(October 1, 2019 at 6:20 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(October 1, 2019 at 4:50 pm)Lek Wrote: They can all reveal God.

Or they can all reveal the same or similar common cognitive disfunction and emotional craving inherited from our ancesters, who were nothing more than merely the least difunctional of various kluges of extemporized neurological circuitry thrown together by contingent circumstances.


Yes, I know, you emotionally crave to be more than that, but that's purely because you are nothing more than that.

Nailed it!

This description is probably very close to what actually is the case. And study after study seems to bear that out. These studies can be researched, reproduced, demonstrated, falsified, etc.

And yet, not a single study points to any god existing. All that we are ever presented with is: ancient 'holy books', feelings, anecdotal reports, fallacies, and failed logical arguments.

I'm going to steal this quote from you: "kluges of extemporized neurological circuitry thrown together by contingent circumstances", because that exactly describes our brains.

(October 1, 2019 at 9:51 am)Succubus Wrote:

(September 30, 2019 at 9:30 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote: Straw-man god, par excellence.  Well done...

If in your opinion it's a strawman god then you are now obliged to define the real god.
AFAICS nowhere have you have made an attempt at defining the god you actually believe in, so this is an ideal opportunity. What is the real god?*


*Points will be deducted for any mention of philosophers/theologians, dead or otherwise.

If I could define it comprehensively, it wouldn't be God. I know what God is not, and it's not something that moves around space and time and thinks about when or how it should intervene. God is the source and sustenance of existence, but I don't know — I cannot know — what that is, directly, only indirectly what results from it, such as matter and consciousness. I also know that I am not God, fortunately. Whatever representations we make are only imperfect analogies and metaphors. So you could say that any description of God is a limitation and caricature and, therefore, a straw-man. I think the video does a good job of showing that biblical stories cannot be the whole story. We can't try to limit God in any way, including with our religions.

---

(September 30, 2019 at 9:30 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote: Straw-man god, par excellence.  Well done. But let me just say that I don't think revelation is limited to this planet. If or when we contact other intelligent life elsewhere in this vast universe, I sincerely expect that they will have their own numinous relationship. "There is no meaning to all this stuff" is not an answer, either. Maybe extraterrestrials will convince you, if your own kind, cannot.  [Lol, imagine they actually look like the Flying Spaghetti Monster?]

I am not claiming that video describes all gods believed in by humanity, but there sure are a lot of people that do believe in a god very similar to the one the video is depicting.

You do remember, that the god in the vid is called Yahweh, right? That is a specific mythological god described in some ancient texts, that pretty closely lines up with the video.

If you are believe in a different god, then the video does not refer to you.
[/quote] [Something messed up with the quote here] @Simon Moon
I do believe in Yahweh/Jahweh, yes. Praise Jah. The descriptor is etymologically from Hebrew and means what causes to exist. That is God. The root of all being.

If I could define FSM comprehensively, it wouldn't be FSM. I know what FSM is not, and it's something that moves around and in-between space and time and thinks about when or how it should intervene. FSM will often roll Its cosmic 100 octillion sided die and if it comes up a specific number, FSM intervenes. These events are so rare and unpredictable someone foolish might say they are inseparable from random chance, I know better of course.

FSM is the source and sustenance of existence, but I don't know — I cannot know — what that is, directly, only indirectly what results from it, such as matter and consciousness. I also know that I am not FSM, Just Its messenger.

Whatever representations we make are only imperfect analogies and metaphors. So you could say that any description of FSM is a limitation and caricature and, therefore, a straw-man.

Blessings and RAMen

(October 1, 2019 at 7:48 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: If I could define FSM comprehensively, it wouldn't be FSM. I know what FSM is not, and it's something that moves around and in-between space and time and thinks about when or how it should intervene. FSM will often roll Its cosmic 100 octillion sided die and if it comes up a specific number, FSM intervenes.  These events are so rare and unpredictable someone foolish might say they are inseparable from random chance, I know better of course.

 FSM is the source and sustenance of existence, but I don't know — I cannot know — what that is, directly, only indirectly what results from it, such as matter and consciousness. I also know that I am not FSM, Just Its messenger.

Whatever representations we make are only imperfect analogies and metaphors. So you could say that any description of FSM is a limitation and caricature and, therefore, a straw-man.

Blessings and RAMen

Imitation is the highest form of flattery.   But if that's the FSM, then Blessings to you and Ramen, brother!

(October 1, 2019 at 7:28 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote: If I could define it comprehensively, it wouldn't be God. I know what God is not, and it's not something that moves around space and time and thinks about when or how it should intervene. God is the source and sustenance of existence, but I don't know — I cannot know — what that is, directly, only indirectly what results from it, such as matter and consciousness. I also know that I am not God, fortunately. Whatever representations we make are only imperfect analogies and metaphors. So you could say that any description of God is a limitation and caricature and, therefore, a straw-man. I think the video does a good job of showing that biblical stories cannot be the whole story. We can't try to limit God in any way, including with our religions.

You do understand that the video was not meant to be an exact depiction of the Biblical god, but a sardonic depiction meant to show how ridiculous some of the stories, and the god depicted is, right?

For example; a god that wants all of humanity to believe and worship him, yet only appears to a very small geographical area, and a barbaric and illiterate tribe.

Quote:I do believe in Yahweh/Jahweh, yes.  Praise Jah.    The descriptor is etymologically from Hebrew and means what causes to exist. That is God. The root of all being.

So, does this thing that 'causes to exist', is it a being? Or can it be an unknown natural process?

(October 1, 2019 at 7:51 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote:

(October 1, 2019 at 7:48 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: If I could define FSM comprehensively, it wouldn't be FSM. I know what FSM is not, and it's something that moves around and in-between space and time and thinks about when or how it should intervene. FSM will often roll Its cosmic 100 octillion sided die and if it comes up a specific number, FSM intervenes.  These events are so rare and unpredictable someone foolish might say they are inseparable from random chance, I know better of course.

 FSM is the source and sustenance of existence, but I don't know — I cannot know — what that is, directly, only indirectly what results from it, such as matter and consciousness. I also know that I am not FSM, Just Its messenger.

Whatever representations we make are only imperfect analogies and metaphors. So you could say that any description of FSM is a limitation and caricature and, therefore, a straw-man.

Blessings and RAMen

Imitation is the highest form of flattery.   But if that's the FSM, then Blessings to you and Ramen, brother!

No imitation needed. FSM is the king of kings, lord of lords, the name higher than all others.  Also the undisputed tri regional pog champion of 1996

(October 1, 2019 at 8:03 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: You do understand that the video was not meant to be an exact depiction of the Biblical god, but a sardonic depiction meant to show how ridiculous some of the stories, and the god depicted is, right?

For example; a god that wants all of humanity to believe and worship him, yet only appears to a very small geographical area, and a barbaric and illiterate tribe.

So you don't believe in the bible ergo God does not exist? Wouldn't it be more reasonable to say that the bible is one nation's story about their faith? It would be ridiculous if God only cared about the Jews, I agree with that. And I'm not anti-semitic at all. The bible is not a comprehensive vision of God, it's a collection of books about a particular human narrative, that may or may not have happened.

Quote:I do believe in Yahweh/Jahweh, yes.  Praise Jah.    The descriptor is etymologically from Hebrew and means what causes to exist. That is God. The root of all being.

So, does this thing that 'causes to exist', is it a being? Or can it be an unknown natural process?
[/quote]
natural, no, because nature is limited to space, time, matter and energy. Neither a being nor a process, but whatever it is that causes anything to be. Personally I like Aristotle's idea of God as the pure act of being. I also don't think acknowledging this requires any faith in the bible. The bible describes a possible revelation to one species in this little corner of a group of a spiral arm of a speck of dust in the natural universe, that I happen to believe in. That doesn't make its claims more palatable to someone who believes in the uniformity of nature (that miracles never happen) but its faith in something particular, in a particular place, at a particular time, and not a philosophical treatise on all that God is and does.

(October 1, 2019 at 8:20 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote: natural, no, because nature is limited to space, time, matter and energy. Neither a being nor a process, but whatever it is that causes anything to be.

No one can really know if this is true or not. We know only about a very tiny portion of this whole wide cosmos (whatever it may be like) that we can only surmise or postulate what could be the best explanation for this and that, but we could be missing a very important chunk of information (and chances are we are) that once we become aware of that, we realize it's not that nature is limited to such things as "space, time, matter and energy", it's that this is all there is and that they collectively account for all else in existence. Given our current knowledge, I don't even see why we need to go beyond that for the time being.

It's fine to have a belief, a tentative provisional viewpoint on matters like this, but let's not confuse a strong conviction about our beliefs with knowledge, and let's not even have such a strong conviction.

(October 1, 2019 at 8:07 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Also the undisputed tri regional pog champion of 1996

That does make sense.

(October 1, 2019 at 8:49 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote:

(October 1, 2019 at 8:07 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Also the undisputed tri regional pog champion of 1996

That does make sense.

all things do with FSM. RAmen.