Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 9, 2025, 12:42 pm
Thread Rating:
Evidence for God being "a superior being" ?
|
(June 12, 2010 at 9:43 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Humans have the power to end their own lives, I guess that would make them incoherent too? Not unless you think that humans are somehow all-powerful. Quote:As someone, I think Arcanus demonstrated before, a logical impossibility doesn't resemble a real challenge. I thought you read that debate. I read the debate, sure. But that doesn't mean that I agree with what was said.
He who desires to worship God must harbor no childish illusions about the matter but bravely renounce his liberty and humanity.
Mikhail Bakunin A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything Friedrich Nietzsche RE: Evidence for God being "a superior being" ?
June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm
(This post was last modified: June 13, 2010 at 4:25 am by tavarish.)
(June 11, 2010 at 8:43 am)tavarish Wrote: One problem with God is that there is absolutely no consensus on the term. It means different things to different people, which is understandable when you put it into the context that he is only a concept. (June 12, 2010 at 1:22 am)tackattack Wrote: Or in the context that he is omnipresent and exists outside the rules of the known universe. That's very incoherent. Is there anything about God's existence that distinguishes him from being non-existent? tav Wrote:1. What is your account for why God has a nature? (June 12, 2010 at 1:22 am)tackattack Wrote: 1- He doesn’t necessarily have to have a nature, but due to his observability in this universe he therefore has some sort of nature that’s observable. 1. You didn't answer my question. I asked you why God HAS a nature. Why does God have a particular nature instead of no nature or a different nature? And didn't you just demonstrate that you can't measure in any form a way in which you distinguish God as being existent? 2. First, I'm not alleging that I'm the author of my being, or the author of the natural laws I'm bound by. I'm a finite being, which isn't a good analogy. I'm asking if God can do things like lie and create a squared circle, and if not, why not? 3. What constructs have to be in place in order for a being such as God to have an effective will rather than an ineffective will? It is assumed God is the creator, but why is this so? 4. So why is he bound by a nature if there isn't anything he can't do?
My blog: The Usual Rhetoric
(June 12, 2010 at 1:22 am)tackattack Wrote: Perhaps that was poorly worded, thanks! God’s Love is a separate concept to that of the human emotion love was my point. Also that it is an identifier of God’s nature. It’s also axiomatically and unforeseeably unobtainable.If god's love is not literally the same concept as "love" then why call it love in the first place? tackattack Wrote:God is not ok letting a vast portion "go to hell", he proved it by sacrificing his son for all of us.Do you even realise just how phenomenally disturbing that sounds? All that killing your only child through neglect accomplishes to any sane third party, is not admiration or reverence, but the apprehension of how much of a sick and twisted individual you are. Face facts - the god of the bible is no 'superior' being, he needs psychiatric help.
It's quite odd to me how many people think blood sacrifice is a noble and divine thing.
My blog: The Usual Rhetoric
(June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: 1. You didn't answer my question. I asked you why God has a nature, not if he HAS to have a nature. Why does God have a particular nature instead of no nature or a different nature?God's nature is what we try to understand it to be. It's how we label things. Like his signature... it's what, given what we've all worked out from simple deduction, we can expect him to do. (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: I'm asking if God can do things like lie and create a squared circle, and if not, why not?It follows from our logical construct of God. If he did create everything, then he is a positive force. Etc.. God could do whatever the hell God wanted. We could get very theoretical but it doesn't help understand God much. (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: It is assumed God is the creator, but why is this so?It fits with the rest of the idea. Theology describes the whole of humanly perceived reality. (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: So why is he bound by a nature if there isn't anything he can't do?His nature is that he can do anything. His signature is what he's done in our reality. (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: 1. You didn't answer my question. I asked you why God has a nature, not if he HAS to have a nature. Why does God have a particular nature instead of no nature or a different nature? (June 12, 2010 at 1:38 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: God's nature is what we try to understand it to be. It's how we label things. Like his signature... it's what, given what we've all worked out from simple deduction, we can expect him to do. You have still to explain WHY God has a specific nature, which was my question. (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: I'm asking if God can do things like lie and create a squared circle, and if not, why not? (June 12, 2010 at 1:38 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: It follows from our logical construct of God. If he did create everything, then he is a positive force. Etc.. God could do whatever the hell God wanted. We could get very theoretical but it doesn't help understand God much. How would that be a positive force? And if God could do something else, like act in another fashion, why does he not do it? (June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: It is assumed God is the creator, but why is this so? (June 12, 2010 at 1:38 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: It fits with the rest of the idea. Theology describes the whole of humanly perceived reality. That doesn't make sense. You essentially said God is assumed to be the creator because it fits with the idea that God is the creator - a tautology. (June 12, 2010 at 1:38 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: His nature is that he can do anything. His signature is what he's done in our reality. So why has he conformed to a specific nature? What's stopping him from doing "anything"?
My blog: The Usual Rhetoric
(June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm)tavarish Wrote: Is there anything about God's existence that distinguishes him from being non-existent? Not that I can currently measure. 1- Why does God have one nature as opposed to another nature or anything nature at all? As an entity it's defined by having a definite, individual existence and is real in itself. Surely God believes God is real. 2- I suppose God could lie or create a square circle, yes. 3a-I'm tired you're going to have to define "effective will" and "ineffective will" for me please. 3b-The Judeo God is considered the creator because design is seen in nature and the Bible states he created. 4-I don't think God is bound by the "laws of nature" but bound by his nature as an entity, you're confusing the definition. (June 12, 2010 at 12:49 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: It's shorter than an explicative definition and similar to love if love had an absolute moral true. You're still not changing your perspective. I'll use my hillbilly speak for this. God's chilling up in heaven saying "these idiots just don't get it and I've done the flood thing already." He decides to take a part of himself and make a son who wants to help humans learn about God. God knows that his son will be seen as crazy and be tortured and killed. He'll have to experience the limiting of human emotions and mortality and be confined to a body as opposed to transcended. Jesus agrees to do this for our benefit and dies. Goes back to heaven to describe the limiting effect being mortal is to God and God says ," well we'll be back in a few millennium, and if they haven't got it by then , they're gonna have to fend for themselves."
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)