Your DUTY to God

[Bishadi]

???

The premiss is silly. The purpose of language is not to 'tell someone what to do'.

dahhhhhhhh

but without language, one person cannot tell another a lie and say it is true.

The point was if no one told you what is true (with words) would you be able to do 'good' with simply living as any other beast.

'what would be your duty?'

What's worse, the silly premiss entails nothing whatsoever about neither god nor one's duty.

because you are awaiting someone to tell you what to do, rather than observe that 'living' is doing all by itself.

So without words, then you would never know anything outside of just living (capable of doing good naturally)

Bishadi, even for you, this is stunning nonsense.

because as ooosual, you await others to respond before making a comment based on your own opinion. (you chime in with what others say, versus just addressing the thread as they are)

the thread is intended to allow others to think for themselves and realize that words cause more ignorance (tangents from reality) than just living.

no one is perfect, perhaps try and realize that first reality (meaning, i will never say everything every person can understand)

so to mod it up, perhaps be a contributer and add to the threads with quality INTENT!

 

[Oli]

a dog, cat and lion have the same God as you do; but they don't make believe what a god is, because no one is lying to them about what a god is.

Nonsense.

Language is not impure; people are by choice.

Language is an approximation.
Purity doesn't come into it.

 

[Bishadi]

a dog, cat and lion have the same God as you do; but they don't make believe what a god is, because no one is lying to them about what a god is.

Nonsense.

Why?

Language is an approximation.
Purity doesn't come into it.

instinct shares 'purity' to reality, far better than beliefs created by words

if not, show me otherwise

 

[Oli]

Why?

Because:
"god" is an ssumption.
animals believing in god is an assumption.

instinct shares 'purity' to reality, far better than beliefs created by words
if not, show me otherwise

You're wandering off into La la land again:
YOU claimed that language is pure: no, language is an approximation to reality.

 

[Bishadi]

Because:
"god" is an ssumption.
animals believing in god is an assumption.

and what species of animal is mankind?

i said

instinct shares 'purity' to reality, far better than beliefs created by words
if not, show me otherwise

and your respnse is

You're wandering off into La la land again:
YOU claimed that language is pure: no, language is an approximation to reality.

where is your head kid?

the claim is that NO language is pure while instinct is, naturally

are you really having that tough a time?

Notice the thread title and what the OP implied? Or are you posting again, without reading?

The thread is suggesting that if there were NO WORD IN EXISTENCE, what would be YOUR duty?

Is it to live?

To live

or to live............... just like every other ANIMAL on the earth?


And then if 'to live' is the rule, then what is it that would allow you to live longer? Perhaps procreate, perhaps associate with others to share food?

perhaps contribute with others 'to live'

but in all cases of the example: there are no words in the frame to reference.

SO NO LIES CAN EXIST!

is there anything else you want to discuss or did i mesbell a word?

 

[Oli]

and what species of animal is mankind?

Then why bring up lions, dogs etc?
You assume they have a god, just as you assume god exists.

the claim is that NO language is pure while instinct is, naturally

Correction, you stated:

Language is not impure

Post #20 for reference.
If it's not impure then it must be pure, no?

The thread is suggesting that if there were NO WORD IN EXISTENCE, what would be YOUR duty?

The thread title is about God, not words.
I'm still waiting for you to show that there's ANY duty to god, with or without words.

is there anything else you want to discuss or did i mesbell a word?

Stunning.
Thanks for that one.

 

[Bishadi]

Then why bring up lions, dogs etc?
You assume they have a god, just as you assume god exists.

not me.......

but as any human being (other than you) can understand, that whether a word is used or not; if the concept of God is being observed, than that God is the God of everything.

again; if there are no words; what does life (instinct) do?

is it pure to existence?

(is instinct, pure to existence? (God if you like/or not)

Correction, you stated:

Post #20 for reference.
If it's not impure then it must be pure, no?


The thread title is about God, not words.
I'm still waiting for you to show that there's ANY duty to god, with or without words.


Stunning.
Thanks for that one.

Moderators will you guys remove this fool as he is apparently not reading the thread, the opening posts........ as well just a rude troll (as usual)


the whole premise of the thread is if there are no words and what would be the duty of each person and would nature share what is true, naturally...........

apparently oli is not capable of comprehending even when it is written


The thread is suggesting that if there were NO WORD IN EXISTENCE, what would be YOUR duty?

