(September 18, 2026 at 3:33 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:31 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Sure, why not.  It’s the hand of god that keeps you from jumping to the moon and also the hand of god that pushes you down to your death when you fall out of a window.

That’s some man you’ve got yourself there.  A real catch.

It would be unacceptable for Yahweh to allow an innocent man to fall to his death from a window.
Oh that's right. I almost forgot. In my theodicy, no man is born innocent.

There is for me, and I accept this is just a subjective opinion, unsupported by any objective evidence, only one word to describe anyone who indulges in this kind of victim blaming, and that word rhymes with shunt, but starts with c, and has one less letter. 

No deity evidenced still, panpsychism unevidenced still...

(September 18, 2026 at 3:43 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: A few things.

1. It relies on the ‘sins of the father’ nonsense.

2. It presupposes the existence of God - more nonsense.

3. Paul was a hate-filled lunatic.

Boru

No I think you're misunderstanding me. Ezekiel 18 is quite clear that a child shall not pay for the sins of the father.

Let's try this again. YOU are Adam. YOU sinned in the garden. God punishes the GUILTY. 

If it's still not clear, try to apprise me which part is not clear to you.

None of it is clear to me. I am not Adam (although I had a brother of that name). I was not in the garden. I have not sinned (at least not as you understand the word). God doesn’t punish anyone, any more that Father Christmas rewards well-behaved children.

Boru

(September 18, 2026 at 3:41 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 2:55 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If we’re talking about divine justice, I’m looking at 0% as a legitimate number. If we’re talking about earthly justice, 50% sounds about right.

I don't believe in double-standards.  There is only "justice". There is not "human justice versus divine justice."

Admittedly humans are imperfect in their efforts to administer justice - for example they can't read minds (i.e. listen to brain waves) like Yahweh  can, so they can't properly evaluate motive, intent, brainwashing/indoctrination, etc.

Quote:As for ‘solid ground’, the Bible frequently describes God as merciful. Either he is or he isn’t.

Merciful necessarily means 100% NO JUSTICE? That's a non-sequitur.

Every single assertion you have offered involves a double standard. Justice is a subjective human concept, you cannot evidence any deity, and thus the wankery of asserting there is divine justice is manifestly hilarious. 

We can also add the words merciful and justice to the growing list you clearly don't understand.

(September 18, 2026 at 3:24 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Meanwhile, back here on Earth A the book the rest of us are reading is chock full of inconsistencies, narrative discontinuity, and anachronism.  There a whole field of study dedicated to it.

It's not "chock full" of inconsistencies. Indeed there may be some minor ones. I'm not aware of any, but I don't really dedicate myself to that exploration.

A while back I pushed play on a YouTube video alleging dozens of inconsistencies. One by one, I checked them out in the Bible.
I only lasted a few hours, I only made it halfway through the video because I became bored out of mind because, in each case, I eventually found the alleged "contradiction" to be resolved by a charitable reading.

(September 18, 2026 at 3:29 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:17 pm)Angrboda Wrote: So these invisible forces are like magic?  This is just another of your bullshit analogies.  How is gravity unlike magic?  Let me count the ways.



So invisible forces are unlike magic and this is just you making another false analogy.  Gravity is unlike magic and you comparing it to magic is just you making another apples to oranges comparison.  Every schoolchild knows such comparisons are worth nothing and the conclusions drawn are nonsense.


Definitions and tautologies are germane when they are relevant.  When they don't deal with the subject at hand, they are just red herrings worth nothing.  Let's review how your definitions and tautologies have failed to hold up.

1.  You objected essentially that, "If tangible forces involve collidable objects, and intengible objects are non-collidable, then an intagible thing cannot impart a force upon a tangible object by collision."  True enough, but noone is supposing that intangible forces like gravity impart force through collision, so your tautology while true, does not address the actual case and is thus irrelevant.  Your protestations that it is true utterly miss the point in that, even if it is true, it doesn't feed the bulldog.  This is an example of ignoratio elenchi.  Noone but you is talkling about collisions so you're just talking to yourself like a madman.

2. You objected that an increasingly less physical golf club would cease to be able to impact the ball and thus impart no force at all.  But again, the force is imparteed not by impact, but by action at a distance.  So once again you've presented an analogy that is unlike the thing you are analogizing.  It thus has no force and is apples to oranges bullshit.

3. You likened gravity to a father pulling his daughter into the water from a distance.  Absurd.  But daughters and fathers are tangible objects who when they do impart force, do it through physical contact.  So this is totally unlike the thing you are analogizing and thus another false analogy.  Comparing apples to oranges tells you nothing about either apples and oranges.  Analogizing the intangible as if it were tangible only tells you that you are inept and incompetent.


