Hell is theologically impossible if God is omnipotent.

[Panacea]

Wow Pancakes, I knew you didn't join in because you really can't debate anything but it is worse than I thought....that post is stinkaroo! phew!

And all you can do is take pot shots. Where is that substance? hahaha!

Oh... let me try the bug justification for bad behavior...
I'm just as bad as the bug about taking pot shots instead of posting logical arugments. Therefore, I am not bad at posting logical arguments.

 

[Panacea]

Some can start a discussion for sure but most I speak with eventually go and hide behind one of God's miracle that cannot be proven, or resort, when God is shown as immoral, to their------- God can do anything moral or not, because he owns us.

Regards
DL

I agree, that's the nature of faith in god, I guess.

 

[doombug]

Oh... let me try the bug justification for bad behavior...
I'm just as bad as the bug about taking pot shots instead of posting logical arugments. Therefore, I am not bad at posting logical arguments.

You are off the mark on that one. If it is concerning you specifically I have to say that you only make very short posts with no substance. You occasionally toss around some term you obviously heard somewhere just to make yourself look intelligent but anyone with any intelligence can see through that crap. Is this why you are so upset at me? hmmm....because I see through your crap....Why don't you stop your "bug" attacks long enough to make a post of substance.

 

[Panacea]

You are off the mark on that one. If it is concerning you specifically I have to say that you only make very short posts with no substance. You occasionally toss around some term you obviously heard somewhere just to make yourself look intelligent but anyone with any intelligence can see through that crap. Is this why you are so upset at me? hmmm....because I see through your crap....Why don't you stop your "bug" attacks long enough to make a post of substance.

I'm open and honest; it's in my personality to be so. I'm not upset at you, I find your illogical and mental behaviors hilarious. I will admit, I'm mostly fucking with you for entertainment, because you've proven time and time again you can't have a meaningful discussion. I should just let you alone, but I'm bored and want to have an easy laugh.

I say what I know and think (we all use terms we've "heard somewhere", bug, that's how knowledge is obtained), and try to learn where I can. I'm not perfect, I have my biases, and I don't know everything, but I'm willing to have an honest discussion with integrity when one presents itself.

 

[doombug]

I'm open and honest; it's in my personality to be so. I'm not upset at you, I find your illogical and mental behaviors hilarious. I will admit, I'm mostly fucking with you for entertainment, because you've proven time and time again you can't have a meaningful discussion. I should just let you alone, but I'm bored and want to have an easy laugh.

So you are an admitted troll. That is one of the few honest things you have done so far.

I am always open for a discussion but all you want to do is fling poo. Your feelings must really be hurt.

I have actually worked with and still do work with highly intelligent people. It is refreshing sometimes to interact with people who are, well, less fortunate in the intelligence arena.

I say what I know and think (we all use terms we've "heard somewhere", bug, that's how knowledge is obtained), and try to learn where I can. I'm not perfect, I have my biases, and I don't know everything, but I'm willing to have an honest discussion with integrity when one presents itself.

No, some people actually are able to discuss things because they know what those terms mean. You hint at knowing things when you really don't. The only discussion you can have is with someone you agree with. That is what you mistakenly call integrity.

 

[Panacea]

So you are an admitted troll. That is one of the few honest things you have done so far.

Were you not paying attention when I said that before, dip?

I am always open for a discussion but all you want to do is fling poo. Your feelings must really be hurt.

Did you drool after you typed that, I imagine a good chunk of your grey matter died off. No, I don't want to fling poo and my feelings are not at all hurt.

I have actually worked with and still do work with highly intelligent people. It is refreshing sometimes to interact with people who are, well, less fortunate in the intelligence arena.

Refreshing? Are you insinuating it's troubling to you to be around highly intelligent people and you need some stupidity to bring you back to normal?
Bible trivia, does not intelligence make.
You'll never succeed in making me feel unintelligent. Now if a person with real integrity and intelligence said I was stupid, I'd probably feel a bit sad.

No, some people actually are able to discuss things because they know what those terms mean. You hint at knowing things when you really don't. The only discussion you can have is with someone you agree with. That is what you mistakenly call integrity.

Think what you want, but you continue to tell lies if you think this.

 

[doombug]

"Stake my reputation on?" hahaha! That's funny.You are sounding mighty serious MA..... easy big fella.

You see the problem is with how you define the word omnipotent. How much sense does "able to do anything" make? Not much if you look at the omnipotence paradox. As a matter of fact this definition "able to do anything" is nonsense. Think of the saying an irresistable force meets an immovable object. If a force is irresistable then there is no such thing as an immovable object. If there is an immovable object then there is no irresistable force. The two cannot exist at the same time because of the contradiction so this statement is nonsense.

"Able to do anything?" Can God create a rock so big even He can't lift it? This is an example that shows how the perception of omnipotence by some people is nonsense because of the paradox it creates.



My view of omnipotence is: The ability to do anything WITHIN REASON. This addition to your definition makes the word omnipotent logical.



Using your illogical defintion of omnipotence your and GIA's premise seems logical but really it is nonsense. If you read the bible it seems that God wants humans to choose to love and trust him, hence our free will. If God created us to love Him from the start we wouldn't have free will to choose and we would be nothing but puppets. Same goes for GIA's premise. If God put us under a spell to love Him then heaven would be nothing but a puppet show. What would be the point of that? But since we have free will to choose there will be some who choose not to love God. According to the bible hell was created as a place of everlasting punishment for Satan and his demons. It seems to me the logical place for those who choose not to love God would be hell.

