First  Prev  119  120  121  122  123  124  125  126  127  128  129  130  131  Next  Last
What if it was -proven- that God -does- exist?
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 8/17/08

crunchypibb wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


crunchypibb wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


crunchypibb wrote:

Skeptic.
But if you want to deny history that's fine by me.


I challenge you to debate me on the existence of god. Let us see if that cock sure attitude is warranted.


Oh f***, I love the questions that athiests provide on religion for they are the most contravercial ones but you realize if we have a debate neither of us will convince the other, only the audience may change sides. I may do a sh*ty job compared to the pope but I will love to see you screw up for who you stand up for, yourself. I say this and not the atheist community for you cannot believe and have faith in things you don't believe in and lack faith in. That is a contradiction.
Also don't wait for a quick response, they may take longer since I am preparing to move into my college dorm on the 21st and college is my priority, not this debate. So be patient if you really care to hear my rebuttals.


Let us just debate in this thread. I am assuming that you think god is all loving, all knowing,all good, all powerful, triune, and sent Jesus Christ to die for us.Are these assumptions correct?


For the time being, ya, but I'm well open to suggestions.

Excellent. Then I will present an argument I have used in the past.

The problem of evil asks us why a good god allows bad things to occur. Free will is the answer most often given.

But free will is a weak defense if you are talking about the Christian god. If god has free will and is perfect, why can humans not also be perfect and have free will?

One objection I can see being put forward to the above is that God is a necessary being whereas we are contingent. God and creation are in different categories ontologically speaking. It may be possible that a necessary being can possess free will yet never do evil whereas contingent beings are incapable of possessing free will and that evil will never emerge. Ergo, the emergence of evil is logically necessary (and inevitable) amongst contingencies who possess free will.



But , this is itself full of problems. For example, how will God actualise Heaven? Heaven is assumed to be a place free of the influence of evil but if all of those in Heaven (other than God) will be contingent and the emergence of evil is logically necessary amongst contingencies with free will and he cannot make us non-contingent how can he eradicate evil without violating free will? If it is logically necessary that God will violate free will to actualise Heaven then the whole "refusing to violate free will" defence fails especially as the actualisation of evil results in the violation of free will also.



God (as we are discussing him) attains to the highest levels of perfection with respect to his power, knowledge and morality. In the context of this argument I use the terms "perfect" and "greatest possible" interchangeably (synonymously) so God possesses the greatest possible power, the greatest possible knowledge and the greatest possible morality. Consequently, God is the greatest possible being by definition. He also has free will.

The term "reality" refers to the sum total of all that is thought to exist at any one time. Prior to creation there was only God so ...

1. Prior to creation "reality = God".
2. Post creation "reality = God + creation".

If God is the greatest possible being then we have ...

1. Prior to creation "reality = greatest possible being".
2. Post creation "reality = greatest possible being + creation".

It is important to note that reality with only God in it (1) is already the greatest possible reality because in that context the terms "reality" and "God" can be used interchangeably and God is the greatest possible being. Christians are uncomfortable with this thought ... and for very good reasons.

'A maximally good being will always choose the best option it can. What is the best option? In the context of the argument the "best possible option" would seem to be a reality in which free will existed perfectly and in which evil was never actualised. Isn't this what the Christian expects in Heaven after all? If the actualisation of evil is such a great thing, why isn't anyone pleading with God to keep a little of it in Heaven for them? is anyone asking God to remove their free will? Nope. Is anyone asking God to allow just a little bit of evil in Heaven? Nope. Most assume that the former will be present and the latter removed. But this falls foul of my opening comments. If Heaven can be actualised (free will and no evil) then it must be possible for contingencies to possess free will and be incapable of evil and the comment about "necessary being/contingent being" demarkation (as put out in the opening of my argument) fails. The best that can be argued at this juncture is that the experience of evil (and the performance of it) was logically necessary in the history of those who will later possess free will yet never do evil or experience it again.

However, this doesn't alter the fact that a reality in which evil is never actualised and free will exists perfectly is greater than a reality in which evil is able to emerge and violate free will as it necessarily does. As we have noted, a reality with only God in it is the greatest possible reality by definition and a reality in which free will exists perfectly and evil procluded totally. This is internally consistent but it has an unfortunate outcome for the theist! The greatest possible reality (one in which free will exists perfectly and evil never emerges) is a reality with only God in it! Consequently, a greatest possible being who only ever chooses the best option would never choose to create!


1. God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil (Christian premise).
2. (1) entails that something greater is achieved by allowing evil to be actualised than what exists in a reality from which evil is procluded.
3. God is the greatest possible being (Christian premise).
4. God is incapable of evil (even if by choice (Christian premise)).
5. From (4): The emergence of evil is procluded in a reality with only God in it.
6. From (3) and (5): A reality with only God in it is a reality in which evil can never occur and the greatest possible reality (is perfect).
7. A perfect state cannot be improved upon by definition.
8. From (6) and (7): Anything achieved by creating and actualising evil could not be greater than a reality with only God in it and in which evil is impossible.
9. From (6): It is impossible for God to achieve (2) because he cannot produce something greater than himself.
10. (1) is therefore false.



