(December 18, 2019 at 12:43 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: A Bad™ definition..is still a definition.  The god concept doesn't fail for a lack of defining things.  That's all that god concepts do to begin with.  They define the sacred, and our relationship to the sacred -even if nothing actually is "sacred" in any less-than-novel sense.

Point is, they do the defining regardless of whether there's an actual referent, and so the objection from a lack of definition is a non-starter.

Until they use that definition(s) as part of their defense, then I get to object.

(December 18, 2019 at 12:43 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: A Bad™ definition..is still a definition.  The god concept doesn't fail for a lack of defining things.  That's all that god concepts do to begin with.  They define the sacred, and our relationship to the sacred -even if nothing actually is "sacred" in any less-than-novel sense.

Point is, they do the defining regardless of whether there's an actual referent, and so the objection from a lack of definition is a non-starter.

I see your point but my point is that when a thing is so poorly defined, the argument about the ontology of such a thing is a non-starter, especially when the believers can't even agree among themselves.

But fnord bloongies dlorbet the flord into bringle and caused my green idea to sleep furiously. So thrumbo the gnerblet.

QED

Even if this god character proved beyond on a shadow of a doubt that its existence was undeniable, I would still tell it to pick the corn out of my shit and then to fuck off!

(December 18, 2019 at 10:20 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: Any sufficiently advanced being could convince me it was God. As a mere mortal, I am not competent to tell the difference between God and any number of conceivable powerful beings capable of powerful feats or just manipulating my perceptions. For that matter, I can imagine having great difficulty telling God from a hallucinatory experience.

Even if God were real, there are logical problems with it being able to prove that it's the reputed tri-Omni deity that created all of existence (except itself because it was always there, for some reason or none). A real God couldn't do anything to convince us that aforementioned perception manipulators couldn't. It can't demonstrate that it's the tri-Omni Creator, it can only demonstrate that it's really powerful, or at least appears to be. Once you're above a certain level of power or illusion, we mortals can't tell the difference.

That said, I will gladly believe any reality or perception warper that claims to be God if it keeps it from torturing me.

I have to agree. If I believed that this God was like many have made him out to be I would have nothing to do with him and would decide not to believe in him. I would gather all the evidence I could muster to disprove his existence. I would pile it up so high nothing else could be seen. I would religiously worship that pile of rubbish faithfully every morning.

For the most part man has constructed god in their image not the other way around. This construction is made of a being that is unbending, revengeful, and arbitrary. He has been depicted as a being willing and wanting to torcher those who disagree with him. However, this is a malconstruction and unsupported in scripture. Believe he exists or not, at least accept the fact that his character has been maligned from what scripture teaches.

(December 18, 2019 at 2:28 pm)maxolla Wrote: I have to agree.  If I believed that this God was like many have made him out to be I would have nothing to do with him and would decide not to believe in him.  I would gather all the evidence I could muster to disprove his existence.  I would pile it up so high nothing else could be seen.  I would religiously worship that pile of rubbish faithfully every morning.

For the most part man has constructed god in their image not the other way around.  This construction is made of a being that is unbending, revengeful, and arbitrary.  He has been depicted as a being willing and wanting to torcher those who disagree with him.  However, this is a malconstruction and unsupported in scripture.  Believe he exists or not, at least accept the fact that his character has been maligned from what scripture teaches.

Now that you've told us what god isn't how about you tell us what he-she-it, is?

(December 18, 2019 at 2:58 pm)Succubus Wrote:

(December 18, 2019 at 2:28 pm)maxolla Wrote: I have to agree.  If I believed that this God was like many have made him out to be I would have nothing to do with him and would decide not to believe in him.  I would gather all the evidence I could muster to disprove his existence.  I would pile it up so high nothing else could be seen.  I would religiously worship that pile of rubbish faithfully every morning.

For the most part man has constructed god in their image not the other way around.  This construction is made of a being that is unbending, revengeful, and arbitrary.  He has been depicted as a being willing and wanting to torcher those who disagree with him.  However, this is a malconstruction and unsupported in scripture.  Believe he exists or not, at least accept the fact that his character has been maligned from what scripture teaches.

Now that you've told us what god isn't how about you tell us what he-she-it, is?

Pretty much the opposite of what is depicted in your profile picture. You could also take everything I said it (he, she) was not, and replace with the opposite.

You worship a god who murdered every single infant in the world because he had designed humans poorly.

Ya'but he gave them free will and they abused it, dontya know.