God is Absurd

[nietzschefan]

Consider if omnipotent "God", the being decended from the hebrew god YHWH, whom was most likely a ripoff of the Sumerian god of "creation" Enki....was a real entity that might have actually had a hand in creating us.

Shit, we could actually "create" all kinds of weird shit with our knowledge now...imagine in 200 years what "we" could "create"?

What I am saying is, perhaps we were created and perhaps we are almost as flawed as the being that created us. Our "god" is not perfect.

Oh! You are talking about whatever created the whole universe??? Fuck that, i'm not touching that one!

 

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Consider if omnipotent "God", the being decended from the hebrew god YHWH, whom was most likely a ripoff of the Sumerian god of "creation" Enki....was a real entity that might have actually had a hand in creating us.

Shit, we could actually "create" all kinds of weird shit with our knowledge now...imagine in 200 years what "we" could "create"?

What I am saying is, perhaps we were created and perhaps we are almost as flawed as the being that created us. Our "god" is not perfect.

Oh! You are talking about whatever created the whole universe??? Fuck that, i'm not touching that one!

There is a dimensional realm were all your thoughts you have had during your entire life have materialized and become real; imagine what fuck up realm that is, with so many fucked up people... Now just imagine we are just a bi-product of one of these realms that comes mearly from the imagination of a higher being... In this sense, human beings are what we may call gods, we are creators of systems.

"And God created man in His image"

 

[UncleChrist]

How about simply

Memories fade for a reason

People die for a reason

to make room .........for new ones

religion is a mass "delusion" that has "afflicted" the world
with a mental virus in turn giving birth to many deluded "followers"
that believe in childish "things"

:shrug:

 

[SnakeLord]

and you believe in the same God as I do, but you call it differently.

No I don't.

My point is, if you don´t believe in God, why are you guys so eager to prove the unexistence?

Having grown up in society where religious bullshit is in the paper, on TV, on every street corner, in the schools, knocks on your door every Saturday, causes daily worldwide mayhem/death/destruction, goes to utmost lengths to make threats if I do anything some ancient shepherd didn't like and so on and so forth it's not much of a surprise when the minority stands up and says: stfu.

However, we largey don't say stfu rudely. We debate the claims made by those people.

whatever comes from the heart cannot be understood by the mind...

The heart is a blood pump. What you're talking about is the mind and the mind.

Do you have any proof that love exists?

Yes. Chemical reactions, externally visible signs, (flushed cheeks etc), noticed tendencies and activities of those in love etc etc etc.

So you can try to argue and tell me that love does not exist, but I can only pitty you for not knowing what love is.

Your pity is not required, I know what love is. How you try and liken love to space fairies is anyones guess.

So if you don´t believe in God, give it up!!!

Certainly, the day people stop claiming one exists.

If you raise a question about God´s existence, and you don´t believe in God; don´t you think there is something missing in your argument?

No. Just the other day I raised a question concerning The Borg to a friend of mine. No, I don't believe the Borg exist.

 

[Wisdom_Seeker]

No I don't.

Forget about the word "God", how about calling it "the truth"? The word "God" is getting old anyway...

 

[S.A.M.]

My question today is:
Is that possible?

Things you cannot see or hear or sense in any way are frequently considered impossible, right upto the point when you can.

The question is, who looks for these things? The ones who consider them impossible or the ones who don't?

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

who said god was omni anything? he might be an omnivore though.

peace.

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

Things you cannot see or hear or sense in any way are frequently considered impossible, right upto the point when you can.

The question is, who looks for these things? The ones who consider them impossible or the ones who don't?

there is proof that something we cannot see, hear, taste, touch, smell or sense atall exists. it is invisible and cannot be tested on but we know it exist.

empty space, and for those who say empty space does not exist because no space is empty. and you use the old saying of "no space is empty", well if that were true then seperation of mass and energy would not exist, and everything would be one big solid lump of universe.


peace.

 

[Yonescoh]

I know, the concept of God is absurd from our limited mind´s perspective; but I urge you to think about why you are asking this in the first place.

I ponder, so that I can grow.

 

[Yonescoh]

Things you cannot see or hear or sense in any way are frequently considered impossible, right upto the point when you can.

The question is, who looks for these things? The ones who consider them impossible or the ones who don't?

Good point. However, I ask you.... how can you understand someone that is all-knowing?

 

[Yonescoh]

who said god was omni anything? he might be an omnivore though.

peace.

What is a god without superpowers? Human?

 

[original]

I shall destroy my own argument by saying that I am essentially agnostic.
If you want to get your omni fix then consider God to be everything, all that exists.

As lightgigantic quoted: Bhagavad Gita 9.4 - "By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them."

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I mean... think about it. An omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient living being? Absurd! How can any sane mind possibly conceive such notion?

What theology have you studied? Ridiculing childish and ignorant caricatures is a poor example of "think[ing] about it".

 

[Yonescoh]

I shall destroy my own argument by saying that I am essentially agnostic.
If you want to get your omni fix then consider God to be everything, all that exists.

True...

As lightgigantic quoted: Bhagavad Gita 9.4 - "By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them."

The Bible says God is within us as well, though...

 

[Yonescoh]

What theology have you studied? Ridiculing childish and ignorant caricatures is a poor example of "think[ing] about it".

Are we reading the same thread?

 

[Yonescoh]

Just because something is absurd, it doesn't make it non-existent. Take Britney Spears, for instance.

 

[QuisUtDeus]

God writes straight with crooked lines.

Do you claim to understand an omniscient being? Anyone who claims to know that an omniscient being exists probably has no idea what they are talking about. How can you claim to know someone who is so beyond our little minds? Hence, the agnostic one is the wise one.

I'm not an atheist. I'm agnostic.