So if god is all good he could never have created the universe thus committing an evil action. Thus the Christian god i logically impossible, and does not exist.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
36005 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 8/17/08
Are we ones to comprehend the mind of God? No, we are a creation, subject and infinitely inferior to the creator. God does not obey the laws of human logic, nor does He have to. You seem to be forgetting Satan. Satan was an angel, a creation of God. Satan committed the first sin with his free will. God wants to be loved and worshipped, and true love and worship cannot come from mindless people with no wills. God allows us to choose to love and worship Him. God did not create sin, He merely gave good commands which if are violated, produce sin. Humans and demons used their free will to create sin. We can choose to create sin with our free will, or to worship and love God with it. In actuality, Christians give our free will up so that we may follow God's will. We may still choose to sin, and sin is wrong, but we can choose God and be forgiven and not sin again. We can use our will for ourselves as sin, or for God as righteousness. Heaven isn't just a dwelling, it is a reward. Hell is not just a dwelling, it is a reward. Our choices regarding our gift of free will determines our eternity. We can have a blesses eternity, or a condemned eternity. God is Love, and possesses Perfect Agape Love. God gives commands because it is in our own best interest to obey them. Heaven is being with God, and experiencing that Perfect Agape Love for all eternity. We will worship God because we love Him as well. 1John 4:19 We love because he first loved us. We love God because He loved us first, and as Christians our love with God is mutual. Agape love is so strong that it doesn't requite mutual love to sustain itself. God loves everyone, even non Christians. When we die, is when we are judged, and up until that point, we are all loved by God. When we die, we are accountable for our actions, and if we have imperfect unforgiving sin in our lives, then we must be punished for that sin when we die. That punishment is eternal hell. If we are forgiven, then our sins are no more. When we die as forgiven, because God Loves us, and because there is no sin, we may enter heaven and be with God for all eternity. Sin is imperfections, God is Perfection; therefore, sin cannot be in the presence of God. This is why hell exists, and this is why Jesus died on the cross to offer atonement for all the sins of the world. All we have to do is accept the gift and turn from our sins through repentance.
Posted 8/17/08 , edited 8/17/08

saranee wrote:

there is only one god in this world people can not see him but they know that he exist..
upon the sky there is Allah watching all of us Allah is our god and only the people who will go to the heaven will see him when the final day come

read the true history and u will find lot of stories prove Allah existence



Agree ! ~ and the marks of the final day are appearin ~ about half of them happened ~ or even more ~

and god exist ~ coz he made us ~ like humans made doors, tables ... etc ~ everything in this life has an owner
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 8/17/08

digs wrote:

I believe that Jehovah is the One True God. There are stories and historical evidence to support Jehovah. Allah is a moon god. There is no love from Allah. True love comes from the One True God.


As someone who has read the Q'uran I find your ignorance to be egregious. You are making statements about something you clearly don't understand.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
36005 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 8/17/08
I have read some of the Koran. Does Allah ever say that he loves us? Does he ever promise a sure way into heaven? Does he ever offer forgiveness? Nope, Allah possesses no love. And there is no definite way into heaven through Islam (even if it stated that there was, it isn't the Truth. Muhammad was a manipulator)
10789 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / In my secret World
Offline
Posted 8/18/08

digs wrote:

I have read some of the Koran. Does Allah ever say that he loves us? Does he ever promise a sure way into heaven? Does he ever offer forgiveness? Nope, Allah possesses no love. And there is no definite way into heaven through Islam (even if it stated that there was, it isn't the Truth. Muhammad was a manipulator)



if you really read quran u will find a lot of evidence that show how Allah love all of us, also he love the people who obey him and pray to him. Allah love us and forgive us even though we do a lot of bad things but he give us chances so that we return to the good way. if Allah hate us he can kill us all and create new people who obey him but he want to see how we react until the final day come. In the Quran there are a lot of ways that show us how we can enter heaven and that is by being muslim and obeying Allah and mohammad peace upon him and when u are muslim there are a lot of way to make u feel u are near Allah and u will feel his love in ur life and u will be happy because u now u are going to the right way. there are easy ways that we as muslim can do it to enter heaven like giving money for poor people, obeying our parents, visiting sick people all those things is recorded until u will see the result in the final day.

4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 8/18/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


digs wrote:

I believe that Jehovah is the One True God. There are stories and historical evidence to support Jehovah. Allah is a moon god. There is no love from Allah. True love comes from the One True God.


As someone who has read the Q'uran I find your ignorance to be egregious. You are making statements about something you clearly don't understand.


Oh, so a scientists always knows about the things he talks about. I see.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 8/18/08 , edited 8/18/08

crunchypibb wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


digs wrote:

I believe that Jehovah is the One True God. There are stories and historical evidence to support Jehovah. Allah is a moon god. There is no love from Allah. True love comes from the One True God.


As someone who has read the Q'uran I find your ignorance to be egregious. You are making statements about something you clearly don't understand.


Oh, so a scientists always knows about the things he talks about. I see.


Of course everyone in a religious debate is going to think that their side is right. No one starts an argument with "I know this is wrong, but I'm going to share it anyway." If someone has devoted a lot of their time to studying a certain subject, wouldn't it be safe for them to assume that they have the advantage when they are discussing that with someone who hasn't spent as much time studying it?

Although YouAreDumb does go overboard with it...
4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 8/18/08

YouAreDumb wrote:



1. God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil (Christian premise).
2. (1) entails that something greater is achieved by allowing evil to be actualised than what exists in a reality from which evil is procluded.
3. God is the greatest possible being (Christian premise).
4. God is incapable of evil (even if by choice (Christian premise)).
5. From (4): The emergence of evil is procluded in a reality with only God in it.
6. From (3) and (5): A reality with only God in it is a reality in which evil can never occur and the greatest possible reality (is perfect).
7. A perfect state cannot be improved upon by definition.
8. From (6) and (7): Anything achieved by creating and actualising evil could not be greater than a reality with only God in it and in which evil is impossible.
9. From (6): It is impossible for God to achieve (2) because he cannot produce something greater than himself.
10. (1) is therefore false.



So if god is all good he could never have created the universe thus committing an evil action. Thus the Christian god i logically impossible, and does not exist.


Applause!!! Such a wonderful conclusion! Now that we don't have a God, what now? Our lives are now purposeless because all that our end will ever be will be is nonexistance. It doesn't matter how much fun we have now, once we hit nine feet under all that won't matter anymore. Wonderful.
But, it seems as if you have forgotten quite a number of factors. Sorry, I take my applause back. Let me quickly list them:
1. other invisible entities exists
2. the chaos of an 'all-good' world on earth
3. God is not like humans
4. Why God lets evil exist on earth
5. perfect =/= free will
6. God generally speaking is the name of the creator of earth so God and creation are not in different categories.
7. to add to (6) self creation is not possible on earth.
8. Heaven is seperate from earth for a reason
9. to add to (8) the reason for Purgatory
10. the agreed definition of something does not change it's essence.
11. Your reality=God equation is retarded, especially in how you explained it.
12. You're an athiests, of course this makes sense to you with the possessed knowledge and logic you have. But since you forgot the above eleven (and possibly more) your ideas are debunk.

Now let me have some fun, but first I want to say...


Anyways, now that's out of the way. I'm gonna explain my points in the order I feel like explaining them in, so I can leave room for you to screw up in the rebuttal.
(8) heaven is not on earth, although it would be very nice. You said something like this:

Heaven is assumed to be a place free of the influence of evil but if all of those in Heaven (other than God) will be contingent and the emergence of evil is logically necessary amongst contingencies with free will and he cannot make us non-contingent how can he eradicate evil without violating free will?

-First, not all 'evils' are neccessary, as I will explain in my next point. Second, Purgatory exists for a reason despite how many people seem to reject the idea, evidence of it is found in Maccabees which is a book Protestants removed from their versions of the bible because of such evidence. This will also be later explained. "How can he eradicate evil without violating free will?" wtf are you talking about? God already solved that, Jesus died for us for a reason (plus there's still purgatory).
-To explain shortly, when we confess our sins to Jesus, best through a priest, and we really want to put our sins behind, Jesus removes the spiritual stains that the sin has caused us and will erase the record of it happening like when the police scrap small crimes that you did during your juvenile years. However, you still suffer the earthly consequences, it's just the ultimate spiritual consequence that has been erased. Whatever happened still happened but you are fully forgiven by Jesus so that, he paid your debt for you. If you still don't understand just read the entire rebuttal, so I don't have to respond to half-baked complaints.

(2) Without specific 'evils' the earthly world would be in chaos ironically. You said something like this:

The problem of evil asks us why a good god allows bad things to occur. Free will is the answer most often given.

-I'll quote it later but the next two paragraphs after that violate my points 5 and 6. Now a good friend of mine John Hick, who follows what Thomas Aquinas says, came up with a very good arguement to this. I will not quote his entire arguement but the entire point was that without a world full of natural evils (physical pain and internal suffering) there would be no consequences to such faulty actions. If I decided to stab you and you didn't die, I technically commit murder since my intent was to kill you but since you didn't die I can never learn that. All in all, the earth was specifically created for human development by God's intent so that we would learn from these evils that we commit, intentionally or unintentionally.

(3) God is God for a reason. He's not an amplified human. You entire arguement in general seems to make God faulty like his humans which he created but you have to consider one thing, God is a divine creature. On that note I would also like to add that a lot of people confuse Jesus as a human but that is not so. Jesus is a divine creature but has two natures, a divine and a human nature. As a rectangle is a square and a square is not a rectangle, we are comparable to God but God is not entirely comparable to us.

(4) I kind of already explain this point with (2) but like I didn't mention yet there are other spiritual entities out there. So I'll explain that first.

(1) Ha, and you thought this should have been the first since this was #1. Whatever, I like to mix things up. Again I really don't have any specific reference to your arguement about this point but in general you seemed to think demons didn't exists. WRONG.
Throughout the whole bible in general demons were given reference to. Some to bluntly describe Jesus (he was compared to Bezulbub by some skeptics at the time) and some that were shortly exiled by Jesus. Why God lets them run around, I can only guess from my point of knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, demons can't enter heaven so for everyone up there they're fine. Demons got their place too, on earth, but like that crabby roomate or annoying neighbor of yours, all you can really do is ignore them. If however they decide to invade your space, it's because they want to pick on you specifically for a reason or you just let them trample all over you. If you are demon possessed or bothered by a demon, pray to God to help you get rid of it and just continue to fight back until God tazzers them and imprisons and/or exinguishes it. That's what I've got to say.

(4) Yay back to 4. You want an explaination, read 1.

(11) Word equations are sketchy. If they were all true then, your cat = my penis, but that is not so. In general, I can't even begin to rebuttal what you trying to say from your word equation because there is no real point to rebuttal against. It's just stupid, especially how you added creation to the equation.

1. Prior to creation "reality = God".
2. Post creation "reality = God + creation".

If God is the greatest possible being then we have ...

1. Prior to creation "reality = greatest possible being".
2. Post creation "reality = greatest possible being + creation".

