NewStats: 3,264,942 , 8,185,158 topics. Date: Thursday, 12 June 2025 at 09:39 PM 4b119

DaddyCoool:


Which of what I posted is wrong?

Matter, antimatter🤦🏾‍♂️ and their supposed dual existence.

The present universe is a direct contradiction to that as antimatter is really rare!!!

If it persisted in the complementary ratio you so allude to, you and I wouldn't exist!!!

Newgoodkk:
Why did God create the devil to destroy His plan?

Some Would say , The Devil wasn't Created to destroy God's Plan but Sin Entered into him and He Turned Against God .

God created Everything, Where did SIN Emanated from ?

Did the Devil Creates SIN ?

The Devil was Said to be among the Angels ..Right ?
Does the Devil too has Flesh ,Was Sinful Spirits Parts of the Devil's Creative Components ?

if this is true ,Meaning God Puts in that Sinful spirit in the Devil ..

Was it God's Original Plan to Make the devil acts the way he did .

Judas...Christ Must be betrayed for the Prophesy to be fulfilled .

Revelation 12 V 7..And there was War in Heaven ....

Pls. We need Knowledge, Don't turn this into Unnecessary Argument, Make your Comment and don't try to force your View, Comments and Believes on others .

It would really help you greatly if you could pick up Eastern religious text and digest them.

Your view about reality would greatly improve.

I want to believe you're not one of those fellows that think what they know is objectively true.

Some might even say "The Bible is the only trusted source of information" that one is a topic for another day.

If you truly want to find answers to these, questions that ever so frequently find a way to keep questioning norms.

Read Eastern religious texts.

DaddyCoool:


You can't have all good God and angels on one side, and nothing on the other side. God set our reality and sensibilities to only work like that. The only way we'er aware of good is because bad exists

In other words the god of the bible is not omnipotent. Agreed.

Lucifyre:


In other words the god of the bible is not omnipotent. Agreed.

God is omnipotent 😁

Kobojunkie:
. Meaning your god was never in fact an All-mighty to begin with, abi?

Lucifyre:


In other words the god of the bible is not omnipotent. Agreed.

Can you people think at all. It is like asking why don't God have dead people walking around.
He, HE, HE HIMSELF set things up that way!!!!

DaddyCoool:
➜Can you people think at all. It is like asking why don't God have dead people walking around.He, HE, HE HIMSELF set things up that way!!!!

This is what you call thinking? Stop with the ridiculous attempt to deviate from the real issue here, which is that you claim that there's an antimatter factor that stands in opposition to your god here.

Gabrielshow24:

Matter, antimatter🤦🏾‍♂️ and their supposed dual existence.

The present universe is a direct contradiction to that as antimatter is really rare!!!

If it persisted in the complementary ratio you so allude to, you and I wouldn't exist!!!

See below

Kobojunkie:
This is what you call thinking? Stop with the ridiculous attempt to deviate from the real issue here, which is that you claim that there's an antimatter factor that stands in opposition to your god here.

Are you OK?
God set this up as a binary reality. Even matter - for every matter there's antimatter!

DaddyCoool:
✓ Are you OK? God set this up as a binary world. Even matter - for every matter there's antimatter!

So in this binary world set up by your deity, he is directly opposed by these any elements-- antimatter, right?

DaddyCoool:


See below

why then is antimatter rare🤦🏾‍♂️?

Do you know how much 1g of antimatter is worth?

If truly there is a one to one ratio.
They will nullify themselves and transform into energy.

Is that what exists now? 🤦🏾‍♂️
The present universe lacks that ratio.
Matter is far more!!!

Kobojunkie:
So in this binary world set up by your deity, he is directly opposed by these any elements-- antimatter, right?

Noooo, it's just an example. Just there can't be matter without antimatter, down without up, etc, there can't be good God on one side and nothing on the other side!

DaddyCoool:





Can you people think at all. It is like asking why don't God have dead people walking around.
He, HE, HE HIMSELF set things up that way!!!!

Lol maybe you should take your advice and put your brain cells to work. You were the one that made the assertion good can't exist without evil. If good can't exist without evil, then god is limited and not omnipotent cause he can't create just good. If god is omnipotent, then he can create good without needing to create evil. You can't have it both ways. 😌

DaddyCoool:


Noooo, it's just an example. Just there can't be matter without antimatter, down without up, etc, there can't be good God on one side and nothing on the other side!

If true, then "Heaven" must come as a shock to you.

After all, in the "end" there will be no death, sickness and disease - evil will finally be wiped out🤔

What say you then?
Does God need all this to still show he is Good🤨?

DaddyCoool:
➜Noooo, it's just an example. Just there can't be matter without antimatter, down without up, etc, there can't be good God on one side and nothing on the other side!

Your particular confusion is palpable! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Again, your deity is directly opposed by another deity out there — the antimatter to his matter — is what you have been insisting upon all this time. But somehow, you refuse to accept what you said as that?

Kobojunkie:
Your particular confusion is palpable! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Again, your deity is directly opposed by another deity out there — the antimatter to his matter — is what you have been insisting upon all this time. But somehow, you refuse to accept what you said as that?

Leave it at that, you know what she intended to allude to but her phrasing was wrong🤔.

The particle example was flawed and life is not always filled with dichotomy!!!

Gabrielshow24:
➜Leave it at that, you know what she intended to allude to but her phrasing was wrong🤔. The particle example was flawed and life is not always filled with dichotomy!!!

Is her phrasing wrong, or is her entire premise wrong? In one statement she claims her god is all-powerful only to reveal in the next that he really isn't.

Gabrielshow24:

God is omnipotent 😁

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Epicurus.

Kobojunkie:
Is her phrasing wrong, or is her entire premise wrong? In one statement she claims her god is all-powerful only to reveal in the next that he really isn't.

Like I said, her example was flawed!
Leave it at that.

By now, she should have been able to reflect upon the implications of her analogy!!!

Lucifyre:


Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Epicurus.

False Dichotomy 🤦🏾‍♂️

Gabrielshow24:
➜Like I said, her example was flawed! Leave it at that. By now, she should have been able to reflect upon the implications of her analogy!!!

She exposes your god as not being omnipotent. And you want me to leave it at that?

Kobojunkie:
She exposes your god as not being omnipotent. And you want me to leave it at that?

Fine, she committed a fallacy of weak analogy.
Will you use that as proof for God being impotent? 🤨

Are you ok?

Gabrielshow24:
➜Fine, she committed a fallacy of weak analogy. Will you use that as proof for God being impotent? 🤨 Are you ok?

She did not commit a fallacy in revealing that her god is not, in fact, omnipotent as she initially wanted for us to believe. She revealed a truth about the particular deity she holds to.

Kobojunkie:
She did not commit a fallacy in revealing that her god is not, in fact, omnipotent as she initially wanted for us to believe. She revealed a truth about the particular deity she holds to.

You don't know what you are saying.
Now you are committing "fallacy of hasty generalization".

Drawing conclusions based on her " faulty analogy"🤨

Gabrielshow24:

False Dichotomy 🤦🏾‍♂️

Mental Gymnastics 😅

Gabrielshow24:
➜You don't know what you are saying.
➜Now you are committing "fallacy of hasty generalization". Drawing conclusions based on her " faulty analogy"🤨

The analogy in question was deemed faulty, not by her but by you without correcting, leading me to suspect that the analogy is not the problem here but your desire to deny any conclusions drawn from i that may not fit your particular delusion.

And please, resist the urge to use you lack adequate understanding of.

Kobojunkie:
The analogy in question was deemed faulty, not by her but by you without correcting, leading me to suspect that the analogy is not the problem here but your desire to deny any conclusions drawn from i that may not fit your particular delusion.

And please, resist the urge to use you lack adequate understanding of.

Were you blind?
Didn't you see when I quoted her?
Where I used reflective questions to show her the flaw? 🤦🏾‍♂️

You don't have anything useful to contribute, you are just here to troll!!!

Also it seems you are one that's not knowledgeable of the fallacy you committed.

Maybe you should read up!

Gabrielshow24:
➜Were you blind? Didn't you see when I quoted her? Where I used reflective questions to show her the flaw? 🤦🏾‍♂️ You don't have anything useful to contribute, you are just here to troll!!! Also it seems you are one that's not knowledgeable of the fallacy you committed. Maybe you should read up!

Nonsense!

Lucifyre:


Mental Gymnastics 😅

Lucifyre, you know how it ended sour for you and your friends😂😂😂 last time!

Let that just be a remainder🤨.
I don't have your time this night!

Kobojunkie:
Nonsense!

Better educate yourself on what a fallacy is.
Especially what a "weak analogy" fallacy entails before you come here spewing thrash!!!

Her analogy provided a contradiction 😂
One which you are bent on using and from this you are drawing a conclusion or generalization, an hasty one at best, to dispute her initial premise!!!

Gabrielshow24:
➜Better educate yourself on what a fallacy is. Especially what a "weak analogy" fallacy entails before you come here spewing thrash!!! Her analogy provided a contradiction 😂 One which you are bent on using and from this you are drawing a conclusion or generalization, an hasty one at best, to dispute her initial premise!!!

So, the fact that her beliefs are contradictory— ridilled with falsehoods— is somehow to be blamed on me? 😂😂😂😂

I don tell you... stop using you have little to no understanding of.

Kobojunkie:
So, the fact that her beliefs are contradictory— ridilled with falsehoods— is somehow to be blamed on me? 😂😂😂😂

I don tell you... stop using you have little to no understanding of.

"not her belief, Dummy"

Her analogy created the "contradiction"!!!

Am calling you out for making a generalization from her perceived "contradiction" to discredit the omnipotence of God🤨!!!

An hasty generalization at best!!!

I must also add, that you dismantling her weak defense of "the argument" and then implying that the argument itself is false is a form of attacking her weaker version rather than addressing the actual argument. This misrepresents the original argument and creates the illusion that it is invalid because her weak defense was refuted.

docdes:
This is an old question. And, there can hardly be an answer we can all accept. You can't understand it just as your 5-year-old can't understand it when you whip him.

In my understanding, the Devil is like someone who does God's dirty jobs. Or, he's like a control experiment.

And, I can my perspective with biblical scriptures. For instance, when Jesus Christ went to the wilderness, the Bible suggests that the Holy Spirit cooperated with the Devil on purpose to get Jesus tempted.

"Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil" (Mt. 4:1).

If your interpretation of Matthew 4:1 is correct, explain James 1:12, 13.