 

[Oli]

but as any human being (other than you) can understand, that whether a word is used or not; if the concept of God is being observed, than that God is the God of everything.

But many people (more than just me even) don't accept the concept of god.
And you have yet to show that animals (i.e. non-human ones0 have any concept of god.

again; if there are no words; what does life (instinct) do?

What do rocks do?
Dogs?
Etc.

Moderators will you guys remove this fool as he is apparently not reading the thread, the opening posts........ as well just a rude troll (as usual)

So because I take one of your posts at face value (which you still haven't explained), you scream for my removal.
Did you or did you not not state : Language is not impure?

apparently oli is not capable of comprehending even when it is written

Hmm, I did comprehend "Language is not impure".

The thread is suggesting that if there were NO WORD IN EXISTENCE, what would be YOUR duty?

That's a question, not a suggestion.
Why do you assume there would be a duty?
Why do you bring "god" into it if it's a question about the existence of language?

 

[Bishadi]

But many people (more than just me even) don't accept the concept of god.

i didn't ask you that, you assuming, and is what is making a blanck out of you

And you have yet to show that animals (i.e. non-human ones0 have any concept of god.

don't need to, as i was not asking about animals, i ws using animals as an example of instinct

What do rocks do?

rattle in your head

Dogs?

they like doggy style

So because I take one of your posts at face value (which you still haven't explained), you scream for my removal.
Did you or did you not not state : Language is not impure?

NOPE.....

i stated if there was NO words (language) what would you do (personally) and would you be able to learn from nature (you personally) and would nature offer you a fair shot as learning 'truth' ?????

i was asking what people (their opinions) of the possibility of learning, observing and being capable of understanding the rules of existence from nature?

Hmm, I did comprehend "Language is not impure".

Then your comprehension was based on your assumptions, not the thread, any post or anything i ever wrote.

That's a question, not a suggestion.

because the initial post was apparently not worded well enough for you, so as always i try and offer each a chance to observe the idea in wording that is simple. ( i was trying to give you another chance with the thread rather than just point out the obvious; you are not here to observe the thread and its intent but to be a rude kid with a magnifying glass)

Why do you assume there would be a duty?

your lungs have a duty with our without your choice, correct?

living is the duty of living things and without words, there would be no issue in comprehending that.

Why do you bring "god" into it if it's a question about the existence of language?

because what i consider God and what others consider God is different; i am offering the venue so others can apply.

to me God is existence itself and we all bound to nature, whether we like it or not

where as others believe God is the master of everything that exists.

so rather than put my opinion against others i was offering a venue for each to see for themselves, that nature offers the rules for life all by herself.

I like people to be able to think for themselves, rather than tell them what to think and to me, often asking a question allows people to realize truth by themselves.

the reason you contest each question as illogical is you are not observing the question as it is; hence why i continually have to rewrite most everything for you and even as you reply, you still NEVER address the thread, but continue the tangent of your trollings

you are not doing anything but trolling and enjoying yourself with it.

damn right you should be removed!

 

[Oli]

i didn't ask you that, you assuming, and is what is making a blanck out of you

A blanck?

but as any human being (other than you) can understand, that whether a word is used or not; if the concept of God is being observed, than that God is the God of everything.

You singled me out...

don't need to, as i was not asking about animals, i ws using animals and an example of instinct

No?

a dog, cat and lion have the same God as you do;

An assumption.

i stated if there was NO words (language) what would you do (personally) and would you be able to learn from nature (you personally) and would nature offer you a fair shot as learning 'truth' ?????

You STATED; Language is not impure.
DO you retract that?

i was asking what people (their opinions) of the possibility of learning, observing and being capable of understanding the rules of existence from nature?

Without language no one would be able to pass on that knowledge and it would be have to be relearnt by each generation.

Then your comprehension was based on your assumptions, not the thread, any post or anything i ever wrote.

I quote AGAIN, your post #20.

Language is not impure

Still wish to deny it?

your lungs have a duty with our without your choice, correct?

Incorrect.
My lungs have a function, not a duty.

living is the duty of living things and without words, there would be no issue in comprehending that.

