Posted on November 28th, 2008 by admin.
Categories: Ranting.
On Nov 28, 1:49 pm, Alan Wostenberg wrote:
> If you are not thinking of God as Infinite Being, then we are not
> thinking about the same thing, and the god whom you lack belief is not
> the God in whom we believe, but something else. Term definitions are
> not a matter of proof, for they are neither true nor false, merely
> clear or unclear. God is defined as Infinite Being.
One more time, a theist totally misses the piont and rants about a
totlly different subject.
This was not about me.
I asked YOU to prove that YOUR god is infinite.
Not to tell me that the god I lack belief in is not the same god you
believe in (Which si totally ridiculous, by the way.) and to then
reiterate that your god is infinite by definition.
> You wonder if a plurality of Infinite Beings is possible. Consider
> that to have two beings one must posess something the other lacks,
Why?
How does that even make sense as some sort of premise?
> othrewise they would be the /same/ being. But Infinite Being is by
> definition lacking in nothing. Consequently there can be at most, one.
When did “infinity” become equivalent with “not lacking anything”???
Why do many theists always redefine words as they go along?
___________________________________
All children are atheists — they have no idea of God.
0 comments.
Comments can contain some xhtml. Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.