RE: Define God

RE: Define God (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Starbuck09 -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 10:02:18 AM)
No problems Esinn it's been a fast moving thread and very dfcult tokeepupith everything. I was only pointing it out f my own vanity.

FullCircle -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 10:07:45 AM)
and remember kids that X is always X except when it holds the same value as Y.[8\|]

Esinn -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 10:37:36 AM)
quote: I think it is very difficult to define a concept of god but I will take a stab nevertheless. I'd say God, or a god is an agent that appears to bring order, often in the form of an ultimate plan, to chaos and chance. God does this in a way that is ultimately unknowable to the minds of man though the perceived order is endlessley open to attempts at interpretation. Once one has interpreted said order to a degree that is satisfying either on your own or by listening to others the fact that the ultimate purpose of the perceived order is unknowable requires the final element of God, faith that what has been interpreted is truth and not simply hope. Yes, I agree. Natural law has defined specific tautologies. The universe is an amazing and awe inspiring place. RNA, which has now been created in a lab, or will be very soon brings life from nothing(spontaneous creation). Vacuum fluctuations as defined by Hawkins also discuss matter(particles) popping in and out of existence. This is fairly well understood by the vast majority of physicists. Natural selection guides a process.... This process what some might define as order over millions or billions of years. In this universe there simply is no eternal order or fine tuning - the opposite is true. There are laws which govern us; laws I sit and ponder as I gaze at stars during the night(seriously). I think how a universe which is so insanely massive how awesome it is I am to exist on a planet so infinitesimally small. A planet that is indifferent to my survival. In fact a planet that frequently is hostile to my survival in a universe which 99% + is absolutely hostile to it. The most basic parts of our universe(sparticles, quarks, up quarks or neutroions) operate on absolute chance in frenzied chaotic states within a world of their own in which order is never possible. These are the building blocks of everything. Nature points against fine tuning or plan of a personal intelligent uncreated god - I briefly touched on this. It also points against general order(any college level cosmology or physics/quantum physics class will demonstrate this to satisfaction) But, yes if you wish to view some concrete laws of the universe we live in as god that is cool. It is a misuse of the word and I have discussed this in more detail in this thread or was it another - I will look for it if you like. However, this is not a theistic definition - you are playing with different tools. You are attempting to leave room for it, I speculate. I am curious what is "ultimately unknowable"? what type of agent is it? You know our minds have evolved such mechanisms to recognize such agents:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VH9-3YF3BY5-C&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=980681836&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=73eac65ba6ace0cd11317ac021ef0e18 I am also concerned with your definition as it could be aliens which fit this. It could be a human race living light years away. I am also tempted to ask if you view your god from a theistic POV where did it come from? However, the devil's advocate has remained intentionally silent. We never did finish the discussion on faith. In which thread did we start it?

Esinn -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 10:40:29 AM)
http://www.cap-press.com/pdf/1516.pdf This is a very good article on the mechanism in our brain now known as: Hyper Active Agency Detection. We are programmed to recognize "agents". A shadow might be recognized as a burglar. However, a burglar will not be recognized as a shadow - that is the benefit.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 11:40:34 AM)
I think you might have slightly misunderstood me Esinn. As you point out most scientific disciplines point to our universe as being one of chance albeit chance confined by certain rules. While defining god as those rules is temptingformyself I don't think it's fair as I don't think it is how most people would define such an entity. When I say brings or fom chaos that order is perceived by individuals. So for example a coincidence that saves one om a bus would be interpreted by many [including myself] as nothing more than chance. But others interpret it as strands of a plan that allows order to be threaded throughout chaos. THe weave of that order is completely open to interpretation. What I believe is unknowable is difficult to define,almost as difficult as it is to define god. What I would posit is that as a crocodile's brain is not able to comprehend phyics so our own brain is inherentley limited. As appaling to my ego as that is I presume that means that given the nature of the universe there will always be some concepts beyond our ability to grasp. Certainly a deity, if it exists, would be outside of our comprehension as by ''definition'' it is outside of our experiences. Therefore second guessing a god is, I believe, impossible. What one does instead is to read a religous text and if it appeals to you choose to take a leap of faith [with no evidence] that it is broadly speaking the word of god. With that in mind I could not tell you what form of agent it is as any definition I gave would be subject to the restrictions of my own brain, restrictions which such a creture would not be bound by. As for aliens it is entirely possible such a being would be an alien. Once one reaches certain levels I believe the words our interchangeable. There is no reason [as god's origin is never stated] that an omniscient being whitch takes an interest/creates man and has an ultimate plan for our race could not be an alien. Though a human race living light years away would again be subject to their own inbuilt limitations. It would be an alien nothing like ourselves [I presume]. My own theistic views are not ones that most people would consider acceptable Esinn. Personally I just hope for the best. I do not believe any of the world's religous texts are the undiluted word of god and I see no reason [personally] to do anything other than live my own life as I see fit and if there is an afterlife hope that that is good enough. If there is no afterlife I will have lived a fulfilling life and that's okay. However i'm alos aware that it is possible that i am wrong and when I am being spit roasted in hell by satan and his minions that I will have an eternity to regret my decisions. My views on the matter are sort of made up as I go along Esinn.

BitaTruble -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 12:06:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Each time god was defined I showed why the belief was based upon bias, flawed reasoning or illogical. Typically not to hear back from the person who brought it up. No, you didn't. quote: No, but what I will be doing is having stupid conversations with people who who make absolute claims based on illogical emotional decisions. Ah, semantics. You won't be having conversations about God (which, of course, you said were not possible) but about 'illogical emotional decisions.' Nicely backpeddled, Esinn. Doesn't change anything but I suppose when one goes on the defensive rather than own their words, one must do such things. I must admit, I do not have your stamina. I have no desire to engage in stupid conversations so I doubt we're going to be interacting very much. I'll leave you to the stupidity which you seem to prefer.

mnottertail -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 12:34:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble I have no desire to engage in stupid conversations ... You talk to me all the time, honey. Ron

VanityFix -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 1:42:42 PM)
i miss fighting with the jesus freaks, these athiests preachers are way less fun.. [:(]

Esinn -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 2:23:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Each time god was defined I showed why the belief was based upon bias, flawed reasoning or illogical. Typically not to hear back from the person who brought it up. No, you didn't. quote: No, but what I will be doing is having stupid conversations with people who who make absolute claims based on illogical emotional decisions. Ah, semantics. You won't be having conversations about God (which, of course, you said were not possible) but about 'illogical emotional decisions.' Nicely backpeddled, Esinn. Doesn't change anything but I suppose when one goes on the defensive rather than own their words, one must do such things. I must admit, I do not have your stamina. I have no desire to engage in stupid conversations so I doubt we're going to be interacting very much. I'll leave you to the stupidity which you seem to prefer. Well something which is beyond comprehension, knowledge or unknowable the only sort of conversation possible is with the one who holds the irrational, illogical or stupid belief(in any sphere). Of course it is possible - I thought this went with out saying. However, this is not what meaningful or intelligent dialogue is about. We can go to any mental institution in the country and strike up a conversation. It does not have to be logical. We can converse about anything. However, I believed yourself included others would be interested in rational dialogue. Please mine up the examples where I did not identify that such a definition was irrational or illogical. Again if you wish to put all these pages aside... I am ok with just talking to you. It does not seem you want that though?

Rule -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 5:18:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn What is a "god within" ? Really what does that statement mean? I have told you that in an earlier post, but apparently you did not pay any attention to it. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn (If "god is within" particles/cells the same questions apply) You would get a different answer - which I also told you in a previous post, but apparently then you also paid no attention. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Within what? Why would a god want to be within? Within human minds - but apparently not in yours. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn When did it get within? Umm, when they were born? quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Prior to becoming within where was is('with-out'?) Good supposition. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn When this god is within me is it within you? How is this possible? I suspect that you lack one. Due to genetics. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Does it self replicate line evolution suggests? Depends on the nature of 'it'. If you are talking about alleles, these are replicated, but do not self-replicate. If you are talking about aspects of the mind, the likely answer is 'yes'. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Does it cut itself into trillions of pieces so it can be within everything? Very good, Esinn; astute. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn When it is within me how does it survive? I need food, sleep and drink to survive I suspect that it is not within you - but other aspect(s) of the mind certainly is / are, and being products of your brain to present would require your brain to be sustained. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn When I die where does this god within go? When the mind dies, hopefully its aspects go to the Divine / the realm of the Dead / the God of the Dead. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Why is this god within undetectable? Lots of people are aware of its presence. If others do not, then in some cases perhaps it is because they do not have one. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Does it hide? Not necessarily. Does a stomach or any other internal organ hide? quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Is it afraid? No, but it is a coward. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn When mitosis happens does this process create 2 more "gods within". The question makes no sense. quote:* ORIGINAL: Esinn Sometimes cells which have split rejoin. Does this make 1 less "god within" Neither does this question make sense. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn * 3.5 billion years ago before first coacervates what was this god within? Life was not here Had to look that word up. Neither does this question make sense. quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn **How do you know? I am omniscient. [8D]

Starbuck09 -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 5:27:26 PM)
What does that word mean Rule i've never heard of it either.

