We can't judge god by our standards.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2013, 10:38 PM (This post was last modified: 07-12-2013 11:00 PM by Free.)
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(07-12-2013 03:40 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 01:23 PM)Free Wrote:  How do I change something to mean it as a superstition when it exists in its natural state as, in fact, a superstition?

It is called disregarding precepts so as to make up your own definitions of words used prior to your existence so as to mean something other than was originally meant and then call your conclusions based on your error of interpretation as fact. The bible clearly identifies God as Love. This happened long before you were born, and Love is not a superstition.

Your response is no response at all, since you are attempting to dispute my point with yet another unsubstantiated belief.

Listen, I understand your beliefs and respect your right to defend them. Hell, I will even defend your right to believe as you do. But you cannot compound beliefs upon beliefs in an effort to dispute a point for the simple reason that all of your beliefs completely depend firstly upon the existence of your god, who's existence you cannot establish. It is not up to me to establish your god's non-existence because that is expecting someone to prove a negative.

If you make a positive claim that something exists, then the burden of proof falls to you to prove the claim.

Therefore my question of "How do I change something to mean it as a superstition when it exists in its natural state as, in fact, a superstition," remains unaddressed.

Quote:
Quote:Until you can demonstrate otherwise, then of course it is a superstition. The burden of proof is upon he/she who makes a positive claim, not upon those who dispute the claim. Since it is your position that your god exists, it is your responsibility to demonstrate that as being truthful conclusively. Until you do, then the default position is that God does not exist.

I have proven God exists since the precept of the definition of the term I am using is referring to the goodness in mankind called Love. Love does exist as the goodness in mankind. Of course I know that Love is not based upon the existence of superstition. Moreover this is not my God, but everyone's God. It is not a matter of yours or mines opinion.

How does the existence of love in any way prove the existence of your god?

Quote:Simple, I don't believe God\Love is superstition.

Those are your beliefs and you are entitled to them, however you must acknowledge that they are just beliefs, and in no way can be demonstrated to be factual.

Quote:
Quote:Again, the burden of proof is always upon he/she who makes the positive claim. Until such proof is provided, the claim is false. If this were not true, then anyone could claim that anything does exist, and we would all have to accept that existence with absolutely no proof whatsoever.
You're missing the point. God defined as Love does exist. God defined as made up by men does not.

If that's your position, then equally God defined as Hate would also exist. God defined as the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or Batman would also exist. Using your reasoning, anything can be defined as God.

Quote:I am not disagreeing with you. I am saying you are arbitrarily changing the meaning of the term God to mean other than what scripture us referring to. Your applied reasoning based on a false understanding of the term is not in question. This is taken from 1 John 4:8.
1 John 4:8
New International Version (NIV)
8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Here I have factually proven that the term God used in scripture is identified as Love. You are blatantly disregarding this fact if you claim they are referring to something made up by men.

You are quoting an author known by the name of John. I shall quote someone else you might know, who goes by the name of Jesus:

Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit.

So according to Jesus, is God identified as love, or is God identified as a Spirit?

Who do you believe, Jesus or John?

You will be interested to know that the Hebrew word Jesus uses for "Spirit" in that verse is feminine, and he is again demonstrating polytheism by speaking of the female aspect of his gods. And did you know that the spiritual mother of Jesus was known as Wisdom, aka "Sophia?" Read the following:

Mat_11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But Wisdom is justified of Her children.

He's literally telling you that he is a child of Wisdom, "Pistis Sophia", or ... as you may already have figured out .. the Holy Spirit.

Indeed, also view the following scripture:

Luk 11:49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:

And now view it again in its proper format:

Luk 11:49 Therefore, also said the Wisdom of God, "I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute."

Jesus is actually quoting Wisdom/Pistis Sophia/The Holy Spirit in the quote above. That is why it says "said the wisdom of God." He is telling you that the God Wisdom has said, ""I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute."

Hence again ... polytheism.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Free's post
08-12-2013, 12:29 AM (This post was last modified: 08-12-2013 11:24 AM by childeye.)
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(07-12-2013 05:35 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Human emotions exist. That is true. Not a single word of your conclusions follows from this premise.
I simply said God is Love. Love exists. What's the big deal?

Quote:Human emotions don't have sons.
Actually the words sons of God in the bible is a spiritual terminology not a carnal one. Belief in Jesus' act of self sacrifice touches my heart and I wish to emulate him accordingly, hence Love has children.

(07-12-2013 03:40 PM)childeye Wrote:  Love does exist as the goodness in mankind. Of course I know that Love is not based upon the existence of superstition. Moreover this is not my God, but everyone's God. It is not a matter of yours or mines opinion.

Quote:In attaching the label 'God' you are imputing an externality, a continuity, an agency, a purpose, and a thousand other things, absent all coherence, evidence, or providence
.
I simply state the obvious. Love is external as well as internal. We receive Love from out side ourselves and it affects us inside. We take for granted that which is good and no one ever asks why does God do good. It is therefore clear that Love precedes us. I do believe in Loves continuity even as I believe this temporal existence wherein we experience it's value is not a wasted lesson that dies in the grave without purpose or reason. And I suppose philosophically speaking you could describe Love as an agency. I don't think it is without any coherence however since I honestly see Love as good and I cannot help that nor change it, nor understand any plausible reason why I would need to. I cannot logically count Love as bad. Therefore it is by providence. As for evidence, all of this is self evident and I have explained why with all sincerity the cause for my conviction.

Quote:These are things you just made up. There is no link. The subjective personal experience of a crazy person is not compelling.
So explain to me why not wishing to be a hypocrite or deceived or dishonest is insanity. I did not make these things up. I simply declare what is self-evident in my honesty to the best of my ability. I believe Jesus is the true character of God.

I also understand your reasoning and why you say the things you do. When asked the question do you believe Jesus is the son of God, this would be a loaded question to you. Your immediate response is first prove there is a God.

But Truth be told, you do not comprehend the term which is why you have an aversion to the concept and consequently the term with all its implications. I do understand, since to me it is clear that it is referring to that which is eternal. That which is outside time because it transcends time. I also realize that what is eternal can never be proven to be eternal by that which is temporal. A man would simply die following a line that goes on forever trying to prove that it ends somewhere. I don't believe anyone can see God through dishonesty. And here is where dishonesty would be present in my reasoning if I were to say prove to me first that there is a God. For I know what is eternal cannot be proven to be so. It is therefore an issue of faith. Do I want to believe Love is eternal? Since I count Love as good, the answer is obvious. Do I see a divine Love in the story of the cross and in he who dies and yet forgives those who mercilessly crucify him? The answer is yes. If there was a divine Love that transcended life and was incorruptible, this is what it would do.

Quote:Whereas according to you:
Love exists,
THEREFORE a moldy old contradictory and indeed falsifiable book of jumbled-up melting-pot mythology which happens to say as much in a couple places is true. And divinely inspired, because that's a thing human emotions can do now.

Yeah. "Logic".
So what would you have me do? Is it logical to ignore that the bible speaks of God as Love for the sake of a hope that Love is not eternal? What exactly is wrong with hoping Love is Eternal? Why exactly is that insanity? Your view to me is illogical.
Quote:I have a tiger-repelling rock whose operational principles bear more connection to reality.
What exactly is the reality you embrace? The universe? And what if this universe is just a simulation? What if all physical matter is computable pixels? Let us make man in our image implies just that.



[
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 12:35 AM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
double post.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 01:41 AM (This post was last modified: 08-12-2013 02:01 AM by childeye.)
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(07-12-2013 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  If you make a positive claim that something exists, then the burden of proof falls to you to prove the claim.
I simply am saying Love exists. I don't see the problem. Surely you're not suggesting that love does not exist.

Quote:Therefore my question of "How do I change something to mean it as a superstition when it exists in its natural state as, in fact, a superstition," remains unaddressed.
Exactly how does love exist as superstition?


Quote:How does the existence of love in any way prove the existence of your god?
That's a simple answer, God is Love.

Quote:Those are your beliefs and you are entitled to them, however you must acknowledge that they are just beliefs, and in no way can be demonstrated to be factual.
I believe that Love rules as the goodness in mankind. That's proof enough for me.

Quote:You're missing the point. God defined as Love does exist. God defined as made up by men does not.

Quote:If that's your position, then equally God defined as Hate would also exist.
Yes but hating one another is not the goodness in mankind.
Quote: God defined as the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or Batman would also exist. Using your reasoning, anything can be defined as God
.
This is not my reasoning. I don't see any of these as the goodness in mankind.

Quote:I am not disagreeing with you. I am saying you are arbitrarily changing the meaning of the term God to mean other than what scripture us referring to. Your applied reasoning based on a false understanding of the term is not in question. This is taken from 1 John 4:8.
1 John 4:8
New International Version (NIV)
8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Here I have factually proven that the term God used in scripture is identified as Love. You are blatantly disregarding this fact if you claim they are referring to something made up by men.
Quote:You are quoting an author known by the name of John. I shall quote someone else you might know, who goes by the name of Jesus:

Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit.

So according to Jesus, is God identified as love, or is God identified as a Spirit?

Who do you believe, Jesus or John?
i believe they are both correct. Love is a Spirit.

Quote:You will be interested to know that the Hebrew word Jesus uses for "Spirit" in that verse is feminine, and he is again demonstrating polytheism by speaking of the female aspect of his gods. And did you know that the spiritual mother of Jesus was known as Wisdom, aka "Sophia?" Read the following:

Mat_11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But Wisdom is justified of Her children.

He's literally telling you that he is a child of Wisdom, "Pistis Sophia", or ... as you may already have figured out .. the Holy Spirit.

Indeed, also view the following scripture:

Luk 11:49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:

And now view it again in its proper format:

Luk 11:49 Therefore, also said the Wisdom of God, "I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute."

Jesus is actually quoting Wisdom/Pistis Sophia/The Holy Spirit in the quote above. That is why it says "said the wisdom of God." He is telling you that the God Wisdom has said, ""I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute."

Hence again ... polytheism.
I understand where you are coming from. But consider this. Male and female gender usage are terms being used to describe spiritual characteristics based on the perspectives according to who preceded who as part of the other. This simply means one preceded the other in existence. Hence the woman was made from a piece of the man, and the son from a piece of the woman. There are certain characteristics that are circumstantial results of the order of existence. This does not however imply polytheism since all are one in that they all proceeded from the same Spirit. The Holy Spirit testifies to God and not to its self. Likewise Jesus says he can do nothing apart from the Father, just as we as his body can do nothing apart from him. He is therefore acknowledged as the head of the body of Christ because it is his spirit that dwells in us to do his will. Hence God rules as the goodness in mankind. This is not polytheism. Jesus never said the God wisdom, he simply meant the wisdom that comes from God just as scripture states that Christ has become wisdom for us. While it can be said there are many gods by God, this simply means that there is One Spirit of Truth that can live in many men and all these men would be a part of God or children of God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 01:50 AM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
What, no address to 'lil ol' me?

In fact, I can probably do without it.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 02:05 AM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(07-12-2013 09:03 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 08:41 PM)childeye Wrote:  I'm not speaking of the literal heart organ. I suppose you never heard of a broken heart? It is not cured by surgery. I highly doubt that when your feelings get hurt you get a headache.

A broken heart is a psychological issue dude, just like a fallen ego and damaged pride. Psych problems tend to be localised in and to the brain.

Unless we are talking Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, then it's kind of in the heart and the brain...
Perhaps you don't realize you are only making my point. A broken heart is just an expression.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 02:20 AM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(08-12-2013 02:05 AM)childeye Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 09:03 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  A broken heart is a psychological issue dude, just like a fallen ego and damaged pride. Psych problems tend to be localised in and to the brain.

Unless we are talking Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, then it's kind of in the heart and the brain...
Perhaps you don't realize you are only making my point.

So you are admitting that emotions are entirely psychological and thus confined to the brain, that's good.

(08-12-2013 02:05 AM)childeye Wrote:  A broken heart is just an expression.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy disagrees with that statement....

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 11:05 AM (This post was last modified: 08-12-2013 11:31 AM by childeye.)
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(08-12-2013 02:20 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  So you are admitting that emotions are entirely psychological and thus confined to the brain, that's good.
Thanks.

(08-12-2013 02:05 AM)childeye Wrote:  A broken heart is just an expression.

Quote:Takotsubo cardiomyopathy disagrees with that statement...
I don't know what that is. However,
I once knew this heartbreaker whose chin had a dimple from where she grinned as she reached in with her skilled and honed talent to rip the heart out of someone and rip it in half while she watched the shocked expression on her victims face. She lost that grin however one day, when she experienced a very bad jaw breaker. Ha.......Ha.......Ha......
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 11:36 AM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(08-12-2013 11:05 AM)childeye Wrote:  I don't know what that is.

Wikipedia Wrote:Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as transient apical ballooning syndrome, apical ballooning cardiomyopathy, stress-induced cardiomyopathy, Gebrochenes-Herz-Syndrom, and stress cardiomyopathy is a type of non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy in which there is a sudden temporary weakening of the myocardium (the muscle of the heart). Because this weakening can be triggered by emotional stress, such as the death of a loved one, a break-up, or constant anxiety, it is also known as broken heart syndrome. Stress cardiomyopathy is a well-recognized cause of acute heart failure, lethal ventricular arrhythmias, and ventricular rupture.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takotsubo_cardiomyopathy

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
08-12-2013, 12:09 PM
RE: We can't judge god by our standards.
(08-12-2013 11:36 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(08-12-2013 11:05 AM)childeye Wrote:  I don't know what that is.

Wikipedia Wrote:Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as transient apical ballooning syndrome, apical ballooning cardiomyopathy, stress-induced cardiomyopathy, Gebrochenes-Herz-Syndrom, and stress cardiomyopathy is a type of non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy in which there is a sudden temporary weakening of the myocardium (the muscle of the heart). Because this weakening can be triggered by emotional stress, such as the death of a loved one, a break-up, or constant anxiety, it is also known as broken heart syndrome. Stress cardiomyopathy is a well-recognized cause of acute heart failure, lethal ventricular arrhythmias, and ventricular rupture.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takotsubo_cardiomyopathy
Thanks for educating me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: