The Son of God:

"

bwam wrote:

C'mon, man; you're just trolling. You don't even believe, so why would you adopt such an argument, accusing others of blasphemy? *Waves hand* I could refute it, but you're just looking for things to say that are antagonist to the Son of God.

If you don't have anything legitimate to say, go grind some maps or something.

Lol, sorry I was framing a logical argument in a theatrical manner.

But I think I'm on to something here. How can you tell if you're following the real word of god or just the words of some vain people purporting to know god's will?

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

"

bwam wrote:

C'mon, man; you're just trolling. You don't even believe, so why would you adopt such an argument, accusing others of blasphemy? *Waves hand* I could refute it, but you're just looking for things to say that are antagonist to the Son of God.

If you don't have anything legitimate to say, go grind some maps or something.

Lol, sorry I was framing a logical argument in a theatrical manner.

But I think I'm on to something here. How can you tell if you're following the real word of god or just the words of some vain people purporting to know god's will?

Alright, I accept your apology. You're interested in how I discern Jesus's call? His Word resounds within me in its Almighty power. He has given me faith; he has given me everything, even my very life! He sustains my life through is powerful Word. I hear him and I listen.

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

"

bwam wrote:

C'mon, man; you're just trolling. You don't even believe, so why would you adopt such an argument, accusing others of blasphemy? *Waves hand* I could refute it, but you're just looking for things to say that are antagonist to the Son of God.

If you don't have anything legitimate to say, go grind some maps or something.

Lol, sorry I was framing a logical argument in a theatrical manner.

But I think I'm on to something here. How can you tell if you're following the real word of god or just the words of some vain people purporting to know god's will?

He can't.

"

bwam wrote:

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

"

bwam wrote:

C'mon, man; you're just trolling. You don't even believe, so why would you adopt such an argument, accusing others of blasphemy? *Waves hand* I could refute it, but you're just looking for things to say that are antagonist to the Son of God.

If you don't have anything legitimate to say, go grind some maps or something.

Lol, sorry I was framing a logical argument in a theatrical manner.

But I think I'm on to something here. How can you tell if you're following the real word of god or just the words of some vain people purporting to know god's will?

Alright, I accept your apology. You're interested in how I discern Jesus's call? His Word resounds within me in its Almighty power. He has given me faith; he has given me everything, even my very life! He sustains my life through is powerful Word. I hear him and I listen.

So let's say I accept this right, I don't know if you actually do but I believe you do. You tell me things about His Word and how he speaks within you. Unless God literally tells me you're telling the truth how can I accept what you say is true without putting your words before the real words of God? I would have to have faith and belief in your interpretation of what you imagine the word of God to be and then accept that as my own belief in God but in that case I didn't get that from God I got it from you so I'm following you in place of God otherwise I must reject what you say as false because it didn't come directly from God.

You see the logical paradox I'm trying to get at?

When I watch ministers on tv for example they speak as if Jesus was someone they personally know and they speak of His intentions and interactions in our lives and so on but that's not Jesus saying that it's this guy, so I'm not believing in the word of Jesus I'm following the word of this guy.

This applies to any kind of teachings from God you receive from any other entity not directly from God himself, for example your parents or the bible etc.

That's the part I can't wrap my head around. There are two sides to the faith coin, a belief in the existence of some set of deities and then additionally the belief in the validity of a religion associated with them. How can you have religion without the direct interaction from the deity itself? In the absence of a deity's direct interaction you're reduced to having faith in man not God.

"

MonstaMunch wrote:

Re: Omnipotence

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I think it's worth noting that if such an imaginary entity was even a hair short of omnipotent, yet claimed omnipotence in a "close e-fucking-nough" kind of manner, then your argument would fall apart.

Lots of problems with this, the main one being that the Bible doesn't claim God is "close enough to being omnipotent", it claims that he is. Accepting that Biblical claims about the nature of God are false doesn't cause my argument to fall apart, it proves it.

"

If God could snuff out the sun in a matter of seconds, but in so doing would become even the slightest bit tired, then all of a sudden his actions have opportunity cost and his behavior becomes subject to the laws of economics. At such a point, God would presumably have an interest in getting us to a point where we can handle as many things as possible on our own, which would mean that there could be good in God not acting when he easily could, because it could serve as a learning experience for us.

We've gone from "a hair short of omnipotent" to getting tired and actions having opportunity cost (btw, the Bible claims he's omnipresent as well as omnipotent, so opportunity cost isn't a thing). At this point we've lost any semblance of the God described in the Bible.

"

True, infinite omnipotence would make free will itself an evil, as without it God could predetermine all good.

What part of that would make free will "evil"? According to the Bible, God already knows everything including the future, so to that extent everything is already predetermined. One could conclude that this means free will doesn't exist, though the typical Christian response is that we have free will but God already knows how we will use it and what the outcome will be.

"Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O Lord, you know it altogether." - Psalm 139:4

"

Instead, God's "power level" is meant to understood as arbitrarily large number, many orders of magnitude beyond what we can even conceive (or at least what we could conceive — math has advanced considerably since the Bible was written), which is logically distinct from infinite.

Two issues:

- What you're describing isn't the God described in the Old Testament. You're giving a more plausible description of a God, but it isn't the Biblical God.

- Beyond what we can even conceive? Why didn't God create us able to conceive it? Better yet, why not create us with certainty of his existence if worshiping him was so important?

"

It's relatively simple to make an argument that such a distinction was lost in translation while going from God to prophet.

That's an incredibly poor argument. God picked a bad translator by accident and had no way to correct the record?

Having thought on this more, my point is this: the additional qualifier of "all wise" is essentially moot. The mere conception of true, infinite omnipotence, without further qualifiers (ex: omniscience), is untenable. It breaks the concept of opportunity cost so thoroughly that choice is utterly irrelevant and any pretext at free will a joke. In rendering choice meaningless, it also destroys morality and the concepts of good and evil. This makes omnipotence fall into the same general category as traveling backwards in time; if such a thing were to exist, it would alter the laws of the universe on such a fundamental level that it inherently stands as a contradiction to reality itself, and thus would require some form of reality fission theory (ex: alternate timelines) to even be cognizable... and even then would break the law of cause and effect in the sense that causes outside of one reality can create effects within it.

In short, omnipotence is in and of itself a contradiction in terms; it is impossible not just in an a posteriori sense, but in an a priori sense. Saying anyone believes in omnipotence is like saying someone believes in an invisible greenness; no, they don't, they couldn't, it's impossible. Instead, such people necessarily believe in something asymptotic to omnipotence, something that comes ever closer but never reaches.

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

"

bwam wrote:

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

Lol, sorry I was framing a logical argument in a theatrical manner.

But I think I'm on to something here. How can you tell if you're following the real word of god or just the words of some vain people purporting to know god's will?

Alright, I accept your apology. You're interested in how I discern Jesus's call? His Word resounds within me in its Almighty power. He has given me faith; he has given me everything, even my very life! He sustains my life through is powerful Word. I hear him and I listen.

So let's say I accept this right, I don't know if you actually do but I believe you do. You tell me things about His Word and how he speaks within you. Unless God literally tells me you're telling the truth how can I accept what you say is true without putting your words before the real words of God? I would have to have faith and belief in your interpretation of what you imagine the word of God to be and then accept that as my own belief in God but in that case I didn't get that from God I got it from you so I'm following you in place of God otherwise I must reject what you say as false because it didn't come directly from God.

But what have I said that is a revelation to you? I've merely said what is written -- in Scripture and in my heart. I haven't offered you my own guidance; I've merely pointed the way to the one who gives me guidance. To say that His Word lives in my heart is true and trustworthy, and in keeping with what is written.

"

GeorgAnatoly wrote:

You see the logical paradox I'm trying to get at?

When I watch ministers on tv for example they speak as if Jesus was someone they personally know and they speak of His intentions and interactions in our lives and so on but that's not Jesus saying that it's this guy, so I'm not believing in the word of Jesus I'm following the word of this guy.

This applies to any kind of teachings from God you receive from any other entity not directly from God himself, for example your parents or the bible etc.

That's the part I can't wrap my head around. There are two sides to the faith coin, a belief in the existence of some set of deities and then additionally the belief in the validity of a religion associated with them. How can you have religion without the direct interaction from the deity itself? In the absence of a deity's direct interaction you're reduced to having faith in man not God.

"

bwam wrote:

But what have I said that is a revelation to you? I've merely said what is written -- in Scripture and in my heart. I haven't offered you my own guidance; I've merely pointed the way to the one who gives me guidance. To say that His Word lives in my heart is true and trustworthy, and in keeping with what is written.

Right, my point is God hasn't literally revealed to me these things in your heart and what has been written in scripture to be the true words and will of God so I have to take your word for it and I would then have to have faith in your words and the words written in scripture to be true, not the word of God because it isn't God telling me these things its literally you and whomever wrote the bible.

Do you see the paradox there? If I suddenly said I believe you, the bible and whomever gives you guidance unless God literally somehow revealed to me these things were true I wouldn't be worshiping God I'd be worshiping some group of people.

I mean I'd rather the "God revealed these things in my heart" than the 3 people in this discussion that have claimed that God literally speaks to them directly, at least. Far less psychotic.

Faith is emotion-driven and irrational by definition. Arguing about faith is an amazing waste of time. Some guys have it, some guys don't. That's pretty much all there is to it.

Bwam is in a mental state in which he feels tranquility and fulfillment for no good reason, and that's pretty amazing as far as I'm concerned. Trying to logic him out of it, or Bwam traying to faith the others out of their mental state, is rather pointless. It's an inner experience which makes no sense to people who haven't actually experienced it.

"

BodyHammer01 wrote:

It's the same God. Christianity hijacked the Torah. Islam hijacked them both.

If you every wanted to put on your ""tin foil hat"", then religion is the best Topic to beginn with. One has to understand the nutorious natur of some dessertfreaks first before
he makes such broad statements.

A lot of cases about Jesus do not make sense. He is depictured as a european, all angel´s are even depictured as nordic european´s, and the origin is supposed to be Arabien,Rome?
Yes he probably was a jew, but the likelyhood that he was just a pegan is equaly high.
Might be just a kryptic mockery, there gotta be a reason why they hate him so much.

We would have to dive into the triangular relation between all monolothic religion´s, or better, the Dessertfreak could have just wrote ""although we are weaker than you, we would realy want your prescius land"". Trust me, i´d rather have Odin in Charge in europe, we sure had less sandy problems, but good luck explaining that to 500+300mil people.
Christianity made a condition, were evrything is debated on there moral ground, you literaly have to forgive and regret evrything.

Anyway´s im agnostic, i defend christianity solely for the reason, because atheism is the worst outcome for society ""Curiosity""Doubt"" therefore ""Despair"". Nowdays,i see this atheism promotion a lot. These vocal People sure are amoung the lowest, they are amused by humanity´s extinction. That´s the reason why a certan ""Prophet"" ordert there persecution and not because he was salty.

Marxismus and Atheism are best friends, the ultimate enemy to evry ""functioning"" society. The faaaaaaaaaaar right person´s are not stupid people, they know were the bunny run´s.