God can't think or create anything.

[The Merchant Republics]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

He created the universe and then occupied it (literally in the flesh of Jesus Christ). And is at once both outside and inside. The laws of physics apply to his changes and presence in the universe, but his actual existence is outside and thus not conditional to those laws.

He is at once the creator of the watch and maintainer of cogs and gears when need arises. He is outside but perceives and affects the inside.

[Four-sided Triangles]

Not really. Everything you think, know, believe, understand etc. is entirely limited by your brains capacity for understanding. Logic is not exempt from this, you can only understand it as much as your brain can process it, which simply is not enough.

Bollocks. Truth and falsehood are DEFINED in terms of logic. Something which is logically inconsistent cannot be true, BY DEFINITION. It can be "true" according to some other notion of truth that you make up, but it can't be true in the sense that we all normally mean when we speak. In terms of normal definitions, it must be false.

The first rule of all things is to understand you know nothing.

This is self-refuting. If you know nothing, then how can you understand that you know nothing?

[The Parkus Empire]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

He created the universe and then occupied it (literally in the flesh of Jesus Christ). And is at once both outside and inside. The laws of physics apply to his changes and presence in the universe, but his actual existence is outside and thus not conditional to those laws.

He is at once the creator of the watch and maintainer of cogs and gears when need arises. He is outside but perceives and affects the inside.

Sure is Watchmen in here.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

you know nothing.

For all foreseeable, pragmatic, applicable, effective and real purposes, this is false.

We're not really discussing foreseeable, pragmatic, applicable, effective and real purposes here. If you want to actually talk about god and other supernatural shit, be prepared to accept that.

So there.

[Nazi Israel Land]

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

What a perfect non-answer!

I love how no one has even tried to show how my argument fails. No one has tried to show how my scenario ISN'T a contradiction. No one has tried to show how a god existing outside of time and space can coherently perform actions. Usually, they at least attempt to make explanations for how an apparent contradiction in the bible isn't really a contradiction. Here, they aren't even trying.

Instead it's "Well, if logic says my god isn't possible, then fuck logic, even though it's the basis for absolutely every kind of truth and sense possible, and the denial of logic is a complete non-starter by definition."

It's like you've given up completely.

Your problem is that you're applying logic to a belief system that deals with a force considered to be above human understanding. Pointing that out isn't a non-answer, its telling you that you're wasting your time looking for one.
If you try to logically explain away G-d, all you do is demonstrate to the faithful that G-d is above petty human ways of thinking.

[The Parkus Empire]

For all foreseeable, pragmatic, applicable, effective and real purposes, this is false.

We're not really discussing foreseeable, pragmatic, applicable, effective and real purposes here. If you want to actually talk about god and other supernatural shit, be prepared to accept that.

So there.

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

[Four-sided Triangles]

I think it should be noted at this point that our scientific knowledge is not infalible. To refer to something 'outside of the universe' is as fundamentally nonsensical in scientific terms as 'before the big bang', even when doing so proves the falsity of this god. Your discussion is flawed to begin with.

Goddammit! How many times do I have to explain that this is not a scientific argument? How many times must I explain that this argument is PHILOSOPHICAL and LOGICAL, not empirical?

[Arkania 5]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

He created the universe and then occupied it (literally in the flesh of Jesus Christ). And is at once both outside and inside. The laws of physics apply to his changes and presence in the universe, but his actual existence is outside and thus not conditional to those laws.

He is at once the creator of the watch and maintainer of cogs and gears when need arises. He is outside but perceives and affects the inside.

So he slaps Logic in it's face.

I see...

[Tecknoko]

Existing outside of Space and Time is different than existing outside of space-time. God exists within space and time but outside of space-time. Once I get time later Ill come back and argue my point.

[Nazi Israel Land]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

He created the universe and then occupied it (literally in the flesh of Jesus Christ). And is at once both outside and inside. The laws of physics apply to his changes and presence in the universe, but his actual existence is outside and thus not conditional to those laws.

He is at once the creator of the watch and maintainer of cogs and gears when need arises. He is outside but perceives and affects the inside.

So he slaps Logic in it's face.

I see...

G-d has sex with logic and never calls it back.

That's how G-d rolls.

[Leepaidamba]

I used no physics at all, only philosophy, the subject which has ALWAYS been used in theology. As for logic, it forms the basis of philosophical inquiries.

My point here is that your argument is solely based on personal opinion, and you don't consider the fact that God isn't affected by the standard laws of physics. It is widely accepted that He exists outside of our universe, and that His existence can't be understood by the human mind.

Except by atheists, pantheists and panentheists of course, including also various groups in various religions, who think that either "He" doesn't exist, that "He" is everything and only everything or that "He" partly everything and partly some more. That isn't so much the problem though, more why it is so widely accepted. This is mostly by indoctrination from Abrahamists and Hindus worldwide to their ancient mythology penned down by both early scientists, mathmaticians, scientists and philosophers, but also the common man who knows nothing but what he hears, not through a systematic search for the truth like modern science and philosphy.

This statement alone demonstrates that arguing with you is a waste of time. Nothing at all could ever convince you, even if it were ironclad. Why should I debate with someone who refuses to consider even the possibility of being wrong?

I was being hyperbolic - my point was that there will most likely never be an argument that will prove either sides beliefs.

One side is that of a universal negative, which is by necessity improvable, and the other is that of an, often very specific, positive which should theoretically be provable but so far isn't practically, and has in some cases turned out disprovable like in such specific cases as the Olympian gods but also the omnipotent-omniscient gods.

However, if neither side will ever create an argument capable of proving either side, and of one side we're completely certain they won't, why take sides? Why not say "I don't believe that, nor do I believe that." and leave it at that? Why must we have a belief?

[The Parkus Empire]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

He created the universe and then occupied it (literally in the flesh of Jesus Christ). And is at once both outside and inside. The laws of physics apply to his changes and presence in the universe, but his actual existence is outside and thus not conditional to those laws.

He is at once the creator of the watch and maintainer of cogs and gears when need arises. He is outside but perceives and affects the inside.

So he slaps Logic in it's face.

I see...

Logic kinda had it coming, tbf.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Not really. Everything you think, know, believe, understand etc. is entirely limited by your brains capacity for understanding. Logic is not exempt from this, you can only understand it as much as your brain can process it, which simply is not enough.

Bollocks. Truth and falsehood are DEFINED in terms of logic. Something which is logically inconsistent cannot be true, BY DEFINITION. It can be "true" according to some other notion of truth that you make up, but it can't be true in the sense that we all normally mean when we speak. In terms of normal definitions, it must be false.

The first rule of all things is to understand you know nothing.

This is self-refuting. If you know nothing, then how can you understand that you know nothing?

Logic is faulty, your perception of truth is faulty, everything you think is faulty. Usually it's not important; it suffices to perceive and function in the universe as we see it. BUt taken beyond into the very nature of reality itself, it falls utterly flat. Logic fails, truth fails, we fail.

[The Parkus Empire]

So he slaps Logic in it's face.

I see...

G-d has sex with logic and never calls it back.

That's how G-d rolls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6QBaZHltJw

Who would? Logic is clingy as fuck.

[Four-sided Triangles]

But you forget that God is omnipresent, and thus both inside and outside the realm of our space and time, and though part of him exists outside it does not necessitate that he cannot perceive it from there. Being omnipresent and omniscient indeed, requires that he is capable of that perception, he is after all, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Whom wrote the book of life, if this is accepted as true, we must qualify his status as being outside looking in at all times and all places.

The parts of him outside of time can't DO anything, by definition.

He created the universe and then occupied it

If time is part of the universe, then this statement is literally impossible. It's not just physically impossible. It's LOGICALLY impossible, the worst kind of impossibility there is.

I notice how you use the word "then." If there's no time without the universe, temporal concepts like "before," "after," and the temporal form of "then" are incoherent.

[1000 Cats]

Alright, here.

-Time is now multifaceted. That is, God exists within his own time, but it is wholly separate from our time.
-The universe cannot be said to be a closed system.

[The Parkus Empire]

Alright, here.

-Time is now multifaceted. That is, God exists within his own time, but it is wholly separate from our time.
-The universe cannot be said to be a closed system.

Did God's time exist before God did?

[Four-sided Triangles]

Logic is faulty.

What the hell does that even MEAN? You've failed to answer my charge that logic defines truth and instead you've responded with word salad.

[Norvenia]

Note: This ONLY applies to the super-transcendent deity of the kind espoused by some monotheists high on Platonism and Aristotelian metaphysics.

A transcendent god is often described by believers as being "outside of" time and space. Because god is outside the flow of time and outside of location in space, he is able to be a non-contingent being, that is, a being whose existence is dependent on nothing external at all.

However, a major problem exists with this logic. If god does not reside within time and space, then god cannot think or act at all. The idea of a process is only coherent within the context of some notion of time. Creation is a process, as is conscious thought. Without a sense of time along which change occurs, any sense of a "process" occurring is incoherent and self-refuting. Therefore, if god is a perfect being which exists outside of time and space, "he" cannot act in any way, nor can he have any consciousness.

If, instead, god exists INSIDE of some flow of time, he becomes able to perform actions and have thoughts. However, he also becomes a contingent being, and thus both his transcendence and the "argument from contingency" utterly fail, not that the argument from contingency works even for a do-nothing deity.

In the quest to make god increasingly "perfect" and "transcendent," some theists have defined him so abstractly that he can't actually function as anything at all.

Again, why should anyone care? Why is this relevant? What is the point in this debate?

[Four-sided Triangles]

Alright, here.

-Time is now multifaceted. That is, God exists within his own time, but it is wholly separate from our time.
-The universe cannot be said to be a closed system.

Sure, that's possible, but it's also no longer a "transcendent" deity. It's a god subject to his own sense of time.

[Johz]

I think he's suggesting that you would be unable to affect the world in this situation, but that does not mean that his deity would.

I think what Four-sided Triangles is saying that though a transcendental deity would be able to act upon the world and influence it, but that it would likely be utterly incomprehensible and totally unlike the common conception of a loving, monotheistic deity. Time would have no meaning to it, ensuring that thought, in the linear sense that we're aware of and causality becomes an intensely tricky affair. Not to mention that a transcendental deity runs afoul of the laws it supposedly created in the universe; if it breaks the laws frequently to interfere in the lives of the squishy meatbags its taken upon itself to care for, then we'd notice it. If it didn't or couldn't interfere, then, of course, what's the point in worshiping it?

Eh, I think all of that's taken as a given in the Bible.

[Four-sided Triangles]

Again, why should anyone care? Why is this relevant? What is the point in this debate?

If you don't care, why are you here telling about how much you don't care? Wouldn't you just leave? Why spam the thread you don't care about in order to tell us that you don't care?

[The Parkus Empire]

Logic is faulty.

What the hell does that even MEAN? You've failed to answer my charge that logic defines truth and instead you've responded with word salad.

"Salad is truth, truth salad",--that is all. Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Logic is faulty.

What the hell does that even MEAN? You've failed to answer my charge that logic defines truth and instead you've responded with word salad.

*sigh*

Logic may define truth, but you define neither. You saying that something is logically impossible does not make it so. You don't have enough understanding of logic to determine what being outside of time is like or how it would work.

Basically, if you were a perfect being with unlimited understanding then I might listen. Till then you're just another ass wipe like the rest of us.

[Leepaidamba]

Again, why should anyone care? Why is this relevant? What is the point in this debate?

If you don't care, why are you here telling about how much you don't care? Wouldn't you just leave? Why spam the thread you don't care about in order to tell us that you don't care?

Why would you care about one telling one does not care? Why not not care and leave?
Spam is tasty, but don't take too much.