The impossibility of infinite ability..aka "god"

From Pantheism - Wikipedia:

quote:

---

Pantheism is the view that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are equivalent. More detailed definitions tend to emphasize the idea that natural law, existence, and the Universe (the sum total of all that is, was, and shall be) is represented in the theological principle of an abstract 'god' rather than a personal, creative deity or deities of any kind.

---

Pantheism is not anthropomorphism. If anything, it is further from anthropomorphism than your belief system as you refer to your 'god' as male, which last I saw would require your 'god' to have male sex organs, which is a physical attribute.Look NJ, if you don't know what a word means or don't know how to use a given word in it's proper context, then don't use it.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

Unless god can't move, he is confined to time. If he can't move, though, the only alternative to being confined to time, he's useless. Which do you choose?Nemesis Juggernaut-"Why do you insist that God moves at all, since movement is uniquely apportioned to that which has a body -- i.e., material? You speak of God in anthropomorphic terms, as if he were a man in outer space. These pantheistic notions about God have nothing to do with the Judeo-Christian concept of God."Uhhhhhhhhh.....if god cant move, hes a STATUE. ehhh, common sense?and, um, something has to be anthropomorphic(human-like) to move?! I didnt know my car cant move!
hmmm..........you know, I'm not convinced by you statements insofar.

by my belief:God is the pure singular energy that was before all things and created by faith it was.nothing was before this energy, it just was. and nothing is outside it.therefore: in its pure state before creation, time is only as relevant as it would decide it is.being man, and not able to build a star system, or a galaxy, can only understand time from the point of view of its condition. therefore: what God can do, or cannot do, is limited only by what God decides he will do, or will not do.that's my take, based on the definition i have observed.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

TheNaturalist-"distance = rate * time. correct? of course. and, therefore, if there is no time, otherwise time, in this equation, equals zero, then d=rt= zero. No distance is traveled unless time passes."tesla-"by my belief:God is the pure singular energy that was before all things and created by faith it was.nothing was before this energy, it just was. and nothing is outside it.therefore: in its pure state before creation, time is only as relevant as it would decide it is.being man, and not able to build a star system, or a galaxy, can only understand time from the point of view of its condition. therefore: what God can do, or cannot do, is limited only by what God decides he will do, or will not do.that's my take, based on the definition i have observed."All I have to say is: "Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

As a helpful hint to getting you started at EvC, if you'd like to quote someone, you can do that in a couple of different ways.At the beginning of your quote, place this html code "quote" in brackets. When you are finished with your quote, you close it by doing the same thing by placing the word "/quote" in brackets.Likewise, if you want to quote shade, the code is "qs" in brackets at the beginning of what you'd like to quote, followed by closing it with "/qs" in brackets at the end of what you'd like to quote.If this still does not make any sense to you, EvC has a "peek" function at the lower rightthand corner of your screen, directly adjacent to the "reply" button. After you are done reading this post, hit the peek button and you can see what I'm talking about.Btw, welcome to EvC. In theory, yes, it would. But I hardly see how it is relevant since it only makes sense in relation to space and matter, none of which are attributes given to God. You destroyed me, eh?Check this out: If you don't move, time will NOT speed up, either for you, or anyone else around you. We should assume that time speeds up when you are sleeping?Secondly, you are using Relativity and Special Relativity incorrectly. Time only means anything in relation to matter and the forces exerted on it, and the space in which the matter exists. Since God has no mass and is not contained or defined by space, its completely moot, as has been pointed out to you by other naturalists. Mathematically, distance x speed will give you the time it takes to travel that distance, but you are equivocating that time means distance when it does not. If time and distance are really just the same thing, then how is that going to work in a formula with time x time, or distance x distance? How is that going to tell you speed? Answer: it won't.Furthermore, your use of natural physical laws are erroneous because there is no justification to assume that God is subject to ANY of it. Here is the surest way to know that God is outside of this domain:This is all, of course, contingent upon the assumption that God exists. If God is the creator of all life, then God is outside of the elements of that universe for the sole fact that nothing that comes in to existence can define its existence without a cause. If God is bound by time, mass, and space, then He would essentially have had to create Himself in the process, which is an absurdity. This is a logical fallacy because no one has ever witnessed anything coming in to existence without a cause outside of itself.But maybe you can explain to me why it is you think that God is bound by any physical property. Edited by Nemesis Juggernaut, : Edit to fix lefthand to righthand

---

“There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the 'wisdom' of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to objective reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious" -C.S. Lewis

I answered that in Message 9. "Movement" is a nonsensical concept when talking about God. He has no need to "move" since He's already everywhere. Your whole idea of movement and time is worthless in describing God. Dirt is common, and not very valuable.

---

“If you had half a brain, wouldn't you have realized after the second time, that it was you, not God?” -- riVeRraT (see context here)“The endearing controvertist! One needs to become acute in the ploys of his kind.” -- ThreeDogs

In the pantheon, Gods and Goddesses have intercourse, which in turn tells me that they have genitalia. The Judeo-Christian concept of God as a "He" or "Him" is a personification of that which has no physical personhood. By your rationale, we should assume that referring to ships as "she" means that the ship physically is a female, or that Spanish words referring to masculine or feminine pronouns means that they actually assume that a table or a door has a sex. If per chance you are discussing a Spinoza-like pantheism, then I would agree that it does not entail physical features. I was specifically referring to the pantheon, where Zeus and Odin reside.

---

“There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the 'wisdom' of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to objective reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious" -C.S. Lewis

Hey, thanks Well as a matter of fact, time does speed up when you are sleeping, compared to when you are moving your body, by an extremely small degree. Even if a body is moving tens of thousands of miles per hour, the time experienced on them, while they are moving, is about 99.999999% as much as if they were standing still, again, during the period of time they are moving at tens of thousands of miles per hour. When a body moves at the speed of light, the time experienced by that entity is zero.Know why? Because of this: firstly, nothing can move greater than the speed of light. (dont mention god). And since this is true, anything going at the speed of light, in one direction, would not be able to concentrate any of its time moving in any other direction. An atom(if it could, but it couldnt) moving at the speed of light would have all of its subatomic particles frozen in position. Why? Because they'd all be moving straight forward, not in their orbits. They, again, couldnt concentrate any of their time moving in a curved direction since they couldnt move more than the speed of light.And, it seems like anything anyone says about what god is rather than what it supposedly does is "not what god is". Theists just say what god can do, the supposed consequences of it. But thats not good enough. They also have to tell what god is made out of. If not, then you cannot say that saying that "god" exists is no different than saying, "there is something i have. It can do anything." I ask, "well, what is it?" and a theist replies, "well, thats not the point. It isnt made out of anything".???????????

The point is, if god cant move, its a STATUE. It is completely senseless to say that god cant move any distance, since then he would be powerless. If god is all-powerful, he ought to be able to do that. Even, well, anything in the universe can [i]move[i].

OK , just checking to make sure your views on your version of 'god' are not in the slightest anthropomorphic, as it seems some others in this forum are judging from their posts. Then wouldn't a more appropriate and precise term be ancient European polytheism, or even Pre-Christian polytheism? Using the terms pantheism and polytheism interchangeably is not normal English usage IMO.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

ok, since you didn't understand my post, perhaps i am misunderstanding you.unless you have a definition of God, you cannot hope to enter into a conversation on what God is capable of.how do you define God?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

I define "god" as an undefined entity made up by primitive people to explain what they didnt have the knowledge and/or deduction capacity to understand.

Again, the concepts of "movement" and "distance" are nonsensical when we're talking about something that doesn't have a location. What part of "God is everywhere" don't you understand? The U.S. can't "move" from New York to Los Angeles because it's already there. That doesn't mean the U.S. doesn't exist.You're "refuting" a strawman.

---

“If you had half a brain, wouldn't you have realized after the second time, that it was you, not God?” -- riVeRraT (see context here)“The endearing controvertist! One needs to become acute in the ploys of his kind.” -- ThreeDogs

Again, the concepts of "movement" and "distance" are nonsensical when we're talking about something that doesn't have a location. What part of "God is everywhere" don't you understand? The U.S. can't "move" from New York to Los Angeles because it's already there. That doesn't mean the U.S. doesn't exist.You're "refuting" a strawman.So, are we parts of god, like New York and Los Angeles are parts of the U.S.?And secondly, the U.S. can still move; the entire U.S. can move to different parts of the world over time. Apparently, god cant do shit.
Hes worthless

... is atheistic bullshitDon't know why - I must just expect slightly more rational and sound argumentation from the atheistic side.