Rule -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 5:50:32 PM)
quote: coacervate A coacervate is a collection of biochemical molecules that self-assemble into a spherical structure, oftentimes with osmotic properties. Say membrane sacks without content. Reminiscent of micelles, I suppose. I learned about these structures decades ago, but never knew they were named coacervates.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 6:06:24 PM)
Cheers Rule that's appreciated... I have learned my fact for the day![:D]

knees2you -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 7:32:26 PM)
*quote:* Is it possible to talk about god without evoking poetic mumbo jumbo? What is a "god within" ? Really what does that statement mean? The last three being the most important. (If "god is within" particles/cells the same questions apply) Within what? Why would a god want to be within? When did it get within? Prior to becoming within where was is('with-out'?) When this god is within me is it within you? How is this possible? Does it self replicate line evolution suggests? Does it cut itself into trillions of pieces so it can be within everything? When it is within me how does it survive? I need food, sleep and drink to survive When I die where does this god within go? Why is this god within undetectable? Does it hide? Is it afraid? When mitosis happens does this process create 2 more "gods within". Sometimes cells which have split rejoin. Does this make 1 less "god within" 3.5 billion years ago before first coacervates what was this god within? Life was not here How do you know? This theory you are evoking for which I am aware no evidence exists creates more problems than it addresses. I am interested in learning about it though. We could spend an entire lifetime trying to figure out God and where he comes from? We already know how a watch works, it is made by a watch maker. But then he would be of this world. God is not. As Professor Richard Dawkins said. He does not believe in God, but believes the world is to complex to have gotten here by itself. Always, Ant~[:D]**

pyroaquatic -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 7:42:37 PM)
What did your original face look like before your parents were born? quote: *As Professor Richard Dawkins said. He does not believe in God, but believes the world is to complex to have gotten here by itself.* Zing. Rule and Knees you rock. Esinn, you are trying to hard. Smoke yur cigarette. [8D]

BitaTruble -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 8:16:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail You talk to me all the time, honey. Ron You are about as far removed from stupid as it gets and if it you weren't, I make exceptions for hunky, bald dudes who make me drool. [;)]

BitaTruble -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 8:23:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Each time god was defined I showed why the belief was based upon bias, flawed reasoning or illogical. quote: Please mine up the examples where I did not identify that such a definition was irrational or illogical. Post 624. I remember it because I wrote it.

BitaTruble -> RE: Define God (8/14/2009 8:31:30 PM)
quote: Again if you wish to put all these pages aside... I am ok with just talking to you. It does not seem you want that though? I don't care to engage in stupid conversations (except with Ron). If you want to have conversations which are intellectually stimulating, then I'm game. Outside of the relationship or kink topics, my favorites are gun control, Constitutional law and civil rights. Any of those threads and I'm, generally, drawn in.

Brain -> RE: Define God (8/15/2009 5:36:34 PM)
How Creationism (and Other Idiocies) Are Mainstreamed One of the things that has enabled the mainstreaming of various idiocies, from altie woo, to creationism, to global warming denialism is mainstream corporate media's inability to accurately describe lunacy. For obvious reasons, 'family-friendly' newspapers and teevee can't call creationists, birthers, or deathers batshit lunatic or morons. This is where 'civility' (beyond the basic norms of decency when dealing with the mentally ill) and pretensions of 'balance' utterly fail. Read Full Story at scienceblogs.com http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2009/08/how_creationism_and_other_idio.php

cornflakegirl -> RE: Define God (8/15/2009 8:26:53 PM)
quote: As Professor Richard Dawkins said. He does not believe in God, but believes the world is to complex to have gotten here by itself. Do you have a source for this?

Page: << < prev 30 31 32 [33] 34 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875