(March 2, 2011 at 1:21 pm)Captain Scarlet Wrote:(March 2, 2011 at 9:23 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Again your just asserting that. Please explain why.No it is supported by all of reality:
1.all actions performed by actors are a result of cause and effect
2.all effects follow causes in time
3.time is required for actions
Problems:
1. Black swan fallacy, we know of no acausal actions taken by actors, that does not necessitate there are none, you could make an effective bayesian argument from this, or an argument from best explanation (specifically in terms of consistency with background knowledge) but you cannot necessitate this is the case.
2. There are acausal quantum effects (to the best of our scientific understanding).
3. Necessitates that time always existed, this is contrary to our best scientific understandings.
Quote:And yet again your assertions that a god could exist atemporally, is not a being and that Jesus was 100% man and 100% a god go unanswered. Perhaps you would like to support your assertions? It would make a pleasant change.
Another problem:
His assertions that God could exist atemporally are no worse than your fallacious reasons why he could not, well, aside from the fact that you actually tried to make an argument.
Aside from that I agree:
Being 100% man and 100% god is just plainly illogical, If Jesus was made up of 1 complete human an 1 complete god his total being still has to equal 100%, that would necessarily be some combination of the two. I fail to understand why Christians fell the need to defend this plainly illogical dogma, it could be easily rectified without impacting on the message, yet they feel obligated to defend all the nonsense...
I would love to see Fr0ds back up some of his assertions with something even slightly resembling an argument, I just don't expect to see it.
.
