yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Flamegrilled - are you seriously proposing that human activity may have caused the Asian tsunami?
Nope. I think I was clear that I wasn't proposing that human activity caused any tsunami, never mind about the Asian one specifically.
On the other hand neither do I think you have any special knowledge of exactly how much human activity effects any particular environmental variable.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Viviane
You probably need to read more carefully. Cofty WAS using impotent as an antoym for omnipotent. And then you subsequently supported him. And I quote from two pages ago:
Possibly not all-powerful.
What is the point of an impotent god?
Now perhaps you'd be kind enough to quote me when you say "You did say [he lacks the power]"
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Yes. You are assuming that all other variables that we observe are exactly what God (if he exists) intended. If God lacks te power to make happen what he wants to, then he is impotent. Viviane
I didn't say he lacks the power. You somehow inferred that, but I didn't say it.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Well Cofty scores high on the chart for making assertions and throwing insults. Not so much on logical debate though.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
adamah - some of what you say may be true, but to address it we would have to turn this into a discussion about the existence of God. And Cofty is quite firm that this is not about that. He simply wishes to assert that the tsunami is a defeat to the viewpoint of a Christian theist, but logically speaking there is no reason to make that conclusion.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Flamegrilled you have just hit bedrock of willful stupidity. I am embarrassed for you.
When comments like this are made with no reference to what was said, or no further argument, I can only assume that there is no further argument and an insult will have to do instead.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
The god of christian theism made the world the way he intended.
But as you are well aware a Christian theist does not believe that the current world exists as God intended. (This also applies to the first point)
Humans have had absolutely zero influence on plate tectonics.
An assertion which you have no possible way to support.
Please don't get me wrong. I am not asserting that humans have had an effect on plate tectonics. I am simply saying that you cannot support your absolute statement. The best you would be able to to do is provide some opinions on the matter.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
And impotent was the right word in the way he used it. The reason it's even being discussed is that would NOT be the God of the Bible, the one Christians worship, if he is NOT all powerful, if he is impotent. Viviane
This is going off-topic but since I didn't start it ...
Since when is the definition of impotent "a being who is not omnipotent"?
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
Viviane - please point to where I described either God's ignorance, or His impotence.
yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.
we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.
they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.
He made the earth in such a way that earthquakes were a certainty. When he put humans on earth he knew for an absolute certainty that he was condemning millions to violent death.
Not at all. You are assuming that all other variables that we observe are exactly what God (if he exists) intended. We can easily conceive of a planet full of seismic activity in which nobody is hurt.
Are there earthquakes and volcanos that affect nobody? Of course. Can we be certain that current seismic activity has no other explanation except that it has proceeded exactly as God intended? Of course not. In case you haven't noticed humans do interact with the planet.
Therefore it is not a logical certainty that putting human on earth was certain to lead to violent death.
