That's news to me. Certainly we can't take this statement for granted, but perhaps we can proceed on the provisional assumption that this is the case-- e.g. "assuming the universe was created by some god, what could we say about..." You should give us some idea of what you mean by "god" and explicate any properties this god might have that would be relevant to this discussion.time traveller d said:
Not necessarily. Your argument seems to rest on the truth of the conditional, "If A creates B, then A can manipulate B in whatever way A wishes." But this conditional is false. For instance, if I create a robot out of a cheesy science fiction movie, it does not follow that I will be able to do whatever I wish with this robot (perhaps I might try to reprogram it, but perhaps it would forcibly prevent me from doing that). Or, if I create a child with a woman, it certainly doesn't follow that we can manipulate that child to be whatever way we wish it to be.time traveller d said:
The laws of physics cannot prove or disprove anything. Perhaps you meant to say that we cannot prove or disprove the existence of a god using only constraints presented to us by the laws of physics?time traveller d said:
i was trying to ask is since god created the laws of physics shouldn't he be able to manipulate and breaks the very laws of physics he made? i would think he would be able to. also, since he created the laws of physics and can manipulate and break these law's i would think that the laws of physics can not prove nor disprove his existence since these laws would not apply to him.hypnagogue said:
but can be terminated at any moment 
All you've done is to restate your original post, without addressing any of the questions and comments that were presented. Saying "I would think X is true" without any deeper elaboration is perhaps a nice way of sharing one's opinion, but it does not make for good philosophical discussion.time traveller d said:
