“1896 - 3000”

Since: Apr 09

Frankfurt am Main, Germany

#89 Dec 4, 2010
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
@Ernst: I am not forcing anything on anyone.
Then how come you keep saying we can't seem to understand your proof? Isn't that good as attempting us to agree to you? In which case, I believe that is "forcing" us. Let's see:
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
This is pathetic! If you actually read or understood my post, you would see why God couldn't have created the Universe. Admit it. You can't comprehend the proof I gave.
May I repeat that again?
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
Admit it.
See? You assumed that we should agree to your statement, in which case, you're practically forcing us into your belief that God didn't create the universe.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
I am a stereotyper? I disagree.
I think you are because of this;
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
You are a typical Christian. You are afraid that God will punish you, if you say he doesn't exist. You are terrified at the prospect of a dreamless, eternal sleep.
You are directly pulling us to the category of fundamentalist, do-it-or-else Christians. And that is what I mean a "steretype". You don't even know us. You don't know our actual beliefs, and yet you blame us on this.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
So, calling me a stereotyper is wrong. I am disappointed that you fail to understand the PROOF I presented, like Spinodont does.
Oh, that again tells me you're trying to force us into agreement. I mean, yes, we can see what you're trying to say, it's just that we don't agree to that being the actual truth.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
I am a fundamentalist? I find that rather offensive. I am a
Christian. I attend Mass every Sunday. I pray three times a day. I believe in an "afterlife" of sorts. I have ALWAYS said that a God may exist. I just believe that we are getting the wrong impression about what a God is.
Oh, so you're a Christian? I take back what I said. However, if you think we are all getting the wrong impression of God, then keep it to yourself. You yourself believes in that. Why do you want to preach it out, and start calling us "pathetic" if we disagree?

“1896 - 3000”

Since: Apr 09

Frankfurt am Main, Germany

#90 Dec 4, 2010
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
Your last post was clearly an attack on me, rather than a contribution to the debate.
That was no attack. I merely stated what was wrong in your posts about this. Remember my line;
Ernst Udet wrote:
Below are some reasons why your argument is completely irrelevant.
So, was that an attack? Would you like to see an attack? It's this;

"Paudie, you are completely wrong and disgusting. You shouldn't be here in the first place. I mean, we will NEVER EVER believe in what you say!! You are no more than a ******* atheist! Hell! If you don't want to believe in God, screw you!!!"

See? Did my comment sound like an attack?
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
This is disappointing. Let me go through the it, again. You, hopefully, will get it this time. An omnipotent being would be able to create anything. It should, therefore, be able to create, for example, a rock that is too heavy for it to lift. Therefore, it is not omnipotent. THIS IS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS.
Sure, and what if the omnipotent being simply didn't want to?
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
Listened to what? Your nonsense? You, and the majority of you, clearly do not understand the arguement, here. God could not have done what you said, because an omnipotent being is IMPOSSIBLE. An omnipotent being would be able to create anything, right? Even a rock that is too heavy for it to lift? WRONG, because then it is NOT omnipotent. Therefore, NOTHING like a god created or triggered the big bang. It is you who should listen.
This is actually funny. You are directly stating a law that should govern omnipotent beings. Why don't you look at an omnipotent being yourself? Meet it? See. That's the problem. You say that "an omnipotent can do this, not that. Not that! You're stupid! You clearly don't understand me!" without even trying to respond to our own statements.

And I am not at all attacking you. I am stating that what you are doing here is completely wrong. Also, you shouldn't be trying to preach the way you believe in God. Not here. And that shouldn't be, in the first place,'cause you're trying to make us agree to something that we won't. Mark that.

“1896 - 3000”

Since: Apr 09

Frankfurt am Main, Germany

#91 Dec 4, 2010
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
@Ernst: I am not forcing anything on anyone.
Then how come you keep saying we can't seem to understand your proof? Isn't that good as attempting us to agree to you? In which case, I believe that is "forcing" us. Let's see:
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
This is pathetic! If you actually read or understood my post, you would see why God couldn't have created the Universe. Admit it. You can't comprehend the proof I gave.
May I repeat that again?
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
Admit it.
See? You assumed that we should agree to your statement, in which case, you're practically forcing us into your belief that God didn't create the universe.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
I am a stereotyper? I disagree.
I think you are because of this;
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
You are a typical Christian. You are afraid that God will punish you, if you say he doesn't exist. You are terrified at the prospect of a dreamless, eternal sleep.
You are directly pulling us to the category of fundamentalist, do-it-or-else Christians. And that is what I mean a "steretype". You don't even know us. You don't know our actual beliefs, and yet you blame us on this.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
So, calling me a stereotyper is wrong. I am disappointed that you fail to understand the PROOF I presented, like Spinodont does.
Oh, that again tells me you're trying to force us into agreement. I mean, yes, we can see what you're trying to say, it's just that we don't agree to that being the actual truth.
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
I am a fundamentalist? I find that rather offensive. I am a
Christian. I attend Mass every Sunday. I pray three times a day. I believe in an "afterlife" of sorts. I have ALWAYS said that a God may exist. I just believe that we are getting the wrong impression about what a God is.
Oh, so you're a Christian? I take back what I said. However, if you think we are all getting the wrong impression of God, then keep it to yourself. You yourself believes in that. Why do you want to preach it out, and start calling us "pathetic" if we disagree?

Oh, and I don't so much like this in Paleoplace either.

“1896 - 3000”

Since: Apr 09

Frankfurt am Main, Germany

#92 Dec 4, 2010
Oops. Double post.
Inkayacu paracasensis

Ireland

#93 Dec 5, 2010
Can we not continue this at Paleoplace?

I am no atheist, nor am I stereotyper. If I was, that post would look like "You and all Christians are afraid of God." I did not say this. I said, "You are a typical Christian. You are afraid that God will punish you." This means that I believe a TYPICAL Christian is like this, not EVERY Christian. You say you are not attacking me, but, yet, this has nothing to do with the debate. You say I am forcing it on people? Please, then, come to PP, and prove me wrong.

“1896 - 3000”

Since: Apr 09

Frankfurt am Main, Germany

#94 Dec 5, 2010
I've already proven you wrong in this very thread.

You assumed that we were typical Christians, and that was stereotyping.

Yes, I am not attacking you. You think this has nothing to do with the debate? You yourself said that I was attacking you, so I reasoned out why I was actually not.

Yes, I say that you seem to be forcing it on people, because you keep labeling us as pathetic, and that we don't accept your facts.

I don't have to come to Paleoplace and start another long debate of about 100 posts. You know I'm just too lazy to do that. I don't need to, really.

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#95 Dec 5, 2010
Thats the point. God does not exist primarily in this Dimension/ reality
Therefore, he would not be real. Speculating and bringing up some random excuse that he is in a different dimension is, quite frankly, hilarious.
if he is all powerfull he would be able to defy logic and be able to lift something that, theoretically, he could not.
You dont get it. IF he was all powerful he would have the capability to create something he could NOT lift. Id he cannot create something like that, then he is not all powerful cause there is at least one thing he cannot do.
This is actually funny. You are directly stating a law that should govern omnipotent beings.
The only laws that can be applied to omnipotent beings are either the same as the rest of the universe (in which case, they wouldnt be omnipotent to begin with), or make up some clearly impossible scenario just to try and cling to their belief in the modern world.
The problem is,saying that god resides in another dimension or something has as much backing as me saying god was eaten by an omnipotent caterpillar. Sound ridiculous? You bet, but in all honesty, which has the most backing? God, or the caterpillar?
Spinosaur King

London, UK

#96 Dec 5, 2010
Spinodontosaurus wrote:
Therefore, he would not be real. Speculating and bringing up some random excuse that he is in a different dimension is, quite frankly, hilarious.
Its a totally plausable answer. And just because hi say he resides in another dimension does not mean that he cannot exist. Even scientists believe in other dimensions.
You dont get it. IF he was all powerful he would have the capability to create something he could NOT lift. Id he cannot create something like that, then he is not all powerful cause there is at least one thing he cannot do.
If he is all powerfull, he would still be able top list something he theoretically couldn't. This is something we can hardly wrap our brains around, but, if he is all powerfull, he can do ANYTHING.
The only laws that can be applied to omnipotent beings are either the same as the rest of the universe (in which case, they wouldnt be omnipotent to begin with), or make up some clearly impossible scenario just to try and cling to their belief in the modern world.
The problem is,saying that god resides in another dimension or something has as much backing as me saying god was eaten by an omnipotent caterpillar. Sound ridiculous? You bet, but in all honesty, which has the most backing? God, or the caterpillar?
Thats where yopu are wrong. An omniponent being can do anthing. he created the universe, and, in oredr to do that, muist be outside of time and space.
For that last bit, i'd say that God has the most backing for these reasons:

1. Who believes that caterpillars are omniponent?
2. The brillaint designs of the universe are evidence that it was designed by a powerfull being, among other evidence.
3. What evidence is there that a caterpillar is omniponent XD?
4. Atleast God is the center of a religion.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#97 Dec 5, 2010
Everybody, just argue about this somewhere alse. I, being an athiest, have no interest in this matter.
Inkayacu paracasensis

Ireland

#98 Dec 5, 2010
You are clearly not open to discussion. Proved me wrong? LOL. Open your eyes. No offence, but you are a lost cause.
Inkayacu paracasensis

Ireland

#99 Dec 5, 2010
That was at Ernst.
Paleoman

Keene, NH

#100 Dec 5, 2010
Inkayacu paracasensis wrote:
You are clearly not open to discussion. Proved me wrong? LOL. Open your eyes. No offence, but you are a lost cause.
I just love how all the people arguing that God exists come out with these huge long posts and how Paudie comes out with a few sentences which sends a message to all of us that he should stick to dinosaurs.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#101 Dec 5, 2010
Please?
Inkayacu paracasensis

Ireland

#102 Dec 5, 2010
Paleoman wrote:
<quoted text>
I just love how all the people arguing that God exists come out with these huge long posts and how Paudie comes out with a few sentences which sends a message to all of us that he should stick to dinosaurs.
What?
mattking

Brandon, Canada

#103 Dec 5, 2010
Spinosaur King wrote:
<quoted text>
Its a totally plausable answer. And just because hi say he resides in another dimension does not mean that he cannot exist. Even scientists believe in other dimensions.
<quoted text>
If he is all powerfull, he would still be able top list something he theoretically couldn't. This is something we can hardly wrap our brains around, but, if he is all powerfull, he can do ANYTHING.
<quoted text>
Thats where yopu are wrong. An omniponent being can do anthing. he created the universe, and, in oredr to do that, muist be outside of time and space.
For that last bit, i'd say that God has the most backing for these reasons:
1. Who believes that caterpillars are omniponent?
2. The brillaint designs of the universe are evidence that it was designed by a powerfull being, among other evidence.
3. What evidence is there that a caterpillar is omniponent XD?
4. Atleast God is the center of a religion.
Exactly, and also because God is all powerful and doesn't want to destroy his creation, the number one thing he most do is have no evidence that he exists. It is human choose to think what they want and god allows everyone freedom that is the why god allows everything to be free flowing
mattking

Brandon, Canada

#104 Dec 5, 2010
If God just came to earth or where ever all the time and said do what I say and I well repay you then we would become dependent on him, thats why he remains in heaven or other dimension that may hold heaven in it.

Since: Nov 10

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

#105 Dec 5, 2010
i don't know about you guys, but i'm a deist. something created everything, but everything happened on it's own after that.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#106 Dec 5, 2010
Look, I can't stand this religous talk, please discuss it elsewhere.
THE ALMIGHTY CATERPILLAR

San Francisco, CA

#107 Dec 5, 2010
Neither can I.

BTW, Spino king, there is the same amount of evidence that a caterpillar is omnipotent that god exists/is omnipotent.

“BOOMER WILL LIVE”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#108 Dec 5, 2010
Its a totally plausable answer. And just because hi say he resides in another dimension does not mean that he cannot exist.
But that does not mean he DOES exist. For all we know, god might reside in some far flung dimension and hunts demonic cows atop flying therizinosaurs. But the best thingto do is go with the most backed up and logical answer. Sorry to say but, not only is there no evidence god lives in some other dimension (or even exists for that matter), but looking at it logically an omnipotent being MAKES NO SENSE.
Even scientists believe in other dimensions.
Like who?
If he is all powerfull, he would still be able top list something he theoretically couldn't. This is something we can hardly wrap our brains around, but, if he is all powerfull, he can do ANYTHING.
You can say this all you want, but your last phrase contradicts the rest of the sentance. Partly for the reason Paudie originally pointed out, and that i have stated multiple times.
Ie, he should be able to lift X, but he created it specifically so he couldnt lift it. But because he is omnipotent, he can do anything, so he can lift it. But because he is omnipotent, X was made heavy enough by himself so he CANNOT lift it. It basically delves into an endless "yes he can, no he cant" exchange. Which is why such a being existing is EXTREMELY improbable.
Thats where yopu are wrong. An omniponent being can do anthing. he created the universe, and, in oredr to do that, muist be outside of time and space.
Correction, you SPECULATE/belive he created the universe based on a couple thosand year old book says.
1. Who believes that caterpillars are omniponent?
MEH!(sarcasm btw).
The brillaint designs of the universe are evidence that it was designed by a powerfull being
It is NOT evidence that it was creatde by a powerful being, and our universe has some serious flaws. Ever wanted to go visit your mate at the opposite end of the universe? Good luck getting there. Ever wanted to take a stroll to the moon? Good luck with the walking, and the breathing.
And what about predatory life forms? They have to kill the poor innocent herbivores just to SURVIVE. Kinda evil, dont ya think?
3. What evidence is there that a caterpillar is omniponent XD?
It says so in the back of my friends maths book :P
4. Atleast God is the center of a religion.
Religion is, again, based on BELIEF, not FACT. So god can be in as many or as little religions as he pleases, but they are still not actual evidence of his existance.
Exactly, and also because God is all powerful and doesn't want to destroy his creation, the number one thing he most do is have no evidence that he exists
Havent you seen the crazy things religous nations get themselves into? Sounds to me like keeping the 'truth' hidden from us is causing utter chaos in the world.
The way i see it, he is also rather, how should i say it, decieving. I mean, its like this:
2You can choose whether to belive in me, i will not tell you the truth about my existance. However, if you not worship me, you go to hell. Its your choice from now on".
Blackmail much?

Btw, the 'omnipotent catterpillar' is a little joke me and my friends have going arounf. Its meant to be a pun on the fact that one of my favorite pokemon, Weedle, is pretty useless in battle. Hence why my username changed to 'EpicWeedle' for a while.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dinosaur Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Spinosaurus vs. t-rex (Dec '07) 13 hr Jinfengopteryx 5,714
Jakesaurus Imperator Vs T rex 23 hr Mr Bloodwing 16
Ethan Dino is back! (Jun '09) Tue Ethan Dino2 25
Which Godzilla do you like best? (May '09) Tue tyrannospinus 12
Spinosaurus vs King Kong Tue tyrannospinus 1
Jurrasic Fight Night! (Oct '11) Tue tyrannospinus 74
Spinosaurus the adaptable Mon Tiborg 3
•••

Dinosaur People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••