For Agerg and atheists

Originally posted by epiphinehas
What if I say that God exhibits immutable-like characteristics and omniscient-like characteristics, would this also, then, not be contradictory? Strictly speaking, a God who cannot change (who is immutable) cannot know changing truths (via omniscience) -- a contradiction. Is it possible for God to be partly immutable and partly changeable? Of course, and good reason to conclude, based on apparently contradictory statements, that God doesn't exist.

Except my charge was not 'apparently contradictory statements' my charge was 'actually contradictory statements'.
Do you concede that if the definition is actually self contradictory, then the being defined cannot exist? (I notice you haven't produced any argument to the contrary)

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its not an assumption, the assumption was that it was obvious and would not need further explanation, but that does not mean I did not 'do the work' myself.

[b]I already provided a reason to doubt this proposition: if our language is metaphorical, then it can only be inexact when used to describe what is non-physical.
There is nothing wrong with i ...[text shortened]... o idea as to what you are talking about (and it is quite likely that you have no idea either).[/b]

No, it is not possible, if those descriptions are valid.

The problem for you is, the law of non-contradiction says that two contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, which means there is a way in which two contradictory statements can be true about something as long as they are not in the same sense at the same time. As in this case: God is everywhere, in the sense that there is no place where God isn't, and nowhere, in the sense that God cannot be detected physically. If we limit your argument's definition of contradiction to only those instances where two statements contradict each other in the same sense at the same time, this severely limits your ability to claim, at least outright, that any two contradictory statements about God entail God's non-existence.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
If we limit your argument's definition of contradiction to only those instances where two statements contradict each other in the same sense at the same time, this severely limits your ability to claim, at least outright, that any two contradictory statements about God entail God's non-existence.

Nevertheless, I claim that:
1. If, by your restricted definition of contradiction, an entity is defined with contradicting properties, it cannot exist.
2. The Bible describes God with contradicting properties that match your restricted definition of contradiction.

Of course you may claim that I simply don't understand the meaning of the Bible, but my counter is then that the Bible does not constitute a definition as it is unintelligible.
This is similar to my claim that people who claim that the Bible is inerrant are talking about a non-existent entity ie the entity they claim is inerrant is actually their interpretation of the document usually known as the Bible, and their interpretation is either uncommunicable, or subject to change.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Here's your argument:

P1: If an entity possesses a contradictory description, then it cannot exist.
P2: The Bible contains contradictory descriptions of an entity.
C: The entity described in the Bible does not exist.

It is a valid deductive argument (modus ponens), but you haven't established the truth value of the propositions yet. By declaring being to exist.

It is far from clear whether your argument is sound or not, I'm afraid.

Clearly.

Just as clearly, he didn't get it when I told him his 'given' was false.

Vanity. That's all this is.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Clearly.

Just as clearly, he didn't get it when I told him his 'given' was false.

Vanity. That's all this is.

On a side note, is that a picture of you in your profile exposing your midsection?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Parody aside, I assume some (including you) would think it a reasonable thing to ask of theists. Just cutting off that stampede at the pass.

And no, 1) it is NOT a myth (ancient or otherwise), and yes, 2)kids do eventually grow up and too many of them lose their childish wisdom and become jaded. This is something we adults do to them and it's si ...[text shortened]... ugh time, if nothing else) and a lot of them still retain traces of their pre-mortal existence.

I have no interest in silencing anyone, so there is no stampede to cut off. I think that course of action is counter productive, we only have to look at the history of Christianity here in the UK to see an example of how trying to silence people fails. For hundreds of years the Church in this country 'silenced' those with opposing views, did it work? No. Christianity is on it's death bed in this country here in the 21st Century.

'Childish wisdom'?! Now that's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
On a side note, is that a picture of you in your profile exposing your midsection?

Sigh...

Yes, it is.

Why do you ask?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Sigh...

Yes, it is.

Why do you ask?

Vanity.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Just as clearly, he didn't get it when I told him his 'given' was false.

Vanity. That's all this is.

I didn't get it because you did not state which 'given', (despite my invitation to do so) nor did you explain why you believe it is false. Essentially you claim I am wrong but don't want to explain why.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I have no interest in silencing anyone, so there is no stampede to cut off. I think that course of action is counter productive, we only have to look at the history of Christianity here in the UK to see an example of how trying to silence people fails. For hundreds of years the Church in this country 'silenced' those with opposing views, did it work? No. ...[text shortened]... e in the 21st Century.

'Childish wisdom'?! Now that's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

I have no interest in silencing anyone, so there is no stampede to cut off. I think that course of action is counter productive, we only have to look at the history of Christianity here in the UK to see an example of how trying to silence people fails. For hundreds of years the Church in this country 'silenced' those with opposing views, did it work? No. Christianity is on it's death bed in this country here in the 21st Century.

And you wonder why I say we're alarmingly close to the 'end times'. It's Christianity that will be publicly silenced before all is said and done. But it won't die. Christians have suffered persecution before.

'Childish wisdom'?! Now that's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

Spoken like an adult. A thoroughly jaded adult. More adults should listen to the innate wisdom of children. Am I going to base my career decisions (for example) on what a child says? I doubt it. But there are indeed pearls of wisdom in children if you truly listen to them and come down off your pedestal and see the world from their viewpoint. Ask one (or more) sometime what they think the 'rules of life' should be. You'll hear some amazing things. It's not all 'self-centeredness'. We adults are usually better at that.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Vanity.

Perhaps.

I work out way too many hours in a week.

I tell myself it is for health reasons, since I'm diabetic and I just do not want the health problems associated with being overweight. I see lots of older people who are just not happy or comfortable in their bodies, and that's not going to be me.

I mean, I work out for the same reason I brush my teeth.

Maybe there's some vanity in there (after all, I do like turning heads when I walk into a room all decked out), but that's far from all it is.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I didn't get it because you did not state which 'given', (despite my invitation to do so) nor did you explain why you believe it is false. Essentially you claim I am wrong but don't want to explain why.

Probably because I know your M.O.

As another Christian here said recently, you're not generally in this forum to honestly discuss the issues.

You're here to put Christians and their beliefs down. It's entertainment for you.

I'm done dancing for you.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Perhaps.

I work out way too many hours in a week.

I tell myself it is for health reasons, since I'm diabetic and I just do not want the health problems associated with being overweight. I see lots of older people who are just not happy or comfortable in their bodies, and that's not going to be me.

I mean, I work out for the same reason I brush my o like turning heads when I walk into a room all decked out), but that's far from all it is.

Perhaps? It's nothing but vanity Suzianne.

I like going to the gym, I enjoy picking up heavy things and putting them for an hour 4 times a week. I also do it for health reasons, I have a history of arthritis on one side of my family. So I know where you're coming from. But I'm not putting a picture of me sans top showing my chiselled chest on a chess website.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Perhaps? It's nothing but vanity Suzianne.

I like going to the gym, I enjoy picking up heavy things and putting them for an hour 4 times a week. I also do it for health reasons, I have a history of arthritis on one side of my family. So I know where you're coming from. But I'm not putting a picture of me sans top showing my chiselled chest on a chess website.

Maybe you should. 😉

lol

If you knew my history on this site, maybe you'd understand a bit more of my motives. It all (well, most of it) played out on the General Forum (over several years), but you'd have to be an 'old-timer' to remember it.



(Sheesh, it's just an abs shot. Am I in a bikini? No. True, I have another taken at the same time without the 'pull-up', but this one also shows I have a fun personality. I'm not an all-serious-all-the-time stick in the mud. If I wanted to show more, I could have, believe me.)

Originally posted by Suzianne
Probably because I know your M.O.

No, you think you know my M.O. but you are clearly quite wrong. You just seem to see red whenever you see a post by me and you go ballistic.

I'm done dancing for you.
Then don't bother replying to my posts. When you claim that I am wrong but can't back it up, then you just make yourself look bad. It might damage that vanity of yours.