There is no way to explain god with words we have created to explain mysteries we dont understand ("omniscient" for example). However, god* if "omniscient" would be so powerful that one could argue that he could let each of us have a personal basic understanding of him in relation to our individual souls. e.g i know bill and bill knows bob but both bob and i know different things about bill due to our individual personal relationship with bill, furthermore i dont know everything about bill but i do know he exists through my simple understanding of him.

Moreover, surely the wise thing to do would be to accept there is a god. for this basic, cut down logic:

If a devote atheist (one who spreads the hatred of the existence of god) dies and then finds out there is a god, he will realise all his life he has been tricked by something and will ultimately reject god.

If a devote theist (one who spreads love of god) dies and there is nothing then there is no wastage of a life, as he wont know any different. Besides his good works in the present eternity on earth may live on.

However being agnostic is the super easy option as it gives you the best of both worlds. The freedom and ease of not worrying about sin (not to mention the lack of stigma) and just in case, you've left a possibility for god (love*). But will this work to your advantage on earthly material/flesh needs? yes. What if you have a soul? The lack of nurturing your "soul" through just focusing on material/flesh/social status/ambition/lust would leave it so unprepared and malnutritioned that come the after life that you could end up no better off than the atheist.

So why not nurture both sides of your assumed existance... Fair enough, You will never understand the mystery of gods love, but the benefits of believing, both in our eternity (present) and his, are more beautiful than creation and although hard to believe its more powerful than any argument on this forum ;D

* in this use of the word 'love' and 'god' im mean the fundamental belief in god being the 'putting of oneself last for the benefit of those around him'.

 

[Oli]

If a devote atheist (one who spreads the hatred of the existence of god) dies and then finds out there is a god, he will realise all his life he has been tricked by something and will ultimately reject god.

If a devote theist (one who spreads love of god) dies and there is nothing then there is no wastage of a life, as he wont know any different. Besides his good works in the present eternity on earth may live on.

And atheists don't do good work while they're alive?
BTW devote (= devout?) atheists?

1. Devoted to religion or to the fulfillment of religious obligations. See Synonyms at religious.
2. Displaying reverence or piety.
3. Sincere; earnest:

I assume you mean sincere rather than "devoted to religion.
They don't (and can't) spread "hatred of god" since they don't believe he exists.

However being agnostic is the super easy option as it gives you the best of both worlds.

Except, presumably, the after life since you weren't a believer.

The freedom and ease of not worrying about sin

Agnostics and atheists just worry about being good people, rather than mess about with "sin".

So why not nurture both sides of your assumed existance... Fair enough, You will never understand the mystery of gods love, but the benefits of believing, both in our eternity (present) and his, are more beautiful than creation and although hard to believe its more powerful than any argument on this forum ;D

I get it: you want us to be hypocrites.

 

[QuisUtDeus]

No I don't.



Having grown up in society where religious bullshit is in the paper, on TV, on every street corner, in the schools, knocks on your door every Saturday, causes daily worldwide mayhem/death/destruction, goes to utmost lengths to make threats if I do anything some ancient shepherd didn't like and so on and so forth it's not much of a surprise when the minority stands up and says: stfu.

However, we largey don't say stfu rudely. We debate the claims made by those people.



The heart is a blood pump. What you're talking about is the mind and the mind.



Yes. Chemical reactions, externally visible signs, (flushed cheeks etc), noticed tendencies and activities of those in love etc etc etc.



Your pity is not required, I know what love is. How you try and liken love to space fairies is anyones guess.



Certainly, the day people stop claiming one exists.



No. Just the other day I raised a question concerning The Borg to a friend of mine. No, I don't believe the Borg exist.

'Religon' is such a loose term for what we are talking about. As when it comes down to it religon is a belief system mostly concerning a divine being. therefore atheists are 'religous'. Dont you think it is but naive to think that if there wasnt what you call 'religon' there wouldnt be any daily worldwide mayhem/death/destruction? Also anyone who threatens you for their belief of god is messed up regardless, be it brain washed by abu hammzer or led astray by influence of evil not the 'religon'.

Without being rude, i would presume you have a certain liking to Richard Dawkins,( a ridiculously intelligent scientist/atheist an admirable man) ? When people use his arguments it shows two things 1, they cant formulate their own and 2, that they have a hard time understanding the true meaning of love as he obviously but sadly has an absence of it in his life. Now to put love down to chemicals and science besides from being extremely cold hearted, sorry 'minded', also suggests we have nothing but instincts like animal, well in that case speak for yourself .

However I understand where you are coming from. And i respect your belief. So if i have made a wrong presumption, my apologies. But i base it on a general argument against god that most people adopt without thought.

Sorry had to chuck this in:
I bottle wine in a vineyard, i sometimes transfer it tank to tank, filtering the acids. but i have no idea about wine making. Similie most people dont know anything about their beliefs in the same way Richard Dawkins has as much idea about theology as i do winemaking.

Who is like unto god?

 

[Oli]

'Religon' is such a loose term for what we are talking about. As when it comes down to it religon is a belief system mostly concerning a divine being. therefore atheists are 'religous'.

First definition I found on the net of religion:

re·li·gion (r-ljn)
n.
1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Which one (if any) of those applies to atheists?
Atheists are not religious.
Learn something.

When people use his arguments it shows two things 1, they cant formulate their own

Or that they agree with him and find his words useful?
Or do you meant to say that everyone who quotes scripture is too stupid to formulate their own opinions?

and 2, that they have a hard time understanding the true meaning of love as he obviously but sadly has an absence of it in his life.

Wild, unfounded speculation.
On both counts.

Now to put love down to chemicals and science besides from being extremely cold hearted, sorry 'minded', also suggests we have nothing but instincts like animal, well in that case speak for yourself .

Arrant nonsense.