Absolutes or relativism

@bigdoggproblem said
No.

The "Creator" himself is bound to play by those laws.

I agree. If there is a "creator being", then the laws of physics are presumably the manifestation of his nature and capacity ~ as well as the reality that he has created.

@fmf said
I agree. If there is a "creator being", then the laws of physics are presumably the manifestation of his nature and capacity ~ as well as the reality that he has created.

The 'creator' can alter anything the creator wishes to alter.

The 'creator' is NOT bound by human perception.

@chaney3 said
The 'creator' can alter anything the creator wishes to alter.

The 'creator' is NOT bound by human perception.

I am well aware of your speculations about a "divine" being.

People can assert that a purported "creator being" is not bound by human perception all they want ~ it's their prerogative.

But it just means they can then assert whatever they want and then insist that their "human perception" backs whatever those claims about supernatural causality happen to be.

Religions channel and codify these kinds of speculations.

@fmf said
I am well aware of your speculations about a "divine" being. People can assert that a purported "creator being" is not bound by human perception all they want ~ it's their prerogative ~ but it just means they can then assert whatever they want and then insist that their "human perception" backs whatever those claims about supernatural causality happen to be. Religions channel and codify these kinds of speculations.

What don't you understand?

If a creator creates, he can also alter.

Are you seriously trying to put limitations on things you cannot comprehend?

@chaney3 said
What don't you understand?

If a creator creates, he can also alter.

Are you seriously trying to put limitations on things you cannot comprehend?

What I am "seriously" doing is expressing a belief that is not the same as yours.

You believe: If a creator creates, he can also alter.

I believe: If a creator being creates, then the laws of physics define his nature and capacity and the nature of what he has created.

I don't subscribe to what your speculation makes you believe.

What I have expressed is the result of my speculation and it seems to be more credible than what you believe.

@chaney3 said
Are you seriously trying to put limitations on things you cannot comprehend?

I am not trying to put limitations on the things you believe and claim you comprehend.

@fmf said
What I am "seriously" doing is expressing a belief that is not the same as yours.

You believe: If a creator creates, he can also alter.

I believe: If a creator being creates, then the laws of physics define his nature and capacity and the nature of what he has created.

I don't subscribe to what your speculation makes you believe.

What I have expressed is the result of my speculation and it seems to be more credible than what you believe.

You are a simpleton. You've just proven it.

If a creator is responsible for all of this, then said creator can do whatever he wants.

You trying to say otherwise proves your immaturity in these matters.

@chaney3 said
If a creator is responsible for all of this, then said creator can do whatever he wants.

I am well aware that this is the conclusion you reach when you speculate about supernatural things. My view is different.

Presuming there is a creator being, then my speculation tells me that the wonder of his creation is described by the laws of physics.

I do not believe that he - and the wonder of his creation - are described by a mish-mash of doctrines rooted in anthropology and psychology which humans seek to attribute to him and which they use to describe him.

@chaney3 said
You are a simpleton...You trying to say otherwise proves your immaturity in these matters.

These are not the kinds of 'debating points' that persuade me of anything.

@fmf said
I am well aware that this is the conclusion you reach when you speculate about supernatural things. My view is different.

Presuming there is a creator being, then my speculation tells me that the wonder of his creation is described by the laws of physics.

I do not believe that he - and the wonder of his creation - are described by a mish-mash of doctrines rooted in anthropology and psychology which humans seek to attribute to him and which they use to describe him.

FMF.....are you stupid?????

A creator can do whatever he wants!!!!!!!

Your BS analysis means nothing.

@chaney3 said
FMF.....are you stupid?????

A creator can do whatever he wants!!!!!!!

You keep asserting this and I have said that I understand and accept that it is your belief.

@fmf said
You keep asserting this and I have said that I understand and accept that it is your belief.

What is an agnostic atheist?

To me, it's BS.

@chaney3 said
Your BS analysis means nothing.

Your speculation and my speculation are both part of the discourse on this topic.

That a perspective you disagree with "means nothing" to you is neither here nor there, ultimately, in a marketplace of ideas and opinions.

Having said that, your perspective ~ which I disagree with ~ does not "mean nothing" to me. Nor would I characterize your view as "BS analysis".

@chaney3 said
What is an agnostic atheist?

Look it up. Or take a look at the 2-3 relatively recent threads where it was thoroughly discussed and my agnostic atheist stance was explained.

@bigdoggproblem said
No.

The "Creator" himself is bound to play by those laws.

Any other questions?

Why in the universe would the Creator be bound by those laws? To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, if you put 5 dollars in your drawer one night, 5 dollars in the same drawer the next night, then in the next morning you found only 2 dollars. You would think the laws of your country were broken, rather than the laws of mathamatics? The creator God, He is not bound by the laws of the universe, He set them in the first place, so seeing the laws altered beyond natural explanation, reveals the hand of God it doesn't keep Him away.