God is almost omnipotent. He has many limits

First topic message reminder :

God is almost omnipotent. He has many limits.

Omnipotent is defined in part as having power or authority without limits IOW, almighty.

Seems to me that God has a few limits.

He cannot reproduce true.
He cannot enjoy sex.
He cannot reproduce without bestiality or cross species breeding.
He can only reproduce half breed chimeras like Jesus.
He could not create a heaven without Satan.
He could not create Eden without evil in it.
He cannot control wayward demons or devils.
He cannot sin, although scripture says he does.
He cannot live without needs like adoration, honour, obedience, love.
He cannot accept a soul into heaven without us accepting Jesus and human sacrifice.
He could not forgive sin without having Jesus sacrificed.
Feel free to add to this list.

How then can Christians say that God omnipotent, all-powerful and without limits when he clearly has many?

Regards
DL

Dr, Sheldon,
The scientists only used that which already existed and the method used would not be of a natural origin but based on a complicated method that would be outside anyone, with common sense, to believe could come about by chance.

Did god create that synthetic genome?  If not then how are they studying only what god created?

Your claim was absurd hubris with no attempt at evidence.Simply assuming your chosen deity created everything and using hubris to shift the claim to include what humans create is absurd and speaks for itself. 


Getting back on topic religions have an appalling track record of checking immoral acts and atrocities.  From the crusades to the Inquisition and the Holocaust,  right up to the present endemic child abuse in the RCC and the Jewish suppression and abuse of human rights, matched in depravity by their Palestinian neighbours.  Religion has no claim to moral ascendancy at all that I can see, quite the opposite.

Greatest I am,
I feel you have matters a little astray.

Because God chooses not to do certain things does not mean he is not capable of doing so.

Dr, Shedlon,
Because you have certain evil people within a community it does not mean the whole community is rotten.

In every aspect of life you will find evil and wrong doing, this does not mean that those involved bringing a community into disrepute makes that which is involved wrong, it means that the wrong doers are bringing it into disrepute as individuals.

I didn't cite individuals but religions and religious insitituons. It's absurd to wave these behaviours away with no explanation. You're implying the no true Scotsman fallacy again.  I've already linked textbook explanations of this logical fallacy. 

You can't simply claim a person isn't religious or christian when their beliefs compell them to commit atrocities.  

Look at your own homophobic remarks in the other thread.  Prompted unequivocally by your own personal religious beliefs.

Dr, Shedlon,
I have never made any homophobic remarks, I have always said what the dictionary's definition of homosexuality is, if you cannot accept what the dictionary says that is not my fault nor is it a crime to refer to the dictionary.

I fear that it is the misinterpretation that makes some people commit that which they should not.

Polyglide,  you have repeatedly made the most offensive and bigoted homophobic remarks. Your lie about the dictionary definition containing the word pervert is as untrue as it is stupid. Again both boatlady and I actually posted the dictionary definition. You have never done so. I even provided a link to the OED online.  

Just why you think you can lie like this I really don't know, but it's absurd to think everyone can't read what you have previously written. You ought to hang your head in shame for lying again as I have stuck rigidly to the dictionary definition. It is you who stubbornly and idiotically refuses even now to accept that definition.

You really ought to think how such persistentdishonest reflects both on you and your beliefs.

Dr, Shedlon,
All anyone has to do is read all the relevant definitions for any word and understand the implications which you are sadly lacking in.

Dr, Shedlon,
Anyone can read the definition of anything and decide for themselves who is right and who is wrong, I leave it to the sensible to decide for themselves on this matter.

"   by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Yesterday at 4:43 pm

Polyglide,  you have repeatedly made the most offensive and bigoted homophobic remarks. Your lie about the dictionary definition containing the word pervert is as untrue as it is stupid. Again both boatlady and I actually posted the dictionary definition. You have never done so. I even provided a link to the OED online."

I've no need to retype this, if you wish to portray yourself as this much of a brazen liar then who am I to resist. I'll happily help you embarrass and shame yourself with the simple truth. 

Dr, Shedlon,
The dictionary definition of homophobia is, one who hates and fears homosexuality.

I have two close homosexual friends both of whom I love in a difference manner to sexuality, I do not in any way fear them.

So irrespective of any other matter you cannot in any way call me homophobic.

As for the OED definition of perversion, the diversion of something from it's original and proper course.

Ian's dictionary definition, sexual behaviour that is considered abnormal and unacceptable.

Pervert, to turn aside or pervert from the right purpose or use.

They are the correct definitions and it is up to anyone to feel their meaning.

One thing I can't abide is a liar. So even though I'm on holidays posting on a phone with poor intermittent hotel Wi fi,  I have traced two posts, one of mine from Feb 27 plainly stating that homosexuality is not genetic, and more importantly one by you implying it might be. 

