Punished for Babel?

[The Reality Salesman01]

The logic presented is of an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, benevolent and timeless being. That is our point of contention.

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to instigate, but I assure you that I do not know what this means. Logic presented?

That information is transferable to other people. Christians verify what other Christians say is correct, and check the information to confirm it's validity.

I believe that you think this is sufficient for you and others that want to believe the same thing. To a man looking for an external and verifiable reason, this comes accross as circular logic.

You have to rationalise it.

You and I disagree on what is a reliable form of rationalization.

I bridge no gaps with ignorance. I can draw logical conclusions based on the assumption that God is logical and has to be to exist,

Your assumption is using the word God at all. The definition of assumption is taking someting for granted without evidence. You as well as I are ignorant to what might exist. You are willing to assume that what you've heard about a God is true (based on no evidence that can be verified), and then attribute that assumption, with everything in the universe. That sir, is bridging gaps of ignorance.

based upon knowledge that this universe is physically logical.

The universe is subject to logical contengencies. If your God exists, It too would also be subject to them. Not the other way around.

Therefore I am able to rule out illogical conclusions in constructing my idea of deity.

The diety itself was an assumption. You expanded upon that assumption and started assigning things to it that make sense to you, but are not verifiable to anyone else in the world that isn't already willing to accept your claims using the same process you used. The initial assumption of a diety was illogical. Anything later assigned to it does not have a foundation in reason or reality. That's why I reject your claim of knowledge. It shares the same characteristics of false-knowledge.

---

It's not pure speculation for an Omnipotent God.

Anything you say on such an unfounded agent on its behalf is absolute speculation. And currently, remains indistinguishable from fiction.

That points to the question I asked: If you being absolutly omnipotent knew beyond a shadow of doubt that your son's shawdow chasing would lead to his death or the death of everyone else around him would you allow him to continue to chase his shadow, EVEN IF the act of shadow chasing was benign?

Drich, if I was omnicient, I wouldn't be concerned, as I would already know that It would never happen. I would be able to foresee that the catastrophe will be avoided. If I was omnipontent too, I could arrange a less violent solution. These are all obvious flaws with the way your stories are told. It's so strange that you remain oblivious to the absurd nature of the God you describe.