Hell and God cant Co-exist.

[Homeless Nutter]

You're pretty much just rambling a what if scenario that has absolutely no likelyhood

Exactly - I'm glad you see it. It's a "what if god existed" scenario, because I PUT GOD IN IT. And there is no god in reality, so yeah - it's VERY unlikely. So you agree with me. Good...

based on a faulty logic that GOD would have to do any thing any certain way.

No - You're the one who says god must or mustn't do this or that. I said - omnipotent god CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS and DOESN'T NEEED TO EXPLAIN HIMSELF TO YOU, so if he decided he has to do things certain way, or that some laws of physics need to change - there's no way for you to know it. Like most religious fairy-tellers you're just making convenient sh*t up about god, trying to imply, that you know god's mind. You want god to be able to do EVERYTHING, but not really do ANYTHING, so that we can do science as if god wasn't there at all. Which he isn't, so you're half-right. Kind of...

I'm not saying GOD works in mysterious ways;

He doesn't? Of course he doesn't - he doesn't exist, but if he did - then how come you can't predict ANYTHING he does? We can predict physics, like the sun eclipses, or planetary orbits. But with god - nope, nothing, despite believers having tried for thousands and thousands of years of "observation", prayer and "revelation". So tell me - how is that not "mysterious" to you, huh? Are you so insecure in your beliefs, that you can't even admit, that you don't know anything for sure about your god? So my scenario is way more plausible than any you may have in mind, since there is nothing actually known about god and god can't be tested, even by your own admission - and that's EXACTLY consistent with there being no god at all.

I'll let you ponder that for a while, but I doubt your capable of understanding the argument, let alone - respond in a coherent manner. Oh, well - maybe someone else comes across it and helps you out of your misery...

[popsthebuilder]

You're pretty much just rambling a what if scenario that has absolutely no likelyhood

Exactly - I'm glad you see it. It's a "what if god existed" scenario, because I PUT GOD IN IT. And there is no god in reality, so yeah - it's VERY unlikely. So you agree with me. Good...

based on a faulty logic that GOD would have to do any thing any certain way.

No - You're the one who says god must or mustn't do this or that. I said - omnipotent god CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS and DOESN'T NEEED TO EXPLAIN HIMSELF TO YOU, so if he decided he has to do things certain way, or that some laws of physics need to change - there's no way for you to know it. Like most religious fairy-tellers you're just making convenient sh*t up about god, trying to imply, that you know god's mind. You want god to be able to do EVERYTHING, but not really do ANYTHING, so that we can do science as if god wasn't there at all. Which he isn't, so you're half-right. Kind of...

I'm not saying GOD works in mysterious ways;

He doesn't? Of course he doesn't - he doesn't exist, but if he did - then how come you can't predict ANYTHING he does? We can predict physics, like the sun eclipses, or planetary orbits. But with god - nope, nothing, despite believers having tried for thousands and thousands of years of "observation", prayer and "revelation". So tell me - how is that not "mysterious" to you, huh? Are you so insecure in your beliefs, that you can't even admit, that you don't know anything for sure about your god? So my scenario is way more plausible than any you may have in mind, since there is nothing actually known about god and god can't be tested, even by your own admission - and that's EXACTLY consistent with there being no god at all.

I'll let you ponder that for a while, but I doubt your capable of understanding the argument, let alone - respond in a coherent manner. Oh, well - maybe someone else comes across it and helps you out of your misery...

Did you really say that I imply I know GOD's mind, and that I said I don't understand GOD at all in the same post? That's rhetorical. You did.

This is going way off of logic and into ridiculousness.

Let me know if and when you would like to entertain serious conversation.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[Redbeard The Pink]

Exactly - I'm glad you see it. It's a "what if god existed" scenario, because I PUT GOD IN IT. And there is no god in reality, so yeah - it's VERY unlikely. So you agree with me. Good...


No - You're the one who says god must or mustn't do this or that. I said - omnipotent god CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS and DOESN'T NEEED TO EXPLAIN HIMSELF TO YOU, so if he decided he has to do things certain way, or that some laws of physics need to change - there's no way for you to know it. Like most religious fairy-tellers you're just making convenient sh*t up about god, trying to imply, that you know god's mind. You want god to be able to do EVERYTHING, but not really do ANYTHING, so that we can do science as if god wasn't there at all. Which he isn't, so you're half-right. Kind of...


