Heaven, Hell, Reincarnation, and other "end points"

[Derek]

You think we get eaten by worms? Well our bodies do.

What does that have to do with the question?

Isn't that your first post on here about the topic?

[John Dibble]

If they have different gods who aren't infinite then that can't be a true God.

Says you. They would disagree. Neither of you can prove your view right. Why should I think your definition is any more correct than anyone else's?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You feel incorrectly. It could be some nebulous energy being or an invisible pink unicorn for all I care. My problem is that you keep making this definition based on what you'd like God to be like - for all you know there was a god but it burned itself out creating the universe. You can yell "infinite" until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it true. Where's the evidence that a god must be infinite?

How about this? Are you reading? You envision God as an invisible pink unicorn and I'll envision God as the first mover.

I'm reading, you clearly aren't. Your inability to comprehend even the most simply written sentences shows that.

[Derek]

If they have different gods who aren't infinite then that can't be a true God.

Says you. They would disagree. Neither of you can prove your view right. Why should I think your definition is any more correct than anyone else's?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You feel incorrectly. It could be some nebulous energy being or an invisible pink unicorn for all I care. My problem is that you keep making this definition based on what you'd like God to be like - for all you know there was a god but it burned itself out creating the universe. You can yell "infinite" until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it true. Where's the evidence that a god must be infinite?

How about this? Are you reading? You envision God as an invisible pink unicorn and I'll envision God as the first mover.

I'm reading, you clearly aren't. Your inability to comprehend even the most simply written sentences shows that.

cop out

[John Dibble]

No, what you said is a cop out. It was in no way a valid response to any of the points I made - essentially it was you giving up because you know you can't argue for crap. How about you actually respond instead?

[fezzyfestoon]

You think we get eaten by worms? Well our bodies do.

What does that have to do with the question?

Isn't that your first post on here about the topic?

What on earth?  Are you a goldfish?  You asked me if I think being "right" is important and in my very first post that's exactly what I said.

[Derek]

You think we get eaten by worms? Well our bodies do.

What does that have to do with the question?

Isn't that your first post on here about the topic?

What on earth?  Are you a goldfish?  You asked me if I think being "right" is important and in my very first post that's exactly what I said.

So you think it does or doesn't matter if we're right? I can't seem to find it.

[fezzyfestoon]

You think we get eaten by worms? Well our bodies do.

What does that have to do with the question?

Isn't that your first post on here about the topic?

What on earth?  Are you a goldfish?  You asked me if I think being "right" is important and in my very first post that's exactly what I said.

So you think it does or doesn't matter if we're right? I can't seem to find it.

I quite obviously don't, but that has nothing to do with the issue.  The issue is that you do while also claiming your God is infinite and can't be understood (like I said from the very beginning).  How can you be right about something you yourself can't understand?

I like this evolution in you, acting like we're the ones shying away or not answering questions.  It's funny.

[Derek]

You think we get eaten by worms? Well our bodies do.

What does that have to do with the question?

Isn't that your first post on here about the topic?

What on earth?  Are you a goldfish?  You asked me if I think being "right" is important and in my very first post that's exactly what I said.

So you think it does or doesn't matter if we're right? I can't seem to find it.

I quite obviously don't, but that has nothing to do with the issue.  The issue is that you do while also claiming your God is infinite and can't be understood (like I said from the very beginning).  How can you be right about something you yourself can't understand?

I like this evolution in you, acting like we're the ones shying away or not answering questions.  It's funny.

It wouldn't be my God, it would be God. I'm a scholar not a scientist. My goal is to research and argue ideas based on what is written with the foreknowledge that the events may have happened in some way or another. I demythologize and then re-mythologize. As for God my belief resides in the fact that something cannot just come out of nothing. In order to argue that there is no God you must be able to prove that something can come from nothing. How can I be right about something that I don't FULLY understand? That doesn't matter according to you. Now does it matter to me? Somewhat, but since I have yet to see that there is concrete evidence supporting that something can come from nothing, I am still in the belief that there is a God and that God must be infinite as a first cause.