god is great

Author: Vici

Posts

Total: 80
Topic's author
#61
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Double_R
Again, this transcendental being… is it subject to the laws of logic? YES or NO?
That which is logical and reasonable is in accordance with God's nature. God cannot do that which is inherently against his nature. 
Topic's author
#62
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Double_R
what is your account for logic? you lack the creator and ultimate foundation by which you are using to criqtique god. 
#63
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@rosends
So Jews are still existing in Exile!! Was that from 70AD when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and scattered the Jews after the Old Covenant was destroyed.
There is a New Covenant Theology that no longer requires circumcision. 
It is actually from a little after 70, but generally that's accurate. Nice work! Of course, your claim about the covenant being destroyed is wrong, but at least you know that Christianity doesn't require circumcision. You ARE capable of learning. Good work!
So Jews keeping the covenant of circumcision has not changed their exile status? Has it occurred to Jews circumcision is how Jews are identified and targeted for exile? 
#64
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Vici
yes but the ockams razors finds that 1 is less than 4 so.
O is less than 1. ;-)
#65
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Shila
Why would a religion attack it's GOD?

Wouldn't that be sort of counter-intuitive?


Oh almighty GODDO thou art a dumbass in heaven.



#66
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Vici
God cannot do that which is inherently against his nature.
If God cannot defy the laws of logic then God does not account for them. He cannot both be the arbiter of them and be subject to them.

what is your account for logic?
I don’t pretend to “account” for them, whatever that means exactly. This is just a game of infinite regress where if one of us mentions something that accounts  for it the other just asks how we amount for that. The only reason you are convinced your answer is correct is because you have essentially defined God as “the answer to all problems”, so when a problem comes along you insert God as the answer without any thought. Well that might be comforting, but it certainly does not justify your answer any more than me saying “it’s magic”.

Going back to the laws of logic, the reason they cannot be accounted for is because they are the laws of existence, which means existence itself is subject to them. So if you’re trying to argue that god exists then of course he will be subject to them.
Topic's author
#67
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Double_R
God cannot do that which is inherently against his nature.
If God cannot defy the laws of logic then God does not account for them. He cannot both be the arbiter of them and be subject to them.
God is logic, the foundation. Logic is his essence. 

I don’t pretend to “account” for them, whatever that means exactly.
so if you cant justify logic, why ought i believe anything you say? 
Topic's author
#68
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Double_R
he is subject to them in the same sense that humans are subject to breathing. It is there nature. God's nature is the ultimate good

#69
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Why would a religion attack it's GOD?

Wouldn't that be sort of counter-intuitive?


Oh almighty GODDO thou art a dumbass in heaven.
Only the Jews are known for attacking God and his only begotten son Jesus.

Luke 23:20 Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again. 21 But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”
22 For the third time he spoke to them: “Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty. Therefore I will have him punished and then release him.”
23 But with loud shouts they insistently demanded that he be crucified, and their shouts prevailed. 24 So Pilate decided to grant their demand. 25 He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jesus to their will.
#70
TWS1405
TWS1405's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,048
3
4
7
TWS1405's avatar
TWS1405
3
4
7
-->
@Vici
thanks for the ad hom and avoiding my argument
Not an ad hom if it is true.

You made no legit argument.

Which is why I said you're being delusional. 
#71
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Vici
he is subject to them in the same sense that humans are subject to breathing. It is there nature. God's nature is the ultimate good
We have Gods apology for wrongfully destroying the world with a giant flood. God promises never to do it again.

Genesis 9:11 I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth."

Yet we have passages in the Bible describing The End Of Time

#72
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Vici
God is logic, the foundation. Logic is his essence.
Logic is the process by which we arrive at conclusions from a given set of premises.

God is (allegedly) the most powerful being in the universe.

These are categorically different concepts. To claim they are the same is logically absurd, you might as well be telling me the sky is October.

so if you cant justify logic, why ought i believe anything you say?
Because you gave it some thought and realized that what you’re arguing is senseless.

Logic can’t be justified, it is foundational. You have to assume its validity in order to use it and to argue against it also requires the use of it, so you’re either using logic to validate logic or using logic to argue against logic. Neither of those work, yet you’re trying to do both by claiming God justifies logic or that without God logic would not be valid.

he is subject to them in the same sense that humans are subject to breathing. It is there nature.
Humans do not account for breathing, so it’s not the same sense.
#73
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,593
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Yes, god  is great. Remember that the people who flew the plane into the World Trade center said 'Allahu Akbar' (which translates to mean “God is the greatest,”)
#74
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@FLRW
Yes, god  is great. Remember that the people who flew the plane into the World Trade center said 'Allahu Akbar' (which translates to mean “God is the greatest,”)
Even the Pentagon agreed the Sept 11 mission was successful. It brought about a recession. American troops after 20 years in Afghanistan had to withdraw in humiliation similar to the Saigon experience.

God must love a challenge. Who would have thought believing God is Great would produce such dramatic results?


#75
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 968
3
7
9
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
7
9
-->
@Vici
You are presupposing logic as a cogent apparatus when you argue that logic entails God's existence. The stipulation that logic is contingent upon God's existence is itself a postulation which already presupposes logic which, according to the presuppositionalist, is unacceptable. Critiquing our human epistemic presuppositions is categorically impossible - you identifying "God" as the answer to this unanswerable question is merely contributing to the "God of the gaps" hypothesis. 
#76
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@rosends
So Jews are still existing in Exile!! Was that from 70AD when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and scattered the Jews after the Old Covenant was destroyed.
There is a New Covenant Theology that no longer requires circumcision. 
It is actually from a little after 70, but generally that's accurate. Nice work! Of course, your claim about the covenant being destroyed is wrong, but at least you know that Christianity doesn't require circumcision. You ARE capable of learning. Good work!
The moment I mentioned circumcision you became very agreeable. 
The Jews willingly accepted for a piece of foreskin God would make them his chosen people. It’s the other sacrifices that turned the Jews against expanding the covenant of circumcision.
#77
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
It wasn't my being agreeable. It was my celebrating that you said something in the realm of "correct."
Sadly you then devolved back into gibberish. Have a great day!
#78
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@rosends
It wasn't my being agreeable. It was my celebrating that you said something in the realm of "correct."
Sadly you then devolved back into gibberish. Have a great day!
Rabbi’s came into existence only after the destruction of the Holy Temple.
Rabbinic Judaism, the normative form of Judaism that developed after the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem (ad 70).

So like the Roman Catholic Church, Rabbinic Judaism is profiting from the destruction of the Holy Temple.

Any wonder you people are in no hurry to rebuild the Temple. 
#79
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
You somehow pushed four factual errors into four sentences. That's incredible 1:1 ratio of error to sentence. That's amazing!

When you grow up into an adult, maybe you can study what we adults like to call "history" and you might even learn something. Good luck, I know the pre-teen years are hard, but you'll get there.
#80
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
You somehow pushed four factual errors into four sentences. That's incredible 1:1 ratio of error to sentence. That's amazing!

When you grow up into an adult, maybe you can study what we adults like to call "history" and you might even learn something. Good luck, I know the pre-teen years are hard, but you'll get there.

After the Destruction of the Second Temple

Developing over a period of five centuries (until c.AD 500), rabbinic Judaism completed the process already underway, which saw the replacement of the Temple by the synagogue (the Second Temple was destroyed in AD 70), of the priest by the rabbi, and of the sacrificial ceremony by the prayer service and study. Basic to these changes was the redaction and codification of the Oral Law (see Mishna; Talmud) and the Midrash, which, as outgrowths of the biblical religion, centered on the relationships between God, His Torah, and His people, Israel. Emphasis was placed upon study of the Torah (in its broadest sense) as the most important religious act, leading to an understanding of the proper way of life; upon the growing need for national restoration in the face of continued Exile from the Promised Land; and upon the function of this world as preparatory for the World to Come (Olam ha-Bah), while not devaluing the importance of life in this world.

Rabbi’s came into existence only after the destruction of the Holy Temple.
Rabbinic Judaism, the normative form of Judaism that developed after the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem (ad 70).

So like the Roman Catholic Church, Rabbinic Judaism is profiting from the destruction of the Holy Temple.

Any wonder you people are in no hurry to rebuild the Temple.