Total Posts:104|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Good grief this board is full of...

Naruto2005
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 1:39:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
religious bigotry.

"if you say to me that God doesn't exist. I would laugh at you. If your professor proved it so, I would cry for you. If your conscience tells so. I will pray for you"- Tom Price 2009, aka Naruto2005
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 3:47:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Oh great, another troll!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 4:40:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 1:39:08 AM, Naruto2005 wrote:
religious bigotry.

"if you say to me that God doesn't exist. I would laugh at you. If your professor proved it so, I would cry for you. If your conscience tells so. I will pray for you"- Tom Price 2009, aka Naruto2005

Just like the rest of the planet then.. get over it.
The Cross.. the Cross.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 6:37:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Religious absurdity.

"If you tell me God does exist, i will ask for evidence. If your professor proved it so, i would call up my theology professor so that they can give this man the nobel prize for proving something that people have not been able to do for 2000+ years. If your conscience tells you so, I will say to you, "You pray for me, and ill think for you"."
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 6:38:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 6:37:58 AM, tkubok wrote:
Religious absurdity.

"If you tell me God does exist, i will ask for evidence. If your professor proved it so, i would call up my theology professor so that they can give this man the nobel prize for proving something that people have not been able to do for 2000+ years. If your conscience tells you so, I will say to you, "You pray for me, and ill think for you"."

Oh, and yes. Tkubok 2010, aka Tkubok.
Naruto2005
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 8:26:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 6:38:29 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/3/2010 6:37:58 AM, tkubok wrote:
Religious absurdity.

"If you tell me God does exist, i will ask for evidence. If your professor proved it so, i would call up my theology professor so that they can give this man the nobel prize for proving something that people have not been able to do for 2000+ years. If your conscience tells you so, I will say to you, "You pray for me, and ill think for you"."

Oh, and yes. Tkubok 2010, aka Tkubok.

Well the answer is "FAITH". If you don't believed in it then this is pointless. Who can proved that God doesn't exist? Its de same either way.

Pray that you may have "FAITH". Your theology teacher should start teaching Mathematics if he doesn't know the word meaning "FAITH and dont practice it.". Theology is about religion.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 8:51:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 8:26:04 AM, Naruto2005 wrote:
Well the answer is "FAITH". If you don't believed in it then this is pointless. Who can proved that God doesn't exist? Its de same either way.

Pray that you may have "FAITH". Your theology teacher should start teaching Mathematics if he doesn't know the word meaning "FAITH and dont practice it.". Theology is about religion.

I agree that the answer is faith. And thats the problem. Faith is an especialy bad way of determining what is true, which is apparently why theologians, for 2000 years, have been trying to produce arguments, logical arguments, evidence to back up their beliefs.

Why do you think THEOLOGIANS like Plantiga even bothered with their logical arguments to prove God, if Fiath is all they needed? Its because they know that Faith alone is a POOR reason to believe in anything.

Thats right. Faith can make you believe in ANYTHING. Literally, ANYTHING.
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 8:54:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Why do you think THEOLOGIANS like Plantiga even bothered with their logical arguments to prove God, if Fiath is all they needed?

To defend attacks from Atheists probably.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:07:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 8:54:25 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Why do you think THEOLOGIANS like Plantiga even bothered with their logical arguments to prove God, if Fiath is all they needed?

To defend attacks from Atheists probably.

Why would they need to defend attacks from atheists, if they already have a justification for their beliefs? Are they so insecure about their belief, that they feel the need to justify it?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:27:56 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 9:24:58 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Too answer questions asked.

If question was not asked they would generally continue believing with only faith.

Yes, and the answer, according to you, to every question is simply "I believe on Faith".

What is the logical argument to support the existance of God?

Plantinga would bring his argument to the table.

You on the other hand would rather say "No logical argument, just Faith".
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:32:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Yes, and the answer, according to you, to every question is simply "I believe on Faith".
That is not my answer to everything?

What is the logical argument to support the existance of God?
What is the logical argument to support the non-existance of God?

Plantinga would bring his argument to the table.

You on the other hand would rather say "No logical argument, just Faith".
Not really.
Show me why a -Logical Argument- is required for the existance of God to be true?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:45:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 9:32:51 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
That is not my answer to everything?
Really? So you have evidence regarding Gods existance?

What is the logical argument to support the non-existance of God?

There are plenty, but this depends on the definition of God that you are using.

Show me why a -Logical Argument- is required for the existance of God to be true?

Because something cannot exist if it contradicts logic.
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:51:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 9:45:35 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/3/2010 9:32:51 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
That is not my answer to everything?
Really? So you have evidence regarding Gods existance?

