Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

God is perfect ?

illegalcombat
Posts: 632
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...
illegalcombat
Posts: 632
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 6:22:29 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

I think you need to do some more explaining there.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 6:37:59 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:22:29 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

I think you need to do some more explaining there.

Nah I don't have time right now... that is why you don't see me much on here anymore.

I'll give you the quick bones of it - if God is the unmoved mover there can be nothing greater than Him, this makes Him not a being, but being itself, will itself, power itself. Thus God becomes the creator of everything by his will alone, and thus everything is necessarily held in existence by this same will. This is a logical necessity.

Additionally, this necessitates that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-present, thus there can be nothing lacking in his knowledge or ability.

Finally you cannot give what you do not have. This too is a logical truism. Thus we are able to possess a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits. Intellect, because perfect intellect exists. Love because perfect love exists, etc...

These are logical necessities for God and why God is by definition perfect.
illegalcombat
Posts: 632
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 6:53:01 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:37:59 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:22:29 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

I think you need to do some more explaining there.

Nah I don't have time right now... that is why you don't see me much on here anymore.

Yeah I thought you mean't something like that, but I wanted to give you a chance to explain yourself first.


I'll give you the quick bones of it - if God is the unmoved mover there can be nothing greater than Him,

Baseless assertion, this raises of the question of what it means when we say X is greater than Y...........VERY DEBATEABLE, well to thinkers, and your a thinker right Geo ?

this makes Him not a being, but being itself, will itself, power itself. Thus God becomes the creator of everything by his will alone,

Nope, even if you are the start of a casual chain, something else in that casual chain can create something else.

and thus everything is necessarily held in existence by this same will. This is a logical necessity.

No it isn't.


Additionally, this necessitates that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-present, thus there can be nothing lacking in his knowledge or ability.

There is nothing about being a first mover, uncased case, the first of a casual chain that logical entails that you MUST be among other things all knowing, all powerful, etc etc.


Finally you cannot give what you do not have. This too is a logical truism. Thus we are able to possess a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits. Intellect, because perfect intellect exists. Love because perfect love exists, etc...

You have two arguments in here, let's deal with the X exists therefore perfect X exists....

"a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits"

Rape exists, therefore perfect rape exists ?

You really got to test your assertions Geo and not just jump on the first thing cause it sounds good in the cause for God and religious belief.

In order for your got to have to give argument to work it would have to go something like, you can't give what you don't have, we have perfect intelligence from God, ergo God possess perfect intelligence.

1) DO we possess perfect intelligence ?

I don't think even your going to claim that, so even accepting your got to have to give premise gets you where exactly ?

We have imperfect intelligence *assuming it came from God) therefore God has imperfect intelligence.

Hell operating on your premise and the God given assumption you just made an argument for Gods imperfection...........thanks I might use that one day.

But know this, I will give you NONE, none whats so ever of the credit.............your welcome :)


These are logical necessities for God and why God is by definition perfect.
freekundli
Posts: 77
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2016 7:14:34 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

What do you mean by this?
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2016 9:42:14 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

There's an actual argument for this called "argument by degrees of perfection."

Basically, we can only measure any degree of something in relation to a superlative. So the statement "the world is imperfect" can only be a true statement if there's a superlative for perfection. The same goes for the following:

Intelligence is better than ignorance

Honesty is better than dishonesty

Power is better than weakness

Richness is better than poverty

Health is better than sickness

These statements can only actually be true if actual perfection exists. If God doesn't exist, humanity is inherently not a means towards any end, so an actual perfection can't exist. God's existence is the only means for true perfection to exist.
tarantula
Posts: 846
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2016 11:16:57 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Anyone who claims god is perfect has never read the Bible, which gives the lie to that statement.
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 4:52:22 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/1/2016 9:42:14 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

There's an actual argument for this called "argument by degrees of perfection."

Basically, we can only measure any degree of something in relation to a superlative. So the statement "the world is imperfect" can only be a true statement if there's a superlative for perfection. The same goes for the following:

Intelligence is better than ignorance

Honesty is better than dishonesty

Power is better than weakness

Richness is better than poverty

Health is better than sickness

These statements can only actually be true if actual perfection exists. If God doesn't exist, humanity is inherently not a means towards any end, so an actual perfection can't exist. God's existence is the only means for true perfection to exist.

I agree!

The fact that "better" (a qualitative value) implies a best in which to measure these degrees of value by. Better has to be grounded in best, in an absolute, concrete value. But how do you arrive at an absolute from a relative? You don't. It just becomes a game of opinions and preferences.

The problem with mankind and qualitative values are that we are relative, subjective, limited beings. The question becomes how can we comprehend better without a revelation from a perfect Being that is best? Values become nothing more than likes unless such a being exists. But we all live as though they do exist. That is the inconsistency of living without God. Those who deny God still live life as if He does exist. Meaning in a meaningless universe does not make sense. Meaning being a derivative of meaninglessness does not make sense. Meaning apart from conscious, mindful beings does not make sense. How does a universe without meaning, without purpose, without consciousness, without life, without intentionality to sustain conformity of nature, acquire these things by happenstance or mere chance? The atheist and denier of God cannot account for them, just assert that they are possible because we are here. They are leading us to believe that laws just happen for no reason. Which peels the problem back further to why there is something rather than nothing.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 6:16:30 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

A claim is an assertion.

The question is would you see what I presented as proof and a defense?

Assertions can work both ways. The atheist likes to assert that God does not exist. How well can they defend that position?

It is very hard to convince someone who does not want to be convinced. Their worldview bias will get in the way even though I believe the proofs are very reasonable and logical. We live in a universe God created and it reflects His character and nature; the majesty, the grandeur, the immensity, and complexity, yet simplicity of it (I'm thinking of complex mathematical equations we discover that can be expressed so eloquently and simply, such as E=MC2).

God doesn't need my defense but He has given us many proofs of His existence, and as a witness to Him the chief witness being the Bible, which the Christian claims to be His Word or revelation to mankind. But more so than the Christian claim is the authority of the Bible. It brings up the question as to what is the highest source of appeal, the highest authority, that a subjective human being can appeal to? Is it himself/herself? Is it some other limited human being? Or is there a wise, objective omniscient, loving, unchanging, Being that holds the answers to the riddle of existence?

I believe these proofs seen both in the natural world and the Bible cannot easily be dismissed. Proofs like the prophetic argument which I invite an atheist to logically refuted. Those who think it can, I have found, do not have a good grasp of it and its complexity and unity as it radiates throughout the pages of the Bible. It has a very rational defense in history also. Another proof is the moral argument, the argument for meaning, and trying to make sense of goodness, right and wrong, without first presupposing God is a very confusing prospect. There are many other arguments too, such as the argument for mindful being, for consciousness, for life, for truth, for conformity of/in nature, because conformity requires sustainability. How does something that lacks purpose or intent sustain anything? Laws require sustainability. I can give a poor analogy.

Try rolling a dice with the consistent result of six for a million times straight. It could be rigged to produce the same number constantly but that would require mindful intentionality, not blind, random chance happenstance (same number of flips, same direction of rotation, same landing surface, same height, same weight and many other variables). You first have to have the dice before it can be rolled and the rolling of it doesn't come about without reason. Something or Someone has to be responsible for the dice in order for there to be dice to roll. then, the only reason that you can think about the dice is because you are a mindful being. Would it exist outside of mindfulness? Certainly without your mind or my mind it can, but outside of a necessary Mind, that is highly debatable.

We think and we reason, we create, we love, we comprehend because we are made in the image and likeness of God. We are not omniscient like Him. We require Him for life, for understanding, for ultimate purpose and meaning.

What is more, without God I don't see how a person can make sense of existence.

I think the principles of 2 Timothy 3 still apply to some people today, as they did back then. They are "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2 Timothy 3:7)

How are you going to come to a knowledge of the truth unless He exists and has revealed Himself? Who is going to lead you into that knowledge of what is true? Your subjective self? Some other subjective being? Only if that subjective being points to Him and His revelation! Without it, he is as lost as anyone else.

Peter
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,861
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 6:31:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:53:01 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:37:59 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:22:29 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

I think you need to do some more explaining there.

Nah I don't have time right now... that is why you don't see me much on here anymore.

Yeah I thought you mean't something like that, but I wanted to give you a chance to explain yourself first.


I'll give you the quick bones of it - if God is the unmoved mover there can be nothing greater than Him,

Baseless assertion, this raises of the question of what it means when we say X is greater than Y...........VERY DEBATEABLE, well to thinkers, and your a thinker right Geo ?

this makes Him not a being, but being itself, will itself, power itself. Thus God becomes the creator of everything by his will alone,

Nope, even if you are the start of a casual chain, something else in that casual chain can create something else.

and thus everything is necessarily held in existence by this same will. This is a logical necessity.

No it isn't.


Additionally, this necessitates that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-present, thus there can be nothing lacking in his knowledge or ability.

There is nothing about being a first mover, uncased case, the first of a casual chain that logical entails that you MUST be among other things all knowing, all powerful, etc etc.


Finally you cannot give what you do not have. This too is a logical truism. Thus we are able to possess a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits. Intellect, because perfect intellect exists. Love because perfect love exists, etc...

You have two arguments in here, let's deal with the X exists therefore perfect X exists....

"a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits"

Rape exists, therefore perfect rape exists ?
Are you really this clueless? False analogy fallacy, just because one thing necessitates a perfect scale of it doesn't mean everything does.

You really got to test your assertions Geo and not just jump on the first thing cause it sounds good in the cause for God and religious belief.

In order for your got to have to give argument to work it would have to go something like, you can't give what you don't have, we have perfect intelligence from God, ergo God possess perfect intelligence.

1) DO we possess perfect intelligence ?
Not the point.....
I don't think even your going to claim that, so even accepting your got to have to give premise gets you where exactly ?

We have imperfect intelligence *assuming it came from God) therefore God has imperfect intelligence.
Wrong, a scale doesn't therefore mean that all possess the highest end of the scale. Perfection can demonstrate imperfection but something that does not possess perfection cannot demonstrate it.
Hell operating on your premise and the God given assumption you just made an argument for Gods imperfection...........thanks I might use that one day.

But know this, I will give you NONE, none whats so ever of the credit.............your welcome :)







These are logical necessities for God and why God is by definition perfect.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,861
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 6:32:40 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 6:53:01 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:37:59 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:22:29 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
At 9/24/2016 6:17:49 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 9/24/2016 5:32:52 AM, illegalcombat wrote:
Does anyone actually think they can defend that claim beyond religious assertion shoved down your throat ad-nauseum

And if so, may I ask how ?

Logical necessity.

First mover, you cannot give what you do not have, etc...

I think you need to do some more explaining there.

Nah I don't have time right now... that is why you don't see me much on here anymore.

Yeah I thought you mean't something like that, but I wanted to give you a chance to explain yourself first.


I'll give you the quick bones of it - if God is the unmoved mover there can be nothing greater than Him,

Baseless assertion, this raises of the question of what it means when we say X is greater than Y...........VERY DEBATEABLE, well to thinkers, and your a thinker right Geo ?

this makes Him not a being, but being itself, will itself, power itself. Thus God becomes the creator of everything by his will alone,

Nope, even if you are the start of a casual chain, something else in that casual chain can create something else.

and thus everything is necessarily held in existence by this same will. This is a logical necessity.

No it isn't.


Additionally, this necessitates that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-present, thus there can be nothing lacking in his knowledge or ability.

There is nothing about being a first mover, uncased case, the first of a casual chain that logical entails that you MUST be among other things all knowing, all powerful, etc etc.


Finally you cannot give what you do not have. This too is a logical truism. Thus we are able to possess a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits. Intellect, because perfect intellect exists. Love because perfect love exists, etc...

You have two arguments in here, let's deal with the X exists therefore perfect X exists....

"a sense of justice because a perfect justice exits"

Rape exists, therefore perfect rape exists ?
Are you really this clueless? False analogy fallacy, just because one thing necessitates a perfect scale of it doesn't mean everything does.

You really got to test your assertions Geo and not just jump on the first thing cause it sounds good in the cause for God and religious belief.

In order for your got to have to give argument to work it would have to go something like, you can't give what you don't have, we have perfect intelligence from God, ergo God possess perfect intelligence.

1) DO we possess perfect intelligence ?
Not the point.....
I don't think even your going to claim that, so even accepting your got to have to give premise gets you where exactly ?

We have imperfect intelligence *assuming it came from God) therefore God has imperfect intelligence.
Wrong, a scale doesn't therefore mean that all possess the highest end of the scale. Perfection can demonstrate imperfection but something that does not possess perfection cannot demonstrate it. Simple set theory.
Hell operating on your premise and the God given assumption you just made an argument for Gods imperfection...........thanks I might use that one day.

But know this, I will give you NONE, none whats so ever of the credit.............your welcome :)







These are logical necessities for God and why God is by definition perfect.