On 2/5/2013 6:04 AM, Jason Resch wrote:

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com <mailto:allco...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    2013/2/5 Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com <mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>>

        On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:04 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
        <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

            On 2/3/2013 7:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote:

                On 2/3/13, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net 

                    On 2/3/2013 8:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

                        It simpler to generalize the notion of God so that 
                        basically all
                        correct machines
                        believes in God, and in some theories question like "is 
God a
                        person" can
                        be an open

                        But you have a vocabulary problem related to the fact 
that you
                        cannot cut
                        with your
                        education which has impose to you only one notion of 

                    Why should there be more than one notion designated by 

                Do you not agree that there are multiple religions and each is 
free to
                designate its own God or Gods?  To choose one sect of one 
                God as the standard God for all atheists to disbelieve in is
                favoritism.  Why do the atheists choose the Abrahamic God over 
the God
                the Hindus, the Sikhs, the Zoroastrians, the Deists, the 
                or any of the myriads of religions since lost to history?

            Because that's the god of theism - hence a-theism.

        So are you also an a-deist?  What about an a-Brahmanist, or

                You say it
                is because it is the most popular.  Even if that were so, 
                isn't about rejecting one God, it rejects all Gods.

            Not at all.  All the atheists I know allow that a deist god is more 
            to exist than a theist god.

        They still (I would think) put that probability less than 50%.

                You would have to
                be quite an expert to disqualify every religion's (and indeed, 
                person's) notion of God.

            I don't have to 'disqualify' them (whatever that means); I just 
fail to put
            any credence in them.

        How do you differentiate yourself from agnostics, who also fail to put 
        credence in them?

                    The Abrahamic
                    religions use
                    the word to designate a particular notion: an omniscience, 
                    benevolent creator
                    person who wants us to worship him.

                Not all do, which you failed to account for in your below 

Not all what do?

        Not all Christians define God as an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent 
        person who wants us to worship him.

    Then they're not Christians... christianity is defined by a set of dogmas 
(hey dogma
    is what define religions), so if you doubt the basic dogmas of 
christianity, why
    would you call yourself a christian ??

So Thomas Aquinas was not a christian, because he understood the incompatibility of omniscience and omnipotence.

He understood there could be a conflict and he proceeded to redefine 'omnipotence' to meand 'do anything not self-contradictory', then you could invoke the 'nature of God' to say that some things, e.g. sinning, would be contradictory.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to