God 'sacrificed' his only son... so what? (believer, exist, about)

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by arguy1973

it seems illogical because we have to look at it through earthly standards..God doesnt operate on the same scale that we have too.

It seems illogical because it is illogical. You can't get around that. Something that is illogical is meaningless.

"Go forthdom until the backworm resides under the microscopic pladula."

How would you respond if I told you the above statement was the key to salvation?

[sean98125]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

Because God is omnipotent. Man isn't.

If a man gains omnipotence, he becomes a god. If God loses omnipotence, he ceases to be God.

You're thinking in binary. Maybe it's not either/or.

[arguy1973]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

Because God is omnipotent. Man isn't.

If a man gains omnipotence, he becomes a god. If God loses omnipotence, he ceases to be God.

but see..there..we believe a man WAS God..Jesus..but he was also a man..he didnt HAVE to die..he chose to.

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by sean98125

You're thinking in binary. Maybe it's not either/or.

It is binary!

Zero; not zero.

On; off.

Omnipotent; not omnipotent.

Yep. Binary.

[sean98125]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

It seems illogical because it is illogical. You can't get around that. Something that is illogical is meaningless.

The same could be said for the logical. It's easy to make a purely logical argument that doesn't reflect anything meaningful. I don't think that meaningfulness stems from the ability to readily explain things using rhetoric.

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by arguy1973

but see..there..we believe a man WAS God..Jesus..but he was also a man..he didnt HAVE to die..he chose to.

Okay guys. I appreciate the conversation, but I see this is going nowhere (actually, it's going in circles).

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by sean98125

The same could be said for the logical.

Something that is logical is meaningless? Please explain.

It's easy to make a purely logical argument that doesn't reflect anything meaningful.

Which does not mean logical = meaningless.

We're not discussing "meaningful" as in "give meaning to one's life." We're discussing "meaning" as in "internally consistent."

1 + 1 = 2 has meaning. "I previously visited my aunt next year" does not.

I don't think that meaningfulness stems from the ability to readily explain things using rhetoric.

No, but meaning must be derived from something meaningful. As the illogical is meaningless, no meaning can be derived from it.

[arguy1973]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

Okay guys. I appreciate the conversation, but I see this is going nowhere (actually, it's going in circles).

yea I agree..Im gettin dizzy

[satanoid]

Abandoning reason to achieve understanding is like like closing your eyes to find your way home from the woods.

[cg81]

Originally Posted by satanoid

Abandoning reason to achieve understanding is like like closing your eyes to find your way home from the woods.

Now if only we could agree on what is "reason" and "understanding".