[Pants-of-dog]

Its handled in my argument, the one you refused to debate.

The one you refuse to write here?

I don't hold to your position, so you are debating yourself, not me.

Sorry, I thought you accepted the orthodox Christian view of God as infinite.

Correct.

False. He can be a non-toilet and still be present in your toilet. Identity is not Presence.

Omnipresence is that God is all present, not that ALL things are God.

Your are confused with your terms.

No, we are both agreeing here:

God is present in the toilet, but is not the toilet because He is omnipresent but simultaneously separate from His creation. Or, if you like, he is present but has a different identity.

That would only be the case if the creation and the Creator were regarded as of being either the same substance, or of substances that were different and being spatially exclusive of one another (not being able to share the same space without mixture).

Neither are true.

No. God’s finiteness is true even if we see God as a transcendent being separate from His creation yet present everyhwere. This is becuase he is only transcendentally present everywhere. God would have to also be immanently omnipresent to be truly infinite.

If the substances are different, but not spatially exclusive, such can occupy the same space without identity, hence presence without identity.

Your argument rests on a false-dilemma.

I completely agree with the first sentence, but since my argument is based on that, my argument does not rest on a false dilemma.

How so?

The point of comparison is your belief in the incorrectness of both claims.

What it seems to you does not necessarily imply what it is.

If you are calling your own argument a DOA shitpost, you are conceding.

As you wish.

The Proof.

That does not address my point about god’s finiteness.

[B0ycey]

...anyway Aliens. Have we discovered them?

[Victoribus Spolia]

The one you refuse to write here?

I did.

Sorry, I thought you accepted the orthodox Christian view of God as infinite.

I do, but I doubt you understand it from what you've said. His infinite nature is defined in terms of His primary attributes, and His primary attributes are not violated in the argument i've given.

God is present in the toilet, but is not the toilet because He is omnipresent but simultaneously separate from His creation. Or, if you like, he is present but has a different identity.

Correct.

God’s finiteness is true even if we see God as a transcendent being separate from His creation yet present everyhwere. This is becuase he is only transcendentally present everywhere. God would have to also be immanently omnipresent to be truly infinite.

False, immanence would imply identity, transcendence would imply non-identity, you can have transcendence without a violation to omnipresence.

I completely agree with the first sentence

If so, God is omnipresent. Thus, God is present in the toilet but you were not shitting on Him.

The point of comparison is your belief in the incorrectness of both claims.

I didn't say that, you claimed it was implied, but you have not proven such.

That does not address my point about god’s finiteness.

Actually it does; as the conclusion demonstrates a satisfaction of the orthodox definitions given. Hence, God must exist and He must be omnipresent. This is a logical truth and He is ontologically distinct from His creation.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

@B0ycey

No.

[One Degree]

...anyway Aliens. Have we discovered them?

Well, based upon Astro biologists research used by NASA, I am not sure we would recognize them if they were here. They could be thriving at the bottom of the ocean depths right now. Who says how big aliens are to start with? What if they are too small to see or too large to comprehend?

[B0ycey]

Whether this was asteroid or a probe, when you look at Berens graphics of its trajectory, you have got to ask what the odds of this interstellar object we find being both a cigar shape and also having a perfect route to view the inner solar system and Neptune without intelligence guiding it?

#Devilsadvocate

[XogGyux]

Whether this was asteroid or a probe, when you look at Berens graphics of its trajectory, you have got to ask what the odds of this interstellar object we find being both a cigar shape and also having a perfect route to view the inner solar system and Neptune without intelligence guiding it?

#Devilsadvocate

What does a cigar shape has anything to do with it being alien?
At 700' this seems like a huge waste of resources and huge amount of energy to send something that big just as a probe. For instance, most modern scientist believe that our best current chance of sending probes to other solar system would be tiny satellite-like devices with light sails and shoot them at a portion of the speed of light (~20%?) using a powerful beam. If we, can figure that out, I am pretty sure a more advanced alien civilization would have done so as well.
Perhaps more importantly, even if this would have been a probe, and it would have come from our closest stellar neighbors, it would have taken 15,000 years to reach us! let that sink in... that's how vast stellar distances are.

[B0ycey]

What does a cigar shape has anything to do with it being alien?
At 700' this seems like a huge waste of resources and huge amount of energy to send something that big just as a probe. For instance, most modern scientist believe that our best current chance of sending probes to other solar system would be tiny satellite-like devices with light sails and shoot them at a portion of the speed of light (~20%?) using a powerful beam. If we, can figure that out, I am pretty sure a more advanced alien civilization would have done so as well.
Perhaps more importantly, even if this would have been a probe, and it would have come from our closest stellar neighbors, it would have taken 15,000 years to reach us! let that sink in... that's how vast stellar distances are.

I am quite aware of the distances. Although you assume seperate technological advances and achievements to reach goals are the same. That is, if this is a probe, why do you expect it to behave or look like ours? And transmission of information is by speed of light. No probe needs to return home for information to get there. We thank God that is true from Voyager.

