RE: Define God

RE: Define God (Full Version)

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

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 10:35:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either. seems more than religious feathers were ruffled by this thread. which is why i mentioned some time back that religion isnt ever a good thing to debate with so many people. You realize that nowhere in my response to him did I make any derogatory comments towards you? In fact, if you were only offering up those links in a detached fashion (and have no investment in them), then me commenting on the fact that they function on logically unsound premises shouldn't genuinely offend you...right?

Esinn -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 10:43:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero She referenced the Wiccan Rede. Wicca is a modern form of neopaganism. Oh God loves you and he needs money http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o It does not require a leap of faith to find humor in the absurdity of religion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P47OC439x88 satire - yes I know....

NihilusZero -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 10:43:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957 Thank You NZ. ~big hugs~ Aww! [:)] Thank you.

Esinn -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 10:45:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957 quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn *I do not think she is a neopagan though. We can ask her? Go ahead and ask me, Esinn. Yes, I am a Wiccan. He took note that I cited the Wiccan Rede in my post. Plus, in a different thread, I answered that I am. ~edited to add the last sentence~ No need to ask now. Thanks for the clarification.

NihilusZero -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 10:46:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Oh God loves you and he needs money http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o I do miss that man.

tazzygirl -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 11:06:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either. seems more than religious feathers were ruffled by this thread. which is why i mentioned some time back that religion isnt ever a good thing to debate with so many people. You realize that nowhere in my response to him did I make any derogatory comments towards you? In fact, if you were only offering up those links in a detached fashion (and have no investment in them), then me commenting on the fact that they function on logically unsound premises shouldn't genuinely offend you...right? and i mentioned i was offended by your comment... when?

cpK69 -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 11:06:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero Death is scary. Not to everyone; to some, not including myself, life is scarier. quote: It is the termination of everything we know, in addition to the termination of our awareness of it. Do you know this, or are you assuming? quote: One of the primary reasons people can say it isn't scary is because of the metaphysical presumption that it is "only change"...and that notion is wrought from a belief in a deity and, (usually) thereby, a belief in some concept of afterlife. My belief stemmed from my speculation of the phrase “the end is the beginning”. Death happens to lots of people, daily. Every time our lives bring us to a crossroad where we must choose to let go of the old, in order to grab for the new, is a death. Whether I continue to exist in an alternate state, or nothing more than memories, it is still only change. quote: Impossible based on your understanding of anthropology, physics and architecture, perhaps? That sounds to me like evidence of something you could not understand. It is only the a priori existence of a deity concept in the first place that would lead you to make the inference of what your incredulity meant. Evidence of something 'unbelievable' is only that: evidence of something unbelievable. It is not evidence for whatever metaphysical theory used to concoct an imaginative answer for why that very thing is unbelievable. You are right. It is more accurate to say I saw a UFO; origin, unknown. Edited to add: For the sake of accuracy, the F in UFO stands for floating, I didn't see anything that would indicate some type of means for flying. Kim

tazzygirl -> RE: Define God (8/3/2009 11:09:42 PM)
So, we can say that christians believe in god, and that they believe god is good, yes? sorry, this is towards any who really wish to get into a discussion, not an argument.

NihilusZero -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 12:43:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either. seems more than religious feathers were ruffled by this thread. which is why i mentioned some time back that religion isnt ever a good thing to debate with so many people. You realize that nowhere in my response to him did I make any derogatory comments towards you? In fact, if you were only offering up those links in a detached fashion (and have no investment in them), then me commenting on the fact that they function on logically unsound premises shouldn't genuinely offend you...right? and i mentioned i was offended by your comment... when? In any casual discussion, starting off with these sorts of sentences: "all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either." certainly implies the apparent intent to absolve yourself of the negativity surrounding the topics brought up. If it wasn't intentional, then that weird "in reply to" parentheses blurb at the bottom right of every post only helped make the reference more confusing. I actually normally ignore it, but I realize many people don't. So if your reply was a general one, then I can retract my response as it wasn't applicable.

NihilusZero -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 12:51:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cpK69 Not to everyone; to some, not including myself, life is scarier. I am at a loss to understand that value assessment, but it certainly is yours to have. quote: ORIGINAL: cpK69 Do you know this, or are you assuming? I know it about as reliably as most anything in this universe can be known. If even Harry Houdini could not find a way to send some reliable evidence to us from the beyond that there is, in fact, a beyond, the rest of us are screwed. quote: ORIGINAL: cpK69 My belief stemmed from my speculation of the phrase “the end is the beginning”. Death happens to lots of people, daily. Every time our lives bring us to a crossroad where we must choose to let go of the old, in order to grab for the new, is a death. Sure. Yet each of those deaths marks the definitive end of that particular thing/chapter. Eventually, he entire book will close upon itself...and at that point, no more pages are left to continue writing/reading. At least to me, that's a terrifying prospect. It doesn't mean I'm consumed by the fear (that wouldn't help anything), but it's there.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 1:11:51 AM)
"Thou art God. All that groks is God." I will be the first to admit that my concept of God is severely limited. If there is a 'God', God is so vast, so incomprehensibly unlimited in scope and potency, that beings such as us must be as individually important as bacteria are to us. I am but a finite being, horribly ill-equipped to contemplate the infinite. That said, this is the best bet I've got at the moment: I'm something of a materialistic Panthiest. That means that when I talk about God, I'm talking about the whole of the Cosmos. I hold a deep, abiding reverence for the universe in all its splendor, born of sitting in rapt worship before Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" series when I was four years old. (If your consciousness is still out there somewhere, Carl, Godspeed - and may your sails always find the wind.) So, to me, separating "God" from his creation requires a bit of mental gymnastics. I can work with that, though. If I want to talk about "God" as a sort of being separated from physical reality, I conceive of "God" as made up of two fundamental cognitive components: First, the "left-brain" of God, which is all of mathematics. When we talk about "God's laws" and "God's rules", I don't believe they have any particular hard-coded relevance to the reproductive habits of carbon-based mammalian lifeforms zipping about on the eggshell-thin H2O membrane of a rather ordinary rock somewhere out towards the edge of a rather ordinary spiral galaxy. No, God's laws are something more like the laws of Russel and Whitehouse, with a bit of Gödel thrown in for good measure (God, obviously, has a wicked sense of humor). So God's laws are the fundamental laws of mathematics, of which the laws of physics are a meager subset. God's laws constrain what is possible, in a very literal sense. Second, the "right-brain" of God, which is all of quantum mechanics. When we talk about "God's will" and "God's plan", what we mean is whatever is going to happen next. As near as we can tell, every particle in the universe makes a decision about what to do next roughly 1,800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times per second. There are somewhere around 720,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 particles in the universe. God is busy.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 3:17:03 AM)
God/Nature/Life/Tao Is... No more and no less.

cpK69 -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 3:39:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero I am at a loss to understand that value assessment, but it certainly is yours to have. It was a reference to people, who choose to stay in situations where they are completely miserable, and those who have opted to end their existence on Earth, basically, because they were afraid to face the consequences of life. quote: I know it about as reliably as most anything in this universe can be known. Good, then we have a common ground to start from. quote: If even Harry Houdini could not find a way to send some reliable evidence to us from the beyond that there is, in fact, a beyond, the rest of us are screwed. I wouldn’t be so sure about that, maybe he just didn’t have what it takes; maybe the time for that to be possible has not occurred yet. Lots of possibilities. quote: Sure. Yet each of those deaths marks the definitive end of that particular thing/chapter. Eventually, he entire book will close upon itself...and at that point, no more pages are left to continue writing/reading. At least to me, that's a terrifying prospect. It doesn't mean I'm consumed by the fear (that wouldn't help anything), but it's there. Would you resent the opportunity to start reading the next book? If not, why fear the end of the last? Kim

RCdc -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 4:16:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl So, we can say that christians believe in god, and that they believe god is good, yes? Yes to the first. No to the second. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 4:38:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Logical musings aside... I am still interested define this thing you call god. .theword. the.dark.

tazzygirl -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 6:56:12 AM)
why no to the second? is god not good?

tazzygirl -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 7:00:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either. seems more than religious feathers were ruffled by this thread. which is why i mentioned some time back that religion isnt ever a good thing to debate with so many people. You realize that nowhere in my response to him did I make any derogatory comments towards you? In fact, if you were only offering up those links in a detached fashion (and have no investment in them), then me commenting on the fact that they function on logically unsound premises shouldn't genuinely offend you...right? and i mentioned i was offended by your comment... when? In any casual discussion, starting off with these sorts of sentences: "all i did was post two links, saying no more than they were interesting. i did not give a view point on either." certainly implies the apparent intent to absolve yourself of the negativity surrounding the topics brought up. If it wasn't intentional, then that weird "in reply to" parentheses blurb at the bottom right of every post only helped make the reference more confusing. I actually normally ignore it, but I realize many people don't. So if your reply was a general one, then I can retract my response as it wasn't applicable. never assume what someone means by any statement, no matter what you may believe they may be implying. its always best to ask, no?

pyroaquatic -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 7:10:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl why no to the second? is god not good? Saying God is Good is like saying I can hold these conversations with a bug. According to the bible God created everthing, including satan. God knew that Eve and Adam were going to eat the apple. Nothing is a surprise to God. God is beyond the simple 'Good' and 'Evil', if you choose to believe in God/Kosmos.... whatever. God is both and neither at the same time. If I were God I would prefer that many were Atheist. They are attempting to get closer to the actual source of God's Essence than let me say.... Christians. But that is passing judgment and this is supposedly wrong.

tazzygirl -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 7:20:34 AM)
and most would say god is good... according to the bible. so... the bible says god is good.. and we, as sinners... are evil... anyone not agreeable to that supposition?

igor2003 -> RE: Define God (8/4/2009 7:46:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl and most would say god is good... according to the bible. so... the bible says god is good.. and we, as sinners... are evil... anyone not agreeable to that supposition? I agree that most CHRISTIANS believe your statement, but personally, I disagree with the concept.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125