(January 15, 2010 at 9:13 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 15, 2010 at 6:54 pm)Purple Rabbit Wrote: You realize that's your POV don't you?

Besides it's positive for it places inter human relations to the center of human concern, and because it makes clear this universe is no silly kindergarten for a thrilling life after death experience, this IS as thrilling as it gets. You dont have to follow silly rules from ancient goat herders but you may reason for yourself. You're not monitored for masturbation and other sinful bodily function but you can enjoy etc.

Life is somthing beautiful, not because some god says so, but because we can figure it out ourselves. That's beauty not destruction.

Your POV is ridiculous in this instance.

Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

Random thought...

I just wonder how we would look to Bacteria?? Does Bacteria really consider Us?? Do they worship us?? And just how do they feel when we stretch forth our mighty hand armed with soap??

Just thinking

(January 15, 2010 at 9:41 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: You appear to misunderstand what I mean by God being an emergent property of the universe. I mean that God is a result of the universe, not the other way around.

Yes but you're making it either/ or: You said: "we have concluded that God is not an emergent property. But a Creator"

What I'm saying is that if you suppose God to be the creator, then it follows that he has to be everything that emerges as well.

(January 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: And as to human adoration being its ultimate goal? Try reading Revelations. However, please feel free to tell us what you think its ultimate goals might be.

1. I thought we weren't talking about Christianity?
2. You choose to be literalist ...I don't thanks.

As to your first point, why, if God is the creator, then it follows that he has to be everything that emerges as well.

How fo you arrive at that conclusion.

And since we apparently both agree that human adoration is not God's ultimate goal.

Again, I ask, what do you think it would be?

(January 13, 2010 at 6:21 pm)LEDO Wrote: I would say God loves irony.

What, you mean like in a (almost certainly) non-existent way?

EvF

(January 16, 2010 at 12:30 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote:

(January 15, 2010 at 6:48 pm)lukec Wrote: I'm confused. Wasn't this about postulating exactly what kind of god COULD exist as per scientific discoveries up to this point?

BINGO!

Scientific discoveries have dismissed what was never religion. Nothing about religion was 'reduced' by science. Nowadays we're totally ignorant about God and his purpose.. which is the beauty of ZB's question... you have to work out what that is.

(January 16, 2010 at 4:08 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

I'm capable of spotting sophistry which is all you seem to be coming up with. Hence the endless circling.

(January 16, 2010 at 5:52 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(January 15, 2010 at 9:41 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: You appear to misunderstand what I mean by God being an emergent property of the universe. I mean that God is a result of the universe, not the other way around.

Yes but you're making it either/ or: You said: "we have concluded that God is not an emergent property. But a Creator"

What I'm saying is that if you suppose God to be the creator, then it follows that he has to be everything that emerges as well.

(January 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: And as to human adoration being its ultimate goal? Try reading Revelations. However, please feel free to tell us what you think its ultimate goals might be.

1. I thought we weren't talking about Christianity?
2. You choose to be literalist ...I don't thanks.

As to your first point, why, if God is the creator, then does it follows that he has to be everything that emerges as well? How do you arrive at that conclusion?

If there was nothing and God created everything, then everything was made from God. God couldn't have gotten anything from anywhere else because then he couldn't then be the first cause. We're saying he is the creator, or first cause.

(January 16, 2010 at 5:52 am)Zen Badger Wrote: And since we apparently both agree that human adoration is not God's ultimate goal.

Again, I ask, what do you think it would be?

Our ultimate goal might be the perfection of God. From the perspective of humanity, Gods purpose for us is that we love him back and in doing so live life to it's ultimate capacity. Gods ultimate goal for the universe can be observed from physical evidence following physical laws.

(January 16, 2010 at 8:34 am)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 4:08 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

I'm capable of spotting sophistry which is all you seem to be coming up with. Hence the endless circling.

You're a master in dodging simple questions like

Why is the following statement "life is something beautiful, not because some god says so, but because we can figure it out ourselves" a ridiculous POV?

Be a man and answer the question or crawl back in your religious stone age cave.

(January 16, 2010 at 10:34 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote:

---

(January 16, 2010 at 8:34 am)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 4:08 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

I'm capable of spotting sophistry which is all you seem to be coming up with. Hence the endless circling.

You're a master in dodging simple questions like

Why is the following statement "life is something beautiful, not because some god says so, but because we can figure it out ourselves" a ridiculous POV?

Be a man and answer the question or crawl back in your religious stone age cave.

---

God doesn't say any such thing.. in fact I'm not even sure if he has vocal chords??? We of course have to figure out everything out for ouselves because perspective is subjective as is beauty.

(January 16, 2010 at 10:57 am)tackattack Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 10:34 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote:

---

(January 16, 2010 at 8:34 am)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 4:08 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

I'm capable of spotting sophistry which is all you seem to be coming up with. Hence the endless circling.

You're a master in dodging simple questions like

Why is the following statement "life is something beautiful, not because some god says so, but because we can figure it out ourselves" a ridiculous POV?

Be a man and answer the question or crawl back in your religious stone age cave.

---

God doesn't say any such thing.. in fact I'm not even sure if he has vocal chords??? We of course have to figure out everything out for ouselves because perspective is subjective as is beauty.

I'm sure he has no vocal chords, that would be attributes and he does not like that. Probably hates that typical moaning singing in church for it.

But what I obviously meant was a figure of speech. Let me rephrase so you can understand:

"life is something beautiful, not because the word of some god prescribes it, but because we can figure it out ourselves"

(January 16, 2010 at 11:11 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote:

---

(January 16, 2010 at 10:57 am)tackattack Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 10:34 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 8:34 am)fr0d0 Wrote:

(January 16, 2010 at 4:08 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Well you're capable of opinion, now show that you're capable of argument.

I'm capable of spotting sophistry which is all you seem to be coming up with. Hence the endless circling.

You're a master in dodging simple questions like

Why is the following statement "life is something beautiful, not because some god says so, but because we can figure it out ourselves" a ridiculous POV?

Be a man and answer the question or crawl back in your religious stone age cave.

God doesn't say any such thing.. in fact I'm not even sure if he has vocal chords??? We of course have to figure out everything out for ouselves because perspective is subjective as is beauty.

I'm sure he has no vocal chords, that would be attributes and he does not like that. Probably hates that typical moaning singing in church for it.

But what I obviously meant was a figure of speech. Let me rephrase so you can understand:

"life is something beautiful, not because the word of some god prescribes it, but because we can figure it out ourselves"

---

Sorry I was just answering the question as presented. Life is something beautiful. Subjective, but yes. I don't think the world is beautiful because God's word "says" it is. I think it's just beautiful, and adjective attributed by human perspective on reality. My relationship of it's value comes from within and is not universal. Universally though, it doesn't ascribe as to what created that beauty. God creating the beauty doesn't give the value of that beauty any more or less value. As for us "figure it out ourselves" that's obvious. We are all observers and reason comes naturally to us as a species. Just because we figure out how the insides of a computer work, who made it and why they made it doesn't change the value of the computer itself on a philosophical level. Realistically of course we add more value to something if it has provenance, but the object is the same as it started before provenance and if looked at truely then it's value won't change.

I too don't need God's prescription to appreciate the beauty of life. I appreciate something extra which without God I would have no means of expression. In my understanding, harmony with God is a method of achieving a healthy perspective. This isn't a given just a method.