the God term
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-04-2013, 08:28 PM (This post was last modified: 24-04-2013 09:27 PM by childeye.)
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 07:32 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  
(24-04-2013 06:39 PM)childeye Wrote:  Have you seen post 1248?

I have. But it's still not clear to me what specifically I said that you felt was outside any limitations. Perhaps this is because I see none.

So, perhaps you should explain what you're referring to as "the atheist box".
The atheist box is conflating religion with God. The atheist mind does not consider the term god anything other than superstition, much less the term God as in a real Person Who is knowable. That is why I use the term god refering to men's imaginings of god which I see as religion, while I use the term God to refer to The True Image He sends which is meant to end man's false images of god and end all religion. That is why I have said that the terms God\god is meant to be an absolute\false absolute. Morally speaking therefore, every man who doesn't know God, must construct an image of god whenever they decide what is right or wrong. Hence there are many false gods, many religions, many differing rights and wrongs. Love is simple enough to understand as empathy, but if that empathy is regarded as a man's prerogative or initiative then it is vanity and not God. So imagine how hard it is to describe to an atheist the definition of God when the mindset is that god\God\religion is all counted as the same.

This is what you said that was outside the box: However, I see these traits as human being shared by most living things. I do not see them as spiritual nor do I see the necessity to claim any outside forces.

This is exactly what I wish to discuss so as to answer the question,"is Love a power that is spiritual in nature that can be regarded as an entity separate from the flesh?"
I have this Love right here in my heart and it is pure, therefore it is God. And because I have this Love, I have no desire to steal or murder or in any way do harm to anyone. Can this Love be taken away? If it was, would I even care?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2013, 08:37 PM
RE: the God term
mistake
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2013, 08:39 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 07:36 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(24-04-2013 06:58 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  That's what's so disingenuous...the goal post keeps getting movied at his will. He'll twist around words so that they mean what he believes.

He doesn't care a wit about truth, he just needs to feel he's won.

That's why I'm ignoring him from now on. It's not worth the effort because he'll just cherry pick what he wants to see.

I hear you. I tried to ignore him, but dammit, something just keeps dragging me back. I think I have to hear him admit that it could just be in his head. Just once, then I could let it go.

Weeping

Yea but what's the definition of redundant?


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2013, 08:40 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 08:37 PM)childeye Wrote:  mistake

Yup. Drinking Beverage

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2013, 08:41 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 08:39 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(24-04-2013 07:36 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  I hear you. I tried to ignore him, but dammit, something just keeps dragging me back. I think I have to hear him admit that it could just be in his head. Just once, then I could let it go.

Weeping

Yea but what's the definition of redundant?

The god term.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
24-04-2013, 09:56 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  This is exactly what I wish to discuss so as to answer the question,"is Love a power that is spiritual in nature that can be regarded as an entity separate from the flesh?"

Love is Void.

Part of tao is the manufacture of necessary dualities. Perhaps the fundamental duality is that of sequence and simultaneity. Causality and materialism derive from sequence, spirituality from simultaneity. But your God and my Gwynnies, they're vectors. Signposts on the journey.

Theists who assign identity to god are like locals giving directions. Keep telling peeps shit like "Take a left at Earl's," and when we go Huh you just speak louder, slower, like we're deaf.

You say Love is fundamental, imply it is like GPS; so what the fuck are we talking about?

And my usual conclusion is the uncertain faith of the theist. You find confidence in numbers. You need each other to lean against, to confirm each other's bias, to make sequence that which is simultaneous.

That's too many words... I love my Gwynnies. Take away my vector, and I love, but you won't hear nothing from me, cause I'll be waiting to die. Then take away the I.

And what's left? The undifferentiated medium. God, if you will...

So what are we really talking about? Your insecurities, your fear, your lack of purpose? Consider

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
24-04-2013, 10:15 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  The atheist box is conflating religion with God.

No, you still don't seem to understand. I shall try to speak only for myself.

