View Full Version: AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!!

Haven Of Wiidom > Rantings and Ravings > AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!!

Pages: [1] 2 3

Title: AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!!


Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:09 PM (GMT)
The Living Tribunal lost another match, this one to Al Bundy. Now I ask you whats more likely: LT losing to Al Bundy with the IG or him not understanding human emotions. (Like in the Naruto match, which I wrote.)?

M Bison - October 20, 2008 09:20 PM (GMT)
The Living Tribunal can understand emotion, as there is simply no difference between understanding and knowledge.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:23 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 04:20 PM)
The Living Tribunal can understand emotion, as there is simply no difference between understanding and knowledge.

That is where you are wrong when I said understanding I maent more empathy which as Yoda would say LT has not. You can know of sadness but not know sadness etc. Besides you didn't answer the real question.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 09:30 PM (GMT)
Yeah. Omniscience means to know everything. That includes how things feel. Philosophically, an omniscient being understands all as much as he knows all.

I take philosophy, you can't beat me in this discussion.

And the Infinity Gauntlet>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Naruto's silly game. If Naruto wanted a chance, he should have questioned weather the Living Tribunal could create logical paradoxes, such as creating a rock he could not lift, a being he cannot control, or a squared circle.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:35 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 04:30 PM)
Yeah. Omniscience means to know everything. That includes how things feel. Philosophically, an omniscient being understands all as much as he knows all.

I take philosophy, you can't beat me in this discussion.

And the Infinity Gauntlet>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Naruto's silly game. If Naruto wanted a chance, he should have questioned weather the Living Tribunal could create logical paradoxes, such as creating a rock he could not lift, a being he cannot control, or a squared circle.

But the LT could nullified the IG. It would be a lot easier than living on Earth as a human for a year. btw I found a way past the rock Paradox. Any truly omnipotent God could limit there phisical strength temporarily to the point where they con't lift said rock but he could then lift those restriction and the rock and is therefore capable of breaking the Paradox.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 09:40 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:35 PM)

But the LT could nullified the IG. It would be a lot easier than living on Earth as a human for a year. btw I found a way past the rock Paradox. Any truly omnipotent God could limit there phisical strength temporarily to the point where they con't lift said rock but he could then lift those restriction and the rock and is therefore capable of breaking the Paradox.

When they limit them self, they cease to be omnipotent, even if they could give their own powers back. That is not a good answer to the paradox.

A good answer is that a god would only do what is appropriate to do. If God does not have a corporal body, it is not appropriate for Him To lift a rock.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:46 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 04:40 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:35 PM)

But the LT could nullified the IG.  It would be a lot easier than living on Earth as a human for a year.  btw I found a way past the rock Paradox.  Any truly omnipotent God could limit there phisical strength temporarily to the point where they con't lift said rock but he could then lift those restriction and the rock and is therefore capable of breaking the Paradox.

When they limit them self, they cease to be omnipotent, even if they could give their own powers back. That is not a good answer to the paradox.

A good answer is that a god would only do what is appropriate to do. If God does not have a corporal body, it is not appropriate for Him To lift a rock.

]God does have a pyhsical body, hwe created us in his image. Lititing how much power you use doesn't mean you don't have it; that's illogical.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 09:50 PM (GMT)
No, if it's simply choosing not to be strong, it's not that you cannot lift it, but that you choose not to. If you actually remove power, you cease to be omnipotent.

And you can be incorporeal and have an image. Ghosts, for example.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:54 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 04:50 PM)
No, if it's simply choosing not to be strong, it's not that you cannot lift it, but that you choose not to. If you actually remove power, you cease to be omnipotent.

And you can be incorporeal and have an image. Ghosts, for example.

God could make those same choices.

Besides, I believe that God has abody.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 09:54 PM (GMT)
Ah. All these omnipotent paradoxes take me all the way back to when I was dabbling into this topic with immense interest like in early to mid 2007. He he I remember when I said that GOD or any other religious deity you believe in could create a beam attack so powerful that when reflected back at him/her/it, that deity would die instantly on the spot.

As for Living Tribunal losing to Al Bundy, boy, just two losses already makes it extremely hard for things to be worse for him and his fanbase. I really pity the LT.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 09:58 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 04:54 PM)
Ah. All these omnipotent paradoxes take me all the way back to when I was dabbling into this topic with immense interest like in early to mid 2007. He he I remember when I said that GOD or any other religious deity you believe in could create a beam attack so powerful that when reflected back at him/her/it, that deity would die instantly on the spot.

As for Living Tribunal losing to Al Bundy, boy, just two losses already makes it extremely hard for things to be worse for him and his fanbase. I really pity the LT.

Gods are Immortal.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:01 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:58 PM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 04:54 PM)
Ah. All these omnipotent paradoxes take me all the way back to when I was dabbling into this topic with immense interest like in early to mid 2007. He he I remember when I said that GOD or any other religious deity you believe in could create a beam attack so powerful that when reflected back at him/her/it, that deity would die instantly on the spot.

As for Living Tribunal losing to Al Bundy, boy, just two losses already makes it extremely hard for things to be worse for him and his fanbase. I really pity the LT.

Gods are Immortal.

I meant the question. I meant can the god create an attack so powerful that it would dissent from the rule that the diety is bound to immortality?

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:01 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:54 PM)

God could make those same choices.

Besides, I believe that God has abody.

Always question our own beliefs, and never use "I believe" as an argument, or you are incapable of debating things philosophically. "I believe" is a conclusion, not an argument.

Also, if He made the choice to limit himself, then He loses the challenge. If he removes his omnipotence, he ceases to be God, as Omnipotence is one of the seven attributes of God.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:04 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:58 PM)

Gods are Immortal.

Debatable. And attribute of God is "eternal and everlasting", which in itself is a contradiction. Eternal means outside of time itself, whilst everlasting means inside of time, but never ceasing to be. He cannot be both inside and outside of time.

weather or not God could commit suicide is a logical paradox that can be used on the atheistic side of an argument.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:06 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:04 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:58 PM)

Gods are Immortal.

Debatable. And attribute of God is "eternal and everlasting", which in itself is a contradiction. Eternal means outside of time itself, whilst everlasting means inside of time, but never ceasing to be. He cannot be both inside and outside of time.

weather or not God could commit suicide is a logical paradox that can be used on the atheistic side of an argument.

Ah yes, the "committing suicide" bit was also another paradox that I remember looking into. My answer for it was "No, God cannot. Ever. Unless he wanted to. Which will never happen according to the flow of His Nature"

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 10:09 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:04 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 09:58 PM)

Gods are Immortal.

Debatable. And attribute of God is "eternal and everlasting", which in itself is a contradiction. Eternal means outside of time itself, whilst everlasting means inside of time, but never ceasing to be. He cannot be both inside and outside of time.

weather or not God could commit suicide is a logical paradox that can be used on the atheistic side of an argument.

Well, using some scietific law if a God exsist outside of time then the only way for them to die would be being earased from exsistance. Matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:10 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:06 PM)

Ah yes, the "committing suicide" bit was also another paradox that I remember looking into. My answer for it was "No, God cannot. Ever. Unless he wanted to. Which will never happen according to the flow of His Nature"

Nice answer to the paradox. After briefly thinking about how to counter it, I think i like it.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:11 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:10 PM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:06 PM)

Ah yes, the "committing suicide" bit was also another paradox that I remember looking into. My answer for it was "No, God cannot. Ever. Unless he wanted to. Which will never happen according to the flow of His Nature"

Nice answer to the paradox. After briefly thinking about how to counter it, I think i like it.

Gracias, M. Bison.

Can God create a circled square? or make 3+3=8 (might have given the answer away a little)?

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:11 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:09 PM)

Well, using some scietific law if a God exsist outside of time then the only way for them to die would be being earased from exsistance. Matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Is God matter? Is God energy? We are debating philosophy, not science.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:12 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:11 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:09 PM)

Well, using some scietific law if a God exsist outside of time then the only way for them to die would be being earased from exsistance.  Matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Is God matter? Is God energy? We are debating philosophy, not science.

lol that god = energy bit made me laugh.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:13 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:11 PM)

Gracias, M. Bison.

Can God create a circled square? or make 3+3=8 (might have given the answer away a little)?

Mathematical paradoxes are harder to counter, as maths is often held as the one thing we can be certain of in philosophy.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 10:13 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:11 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:09 PM)

Well, using some scietific law if a God exsist outside of time then the only way for them to die would be being earased from exsistance.  Matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Is God matter? Is God energy? We are debating philosophy, not science.

All ting are made of some formof matter or energy.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:14 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:13 PM)

All ting are made of some formof matter or energy.

All things in this universe. And attribute of God is that he is transcendent, outside of this universe. He is also Immanent, inside of this universe, which leads to more logical paradoxes.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:15 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:13 PM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:11 PM)

Gracias, M. Bison.

Can God create a circled square? or make 3+3=8 (might have given the answer away a little)?

Mathematical paradoxes are harder to counter, as maths is often held as the one thing we can be certain of in philosophy.

My answer for the 3+3=8 bit was "Yes, because if you merge two 3's from opposite sides together, it becomes an 8. At least sort of".

As for the circled square, I just draw either an simple, yet precisely shaped sun or a four-spiked ball like one of those enemies in super mario world.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 10:16 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:14 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:13 PM)

All ting are made of some formof matter or energy.

All things in this universe. And attribute of God is that he is transcendent, outside of this universe. He is also Immanent, inside of this universe, which leads to more logical paradoxes.

God created the universe and set-up it's laws; if God breaks his own laws then God would cease to be God.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:17 PM (GMT)
Just to let you know, I kinda purposely put an 8 so there so that it would easier for you guys to decode. Other than that, I have no ultimate answer yet.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:19 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:16 PM)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:14 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:13 PM)

All ting are made of some formof matter or energy.

All things in this universe. And attribute of God is that he is transcendent, outside of this universe. He is also Immanent, inside of this universe, which leads to more logical paradoxes.

God created the universe and set-up it's laws; if God breaks his own laws then God would cease to be God.

But doesn't God exist outside the omniverse? So he doesn't have to follow it. Like if I made up a mini-universe diorama out of a small bowl and some critters, dirt, and all that tiny junk, I wouldn't have to follow what the critters do, especially if they had flaws.

But then again, I'm a human and even the smartest of humans are almost infinitely far from omnipotent. Nevertheless, you get my point on the rule adherence.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:19 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:15 PM)

My answer for the 3+3=8 bit was "Yes, because if you merge two 3's from opposite sides together, it becomes an 8. At least sort of".

As for the circled square, I just draw either an simple, yet precisely shaped sun or a four-spiked ball like one of those enemies in super mario world.

Ah, but what if we change the sum, can He make 3+3=47?

Ans anything with spikes is not a circle, due to having corners. I'd have to see the sun to judge, but I've tried drawing them myself, but it doesn't work as they either ciese to be a square or ciese to be a circle.

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:20 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:19 PM)

But doesn't God exist outside the omniverse? So he doesn't have to follow it. Like if I made up a mini-universe diorama out of a small bowl and some critters, dirt, and all that tiny junk, I wouldn't have to follow what the critters do, especially if they had flaws.

But then again, I'm a human and even the smartest of humans are almost infinitely far from omnipotent. Nevertheless, you get my point on the rule adherence.

This answer is similar to what I would have given.

Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 10:22 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 05:19 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:16 PM)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:14 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:13 PM)

All ting are made of some formof matter or energy.

All things in this universe. And attribute of God is that he is transcendent, outside of this universe. He is also Immanent, inside of this universe, which leads to more logical paradoxes.

God created the universe and set-up it's laws; if God breaks his own laws then God would cease to be God.

But doesn't God exist outside the omniverse? So he doesn't have to follow it. Like if I made up a mini-universe diorama out of a small bowl and some critters, dirt, and all that tiny junk, I wouldn't have to follow what the critters do, especially if they had flaws.

But then again, I'm a human and even the smartest of humans are almost infinitely far from omnipotent. Nevertheless, you get my point on the rule adherence.

You didn't make laws for the creatures to follow. Even one who made laws of nature is not above them. For all must obey the law. New question where did God come from.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:23 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:19 PM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:15 PM)

My answer for the 3+3=8 bit was "Yes, because if you merge two 3's from opposite sides together, it becomes an 8. At least sort of".

As for the circled square, I just draw either an simple, yet precisely shaped sun or a four-spiked ball like one of those enemies in super mario world.

Ah, but what if we change the sum, can He make 3+3=47?

Ans anything with spikes is not a circle, due to having corners. I'd have to see the sun to judge, but I've tried drawing them myself, but it doesn't work as they either ciese to be a square or ciese to be a circle.

QUOTE
I kinda purposely put an 8 so there so that it would easier for you guys to decode. Other than that, I have no ultimate answer yet.


And by drawing the sun, I meant like a stereotypical kindegartner's depiction of it.
Even with the corners, there's still some roundness to it.


M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:25 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:23 PM)


And by drawing the sun, I meant like a stereotypical kindegartner's depiction of it.
Even with the corners, there's still some roundness to it.

Ah, but to be both a square and a circle, it needs:

To have both one side, and four.
To have both no corners, and four.
To have four right angles, and none.

Can you honestly say your picture had this?

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:26 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:22 PM)

You didn't make laws for the creatures to follow. Even one who made laws of nature is not above them. For all must obey the law. New question where did God come from.

But an attribute of God is omnipotence. He should have the power to break said laws freely.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:27 PM (GMT)
Hmmm... where did God come from?

Well according to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and Zoroastrians: Most, if not all of them attribute to God the essence of eternity and by being eternal, that means you have no beginning or end at all. You're there all the time, I know it sounds stupid and illogical to the human mind, but God does exist outside all conventional rules of existence.

Hey, who knows? When humanity, regardless of religion/culture, see GOD and ask Him/It where did he come from? He might even tell us that he had a father, but abandoned him long time ago ever since. NAH J/K


Guardian of Nesh - October 20, 2008 10:28 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:26 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:22 PM)

You didn't make laws for the creatures to follow.  Even one who made laws of nature is not above them.  For all must obey the law.  New question where did God come from.

But an attribute of God is omnipotence. He should have the power to break said laws freely.

If God is Omnipotent, why create imperfect beings. There must be a limitation there or at least a purpose for us.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:28 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:25 PM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:23 PM)


And by drawing the sun, I meant like a stereotypical kindegartner's depiction of it.
Even with the corners, there's still some roundness to it.

Ah, but to be both a square and a circle, it needs:

To have both one side, and four.
To have both no corners, and four.
To have four right angles, and none.

Can you honestly say your picture had this?

Well I can't find a perfect depiction of it, but I just visualize its structure to the closest possible real form it has by the name of being "Squared" and "Circled".

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:30 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:28 PM)
If God is Omnipotent, why create imperfect beings. There must be a limitation there or at least a purpose for us.

Exactly. You just brought up an atheistic point of debate.

Anyway, as for the origins of God, I'm not sure. We've only just started that topic in college, so thus far I only know Descartes argument, but that only explains where the idea of God came from, not God Himself.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:30 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:28 PM)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 05:26 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:22 PM)

You didn't make laws for the creatures to follow.  Even one who made laws of nature is not above them.  For all must obey the law.  New question where did God come from.

But an attribute of God is omnipotence. He should have the power to break said laws freely.

If God is Omnipotent, why create imperfect beings. There must be a limitation there or at least a purpose for us.

I think if he created nothing but perfect things, existence would be as boring, monotone, colorless, and un-diverse as hell.

What's going to happen to the fun of CBUB and fiction in general?

M Bison - October 20, 2008 10:31 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Oct 20 2008, 10:28 PM)
Well I can't find a perfect depiction of it, but I just visualize its structure to the closest possible real form it has by the name of being "Squared" and "Circled".

Ah, but I'm not talking square looking and circle looking. I'm talking a literal, mathematically correct square circle.

Phalanx - October 20, 2008 10:35 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (M Bison @ Oct 20 2008, 10:30 PM)
QUOTE (Guardian of Nesh @ Oct 20 2008, 10:28 PM)
If God is Omnipotent, why create imperfect beings.  There must be a limitation there or at least a purpose for us.

Exactly. You just brought up an atheistic point of debate.

Anyway, as for the origins of God, I'm not sure. We've only just started that topic in college, so thus far I only know Descartes argument, but that only explains where the idea of God came from, not God Himself.

In the western world, the idea of a supreme deity came from none other than ancient Biblical Israel itself and neighbored parts of the Near East. Or from pagan-era Europe, since king-deities like Zeus/Jupiter/Odin/Dagda/etc. or at least the creator/supreme deities Chaos/Buri/Deus/etc. was basically GOD to them in their respective cultures.

In the eastern world, the idea of a supreme deity would have came from I'd say... Pre-historical Vedic India, Shang Dynasty China, or Pre-Zoraoster/Zoroaster Persia.

Elsewhere, I think they form the idea from the strongest/chief deities that their tribes share in common with each other, like the Americas, Africa, non-South/East Asia, and Australia.




Hosted for free by zIFBoards