Cheers01:


I hope them religious people learn that their God is nothing but fairytales to non believers.

Of course we realise they are "fairytales to non believers". They are fairytales to believers too, to anyone who does not understand them in fact. And very few do. Which is why we dress it in myth and form religion about it, hoping one day the layers and layers of mist would be seen through.

vaxx:
what i am doing there is illustration demonstrating that such language is wrong in mathematical context.

So what has mathematical context to do with the nature of god since you say they are not equatable?

LordReed:


So what has mathematical context to do with the nature of god since you say they are not equatable?

This does not have anything to do with my current postulation. Unless you want to raised a new topic

vaxx:
When I said you are ignorant of the discussion, it is even an understatement. You are even poor in your thinking process.

You yourself already establish that paradox is allowed in every language . Since true or false statement exist in every language. I push you further that statement is false. it is wrong mathematically and I demonstrate it by showing you evidence of your illogicalities.


In mathematical language, nonsense question can't be answered as it is lacking sense.

I made a deductive argument with the problem of omnipotence. Address that deductive argument first;

Premise 1- God is omnipotent
Premise 2- This means that God can create anything
Conclusion- Therefore, God should be able to create another God just like himself or even more powerful.





With regarding mathematics, there are paradoxes in mathematics.

If 5 x 2 = 10
Then, 5 = 10 ÷ 2

But then

5 × 0 = 0
5 = 0 ÷ 0

Following the rules of mathematics, 5 is equal to 5 and 5 is also equal to 0. Dividing by zero results in paradoxes.

LordReed:


In what way was I arguing out of point?

There was no need to bring maths and infinity into the argument that omnipotence is ridiculous.

I just wanted vaxx to address the deductive argument.

JeromeBlack:



With regarding mathematics, there are paradoxes in mathematics.

If 5 x 2 = 10
Then, 5 = 10 ÷ 2

But then

5 × 0 = 0
5 = 0 ÷ 0

Following the rules of mathematics, 5 is equal to 5 and 5 is also equal to 0. Dividing by zero results in paradoxes.

This violates some mathematical axioms. A valid paradox can only arise when you adhere to the various rules and still end up with a true and false statement.

Lxdd:


This violates some mathematical axioms. A valid paradox can only arise when you adhere to the various rules and still end up with a true and false statement.

It violated no axiom.

The simple fact is that dividing by zero leads to paradoxes. You can divide by any other number and get results.

JeromeBlack:



There was no need to bring maths and infinity into the argument that omnipotence is ridiculous.

I just wanted vaxx to address the deductive argument.

Exactly what I was trying to portray to him. Can you see how he is backtracking?

LordReed:


Exactly what I was trying to portray to him. Can you see how he is backtracking?

Okay. I see your point now.

vaxx:
This does not have anything to do with my current postulation. Unless you want to raised a new topic

Then don't bring what has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, simple.

LordReed:


Then don't bring what has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, simple.

You are the one doing that. Mine is illustration and it is allowed in argument.

JeromeBlack:
i made a deductive argument with the problem of omnipotence. Address that deductive argument first;

Premise 1- God is omnipotent
Premise 2- This means that God can create anything
Conclusion- Therefore, God should be able to create another God just like himself or even more powerful.

A premises that is false even if it produce a true conclusion is invalid argument. An argument is valid if the premises lead to the conclusion. Your premises 2 is illogical as i have demonsrate its absurdity.

With regarding mathematics, there are paradoxes in mathematics.

If 5 x 2 = 10
Then, 5 = 10 ÷ 2

But then

5 × 0 = 0
5 = 0 ÷ 0

Following the rules of mathematics, 5 is equal to 5 and 5 is also equal to 0. Dividing by zero results in paradoxes.

The premise is that a simple division of two integers can be calculated by cancelling common numbers from the numerator and denominator. wrong premises will generally produces incorrect answers.

but if you change the dynamic by applying it to 16 divided by 64, using the method of cancelling the 6’s from the numerator and denominator. there may be other solutions, but the correct answer (1/4) which is obtained by that mostly-false presumed method.

LordReed:


Exactly what I was trying to portray to him. Can you see how he is backtracking?

You guys are funny people. You guys wiith your ill logic.

vaxx:
You are the one doing that. Mine is illustration and it is allowed in argument.

But when I show your illustration is flawed you go on the it is not the same route.

vaxx:
You guys are funny people. You guys wiith your ill logic.

You are the one being illogical.

JeromeBlack:



There was no need to bring maths and infinity into the argument that omnipotence is ridiculous.

I just wanted vaxx to address the deductive argument.

cus you refused to connect how such illustration reduce your question to reducto absurdum.

LordReed:


You are the one being illogical.

You are free to accused me of such... . Aren't you the one asking question out of context?

LordReed:


But when I show your illustration is flawed you go on the it is not the same route.

You never did show anything.. You only show your lack of understanding to the premises raised.

vaxx:
cus you refused to connect how such illustration reduce your question to reducto absurdum.

Stop talking nonsense

vaxx:
A premises that is false even if it produce a true conclusion is invalid argument. An argument is valid if the premises lead to the conclusion. Your premises 2 is illogical as i have demonsrate its absurdity.

Premise 2 states that God can create anything. Please, how is that false or illogical?

Are you saying that there are things that God cannot create?

vaxx:



The premise is that a simple division of two integers can be calculated by cancelling common numbers from the numerator and denominator. wrong premises will generally produces incorrect answers.

but if you change the dynamic by applying it to 16 divided by 64, using the method of cancelling the 6’s from the numerator and denominator. there may be other solutions, but the correct answer (1/4) which is obtained by that mostly-false presumed method.

What are you saying ogbeni? You are just talking over the place.

Did I bend any mathematical rule in my equations? Did use any false method in my equations?

So why are you talking about false methods?

JeromeBlack:



Premise 2 states that God can create anything. Please, how is that false or illogical?

Are you saying that there are things that God cannot create?






What are you saying ogbeni? You are just talking over the place.

Did I bend any mathematical rule in my equations? Did use any false method in my equations?

So why are you talking about false methods?

So the situation is even worst. The dude does not even know the diffrence between numerator and denominator? Holla me next time. I am done with this irrational logic.

vaxx:
So the situation is even worst. The dude does not even know the diffrence between numerator and denominator? Holla me next time. I am done with this irrational logic.

I used the division sign (÷) for my equations, therefore there is no need to start talking about numerators and denominators.

I never used the division slash (/) and so, no fractions or denominators.


I also noticed that you avoided talking about how you indirectly claimed that God cannot create everything since you claimed that my premise 2 for God's omnipotence is false. Contradicting yourself.


At this point, I would advice you to stop ridiculing yourself. It is embarrassing.

vaxx:
You are free to accused me of such... . Aren't you the one asking question out of context?

vaxx:
You never did show anything.. You only show your lack of understanding to the premises raised.

LMFAO! Which question did I ask? You brought mathematics and when I showed you maths you ran to it is not what you are talking about. Rubbish. LoL!

JeromeBlack:


I [s]used the division sign (÷) for my equations, therefore there is no need to start talking about numerators and denominators.

I never used the division slash (/) and so, no fractions or denominators.


I also noticed that you avoided talking about how you indirectly claimed that God cannot create everything since you claimed that my premise 2 for God's omnipotence is false. Contradicting yourself.


At this point, I would advice you to stop ridiculing yourself. It is embarrassing[/s].

i don't answer unintelligent question that is posed to abused logic.


But you can improve it . Holla me after.

LordReed:


LMFAO! Which question did I ask? You brought mathematics and when I showed you maths you ran to it is not what you are talking about. Rubbish. LoL!

Do you hear yourself speaking here.

vaxx:
i don't answer unintelligent question that is posed to abused logic.


But you can improve it . Holla me after.

The irony..

vaxx:
Do you hear yourself speaking here.

Go and rest your head, it must have overheated.

Jesusjnr, felixomor

una sabi run from good argument!