You going to just ignore my argument retard? Or will you spend the time to try and explain yourself?
Wow I get to be called retard on your 9000 post...
Whats your argument... retard.
derdev789 wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Neither of these things when attributed to a god, makes any sense at all.
I don’t understand your meaning. Are you saying that a deity shouldn’t be Perfect or Omnipotent? If they are neither of those things then what possibly separates them from humanity?
If a deity is not perfect, they cannot set any sort of realistic standard for others to try and live up to. It’s an extreme version of 'practice what you preach'. If a deity is not omnipotent, then they cannot do anything to effect the real world.
Realistically a deity doesn’t make any sense WITHOUT perfection and omnipotence. Unless of course you have some clever explanation.
^ ^
Thank you for making me quote it for the third time.
Well I tend to move the polite people to the front of my todo list..
You can not say this person or being is perfect.. at leave it at that.
Perfect at what? Perfect at not being perfect? It leaves a bunch of things unanswered. People need to be more precise on the definition they attribute to their god.
Omnipotents doesnt make sense, because you can not do everything, which technically unlimited power should give you the ablity to do everything.
But how is that specifically impossible for a deity. What your saying is that it can’t be done by ANYONE, so why would you specifically say it can’t be done by a deity?
But if something that WAS omnipotent existed, and could do the logically impossible, it COULD do both could it not lift and not lift the rock?
I am NOT saying there is a god, but if there is and it’s omnipotent, then I would have to say nothing of our standards of impossible could apply.
For instance, if one of these beings made sure you know with absolute certainity it was omnipotent and existed, would you claim it was impossible to exist then?
I can almost hear the Creator of the universe chuckling right now. Gplex, I know someone that can answer your question about a being that can create a rock so heavy he can’t lift it. If he thinks you are honestly serious and not just trying to be a troll (is that the correct word?). He does not suffer fools lightly. Let me know if you want his e-mail address.
Here I thought you told me I wouldnt have to suffer through one of your deluded argument again.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:
If the parameters of the universe are changed, how can one say otherwise?
Again, please dont argue from igonrance its annoying.
So are you saying in the context of this universe, a omnipotent being can not be omnipotent?
I don’t get what you mean by argue by ignorance.
In the confined context of our understanding of our universe a being cannot be omnipotent, yes, though our understanding of the universe is not infinite.
Count Bleck wrote:
I know what you are getting at Gplex, I do agree.
Omnipotence= logically impossible.
But if something that WAS omnipotent existed, and could do the logically impossible, it COULD do both could it not lift and not lift the rock?
I am NOT saying there is a god, but if there is and it’s omnipotent, then I would have to say nothing of our standards of impossible could apply.
For instance, if one of these beings made sure you know with absolute certainity it was omnipotent and existed, would you claim it was impossible to exist then?
Im sorry, but how does contradicting yourself help?
How would it? I would ask it to create a rock so heavy that it can not lift it, I would be very intrested in what it does then.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Count Bleck wrote:
I know what you are getting at Gplex, I do agree.
Omnipotence= logically impossible.
But if something that WAS omnipotent existed, and could do the logically impossible, it COULD do both could it not lift and not lift the rock?
I am NOT saying there is a god, but if there is and it’s omnipotent, then I would have to say nothing of our standards of impossible could apply.
For instance, if one of these beings made sure you know with absolute certainity it was omnipotent and existed, would you claim it was impossible to exist then?
Im sorry, but how does contradicting yourself help?
How would it? I would ask it to create a rock so heavy that it can not lift it, I would be very intrested in what it does then.
That is my point dude, it is logically impossible for us to comprehend. I would say it is impossible. But if something logically impossible existed, then doing the logically impossible is not something out of the question. Correct?
If you ARE the logically impossible then you are not bound by logic. It’s weird using logic to say we can’t bind it by logic, but you are using logic to say that it is logically impossible. But whatever, it’s just confusing.
Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:
If the parameters of the universe are changed, how can one say otherwise?
Again, please dont argue from igonrance its annoying.
So are you saying in the context of this universe, a omnipotent being can not be omnipotent?
I don’t get what you mean by argue by ignorance.
In the confined context of our understanding of our universe a being cannot be omnipotent, yes, though our understanding of the universe is not infinite.
To argue that we can not know, there for we can not make a conclusion.
Sorry you seem to be willing to not take the finally step to acknowledge that in this universe, you are unable to do everything.
Kagrenac wrote:
Gplez, your so biased. lol
So? How does this prove that there is a omnipotent being?
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Tyreaus Dreacon wrote:
If the parameters of the universe are changed, how can one say otherwise?
Again, please dont argue from igonrance its annoying.
So are you saying in the context of this universe, a omnipotent being can not be omnipotent?
I don’t get what you mean by argue by ignorance.
In the confined context of our understanding of our universe a being cannot be omnipotent, yes, though our understanding of the universe is not infinite.
To argue that we can not know, there for we can not make a conclusion.
Sorry you seem to be willing to not take the finally step to acknowledge that in this universe, you are unable to do everything.
Kagrenac wrote:
Gplez, your so biased. lol
So? How does this prove that there is a omnipotent being?
And you seem unwilling to accept that in this universe you can’t know everything. Both of you are screwed.
__________________
THE KING HAS RETURNED!
Last edited 12 Apr 2009 03:19 am by The King of MVC
Count Bleck wrote:
That is my point dude, it is logically impossible for us to comprehend. I would say it is impossible. But if something logically impossible existed, then doing the logically impossible is not something out of the question. Correct?
If you ARE the logically impossible then you are not bound by logic. It’s weird using logic to say we can’t bind it by logic, but you are using logic to say that it is logically impossible. But whatever, it’s just confusing.
Translation. If god exist, then he must exist, so god must exist. - Im not assuming that this is your possition, but these argument fail.
No, I can use logic to show how illogical 2+2=5 is.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Here is my final point before sleep. It’s kinda weird but here goes.
An Omnipotent is illogical. Therefor, using logic to say it does not exist is not a logically thing to do because to argue against something that argument(Logic) does not apply to is illogical.
You cannot argue for an omnipotent being because using logic to argue an illogical being is just not logical.
Both sides are illogical in other words. Therefor the omnipotent debate can’t be solved. Logically.
I can almost hear the Creator of the universe chuckling right now. Gplex, I know someone that can answer your question about a being that can create a rock so heavy he can’t lift it. If he thinks you are honestly serious and not just trying to be a troll (is that the correct word?). He does not suffer fools lightly. Let me know if you want his e-mail address.
Here I thought you told me I wouldnt have to suffer through one of your deluded argument again.
lol Yeah, I did. But I was in a deep dark place of despair and couldn’t stomach your assinine inability to debate with respect and a reasonable modicum of intelligence. I am better now and am have a wonderful time watching you all debate the omnipotence and perfection of the Creator. I’m sure He enjoys watching the debate out of love and understanding of your need to debate His existence. If you’re not serious and just being a troll, well, he knows your intentions.
Count Bleck wrote:
That is my point dude, it is logically impossible for us to comprehend. I would say it is impossible. But if something logically impossible existed, then doing the logically impossible is not something out of the question. Correct?
If you ARE the logically impossible then you are not bound by logic. It’s weird using logic to say we can’t bind it by logic, but you are using logic to say that it is logically impossible. But whatever, it’s just confusing.
Translation. If god exist, then he must exist, so god must exist. - Im not assuming that this is your possition, but these argument fail.
No, I can use logic to show how illogical 2+2=5 is.
I can use logic to show that in a base 5 counting scale consisting of 0,1,2,3 and 5 that 2+2=5
Gplex wrote:
Sorry you seem to be willing to not take the finally step to acknowledge that in this universe, you are unable to do everything.
Unless the context of this universe were to be rewritten, of course.
Do you not see the flaw of your argument. You know that in this universe omnipotents is impossible, but that means omnipotents is impossible. Because if something was omnipotent, it would be able to be omnipotent anywhere.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
derdev789 wrote:
And you seem unwilling to accept that in this universe you can’t know everything. Both of you are screwed.
Arguements from igonrant doesn’t prove anything.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Count Bleck wrote:
That is my point dude, it is logically impossible for us to comprehend. I would say it is impossible. But if something logically impossible existed, then doing the logically impossible is not something out of the question. Correct?
If you ARE the logically impossible then you are not bound by logic. It’s weird using logic to say we can’t bind it by logic, but you are using logic to say that it is logically impossible. But whatever, it’s just confusing.
Translation. If god exist, then he must exist, so god must exist. - Im not assuming that this is your possition, but these argument fail.
No, I can use logic to show how illogical 2+2=5 is.
Well not exactly what I was meaning to say, but the translation is just logic cannot bind illogic(Omnipotence) so anything that logic says is impossible(2+2=5,omnipotence, zero sides triangle) is possible for illogic.
Count Bleck wrote:
That is my point dude, it is logically impossible for us to comprehend. I would say it is impossible. But if something logically impossible existed, then doing the logically impossible is not something out of the question. Correct?
If you ARE the logically impossible then you are not bound by logic. It’s weird using logic to say we can’t bind it by logic, but you are using logic to say that it is logically impossible. But whatever, it’s just confusing.
Translation. If god exist, then he must exist, so god must exist. - Im not assuming that this is your possition, but these argument fail.
No, I can use logic to show how illogical 2+2=5 is.
I can use logic to show that in a base 5 counting scale consisting of 0,1,2,3 and 5 that 2+2=5
Do I really have to state base 10 maths? Do I really have to state that meaning of every word that I wrote? Didnt think so.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
I can almost hear the Creator of the universe chuckling right now. Gplex, I know someone that can answer your question about a being that can create a rock so heavy he can’t lift it. If he thinks you are honestly serious and not just trying to be a troll (is that the correct word?). He does not suffer fools lightly. Let me know if you want his e-mail address.
Here I thought you told me I wouldnt have to suffer through one of your deluded argument again.
lol Yeah, I did. But I was in a deep dark place of despair and couldn’t stomach your assinine inability to debate with respect and a reasonable modicum of intelligence. I am better now and am have a wonderful time watching you all debate the omnipotence and perfection of the Creator. I’m sure He enjoys watching the debate out of love and understanding of your need to debate His existence. If you’re not serious and just being a troll, well, he knows your intentions.
I never said anything about a creator, or the existence of a god.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
