The Evil Lunacy of Calvinism.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2012, 04:38 PM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(12-03-2012 11:22 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(12-03-2012 06:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  Really, your discussions devolve to that level of content. There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion.

So, if you have nothing intelligent to add, stay out of the conversation.

Really?
There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion. Cool

It's all in your head, because there is no other place it could be.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2012, 05:02 PM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Quote:Really?
There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion. Cool

What they are discussing now is what an omnipotent being can/can't do (which you should be able to discuss whether you are a theist or not).
Feel free to add something to the actual discussion.

To me, even a universe "without God (of some sort)" would meet a paradox.
If the universe has existed for inifinity, it means that an infinite amount of time has passed for today to come, thus creating a paradox (I could explain this more, but I'm too lazy).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2012, 07:25 PM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(13-03-2012 05:02 PM)Dust Wrote:  
Quote:Really?
There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion. Cool

What they are discussing now is what an omnipotent being can/can't do (which you should be able to discuss whether you are a theist or not).
Feel free to add something to the actual discussion.

To me, even a universe "without God (of some sort)" would meet a paradox.
If the universe has existed for inifinity, it means that an infinite amount of time has passed for today to come, thus creating a paradox (I could explain this more, but I'm too lazy).

No paradox involved, eternal is eternal. The mass/energy of the universe probably always existed but has changed form countless times.

If you can say that your (non-existent) god is eternal, then why is that not paradoxical?

(12-03-2012 11:22 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(12-03-2012 06:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  Really, your discussions devolve to that level of content. There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion.

So, if you have nothing intelligent to add, stay out of the conversation.

I did add something intelligent; more intelligent, certainly, than you two going on about how your imaginary overlord is better than his imaginary celestial dictator.

I could, as you so rudely suggest, stay out of the discussion. I could ask you to stay out of the forum, but I won't because that would be bad manners.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
13-03-2012, 07:56 PM
RE: The Evil Lunacy of Calvinism.
I have a question for Egor. If god can diminish his omnipotence, once it is diminished he would not be omnipotent. How then does a non omnipotent being regain his omnipotence. If he can't then he logically stops becoming all powerful and essentially retires as your god. If he can then surely he never really gave it up in the first place and was just pretending.

(please excuse me talking directly to you, I know it is out of character but as I have explained elsewhere I have had a drink)

"Belief means not wanting to know what is true"
Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2012, 10:17 PM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Quote:No paradox involved, eternal is eternal. The mass/energy of the universe probably always existed but has changed form countless times.

If you can say that your (non-existent) god is eternal, then why is that not paradoxical?

The paradox I'm talking about is based around math. Something must cause an infinite cycle, or else the cycle would not be there in the first place. This explanation is pretty rough (and perhaps bad) so I'll give an example.

Let's say everything has existed for eternity. That means that it's been an eternity for today to come. Since eternity would have passed, today would be the end. Nothing can be bigger than an eternity, unless it is something that surpasses normal "boundaries". A god is a good explaination for something that surpasses normal "boundaries".

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist = ∞

∞ - ∞ = 0
Universe ends NOW.

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist (with something outside of normal "boundaries") = ∞ + X
(note that X can't exist in the previous example as ∞ + X would be ∞ as long as X is < ∞)

∞ + X - ∞ = X

Thus the universe exists for as long as X is (as decided by the factor outside normal boundaries).

Does this mean that the christian God, Allah or some Hindu god exists? No, most certainly not. But it means that no matter how you look at the universe, you will find a paradox.


I admit I was close to deleting all this, as it's probably just rabble. If I REALLY took some time I would perhaps be able to explain it in a more coherent manner. I wanted to explain X better, but right now I would just make things more silly. Confused
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2012, 11:09 PM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(13-03-2012 07:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-03-2012 05:02 PM)Dust Wrote:  
Quote:Really?
There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion. Cool

What they are discussing now is what an omnipotent being can/can't do (which you should be able to discuss whether you are a theist or not).
Feel free to add something to the actual discussion.

To me, even a universe "without God (of some sort)" would meet a paradox.
If the universe has existed for inifinity, it means that an infinite amount of time has passed for today to come, thus creating a paradox (I could explain this more, but I'm too lazy).

No paradox involved, eternal is eternal. The mass/energy of the universe probably always existed but has changed form countless times.

If you can say that your (non-existent) god is eternal, then why is that not paradoxical?

(12-03-2012 11:22 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(12-03-2012 06:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  Really, your discussions devolve to that level of content. There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion.

So, if you have nothing intelligent to add, stay out of the conversation.

I did add something intelligent; more intelligent, certainly, than you two going on about how your imaginary overlord is better than his imaginary celestial dictator.

I could, as you so rudely suggest, stay out of the discussion. I could ask you to stay out of the forum, but I won't because that would be bad manners.

I'm a little disappointed. Are you feeling ok, Chas?

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 01:58 AM
 
RE: The Evil Lunacy of Calvinism.
(13-03-2012 07:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  I could, as you so rudely suggest, stay out of the discussion. I could ask you to stay out of the forum, but I won't because that would be bad manners.
Touché
I apologize.

(13-03-2012 07:56 PM)Eternal Wrote:  I have a question for Egor. If god can diminish his omnipotence, once it is diminished he would not be omnipotent. How then does a non omnipotent being regain his omnipotence. If he can't then he logically stops becoming all powerful and essentially retires as your god. If he can then surely he never really gave it up in the first place and was just pretending.

(please excuse me talking directly to you, I know it is out of character but as I have explained elsewhere I have had a drink)
And I’ve had some hydrocodone (Rx’d for a cough and cold), so I’ll address you directly. The fact is I don’t know.

God is monistic. To create things he creates a line within his substance, and as Dust would surely tell you, a line is a conscious construct. There is something about creating a human soul that at the same time blinds God to the precognition of what choices that soul will make. I don’t know the mechanics of that kind of creating. And I don’t have a model in the physical world that I can use to illustrate it at this time.

It’s as if God has permanently lined off a part of himself that he cannot get back unless that part comes back by its own free will, and God cannot predetermine what outcome will occur.

You have hit on the frontier of my current spiritual studies with your question. I will have the answer one day, but I don’t have it now.

But how He regains His omnipotence is easy: He destroys the universe. That is, he destroys all lines within his substance. He just stops imagining them.

(13-03-2012 10:17 PM)Dust Wrote:  
Quote:No paradox involved, eternal is eternal. The mass/energy of the universe probably always existed but has changed form countless times.

If you can say that your (non-existent) god is eternal, then why is that not paradoxical?

The paradox I'm talking about is based around math. Something must cause an infinite cycle, or else the cycle would not be there in the first place. This explanation is pretty rough (and perhaps bad) so I'll give an example.

Let's say everything has existed for eternity. That means that it's been an eternity for today to come. Since eternity would have passed, today would be the end. Nothing can be bigger than an eternity, unless it is something that surpasses normal "boundaries". A god is a good explaination for something that surpasses normal "boundaries".

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist = ∞

∞ - ∞ = 0
Universe ends NOW.

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist (with something outside of normal "boundaries") = ∞ + X
(note that X can't exist in the previous example as ∞ + X would be ∞ as long as X is < ∞)

∞ + X - ∞ = X

Thus the universe exists for as long as X is (as decided by the factor outside normal boundaries).

Does this mean that the christian God, Allah or some Hindu god exists? No, most certainly not. But it means that no matter how you look at the universe, you will find a paradox.


I admit I was close to deleting all this, as it's probably just rabble. If I REALLY took some time I would perhaps be able to explain it in a more coherent manner. I wanted to explain X better, but right now I would just make things more silly. Confused

Dust, I think you’re doing great. Don’t delete. Keep it up. Kudos.
Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 03:06 AM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(13-03-2012 10:17 PM)Dust Wrote:  I admit I was close to deleting all this, as it's probably just rabble. If I REALLY took some time I would perhaps be able to explain it in a more coherent manner. I wanted to explain X better, but right now I would just make things more silly. Confused

Hey Dust, don't worry about making it sound sillier, its ok as it is...Wink

It may have saved you time if you had mentioned (astrophysical) singularity, I think most people would have picked up what you where saying from that.

And no need for magical god thinking with a singularity Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 08:26 AM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2012 08:29 AM by Chas.)
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(13-03-2012 10:17 PM)Dust Wrote:  
Quote:No paradox involved, eternal is eternal. The mass/energy of the universe probably always existed but has changed form countless times.

If you can say that your (non-existent) god is eternal, then why is that not paradoxical?

The paradox I'm talking about is based around math. Something must cause an infinite cycle, or else the cycle would not be there in the first place. This explanation is pretty rough (and perhaps bad) so I'll give an example.

Let's say everything has existed for eternity. That means that it's been an eternity for today to come. Since eternity would have passed, today would be the end. Nothing can be bigger than an eternity, unless it is something that surpasses normal "boundaries". A god is a good explaination for something that surpasses normal "boundaries".

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist = ∞

∞ - ∞ = 0
Universe ends NOW.

Time for today to come = ∞
Time universe will exist (with something outside of normal "boundaries") = ∞ + X
(note that X can't exist in the previous example as ∞ + X would be ∞ as long as X is < ∞)

∞ + X - ∞ = X

Thus the universe exists for as long as X is (as decided by the factor outside normal boundaries).

Does this mean that the christian God, Allah or some Hindu god exists? No, most certainly not. But it means that no matter how you look at the universe, you will find a paradox.


I admit I was close to deleting all this, as it's probably just rabble. If I REALLY took some time I would perhaps be able to explain it in a more coherent manner. I wanted to explain X better, but right now I would just make things more silly. Confused

That is specious thinking - a complete misunderstanding of infinities. Now is now. We are where we are on an infinite time line, just as '0' is a place on the infinitely long number line.
(13-03-2012 11:09 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(12-03-2012 11:22 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(12-03-2012 06:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  Really, your discussions devolve to that level of content. There is no evidence of God.
Neither of you has any; no one does. All your talk is just your delusion vs. delusion.

So, if you have nothing intelligent to add, stay out of the conversation.

I did add something intelligent; more intelligent, certainly, than you two going on about how your imaginary overlord is better than his imaginary celestial dictator.

I could, as you so rudely suggest, stay out of the discussion. I could ask you to stay out of the forum, but I won't because that would be bad manners.

I'm a little disappointed. Are you feeling ok, Chas?
[/quote]

Tired, run down, distracted. Sad Still, I thought it was a good, if restrained, answer.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2012, 09:47 AM
RE: So, Egor and KC, just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
(14-03-2012 08:26 AM)Chas Wrote:  Tired, run down, distracted. Sad Still, I thought it was a good, if restrained, answer.

Take a nap. The restraint concerns me.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: