Yeah, pretty much. You'll notice an unusually large amount of :shrug: icons and other smarmy dodges from Light and other religious folks here. They can't answer the questions posed to them, so they resort to sarcasm and emoticons.
A God We Know Nothing About
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
Yeah, pretty much. You'll notice an unusually large amount of :shrug: icons and other smarmy dodges from Light and other religious folks here. They can't answer the questions posed to them, so they resort to sarcasm and emoticons.
Call me old fashioned but futility in the face of obstinacy tends to evoke an emotional response
Last edited:
My point is that this is merely a statement of your boundaries of experience and says absolutely nothing about the "knowability" of the subject. For instance if a person discovered a cure for cancer and you developed it but disbelieved the cure (and hence never applied it) your death would not impinge a bit on the truthfulness of his claim (IOW there is a difference between the experience of any particular individual and how a claim is determined to be valid or not)
The next question is whether your experience is sufficient to grade the experiences of all others who may have an alternative conclusion.
As already indicated previously, you've called upon your qualitative model of god on numerous occasions for the sake of debate.
You may have issues with a quantitative model, but that's merely the paradox of atheism that finds its fault in epistemology ("I don't want to apply myself but I demand to know")
therefore the value of the text lies in indicating how that personal experience can be achieved.
For instance if you are sitting on the toilet and declare that the president is only true if he comes and shakes your hand, it might require you to understand that the president doesn't usually shake the hand of a person who is taking a crap (and its not because he is somehow limited ... just to save you from the effort of launching into the equivalent "an omnipotent god could shake the hand of a person taking a crap").
Similarly, for as long as you are cent per cent engaged in the business of material affairs, god won't be raining on your parade any time soon (except through the standard channels of death, old age, disease etc)
This issue becomes doubly complex if you declare written statements to the effect of "The president does not shake the hand of people taking a crap" to be of no value to the endeavor.
Its not clear why god is (quite literally) duty bound to personally put with our shit
I did, with the example of the med student and heart surgery.
Quite obviously, successful performance is determined outside of issues of "indoctrination", although it may offer a more suitable context for achieving it.
not entirely
standards and norms make the act of teaching a damn sight easier
Its not clear what you are advocating here.
Do all forms of teaching inhibit our natural instinct?
Are issues such as "justice" and "civil order" suppressing our progress?
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
Is that your proof of souls? ”
Bullshit. You're the obstinate 1 here.
Is that your proof of souls? ”
Call me old fashioned but futility in the face of obstinacy tends to evoke an emotional response
Bullshit. You're the obstinate 1 here.
/facepalm
I mean we aren't born religious. God doesn't seem to care what religion we take up as long as He's in the picture. People make way too much of it.
Religion kind of gives someone a mental image of God. Without religion god would pretty much have to make an appearance to show He exists. It would seem that if God exists then He is quite happy with the texts and it doesn't matter what any religion is saying. So if God tolerates religion then it really isn't a teaching tool. Religion would then have to be thought of as completely overrated as an avenue to knowing God, in fact practically worthless.
Some religions seem to swear more by text than others. I think it's pretty obvious that if God cared about what people do with it then He would have settled the differences between religions long ago. Again if God exists then He just tolerates religion. If it's not important to Him then why should we care?
-=-
If it isn't important to God to explain things, it isn't important to me to believe them.
If it isn't important to God to explain things, it isn't important to me to believe them.
Its still not clear what you are advocating.
That all cultural issues are merely impositions on our "natural" state?
That any cultural development stands independent/isolated from the will of god?
and suppose god did make an appearance, what do you suppose would be a direct ramification of that?
The formation of a religion, perchance?
What you don't appear to be factoring in is the variety of desire that the living entity possesses.
IOW if all living entities were possessed of the same needs, interests and concerns (and/or conditioning) you would expect a singularly visioned god to be constant.
Even in terms of mundane governance, you see a host of public bodies and tiers of representation (For instance you could argue that if a government is singular in performance, why are there requirements for local, state and national bodies?)
ideal answers require ideal questions
People will do what God wants for the most part. It would be the first time in history God actually showed up despite what texts say. If He wanted a religion then there will be one, but only one. I'd love to be there and see which one of the existing religions, if any, are right. The ones that have it wrong would probably deny God unless He was very convincing.
Afterthought: Would atheists be more accepting of the real God than theists? I think so
You're just trying to justify the many different world religions with that remark. Trying to make them all the right religions is a stretch. LG, only one can be right and I'm sorry if it's not yours.
Again, same thing. LG, there is only one God for you. There are many different municipalities, countries, provinces, etc. and that is to be expected. One god means one way. If not then you just confirmed what I said earlier, religion is worthless. If God doesn't care then what good is it? Other than a befuddling litany of delusional accounts.
Psychotic Episode
“
I simply suggested that you have a variety of people socialized around a variety of levels of performance.
so one government doesn't mean one way?
“
I'm not sure what gives you the clue that it would be the first time
once again, the moment you start factoring in the variety of the individual you get a different answer
try googling "henology"
If you want me to comment on this I'm afraid you will have to expand on it a bit more
actually I am bringing to your attention that you are not factoring a key element in your argument
Whoever said they were all right?
I simply suggested that you have a variety of people socialized around a variety of levels of performance.
feel free to explain why
think again
interesting
so one government doesn't mean one way?
you still haven't properly addressed how you propose god deal with the variety that the conditioned living entities projects.
If I were a religious man then I'd probably answer that according to what I think I know about Him. I'd probably say He'd premonish then admonish.
Fortunately I am not religious so I think more practical. For me it would be God for the first time. I would have no expectation of any of this world's many descriptions of God to be true. So warnings and punishments are out. I can't see God lowering Himself to those levels. I would expect Him to be very calm and unexcitable.
It all would depend on what God is actually capable of. Parlor tricks, mind control, psychokinesis, etc. would be some of the things people might expect Him to use but I think once He's established His authenticity then it would be no problem simply talking to the world. Stick around for awhile, make public appearances, just take things over and lead by example.
One of my favorite old Star Trek episodes was when the Federation and the Klingons waged war on a planet inhabited by very simple peasant-like folk. However in the end these Organians were able, just by the power of thought, to put an end to the conflict.
However I don't think God would be anything like that. In fact it is very difficult for me to even imagine what God would be like, so I consider your question a bit unfair in some respect but if you hadn't asked it then I might not have realized just how much I enjoy being an atheist.
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
If it isn't important to God to explain things, it isn't important to me to believe them. ”
Just more obfuscating bullshit which does not refute my statement.
If it isn't important to God to explain things, it isn't important to me to believe them. ”
Just more obfuscating bullshit which does not refute my statement.
Its still not clear why an authority requires a singular representation to undertake premonitory tasks.
For instance, even in terms of the mundane justice system, there are a host of personalities operating in a variety of capacities to deal with a variety of individuals (eg - parking inspector, police officer, school liason officer, military police etc)
Its not clear what requirement punishment has that the instigator must be excited
Once again, its not clear when or how the world ever left the control of god. In fact its not even clear how the living entity can exist in a state of actual independence from god.
the solution appeared to be short lived since the peace wasn't particularly long lasting.
IOW god has better solutions at hand than mere sedation.
“The thought of suicide is a great source of comfort; with it a calm passage is to be made across many a bad night.”
Friedrich Nietzsche
God's done a great job so far
. I'd rather be sedated. This declaration of yours, how do you know this? I think I must have asked you that same question about 10 times already. For someone who seems to possess very intimate knowledge of his god, you sure aren't willing to share it.
I wonder why God has felt it so necessary to provide you with a dossier on Himself whereas us mere mortals have some stone tablets and environmentally friendly parchments to formulate what amounts to barely an opinion. You're so fortunate, unless you feel you're being rewarded for all your patience and real thought.
sure hasGod's done a great job so far
The material world cannot infringe on anyone's eternality, despite whatever it may do to cloud one's vision of it.
well its certainly what the material world affords, so I guess god is doing a great job for you in lieu of your desires
the declaration that god is doing a great job?
We have a host of environments to pursue our desires that are not only safe (the soul never perishes) but dovetail us towards sanity.
If you disagree you must be overly optimistic in light of climate change or something .....
I've received infractions for it, but I am sure that I have posted BG 4.10 numerous times before (in fact the whole chapter is titled "transcendental knowledge")
perhaps you have some problems with your web browser
:shrug:
When was the last time you read anything from scripture that wasn't footnoted on an atheist hate-site?
No, this one:
How do you know? If the answer is going to come from some tired old philosophy rag then don't bother filling me in.
sorry
mind you I've kind of suspected you were adverse to philosophy
perhaps we should discuss football or something
Bullshit.
You are adverse to philosophy.
Will you provide a link for an atheist hate site.
You do remind me of Andy Griffith's hilarious "What It Was Was Football".
Last edited by a moderator:
sorry
mind you I've kind of suspected you were adverse to philosophy
perhaps we should discuss football or something
What does God know about sport? If God went golfing, would He shoot an 18?
Really, what sport would interest God?