• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

God's Omniscience

delphi_ote said:
That's just sad right there. Takes himself too seriously to even see my lame puns!
Click to expand...
Don't feel bad. It's just that he's so self centered, that he is unaware of what is going on around him.

I assure you, those were truly wretched puns, and I am deeply envious.
 
Tricky said:
Don't feel bad. It's just that he's so self centered, that he is unaware of what is going on around him.

I assure you, those were truly wretched puns, and I am deeply envious.
Click to expand...
Actually, delphi, you can believe Trixie on this. He is not one, as a general rule, to be so sappy.
 
Tricky said:
Don't feel bad. It's just that he's so self centered, that he is unaware of what is going on around him.

I assure you, those were truly wretched puns, and I am deeply envious.
Click to expand...

Even green with envy?

It chlorophylls me with pride to be crowned king of the lame tree puns.
 
Mercutio said:
Presumably. But we could never know. And it would have no bearing whatsoever on time-space within this universe.
Click to expand...
As if to say it was possible for a state of absolute nothingness to exist between the two? How so? Or, let's say both Universes started only two minutes apart, does that change the fact that they started two minutes apart, whether we have the means of establishing the other one exists or not?

If you are in the midst of it, it is not "nothing". Indeed, if it can be said to have a "midst", it is not "nothing".
Click to expand...
Okay, what I meant to say is nothingness in terms of its degree or, absoluteness. In which case there really isn't much to discuss now is there?

If it can be described as "vast and deep", it is not "nothing." You continue to think of "nothing" as having dimensions, as occupying space. Sorry, empty space is something.
Click to expand...
Indeed, if it can be described at all, it is not "nothing."

As long as you have the wrong conception of "nothing", Iacchus, your examples will continue to be flawed, and your understanding as well.
Click to expand...
At best, nothing can only be described as the appearance of nothing which, is what I've already stated.
 
Iacchus said:
As if to say it was possible for a state of absolute nothingness to exist between the two? How so? Or, let's say both Universes started only two minutes apart, does that change the fact that they started two minutes apart, whether we have the means of establishing the other one exists or not?
Click to expand...

Again, you don't understand anything about space OR time. THERE IS NO TIME OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE. Two universes could NOT be "2 minutes apart".
 
Iacchus said:
As if to say it was possible for a state of absolute nothingness to exist between the two? How so? Or, let's say both Universes started only two minutes apart, does that change the fact that they started two minutes apart, whether we have the means of establishing the other one exists or not?
Click to expand...
This question is meaningless. When you figure out why (hint: it has been explained to you many times over within the past month or so), you can try to rephrase it, or better, realize that you can't really ask anything of this sort in a meaningful way.
Okay, what I meant to say is nothingness in terms of its degree or, absoluteness. In which case there really isn't much to discuss now is there?
Click to expand...
Degree of nothingness? "Absoluteness"? Again, these words have no meaning in this context.
Indeed, if it can be described at all, it is not "nothing."
Click to expand...
If you believed this, why did you not go back and change what you wrote above? Or below, for that matter?
At best, nothing can only be described as the appearance of nothing which, is what I've already stated.
Click to expand...
There is no "appearance of nothing". You are still confusing "nothing" with "empty space". Stop it.
 
c4ts said:
If you're going to talk about God as portrayed in the Bible, those examples you named don't always work. God can lie, as he told Adam he would surely die if he ate the fruit. Adam didn't die, he lived on to raise a family. God can fail, as he is always correcting errors in ways like flooding the world or destroying entire towns. Also, an obscure passage about "chariots of iron" comes to mind.
Click to expand...
In the aspects to your response, God told Adam he would die:
Three possible reference to what God meant:
1. Spiritual death of the connection to God verbal, as in the garden.(God's verbal communication spiritually was severed, making it different for God to walk around and talk with people)
2. Immortality lost, eventual death as a result.(look at the life expectancy it has deminished tot he age of 120 years as of the flood.)
3. Foretelling that Adam and his descendant would live only to bring death and destruction. (Which we see as a result of the timeline before the flood).

God is not imperfect in that he sins, but rather imperfect in that he is blind to only see the good in people. Unfortunately God is split personality: The father is represented in the Old testament as the father that natured, cast judgement in the form of strict punishments of daily and average mistakes. While the New testament, has a seperation between father and son, so two distinct personalities are present. That of Jesus Christ, a humble child, and that of the Father, the overlooking parent that steadily pressures and reassures Christ of his tasks on Earth. The Holy Spirit was present in both characteristics in that it gave views of heavy regret, judgement, etc through the father and son, while upon the people they interacted with.

The only example to explain this is to imagine three voice, distinct personalities, that are speak different concepts or views of the same situation. These three voices speak with different tones, placing importance on specific positive and negative externalities of life. The result is that one is domininant at times, with the brief whisper of another personality in their voice. So you have God the concerned father, with the brief whisper of judgement from the Holy Spirit: (as seen in the story of Cain and Able).The dominiant judgement figure of the Holy Spirit overpowers the concerned father during the Flood; but brief moments of mercy arise from the father to save Noah and his family. The seperation of God the Son from the trinity results in the inevitable distinction of Christ's personality. It allows Christ to pled for his life the night before he would be tried after the Mount of Olives. While the firm and strict hand of the God the Father and Holy Spirit.

In turn it is not a question of whether God lies or steals, or is prideful. It is about the struggle of the sub-conscience pysche of God's three distinct personalitys and their contridiction and agreement of their deity.
 
Shadownexius said:
In the aspects to your response, God told Adam he would die:
Three possible reference to what God meant:
1. Spiritual death of the connection to God verbal, as in the garden.(God's verbal communication spiritually was severed, making it different for God to walk around and talk with people)
Click to expand...

I've already discussed why this is irrelevant. If God didn't mean what he said, and the Bible doesn't portray what he meant, then the former is beign intentionally impossible to understand, and the latter is useless.

2. Immortality lost, eventual death as a result.(look at the life expectancy it has deminished tot he age of 120 years as of the flood.)
Click to expand...

Again, God said he would die that very same day.

3. Foretelling that Adam and his descendant would live only to bring death and destruction. (Which we see as a result of the timeline before the flood).
Click to expand...

That's quite a leap. I don't see how you could interpret the words as meaning this.

While the New testament, has a seperation between father and son, so two distinct personalities are present. That of Jesus Christ, a humble child, and that of the Father, the overlooking parent that steadily pressures and reassures Christ of his tasks on Earth. The Holy Spirit was present in both characteristics in that it gave views of heavy regret, judgement, etc through the father and son, while upon the people they interacted with.

In turn it is not a question of whether God lies or steals, or is prideful. It is about the struggle of the sub-conscience pysche of God's three distinct personalitys and their contridiction and agreement of their deity.
Click to expand...

...God has a subconscious ?
 
Iacchus said:
Which is to say, something can come from nothing? I'm afraid I don't understand. :confused:
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking in temporal terms. Besides, I do believe we were talking about an assumed nothingness for the sake of argument, not an actual one.

I don't think a singularity, assuming this is all there is "beyond" the universe, could be called nothing.
 
Belz... said:
I don't think a singularity, assuming this is all there is "beyond" the universe, could be called nothing.
Click to expand...
So, what do you mean by "singularity?" Are you suggesting this is something which has always existed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom