Is there a God?

[Godular]

No, I mean it. You’re half correct about the thermodynamics thing, though I’m somewhat curious as to what angle you’re working on with the argument. Is it the energy transfer or the sensation that you’re relying on?

Two diametrically things cannot be the same thing. It's not a perfect metaphor but it works well enough to get the point across.

So, it’s the sensation you’re keying on?

I mean, thermodynamics like all physics is heavily influenced by perspective

[Neutraligon]

Two diametrically things cannot be the same thing. It's not a perfect metaphor but it works well enough to get the point across.

So, it’s the sensation you’re keying on?

I mean, thermodynamics like all physics is heavily influenced by perspective

Sorta, I mean the various heat cycles kinda exist without perspective, but then they do not have all that much to do with the sensation of hot or cold. The sensation of course is still perspective based so the original reply still works.

[Tarsonis]

Proof was given via revelation. Granted were about 2000 years removed from that event, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It does mean that I was never given proof, and neither were you. And, in fact, it's impossible to know whether proof was really given. Which sort of defeats the whole point of proof.

If God appeared to you in a vision, but you had no way of proving it actually happened, would you just assume it was an hallucination?

When the bill comes is inconsequential.

It's pretty consequential considering that people can live their entire lives without believing the bill even exists.

People can live their entire lives without believing in Global Warming, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or will protect them from the eventual deluge.

And that, actually, we don't know whether the bill exists. Some people say it does. Some people say they were given the bill (usually a refund in these cases) on their deathbeds, but their bank accounts are always the same when you check them.

This is not a great way to maintain traffic conditions.

Depends on what the indented purpose of your traffic system is.

[Tarsonis]

Two diametrically things cannot be the same thing. It's not a perfect metaphor but it works well enough to get the point across.

So, it’s the sensation you’re keying on?

I mean, thermodynamics like all physics is heavily influenced by perspective

You're quite fascinated by my finger.

[Neutraligon]

It does mean that I was never given proof, and neither were you. And, in fact, it's impossible to know whether proof was really given. Which sort of defeats the whole point of proof.

If God appeared to you in a vision, but you had no way of proving it actually happened, would you just assume it was an hallucination?

It's pretty consequential considering that people can live their entire lives without believing the bill even exists.

People can live their entire lives without believing in Global Warming, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or will protect them from the eventual deluge.

And that, actually, we don't know whether the bill exists. Some people say it does. Some people say they were given the bill (usually a refund in these cases) on their deathbeds, but their bank accounts are always the same when you check them.

This is not a great way to maintain traffic conditions.

Depends on what the indented purpose of your traffic system is.

People can indeed go their whole lives without believing in global warming, we however have much more evidence for it then has been provided for a god.

[Tarsonis]

But that's not the case for a being such of God. What God declares to be morally right, is morally right. His enforcing that, doesn't negate the fact that you have a choice not to adhere.

Your entire line of argumentation here is invalid.

Yes it is, if god enforces through not permitting any other action to take place, then it is not morality because the individuals had no choice, it is simply the state of the universe. If it is enforced through some other force and people are able to form their opinions, then it is not morality because it is against the opinion of the person being forced, an if it is not forced but instead pushed using divine favor/punishment then it is not morality it is simply coercion.
No it does not become morally right hen god dictates it, anymore then my torturing an ant becomes morally right simply because I am so much more powerful then that ant. You are arguing that morality is simply might makes right.

But other action is permitted to take place. You do have a choice. Actions having consequences does not invalidate the choice.

[Tarsonis]

If God appeared to you in a vision, but you had no way of proving it actually happened, would you just assume it was an hallucination?



People can live their entire lives without believing in Global Warming, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or will protect them from the eventual deluge.





Depends on what the indented purpose of your traffic system is.

People can indeed go their whole lives without believing in global warming, we however have much more evidence for it then has been provided for a god.

Irrelevant to the point.

[Godular]

So, it’s the sensation you’re keying on?

I mean, thermodynamics like all physics is heavily influenced by perspective

You're quite fascinated by my finger.

I’m not sure what you mean by this. Mayhap I missed a post?

[Neutraligon]

Yes it is, if god enforces through not permitting any other action to take place, then it is not morality because the individuals had no choice, it is simply the state of the universe. If it is enforced through some other force and people are able to form their opinions, then it is not morality because it is against the opinion of the person being forced, an if it is not forced but instead pushed using divine favor/punishment then it is not morality it is simply coercion.
No it does not become morally right hen god dictates it, anymore then my torturing an ant becomes morally right simply because I am so much more powerful then that ant. You are arguing that morality is simply might makes right.

But other action is permitted to take place. You do have a choice. Actions having consequences does not invalidate the choice.

Holding a gun against someone's head does however. Divine punishment is that gun. A person who makes a decision under coercion is not considered responsible for that "decision."

[Tarsonis]

You're quite fascinated by my finger.

I’m not sure what you mean by this. Mayhap I missed a post?

I used an imperfect metaphor to convey a point, and instead of addressing the point, you're fixated on the metaphor.

[Tarsonis]

But other action is permitted to take place. You do have a choice. Actions having consequences does not invalidate the choice.

Holding a gun against someone's head does however. Divine punishment is that gun. A person who makes a decision under coercion is not considered responsible for that "decision."

Nope. Even with a gun to your head, you still have a choice.

[Neutraligon]

I’m not sure what you mean by this. Mayhap I missed a post?

I used an imperfect metaphor to convey a point, and instead of addressing the point, you're fixated on the metaphor.

When your metaphor fails then your point is not made.

[Neutraligon]

Holding a gun against someone's head does however. Divine punishment is that gun. A person who makes a decision under coercion is not considered responsible for that "decision."

Nope. Even with a gun to your head, you still have a choice.

Nice, if someone points their gun at your head and demands all your cash, when you hand it over they where not stealing, after all you made the choice to give them your cash.

[Tarsonis]

I used an imperfect metaphor to convey a point, and instead of addressing the point, you're fixated on the metaphor.

When your metaphor fails then your point is not made.

Point was made just fine. Attacking the metaphor is the realm of those who can't refute the point.

[Godular]

I’m not sure what you mean by this. Mayhap I missed a post?

I used an imperfect metaphor to convey a point, and instead of addressing the point, you're fixated on the metaphor.

Could you explain what the point of your argument was again, just for clarity’s sake?

[Tarsonis]

Nope. Even with a gun to your head, you still have a choice.

Nice, if someone points their gun at your head and demands all your cash, when you hand it over they where not stealing, after all you made the choice to give them your cash.

They are stealing, but you are also making the choice to give over your cash. You can refuse.

[Neutraligon]

When your metaphor fails then your point is not made.

Point was made just fine. Attacking the metaphor is the realm of those who can't refute the point.

Point was not made fine. If you attempt to use a metaphor to make a point, and the metaphor does not actually match the situation, then you failed to make a point.

[Neutraligon]

Nice, if someone points their gun at your head and demands all your cash, when you hand it over they where not stealing, after all you made the choice to give them your cash.

They are stealing, but you are also making the choice to give over your cash. You can refuse.

Nope, you voluntarily handed over the cash. I am not stealing at all because you gave your cash to me.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Nice, if someone points their gun at your head and demands all your cash, when you hand it over they where not stealing, after all you made the choice to give them your cash.

They are stealing, but you are also making the choice to give over your cash. You can refuse.

If you truly have a choice then it isn't stealing. You handed it over of your own free will, no?

[Tarsonis]

I used an imperfect metaphor to convey a point, and instead of addressing the point, you're fixated on the metaphor.

Could you explain what the point of your argument was again, just for clarity’s sake?

Some one asked why God can't be evil. As Evil is defined (by us) as in opposition to God, logically God can't be evil. I realize now I should have just said that, instead of appealing to the "Cold is the absence of Heat" bit.

[Neutraligon]

Could you explain what the point of your argument was again, just for clarity’s sake?

Some one asked why God can't be evil. As Evil is defined (by us) as in opposition to God, logically God can't be evil. I realize now I should have just said that, instead of appealing to the "Cold is the absence of Heat" bit.

Sorry my definition of evil has nothing to do with god, what god says is evil is that gods opinion, and no more objective then my opinion of evil.

[Tarsonis]

They are stealing, but you are also making the choice to give over your cash. You can refuse.

If you truly have a choice then it isn't stealing. You handed it over of your own free will, no?

Sure it's stealing. They don't have a right to demand you hand it over and take it from you, but you can choose to resist instead of submit. How that works out for you though, is another matter.

[Tarsonis]

Some one asked why God can't be evil. As Evil is defined (by us) as in opposition to God, logically God can't be evil. I realize now I should have just said that, instead of appealing to the "Cold is the absence of Heat" bit.

Sorry my definition of evil has nothing to do with god, what god says is evil is that gods opinion, and no more objective then my opinion of evil.

God's opinion is really all that matters. Your opinion is functionally irrelevant in the scheme of things.

[Neutraligon]

If you truly have a choice then it isn't stealing. You handed it over of your own free will, no?

Sure it's stealing. They don't have a right to demand you hand it over and take it from you, but you can choose to resist instead of submit. How that works out for you though, is another matter.

Nope, you had the choice not to hand it over, thus it is not stealing because you made the voluntary choice to hand it over.

[Neutraligon]

Sorry my definition of evil has nothing to do with god, what god says is evil is that gods opinion, and no more objective then my opinion of evil.

God's opinion is really all that matters. Your opinion is functionally irrelevant in the scheme of things.

Nope, god's opinion matters not at all, especially since you have provided no evidence that such a being exists, holds an opinion, and holds an opinion that I should care about.