[One Degree]

What if that probe is tiny to them? What if 15,000 years is not a long time to them?

[B0ycey]

As we know time is not absolute, 15000 years is relative. So yes One Degree that is true. Although it is important to note, we only estimate time and distance by our technological standards not alien.

[SolarCross]

The object was about the size of an aircraft carrier consequently (assuming it wasn't just a weird rock) I don't think it was likely to have been just an information gatherer, so it was carrying a payload (von neumann machines most likely). Given it passed right through the solar system rather than decelerating and hanging around even if it was only a spy ship it must of been carrying a payload of sensor equipment that it would have left behind because if it did not leave behind probes then it would only get a brief snapshot of our solar system instead of a continuous feed of information for the indefinite future which would be a bit of a waste of a 15,000 year flight time.

[Pants-of-dog]

I did.

I do, but I doubt you understand it from what you've said. His infinite nature is defined in terms of His primary attributes, and His primary attributes are not violated in the argument i've given.

If the definition “in terms of His primary attributes” means He is is infinite only in the transcendent sense, then okay.

Correct.

False, immanence would imply identity, transcendence would imply non-identity, you can have transcendence without a violation to omnipresence.

I have no problem with identity or immanence, for my god. I know the Christians do not. Which is why your God is finite.

Why would transcendence imply non-identity?

And I completely agree that you can have transcendence without a violation of omnipresence.

What I am saying is that a totally transcendent, non-immanent being is finite insofar as their omnipresence on the transcendent level, and not on the physical level.

If so, God is omnipresent. Thus, God is present in the toilet but you were not shitting on Him.

Right. So God is finite.

I didn't say that, you claimed it was implied, but you have not proven such.

If you wish to believe I am an atheist, feel free.

Actually it does; as the conclusion demonstrates a satisfaction of the orthodox definitions given. Hence, God must exist and He must be omnipresent. This is a logical truth and He is ontologically distinct from His creation.

Sure. Then He is finite.

—

And that is it.

You can have the last word and maybe you might even get what I am arguing which I am not sure is the case right now.

These discussions are inevitably pointless and have no impact whatsoever on anything important.

So, have a good one.

——————————————

The actual study looking at the possibility of a solar sail on Oumuamua is here:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.11490.pdf

The abstract:

‘Oumuamua (1I/2017 U1) is the first object of interstellar origin observed in the Solar System. Recently, Micheli et al. (2018) reported that ‘Oumuamua showed deviations from a Keplerian orbit at a high statistical significance. The observed trajectory is best explained by an excess radial acceleration ∆a ∝ r−2, where r is the distance of ‘Oumuamua from the Sun. Such an acceleration is naturally expected for comets, driven by the evaporating material. However, recent observational and theoretical studies imply that ‘Oumuamua is not an active comet. We explore the possibility that the excess acceleration results from Solar radiation pressure. The required mass-to-area ratio is (m/A)≈0.1gcm−2. For a thin sheet this requires a thickness of≈0.3−0.9mm. We find that although extremely thin, such an object would survive an interstellar travel over Galactic distances of ∼ 5 kpc, withstanding collisions with gas and dust-grains as well as stresses from rotation and tidal forces. We discuss the possible origins of such an object. Our general results apply to any light probes designed for interstellar travel.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Right. So God is finite.

Omnipresence is infinitude in Christian theology (and my argument), and omnipresence does not imply identity.

You know where my proof has been posted if you ever want to take up the gauntlet.

You can have the last word

WORD.

[Pants-of-dog]

If you want to confuse omnipresence with infiniteness, go ahead. My argument sees them as two different things.

Do you have any comment on Oumuamua?

[Victoribus Spolia]

If you want to confuse omnipresence with infiniteness, go ahead. My argument sees them as two different things.

Which is why you are fundamentally wrong. Especially if you examine the definitions in my proof.

So much for the last word eh Pants?

Admit it, you can't help yourself when i'm commenting.

Its a fatal attraction, an obsession you have with me.



__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Do you have any comment on Oumuamua?

[Pants-of-dog]

I did not read your defintions because they are not the ones I used for my point.

Now, if we assume Oumuamua is an alien object using a solar sail, it would have taken millenia to reach our solar system. And it is tumbling rather than smoothly rotating.

These two points suggest that it is not an alien probe.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Now, if we assume Oumuamua is an alien object using a solar sail, it would have taken millenia to reach our solar system. And it is tumbling rather than smoothly rotating.

These two points suggest that it is not an alien probe.

You may be right.

I don't really believe in aliens.

I think they may be Demons if they do exist.

[Pants-of-dog]

....or the comet tail is simply not detectable for some reason.

[Victoribus Spolia]

....or the comet tail is simply not detectable for some reason.

The acceleration thing is a bit weird.

[Pants-of-dog]

Not if we are currently unable to detect the offgassing. If that is the case, the acceleration could be due to that and we would not know.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Not if we are currently unable to detect the offgassing. If that is the case, the acceleration could be due to that and we would not know.

You think the Harvard researchers were just trying to get attention by bringing up the "A" word then?