Look, I'm just gonna rebuttal with arithmatic. Look, 1+2=3 right? But if you want to add 4 to the equation you can't do this: 1+2+4=3 or 1+2=3+4. You have to add 4 to both sides so it makes sense: 1+2+4=3+4.
Go to pre-k and learn how to count again.

(6) It kind of explains itself but I'll just quote you again anyways.

One objection I can see being put forward to the above is that God is a necessary being whereas we are contingent. God and creation are in different categories ontologically speaking. It may be possible that a necessary being can possess free will yet never do evil whereas contingent beings are incapable of possessing free will and that evil will never emerge. Ergo, the emergence of evil is logically necessary (and inevitable) amongst contingencies who possess free will.

No more really needs to be added about this point.

(7) To add to 6, if God so to speak wasn't the creator then who was? Us? Self creation is not possible, Your Wii or whatever game system you have was created by something and did not construct itself at the local Walmart. As for God, the best explaination out there is that he is uncreated. For if he was created he wouldn't be God, the entity that created created Him would be God and that one would be uncreated. But that wouldn't make sense because otherwise we would reach the problem of infinite regress if you didn't accept that God was uncreated.

(9) Yes I skipped from 7 to 9 and passed 8, deal with it. As I talked about in 8, heaven is an entirely different place from earth. How we get there, we have to be pure in spirit. The problem, 99% of us aren't like that when we die. Only Jesus and specific saints go straight to heaven. And because our God is a merciful God, we can cleanse our souls in purgatory. That is, if God knows that we have the potential to go to heaven. If not we go to hell and stay there for an eternity. All this is determined in how we lived our lives, so if you really care what happens to you when you die I'll recommend that you convert to Christianity asap.

(10) Again the statement I made kinda explains itself and again I will quote you:

God (as we are discussing him) attains to the highest levels of perfection with respect to his power, knowledge and morality. In the context of this argument I use the terms "perfect" and "greatest possible" interchangeably (synonymously) so God possesses the greatest possible power, the greatest possible knowledge and the greatest possible morality. Consequently, God is the greatest possible being by definition. He also has free will.

Some people say God is perfect, some say He's "greatest possible being", they both mean the same thing if you really think about what you said. However, I got the inference that you think definitions of God can be used interchangeably. Definitions in general are used interchangeable, like the definition of light (a wave and a particle) since it has properties of both, but I just want to point out that two subjective definitions for anything may not be interchangeable and one of the definitions may be wrong. I addressed this because your logic within the whole arguement in general tends to contain some faulty truths. But I have no time to point out specifics.

(5) 10/2 = 5, so let's go ahead and talk about it. Go find 11 yourself.

But free will is a weak defense if you are talking about the Christian god. If god has free will and is perfect, why can humans not also be perfect and have free will?

There is a slight difference in perfection and free will that isn't very slight at all. Perfection, as a definition it generally means faultless. Free will means that we can do whatever the hell we want despite what people say, but you will still suffer consequences. We can still be faulty with free will but perfection alongside with free will means God can't be faulty. While you are reading this, I would like to say your logic is as straight as a rainbow, no lie.

(12) Your an athiest, there is no one who can say your right or wrong since there is no God from your standpoint so go play chicken on a busy freeway. You won't die if you convince yourself that death is relative right? Tell me when you come back from doing what I asked ya to do.

If you need me I'll be back in reality. Oh damn I have the urge to say this again:
4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 8/18/08

Cuddlebuns wrote:


crunchypibb wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


digs wrote:

I believe that Jehovah is the One True God. There are stories and historical evidence to support Jehovah. Allah is a moon god. There is no love from Allah. True love comes from the One True God.


As someone who has read the Q'uran I find your ignorance to be egregious. You are making statements about something you clearly don't understand.


Oh, so a scientists always knows about the things he talks about. I see.


Of course everyone in a religious debate is going to think that their side is right. No one starts an argument with "I know this is wrong, but I'm going to share it anyway." If someone has devoted a lot of their time to studying a certain subject, wouldn't it be safe for them to assume that they have the advantage when they are discussing that with someone who hasn't spent as much time studying it?

Although YouAreDumb does go overboard with it...


I pretty much agree with you. YAD is picking the wrong fight.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 8/18/08

crunchypibb wrote:



Applause!!! Such a wonderful conclusion! Now that we don't have a God, what now? Our lives are now purposeless because all that our end will ever be will be is nonexistance. It doesn't matter how much fun we have now, once we hit nine feet under all that won't matter anymore. Wonderful.
But, it seems as if you have forgotten quite a number of factors. Sorry, I take my applause back. Let me quickly list them:

1. other invisible entities exists
Unsupported assertion



2. the chaos of an 'all-good' world on earth
Unsupported assertion which ignores the fact if evil has to come into existence on Earth god would never create it.


3. God is not like humans
4. Why God lets evil exist on earth
5. perfect =/= free will
True but in the context we are using we establish free will would exist with just god in reality so that one may not object and claim that it is needed and that is why god created us.




6. God generally speaking is the name of the creator of earth so God and creation are not in different categories.

7. to add to (6) self creation is not possible on earth.
Self creation is never possible anywhere.


8. Heaven is seperate from earth for a reason
Which is?
9. to add to (8) the reason for Purgatory
Which is no longer a point of Catholic dogma.



10. the agreed definition of something does not change it's essence.
You agreed to the definition already and thus can not now object to it's usage.