So you see what GIA is proposing may not even be possible to do. It isn't reasonable to create free willed beings for the purpose of choosing to love/not love God and allowing everyone to be with God in the end regardless of what choice they make. Is God omnipotent? First you have to examine how one defines the word "omnipotent" because some definitions are nonsense. If omnipotent means: the ability to do anything within reason, then sure God is omnipotent. Is GIA's premise possible? Not if God created humans with free will.

I see that Ol' Minor Axis has disappeared. The above post was clearly too much for him so the hyenas have taken his place. It is too much for them also because I don't see any rebuttal from them instead they act like screechy monkeys.

 

[doombug]

Were you not paying attention when I said that before, dip?



Did you drool after you typed that, I imagine a good chunk of your grey matter died off. No, I don't want to fling poo and my feelings are not at all hurt.



Refreshing? Are you insinuating it's troubling to you to be around highly intelligent people and you need some stupidity to bring you back to normal?
Bible trivia, does not intelligence make.
You'll never succeed in making me feel unintelligent. Now if a person with real integrity and intelligence said I was stupid, I'd probably feel a bit sad.



Think what you want, but you continue to tell lies if you think this.

hehehe! nothing but attacks. No substance.

 

[Panacea]

I see that Ol' Minor Axis has disappeared. The above post was clearly too much for him so the hyenas have taken his place. It is too much for them also because I don't see any rebuttal from them instead they act like screechy monkeys.

hehehe! nothing but attacks. No substance.

​.....

 

[doombug]

Taking things out of context proves nothing. I guess you are trying to make some point???

 

[Panacea]

If you have to ask...

 

[doombug]

If you have to ask...

You know I will though. Can you answer?....for once.

 

[Panacea]

You know I will though. Can you answer?....for once.

You made a post with no substance, full of attacks. Your next posts was an indictment on making posts with no substance, full of attacks.

 

[doombug]

You made a post with no substance, full of attacks.

Oh you mean this post:

"Stake my reputation on?" hahaha! That's funny.You are sounding mighty serious MA..... easy big fella.

You see the problem is with how you define the word omnipotent. How much sense does "able to do anything" make? Not much if you look at the omnipotence paradox. As a matter of fact this definition "able to do anything" is nonsense. Think of the saying an irresistable force meets an immovable object. If a force is irresistable then there is no such thing as an immovable object. If there is an immovable object then there is no irresistable force. The two cannot exist at the same time because of the contradiction so this statement is nonsense.

"Able to do anything?" Can God create a rock so big even He can't lift it? This is an example that shows how the perception of omnipotence by some people is nonsense because of the paradox it creates.



My view of omnipotence is: The ability to do anything WITHIN REASON. This addition to your definition makes the word omnipotent logical.



Using your illogical defintion of omnipotence your and GIA's premise seems logical but really it is nonsense. If you read the bible it seems that God wants humans to choose to love and trust him, hence our free will. If God created us to love Him from the start we wouldn't have free will to choose and we would be nothing but puppets. Same goes for GIA's premise. If God put us under a spell to love Him then heaven would be nothing but a puppet show. What would be the point of that? But since we have free will to choose there will be some who choose not to love God. According to the bible hell was created as a place of everlasting punishment for Satan and his demons. It seems to me the logical place for those who choose not to love God would be hell.

So you see what GIA is proposing may not even be possible to do. It isn't reasonable to create free willed beings for the purpose of choosing to love/not love God and allowing everyone to be with God in the end regardless of what choice they make. Is God omnipotent? First you have to examine how one defines the word "omnipotent" because some definitions are nonsense. If omnipotent means: the ability to do anything within reason, then sure God is omnipotent. Is GIA's premise possible? Not if God created humans with free will.

I see that Ol' Minor Axis has disappeared. The above post was clearly too much for him so the hyenas have taken his place. It is too much for them also because I don't see any rebuttal from them instead they act like screechy monkeys.

It included my other post which has plenty of substance so your statement is false.

Your next posts was an indictment on making posts with no substance, full of attacks.

My next post:

hehehe! nothing but attacks. No substance.

This is an "indictment" of YOUR posts that have no substance. So you took that out of context.

First you make a false statement. Then you take something out of context to try and prove some phantom point. How dishonest.

 

[Panacea]

Oh you mean this post:


It included my other post which has plenty of substance so your statement is false.



My next post:


This is an "indictment" of YOUR posts that have no substance. So you took that out of context.

First you make a false statement. Then you take something out of context to try and prove some phantom point. How dishonest.

More of a mistake than anything. I'm not a dishonest person.

 

[doombug]

More of a mistake than anything. I'm not a dishonest person.

Are you admitting a mistake? Then maybe you aren't being dishonest after all.

 

[Panacea]

Are you admitting a mistake? Then maybe you aren't being dishonest after all.

Yes, and no, I'm not being dishonest.

 

[doombug]

Yes, and no, I'm not being dishonest.

OK then and I apologize for saying that you were.

 

[Minor Axis]

Yes, and no, I'm not being dishonest.

The majority of his posts lack substance. It has to dragged out of him, but then he usually resorts to quoting scripture to back up his premises which he really does not believe in (according to him), just feels compelled to spend all his time in this forum defending...

 

[doombug]

The majority of his posts lack substance. It has to dragged out of him, but then he usually resorts to quoting scripture to back up his premises which he really does not believe in (according to him), just feels compelled to spend all his time in this forum defending...

I mostly quote scripture to show how false GIA's premises are because his come from the bible. Nice false statement you are making.