You really do have reading comprehension issues.  As I patiently explained, nobody is suggesting intangible forces impart force through pushing.  So this objection is beside the point.  It is not a question of you standing by your tautologies but whether your tautologies stand in the way of the intangible imparting force.  They do not.  Because intangibles impart force in a way that isn't covered by your tautology, thus your tautology is moot.

We'll just to have to agree to disagree. As I cited Newton on gravity earlier, he indicated that to literally believe in a force acting across a vacuum is idiocy. 

I myself would call it magical/supernatural. I don't believe in magic. 

Sorry we just don't see eye to eye here.

It's not a question of seeing eye to eye or not. It is a question of whether you have presented a strawman and thus failed to make a meaningful case. I showed you have.

Btw, even you yourself have admitted that the sciences were not adequately developed at the time of Newton. So you're preferring the backward thinking of Newton to fully developed sciences. That strikes me as backwards.

(September 18, 2026 at 3:43 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: A few things.

1. It relies on the ‘sins of the father’ nonsense.

2. It presupposes the existence of God - more nonsense.

3. Paul was a hate-filled lunatic.

Boru

No I think you're misunderstanding me. Ezekiel 18 is quite clear that a child shall not pay for the sins of the father.

Let's try this again. YOU are Adam. YOU sinned in the garden. God punishes the GUILTY. 

If it's still not clear, try to apprise me which part is not clear to you.

Alexa, add chocolate to my shopping list...

(September 18, 2026 at 3:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:43 pm)Jal Wrote: No I think you're misunderstanding me. Ezekiel 18 is quite clear that a child shall not pay for the sins of the father.

Let's try this again. YOU are Adam. YOU sinned in the garden. God punishes the GUILTY. 

If it's still not clear, try to apprise me which part is not clear to you.

None of it is clear to me. I am not Adam (although I had a brother of that name). I was not in the garden. I have not sinned (at least not as you understand the word). God doesn’t punish anyone, any more that Father Christmas rewards well-behaved children.

Boru

God will jog your memory on judgment day. You'd be surprised on the things you can't remember.

About 30 years ago, I took a job to do some janitorial work. Me and a friend took turns cleaning a bowling alley after hours, among other customers.

Anywho, one night he pulled into the bowling alley about 3 AM. As he was coming in, a car was pulling out. He didn't think much of it.

Turns out the bowling alley was robbed that night. He was sure he didn't get the license plate, but he agreed to meet with a hypnotist. 

In that session, he remembered the license number! AFAIK, they caught the guy.

Yes, you are Adam, even though you don't remember it.

(September 18, 2026 at 3:54 pm)Angrboda Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:29 pm)Jal Wrote: We'll just to have to agree to disagree. As I cited Newton on gravity earlier, he indicated that to literally believe in a force acting across a vacuum is idiocy. 

I myself would call it magical/supernatural. I don't believe in magic. 

Sorry we just don't see eye to eye here.

It's not a question of seeing eye to eye or not.  It is a question of whether you have presented a strawman and thus failed to make a meaningful case.  I showed you have.

Btw, even you yourself have admitted that the sciences were not adequately developed at the time of Newton.  So you're preferring the backward thinking of Newton to fully developed sciences.  That strikes me as backwards.

Yeah Newton's not a credible source on the topic of gravity.  Not worth listening to at all. Got it.

(September 18, 2026 at 4:00 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:48 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: None of it is clear to me. I am not Adam (although I had a brother of that name). I was not in the garden. I have not sinned (at least not as you understand the word). God doesn’t punish anyone, any more that Father Christmas rewards well-behaved children.

Boru

God will jog your memory on judgment day. You'd be surprised on the things you can't remember.

About 30 years ago, I took a job to do some janitorial work. Me and a friend took turns cleaning a bowling alley after hours, among other customers.

Anywho, one night he pulled into the bowling alley about 3 AM. As he was coming in, a car was pulling out. He didn't think much of it.

Turns out the bowling alley was robbed that night. He was sure he didn't get the license plate, but he agreed to meet with a hypnotist. 

In that session, he remembered the license number! AFAIK, they caught the guy.

Yes, you are Adam, even though you don't remember it.

No, I am not Adam, because Adam is a myth. You might as well say I’m Paul Bunyan, Dionysus, or The Amazing Maurice.

Boru

(September 18, 2026 at 3:45 pm)Jal Wrote:

(September 18, 2026 at 3:44 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Divine mercy precludes divine justice and vice-versa. If God is just, he cannot be merciful. Humans, on the other hand, have figured out how to temper justice with mercy.

Boru

God fulfills both justice and mercy via the atonement. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Dear oh dear, firstly it's allegedly, as you are again offering bare subjective opinion about archaic superstition, but at least you are done lying that you were never peddling a deity, and you're wrong yet again of course, since mercy, by definition, is the suspension of justice.