XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.society.liberalism   
   From: gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com   
      
   "wcb"  wrote in message   
   news:12cfrah7o89re30@corp.supernews.com...   
   > Gandalf Grey wrote:   
   >   
   >> That's a lie. You explicitly stated originally that you had a simple   
   >> proof that no god can exist.   
   >   
   > Gandy, the only liar here is you.   
      
   Then you should be able to prove it.   
      
   > CAN GOD EXIST?  STRONG ATHEISM SAYS NO.   
      
   Which is again a universal claim you haven't backed.   
      
   >   
   > 1.THE SELF DESTRUCTION OF THE CONCEPT OF   
   >  OMNIPOTENCE   
   >   
   > A. Omnipotence is derived from Latin words   
   > omni - all, potent - power, potency.   
      
   A word that is not included in the bible.   
      
   >   
   > B. It thus means all potent, all powerful.   
      
   Not to the Hebrews.  El Shaddai did not mean "all powerful" it meant "God of   
   the mountain"   
      
   > Having all possible powers and abilities.   
      
   The Augustinians derived that belief from the heavy Greek influence on   
   philosophy.  It was this that led to the contradictions of Augustinian   
   thought.  Not some necessary attribute of any necessary god.   
      
      
   > 2. GOD AND TIME   
   >   
   > A. Time exists   
   > B. But if god is to be omnipotent, time cannot   
   >   limit god in any way.   
      
   Unproven.  God may be the source of time.  If this is the case, time is   
   perfect because god is perfect.  God is under no obligation to tinker with   
   his own perfection.   
      
      
   > 3. GOD, CREATION, AND TIME.   
   >   
   > A. God created all, this is a basic claim   
   >   of many religions, Judaism, Christianity,   
   >   Hinduism, Islam.  The Bible and Quran and   
   >   other sacred books are explicit about god's   
   >   creation of all.   
   > B. If all is now, and for God there is no past,   
   >   and no future in essence, all is for practical   
   >   purposes now, and all that was, is and shall   
   >   be are now, existant.   
   > C. Thus god created all now, at one time,   
   >   complete in all particulars to the last quark   
   >   and last fraction of a second in all   
   >   particulars and connections to all the rest of   
   >   the things in the Universe.   
      
   Unshown.  The fact that god created all does not mean god created everything   
   in detail.  If the big bang 'created' the unverse, it does not imply that   
   the big bang made my butane lighter.   
      
      
   > 4. OMNIGENESIS   
   >   This idea that god creates all now, totally,   
   >   in all physical particulars for all time to   
   >   the smallest details should have name as it is   
   >   a powerful concept that is destructive to so   
   >   many claims.  Omnigenesis, creation of all   
   >   would be an apt term.   
      
   The famous debunker Martin Gardner noted that the need to create neologisms   
   like "class of omni-everything gods" and "omnigenesis" is one of the 5   
   hallmarks of the pseudo-scientific *crank.*   
      
   Since you have not proved that god must have created all particulars of all   
   things "totally, in all physical particulars for all time" there is no need   
   for some new word to describe that which you have not shown.   
      
   > 5. GOD AND OMNIBENEVOLENCE.   
   >   
   > 1. God is said to be good, all good, supremely   
   >   good.  Often denoted by the word   
   >   omnibenevolent.   
   > 2. There is evil.   
   > 3. Evil comes in two type, natural evil,   
   >   drought, floods, hurricanes and moral evil,   
   >   evil deriving from acts of mankind, murder,   
   >   rape, lying as examples.   
   > 4. But if god made all man's acts to the last   
   >   detail including evil ones, then evil exists   
   >   only because god exists.   
      
   The above is a sloppy restatement of the Logical and Evidential Argument   
   from Evil.  These are two arguments that work quite well until you get your   
   hands one them.   
      
   It would be nice if you left them alone.  Your tinkering and your addition   
   of non-sequiturs and self-contradictory notions and useless neologisms does   
   nothing but mutilate the original ideas.   
      
      
   > 5. GOD AND OTHER CLAIMS ATTRIBUTES OF GOD   
   >   THAT FAIL HERE.   
   > 1. God is claimed to be loving, merciful,   
   >   and just.   
      
   And you've done nothing to show that god is not.  See above.   
      
   >   
   > 7. GOD'S FREE WILL   
   > A. If god creates all in one now   
      
   But you haven't shown this to be a logical necessity, hence the rest fails.   
      
   >   
   > 8. GOD AND TIME IN RETROSPECT AT THIS POINT.   
   > A. Suppose we say we cannot have this, we must   
   >   rethink this.   
      
   You should read those words very carefully.  That's exactly the point you're   
   at.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)