What is the logical argument to support the non-existance of God?

There are plenty, but this depends on the definition of God that you are using.

Show me why a -Logical Argument- is required for the existance of God to be true?

Because something cannot exist if it contradicts logic.

Why not?
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 9:56:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 9:51:08 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
At 3/3/2010 9:45:35 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/3/2010 9:32:51 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
That is not my answer to everything?
Really? So you have evidence regarding Gods existance?

What is the logical argument to support the non-existance of God?

There are plenty, but this depends on the definition of God that you are using.

Show me why a -Logical Argument- is required for the existance of God to be true?

Because something cannot exist if it contradicts logic.

Why not?

Do square circles exist?

Does a triangle with 5 sides and 8 corners, exist?

If so, can i have a picture of what they look like? Could you describe them for me?
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 10:15:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Because something cannot exist if it contradicts logic.

Like the universe(something) coming from nothing?
Or Life coming from non-life?

These two things cannot be logically explained, (yet) but they exist.

God cannot be explained logically (yet), but you assume he does not?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2010 11:07:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 10:18:37 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Because God is the pink unicorn to you.

Fine so be it.

And to you.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2010 11:08:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/3/2010 10:15:48 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Because something cannot exist if it contradicts logic.

Like the universe(something) coming from nothing?
Where is the contradiction?
Or Life coming from non-life?
Again, where is the contradiction?
These two things cannot be logically explained, (yet) but they exist.
Logically explained, no. But there is no logical CONTRADITION. There is nothing within there that contradicts logic, and therefore, explanation or no, the possibility still exists.
God cannot be explained logically (yet), but you assume he does not?
That is the same as saying "Well, the existance of a square circle cannot be explained logically (Yet), but you assume it cannot exist?"

Sorry, but no. A fail argument is fail.
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2010 11:49:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
So your argument is that because god is omnipotent, he should be able to make a square circle.
How about make a rock so big he cannot lift it?
same thing right? Logical Contradiction?

Can god make a rock so big that he can't lift it?
Answer:
God is omnipotent. But omnipotence does not mean that God can do literally everything.

As the shorter catechism says "God can do all His holy will."

God cannot sin...God cannot lie...God cannot change His nature.
God cannot deny the demands of His holy character.
God cannot make a square circle, for the notion of a square circle is self–contradictory.
God cannot cease to be God. But all that God wills and promises He can and will do.
-Professor Henry F. (Fritz) Schaefer -

If you do not accept this answer, that is your perogative.
have a nice day.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2010 8:08:03 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/4/2010 11:49:22 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
So your argument is that because god is omnipotent, he should be able to make a square circle.
How about make a rock so big he cannot lift it?
same thing right? Logical Contradiction?

Can god make a rock so big that he can't lift it?
Answer:
God is omnipotent. But omnipotence does not mean that God can do literally everything.

As the shorter catechism says "God can do all His holy will."

God cannot sin...God cannot lie...God cannot change His nature.
God cannot deny the demands of His holy character.
God cannot make a square circle, for the notion of a square circle is self–contradictory.
God cannot cease to be God. But all that God wills and promises He can and will do.
-Professor Henry F. (Fritz) Schaefer -

If you do not accept this answer, that is your perogative.
have a nice day.

If your argument is that God is omnipotent with a qualifier on what the definition of Omnipotence is, thats fine. CS Lewis for example defines Gods omnipotency to anything that is logically possible.

The only problem i see with this, is, first off, this doesnt make God all powerful, but merely the MOST powerful in the universe. This also places into question his other attributes, such as omnibenevolence and omniscience, because those two also contradict with each other and contradict with themselves. And, secondly, this provies the problem of a miracle. Miracles, by definition are a violation of physical laws, and therefore contradict.

However, here are some interesting questions id like answers to. First of all, Does God have free will?

Secondly, If God can only do what is in his nature, then the definition of Omnipotence becomes useless. As Gods nature is usually defined as "The things that God is capable of doing", therefore the definition of Omnipotence would become something of a tautological question of "God can do all the things that God can do", and therefore, under this new definition, humans are also omnipotent.
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2010 10:26:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
This also places into question his other attributes, such as omnibenevolence and omniscience, because those two also contradict with each other and contradict with themselves.
Right, but its an easy way to describe God's abilities with 3 words.
No one is trying to give a scientific definition of God.
Why do people not understand this?
Its like calling a white man white, and a black man black.
Neither are correct. Your breaking the english language apart to suit your needs.

And, secondly, this provies the problem of a miracle. Miracles, by definition are a violation of physical laws, and therefore contradict.
The laws of logic are rational statements that are universally true. The first law of logic is the Law of Identity which says that something is what it is and is not what it is not. The second law of logic is the Law of Non-Contradiction which states that something cannot be itself and not itself at the same time and in the same sense. The third law of logic is the Law of Excluded Middle which says that statements are either true or false. Such laws and other logical laws form the undergirding foundations of rational thought.

A miracle is an extraordinary event, something that appears to defy the normal laws of physics. Miracles, from the Christian perspective, are authored by God. Examples of miracles would be the parting of the Red Sea, turning water into wine, and the physical resurrection of Jesus.

There is no logical reason why an omnipotent and omniscient God could not part the Red Sea, turn water into wine, and raise someone from the dead. In Christian theology God is the Creator of the universe and the master of all of its laws. Undoubtedly, God would have access to certain laws of the universe that we don't know about and could use them in such a way that they would appear to be miraculous. Also, since he transcends space and time and is not restricted to the physical universe, it is logical to assume that he has characteristics within his own nature that we cannot comprehend. For example, we cannot fathom what it means to be in all places at all time. How does God know all things? How can he be outside of time? We can understand the concepts but we cannot experience their reality.

So, we can safely conclude that within the Christian perspective of God, he possesses attributes that allow him to access laws of the universe that we do not know about and use them, in combination with his divine power in nature, to bring about the miraculous.

There is nothing illogical about this. Therefore, there's nothing illogical God performing miracles
http://www.carm.org...

However, here are some interesting questions id like answers to.
ME TOO!!!!

First of all, Does God have free will?
Maybe?
You can ask 1000 questions about God that I may not be able to answer, I have questions about God that I cannot answer.... so what?

Secondly, If God can only do what is in his nature, then the definition of Omnipotence becomes useless. As Gods nature is usually defined as "The things that God is capable of doing", therefore the definition of Omnipotence would become something of a tautological question of "God can do all the things that God can do", and therefore, under this new definition, humans are also omnipotent.
See above.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2010 6:28:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/5/2010 10:26:53 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Right, but its an easy way to describe God's abilities with 3 words.
No no, not at all. There are easier AND more accurate ways of describing Gods abilities. What does it matter that you can describe something with 3 words if its accuracy of description is poor?

No one is trying to give a scientific definition of God.

No one is asking for a "Scientific definition". I dont even know what that is. What were looking for, is the BEST definition possible. Why is this a bad thing?

Why do people not understand this?

Why dont you?

Its like calling a white man white, and a black man black.

What youre doing though, is pointing to an asian and saying "Black". There are some things to which simplistic definitions work. A rubix cube can be simply be defined as a "Box". But there are also things that utterly fail when simplified.

Neither are correct. Your breaking the english language apart to suit your needs.

Neither of what are correct? Neither of your examples? Furthermore, how am i breaking the english language apart to suit my needs? What does that even mean? How is establishing a proper definition that most accurately defines something, breaking the english language? Seriously?

The laws of logic are rational statements that are universally true. The first law of logic is the Law of Identity which says that something is what it is and is not what it is not. The second law of logic is the Law of Non-Contradiction which states that something cannot be itself and not itself at the same time and in the same sense. The third law of logic is the Law of Excluded Middle which says that statements are either true or false. Such laws and other logical laws form the undergirding foundations of rational thought.

Yes.

A miracle is an extraordinary event, something that appears to defy the normal laws of physics. Miracles, from the Christian perspective, are authored by God. Examples of miracles would be the parting of the Red Sea, turning water into wine, and the physical resurrection of Jesus.

There is no logical reason why an omnipotent and omniscient God could not part the Red Sea, turn water into wine, and raise someone from the dead. In Christian theology God is the Creator of the universe and the master of all of its laws. Undoubtedly, God would have access to certain laws of the universe that we don't know about and could use them in such a way that they would appear to be miraculous. Also, since he transcends space and time and is not restricted to the physical universe, it is logical to assume that he has characteristics within his own nature that we cannot comprehend. For example, we cannot fathom what it means to be in all places at all time. How does God know all things? How can he be outside of time? We can understand the concepts but we cannot experience their reality.

So, we can safely conclude that within the Christian perspective of God, he possesses attributes that allow him to access laws of the universe that we do not know about and use them, in combination with his divine power in nature, to bring about the miraculous.

There is nothing illogical about this. Therefore, there's nothing illogical God performing miracles
http://www.carm.org...

Thank you Matt Slick for that Copy and paste.

However, sadly, you are wrong.

First of all, being a master of some law does not mean you can violate the law.

Secondly, claiming that there are some laws that we do not know, which CONTRADICT KNOWN laws, solves nothing. For example, there may be a law that is not known to us, which turns a square into a square and a circle at the same time. Well congratulations, youve just defied the laws of logic. And when, for example, the Trinity, violates the laws of logic, your argument is meaningless.

you can send my reply to Matt Slick so that i can hear his reply. I doubt you will give me one since you had to copy and paste his entire argument in order to reply to me.

Maybe?
You can ask 1000 questions about God that I may not be able to answer, I have questions about God that I cannot answer.... so what?
See above.

Well, how do you know anything about God, then, including his existance?
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2010 9:10:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Neither of what are correct?
Calling a white man white, and a Black man Black.
Calling God omni-etc is no different, its a great and accurate description to a degree.

There are easier AND more accurate ways of describing Gods abilities. What does it matter that you can describe something with 3 words if its accuracy of description is poor?
Ok Tku, without being scarcastic, please give me an exact definition of all of Gods thoughts, powers, abilities, behaviors etc. in 3 words! GO.
-Your going to fail at this-
Then you get upset and cry when we do with with Omni-etc

Well, how do you know anything about God, then, including his existance?
Jesus.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 11:11:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/8/2010 9:10:05 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Calling a white man white, and a Black man Black.
Yes, in a simplistic sense, this is correct. As i said before, there are different situations, objects with different characteristics and therefore limits as to how simple the words you can use to describe anything.
Calling God omni-etc is no different, its a great and accurate description to a degree.
And calling a car "Metal", is also accurate to a degree. But no one would ever use that as a description because it is TOO simplistic.

Ok Tku, without being scarcastic, please give me an exact definition of all of Gods thoughts, powers, abilities, behaviors etc. in 3 words! GO.

Did i not just say that using a description, is not valid just because the least number of words were used?

-Your going to fail at this-
Then you get upset and cry when we do with with Omni-etc
Yes, i am, if i tried, which is why my argument was regarding the fact that describing God within 3 words is the mistake, not the application of the definition. Please address my argument instead of ignoring it and making it appear as though i presented a different argument.

Jesus.
Jesus... What? Sent you a fax?
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 1:27:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/9/2010 11:11:45 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 3/8/2010 9:10:05 AM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Calling a white man white, and a Black man Black.
Yes, in a simplistic sense, this is correct. As i said before, there are different situations, objects with different characteristics and therefore limits as to how simple the words you can use to describe anything.
Calling God omni-etc is no different, its a great and accurate description to a degree.
And calling a car "Metal", is also accurate to a degree. But no one would ever use that as a description because it is TOO simplistic.
Fine. once again... give me a better (more accurate) description of God, so that ALL US CHRISTIANS can learn from you and start using your definition.

Ok Tku, without being scarcastic, please give me an exact definition of all of Gods thoughts, powers, abilities, behaviors etc. in 3 words! GO.

Did i not just say that using a description, is not valid just because the least number of words were used?
Yes.

-Your going to fail at this-
Then you get upset and cry when we do with with Omni-etc
Yes, i am, if i tried, which is why my argument was regarding the fact that describing God within 3 words is the mistake, not the application of the definition. Please address my argument instead of ignoring it and making it appear as though i presented a different argument.
Don't avoid mine, How do you blame us to giving a too simplistic definition of God's abilities, when you cannot provide a better one, AND EXPECT US TOO????

Jesus.
Jesus... What? Sent you a fax?
No, not a fax. Jesus' paraboles and quotes from scripture/gospels.
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 1:35:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I understand your argument, but what your asking is borderline absurd.
You want us to say.... God can do this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 2:43:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/9/2010 1:27:34 PM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Fine. once again... give me a better (more accurate) description of God, so that ALL US CHRISTIANS can learn from you and start using your definition.

Sure. Heres the definition.

God is the most powerful being in this universe, who knows everything within the universe that can be known.

Don't avoid mine, How do you blame us to giving a too simplistic definition of God's abilities, when you cannot provide a better one, AND EXPECT US TOO????

Id gladly present one. And since you JUST asked me to present my definition, i dont see how i can avoid something that hasnt happened yet.

No, not a fax. Jesus' paraboles and quotes from scripture/gospels.

Oh, so in other words, the bible.

Well then, how do you know the bible is true?
CrappyDebater
Posts: 334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 2:57:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
God is the most powerful being in this universe, who knows everything within the universe that can be known.
Tkubok, for shame... you would be so disappointed if I offered this definition to you.

Oh, so in other words, the bible.

Well then, how do you know the bible is true?
Jesus.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2010 2:59:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/9/2010 2:57:04 PM, CrappyDebater wrote:
Well then, how do you know the bible is true?
Jesus.

The bible was written after Jesus.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light