Re: Peterson's Death Sentence
From: Noah Roberts (nroberts_at_stmartin.edu)
Date: 01/25/05
- Next message: Rich The Philosophizer: "Re: Have you heard the GOOD NEWS?"
- Previous message: Tim Shoppa: "Re: Low-cost RF Detector Circuit"
- In reply to: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Parse Tree: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 25 Jan 2005 12:51:01 -0800
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> Noah Roberts wrote:
> > Kevin Aylward wrote:
> >
> >> The issue is that you don't understand the *implications* of your
> >> arguments. This is typically with the religious, e.g not realising
an
> >
> >> "all powerful god" is logically self contradictory, hence a false
> >> idea.
> >
> > How so?
>
> Here we go..
>
> If god is all powerful he can make a weight that is so heavy no one
can
> lift it, including god. If it is so heavy, and god himself can't lift
> it, then he cant be all powerful. This contradicts the original
> assumption, hence the original assumption must be false.
After consideration I believe your argument to be flawed.
You assume that the laws of this universe apply to God, when God is
very likely not bound by these rules. Like I said before, since God
made the Universe he probably is not contained by it as we are. What
is outside of the universe is not necessarily bound by the laws of it.
Same applies to any argument about infinity...you assume that God is
bound by the same linear rules of time and space as we are, yet since
he /created both/ I seriously doubt that to be so, and obviously cannot
be assumed.
We cannot possibly know what rules God operates under, if any, since we
are bound to the universe and its rules whereas he/she/it is not. The
rules of logic may apply, but the rules governing mass, distance, and
time probably do not.
Basically what I am saying is that your logic is correct, but is based
on a premise that is not obviously true and probably isn't. Therefor
the conclusion does not follow. And since there are no premises we can
say are true about anything that exists outside of the universe I don't
see how you can apply logic to arrive at any valid conclusion about
God's existance.
- Next message: Rich The Philosophizer: "Re: Have you heard the GOOD NEWS?"
- Previous message: Tim Shoppa: "Re: Low-cost RF Detector Circuit"
- In reply to: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Kevin Aylward: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Parse Tree: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|