You're changing the subject. I am taking no stand on whether time began or not - not for the purposes of this debate. I am pointing out that it is irr...
There's no assumption of infinite time. When there was no time, the ball was on the cushion, causing the dent. Note, if you think that all cause must ...
You are doing things the wrong way around. Suppose God - an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent person - exists. Well, by hypothesis, they are fair...
What total rubbish. All you're doing is insisting - not arguing - that the law of non-contradiction is necessarily true as opposed to just 'true'. I t...
You don't seem to understand what omnipotence means. It means 'all powerful' (omni - all - potentia - power). That's what everyone - everyone - unders...
Epistemology is about knowledge. To say that something is 'epistemically' possible, is to say something about our state of knowledge. So, I can be cer...
Yes, but you are not engaging with any argument. Obviously an omnipotent being can kill itself. An omnipotent being can do anything. That includes tha...
God. Capital G God. Which is convenient shorthand for a person with the three omni properties. Unless one is speaking to someone incredibly ignorant, ...
It's what the word is used to mean. If you don't want to use it that way, that's fine. But in philosophy the default is it stands for someone with tho...
A mind. A person is just a mind. If you are using the word 'God' to mean something other than a person, then you're just not talking about what others...
So what? Incidentally, if Descartes thought I was right, that's pretty damn good indirect evidence that I am. You do realize he's one of the greatest ...
No, it is not epistemically possible for a square circle to exist. You are confused. It is metaphysically possible for a square circle to exist if an ...
For something to be epistemically possible, is for us simply not to know whether it is, or is not the case. It is epistemically possible for next week...
What's in a word? Yes, one can label positions and one can say that some would define 'omnipotence' as 'being able to make a cup of tea'. But if one i...
On the contrary, your argument now fails. For you can generate no actual contradiction from that claim. I claim that it is possible for there to be sq...
Sounds like an essay question. You know it would be easier to do some research yourself and think about what the answer might be than try and piece to...
Then you need to find a talking forum, not a philosophy forum. Philosophers use reasoned argument to try and figure out what's what. They don't just s...
That just demonstrates the falsity of those ideas. An omnipotent person can always divest themselves of their omnipotence, else they would not be omni...
That's false. Being able to make a square circle is obviously not equivalent to actually making one, and thus in holding - as I do - that an omnipoten...
It isn't. What are you on about? I believe in God. I also believe that no good, all knowing, all powerful person would create some evil, ignorant idio...
What the hell does that mean? God is an energy? Oh, I thought he was a gas. Or a potato. Silly me. So, just to be clear, when you hear 'the problem of...
You're just saying stuff. Again: as is blindingly obvious to virtually everyone bar the psychopathic and morally bankrupt, an omnipotent, omniscient, ...
So, free will requires existing with aseity. And that's the manner in which minds exist. Thus, God has free will (something we could know independentl...
No he wouldn't. You've said nothing in support of your claim. Why on earth would God - an all powerful, all knowing, all good person - create ignorant...
Two events can occur at the same time. And typically, causes precede their effects (not always, but typically). So, an omnipotent person can cause at ...
Yes, like most atheists, you confuse 'God' with 'Christianity' and think that hackneyed criticisms of Christianity can just be lazily peddled against ...
It is not at all clear to me what you're trying to convey. Does God have free will? Yes. Obviously. Do you need to be omnipotent to have free will? No...
You are now confusing God with the bible. A good person is not a dictator. Thus, God is not a dictator. I assume you don't think it is morally good to...
Fallacious. An omnipotent person has free will, but it does not follow that a person who has free will is omnipotent. Also, being able to do what you ...
What on earth are you on about? Here's the argument: 1. If God is a dictator, then he is morally bad 2. God is morally good 3. Therefore God is not a ...
That's true of anything anyone has ever said. I did not say that it was 'necessarily' true that God is not a garden variety dictator. I said he is not...
No, you think God is morally bad. That's a contradiction. It's no different to thinking bachelors have wives. Minds can and do think contradictory tho...
We're talking about idealism here, yes? What do idealists think the brain is? Do they think the brain is the mind? No. They think the mind is the mind...
Well, I give you you. You are thinking contradictory things. You think God is a bad person. That's a contradiction. And you think it. So you 'did' a c...
No, it is manifest to reason. If you think God lacks free will, explain why (and do so without attributing to God something that contradicts the defin...
Well, I think an idealist who thinks minds exist but also thinks that the only things that exist are things that can be conceived of exist, is thinkin...
No. Berkeley - the steel idealist rather than the straw one - thinks minds exist. He thinks it is manifest to reason that sensations cannot exist abse...
Comments