Christianity QA

Question:

That God exists, that He is the All-Knowing, the All-Powerful, is knowable; but it is not proveable.  Those seeking to prove or disprove the existence of God via something akin to a mathematical proof would do well to reconsider. Abdullah Brown

Response:

: Could some of you please responde to this essay (especially you : Atheists) and let me know if you can think of a way to refute this. : Yep. Here’s a hint. What you are espousing is a well known "paradox" that : has it’s origins in good old Greek philosophy. See if you can track it down : (the journey should be worth the effort . . .). Wait a sec…  I know Zeno, and there’s nothing about what he said or the responces to it that I can see applying as a "way to refute" what I think Justin is saying.  Zeno’s paradoxes are basically exercises in early dialectic, of the sort which Socrates later refined.  The conclusions you’d come to when reading that sort of thing may seem absoloutely absurd and contradictory to common sense, but that’s the point of a paradox – to get you thinking about the meanings behind what you say.  Paradoxes, by definition, SEEM to contradict themselves, but really they’re just pointing out double-meanings in the words that form them and deficiencies in the way people are taught to understand things. In any case, Justin seemed to be getting to saying that his concept of God is equivilent to that of an uncaused cause, or whatever you want to call it.  Aside from the similarity to Zeno’s use of multiple concepts of "things" to say that "things" are both limited and unlimited (in this case, any unit of time, and therefore all of time itself, has a definite beginning, but yet is infinite), what in Justin’s work are you getting at by bringing the paradoxes up, and why do you think it disproves what’s being said?

Response:

: : The knowledge and wisdom of the world is full of false science "facts" : that have been placed with us to lead people from the truth.  God is : found through faith, not through science. :NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO :NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Now *that’s* taken care of. Steve Monson — I have a switch in my apartment that doesn’t do anything. Every once in a while I turn it on and off.  One day I got a call from a woman in Germany who said "Cut it out!"                                 — Steven Wright

Response:

The fallacy is that if uou describe an infinite series of terms i.e the first few and the recipe for producing indefinitely many (one plus a half plus a quarter plus, etc, halving the increment each time), then it can never come to a finite sum because "you would have to add up an infinte number of terms before you get there." The solution is that you can find a to which, by taking a sufficiently large finite number of terms, the sum will approach closer and closer within any desired margin: therefore it is not necessary to complete infinitely many operations before getting the answer.

Indeed, I can list an infinite number of things i’ve done this past second.  The originals posters argument of ‘going through infinity’ seems rather nebulous. Causation may not have a beginning, but that doesn’t mean its been goin on forever.  Causation may have started at some time greater than 0.  Is it .01, .001?, .0001?  We can’t list the beginning of causation, but that doesn’t mean its been going on forever. —ralph

Response:

We are to follow the will of God, yes we have free choice, but when the evil of the world is the ruler of ones life then that person thinks that they should be in control, God is ruler and King, we do not vote for God, we do not have an appeal court to God’s judgement. The knowledge and wisdom of the world is full of false science "facts" that have been placed with us to lead people from the truth.  God is found through faith, not through science.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Could some of you please responde to this essay (especially you Atheists) and let me know if you can think of a way to refute this. When people try to think of things that are infinite, some people would say time. But that is when we reach to argument that this paper is about. Time is NOT infinite, it cannot be. Many of those who argue against God, say that the only infinite is time and space (matter), but that cannot be so. If time where infinite and if time has always existed, then we could never possibly reach this point in time. Confused? Read carefully. If time (and space) went back into entirety, that would mean that it would have no beginning (correct?). So that no matter what point in time any one person, thing, whatever is at there would be an infinite number of points of time that would have to have happened to reach that point. You follow me? Just like we cannot go from zero to 1 in a completely sequential order, we cannot get to today with having literally waited through forever to reach this point. Time had to have a beginning, so that there is a starting point from which to reach the here and now.

Justin, you have grasped the infinity of space and that is very good because there are people who can’t get their heads around that. You haven’t grasped infinite time and that is very bad because it has layed you open to a superstitious belief. The key I think is that "we" don’t have to "get" through an infinite amount of time to get here. All that infinite time did not need to be got through any more than infinite space needs to be travelled for us to know that it exists. Like belief in infinite space, belief in infinite time is a mental jump that you can make or not. (Please don’t compare this to faith in God). It’s hard for creatures with a beginning and an end to get the idea but try hard.

Response:

  One of my books is entitled "Rediscovering The Truth About Creation."  It talks about some of the erroneous scientific teaching that we have been given through the Public School system.

as opposed to the religious ’scientific’ truth of creationism, perhaps? amazing how these preachers who never did anything scientific are all of a sudden experts on the origin of the universe…  It also presents my re delete the xx from my email address to reply

Response:

We are to follow the will of God, yes we have free choice, but when the evil of the world is the ruler of ones life then that person thinks that they should be in control, God is ruler and King, we do not vote for God, we do not have an appeal court to God’s judgement.

Ho hum.  Been said before, and it’s still full of holes that I am refusing to plug once more.  Look at my web site or (better) http://www.infidels.org/ for the flaws in that argument. The knowledge and wisdom of the world is full of false science "facts" that have been placed with us to lead people from the truth.  God is found through faith, not through science.

Just remember that if it wasn’t for science, you probably wouldn’t be alive now (the average age of death before science stepped in at all was around 17 years old). Matt Singerman http://www.pitt.edu/~messt66/ (Take off the x’s to e-mail to me) High General, IRCWP "SPOOOOOOOOON!"  - The Tick          

Related Posts