Impossible(def): not able to occur, exist, or be done. Because you believe miracles exist, they can't be impossible. If I said I don't accept miracles. Quote me.
You said you as a human cannot accept anything illogical.
Miracle:
a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency:
So, either
A. using your logic, you should be an atheist.
B. Your God is not all powerful, because (like you said) he can't do anything illogical.
God is all powerful.
So, God can defy logic, because in order to be all powerful by definition, you would have to create logic.
God can only break the rules of physics and nature. Not logic.
Then he isn't all powerful...........
Again, you can't say:
"God is all powerful."
and
"God can only break the rules of physics and nature. Not logic."
Thats a direct contradiction into the nature of God.
So we limit what God can do.
A creation can limit the creators' abilities, based on the premise that they can't comprehend the creators' abilities?
Thats funny.
Therefore, he can't do impossible things.
Then your God, isn't all powerful, if he can't do impossible things, period.
Yes God is not bound by logic. We are bound by logic. You agree human knowledge is limited? So its not that its impossible for God to break the laws of logic. We can't accept it. Because we can't accept contradictions. Understand?
Ok. I understand your argument, but your wording is very poor.
You're basically saying that God can himself defy logic, because he created it, but in order to be a fair God, he must represent only what we find logical as evidence for him and his teachings.
Thats fine to argue.
However, that doesn't contradict the fact that we humans are also triune in body, mind, and spirit. So why can't God?
Also, what is illogical about God coming down to earth in a human body, claim to be God, and perform many supernatural miracles to prove it.
Thats not illogical if you believe in the supernatural. There is an argument to be made about the logic of that if you're an atheist.
But if you believe in the supernatural, and a God that can do anything, it makes more sense for him to appear and do supernatural thing to prove himself rather than claim divinity from a man.
You claim my faith is blind, yet you base your religion based on the fact that one man claimed to have a revelation from God and had others write down his revelation. That takes a lot of faith my friend.
Miracles are not illogical.
So, the miracle of God coming down in the body of a man isn't illogical then.
Yes.
Wow.........well that's a self-defeating argument my friend.
Seeing is not the main way to reach truth. Depends what their intention was. If they were genuine, then they are not at fault.
What happened to God appearing to us logically?
Yes. If what that guy says is more reasonable.
What's more reasonable?
Taking the words of a man who describes Jesus 500 years after Jesus lived as truth.
or
Taking the words of people who literally walked with Jesus, as truth
The assumption is false. The entire Bible is not Gods words. And Quran refers to which ones are. One of Muhammads miracle was the Quran. It was the only book that didn't get corrupted because it doesn't contain contradictions. Contradiction. Verse A says do X, verse B says don’t ever do X. So no.
So, in order to understand what parts of the Bible true and which parts are false, we need to line it up with the Qur'an, which was written 500 years after the Bible was completed, in order to understand what parts of the Bible are true?
And you are basing this off of the fact that a man said God told him?
That is less reasonable by a long shot.
So, we must read the bible, by first reading the Qur'an then read the Bible, but just throw out the other parts that don't agree with the Qur'an, based soley on the claim of a man, who lived 500 years after the Bible was finished, and claimed to have a revelation from God.
That is not logical, I'm sorry.
Islam does not believe in attacking people based on their religion.
Then why:
Did Muhammed fight in or oversee many battles, many of which were offensive ones.
Did Muhammed order the execution and maiming of many people, including massacres.
Does the Qur’an teach Jihad as a means to spread the faith and there is no possible question that this Jihad is principally warfare. Much of the Qur’an is advice for battle and conquest.
Does the Hadith agree with this and even expands on it.
Was Muhammad’s vision was put into practice and by AD 700 his followers created one of the largest empires in history.
Was Muhammed promised immediate access to heaven to those who died in war for Allah.
Based on the doctrine of abrogation, what is acknowledged as the last or nearly the last of the suras is Sura 9—the most violent of all the Suras. In this one, Muslims are told to no longer compromise with Jews or Christians, but to attack and defeat them.
Christians and Jews are people of the book and are respected.
Thats laughable:
«لَا تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى يُقَاتِلَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ الْيَهُودَ، فَيَقْتُلُهُمُ الْمُسْلِمُونَ حَتَّى يَخْتَبِىءَ الْيَهُودِيُّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ الْحَجَرِ وَالشَّجَرِ، فَيَقُولُ الْحَجَرُ وَالشَّجَرُ: يَامُسْلِمُ يَاعَبْدَاللهِ هَذَا يَهُودِيٌّ خَلْفِي فَتَعَالَ فَاقْتُلْهُ إِلَّا الْغَرْقَدَ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْ شَجَرِ الْيَهُود»
(The Hour will not start, until after the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them. The Jew will hide behind a stone or tree, and the tree will say, `O Muslim! O servant of Allah! This is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.' Except Al-Gharqad, for it is a tree of the Jews.)