>Be God. >Be omnipotent,boundless,... >Transcend mortal concepts like casuality,time,space and logic

>Be God
>Be omnipotent,boundless,...
>Transcend mortal concepts like casuality,time,space and logic
Based

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, that's the whole idea...
    God is supposed to be supernatural.

  2. 8 months ago
    Chud Anon

    >I’m going to rephrase genuine theological questions in a silly way to disguise my seething inability to address them

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      They've all been addressed countless times in a million different ways.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why do they have to be addressed? Why is law strictly constructed, but theology isn’t? Why does it allow maximum interpretability? Because it’s a form of lying. Abrahamism is probably the most advanced form of lying ever created.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >They've all been addressed countless times in a million different ways.
        And has a single one of those attempts been successful? You'd think that apologists would have found the right answer and stopped there.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >And has a single one of those attempts been successful?

          Yes. The Holy Spirit revealed Himself to me through prayer and scripture.

          If you’re looking for a series of logical proofs that lead to ‘Jesus, QED’ you won’t find them. It’s not that kind of thing. It’s a truth that’s written in your heart and soul. It runs through mankind like the writing in a stick of rock.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >genuine theological questions
      Find me one genuine theological question in this stack of papers that hasn't been answered 1000 times already. Hawkins is a hack, and his fans are midwit pseuds.

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >another thread squabbling about omnipotence
    it doesn't exist. nothing, absolutely nothing is "omnipotent"

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >nothing, absolutely nothing is "omnipotent"
      Omnipotence only means one has the power to do anything that is possible. People tend to include paradoxes or logical contradictions in this when they aren't applicable.

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >transcend logic
    Source? Also it's strange that you would have to defend something illogical. Not an atheist btw.

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    If God is real, why is there no evidence for it?

    >These ancient desert scrolls written by goat frickers is the proof

    LOL

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If God is real, why is there no evidence for it?
      look around you, you moron

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Couldn't I just use that as proof for every other god that people believed at some point.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          you could do or you could simply accept these as manifestations of God in the human imagination.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nta but I already accept them as imaginary, along with the judeochristomozlem god.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I thought like you once, but when you grow up, you will soon realise what an intellectual dead-end atheism is.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >intellectual dead-end
            What does that even mean in this context?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What does that even mean in this context?
            It means to close your mind to the existence of God, a Creator, on the grounds of it being 'unscientific ' according to a primitive human scientific standard is arrogant and mid- wit tier philosophy. Atheists have no humility. they delight in pointing out flaws in religious scripture but never apollogise when their own 'truths' are modified with every new discovery such as the age of the observable universe. This was measured without much dispute for the last 20 years to be 14 billion years old and has now jumped dramatically to 26 billion years old. Not a single astronomer has explained why the original estimate was so out when it was supposed to be based on empirical redshift data to a high degree of precision.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It means to close your mind to the existence of God, a Creator, on the grounds of it being 'unscientific '
            Strawman.
            >Atheists have no humility. they delight in pointing out flaws in religious scripture but never apollogise when their own 'truths' are modified with every new discovery such as the age of the observable universe.
            Scientific shit isn't "atheist truths".
            >This was measured without much dispute for the last 20 years to be 14 billion years old and has now jumped dramatically to 26 billion years old.
            The 26 billion thing is a meme btw, you fell for moronic headlines.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Strawman
            no it isn't. explain.

            >Scientific shit isn't "atheist truths".
            Try telling that to Richard Dawkins. atheism only gained credibility from approiating so called 'scientific truth '

            >The 26 billion thing is a meme btw, you fell for moronic headlines.

            >'Our newly-devised model stretches the galaxy formation time by a several billion years, making the universe 26.7 billion years old, and not 13.7 as previously estimated," says author Rajendra Gupta, adjunct professor of physics in the Faculty of Science at the University of Ottawa.'

            https://phys.org/news/2023-07-age-universe-billion-years-previously.html

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >approiating
            * appropriating

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >no it isn't. explain.
            I don't reject the idea that god or gods exist on scientific grounds.
            >Try telling that to Richard Dawkins. atheism only gained credibility from approiating so called 'scientific truth '
            I don't give a frick about Richard Dawkins. Most scientific research is done by religious people, the big bang was discovered by a catholic priest. Scientific theories are scientific theories, not atheistic theories.
            >'Our newly-devised model stretches the galaxy formation time by a several billion years, making the universe 26.7 billion years old, and not 13.7 as previously estimated," says author Rajendra Gupta
            >Pajeet says X
            >therefore it's true
            Are you an American? Your reading comprehension is wonderful.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe

            I guess you better update the age of the Universe here and add "God did it" while you're at it and see how that goes, you pop-sci know-nothing fricking moron.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            it isn't me making these claims. ask the physicists who wrote the paper I cited from.

            >no it isn't. explain.
            I don't reject the idea that god or gods exist on scientific grounds.
            >Try telling that to Richard Dawkins. atheism only gained credibility from approiating so called 'scientific truth '
            I don't give a frick about Richard Dawkins. Most scientific research is done by religious people, the big bang was discovered by a catholic priest. Scientific theories are scientific theories, not atheistic theories.
            >'Our newly-devised model stretches the galaxy formation time by a several billion years, making the universe 26.7 billion years old, and not 13.7 as previously estimated," says author Rajendra Gupta
            >Pajeet says X
            >therefore it's true
            Are you an American? Your reading comprehension is wonderful.

            >Are you an American? Your reading comprehension is wonderful.
            if the science is so indisputable and the consensus so strong then it should be possible to easily disprove the claims that the original estimate of 14 billion years are inaccurate.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It means to close your mind to the existence of God, a Creator, on the grounds of it being 'unscientific ' according to a primitive human scientific standard is arrogant and mid- wit tier philosophy.

            Yeah I suppose you're right about thi-

            >the rest of your post

            Oh you're just a Christian moron. How the frick do you jump from "atheism is foolish, there must be a creator" to "the folklore of the israelites is the answer". How arrogant to believe the universe was created by a being that looks like us and cares what we do.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Oh you're just a Christian moron. How the frick do you jump from "atheism is foolish, there must be a creator" to "the folklore of the israelites is the answer". How arrogant to believe the universe was created by a being that looks like us and cares what we do.
            cite examples where I claim to be a Christian or that I believe in 'israeli folklore' or where I believe God is a being that looks human. Also it is not unreasonable to assume that out of all the different types of matter in the universe a sentient God would not take a special interest in the rare lifeforms that have acquired sentience and a basic understanding of the rules of nature and the cosmos.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            I just assumed based on your issues with the estimated age of the universe and people rightfully picking holes in scripture that has been analysed a million times more than it's worth. I apologise.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            You think a God created this?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You think a God created this?
            I think God created the conditions that allowed such things to come into existence.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why? What's the point?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            boredom, curiosity, a great plan? i dont know or pretend to know.

            Since God is omniscient, did he also know that creating these kind of conditions would create all kinds of terrible people including atheists?

            >Since God is omniscient, did he also know that creating these kind of conditions would create all kinds of terrible people including atheists?
            He would have had to know.

            Well I believe an eternal infinite quantum fuzz multiverse exists that creates all things through random chance without a God. Prove me wrong. You can't prove that doesn't exist.

            >ell I believe an eternal infinite quantum fuzz multiverse exists that creates all things through random chance without a God. Prove me wrong
            Well at least that is more plausible than the stupid chocolate teapot spaghetti monster orbiting the sun trope but it is still a belief. The atheists like Richard Dawkins attempt to use empirical evidence to disprove the existence of God. very different things.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >He would have had to know.
            Then what is the point of this 'test'? An omniscient being would already know the results.
            A being like God as described in the Abrahamic literature wouldn't need to put us on this earth to test us in this way, because knowing how a person with a certain nature will behave when in a certain environment defeats the whole purpose of testing our faith

            If a omnipotent being like God were to exist, he/she/it would give 0 fricks about testing us and it confuses me as to why such a God would make sentient beings like us in the first place.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            NTA but it's described as a "test" because that's our experience of it. Not because it's God's experience. God didn't need an experiment.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then why the frick are we here?
            Why did God create me knowing full well I would end up becoming a sinful atheist?
            Why did he create a being capable of being hurt and unable to believe in his existence and scriptures?

            Just so God can make me suffer for all of eternity?

            With every passing day Satan sounds more like the good guy to me

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Then why the frick are we here?
            To share in God's goodness.
            >Why did God create me knowing full well I would end up becoming a sinful atheist?
            To share in God's goodness.
            >Why did he create a being capable of being hurt and unable to believe in his existence and scriptures?
            To be free, which is one of the aspects of God's goodness.
            >With every passing day Satan sounds more like the good guy to me
            Good luck with that.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >To be free, which is one of the aspects of God's goodness.
            How am I free? God chose:
            >When I am born
            >Where I am born
            >My parents and their genetics and nurture
            >Events that are out of my control were either a direct act of God or consequences of actions by God

            Everything about me, including my faith and ability to reason, is the way that it is because of God.

            There is no freedom when an omnipotent and omnipresent has set everything into motion knowing full well where everything and everyone is headed

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How am I free?
            By choosing how you respond.

            >Everything about me, including my faith and ability to reason, is the way that it is because of God.
            And it all gives you options.

            As attractive as it is to pretend that you can't help your actions and responses, it is neither analytically nor morally valid.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Since God is omniscient, did he also know that creating these kind of conditions would create all kinds of terrible people including atheists?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Well I believe an eternal infinite quantum fuzz multiverse exists that creates all things through random chance without a God. Prove me wrong. You can't prove that doesn't exist.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >intellectual dead-end
            What does that even mean in this context?

            the existence of a creator and a metaphysical order doesnt validate any earthly religion
            to try to argue otherwise is a lie. that doesnt mean that those religions cant have morsels of truth, but imagine believing in indo european sky daddies or semetic volcano/rain/thunder/war gods and israeli prophets and zombies

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are Abrahamtards such resentful losers?

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Religious people are less intelligent so more likely to be lower in wealth and status than athechads.

  7. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Frick, Dawkins is such an imbecile.

  8. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Oh look some ugly loser in christ using a picture of a better man, and his name, to argue about religion on the Internet. Sure makes Dawkins look silly when he rewrites his argument in downs syndrome speak. Hopefully he doesn't post scripture or quote religious leaders verbatim to the same effect!

  9. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Theology is the study of nothing. Every theologian in human history wasted their lives and contributed nothing of value.

  10. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are christcucks so butthurt about people questioning their religion? Can you imagine a scientist being this bootyblasted because someone doesn't believe in gravity? All a scientist needs is to wait for that person to walk off the cliff. Christcuckies have no reason to fume, if they're right that G-d will send stupid people to heckin hell to be punished. Seems like the problem resolves itself.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *