A Disproof of Your God.

[Empire]

If he does not follow my premises in my OP, he is illogical. Using the argument that he can defy logic is simple unacceptable, because "holy" books of Abrahamic Religions state that God is omnipresent, meaning he exists everywhere, including our universe, which is defined by logic.

If he does not comply with logic, he cannot exist in our universe. He is then not omnipresent, and does not exist according to Judeo-Christian standards.

Illogical using your logic though.

Defying "logic" is possible though, has that not been done so many a time? Surely you don't think that the current "logic" you hold is timeless?

:/ If he does not comply with your logic, he can't exist? I sure do hope you know how stupid that sounds lol.


Omnipresent means to be everywhere right? Well given the ability of time, the possibility, nay, the reality to be everywhere exist.

:/ don't see the point.

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

Assuming your only proof of this made up phenomenon is your "evidence" below, I'd say otherwise.




"


For the second time now;

Should you argue that human logic does not apply to god - by the argument's reflexive properties - you argue you cannot trust your OWN concepts of god - and thus, you have no reason to believe in a god; because, if human logic cannot be trusted, neither can yours. In addition, if you believe your logic of god is trustworthy, but not another human's, you idolize yourself equivilent of a demigod - a feat which is condemned by Judeo-Christian religions and is thus impossible.

Do also note that anything existing in your universe is judged by logic, or it cannot exist. As such, God cannot act outside of logic in a universe which he is omnipresent in. You said it yourself, he cannot contradict himself. And yet he does.

You quoted that 3 times, and each time it held no merit to my situation.
I view myself as a demigod? That is just absolutely absurd.
If anyone here is not understanding the premises of this argument it is you.
So I idolize myself as a Demigod, even though I have submitted myself to God fully.That makes a whole lot of sense.


As I said earlier in this thread,
the word omnipotent would not even be in an original Bible, due to the fact that this is a Latin word.
The Hebrew word Shaddai means "Almighty"
But this does not mean that the Almighty here, means the same as Omnipotent(by the definition we know) We are talking about something that goes beyond human definition. Btw, the logic theory about God that you present really can't be proven, yet you're acting as if you have solid evidence. You don't.
Before God created the Universe there was nothing. No logic (as we would understand it) So God governed his creation with this. Does that mean that God is incapable of bending logic? I say no.
I also said God wouldn't go against his nature,
this does not mean he is not Almighty., just means he is consistent.

If you want to advocate logic then maybe you should use it more yourself.
I offered you a stalemate on this debate. That was logical.
Your massive ego would not accept that, because to you this would be defeat.
If you really want to get technical, then the only one that has proved anything in this thread is I.
I proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you do not have any hardcore evidence that the Abrahmaic God does not exist. You took the issue of Ancient language barriers and used it to your andvantage.

[barklolbark]

Illogical using your logic though.

Defying "logic" is possible though, has that not been done so many a time? Surely you don't think that the current "logic" you hold is timeless?

:/ If he does not comply with your logic, he can't exist? I sure do hope you know how stupid that sounds lol.


Omnipresent means to be everywhere right? Well given the ability of time, the possibility, nay, the reality to be everywhere exist.

:/ don't see the point.

Please, sir, give an example of something defying logic. I am not the only one that says if something contradicts itself, it cannot be true. Two opposing statements cannot be held true and the being exist.

You quoted that 3 times, and each time it held no merit to my situation.
I view myself as a demigod? That is just absolutely absurd.
If anyone here is not understanding the premises of this argument it is you.
So I idolize myself as a Demigod, even though I have submitted myself to God fully.That makes a whole lot of sense.


As I said earlier in this thread,
the word omnipotent would not even be in an original Bible, due to the fact that this is a Latin word.
The Hebrew word Shaddai means "Almighty"
But this does not mean that the Almighty here, means the same as Omnipotent(by the definition we know) We are talking about something that goes beyond human definition. Btw, the logic theory about God that you present really can't be proven, yet you're acting as if you have solid evidence. You don't.
Before God created the Universe there was nothing. No logic (as we would understand it) So God governed his creation with this. Does that mean that God is incapable of bending logic? I say no.
I also said God wouldn't go against his nature,
this does not mean he is not Almighty., just means he is consistent.

If you want to advocate logic then maybe you should use it more yourself.
I offered you a stalemate on this debate. That was logical.
Your massive ego would not accept that, because to you this would be defeat.
If you really want to get technical, then the only one that has proved anything in this thread is I.
I proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you do not have any hardcore evidence that the Abrahmaic God does not exist. You took the issue of Ancient language barriers and used it to your andvantage.

All - the whole extent or quantity of
Mighty- forceful, powerful

Almighty- the whole extent or quantity of power

It think that definition is pretty straight forward to me.

You have proved nothing except recycled the same "OMNIPOTENT ISN'T IN THE BIBLE, GOD ISN'T ALL POWERFUL TROLOLOL!@!@!@@!@@!". I never said he had to contradict himself. But the fact is that his properties contradict themselves. He doesn't have to be able to create and rock that he can't lift, and lift it. After all, he is all powerful, and can create another universe in which this logic works, and lift the stone.

But considering that he is omnipresent and timeless, the fact that he is also conscious is a logical impossibility. For the last time, he cannot be omnipresent, timeless, and conscious in our universe, as all stated in the Bible. This is also irregardless of your omnipotent tantrum.

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

Please, sir, give an example of something defying logic. I am not the only one that says if something contradicts itself, it cannot be true. Two opposing statements cannot be held true and the being exist.



All - the whole extent or quantity of
Mighty- forceful, powerful

Almighty- the whole extent or quantity of power

It think that definition is pretty straight forward to me.

You have proved nothing except recycled the same "OMNIPOTENT ISN'T IN THE BIBLE, GOD ISN'T ALL POWERFUL TROLOLOL!@!@!@@!@@!". I never said he had to contradict himself. But the fact is that his properties contradict themselves. He doesn't have to be able to create and rock that he can't lift, and lift it. After all, he is all powerful, and can create another universe in which this logic works, and lift the stone.

But considering that he is omnipresent and timeless, the fact that he is also conscious is a logical impossibility. For the last time, he cannot be omnipresent, timeless, and conscious in our universe, as all stated in the Bible. This is also irregardless of your omnipotent tantrum.

Smart kid..again you keep comparing God with Human logic as we know in the universe. God would have supernatural logic that we couldn't possibly understand. What exactly is your education of the Bible?
To me it seems there are a lot of holes, and you're only using vague examples to cater to your own theories/beliefs.

You said being omnipresent is a LOGICAL impossibility.
Keyword being logical here. You cannot say it is an impossibilty,
because you have nothing to back these claims but a simple theory.

[Empire]

Please, sir, give an example of something defying logic. I am not the only one that says if something contradicts itself, it cannot be true. Two opposing statements cannot be held true and the being exist.

:/ the problem with going solely by logic is that as time progresses so too does the logic.

So in essence, what you believe to be perfect logic now, is not the same in 20 years.


O.O Defying logic is simple, just say no.

[pK_Nicky5]

If there is an all powerful being up there, why the fuck is our world like this
I'd rather worship the sun then 'God' because it gives us everything we need light, grows plants, etc and most importantly you can actually see it.
Dont dare say god created the sun.

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

If there is an all powerful being up there, why the fuck is our world like this
I'd rather worship the sun then 'God' because it gives us everything we need light, grows plants, etc and most importantly you can actually see it.
Dont dare say god created the sun.

God created the Sun.

[Empire]

If there is an all powerful being up there, why the fuck is our world like this
I'd rather worship the sun then 'God' because it gives us everything we need light, grows plants, etc and most importantly you can actually see it.
Dont dare say god created the sun.

:/ God created the sun according to theist. Why do you set yourself up so well?

[barklolbark]

Smart kid..again you keep comparing God with Human logic as we know in the universe. God would have supernatural logic that we couldn't possibly understand. What exactly is your education of the Bible?
To me it seems there are a lot of holes, and you're only using vague examples to cater to your own theories/beliefs.

You said being omnipresent is a LOGICAL impossibility.
Keyword being logical here. You cannot say it is an impossibilty,
because you have nothing to back these claims but a simple theory.

For the third and hopefully final time;
Should you argue that human logic does not apply to god - by the argument's reflexive properties - you argue you cannot trust your OWN concepts of god - and thus, you have no reason to believe in a god; because, if human logic cannot be trusted, neither can yours. In addition, if you believe your logic of god is trustworthy, but not another human's, you idolize yourself equivilent of a demigod - a feat which is condemned by Judeo-Christian religions and is thus impossible.

Logic isn't a theory.

:/ the problem with going solely by logic is that as time progresses so too does the logic.

So in essence, what you believe to be perfect logic now, is not the same in 20 years.


O.O Defying logic is simple, just say no.

You can't just say no. That is ignoring logic, not defying it. 2 + 2 will always be 4, that is logic. It can never equal three in our universe, as our universe is governed by logic, and the logic of our universe states that 2+2 will always be 4, and for someone to state otherwise would be illogical. I could say 2+2 = 3, but that wouldn't make it true.

You're saying that Christians can say God can be omnipresent, conscious, and timeless. Of course they can say that. It doesn't make it logically possible, however. The fact is that it isn't logically possible, and thus cannot exist in our universe. It's a simple thought process, actually. Humans can say anything, but that doesn't mean it automatically regards the principles of logic.

By the way, what the fuck is that thing in your signature?

God created the Sun.

Pics or gtfo.

[Paroxysm]

God created the Sun.

Man created the Gods.

[Synchromanica]

Of course logic is deniable. When did I say it wasn't?

Logic is undeniable proof,

Perhaps you should learn to not contradict yourself, before you claim anything else.

[barklolbark]

Perhaps you should learn to not contradict yourself, before you claim anything else.

You can deny logic. But if you are looking for the truth, it is undeniable.

