At 11:44 AM 8/18/95 CDT, you wrote:
>>>I think it is logically impossible for a single entity to be
simultaneously
>>omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly moral.
>>If he were trapped in our three dimensional little view of things, yes, I
>>agree.
>>Could you explain your logic if I am missing something?
>It has nothing to do with spatial dimensions. Logic does not depend
>on space or time.
Then on what does it depend, the limitations of what our finite minds can
comprehend?
>>>For example, I can know fear. God cannot, because God also knows that
>>>nothing can hurt him. He can be all-knowing or all-powerful, but not both
>>>at once.
>>God knows fear, not as you know it. It is one of the tools of my enemy,
but
>If God does not know fear as I know it, he doesn't know everything does he?
>That is the whole point.
You know what I meant...
>>I won't go into a theology lesson. God is not afraid, if that is what you
>>are implying, but He can feel hurt, nothing can defeat Him if that is your
>>point. He says it hurts Him when His creation rebels against Him. Why
can't
>>he be all knowing and yet all powerful?
>I didn't say he can't know hurt. Why bring that up? I already explained
>why he can't know fear. That is sufficient to show that God is logically
>impossible. If you believe logically impossible things can't exist (I do)
>then you will believe that God does not exist. If you think logically
>impossible things can exist, then you might as well believe in everything
>mythical if it amuses you.
I don't see the relevance of fear, I am not afraid of anything.
Through God, all things can be made possible, that is the "logic".
Is your logic limited to what you know? Or choose to know? Yes.
>>>There is not much to say about how the big bang model does not contradict
>>>any of my current beliefs. It is a scientific model. It doesn't invoke
>>>any supernatural explanations. What do you want?
>>Is it because you believe one group of people over another? That would be
>>being biased and "closed-minded"... And that would contradict your
beliefs,
>>would it not?
>No, I don't believe I should accept every possible theory in the interest
>of being open-minded. That is called "stupid". I base my beliefs on
>available evidence and logical consistency. Available evidence suggests
>that Christianity, like every other religion, is a creation of humanity.
>It is not the first and it isn't the most popular. It is not even the most
>consistent or most explanatory.
Can you show me your consistant facts for or against Christianity or non
Christianity. Are we really more intelligent than our ancestors? Who knows,
what we call legend, may have really existed. Who has the right and with
what evidence can we say otherwise?
>However I can see that your faith is very important to you, so you
>are welcome to it. You should really stop asking questions, though,
>because the answers can only hurt your faith.
None have hurt my faith. If anything it strengthens it because I can see
where the Devil is working.
I see that you now understand that I walk on faith and not by sight,
appearances can be decieving. It is God who means everything, and His
word,which does not conflict with true science. As a matter of fact I have
only seen the principles in the Bible work. His word has never failed.
Am I upsetting you?
Take care,
In Him,
-JDF-
jfern@ltsrv.ltnet.kelly.af.mil