So let me see if I understand Wade correctly. ..... -- Ben's Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Sunday, May 18, 05:19:13pm

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: So let me see if I understand Wade correctly. .....

Author:
Don

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09/ 8/04 9:15am
In reply to: Duane 's message, "Finally.... Tristam meets his doom.... (bleah)" on 08/31/04 5:56am

>Wade said:
>Is it? You be the judge. The essence of the argument is >that an infinite past implies an absurdity
and therefore >cannot be correct.

So let me see if I understand Wade correctly. He is saying that an infinite past is not posible?
Why he thinks it is under the "absurd" argument is like
the christains confronted with a round earth as they
called a round earth obserd also. Absurd is not an argument and not even related.

But even more so if an ifinite past is obsurd then forget an infinite future as in a god
of some kind. UH DUAH... the future becomes the past also as is self obviouse. If an infinite
past can not exist then neither can a infinite future, or the christians have to say
that "god had a begining" and now they are in conflict with their own doctrine.
Now that is common.

Or how about infinitly all powerfull or infinitly all knowing? Acorrding to Wades argument
if an infinite past is obsurd then so would be a infinitly all knowing and a all powerfull god--
well on that we could agree.

No one can show an infinite anything what so ever, and even the thought breakes down into
nonsence. How would you or any person know something is infinite? If a god spoke and said
he is infanite how do you know that was a real god that made the claim? Do the more
fire works in sky make a statement more believable? Don't be stupid, but I supose
a burning bush verifies every thing to the christian mind. It is absurd that one single
fish could
feed thousand of people. As you can see religion thrives on the total absurdity of miricles.
But yet to say some thing is valid or not by how obsurd it is--or is not--
only shows the ignorance and stupidity of religious thinking.

Here is the sad part--Wade knows this. He knows this very well so I can only conclude
Wade is looking to dumy down others as a cheap carpet bager of religious garbage. Wade
is a prime example of selective thinking, he can no more show a god than the
man in the moon, and he knows it.

The argument goes like this--know one knows anything about a god,
god is beyound human understanding--
so the christians say...OK then you know
nothing.. don't say in one breath no one knows about a god, or the nature of a god
then proceed to tell me something about this god for all you do is make claims.
Say a truth then... you are making claimes about a god that you know nothing about.

Is a little self honesty a sin to the christian mind? Most would think so.

Don

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Welcome back, Don	Ben	09/ 8/04 9:57pm
It is good to see you also Ben. -- Don, 09/11/04 2:02pm
No, you do not quite understand me.	Wade A. Tisthammer	09/12/04 6:10pm
This is a tipcal mind game of the religious. -- Don, 09/16/04 11:17am