Re: Peterson's Death Sentence
From: Parse Tree (account_at_domain.extension)
Date: 01/25/05
- Next message: Richard the Dreaded Libertarian: "Re: Republican voters will soon be rounded up"
- Previous message: Aaron Hughes: "Re: General flash memory question"
- In reply to: Noah Roberts: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Noah Roberts: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:22:29 GMT
Noah Roberts wrote:
> 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.
None of these comments could in any way alter the fact that God is
logically impossible, and therefore logically proven to not exist.
- Next message: Richard the Dreaded Libertarian: "Re: Republican voters will soon be rounded up"
- Previous message: Aaron Hughes: "Re: General flash memory question"
- In reply to: Noah Roberts: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Reply: Noah Roberts: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|