No.
It's not a "duty".

the reason you contest each question as illogical is you are not observing the question as it is

Or maybe you're incoherent at the best of times and incapable of actually making sense.

you still NEVER address the thread, but continue the tangent of your trollings

Because the intent of your thread is never made clear.

damn right you should be removed!

Aw, poor little Bishadi, maybe you should formulate your questions better.

 

[Mr. Hamtastic]

Let's set the stage:

If mankind 'created' all words and there was no language to tell anyone what to do;

What is your duty to God?


Do we learn from observing nature?

Would the nature of things show us what is pure?

Ok. Aside from the obvious fact that this is nonsensical, I can play with it for you.

IF deity (of any kind) exists
AND we are aware of said deity's existence
AND we have no language
THEN our duty would be to exist, live, and reproduce.

Without instructions and all being up to interpretation, what would there be to learn about a deity from observing nature?

Deity X favors the aggressor in one on one situations?
Deity X does not believe in mercy to those outside one's family unit?
Deity X likes water more than fire?

I mean, what do YOU see to be learned from nature, Bishadi? Please compare your esoteric answers to examples of occurrences one might find in our agreed upon reality.

 

[Bishadi]

You STATED; Language is not impure.
DO you retract that?

show me that sentence!

language is NOT PURE....... as I KNOW all words were CREATED by mankind.

there is nothing pure of language and why you don't understand me half the time.

Without language no one would be able to pass on that knowledge and it would be have to be relearnt by each generation.

no...shhhhhh

 

[Bishadi]

post #20 was corrected.... but i would think someone with loli intelligence would have realized that if the thread opening was implying 'if no words' existed, that it is implying language is faulty throughout mankind understanding

good to have evidence of the trolling of oli.......... all written up and documented (even as he continued)

 

[Oli]

show me that sentence!

Still having reading problems?
I've told you TWICE it's post 20.
Oh, I see you changed it.
That's somewhat dishonest.. asking me to show you it now.

language is NOT PURE....... as I KNOW all words were CREATED by mankind.
there is nothing pure of language and why you don't understand me half the time.
no...shhhhhh

So you were wrong?

 

[Oli]

post #20 was corrected.... but i would think someone with loli intelligence would have realized that if the thread opening was implying 'if no words' existed, that it is implying language is faulty throughout mankind understanding
good to have evidence of the trolling of oli.......... all written up and documented (even as he continued)

Incorrect: it merely illustrates that you can't keep track of your own arguments.
It took THREE pointers for you realise even when I quoted you.

 

[Bishadi]

Ok. Aside from the obvious fact that this is nonsensical, I can play with it for you.

IF deity (of any kind) exists

Then use universe or mother nature or perhaps zeus, maybe existence itself.

The definition of God is YOUR CHOICE!

AND we are aware of said deity's existence
AND we have no language
THEN our duty would be to exist, live, and reproduce.

Exactly!

Life is what governs, not opinions.

Without instructions and all being up to interpretation, what would there be to learn about a deity from observing nature?

don't care about a diety............ i want to know what each consider the absolute responsibility is.

Deity X favors the aggressor in one on one situations?
Deity X does not believe in mercy to those outside one's family unit?
Deity X likes water more than fire?

No diety if no words.

kind of nice eh?

I mean, what do YOU see to be learned from nature, Bishadi? Please compare your esoteric answers to examples of occurrences one might find in our agreed upon reality.

The truth!

but since we know that words have caused a ton of tangents, it is good to see that within there is true reasoning to based reality on


so the last true of absolute reality seems to be 'what is life?'




everything else is speculation


so as i see it, if mass comprehends its existence, then it can cause/create and actually live forever BY CHOICE!


so my duty is to learn and share what i can

how is my ingish

 

[Bishadi]

someone please tell the duck, i was wrong by mistypppppping a word

but i can see quick clearly you Oli are a troll

all you want is to be right on something ....

and all i want is to share what any can see for themselves, if they wish too

 

[Oli]

But you still haven't made your point.
Why should there be any duty?

 

[glaucon]

But you still haven't made your point.
Why should there be any duty?

I don't think he'll be able to answer. He clearly either doesn't understand the correct meaning of the term duty, or is making use of some bizarre personal definition of it.

 

[Oli]

I don't think he'll be able to answer. He clearly either doesn't understand the correct meaning of the term duty, or is making use of some bizarre personal definition of it.

But don't forget: I'm the troll