The Definition of God

[Photizo]

All very nice, I'm sure, but you haven't actually countered his argument.
Rather you have just blathered on about how he can not, in your eyes, use logic properly - yet nowhere do you actually bother to point out the flaw in his logic that you seem to think exists.
So, in order to educate the rest, please do so, if you would be so kind and generous.

Or are you merely saying that your "arguments" are nothing but confidence statements, unable to be supported by either logic or evidence?

I'm not going to spoonfeed you or anyone else... I said "not necessarily"...what does that imply, logically speaking, about his comment?

In another thread, I stated I'm not here to argue or debate with anyone, merely to inform from the standpoint of the Word of God. His Word needs no defense or apology. On the other hand, you might want to start considering/planning your defense or apology for not obeying/trusting--not that it will do any good: There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.

 

[Photizo]

This is nonsense:

So long as we use logic (or the lack of thereof) to try to understand God, our arguments will be riddled by chaos and confusion. God is not quantifiable by any means. Such is the nature of God that it disallows us to understand His existance in a logical manner.

Language is the seed of logic. Remove language, and what is left is all that we can use to understand Him.

In order to communicate with us or make Himself known it stands to reason that He would utilize a means consistent with how He made us...a means by which we could understand and comprehend Him...this would include both the Spoken and Written WORD. The Word of God both Written and Incarnate--The LOGOS (Word, Logic) of God: Jesus Christ.

Consider the following:

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And we are writing these things so that our joy may be complete.


There is no reason not to trust this testimony, but if one is skeptical, an honest study of God's Word (both Written and Incarnate) will yield enough evidence to sway any honest seeker.

 

[superluminal]

an even better method of inquiry would be to examine the criteria that indicates the qualification for becoming acquainted with evidence

sounds like a good approach to anything that some yahoo claims without examining the nature of qualification

Ahhh... no.

Evidence just is. This is not and has never been about the evidence in and of itself. It's about the interpretation.

Trees are evidence of something. The question is, what?

An intellectually honest and rigorous person might say,

"Ok. What I know is that trees are plants with a cell structure of thus and such. They have apparently evolved from some common primordial instance of life, just like all life. I know this as the result and peer review of years of recearch and evidence in biology, archaeology (the fossil record), molecular physiology, etc.

Not being a plant biologist, I tentatively accept the findings of science in this area based on my understanding of how science works and the real, tangible results this method has delivered since its inception.

I even know some very bright highschool dropouts who can read and understand this very well."

Now, what might a different type of person say?

"God did it. How do I know this? Because a book (or series of books) that were last peer reviewed 2000+ years ago, and clearly written by men being driven by the word of God, says so."

Do any of the theists here get the fact that the assumption that a god is behind the tree is the least supportable of approaches? Training or not? What can you say about the mechanism that god used to construct the cell? What about the tree can you even attempt to explain by ending your investigation of the tree with "God did it"?

Religion has no place in the realm of science.

Take these two statements:

1) As far as we know, there are no alien lifeforms.

2) As far as we know, there are no gods.

They are both absolutely true to anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity. It's as simple as that. If you "believe" in aliens, than good for you, but understand that you have nothing to offer but feelings and hopes, and at best, an interesting challenge for a graduate psychology student.

If you "believe" in god, good for you, but the same thing applies.

Another question: Do any theists out there who insist that god is real see the absolute selfimportant arrogance of such a statement? I mean, come on! You insist that a certainty that you harbor inside your mind, with zero compelling evidence beyond that, is real. Really real, and we should all take heed of your warnings and prophecies of doom, or hellfire, or whatever.

Is any room big enough for you and your ego?

 

[superluminal]

There is no reason not to trust this testimony, but if one is skeptical, an honest study of God's Word (both Written and Incarnate) will yield enough evidence to sway any honest seeker.

You keep supporting your assertion of god's word by referring to the bible as god's word!

Are you truly that immune to your own circular reasoning? There's every reason to not trust any testimony without supporting, independent evidence.

I have a question for you. Do you believe that the earth and the planets orbit the sun?

If you do, why? It's obvious to me and everyone else that everything revolves about the earth. How will you convince me otherwise?

Give it a shot.

 

[Cris]

photizo,

In another thread, I stated I'm not here to argue or debate with anyone, merely to inform from the standpoint of the Word of God. His Word needs no defense or apology. On the other hand, you might want to start considering/planning your defense or apology for not obeying/trusting--not that it will do any good: There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.

Yes I've noticed your reluctance to enter into debate especially when you are presented with difficult issues that you are clearly unable to counter.

Please be aware that this is a DEBATE forum and not a platform for you to preach. If you persist in merely posting assertions then your posts will be deleted.

 

[Cris]

photizo,

There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.

Prove it please or justify your assertion with at least an atempt at a reasoned argument.

 

[Photizo]

You keep supporting your assertion of god's word by referring to the bible as god's word!

Are you truly that immune to your own circular reasoning? There's every reason to not trust any testimony without supporting, independent evidence.

I told you, if you are still skeptical, READ The Word, specifically, the Gospels. Study the Person of Christ with a sincere, honest, and open mind, free of any conditions/stipulations ...'listen' to him, 'observe' Him...you will be given all the evidence your heart desires.

 

[Cris]

Photizo,

I told you, if you are still skeptical, READ The Word, specifically, the Gospels. Study the Person of Christ with a sincere, honest, and open mind, free of any conditions/stipulations ...'listen' to him, 'observe' Him...you will be given all the evidence your heart desires.

Did it years ago. It didn't work. Now what?

 

[superluminal]

I told you, if you are still skeptical, READ The Word, specifically, the Gospels. Study the Person of Christ with a sincere, honest, and open mind, free of any conditions/stipulations ...'listen' to him, 'observe' Him...you will be given all the evidence your heart desires.

I've read it. And my "heart" does not require anything but a good AV node signal and properly functioning valves. My mind, though, would like some reason an logic.

 

[Photizo]

My mind, though, would like some reason an logic.

Ask and ye shall receive:

Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles.

Then, last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen.

And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise.

For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.

If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

Logic, for you--compliments of God Himself.

 

[superluminal]

Ask and ye shall receive:

[Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures

Useless for obvious reasons that even you should be able to discern.

and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

Uh Huh...

and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles.

According to...?

Then, last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

This dude says so? Not nearly good enough.

Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen.

Because someone says so?

And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise.

I agree. It's all empty and false. Notice the big IF at the beginning.

For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.

Yep. Futile.

If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

Totally agreed.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

So certain are we now?

For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

Exactly. MAN invented this childrens bedtime tale.

Logic, for you--compliments of God Himself.

You really have no interest in logic, do you. Oh well.

 

[Cris]

photo,

Logic, for you--compliments of God Himself.

Logic kinda depends on facts to be valid. I didn't see any facts among your assertions.

How about trying again with at least one fact that we might be able to agree with?

 

[Photizo]

Photizo,

Did it years ago. It didn't work. Now what?

"The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fucked."

 

[superluminal]

"The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fucked."

Ha! That's actually funny! I didn't think you had it in you.

 

[TruthSeeker]

This is nonsense:

You are nonsense.

In order to communicate with us or make Himself known it stands to reason that He would utilize a means consistent with how He made us...a means by which we could understand and comprehend Him...this would include both the Spoken and Written WORD. The Word of God both Written and Incarnate--The LOGOS (Word, Logic) of God: Jesus Christ.

You really think you can communicate with God? You think you can understand someone who has all the knowledge in the universe, while you don't have any knowledge at all?

 

[Photizo]

You really think you can communicate with God? You think you can understand someone who has all the knowledge in the universe, while you don't have any knowledge at all?

A baby can communicate with it's parents despite any knowledge gap...anyway, I don't just think...I KNOW I can communicate with Him.

He has communicated with mankind through directly through Jesus Christ and, since the Acension, the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is a human being like the rest of us, and He informed us that communication is not just possible with God, but necessary.

We naturally want to communicate with others...case in point these fora...being made in God's Image, one infers God is similar, desiring to communicate with us also. In light of that, one then seeks to discern/discover instances of His communication...along with what He has said and continues to say.

From the book of Hebrews:

Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. But now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son.

 

[TruthSeeker]

A baby can communicate with it's parents despite any knowledge gap...

Yeah... with crying and screaming. I don't call that communication. Ever had a baby or taken care of one? My son is nearly 2 years old and I still have a hard time understanding him. Most of the time he just babbles. Babies are even harder to understand.

anyway, I don't just think...I KNOW I can communicate with Him.

Oh..... yeah, well, how?

He has communicated with mankind through directly through Jesus Christ and, since the Acension, the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is a human being like the rest of us, and He informed us that communication is not just possible with God, but necessary.

We naturally want to communicate with others...case in point these fora...being made in God's Image, one infers God is similar, desiring to communicate with us also. In light of that, one then seeks to discern/discover instances of His communication...along with what He has said and continues to say.

Why did Jesus speak in parables?
Hoe can someone put an ocean in a bucket of water?
What is the language of the angels?

From the book of Hebrews:

Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. But now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son.

How do you know the Bible is right?

 

[Photizo]

Yeah... with crying and screaming. I don't call that communication. Ever had a baby or taken care of one? My son is nearly 2 years old and I still have a hard time understanding him. Most of the time he just babbles. Babies are even harder to understand.

I'm the Father of seven children...you learn to distinguish between types of cries. One kind of sound from one type of cry means one thing and another means something else.

How do you know the Bible is right?

I've explained "how" at least twice before...I'm not going to explain that again.

Read the Bible with an honest, open mind and experience "how" yourself.

 

[Cris]

photizo,

"The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fucked."

Claiming to be a direct messenger of a god is somewhat arrogant isnt it?

But you avoided the question again. if one does study the bible in an open and sincere manner and cannot overcome the considerable inconsistencies and unsuported claims, then what can be said of your claim that reading the bible with oopenness will reveal all the truths needed. It does not.

The only way one can believe what the bible says is true is to dismiss any sense of rationality and reason. The bible was written by men in times when myth making was the norm and religious superstitions and ignorance was rife. It should be no surprise to any reasoned person that the bible simply reflects those fantasies.

 

[Cris]

Photizo,

Read the Bible with an honest, open mind and experience "how" yourself.

And suspend all sense of reason at the same time.