Interesting argument against God

[Reach]

Therefore God cannot be meaningfully said to act.

C. Therefore God did not create anything and is utterly irrelevant to us.

This one is driving me nuts. I think the author meant to say, Therefore God cannot be said to act meaningfully. That supports his conclusion. Otherwise, his very statement is meaningless drivel. No pun intended.

 

One can say all kinds of things meaningfully, but may still have nothing meaningful to say, i.e. meaningful to the observer.

 

I'll have to get back here to read Quick's post.

[Amanda]

What denomination of protestant christianity do you belong to? Do you consider yourself a liberal or iirerrantist christian

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pritishd, thanks for the sites you offered in your post!

 

I've had influences from a diverse Christian background, which I had questioned many times. Reluctantly I started seminary where I stumbled upon a teacher that stripped away my past beliefs and encouraged me to find 'my own' revelations with reason. I think I can NOT be labeled.

 

I think I learn more here than any church I've attended in the past few years... yet, I find much of it emphasizing or refining many of these beliefs I already have.

[SkepticOfBible]

Pritishd, thanks for the sites you offered in your post!

 

I've had influences from a diverse Christian background, which I had questioned many times. Reluctantly I started seminary where I stumbled upon a teacher that stripped away my past beliefs and encouraged me to find 'my own' revelations with reason. I think I can NOT be labeled. 

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

So in case your "revelation" or your interpretation of the bible is not the same as a fundamentalist christian, then how does one determine who is right? Cause in theory both of you are filled with a "Holy spirit". Shouldn't your Biblegod reveal the same thing to both of you.

 

I am asking this cause christian make the following claim

 

"There can be only one absolute". Surely not all interpretation are equal are they? So how does a third person who is telling the correct interpretation of the bible

 

Pritish

[Amanda]

Quicksand, thanks for these tips, and of the online dictionary... I knew about that, yet seldom use it except on this site.

 

If god is in everything, he is every evil and every good thing. That being the case, when the Christian says god is only good they are taking a selective sample from everything of what god is, while ignoring the rest of everything else what god is. Again, this is a special plead from a selective bias.

---------------

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (KJ)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe I said in my other post that I think God is good AND evil. Although I do believe that everything that was created was created by God and for God. Maybe 'evil' has a purpose for good?

 

If one were to believe, like me, that in the beginning there was only God/Goddess, then everything that was created had to come from him/her/it. If ALL things came out of 'this' then it must be part of 'this', right?

Furthermore, the NT, especially in Revelation shows your God as the ultimate patriarch forever punishing finite crimes against his infinite nature for infinite time. That's barbaric justice. That's the definition of evil in Christian reckoning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quicksand, I do not agree entirely with most interpretations, nor spins, of these Bibles today. I know that many verses researched in the manuscript from which the KJV was taken, it can yield quite different results. We were in no way as articulate back then as we are now. I've studied some of Revelations more intently, especially the Seven Seals. Revelations is NOT a bad time.... how could it be? If you read Chapter 1:1 it says something like... 'This book is about the revealing of Jesus Christ, written in signs and symbols to my brother John.' If it is about the revealing of Jesus, then it is about love and mercy and compassion... in signs and symbols.

Amanda, you're muddling things here, sorry. My point that "since humanity is also capable of doing evil and good" and that "how does this make god divine or anything different from your average human" is to show you that once one posits god as capable of doing good and evil, he is no different than Hitler, Osama, you or me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I apologize for such an incoherent statement... as it did not communicate clearly what I meant.

 

First, I believe IMHO, God started by setting laws and order to all things. He/she/it set things in motion within boundaries. IF all things are part of God, God experiences all things individually and collectively. There is a part in all living things that is divine, IMO. Doesn't that make ALL things more special, to be honored?

 

There is 'light' and 'darkness' in each person. Each has to accountable and responsible for their actions. This is part of the 'purifying' process, driving people into the light. As where the 'light' is, the 'darkness' must flee. IMO. As most know on this site, I believe that ALL are 'saved' and have been from the foundation of the world.

 

It is my belief that you, I, and all think we are separate, when we are really the same... manifesting different experiences and perceptions, enabling companionship and relationships. Our skin and all this other stuff may be an illusion, right? Einstien said something similar to that, something like this is all an illusion, yet a very persistant one.

If God is in all things Amanda - you've removed the middle ground between the divine and the normal everyday. And being all things, we as humans can only gather what attributes about something - like a god, from nature and say, well this is the "nature" of god.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eliminating the middle ground... I think that is a very fair statement. What's wrong with making each normal day divine? As humans discerning God, it is about looking at the nature of all things and see what brings light on... peace, joy, happiness to all, and perhaps 'that' is God... that is sacred. Wonder IF there were a divine part in everything and we ALL were seeking to recognize and connect with that? Would that be horrible?

Plato taught that there was a perfect form of beauty somewhere out there and here on Earth we only had shadow or dull glimpses of it and that only well trained individuals with perfect reasoning could get us closer to these perfect forms in heaven - or where-ever. This is a gross simplification of course, however, if there are perfect circles, perfect beauty in heaven, then there is also a perfect from of reasoning in heaven.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe instead of looking for beauty and perfect reasoning to come from the outside to within, it has to come from within to that perspective on the outside? Reasoning and beauty are not made out there, but from inside of each of us, our perceptions.

 

If you really want to use reason, how do we know any of this would exist if life to perceive it were not here? If there was no one to 'hear' sound, sound would not exist... it is just a wave that is processed and interpreted as 'sound' by our ears. As I understand it, if no life were here and a boulder fell from a cliff and slammed on the ground breaking into many pieces, sound would not exist from this as noise. Another forum on this site discussed... how do we KNOW that reality created us... or are we creating reality? I've heard another scientist say we change the very nature of something just by looking at it. Now that one was too deep for me!

[Amanda]

So in case your "revelation" or your interpretation of the bible is not the same as a fundamentalist christian, then how does one determine who is right? Cause in theory both of you are filled with a "Holy spirit". Shouldn't your Biblegod reveal the same thing to both of you.

 

I am asking this cause christian make the following claim

 

"There can be only one absolute". Surely not all interpretation are equal are they? So how does a third person who is telling the correct interpretation of the bible

 

Pritish

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pritish, I think that there are many interpretations to the Bible because in the beginning of Christianity, it was a persecuted belief... and people could not talk to each other to question them if they were one of their own... so dogmas formed so that they might secretly know each other by codes of ethics and practices. Also, there seems to be emphasis on different aspects of teachings. Further, the first church, the Universal church seemed to have let their absolute power corrupt themselves... and so other sects started, protestants. IMO, dogmas have now persisted to ensure a pastor that his congregation he has worked so hard to get doesn't get taken away by another preacher, so he insists his teachings are the ONLY one. This is not in ALL cases, but more than I think most people would imagine. Otherwise, why don't they allow a debate like this in their church?

 

I think I had a wonderful teacher in seminary. Unfortunately he passed away 6 weeks before I graduated. He challenged my original beliefs till I didn't believe them anymore, which I found many questions about them on my own. Then he questioned the veracity of my new beliefs in regards to other verses in the Bible.

 

Perhaps miracles are miracles till we know how they are done. I don't think I have ultimate Truth, and that it is a refining process... much like all things. The things I learned from this teacher made a tremendously positive impact on my life, as well as others... and I think it is grounded in reason.

[SkepticOfBible]

Pritish, I think that there are many interpretations to the Bible because in the beginning of Christianity, it was a persecuted belief... and people could not talk to each other to question them if they were one of their own... so dogmas formed so that they might secretly know each other by codes of ethics and practices. Also, there seems to be emphasis on different aspects of teachings. ? 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So r u saying that all the interpretation which exist within christianity are equally valid and correct at the same time? My question is which one is valid? The reason I ask that is because on close examination it is found that although they adhere to the bible they come with two opposite result, yet each of the make the following assertion

 

1)God is with them

2)That they believe that they are christian

3)And they are following the word of god.

 

It's been like 2000 years and christian can't even agree on even the most fundamental of issues like

 

1)Whether God is a trinity?

2)Whether Jesus was God or not?

3)Whether one should follow KJV version of the bible or the newer ones

4)Whether remarriage is a sin or not?

5)Whether Woman pastor should be allowed or not

6)Whether Homosexuality is a sin or not?

7)Whether Christians will be raptured prior to the tribulation or after it

8)Whether unbelievers will be thrown in the lake of fire or even whether hell is a real place or not?

 

 

Further, the first church, the Universal church seemed to have let their absolute power corrupt themselves... and so other sects started, protestants.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ok, never heard of the Universal Church, but reckon you are talking about Roman Catholic church. Which comes to my second question? Why is it that after 1000 year the bible was formed, protestant christian decided to toss out like 15

book out of the bible and then present the KJV version as the true word of god.

 

http://www.catholic.com/library/What_Your_Authority.asp

 

 

 

IMO, dogmas have now persisted to ensure a pastor that his congregation he has worked so hard to get doesn't get taken away by another preacher, so he insists his teachings are the ONLY one. This is not in ALL cases, but more than I think most people would imagine. Otherwise, why don't they allow a debate like this in their church

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I seen that happen first hand

[Amanda]

So r u saying that all the interpretation which exist within christianity are equally valid and correct at the same time? My question is which one is valid?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pritish, I don't think ANYONE knows the TOTALITY of these deep truths in the Bible yet, except Jesus. Even these disciples debated amongst themselves, and they had first hand experiences of these teachings... and because of that, they have a wealth of respectable knowledge, IMO! I think finding these truths is a refining process. NOT to be changing these teachings , but our understanding of them as they are crossreferenced, using the most accurate definitions to their days, reason, and even things that are coming to light today seem to shed more insights on these teachings back then.

 

As I've said, different beliefs and denominations initiated from the original persecution of these followers of Christ... creating different sects known only by their dogmas, a devotion to certain behaviors, which allowed them to recognize one another. I think this grew to evolve, in many aspects having selfish reasons, to be keeping one's congregation from wandering elsewhere and not seeking truth. The Bible said to NOT follow every tradition (and doctorine) out there... so there must of been a sign that these negative repercussions could happen.

 

Mt 15:3 -

But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

 

Mr 7:13 -

Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

Col 2:8 -

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

 

Eph 4:14

That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness *, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

[Amanda]

Hi SerenityNow!

But Amanda, may I respectfully point out that the warnings about man-made "traditions" were those that went against the OT Laws.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now, they were against these traditions of those times, and it was pointing out the extent at which traditions had gone in the hand washing one! Condemned because you didn't wash your hands or ate a certain meat! You're right, that is why he said it is not that which goes in the body, but that which comes out of the body that defiles it.

 

Washing hands, eating meat, things like that were questioned as even being important at all... similar, IMO, to if women can be preachers, if one can remarry, is homosexuality a sin, should we read the KJV or other versions... how can these traditions of today matter, being like those of back then? I don't think they do have any merit.

 

In the verse you gave with Jesus speaking, he condemned the pharisees for not killing a rebellious child but rather making their own laws up instead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't see this matter when I looked at these verses. I know this is a part of the Bible you are very familiar, as you've presented it to me awhile back... yet I don't see it in these particular verses I've listed. Did I overlook it? Which one is it?

During the Jesus era they still didn't have advanced refrigeration so the pork and shellfish tainted theory doesn't work on making the law void.  Those laws were given to set gods people apart and they were meant to last forever.  I'm not claiming to have all knowledge on scripture but to me, the Messianics have that dead on and it goes with OT law.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, the law was to initially set them apart... I'll take your word on that. You're right, they did not have refrigeration, yet it was cooking the pork completely that got rid of the parasite... not the refrigeration, and I believe the shellfish was due to cholesterol. It did need to be prepared properly and eaten in moderation with respect to the body. What I think is important here, is that many Jews thought they were set aside to be the chosen people and that God only came for them!

 

Jesus said... NO! Not so. ALL these traditions and doctorines that set people apart are of no importance... what does that achieve? Division? We want reconciliation, bringing ALL together as one... no one better or less than anyone for any reason! It seems to me that many traditions and dogmas just separate people. They cause wars... not good. It makes people feel they are better than other groups of people... not good. Don't fall for these traditions and doctorines... IMHO. No one is better than anyone, and God isn't going to save just one group of people... no, not just the Jews and/or Christians... but EVERYONE.

 

I know, I remember... many of you don't want to be saved... It will be interesting to see what we can do about that, maybe we can negotiate the state of environment/ ambiance to exist there, ok?

Also, clearly there are laws both in the OT and NT that say not to worship god in any way shape or form that pagans worshipped their gods.  Yet today, Christians celebrate Easter, Christmas, some Halloween, Sunday worship etc. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

IMO, we don't worship them, we've incorporated them together! I think it would be wonderful to continue to include ALL religions into one. We are coming to a one world order, it appears, and this may eventually happen. I've always thought Jesus's teachings were to be inclusive, NOT exclusive... and he did give us the ministry of reconciliation. Maybe all these Gods are expressions of one God. Maybe ALL these spiritual teachers have an important message from which we can grow and use for our benefits. As I see it, they really don't contradict each other... but fit nicely together... even these beliefs of Atheist, as they seem to hold high individual responsibilities... a good thing.

[SkepticOfBible]

Pritish, I don't think ANYONE knows the TOTALITY of these deep truths in the Bible yet, except Jesus. Even these disciples debated amongst themselves, and they had first hand experiences of these teachings... and because of that, they have a wealth of respectable knowledge, IMO! I think finding these truths is a refining process. NOT to be changing these teachings  , but our understanding of them as they are crossreferenced, using the most accurate definitions to their days, reason, and even things that are coming to light today seem to shed more insights on these teachings back then.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Then how can christians come and say that there are absolute truth and absolute morality if they themselves don't understand the bible? and does that mean that the meaning of the bible changes over time.

 

Didn't Jesus said that he will send the holy ghost to help reach the believers to the truth? It's been like 2000 year since jesus died, and it seems that the holy ghost has failed miserably in doing the task.

 

 

The Bible said to NOT follow every tradition (and doctorine) out there... so there must of been a sign that these negative repercussions could happen. 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So how do you know which doctrine to follow? Is it like pick and choose whatever you want? This seems to me more like a cafeteria style of practicing a religion.

 

And you still haven't answered my question which I asked earlier

 

Why is it that after 1000 year the bible was formed, protestant christian decided to toss out like 15 book out of the bible and then present the KJV version as the true word of god?

 

Pritish

 

PS: I hope u don't get annoyed if I engage you in other topics. It seems to me that you are the only christian who responds regurly on this forum

[Amanda]

Then how can christians come and say that there are absolute truth and absolute morality if they themselves don't understand the bible? and does that mean that the meaning of the bible changes over time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hello Pritish!

I don't know how ANYONE can say they know the absolute truth in ANYTHING, including the Bible. All we can do, at best, is debate and be open minded and search for the truth... perhaps much like a ship tacking towards shore. I don't think these absolute truths of the Bible change, no more than these absolute truths of science changes... yet hopefully we allow our perceptions to change to accommodate a more accurate understanding. Of course, Pristish, all this is just my opinion.

Didn't Jesus said that he will send the holy ghost to help reach the believers to the truth? It's been like 2000 year since jesus died, and it seems that the holy ghost has failed miserably in doing the task.

So how do you know which doctrine to follow? Is it like pick and choose whatever you want? This seems to me more like a cafeteria style of practicing a religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that God is in control, and that there is order established in how things will manifest. Yes, I do believe the Holy Spirit is at work... yet in the timing of a supreme entity, not ours. If we all came to a mutual understanding, and we all thought alike... it might be like singing a song. We would all have the same words, similar thoughts, ideas, feelings while singing. Much conversation and companionship would be lost. Wouldn't it be boring, as to not need each other to explore, share, and appreciate our different perspectives. Perhaps it is not the destination that is so important, but the journey.

And you still haven't answered my question which I asked earlier

 

Why is it that after 1000 year the bible was formed, protestant christian decided to toss out like 15 book out of the bible and then present the KJV version as the true word of god?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know why. I just have to trust that there is enough there for us now to learn to understand. Perhaps as time goes on, there will be more insights to prompt us to reconsider these other books for investigation? It seems to me that we have more than our hands full now. I do read the Apocrapha, and have been reading Thomas some too. Although I really appreciate other spiritual teachers immensely, Buddhist, Suffism, and many others. I have read about Madeline O'Hare and have liked what she has to offer also. It seems to me that some people may not need a book at all, and seem to find sacred foundations.

PS: I hope u don't get annoyed if I engage you in other topics. It seems to me that you are the only christian who responds regurly on this forum

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I learn a lot from you and everyone, and enjoy engaging in meaningful discourse. It seems to me that no one is ALL right, yet maybe everyone has a piece of what is. Of course, I can't speak for all Christians... I can only speak for one.

 

Pritish, I will be leaving town for a couple of days, so if I don't respond immediately, you'll know why.

[Cerise]

If we all came to a mutual understanding, and we all thought alike... it might be like singing a song. We would all have the same words, similar thoughts, ideas, feelings while singing. Much conversation and companionship would be lost. Wouldn't it be boring, as to not need each other to explore, share, and appreciate our different perspectives. Perhaps it is not the destination that is so important, but the journey.

 

This sounds really good, but what does it actually mean?

 

Boring? How can it be? If everyone had mutual understanding, how would we know whether or not we would be bored? We would have no differences to compare ourselves to and say "well this is certainly more interesting then that" would we?

 

It's all well and good for you to say that a world of sameness would be boring, but you can only say that from your position as actively engaging with the other. Like saying that having a world with only raisins in it to eat would be boring, if all you had ever known or experienced were raisins. What could you compare it too? What could you claim to be missing?

[Amanda]

This sounds really good, but what does it actually mean?

 

Boring?  How can it be?  If everyone had mutual understanding, how would we know whether or not we would be bored?  We would have no differences to compare ourselves to and say "well this is certainly more interesting then that" would we?

 

It's all well and good for you to say that a world of sameness would be boring, but you can only say that from your position as actively engaging with the other.  Like saying that having a world with only raisins in it to eat would be boring, if all you had ever known or experienced were raisins.  What could you compare it too?  What could you claim to be missing?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cerise, don't you think if we ALL thought just alike, agreed on these same things in ALL subjects, were in perfect harmony in every aspect of the world... what would there be to discuss? NONE of us would even be on this site. What would you even say for an opening statement?

[Cerise]

Cerise, don't you think if we ALL thought just alike, agreed on these same things in ALL subjects, were in perfect harmony in every aspect of the world... what would there be to discuss? NONE of us would even be on this site. What would you even say for an opening statement?

 

No, Amanda, I wouldn't think that IF we all thought alike. Because I wouldn't know anything different to compare myself to, because we would all think alike.

 

Please try very hard to get what I am saying. You posit that IF we all thought alike THEN the world would be very boring. That is your If/Then statement, correct?

 

What I am saying is that IF we all thought alike, THEN we wouldn't know whether we were boring or not. We would have no comparison.

 

If you wish to state that from our perspective, living in a world where everyone most definitely does not think alike, such a situation would seem boring or unproductive, that's fine. But that is totally irrelevent to anyone who actually would be living in the mythical world where everyone thinks alike.

 

You see?

[pug]

Hi Amanda,

 

I've been following a lot of your posts. Food for thought. <delete> Aaaah, I'll rather not say any thing more as this is an ex-C's forum. Oooops even saying that could be open to flak. Still, keep on rocking.

[quicksand]

Hello Amanda, sorry its taken me so long to get back to you, in addition to my FT I freelance on the side and my business has been good, but keeping me over-busy as of late.

 

Also, I don't have much time today to follow along your debate with Pritishd, so if I utter things that are repeated, have pity on me.

 

I believe I said in my other post that I think God is good AND evil. Although I do believe that everything that was created was created by God and for God. Maybe 'evil' has a purpose for good?

Yes you did. The trick is, if you think God is only good, or only evil in this reductive/black and white discussion. You did state that God is in everything so again my point is to coherently delineate between the two opposing forces while maintaining that God is only one attribute over another. Again, whatever God's purpose maybe is, is irrelevant to this discussion. What the discussion is centered on is not motive but on inherent properties - or states that God is said to actualize.

 

Intent, or motive is a shift in focus.

 

If one were to believe, like me, that in the beginning there was only God/Goddess, then everything that was created had to come from him/her/it. If ALL things came out of 'this' then it must be part of 'this', right?

You still face the problem of infinite recursion, so you better check that and makes god the antecedent to nature, which you contradict later on (read down).

 

Quicksand, I do not agree entirely with most interpretations, nor spins, of these Bibles today. I know that many verses researched in the manuscript from which the KJV was taken, it can yield quite different results. We were in no way as articulate back then as we are now. I've studied some of Revelations more intently, especially the Seven Seals. Revelations is NOT a bad time.... how could it be? If you read Chapter 1:1 it says something like... 'This book is about the revealing of Jesus Christ, written in signs and symbols to my brother John.' If it is about the revealing of Jesus, then it is about love and mercy and compassion... in signs and symbols.

Origin thought that the OT should be interpreted as allegorical. Well, he was later branded as heretic and nearly all of his writing and theology was destroyed. He wrote over a 1,000 commentaries. I have no problem with the Bible as poetry, but as literal word of God, now that's another story.

 

Christian's special plead when they decide that some of the Bible is allegorical, myth, or allusionary and some of it is in fact the actual words or deed's of God. Occam's Razor cuts to the conclusion that most of the Bible is heroic fiction or literature of one form or another by critical analysis.

 

The trick for you Amanda is not to special plead when you state that it {the bible} can yield quite different results. Well, whose results are accurate? Yours? Should I have faith in yours verses a Farwell or Robertson? My own?

 

I'm a designer, and I know from practical experience how signs and symbols are interpreted everyday. Where one client sees a successful identity, his or her partner may see a failure. It is up to me sometimes to qualify the solution or go back to the drawing board. Are you sure you are not doing the same with the Bible?

 

Something things to consider.

 

I apologize for such an incoherent statement... as it did not communicate clearly what I meant.

 

*****

 

First, I believe IMHO, God started by setting laws and order to all things. He/she/it set things in motion within boundaries. IF all things are part of God, God experiences all things individually and collectively. There is a part in all living things that is divine, IMO. Doesn't that make ALL things more special, to be honored?

Ignoring the problem again of infinite recursion and God and God again is the lexus of things, you state once again that God is all things.

 

You have my comments regarding this and how being in all things makes this God concept of yours inert, so I needed daddle with this again.

 

You are only reduced to a special plead and selective sampling of evidence.

 

Sorry.

 

Eliminating the middle ground... I think that is a very fair statement. What's wrong with making each normal day divine? As humans discerning God, it is about looking at the nature of all things and see what brings light on... peace, joy, happiness to all, and perhaps 'that' is God... that is sacred. Wonder IF there were a divine part in everything and we ALL were seeking to recognize and connect with that? Would that be horrible?

The problem is you make God subsequent of nature and not the other way around. Where material science and reasoning elucidates and ferrets out contradictions in such a being as God, such a God can not exist.

 

Maybe instead of looking for beauty and perfect reasoning to come from the outside to within, it has to come from within to that perspective on the outside? Reasoning and beauty are not made out there, but from inside of each of us, our perceptions.

Well, that's perceptive you and I agree. Platonic reasoning is incoherent as are forms of platonic perfection are.

 

Zach in a conversation with Gene Cook said that one has to "trust" themselves. This is in fact what we do everyday.

 

Welcome to the world. The real-world Amanda.

 

If you really want to use reason, how do we know any of this would exist if life to perceive it were not here? If there was no one to 'hear' sound, sound would not exist... it is just a wave that is processed and interpreted as 'sound' by our ears. As I understand it, if no life were here and a boulder fell from a cliff and slammed on the ground breaking into many pieces, sound would not exist from this as noise. Another forum on this site discussed... how do we KNOW that reality created us... or are we creating reality? I've heard another scientist say we change the very nature of something just by looking at it. Now that one was too deep for me!

The "other-world" is based upon the context of our world. That should tell you something Amanda.

 

If you want to doubt your reality here-and-now Amanda, go for it. You take an absurd position of course, so just a caveat from me on that. You sound like a Solipsist when you make statements like "how do we KNOW that reality created us?" These questions are invariably wrought with absurdity. The questions are fun to pursue and valuable for what they teach, but not a ground for which to establish a context of understanding of the world and the reality around you.

[Amanda]

Hi Quicksand! Glad to see you could take a moment from work!

You did state that God is in everything so again my point is to coherently delineate between the two opposing forces while maintaining that God is only one attribute over another.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Does rain have opposing forces, yet does it have one attribute over another in its properties?

You still face the problem of infinite recursion, so you better check that and makes god the antecedent to nature, which you contradict later on (read down).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I apologize, as I do not see how infinite recursion contradicts God being the antecedent to nature. Could you please explain this more explicitly please, maybe a simple analogy? I believe there is a constant progressing evolution of God manifesting God's self. (Maybe there is a point God collapses back on his/her/itself and starts again.) How does that contradict that God is the precedence of nature?

Origin thought that the OT should be interpreted as allegorical. Well, he was later branded as heretic and nearly all of his writing and theology was destroyed. He wrote over a 1,000 commentaries. I have no problem with the Bible as poetry, but as literal word of God, now that's another story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, finally we might find some common grounds here. I do believe there are hidden spiritual truths in the Bible, allegories, although I do believe there are some literal aspects also. I do believe that Jesus really did exist, he presented these teachings, and he died a crucifixion.

The trick for you Amanda is not to special plead when you state that it {the bible} can yield quite different results. Well, whose results are accurate? Yours? Should I have faith in yours verses a Farwell or Robertson? My own?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do not know the absolute truth, as NO ONE does... but perhaps Jesus IMO. Hopefully we can all be open minded, and perhaps each person is not ALL right and no one is ALL wrong. Maybe each person has a piece of the puzzle? What we are ultimately left with for now, seems to be our own accepted version of reality for the moment.

I'm a designer, and I know from practical experience how signs and symbols are interpreted everyday. Where one client sees a successful identity, his or her partner may see a failure. It is up to me sometimes to qualify the solution or go back to the drawing board. Are you sure you are not doing the same with the Bible?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As long as I am not changing the Bible (original manuscript of KJV for now), but honing the accuracy of my perception of it... what is wrong with that?

Something things to consider.

Ignoring the problem again of infinite recursion and God and God again is the lexus of things, you state once again that God is all things.

 

You have my comments regarding this and how being in all things makes this God concept of yours inert, so I needed daddle with this again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since my body parts are all parts of 'me', does that make me inert?

Welcome to the world. The real-world Amanda.

The "other-world" is based upon the context of our world. That should tell you something Amanda.

 

If you want to doubt your reality here-and-now Amanda, go for it. You take an absurd position of course, so just a caveat from me on that. You sound like a Solipsist when you make statements like "how do we KNOW that reality created us?" These questions are invariably wrought with absurdity. The questions are fun to pursue and valuable for what they teach, but not a ground for which to establish a context of understanding of the world and the reality around you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't you think reality is different for each person to some degree, and their world may be mirroring their reality to them? Once a construct has been bought/sold to/by one, it seems to be their reality till another one comes and takes its place. Usually this is a progressive thing, IMO. Additionally, no one knows what 'reality' is at the moment, not even scientist... it seems we all have to accept one for now. I have tremendous respect for scientific exploration towards more precise definitions of tangible things, as I do that of many aspects seeking an inner actualization process too.

[quicksand]

Hi Quicksand! Glad to see you could take a moment from work!

I hate my job. I love design, but I really hate my job. Good thing, I gave my two weeks today!

 

Beers are on me!

 

Does rain have opposing forces, yet does it have one attribute over another in its properties?

 

**********************

 

Since my body parts are all parts of 'me', does that make me inert?

Not sure what you're driving at. You could be making a modal argument here as an analogy to "God". However, rain does has specific properties for which we know it by. If I say a hard rain, we might safely assume that it includes hale or that the precipitation is hitting the earth at a high velocity. When we say acid rain, we can measure the content of the water-drops for heavy metals or other agricultural or industrial contaminants. Thus, we know what this rain is by its properties that distinguish itself from snow, which is another form, or mode of water.

 

The question is, what can you safely say is a property of God, or not just a mode of it's alleged existence? This is an old argument that the atheist have made for ever. If you say God is loyal, well, Dogs are loyal. So that is not a property of God. If you say that God is loving, well, I love my parents and my job too. Well, okay, I really don't love my job, but my folks do. Even Justin Martyr confronted the Roman Senate on charges of atheism and stated that his God was like Jupiter - yet made exceptions after that.

 

Anyway, Amanda, the gist is, you have cast such a wide net, ie properties of god such as "force" (whether the force be good or evil) that nothing can be specifically said about "it."

 

Also, your body and your hands are not "everything". But let's take the analogy one step forward. Can you identify what is God's hand without special pleading, since god is in everything. This will have to be a specific example and it has to be specific so that we may know God's hand by its attributes.

 

I do not know the absolute truth, as NO ONE does... but perhaps Jesus IMO. Hopefully we can all be open minded, and perhaps each person is not ALL right and no one is ALL wrong. Maybe each person has a piece of the puzzle? What we are ultimately left with for now, seems to be our own accepted version of reality for the moment.

Well, I do close my mind to various things after I have considered enough evidence to make a conclusion and get on with life. For example, racism, sexism, and other social ills of needless division. But these are material concerns and rightly so. I can't really begin to presume spirituality, gods, etc, as each are predicated on immateriality. So, I don't know. If Jesus did exist, he was probably just like you and I. Did not walk on water, did not magically make food from limited amounts, was not God, and probably had the same foibles and fault as we all do.

 

I doubt that I have much in common with Jesus, the pro-slavery bastard that he was. Well to be fair, I guess the slavery thing could just be the socio-economic politics of each respective oral tradition's of the NT which was all penned pseudepigraphically anyway named after each "apostle." Well, unless if Jesus was buying rounds, then we're having a conversation.

 

As long as I am not changing the Bible (original manuscript of KJV for now), but honing the accuracy of my perception of it... what is wrong with that?

If you believe in the Trinity, you believe in heresy. The Trinity, by way of Nicea, was decided solely on the authority of Emperor Constantine, and he could have cared less what squabbling Christians believed. Order of the Empire was at stake. You've read the NT and you know that Jesus is clearly subordinate to god.

 

Don't you think reality is different for each person to some degree, and their world may be mirroring their reality to them? Once a construct has been bought/sold to/by one, it seems to be their reality till another one comes and takes its place. Usually this is a progressive thing, IMO. Additionally, no one knows what 'reality' is at the moment, not even scientist... it seems we all have to accept one for now. I have tremendous respect for scientific exploration towards more precise definitions of tangible things, as I do that of many aspects seeking an inner actualization process too.

No, the fact that we share the word reality shows that we do know what reality is.

 

While the names of Rocky Mountain and North America are contingent, the fact that they are mountains and that they are on this continent and not in another, is absolute fact - undeniable reality, even if by time the mountains subside and worn down by weather or the whole continent becomes sublimated. This is what "truth" is, that Saviourmachine was hinting at above.

[quicksand]

I apologize, as I do not see how infinite recursion contradicts God being the antecedent to nature. Could you please explain this more explicitly please, maybe a simple analogy? I believe there is a constant progressing evolution of God manifesting God's self. (Maybe there is a point God collapses back on his/her/itself and starts again.) How does that contradict that God is the precedence of nature?

Whoops, sorry I missed this one.

 

At which point of creation does creation stop if you posit an origin, a keystone event from which creation stems from? God creates the universe, but what creates God? If nothing creates god, then why conflate god with the universe and take the universe as it is without innovation or invention as to what is the cause of origin? The Big Bang hypothesis does not confirm an existance of the big guy, but raises more questions about him. Neil and CT beat TRJ over the head in the Knowledge thread when it comes to establishing God as the creative force and the point of origin of the universe.

 

That's my point.

[Amanda]

Hey Quicksand, before I forget... what is the 'heretic of Dune'? Are you an Atheist, and if so... were you always one? Just curious.

I hate my job. I love design, but I really hate my job. Good thing, I gave my two weeks today!

 

Beers are on me!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cheers! Here's to great transitions and better things to come my friend! I'll drink to that!

Not sure what you're driving at. You could be making a modal argument here as an analogy to "God". However, rain does has specific properties for which we know it by.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quicksand, I was using rain as an analogy to these aspects you were referring to about God, of good and evil. God was both, yet had attributes of one over the other, as evil probably supports and yields 'good' as the ultimate conclusion... Yet we would not know 'good' without the contrast. Rain can have what is perceived as good and evil properities. All life needs water to live, yet one may say a flood is evil. Once we learn to perceive the flood in a different way, it may eventually support the good attributes moreover.

The question is, what can you safely say is a property of God, or not just a mode of it's alleged existence?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doesn't the Lord's Prayer say that the way we may know and identify God is by what is holy, what we come to honor as sacred? It seems to me that we are ALL evolving in this direction. We don't go out for the weekend to watch the government feed prisoners to the lion, nor hang someone on the cross. Things seem to be getting better because of how we are defining what is acceptable... including eliminating sexist, racial, and disrespect of human rights.

Also, your body and your hands are not "everything". But let's take the analogy one step forward. Can you identify what is God's hand without special pleading, since god is in everything. This will have to be a specific example and it has to be specific so that we may know God's hand by its attributes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly, my body and my hands are NOT everything! I am consciousness, character, emotions too. The WHOLE ultimate package is ME. If we were to classify all things, the ultimate classification goes to living and nonliving. What would encompass those two also?

 

It seems to me that evolution of orgainisms is about smaller organisms collecting and relying on each other, closely entertangled with each other for survival is what creates larger organisms, and these collectively become intertwined in reliance to one another till they become even a larger organism, and so forth till eventually... could the whole world becomes a great big organism... with a closely knit symbiotic reliance on each other for survival and even a shared and united consciousness?

If Jesus did exist, he was probably just like you and I. Did not walk on water, did not magically make food from limited amounts, was not God, and probably had the same foibles and fault as we all do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree he was a man, just like you and I... yet he figured out a metaphysical side that transcends these tangible aspects. Maybe these miracles are only miracles till we figure out how they were done... then they aren't miracles anymore. Some are allegories. I think all these things he did, the way they were done can be known and replicated. Everything he did, we too can do and greater things.

 

BTW, I do NOT think that Jesus thought he was subordinate to God, according to the NT.

 

Phillipians 2:6

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

 

Now, more importantly... how about celebrating your prosperous transition to a better career....