I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Edwardo Piet]

Well, how about actually reading it? Then you would know it. Now you are just repeating that "there isn't evidence" - but you haven't in any way refuted or even addressed the links I gave, both to the long expositions in the Summa and my own posts.

I fail to see where any of those arguments give any evidence for God...ok?

And how does Christ come into all this? And how does a creative force=omnibenevolent...it could just as easily be omnimalevolent.

I've read your posts time and time again, and you keep relinking them when I've already read them. The summa doesn't seem to have anything of merit on it, more non-sequiters, and when it starts mentioning scripture I'm not going to delve into any of that...it's about as pointless as delving into the FSM gospel for pastafarianism.

Where does Christ come into all of this, and why not omnimalevolence, why omnibenevolence?

Exactly. Not actus purus, and therefore not God, and therefore not anything like God. If he was not actus purus, he would not be maximally perfect, omnibenevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, eternal, subsistent, or anything else either, because all these facts are only attributions that follow from actus purus and do not exist on their own.

It's irrelevant to my argument that if he's identical but temporal and therefore not actus purus, that that is analgous in complexity and improbability to actus purus untill you evidence it otherwise.

If you don't understand what difference it makes yet, then you are incapable of understanding it.

Some evidence would be nice. Evidence has merit. Why do I keep asking for evidence? Because what you are providing isn't evidence because it doesn't give credence to the God belief.

So evidence please.

to EV.

You have some nice work in this thread.

While it seems most of us have given up on JP with his same pile of poo painted in latin, it is entertaining to watch you continually hammering on it. I have come to find myself actually looking forward to your exchanges with JP.

It's no problem It's all good entertainment for me becasue it's always the same story - no evidence

You don't know EvF (can't say that anymore can I?) EvD that well then

He's like a Pit Bull and will never let go, as I've learnt


EvD FTW (as I believe the locals say)

Since I've been on these forums from 22 september last year - I've never backed off from a debate if I think I'm right...and I never agree to disagree here.

Might be one of the reasons my post count is so large lol. Why would I want to agree to disagree? I find every argument interesting and I find agreements is just affirimg what you already believe.

I'm not going to stop if I think I'm right.

EV in his immaturity thinks repeating ad infinitum equates to an argument. He has yet to grasp the basic ideas. He doesn't even realise that Jon Paul is actually talking about the Christian God yet.

Jon Paul repeatedly re-links his lack of evidence an infintium if you want a comparison

And you repeatedly repeat how I 'don't get it' and my 'logic is flawed' because of the fact that I demand evidence for faith matters, because faith being without evidence is delusional

Not that EV doesn't have some interesting ideas to put forward.

Ty

Just he straightjackets himself sometimes.

How so?

EvD