11. Your reality=God equation is retarded, especially in how you explained it.In what way?


12. You're an athiests, of course this makes sense to you with the possessed knowledge and logic you have. But since you forgot the above eleven (and possibly more) your ideas are debunk.
It must be nice to assert things without arguments or evidence to back up your assertions.





Now let me have some fun, but first I want to say...


Anyways, now that's out of the way. I'm gonna explain my points in the order I feel like explaining them in, so I can leave room for you to screw up in the rebuttal.
(8) heaven is not on earth, although it would be very nice. You said something like this:

Heaven is assumed to be a place free of the influence of evil but if all of those in Heaven (other than God) will be contingent and the emergence of evil is logically necessary amongst contingencies with free will and he cannot make us non-contingent how can he eradicate evil without violating free will?

-First, not all 'evils' are neccessary, as I will explain in my next point. Second, Purgatory exists for a reason despite how many people seem to reject the idea, evidence of it is found in Maccabees which is a book Protestants removed from their versions of the bible because of such evidence. This will also be later explained. "How can he eradicate evil without violating free will?" wtf are you talking about? God already solved that, Jesus died for us for a reason (plus there's still purgatory).

-To explain shortly, when we confess our sins to Jesus, best through a priest, and we really want to put our sins behind, Jesus removes the spiritual stains that the sin has caused us and will erase the record of it happening like when the police scrap small crimes that you did during your juvenile years. However, you still suffer the earthly consequences, it's just the ultimate spiritual consequence that has been erased. Whatever happened still happened but you are fully forgiven by Jesus so that, he paid your debt for you. If you still don't understand just read the entire rebuttal, so I don't have to respond to half-baked complaints.

(2) Without specific 'evils' the earthly world would be in chaos ironically. You said something like this:

The problem of evil asks us why a good god allows bad things to occur. Free will is the answer most often given.

-I'll quote it later but the next two paragraphs after that violate my points 5 and 6. Now a good friend of mine John Hick, who follows what Thomas Aquinas says, came up with a very good arguement to this. I will not quote his entire arguement but the entire point was that without a world full of natural evils (physical pain and internal suffering) there would be no consequences to such faulty actions. If I decided to stab you and you didn't die, I technically commit murder since my intent was to kill you but since you didn't die I can never learn that. All in all, the earth was specifically created for human development by God's intent so that we would learn from these evils that we commit, intentionally or unintentionally.
A meaningless objection. If god was able to create us morally perfect we would never commit evil with the need to learn from it. If we have to commit evil be existing given my above argument god would never create us.

(3) God is God for a reason. He's not an amplified human. You entire arguement in general seems to make God faulty like his humans which he created but you have to consider one thing, God is a divine creature. On that note I would also like to add that a lot of people confuse Jesus as a human but that is not so. Jesus is a divine creature but has two natures, a divine and a human nature. As a rectangle is a square and a square is not a rectangle, we are comparable to God but God is not entirely comparable to us.
This has nothing to do with my argument. I even stress that people argue that god is ontologically different from humans in my argument.



(4) I kind of already explain this point with (2) but like I didn't mention yet there are other spiritual entities out there. So I'll explain that first.

(1) Ha, and you thought this should have been the first since this was #1. Whatever, I like to mix things up. Again I really don't have any specific reference to your arguement about this point but in general you seemed to think demons didn't exists. WRONG.
Throughout the whole bible in general demons were given reference to.
And as we all know that proves that they exist. Not.



Some to bluntly describe Jesus (he was compared to Bezulbub by some skeptics at the time) and some that were shortly exiled by Jesus. Why God lets them run around, I can only guess from my point of knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, demons can't enter heaven so for everyone up there they're fine. Demons got their place too, on earth, but like that crabby roomate or annoying neighbor of yours, all you can really do is ignore them. If however they decide to invade your space, it's because they want to pick on you specifically for a reason or you just let them trample all over you. If you are demon possessed or bothered by a demon, pray to God to help you get rid of it and just continue to fight back until God tazzers them and imprisons and/or exinguishes it. That's what I've got to say.

(4) Yay back to 4. You want an explaination, read 1.

(11) Word equations are sketchy. If they were all true then, your cat = my penis, but that is not so. In general, I can't even begin to rebuttal what you trying to say from your word equation because there is no real point to rebuttal against. It's just stupid, especially how you added creation to the equation.

1. Prior to creation "reality = God".
2. Post creation "reality = God + creation".

If God is the greatest possible being then we have ...

1. Prior to creation "reality = greatest possible being".
2. Post creation "reality = greatest possible being + creation".

Look, I'm just gonna rebuttal with arithmatic. Look, 1+2=3 right? But if you want to add 4 to the equation you can't do this: 1+2+4=3 or 1+2=3+4. You have to add 4 to both sides so it makes sense: 1+2+4=3+4.
Go to pre-k and learn how to count again.
I am a math major. Your rebuttal is stupid because my argument follows logically and 1+2=3+4 does not. You seem to be saying that one can not make use of logical axioms which demonstrates that you have never read a book on logic whatsoever. Do you know what an axiom is? You should thank your god I did not use formal logic on you.



(6) It kind of explains itself but I'll just quote you again anyways.

One objection I can see being put forward to the above is that God is a necessary being whereas we are contingent. God and creation are in different categories ontologically speaking. It may be possible that a necessary being can possess free will yet never do evil whereas contingent beings are incapable of possessing free will and that evil will never emerge. Ergo, the emergence of evil is logically necessary (and inevitable) amongst contingencies who possess free will.

