Okay

In what sense are you skeptical and how does that skepticism play out in your ability (or inability/willingness/unwillingness) to discuss God?

It’s because the faith centered narrative is where it’s at, and the god centered narrative often dominates attention. While the god centered narrative can be an entry point into the faith narrative, it is usually a hindrance.

I am speaking at the individual level though. At the cultural level, the god centered narrative had to lead. It’s based in my desire for people to make that necessary transition from the cultural to the individual.

But it’s me projecting, it’s a “leak”, and you’re right to point it out.

not an argument

How can we "safely" say that God doesn't have free will. Why couldn't there be several options at God's disposal that would all classify as "perfect"?

Often pursuing the truth leads us to situations that are "hard", and to conclusions that we may not "prefer", but are nonetheless true.

Correct it's not an argument. To make an argument you need to use logic.

The problem is that you've continually used ill-defined concepts. What do you mean when you say that a property is "immutable"?

For example, according to how you've defined things, neeel is an immutable part of the universe, because if he didn't exist, then the universe (as we currently know it) wouldn't exist. Is that the same concept of immutability that you mean here, or is that a different thing?

Furthermore, if neeel is being illogical, then illogic is a property of part of the universe, and is hence a property of the universe itself, so that the universe is illogical. This would also contradict the immutability claim (at least, as I understand the term immutable).

So mostly, I think you're spouting off nonsense but it's nonsense because you're not taking the time to actually think carefully about what you're saying. You're in state where you think that simply asserting and reasserting your claims is going to make progress for you, which is never really a good sign.

Inherent.

I'd say the same. Neeel is an inherent part of the universe.

I dont think neeel being illogical is an inherent part of neeel. He has the ability to be illogical, but being illogical is not an inherent part of him. Neeel is inherently logical.

Mostly I think you have great difficulty following my reasoning. I suspect that's not a function of your intelligence but something emotional because you seem to be above average in intelligence.

inherent is not the same as immutable

Can the universe change to being fundamentally illogical? Not without stopping being the universe because logic is inherent to the universe.

Can a gay person stop being gay? Not without becoming a different person.

So while not directly synonymous both terms are related.

Okay. So that's a totally different word with a totally different meaning. Maybe you should use a dictionary before just spouting off words.

And how have you determined it's not the other way around? There's a TON of research out there (science) that points in the direction that humans are quite illogical and only sometimes make logical decisions.

You've got multiple people in multiple threads, both religious and irreligious, both highly educated and not highly educated, telling you that you're not making much sense. How is it that you've determined that we are the ones that aren't understanding and that you aren't the one with the emotional issue?

That's still not immutability.

I inherently have 10 fingers. But if I lose one, am I a different person?

You're still having tons of issues with the way you try to identify things. You're being inconsistent and that's at the root of many of your errors.

No. That's not how this works at all.

Another claim you need to back up

Logic is inherent to the universe because the universe is logical.

We've already been over this ground. It takes a lot of time and about 60% of my mental horsepower to dumb things down enough for you to get them, and I'm not interested in doing it anymore. Vaya con dios.

I dont need an argument. The universe is logical because logic is inherent to the universe, and logic is inherent to the universe because the universe is logical.

You can substitute 'immutable' here for inherent and you see it means something similar.

Are you claiming that the universe isn't logical? I wonder what logic one would use to make such a claim!

How nice.

Do people who disagree with you need an argument?

Huh?

Okay.

I don't think Neeel was "claiming" anything other than pointing out that you didn't give an argument.

The universe is illogical because illogic is inherent to the universe, and illogic is inherent to the universe because the universe is illogical.

No, you actually find that the words mean VERY different things and that you cannot substitute one for the other.

No logic is necessary to make such a claim. You've shown this to be the case.

Yes. It was demonstrated that you made no sense.

That's fine. I'll take this as a concession that you know you don't actually make sense, because if it made sense you wouldn't need to use 60% of your mighty brain power to dumb it down. You'd just be competent enough to explain it effectively.

It's threads like this that makes this site so special.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Its called determinism and all signs point towards it being true. That being said, its probably best you dont spend too much time thinking about it because it can be a real time sink and nothing ever comes from that time being spent thinking about it (unlike what might come from time spent thinking about an induction motor, however). Just accept it and move on is my personal advice. Dont try to build your life around it.

Logical statements are internally tautological. My argument, if you can call it that, is that to argue against the universe being logical is absurd.

An argument against it isnt possible, since it would require constructing something (an argument), arguing against the thing (logic) that argument depends on (logic).

But the universe is logical. We make sense of it all the time.

still not backing up your claim. it might almost be an argument, but if it is, it is almost certainly a circular one.

this is most definitely a circular argument ( and therefore invalid, in case you didnt know)

Nope. You cant


What does it mean for the universe to be logical, and how do you know?

Speak for yourself.