He doesn't? Of course he doesn't - he doesn't exist, but if he did - then how come you can't predict ANYTHING he does? We can predict physics, like the sun eclipses, or planetary orbits. But with god - nope, nothing, despite believers having tried for thousands and thousands of years of "observation", prayer and "revelation". So tell me - how is that not "mysterious" to you, huh? Are you so insecure in your beliefs, that you can't even admit, that you don't know anything for sure about your god? So my scenario is way more plausible than any you may have in mind, since there is nothing actually known about god and god can't be tested, even by your own admission - and that's EXACTLY consistent with there being no god at all.

I'll let you ponder that for a while, but I doubt your capable of understanding the argument, let alone - respond in a coherent manner. Oh, well - maybe someone else comes across it and helps you out of your misery...

Did you really say that I imply I know GOD's mind, and that I said I don't understand GOD at all in the same post? That's rhetorical. You did.

This is going way off of logic and into ridiculousness.

Let me know if and when you would like to entertain serious conversation.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

pops, Nutter is right.


Miracles, by every useful definition of the word, are suspensions of the laws of physics. They are the sort of magic a god does.


Your god is defined as a being that can and does perform miracles, right? That means your god suspends the laws of physics at least as often as he's doing magic, unless you're using a dishonest definition of "miracle" so that you can say that your god doesn't have to alter or suspend natural law to do magic. If that's the case, then your god is very clearly entirely individual and entirely made up.


Besides, even if god never alters the laws of physics, he still can, right? Your god created the very Universe, and you describe his power as "limitless," right? I think you actually said "limitless limits," which is just gibberish as far as I can tell, but the point is that your god is powerful enough to do anything he wants, right? He could do miracles by setting them up beforehand as rare/unlikely natural events, or he could do it in the moment by changing or ignoring the rules he wrote, right? Surely if he has the power to make these rules, he has the power to change or break them.


Even if he has never actually changed Universal Law, the point is that he can (can't he?). The mere presence of a thinking agent who is capable of rendering science false on a whim means that science is technically useless. Even if he never has changed physics, there is no guarantee that he won't in the future and no way to know if he has, which means that there's no way to do science and come to consistent, reliable conclusions.


But seriously...nowhere in canon is this god of yours who does miracles without suspending natural law, so that's really starting to look like an ad hoc argument that you're using to worm out of having to admit that your god is a being that would void science if he were real. Show me these science-compatible miracles in the Bible or some other religious text (spoiler: they ain't there). Until then, you're just redefining "miracle" to be what you need for this argument, which is just sloppy rhetoric and intellectual dishonesty.

[popsthebuilder]

Did you really say that I imply I know GOD's mind, and that I said I don't understand GOD at all in the same post? That's rhetorical. You did.

This is going way off of logic and into ridiculousness.

Let me know if and when you would like to entertain serious conversation.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

pops, Nutter is right.


Miracles, by every useful definition of the word, are suspensions of the laws of physics. They are the sort of magic a god does.


Your god is defined as a being that can and does perform miracles, right? That means your god suspends the laws of physics at least as often as he's doing magic, unless you're using a dishonest definition of "miracle" so that you can say that your god doesn't have to alter or suspend natural law to do magic. If that's the case, then your god is very clearly entirely individual and entirely made up.


Besides, even if god never alters the laws of physics, he still can, right? Your god created the very Universe, and you describe his power as "limitless," right? I think you actually said "limitless limits," which is just gibberish as far as I can tell, but the point is that your god is powerful enough to do anything he wants, right? He could do miracles by setting them up beforehand as rare/unlikely natural events, or he could do it in the moment by changing or ignoring the rules he wrote, right? Surely if he has the power to make these rules, he has the power to change or break them.


Even if he has never actually changed Universal Law, the point is that he can (can't he?). The mere presence of a thinking agent who is capable of rendering science false on a whim means that science is technically useless. Even if he never has changed physics, there is no guarantee that he won't in the future and no way to know if he has, which means that there's no way to do science and come to consistent, reliable conclusions.


But seriously...nowhere in canon is this god of yours who does miracles without suspending natural law, so that's really starting to look like an ad hoc argument that you're using to worm out of having to admit that your god is a being that would void science if he were real. Show me these science-compatible miracles in the Bible or some other religious text (spoiler: they ain't there). Until then, you're just redefining "miracle" to be what you need for this argument, which is just sloppy rhetoric and intellectual dishonesty.

