Omniscience vs Omnipotence (special for Jonathan)

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2003-04-21 10:48pm

Like I've said, both these attirbutes would mean that God merely created the universe simply to have something to destroy. Knowing exactly what was going to ever happen in the universe (by definition of omniscience) while he made it, knowing what would betray him and what wouldn't, and how he would destroy it in the end, and who would return back with him to heaven in a meaninglessly contrived state of blissful nothingness, he went ahead and created the universe; a purposeless experiment that had no reason to be executed, other than to apparently fill the needs of some all-powerful being. I'd daresay this makes El-Shaddai the most diabolically evil being in mythology.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-04-21 11:31pm

Jonathan wrote:
Durandal wrote:You missed the "Boyd vs. The Jehovah's Witnesses" spectacle on ASVS. It was very amusing.
It's still going. I'm waiting for Enigma's next reply. I think we've each written a doctoral thesis by this point. Mine's better of course.

Enigma basically said that he wasn't going to take it any further because even he thinks that your version of God is a sadistic asshole who loves no one, and he's a Jehovah's Witness.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-21 11:34pm

Durandal wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
Durandal wrote:You missed the "Boyd vs. The Jehovah's Witnesses" spectacle on ASVS. It was very amusing.
It's still going. I'm waiting for Enigma's next reply. I think we've each written a doctoral thesis by this point. Mine's better of course.
Enigma basically said that he wasn't going to take it any further because even he thinks that your version of God is a sadistic asshole who loves no one, and he's a Jehovah's Witness.

Wow, Johnny Boyd has been labelled as an intolerant fundie by a Jehovah's Witness. That's simply amazing. Of course, given some of the bullshit that Boyd has spouted, it's not surprising (see my sig).

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-04-22 12:35am

Jonathan wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:The funniest thing about all this is that one of Jonathan's first posts during his triumphant return to the board this weekend was to insinuate that it was unfair of me to slap a "fundamentalist moron" title on him. Since then, he has conveniently proven to the satisfaction of every observer, religious or not, that the title is absolutely deserved.
Good to see you're putting your telepathy to good use their Mike. Or did you conduct a poll? I trust you took sampling errors into consideration and all that?

To save up some of Mike's telepathy, I'm going to say that I agree that Johnahtahnh is a Fundie Moron. Anyone who agrees please say so, so Mike doesn't have to read our minds. Thank you.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-04-22 12:37am

Wait, now that I think about it, there should be a poll here asking if Johnhahthanhnh is deserving of the title Fundamentalist Moron, since it is standard operational procedure in these forums before slapping a custom title. In fact usually the people make a poll ASKING Mike or the other mods to slap the bitch... I mean the title.

So yes Johnhhyh, I think there's a poll. Can you be any more stupid?

Graeme Dice · Post by **Graeme Dice** » 2003-04-22 12:39am

Durandal wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:The funniest thing about all this is that one of Jonathan's first posts during his triumphant return to the board this weekend was to insinuate that it was unfair of me to slap a "fundamentalist moron" title on him. Since then, he has conveniently proven to the satisfaction of every observer, religious or not, that the title is absolutely deserved.
You missed the "Boyd vs. The Jehovah's Witnesses" spectacle on ASVS. It was very amusing.

I think I'm going to have to agree with both of you here in that, even though I get along well with him, his behaviour is definetly fundamentalist.

Jonathan · Post by **Jonathan** » 2003-04-22 08:12am

Graeme Dice wrote:I think I'm going to have to agree with both of you here in that, even though I get along well with him, his behaviour is definetly fundamentalist.

Well, I would agree I"m a Fundamentalist and proud of it. It's the moron bit I'm not so fond of it. Didn't realise you were posting here. How're the exams going? Or have they mercifully finished?

Jonathan · Post by **Jonathan** » 2003-04-22 08:18am

Darth Wong wrote:Wow, Johnny Boyd has been labelled as an intolerant fundie by a Jehovah's Witness. That's simply amazing. Of course, given some of the bullshit that Boyd has spouted, it's not surprising (see my sig).

Actually, he didn't say that. He wished me fell and disagreed with my interpretation of certain things. We were having a fairly passionate, but quite civil debate that I greatly enjoyed and was able to go through without anyone callling each other names. Unlike here. If only there were more of you like Enigma.

Jonathan · Post by **Jonathan** » 2003-04-22 08:19am

Durandal wrote:Enigma basically said that he wasn't going to take it any further because even he thinks that your version of God is a sadistic asshole who loves no one, and he's a Jehovah's Witness.

That's not true. He said he wasn't going to go through it any more because we were just going in circles with neither of us budging from our position.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-22 09:05am

Jonathan wrote:
Durandal wrote:Enigma basically said that he wasn't going to take it any further because even he thinks that your version of God is a sadistic asshole who loves no one, and he's a Jehovah's Witness.
That's not true. He said he wasn't going to go through it any more because we were just going in circles with neither of us budging from our position.

Then why did you say you were waiting for his next reply, not-so-subtly acting as though this was somehow a concession on his part?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-22 09:34am

Jonathan wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Wow, Johnny Boyd has been labelled as an intolerant fundie by a Jehovah's Witness. That's simply amazing. Of course, given some of the bullshit that Boyd has spouted, it's not surprising (see my sig).
Actually, he didn't say that. He wished me fell and disagreed with my interpretation of certain things. We were having a fairly passionate, but quite civil debate that I greatly enjoyed and was able to go through without anyone callling each other names. Unlike here. If only there were more of you like Enigma.

Yes, I'm sure you would be overjoyed if the world was full of Jehovah's Witnesses instead of freethinkers. Mind you, you shouldn't complain about our use of insults; you routinely use them as an excuse for style over substance fallacies which you use to evade the main thrust of any argument.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-22 09:43am

Jonathan wrote:
Graeme Dice wrote:I think I'm going to have to agree with both of you here in that, even though I get along well with him, his behaviour is definetly fundamentalist.
Well, I would agree I"m a Fundamentalist and proud of it. It's the moron bit I'm not so fond of it.

"Fundamentalist" automatically implies "moron". The title "fundamentalist moron" is technically redundant for that reason, albeit still useful for those people who don't recognize that fact yet.

Jonathan · Post by **Jonathan** » 2003-04-22 11:34am

Darth Wong wrote:Then why did you say you were waiting for his next reply, not-so-subtly acting as though this was somehow a concession on his part?

Because I was letting him know that I was happy to continue the debate if he wanted to. I never mentioned accepting concessions. I'm not into petty point scoring, but rather honest intellectual debate.