Those quotes are out of context, as denying logical proof is being ignorant and illogical. You can deny 2+2 = 4, but doing so would make you ignorant. I'm not using undeniable as a literal sense, but as more of a word meaning it is obviously true.

[Synchromanica]

You can deny logic. But if you are looking for the truth, it is undeniable.

Those quotes are out of context, as denying logical proof is being ignorant and illogical. You can deny 2+2 = 4, but doing so would make you ignorant. I'm not using undeniable as a literal sense, but as more of a word meaning it is obviously true.

They aren't really out of context...you did say them did you not? If you were in court, your words would be used against you. Saying you meant to say it as a word meaning obviously true instead of what it actually means is illogical, and goes against the word. Why would a word come out of context because you didn't know how to use it? It didn't, you just used it wrong, got caught, and tried making up an excuse. You can deny what I've said, but doing so would make you pathetic. Accept that you've created an error in your choice of words.

You can deny logic. But if you are looking for the truth, it is undeniable.

Wrong. Until you have found the truth, logic is still deniable. Therefor, wait until something happens and find out for yourself, don't tell other people that don't want to hear due to "ignorance".

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

For the third and hopefully final time;
Should you argue that human logic does not apply to god - by the argument's reflexive properties - you argue you cannot trust your OWN concepts of god - and thus, you have no reason to believe in a god; because, if human logic cannot be trusted, neither can yours. In addition, if you believe your logic of god is trustworthy, but not another human's, you idolize yourself equivilent of a demigod - a feat which is condemned by Judeo-Christian religions and is thus impossible.

Logic isn't a theory.



You can't just say no. That is ignoring logic, not defying it. 2 + 2 will always be 4, that is logic. It can never equal three in our universe, as our universe is governed by logic, and the logic of our universe states that 2+2 will always be 4, and for someone to state otherwise would be illogical. I could say 2+2 = 3, but that wouldn't make it true.

You're saying that Christians can say God can be omnipresent, conscious, and timeless. Of course they can say that. It doesn't make it logically possible, however. The fact is that it isn't logically possible, and thus cannot exist in our universe. It's a simple thought process, actually. Humans can say anything, but that doesn't mean it automatically regards the principles of logic.

By the way, what the fuck is that thing in your signature?



Pics or gtfo.

You're an idiot, plain and simple.
All you're doing is retyping the same thing over and over and over.
It doesn't even make sense either.
I love how you pretty much make claims of things I never even mentioned.
I never said I didn't trust the Bible,
all I'm saying is that you're ignoring the language barriers,
as in HELLO, Hebrew is a lost language and this was what the original Torah would be written in.
Not LATIN, NOT GREEK.
There are words in this language that are similar, but don't exactly mean the same in English. Also, just stop with the demigod shit, because you just make yourself look like a moron. Even if I did believe my own logic of God was trustworthy and not another humans, that wouldn't make me idolize myself as a demigod..do you even have a clue what you're talking about? Or are you just copy pasting from someone with no brain in their skull?

BOTTOM LINE: YOU HAVE DISPROVED NOTHING. THIS ARGUMENT IS ON SO MANY ATHEIST WEBSITES, AND GUESS WHAT? IT IS STILL NOT IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE THAT ELOHIM IS NOT GOD THE CREATOR, NOR DOES IT PROVE ANYTHING FALSE ABOUT THE ATTRIBUTES WE HAVE BEEN REVEALED. /END THREAD

Nice big bold font so you can let it sink in.

[Empire]

"Disproof of God #3

1.) God is, at the least, omnipotent and omniscient - by the conventional assumptions of divine qualities made by Abrahamic religions. To deny this is to contradict your own belief in god.(*A)

2.) If god is all powerful, he can limit his omniscience.

3.) If god is able to limit his omniscience, then he is not actually omniscient - and, therefore, not a god. If he cannot limit his omniscience, then he is not omnipotent - and therefore not a god. Either way your god's existance is an impossibility.

(*A) Should you argue that human logic does not apply to god - by the argument's reflexive properties - you argue you cannot trust your OWN concepts of god - and thus, you have no reason to believe in a god; because, if human logic cannot be trusted, neither can yours. In addition, if you believe your logic of god is trustworthy, but not another human's, you idolize yourself equivilent of a demigod - a feat which is condemned by Judeo-Christian religions and is thus impossible."-Bark.

1. God created the universe.
-Casuality:
Ok here is the simplified version.
a) Every effect has a cause.
b) From nothing comes nothing.
c) Go back as far as you can, logically something had to start it.
d) The something is therefore not an effect, but a timeless cause.
e) That thing is god.

2. "limiting power" is like me throwing a ball.
I can either throw it "fast" or "slow". I limit myself from throwing it at the fastest i can, so that the other guy can catch it.
"limiting omniscience" Isn't possible in the first place. Limiting unlimited knowledge is like saying limiting an unlimited item.
-Unlimited is without limit. To limit it would be impossible.

3. Saying "if he can't limit his power/knowledge" then he is not a God is silly, when by definition thats what makes him God in the first place.

Human logic is in all fairness, evolving.