Philosophy Now Forum

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:21 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:06 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:04 pm
What a stupid respoonse.

You are talking about a perfect God and a perfect creation that I am not.

No not even that.
We are done here

If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:21 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:06 pm
You are talking about a perfect God and a perfect creation that I am not.

No not even that.
We are done here

If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

We are done here

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:31 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:21 pm
No not even that.
We are done here

If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

We are done here

Well, if you agree with me!

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:36 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:31 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm
If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

We are done here

Well, if you agree with me!

Please refer to the post I made some time ago.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:42 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:36 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:31 pm

We are done here

Well, if you agree with me!

Please refer to the post I made some time ago.

I just was kidding!

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:36 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:31 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm
If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

We are done here

Well, if you agree with me!

Actually, bahm, it appears that you are agreeing that there is no God.

commonsense wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 3:50 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:36 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:31 pm

We are done here

Well, if you agree with me!

Actually, bahm, it appears that you are agreeing that there is no God.

How come? I am agnostic toward the existence of God.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:21 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:06 pm
You are talking about a perfect God and a perfect creation that I am not.

No not even that.
We are done here

If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

If God were perfect he would have created the final version of all species to begin with. God did not do that. God could not be perfect. If God isn’t perfect he cannot be God. If God cannot be God there can be no God.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 3:51 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 3:50 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 2:36 pm
Well, if you agree with me!

Actually, bahm, it appears that you are agreeing that there is no God.

How come? I am agnostic toward the existence of God.

If God were perfect he would have created the final version of all species to begin with. God did not do that. God could not be perfect. If God isn’t perfect he cannot be God. If God cannot be God there can be no God.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:37 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:21 pm
No not even that.
We are done here

If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

If God were perfect he would have created the final version of all species to begin with. God did not do that. God could not be perfect. If God isn’t perfect he cannot be God. If God cannot be God there can be no God.

Where do you get that premise from, God has to be perfect? God could be defined as a creator or a being who enforces order in the natural world. None of these definitions require God to be perfect.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:57 am

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:37 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 1:26 pm
If God is perfect then He would create the final creature, final world, etc. There was no need for, change, struggle, etc.

If God were perfect he would have created the final version of all species to begin with. God did not do that. God could not be perfect. If God isn’t perfect he cannot be God. If God cannot be God there can be no God.

Where do you get that premise from, God has to be perfect? God could be defined as a creator or a being who enforces order in the natural world. None of these definitions require God to be perfect.

Yours are idiosyncratic. Generally an imperfect God is no God.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 2:57 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:57 am

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:37 am

If God were perfect he would have created the final version of all species to begin with. God did not do that. God could not be perfect. If God isn’t perfect he cannot be God. If God cannot be God there can be no God.

Where do you get that premise from, God has to be perfect? God could be defined as a creator or a being who enforces order in the natural world. None of these definitions require God to be perfect.

Yours are idiosyncratic. Generally an imperfect God is no God.

God is perfect is one of your premises that you have prove that is correct.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 3:15 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 2:57 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:57 am
Where do you get that premise from, God has to be perfect? God could be defined as a creator or a being who enforces order in the natural world. None of these definitions require God to be perfect.

Yours are idiosyncratic. Generally an imperfect God is no God.

God is perfect is one of your premises that you have prove that is correct.

No, it is a priori according to an acceptable definition of God. God must be perfect or else anyone, e.g. bahman, could be God. And that’s blasphemous.

A priori.

Generally accepted definition.

Blasphemy.

Even if not understood by you, bahman.

Have you ever encountered someone who explicitly agrees with you?

Now reply with a repetition of your unique tenet about God, bahman.

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:26 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 3:15 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 2:57 pm

Yours are idiosyncratic. Generally an imperfect God is no God.

God is perfect is one of your premises that you have prove that is correct.

No, it is a priori according to an acceptable definition of God. God must be perfect or else anyone, e.g. bahman, could be God. And that’s blasphemous.

I don't agree with that definition and I don't think that anyone else could be God given the definition of God I provided.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:55 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 5:26 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 3:15 pm
God is perfect is one of your premises that you have prove that is correct.

No, it is a priori according to an acceptable definition of God. God must be perfect or else anyone, e.g. bahman, could be God. And that’s blasphemous.

I don't agree with that definition and I don't think that anyone else could be God given the definition of God I provided.

Provide the name of someone who agrees with your premise that God is not perfect. I down-and-dirty-double-dog dare you.