No more really needs to be added about this point.

(7) To add to 6, if God so to speak wasn't the creator then who was? Us? Self creation is not possible, Your Wii or whatever game system you have was created by something and did not construct itself at the local Walmart. As for God, the best explaination out there is that he is uncreated. For if he was created he wouldn't be God, the entity that created created Him would be God and that one would be uncreated. But that wouldn't make sense because otherwise we would reach the problem of infinite regress if you didn't accept that God was uncreated.

(9) Yes I skipped from 7 to 9 and passed 8, deal with it. As I talked about in 8, heaven is an entirely different place from earth. How we get there, we have to be pure in spirit. The problem, 99% of us aren't like that when we die. Only Jesus and specific saints go straight to heaven. And because our God is a merciful God, we can cleanse our souls in purgatory. That is, if God knows that we have the potential to go to heaven. If not we go to hell and stay there for an eternity. All this is determined in how we lived our lives, so if you really care what happens to you when you die I'll recommend that you convert to Christianity asap.

(10) Again the statement I made kinda explains itself and again I will quote you:

God (as we are discussing him) attains to the highest levels of perfection with respect to his power, knowledge and morality. In the context of this argument I use the terms "perfect" and "greatest possible" interchangeably (synonymously) so God possesses the greatest possible power, the greatest possible knowledge and the greatest possible morality. Consequently, God is the greatest possible being by definition. He also has free will.

Some people say God is perfect, some say He's "greatest possible being", they both mean the same thing if you really think about what you said. However, I got the inference that you think definitions of God can be used interchangeably. Definitions in general are used interchangeable, like the definition of light (a wave and a particle) since it has properties of both, but I just want to point out that two subjective definitions for anything may not be interchangeable and one of the definitions may be wrong. I addressed this because your logic within the whole arguement in general tends to contain some faulty truths. But I have no time to point out specifics.
What are these faulty truths?




(5) 10/2 = 5, so let's go ahead and talk about it. Go find 11 yourself.

But free will is a weak defense if you are talking about the Christian god. If god has free will and is perfect, why can humans not also be perfect and have free will?

There is a slight difference in perfection and free will that isn't very slight at all. Perfection, as a definition it generally means faultless. Free will means that we can do whatever the hell we want despite what people say, but you will still suffer consequences. We can still be faulty with free will but perfection alongside with free will means God can't be faulty. While you are reading this, I would like to say your logic is as straight as a rainbow, no lie.

(12) Your an athiest, there is no one who can say your right or wrong since there is no God from your standpoint so go play chicken on a busy freeway. You won't die if you convince yourself that death is relative right? Tell me when you come back from doing what I asked ya to do.

If you need me I'll be back in reality. Oh damn I have the urge to say this again:


You provided no objections to my argument. I shall take this as a concession.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 8/18/08
I really am stunned. Your only objection to my logic was to say that because you could type out an incorrect equation my use of logical syntax is invalid. We're done here.
4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 8/18/08 , edited 8/18/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


Well you're pretty damn quick. Maybe you can explain these unsupported assertions to me if you really know better than me.


crunchypibb wrote:
Applause!!! Such a wonderful conclusion! Now that we don't have a God, what now? Our lives are now purposeless because all that our end will ever be will be is nonexistance. It doesn't matter how much fun we have now, once we hit nine feet under all that won't matter anymore. Wonderful.
But, it seems as if you have forgotten quite a number of factors. Sorry, I take my applause back. Let me quickly list them:

1. other invisible entities exists
Unsupported assertion


Want do you want me to do, give you a third eye so you can see them? If you don't think they exists please explain why I'm on the third rock from the sun. Also explain why humans are here in general. Also explain what happens to us when we die. Actually, explain to me why some of the saints bodies don't corrupt, it's completely unnatural.
So what, is the bible a lie? Is God an invention? Was the Bible made up? Did the Holocaust really exist? Some say otherwise but don't you still think the events happen even if they were denied? Have you even considered reading the Bible?



2. the chaos of an 'all-good' world on earth
Unsupported assertion which ignores the fact if evil has to come into existence on Earth god would never create it.


Of course God didn't create it. All that is good was created by God, it did not include evil.




3. God is not like humans
4. Why God lets evil exist on earth
5. perfect =/= free will
True but in the context we are using we establish free will would exist with just god in reality so that one may not object and claim that it is needed and that is why god created us.

Run by me again, your run on sentence was really hard to read.




6. God generally speaking is the name of the creator of earth so God and creation are not in different categories.

7. to add to (6) self creation is not possible on earth.
Self creation is never possible anywhere.

Your point?




8. Heaven is seperate from earth for a reason
Which is?
9. to add to (8) the reason for Purgatory

Which is no longer a point of Catholic dogma.
Where did you get that idea? Go look for the book of Maccabees on the internet and you tell me about purgatory. Besides, the Catholics dogmas are not like the constitution, you can't make a dogma to erase a previous one. I think your idea of what a dogma is happens to be wrong. Dogmas are the ultimate explainations/answers for contravertial christian topics at the time. They can't be reammended. Seriously, someone else said the same thing to me. Where's your source coming from?




10. the agreed definition of something does not change it's essence.
You agreed to the definition already and thus can not now object to it's usage.

Wtf are you saying? So if we decide that the role of the sun is to emit cold and not hot, will it emit cold? Watch what you're saying.


11. Your reality=God equation is retarded, especially in how you explained it.
In what way?

I kind of already addressed how dumb it was with simple arithmatic but I'll also add, since you asked, that you devalued one variable so that another could fit. Math, words and numbers, doesn't go that way. Take my advice which I had addressed to you.



12. You're an athiests, of course this makes sense to you with the possessed knowledge and logic you have. But since you forgot the above eleven (and possibly more) your ideas are debunk.
It must be nice to assert things without arguments or evidence to back up your assertions.

Did you read the whole arguement before quoting all this? I'll repeat myself and say that I had specifically told you that you should read the whole arguement before responding back.




Now let me have some fun, but first I want to say...


Anyways, now that's out of the way. I'm gonna explain my points in the order I feel like explaining them in, so I can leave room for you to screw up in the rebuttal.
(8) heaven is not on earth, although it would be very nice. You said something like this:

Heaven is assumed to be a place free of the influence of evil but if all of those in Heaven (other than God) will be contingent and the emergence of evil is logically necessary amongst contingencies with free will and he cannot make us non-contingent how can he eradicate evil without violating free will?

-First, not all 'evils' are neccessary, as I will explain in my next point. Second, Purgatory exists for a reason despite how many people seem to reject the idea, evidence of it is found in Maccabees which is a book Protestants removed from their versions of the bible because of such evidence. This will also be later explained. "How can he eradicate evil without violating free will?" wtf are you talking about? God already solved that, Jesus died for us for a reason (plus there's still purgatory).

-To explain shortly, when we confess our sins to Jesus, best through a priest, and we really want to put our sins behind, Jesus removes the spiritual stains that the sin has caused us and will erase the record of it happening like when the police scrap small crimes that you did during your juvenile years. However, you still suffer the earthly consequences, it's just the ultimate spiritual consequence that has been erased. Whatever happened still happened but you are fully forgiven by Jesus so that, he paid your debt for you. If you still don't understand just read the entire rebuttal, so I don't have to respond to half-baked complaints.

(2) Without specific 'evils' the earthly world would be in chaos ironically. You said something like this:

The problem of evil asks us why a good god allows bad things to occur. Free will is the answer most often given.

-I'll quote it later but the next two paragraphs after that violate my points 5 and 6. Now a good friend of mine John Hick, who follows what Thomas Aquinas says, came up with a very good arguement to this. I will not quote his entire arguement but the entire point was that without a world full of natural evils (physical pain and internal suffering) there would be no consequences to such faulty actions. If I decided to stab you and you didn't die, I technically commit murder since my intent was to kill you but since you didn't die I can never learn that. All in all, the earth was specifically created for human development by God's intent so that we would learn from these evils that we commit, intentionally or unintentionally.
A meaningless objection. If god was able to create us morally perfect we would never commit evil with the need to learn from it. If we have to commit evil be existing given my above argument god would never create us.

We don't have to commit evil, it's our choice to do so. Just because we have free will doesn't mean we won't trip up. In Genesis, Adam and Eve were actually sinless until they ate the forbidden fruit. That sin passes on generation to generation like the same way diabetes or seizures are passed down through the family. How those sins are forgiven is through baptism, so that we can start clean when we become Christians.
As for morally perfect beings, God has angels but they don't have free will. And btw, people don't become angels when they go to heaven, they're just people in heaven.



(3) God is God for a reason. He's not an amplified human. You entire arguement in general seems to make God faulty like his humans which he created but you have to consider one thing, God is a divine creature. On that note I would also like to add that a lot of people confuse Jesus as a human but that is not so. Jesus is a divine creature but has two natures, a divine and a human nature. As a rectangle is a square and a square is not a rectangle, we are comparable to God but God is not entirely comparable to us.
This has nothing to do with my argument. I even stress that people argue that god is ontologically different from humans in my argument.

I mentioned this because most (pretty much all) of your arguement didn't support what you just said. If God made fault he wouldn't be God, he'd just be an amplified human spirit. Do you comprehend?




(4) I kind of already explain this point with (2) but like I didn't mention yet there are other spiritual entities out there. So I'll explain that first.

(1) Ha, and you thought this should have been the first since this was #1. Whatever, I like to mix things up. Again I really don't have any specific reference to your arguement about this point but in general you seemed to think demons didn't exists. WRONG.
Throughout the whole bible in general demons were given reference to.
And as we all know that proves that they exist. Not.

Again you can choose to deny history. Seriously, with that kind of rebuttal that really tells me you're gonna argue against a book you've never read, wtf.




Some to bluntly describe Jesus (he was compared to Bezulbub by some skeptics at the time) and some that were shortly exiled by Jesus. Why God lets them run around, I can only guess from my point of knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, demons can't enter heaven so for everyone up there they're fine. Demons got their place too, on earth, but like that crabby roomate or annoying neighbor of yours, all you can really do is ignore them. If however they decide to invade your space, it's because they want to pick on you specifically for a reason or you just let them trample all over you. If you are demon possessed or bothered by a demon, pray to God to help you get rid of it and just continue to fight back until God tazzers them and imprisons and/or exinguishes it. That's what I've got to say.

(4) Yay back to 4. You want an explaination, read 1.

(11) Word equations are sketchy. If they were all true then, your cat = my penis, but that is not so. In general, I can't even begin to rebuttal what you trying to say from your word equation because there is no real point to rebuttal against. It's just stupid, especially how you added creation to the equation.

1. Prior to creation "reality = God".
2. Post creation "reality = God + creation".

If God is the greatest possible being then we have ...

1. Prior to creation "reality = greatest possible being".
2. Post creation "reality = greatest possible being + creation".

Look, I'm just gonna rebuttal with arithmatic. Look, 1+2=3 right? But if you want to add 4 to the equation you can't do this: 1+2+4=3 or 1+2=3+4. You have to add 4 to both sides so it makes sense: 1+2+4=3+4.
Go to pre-k and learn how to count again.
I am a math major. Your rebuttal is stupid because my argument follows logically and 1+2=3+4 does not. You seem to be saying that one can not make use of logical axioms which demonstrates that you have never read a book on logic whatsoever. Do you know what an axiom is? You should thank your god I did not use formal logic on you.

I DID NOT SAY 1+2=3+4. You're just reading too damn fast. Even worse, you're putting words in my mouth. That really dirty play on you. Boo to you.
Not using formal logic? Isn't that something your sopposed to bring to a debate? Why did you start being illogical on me? Did you think I wouldn't catch it?



(6) It kind of explains itself but I'll just quote you again anyways.

One objection I can see being put forward to the above is that God is a necessary being whereas we are contingent. God and creation are in different categories ontologically speaking. It may be possible that a necessary being can possess free will yet never do evil whereas contingent beings are incapable of possessing free will and that evil will never emerge. Ergo, the emergence of evil is logically necessary (and inevitable) amongst contingencies who possess free will.

No more really needs to be added about this point.

Ya I know, your whole arguement totally debunks that. Did I not say that God is generally the accepted label given to the creator of creation? What do you want to call the creator of creation, James Brown? Comprehend yourself first before comprehending others, it helps.
Lols, James Brown.




(7) To add to 6, if God so to speak wasn't the creator then who was? Us? Self creation is not possible, Your Wii or whatever game system you have was created by something and did not construct itself at the local Walmart. As for God, the best explaination out there is that he is uncreated. For if he was created he wouldn't be God, the entity that created created Him would be God and that one would be uncreated. But that wouldn't make sense because otherwise we would reach the problem of infinite regress if you didn't accept that God was uncreated.

(9) Yes I skipped from 7 to 9 and passed 8, deal with it. As I talked about in 8, heaven is an entirely different place from earth. How we get there, we have to be pure in spirit. The problem, 99% of us aren't like that when we die. Only Jesus and specific saints go straight to heaven. And because our God is a merciful God, we can cleanse our souls in purgatory. That is, if God knows that we have the potential to go to heaven. If not we go to hell and stay there for an eternity. All this is determined in how we lived our lives, so if you really care what happens to you when you die I'll recommend that you convert to Christianity asap.

(10) Again the statement I made kinda explains itself and again I will quote you:

God (as we are discussing him) attains to the highest levels of perfection with respect to his power, knowledge and morality. In the context of this argument I use the terms "perfect" and "greatest possible" interchangeably (synonymously) so God possesses the greatest possible power, the greatest possible knowledge and the greatest possible morality. Consequently, God is the greatest possible being by definition. He also has free will.

Some people say God is perfect, some say He's "greatest possible being", they both mean the same thing if you really think about what you said. However, I got the inference that you think definitions of God can be used interchangeably. Definitions in general are used interchangeable, like the definition of light (a wave and a particle) since it has properties of both, but I just want to point out that two subjective definitions for anything may not be interchangeable and one of the definitions may be wrong. I addressed this because your logic within the whole arguement in general tends to contain some faulty truths. But I have no time to point out specifics.
What are these faulty truths?

Oh for the love of God, what do you think I've been rebuttaling against? I'll say it a 3rd time, Comprehend my friend.





(5) 10/2 = 5, so let's go ahead and talk about it. Go find 11 yourself.

But free will is a weak defense if you are talking about the Christian god. If god has free will and is perfect, why can humans not also be perfect and have free will?

There is a slight difference in perfection and free will that isn't very slight at all. Perfection, as a definition it generally means faultless. Free will means that we can do whatever the hell we want despite what people say, but you will still suffer consequences. We can still be faulty with free will but perfection alongside with free will means God can't be faulty. While you are reading this, I would like to say your logic is as straight as a rainbow, no lie.

(12) Your an athiest, there is no one who can say your right or wrong since there is no God from your standpoint so go play chicken on a busy freeway. You won't die if you convince yourself that death is relative right? Tell me when you come back from doing what I asked ya to do.

If you need me I'll be back in reality. Oh damn I have the urge to say this again:


You provided no objections to my argument. I shall take this as a concession.

Fine then, if you want to say that then I can say that you are done my friend and you in fact are the one who conceded. We'll let the audience decide. Besides, if I was to explain everything I wanted to say it would have taken way to damn long, you would have ignored it anyways. I bet you didn't play play chicken on the highway yet.
Anyways SCIENCE IS NOT THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!!! It answers how and what questions but it doesn't answer why questions. If you ask a scientist why water evaporates, a smart scientists will shurg and smile at you. Try to read some philosophy, metaphysics would really help you think.
Oh ya, you have no sense of humour whatsoever.
4559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 8/18/08 , edited 8/18/08

YouAreDumb wrote:

I really am stunned. Your only objection to my logic was to say that because you could type out an incorrect equation my use of logical syntax is invalid. We're done here.


Say whatever you want to say. I don't think you'll be convincing anybody at all.
Why, for all I care I can say this is a duck and convince people that it's true.
First  Prev  119  120  121  122  123  124  125  126  127  128  129  130  131  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.