WHERE I FIRST DENIED HOMOSEXUALITY WAS DETERMINED BY GENES.
by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Feb 17, 2015 4:51 pm

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t408p320-religion-gay-artists-and-homophobia

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:
I made no claim that homosexuality was genetic, and again unless heterosexuality is genetic I fail to see what point you're trying to make

WHERE YOU A LITTLE LATER CLAIMED IT WAS:

 by polyglide on Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:37 pm

rape hurts, of course it does and is a henious crime,however, what if the desire to do so is on the same level as homosexuality, involved in ones genes etc;

For shame for repeatedly lying about what I had posted.

It's also worth pointing out that you (polyglide ) have since denied more than once comparing homosexuality to appalling crimes and criminality.  Yet your post above clearly implies being gay and rape are comparable behaviours. You've also denied decrying gay people or making homophobic remarks. When quite clearly likening being gay to the desire to commit rape or peadophile attacks on children which you have also done is both homophobic and an appalling offensive derogation.

PG - just stop with the dictionary definitions, please - I think we all know what your prejudices are by now - quibbling about dictionary definitions does not make the any more legitimate.

I really don't want to close down any more threads

boatlady,
The dictionary definions are the means of mankind determining what is and what is not according to accepted practices.

There no dispute regarding anything I have stated, I have given the dictionary and the pages etc; for every definition I have quoted.

You, as Dr, Sheldon, are confused between what anyone feels about homosexuality and what it is.

It is like saying you cannot mention meat when discussing a butcher because it would upset a vegitarian.

You can close down as many threads as you wish it will not change the facts.

I take great exception to you calling me hompophobic because it is obvious you do not know what is means.

I have at no time indicated any predudice regarding homosexuality, it appears to me you are unable to understand exactly the difference between discussing a matter and drawing unfounded conclusions.

Dr, Sheldon,
Get someone to explain why we have dictionaries and that compromising words to suit has not basis.

Dr, Shedlon,
There was a lovely black lady on television the other night she was pointing out that in certain parts of America black people were being treated as animals, is this where you get your thoughts from?.

I have seen the word perv used in an endearing way, when someone has done something [not sexual] out of the ordinary and a friend has said ;you little perv etc;

It is obvious you have a mental problem with words, there are, I believe, centres where you could get help.

Polymouth, your religious bigotry and rank stupidity are not nearly as impressive as you seem to think. Nor am I remotely intimidated by your asinine and dishonest lies about the dictionary definitions that YOU, and you alone, are trying to misrepresent. 

As boatlady has said, and many others before her, including me, the dictionary definition of homosexuality does not contain any reference to the word perversion.  That's just your own prejudiced opinion.

I see your despicable beliefs now extend to using accusations of racism, rather than address the OED definition of a word. After your nasty lying tirade in the previous posts this speaks for itself.  You sir are as repulsive an example of religious zealotry as one could have the misfortune to encounter. 

Countless posters have offered intelligence and erudition in a vain attempt to educate your ignorance and bigotry.  

All have stopped bothering with you. I may have to seriously ask why I am bothering with anyone who takes such delight in ignorance, bigotry,  and childish insults. 

Grow up.

Bravo.  Gay people deserve the same rights as heterosexual people.  No more and no less.

Dr, Sheldon,
Of course ALL peole should have the same rights under the law.

This includes homosexuals as well as any other activity that is within the law.

It should also include black people who as the South African black people have shown, can teach us a lot about tollerance and forgiveness, aq great pity some people think otherwise.

Only you have posted an opinion contrary to this. It's deeply sad that people put their own subjective beliefs before the rights of their fellow human beings.  

I hope you've learned a lesson, but in all honesty I think you have not since you have ignored all facts, evidence,  and even the dictionary. What's more you've shown no sign you'll ever acknowledge your attitudes towards gay people are homophobic and therefore deeply pernicious.  

Your inability to even acknowledge the prejudice you feel to the gay people you claim to know speaks for itself. Not once have you acknowledged what such obvious hypocrisy must mean.

Your equally shameful post implying racism on my part is despicable.  Your attempt to deny yet again the dictionary definition of a word, this time animal simply speaks for itself.

[size=51][size=48]by [/size][size=48]polyglide[/size][size=48] Today at 12:35 pm

[/size]Of course ALL peole should have the same rights under the law.[/size]

Including getting married? In a church? Or renting a room in a B&B without any prejudice?

I only ask as your claim seems oddly incongruous when compared to previous posts you've made.

Dr, Shedlon,
Either you are being stupid on purpose or just unable to appreciate what is said.

A Christian couple should have the right to have in their home anyone they choose and not have others they do not want in, or are they to be denied their rights?

If I thought a homosexual couple would feel uncomfortouble if I wanted to stay in their home I would go somewhere else and I would expect a homosexual couple to feel the same about a Christian couple, it is called common curtesy and there was plenty of other places available to the homosexuals concerned.

As far as I am aware homosexual couples can marry in church, however, as a church can refuse to marry certain other couples it would be prdudicial not to be able to do the same for evryone else.

I have no idea why you continually bring up homosexuality, I have no problem with it.

It wasn't their home though as has been explained multiple times to you it was a B&B as well. They have the right to exclude anyone they want from their home. They don't have the right to open it to the public then discriminate as they did.

This has been pointed out numerous times, and consequently the stupidity and inabilityto understand is not mine.

Polyglide wrote:I have no idea why you continually bring up homosexuality, I have no problem with it.

For once I agree totally, and accept you genuinely have no idea why this was salient to your claim. Nor do I have any problem accepting you think that the problem here is everyone else's and does not stem from your homophobic prejudice.  


Sadly the truth litters several threads,  and yet again I'm happy for anyone reading to decide the truth from what's been posted. 

Dr, Shedlon,
I am not predudiced towards homosexuality, I do not agree with it but accept it as fact and have no other feelings one way or the other.

It is amazing how you can read ones mind and yet not understand plain English.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Shedlon,
                I am not predudiced towards homosexuality, I do not agree with it but accept it as fact and have no other feelings one way or the other.

                It is amazing how you can read ones mind and yet not understand plain English.

We're all aware that you think you're not prejudiced against gay people, just as that old Christian couple with the B&B probably thought they weren't prejudiced as well, but you and they absolutely are. Your posts, and their actions prove this unequivocally. Your use of pejorative language repeatedly, your lies about the dictionary definition of homosexuality being defined as a perversion, your dishonest use of semantics using a thesaurus when this lie was utterly exposed, all prove you are very much prejudiced against gay people. I'd think you'd want to steer clear of other posters grasp of English with gems like predudiced (sic), and the hilarity of that double comma at the start of every single post, or the equally hilarious Shedlon (sic).

polyglide wrote:Dr, Shedlon, As far as I am aware homosexual couples can marry in church, however, as a church can refuse to marry certain other couples it would be prdudicial not to be able to do the same for evryone else.

The problem is that you have stated plainly in your posts that you don't think gay people should have exactly the same right to marry as heterosexual people. So this seems like yet another dishonest contradiction to me?

Dr, Sheldon,
The spelling errors are because I have not the same facilities as you, although you have and have on present posts made some spelling errors and obviously do not know America starts with a capital letter.

I have not the time to check every post for errors as half way through some posts the material just vanishes.

Common sense and the truth explained with spelling mistakes involved is far better than the drivel you often post.

Since that's nothing to do with my post or even this thread why don't you try again.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Shedlon, As far as I am aware homosexual couples can marry in church, however, as a church can refuse to marry certain other couples it would be prdudicial not to be able to do the same for evryone else.

The problem is that you have stated plainly in your posts that you don't think gay people should have exactly the same right to marry as heterosexual people. So this seems like yet another dishonest contradiction to me?

Greatest I am wrote:God is almost omnipotent. He has many limits. How then can Christians say that God omnipotent, all-powerful and without limits when he clearly has many?

Apparently he can't get out of a deal he's struck with Satan, according to Polyglide, and this causes untold suffering. Or he can get out of it if he wanted, but chooses not to and allows untold suffering DELIBERATELY. It's hard to tell which position Polyglide is actually taking as he claims each alternately, So perhaps he could clear it up then once and for all? Is his deity malevolent as it choose to allow untold suffering and tie itself to a deal with Satan, or is it not omnipotent and so unable to stop Satan?

Dr, Sheldon,
Let me put it in as childish a manner as possible so that even you can understand.

I have a child whose whole life I can control and have the power to do everything that I wish.

The child challenges my authority and says he can do as he wishes and can prove it providing he is given the chance and allowed a certain time to do so.

To bring the child into line and to prove he is wrong, he is given the chance to do so with certain restrictions, [in the case of God and Satan, Satan cannot use killing but bribery etc;]

I can prevent the child from using any unfair means.

I could if I wished get out of the deal at any time but that would make me and not the child unworthy etc;

The whole aim being to get the child to understand right from wrong and the best way in which to conduct his life. etc;
as any loving parent would do.

Dr, Sheldon,
If you make an agreement you keep to it.

My position is that unless Satan actually threatens the lives of God's people he has been given the chance to use all other methods, God also has the right to, as he has on numerous occasions shown, take whatever steps are necessary to stop Satan from actually killing Christians and also show Satan that he can rebuke him for doing so. This in no way has anything to do with being omnipotent or anything else.

Dr, Sheldon,
God is both omnipotent and benevolent.

I have explained in as simple terms as possible the implications I feel sorry for you that you are unable to undetsand.

I do understand. The two claims are mutually exclusive,  so your explanations contradict each other. I am starting to think you genuinely can't see it as well. 

If your deity is omnipotent "and benevolent" then why has it created things like evil and suffering? That's so obviously contradictory, can you genuinely not understand this? Wow!

Try answering my question, that might help you understand why you're simultaneously making two mutually exclusive claims as if they are both true.

Does your god choose to allow suffering?

Dr, Sheldon,
On exactly what grounds are you saying God created suffering.

Satan started using suffering as a means of turning God's people away from God, God turned the tables by showing Satan he was on a loser etc;

The trouble is you do not believe in God and therefore unable to grasp anything relative.