Tony Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I understand full that position and accept that potion, what I don't accept is that someone should to try to be open minded enough to be able to be convinced of anything at all, if it isn’t possible then it would be pointless being open mind about it. Why isn't God possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Why isn't God possible? Which God? Some definitions of God are possible and some definitions of God aren’t possible and there are infinite other imaginary things that aren't possible and don't require people to be open minded about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Any God, take your pick, I don't mind which. Your proposal for why God isn't possible will have to cover them all though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Any God, take your pick, I don't mind which. Your proposal for why God isn't possible will have to cover them all though. Christian God is all powerful, able to do anything and is all knowing, knows everything. A God clearly can’t do anything and has limits and clearly can’t know everything so again has limits, if it has limits its not God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 Yes, how silly. Just because quantum physics has demonstrated that human assumptions about time, space and existence become completely inaccurate and irrelevant when applied to the vast majority of phenomena which exists outside the realm of normal human experience, why should we not continue to assume that any explaination for the existence of the univesrse should conform to good ol fashioned human assumptions about time, space and existence? Hiow silly. It's just conmmon sense. When a credible unified theory emerges, it won't come from one of these silly scientists and their daft ideas. It will probably come from a columnist on the Daily Mail with moderate Christian views. If an explaination of the universe doesn't fit in with good old pre-quantum logic, it must be silly. After all, anything we don't understand is just daft. Quantum physics is silly, and if a whole new technological age has been made possible by it, well then those silly physicists were just lucky. If quantum physics has determined that human assumption becomes irrelevant when applied to the unknown phenomena that exists outside of the realm of normal human experience, why is it that the logical argument which concurs that arguments such as the creationism argument are flawed by contradiction making them negative arguments, is still being used to discredit creationism? Why is it that human logic remains relevant to the nature of unknown phenomena that exists outside of the realm of normal human experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Christian God is all powerful, able to do anything and is all knowing, knows everything. A God clearly can’t do anything and has limits and clearly can’t know everything so again has limits, if it has limits its not God. You'll have to excuse me for not understanding what you wrote there, but I don't see how that proves that God isn't possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 You'll have to excuse me for not understanding what you wrote there, but I don't see how that proves that God isn't possible. The God described in the bible isn't possible so therefore doesn’t exist, and like I said some Gods are possible, for instance a stone worshipped by man is a God and clearly exists. It can't do anything other than look like a stone but it is still a God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 ......because that's got nothing to do with what Jimmy said? That's because he deliberately worded it with no mention of the reason for the celebration. "A celebration of the days getting longer"? Who celebrates that? He was obviously referring to the ancient practice of worshiping the Sun God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 In effect yes. You're asserting that if it can't be proved then the pixie could well exist and be the creator. No I'm not. I'm asserting that the universe could have been created. I'm making no assertions about sky pixies, it's you who's brought them into the discussion so you can mock them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 Well, that's true isn't it? However unlikely. That doesn't seem to be what Danot is saying though. He seems to be saying he is confused about a lot of things. I'm confused about everything relating to the unknown phenomena, aka- God. I'm in no position to tell anyone what it is or isn't, or whether it did or didn't create the universe and everything within it. All I know is that I don't know anything about it, I don't proclaim to know what it isn't, like you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.