe this, Budhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are all congruent, and I find it rediculous to argue with one another when all are saying the same thing, only in a different way. 'Course on the other hand, maybe the ancient Bantu's are right, Voodoo is the norm, and there are thousands of gods that we must appease! Or hell, maybe there isn't a God. But the one purpose religion serves in the world is to ( as Marx said) to calm the masses and help government rule. Who knows?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Because the alternative is that we've completed the sequence, we've actually reached infinity is the alternative, we've traversed an infinite number of events to get to the present. This doesn't make sense [/b][/quote] why doesnt it makes sense to say that the universe has traversed an infinite time-span? are you saying that no sequence can truly be infinite? [/b][/quote] I'm saying if you have a point of reference your sequence can't be infinite. Either you're infinite or your not. You can't start somewhere & get there. Just think about it rooster, it's not possible to count to/from infinity. You're saying you've done that with an infinitely old universe.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> In regards to an earlier atheist, God is supposed to be omnipotent. If He is omnipotent, then He can create a rock so big that He can't pick it up. If He cannot make a rock like this, then He is not omnipotent. If He can make a rock so big He can't pick it up, then He isn't omnipotent either. Either way demonstrates that God cannot do something. Therefore God is not omnipotent. Therefore God does not exist. Is this logical? A little. However, the problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate. What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else. For example, I have human nature. I can run. But, I cannot outrun a lion. My nature simply does not permit it. My ability to run is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself. Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Therefore, He cannot cease to exist without violating His own nature. The point is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. Therefore, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, not being able to do this does not mean He is not God nor that He is not omnipotent. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything consistent with His nature and consistent with His desire within the realm of His unlimited and universal power which we do not possess. This does not mean He can violate His own nature. If He did something inconsistent with His nature, then He would be self contradictory. If God were self contradictory, He would not be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like make a rock so big He can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self contradiction. Since truth is not self contradictory, as neither is God, if He were not true, then He would not be God. But God is true and not self contradictory, therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature. Another way to look at it is realize that in order for God to make something so big He couldn't pick it up, He would have to make a rock bigger than Himself. Since He is infinite in size, He would have to make something that would be bigger than Himself. Since it is His nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, He cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than He. Also, since a rock, by definition, is not infinitely big, then it isn't logically possible to make a rock, something that is finite in size, be infinite in size (no longer a rock) since only God is infinite in size. At dictionary.com, a rock is defined as a "Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. a) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material. b) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak. c) A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust." A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that the rock must be so big that God cannot pick it up is to say that the rock is no longer a rock. What the critics are asking is that God become self contradictory as a proof He doesn't exist. Their assertion is illogical from the start. So what they are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. They want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid. [/b][/quote] Exactly. The Sly One has Spoken!!
black i still dont see how you've established that trhe universe is finitely old. the universe is infinitely old, it has been going on forever. i'm not saying: "Here is point A, and here is point B. The distance between points A and B is infintely long. And we have crossed this infinite distance, and have travelled from A to B." if i were saying that then maybe that'd be wrong. but i'm not saying that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> black i still dont see how you've established that trhe universe is finitely old. the universe is infinitely old, it has been going on forever. i'm not saying: "Here is point A, and here is point B. The distance between points A and B is infintely long. And we have crossed this infinite distance, and have travelled from A to B." if i were saying that then maybe that'd be wrong. but i'm not saying that. [/b][/quote] It seems pretty plain to me to see but I guess it isn't
