The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Sorry...I'm not seeing an answer to my questions. Just an ad hominem , with an attempt to escape. Let me ask you again, and most pointedly: is Israel "chosen"? You said Israel, but do you mean Israel or the Jewish people or the Jewish religion? It won't matter. Because "chosen" ...

It is impossible to prove anything... Sorry...I'm not seeing an answer to my questions. Just an ad hominem , with an attempt to escape. Let me ask you again, and most pointedly: is Israel "chosen"? You said Israel, but do you mean Israel or the Jewish people or the Jewish religion? It is ...

I can't see why Pantheism doesn't satisfy the "creationism" model. Nobody said it didn't "satisfy" some "creation model". I just said it wasn't the real God. That's quite a different claim. Understood that you believe this. But then what exactly would be meant by "...

Laws of nature are revisable. The formulations of scientific laws are being refined, but the Regularity of nature remain unchanged, of course. You don't understand the definition of "miracle." A "miracle" is, by definition, a divine intervention that produces something contrary ...

For from the creation of the world His invisible qualities, both His eternal power and divinity, are clearly seen, being understood by the things made, for them to be without excuse. His qualities are both invisible and clearly seen. That's religion. :lol: Seen things are not the seeing. But are cl...

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2026 7:11 am For from the creation of the world His invisible qualities, both His eternal power and divinity, are clearly seen, being understood by the things made, for them to be without excuse.

Disprove what is seen is not there, disprove there is no thing seen.

This is just high-level word salad.

You believe in a hands-off God who started the machine and who lets it run. Whether you believe that don't, the argument "creation implies a creator" gets you no farther than that. Actually it does get you farther...much farther. For the important question that it raises is WHAT ABOUT CRE...

For from the creation of the world His invisible qualities, both His eternal power and divinity, are clearly seen, being understood by the things made, for them to be without excuse. Disprove what is seen is not there, disprove there is no thing seen. Look at the topic question again. The challenge...

I’m agnostic. In my view, God must be benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent. Children with cancer make me believe that God is not those things. Therefore He/She is not God. No? God is not in his created finite things. Created finite things live and move and exist in him. “For they exchanged the tru...

One of the ways that we know that God exists is because we cannot replicate what God has done. The undoable and the incomprehensible are attributed to God. God is the explanation that explains nothing. But "God did it" feels better than "I don't know". As to the undoable point, ...

Let me know how that all strikes you. We can go a further step in that thinking, but only if I'm clear so far, and if you're content with it. It strikes me as very well thought out. I agree that it would be better to live in accordance with God’s wishes than to seek the protection of a Satan. But h...

"Could be"? You "could" go with the story that the moon is made out of blue cheese. But why should you? You need a better reason to believe. Says the guy who believes the talking snake story. Well, let's see. So far, we have no advance from "science" on that. The searc...

Let me know how that all strikes you. We can go a further step in that thinking, but only if I'm clear so far, and if you're content with it. It strikes me as very well thought out. I agree that it would be better to live in accordance with God’s wishes than to seek the protection of a Satan. But h...

I’m agnostic. In my view, God must be benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent. Children with cancer make me believe that God is not those things. Therefore He/She is not God. No? Let's go back to here. I simply can;t understand the juxtaposition, "I am agnostic" and "God must be X, Y ,...

I think you need to read my post a bit more carefully. I think you need to answer my question. Seriously. Did you try to read my post more carefully? I think you are wrong about what I need to do and not good at picking up sarcasm/parody. I'll add some formatting to help. This is a great hypothesis...