PDA

View Full Version : Can God possibly be maximally great?


Pages : [1] 2

Microcosm
August 3rd, 2016, 10:47 PM
I was thinking about this the other night and considered some interesting scenarios in which it would seem impossible that a maximally great being can exist.

A maximally great being, that is to say, a being that is the greatest possible being that humans can conceive, must be able to do every possible thing that we can conceive it to do.

For instance, I've read that it is paradoxical that God ought to be able to duplicate himself. This means he cannot do everything and therefore cannot be maximally great. However, I suppose it makes sense to say that God could duplicate himself, but chooses not to.

Let's look at a more mathematical, practical thing that I believe is impossible for even the maximally greatest being to achieve. People will say that God can see everything. However, I'd like to take that a step further. Can God possibly see everything from every possible angle? By every angle, you can imagine a 360 degree camera able to see in all directions at once. Now, in order to see from every angle God would have to have multiple cameras in every possible position able to see in every possible direction across the whole Universe. The cameras were an analogy, by the way. It is admitted that God would see in a different way than we can. So, every angle can be represented by a sphere of vision such as that which 360 degree cameras produce. The amount of angles from which God can see, however, is made infinite by only one positional viewpoint(or camera by my analogy) because there is an infinite amount of angles between 1 degree and 2 degrees(0.1 degree, 0.001 degree, 1 x 10^-99 degrees, etc.).

So, this means that God cannot see from every conceivable angle at the same time, which means that he cannot do every conceivable thing.

If you can think of another example, please share. Judean Zealot always has interesting arguments for this so I'll tag him.

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 10:59 PM
No god can't be maximally great! Why is there so many natural disasters? Why can he not confirm his existence? It seems as though he created the earth and left! For the record though, I am a strong atheist.

Uniquemind
August 3rd, 2016, 11:20 PM
I take the view that our understanding and definition of what is infinite, is flawed and so God becomes unfathomable to even have this debate.

Typhlosion
August 4th, 2016, 04:27 AM
I really didn't understand the angle bit. A god cannot see from as infinitely many angles because...?

You mentioned sphere of vision correctly, but then used 2D angles? Why limit such a powerful god to only thee dimensions? And how are you so sure about infinitely many angles, if distances might not be infinitely divided with meaning (planck length?)

What about things humans cannot concieve?

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 04:43 AM
Let us say something that would possibly freak Hawkins and Kaku out.

Is physics perfect?

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 06:10 AM
I really didn't understand the angle bit. A god cannot see from as infinitely many angles because...?
Basically this. You correctly mentioned that between 1 degree and 2 degrees, for instance, there are infinite angles, but you didn't explain why God isn't able to see in all those infinite angles.

Why is there so many natural disasters?
Why is it his fault? I can't never understand this argument, honestly, when something bad happens (a natural disaster, etc...), atheists be like "Why didn't God prevent it?", when something good happens (a medical "miracle") and people say it was God that helped the doctors, atheists be like "Pff, it wasn't God, it was the doctors skill that did it!"

Why can he not confirm his existence?
Why does he need to? He hasn't plainly confirmed his existence yet some people believe him. How do you explain that?

Reise
August 4th, 2016, 06:28 AM
Let us say something that would possibly freak Hawkins and Kaku out.

Is physics perfect?
Not really the kind of debate I would take part to, but I can't resist answering this question.
The point is not whether or not physics is "perfect". The concept of perfection in physics ans science in general is pointless.
If something exists it is explainable, or af worst, observable and thus it is physical.
And, therefore, can be described (but not necesserally explained) by the laws of physics.

I admit the fact that this "description idea" can be applied to the whole Universe can be hard to conceive. But what's really incomprehensible about the Universe, it's that it is comprehensible.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 06:35 AM
Not really the kind of debate I would take part to, but I can't resist answering this question.
The point is not whether or not physics is "perfect". The concept of perfection in physics ans science in general is pointless.
If something exists it is explainable, or af worst, observable and thus it is physical.
And, therefore, can be described (but not necesserally explained) by the laws of physics.

I admit the fact that this "description idea" can be applied to the whole Universe can be hard to conceive. But what's really incomprehensible about the Universe, it's that it is comprehensible.

May I talk to you via PM? There are somethings which I might like to ask you if it is possible. I'll be thankful.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 07:54 AM
I was thinking about this the other night and considered some interesting scenarios in which it would seem impossible that a maximally great being can exist.

A maximally great being, that is to say, a being that is the greatest possible being that humans can conceive, must be able to do every possible thing that we can conceive it to do.

So you mean an onmipotent entity, but I don't see it as necessarily the greatest possible thing humans can conceive, if you mean it by human comprehension of this entity. I see it that we would fall short of such a comprehension.



For instance, I've read that it is paradoxical that God ought to be able to duplicate himself. This means he cannot do everything and therefore cannot be maximally great. However, I suppose it makes sense to say that God could duplicate himself, but chooses not to.

The omnipotence can be relative to our world, not this God itself included. This God can be able to do anything relative to our world, meaning it can create and sustain worlds. The omnipotence doesn't need to mean infinite omnipotence in every sense of the world, but taking you're talking about a 'maximally great' God, it does then sound paradoxical yes.



Let's look at a more mathematical, practical thing that I believe is impossible for even the maximally greatest being to achieve. People will say that God can see everything. However, I'd like to take that a step further. Can God possibly see everything from every possible angle? By every angle, you can imagine a 360 degree camera able to see in all directions at once. Now, in order to see from every angle God would have to have multiple cameras in every possible position able to see in every possible direction across the whole Universe. The cameras were an analogy, by the way. It is admitted that God would see in a different way than we can. So, every angle can be represented by a sphere of vision such as that which 360 degree cameras produce. The amount of angles from which God can see, however, is made infinite by only one positional viewpoint(or camera by my analogy) because there is an infinite amount of angles between 1 degree and 2 degrees(0.1 degree, 0.001 degree, 1 x 10^-99 degrees, etc.).

So, this means that God cannot see from every conceivable angle at the same time, which means that he cannot do every conceivable thing.

I wouldn't approach God's omni-vision through a physical dimensional way though. I'd take it in in terms of awareness rather than literal vision of some sort, if you get me. God could be aware of absolutely everything of this world, all 'at the same time', but it necessarily holds then that it is not infinite and absolute as its awareness if focused on certain entities (relevant to the subject of absolute freedom in technetheism).


No god can't be maximally great! Why is there so many natural disasters? Why can he not confirm his existence? It seems as though he created the earth and left! For the record though, I am a strong atheist.

Omnipotence can mean maintaining the world from absolute chaos, which doesn't mean that the God has left at all. What if God is intervening all of the time? Omniscience doesn't entail the divine intervention you speak of. We're not assuming that this God is omnibenevolent, or even cares about us.


Let us say something that would possibly freak Hawkins and Kaku out.

Is physics perfect?

What do you mean by this? The theories of physics, or the knowledge of physics?

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:01 AM
Paraxiom, I simply wanted to say physics in General. You know in a wider range universe. Is it going perfect for itself?

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 08:03 AM
Paraxiom, I simply wanted to say physics in General. You know in a wider range universe. Is it going perfect for itself?

Perfect relative to what though? I'm wondering what you mean by this perfection, if it is of predictability / order / or of something else.

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 08:07 AM
Living For Love It his his fault because he as a loving god should not want us humans to die painful deaths right? What a loving god if you don't prevent people from drowning in a flood. Why does he need to? Well if he does atheists wouldn't be needed so yeah he can stay up in the clouds.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:07 AM
Perfect relative to what though? I'm wondering what you mean by this perfection, if it is of predictability / order / or of something else.

No relatvity. Is the universe absolutely fine? I mean do you see universe itself without anything wrong with it? Not talking about things which are painful or suffering for us. Just the way universe itself is going. Is it perfect?

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 08:16 AM
No relatvity. Is the universe absolutely fine? I mean do you see universe itself without anything wrong with it? Not talking about things which are painful or suffering for us. Just the way universe itself is going. Is it perfect?

No; the suffering/etc is necessary for life. I'm not seeing a flaw with the world, unless I compare it to an imagined ideal situation where I easily subtract suffering and presume that all/most of the 'good' aspects of the world keep going on as before.

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 08:18 AM
Living For Love It his his fault because he as a loving god should not want us humans to die painful deaths right? What a loving god if you don't prevent people from drowning in a flood. Why does he need to? Well if he does atheists wouldn't be needed so yeah he can stay up in the clouds.
But the humans don't believe in him. How do you expect to be saved by an entity you don't believe in?

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:19 AM
No; the suffering/etc is necessary for life. I'm not seeing a flaw with the world, unless I compare it to an imagined ideal situation where I easily subtract suffering and presume that all/most of the 'good' aspects of the world keep going on as before.

So universe is going Perfect right?

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 08:20 AM
But the humans don't believe in him. How do you expect to be saved by an entity you don't believe in?

But the humans who do believe in him are also left to suffer.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:23 AM
But the humans who do believe in him are also left to suffer.

Left to suffer in what way?

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 08:24 AM
So universe is going Perfect right?

Well, there's an absence of imperfection, as I'm not seeing the world through this perception of perfection.

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 08:28 AM
But the humans who do believe in him are also left to suffer.
Yes, but they are comforted by the love of the God they believe in. If you think being Christian is a bed of roses, you're wrong.

"In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."
John 16:33 (NIV)

"Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted."
Matthew 5:4 (NIV)

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:29 AM
Well, there's an absence of imperfection, as I'm not seeing the world through this perception of perfection.

You know I am actually saying wouldn't it be better if water was not cool, fire was not hot, solid was not solid, liquid was not liquid and so on?

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 08:33 AM
You know I am actually saying wouldn't it be better if water was not cool, fire was not hot, solid was not solid, liquid was not liquid and so on?

In what way would it be better? :confused:

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 08:45 AM
Yes, but they are comforted by the love of the God they believe in. If you think being Christian is a bed of roses, you're wrong.

So suffer so you may go to a heaven that may be there but probably isn't? Also I don't see the bible as a good source of proof for Christianity because if the earth was created by a god then how does this book know?

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 08:50 AM
In what way would it be better? :confused:

I am asking you friend. I mean is universe right now good enough for you? With the traits which it has right now. Like liquids are liquids and so on.

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 08:53 AM
So suffer so you may go to a heaven that may be there but probably isn't? Also I don't see the bible as a good source of proof for Christianity because if the earth was created by a god then how does this book know?
That would take us to a whole new discussion in which I don't want to enter because I don't want to go off-topic. Either way, we do believe that Heaven exist and the people who wrote the Bible were inspired by God.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 08:57 AM
I am asking you friend. I mean is universe right now good enough for you? With the traits which it has right now. Like liquids are liquids and so on.

It's as good as anything I know. I'm open to 'alternate' world and the like, but I believe there is enough in 'this' one to live with.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 09:03 AM
Why is it his fault? I can't never understand this argument, honestly, when something bad happens (a natural disaster, etc...), atheists be like "Why didn't God prevent it?
Because he created this world himself? If he was all powerful he could protect everyone!

when something good happens (a medical "miracle") and people say it was God that helped the doctors, atheists be like "Pff, it wasn't God, it was the doctors skill that did it!
Probably because the doctor can tell you how he did it and repeat it?

Why does he need to? He hasn't plainly confirmed his existence yet some people believe him. How do you explain that?
Because religion was used as a way to explain stuff and used by world governments to control people for centuries? No religions god have proved themselves and millions still follows so many different ones.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 09:04 AM
It's as good as anything I know. I'm open to 'alternate' world and the like, but I believe there is enough in 'this' one to live with.

Well here comes the perfection of God. If we see universe as direct evidence of God itself though. The way Islamic philosophy emphasizes.

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 09:09 AM
Because he created this world himself? If he was all powerful he could protect everyone!
Not the ones who deny his existence. I mean, he could, but what's the point?

Probably because the doctor can tell you how he did it and repeat it?
Not always, though.

Because religion was used as a way to explain stuff and used by world governments to control people for centuries?
Which governments? Do you have any evidence on this? Also, how does religion control people?

No religions god have proved themselves and millions still follows so many different ones.
People follow them because they want to and because they feel it's right, not because one or two governments force them.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 09:36 AM
Well here comes the perfection of God. If we see universe as direct evidence of God itself though. The way Islamic philosophy emphasizes.

Alright; I don't bring gods into it personally though.

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 09:55 AM
Not the ones who deny his existence. I mean, he could, but what's the point?


Shouldn't he love everyone though? Isn't it discrimination? God hates atheists, god is mean.

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 10:03 AM
Because he created this world himself? If he was all powerful he could protect everyone!
Us having the freedom and capability to be unsafe is preferable to being servile and without free will. It is a much greater evil to be unfree.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 10:07 AM
Ghaem Porpoise101

Do you see God as infinite and absolutely free, along with desiring for humans to exist and such?

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 10:16 AM
Ghaem Porpoise101

Do you see God as infinite and absolutely free, along with desiring for humans to exist and such?

That would require enough knowledge on what God really is. Fortunately or unfortunately we lack such knowledge. The thing which is clear is God is Perfect. Let us say God acts in a limit, but is not limited itself. Why? Because it is necessary for perfection of humans. The thing which is clear is that God wants perfection of humans. Does it need it? I don't know, but I know I need perfection and it is the only thing which can offer it to me.

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 10:17 AM
Do you see God as infinite and absolutely free, along with desiring for humans to exist and such?
Yes to the first part. But I don't see God to be wholly in favor of the existence of mankind. Only that God has certain aspects which desire 'creation' and others with 'destruction'. So there is no 'net desire' if that makes sense.

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 10:18 AM
That would require enough knowledge on what God really is. Fortunately or unfortunately we lack such knowledge. The thing which is clear is God is Perfect. Let us say God acts in a limit, but is not limited itself. Why? Because it is necessary for perfection of humans. The thing which is clear is that God wants perfection of humans. Does it need it? I don't know, but I know I need perfection and it is the only thing which can offer it to me.

If god is perfect why doesn't he do something about all the problems in the world? Nothing is perfect.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 10:19 AM
That would require enough knowledge on what God really is. Fortunately or unfortunately we lack such knowledge. The thing which is clear is God is Perfect. Let us say God acts in a limit, but is not limited itself. Why? Because it is necessary for perfection of humans. The thing which is clear is that God wants perfection of humans. Does it need it? I don't know, but I know I need perfection and it is the only thing which can offer it to me.

Yes to the first part. But I don't see God to be wholly in favor of the existence of mankind. Only that God has certain aspects which desire 'creation' and others with 'destruction'. So there is no 'net desire' if that makes sense.


My explanation of technetheism is the response I give to this.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 10:20 AM
If god is perfect why doesn't he do something about all the problems in the world? Nothing is perfect.

I am sure it is doing. Through Calculation and Manipulation.

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 10:24 AM
If god is perfect why doesn't he do something about all the problems in the world? Nothing is perfect.
Because solving everything for humans would be much worse than letting in the occasional disaster.

One Example:
There is a disaster that kills thousands. But in response, people around the world go and support each other. The communities come together and show love. Charity increases. Even better, people learn from their mistakes in the past. I see the good that comes out of such situations as better than the bad.

Ghaem
August 4th, 2016, 10:26 AM
Because solving everything for humans would be much worse than letting in the occasional disaster.

One Example:
There is a disaster that kills thousands. But in response, people around the world go and support each other. The communities come together and show love. Charity increases. Even better, people learn from their mistakes in the past. I see the good that comes out of such situations as better than the bad.

You want it, try for it and I got your back through manipulation and calculation. This is the thing which I belive God does.

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 10:30 AM
If god is perfect why doesn't he do something about all the problems in the world? Nothing is perfect.

God is like a good parent. What happens when a parent gives the child whatever they want? The child becomes spoiled, untrained, and an otherwise jerk. However, if a parent let the child work out their own problems through their own skills, the child will learn and likely grow up to be respectful and wise. Sometimes the parent needs to interfere, but it is best for the child to figure problems out themselves.

Paraxiom, I simply wanted to say physics in General. You know in a wider range universe. Is it going perfect for itself?

I am going to offer another example off this. Whether or not God exists, physics cannot explain how the universe came to be. Physics is about matter and energy, but we cannot explain how that energy existed in the first place. Thus, Ghaem does have a point regarding using physics to limit God when physics cannot explain the other ways we came to be either.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 10:36 AM
I am going to offer another example off this. Whether or not God exists, physics cannot explain how the universe came to be. Physics is about matter and energy, but we cannot explain how that energy existed in the first place. Thus, Ghaem does have a point regarding using physics to limit God when physics cannot explain the other ways we came to be either.

If he meant that physics cannot explain everything, then I sure agree with that.

Living For Love
August 4th, 2016, 10:46 AM
Shouldn't he love everyone though? Isn't it discrimination? God hates atheists, god is mean.
By that logic: Atheists hate God, atheists are mean.

God doesn't hate atheists, but he hates sin. He loves everyone, and wants everyone to be saved. It's the fact that some people can't stand him that prevents him from saving them.

mattsmith48
August 4th, 2016, 11:43 AM
By that logic: Atheists hate God, atheists are mean.

God doesn't hate atheists, but he hates sin. He loves everyone, and wants everyone to be saved. It's the fact that some people can't stand him that prevents him from saving them.

Atheist dont hate any Gods, Atheist hate people who worship and bring up their God/Gods where any God doesnt belong. If you want to believe in a God fine but worship him where its appropriate, either in place a worship like a mosque, a temple, a church... or at home, but away from childrens, not only Catholics but any religions should be keep away from childrens.

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 12:20 PM
Atheist dont hate any Gods, Atheist hate people who worship and bring up their God/Gods where any God doesnt belong. If you want to believe in a God fine but worship him where its appropriate, either in place a worship like a mosque, a temple, a church... or at home, but away from childrens, not only Catholics but any religions should be keep away from childrens.


So, Atheists hate religious people, thus Atheists are mean.

You are suggesting limiting free speech so you don't hear what you don't want to hear. I wish you could understand what comes out of your mouth sometimes. If you really hate religion so much you are going to despise me.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 12:27 PM
Not the ones who deny his existence. I mean, he could, but what's the point?
Sooooo god is a narcissist? What's the point? Because all life is sacred? Because he is all loving? Killing someone because they deny something isn't nice. Also what about all the religious guys? All the Christians, Muslims and the Hindus that get killed by their god?



Which governments? Do you have any evidence on this? Also, how does religion control people?
All the English monarchs that persuaded people that god wants them to rule? Scaring people with hell so they behave?
9QSU_KVgcVo

People follow them because they want to and because they feel it's right, not because one or two governments force them.
Yeah I know people follow religions because they want to but the leaders take advantage of this to take money and to molest kids.

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 12:40 PM
Sooooo god is a narcissist? What's the point? Because all life is sacred? Because he is all loving? Killing someone because they deny something isn't nice. Also what about all the religious guys? All the Christians, Muslims and the Hindus that get killed by their god?


Everyone deserves death, no body is perfect. Imagine that all of humankind is hanging off a cliff. We are all going to die. But then God stretches out his hand to us, and we have a choice. We can either believe that we don't need God's help, as our pride and belief in the superiority of mankind blinds us from our certain doom. Those who deny God's help continue to struggle fruitlessly, eventually falling into the pit below. Or we can realize that we are doomed, and that God is our only hope. We take his hand, and he pulls us to solid ground. God doesn't condemn us to death, we condemn ourselves.

There is a huge difference between Earthly death and Spiritual death, and you seem to be confusing the two.

mattsmith48
August 4th, 2016, 12:43 PM
So, Atheists hate religious people, thus Atheists are mean.

You are suggesting limiting free speech so you don't hear what you don't want to hear. I wish you could understand what comes out of your mouth sometimes. If you really hate religion so much you are going to despise me.

Atheist dont hate all religious people just the ones who insist on bringing up their religion where it doesnt belong.

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 12:43 PM
Atheist dont hate all religious people just the ones who insist on bringing up their religion where it doesnt belong.

You are suggesting limiting free speech so you don't hear what you don't want to hear. I wish you could understand what comes out of your mouth sometimes.

mattsmith48
August 4th, 2016, 12:49 PM
You are suggesting limiting free speech so you don't hear what you don't want to hear. I wish you could understand what comes out of your mouth sometimes.

Im just saying they are places where religion should be present. In what way is it suggesting to limit free speech?

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 12:51 PM
Everyone deserves death, no body is perfect. Imagine that all of humankind is hanging off a cliff. We are all going to die. But then God stretches out his hand to us, and we have a choice. We can either believe that we don't need God's help, as our pride and belief in the superiority of mankind blinds us from our certain doom. Those who deny God's help continue to struggle fruitlessly, eventually falling into the pit below. Or we can realize that we are doomed, and that God is our only hope. We take his hand, and he pulls us to solid ground. God doesn't condemn us to death, we condemn ourselves.

There is a huge difference between Earthly death and Spiritual death, and you seem to be confusing the two.
How do you know there is a god that would help you if you worship him? Why can't he save everyone?

Going back to the topic of the thread, if he was all powerful he could save everyone and prove he is real. He would also eliminate all suffering in the world. Unless we are to him what ants are to a nasty child with a magnifying glass glass?

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 01:10 PM
Im just saying they are places where religion should be present. In what way is it suggesting to limit free speech?

You are basically saying that you hate those who bring religion into public. That you think that religion shouldn't be in public. You are basically saying that religion should be reduced only to private households, while Atheism should be public, how is that not restricting free speech?


Going back to the topic of the thread, if he was all powerful he could save everyone and prove he is real. He would also eliminate all suffering in the world. Unless we are to him what ants are to a nasty child with a magnifying glass glass?

I agree that we need to get to the topic at hand. I made an earlier post as to why God doesn't just come down and fix all our problems.

Arkansasguy
August 4th, 2016, 02:19 PM
I was thinking about this the other night and considered some interesting scenarios in which it would seem impossible that a maximally great being can exist.

A maximally great being, that is to say, a being that is the greatest possible being that humans can conceive, must be able to do every possible thing that we can conceive it to do.

For instance, I've read that it is paradoxical that God ought to be able to duplicate himself. This means he cannot do everything and therefore cannot be maximally great. However, I suppose it makes sense to say that God could duplicate himself, but chooses not to.

Let's look at a more mathematical, practical thing that I believe is impossible for even the maximally greatest being to achieve. People will say that God can see everything. However, I'd like to take that a step further. Can God possibly see everything from every possible angle? By every angle, you can imagine a 360 degree camera able to see in all directions at once. Now, in order to see from every angle God would have to have multiple cameras in every possible position able to see in every possible direction across the whole Universe. The cameras were an analogy, by the way. It is admitted that God would see in a different way than we can. So, every angle can be represented by a sphere of vision such as that which 360 degree cameras produce. The amount of angles from which God can see, however, is made infinite by only one positional viewpoint(or camera by my analogy) because there is an infinite amount of angles between 1 degree and 2 degrees(0.1 degree, 0.001 degree, 1 x 10^-99 degrees, etc.).

So, this means that God cannot see from every conceivable angle at the same time, which means that he cannot do every conceivable thing.

If you can think of another example, please share. Judean Zealot always has interesting arguments for this so I'll tag him.

God knows every possible thing about the world. Infinite knowledge is non-paradoxical for God.

We can't conceive of God duplicating himself anymore than we can conceive of two plus two equaling five. It's rationally incoherent, people who spout such scenarios consequently are speaking without thought to correspond.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 02:39 PM
God knows every possible thing about the world. Infinite knowledge is non-paradoxical for God.

We can't conceive of God duplicating himself anymore than we can conceive of two plus two equaling five. It's rationally incoherent, people who spout such scenarios consequently are speaking without thought to correspond.
Soooo why can't an all powerful god stop natural disasters? Why can't he kick Satan's ass?

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 02:45 PM
Soooo why can't an all powerful god stop natural disasters? Why can't he kick Satan's ass?

I've answered that, I am getting tired of constantly reminding you of that.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 02:46 PM
I've answered that, I am getting tired of constantly reminding you of that.
Copy and paste it then because if you did I haven't read it buddy:)

Arkansasguy
August 4th, 2016, 03:59 PM
Soooo why can't an all powerful god stop natural disasters? Why can't he kick Satan's ass?

Satan is a purely spiritual creature. It's logically impossible for him to be subject to such a physical assault.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 04:59 PM
Satan is a purely spiritual creature. It's logically impossible for him to be subject to such a physical assault.
I am not suggesting god tackle him to the ground but surely an all powerful man would have no problem killing him? Or turning him good again?

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 05:05 PM
Sooooo god is a narcissist? What's the point? Because all life is sacred? Because he is all loving? Killing someone because they deny something isn't nice. Also what about all the religious guys? All the Christians, Muslims and the Hindus that get killed by their god?

All the English monarchs that persuaded people that god wants them to rule? Scaring people with hell so they behave?

Yeah I know people follow religions because they want to but the leaders take advantage of this to take money and to molest kids.

In fairness for the OP, we're speculating/discussing on what it would mean for there to be a 'maximally powerful' and/or knowing entity that is responsible for the world.

This does not need to entail drawing a human-quality God with internal conflict issues, which is making the former god/etc look like it's being put in a straw man. (Despite my conjuring of technetheism, which is still relevant.)


Everyone deserves death, no body is perfect.

I prefer to see it as everyone necessarily dies, rather than that everyone deserves dying.



There is a huge difference between Earthly death and Spiritual death, and you seem to be confusing the two.

By spiritual death do you mean failing to recognise one's purpose and worth in life and in oneself, because of God?

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 05:12 PM
Copy and paste it then because if you did I haven't read it buddy:)
A little OT, but isn't this a little unreasonable? Just do CTRL+F and search 'PlasmaHam'. You can then go to his responses.

Anyways, I believe that question has been addressed, if not by him, then I at the very least.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 05:17 PM
A little OT, but isn't this a little unreasonable? Just do CTRL+F and search 'PlasmaHam'. You can then go to his responses.

Anyways, I believe that question has been addressed, if not by him, then I at the very least.
I don't think he did is why I asked buddy! It is possible I missed it though and yeah I know how to find something cheers;)

Arkansasguy
August 4th, 2016, 06:56 PM
I am not suggesting god tackle him to the ground but surely an all powerful man would have no problem killing him? Or turning him good again?

By nature, spiritual creatures have free will.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 06:57 PM
By nature, spiritual creatures have free will.
Sooo the guy that made nature cannot overcome it? That surely makes him not all powerful?

Arkansasguy
August 4th, 2016, 07:40 PM
Sooo the guy that made nature cannot overcome it? That surely makes him not all powerful?

To directly force a rational creature to choose the good is a contradiction of terms. God being able to do anything doesn't mean that any chain of words you might come up with has meaning.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 07:43 PM
To directly force a rational creature to choose the good is a contradiction of terms. God being able to do anything doesn't mean that any chain of words you might come up with has meaning.
I didn't say convert Satan I said kill Satan! Also why all the natural disasters? Why does he not prove his existence?

Arkansasguy
August 4th, 2016, 08:58 PM
I didn't say convert Satan I said kill Satan! Also why all the natural disasters? Why does he not prove his existence?

God's existence is knowable through natural reason. Regarding those who refuse to accept him, see free will.

What makes you think the other things you mentioned are beyond God's power?

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 09:38 PM
God's existence is knowable through natural reason. Regarding those who refuse to accept him, see free will.

What makes you think the other things you mentioned are beyond God's power?
How does natural selection prove God's existence? An organism's random mutation and the selection pressure it is under is God's doing?

Ohhh so god is all powerful but just lazy! So next time Satan does something or a hurricane kills someone I'll be sure to blame God because he was too lazy to intervene?

PlasmaHam
August 4th, 2016, 09:45 PM
How does natural selection prove God's existence? An organism's random mutation and the selection pressure it is under is God's doing?

Ohhh so god is all powerful but just lazy! So next time Satan does something or a hurricane kills someone I'll be sure to blame God because he was too lazy to intervene?

I would explain, but it is pretty obvious you don't want an answer. I will just say that everything works out for the good, and that we can't explain God's ways.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 09:46 PM
I would explain, but it is pretty obvious you don't want an answer. I will just say that everything works out for the good, and that we can't explain God's ways.
No I do want an answer xD I don't ask questions for the LOLs xD

Periphery
August 4th, 2016, 11:29 PM
By that logic: Atheists hate God, atheists are mean.

God doesn't hate atheists, but he hates sin. He loves everyone, and wants everyone to be saved. It's the fact that some people can't stand him that prevents him from saving them.

How can we hate something we don't believe in? Don't assume we all hate on religion.

Uniquemind
August 5th, 2016, 12:10 AM
It is not God's job to play the mortal concept of "Superhero".

Also the conversation so far has looked at God and his relationship to mankind in a one-to-one ratio, without considering simultaneous interference of other created beings who also influence mankind's evolution within the domain of free will.

Natural disasters are sad from our point of view, but their also our fault too.

From where societies feel it should be geographically smart to build homes on floodplains...

A lot of our misery is our own fault, not God's.

Living For Love
August 5th, 2016, 04:48 AM
Atheist dont hate any Gods, Atheist hate people who worship and bring up their God/Gods where any God doesnt belong.
Where does any God doesn't belong exactly?

If you want to believe in a God fine but worship him where its appropriate, either in place a worship like a mosque, a temple, a church... or at home, but away from childrens, not only Catholics but any religions should be keep away from childrens.
Why don't children have the right to believe in any God and "have" a religion? What do you think of parents who bring their kids with them to churches/mosques/synagogues/temples, etc...?

Sooooo god is a narcissist? What's the point? Because all life is sacred? Because he is all loving? Killing someone because they deny something isn't nice. Also what about all the religious guys? All the Christians, Muslims and the Hindus that get killed by their god?
But God is not killing them, he's just not saving them because they don't allow him to. I've already answered the last part of your question.

All the English monarchs that persuaded people that god wants them to rule? Scaring people with hell so they behave?
9QSU_KVgcVo
You're talking about a situation that has happened hundreds of years ago, in medieval times, perhaps. What about nowadays?

Yeah I know people follow religions because they want to but the leaders take advantage of this to take money and to molest kids.
That's just a plain wrong generalisation...

How can we hate something we don't believe in? Don't assume we all hate on religion.
Precisely, so your logic "God hates atheists, god is mean." is flawed.

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 07:37 AM
Living For Love But I said that because of the posts of your friend Plasmaham, not yours.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 08:42 AM
How does natural selection prove God's existence? An organism's random mutation and the selection pressure it is under is God's doing?

What on Earth are you going on about?

Ohhh so god is all powerful but just lazy!

What does this even mean?

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 08:51 AM
What on Earth are you going on about?



Science!

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 08:55 AM
You're talking about a situation that has happened hundreds of years ago, in medieval times, perhaps. What about nowadays?

Yeah I was talking about medieval times and that is why religion is so prominent today.

Today you have Scientology and these twats
-QtO4Z2zH2Y


But God is not killing them, he's just not saving them because they don't allow him to. I've already answered the last part of your question.

Why did he design the earth so there would be natural disasters then? And all powerful god needs permission? What about the believers that die?
What on Earth are you going on about?

You said natural selection was God's doing and I think you have just proved you don't actually know how evolutions works xD
What does that even mean

You was saying he could but he doesn't which tbh is kinda evil don't you think? I could save that family from the water drowning them but nahhh I'll sit here and do nothing again.

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 09:02 AM
How does natural selection prove God's existence? An organism's random mutation and the selection pressure it is under is God's doing?
He said natural reason not natural selection. Two very different things :)

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 09:06 AM
He said natural reason not natural selection. Two very different things :)
Probablyyy why I shouldn't be debating at 5 am xD I'd love to know what natural reason is?

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 09:18 AM
Probablyyy why I shouldn't be debating at 5 am xD I'd love to know what natural reason is?
It is using the mind to gain insight about God instead of revelation (stuff like prophecy). So pretty much you use your capability to reason and think to prove God's existence.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 09:20 AM
It is using the mind to gain insight about God instead of revelation (stuff like prophecy). So pretty much you use your capability to reason and think to prove God's existence.
But there is no way to test or proved his existence? The other guy said God could not do that stuff because it is outside of natural reason.

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 09:38 AM
But there is no way to test or proved his existence? The other guy said God could not do that stuff because it is outside of natural reason.
Yeah, God just summoning or doing things to show off power is outside of natural reason. That is more of a revelation since that information is solely from God and is not a product of the human mind.

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 09:55 AM
You are basically saying that you hate those who bring religion into public. That you think that religion shouldn't be in public. You are basically saying that religion should be reduced only to private households, while Atheism should be public, how is that not restricting free speech?

Public places are public should be neutral its either all religion represented equally or none since the 1st one is imposible because there are to many so were left with the 2nd option. The 2nd option doesnt mean ban all religions from public places it means dont acknowledge any God if your not gonna mention all the others or mention whether there is a God or not. It also mean if your gonna have a public holliday for one religious holliday you should do the same for all of them which is impossible because we would work 5 days a year. Im for free speech but you should use some common sense.

Ohhh so god is all powerful but just lazy! So next time Satan does something or a hurricane kills someone I'll be sure to blame God because he was too lazy to intervene?

God is not gonna stop hurricanes because hes lazy hes not gonna stop them because its a punishment for humanity for legallizing same sex marriage and abortion everyone knows that

Where does any God doesn't belong exactly?

Any places run by the goverment or payed for or funded by tax payer money.

Why don't children have the right to believe in any God and "have" a religion? What do you think of parents who bring their kids with them to churches/mosques/synagogues/temples, etc...?

When old enough to choose they will, before they shouldnt be involved in any discution involving God or what happens when you die. It will bias their mind for a specific religion when he would be old enough to choose in what religions he wants to believe or to not believe in any. It doesnt feem fair to brainwash him with stuff that is very likely not real, not only with religion but other things too like Santa, the Tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny. Buddy earlier keeps talking about the restriction of free speech, teaching a kid that one religion is right and all others are wrong is restricting his freedom of religion and his right to choose. For the reasons I just mention parents shouldnt bring their kids to worship places, parents who do it arent terrible parents (with the exception of Catholics), its just one of those things parents shouldnt really do and probably isnt good for him but everyone does anyway.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:13 AM
Yeah, God just summoning or doing things to show off power is outside of natural reason. That is more of a revelation since that information is solely from God and is not a product of the human mind.
Not showing off, saving people's lives and killing Satan. How did God tell humans of this information?

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 10:43 AM
Not showing off, saving people's lives and killing Satan. How did God tell humans of this information?
Arkansasguy answered your first question.

As for your second question I think you are trying to ask "How did God tell humans about himself originally?" This is a tougher question because it differs from religion to religion. In the Bible, I would say it is revelation because God revealed himself to man again to Abraham. It could be argued otherwise though.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:47 AM
@Arkansasguy (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=112972) answered your first question.

As for your second question I think you are trying to ask "How did God tell humans about himself originally?" This is a tougher question because it differs from religion to religion. In the Bible, I would say it is revelation because God revealed himself to man again to Abraham. It could be argued otherwise though.
He never answered my question xD He said it was against nature or something but he is still all powerful? Made zero sense and you just take the word of these people hundreds of years ago when today we have science to provide answers?

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 11:34 AM
You said natural selection was God's doing . . .

No, I did not in fact say anything about that subject at all.

You was saying he could but he doesn't which tbh is kinda evil don't you think?

On what possible premise would you base that assertion?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:35 AM
On what possible premise would you base that assertion?
When you have the ability to save a life and choose not to then you are evil.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 11:36 AM
Public places are public should be neutral its either all religion represented equally or none since the 1st one is imposible because there are to many so were left with the 2nd option. The 2nd option doesnt mean ban all religions from public places it means dont acknowledge any God if your not gonna mention all the others or mention whether there is a God or not. It also mean if your gonna have a public holliday for one religious holliday you should do the same for all of them which is impossible because we would work 5 days a year. Im for free speech but you should use some common sense.
Um, you aren't for free speech. Everyone should have the right to say whatever they want in public. If that offends other people, sorry, but that is our right. You are saying that people should be forced to acknowledge all gods, or be quiet about their own. That is not free speech, that is not what the Founding Fathers wanted. You want freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

About religious holidays, all our holidays are based around American culture or memorials. Thanksgiving, Veterans Day, Halloween, and Independence Day are all parts of our culture. The same way with Christmas and Easter, they may have religious origins but they are so ingrained in our culture that they are acknowledged. America is not singling out Christian holidays, it is just that Christian holidays have had such an influence on American culture. And honestly, Christmas and Easter are far from religious holidays for most people, with it more being about reindeer and bunnies.

God is not gonna stop hurricanes because hes lazy hes not gonna stop them because its a punishment for humanity for legallizing same sex marriage and abortion everyone knows that
Through the hardships you become stronger, if God fixed all our problems we would become spoiled brats who didn't strive to do better.

Any places run by the goverment or payed for or funded by tax payer money.
Provide some legal justification for such. Throughout history people have used public spaces to spread ideas. Some secular, some religious. You are suggesting that religious ideas be banned from those places and only secular ideas being allowed.

You realize that you are discriminating? You are so much about "equality" for gays and trans but when someone doesn't agree with you, you want to push them into a closet. Admit it, you don't want full equality. You just want the people who agree with you to have the power, and those who don't agree with you to be gone.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 11:37 AM
When you have the ability to save a life and choose not to then you are evil.

On what premise do you base this assertion?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 11:39 AM
When you have the ability to save a life and choose not to then you are evil.

When you offer to save a life, but the person refuses, are you evil?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:39 AM
On what premise do you base this assertion?
I literally just answered that -_-

If you were dying of a poison and I had the antidote and I was sitting at the end of your death bed refusing to give it to you, would you like that? Replace me with God and you'll understand why I think he is either not all powerful or lazy and nasty.
When you offer to save a life, but the person refuses, are you evil?
So all the religious people that die in natural disasters refused help?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 11:47 AM
So all the religious people that die in natural disasters refused help?

You are once again confusing spiritual and earthly death. I believe I had an earlier discussion with Paraxiom on this thread regarding the differences.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:51 AM
You are once again confusing spiritual and earthly death. I believe I had an earlier discussion with Paraxiom on this thread regarding the differences.
Ohhhh so it's okay because he only lets you die earthly and no one has evidence of a spiritual death.

Little note to God, I like being 'earthly' alive so please save me xD

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 12:31 PM
If you were dying of a poison and I had the antidote and I was sitting at the end of your death bed refusing to give it to you, would you like that?

So you're asserting that what is right and wrong depends on my personal fancies?

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 12:32 PM
About religious holidays, all our holidays are based around American culture or memorials. Thanksgiving, Veterans Day, Halloween, and Independence Day are all parts of our culture. The same way with Christmas and Easter, they may have religious origins but they are so ingrained in our culture that they are acknowledged. America is not singling out Christian holidays, it is just that Christian holidays have had such an influence on American culture. And honestly, Christmas and Easter are far from religious holidays for most people, with it more being about reindeer and bunnies.

Christmas is not a religious holliday its a commercial holiday that as nothing to do with Jesus's birth christians just picked that date for reasons. Easter is religious holiday that people took for commercial purposes, if you want to celebrate a giant bunny hiding eggs for kids and make it a holiday fine but change the name, pick a date and stick with it and let christians celebrate Jesus's death and resurrection independently switching dates every year.

Um, you aren't for free speech. Everyone should have the right to say whatever they want in public. If that offends other people, sorry, but that is our right. You are saying that people should be forced to acknowledge all gods, or be quiet about their own. That is not free speech, that is not what the Founding Fathers wanted. You want freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

Provide some legal justification for such. Throughout history people have used public spaces to spread ideas. Some secular, some religious. You are suggesting that religious ideas be banned from those places and only secular ideas being allowed.

You realize that you are discriminating? You are so much about "equality" for gays and trans but when someone doesn't agree with you, you want to push them into a closet. Admit it, you don't want full equality. You just want the people who agree with you to have the power, and those who don't agree with you to be gone.

Religion in public places its all or nothing, like everyone can get married or no one can, everyone gets to use public bathrooms or no one can, everyone can eat in your restaurant or no one can... Including some gods and not others is also discrimination, they are places made to worship your god/gods, like a temple or a mosque, but they are places where you shouldnt worship a god. Goverment is suppose to be neutral so in any places run by the goverment or payed for or funded by tax payer money its all or nothing, other places its fine to talk about it but not worship it. If you want to talk with someone that God will kill us all if we let gay people get married fine, if your muslim and you want to where the burka or niqab go for it. But there are limits like having a restaurant and not feeding gay people because thats what Jesus would do, or mentioning God in a national anthem, or not taxing churches, or teaching creationism as science...

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 12:33 PM
So you're asserting that what is right and wrong depends on my personal fancies?
What is right and wrong will always be a personal opinion. Is it your opinion then that God is right letting all them people die in horrific and painful ways?
teaching creationism as science...
That is sooo wrong!! Makes you think how the USA is so far behind the rest of the developed world.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 12:51 PM
Christmas is not a religious holliday its a commercial holiday that as nothing to do with Jesus's birth christians just picked that date for reasons. Easter is religious holiday that people took for commercial purposes, if you want to celebrate a giant bunny hiding eggs for kids and make it a holiday fine but change the name, pick a date and stick with it and let christians celebrate Jesus's death and resurrection independently switching dates every year.


Why were you ranting about religious holidays then if you don't consider the only religious holidays in the USA religious? Why can't Christians celebrate Christ's birth on Christmas and Christ's Resurrection on Easter? They had it first after all. Are you suggesting limiting free speech and assembly?

Religion in public places its all or nothing, like everyone can get married or no one can, everyone gets to use public bathrooms or no one can, everyone can eat in your restaurant or no one can... Including some gods and not others is also discrimination, they are places made to worship your god/gods, like a temple or a mosque, but they are places where you shouldnt worship a god. Goverment is suppose to be neutral so in any places run by the goverment or payed for or funded by tax payer money its all or nothing, other places its fine to talk about it but not worship it.

That is not equality. You are considering religious speech be restricted, while secular speech be free, that is discrimination. You are saying that religion should be restricted to private households and places of worship, that is discrimination. You consider religious ideas to be lesser than secular ideas and should be treated as such, that is discrimination. You are saying that if I want to talk about my own God, I also have to recognize all the other gods, that is discrimination.

Admit it, you don't want equality. You would like to see opposing viewpoints buried away so you don't have to face morality. Intellectual diversity is key to the success of a nation, yet you want only your opinion to be out their. If I was suggesting the same things you are saying about religion to gays, that would be seen as hate speech and discrimination. Admit it, you don't want free speech.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 12:54 PM
Why were you ranting about religious holidays then if you don't consider the only religious holidays in the USA religious?



That is not equality. You are considering religious speech be restricted, while secular speech be free, that is discrimination. You are saying that religion should be restricted to private households and places of worship, that is discrimination. You consider religious ideas to be lesser than secular ideas and should be treated as such, that is discrimination. You are saying that if I want to talk about my own God, I also have to recognize all the other gods, that is discrimination.

Admit it, you don't want equality. You would like to see opposing viewpoints buried away so you don't have to face morality. Intellectual diversity is key to the success of a nation, yet you want only your opinion to be out their. If I was suggesting the same things you are saying about religion to gays, that would be seen as hate speech and discrimination. Admit it, you don't want free speech.
You do know there is a difference between secularism and atheism, right?:D

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 12:58 PM
You do know there is a difference between secularism and atheism, right?:D

Secular: "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis."

Nitpicking specific words when you know good and well what they mean just makes you look like a fool. Especially if you are completely wrong about that nitpicking. That comment right there added nothing to this discussion, and like most of your posts were just looking for a fight.

Do you think that MattSmith48's comments about restricting free speech are what a free society should do? If you want to add random comments, you better be able to defend your view point as well.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 01:01 PM
Nitpicking specific words when you know good and well what they mean just makes you look like a fool. That comment right there added nothing to this discussion, and like most of your posts were just looking for a fight.
Yep I do know what they mean, that's how I recognised that you did not.

Secularism means not supporting or endorsing any religion or belief, atheism is the belief that there is no God.

How does secularism threaten religion?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 01:05 PM
Yep I do know what they mean, that's how I recognised that you did not.

Secularism means not supporting or endorsing any religion or belief, atheism is the belief that there is no God.

How does secularism threaten religion?

Secular: "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis."

Secularism is the absence of religion, that is exactly what I meant.

Actually read my posts and you will realize that at no point was I discussing how secularism threatened religion. I was talking about how MattSmith48 wants to discriminate against religious people and ideas.

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 01:12 PM
Why were you ranting about religious holidays then if you don't consider the only religious holidays in the USA religious? Why can't Christians celebrate Christ's birth on Christmas and Christ's Resurrection on Easter? They had it first after all. Are you suggesting limiting free speech and assembly?

Well Jesus wasnt actually born on december 25th, but your still allowed to celebrate his birth whenever you want. For Christmas one of the two as to change the name im not saying which one but there is more people celebrating Christmas commerically than religiously. Easter is different its clearly a religious holiday if you want to celebrate it fine but it doesnt need to be a federal holiday.

That is not equality. You are considering religious speech be restricted, while secular speech be free, that is discrimination. You are saying that religion should be restricted to private households and places of worship, that is discrimination. You consider religious ideas to be lesser than secular ideas and should be treated as such, that is discrimination. You are saying that if I want to talk about my own God, I also have to recognize all the other gods, that is discrimination.

Admit it, you don't want equality. You would like to see opposing viewpoints buried away so you don't have to face morality. Intellectual diversity is key to the success of a nation, yet you want only your opinion to be out their. If I was suggesting the same things you are saying about religion to gays, that would be seen as hate speech and discrimination. Admit it, you don't want free speech.

I just said your allowed to talk about it if you want but you cant worship it anywhere you want and it should stay out of the goverment and goverment runned and/or funded places.

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 01:14 PM
Secular: "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis."

Secularism is the absence of religion, that is exactly what I meant.

Actually read my posts and you will realize that at no point was I discussing how secularism threatened religion. I was talking about how MattSmith48 wants to discriminate against religious people and ideas.

Secular is being neutral.
Atheism is saying there is no God due to the lack of evidence.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 01:22 PM
Well Jesus wasnt actually born on december 25th, but your still allowed to celebrate his birth whenever you want. For Christmas one of the two as to change the name im not saying which one but there is more people celebrating Christmas commerically than religiously. Easter is different its clearly a religious holiday if you want to celebrate it fine but it doesnt need to be a federal holiday.


Its not like Christmas was originally a Federal holiday and the Christians adopted it later. Christmas was a Christian holidays long before the USA came around. As was Easter.
I just said your allowed to talk about it if you want but you cant worship it anywhere you want and it should stay out of the goverment and goverment runned and/or funded places.

Worship is free speech. And you are suggesting more than that. Here are some previous posts of yours:
Atheist dont hate all religious people just the ones who insist on bringing up their religion where it doesnt belong.
The 2nd option doesnt mean ban all religions from public places it means dont acknowledge any God...
You are suggesting banning any mention of religion in public. You are discriminating. If I said that all gays could only be gay in their homes and private buildings, and that gay ideas are lesser than straight ideas, how would you feel, because that is exactly what you are saying.
Secular is being neutral.
Atheism is saying there is no God due to the lack of evidence.

Secular: "of or relating to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal:"

Who has a dictionary definition, and who does not?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 01:38 PM
Secular: "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis."

Secularism is the absence of religion, that is exactly what I meant.

Actually read my posts and you will realize that at no point was I discussing how secularism threatened religion. I was talking about how MattSmith48 wants to discriminate against religious people and ideas.
Secular - not connected with religious or spiritual matters.

If a school is secular, and all schools should be, it means the school does not promote any religious belief, including atheism.

Living For Love
August 5th, 2016, 01:49 PM
Why did he design the earth so there would be natural disasters then?
That's something I don't know how to answer.

And all powerful god needs permission?
He needs your permission to save you, yes.

What about the believers that die?
I already answer this to someone else. It's written in the Bible that we (Christians) will face lots of trouble on Earth, but the love of the God in whom we believe helps face all those difficulties. When we die, it's because God wanted it to happen that way, and we're sure to be rewarded with Heaven when it happens.

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 01:54 PM
Its not like Christmas was originally a Federal holiday and the Christians adopted it later. Christmas was a Christian holidays long before the USA came around. As was Easter.

You shouldnt have a day off because of Easter. Since there is more people celebrating Christmas than Jesus' birthday on December 25th, its fine to have a day off for it but you cant say its for the religious reason we have the day off.

Worship is free speech. And you are suggesting more than that. Here are some previous posts of yours:


You are suggesting banning any mention of religion in public. You are discriminating. If I said that all gays could only be gay in their homes and private buildings, and that gay ideas are lesser than straight ideas, how would you feel, because that is exactly what you are saying.


If two men are holding hands at the mall doesnt hurt anyone. your allowed to talk about your religion if you want. Worshiping a God is like sex theres places that are made to do it, and you shouldnt do it in public.

Secular: "of or relating to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal:"

Who has a dictionary definition, and who does not?

Secular: denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 02:31 PM
He needs your permission to save you, yes.

Do you think he is all powerful then? Or all powerful when you allow him to be?:)

Worshiping a God is like sex theres places that are made to do it, and you shouldnt do it in public.

I agree with everything you're saying aside from this buddy, I just don't see the harm caused by people praying in public causes?:)

Living For Love
August 5th, 2016, 02:45 PM
Do you think he is all powerful then? Or all powerful when you allow him to be?:)
He's still all powerful as he doesn't want to automatically take control of your life and force you to worship him, he wants instead people to take that decision by themselves. This fact doesn't go against the fact that he's also all powerful.

Reise
August 5th, 2016, 02:48 PM
He's still all powerful as he doesn't want to automatically take control of your life and force you to worship him, he wants instead people to take that decision by themselves. This fact doesn't go against the fact that he's also all powerful.
That's a hell of a lot knowledge about God, how do you know all that?

Living For Love
August 5th, 2016, 02:59 PM
That's a hell of a lot knowledge about God, how do you know all that?
By reading the Bible.

Reise
August 5th, 2016, 03:01 PM
By reading the Bible.
So you consider the Bible - or at least its teaching - as valid and factual?

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 03:07 PM
you just take the word of these people hundreds of years ago when today we have science to provide answers?
I want to clarify: I am not Jewish, Christian, or Muslim. I do not follow those paths. I referred to the Bible because often times that is the book to refer to in religious discussions. Especially because Christianity is the main target of anti-theists.

You can't say that science provided these answers either. In the example I gave, we do not have evidence that the events surrounding Abraham's journey from Babylon was false. In my view, the Old Testament is a decent historical source when you compare it to other contemporary ones.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 03:12 PM
You shouldnt have a day off because of Easter. Since there is more people celebrating Christmas than Jesus' birthday on December 25th, its fine to have a day off for it but you cant say its for the religious reason we have the day off.


Well, it is whether or not you want to admit it. We have the day off because of a religious holiday, would you rather not have the day off?


If two men are holding hands at the mall doesnt hurt anyone. your allowed to talk about your religion if you want. Worshiping a God is like sex theres places that are made to do it, and you shouldnt do it in public.

That is a pretty awful comparison in all honesty, even Mimikyu agrees with me on that. How is sharing religion equivalent to public sex?

Secular: denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.

So, we agree that secular was the correct word to use when referring to non-religious ideas and practices.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 03:12 PM
I want to clarify: I am not Jewish, Christian, or Muslim. I do not follow those paths. I referred to the Bible because often times that is the book to refer to in religious discussions. Especially because Christianity is the main target of anti-theists.

You can't say that science provided these answers either. In the example I gave, we do not have evidence that the events surrounding Abraham's journey from Babylon was false. In my view, the Old Testament is a decent historical source when you compare it to other contemporary ones.
Are you atheist then?

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 03:15 PM
Are you atheist then?
No. I'm Hindu.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 03:15 PM
What is right and wrong will always be a personal opinion.

Then on what basis do you assert that it's wrong for God to allow suffering?

Living For Love
August 5th, 2016, 03:22 PM
So you consider the Bible - or at least its teaching - as valid and factual?
Yes.

Also, how can there be anyone who believes in [the Christian] God but doesn't believe in the Bible?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 03:27 PM
Then on what basis do you assert that it's wrong for God to allow suffering?
My personal belief that as he has the ability to easily save everyone's life and chooses not to that makes him evil.

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 03:36 PM
My personal belief that as he has the ability to easily save everyone's life and chooses not to that makes him evil.
Isn't being decadent, stagnant, and without any free will or choice a worse alternative?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 03:38 PM
Isn't being decadent, stagnant, and without any free will or choice a worse alternative?
Noooo not creating a planet where there are natural disasters that kill people would be best.

Porpoise101
August 5th, 2016, 03:52 PM
Noooo not creating a planet where there are natural disasters that kill people would be best.
Uniquemind had a good response to this. Essentially, most disasters are caused by mankind's own fault. Furthermore, some of these disasters help the rest of nature.

For example, wildfires kill many and destroy property. But they also help the forest and it's wildlife. In my state, there is a rare bird that only survives because of wildfires. The fact that these fires damage property isn't the fault of God either, it's the fault of people building their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It's also the fault of people that they affect the environment to make these situations worse (like desertification, climate change, etc).

Many of these disasters are good for people as a whole. They make us more safe in the long term because we learn from them and how to cope with them. They bring out the best in people, as people must come together.

Paraxiom
August 5th, 2016, 04:22 PM
Do we need to presume that this 'maximally great' God is conscious?

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 05:21 PM
My personal belief that as he has the ability to easily save everyone's life and chooses not to that makes him evil.

Why should God abide by your personal tastes?

mattsmith48
August 5th, 2016, 06:34 PM
Well, it is whether or not you want to admit it. We have the day off because of a religious holiday, would you rather not have the day off?

Christmas is a commercial holiday having a day off is fine. We shouldnt have a day off because of Easter.[/QUOTE]

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 06:59 PM
Christmas is a commercial holiday having a day off is fine. We shouldnt have a day off because of Easter.[/QUOTE]

You make no sense whatsoever.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 07:15 PM
@Uniquemind (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=115092) had a good response to this. Essentially, most disasters are caused by mankind's own fault. Furthermore, some of these disasters help the rest of nature.

For example, wildfires kill many and destroy property. But they also help the forest and it's wildlife. In my state, there is a rare bird that only survives because of wildfires. The fact that these fires damage property isn't the fault of God either, it's the fault of people building their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It's also the fault of people that they affect the environment to make these situations worse (like desertification, climate change, etc).

Many of these disasters are good for people as a whole. They make us more safe in the long term because we learn from them and how to cope with them. They bring out the best in people, as people must come together.
Soooo he designed trees that need to be burned down putting people in danger? Let me guess he designed a fish that needs to fly into a city in a tsunami?
Why should God abide by your personal tastes?
He doesn't have to being an all powerful God. He's not all loving then. But he is an evil selfish lazy bastard if what you say is true! Why worship him?

Paraxiom
August 5th, 2016, 07:20 PM
Mimikyu PlasmaHam Porpoise101 mattsmith48

*ahem*
What about what I said five posts ago?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 07:23 PM
@Mimikyu (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122060) @PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733) @Porpoise101 (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=116343) @mattsmith48 (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=101901)

*ahem*
What about what I said five posts ago?
Do we need to presume that this 'maximally great' God is conscious?
If he is maximally great then yeah I'd imagine he is conscious :)

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 07:23 PM
But he is an evil selfish lazy bastard if what you say is true

What do you mean when you call God evil?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 07:24 PM
What do you mean when you call God evil?
You have to be trolling?-_- you have asked me why before and I explained it and they you asked why God should listen to me. In case you're serious, Stephen Fry sums it up pretty well
-suvkwNYSQo

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 08:02 PM
Nitpicking specific words when you know good and well what they mean just makes you look like a fool. Especially if you are completely wrong about that nitpicking. That comment right there added nothing to this discussion, and like most of your posts were just looking for a

And complaining about it to fill up a post is even worse. There's no reason to bash on Jack because you don't agree with him. It's not because your opinions differ that you can't try to be nice you know. I have anothet question for you that can take this debate in an interesting direction.

Do you believe in creationism?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 08:36 PM
And complaining about it to fill up a post is even worse. There's no reason to bash on Jack because you don't agree with him. It's not because your opinions differ that you can't try to be nice you know. I have anothet question for you that can take this debate in an interesting direction.

Do you believe in creationism?

I do try to be nice, but constantly asking questions that have already been answered or simply not needed gets annoying.

Yes, I do believe in creationism

Dalcourt
August 5th, 2016, 08:52 PM
All of you ever realised that it's always the same questions and answers back and forth in every thread about religion?
And in any other religious debate anywhere else? Ever wondered why?

Neither party will ever change its opinion so sometimes I just feel talking about the same things over and over without any new results is kinda gettin old.

You believe in an almighty God who created the whole universe fine...you believe this whole God thing is bullshit fine,too.
Neither side will ever be able to have proofs or persuade the otherside...so I just don't see where these discussions will ever lead too.

If anyone could enlighten me on that it would be way more important to me than this whole talk I just read through.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 08:59 PM
All of you ever realised that it's always the same questions and answers back and forth in every thread about religion?
And in any other religious debate anywhere else? Ever wondered why?

Neither party will ever change its opinion so sometimes I just feel talking about the same things over and over without any new results is kinda gettin old.

You believe in an almighty God who created the whole universe fine...you believe this whole God thing is bullshit fine,too.
Neither side will ever be able to have proofs or persuade the otherside...so I just don't see where these discussions will ever lead too.

If anyone could enlighten me on that it would be way more important to me than this whole talk I just read through.

You make a good point. I use debates like this for teaching as much as debating. No offense, but most of the people I have been debating know very little about what Christianity is, it's doctrines and teachings. I probably won't be able to convince them just by this thread, I'm no theologian or debater after all. But letting them gain more knowledge about God's truth will give them something to think upon, and hopefully realize what God want for them.

So for me, debates like this are to get the word of Jesus' salvation out there. Its my own way to spread his word. I also grow stronger and smarter in God and the Bible by these debates. God wishes that all should come to know him, and hopefully I can help some do that.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 09:16 PM
You have to be trolling?-_- you have asked me why before and I explained it and they you asked why God should listen to me. In case you're serious, Stephen Fry sums it up pretty well
-suvkwNYSQo

What do you mean when you call God evil?

I'm going to continue asking this question until you answer it.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 09:56 PM
What do you mean when you call God evil?

I'm going to continue asking this question until you answer it.

When I do debates, I normally try to be educated on the subject enough to make my own opinions of it. Referring your whole argument based on the opinions of another person is not good debating. It just shows you don't understand the subject matter and are having to copy other's ideas.

I believe ArkansasasGuy is asking for your personal opinion on the matter. He wants to hear your response, not someone elses.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:02 PM
What do you mean when you call God evil?

I'm going to continue asking this question until you answer it.
-_- I have answered this xD If he is all powerful as you claim and created the earth with natural disasters and cancers and never intervenes when he could so easily save people. This I think is the 3rd time I have told you why God is evil. Let me guess, you next question is why should God listen to me?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 10:04 PM
-_- I have answered this xD If he is all powerful as you claim and created the earth with natural disasters and cancers and never intervenes when he could so easily save people. This I think is the 3rd time I have told you why God is evil. Let me guess, you next question is why should God listen to me?

Should a parent fix every problem for a kid, or should the kid learn to fix his own problems?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:09 PM
Should a parent fix every problem for a kid, or should the kid learn to fix his own problems?
A parent should teach a kid how to fix their own problems. If God could teach me how to save myself from a tsunami he caused or not die of cancer he caused I would be aright with that however as of righting this God hasn't told me how so I still think he is either,


Evil
Not all powerful
Made up

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 10:12 PM
Yes, I do believe in creationism

So you don't believe in dinosaurs, erosion, big bang, evolution, homo sapiens and all the other proof?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:13 PM
So you don't believe in dinosaurs, erosion, big bang, evolution, homo sapiens and all the other proof?
Bram you're so ignorant! Obviously Satan went around the world burying bones to trick us!! :D

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 10:32 PM
When I do debates, I normally try to be educated on the subject enough to make my own opinions of it. Referring your whole argument based on the opinions of another person is not good debating. It just shows you don't understand the subject matter and are having to copy other's ideas.

I believe ArkansasasGuy is asking for your personal opinion on the matter. He wants to hear your response, not someone elses.

The issue with him goes beyond not understanding the subject matter. He clearly doesn't have the slightest idea how to have a logical comversation.

This I think is the 3rd time I have told you why God is evil.

Great. Now answer my last question. What do you mean when you say God is evil?

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 10:35 PM
So you don't believe in dinosaurs, erosion, big bang, evolution, homo sapiens and all the other proof?

Ha, its not like I didn't see this coming. Why did you ask that question anyway, besides a futile attempt to make me look like a fool?

You have proof of the big bang! I would certainly like to see that! Especially since it breaks all the laws of the universe!

Evolution is flawed. When Darwin came up with the theory it was revolutionary, but as we discovered more about genetics it became apparent evolution could not work. Every mutation we see in nature is never beneficial. Why do we see clearly defined species? If evolution was correct, we should see huge amount of variation in the animal kingdom, instead of an orderly system. The law of entropy goes against evolution. Even scientists admit the basic building block of organic molecules require perfect conditions to create and they have no idea how it would have evolved beyond such.

I believe in erosion, I have a creek in my backyard. We had a big rainfall a few weeks back that almost completely destroyed the bank. I can observe erosion, it is a fact.

I also believe in homo sapiens, because, well, I am one. What kind of question is that?

Dinosaurs! Rawr! We see their fossils, we know they existed. Pretty interesting that almost all ancient cultures have some sort of tales of huge reptiles, despite dinosaurs apparently being wiped out millions of years ago by your guessing. Hm, even the Bible tells of two large reptiles that seem to match modern dinosaur models. It is also odd that dinosaur-like cryptic creatures like Loch Ness and Mokele-Mbembe and others should possibly exist if all the others died out millions of years ago.

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 10:41 PM
PlasmaHam You know Darwin was wrong when he said humans were direct relatives from monkeys right? You know there are monkey species reaching the stone age right? Evolution! There are still certains things in the human body that some people don't have, things that were needed by our ancestors to climb and do the things we don't have to today. Evolution! Do you also know that trough evolution species adapt to their enviroment so that's why local species have similar abilties right? Also do you actually believe in Loch Ness? Also how do you explain the fact humans were created first as humans but we find bones of early stage humans? Tell me, please.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 10:50 PM
Great. Now answer my last question. What do you mean when you say God is evil?
Do you want the definition of evil?
profoundly immoral and wicked
That is what I mean when I call someone evil.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 10:53 PM
The Special One You failed to answer my question, why did you ask that question about evolution besides an attempt at character assassination? We are talking about God's power and religion in society, if you don't have anything beneficial to add to that conversation then I am not responding. Its pretty obvious you don't, so this discussion is over.

I'll bet $50 someone is going to say that I chickened out or couldn't support my position. Please make a fool of yourself, I'll get the last laugh.

profoundly immoral or wicked

This comment better describes you than God. I thought you said earlier that morality was personal, are you suggesting that there is a universal morality?

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 10:55 PM
The Special One You failed to answer my question, why did you ask that question about evolution besides an attempt at character assassination? We are talking about God's power and religion in society, if you don't have anything beneficial to add to that conversation then I am not responding. Its pretty obvious you don't, so this discussion is over.

I'll bet $50 someone is going to say that I chickened out or couldn't support my position. Please make a fool of yourself, I'll get the last laugh.

You know I already told you. To bring up another topic I found interesting. There is no reason to act all tough guy and be rude because you don't get what you want. I you want to come over as mature and if you want people taking you seriously insulting people won't help.

PlasmaHam
August 5th, 2016, 10:58 PM
You know I already told you. To bring up another topic I found interesting. There is no reason to act all tough guy and be rude because you don't get what you want. I you want to come over as mature and if you want people taking you seriously insulting people won't help.

And complaining about it to fill up a post is even worse. There's no reason to bash on me because you don't agree with me. It's not because your opinions differ that you can't try to be nice you know. I have anothet question for you that can take this debate in an interesting direction.

Do you believe that God is maximally great?

(I couldn't resist, PlasmaHam, out)

Periphery
August 5th, 2016, 11:02 PM
And complaining about it to fill up a post is even worse. There's no reason to bash on me because you don't agree with me. It's not because your opinions differ that you can't try to be nice you know. I have anothet question for you that can take this debate in an interesting direction.

Do you believe that God is maximally great?

(I couldn't resist, PlasmaHam, out)

I didn't bash on you but aight. The maturity level in ROTW today jeez.

Also, I don't. I don't believe in 'god' so I don't see how I should believe this.

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:07 PM
You have proof of the big bang! I would certainly like to see that! Especially since it breaks all the laws of the universe!

Because God obeys every law of physics! I do agree the basic big bang model is flawed.

Every mutation we see in nature is never beneficial.
So the Peppered moth that adapted by changing colours was not beneficial?
I don't think you have an even basic idea of how genes, nucleotides or mutations work, do you?
Why do we see clearly defined species?
Clearly defined like the axolotl and the platypus, right?
The law of entropy goes against evolution.
Do you know what entropy means? Because I study A-level chemistry and it looks like you're using sciencey sounding words without knowing their meaning.....
Even scientists admit the basic building block of organic molecules require perfect conditions to create and they have no idea how it would have evolved beyond such.

What scientists? What organic molecules? Organic molecules like propane? Because organic means a chemical that contains carbon xD

This comment better describes you than God. I thought you said earlier that morality was personal, are you suggesting that there is a universal morality?
So that's why you kept on asking xD

Uniquemind
August 5th, 2016, 11:19 PM
A parent should teach a kid how to fix their own problems. If God could teach me how to save myself from a tsunami he caused or not die of cancer he caused I would be aright with that however as of righting this God hasn't told me how so I still think he is either,


Evil
Not all powerful
Made up



All things that cause humans to feel pain and suffering aren't necessarily bad nor evil.

I could easily argue that God gave humans a brain which has the potential to very vast critical thinking and to always chase the truth, or if that person or society (en mass) chose to deny the truth, they would suffer.

So in my view God gave humanity a very fair blank slate from which to work with, and it's humanity's fault that they invented false religions before acknowledging Christianity.

On the issues of cancer, a lot of science has revealed how cancers start and what societies and governments of the world need to do to reduce incidences of disease. A main factor of why this has not happened are as follows:

1. Poor diet, and too much salt and sugar in the diet, and an unwillingness on a large part of society to change what they buy and eat.

2. Air pollution (factories, cars, fires etc.)

3. Genetic diseases (science can edit genes or predict offspring between mates to yield probabilities and eradicate genetic diseases)


--

You have to understand on a deeper level what being all powerful is, and for purposes of this debate we have to do our best to put this into hypotheticals.

In theory, every event (good, bad, neutral) between the beginning of time and the end of it, can technically be undone, but from our mortal perspectives we would not notice nor feel it and we would experience it in a A to B to C etc fashion.


So the answer isn't why hasn't God intervened, the question is why is your perception limited?

You can't say that God hasn't, won't, intervene just because you haven't experienced his interventions.

There is basically no measure to test God.

--

However in fairness I will say there is not one simple example of Jesus healing an amputee victim in the NT.

The geological time scale and theory of how the Earth formed, is the reverse of the events described in Genesis.


--

So there I've successfully argued both for and against Christianity.


P.S. Let me also add that a lightly touched upon (It's rarely talked about by pastors or Catholic fathers, about why Satan and his fallen angels rebel against God and the elect angels) concept of Christianity is that the figure of Satan is arguing that God is not good, hence why there was the angelic rebellion he started.

Ironically it's the same argument you're making here, that God is not good or he is ignoring the suffering on Earth.

I said that's a false debate.


He's God of all things, both to create and destroy. It's by default offensive to accept there is a hierarchy of power that has the rightful place to decide such things over you. That's ultimately what is fueling this debate.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 11:30 PM
Ha, its not like I didn't see this coming. Why did you ask that question anyway, besides a futile attempt to make me look like a fool?

You have proof of the big bang! I would certainly like to see that! Especially since it breaks all the laws of the universe!

Evolution is flawed. When Darwin came up with the theory it was revolutionary, but as we discovered more about genetics it became apparent evolution could not work. Every mutation we see in nature is never beneficial. Why do we see clearly defined species? If evolution was correct, we should see huge amount of variation in the animal kingdom, instead of an orderly system. The law of entropy goes against evolution. Even scientists admit the basic building block of organic molecules require perfect conditions to create and they have no idea how it would have evolved beyond such.

I believe in erosion, I have a creek in my backyard. We had a big rainfall a few weeks back that almost completely destroyed the bank. I can observe erosion, it is a fact.

I also believe in homo sapiens, because, well, I am one. What kind of question is that?

Dinosaurs! Rawr! We see their fossils, we know they existed. Pretty interesting that almost all ancient cultures have some sort of tales of huge reptiles, despite dinosaurs apparently being wiped out millions of years ago by your guessing. Hm, even the Bible tells of two large reptiles that seem to match modern dinosaur models. It is also odd that dinosaur-like cryptic creatures like Loch Ness and Mokele-Mbembe and others should possibly exist if all the others died out millions of years ago.

Side note:

How and when the universe came into being, how and when life on Earth began, and how there came to be multiple forms of life on Earth are separate questions.

Do you want the definition of evil?

That is what I mean when I call someone evil.

So you mean that God is behaving incorrectly? He is doing other than he ought?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:46 PM
So you mean that God is behaving incorrectly? He is doing other than he ought?
It's not incorrect as there are no rules for a God but I would say that he ought to be nice yeah:)
Side note:

How and when the universe came into being, how and when life on Earth began, and how there came to be multiple forms of life on Earth are separate questions.


Is this aimed at me?

All things that cause humans to feel pain and suffering aren't necessarily bad nor evil.

Of course not:) I am an atheist and so when a rock falls on my head I blame nature ya know? But for the question, Is God all powerful? I would say he is either not all powerful or chooses not to intervene:)

I could easily argue that God gave humans a brain which has the potential to very vast critical thinking and to always chase the truth, or if that person or society (en mass) chose to deny the truth, they would suffer.

Do you think it is nice that God makes non believers suffer? How do you explain the suffering of believers?

So in my view God gave humanity a very fair blank slate from which to work with, and it's humanity's fault that they invented false religions before acknowledging Christianity.
How do you know Christianity wasn't the one that was invented? Because you was told as a child that it wasn't?

On the issues of cancer, a lot of science has revealed how cancers start and what societies and governments of the world need to do to reduce incidences of disease. A main factor of why this has not happened are as follows:
1. Poor diet, and too much salt and sugar in the diet, and an unwillingness on a large part of society to change what they buy and eat.
2. Air pollution (factories, cars, fires etc.)
3. Genetic diseases (science can edit genes or predict offspring between mates to yield probabilities and eradicate genetic diseases)

Okayy I will try to keep the science to a minimum but basically we always undergo random mutations, even me sitting in my chair now. They can code for the same amino acid so there would be no change or they could code for another amino acid. Basically during mitosis the cell goes through these checkpoints before the cell divides to make sure everything is good, if everything is not good the cell could go back and sort it out of if the cell can not do that it will undergo apoptosis, the cell will destroy itself basically. What this means is that cancer actually needs a few mutations to happen and this is rare.

Carcinogens, like a poor diet or toxic air will increase the rate of random mutations so cancer is more likely. Basically me doing nothing in my chair I could have a random mutation and develop cancer. Why did god design us like that? Genetic diseases are different to carcinogens but again, why create it like that?


There is basically no measure to test God.

Then how do I know he is there? I believe in the scientific process xD



Posts merged. Next time, use the "edit" button. -Hideous

Dalcourt
August 5th, 2016, 11:52 PM
It's not incorrect as there are no rules for a God but I would say that he ought to be nice yeah:)



why should god be nice?

Flapjack
August 5th, 2016, 11:54 PM
why should god be nice?
He doesn't have to xD But calling him all nice, all knowing and all powerful when there is so much horrific stuff on earth suggests he is not all nice or he is not all powerful.

Arkansasguy
August 5th, 2016, 11:58 PM
I would say that he ought to be nice yeah:)

Ok good, you've formulated a precise proposition (taking "be nice" as meaning "stop natural disasters etc.").

On what basis do you assert that God ought to do this?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 12:06 AM
Ok good, you've formulated a precise proposition (taking "be nice" as meaning "stop natural disasters etc.").

On what basis do you assert that God ought to do this?
Yeah you're trolling xD

Uniquemind
August 6th, 2016, 12:23 AM
Yeah you're trolling xD

I don't believe the Christian faith or bible claims that God is "all nice".

He's loving but in terms of human definition of "nice", I don't know.

I will also say that you can't use the scientific method on God the way you're expecting.

It's called faith for a reason.

Also Christian and Catholic sex scandals aren't behaviors endorsed by the faith, those are failings of those humans who had religious titles they should've been stripped of immediately for being hypocrites and as blind leading the blind.

On another note, priests technically aren't scripturally barred from having a wife, that's more a custom set by the Vatican.

As for suffering, you don't avoid suffering based on your status of being a believer or non-believer.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 12:29 AM
I don't believe the Christian faith or bible claims that God is "all nice".

He's loving but in terms of human definition of "nice", I don't know.

I will also say that you can't use the scientific method on God the way you're expecting.

It's called faith for a reason.

Also Christian and Catholic sex scandals aren't behaviors endorsed by the faith, those are failings of those humans who had religious titles they should've been stripped of immediately for being hypocrites and as blind leading the blind.

On another note, priests technically aren't scripturally barred from having a wife, that's more a custom set by the Vatican.

As for suffering, you don't avoid suffering based on your status of being a believer or non-believer.
That trolling comment wasn't aimed at you or plasmaham buddy:)

James_Wilson
August 6th, 2016, 12:32 AM
I don't think that it's appropriate to look at spiritualism from a physics and or mathematical point of view.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 12:33 AM
I don't think that it's appropriate to look at spiritualism from a physics and or mathematical point of view.
I don't think we was?

Uniquemind
August 6th, 2016, 12:40 AM
I don't think that it's appropriate to look at spiritualism from a physics and or mathematical point of view.



I don't think we was?


I kind of was, only because physics and math are part of the creation we're debating is flawed.

Where humankind and any other intelligent life has existed within creation should cause for a re analysis of scripture and views so dogma does not set in. There is a limitation though upon how far math and physics can help one grow spiritually.

All things are connected one way or another.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 10:02 AM
He doesn't have to xD But calling him all nice, all knowing and all powerful when there is so much horrific stuff on earth suggests he is not all nice or he is not all powerful.
This is where I diverge from the Abrahamic folks. Since you weren't convinced that the problems like disease, disasters, etc are more of humanity's fault than any God's, I have this to say: death isn't something to be feared.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 10:18 AM
This is where I diverge from the Abrahamic folks. Since you weren't convinced that the problems like disease, disasters, etc are more of humanity's fault than any God's, I have this to say: death isn't something to be feared.
Okayy I will try to keep the science to a minimum but basically we always undergo random mutations, even me sitting in my chair now. They can code for the same amino acid so there would be no change or they could code for another amino acid. Basically during mitosis the cell goes through these checkpoints before the cell divides to make sure everything is good, if everything is not good the cell could go back and sort it out of if the cell can not do that it will undergo apoptosis, the cell will destroy itself basically. What this means is that cancer actually needs a few mutations to happen and this is rare.

Carcinogens, like a poor diet or toxic air will increase the rate of random mutations so cancer is more likely. Basically me doing nothing in my chair I could have a random mutation and develop cancer. Why did god design us like that? Genetic diseases are different to carcinogens but again, why create it like that?

I posted that earlier explaining how cancer isn't our fault and also how on earth is a tsunami humanities fault?

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 10:38 AM
I posted that earlier explaining how cancer isn't our fault and also how on earth is a tsunami humanities fault?
A tsunami is not directly the fault of people. But it is the fault of people for living in areas prone to tsunami. Take Japan for instance. They know that tsunamis happen. But they still live on the coasts, aware of their risks. If you put your hand on a stove, you should expect to get burned.

As for cancers, most cancer cases today probably result from carcinogens, at least partially. Not all disease is mankind's fault, but humans must die also.

This brings me to my question that you never answered: Why is death bad/to be feared?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 10:43 AM
A tsunami is not directly the fault of people. But it is the fault of people for living in areas prone to tsunami.
So why make a world with tsunamis?

As for cancers, most cancer cases today probably result from carcinogens, at least partially. Not all disease is mankind's fault, but humans must die also.

You didn't read my post did you?

Maybe we like earth and don't want to die and go to heaven however I believe that when you die you're gone because your consciousness is cells and ions carrying charges in your brain.

Reise
August 6th, 2016, 10:49 AM
A tsunami is not directly the fault of people. But it is the fault of people for living in areas prone to tsunami. Take Japan for instance. They know that tsunamis happen. But they still live on the coasts, aware of their risks. If you put your hand on a stove, you should expect to get burned.
I think if I had you in front of me I would have punched you in the face.
Anyway. You can find humans approximately everywhere on the planet, our species has the strange ability to not be limited by its sole physical capabilities to survive.
Japan, despite its propensity to disasters like earthquakes or tsunamis constitutes actually a large piece of farmable land (large enough for the first populations) and a good access to freshwater. History has shown this is well enough for a settlement to be made.
Furthermore natural disasters are not Japan's fault, it's not because Japanese people live there that it is their fault, your argument is fallacious.


As for cancers, most cancer cases today probably result from carcinogens, at least partially. Not all disease is mankind's fault, but humans must die also.
Do you have a source for this?


This brings me to my question that you never answered: Why is death bad/to be feared?
As a living being death is the state you surely don't want to get into.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 10:51 AM
Maybe we like earth and don't want to die and go to heaven however I believe that when you die you're gone because your consciousness is cells and ions carrying charges in your brain.
See I believe in reincarnation. So yeah, death is not a fear of mine. I need to live and be the best person I can be. And then in the next life, I shall continue to succeed.

Also about the cancers, we didn't evolve to sit into chairs.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 10:54 AM
Also about the cancers, we didn't evolve to sit into chairs.
What does that mean? You didn't read my post because I actually explained how cancer happens, not just causes. If you knew what I wrote you wouldn't say that crap. Lifestyles can increase the risks of cancers but random mutations will always happen and have always happened.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 11:07 AM
I think if I had you in front of me I would have punched you in the face.
Sorry, what was so offensive?

Japan, despite its propensity to disasters like earthquakes or tsunamis constitutes actually a large piece of farmable land (large enough for the first populations) and a good access to freshwater. History has shown this is well enough for a settlement to be made.

Those initial settlements were much smaller, so there wasn't as much damage to do. They didn't have millions of people, so millions of people were not at risk of dying.

Furthermore natural disasters are not Japan's fault, it's not because Japanese people live there that it is their fault, your argument is fallacious.

Ok the actual natural phenomenon that causes the event is not their fault. But the 'disaster' part is because they built things there that are vulnerable to tsunami and earthquakes. They make their lives vulnerable to these things.

Do you have a source for this?

Look at this map (http://globalcancermap.com/). The less industrialized you are, the less cancer. In the developed world, we surround ourselves with many chemicals and I would presume this has at least something to do with cancer cases.

As a living being death is the state you surely don't want to get into.
But you are inevitably going to face it, so why fear?

Reise
August 6th, 2016, 11:27 AM
Sorry, what was so offensive?
3 reasons, one being you previous argument that I qualified as fallacious, the other being using the suffer of people to give credit to your argumentation and the last one being unjustly criticizing a culture that I personally like (this one being the subjective reason).


Those initial settlements were much smaller, so there wasn't as much damage to do. They didn't have millions of people, so millions of people were not at risk of dying.

The number of people is not really important, all across its history Japan experienced some of these disasters and quickly made structures able to handle them (anti-earthquake grounding etc).
Once a settlement is made it's very likely to it will grow, and the overall cost of building structures able to handle these disasters is inferior to the one of moving.


Ok the actual natural phenomenon that causes the event is not their fault. But the 'disaster' part is because they built things there that are vulnerable to tsunami and earthquakes. They make their lives vulnerable to these things.

If you live in a 'not really good' district and your house is being robbed or you're being aggressed. Such an event wouldn't be your fault.
The only way your argument would be valid is "you didn't do enough to prevent or handle it', 1) Japan did and does way more than the rest of countries subject to such disasters and 2) this point totally undermines your general ideas.


Look at this map (http://globalcancermap.com/). The less industrialized you are, the less cancer. In the developed world, we surround ourselves with many chemicals and I would presume this has at least something to do with cancer cases.

I'm skeptical regarding the ability of this map to describe the most industrialized countries.
Regardless, this does not prove your point, which is "most cancer cases today probably result from carcinogens".


But you are inevitably going to face it, so why fear?
The fact that it is a fatality makes it actually even more scary.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 11:52 AM
3 reasons, one being you previous argument that I qualified as fallacious, the other being using the suffer of people to give credit to your argumentation and the last one being unjustly criticizing a culture that I personally like (this one being the subjective reason)
Ok the first criticism is fair enough. The second is a little unjust. We are talking about the deaths of people in large quantities and evil, so of course I am going to use them. The third one, I was not trying to criticize Japanese people or their culture, I like Japanese culture as well.

Mimikyu Reise Right now this discussion is a little OT, which is partially my fault. This discussion in my view has gone like this: OP asks if God can be maximally great. Then a while passes and we get to whether the existence of evil in the world undermines this greatness of God. We are saying that a 'good God' must equal a 'maximally Great' one. And this is where we are stuck currently. Personally, I am trying to say that evil in general is needed to bring out the best in people. I am also saying that 'evil' caused by nature is not necessarily evil. This is because the evil from nature is solely from a human point of view, as the evil from nature often benefits other life. None of you probably think that an antelope's death is bad when a cheetah kills it. So why should one think that a human's death is bad when the human is killed by a pile of rubble in an earthquake (when the humans built the rubble in the first place!)? Maybe we should make another thread specifically about evil.

When people say the word 'great' I think of power and strength, not necessarily niceness. Think of Alexander the Great, he was powerful, but was not perfectly good nor evil. If we are talking about the God in the OT, I would not say that he is exactly a 'good' one, but a very powerful one. So for the sake of argument, I would say that God is maximally great but is not maximally good.

Uniquemind
August 6th, 2016, 03:36 PM
Ok the first criticism is fair enough. The second is a little unjust. We are talking about the deaths of people in large quantities and evil, so of course I am going to use them. The third one, I was not trying to criticize Japanese people or their culture, I like Japanese culture as well.

Mimikyu Reise Right now this discussion is a little OT, which is partially my fault. This discussion in my view has gone like this: OP asks if God can be maximally great. Then a while passes and we get to whether the existence of evil in the world undermines this greatness of God. We are saying that a 'good God' must equal a 'maximally Great' one. And this is where we are stuck currently. Personally, I am trying to say that evil in general is needed to bring out the best in people. I am also saying that 'evil' caused by nature is not necessarily evil. This is because the evil from nature is solely from a human point of view, as the evil from nature often benefits other life. None of you probably think that an antelope's death is bad when a cheetah kills it. So why should one think that a human's death is bad when the human is killed by a pile of rubble in an earthquake (when the humans built the rubble in the first place!)? Maybe we should make another thread specifically about evil.

When people say the word 'great' I think of power and strength, not necessarily niceness. Think of Alexander the Great, he was powerful, but was not perfectly good nor evil. If we are talking about the God in the OT, I would not say that he is exactly a 'good' one, but a very powerful one. So for the sake of argument, I would say that God is maximally great but is not maximally good.

I would like to add and also disagree that Good can exist without evil, but only because humans are still learning the evil or misfortune constantly reminds us of the contrast between right and wrong, good and evil.

So again evil isn't necessary, it's only in the human context is it necessary.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 03:43 PM
So again evil isn't necessary, it's only in the human context is it necessary.
The only evil in the world in my opinion, stems from mankind or other beings that posses the ability to determine right from wrong. So 'evil' that derives from nature, that is not really 'evil'. So, I have to agree with you on this.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 03:47 PM
The only evil in the world in my opinion, stems from mankind or other beings that posses the ability to determine right from wrong. So 'evil' that derives from nature, that is not really 'evil'. So, I have to agree with you on this.
I'd say tsunamis are evil xD Why make a world with them?

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 03:51 PM
I'd say tsunamis are evil xD Why make a world with them?
Tsunamis are the result of the earth's plates moving and shifting. First of all, how can a tsunami be evil? It can't distinguish right and wrong. It just does what it does, it's ocean water. Besides, a world without tsunamis could be far worse. Either we have a locked up earth with no continental and oceanic plates or we have no ocean. Those realities seem to be pretty bad.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:01 PM
Tsunamis are the result of the earth's plates moving and shifting. First of all, how can a tsunami be evil? It can't distinguish right and wrong. It just does what it does, it's ocean water. Besides, a world without tsunamis could be far worse. Either we have a locked up earth with no continental and oceanic plates or we have no ocean. Those realities seem to be pretty bad.
Why would a world without tectonic plates be bad? No the water isn't bad, the god that launched thousands of tones it into a city is.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:05 PM
Why would a world without tectonic plates be bad? No the water isn't bad, the god that launched thousands of tones it into a city is.
Answer this: Which came first, tsunami or that city?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:08 PM
Answer this: Which came first, tsunami or that city?
The city xD

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:20 PM
The city xD
Ok let me rephrase: Which were first, plate tectonics or the city?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:22 PM
Ok let me rephrase: Which were first, plate tectonics or the city?
The tectonic plates however wouldn't an all knowing god have seen that humans would settle there? Wouldn't have fault oh I'll leave the tectonic plates out because people will die with them?

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:27 PM
The tectonic plates however wouldn't an all knowing god have seen that humans would settle there? Wouldn't have fault oh I'll leave the tectonic plates out because people will die with them?
Tectonic plates are the result of convection. Without convection to transfer energy I feel like the universe would be radically altered, and may not be suitable to live in at all.

PlasmaHam
August 6th, 2016, 04:31 PM
Mimikyu I have asked this question multiple times but have never gotten an answer:

Is it better for a parent to fix everything for a kid, or a kid to learn to fix things on his own?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:31 PM
Tectonic plates are the result of convection. Without convection to transfer energy I feel like the universe would be radically altered, and may not be suitable to live in at all.
I know why we have them xD Can't god have just made a physics free zone below the crust?

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:32 PM
I know why we have them xD Can't god have just made a physics free zone below the crust?
Nope because without subterranean physics we wouldn't have a magnetic field protecting us from solar radiation :cool:

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:35 PM
Nope because without subterranean physics we wouldn't have a magnetic field protecting us from solar radiation :cool:
You are of course right buddy but couldn't God have made a magnetic field without it being caused? This is the same skygod that defied the laws of physics by creating the earth from nothing. So why could he not do that?

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:36 PM
You are of course right buddy but couldn't God have made a magnetic field without it being caused? This is the same skygod that defied the laws of physics by creating the earth from nothing. So why could he not do that?
I'm not a creationist though. So universal rules are universal. And if a magnetic field wasn't caused by the force of magnetism, then it isn't really a magnetic field.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:39 PM
@PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733)

http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3410615&postcount=140

You have this terrible habit of asking questions you think are clever and ignoring the response only to ask the same question later.
I'm not a creationist though. So universal rules are universal. And if a magnetic field wasn't caused by the force of magnetism, then it isn't really a magnetic field.
Fair enough then xD

Mars
August 6th, 2016, 04:39 PM
Can God possibly be maximally great?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: Which God?

Also, let's keep this thread on topic please :)

PlasmaHam
August 6th, 2016, 04:41 PM
@PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733)

http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3410615&postcount=140

You have this terrible habit of asking questions you think are clever and ignoring the response only to ask the same question later.

Fair enough then xD

Apologizes, but you still failed to answer my question as I wanted. A parent can't teach their kid everything, that answer does not work.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:43 PM
Apologizes, but you still failed to answer my question as I wanted. A parent can't teach their kid everything, that answer does not work.
Even you have to admit that is weak source? :D:D:D

PlasmaHam
August 6th, 2016, 04:44 PM
Even you have to admit that is weak source? :D:D:D

I have no idea what you are talking about, I just know you are avoiding answering my question.

Is it better for a parent to fix everything for a child, or the child to achieve and fix those things himself?

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 04:47 PM
I have no idea what you are talking about, I just know you are avoiding answering my question.

Is it better for a parent to fix everything for a child, or the child to achieve and fix those things himself?


Talking about avoiding stuff, please respond to this.

You have proof of the big bang! I would certainly like to see that! Especially since it breaks all the laws of the universe!

Because God obeys every law of physics! I do agree the basic big bang model is flawed.

Every mutation we see in nature is never beneficial.
So the Peppered moth that adapted by changing colours was not beneficial?
I don't think you have an even basic idea of how genes, nucleotides or mutations work, do you?
Why do we see clearly defined species?
Clearly defined like the axolotl and the platypus, right?
The law of entropy goes against evolution.
Do you know what entropy means? Because I study A-level chemistry and it looks like you're using sciencey sounding words without knowing their meaning.....
Even scientists admit the basic building block of organic molecules require perfect conditions to create and they have no idea how it would have evolved beyond such.

What scientists? What organic molecules? Organic molecules like propane? Because organic means a chemical that contains carbon xD

This comment better describes you than God. I thought you said earlier that morality was personal, are you suggesting that there is a universal morality?
So that's why you kept on asking xD


Back to your weak sauce you have already tried, it is better for a parent to teach their child how to do stuff.

Mars
August 6th, 2016, 04:48 PM
Even you have to admit that is weak source? :D:D:D

I have no idea what you are talking about, I just know you are avoiding answering my question.

Is it better for a parent to fix everything for a child, or the child to achieve and fix those things himself?

Apologizes, but you still failed to answer my question as I wanted. A parent can't teach their kid everything, that answer does not work.

Let's keep this thread on topic, fellas.

Porpoise101
August 6th, 2016, 04:48 PM
Long answer: Which God?

"We need to go deeper"

What is your long explanation?

Mars
August 6th, 2016, 04:57 PM
"We need to go deeper"

What is your long explanation?

I'm an Atheist at heart. But I experiment with praying and (human) sacrifice and shit like that. Recently I've been experimenting with Roman Paganism (as in he Roman gods, like Jupiter, Juno, etc.), leading the question "Which God?" :P just a joke I guess.

But yeah, as for the OPs question, No. No one can be maximally great. Especially a fictional character made up to fill in the universe's many plot holes and currently unexplainable phenomenons.

Paraxiom
August 6th, 2016, 05:12 PM
If he is maximally great then yeah I'd imagine he is conscious :)

mattsmith48 PlasmaHam Peanut_ The Special One Porpoise101

I think it would help if we defined what this 'greatness' concretely is. Great power, consciousness, knowledge, good/bad intention/desire, or what?

Also, 'maximally great' is being seen here basically as 'infinitely great', and an infinite quality for me doesn't have a size/greatness. It doesn't make sense to see infinity as having a size. Size is for the finite.

Also, I see consciousness to run into major problems when we try to make it infinite.

PlasmaHam
August 6th, 2016, 05:56 PM
Let's keep this thread on topic, fellas.

I appreciate your moderating of this thread, but I do have a reason for such a question. Christians see God as sorta like a loving parent, and everyone on Earth as his children. God can teach us somethings through the Bible and prayer, like a parent can teach their child how to count and how to spell. But a good parent also knows that their child must learn to fix things on his own. Lets say a child broke his toy by using it incorrectly. The parents refuse to buy the child a new toy, they love him but the kid must learn his lesson. The child might resent his parents for that, but ultimately the child does learn their lesson and grows better from that.

Similar is that to God, he wants us to not have to worry about hardships, but through hardships we grow stronger, so he lets us endure those to better ourselves. We often don't understand right then why God lets us endure those trials, the same way a child might resent his parents after they have him figure out problems himself, but in the long run we grow better and stronger because of those hardships. We are the children, and he is the parent, and the parent must let go and have the children find their own path and live on their own.

Contrary to that is the parent who is always fixing everything for the kid. The kid is happy, there are no hardships. But the child never learns to fix stuff on his own. He becomes spoiled, expectant, and dependent on others. He can live with his parents the rest of his life, but he will never achieve anything as he can't do anything. If he goes out into the real world, he won't have any experience or knowledge, and would be years behind those who learned to fix stuff as a child.

God does not want spoiled children, he wants good children. He can teach some but the child needs to learn about life himself if he wants to succeed.

Flapjack
August 6th, 2016, 06:03 PM
@mattsmith48 (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=101901) @PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733) @Peanut_ (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=101228) @The Special One (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=105747) @Porpoise101 (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=116343)

I think it would help if we defined what this 'greatness' concretely is. Great power, consciousness, knowledge, good/bad intention/desire, or what?

Also, 'maximally great' is being seen here basically as 'infinitely great', and an infinite quality for me doesn't have a size/greatness. It doesn't make sense to see infinity as having a size. Size is for the finite.

Also, I see consciousness to run into major problems when we try to make it infinite.
There is no size for infinite buddy, if I am being honest I think most religions are so easily debunked and so inconsistent that inspecting them in this much detail is pointless.

I think maximally great is what they call him because he is all knowing, all seeing and all powerful.