if i was saying that there was a start to the universe, and that the time between (A) the universe's start and (B) the present moment is infinitely long, then there'd be a problem. but i'm not saying that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> if i was saying that there was a start to the universe, and that the time between (A) the universe's start and (B) the present moment is infinitely long, then there'd be a problem. but i'm not saying that. [/b][/quote] The universe cannot be infinite. If it were infinite it wouldn't be changing. If it were infinite it wouldn't be expanding. If it were infinite, time wouldn't be affecting it. If it were infinite it would be a constant, unchanging entity. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> In regards to an earlier atheist, God is supposed to be omnipotent. If He is omnipotent, then He can create a rock so big that He can't pick it up. If He cannot make a rock like this, then He is not omnipotent. If He can make a rock so big He can't pick it up, then He isn't omnipotent either. Either way demonstrates that God cannot do something. Therefore God is not omnipotent. Therefore God does not exist.   Is this logical? A little. However, the problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate.   What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else.   For example, I have human nature. I can run. But, I cannot outrun a lion. My nature simply does not permit it. My ability to run is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself. Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Therefore, He cannot cease to exist without violating His own nature.   The point is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. Therefore, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, not being able to do this does not mean He is not God nor that He is not omnipotent. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything consistent with His nature and consistent with His desire within the realm of His unlimited and universal power which we do not possess. This does not mean He can violate His own nature. If He did something inconsistent with His nature, then He would be self contradictory. If God were self contradictory, He would not be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like make a rock so big He can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self contradiction. Since truth is not self contradictory, as neither is God, if He were not true, then He would not be God. But God is true and not self contradictory, therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature.   Another way to look at it is realize that in order for God to make something so big He couldn't pick it up, He would have to make a rock bigger than Himself. Since He is infinite in size, He would have to make something that would be bigger than Himself. Since it is His nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, He cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than He.   Also, since a rock, by definition, is not infinitely big, then it isn't logically possible to make a rock, something that is finite in size, be infinite in size (no longer a rock) since only God is infinite in size. At dictionary.com, a rock is defined as a "Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. a) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material. b) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak. c) A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust." A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that the rock must be so big that God cannot pick it up is to say that the rock is no longer a rock.   What the critics are asking is that God become self contradictory as a proof He doesn't exist. Their assertion is illogical from the start. So what they are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. They want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid. [/b][/quote] In regards to this, I must remind the kind audience that from a religious perspective, God can not kill himself, either. If he could, he would not be eternal. And if He were not eternal, one of his most important attributes would be taken away from him. But does the fact that He can not kill himself "prove" that He is not pwerful? Nope. The fact that He can not kill himself does not make him less powerful or omnipotent. The ability or inability to do certain things usually do not have any connection with being powerful. God can not make two plus two equal five, either, but not for lack of power or omnipotence, but for the presence of consistent and logical principles that, if He really wanted to violate them, He would have to create an alternate universe in which all this illogical nonesense would be permissible. It would be chaos. For that to occur, God would have to create a different type of universe in which being dead but alive were posible. You could be short and tall, skinny but fat, a genius and a Joebazooka, up and down would be the same thing, you would be able to be here but not here, and there would be no disctintion between black and white, red and orange, south or noth, east and west because they would all look the same and mean the same. Everything and its opposite would be possible and somehow make sense to the inhabitants of that cosmos. Whether God decides to create a parallel universe with those characteristics or not, is up for debate but IT IS NOT THE UNIVERSE HE HAS DECIDED TO CREATE FOR US. So for the laws of the universe WE live in, God can not be everywhere and nowhere at the same time. He can not be alive and dead unless it is in a figurative way. He can not create a rock so heavy that He himself can not lift, and He can not possibly kill himself, either. The "rock" paradox is a childish proposition and it does not "prove" that God is not powerful. For the laws of the universe he has decided to create for us, He can not make two plus two equal five. But a nuclear explosion may not cause two plus two equal five, either, however nobody in his right mind would deny that a nuclear explosion is rather... powerful? Being able to do certain things or not is not the sole standard we base our judgement upon when it comes to deciding whether someone is powerful or not. In fact, it has nothing to do with that. If you could do what most people can't, it would be sensible to say that you are a pretty powerful individual even though you may not be able to do everything that most people can. Similarly, the fact that God is the creator of the whole known universe, and is the possessor of such as scientific mind as to be able to design from a one cell organism to a whale, a chimp or a human, that in itself makes Him a pretty powerful individual. And the fact that He is unable to create a rock that He himsef can not lift has nothing to do with anything. It's simply a childish proposition.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> In regards to an earlier atheist, God is supposed to be omnipotent. If He is omnipotent, then He can create a rock so big that He can't pick it up. If He cannot make a rock like this, then He is not omnipotent. If He can make a rock so big He can't pick it up, then He isn't omnipotent either. Either way demonstrates that God cannot do something. Therefore God is not omnipotent. Therefore God does not exist. Is this logical? A little. However, the problem is that this bit of logic omits some crucial information, therefore, it's conclusion is inaccurate. What the above "paradox" lacks is vital information concerning God's nature. His omnipotence is not something independent of His nature. It is part of His nature. God has a nature and His attributes operate within that nature, as does anything and everything else. For example, I have human nature. I can run. But, I cannot outrun a lion. My nature simply does not permit it. My ability to run is connected to my nature and I cannot violate it. So too with God. His omnipotence is connected to His nature since being omnipotent is part of what He is. Omnipotence, then, must be consistent with what He is and not with what He is not since His omnipotence is not an entity to itself. Therefore, God can only do those things that are consistent with His nature. He cannot lie because it is against His nature to do so. Not being able to lie does not mean He is not God or that He is not all powerful. Also, He cannot cease to be God. Since He is in all places at all times, if He stopped existing then He wouldn't be in all places at all time. Therefore, He cannot cease to exist without violating His own nature. The point is that God cannot do something that is a violation of His own existence and nature. Therefore, He cannot make a rock so big he can't pick up, or make something bigger than Himself, etc. But, not being able to do this does not mean He is not God nor that He is not omnipotent. Omnipotence is not the ability to do anything conceivable, but the ability to do anything consistent with His nature and consistent with His desire within the realm of His unlimited and universal power which we do not possess. This does not mean He can violate His own nature. If He did something inconsistent with His nature, then He would be self contradictory. If God were self contradictory, He would not be true. Likewise, if He did something that violated his nature, like make a rock so big He can't pick it up, He would also not be true since that would be a self contradiction. Since truth is not self contradictory, as neither is God, if He were not true, then He would not be God. But God is true and not self contradictory, therefore, God cannot do something that violates His own nature. Another way to look at it is realize that in order for God to make something so big He couldn't pick it up, He would have to make a rock bigger than Himself. Since He is infinite in size, He would have to make something that would be bigger than Himself. Since it is His nature to be the biggest thing in existence because He created all things, He cannot violate His own nature by making a rock that is larger than He. Also, since a rock, by definition, is not infinitely big, then it isn't logically possible to make a rock, something that is finite in size, be infinite in size (no longer a rock) since only God is infinite in size. At dictionary.com, a rock is defined as a "Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. a) A relatively small piece or fragment of such material. b) A relatively large body of such material, as a cliff or peak. c) A naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter constituting a significant part of the earth's crust." A rock, by definition is not infinitely large. So, to say that the rock must be so big that God cannot pick it up is to say that the rock is no longer a rock. What the critics are asking is that God become self contradictory as a proof He doesn't exist. Their assertion is illogical from the start. So what they are doing is trying to get God to be illogical. They want to use illogic to prove God doesn't exist instead of logic. It doesn't work and the "paradox" is self-refuting and invalid. [/b][/quote] First off, I want to laugh at Sly for dodging the arguement and ran into hiding HAHAHA. I'm glad a superior intellect has come forth to help him out. Even though you provide a pretty good explaination to God's omnipotence. It all sums up to making excuses for your inferior God. First off, Rock's size doesnt have to be directly proportional to weight, since gravitational force itself can make one rock heavier in one location like on the moon vs on Jupiter. So you can throw that whole arguement of size out the window. That's ur first mistake. Second, you made the argument that if God can do all within the bounds of his nature and not against because it would be contraditory, that he is still omnipotent. Well, although that sounds good. Here is the problem. Everything in existance only could do things within the bounds of their nature, so by ur definition, are we all omnipotent? And if you say NO because we can't do this or that. I could use ur argument that it's beyond our nature, therefore it doesnt count. See how silly it sounds? That's why I mean, u are simply making excuses for ur God lacking the true ability to be omnipotent cuz as I pointed out he can't do everything unless he is contradicting himself, therefore God is illogical. Btw, God can LIE and he does. That's why you and sly are both so confused. God has lied to both of you. HAHA The Great Juggernaut has spoken!!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> First off, I want to laugh at Sly for dodging the arguement and ran into hiding HAHAHA. I'm glad a superior intellect has come forth to help him out. Even though you provide a pretty good explaination to God's omnipotence. It all sums up to making excuses for your inferior God. First off, Rock's size doesnt have to be directly proportional to weight, since gravitational force itself can make one rock heavier in one location like on the moon vs on Jupiter. So you can throw that whole arguement of size out the window. That's ur first mistake. Second, you made the argument that if God can do all within the bounds of his nature and not against because it would be contraditory, that he is still omnipotent. Well, although that sounds good. Here is the problem. Everything in existance only could do things within the bounds of their nature, so by ur definition, are we all omnipotent? And if you say NO because we can't do this or that. I could use ur argument that it's beyond our nature, therefore it doesnt count. See how silly it sounds? That's why I mean, u are simply making excuses for ur God lacking the true ability to be omnipotent cuz as I pointed out he can't do everything unless he is contradicting himself, therefore God is illogical. Btw, God can LIE and he does. That's why you and sly are both so confused. God has lied to both of you. HAHA The Great Juggernaut has spoken!!! [/b][/quote] God's existence will not and cannot stand up to proper scrutiny and logic. Moral of the story: The more one argues for his existence, the more ridiculous one gets.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> First off, I want to laugh at Sly for dodging the arguement and ran into hiding HAHAHA. I'm glad a superior intellect has come forth to help him out. Even though you provide a pretty good explaination to God's omnipotence. It all sums up to making excuses for your inferior God. First off, Rock's size doesnt have to be directly proportional to weight, since gravitational force itself can make one rock heavier in one location like on the moon vs on Jupiter. So you can throw that whole arguement of size out the window. That's ur first mistake. Second, you made the argument that if God can do all within the bounds of his nature and not against because it would be contraditory, that he is still omnipotent. Well, although that sounds good. Here is the problem. Everything in existance only could do things within the bounds of their nature, so by ur definition, are we all omnipotent? And if you say NO because we can't do this or that. I could use ur argument that it's beyond our nature, therefore it doesnt count. See how silly it sounds? That's why I mean, u are simply making excuses for ur God lacking the true ability to be omnipotent cuz as I pointed out he can't do everything unless he is contradicting himself, therefore God is illogical. Btw, God can LIE and he does. That's why you and sly are both so confused. God has lied to both of you. HAHA The Great Juggernaut has spoken!!! [/b][/quote] God's existence will not and cannot stand up to proper scrutiny and logic. Moral of the story: The more one argues for his existence, the more ridiculous one gets. [/b][/quote] That's why I propose to Barnes and Noble to place the Bible in the Humor section.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Similarly, the fact that God is the creator of the whole known universe, and is the possessor of such as scientific mind as to be able to design from a one cell organism to a whale, a chimp or a human, that in itself makes Him a pretty powerful individual. And the fact that He is unable to create a rock that He himsef can not lift has nothing to do with anything. It's simply a childish proposition. [/b][/quote] Translation: God got OWNED by a childish proposition! You guys are making your God look pathetic now. The Great Juggernaut has spoken!!!!
Where was god when: Millions of slaves for 300 years called his name for deliverance to no avail? Imagine the generations of religious black slaves who were born, breed and died in slavery. I would love to know how they feel about their God. Millions of innocent Jews were deliberately and overtly murdered in cold blood muttering his name with their last breaths? I would love to know what the dead Jews think of God. Millions of natives American were wiped out not too long ago by the righteous, moralist founding fathers? I wonder what the dead natives think of the God of the founding fathers. When 7000 Muslims were wiped out in 24 hours during the Balkans war? I would love to know what the dead Muslims think of Allah. What did God do when all these atrocities were being planned and executed? Maybe he didn’t know? Maybe he laughed and gave his thumbs up? Maybe he smiled and turned the other cheek? Maybe he was powerless to help those calling his name? Maybe he didn’t even hear! Maybe he couldn’t care less. Maybe he was omnipotent; maybe wasn’t? What do u think would happen if the millions referred to above and many more who lived every day of their lives under the worst forms of cruelty and injustice imaginable to the mind, only to be murdered in cold blood as a coup de grace woke up today, assemble in a hall and God walked in? What would happen to God?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> First off, I want to laugh at Sly for dodging the arguement and ran into hiding HAHAHA. [/b][/quote] What are you talking about? I answered your point DIRECTLY and without hestitation, you have amnesia. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> I'm glad a superior intellect has come forth to help him out. Even though you provide a pretty good explaination to God's omnipotence. It all sums up to making excuses for your inferior God. First off, Rock's size doesnt have to be directly proportional to weight, since gravitational force itself can make one rock heavier in one location like on the moon vs on Jupiter. So you can throw that whole arguement of size out the window. That's ur first mistake. Second, you made the argument that if God can do all within the bounds of his nature and not against because it would be contraditory, that he is still omnipotent. Well, although that sounds good. Here is the problem. Everything in existance only could do things within the bounds of their nature, so by ur definition, are we all omnipotent? And if you say NO because we can't do this or that. I could use ur argument that it's beyond our nature, therefore it doesnt count. See how silly it sounds? That's why I mean, u are simply making excuses for ur God lacking the true ability to be omnipotent cuz as I pointed out he can't do everything unless he is contradicting himself, therefore God is illogical. Btw, God can LIE and he does. That's why you and sly are both so confused. God has lied to both of you. HAHA The Great Juggernaut has spoken!!! [/b][/quote] Logic is the only thing that is real. Anything Illogical is by definition erroneous, contradictory and absolute nonsense. If God were in anyway erroneous he wouldn't be God, he wouldn't exist, he wouldn't be perfect. You are asking for God to perform the illogical (oxy moron), that makes no sense. You think that it is a clever argument but it isn't. It has been EASILY refuted but you don't seem to realize that. God is IMMORTAL, so he CANNOT kill himself. Doesn't mean that he is not OMNIPOTENT, he is, but it would be an "oxy moron" for an immortal person to be killed. It is something that doesn't makes sense....it is a contradiction. If God COULD have doe that by virtue of this he WOULDN'T have been immortal. You seem to have a problem with simple logic, my son. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> SEVEN PAGES later and sly STILL hasnt addressed the link i posted coward [/b][/quote] And Neither will I, and you calling me a coward doesn't exactly inspire to do it either. I've addressed this issue before, dating techniques are inconsistent, to say the least. It's down to a matter of opinion. In any event, YOU are in no position to ask me to address ANYTHING. Have you addressed my initial argument regarding why GOD (or a creator) HAS to exist? Have YOU addressed the point about the holes and assumpions in Evolutionary theory? Have YOU addressed the point that LIFE couldn't have started by itself and the reasons why? Have YOU address the point that 4 billions years WOULDN'T have even been long enough to support the formation of life and the evolutionary process? Until YOU address all of the above, which came BEFORE your "link" ( :YeahRight: ), YOU are the coward. So run along monkey. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> If God were in anyway erroneous he wouldn't be God, he wouldn't exist, he wouldn't be perfect. God is IMMORTAL, so he CANNOT kill himself. [/b][/quote] How can something that does not exist be perfect and immortal? :wacko:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Where was god when: Millions of slaves for 300 years called his name for deliverance to no avail? Imagine the generations of religious black slaves who were born, breed and died in slavery. I would love to know how they feel about their God. Millions of innocent Jews were deliberately and overtly murdered in cold blood muttering his name with their last breaths? I would love to know what the dead Jews think of God. Millions of natives American were wiped out not too long ago by the righteous, moralist founding fathers? I wonder what the dead natives think of the God of the founding fathers. When 7000 Muslims were wiped out in 24 hours during the Balkans war? I would love to know what the dead Muslims think of Allah. What did God do when all these atrocities were being planned and executed? Maybe he didn’t know? Maybe he laughed and gave his thumbs up? Maybe he smiled and turned the other cheek? Maybe he was powerless to help those calling his name? Maybe he didn’t even hear! Maybe he couldn’t care less. Maybe he was omnipotent; maybe wasn’t? What do u think would happen if the millions referred to above and many more who lived every day of their lives under the worst forms of cruelty and injustice imaginable to the mind, only to be murdered in cold blood as a coup de grace woke up today, assemble in a hall and God walked in? What would happen to God? [/b][/quote] Typical atheist argument: If There was a God why did he allow so many bad things to happen? :YeahRight: :spadafora: Bad things happen because of sin, not because of God. God is able to deliver, but he has his own time frame and it is not always in line with ours. You will have to read and understand the scriptures (Bible) to get answers to that. I understand it plain and simple but I had to read the Bible first. I can answer this question, but I wont. I don't want the discussion to go into religion. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> How can something that does not exist be perfect and immortal? :wacko: [/b][/quote] That's your opinion. If you don't believe that he exists, that is fine. I am simply answering the question posed based on the assumption that he does exist, because that is the only way I can answer the question. God has in exist, in any event, something cannot come from nothing. The Sly One has Spoken!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> if i was saying that there was a start to the universe, and that the time between (A) the universe's start and (B) the present moment is infinitely long, then there'd be a problem. but i'm not saying that. [/b][/quote] The universe cannot be infinite. If it were infinite it wouldn't be changing. If it were infinite it wouldn't be expanding. If it were infinite, time wouldn't be affecting it. If it were infinite it would be a constant, unchanging entity. The Sly One has Spoken!! [/b][/quote] this is baseless sly. infinity doesn't necessitate homogeneity. the sequence of numbers is infinitely long, yet it changes - from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4... each member of the sequence is different.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Have you addressed my initial argument regarding why GOD (or a creator) HAS to exist? Have YOU addressed the point about the holes and assumpions in Evolutionary theory? Have YOU addressed the point that LIFE couldn't have started by itself and the reasons why? Have YOU address the point that 4 billions years WOULDN'T have even been long enough to support the formation of life and the evolutionary process? The Sly One has Spoken!! [/b][/quote] this sounds like pretty much the same argument repeated -"evolution is untenable". what holes and assumptions are in evolutionary theory? do you really believe scientists believe in evolution due to an anti-religious bias? even darwin still believed in god.
