The Beginning

[AV1611VET]

If " god" were omnipotent then it could lie as readily as i can.

What does omnipotence have to do with lying?

 

[Bobber]

So what I'm saying is it can't be destined prior to time, since there is no time there's nothing before it. This is the view without god. I'm not saying God didn't cause it I'm just acknowledging the fact that Christians often use that argument. Thanks for your reply, means alot

So in your other post you said you were trying to believe but you have this snag of God being in a timeless realm holding you back?
You say Christians say God is timeless or doesn't function in his realm is such a way? But lots of Christians don't claim God doesn't function in a timeless way. All time could be said to be is anything that has sequence. I can show you scriptures of things taking place in heaven and the saints are asking God something. That's sequence. Rev 6

1) the don't know something

2) then they ask a question

3) God answers them and they become aware in their mind of the answer. Sequence IS time.

So maybe now you can set aside that God can't cause something for there's no time thing with God.

 

[Bobber]

If " god" were omnipotent then it could lie as
readily as i can.
But it cannot, therefore it aint omnipotrnt.

I notice you say "it" instead of him....but ok that's where you're coming from .

You're reasoning though is extremely faulty. To you one which is omnipotent could not have character or personality. If he has such and cannot lie because of his character you would call that a limitation. That's just a strange esoteric way of looking at omnipotence. . It's like saying if God can't create a round square he's not omnipotent either.

 

[Astrid]

I notice you say "it" instead of him....but ok that's where you're coming from .

You're reasoning though is extremely faulty. To you one which is omnipotent could not have character or personality. If he has such and cannot lie because of his character you would call that a limitation. That's just a strange esoteric way of looking at omnipotence. . It's like saying if God can't create a round square he's not omnipotent either.

Omnipotent means "unlimited power, " able to do
anything" , there is no "with exveptions ". No " cannot".

That you find it necessary to invent a definition
to custom fit your argument, and pretend that
nonsense ( square circle) is as impossible as
the Omnipotent telling a lie ( anyone can do it)
doesnt begin to reach up to the level of " faulty".
Its closer to lying.

Oh, and making up things to say against me
('To you....") with no " imo", or " sounds like". Said as fact.
Maybe you can explain how that is not outright
lying.

Its a poor prrformane in the nsme of a God who is said to
value integrity..

 

[AV1611VET]

Omnipotent means "unlimited power, " able to do
anything" , there is no "with exveptions ". No " cannot".

What does omnipotence have to do with lying?

 

[Bradskii]

I assert that everything you've posted here is false.

You're right. I don't believe a word of it. Although it's somewhat astonishing that you don't.

 

[Bobber]

Omnipotent means "unlimited power, " able to do
anything" , there is no "with exveptions ". No " cannot".

That you find it necessary to invent a definition
to custom fit your argument, and pretend that
nonsense ( square circle) is as impossible as
the Omnipotent telling a lie ( anyone can do it)
doesnt begin to reach up to the level of " faulty".
Its closer to lying.

Yeah sure! You just finished telling us that
Omnipotent means "unlimited power, " able to do
anything" , there is no "with exveptions "

If you're going to say that's what it means then stay with what it means. So if that what it means WHAT YOU SAID then you're saying if he can't create a round square then he's not omnipotent. You said....there is no "with exveptions "

 

[Astrid]

Yeah sure! You just finished telling us that
Omnipotent means "unlimited power, " able to do
anything" , there is no "with exveptions "

If you're going to say that's what it means then stay with what it means. So if that what it means WHAT YOU SAID then you're saying if he can't create a round square then he's not omnipotent. You said....there is no "with exveptions "

Im not saying that.
Again you are making things up.

 

[Bobber]

Im not saying that.
Again you are making things up.

I'm willing to let the readers decide.

 

[Astrid]

I'm willing to let the readers decide.

They will love your rewriting the dictionary.

 

[AV1611VET]

They will love your rewriting the dictionary.

Like the IAU did?

And no rewriting of the dictionary necessary.

Omnipotence has nothing to do with lying.

Superman could lie if he wanted to.

(Yes, I know. Superman wasn't omnipotent. But you get my point, I'm sure.)

 

[Bobber]

They will love your rewriting the dictionary.

Perhaps. Or perhaps they'll consider you're being silly. You said omnipotence has to mean an ability to do something with no exceptions (your post #84) and I gave you a scenario that God can't make circle squares and you seem to agree he couldn't and I was amiss to even give that illustration..... but you said prior.....NO EXCEPTIONS. So who really is trying to rewrite things?

 

[Astrid]

Perhaps. Or perhaps they'll consider you're being silly. You said omnipotence has to mean an ability to do something with no exceptions (your post #84) and I gave you a scenario that God can't make circle squares and you seem to agree he couldn't and I was amiss to even give that illustration..... but you said prior.....NO EXCEPTIONS. So who really is trying to rewrite things?

I know you are confused, cant
even see that you inventrd a definition.
( see "perhaps")

Theres no need to keep demonstrating your
confusion.

Work on it on your own, trying to comprehend the
difference between nonsensical and impossible.

Im not the one who believes in " omipotent" anyway,
the which of why beimg its a nonsensical concept.

 

[Bobber]

Theres no need to keep demonstrating your
confusion.

Yeah OK fine.

 

[NxNW]

You're right. I don't believe a word of it. Although it's somewhat astonishing that you don't.

Why is it astonishing?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Ok so I'm trying to become a Christian. However, in the back of my head I keep creating questions. For instance, how can you say God created everything before the big bang (God being an uncaused first cause) and not the bang itself. I know some will say there is a cause and effect. Yes, but this situation is different because it's before time. A cause cannot be before matter and time so it was nothing. Therefore the bang be an uncaused first cause. I don't understand how God can be one but the bang itself cannot. Thanks for your help.

It's a good question- the age old question of 'first cause' or 'infinite regression'

But for one, this apparent paradox exists either way, whether you believe in God or purely natural laws.
Secondly, there is obviously a solution one way or another, because here we are!

But there is one important difference between natural laws and creative intelligence:

Creative intelligence can act according to an anticipated future event, rather than merely re-act to past ones.

 

[BeyondET]

Ok so I'm trying to become a Christian. However, in the back of my head I keep creating questions. For instance, how can you say God created everything before the big bang (God being an uncaused first cause) and not the bang itself. I know some will say there is a cause and effect. Yes, but this situation is different because it's before time. A cause cannot be before matter and time so it was nothing. Therefore the bang be an uncaused first cause. I don't understand how God can be one but the bang itself cannot. Thanks for your help.

Can you build a car without a blueprint.

 

[Astrid]

Can you build a car without a blueprint.

Waterfalls, crysral caves, mountain ranges all
were built from blueprints!

 

[One God and Father of All]

Ok so I'm trying to become a Christian. However, in the back of my head I keep creating questions. For instance, how can you say God created everything before the big bang (God being an uncaused first cause) and not the bang itself. I know some will say there is a cause and effect. Yes, but this situation is different because it's before time. A cause cannot be before matter and time so it was nothing. Therefore the bang be an uncaused first cause. I don't understand how God can be one but the bang itself cannot. Thanks for your help.

When the story of creation begins, the earth, water, sun, moon and stars are already existing. I don’t know how long they were existing or how they came to exist. The earth must have existed for billions of years according to science. At the beginning of the creation story any life that had previously existed had become extinct and the earth as it is there is covered by water.
People assume that when it’s said “In the beginning God created heaven and earth” that it means that nothing existed before God created. They assume He created it out of nothing. However, it’s also said that God created man, but did He create man out of nothing? No. God created man from something that already exited…….dirt.
So it quite possible that before the creation as we know it today had been caused by something, even a big bang billions of year ago.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Waterfalls, crysral caves, mountain ranges all
were built from blueprints!

They are at Disneyland.