Ethnographic Research (Help please!)

[stretch3172]

A dodge attempt in what way exactly?

In the presence of an omniscient god, seeing what you wrote before you wrote it, there is no free will to write anything other.

God's seeing what I would write does not logically imply that He dictated what I would write. He was aware of each particular post, your mental processes, my mental processes, and how all of these factors would influence the result of my choosing which words to type. Try again.

[drfuzzy]

Existed before the universe.  Created billions upon billions of galaxies.  Our little insignificant solar system formed about 4.571 billion years ago, give or take a millienia or two.  After 4,497,500,000 years, about 2.5 million years ago, a bunch of bipedal primates starting making stone tools, so - this creature thought that it would watch a while?  After another 4,497,490,000 years - about 10 thousand years ago, give or take a few, a little Semitic tribe starting making up stories about their war god.  Did it decide they were talking about it and start taking over their brain processes?  They wrote down tall tales about it and claimed god spoke to them.  
   This brings up hundreds of questions, such as why these "inspired" works include events that clearly never happened, and how the creator of billions of galaxies wouldn't "inspire" those taking his dictation to say what a star actually is.  But my biggest question is always "if this omnipotent, omniscient creature can communicate via fantasy, then why not communicate with ALL humans?  Why wait 2,490,000 years to say hello, and why say hello to a tiny tribe living in an area smaller than Lake Michigan?  If it wanted to be known and worshiped, (another ridiculous attribute) then it would be beyond simple for it to communicate with every primate on the planet.  That would have avoided a LOT of bloodshed, which any omniscient creature would know would happen before it set off the Big Bang.We have thousands of years of history of humans killing each other over which imaginary friend is the coolest, and the most powerful creature in the cosmos, who numbers the hair on our heads and knows our every thought, is incapable of stopping it.  Incapable of saying "stop killing each other".  Incapable of stopping its priests and preachers from raping kids in its own house.  And there is not one shred of evidence for its existence to be found, anywhere.

Several of your questions are based on ill-conceived presuppositions. For one, even according to the basic evolutionary narrative, the human line did not even begin to evolve separately from the other great apes until about 4.4 million years ago (granted its been awhile since my last anthropology class, but I know that no one believes protohumans were here to understand "hello" 2 billion years ago). That said, my answer to your question is that God has communicated with all humans by revealing Himself through natural creation, conscience, morality, and human reason. This is what Christians call "general revelation." By contrast, "special revelation" is God's more direct means of communicating with humanity, which takes place through His Word. Your question itself presupposes that you have the right to dictate how God should communicate, which is false. General revelation is common to all people, but only those who respond to it and honestly seek after God can come to know and understand Him.

"general revelation"   :   Revealing himself through natural creation.  Which is completely indistinguishable from ignorant people looking around and trying to explain where the sun went at night.  This type of curiosity REVEALED more than 5000 different deities.  None of which have been proven to exist.  Most, like Ra and Ahura-Mazda, have died out and are now considered myth.  And your imaginary friend is right there with Odin and Osiris, for me.

I don't "have the right to dictate how God should communicate" but I have the right to decide for myself what I can believe.  And I believe that if a being is omnipotent and omniscient, and wants the attention of humans, then it should be extremely easy for it to prove it exists.  Particularly in an era where an 8-year-old can create a viral video that can travel around the globe.  And I won't believe it exists until it proves it, all by itself.  No silly books of ridiculous fables, no looking at nature and saying "gee isn't that pretty there must be a god", and "gee I don't understand comets, there must be a god".  Every proof every theist posts here is completely indistinguishable from the same kind of fantasy included in a Spiderman comic.

Oh, and if your sky-daddy actually IS omniscient, and actually did set off the Big Bang (lol) and did tweak the evolution of the human race in some way, then it's an evil monster that nobody could possibly ever worship.

[brewer]

In the presence of an omniscient god, seeing what you wrote before you wrote it, there is no free will to write anything other.

God's seeing what I would write does not logically imply that He dictated what I would write. He was aware of each particular post, your mental processes, my mental processes, and how all of these factors would influence the result of my choosing which words to type. Try again.

I didn't say dictated. god/it foresaw, you had no choice but to do. No free will.

This says your position has a lot of problems: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/free-...knowledge/

[Jenny A]

Existed before the universe.  Created billions upon billions of galaxies.  Our little insignificant solar system formed about 4.571 billion years ago, give or take a millienia or two.  After 4,497,500,000 years, about 2.5 million years ago, a bunch of bipedal primates starting making stone tools, so - this creature thought that it would watch a while?  After another 4,497,490,000 years - about 10 thousand years ago, give or take a few, a little Semitic tribe starting making up stories about their war god.  Did it decide they were talking about it and start taking over their brain processes?  They wrote down tall tales about it and claimed god spoke to them.  
   This brings up hundreds of questions, such as why these "inspired" works include events that clearly never happened, and how the creator of billions of galaxies wouldn't "inspire" those taking his dictation to say what a star actually is.  But my biggest question is always "if this omnipotent, omniscient creature can communicate via fantasy, then why not communicate with ALL humans?  Why wait 2,490,000 years to say hello, and why say hello to a tiny tribe living in an area smaller than Lake Michigan?  If it wanted to be known and worshiped, (another ridiculous attribute) then it would be beyond simple for it to communicate with every primate on the planet.  That would have avoided a LOT of bloodshed, which any omniscient creature would know would happen before it set off the Big Bang.We have thousands of years of history of humans killing each other over which imaginary friend is the coolest, and the most powerful creature in the cosmos, who numbers the hair on our heads and knows our every thought, is incapable of stopping it.  Incapable of saying "stop killing each other".  Incapable of stopping its priests and preachers from raping kids in its own house.  And there is not one shred of evidence for its existence to be found, anywhere.

Several of your questions are based on ill-conceived presuppositions. For one, even according to the basic evolutionary narrative, the human line did not even begin to evolve separately from the other great apes until about 4.4 million years ago (granted its been awhile since my last anthropology class, but I know that no one believes protohumans were here to understand "hello" 2 billion years ago). That said, my answer to your question is that God has communicated with all humans by revealing Himself through natural creation, conscience, morality, and human reason. This is what Christians call "general revelation." By contrast, "special revelation" is God's more direct means of communicating with humanity, which takes place through His Word. Your question itself presupposes that you have the right to dictate how God should communicate, which is false. General revelation is common to all people, but only those who respond to it and honestly seek after God can come to know and understand Him.

This is why it's hard to communicate with Christians popping into atheist forums without real intoduction. You are hear to find out what atheists think. But there isn't an atheist philosophy. There are atheistic philosophies. And there are many atheists who haven't given philosophy much thought.

Mostly, the Christians (We get Muslems too but few Hindus or Jews unless they are now atheist) who post here (and I dont think they are representative of Christians generally, at least not the ones I have face to face conversations with) are either intellectual Catholic, fundamentalist evangelical, or their own self invented thing (search for Huggy if you want the flavor of that). You are obviously not fundamentalist evangelical simply because you accept evolution.

So, let me ask you, if man and nature evolved, what leads you to believe a god created them? I grant you that evolution and a creator are not incompatible only that evolution is certainly not what Genisis describes.

Second, if there is a god directing the universe, or just creating and letting it run free, how do you discern his word? There are many contradictory holy trexts. How do you choose one over the others? How you distinguish among the plethora of purported general relovations?

Direct revolation is rather suspect too. Many claim it. But they don't agree. Imagine Mohamed, Paul, and Joseph Smith discussing what god did and didn't say. Shouting is inevitable. Violence is easily imaginable. I personally have never been contacted.

All of which leads me to the conclusion that there is no revolation. While I can't diictate to anyone more powerful than myself how to communicate with me , those more powerful than me usually make it quite clear that they are communicating, and that they damned well exist. Thus while I may not always understand taxes, I do know that the IRS is out there. And when I get a robo call claiming I'm under audit, I do realize its fraudulent. God doesn't seem able to to manage that

[Mister Agenda]

In the presence of an omniscient god, seeing what you wrote before you wrote it, there is no free will to write anything other.

God's seeing what I would write does not logically imply that He dictated what I would write. He was aware of each particular post, your mental processes, my mental processes, and how all of these factors would influence the result of my choosing which words to type. Try again.

It only implies it if God is also omnipotent and set the initial conditions. If there is such a God that creator had every possible universe to choose from, and chose to implement the one in which you wrote what you wrote.

[possibletarian]

I think they really, really want to know (beyond the "I am what I am" answer).  But unless they suspect they've been taken I can't see why they'd want to ask an atheist that question.

But stretch, if you'd like to give us your definition that is something I'd really like to know too.  If possible, consider how you'd define a light bulb, or romantic love or the internal combustion machine and be as specific as possible.

This is admittedly a tough one to answer, since most definitions of this kind are found inadequate when examined closely enough. That said, here's my take:

God is the eternal, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being who existed prior to the cosmos, brought the cosmos into existence, and rules as its undisputed Ruler (cf. Col 1:17). He possesses a will, intellect, and emotions; He transcends all natural conceptions of physical reality yet is also immanent within physical reality. His essence and nature preclude the possibility of understanding Him fully, but He reveals many of His attributes by means of the created universe and His Word.

I was more thinking of the question asked on a forum where the target audience is people who generally don't define a god because they simply don't believe in one.

It's a bit like asking what my personal definition of an imaginary thing is, and please can i give as many details as possible.

[robvalue]

Credit where it's due, almost all theists I've met on forums won't even try to define God.

PS: I'll add my usual follow up question. Why should anyone care if there is a god?

[stretch3172]

God's seeing what I would write does not logically imply that He dictated what I would write. He was aware of each particular post, your mental processes, my mental processes, and how all of these factors would influence the result of my choosing which words to type. Try again.

I didn't say dictated. god/it foresaw, you had no choice but to do. No free will.

This says your position has a lot of problems: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/free-...knowledge/

And I happen to disagree with the SEP on this one, despite the fact that it is one of the best online philosophical resources available. Yes, I will do precisely what God foresees, but I will ultimately do it because I will myself to do it. I physically send the nerve signal from my brain to my muscle to move and do what I wish. Sure, God was the first cause of the universe and events which ultimately led me to the specific act, but that is not the only understanding of "cause." The cause responsible for my action is my decision.

---

God's seeing what I would write does not logically imply that He dictated what I would write. He was aware of each particular post, your mental processes, my mental processes, and how all of these factors would influence the result of my choosing which words to type. Try again.

It only implies it if God is also omnipotent and set the initial conditions. If there is such a God that creator had every possible universe to choose from, and chose to implement the one in which you wrote what you wrote.

You seem to be confusing first causes with free agent causes (apologies, I forget the technical term). Sure, God Himself is the first cause of this universe and the events which led up to my decision, but that is only one way to understand God's agency in my decision. The decision itself is ultimately an act of my will, which is the primary and imminent cause of my action.

---

Several of your questions are based on ill-conceived presuppositions. For one, even according to the basic evolutionary narrative, the human line did not even begin to evolve separately from the other great apes until about 4.4 million years ago (granted its been awhile since my last anthropology class, but I know that no one believes protohumans were here to understand "hello" 2 billion years ago). That said, my answer to your question is that God has communicated with all humans by revealing Himself through natural creation, conscience, morality, and human reason. This is what Christians call "general revelation." By contrast, "special revelation" is God's more direct means of communicating with humanity, which takes place through His Word. Your question itself presupposes that you have the right to dictate how God should communicate, which is false. General revelation is common to all people, but only those who respond to it and honestly seek after God can come to know and understand Him.

This is why it's hard to communicate with Christians popping into atheist forums without real intoduction.  You are hear to find out what atheists think.  But there isn't  an atheist philosophy.   There are atheistic philosophies.  And there are many atheists who haven't given philosophy much thought.

Mostly, the Christians (We get Muslems too but few Hindus or Jews unless they are now atheist) who post here (and I dont think they are representative of Christians generally, at least not the ones I have face to face conversations with) are either  intellectual Catholic, fundamentalist evangelical, or their own self invented thing (search for Huggy if you want the flavor of that). You are obviously not fundamentalist evangelical simply because you accept evolution.

So, let me ask you, if man and nature evolved, what leads you to believe a god created them?  I grant you that evolution and a creator are not incompatible  only that evolution is certainly not what Genisis describes.

Second, if there is a god directing the universe, or just creating and letting it run free,  how do you discern his word?  There are many contradictory holy trexts. How do you choose one over the others?  How you distinguish among the plethora of  purported general relovations?

Direct revolation is rather suspect too.  Many claim it.  But they don't  agree.  Imagine Mohamed,  Paul, and Joseph Smith discussing what god did and didn't say.  Shouting is inevitable.   Violence is easily imaginable. I personally have never been contacted.

All of which leads me to the conclusion that there is no revolation. While I can't diictate to anyone more powerful than myself how to communicate with me , those more powerful than me usually make it quite clear that they are communicating, and that they damned well exist.  Thus while I may not always understand taxes, I do know that the IRS is out there.  And when I get a robo call claiming I'm under audit, I do realize its fraudulent.  God doesn't seem able to to manage that

I believe you may have misunderstood my comment about evolution. I was simply giving the traditional anthropological explanation to address an error in dr.fuzzy's question. I do not accept the macro-evolution as argued by most anthropologists. I do, however, accept micro-evolution in that I certainly think limited change over time has occurred (as observed by Darwin), but I do not believe genetic mutation is sufficient to produce the information necessary for macro change into a radically different kind of creature. But that's a topic for another time. The evolutionary processes that do occur, however, are simply another secondary means by which God creates. 

For your second question, I personally hold to the conviction that only the original (now lost) biblical autographs were directly inspired by God. However, God has directed the process of preservation and translation of the texts (through the Masoretes, scribes, amanuenses, etc.) such that they have retained their original message and meaning, and this inherent message can be translated from language to language. The first century Church rightly selected only texts which had stood the test of time and/or were written by the apostles of Christ themselves or their close associates (with the exception of Hebrews, whose author remains unknown). Other pseudo-texts were written by random people and contain doctrine which directly contradicts that of the texts preserved in the biblical canon; this is why the early Church fathers excluded them. 

Concerning divine revelation, I judge all supposed "revelation" in light of the canonical biblical text and what I know to be God's basic message to people. Any revelation which contradicts this is false revelation and must be rejected as such. Christians will disagree among themselves concerning whether or not divine revelation continues today, but if it does, it must not contradict the doctrine of Scripture.

---

Several of your questions are based on ill-conceived presuppositions. For one, even according to the basic evolutionary narrative, the human line did not even begin to evolve separately from the other great apes until about 4.4 million years ago (granted its been awhile since my last anthropology class, but I know that no one believes protohumans were here to understand "hello" 2 billion years ago). That said, my answer to your question is that God has communicated with all humans by revealing Himself through natural creation, conscience, morality, and human reason. This is what Christians call "general revelation." By contrast, "special revelation" is God's more direct means of communicating with humanity, which takes place through His Word. Your question itself presupposes that you have the right to dictate how God should communicate, which is false. General revelation is common to all people, but only those who respond to it and honestly seek after God can come to know and understand Him.

"general revelation"   :   Revealing himself through natural creation.  Which is completely indistinguishable from ignorant people looking around and trying to explain where the sun went at night.  This type of curiosity REVEALED more than 5000 different deities.  None of which have been proven to exist.  Most, like Ra and Ahura-Mazda, have died out and are now considered myth.  And your imaginary friend is right there with Odin and Osiris, for me.

I don't "have the right to dictate how God should communicate" but I have the right to decide for myself what I can believe.  And I believe that if a being is omnipotent and omniscient, and wants the attention of humans, then it should be extremely easy for it to prove it exists.  Particularly in an era where an 8-year-old can create a viral video that can travel around the globe.  And I won't believe it exists until it proves it, all by itself.  No silly books of ridiculous fables, no looking at nature and saying "gee isn't that pretty there must be a god", and "gee I don't understand comets, there must be a god".  Every proof every theist posts here is completely indistinguishable from the same kind of fantasy included in a Spiderman comic.

Oh, and if your sky-daddy actually IS omniscient, and actually did set off the Big Bang (lol) and did tweak the evolution of the human race in some way, then it's an evil monster that nobody could possibly ever worship.

I will give you the fact that general revelation is a difficult concept with which even most Christians (including myself) have struggled. It is entirely possible to misinterpret general revelation and attribute the things I mentioned to a false deity, which people have done over and over throughout history. That said, there is a difference between honestly, passionately seeking to know the invisible Creator and pursuing dumb alternatives such as physically carving a statue out of wood or stone and somehow assuming that it created you and organizes the cosmos. This need to make tangible objects divine has been a major contributor to the development of many ancient religions and is clearly a nonsensical response to general revelation. God simply does not do things the way we in our understanding would expect. He must be sought after, pursued, and desired. He also promises to be found by those who seek with all their heart (Jer 29:13).

[Whateverist]

Concerning divine revelation, I judge all supposed "revelation" in light of the canonical biblical text and what I know to be God's basic message to people. Any revelation which contradicts this is false revelation and must be rejected as such. Christians will disagree among themselves concerning whether or not divine revelation continues today, but if it does, it must not contradict the doctrine of Scripture.

That kind of makes it sound like you go into it having already decided what you will find out. Is there really any point in prayer or beseeching God for anything if you already know what the answer is permitted to be?

I'll be honest, I have a very low regard for most fundamentalists but I"m impressed with you. I'm afraid that must be owing to your youth. If you persist in the religion I'm afraid you'll acquire some of the bad qualities that go with the genre. I hope I'm wrong.

[stretch3172]

Concerning divine revelation, I judge all supposed "revelation" in light of the canonical biblical text and what I know to be God's basic message to people. Any revelation which contradicts this is false revelation and must be rejected as such. Christians will disagree among themselves concerning whether or not divine revelation continues today, but if it does, it must not contradict the doctrine of Scripture.

That kind of makes it sound like you go into it having already decided what you will find out.  Is there really any point in prayer or beseeching God for anything if you already know what the answer is permitted to be?

I'll be honest, I have a very low regard for most fundamentalists but I"m impressed with you.  I'm afraid that must be owing to your youth.  If you persist in the religion I'm afraid you'll acquire some of the bad qualities that go with the genre.  I hope I'm wrong.

I say yes, simply because it's entirely possible for God to show us many different new things, such as new ways of approaching and applying biblical principles or handling new, difficult situations. . He also gives certain forms of revelation which help us make better decisions or understand certain things more fully. All of these types of revelation are still legitimate; they just can't stand in direct opposition to the fundamental principles set by Scripture. 

I appreciate your support and willingness to hear my thoughts on these topics. Rest assured that I will never stoop to the level of certain misguided Christians, many of whom honestly do not even embrace and teach true Christianity.