Christian Doctrine
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-12-2016, 05:29 PM (This post was last modified: 18-12-2016 05:32 PM by unfogged.)
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 01:54 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I bought up the comets and the oort cloud because the Big Bang Theory became a topic. The BBT is coming under scrutiny and the existence of comets and the oort cloud are part of it.

No big deal just something an inquiring mind may want to research.

The big bang became a topic because you brought it up.

(18-12-2016 02:33 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I have read that there is some evidence for a day standing still?

Facepalm

The total ignorance of the nature of the solar system that that claim represents is hard to overestimate.

(18-12-2016 02:55 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I just heard that some astronomers say there was some evidence for it. I did not really look into it.

It looks like you are throwing out random crap to see what sticks. It smacks of dishonesty. If you think you have a point, make it. Brief mentions of things you don't understand and haven't researched just reinforces the impression that you just believe things or not based on what you find appealing with no regard for whether they are true or not.

[Image: 27efbe80531122e7787d4d5c840a7486.jpg]

It looks like you are trying to make an argument. Would you like some help?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like unfogged's post
18-12-2016, 05:34 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
I'm not sure about an ass, but if he is real he certainly speaks through his ass, I mean who would allow such a ridiculous document to stand he's supposed to be almighty god for fucks sake cant he communicate a bit better.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2016, 05:52 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 04:12 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I have studied the Bible. I have gone through the prophecies concerning the Messiah and others and found them to be accurate.

No you haven't. The prophets were not prophesying about the future. They were speaking to the jews of the time about the problems of the time.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
18-12-2016, 05:58 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 05:52 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 04:12 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I have studied the Bible. I have gone through the prophecies concerning the Messiah and others and found them to be accurate.

No you haven't. The prophets were not prophesying about the future. They were speaking to the jews of the time about the problems of the time.

He found them to be accurate because he heard what his pastor had to say on the subject and then he stopped looking for answers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Aliza's post
18-12-2016, 05:59 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 05:34 PM)adey67 Wrote:  I'm not sure about an ass, but if he is real he certainly speaks through his ass, I mean who would allow such a ridiculous document to stand he's supposed to be almighty god for fucks sake cant he communicate a bit better.

Yes. He shows up on a piece of toast or drips of paint on a wall or the ass of a Pug Dog * see below * or maybe talks out of jackass but he can't seem to communicate normally. Laugh out load

[Image: o-JESUS-DOG-BUTT-570.jpg?1]

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like dancefortwo's post
18-12-2016, 08:21 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 04:05 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 03:54 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  So how do you reconcile that with variable perfection?

God is widely viewed as being perfect. The problem with that is that perfection is immutable. The only possible change is to become imperfect. This leads to a static deity, incapable of thought, action or even perception.

I think because God is outside of our universe and we are inside the universe the universe He created does not allow a squared circle. If He did He would be breaking His own rules.

Wouldn't stopping the rotation of the earth be "breaking His own rules"? Not to mention a talking ass and any other kind of "miracle" that supposedly happened in the bible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2016, 10:19 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 03:28 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 03:03 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  So since we're all here, and terribly busy, perhaps you can try out one of these importantish questions.

Can god make a rock so big that he can't lift it?

More meaningfully, is your deity bound by logic or can it commit paradox? What are the bounds on omnipotence?

I don't think anyone can make a square circle or a married bachelor even God.

Wow. Valid point.

I've been saying it for a long time. The GRP is dumb, and people need to stop using it.

All the GRP is a crafty use of semantics to change a definition. The paradox simply can't be because it alters the definition of what is being called into question.

Omnipotence is complete power. Just because you create a textual paradox doesn't make it a valid argument; moreover, it's a loaded question when the actual answer is, "your question is invalid".

I know you've gotten a lot of heat (I haven't read much of what you've written), but this entry is valid. Gotta give you props.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
18-12-2016, 10:25 PM (This post was last modified: 18-12-2016 10:30 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 10:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 03:28 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I don't think anyone can make a square circle or a married bachelor even God.

Wow. Valid point.

I've been saying it for a long time. The GRP is dumb, and people need to stop using it.

All the GRP is a crafty use of semantics to change a definition. The paradox simply can't be because it alters the definition of what is being called into question.

Omnipotence is complete power. Just because you create a textual paradox doesn't make it a valid argument; moreover, it's a loaded question when the actual answer is, "your question is invalid".

I know you've gotten a lot of heat (I haven't read much of what you've written), but this entry is valid. Gotta give you props.

Agreed. Never liked this argument. It's why I made a joke about it.

I disdain the "problem of evil" argument even more, people thinking that God has to conform to our ideas about what degree of evil (to our minds) is necessary for The Grand Plan (which we have no way of knowing) to work. [Edit to Add: This presumes there is an interventionist almighty being, and a plan, of course. Just leaving it alone for the sake of the argument. It's why I focus on whether or not the God being described fits the attributes I'd consider "worthy of worship, even if real", rather than the issue of whether it must/should conform to our ideas about good in order to be called good. I would, for instance, fault this being for creating creatures without moral sense (good/evil), defining sin as the evil act of defying God, and then faulting the creatures for doing the evil act they didn't even know was a thing. That's a just bad story.]

Doesn't stop people from using it. *shrug*

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
18-12-2016, 10:28 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 08:21 PM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 04:05 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  I think because God is outside of our universe and we are inside the universe the universe He created does not allow a squared circle. If He did He would be breaking His own rules.

Wouldn't stopping the rotation of the earth be "breaking His own rules"? Not to mention a talking ass and any other kind of "miracle" that supposedly happened in the bible.


Just an FYI: a being such as the Christian God (perfect being, O3, etc), cannot not move from perfect to imperfect. If he could, then he would never have been perfect.

All things in this world that we can remotely consider "perfect" have a propensity for decay; therefore, they were, and always will be, imperfect. Something that is actually perfect, cannot have that propensity because that would make it imperfect from the onset.

In other words, something that's truly infinite cannot degrade into something finite. It wouldn't have been infinite.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2016, 12:20 AM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(18-12-2016 10:25 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(18-12-2016 10:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Wow. Valid point.

I've been saying it for a long time. The GRP is dumb, and people need to stop using it.

All the GRP is a crafty use of semantics to change a definition. The paradox simply can't be because it alters the definition of what is being called into question.

Omnipotence is complete power. Just because you create a textual paradox doesn't make it a valid argument; moreover, it's a loaded question when the actual answer is, "your question is invalid".

I know you've gotten a lot of heat (I haven't read much of what you've written), but this entry is valid. Gotta give you props.

Agreed. Never liked this argument. It's why I made a joke about it.

I disdain the "problem of evil" argument even more, people thinking that God has to conform to our ideas about what degree of evil (to our minds) is necessary for The Grand Plan (which we have no way of knowing) to work. [Edit to Add: This presumes there is an interventionist almighty being, and a plan, of course. Just leaving it alone for the sake of the argument. It's why I focus on whether or not the God being described fits the attributes I'd consider "worthy of worship, even if real", rather than the issue of whether it must/should conform to our ideas about good in order to be called good. I would, for instance, fault this being for creating creatures without moral sense (good/evil), defining sin as the evil act of defying God, and then faulting the creatures for doing the evil act they didn't even know was a thing. That's a just bad story.]

Doesn't stop people from using it. *shrug*

Sorry, I think problem of evil argument is significant. No theist apart from KC that I know has ever admitted that an evil God is a solution to it. They all want to carry on with their feel-good fuzzies of omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. You just can't do that. I agree that it doesn't *disprove* their God per se, but it sure as fuck proves that one of those three alleged attributes *has* to be incorrect.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: