the God term
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-04-2013, 10:23 AM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 10:16 AM)childeye Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 09:50 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Irrelevant.
The point was that to you: love = god, god = love.
But, as that bible verse clearly states, you cannot possible know love.

So again, why should we listen to you even when your own dogma is working against you?
Again you misunderstand. Yes God equals Love particularly when describing that Love as empathy, wherein you have proposed the ultimate scenario. This does not mean I do not know love nor that you don't know Love. Indeed one who knows Love does those things that Love requires. Forgive me for saying, but this does not appear to be about the term God anymore. Respectfully, I would ask if you think it is fair that you are proposing barriers for me that you do not pose for your self as justification to either be listened to or ignored? Accordingly we are approaching personal areas of discourse that will ultimately cast guilt and will only end up demeaning us both.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it just came to me that your argument as a "proof of god" is entirely based on the ontological argument, only made with slightly different terms.

Is this a fair assessment?

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
21-04-2013, 10:23 AM
RE: the God term
Bumpity bump bump.

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
21-04-2013, 10:57 AM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 08:35 AM)childeye Wrote:  
(20-04-2013 09:13 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  All these ancient paradigms he uses to explain the world he sees and experiences to himself. Devils, gods, sacrifices ... bla bla bla.
It's like trying to tell an Alchemist why he has no place any longer as a "professional".
I mean, at least we could catch up to the 19th Century.
Vanity of vanities, say the ancients we disdain. With upturned snout we strut about all worshipping our brains. And where a child knows there are constants to respect, the proud yet has to learn the source of his neglect.

bla bla bla
bla bla bla
bla bla bla

That's the Vanities fallacy.
It's also the equivication fallacy.
There you go again.
Equating my nose with a snout.
The proud is plural.
Therefore the verb should be "have to learn"
That's the False Verb fallacy.
Jebus does not love your English.
Therefore your Jebus is NOT 'Love".



Anyone have any good stir fry recipes ?

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
21-04-2013, 10:59 AM
RE: the God term
86 pages child and you've restated your thoughts with the same flawed circular reasoning this thread began with.

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
21-04-2013, 12:06 PM
RE: the God term
Wish I got here earlier, not going to read through so many pages though. I suppose asking the OP to get off his knees and stop bowing to the ether would be an irrational request?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atheist in Westeros's post
21-04-2013, 12:22 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 09:16 AM)childeye Wrote:  A most excellent and delightful question. Delightfully I will say that of course they are honestly mistaken, otherwise the forgivness on the cross is a sham. And this is how I know I am a True Christian.

So since *you* admit that others can be honestly mistaken, how can *you* be sure the *you* are a True Christian, and not Joe down the street who thinks True Christians should blow up True Muslims ?

Oh and your whole thing hangs on the True Love of a man who died for you.

How do you know that he did ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 12:29 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 10:23 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 10:16 AM)childeye Wrote:  Again you misunderstand. Yes God equals Love particularly when describing that Love as empathy, wherein you have proposed the ultimate scenario. This does not mean I do not know love nor that you don't know Love. Indeed one who knows Love does those things that Love requires. Forgive me for saying, but this does not appear to be about the term God anymore. Respectfully, I would ask if you think it is fair that you are proposing barriers for me that you do not pose for your self as justification to either be listened to or ignored? Accordingly we are approaching personal areas of discourse that will ultimately cast guilt and will only end up demeaning us both.

Of course it's about the term God.
You say love = god.
I say you don't know love, according to god. So how can you say that love is = to god when that god is saying that you don't know love. Effectively, your god is saying you don't know what he is. Yet you are trying to preach to us what he is...
You see the situation here?
And what barriers? We are both restricted by the same barrier, if we both say something we must have proof to back it up. I have provided my proof, the bible verse, and as such I can make my conclusion because I have the evidence to back it up.
Where's your evidence to the contrary?
The problem Sir, is you have presented a negative for me to prove. The logic of your approach has brought you to where you are assuming that as long as I am here using the internet, I cannot know God since no God knowing man would have the resources to use the internet seeing that there are yet poor in the world. But since the existence of God is not proven by my not owning a computer your deductions would remain inconclusive accordingly. Suppose therefore that charities that help the poor do use computers to accomplish the work of an altruistic Love. Or suppose I use my computer to make funds, some of which I disperse to such charities. Does this not preclude your assertion that anyone who ows a house or even clothes fopr that matter does not know God. You are pondering an endless accusation to which the Christ responded by saying,"you will always have the poor".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 12:31 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 10:59 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  86 pages child and you've restated your thoughts with the same flawed circular reasoning this thread began with.

Shoo fly
Madame I cannot help the fact that all logic revolves around a single Truth.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 12:32 PM
RE: the God term
I quit, I had an interesting side discussion with Momsurrondedbyboys but the rest of this has been shit. An attempt by childeye to use big words (I hate big words) to justify their position of "god is love" (sounds like a bad 60's record) and others correctly pointing out childeye's mistakes. On the part of the others roughly akin to pissing into a hurricane.

I am headed elsewhere.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2013, 12:33 PM
RE: the God term
(21-04-2013 12:22 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(21-04-2013 09:16 AM)childeye Wrote:  A most excellent and delightful question. Delightfully I will say that of course they are honestly mistaken, otherwise the forgivness on the cross is a sham. And this is how I know I am a True Christian.

So since *you* admit that others can be honestly mistaken, how can *you* be sure the *you* are a True Christian, and not Joe down the street who thinks True Christians should blow up True Muslims ?

Oh and your whole thing hangs on the True Love of a man who died for you.

How do you know that he did ?

[sarcasm]
He can't. He believes that he's a true Christian and everyone else isn't. Only he's qualified to define the terms. He's the only one able to set the definitions because he's a true Christian. How he interprets the word is correct, everyone else, since they aren't true Christians have it wrong.

Because only a true Christian is capable of understanding the complex nature of love and empathy. Everyone else is simply wrong, including those people who believe they are Christians but he knows they aren't true Christians because only he is a true Christian and understands the true nature of the christ.

[/sarcasm]


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
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: