The Futile Arguments Thread

[defendor]

There you go. I didn't even have to add a logical contradiction or two to my invisible unicorn, which would make it more accurate of an analogy.

I'm still curious, is that the premise for why a "god" doesn't exist?

[LegendarySandwich]

I'm still curious, is that the premise for why a "god" doesn't exist?

I didn't say that all god concepts can't and don't exist. I'm just saying that the Abrahamic one (A.K.A. The god of the Muslims, Christians, and Jews) doesn't exist. If you can understand why I say an invisible unicorn that has logical contradictions doesn't exist, then certainly you should be able to see why I say that God doesn't exist.

[defendor]

I didn't say that all god concepts can't and don't exist. I'm just saying that the Abrahamic one (A.K.A. The god of the Muslims, Christians, and Jews) doesn't exist. If you can understand why I say an invisible unicorn that has logical contradictions doesn't exist, then certainly you should be able to see why I say that God doesn't exist.

Honestly, I can't ha maybe it is because I am "blinded" by faith.  I'm not trying to say anything by this but I really can't understand the relationship between an obvious faux pas, and a seemingly universal idealogy

[LegendarySandwich]

Honestly, I can't ha maybe it is because I am "blinded" by faith.  I'm not trying to say anything by this but I really can't understand the relationship between an obvious faux pas, and a seemingly universal idealogy

Would anything be different if the majority of the Earth's inhabitants believed in this invisible, contradictory unicorn?

[defendor]

Would anything be different if the majority of the Earth's inhabitants believed in this invisible, contradictory unicorn?

Absolutely. ha

You mentioned contradiction, what about the presence of God is contradicting?

[LegendarySandwich]

Absolutely. ha

You mentioned contradiction, what about the presence of God is contradicting?

I refer you to this post, which shows one out of the couple generic logical contradictions.

[defendor]

I refer you to this post, which shows one out of the couple generic logical contradictions.

Ha the old rock paradox (does it really matter).  I don't think Jesus (who is god) could've bench pressed a boulder which was created by the triune God.  Unless its the Jesus who looks like this http://blog.truelightchristianstore.com ... f-all-time

but what if god being immaterial in nature not only is the force or energy making the rock or keeping the rock together, but also by which He is the capacity the rock is able to move?  So when this question is asked, it is assuming the statement in nature is a contradiction and the God is superimposed into it without really understanding the supreme nature of God

but other than a silly paradox, (which is assuming that the God in his very nature as a supreme being is in fact physical in the sense we know) is that the only contradiction?

[LegendarySandwich]

I refer you to this post, which shows one out of the couple generic logical contradictions.

Ha the old rock paradox (does it really matter).

Yes. You can't just ignore logical contradictions like this as if they don't matter.

...Well, actually...

but what if god being immaterial in nature not only is the force or energy making the rock or keeping the rock together, but also by which He is the capacity the rock is able to move?  So when this question is asked, it is assuming the statement in nature is a contradiction and the God is superimposed into it without really understanding the supreme nature of God

But what if the invisible unicorn, being immaterial in nature, not only is the force or energy making the rock or keeping the rock together, but also by which It is the capacity the rock is able to move? So when this question is asked, it is assuming the statement in nature is a contradiction and the unicorn is superimposed into it without really understanding the supreme nature of Unicorns.

but other than a silly paradox, (which is assuming that the God in his very nature as a supreme being is in fact physical in the sense we know) is that the only contradiction?

No. There are also problems in omniscience (can he change the course of events he has predicted, and how can free will exist?), the existence of evil.

[defendor]

Yes. You can't just ignore logical contradictions like this as if they don't matter.

...Well, actually...

may be logical but universally irrelevant.  

But what if the invisible unicorn, being immaterial in nature, not only is the force or energy making the rock or keeping the rock together, but also by which It is the capacity the rock is able to move? So when this question is asked, it is assuming the statement in nature is a contradiction and the unicorn is superimposed into it without really understanding the supreme nature of Unicorns.

I want to point out a few premises on which this argument is made.  You are using unicorns instead of God to incite some logistic understanding that unicorns are in fact ridiculous (this can easily be assumed).  Also, I mean a unicorn needs to be shaped like a horse with a horn and maybe some pixie dust, all of which are material,  if this unicorn is immaterial in nature, would he still be a unicorn?

If you told this to a child he may revel in the idea of a unicorn God.  

But for all seriousness, we don't live in a world where unicorns are given any credence of existence, not even for merely scientific facts, but philosophical questions,  such as

No. There are also problems in omniscience (can he change the course of events he has predicted, and how can free will exist?), the existence of evil.

ha now we're getting somewhere.  Many theologians and various philosophers have used this phrase that "this is not the best world but the best way TO the best world."

This question is commonly referred to as the paradigm of God's will. If God is sovereign and all powerful how can there be evil in the world.  The dichotomous representation of: the predestiny versus the free will, the common Grace of god (what he allows) versus his sovereign power

SO lets take a biblical understanding of who god is (for the bible is the ultimate source on this "imaginary" Christian god right?), and I'm not gonna quote scripture but its in the book Romans maybe like chapter 9 around verses 21-23 or somethin, I'm not sure, if you don't have a bible, I've heard of websites like biblegateway.com or somethin.... whatever

but God is outside of time.  Time began with the onset of creation.  Before creation there was simply eternity.  (now if you can understand this you win a prize).

So as God sees the flow of time (a flow as perceived by us) in one instant.  He is not in the past or in the future but it is all Present, for he is outside of time.  So with this understanding, God is working now, 5,000 years ago and tomorrow all in the same essence of being (which is outside of time).  He does not simply look down the corridor of time and predict but is outside of time showing his magnitudes.  but still, why evil?

But God gave humans free will, and he also designed the world to work a certain way he designed.  Which is for his Glory, now this sounds egotistical to us, but what more than to show is nature and presence of a HOLY god than to create love, beauty, and most of all, Life.  God saw all things as good.  And so with this free will we are able to live to the full measure of goodness that God has designed this existence to be or contort or manipulate what God has done/said to our will (sin).  Could God have stopped sin? yes, Did he allow it? yes WHY? to bring his Son into the world (as shown from Genesis 3 on) to show the magnitudes of his grace and patience and exuberance as a being fully endowed in love and companionship, to a people so tragically and universally unworthy.  This shows Gods infinite grace and power(eternal life) and also infinite justice (eternal death) and all corresponds to God's Glory-his nature as divine and Holy and lovely.  

So whether we were living in the Garden of Eden, fully delighting in his creation in the purest sense, or we wait and groan in waiting for his glory that has yet to be revealed, God's glory is shown and his sovereignty is shown.  Yes, his sovereignty is shown how he can save sinners, instantly worthy of death to eternal life by sending his Son to take on man and win by submitting to death on a cross!

Check out Mars Hill Church in Seattle, pastor Mark Driscoll, he knows a lot more than I do.

Now how can I talk about God without seeming preachy? I don't think there is a way, you asked a question about evil I gave you a theological answer that answers this question while fully addressing the nature of which the question was asked, with questions of sovereignty and permissible evil.  Does it point to christ? yes, but how can answering a question about a theistic God not point to some standard of truth. blame me for preaching but please tell me how can I write this without seeming as preaching and I will do it!

[LegendarySandwich]

may be logical but universally irrelevant.

Are you trying to say that logic is irrelevant right here?

I want to point out a few premises on which this argument is made.  You are using unicorns instead of God to incite some logistic understanding that unicorns are in fact ridiculous (this can easily be assumed).  Also, I mean a unicorn needs to be shaped like a horse with a horn and maybe some pixie dust, all of which are material,  if this unicorn is immaterial in nature, would he still be a unicorn?

So, being material or immaterial is all the difference here?

First off, what relevance does that have?

Second, Jesus took a physical form, and he was God (the confusing trinity).

Third, how can something not be material and still be in this universe? For an entity to interact with us, wouldn't he have to be in the universe, or be material of some kind?

But for all seriousness, we don't live in a world where unicorns are given any credence of existence, not even for merely scientific facts, but philosophical questions,  such as

So?

But God gave humans free will, and he also designed the world to work a certain way he designed.  Which is for his Glory, now this sounds egotistical to us, but what more than to show is nature and presence of a HOLY god than to create love, beauty, and most of all, Life.  God saw all things as good.  And so with this free will we are able to live to the full measure of goodness that God has designed this existence to be or contort or manipulate what God has done/said to our will (sin).  Could God have stopped sin? yes, Did he allow it? yes WHY? to bring his Son into the world (as shown from Genesis 3 on) to show the magnitudes of his grace and patience and exuberance as a being fully endowed in love and companionship, to a people so tragically and universally unworthy.  This shows Gods infinite grace and power(eternal life) and also infinite justice (eternal death) and all corresponds to God's Glory-his nature as divine and Holy and lovely.  

So whether we were living in the Garden of Eden, fully delighting in his creation in the purest sense, or we wait and groan in waiting for his glory that has yet to be revealed, God's glory is shown and his sovereignty is shown.  Yes, his sovereignty is shown how he can save sinners, instantly worthy of death to eternal life by sending his Son to take on man and win by submitting to death on a cross!

Check out Mars Hill Church in Seattle, pastor Mark Driscoll, he knows a lot more than I do.

This is what I like to call "bullshit rationalization". You're just saying a lot of churchy, theological words in hopes that you can explain away the problem of evil with them. I'm not buying it.

[Stevil]

The rock parodox is BS if you ask me.

There are two approaches to this.
A) Either Omnipotent means one can do anything, even that which is deemed logically impossible
or
B) Omnipotent means one can do anything that is logically possible.

Christians who go for option B, need to disregard certain parts of the Bible as it does present logically impossible ideas of Yhwh.
People who go for option A, well, good on you. I doubt you will ever lose an argument.

[LegendarySandwich]

[youtube:3pa8rwhk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QecUUnLNSiY[/youtube:3pa8rwhk]

[LegendarySandwich]

The rock parodox is BS if you ask me.

There are two approaches to this.
A) Either Omnipotent means one can do anything, even that which is deemed logically impossible
or
B) Omnipotent means one can do anything that is logically possible.

Christians who go for option B, need to disregard certain parts of the Bible as it does present logically impossible ideas of Yhwh.
People who go for option A, well, good on you. I doubt you will ever lose an argument.

In what sense do you mean it's bullshit?

[Stevil]

BS because some people take it too literally. A person that goes by logic and reason takes it as infallible proof that God does not exist.
e.g. "Omnipotent means one can do anything, even that which is deemed logically impossible, however the logically impossible is impossible therefore God is either not omnipotent or doesn't exist"

However as I have stated the answer is either A or B as above in my previous post.

A strong argument that works (for me at least) is one that TheJackel has presented on this forum in a different way to how I am presenting it below.
God (or anything that exists) cannot be made of nothing (same goes for the human soul).
Everything in existence is made up of some form of energy/matter.
If God/human soul is not made of energy/matter then God/human soul is not in existence.
If God is either made of energy/matter or not made of energy/matter then God cannot be the cause of energy/matter.

Also if God and/or the human soul were made up of energy/matter then they would be detectable by science and would be bound to the laws of physics just like everything else in existence. (So would heaven and hell).

By my understanding Space is reality. Reality is a three dimentional construct that is also affected by time. If something does not exist within Space then it does not exist within reality.

That which does not exist and is not within reality is purely conceptual.

[Whitney]

Forget paradoxes (as pointed out with a and b, there are ways to get around it), how about things that are complete nonsense?

What about a god who had to sacrifice himself to himself in order to save you from himself?

[youtube:1aldbmwa]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ8hefESt7c[/youtube:1aldbmwa]