Vatican says aliens could exist

[Neosutra]

no, you get it. kaylia doesn't.

That's not a valid answer to a valid argument.

I think your over analyzing this Day, the confusion between Blarg and Kaylia is that Kaylia's argument is self contradicting nonsense.

Mind pointing where the contradiction is?

I can't see where the contradiction between "omniscient" and "free will" is when omniscient doesn't involve knowing the future. One has to assume there is no determinism when you include the concept of "soul" like Christhians do.

So, and I want you to directly say this:

Your god doesnt know the future?

Some "god" ya got there.

Also, if you knew ALL things present, wouldnt you know what decision every person is currently making, thus what every person/particle will do that instant... And thus know what will happen next (and so on). Omnicience requires knowledge of all events through all time.

[Blarg]

That argument just proves that the concept or idea of a god exists. Because the god concept says he is perfect then by that reasoning used he would exist (I guess thats what A priori means? its been a while since I saw this in philosophy) Something isn't greater whether it exists or not, the attributes of something doesn't rely on it first existing. The greatest sandwich in the world doesn't exist just because it is defined as the greatest, it would be NICE if it would exist in reality but its greatness doesn't rely on its existence.

I thought Kant or Hume did show this wasn't a good proof by talking about how you can't 'own' your own existence or something.

[Day]

I think that would be Kant, but theres a counter to his counter too, but I'm getting pretty lazy and don't feel like looking it up at the moment. It's probably talked about on that exsitence of god site.

[Neosutra]

They did blarg, but your forgetting the theist argument cycle:

1. Propose stupid premis.

2. Ignore countering evidence.

3. Keep premis forever, or re-propose same premis with different wording.

[Blarg]

They did blarg, but your forgetting the theist argument cycle:

1. Propose stupid premis.

2. Ignore countering evidence.

3. Keep premis forever, or re-propose same premis with different wording.

Oh, so just like Pascals Wager

[Beckwin]

Question: how can imperfect beings understand what the perfection, specifically in terms of God, is?

[Blarg]

If you don't claim your god is perfect other gods will come and beat him up.

[Beckwin]

now to carry on what I was saying earlier: ok, we agree that God exists in reality. as in, God manifests in the physical world, in himself.

now the question is, does God have a conscious? Does he exist for himself, that is to say, does he choose to exist and think and reason? I think we'd agree that our perfect God possesses that.

[Demosthenes11]

and just to piss off the atheists:
The only proof of god I need is taking a breath and looking around every day

[Blarg]

and just to piss off the atheists:
The only proof of god I need is taking a breath and looking around every day

Damn Zeus is awesome isn't he.

[Neosutra]

and just to piss off the atheists:
The only proof of god I need is taking a breath and looking around every day

Because ignoring the physical/biological/celestial properties of your surroundings and blaming them on gods so you dont have to bother with actually learning anything is way cooler than studying the massive complexity that our universe holds.

[Demosthenes11]

hey now, I've taken collegiate chemistry, biology, and some sort of astronomy class in the near future. It is not one way or the other. I don't look at gravity and think "oh hey, this is proof god does not exist," just the opposite for me!

[Neosutra]

hey now, I've taken collegiate chemistry, biology, and some sort of astronomy class in the near future. It is not one way or the other. I don't look at gravity and think "oh hey, this is proof god does not exist," just the opposite for me!

Oh, so god is pulling down objects toward each other? With his bare hands? I missed that lecture in physics 101:

F = ma, where a = god.

[Demosthenes11]

if that's what you would like to believe sure

[Neosutra]

if that's what you would like to believe sure

Its not what I believe, its what you just said.

"i look at gravity and see proof for god".

F = G(m1m2)/r^2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:N...ravitation.svg

Oh ok, i must have missed it before, Now I see god. Undeniable proof.

[Demosthenes11]

I'm glad you see the world that way if that's what makes you happy. I'm sorry I'm bringing down the world by seeing god behind numbers

[Blarg]

I'm glad you see the world that way if that's what makes you happy. I'm sorry I'm bringing down the world by seeing god behind numbers

Shouldn't god be in front of numbers too, maybe to the side as well since he is omnipresent. It might be cramped inside numbers but I guess he's in there.

[Beckwin]

I'm glad you see the world that way if that's what makes you happy. I'm sorry I'm bringing down the world by seeing god behind numbers

so are you saying that God manifests himself through the numbers? as in he has a presence in our perceivable reality?

[Jefe]

^You remind me of Bill bill O'reilly (sp?) always putting words in other's mouths & twisting what they say. That's why I ignored all of your "questions." Oh well, the thread was entertaining for a few but it ran out of steam, ciao.

[Demosthenes11]

I am saying god manifests him/her/itself in many things, numbers just being one.