God has passed His judgement

Dixie said:
I am at a distinct advantage over you in these debates, because I don't "believe" God is real, I know it. Just like I know gravity is real, although I can't see it. You have not evolved to the point of being able to understand your God, and that is a shame, because if you ever get there, you will find the peace and happiness you've searched for your whole life.... damn, I am sounding like Roy Masters now, I hate when that happens!
Click to expand...

Dixie, you do not know that God is real anymore than I do. It's philosophically disingenous for anyone to claim they *know* God is real. It's not an IMPROVEMENT over saying you *believe* God is real, it's a huge disadvantage because it's simply so retarded.
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
I'm interested to hear how you differentiate the two.
Click to expand...

Dixie, who has claimed there is a God, has tried to defend himself by asking me to defend God's non-existence. But I never said I didn't believe that God didn't exist, I merely asked him to prove his existence to me. I'm putting the weight of evidence back where it belongs.
 
Last edited:
Watermark said:
Dixie, who has claimed there is no God, has tried to defend himself by asking me to defend God's non-existence. But I never said I didn't believe that God didn't exist, I merely asked him to prove it to me. I'm putting the weight of evidence back where it belongs.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough.
 
Watermark said:
I am not fighting against any God but the Abrahamic God right now. Why would I? If you want to talk about some other set of fairy tales, start a new thread.
Click to expand...
Then again, your very limited understanding of the situation makes it like an ant trying to judge the action of a human who takes the food the ant was going to use to feed its "sisters"...

You are simply unaware of the criteria an omniscient being would use to make such a decision. Being a flawed, and very not omniscient, human being tends to make it so you begin at a point of simplicity to the complexity that would be God (were such a Being to exist.)
 
Damocles said:
Then again, your very limited understanding of the situation makes it like an ant trying to judge the action of a human who takes the food the ant was going to use to feed its "sisters"...

You are simply unaware of the criteria an omniscient being would use to make such a decision. Being a flawed, and very not omniscient, human being tends to make it so you begin at a point of simplicity to the complexity that would be God (were such a Being to exist.)
Click to expand...

I'm talking about an omnibenevolent God. If he is omnibenevolent in the way Christians describe, then he is omnibenevolent in a human sense, and so we can apply human morality to him, and see where this supposed morality logically conflicts with the things that are happening in the world.
 
Watermark said:
I'm talking about an omnibenevolent God. If he is omnibenevolent in the way Christians describe, then he is omnibenevolent in a human sense, and so we can apply human morality to him, and see where this supposed morality logically conflicts with the things that are happening in the world.
Click to expand...
One doesn't necessarily follow the other. First one could not necessarily apply "human morality" without the full and comprehensive understanding that omniscience gets you. You have no idea, for instance, if the kid's survival would have set into motion events that would have killed billions in some other place, or even billions of humans.

Instead you attempt to take your, admittedly limited, picture of the world and judge the giants who keep picking the food you were going to take back to the colony...

Your own limitations make it impossible to judge, you are not even partially a "peer" in order to even serve on the jury....
 
Watermark said:
I'm talking about an omnibenevolent God. If he is omnibenevolent in the way Christians describe, then he is omnibenevolent in a human sense, and so we can apply human morality to him, and see where this supposed morality logically conflicts with the things that are happening in the world.
Click to expand...

That still assumes that the child was inherently good. As I previously mentioned, he could have been the next Hitler.
 
I'm talking about an omnibenevolent God.
Click to expand...

Where do you get God is "omnibenevolent?" (Not that such a word exists.)

An omnipotent entity doesn't have a need to be benevolent, or any other need, for that matter. It's what omnipotence is all about! This shows you clearly lack an understanding of what God is, and instead of trying to understand it, you've merely assigned a human aspect to God, because that is what your mind can comprehend. What you should try is expanding your horizons of thought. Think in terms of the universe and how vast it is... how much of the universe we know nothing about and can't even comprehend through human sciences. God created it, and is more powerful than the universe itself. God doesn't have to do things, God doesn't need to think about things, God doesn't want and desire things! God is NOT human!
 
Damocles said:
Hence I did not ask that question.

I asked, "Who said god is omniscient anyway?"

And pointed out, "Your arguments are simply against one religion set (those religions that came from Abraham), not against god as an idea."

.
Click to expand...

considering this happened in a christian church and most of the members of this site are christian, it would be pretty stupid to start mocking shiva
 
usaloyal2theend said:
He's an overgrown 2 year old who is always craving attention. Any attention.

He's still young and stupid enough to believe his metaphorical fart in the elevator mentality is something that passes for original.

He'll get his ass kicked one day.

Until then the poor schlepp thinks he's terminally unique. Some bizarre mask for his social retardation.
Click to expand...

Add to that he's an ugly geeky looking dude :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top