God's Mentality

by stardesk Mon Apr 07, 2014 12:05 pm

First topic message reminder :

GOD’S MENTALITY

I cannot help but wonder what kind of mentality has God. When you spend money, time, and effort to make or create something, would you then allow something else to come along and demolish your creation? Would you stand back and watch as it’s being destroyed? Of course not, and yet this is exactly what God did, (assuming he exists, of course.) Having apparently created the Earth either he didn’t care or was helpless, whilst asteroids, ice-ages, volcanoes, earthquakes, and tsunamis, destroyed much of his creation. Was he responsible for the negative disasters that struck the planet? Did he create them on purpose to destroy a mistake? If so, then he is not the omnipotent, infallible, and loving father we are led to believe.

Moving on, he supposedly created all the animals and birds etc, and yet what do we find? Timid animals such as a Gazelle or Impala, being pounced on by lions and leopards, tearing at their throats and neck. Can you imagine the sheer terror and fear those timid creatures must have felt? Just one example of bird predation, during the mating season when Black Headed gulls have young in the nest, you will see Herring Gulls bomb down on the nest and grab the young, fly off with them and eat them.

I put these facts to a Jehovah’s Witness at my door, he quite seriously replied: ‘Oh, that’s all Satan’s fault.’ Need I say I had a good laugh at such ignorance. Poor old Satan, he’s been accused of just about every negative issue that exists on planet Earth. And yet, all he did was encourage Adam and Eve to become aware of themselves as self-aware, free-thinking individuals, with the ability to make decisions for themselves. Had that not have happened then they would have been no more than pets, subservient to God, running at his beck and call. I’m sitting here typing away on my laptop, the product of a free thinking, enquiring, inventive mind. Had Adam and Eve not awaken to future potential, we’d still be wandering around naked, rummaging and foraging for food in the wilds.

by Ben Reilly Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:01 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:
eddie wrote:

What does that mean Eddie?

You're always agreeing with sassy JD. It's a bit odd.
I mean, I love the bones of les but I don't go around agreeing with every post he makes.
You can sometimes disagree.

So what, he should disagree for appearances' sake, even if he doesn't, just to keep this from looking too friendly?

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:01 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

What does that mean Eddie?

You're always agreeing with sassy JD. It's a bit odd.
I mean, I love the bones of les but I don't go around agreeing with every post he makes.
You can sometimes disagree.

But that is my honest opinion compared to all other scenarios I've heard, nothing wrong with that is there?

I e noticed you digging at me quite often Eddie, I'd rather you didn't , I don't do it to you , thanks,

by eddie Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:28 pm

Would you rather me lie?

by eddie Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:30 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:

You're always agreeing with sassy JD. It's a bit odd.
I mean, I love the bones of les but I don't go around agreeing with every post he makes.
You can sometimes disagree.

So what, he should disagree for appearances' sake, even if he doesn't, just to keep this from looking too friendly?

It's good that you're managing to get about and read the sections of the forum that you e been alerted to.

Try other threads now. study

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:33 pm

eddie wrote:Would you rather me lie?

If that's what you think you could keep it to yourself ,it's a bit rude, and as I said Eddie, I don't act like that with you.

Cheers Smile

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:35 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:

So what, he should disagree for appearances' sake, even if he doesn't, just to keep this from looking too friendly?

It's good that you're managing to get about and read the sections of the forum that you e been alerted to.

Try other threads now.

You're not trying to say I alerted Ben to this Eddie are you?..

Because I can assure you I did not.

by eddie Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:37 pm

Joy Division wrote:
eddie wrote:

It's good that you're managing to get about and read the sections of the forum that you e been alerted to.

Try other threads now.

You're not trying to say I alerted Ben to this Eddie are you?..

Because I can assure you I did not.

If I had thought that JD, I'd have said it.
I think he alerts himself to what he wants to see at any given time.

No poster Pm's an admin about posts and posters do they?
Unless they're desperate or stupid, of course.

by eddie Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:39 pm

Joy Division wrote:
eddie wrote:Would you rather me lie?

If that's what you think you could keep it to yourself ,it's a bit rude, and as I said Eddie, I don't act like that with you.

Cheers

So,you'd rather lie than say what you think?
That's not helpful. It's pretty useless if you think about it.

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:40 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

You're not trying to say I alerted Ben to this Eddie are you?..

Because I can assure you I did not.

If I had thought that JD, I'd have said it.
I think he alerts himself to what he wants to see at any given time.

No poster Pm's an admin about posts and posters do they?
Unless they're desperate or stupid, of course.