Show me where it states in canon scripture that Jesus is was and has always been the fullness of GOD then we can discuss the miracles.

Show me where it says all scripture is to be taken literally, then I may concede that the Christ, not GOD, but wholly of GOD as he walked the earth, temporarily molded the laws of nature to his will.

I understand your point. And it is valid given the context that you apply it to. However, that isn't the same context that I apply.

I'm sorry but metaphysics shouldn't be interpreted in a literal sense.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[Redbeard The Pink]

pops, Nutter is right.


Miracles, by every useful definition of the word, are suspensions of the laws of physics. They are the sort of magic a god does.


Your god is defined as a being that can and does perform miracles, right? That means your god suspends the laws of physics at least as often as he's doing magic, unless you're using a dishonest definition of "miracle" so that you can say that your god doesn't have to alter or suspend natural law to do magic. If that's the case, then your god is very clearly entirely individual and entirely made up.


Besides, even if god never alters the laws of physics, he still can, right? Your god created the very Universe, and you describe his power as "limitless," right? I think you actually said "limitless limits," which is just gibberish as far as I can tell, but the point is that your god is powerful enough to do anything he wants, right? He could do miracles by setting them up beforehand as rare/unlikely natural events, or he could do it in the moment by changing or ignoring the rules he wrote, right? Surely if he has the power to make these rules, he has the power to change or break them.


Even if he has never actually changed Universal Law, the point is that he can (can't he?). The mere presence of a thinking agent who is capable of rendering science false on a whim means that science is technically useless. Even if he never has changed physics, there is no guarantee that he won't in the future and no way to know if he has, which means that there's no way to do science and come to consistent, reliable conclusions.


But seriously...nowhere in canon is this god of yours who does miracles without suspending natural law, so that's really starting to look like an ad hoc argument that you're using to worm out of having to admit that your god is a being that would void science if he were real. Show me these science-compatible miracles in the Bible or some other religious text (spoiler: they ain't there). Until then, you're just redefining "miracle" to be what you need for this argument, which is just sloppy rhetoric and intellectual dishonesty.

Show me where it states in canon scripture that Jesus is was and has always been the fullness of GOD then we can discuss the miracles.

Show me where it says all scripture is to be taken literally, then I may concede that the Christ, not GOD, but wholly of GOD as he walked the earth, temporarily molded the laws of nature to his will.

I understand your point. And it is valid given the context that you apply it to. However, that isn't the same context that I apply.

I'm sorry but metaphysics shouldn't be interpreted in a literal sense.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

A-ha...the two greatest cop-outs..."Oh, you're out of context...oh, you're taking it too literally..."

Throw in a "But that's the OLD Testament!" and we've got a complete set.


Come on, bro. Don't be a n00b.


Is or isn't your god powerful enough to alter the rules of the Universe once written? Yes or no? Stop squirming around.

[popsthebuilder]

Show me where it states in canon scripture that Jesus is was and has always been the fullness of GOD then we can discuss the miracles.

Show me where it says all scripture is to be taken literally, then I may concede that the Christ, not GOD, but wholly of GOD as he walked the earth, temporarily molded the laws of nature to his will.

I understand your point. And it is valid given the context that you apply it to. However, that isn't the same context that I apply.

I'm sorry but metaphysics shouldn't be interpreted in a literal sense.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

A-ha...the two greatest cop-outs..."Oh, you're out of context...oh, you're taking it too literally..."

Throw in a "But that's the OLD Testament!" and we've got a complete set.


Come on, bro. Don't be a n00b.


Is or isn't your god powerful enough to alter the rules of the Universe once written? Yes or no? Stop squirming around.

Yes, technically, but it has no reason to do such as all is predestined but our choice.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[Redbeard The Pink]

A-ha...the two greatest cop-outs..."Oh, you're out of context...oh, you're taking it too literally..."

Throw in a "But that's the OLD Testament!" and we've got a complete set.


Come on, bro. Don't be a n00b.


Is or isn't your god powerful enough to alter the rules of the Universe once written? Yes or no? Stop squirming around.

Yes, technically, but it has no reason to do such as all is predestined but our choice.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

OK, let me stop you right there. Whether it does so, whether it has a reason to do so...all of that is irrelevant. The meaningful fact (a fact you just acknowledged) is that you believe in a thinking agent that can wilfully nullify all of science without us even knowing that it's happened. If such an agent were to exist, it would mean that we could never fully rely on the consistency of Universal Law, which would make science impossible.


Furthermore, it is not possible for everything except for human choices to be preordained. Either everything is written in advance, or nothing is. If human choices were wildcards, they could cause change and thereby affect preordained events. If no human choices have impact on anything but themselves (i.e. they can't impact other events because those are preordained), then they aren't really choices (seeing as how they don't affect any of the ultimate outcomes one way or another). Besides, it's a special pleading fallacy to say that everything is preordained except for one thing.


You seem to be saying one of two things. Either the perceived magical events of the Bible conform to the laws of nature, even if it would require an exceedingly unlikely or unknown set of circumstances in order to happen within the bounds of natural law, or you're saying that because your god is the boss, anything he does is natural, even if it is a suspension of how the Universe otherwise works.


Both are ad hoc, and both are irrelevant. If your god can write, change, and ignore the rules if he wants, then there are no rules, which means science is out the window. It doesn't matter if he does change the rules. What matters is that he can (only he can't because this is all hypothetical because he doesn't exist).

[popsthebuilder]

Yes, technically, but it has no reason to do such as all is predestined but our choice.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

OK, let me stop you right there. Whether it does so, whether it has a reason to do so...all of that is irrelevant. The meaningful fact (a fact you just acknowledged) is that you believe in a thinking agent that can wilfully nullify all of science without us even knowing that it's happened. If such an agent were to exist, it would mean that we could never fully rely on the consistency of Universal Law, which would make science impossible.


Furthermore, it is not possible for everything except for human choices to be preordained. Either everything is written in advance, or nothing is. If human choices were wildcards, they could cause change and thereby affect preordained events. If no human choices have impact on anything but themselves (i.e. they can't impact other events because those are preordained), then they aren't really choices (seeing as how they don't affect any of the ultimate outcomes one way or another). Besides, it's a special pleading fallacy to say that everything is preordained except for one thing.


You seem to be saying one of two things. Either the perceived magical events of the Bible conform to the laws of nature, even if it would require an exceedingly unlikely or unknown set of circumstances in order to happen within the bounds of natural law, or you're saying that because your god is the boss, anything he does is natural, even if it is a suspension of how the Universe otherwise works.


Both are ad hoc, and both are irrelevant. If your god can write, change, and ignore the rules if he wants, then there are no rules, which means science is out the window. It doesn't matter if he does change the rules. What matters is that he can (only he can't because this is all hypothetical because he doesn't exist).

It looks like you moved the goal posts; I agreed that GOD had the capacity to alter natural law, not that we wouldn't be able to observe it. What kind of sense does that even make? For the sake of discussion lets say GOD flipped a magical switch and shut gravity off. I think we would notice. Let's say the planets, solar systems, galaxies, the universe all stopped going along their ordained path... I'm pretty sure we would notice.

I get what you're saying about the special pleading though. And I admit it is quite difficult to grasp and harder to explain. I think everything is ordained, and nothing is left to chance, except for the human spirit or soul, in the natural world, but at the same time we have freedom, potential, and responsibility. I honestly don't know how that works exactly. I'm sure one day I will though.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[Neo-Scholastic]

A-ha...the two greatest cop-outs..."Oh, you're out of context...oh, you're taking it too literally..."

Throw in a "But that's the OLD Testament!" and we've got a complete set.

How about? "I'm too dense to figure out what is poetry and what is narrative" or "I'm too lazy to bother considering what the purpose of the various authors were so I'll just act like a shithead to every one who actually attempts to use their brain when approaching the most influential book in the history of the planet."

Get a fucking life, Redbeard.

[Losty]

A-ha...the two greatest cop-outs..."Oh, you're out of context...oh, you're taking it too literally..."

Throw in a "But that's the OLD Testament!" and we've got a complete set.

How about? "I'm too dense to figure out what is poetry and what is narrative" or "I'm too lazy to bother considering what the purpose of the various authors were so I'll just act like a shithead to every one who actually attempts to use their brain when approaching the most influential book in the history of the planet."

Get a fucking life, Redbeard.

Do you pretend to know for a fact what verses are poetry, what verses are narrative, and what the purpose of each biblical author is?

Also, you calling anyone a shithead is fucking priceless. I almost never talk to you, because I've always found you extraordinarily dull, but I have noticed you hopping around the forum being a complete dick to everyone lately.