Definition of God - one thread to rule them all

[Xelasnave.1947]

You sensed that part of my reality..... that's empathy.......!

I hope you saw post 660
Alex

 

[Write4U]

I hope you saw post 660
Alex

hehe....yes.....

Actually that was a true observation and I am proud of my years in public service and especially my time with Native Indians, for their economic development.
Helping deserving people with their needs is a rewarding experience, even for an atheist.

As to my demeanor...
The Dutch are an arrogant breed, old history and such.
Just as the Aussies have a very down to earth (brutally honest) approach to social intercourse... it's refreshing.......
if not a little intimidating.
Hate to have some "donk" take a dislike to me over my demeanor........wait........they have!

 

[Write4U]

Let me offer this perspective;
Nature is not created "in the image of God", God is created "in the image of Nature".

p.s. Agency is not uniquely human. Is an Octopus made "in the image of God" ? If so, can we consider the Octopus' image to be "in the image of the FSM" , a defined God with Agency.

The Dalai Lama and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
https://isthmus.com/opinion/citizen-dave/the-dalai-lama-and-the-flying-spaghetti-monster/

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

The Dutch are an arrogant breed, old history and

Each of my wives were half Dutch.
Alex

 

[Vociferous]

Empathy does not excuse a blatant contradiction in your purportedly cogent arguments. But then, maybe you don't know what "contradiction" or "cogent" mean either. That would seem to fit with your track record.

You're a master at "projecting" your foibles onto others. It's a signature egocentric behavior.

My arguments are based on cogent knowledge of the universe. Your arguments are based on a host of contradictions in regard to the existence of this universe .
What I see is a mathematical universe is demonstrably a mathematical universe. An entire scientific area of inquiry is contained in Mathematical Theory.
Mathematical theory
A mathematical theory is a mathematical model that is based on axioms. A theory can simultaneously be a body of knowledge (e.g., known axioms and definitions), so in this sense a "mathematical theory" is used to refer to an area of mathematical research within the established theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_theory

IOW, the Universe.

OTOH, I am not aware of scripture that can match the body of knowledge and mathematical models of how things work . I submit, that merely citing the mundane definition of "Agency" is not a very cogent model for a definition of god., IMHO......

"Nuh-uh, you are!" isn't going to get you out of your demonstrated contradictions and ignorance.

Your arguments have been shown to be ignorant of the science, metaphysics, and even basic reading comprehension, which is all emblematic of a "true believer", who can only muster making appeals to authority (if not foolish enough to add ignorant commentary of your own).

Yes, math is a axiomatic system of logic, and as such, is an abstraction based on assumed axioms that cannot be externally proven, much less proven by any correspondence with the natural world (like negative square roots that don't correspond to anything in nature).

Scripture isn't in competition with science. Again, they are non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA). If anything, science has always been about the business of filling the gaps left by religion, without ever proving/evincing anything in religion wrong. You may deem religion superfluous, but that's far from supplanting it.

 

[paddoboy]

. You may deem religion superfluous, but that's far from supplanting it.

Ignoring the rest of your ignorant hypocritical rhetoric, we now have the usual vociferously loud mouth nonsense re defining superfluous...let me see...how about, obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed, or maybe useless!!! except of course for those gullible enough to fall for such myths, or those so fearful of death and the thought of finality, that they chose myth to comfort them over the scientific undeniable facts and theories of science.
But you'll keep preaching your nonsense like any good charlatan or fraudster.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Scripture isn't in competition with science.

Nonsense. Those who follow scripture have many folk in the ranks who see science as the enemy and work upon ways to discredit science so as their scriptures presumably will gain some credibility ...which they clearly lack else why would these folk making science the enemy bother.

There should be no competition if that is what you were thinking as clearly the uniformed opinions of ancients have nothing to offer to science.

However we have a think tank made up of theists presumably supporters of scripture putting together a concerted attack on science...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

What do you think about the Discovery Institute making you unwittingly a liar...Did you know about them and their plan to corrupt and discredit science..rather sneaky folk and worthy of rejection by decent theists..do you reject them?

Now I notice that Paddoboy often labels you as supportive of the concept of intelligent design and I never see you deny his call, maybe I missed it, but I notice you get all emotional when anyone mentions abiogenesis and rush to say it is nonsense I do wonder if you see the intelligent design notion as credible and worthy of being called science...

You may deem religion superfluou

Religion is superstition and superstition is nonsense, and a major con holding back the human race and greatly wasting resources... taking both labour and materials out of useful application...encouraging folk to avoid personal responsibility whilst injecting them with guilt and self loathing..a nasty business offering false hope of life after death for obedience on the one hand and eternal torture for any sensible rejection on the other, offering in evidence of its unsupported claims the warm feeling of relief when one embraces faith that it is all true and one can now abdicate all personal responsibility and live in a world founded upon unsupported fantasy. Gives nothing and takes all human dignity and ability to reason leaving believers offering nonsense when challenged about the multiple inconsistencies in the story.

Alex

 

[Vociferous]

Scripture isn't in competition with science.

Nonsense. Those who follow scripture have many folk in the ranks who see science as the enemy and work upon ways to discredit science so as their scriptures presumably will gain some credibility

And I guess you don't see the obvious difference between scripture (what I actually said) and "folk in the ranks" (your straw man).

 

[Write4U]

Yes, math is a axiomatic system of logic, and as such, is an abstraction based on assumed axioms that cannot be externally proven, much less proven by any correspondence with the natural world (like negative square roots that don't correspond to anything in nature).

Apparently our understanding of universal mathematics was sufficient to "build and land" a Rover on Mars, or "tease" a Higgs boson from the Higgs Field.
If mathematics cannot imitate and prove the mechanics of Natural phenomena, why are we using it?

OTOH, your concept of a non-mathematical god regulated universe has not progressed since the cave-dwellers who painted gods on the cave walls.
If you wish to deny the mathematics of evolution and want to wait for God to save mankind from its technological (mathematical) trespasses, you will be doomed to the caves forever.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Unlike many here, and I am looking at you, I have no axe to grind nor am I out to troll people I don't like or start threads to target folk I don't like...

I do not care who you are looking at...you have made it crystal clear since you joined SciForums, and openly declaimed in the sentence above, that you only see exactly what you want to see.

That is just so very wrong..more so because he an intelligent man can not for one moment see any reason to be compassionate.

Exactly who is this "intelligent man" of which you speak?

And..just because I am mates with paddoboy don't make the mistake of trolling me as I have no problem with you unless you make it your business to make it that way.

It would possibly behoove you to reread a few of your earlier missives towards me where that was not quite the sentiment you chose to inveigh.

 

[Write4U]

Scripture isn't in competition with science. Again, they are non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA). If anything, science has always been about the business of filling the gaps left by religion, without ever proving/evincing anything in religion wrong.

Really;
In 1933, Ernest Barnes, the Bishop of Birmingham, used the phrase in a discussion of general relativity's implication of a Big Bang:

Must we then postulate Divine intervention? Are we to bring in God to create the first current of Laplace's nebula or to let off the cosmic firework of Lemaître's imagination? I confess an unwillingness to bring God in this way upon the scene.

The circumstances with thus seem to demand his presence are too remote and too obscure to afford me any true satisfaction. Men have thought to find God at the special creation of their own species, or active when mind or life first appeared on earth. They have made him God of the gaps in human knowledge. To me the God of the trigger is as little satisfying as the God of the gaps. It is because throughout the physical Universe I find thought and plan and power that behind it I see God as the creator.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

Did this Bishop envision Nature in the image of God, or God in the image of Nature?

You may deem religion superfluous, but that's far from supplanting it

You may deem science as superfluous, but let's see which belief system yields the greater gaps when supplanted by the other. Science or Theism.....wanna make a bet?

 

[Vociferous]

Yes, math is a axiomatic system of logic, and as such, is an abstraction based on assumed axioms that cannot be externally proven, much less proven by any correspondence with the natural world (like negative square roots that don't correspond to anything in nature).

Apparently our understanding of universal mathematics was sufficient to "build and land" a Rover on Mars, or "tease" a Higgs boson from the Higgs Field.
If mathematics cannot imitate and prove the mechanics of Natural phenomena, why are we using it?

Your comprehension of English has failed you again. I didn't say math couldn't accurately model and predict nature. That's quite different from mathematics, itself, not being provable simply by that correspondence. Evidence doesn't prove logic, because logical propositions need only be self-consistent, and science doesn't actually provide proofs.

OTOH, your concept of a non-mathematical god regulated universe has not progressed since the cave-dwellers who painted gods on the cave walls.
If you wish to deny the mathematics of evolution and want to wait for God to save mankind from its technological (mathematical) trespasses, you will be doomed to the caves forever.

Straw man, as a universe created by God need be no less mathematically regulated than any other.

Really;
In 1933, Ernest Barnes, the Bishop of Birmingham, used the phrase in a discussion of general relativity's implication of a Big Bang: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

Appealing to the authority of the opinions of others doesn't make them true.

You may deem science as superfluous, but let's see which belief system yields the greater gaps when supplanted by the other. Science or Theism.....wanna make a bet?

I don't consider science superfluous. That's why I demonstrably understand it better than you. If you understood science, you'd know its methodology is incapable of supplanting metaphysics, philosophy, or many other branches of human knowledge, much less religion.

 

[Write4U]

Appealing to the authority of the opinions of others doesn't make them true.

Your appeal to your own authority doesn't make it true either. But when it comes to analyzing the way things work, I'd rather consult the authority of science than your authority in theism.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I do not care who you are looking at

I don't care that you don't care..just saying I have you pegged...you and Paddo have something going on ..you need to know I don't care.

you only see exactly what you want to see.

So does that make me different to others or are you complementing me for being upfront...and I see what I see and try and think it thru as best I can manage ..what else can you do?

Exactly who is this "intelligent man" of which you speak?

I can't remember try reading back a few posts and it should become clear...not you...probably V ..does it matter now?

It would possibly behoove you to reread a few of your earlier missives towards me where that was not quite the sentiment you chose to inveigh.

Well let's clear the air. I have no problems with you at all and I enjoy reading all your stuff. There is nothing I basically disagree with as far as you are concerned.. I see your posts as usually related to Paddo somehow, a lot of times such that I get an impression, if you don't like me cause of me that's ok but if you don't like me cause I am mates with Paddo that would hurt me.

Don't take it personal my comments re killing Indians, it's not your fault, I don't take it personal some early Australian settlers were murders...

Anyways if I have offended you in any way I appologise.

Alex

 

[Write4U]

I don't consider science superfluous. That's why I demonstrably understand it better than you. If you understood science, you'd know its methodology is incapable of supplanting metaphysics, philosophy, or many other branches of human knowledge, much less religion.

Exactly, science is incapable of analyzing religion, because religion has no methodology whatever. It's mythology, a form of religious history.

However science is most certainly capable of supplanting religion in all physical and/or metaphysical respects.
What you fail to understand is that if there is a God, it has to be a mathematical object, subject to the rules of mathematics and incapable of creating anything that does not have a mathematical nature.

If there is a God, it has to obey the mathematical laws of nature. Everything else does. End of story.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

And I guess you don't see the obvious difference between scripture (what I actually said) and "folk in the ranks" (your straw man).

Of course I can but through my ploy I presented a whole lot of stuff that you just can't side step with accusations of straw persons.

The inference from what you said I saw as just somehow not correct and so looking at it and concluding it was hard to argue on exactly what you said... I thought..send in a straw person, he will say it's a straw man, raising sexism issues, but I will curry favour from the croud because you fail to address the issues I raise.

Anyways nice chatting as always but must go..keep it fun..
Alex

 

[Write4U]

And I guess you don't see the obvious difference between scripture (what I actually said) and "folk in the ranks" (your straw man).

And what is it you said that is different from "folk in the ranks" (the majority of theists) ?
p.s. I didn't know you actually write scripture....

Would a religious person in the ranks accept your definition of God or are you at odds with all spiritual philosophy and perhaps consider yourself as the new prophesied savior?

 

[paddoboy]

I don't care that you don't care..just saying I have you pegged...you and Paddo have something going on ..you need to know I don't care.

I wouldn't worry too much Alex, dmoe has been conducting himself continually this way for many years and been labeled a troll by admins and mods, both in the past and recently.
A cross between FF and river would be an apt description...read into that what you may But yeah, forget him, and simply answer his nonsensical claims and/or insinuations and leave it at that.

I see your posts as usually related to Paddo somehow,

Yeah, he is quite attracted to me and has been for years, even followed me over to SFN but was quickly hog-tied there, when he tried pulling the same trick there as he did here. It's quite funny actually, but I'll pm you the details if you like as it is off topic here...on the other hand, as you say, why waste the time on such childish trivialities.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

It's quite funny actually, but I'll pm you the details if you like as it is off topic here...on the other hand, as you say, why waste the time on such childish trivialities.

I am not worried etc and I am sure that DMOE and me will become great mates as I am sure he cant have any problems with me but if he has any problems that would be unfortunate. If he does not like my style he will say so ... won't worry me.
I hope your celebrations went well..or are they still going?

Alex

 

[paddoboy]

I am not worried etc and I am sure that DMOE and me will become great mates as I am sure he cant have any problems with me but if he has any problems that would be unfortunate. If he does not like my style he will say so ... won't worry me.
I hope your celebrations went well..or are they still going?

Alex

Celebrations next Friday Alex if current relaxation of restriction laws allow. And yes, I know you well enough to know you ain't worried, just wanted to mention it again.