Ask a Theist!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-12-2014, 05:06 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(18-12-2014 06:04 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  What's it like being you? lol. you know, being theist, in an atheist forums, 165 rep, a 300+ page thread all about you and one of the cool kids on the block of these forums lol!?

You clearly have some sort of X factor that makes you as awesome as you are, what's yo secret? Laugh out load

I ain't no different or better than any other person wandering this earth on or on this forum.

There are so many better people than me on this forum alone it's not even funny. Full Circle has met me, and he can tell you I'm as plain as they come.

I've been around a long time... and honestly, I think I popped up and just the right time.

When I arrived 3 years ago the forum had not seen a lot of theists. It had one diddo-like theist that was the first member banned and one semi-regular theist that people liked. But, when I started posted I dived in with both feet. Spectre didn't post that much, so he didn't have time to build as many relationships.

I think I was just the the first theist that people could actually talk to and discuss things without it becoming nasty. Everything was always pretty cordial.

I also participated in other parts of the forum... and posted as a normal poster... not a "theist poster". I think that helped a lot.

So, in short, I just think it was a timing thing.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
23-12-2014, 05:07 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(18-12-2014 09:09 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  â€˜Cause then they would know what the other one was thinking?

See above.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2014, 05:22 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(21-12-2014 07:58 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Apologies that I have not read this huge thread.

I'm curious about Christian conceptions of Jesus. In your view....

Was Jesus God taking on a human form so we humans could relate to Him? Is Jesus not really a human type entity in heaven, but only on Earth?

As example, if we discover a million intelligent non-human civilizations across the Milky Way galaxy, what is their relationship with Jesus? Are these aliens ruled over by a human Jesus, or would God present Himself to these aliens in an alien form?

Is Jesus human only in his relationship to us? Or is his human-like appearance/existence somehow more universal?

Is Jesus a messenger whose specialty is humans? Or does He have a universal relevance to all things and creatures everywhere?

Thanks!

I talk about aliens and God here and here

tl;dr -

Yes, sorta, probably same as ours, alien, no way to know for sure, probably not if there are aliens, probably not if there are aliens, probably

So

If there are aliens, Christ probably did the same thing with them.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2014, 06:17 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
Quote:
Quote:Even if one of them is (all powerful)+ and the other is (all loving)- they're essentially the same "person."

Why? I disagree. An all powerful being doesn't have to be omni-benevolent?

Also, where did omni-benevolence come from? The Christian God isn't this.

Oh. I thought the O3 you referred to was Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnibenevolent? What did I get wrong?

(23-12-2014 04:58 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(18-12-2014 05:13 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  ^I'm saying that two beings with access to all the same information would make the same decisions and behave in the same way.

Why?

Complete power would affect a decision based on infinite knowledge differently than limited power would with infinite knowledge.

I mean... I still don't see how you can say that beings infinite knowledge would make the same decisions.

Infinite knowledge is also knowledge of middle knowledge; therefore, the power that the being has would definitely affect which path it would take.

I've explained this poorly. I may also be making an assumption that you're not.

Base assumption: The "made man in his image" bit refers to the structure of a human mind/ soul/ spirit/ whatever. So even if we're not one-to-one in how we make decisions, understand the world around us and think, we do so in a way that is comparable and similar to god/ a god/ whatever.

I'd also reach this conclusion if you dropped the "made man in his image" bit from the argument. Our minds are the best example (maybe, certainly not the only example) of a mind that we we can use for a discussion like this. I'm just not sure what other options there are.

If you're positing a completely inhuman mind/ soul/ whatever for god: Fair play.
I'm just not sure how to respond to that.

So if two omniscient beings existed they'd have access to all same information, in the same way. They'd have all the same "experiences" that shape how they view the information, react to it emotionally(?) how they parse the information and how they choose to behave.

(If they do infact choose and they're not locked into a preset path of behaviour that they know they're going to do because it's what they're going to do or any of the other potential problems with perfect precognition.)

If I take two people who know everything and put one of them in control of a helicopter and a battleship then it doesn't matter which is has control over which vehicle. The decisions they'd make, how they'd use their capabilities, are the same.

That's not a great metaphor or argument because I don't know, and neither of us can define, the relationship of the O3 (though I'm still not sure what they are) to each other. If OmniX, Y create OmniZ or if it's possible to have OmniX without OmniY and Z or if it's possible to have "Arbitrarily Large" X, Y and Z rather than "Infinite" X, Y and Z.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2014, 08:40 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  I've explained this poorly. I may also be making an assumption that you're not.

No really. I'm just retarded.

Quote:Base assumption: The "made man in his image" bit refers to the structure of a human mind/ soul/ spirit/ whatever. So even if we're not one-to-one in how we make decisions, understand the world around us and think, we do so in a way that is comparable and similar to god/ a god/ whatever.

I'd also reach this conclusion if you dropped the "made man in his image" bit from the argument. Our minds are the best example (maybe, certainly not the only example) of a mind that we we can use for a discussion like this. I'm just not sure what other options there are.

If you're positing a completely inhuman mind/ soul/ whatever for god: Fair play.
I'm just not sure how to respond to that.

The "in His image" thing doesn't have a bearing on this, IMO. We're not infinite like He is, and we have a likeness to Him... but surely not infinite like Him. "In His image" sure... but limited and finite as humans in all aspects.

Quote:So if two omniscient beings existed they'd have access to all same information, in the same way. They'd have all the same "experiences" that shape how they view the information, react to it emotionally(?) how they parse the information and how they choose to behave.

Yes... but one with unlimited power would react differently than one with only limited power. That's what I'm saying. Omnipotence changes things.

Quote:If I take two people who know everything and put one of them in control of a helicopter and a battleship then it doesn't matter which is has control over which vehicle. The decisions they'd make, how they'd use their capabilities, are the same.

Again... how they would use their abilities would be different based on their level of power.

Quote:That's not a great metaphor or argument because I don't know, and neither of us can define, the relationship of the O3 (though I'm still not sure what they are)

See. Retard moment by me. The Christian Bible claims that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. That omni-benevolent stuff is BS and made up. Yahweh is soooooo not omni-benevolent... I don't even understand the justification for this claim.

Quote:to each other. If OmniX, Y create OmniZ or if it's possible to have OmniX without OmniY and Z or if it's possible to have "Arbitrarily Large" X, Y and Z rather than "Infinite" X, Y and Z.

The way I see it:

The least of these is omnipresence and that doesn't affect the others. However, omnipotence and omniscient affect each other greatly. Just what I'm thinking.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2014, 07:04 AM (This post was last modified: 25-12-2014 07:13 AM by Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue.)
RE: Ask a Theist!
(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  I've explained this poorly. I may also be making an assumption that you're not.

No really. I'm just retarded.

I'll have you know; I'm a billion-ty times more retarded than you. So: *Raspberry*

(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Base assumption: The "made man in his image" bit refers to the structure of a human mind/ soul/ spirit/ whatever. So even if we're not one-to-one in how we make decisions, understand the world around us and think, we do so in a way that is comparable and similar to god/ a god/ whatever.

I'd also reach this conclusion if you dropped the "made man in his image" bit from the argument. Our minds are the best example (maybe, certainly not the only example) of a mind that we we can use for a discussion like this. I'm just not sure what other options there are.

If you're positing a completely inhuman mind/ soul/ whatever for god: Fair play.
I'm just not sure how to respond to that.

The "in His image" thing doesn't have a bearing on this, IMO. We're not infinite like He is, and we have a likeness to Him... but surely not infinite like Him. "In His image" sure... but limited and finite as humans in all aspects.

I'm not sure what you're saying. If you agree that our mind/ soul/ whatever is not fundamentally different to god then do you agree with the conclusion that that god's mental processes are a "bigger" mind constructed along the same principles? (That's a terrible way to put it. Tired.)

(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  
(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  So if two omniscient beings existed they'd have access to all same information, in the same way. They'd have all the same "experiences" that shape how they view the information, react to it emotionally(?) how they parse the information and how they choose to behave.

Yes... but one with unlimited power would react differently than one with only limited power. That's what I'm saying. Omnipotence changes things.

If I take two people who know everything and put one of them in control of a helicopter and a battleship then it doesn't matter which is has control over which vehicle. The decisions they'd make, how they'd use their capabilities, are the same.

Again... how they would use their abilities would be different based on their level of power.

Absolutely but it only changes their behaviour and how they apply the power they have.

They'd still be different "entities" but only in that they'd have different abilities. The guiding intelligence/ mind/ soul/ whatever behind both of them would be the same and that's what makes my initial question kinda dumb.

(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  That's not a great metaphor or argument because I don't know, and neither of us can define, the relationship of the O3 (though I'm still not sure what they are)

See. Retard moment by me. The Christian Bible claims that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. That omni-benevolent stuff is BS and made up. Yahweh is soooooo not omni-benevolent... I don't even understand the justification for this claim.

That makes more sense; thank you. (Frankly I'm not even sure what omnibenevolent would mean.) Slightly insane because of the various infinite contradictions, that I'd prefer if we didn't get into because I'm certain you've had that conversation before, but still closer to Earth than the alternative.

Though omnipresence has never made much sense to me either:
-If god has no physical body or physical locum of power or whatever, then it doesn't have a spacial relationship to the universe and so can't be "everywhere."
-If omnipresence is describing some kind of ability to manipulate everything in the universe then it's describing a facet of omnipotence.
-If omnipresence is describing some kind of kinesthetic sense or understanding of everything in the universe then it's describing a facet of omniscience.

It's, at best; a redundant descriptor.

Edit: Realized just after posting. It's a reference to gods "non-material nature." I'm dumb.

Edit 2: No it's not. "Not being anywhere" is the opposite of "being everywhere." I'm still kinda dumb.

(24-12-2014 08:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(23-12-2014 06:17 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  to each other. If OmniX, Y create OmniZ or if it's possible to have OmniX without OmniY and Z or if it's possible to have "Arbitrarily Large" X, Y and Z rather than "Infinite" X, Y and Z.

The way I see it:

The least of these is omnipresence and that doesn't affect the others. However, omnipotence and omniscient affect each other greatly. Just what I'm thinking.

I'm just replying to this section in order to say that; though I agree with your conclusion (I outlined something similar above.) I also think it's an arbitrary distinction.

I mean: Which is the least of three infinities?

And Merry Christmas bro.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2014, 07:25 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
It interests me how similar the Jehovah character is to the real world.

Consider the words "nature" or "reality". They really mean "everything", right?

As example, is nature good or bad, right or wrong, up or down, left or right? The question makes no sense, because nature is everything and everywhere, right? That is, nature is beyond all these dualistic concepts that the human mind generates.

Because nature is everything, it is loaded with apparent contradictions. It is both gloriously beautiful, and the most ruthless heartless killer of the innocent. But we never yell "nature is contradictory, illogical!!!", do we?

Imho, the Jehovah character is a personalization of nature, and he represents it pretty well. Because he is said to be everything and everywhere, he contains all things, and is thus beyond contradiction.

You will argue with this of course. Before you do, please prove that the dualistic human mind is capable of grasping anything that is not a something, not a this or a that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2014, 05:26 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(25-12-2014 07:25 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  It interests me how similar the Jehovah character is to the real world.

Consider the words "nature" or "reality". They really mean "everything", right?

As example, is nature good or bad, right or wrong, up or down, left or right? The question makes no sense, because nature is everything and everywhere, right? That is, nature is beyond all these dualistic concepts that the human mind generates.

Because nature is everything, it is loaded with apparent contradictions. It is both gloriously beautiful, and the most ruthless heartless killer of the innocent. But we never yell "nature is contradictory, illogical!!!", do we?

Imho, the Jehovah character is a personalization of nature, and he represents it pretty well. Because he is said to be everything and everywhere, he contains all things, and is thus beyond contradiction.

You will argue with this of course. Before you do, please prove that the dualistic human mind is capable of grasping anything that is not a something, not a this or a that.

The problem with this whole line of argument is that nobody except you thinks of Jehovah that way. Everyone who believes that Jehovah exists believes that he is "all good" (and not only that, but the standard for what "good" is), and takes pains to say so. Therefore, evidence that he is not "all good" (which can be found all over the Bible, especially the Old Testament) is a real contradiction, not an "apparent" contradiction.

If Jehovah was simply identified with "everything that is", he wouldn't be worth discussing at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2014, 05:58 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
Quote:The problem with this whole line of argument is that nobody except you thinks of Jehovah that way.

Yes, I understand, you're very very very interested in debunking theists. I'm not. There are billions of theists, so it doesn't surprise me that some of them are just chanting memorized slogans.

Quote:Everyone who believes that Jehovah exists believes that he is "all good"

"Everyone who believes that Jehovah exists" is quite a few people? Are you sure you want to make such a sweeping claim? I'm agreeable that a lot of people feel as you describe. Can you be happy with that?

Quote:Therefore, evidence that he is not "all good" (which can be found all over the Bible, especially the Old Testament) is a real contradiction, not an "apparent" contradiction.

Why would a god proposed to be all powerful be bound by the laws of human reason? Why would such an entity be required to be non-contradictory?

What you're really claiming is that the laws of human reason are essentially "god", that is, binding on all things everywhere. Care to prove that perhaps?

Quote:If Jehovah was simply identified with "everything that is", he wouldn't be worth discussing at all.

That's up to you of course. I must admit I don't feel that way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2014, 06:18 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
OK, show me some evidence of someone, anyone (other than yourself) who believes in "Jehovah" and (a) doesn't consider him to be "good" rather than "bad", and/or (b) equates him with "everything there is". If you can do that, I will retract that part of my claim.

And if "Jehovah" is equated with "everything there is", what would be the point of talking about whether or not he exists, or whether he's good or bad? What would be the point of talking about him at all? Normally, when I engage in discussion with someone, it's about something a bit more specific than "everything there is".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: