Look, I genuinely think you are being a bit delusional here, and let me explain why. You seem to have opinions of your logical argumentation that exceed reality. Take the simple premise “God is perfect”. You wasted time equivocating on the meaning of this word without realising that it wasn’t important to the argument at all. You could have substituted perfect with A and followed that God created A-ly. All things in the universe (tsunamis etc) merely contribute to the notion that the world is A.
The meaning of "perfect" is not a irrelevant. If we don't agree on what "perfect" means an argument that depends on describing reality, the world, or God makes no sense. The reason you think it doesn't matter because then you are free to poor whatever meaning you want into it and play around. I'm interested in making rational arguments and common ground is needed. I can see that we are not using the same definitions so I wanted to do was clarify what you mean. You are the one who said philosophy was needed to establish epistemology - how do we know what we say we know. You have refused to do that and then claim I am delusional. Cute.
And then you spout nonsense like this: “Too hot for you”
I apologize that I obviously offended you. But what other conclusion do you expect me to draw. All I have gotten from you were attacks about how I don't understand what you are saying when I have clearly stated what you are saying, answered your questions, and you ignore mine. Either this is too much for you or you don't understand what I am saying. Which is it?
The reason I am refusing to continue debating you is because, not only do you keep making blunders as above, but you make comments like this:
Johnny P, you say will refuse to debate me and then go on for several more paragraphs. You'd have more time it you would directly answer me.
“I'm saying that God in his omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and omniscent chose to create a life-sustaining universe that now has plate tectonics. When the earth was first formed - there was one land mass. One of two things is true. When God first made earth, there was no earthquakes and it was not part of the prefect design or earthquakes are a consequence of the fall. I don't know but both of these possibilities fit the Christian worldview and does not not conflict with science.”
This really is utterly stupid. Harsh, but in reality, not harsh enough. To admit that you entertain both of those theories is enough to warn me off ever conversing with you again.
What part of it offend you? The thought that there was once a time when all the land on earth was one land mass or the thought that our sins and depravity caused the earth to deteriorate to the point that life-ending natural disasters were brought into being? If you knew about plate tectonics, you could not have a problem with the first statement. It's science.. As for the second, it's a theological thought. Agree or disagree - whatever but to dismiss either out of hand without explanation is either ignorant or lazy. Take your pick, I don't know.
Look, from this comment it is abundantly clear that we simply CANNOT debate. Why? Well, the world is full of people making empirical observations and creating (testable) theories based on these observations. These can be disproved using the scientific method, the best method for achieving cumulative accuracy that there is.
Empirical evidence tells us that the earth was at one time one land mass and that continent eventually broke up due to guess what? Plate Tectonics. Just what exactly do you think that science can disprove about what I've written? Couldn't you have been clearer?
YOU, however, take those observations, and sweep them under the carpet / stuff them down your pants / pretend they don’t exist. Your two ‘theories’ or ‘ideas’ are hilarious.
You mean the earth wasn't one land mass one time? Do you really wanna argue that?
They are hilarious because if you knew the first thing about cosmology or geology, you would know that they are empirically disprovable.
Where is your evidence that the earth wasn't one land mass?
We know EXACTLY why and how plate tectonics work. We know how planets form. Heck, scientists reckon they have even empirically seen it off the star T Chamaeleontis. So it is pointless debating with you when you can simply claim any theory out of your arse while ignoring all empirical data. It renders the collection of all such data pointless.
And exactly how does any of that disprove what I said? C'mon you must be able to be clearer than that.You would have to throw out Pangea and what we know from Geology and how plate tectonics works. Wither you are mistaken or you have not clearly said or thought about what you are trying to say.
It is my opinion that you should never receive medical help, you have no right to use the internet and modern technology. All of these things are a result of the scientific method which helps to accumulate knowledge and develop everything.
That has always seemed like one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard. Science is how I make living. Science is one of God's gifts to humanity. I wouldn't deny it anymore than I would refuse to breath. And you have yet to show how anything I have said is scientifically wrong. You just don't like it. I don't care about your opinion.
In my opinion, Johnny P, you seem to be just making excuses. Adding insult to injury with you condescension.
You, however, decide to ignore any science that may harm your worldview, and use only that which doesn’t harm your worldview in a world of cherry-picking.
Show me where I have done that.
Such double standards are hypocritical. My partner’s daughter in her first year of a geology degree could disprove your crazy ideas in an instance. Go and read some cosmology. Go and learn.
Again - was the earth one land mass at a single time in the distant past or not? Won't answer or can't? I bet she could.
Don’t argue out of your depth. Get the philosophical training and the ancillary knowledge to deserve a place at the debating table with people who clearly have a better idea of science and logic. Good day to you, and don’t you dare say anything like ‘it’s too hot for me’ since you seem to struggle to argue yourself out of a paper bag and I really do have better things to do.
Johnny P, you won't even step into the paper bag and won't even agree to making some epistemological foundation. You have not shown that you have any idea of science and logic so I really don't feel bad if you never comment here again I'll just pray that God has mercy on you and bring him to yourself. Some one may get through to you even if I don't.
Incidentally, I was reading the conversation you had on DC some time ago and I had to cringe.
Examples of your superb logic:
"He isn't right because he's smarter or has some special interpretation you are too stupid to understand. He is right because he agrees with God"
I guess you would have to prove that God doesn't agree or that there is no God,. Good luck with that.
"your own sins affect others around you - even those not yet born. "
And your problem is?
"That is true no matter who you and where you live. I'm suggesting that God created everything and placed you in the best possible place at the best possible time with all the life experiences that would best lead you to God."
Acts 17. Can you demonstrate this as false?
".I'm not a universalist because the sacrifice was too high for God to redeem His people for everyone to just get a pass."
Do you know what a universalist is?
"I didn't say Adam and Eve were enslaved to sin...We are." - but God knew that Adam and Eve would do what they did at creation, so who is ultimately responsible. He chose that outcome over and above any other outcome. Oh yeah, and you're a fool to think Adam and Eve actually existed. Again, empirically false.
"all people are evil and deserving of Hell."
Tell me, how would you go about disproving that scientifically? Again, I think defining "evil" would help you understand what I said, because you probably did not. Oh wait, can we try something simpler? How about using your "knowledge" of the Christian Worldview to show that is now what Christians believe.
"I'm not a young earth creationist and neither" and yet you believe in Adam and Eve and some very strange ideas of plate tectonics etc.
Guess you don't know what a Young Earth Creationist is. Given the level of ignorance of plate tectonics and the Bible you have shown, can't say I'm surprised.
By and large, Johnny P., you claim I am not worth your time talking to yet you look up my previous posts and you just go on and on about how wrong I am with no substantiation or context or demonstration. Who are you that your opinion should carry weight. Seems all your writing is good for is instigating facepalms. Thanks for the laughs however.
What had happen' was.....: FacePalm of th Day #134 - Responding to Johnny P World and does God have Free Will? Part 3