Searching for GOD...

[Nearly Sane]

Derived- from something else.
Actual-The source of that which is derived.
Ability-potential to be or to do.

so an actual ability is 'The source of that which is derived potential to be or to do'. Can you see why that might not be a useful definition?

[BeRational]

Derived- from something else.
Actual-The source of that which is derived.
Ability-potential to be or to do.

so where did the something else get its ability?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So you are saying that it is impossible to show something not derived but you have shown something that isn't derived. Holy contradiction, Vladman!

No I mean the actual is not physical.AND THEREFORE NOT PHYSICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.
The actual is not derived.
The physical is derived.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

so where did the something else get its ability?

It doesn't need to since it has and is actual ability.

A circle or infinite chain of derivation is nonsense. There always has to be actual ability.

[wigginhall]

It's God!  No need then to demonstrate it, since (usefully) it can't be done.    Wow, is this the acme of theological argument?

[Nearly Sane]

No I mean the actual is not physical.AND THEREFORE NOT PHYSICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.
The actual is not derived.
The physical is derived.

And the giant fluffy non corporeal bunny doesn't need to disturb my tiny little Vlad when he/she/it removed little Vladdikins toothiepeg from under the pillow and leaves a big shiny polished turd.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It's God!  No need then to demonstrate it, since (usefully) it can't be done.    Wow, is this the acme of theological argument?

Well spookily, it certainly has some of the classical attributes of God.

Prime mover, maintainer of heaven and earth.

[wigginhall]

Well spookily, it certainly has some of the classical attributes of God.

Prime mover, maintainer of heaven and earth.

Yeah, very spooky, especially as you have started with that in mind.   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And the giant fluffy non corporeal bunny doesn't need to disturb my tiny little Vlad when he/she/it removed little Vladdikins toothiepeg from under the pillow and leaves a big shiny polished turd.

If it's non corporeal how do you know it's a bunny?

[Enki]

It doesn't need to since it has and is actual ability.

A circle or infinite chain of derivation is nonsense. There always has to be actual ability.

It seems to me that all you seem to be on about here is a variation of the first cause argument, with all its attendant problems, an argument which is as old as the hills.

[Nearly Sane]

If it's non corporeal how do you know it's a bunny?

Its ineffable bunniness.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It seems to me that all you seem to be on about here is a variation of the first cause argument, with all its attendant problems, an argument which is as old as the hills.

Not really. An infinite chain or circle of derivation still needs an actual from which it is derived.

[Nearly Sane]

It seems to me that all you seem to be on about here is a variation of the first cause argument, with all its attendant problems, an argument which is as old as the hills.

and as flawed as George Best buying a drink for Paul Gascoigne while introducing his niece and nephew to Jimmy Savile.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Its ineffable bunniness.

You got that from the Rabbi-t Lionel Bloom.

[Enki]

Not really. An infinite chain or circle of derivation still needs an actual from which it is derived.

Just as the proponents of a causal argument suggest that there has to a first cause.

[BeRational]

Just as the proponents of a causal argument suggest that there has to a first cause.

Yes some say, "you cannot get something from nothing".

How do they know this?

[Nearly Sane]

You got that from the Rabbi-t Lionel Bloom.

Nah, Pope Bunnidict.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes some say, "you cannot get something from nothing".

How do they know this?

What is nothing?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Just as the proponents of a causal argument suggest that there has to a first cause.

No, Actual ability and derived ability do not need to exist in a situation in which there is a ''first''.

They can exist eternally but there can be no derived without an actual.

Objections to the first cause go something like. The universe could be infinite or just pop out of nothing.

But actual ability is in any case needed for derived ability for reasons i've spelt out...... and derived ability is observed.

[BeRational]

What is nothing?

Exactly

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nah, Pope Bunnidict.

snork

[Nearly Sane]

No Actual ability and derived ability do not need to exist in a situation in which there is a ''first''.
They can exist eternally by there can be no derived without an actual.

Objections to the first cause go something like. The universe could be infinite or just pop out of nothing.

But actual ability is in any case needed for derived ability for reasons i've spelt out and derived ability is observed.

Can you point out on the dolly where exactly the English language tried to touch you?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes some say, "you cannot get something from nothing".

How do they know this?

Antitheists, careful where you put science out of the way. you will probably need it to turdpolish your next argument.

[BeRational]

Antitheists, careful where you put science out of the way. you will probably need it to turdpolish your next argument.

I don't understand what you mean.

I do not say something cannot come from nothing.

I do not know.

Is this a bit like you ability arguement?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I don't understand what you mean.

I do not say something cannot come from nothing.

I do not know.

Is this a bit like you ability arguement?

Well, science deals with cause and effect.
Something that comes from nothing is er, just effect.