Oh dear!
I think many (if not most) arguments are caused by inserting impossibles in the context of "possible" and then fighting over it.
Clear definitions are essential.
We really fall in a hole in religious arguments because WORDS have rubber meanings in so-called "spiritual" contexts.
Words only serve communication when both sides of that communication have identical understanding of meanings.
Clearly defined words in a bible context are just silly putty!
And this is ON PURPOSE!
Another way of saying it: You can't be playing by checker rules when you're in a chess game!
Let's take the word TIME as an example.
We all think we "know" what we mean when we talk about TIME. But, do we?
I think of time as the distance between events. Without actual events there is nothing to measure using time.
There also has to be a PLACE where time ......is used to measure distance between events.
Without an actually existing place for events....well, it is pointless to even bring up the subject of time!
I've already mentioned how silly it is to think of Eternity as a reality.
It cannot take place! Eternity cannot be an event.
The word "eternity" or "eternal" is just a shorthand way of talking about something outside of our capacity for measurement.
AN ILLUSTRATION
Let's take a simple---very simple---adding and subtracting problem. Let's word the problem as a riddle.
The first time most people hear this riddle (called the Missing Dollar riddle) they are truly stopped in their tracks.
The reason for it has to do with PROCEDURE. Something is a problem when we don't have the proper PROCEDURE for solving it.
This, I assert, is the same problem with RELIGIOUS DEBATE.
Each side is using a different set of procedures! One side is using real language with real definitions and the other side is just making up nonsense and calling it "spiritual" so they can get away with cheating.
Three guests check into a hotel room. The clerk says the bill is $30, so each guest pays $10. Later the clerk realizes the bill should only be $25. To rectify this, he gives the bellhop $5 to return to the guests. On the way to the room, the bellhop realizes that he cannot divide the money equally. As the guests didn't know the total of the revised bill, the bellhop decides to just give each guest $1 and keep $2 for himself.
Now that each of the guests has been given $1 back, each has paid $9, bringing the total paid to $27. The bellhop has $2. If the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?
