God can't think or create anything.

[Johz]

Well many Christians would believe that God is still acting today. Indeed, I've witnessed meetings where Christians say that they have been driven to uncontrollable emotion, 'slayed in the spirit' or even been given the gifts of being able to, supposedly, talk the language of angels, or prophesy with or without translation.

And I've seen perfectly sane people freak out at music concerts. What's your point?

That the reason why 'the Bible doesn't take the time to explain why physical intervention in the universe doesn't happen anymore' is because the adherants of the belief system it espouses do not believe that 'physical intervention in the universe doesn't happen anymore'.

[Seperates]

Logic still must be contigent with observable reality or else it is not logical.

Not true. Logic only has to be self-consistent.

Philisophy, on the other hand, can be espoused by drunkards in a bar at a whim.

No it can't. Please don't confuse proper analytic philosophy with the crap spewed by stoners. I hate when people do this.

Selfconsistent is usually consistant with observable reality...

Well untill you get down to the atomic, in which it is discovered that solid objects aren't actually solid at all, just condensed. And I know that FST, I'm just being snarky.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Processes are temporal by definition.

Oh, and on this subject, I don't know how time works. If time is simultaneous than a process being temporal is kind of a moot point.

[Four-sided Triangles]

Oh, and on this subject, I don't know how time works. If time is simultaneous than a process being temporal is kind of a moot point.

What does time being "simultaneous" mean?

[Seperates]

And I've seen perfectly sane people freak out at music concerts. What's your point?

That the reason why 'the Bible doesn't take the time to explain why physical intervention in the universe doesn't happen anymore' is because the adherants of the belief system it espouses do not believe that 'physical intervention in the universe doesn't happen anymore'.

True. And they would be wrong, as it is perfectly explainable pyschological phenomena. Not gods, nor ghosts, nor spirits... just people.

[New England and The Maritimes]

Then god is literally impossible.

No, because it is G-d. Your mind simply cannot comprehend.

This is a non-argument. It is a cop-out, because you theists are unwilling to accept that your premise is faulty. I'm not buying the whole "omnipotent, omniscient being(but we totally have free will despite everything having already happened in his eyes.)" line.

Even if it does exist, which is a fucking massive if, I don't agree with theist logic that this thing can do whatever the hell it wants to whoever it wants for whatever reason. Fuck that noise.

I don't accept this idea of infallibility regardless of actons from my government, from my parents, from my significant others, from my bosses, from teachers or professors, or from the mugger in the dark alley. I sure as shit won't accept it from some being that has never bothered to give even one single shred of evidence as to its existence, and I refuse to bow down and worship the world's most prolific mass murderer.

[The Parkus Empire]

Your statement was absolute. It did not specify, "You know nothing of the supernatural," but then again, that would also be false.

What do you know then?

That vampires don't like garlic, for one thing.

[Four-sided Triangles]

That vampires don't like garlic, for one thing.

Another objective fact: Dominos pizza sucks.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Oh, and on this subject, I don't know how time works. If time is simultaneous than a process being temporal is kind of a moot point.

What does time being "simultaneous" mean?

All things that have, do, and will exist all exist at the same time. Our perception of time's flow is an illusion. Meaning that a process (indeed all processes) occur within the same instant.

[Nazi Israel Land]

No, because it is G-d. Your mind simply cannot comprehend.

This is a non-argument.

Because there is no argument. You're trying to bring something that people believe is beyond the realm of human understanding into that realm, and then getting mad about it not making sense.

I'm not buying the whole "omnipotent, omniscient being(but we totally have free will despite everything having already happened in his eyes.)" line.

Then don't bother arguing about it, you won't win because its not something you can.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

What do you know then?

That vampires don't like garlic, for one thing.

Fair enough I guess. We do know THAT much at least.

[Nazi Israel Land]

Semantic, yes. Empty, no. At least you concede that G-d is above your ability to define or perceive, which is of course what G-d would be.

Only because you assert a god whose existence cannot be possible without redefining the word "possible" so that it no longer has anything to do with reality.

I could likewise prove the existence of unicorns by redefining "unicorn" to mean "coffee table" and then providing coffee tables as proof of unicorns. The problem is that I haven't really proven anything about unicorns at all, not in the sense that anyone actually means when they use the term. All I've done is shuffle around labels on concepts, and that's all you do when you completely redefine "truth" and "possibility" such that "My formulation of god is possible." can be a "true" statement.

You're the one concerned with labels and concepts. If changing a label helps you think unicorns are real, power to you.

I certainly wouldn't be enough of an ass to start a thread saying "unicorns can't think or create anything" since your unicorn belief is irrelevant to me.

[The Parkus Empire]

That vampires don't like garlic, for one thing.

Fair enough I guess. We do know THAT much at least.

I know a lot more than that. Werewolves change when the moon is full. Leprechauns have pots of gold. Fairies' favorite hangout is a ring of a toadstools.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Fair enough I guess. We do know THAT much at least.

I know a lot more than that. Werewolves change when the moon is full. Leprechauns have pots of gold. Fairies' favorite hangout is a ring of a toadstools.

What are you some king of fucking wiza...

[Four-sided Triangles]

All things that have, do, and will exist all exist at the same time. Our perception of time's flow is an illusion. Meaning that a process (indeed all processes) occur within the same instant.

This doesn't make any sense.

1. What accounts for this illusion? Why is it so persistent on every level we look?

2. This is just a function mapping all different points in time to a single point, and thus is not a refutation of time flow, but a silly process. Either that or this is equivalent to the nonexistence of time, in which case no processes "occur" at all.

I'll think of more problems later, because I definitely know that there are more, I just can't articulate them.

[Caninope]

No, because it is G-d. Your mind simply cannot comprehend.

Yeah, I love that excuse. "Oh, you wouldn't understand."

Have you ever heard the old saying, "Walk a mile in another person's shoes"? Well, while we are of limited knowledge, God is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited knowledge. He is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited power. He is, according to some theologians, capable of appearing in multiple places at once. Until I've got superpowers that are nearly as fraction of those as God's, I doubt I could even begin to comprehend his thought process.

[Caninope]

There's a big difference between "impossible for humans to comprehend intuitively." and "fundamentally and irreparably nonsensical."

Yes. Humans can often comprehend what is otherwise nonsensical.

Or dismiss as what is logical as nonsensical.

[Seperates]

Only because you assert a god whose existence cannot be possible without redefining the word "possible" so that it no longer has anything to do with reality.

I could likewise prove the existence of unicorns by redefining "unicorn" to mean "coffee table" and then providing coffee tables as proof of unicorns. The problem is that I haven't really proven anything about unicorns at all, not in the sense that anyone actually means when they use the term. All I've done is shuffle around labels on concepts, and that's all you do when you completely redefine "truth" and "possibility" such that "My formulation of god is possible." can be a "true" statement.

You're the one concerned with labels and concepts. If changing a label helps you think unicorns are real, power to you.

I certainly wouldn't be enough of an ass to start a thread saying "unicorns can't think or create anything" since your unicorn belief is irrelevant to me.

What he is saying is that you can't change the labels. Well, you can, but you will lose the debate in the process.

[Farnhamia]

Yeah, I love that excuse. "Oh, you wouldn't understand."

Have you ever heard the old saying, "Walk a mile in another person's shoes"? Well, while we are of limited knowledge, God is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited knowledge. He is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited power. He is, according to some theologians, capable of appearing in multiple places at once. Until I've got superpowers that are nearly as fraction of those as God's, I doubt I could even begin to comprehend his thought process.

I have heard that saying, and it doesn't mean what you think it means. It means "Don't condemn someone until you've experienced what they've experienced." It doesn't mean, "You can't understand God until you've been God."

[Avenio]

Well many Christians would believe that God is still acting today. Indeed, I've witnessed meetings where Christians say that they have been driven to uncontrollable emotion, 'slayed in the spirit' or even been given the gifts of being able to, supposedly, talk the language of angels, or prophesy with or without translation.

As Seperates has said, people do all sorts of things when under the influence of charismatic speakers, crowds and neurochemistry. Doesn't prove that God intervened in their lives. And the fact that Old Testament-style intervention doesn't happen anymore, and in fact 'ended' before we had any solid way of confirming that it ever happened in the first place, is more than a bit odd.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

All things that have, do, and will exist all exist at the same time. Our perception of time's flow is an illusion. Meaning that a process (indeed all processes) occur within the same instant.

This doesn't make any sense.

1. What accounts for this illusion? Why is it so persistent on every level we look?

2. This is just a function mapping all different points in time to a single point, and thus is not a refutation of time flow, but a silly process. Either that or this is equivalent to the nonexistence of time, in which case no processes "occur" at all.

I'll think of more problems later, because I definitely know that there are more, I just can't articulate them.

There are problems with everything, buddy. Trying to prove them though will just make you go crazy in the long run.

[Johz]

And scientifically, we arrive at a similar conclusion. So when you write 'this argument is PHILOSOPHICAL and LOGICAL, not empirical', you actually mean 'this argument is PHILOSOPHICAL and LOGICAL but still based on the scientific concepts that I want to accept'.

Right?

No, not right at all. "Science arrives at a similar conclusion." does not imply "You used scientific reasoning."

But I'm using logic here. Logically, to refer to something 'outside of the universe' creates a flaw, as, in this branch of logic, as specified here, there is nothing outside of the universe. Yet in your OP you makw as a premise for logical debate in this thread that '[i]f god does not reside within time and space, then [...]'. This 'is as fundamentally nonsensical in [logical] terms as 'before the big bang', even when doing so proves the falsity of this god. Your discussion is flawed to begin with.'. As I said earlier.

[Seperates]

Yeah, I love that excuse. "Oh, you wouldn't understand."

Have you ever heard the old saying, "Walk a mile in another person's shoes"? Well, while we are of limited knowledge, God is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited knowledge. He is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited power. He is, according to some theologians, capable of appearing in multiple places at once. Until I've got superpowers that are nearly as fraction of those as God's, I doubt I could even begin to comprehend his thought process.

I cannot comprehend the magnitude of the universe. I cannot comprehend the shape of an atom. I cannot comphrehend the pulling power of a black hole. But we can objectivly prove that these things exist. Just because you cannot comprehend it does not mean that you cannot prove that it is real and exists.

[Caninope]

Well explain to me philosophically, what happens outside of the universe?

If all senses of time are part of the universe, then nothing at all happens outside of it, by definition.

What about in the case of another universe?

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Have you ever heard the old saying, "Walk a mile in another person's shoes"? Well, while we are of limited knowledge, God is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited knowledge. He is of bountiful, perhaps unlimited power. He is, according to some theologians, capable of appearing in multiple places at once. Until I've got superpowers that are nearly as fraction of those as God's, I doubt I could even begin to comprehend his thought process.

I cannot comprehend the magnitude of the universe. I cannot comprehend the shape of an atom. I cannot comphrehend the pulling power of a black hole. But we can objectivly prove that these things exist. Just because you cannot comprehend it does not mean that you cannot prove that it is real and exists.

True enough, but there are ways to objectively measure these things. We don't have any such method for this problem.