• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Can there be an all mighty god?

Chagos said:
I addressed this misunderstanding (not just yours) elsewhere already and also in here just now. But I've deleted my post here since Ramoss had already taken care of the matter with his #117.

Changes nothing in the fact though that what you claim in your above is without merit.
Click to expand...

lol...of course you did because you realized what a silly remark it was...
 
Elvira said:
lol...of course you did because you realized what a silly remark it was...
Click to expand...
If we want to talk about silly, I suggest looking at this post of yours.

What in "But I've deleted my post here since Ramoss had already taken care of the matter with his #117." is it that escapes your comprehension?

Now go and look up "chug" and "dur" and when you've understood the difference, maybe come back.
 
Here is the afore-mentioned post #117 again
RAMOSS said:
Well, the Isiah 40:22 is talking about a circle, like a coin, If it was talking about an earth shaped object, it would have used the term for 'ball', which Isaiah used earlier.

The term in Isaiah 40:22 is 'Chug'. That's flat like a coin. The same term is used in Job 26:10.

If they wanted something more like what the earth is shaped as, they would have used the term 'Dur'.
Click to expand...
for those inclined to read.
 
Synonyms for circle...one happens to be sphere....hmmmmm...and globe...and round...

Circle Synonyms, Circle Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

One Hebrew word for “generation” is dohr, corresponding to the Aramaic dar. (Da 4:3, 34) Dohr comes from a root verb meaning “stack in a circle” or “move around” (Eze 24:5; Ps 84:10) and thus has a basic underlying meaning of “circle.” The related word dur means “ball.” (Isa 22:18) The Greek equivalent is ge·ne·aʹ, from a root meaning “be born.”

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001648?q=dur&p=par
 
Last edited:
The significance of word meanings in the original language appears not to be of importance to just everyone. Maybe the assumption resides that the bible was written in English from the getgo.

But since it was not, "chug" doesn't mean "dur" and "dur" doesn't mean "chug".
 
Elvira said:
Synonyms for circle...one happens to be sphere....hmmmmm...and globe...and round...

Circle Synonyms, Circle Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

One Hebrew word for “generation” is dohr, corresponding to the Aramaic dar. (Da 4:3, 34) Dohr comes from a root verb meaning “stack in a circle” or “move around” (Eze 24:5; Ps 84:10) and thus has a basic underlying meaning of “circle.” The related word dur means “ball.” (Isa 22:18) The Greek equivalent is ge·ne·aʹ, from a root meaning “be born.”

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001648?q=dur&p=par
Click to expand...

But the hebrew word for BALL, SPHERE and GLOBE is Dur.

And, no, you are doign a false equivalancy there. Claiming a circle is a sphere is , well incorrect.
 
RAMOSS said:
But the hebrew word for BALL, SPHERE and GLOBE is Dur.

And, no, you are doign a false equivalancy there. Claiming a circle is a sphere is , well incorrect.
Click to expand...
actually the thesaurus she quoted offers up a definition of "circle".
noun
1.
a closed plane curve consisting of all points at a given distance from a point within it called the center. Equation: x 2+ y 2= r 2.
2.
the portion of a plane bounded by such a curve.
3.
any circular or ringlike object, formation, or arrangement:
a circle of dancers.
Click to expand...
Circle | Define Circle at Dictionary.com

Of course the circle of friends I might have whatever influence over can be said as being within my sphere of influence. But that's English anyway and as such totally irrelevant.

No idea what any of this has to do with the thread question, it's just that the claim of any book stating something that it clearly doesn't, is irksome.
 
lefty louie said:
I'm not religious in the least, I have more then enough reason to be anti religious, rape, war, slavery the list goes on and on, but I don't hold it against anyone for being religious. If that's what works for you then God bless.

My real question here is, can a god (all religions are based on a god, gods, god like figure), be all mighty?

A say not.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you started this thread since you have already determined that no "god" can be all mighty.

But if you change that attitude a bit and with a genuine heart seeking to find out if one exists I have a suggestion for you.

Find a quiet place, and with an earnest request on your knees ask Him. You might be surprised.
 
Angel said:
Anthropomorphism has addled your thinking about Ultimate Reality, Lefty. Look to it.
Click to expand...

vesper said:
Not sure why you started this thread since you have already determined that no "god" can be all mighty.

But if you change that attitude a bit and with a genuine heart seeking to find out if one exists I have a suggestion for you.

Find a quiet place, and with an earnest request on your knees ask Him. You might be surprised.
Click to expand...

While I feel there is nor can there be a god that is all mighty, that doesn't mean I haven't spoken with my god. I tend to use humor when discussing things so don't take my jovial way as insulting. I've got a direct line to my god, my god is on call for me and me alone, we have sit downs, pillow talk times etc. I never kneel to him as I am not beneath him. My god understands me and forgives my mistakes, if I have times where I doubt the gods that other follow he forgives that too, some things just don't add up. You know kind of like every country that ever went to war thinks that god is on their side, every player of a sport thinks the same as well, yet millions die and lose a game all the time. I don't accept that a god would allow that to happen to his people. My god has always been there for me, I don't want to make light of anyone that has faith, just that all mighty to me is a bit of a stretch IMO. My feeling is that a god is there for guidance, direction and forgiveness, more then that, well, I just don't think so. Peace.
 
RAMOSS said:
But the hebrew word for BALL, SPHERE and GLOBE is Dur.

And, no, you are doign a false equivalancy there. Claiming a circle is a sphere is , well incorrect.
Click to expand...

Circles do not have volume.
 
lefty louie said:
No, your speaking to my minor points. Focus on the simple fact that nothing can do everything. No rock could be too big, so that's one thing that can't be done. Could a foot be made that could not fit a shoe? Everything can't be done. People want to confuse things by saying "why would a god want to do something like this" etc. that's not the point, if there is a god, he/she/it has a weakness.
Click to expand...

Based on human perception and limited knowledge of science.
 
SirGareth said:
"Can there be an almighty God?"

Well lets just say this, something somewhere is actually almighty and what we can say for certain is that it isn't a "scientist" nor will a "scientist" ever figure out what that something somewhere actually is.

What science does is jump from myth to myth finding one that some contemporary fools think is finally right
Click to expand...
I like the way you see things and put things and I hope you stick around.
 
Logicman said:
Whistle for it.
Click to expand...
So you cannot prove Santa false, once again showing that you dont understand logic.
Who do you think you are, God?
Click to expand...
Prove that I am not, you cant thus you should accept that I can be.
You don't know squat.
Click to expand...
It is painfully obvious that I know far more than you ever will, that is largely because I am able to use logic and have the capacity/desire to learn

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to eternal life." - John 5:24
Click to expand...
Like I said you are definitely going to miss out on heaven
 
Quag said:
So you cannot prove Santa false, once again showing that you dont understand logic.

Prove that I am not, you cant thus you should accept that I can be.

It is painfully obvious that I know far more than you ever will, that is largely because I am able to use logic and have the capacity/desire to learn


Like I said you are definitely going to miss out on heaven
Click to expand...

As the Church Lady would say, "Well, isn't that special?"

In my own experience, the more knowledge I acquire, the more I realize how much I've yet to learn. ;)
 
Angel said:
No, "could be" indicates possibility. And this is what logic says:

In S4, □□...□ = □ and ◊◊...◊ = ◊. This amounts to the idea that iteration of the modal operators is superfluous. Saying that A is necessarily necessary is considered a uselessly long-winded way of saying that A is necessary. [And saying that A is possibly possible is considered a uselessly long-winded way of saying that A is possible.]
Knowledge Representation with Non-Classical Logic
Click to expand...

If you dont know if something cannot be you cannot claim that it can be. You can only claim that it is possible that it can be or as I originally phrased it that it is possible that it is possible.
 
nota bene said:
As the Church Lady would say, "Well, isn't that special?"

In my own experience, the more knowledge I acquire, the more I realize how much I've yet to learn. ;)
Click to expand...

Bolded is true,
Logicman however still cant prove Santa false and is clueless as to why this is relevant to his other posts.
 
Quag said:
So you cannot prove Santa false, once again showing that you dont understand logic.

Prove that I am not, you cant thus you should accept that I can be.

It is painfully obvious that I know far more than you ever will, that is largely because I am able to use logic and have the capacity/desire to learn


Like I said you are definitely going to miss out on heaven
Click to expand...

You don't know squat. You're not God and you don't even have any formal education in Biblical Theology.

So go tell your fairy tales to somebody else.
 
Just ask Trump...he thinks so every time he looks in the mirror
 
Logicman said:
You don't know squat. You're not God and you don't even have any formal education in Biblical Theology.

So go tell your fairy tales to somebody else.
Click to expand...

Prove that I am not God, you cannot any more than you can prove Santa doesn't exist.
As to biblical theology I obviously have a far greater education that you have.
Public forum you dont want me responding to your nonsense stop posting illogical claims like that Santa is proven false or demanding that your claims are true until others prove them false

You have proven over and over again that that Logic is a foreign and unknown concept to you

Continue to insult actual people of faith with your posts and I will continue to point out how absurd your nonsense is
 
Quag said:
Prove that I am not God, you cannot any more than you can prove Santa doesn't exist.
As to biblical theology I obviously have a far greater education that you have.
Public forum you dont want me responding to your nonsense stop posting illogical claims like that Santa is proven false or demanding that your claims are true until others prove them false

You have proven over and over again that that Logic is a foreign and unknown concept to you

Continue to insult actual people of faith with your posts and I will continue to point out how absurd your nonsense is
Click to expand...

Don't bother me with your nonsense.
 
Quag said:
If you dont know if something cannot be you cannot claim that it can be. You can only claim that it is possible that it can be or as I originally phrased it that it is possible that it is possible.
Click to expand...
Something is either possible or impossible. That's the Law of Excluded Middle. A Law of Thought. Fundamental Classic Logic.

If something is not impossible, then it is possible. Logic.

Nothing changes if you add the epistemic dimension (knowing).

If you know that something is not impossible, then you know that it is possible. Logic.

You appear to be resting your argument on epistemic ignorance: If you don't know whether something is possible or impossible, then....
But this doesn't change the fact that something is either possible or impossible.
If you don't know whether it is possible or impossible, you cannot assert anything either way -- you cannot say that it is possible and you cannot say that it is impossible.
You want to say that if you don't know that it is impossible, then it only "can be" possible.
But your "can be" is an expression of possibility. You want to say that ignorance of impossibility entails knowledge of possibility. But you cannot say this.
If you don't know that it is impossible, unless you know that it is possible, you cannot say that it "can be" possible.
You are back at the beginning: something is either possible or impossible.
And this is a necessity, not a possibility. Not a "can be."

In fact, there is no logical contradiction in the concept of an almighty God, and so it is not impossible. And this is known.
Therefor, you know that an almighty God is possible.
 
Angel said:
Something is either possible or impossible. That's the Law of Excluded Middle. A Law of Thought. Fundamental Classic Logic.

If something is not impossible, then it is possible. Logic.

Nothing changes if you add the epistemic dimension (knowing).

If you know that something is not impossible, then you know that it is possible. Logic.

You appear to be resting your argument on epistemic ignorance: If you don't know whether something is possible or impossible, then....
But this doesn't change the fact that something is either possible or impossible.
If you don't know whether it is possible or impossible, you cannot assert anything either way -- you cannot say that it is possible and you cannot say that it is impossible.
You want to say that if you don't know that it is impossible, then it only "can be" possible.
But your "can be" is an expression of possibility. You want to say that ignorance of impossibility entails knowledge of possibility. But you cannot say this.
If you don't know that it is impossible, unless you know that it is possible, you cannot say that it "can be" possible.
You are back at the beginning: something is either possible or impossible.
And this is a necessity, not a possibility. Not a "can be."

In fact, there is no logical contradiction in the concept of an almighty God, and so it is not impossible. And this is known.
Therefor, you know that an almighty God is possible.
Click to expand...

The problem is he could be a muslim so you are screwed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom