|
But we can never "truly" understand god an his motives and plans can we? You said yourself that we are not mentally capable.
|
but we CAN understand HOW he accomplishes them. that's what science is.
|
But what is the point of attaching the "god" prefix to science? I can then question how god was created in such way as to have absolute omnipotence, omniscience etc. and claim that science is actually all about finding about them. It is meaningless.
|
God wasnt created though, he was always there; Understanding HIM is impossible. but understanding how he did things and why is quite easy.
Anyway, we can debate this all day. We'll never be able to decide who's right, simply because neither side has any proof. We honestly wont know the answer till we die. |
If you argue that everything needs a creator, then god needs one too. If you say everything except god needs a creator, then that is special pleading.
And won't know even when we die, because we will be DEAD. You haven't addressed the omnipotence issue. EDIT: I just thought of something. You say that though god is both omnipotent and benevolent, but because he would like us to make the right choice for ourselves i.e he has given us free will. But if he is also omniscient, he will know which one of us is going to change and which one of us isn't, so why doesn't he prevent the evil by changing their minds? |
Quote:
The question is, for how long? |
Vasu, if he lets you choose but stops you from choosing wrong, it wouldnt be free will. it would be him making you do the right. we need to learn to be good on our own.
|
Please reply to the full post.
|
*Sigh* God is the one special exception.
And we WILL know when we're dead, because if you just rot away, you'll be right, but if we end up going to heaven, i'll be right. Honestly, this discussion is getting to the point where we're running in circles and covering the same old ground... i think im gonna just stop posting... |
Quote:
. I think we can all just agree to disagree. Still the most cordial and flame-free God debate this side of the Internet. |
Quote:
Any reason why? Like I said, this is a logical fallacy known as special pleading. Quote:
Whatever you say. I don't believe in an afterlife, so this is meaningless to me. Quote:
Go ahead, I know why you want to stop posting. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You said, "I think I'm gonna just stop posting", so I told you to go ahead because I think I know why.
In fact you are the one who is making this debate kind of "circular". Because you don't reply to the full post, not just this time, but multiple times in the thread (I can quote them if you like), when I raise the issues you didn't respond to again, you feel I'm bringing up the old argument and using "circular" logic. |
Quote:
Guess I should stop watching TV. |
Quote:
|
I'm not saying that you're running out of arguments. You just don't respond to some points for whatever reason, and when I bring them up again, you feel like we're treading old ground.
For example, right now I've raised the point as to why "god is a special example" is a logical fallacy, that isn't something we've raised before. I simply said I think I know why you want to stop posting. |
Eep.
I don't really apply to any of the poll options. D:
For me, it's more like it's a being experimenting with us, to see what's good, like what effects they'll have on the actual being. D: >.< Like, we're artifical and the people watching our actions are the real "humans". D: Ya dig? So they test out stuff on us and then use it for themselves once they know it's safe.. Bascially: We're lab rats. o-o Edit: (Just for the record, I chose the last option on the poll. :3) Another note: I totally missed the actual discussion, I'm sad now. D; |
Quote:
|
:/
That's that not really an argument. That's a cop-out. |
No, it's simply theory on his nature. there's no scientific way of proving it, so it's only explainable that it has to be his nature.
Do you have scientific proof of LACK of an existence of a deity? |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Perhaps there is a scientific way of proving it, but we have no sample. with all of those examples, there's a way to test your theories, but there's no way to examine God till after you're dead.
|
So why do you believe it even though there's no proof, and no way of arriving at such a proof?
All these arguments you've put in are cop outs. I could say I was the first creator, and say that examinations on me will yield no result because I can do anything and will change the test result to my benefit. |
there is proof, but nothing that is testable.
|
Quote:
I just realised that I didn't reply to this bit. Yes, but he knows that out of the x number of people, y are going to learn, and gives them the chance, but he'll know that x-y people will never learn, so he may as well stop them. Quote:
Let's examine your first argument again. "God is the one special exception because he is the first creator." Assumption 1: God is the first creator. Assumption 2: First creators are exempt from the rule that everything needs a creator. Care to back these up? |
The same law applies to your "Big Bang" theory. It created everything, so what created that? it has just about sense to it as God does. There's some things we simply dont understand yet, so there's no real argument i can provide for that. it's like asking Mendel to prove genetics before he had a chance to test his theory.
And there is no good in the world without some bad. you cant have light without darkness. People have to make mistakes and learn to gain the want to use free will for good. |
I have reaqd a few of the earlier pages and some people have been asking for proof that God exists.
Pretty soon there'll be proof he doesn't. The Particle Accelerator. When they eventually get it up and running, They will collide particles to try to create the 'Higgs Boson' Also known as the 'God Particle' This is the thing that apparantly gives us mass, that makes us here. So it proves that God didn't make us. Evolution has already disproven Adam and Eve although some people still believe it, Heaven in the skies above us was disproved when we went into space More and more holes are being poked in the mythical story. I know someone is going to say it, "What about if Heaven is billions of lightyears away/another world ??" The amount of energy that is needed to transport someone's ''Soul'' or ''spirit'' that far would be immense, how does ''God'' get this energy? And people don't choose to be Gay. You can't choose your sexuality. |
this debate is getting hotter by the second sheesh
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
2. Adam and Eve can be metaphorical, also previously stated. they could be the first fully evolved humans. a day for God could be a million years for us, for all we know. 3. God's infinitely powerful, remember? 4. i never made an attack on Gay's, so i dont really need to respond that one.. Quote:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hJtSy_5HX0...ang_theory.jpg last thing: i just found this quote online. "The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable, event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle." Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist. Evolution: A Theory in Crisis. Adler and Adler. |
Quote:
Like Jik said, the theists will just claim that god created the god particle. Quote:
We do not know yet. And "goddidit" is NOT an answer. Quote:
This does not address my point. Let me rephrase. God can do anything, and is also a good person, but does not stop us from doing evil because he would rather that we learn for ourselves, that what we are doing is bad. Cool? But since god also knows everything, he will know that Mr. A is a good person at heart and will change, but Mr. B is a psychopath, and cannot fit into society. So why can't he stop Mr. B? Quote:
Yeah, go ahead and believe every frigging rumour you hear. Quote:
Like I said, the "figurative" bin is the ultimate cop-out for all bible enthusiasts. Who are you to say which part of the Bible is figurative? I can go ahead and say that Jesus didn't exist, and it was all figurative to show us that the cruel times of the OT were over. Quote:
That is not possible, remember? Quote:
It's different because the theory of the big bang was not reaches with intention of reaching the theory of the big bang. It was reached by scientific inquiry with the evidence we have at present, with no prior knowledge that such a thing could have happened. However the Bible was written with the full decision that god existed, and is therefore not scientific proof. Quote:
Yes, it would indeed be a miracle, if ours was the only solar system, the only planet, revolving around the only star. However there are millions of galaxies out there, and maybe even more universes (though there is no evidence of that, so I will not press it). Like I said, if you see a closet with trillions of kinds of clothes of all sizes shapes and colours, you shouldn't be surprised to find one that fits. |
Quote:
and as for the "rumor" i've heard it through the news. not much of a rumor. 2. there is in fact proof that Jesus existed; the only thing that is questioned are his miracles. he's even taught about in history books in school. 3. you never proved that it's impossible; i poked holes in your theories that made it possible. 4. it wasnt like someone just chose to go out and start preaching a falsehood. There was most likely some form of evidence at the time. 5. i think it was more the fact that all these things came together absolutely perfectly, the stars, the planets, everything, in spite of being so complex. How can nothingness explode? explain that to me. how can pure nothingness, no matter, dark matter, nothing, have heat, spontaneously combust, and form everything in the known universe? you saying that it was found because of scientific theory is even worse of a cop-out than anything you've accused me of, because your theory MUST follow the laws of physics. |
Quote:
Because then you would have to explain how god miraculously came about. Quote:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0806/0806.3414.pdf http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0627175348.htm Quote:
Fine then, I'll say that Moses is figurative, Lot is figurative, Baal was figurative, and every character in the Bible for whom there is no proof was just figurative. That game can be played by two. Quote:
What "holes" did you poke in the statement that omnipotence is impossible? You just dropped the issue after a few posts, just like you did not bother backing up those assumptions I mentioned. 4. it wasnt like someone just chose to go out and start preaching a falsehood. There was most likely some form of evidence at the time. Such as? And can you prove that religion was not started for political reasons? If you read "The Foundation" by Isaac Asimov, then you'll see how well religion can be used to make a platform for a strong kingdom. Quote:
And how complex would god need to be to do all this? This only creates another infinite regression. Quote:
Nothingness did not explode. A singularity exploded. How did that singularity come about? Me: We do not know yet, but hopefully with more advances, we can begin to explore that in the future. You: God did it. And I can throw this question right back at you. How did god come about? How did absolute nothingness turn into an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and a whole lot of other omni's being? |
I thought "Michael Denton" was a bit familiar to me and it was:
Quote:
|
Quote:
2. a. Moses DOES have a historical basis too. b. Lot could be figurative for the inclination to take the easier path which leads to sin c. Baal WAS figurative. the golden calf was meant to show God's strength, but at the time, God had put a ban on making an image of him. 3. Perhaps God himself talked to him? And you could claim that it was schizophrenia, but that's simple closed-mindedness. 4. *sigh* im tired of discussing this. God CAN be omnipotent AND omniscient at the same time, IF HE'S ALSO ALL-KNOWING AND COMPLETELY WISE. you must understand that he has the POWER to change his decision, but he's all knowing and all good, so his path is completely good and completely right in the first place, so he wont. Im heading to bed. be back around 6-7 PST. EDIT: Lam, i dont know about the quoted person, i just thought the quote itself made sense. i found it while looking up that picture i used that was discussing the big bang vs. creationism. i personally think both theories are extremely weak without the other. |
Quote:
Ooh, now why didn't I EVER think of that! Could you ask him for me? I don't think I'm in his good books. :rolleyes: This is BY FAR the STUPIDEST cop out I've seen in ANY discussion. No, you go ask the singularity where it came from. Quote:
The question stands. Who are you to pick and decide which parts were figurative? Before evolution was proposed, Genesis was solid truth. After that, it's figurative. Before we knew what caused eclipses, it was god. After that, it was god making the planets move. Notice a pattern here? Quote:
Unfortunately, we have nothing except his own word to suggest god talked to him. And if god is so powerful, why can't he talk to all of us? Quote:
And once again, you have abandoned the free will issue, and the complexity of god issue. Exactly how many times do I have to tell you to reply to the full post? |
Quote:
and i didnt see the freewill issue in your post, sorry if it seemed as if i was ignoring it. upon reviewing your last post i still didnt see it... sorry to be nubbish, but could you point out what exactly you were speaking of? 2. i dont decide the doctrine on metaphores; i simply form my beliefs around what makes sense. and the Big Bang without some form of Deity, whether it be God or Brahma or Zeus or whatever, makes 0 sense. 3. Perhaps he is talking to us, but we just arent listening at the right times. 4. Weight is, once again, meaningless to God. size and weight arent a factor whatsoever. i.e. it wouldnt matter how big he made it, he could still lift it, because physical properties mean nothing. |
Quote:
Exactly, and asking me to explain how everything just came from "chance" when we don't have enough technology or power to explore what created the universe (or the singularity, if you will) is equally stupid. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And deity without some sort of creator for it too also makes no sense. Quote:
Seeing as he knows everything, he could talk when he knows we're listening. Quote:
So, in effect, god cannot make a stone so heavy/big that even he cannot lift it. Right? And like Hrae said, I could form an example where physical size and stuff are not factors. Can god create an equation so complex that even he cannot solve it? |
Quote:
And most violent psychotic diseases are formed usually by birth defect, brain damage, or being pushed over the edge, arent they? please inform me if im wrong, but if im right, these are all other people's free will. And at least you admit that you have just as much of a basis as i do. And lastly, That's not neccesarilly true, since a deity isnt a physical being, but a spiritual one. And perhaps we simply are NEVER open to listen. nowadays, peoples lives are filled with tv, computer, everythings so busy that they have little time to be open to listen. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.