I do not feel I am conflating the 2 ideas as they are totally separate.

God/god/gods: I do not believe in these.

Religion: I know that it exists so it would be silly to say I don't believe in its existence. I have seen its effects firsthand since my youth and continue to see them to this day. I see it as a vestigial human cultural practice which has served us well in the past. However, it's usefulness seems to be on the decline and I do not feel I shall lament its passing.

In what way do these considerations appear to be conflation?

(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  This is exactly what I wish to discuss so as to answer the question,"is Love a power that is spiritual in nature that can be regarded as an entity separate from the flesh?"
What causes you to believe it to be separate from you? What is "spiritual"? Where does "spirit" end and "flesh" begin? How much do you know of your own flesh and its rich history?

(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  I have this Love right here in my heart and it is pure,
How does one measure such purity? How do you know it to be pure? What would be impure love?

(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  ...therefore it is God.
Again, I fear you presume too much. Where does this idea come from? Surely not from within? The concept of God was given to you by other humans. You were not born with it.

(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  And because I have this Love, I have no desire to steal or murder or in any way do harm to anyone.
This is good to hear. However, how do you know that love is the source of your behavior? What other possibilities have you considered?

(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  Can this Love be taken away? If it was, would I even care?
I can see that if you believe it to come from outside yourself this would be cause for concern.

I believe that love can come from both external and internal sources. However, the external forces I sense love from are fellow humans. So, yes, I do believe *some* love can be taken from you...by others....by yourself. Which tends (not always) to encourage humans to treat one another with kindness.

I see no reason to invoke the supernatural to explain the way people treat one another or feel about one another. In fact, it most often tends to get in the way and confuse the issue.

Perhaps what is really happening here, is that you may be conflating love and an ancient myth (yes, I'm sorry, but no matter how much you try to distance yourself from religious traditions or to craft as original or personal a conceptualization of God as possible, it is still based on an ancient myth)?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cardinal Smurf's post
25-04-2013, 10:09 AM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 06:58 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(24-04-2013 06:49 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Huh, I could have sworn you called it the absolute truth.

That's what's so disingenuous...the goal post keeps getting movied at his will. He'll twist around words so that they mean what he believes.

He doesn't care a wit about truth, he just needs to feel he's won.

That's why I'm ignoring him from now on. It's not worth the effort because he'll just cherry pick what he wants to see.
Of course you can ignore me if that seems to you the thing to do. But I have not been disingenuous. You all know perfectly well that I have always viewed God as a Person.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2013, 01:46 PM (This post was last modified: 25-04-2013 09:37 PM by childeye.)
RE: the God term
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: the God term
(24-04-2013 09:56 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(24-04-2013 08:28 PM)childeye Wrote:  This is exactly what I wish to discuss so as to answer the question,"is Love a power that is spiritual in nature that can be regarded as an entity separate from the flesh?"

Love is Void.

Part of tao is the manufacture of necessary dualities. Perhaps the fundamental duality is that of sequence and simultaneity. Causality and materialism derive from sequence, spirituality from simultaneity. But your God and my Gwynnies, they're vectors. Signposts on the journey.

Theists who assign identity to god are like locals giving directions. Keep telling peeps shit like "Take a left at Earl's," and when we go Huh you just speak louder, slower, like we're deaf.

You say Love is fundamental, imply it is like GPS; so what the fuck are we talking about?

And my usual conclusion is the uncertain faith of the theist. You find confidence in numbers. You need each other to lean against, to confirm each other's bias, to make sequence that which is simultaneous.

That's too many words... I love my Gwynnies. Take away my vector, and I love, but you won't hear nothing from me, cause I'll be waiting to die. Then take away the I.

And what's left? The undifferentiated medium. God, if you will...

So what are we really talking about? Your insecurities, your fear, your lack of purpose? Consider
I believe we are talking about which came first, Light or darkness. Truth or lies, Holiness or corruption. Life or death. Thank you for your excellent post.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: