the God term
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-04-2013, 10:53 AM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 10:48 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  I was more commenting on what you have said in light of the place you have chosen to say it, and your lamenting that you haven't been received more hospitably.
This is true and I appreciate your candor.

Quote:You also seem a bit ambiguous in your claims. At first you agreed that the bible, being written by man, is no source for truth claims about god, yet you go on to quote scripture as though it is god inspired truth. See the problem there?
The problem I see is that people misunderstand what I say whether that is my fault or not, that is the problem I am having. Of course the bible was written by several men from several different times in history. That does not preclude those witings from being inspired by God. Moreover, it does not discount that some writings seen in the bible are not inspired by God. Having said that, I must point out that people come to know God all the time without ever reading the bible. Many of those who knew and taught the Old Testament scriptures crucified the Christ whom those scriptures speak about. Also, The Gospel was preached for hundreds of years to many people without what we know today as a bible. People don't even need to know how to read to receive Christ. Consequently, I never said that scripture is no source of Truth for claims about God, nor did I wish to imply that. I simply meant God does not exist because the bible says so. But rather the bible says so because He exists.

Quote:I agree that you are damned if you do, damned if you don't (not literally, of course) within the line of argument that you have chosen to present. You make no acknowledgement of the earnest struggle that many here on the forum have made to reconcile a belief in the contradictory nature of a perfect supreme being with the natural world we encounter day to day. There are many on these forums who would be more than happy to engage in serious, philosophical discussion without all the fucking around.
You're right, I haven't acknowledged such a sentiment as you describe when refering to the contradiction between a corrupt world and a Holy Creator. Nor have I seen it expressed until you mentioning it here and now. Mostly all I've seen is the refusal to even acknowledge any existence of God at all.

Quote: Problem is, you haven't presented any sort of coherent definition of god that won't end up in circular arguments for "personal revelations" proving god exists.
That seems to be a matter of opinion. I have already stipulated that there is no way around not requiring faith in some degree. Even being an atheist requires faith in there being no reason for existence, the cause of life, a cosmic accident. Hence I pointed out that Truth cannot be founded on hypocrisy. Moreover I feel I gave substantial proof. I pointed out that the Israelites were a chosen people who are the only people who exist as both a ethnicity and a religion. The exodus is a well proven episode in history. And these people say they exist to bring forth the Christ into the world. The Christ himself is proof of God. So I pointed all of these facts and they were ignored. One person wrote saying greek was also a religion and an ethnicity, and so also were sikhs. And with that single unproven pronouncment he concluded he had obliterated my point. Another writer simply said, many people were crucified and there were many who claimed to be messiahs. Of course thy failed to mention none of these others were recieved by the world nor did they alter the course of the world as the prophecies about the True Christ foretell would happen. Nor do they mention that in sixty A.D. the temple was destroyed which ended the religion of Judaism. Why? Because the Jews did what they were meant to do. They brought forth the Christ.

Quote:We've been there too many times before, and guess what? We're all still atheists. Hell, even our resident nice guy christian couldn't resist a poke. Many here have spent a lifetime studying, thinking, listening about what god coulda, woulda, shoulda meant in any real sense in this world. Long story short, he hasn't meant anything except for a lot of different versions of the same story, and a lot of violence, death and confusion for mankind.
Scriptures predict that the last religion will be atheism. It asserts that because there will be much war because of religion, that a power will rise up that will not allow the worship of god for the sake of peace. This will be called the kingdom of the antichrist, and it is in fact a worship of Satan who is behind the curtain pulling the strings.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2013, 10:54 AM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 10:48 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  I was more commenting on what you have said in light of the place you have chosen to say it, and your lamenting that you haven't been received more hospitably.
This is true and I appreciate your candor.

Quote:You also seem a bit ambiguous in your claims. At first you agreed that the bible, being written by man, is no source for truth claims about god, yet you go on to quote scripture as though it is god inspired truth. See the problem there?
The problem I see is that people misunderstand what I say whether that is my fault or not, that is the problem I am having. Of course the bible was written by several men from several different times in history. That does not preclude those witings from being inspired by God. Moreover, it does not discount that some writings seen in the bible are not inspired by God. Having said that, I must point out that people come to know God all the time without ever reading the bible. Many of those who knew and taught the Old Testament scriptures crucified the Christ whom those scriptures speak about. Also, The Gospel was preached for hundreds of years to many people without what we know today as a bible. People don't even need to know how to read to receive Christ. Consequently, I never said that scripture is no source of Truth for claims about God, nor did I wish to imply that. I simply meant God does not exist because the bible says so. But rather the bible says so because He exists.

Quote:I agree that you are damned if you do, damned if you don't (not literally, of course) within the line of argument that you have chosen to present. You make no acknowledgement of the earnest struggle that many here on the forum have made to reconcile a belief in the contradictory nature of a perfect supreme being with the natural world we encounter day to day. There are many on these forums who would be more than happy to engage in serious, philosophical discussion without all the fucking around.
You're right, I haven't acknowledged such a sentiment as you describe when refering to the contradiction between a corrupt world and a Holy Creator. Nor have I seen it expressed until you mentioning it here and now. Mostly all I've seen is the refusal to even acknowledge any existence of God at all.

Quote: Problem is, you haven't presented any sort of coherent definition of god that won't end up in circular arguments for "personal revelations" proving god exists.
That seems to be a matter of opinion. I have already stipulated that there is no way around not requiring faith in some degree. Even being an atheist requires faith in there being no reason for existence, the cause of life, a cosmic accident. Hence I pointed out that Truth cannot be founded on hypocrisy. Moreover I feel I gave substantial proof. I pointed out that the Israelites were a chosen people who are the only people who exist as both a ethnicity and a religion. The exodus is a well proven episode in history. And these people say they exist to bring forth the Christ into the world. The Christ himself is proof of God. So I pointed all of these facts and they were ignored. One person wrote saying greek was also a religion and an ethnicity, and so also were sikhs. And with that single unproven pronouncment he concluded he had obliterated my point. Another writer simply said, many people were crucified and there were many who claimed to be messiahs. Of course thy failed to mention none of these others were recieved by the world nor did they alter the course of the world as the prophecies about the True Christ foretell would happen. Nor do they mention that in sixty A.D. the temple was destroyed which ended the religion of Judaism. Why? Because the Jews did what they were meant to do. They brought forth the Christ.

Quote:We've been there too many times before, and guess what? We're all still atheists. Hell, even our resident nice guy christian couldn't resist a poke. Many here have spent a lifetime studying, thinking, listening about what god coulda, woulda, shoulda meant in any real sense in this world. Long story short, he hasn't meant anything except for a lot of different versions of the same story, and a lot of violence, death and confusion for mankind.
Scriptures predict that the last religion will be atheism. It asserts that because there will be much war because of religion, that a power will rise up that will not allow the worship of god for the sake of peace. This will be called the kingdom of the antichrist, and it is in fact a worship of Satan who is behind the curtain pulling the strings.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 09:19 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 10:45 PM)childeye Wrote:  Nontheless your unbelief is centered on Him.

Actually, no. Our unbelief in this thread is centered on you.

QED. Tongue
Atheism is the unbelief in me? But then who are you talking to, if I don't exist?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2013, 11:18 AM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 10:56 AM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-04-2013 09:19 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Actually, no. Our unbelief in this thread is centered on you.

QED. Tongue
Atheism is the unbelief in me? But then who are you talking to, if I don't exist?

Simulation of mind of another in mind, a.k.a. empathy, is the contrasting argument. You bring to the table your simulated mind of god. We do not credit your simulation due to lack of development.

[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
17-04-2013, 11:18 AM (This post was last modified: 17-04-2013 12:52 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 09:16 AM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:No one would necessarily disagree with it, except now that humans have evolved to calling god "love", all that means is that love is what is most important to us.
Yes of course Love is most important to us and always has been. But men take Love for granted even while they dismiss the very Person of God Whose Spirit it is.


Quote:St. Paul said love was a virtue, not a god, and the greatest of the god's gifts. It's a TOTALLY different concept. It's actually not a very "Christian" concept, in the classical sense. Very non-theological. But that's what it's evolved to in 2013. Interesting.
But no longer a need to call it a god.
Respectfully, you are not exactly right about this. Paul did not say God is Love, but neither did he say God is not Love. However John did call God Love. At any rate every good thing endowed by the Creator is a virtue. Love however is the source of many virtues.

Quote:The "god" term is meaningless in 2013. It's why many of us are igtheists, or ignostics. Unless you can define it, you can't say anything about it.
The term "god" is not meaningless in 2013. To an atheist the term "God" is not meaningless. It defines their very belief. To the scientists, the philosophers, the artists, the historians, to everyday people, the term God is the highest of all meanings.

Love has not always been most important to humans. The "romantic ideal" did not arise until the early Middle Ages, in the West. Try going to school. You know no cultural history, obviously. Paul did not say a lot of things. Your point is irrelevant nonsense. You did not explain "creation" with no time. You are slapping YOUR meaning onto others you do not know. You have no right to do that. You have no clue what "god" means to others. You are not the dictator of the universe. You do not define anything for anyone, other than yourself. You do not tell others what things mean to them, to justify your views to yourself. If they say the word is meaningless to them, then it's meaningless. YOU do not define reality for anyone. The absence of belief is NOT the belief in absence. You are making the common street mistake that most theists do about atheism, and you are utterly wrong. I am an igtheist, and YOU cannot (other than your "god is love" crap, which NO Hebrew in the 1st Century would say, except maybe the Gnostic Greeks who wrote John, did), which just proves the concept changes all the time, every time it's used). The word has no meaning just because idiots like you say it does. Too bad. YOU do not define reality for anyone. Get over yourself. Just because you cannot imagine it, it means nothing. YOu do not decree what reality is. How old are you, like 12 ? By your logic, your life is defined by bthe fact that you deny that there is a 1957 Chevy orbiting Pluto. Who do you think you are ? The damn pope ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
17-04-2013, 11:29 AM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 10:27 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(17-04-2013 10:19 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Don't be dissin' no Ra. Angry

It's not like I dissed your beloved Gwynnies.

Sheesh some people Rolleyes

Don't dis the Gwynnies, the Ra, the Set, the Kristen... give me a minute, the list will grow. Being human sux. Angry

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
17-04-2013, 01:06 PM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 09:07 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Let us construct a Holy Trine:

You say God is Love.
I say Love is Void.
They say God is Void.
Respectfully, I do not see a Holy trine here.
Love is void of what exactly? God is void of what exactly? If they are void then so are we.

Quote:There is no Identity to Love.
Not sure what you mean here. Of course there is an identity to Love. It is identified in a myriad of ways, from a hug and a kiss, to anger and hurt. Hence when I say love, people know what I am talking about.

Quote:Can God be greater than God? Of course not, so what the Christian apologist does is introduce another extraneous variable... Satan. And for we atheists to be so convinced of our righteousness, we must be Satan's minions.
Why is Satan irrelevant? Is it not possible that children take their parents for granted? I know I did. Many are the good things that we don't see we have until they are gone. Satan definitely was blinded in a prideful self-righteousness. And yes his minions are like him and we all have been there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2013, 01:11 PM
RE: the God term
Quote:The exodus is a well proven episode in history.

By chance any references for this claim? I'm anything but a scholar, but I have done some reading here and there. From what I've seen, there is little to no solid evidence that the exodus ever took place as described in the bible.

Did the israelite people come to reside in the place they do now? Well, yes. And they also came up with the story and claimed to be "chosen by god". Well good for them saying so. I suggest reading a little from: The Bible Unearthed:Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, Silberman/Finkelstein

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
17-04-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 10:54 AM)childeye Wrote:  Even being an atheist requires faith in there being no reason for existence, the cause of life, a cosmic accident.

Being an atheist does not require faith, it requires reason. I'm willing to bet you didn't lurk here more a few minutes before joining this forum. You did not come to seek friendship or to broaden your horizons to what atheists think or believe. To my knowledge you haven't participated in any other threads or discussions, save for the one you started. No, you came here to just tell your version of why you believe and you seem truly stunned and dismayed not have your words simply taken at face value because you took the time to start a thread.

You have offered no proof as to the idea of your god existing anymore than Zeus. You keep beating your drum about how god is love and empathy couldn't exist before monotheism. Your aphasia-riddled arguments are nothing more than a "word salad" to try seem like you somehow know your talking about.

Atheism is not a religion nor could it ever be considered one. We don't sit around worshipping a nonentity. We don't praise it...we are without theism. And please don't try to argue that because we all gather on a forum makes it somehow a religion. Unless you plan on arguing that the thousands of forums dedicated to child rearing, movies and star trek are religions as well.

You mused earlier in this thread at my "shoo fly" remark and wondered if you had somehow offended me. You were no more offensive than anyone else who tries to force their "logic" onto a group of skeptics and then feign ignorance later on and claim to not understsnd how their "testimony" can be met with any animosity -- let alone a critical eye. You have stated your case; your case has been rejected. You can stop trying to repackage the goods because the people aren't buying it.

Shoo fly...


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
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
17-04-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: the God term
(17-04-2013 11:18 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(17-04-2013 10:56 AM)childeye Wrote:  Atheism is the unbelief in me? But then who are you talking to, if I don't exist?

Simulation of mind of another in mind, a.k.a. empathy, is the contrasting argument. You bring to the table your simulated mind of god. We do not credit your simulation due to lack of development.
Respectfully, empathy is not simulation of mind. It is the ability to feel someone elses feelings. Also I don't simulate the mind of God. There are many lies that can live in one man's mind, even because there is a single Truth that can live in all men.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: