theists:

Originally posted by vistesd
Vacuous generalities that have nothing to do with my questions to twhitehead. Perhaps, however, you do not understand the questions; they do have some historical context in terms of past discussions on here with which twhitehead is familiar.

I take no umbrage, though. And if you want to address the wrong-headedness of a particular question or statement of mine, I'll take a look at it.

Nobility of tone says a lot. You seem to be a vigorous 'Doubting
Thomas' genuinely seeking to know. Appreciate that. Thanks.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Nobility of tone says a lot. You seem to be a vigorous 'Doubting
Thomas' genuinely seeking to know. Appreciate that. Thanks.

And returned.

Despite the abruptness of my response, I do recognize that poetry can be a form of argument (and you do turn some wonderful phrases), and I try not to dismiss comments such as yours without at least some self-examination. Argument on here is good for that, too, with some ping-pong partners to assist.

By the way, with regard to my questions to twhitehead: I am not convinced that the idea of a God is incoherent, just that some notions of God are incoherent, or at least that some expressions of those notions are incoherent.

In spiritual terms, if you think of me as a kind of Zen/Taoist/Vedantist you won’t be far off the mark. You have caught me recently in my more rationalist-skeptic mode. I’m not always there; it depends on what general lines of inquiry I’m pursuing in my own mind, and, as I say, using argument on here as part of that process.

Now I must retire for awhile. Be well.

Originally posted by vistesd
Is what you’re getting at here:
1. The O-O-O god is incoherent per se? (E.g., because we really don’t know what we mean when we use terms like “omniscient”?)
2. That the 3O god becomes incoherent in the face of the conditions of the natural universe (e.g., the general argument from natural evil)?
3. The notion of a being that exists outside of space-t ...[text shortened]... incoherencies? Or (b) that the other attributes commonly assigned are themselves contradictory?

I was aiming for 3. Unless some serious redefinition is done, then I believe that "outside of spacetime" is incoherent as the term 'outside' implies a position which is only meaningful in the context of space time.
My understanding of existence and dimensions is that something exists if it is a specific feature at a specific position for each dimension, or if it is a collection of such features. A dimension is not a dimension unless every existent entity can be placed on it. An entity is not existent unless it can be placed on every dimension.

In addition to that, I object to his false claim that he believes in such a God. He does not. He is attempting to use the tactic of the undefined God. ie, you cannot disprove the existence of something that has not been defined.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i may believe in the easter bunny. that doesn't make me an "incoherent" retard until i stay up all night to wait for it. do try to understand that if someone believes in a higher power doesn't mean that he is a retarded zealot or that he is less intelligent than you, the mighty atheist.

And why would staying up all night affect the retardedness of an easter bunnian?

This conversation between you and me is over. if you cannot be civil, i would rather converse with (and/or make fun of) a creationist person. at least god forbids them to be uncivil with sinners. at least you confirmed to me that atheists can be just as single minded in their religion as christian or muslim zealots
I did not intend to be uncivil. But its interesting that you are ready to make fun of a creationist but do not wish anyone to make fun of you who holds just as irrational beliefs.
Single minded might be a good description of me, but I do not have a religion.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Mr. David C., nothing whatsoever to do with the poster. Focus was on the hopelessly strained vortex of thought.

By the way, and by way of reminder, weak people always attack other persons and their personalities. The strong

consistently deal constructively with worthwhile issues. You may have tipped your hand with your crass vocabulary.

Ah, yes, the ol' "Jesus and I are so far above your level, it's barely worth the effort to reply"-reply. If you consider "strained vortex of thought" to be any less of an ad hominem than my "crassness"...the Jesus Monster has obviously eaten your Brains.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And why would staying up all night affect the retardedness of an easter bunnian?

[b]This conversation between you and me is over. if you cannot be civil, i would rather converse with (and/or make fun of) a creationist person. at least god forbids them to be uncivil with sinners. at least you confirmed to me that atheists can be just as single minded in ...[text shortened]... ational beliefs.
Single minded might be a good description of me, but I do not have a religion.

staying up all night for the easter bunny to come is retarded. it is one thing to believe something but when you expect events to happen according to that belief then you are gambling. not as in poker gambling where you have a non-zero chance of winning. in this case, there is a very good chance that the event will NEVER pass as you expect. like in the case of the easter bunny


i am not making any statements that are contradicted by scientific facts. creationists are. that is the difference.

believing something without proof is the same thing as not believing something even if nothing contradicts the existence of that said thing. even as an atheist you might consider the possibility that you may be wrong. that is why i call atheists religious. they are willing to admit that everything is subjective and most theories we hold true might be proven later false, or incomplete. But when it comes to the existence of a supreme being all atheists are absolutely sure. How come?


"I did not intend to be uncivil"
Apologies accepted. i enjoyed our talk and i was sure you are civil. that is why i was much more pissed when you slipped from good manners than i am when people i think are retards call me names(in fact, i don't mind stupid people calling me names at all)

Originally posted by David C
Ah, yes, the ol' "Jesus and I are so far above your level, it's barely worth the effort to reply"-reply. If you consider "strained vortex of thought" to be any less of an ad hominem than my "crassness"...the Jesus Monster has obviously eaten your Brains.

Principle #2: And the weak invariably attack the strong with the premeditated

purpose of borrowing strength, in an attempt to gain a measure of control.


🙂

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
God has no need for a mediator. We do. Christ is the mediator

between God and man, reconciling hopeless mankind to Himself.

Oh pleeeasse, that is the biggest crock of s hit I ever heard. So if this god of yours made all of us, why would it have made us where we NEED a mediator? You are drowning in your own puke.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Principle #2: And the weak invariably attack the strong with the premeditated

purpose of borrowing strength, in an attempt to gain a measure of control.


🙂

Condescend to me until your heart's content, pal. Fact remains, vistesd's thought was quite clear in context...you happen to be uncomfortable with the conclusion (a 3-O god is a logical fallacy), and felt the need to disparage ("grasping less and less of the truth" ). Forgive me if you think it uncouth, but you and your kind annoy me to no end.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
why do you believe your god is the only god? why is it your god? im not asking for proof this time. im jw why it is you believe so.

because my faith teaches me so. If I were a Hindu, I would believe in many gods. But as a Christian, that's the doctrne: One God, one Savior, one way to heaven.

Originally posted by David C
Condescend to me until your heart's content, pal. Fact remains, vistesd's thought was quite clear in context...you happen to be uncomfortable with the conclusion (a 3-O god is a logical fallacy), and felt the need to disparage ("grasping less and less of the truth" ). Forgive me if you think it uncouth, but you and your kind annoy me to no end.

Principle #3... Our emotional complex is designed to appreciate. Though there are positive and negative patterns, human emotions

per se are devoid of reason and incapable of rational thought. They feel. The mind's job is to think. Decisions made while in a state

of emoting rely on pure subjectivity. Such decisions are among the worst any individual will ever make in this lifetime (school, vocation,

friends, romance, finances, geographical venue, etc). Face it. We've all made a few, including hypersensitivity driven RHP Forum posts.



🙂

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
why do you believe your god is the only god? why is it your god? im not asking for proof this time. im jw why it is you believe so.

Shouldn't the title of this thread be "Monotheists"?