Well I can't answer for everyone, but again I can assure you I've not PM'd Ben about any post or poster, he has had enough to deal with tonight.

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:42 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

If that's what you think you could keep it to yourself ,it's a bit rude, and as I said Eddie, I don't act like that with you.

Cheers

So,you'd rather lie than say what you think?
That's not helpful. It's pretty useless if you think about it.

But your claim was very inaccurate Eddie and I'm sure if I said the same thing to you, you wouldn't be impressed either.

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:43 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

If that's what you think you could keep it to yourself ,it's a bit rude, and as I said Eddie, I don't act like that with you.

Cheers

So,you'd rather lie than say what you think?
That's not helpful. It's pretty useless if you think about it.

..do you have anything else you would like to be so forthcoming about Eddie?

by eddie Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:45 pm

Joy Division wrote:
eddie wrote:

So,you'd rather lie than say what you think?
That's not helpful. It's pretty useless if you think about it.

..do you have anything else you would like to be so forthcoming about Eddie?

Not at the moment JD. When I do, I'll say it. As always.
Rest assured though, if I give you a comment or compliment, it's because I mean it.

Night JD Smile

by Guest Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:46 pm

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

..do you have anything else you would like to be so forthcoming about Eddie?

Not at the moment JD. When I do, I'll say it. As always.
Rest assured though, if I give you a comment or compliment, it's because I mean it.

Night JD

Ok Eddie, sleep well Smile

by Ben Reilly Sat Apr 12, 2014 2:31 am

eddie wrote:
Joy Division wrote:
eddie wrote:

It's good that you're managing to get about and read the sections of the forum that you e been alerted to.

Try other threads now.

You're not trying to say I alerted Ben to this Eddie are you?..

Because I can assure you I did not.

If I had thought that JD, I'd have said it.
I think he alerts himself to what he wants to see at any given time.

No poster Pm's an admin about posts and posters do they?
Unless they're desperate or stupid, of course.

I've been an active participant in this thread, Eddie. And if PMing me about posts is "desperate or stupid," a good number of people you and I like quite a bit here are desperate and stupid.

by eddie Sat Apr 12, 2014 9:47 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:

If I had thought that JD, I'd have said it.
I think he alerts himself to what he wants to see at any given time.

No poster Pm's an admin about posts and posters do they?
Unless they're desperate or stupid, of course.

I've been an active participant in this thread, Eddie. And if PMing me about posts is "desperate or stupid," a good number of people you and I like quite a bit here are desperate and stupid.

Well so be it.
I just don't and never have run to admin about anything.

(Except secret hairy belly pics)

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 10:02 am

eddie wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:

I've been an active participant in this thread, Eddie. And if PMing me about posts is "desperate or stupid," a good number of people you and I like quite a bit here are desperate and stupid.

Well so be it.
I just don't and never have run to admin about anything.

(Except secret hairy belly pics)

And I never approached him either last night Eddie, what I had to say to you I done so myself, but if you still think I did you're more than welcome to ask Ben that question directly ...

It would take a lot more than that for me to ask Ben to intervene in some way. Smile

by Eilzel Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:14 pm

Eilzel wrote:
eddie wrote:

Les it's going to be an answer that will never satisfy you. Because your interpretation of God is that you expect him to be like Superman; you want him to jump in front of the car hurtling to kill,the young mother, you want him to step in and stop the famine in Ethiopia thereby preventing hundreds of children dying.....

I'm afraid I dont hold to that belief that he must prevent these things and if he doesn't, then he doesn't exist.

Tell me, what if he did stop everyone from dying? What then? Would the world be better? Would we all behave better or worse?
How do you know what fate those people had in store had they not died then, on that particular day?
How do you know, what those starved children may have grown up,to be? Rapists? An army? The destruction of their village?

All stupid a hypothesis that sounds as ridiculous as saying "if there was a god then people wouldn't die!"

How absurd!
Do you want to live forever? I don't!

Yes life is unfair. So what?
My dad died way before his "time" - so did my friends girl, she hung from her neck at two years old in a nursery and definitely died before her time.
Why did God "allow" that to happen? Why didn't he intervene? Should he intervene in all children's accidents or just some?

My answer is I don't know. I'm not sure I want him to "intervene".

In the same way your mum has no place now, really, to intervene in your life; she gave you good grounding (obviously, look at the man you've become x), she set you up on a path of goodness and honesty and she taught you how to boil the kettle (lol) and to wait for cars to go past before you step,into the road.
What more can she do? It's up to you now.

Your only argument seems to be; why does God allow.........? (fill,in the blank)

So I'm turning it around and asking you: why shouldn't he allow.........?

Eds, I'm not asking God to be a superman, I don't believe in God remember. I'm asking if there is a god why they wouldn't be more economic, and why they'd devise the most brutal, cruel deaths for people.

You keep saying I'm asking God to stop people dying- this is wrong. Of course people must die or we'd be over populated. But an economic God would have 'set' the age limit a bit lower rather than slaughtering the masses with tidal waves, famine, or parasitical infestations. Please don't make the mistake of thinking I'm somehow asking why people cannot live forever- to do so is to utterly misunderstand my point.

Your cousin had an accident as humans do and I'm sorry to hear that. There is no accident with natural disasters or diseases- I must ask, do you think God is in ANY way responsible for tidal waves, hurricanes, malaria or small pox? (to name some natural killers)

I'll emphasize, I'm not asking for people to live forever- I'm asking why a God would create a world where people must die in such awful NATURALLY caused ways?

On the OP, we are asking about God's mentality. Well surely any creator is powerful enough to have created the universe any which way he liked. He COULD have made a universe where people died younger (but at what we would consider a healthy age)- but instead he created a world where people be slaughtered by hurricanes, tidal waves, malaria, small pox (at one time), epidemics of many kind, earthquakes and so on.

Now, I'm not asking why God doesn't intervene. I'm asking if there is a God, to have created the universe with the needless suffering, pain and injustice it contains, often against those with no real experience of life- what kind of mentality do you think he has?

by eddie Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:29 pm

First off les it wasn't my cousin? My friends daughter died in a nursery, she was found hanging, terrible, horrible......just wanted to clarify.

Do I think God is responsible for tidal waves and hurricanes?
Probably not. I've never thought so anyway.

I think some are natural occurrences and some possibly due to man ie global warming etc

by Eilzel Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:56 pm

eddie wrote:First off les it wasn't my cousin? My friends daughter died in a nursery, she was found hanging, terrible, horrible......just wanted to clarify.

Do I think God is responsible for tidal waves and hurricanes?
Probably not. I've never thought so anyway.

I think some are natural occurrences and some possibly due to man ie global warming etc

Sorry I apologize as I was typing I swore I read cousin Neutral

Ok, I have to ask. You think there is a god yes? You think this god made the universe, the Earth and mankind right? So if this god made all those things then, by default, god made the tectonic plates which cause earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanic eruptions- these things have NOTHING to do with global warming by the way, and ALL natural disasters have occurred since prehistoric times, long before man made global warming.

So if god made the Earth, god made it so it would destroy people- not economically either, because for all the odd natural disaster destroys lives in their thousands the global population is still immense!

Again surely an economic creation would simply have limited the number of lives of the average human or is this not making sense?

And back to the core question, what do you think of the 'mentality' of a God that prefers wanton destruction and suffering to obvious alternative?

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 4:29 pm

Eilzel wrote:
eddie wrote:First off les it wasn't my cousin? My friends daughter died in a nursery, she was found hanging, terrible, horrible......just wanted to clarify.

Do I think God is responsible for tidal waves and hurricanes?
Probably not. I've never thought so anyway.

I think some are natural occurrences and some possibly due to man ie global warming etc

Sorry I apologize as I was typing I swore I read cousin

Ok, I have to ask. You think there is a god yes? You think this god made the universe, the Earth and mankind right? So if this god made all those things then, by default, god made the tectonic plates which cause earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanic eruptions- these things have NOTHING to do with global warming by the way, and ALL natural disasters have occurred since prehistoric times, long before man made global warming.

So if god made the Earth, god made it so it would destroy people- not economically either, because for all the odd natural disaster destroys lives in their thousands the global population is still immense!

Again surely an economic creation would simply have limited the number of lives of the average human or is this not making sense?

And back to the core question, what do you think of the 'mentality' of a God that prefers wanton destruction and suffering to obvious alternative?

you assume God made the earth to last forever and he didn't, do people have to settle near dangerous places??

by Eilzel Sat Apr 12, 2014 4:53 pm

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

Sorry I apologize as I was typing I swore I read cousin

Ok, I have to ask. You think there is a god yes? You think this god made the universe, the Earth and mankind right? So if this god made all those things then, by default, god made the tectonic plates which cause earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanic eruptions- these things have NOTHING to do with global warming by the way, and ALL natural disasters have occurred since prehistoric times, long before man made global warming.

So if god made the Earth, god made it so it would destroy people- not economically either, because for all the odd natural disaster destroys lives in their thousands the global population is still immense!

Again surely an economic creation would simply have limited the number of lives of the average human or is this not making sense?

And back to the core question, what do you think of the 'mentality' of a God that prefers wanton destruction and suffering to obvious alternative?

you assume God made the earth to last forever and he didn't, do people have to settle near dangerous places??

1. Your god; there are many different gods. I have no idea in fact whether eddies' god intend the Earth to last forever, but it is irrelevant to the point. And in any case I KNOW Earth wont last forever, at best it has until our Sun dies, then it will be incinerated, that is unless a collision with the Andromeda galaxy and ours doesn't destroy it first- again however this is good evidence that any gods mentality is far from benign, caring or anything particularly positive.

2. No people don't have to settle near dangerous places- but Earthquakes are pretty widespread, as are tidal waves. And none of that comes close to addressing the point.

by eddie Sat Apr 12, 2014 9:09 pm

Eilzel wrote:
eddie wrote:First off les it wasn't my cousin? My friends daughter died in a nursery, she was found hanging, terrible, horrible......just wanted to clarify.

Do I think God is responsible for tidal waves and hurricanes?
Probably not. I've never thought so anyway.

I think some are natural occurrences and some possibly due to man ie global warming etc

Sorry I apologize as I was typing I swore I read cousin

Ok, I have to ask. You think there is a god yes? You think this god made the universe, the Earth and mankind right? So if this god made all those things then, by default, god made the tectonic plates which cause earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanic eruptions- these things have NOTHING to do with global warming by the way, and ALL natural disasters have occurred since prehistoric times, long before man made global warming.

So if god made the Earth, god made it so it would destroy people- not economically either, because for all the odd natural disaster destroys lives in their thousands the global population is still immense!

Again surely an economic creation would simply have limited the number of lives of the average human or is this not making sense?

And back to the core question, what do you think of the 'mentality' of a God that prefers wanton destruction and suffering to obvious alternative?

I think you presume that people who believe in God think he's perfect?
I dint have all the answers les. Sometimes it's just about belief.

You know how when you meet someone and you click you just 'know'? And someone may ask "HOW do you know?"
The answer often eludes you.

You can't know whether the man you love loves you as much, or of he'll never hurt you, or if he isn't thinking of of someone else when you're together or if it will last a lifetime.
No you don't KNOW.
Love is about belief.
You believe in your feelings and your instinct to a given feeling.

We aren't supposed to master the mind of God. We aren't supposed to sit here and love Him without question.
Questioning is good.

You seem to question religion (God) quite a lot. I believe that a small part of you actually either wants to believe or actually does.
It's the bible and the shit that people spout that has put you off.

Find your own version of God.
That's exactly what he wants you to do!

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 9:36 pm

Eddie, truthfully, if I though there was a 'god' I'd want to give him a good hard slap for being so useless, for letting the innocent suffer and the bad prosper, for letting greedy people get more and more, for so many things the list is too long for this page. Allowing that amount of suffering cannot be classed as 'god-like' by and stretch of the imagination. Just look at the millions of people going through absolute hell in Syria for example, through no fault of their own. And who are the people that normal suffer the most - the children.

by Eilzel Sat Apr 12, 2014 10:00 pm

Eds, interesting points, and I am glad you concede the lack of real logic and point it is purely about belief, and so more personal hypothesis than anything else.

However I do reject your final suggestion. I question God AND religion a lot because the subject of God/s, life, the universe, myth, religion and different cultures fascinates me profoundly.

I don't want to believe; as I think my reasoning makes clear, if there was a god I'd have a lot of explanations to ask for, if there is a God his mentality is savage. I find the wish to believe in 'something better' insulting to the human condition to be honest. If there is a Heaven then super, let the party we started in life continue Smile

But not one small part of me wants or thinks there is a god. And this isn't a case of protesting too much; but belief is a strong force in the world and a sonetimes damaging one- and as someone who thinks a lot about 'big questions' how could I not be interested in other peoples answers Smile

I have greatly enjoyed hearing your views on this x

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:12 pm

Eilzel wrote:^victor, by flawed I mean limited, your God cannot be all powerful with the restraints you attribute to him. By the way you never answered about the purpose.

^smelly, if you are going to salivate as you stalk my contributions could you at least have the decency to do without being an arsehole? I admit I probably wont change my mind, unless I found proof that I have been wrong all this time. But that isn't the point, it is the duscussion if the concepts I find fascinating and worthwhile in itself- something you seem incapable of understanding...

^ eddie, you are proving rather elusive to my first question on this page- I'm not discussing free will, but something else. I do feel that for many living in a country where major natural disasters are nonexistant and at a time when science has wiped out many once lethal diseases has nulled the idea of just how brutal this world is, making it easier to believe in 'a god' who provides all these wonderful things in life

question Eil....why does the creator HAVE to be "unlimited", as opposed to just plain mind bogglingly powerful?

i find a creator that is of sufficient capacity to create the universe, yet not ALL knowing, and ALL powerful (not withstanding he/she/it is unlikely to be anything but the MOST powerful), tp be a far more logical proposition.

there is no law says the creator HAS to be all knowing and all powerful

an ALL knowing/all powerful deity would have no purpose...
no emotion
no passion
no "drive"

by Eilzel Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:17 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Eilzel wrote:^victor, by flawed I mean limited, your God cannot be all powerful with the restraints you attribute to him. By the way you never answered about the purpose.

^smelly, if you are going to salivate as you stalk my contributions could you at least have the decency to do without being an arsehole? I admit I probably wont change my mind, unless I found proof that I have been wrong all this time. But that isn't the point, it is the duscussion if the concepts I find fascinating and worthwhile in itself- something you seem incapable of understanding...

^ eddie, you are proving rather elusive to my first question on this page- I'm not discussing free will, but something else. I do feel that for many living in a country where major natural disasters are nonexistant and at a time when science has wiped out many once lethal diseases has nulled the idea of just how brutal this world is, making it easier to believe in 'a god' who provides all these wonderful things in life

question Eil....why does the creator HAVE to be "unlimited", as opposed to just plain mind bogglingly powerful?

i find a creator that is of sufficient capacity to create the universe, yet not ALL knowing, and ALL powerful (not withstanding he/she/it is unlikely to be anything but the MOST powerful), tp be a far more logical proposition.

there is no law says the creator HAS to be all knowing and all powerful

an ALL knowing/all powerful deity would have no purpose...
no emotion
no passion
no "drive"

But a limited creator with emotion, passion or drive (or all three), is rather humanized aren't they? And then we go back to Dawkins' argument about how such a god came to be as they are- in which case they have gone through a developmental process, an evolution of their own if you like- and such a process would have to have a beginning. I'm sure you can see where that argument is going...

To hypothesize an emotive god with passion and drive and limitations of His or Her own is as I said to imagine a God that fits and makes sense to an individual, but leaves the problem of how such a god came to exist in the first place. Honestly I think veya's idea of multiple gods is as likely as one limited and emotive god.

by Ben Reilly Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:26 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Eilzel wrote:^victor, by flawed I mean limited, your God cannot be all powerful with the restraints you attribute to him. By the way you never answered about the purpose.

^smelly, if you are going to salivate as you stalk my contributions could you at least have the decency to do without being an arsehole? I admit I probably wont change my mind, unless I found proof that I have been wrong all this time. But that isn't the point, it is the duscussion if the concepts I find fascinating and worthwhile in itself- something you seem incapable of understanding...

^ eddie, you are proving rather elusive to my first question on this page- I'm not discussing free will, but something else. I do feel that for many living in a country where major natural disasters are nonexistant and at a time when science has wiped out many once lethal diseases has nulled the idea of just how brutal this world is, making it easier to believe in 'a god' who provides all these wonderful things in life

question Eil....why does the creator HAVE to be "unlimited", as opposed to just plain mind bogglingly powerful?

i find a creator that is of sufficient capacity to create the universe, yet not ALL knowing, and ALL powerful (not withstanding he/she/it is unlikely to be anything but the MOST powerful), tp be a far more logical proposition.

there is no law says the creator HAS to be all knowing and all powerful

an ALL knowing/all powerful deity would have no purpose...
no emotion
no passion
no "drive"

Not to be rude, but for that matter, why can't God be a rock, my computer or one of the Beatles? At a certain point people who argue for a God previously not imagined in one of the endless religions just sound like they really really want God to be real, no matter what it is.

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:29 pm

Oh help...................... there is an explanation for the problem of how god came to exist, and at the same time always is was and has been....and why therefor he is "limited".

its ermmmmm...very mathematical....and is also in accordance with the "hairier fringes of physics"...in fact if physics keeps developing as it is doing...it will complete a full circle and become philosophy again....

however if you want to explore the idea i can try to explain it....I'm not sure I fully understand the whole concept myself, so i may not get it entirely 100% correct, but I'm willing to have a go....

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:38 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

question Eil....why does the creator HAVE to be "unlimited", as opposed to just plain mind bogglingly powerful?

i find a creator that is of sufficient capacity to create the universe, yet not ALL knowing, and ALL powerful (not withstanding he/she/it is unlikely to be anything but the MOST powerful), tp be a far more logical proposition.

there is no law says the creator HAS to be all knowing and all powerful

an ALL knowing/all powerful deity would have no purpose...
no emotion
no passion
no "drive"

Not to be rude, but for that matter, why can't God be a rock, my computer or one of the Beatles? At a certain point people who argue for a God previously not imagined in one of the endless religions just sound like they really really want God to be real, no matter what it is.

because ben those items lack the necessary characteristics..

a rock cannot "create ...anything", of itself it is "created" and anything that issues from it is created by other forces
the same is true of your computer
Your "beatle" example is interesting...because
here we have a "creation", that of itself is greater than merely "a creation" ..because it CAN create something by its own works
this creation...this human...is part divine, part deity itself....and getting closer all the time
This is the "point" of the universe, the creator cannot "create an equal" since any creation is the lesser of creator/created, and is therefor slave to its creator.
however if a "creation" BECOMES, the equal of its creator...it is no longer slave to or beholden to....

that is OUR path...to become....more than we are now...

by Ben Reilly Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:42 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

question Eil....why does the creator HAVE to be "unlimited", as opposed to just plain mind bogglingly powerful?

i find a creator that is of sufficient capacity to create the universe, yet not ALL knowing, and ALL powerful (not withstanding he/she/it is unlikely to be anything but the MOST powerful), tp be a far more logical proposition.

there is no law says the creator HAS to be all knowing and all powerful

an ALL knowing/all powerful deity would have no purpose...
no emotion
no passion
no "drive"

Not to be rude, but for that matter, why can't God be a rock, my computer or one of the Beatles? At a certain point people who argue for a God previously not imagined in one of the endless religions just sound like they really really want God to be real, no matter what it is.

because ben those items lack the necessary characteristics..

a rock cannot "create ...anything", of itself it is "created" and anything that issues from it is created by other forces
the same is true of your computer
Your "beatle" example is interesting...because
here we have a "creation", that of itself is greater than merely "a creation" ..because it CAN create something by its own works
this creation...this human...is part divine, part deity itself....and getting closer all the time
This is the "point" of the universe, the creator cannot "create an equal" since any creation is the lesser of creator/created, and is therefor slave to its creator.
however if a "creation" BECOMES, the equal of its creator...it is no longer slave to or beholden to....

that is OUR path...to become....more than we are now...

Ah, it's all such bollocks, far simpler if you just accept them all as allegories if you ask me. We're already talking about a God that's not all-powerful, not a creator, not all-knowing, etc., I don't see why we don't just take it all the way and worship Steve the Intergalactic Fruit Bat or something else nonsensical.

In fact, as nonsensical as the world is, worshiping nonsense might be the only thing that makes sense in the first place!

On that note:

http://www.discordian.com/

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:44 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

because ben those items lack the necessary characteristics..

a rock cannot "create ...anything", of itself it is "created" and anything that issues from it is created by other forces
the same is true of your computer
Your "beatle" example is interesting...because
here we have a "creation", that of itself is greater than merely "a creation" ..because it CAN create something by its own works
this creation...this human...is part divine, part deity itself....and getting closer all the time
This is the "point" of the universe, the creator cannot "create an equal" since any creation is the lesser of creator/created, and is therefor slave to its creator.
however if a "creation" BECOMES, the equal of its creator...it is no longer slave to or beholden to....

that is OUR path...to become....more than we are now...

Ah, it's all such bollocks, far simpler if you just accept them all as allegories if you ask me. We're already talking about a God that's not all-powerful, not a creator, not all-knowing, etc., I don't see why we don't just take it all the way and worship Steve the Intergalactic Fruit Bat or something else nonsensical.

In fact, as nonsensical as the world is, worshiping nonsense might be the only thing that makes sense in the first place!

On that note:

http://www.discordian.com/

/////////////////// Question

//////////////////////////////////////////

by Ben Reilly Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:47 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

because ben those items lack the necessary characteristics..

a rock cannot "create ...anything", of itself it is "created" and anything that issues from it is created by other forces
the same is true of your computer
Your "beatle" example is interesting...because
here we have a "creation", that of itself is greater than merely "a creation" ..because it CAN create something by its own works
this creation...this human...is part divine, part deity itself....and getting closer all the time
This is the "point" of the universe, the creator cannot "create an equal" since any creation is the lesser of creator/created, and is therefor slave to its creator.
however if a "creation" BECOMES, the equal of its creator...it is no longer slave to or beholden to....

that is OUR path...to become....more than we are now...

Ah, it's all such bollocks, far simpler if you just accept them all as allegories if you ask me. We're already talking about a God that's not all-powerful, not a creator, not all-knowing, etc., I don't see why we don't just take it all the way and worship Steve the Intergalactic Fruit Bat or something else nonsensical.

In fact, as nonsensical as the world is, worshiping nonsense might be the only thing that makes sense in the first place!

On that note:

http://www.discordian.com/

/////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////

Ah, excuse please? Baking powder?

by Guest Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:59 pm

why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:03 am

victorisnotamused wrote:why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

..you canny force folk to believe in what they can't see Vicitor!

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:05 am

who pulled your chain???

i'm not asking anyone to believe in anything.....

I'm looking for philosophy.....which is probably beyond you Evil or Very Mad

by Ben Reilly Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:05 am

victorisnotamused wrote:why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

Wow, I was referring only to the fact that eddie had said previously that God didn't have to be a creator.

Otherwise, I'm very sorry that I seem unable to mentally ascend to your logic and will look to right my ways immediately ...

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:09 am

victorisnotamused wrote:who pulled your chain???

i'm not asking anyone to believe in anything.....

I'm looking for philosophy.....which is probably beyond you

Your correct Victor, stuff like that bores me to tears , I live for now and I've also never seen signs of any God..

Buy yourself a classic car chief, the rewards are brilliant Victor, the car will love you back more than any figment of the imagination ...my dad has an old Vauxhall Velix. Smile

..vroom vroom Smile

Your gonna be hanging around forever waiting on the God Dude Twisted Evil

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:10 am

I don't think we will be waiting all that much longer to ne honest... Smile

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:10 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

Wow, I was referring only to the fact that eddie had said previously that God didn't have to be a creator.

Otherwise, I'm very sorry that I seem unable to mentally ascend to your logic and will look to right my ways immediately ...

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:12 am

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:I don't think we will be waiting all that much longer to ne honest...

Is God coming oot to play soon Favva? Laughing

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:15 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

Wow, I was referring only to the fact that eddie had said previously that God didn't have to be a creator.

Hmmm...well....there is a point to be had in that...who was it who said any sufficiently advanced technology would seem as "magic" to us"
So given the appearence of a being with sufficiently advanced technology it is reasonable that some people would consider him/her/it to be a "god". That of course doesnt make it so....It depends on your "personal definition" of a god i would suppose. i am positing that the title "god" would in reality be only applicable to the entity that created the universe.(does that raise the prospect of "multiple" gods if it is ever confimed that there are indeed multiple universes?)

Otherwise, I'm very sorry that I seem unable to mentally ascend to your logic and will look to right my ways immediately ...

So you should be......

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:16 am

Joy Division wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:who pulled your chain???

i'm not asking anyone to believe in anything.....

I'm looking for philosophy.....which is probably beyond you

Your correct Victor, stuff like that bores me to tears , I live for now and I've also never seen signs of any God..

Buy yourself a classic car chief, the rewards are brilliant Victor, the car will love you back more than any figment of the imagination ...my dad has an old Vauxhall Velix.

..vroom vroom

Your gonna be hanging around forever waiting on the God Dude

why would I wait on him/her/it?

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:18 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

Your correct Victor, stuff like that bores me to tears , I live for now and I've also never seen signs of any God..

Buy yourself a classic car chief, the rewards are brilliant Victor, the car will love you back more than any figment of the imagination ...my dad has an old Vauxhall Velix.

..vroom vroom

Your gonna be hanging around forever waiting on the God Dude

why would I wait on him/her/it?

...well, maybe God's good deeds/miracles, or some kind of reward in the afterlife?

Perhaps it just makes one feel better people for having faith in something they can't see?...

by Ben Reilly Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:23 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:why not a creator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEPARATE TO THE ABOVE

you know what ben...its like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick...

I post to invite debate and get ??? "quote" ...its all bollocks...

if thats what is to be expected from the one who complains that he wants this place to be a place for discussion etc, then I may as well go back to having a punch up with didge, ragga ,and catman

It has to be arrogance in the extreme to show such contempt for serious debate... I can only refer you to the thread on the arrogance of the athiest.

Wow, I was referring only to the fact that eddie had said previously that God didn't have to be a creator.

Hmmm...well....there is a point to be had in that...who was it who said any sufficiently advanced technology would seem as "magic" to us"
So given the appearence of a being with sufficiently advanced technology it is reasonable that some people would consider him/her/it to be a "god". That of course doesnt make it so....It depends on your "personal definition" of a god i would suppose. i am positing that the title "god" would in reality be only applicable to the entity that created the universe.(does that raise the prospect of "multiple" gods if it is ever confimed that there are indeed multiple universes?)

Otherwise, I'm very sorry that I seem unable to mentally ascend to your logic and will look to right my ways immediately ...

So you should be......

My bad, it was Veya who said gods don't have to be creators, not eddie.

My point is that if we're going to make God into whatever we want he/she/it/them to be ... then why don't we just admit we're making it up in the first place?

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:24 am

DURRRRR...have you actually read any of my posts on these matters?? ever???
because IF you had you would realise that you have just posted about a god I dont acknowledge
WHY...are you stuck with the abrahamic belief systems?

try working through this thread and reading what I have posted...

Aint no use waiting for a "sign" from a god thats just said "there ya go...here's a universe...now catch me up"

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:30 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

So you should be......

My bad, it was Veya who said gods don't have to be creators, not eddie.

My point is that if we're going to make God into whatever we want he/she/it/them to be ... then why don't we just admit we're making it up in the first place?

In which case...what point philosophy??
the athiest would say "this is all a random accident"
why not admit defeat right there and stop thinking?
there is no "proof" its all a cosmic fart in a collander
there is no "proof" of a god
there are poor philosophical grounds for the cosmic fart
there are interesting, if not defacto good philosophical grounds for contemplating the possibility of a deity at work

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:31 am

We are our own God, the spark of energy inside us that makes us all unique and links us to the universe is the real spirituality. When you taste an apple or listen to the sea, when you hold someone in your arms and the link between you is unexplainable, that is the spirit within you. The only person you answer to is yourself, whether you are doing your best to help the world not hinder it, whether you can empathise, whether you can love, thats your spirit that joins the universal spirit (energy) when you go. I've watched it go, I've seen a person become a shell, their energy flown. Our bodies are chrysalis for the butterfly of our id, which never dies. It can't, energy is permanent. All we need to do is make sure our time here is as productive as we can make it (and I'm not referring to work), that we have done all that we can while we can.

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:34 am

Sassy wrote:We are our own God, the spark of energy inside us that makes us all unique and links us to the universe is the real spirituality. When you taste an apple or listen to the sea, when you hold someone in your arms and the link between you is unexplainable, that is the spirit within you. The only person you answer to is yourself, whether you are doing your best to help the world not hinder it, whether you can empathise, whether you can love, thats your spirit that joins the universal spirit (energy) when you go. I've watched it go, I've seen a person become a shell, their energy flown. Our bodies are chrysalis for the butterfly of our id, which never dies. It can't, energy is permanent. All we need to do is make sure our time here is as productive as we can make it (and I'm not referring to work), that we have done all that we can while we can.

lol we are so much of a god, we cannot control a single thing, we know nothing...thats a very limited god...lol

all actions have consequences we see that every day so how can we only answer to ourselves, thats just stupid...

and what is productive, that would be different to every person..lol

i love the bs... Smile

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:34 am

Sassy wrote:We are our own God, the spark of energy inside us that makes us all unique and links us to the universe is the real spirituality. When you taste an apple or listen to the sea, when you hold someone in your arms and the link between you is unexplainable, that is the spirit within you. The only person you answer to is yourself, whether you are doing your best to help the world not hinder it, whether you can empathise, whether you can love, thats your spirit that joins the universal spirit (energy) when you go. I've watched it go, I've seen a person become a shell, their energy flown. Our bodies are chrysalis for the butterfly of our id, which never dies. It can't, energy is permanent. All we need to do is make sure our time here is as productive as we can make it (and I'm not referring to work), that we have done all that we can while we can.

sassy, remind down the line to send you a philosophical discussion on this, and why I think you are so close to a truth here.....

by Guest Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:35 am

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:
Sassy wrote:We are our own God, the spark of energy inside us that makes us all unique and links us to the universe is the real spirituality. When you taste an apple or listen to the sea, when you hold someone in your arms and the link between you is unexplainable, that is the spirit within you. The only person you answer to is yourself, whether you are doing your best to help the world not hinder it, whether you can empathise, whether you can love, thats your spirit that joins the universal spirit (energy) when you go. I've watched it go, I've seen a person become a shell, their energy flown. Our bodies are chrysalis for the butterfly of our id, which never dies. It can't, energy is permanent. All we need to do is make sure our time here is as productive as we can make it (and I'm not referring to work), that we have done all that we can while we can.

lol we are so much of a god, we cannot control a single thing, we know nothing...thats a very limited god...lol

all actions have consequences we see that every day so how can we only answer to ourselves, thats just stupid...

and what is productive, that would be different to every person..lol

i love the bs...

Well you would know bs...you make most of it....

by Sponsored content