Definition of God - one thread to rule them all

Celebrations next Friday Alex if current relaxation of restriction laws allow.
Yes..I thought is was Friday past at first...but your reply confused me as you seemed to be talking about a future event and I thought how can he get his birthday wrong? I must reset the calender now that week saving is over...
Alex
 
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.
Appeal to my own authority? That's called having an opinion, and it's not a fallacy. Theism doesn't make any claims regarding "analyzing the way things work". And I haven't even presented theism as an authority of anything.

Exactly, science is incapable of analyzing religion, because religion has no methodology whatever. It's mythology, a form of religious history.
No, religion also tackles many metaphysical questions, like ontology.

However science is most certainly capable of supplanting religion in all physical and/or metaphysical respects.
No, again, you're ignorant to think science can tell us anything about metaphysics. We can certainly leverage science to speculate about metaphysical questions, but they are metaphysical because the scientific method cannot answer them. If science could, it wouldn't be metaphysics; it'd just be science. And religion has a few thousand year head start on proposing answers to metaphysical questions.

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.
What you fail to understand is that, if there was a creator, it's plan was for nature to obey said laws. Such order is what allows free will to be meaningful, instead of useless choices in a wholly capricious world.

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) ?
I didn't say anything different from most.

p.s. I didn't know you actually write scripture....
It would behoove you not to joke, as your usual ignorance doesn't merit much benefit of the doubt when you're intentionally obtuse.

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?
Most Christians do accept most of my definition of God. Unlike you, I don't have a mission to convert the masses to my own beliefs.
 
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.

:D 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.;)
Ad Hominems....accusations...allegations...The Real Scientific Method at work!

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
Meh...Alex, everything just has to be about the toad boy...he can't have it any other way...
 
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!!! :D 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.
Ah, the toads croaking in the summer evening.
 
Ad Hominems....accusations...allegations...The Real Scientific Method at work!


Meh...Alex, everything just has to be about the toad boy...he can't have it any other way...

I am sure there is enough room for all of us. You have a good day and just don't let folk annoy you I don't want to see you upset by anyone and from things I have noticed that you have said you don't need upset in your life now.
Alex
 
Ad Hominems....accusations...allegations...The Real Scientific Method at work!
No, facts....facts and more facts. :rolleyes:
The rules regarding private messages are published in our Site Posting Guidelines, which are readily available in the Site Feedback subforum. Basically, private communications are private, unless you have the express permission of the sender to publish.
Probably you are referring to my warning to you that you should consider ceasing your trolling behaviour.

Since your filing reports and your posting this thread are both a continuation of the same behaviour that led to the initial warning, starting the current thread really isn't helping your case.

The moderator group will consider whether your continued participating on this forum is desirable in good time.

If you wish to make a case for why we ought to retain you as a member, please send a private message copied to myself, Bells and Tiassa.

Thank you.
Let me add my friend, that [in my how many years here has it been dmoe...you have that information? :D] I have made some enemies and also friends, and even had my run in with mods, in my support of science and the scientific method. But the one thing in common that most of my enemies and friends have, is that they generally view you as a troll
 
Ad Hominems....accusations...allegations...The Real Scientific Method at work!
Actually, facts facts and more facts.
The rules regarding private messages are published in our Site Posting Guidelines, which are readily available in the Site Feedback subforum. Basically, private communications are private, unless you have the express permission of the sender to publish.
Probably you are referring to my warning to you that you should consider ceasing your trolling behaviour.

Since your filing reports and your posting this thread are both a continuation of the same behaviour that led to the initial warning, starting the current thread really isn't helping your case.

The moderator group will consider whether your continued participating on this forum is desirable in good time.

If you wish to make a case for why we ought to retain you as a member, please send a private message copied to myself, Bells and Tiassa.

Thank you.
Let me add my friend, that [in my how many years here has it been dmoe...you have that information? :D] I have made some enemies and also friends, and even had my run in with mods, in my support of science and the scientific method. But the one thing in common that most of my enemies and friends have, is that they generally view you as a troll. There is a reason for that.
 
Meh...Alex, everything just has to be about the toad boy...he can't have it any other way...
Ah, the toads croaking in the summer evening.

:D Ahhh, what a nice double they make.My old never ending friend dmoe [god bless his little soul] and the vociferous loud mouthed supporter, the chief forum denier of science, the excuse maker for the lies and womanising and despicable red neck behaviour of Trump, and the promoter of mythical unsupported ideas of ID and creationism. :D
 
Ah, the toads croaking in the summer evening.
And the proper defining of superfluous as obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed, or maybe useless!!! In other words, whatever magic sky daddy any gullible individual sees the need to fabricate to ease his/her inner fear of the finality of death.Sad that some people need that crutch.
 
You made no comment re intelligent design ..do you or don't you?
Thank billvon for resurrecting this from iggy.

I'm not really satisfied with any formulation of intelligent design I've heard. Either God's plan was incorporated in the initial creation event, or some internal agency (whether intelligent or not) made contributions in its stead. What I don't buy is that God created the universe and then tweaked it as time went along.
 
Your questions will likely go unanswered. Trolls tend not to post their own opinions on things, lest others do to them what they do to others.

We can only wait and see but I could understand a hesitation and reluctance on Mr V making a definitive reply given my negative comments upon intelligent design on many occassions.
He may feel I would ridicule him if he supports ID but I just would like to know and why he never pulls Paddo up one way or the other when he calls him an IDer ... I suppose if you say you believe in God then ID must be a given ... He may want to distance himself from the Discovery Institute and their manifesto to discredit science and "teach the controversy" sneakyness...Could you have a creator who was not a designer...well I guess you could not...I mean if you are god you just could not blink a goat into existence without thinking about the details like lungs and heart etc...the only other god involvement approach is that he blinked the chemical building blocks to start life and let evolution take it's course ...I find the more I try and figure out a god approach the more I come up with unrealistic propositions....I then wonder if believers think these things through to a similar degree...like if there is an intelligent designer is he god, their science says they don't know as you would expect if you wanted to be a make believe scientist, but let's face it that Discovery Institute is not to be trusted ... But say this designer is like a contractor god bought in to work out everything..like god pops out of eternity, stretches looks around gets an idea for a universe he is going to get in someone for sure as at his level he would by way past DIY stuff...and you could expect many designers, you know specialists..you would have the landscape guy, the animal guy, a guy to do the Moon's and planets...another for water features.
I would just love to hear a detailed explanation of just how it all came together via intelligent design or a god approach.
Alex
 
I'm not really satisfied with any formulation of intelligent design I've heard. Either God's plan was incorporated in the initial creation event, or some internal agency (whether intelligent or not) made contributions in its stead. What I don't buy is that God created the universe and then tweaked it as time went along.
Except of course that the Universe/space/time does not really give a hoot about any life that happened to undergo abiogenesis and evolution and whether said life is satisfied, or does not buy the science. And of course as most of us agree, any thought of ID and/or some magical spaghetti monster, is superfluous at best...Superfluous of course meaning, obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed.
 
Except of course that the Universe/space/time does not really give a hoot about any life that happened to undergo abiogenesis and evolution and whether said life is satisfied, or does not buy the science. And of course as most of us agree, any thought of ID and/or some magical spaghetti monster, is superfluous at best...Superfluous of course meaning, obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed.

Careful any appeal to reality will get you on his Iggy...but there is a need it seems for many who can't accept personal responsibility to determine a personal code of morality and decency, who need the promise that their current presumably unsatisfactory life will be replaced by something they consider better and sooth their fear of dieing...but of course the problem is they need institutions and real estate in place to add to the illusion that their wish list is real.

What I don't get is if they are so convinced there is another life waiting why the need to try and reject science.

Why can't they see science as god given I wonder...

When you think of the resources wasted in the name of religion, both human and material it is just so wrong..yet they can't see it...and I don't mean just the waste of life and materials in religious wars but just the incredible waste of lives devoted to religion and the waste of building materials going to churches and the like.

Imagine if all the wealth was diverted to housing the homeless, providing universal health care and addressing the million deaths each year because of starvation...and education...just think of the waste of university resources on preparing folk to promote this outdated superstition.

Imagine if religions paid tax.

Then you look at these religious folk...they often seem devoid of compassion unless for folk in their particular tight group.

It seems they are usually right wing holding only hatred for the left who after all are all about fairness to all. That tells you a great deal if you think about it.

Do you ever watch "The Atheist Experience"? I have watched many shows and it is difficult to accept there are so many dingbats out there...oh and their standard statement to an atheist is that they will go to hell for not believing and worse is the glee they get when pointing that out. Nasty small minded and disgusting.

And the fact is if you study history you can trace how the god of the West was invented by drawing on other cultures and how JCs MO was common back then due to all these human gods being based in astrology...it is clear that it's all made up and even the plot defies all logic..yet this promise of after life has believers overlook all reality...get back to straight out Sun worship I say..it created the Solar system and sustains most all life and we know those facts are indeed facts.

They remind me of a poker machine player..they put in and put in in the hope of a payoff and any fool just has to look around them and realise the machines are there to make money for the club and the chance of you retiring on your winnings are zip and if you think management cares about you losing money ...well...there is a sucker on every stool...and the machines themes same approach to lacing the religion con with fantasy.

I just hate how they destroy lives...I have seen it first hand and say religion is evil.
Not the good folk who are conned mind you...
Back to Iggy for me which is good because I have said all that can be said...no need to deal with cute comments from a die hard.

Borrow my soap box if you wish.

Alex
 
Last edited:
Careful any appeal to reality will get you on his Iggy...but there is a need it seems for many who can't accept personal responsibility to determine a personal code of morality and decency, who need the promise that their current presumably unsatisfactory life will be replaced by something they consider better and sooth their fear of dieing...but of course the problem is they need institutions and real estate in place to add to the illusion that their wish list is real.
But I'm already on his iggy, as he has told me a couple of times now when he feels like answering my post/s. :D

The rest of your post makes some valid points, which he'll obviously ignore, or misinterpret or lie about.
 
On another forum something caught my attention

The 10 commandments

Though the numberings differ, the Ten Commandments are:
Different people follow different traditions for interpreting and numbering them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

What brought these into my spotlight was the analysis of number ONE

Now if believers really really think these commandments are from god

what the hell is up with No. ONE?

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

Seems like this implies there are other gods

Who would have thought, god admitting there are others just like him?

:)
 
Exactly, science is incapable of analyzing religion

I'm tentatively inclined to agree with that. Science is concerned with describing the contents of physical reality and describing how different parts of physical reality are believed to interact. So science would seem to have no applicability to hypothetical realities that transcend physical reality. So to the extent that 'religion' posits transcendental sorts of being (God or whatever) it would seem to be outside the scope of science.

because religion has no methodology whatever.

Must something have a methodology in order for science to analyze it? I'm not convinced that physical reality has a methodology per se. It does display various kinds of order, which is why reason and ultimately science can get a grip on it. Of course religions display various kinds of order as well. That's that theologians write about.

As far as methodology goes, as opposed to order, I'd say that the early Buddhism of the Pali canon is nothing if not a methodology. That's what Sila and Samadhi are all about. This sort of Buddhism is exceedingly empirical, if one is willing to expand the scope of empiricism from sensory experience to phenomenal experience in general. It's about a whole host of ethical and meditative processes that have profound effects on one's consciousness.

It's mythology, a form of religious history.

'Mythology' isn't just another word for 'bullshit'. I'd define mythology as stories told to make sense of the world. And defined that way, science is nothing if it isn't mythology. The distinction between science and religion isn't that religion is and science isn't mythology. They are both mythology and the difference is in the kind of stories they tell and in how those stories are justified.

However science is most certainly capable of supplanting religion in all physical and/or metaphysical respects.

I fully agree regarding physical reality. Science has certainly shown its superiority in that regard.

But I disagree strongly regarding metaphysics. Science seems to me to be out of its depth when it comes to metaphysics.

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.

Now you are writing like you somehow possess the secret of the universe. That makes my agnostic klaxons sound. How do you (supposedly) know this?

I damnably continue to consider reality the most profound of mysteries. I most emphatically do NOT think that I possess the secret of the universe. Simply attributing everything to mathematics, even if that was somehow possible which I strongly doubt, still wouldn't explain why mathematics exists in the first place.
 
W4U said; 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.
Yazata said; Now you are writing like you somehow possess the secret of the universe. That makes my agnostic klaxons sound. How do you (supposedly) know this?
I speak from the perspective that the universe is fundamentally a mathematical construct. I cannot imagine any other functionally structured system that can replace the mathematical properties of the universe. This is why I maintain that; if there is a god it has to be or at least obey the mathematical laws of nature. IMO, the best religion can do is propose that God is a sentient (motivated) mathematician, which to me sounds much more complicated than any other possible inherent "quasi-intelligent" mathematical (orderly) causal function (potentialin a dynamic environment.

Thus, if a God exists, it must be a mathematical construct.
I damnably continue to consider reality the most profound of mysteries. I most emphatically do NOT think that I possess the secret of the universe. Simply attributing everything to mathematics, even if that was somehow possible which I strongly doubt, still wouldn't explain why mathematics exists in the first place
Without mathematical values and functions, the universe would still be in a state of chaos. Mathematics are everywhere you look, they are unavoidable properties of every single atom in the universe. We could not speak of "functional mechanics" without invoking mathematics.

Mathematics exist in the first place because the universe could not exist without them. Mathematics constitute self-organizing quasi-intelligent Agency.
Agency
2 Action or intervention, especially such as to produce a particular effect.
‘canals carved by the agency of running water’ or ‘a belief in various forms of supernatural agency’
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/agency

Which of these two definitions sounds more scientifically defensible?

Self-organization


Self-organization in micron-sized Nb3O7(OH) cubes during a hydrothermal treatment at 200 °C. Initially amorphous cubes gradually transform into ordered 3D meshes of crystalline nanowires as summarized in the model below.[1]
Self-organization, also called (in the social sciences) spontaneous order, is a process where some form of overall order arises from local interactions between parts of an initially disordered system. The process can be spontaneous when sufficient energy is available, not needing control by any external agent. It is often triggered by seemingly random fluctuations, amplified by positive feedback.
The resulting organization is wholly decentralized, distributed over all the components of the system. As such, the organization is typically
robust and able to survive or self-repair substantial perturbation. Chaos theory discusses self-organization in terms of islands of predictability in a sea of chaotic unpredictability.
Self-organization occurs in many physical, chemical, biological, robotic, and cognitive systems. Examples of self-organization include crystallization, thermal convection of fluids, chemical oscillation, animal swarming, neural circuits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization

Cosmologists tell us they are not inventing mathematics but "discovering" existing mathematics which they can describe via human symbolized mathematics.

Perhaps recognition of the unbelievably large scope of the universe overwhelms our sense of order, but Science is especially good in pulling things apart and finding "common denominators" in many seemingly disparate patterns.

290px-Hydrogen_Density_Plots.png
Wavefunctions of the electron in a hydrogen atom at different energy levels. Quantum mechanics cannot predict the exact location of a particle in space, only the probability of finding it at different locations.[1] The brighter areas represent a higher probability of finding the electron.

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

Note the "self-organizing" mathematical patterns which become manifest under various conditions. These are recurring mathematical patterns and can be mathematically predicted to form and behave in specific orderly repeatable ways. No supernatural Agency is required (its a human invention) and is conceptually redundant.

One "common denominator' of all things in the universe is the mathematical order in all physical objects , which can be identified and symbolized and used for imitating (copying) universal values and functions in a laboratory.

The Higgs boson was produced by applied mathematics, without any prior observation of the existence of bosons.
We mathematically teased the Higgs boson out from the Higgs field. This is clear proof of the power and universal applicability of mathematics. This is why the invention of human symbolic mathematics is considered the greatest
triumph of human intellect.

Maths themselves are very simple, orderly, and consistent. It is the sheer volume and varieties based on simple mathematical patterns that is the daunting part of scientific inquiry.

The simplest geometric pattern (plane) is the triangle, no? How is it possible for such a simple pattern to be able to dynamically create the most astoundingly beautiful functional mathematical art forms.
fractal_geometry_jasser_studio-min.jpg

http://jasser.nl/about/fractal-geometry/

If I cut an apple into 4 pieces and we each consume 2 pieces, would you wonder if apples exist, even if that apple itself has been consumed and does no longer exist? If not, why would you question if mathematics exist?
The only way we could each have 2 pieces of that apple is if "division" (cutting the apple into 4 pieces) is a mathematical function, by any other name, no?

IMO, what is often overlooked is that the Human brain can only make "best guesses" of what the sensory perceived and processed information actually means in reality.
As Anil Seth posits, "human experience of reality is by "agreement" of shared observations."

The Universe has no such analytical weaknesses. It works via inviolable "universal mathematical constants".
 
Last edited:
Back
Top