Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8890 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-16-2019 8:01 AM
144 online now:
candle2, RAZD (2 members, 142 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 847,559 Year: 2,596/19,786 Month: 678/1,918 Week: 266/266 Day: 3/35 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56
7
89
...
22NextFF
Author Topic:   Can You define God?
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 91 of 318 (675025)
10-05-2012 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Straggler
10-05-2012 6:51 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
I can't think of anything they all have in common except being creations of the Human mind. They tell us very little about GOD but much about man.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 6:51 AM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 9:08 AM jar has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 92 of 318 (675027)
10-05-2012 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by jar
10-05-2012 8:55 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
Well if they have nothing in common they wouldn't all, including GOD, fall under the category of gods would they?

They are all, including GOD, supernatural beings who control, create or personify some aspect of the world.

This GOD you speak of is a god right? Rather than a vegetable or an alcoholic drink or a sport or a type of accounting package or whatever else.

If GOD isn't a god then A) I'm not sure why you are mentioning him in this thread and B) You should consider calling him something more appropriate like "CHOCOLATE BAR" or whatever.....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 8:55 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 9:26 AM Straggler has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 93 of 318 (675028)
10-05-2012 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Straggler
10-05-2012 9:08 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
Of course they would simply because they were identified by a population as a God or god.

No, the GOD I mention as GOD is not really a God or a god.

As I said, the one thing they have in common is being Gods or gods, things we as humans have or can describe. Unfortunately, humans are limited by our hardware; we are natural critters and have no experience beyond the natural world. We have no means of testing or even describing anything except in terms of how we experience the natural world.

The issue as I have said many times in the past is one of specificity. If we consider a phrase like "Christian God" we can get some general agreement but no universal catholic (in the lower case sense) agreement. This appears to be true of all the various Gods.

Now when it comes to gods we find even greater specificity. We can describe Ganesha or Apollo or Thor in pretty great detail, outline their capabilities and limitations, describe their appearance, list their attributes. Very seldom are they a general or universal ultimate.

But GOD, if GOD exists is completely beyond anything we find in the Natural World. As long as we too are part of the Natural World we are limited.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 9:08 AM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Phat, posted 10-05-2012 10:04 AM jar has responded
 Message 98 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 11:42 AM jar has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12025
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 94 of 318 (675030)
10-05-2012 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by jar
10-05-2012 9:26 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
jar writes:

Now when it comes to gods we find even greater specificity. We can describe Ganesha or Apollo or Thor in pretty great detail, outline their capabilities and limitations, describe their appearance, list their attributes. Very seldom are they a general or universal ultimate.

But GOD, if GOD exists is completely beyond anything we find in the Natural World. As long as we too are part of the Natural World we are limited.

I agree with you that GOD,if GOD exists, is not a part of the natural world. But when I get specific and try and introduce Jesus the way many humans describe Him as---an envoy from GOD to man--you keep turning him back into a human and befuddling up the mess by not giving him dual attributes of divinity and humanity. In so doing, you also limit we humans to not being capable of being bestowed with any favor from GOD (If She sxists) and even going so far as to suggest that I should not expect such favor. My point is, whats worship even worth? I may as well be an atheist!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 9:26 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 10:07 AM Phat has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 95 of 318 (675031)
10-05-2012 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Phat
10-05-2012 10:04 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
That's fine, but be a good atheist.

Forget credit, merit badges, salvation, reward and just do what's right.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Phat, posted 10-05-2012 10:04 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Phat, posted 10-05-2012 10:12 AM jar has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12025
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 96 of 318 (675032)
10-05-2012 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by jar
10-05-2012 10:07 AM


Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
jar writes:

Forget credit, merit badges, salvation, reward and just do what's right.

When I do, the old questions still pop up.
  • Why is life not always fair? Shouldn't there be justice? Why are humans so intrinsically selfish? If a man does whats good and finds others cheating or being unfairly prosperous, how can we live with the unfairness?

    I find that I want someone in charge to essentially favor me and give me an equalizing edge.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 95 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 10:07 AM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 97 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 10:21 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
  • jar
    Member
    Posts: 30934
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 97 of 318 (675033)
    10-05-2012 10:21 AM
    Reply to: Message 96 by Phat
    10-05-2012 10:12 AM


    Re: To define God is to define an Ultimate
    Change the questions.

    Why are YOU not always fair? How can YOU promote justice? Why are YOU so selfish?


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 96 by Phat, posted 10-05-2012 10:12 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    Straggler
    Member
    Posts: 10284
    From: London England
    Joined: 09-30-2006
    Member Rating: 3.6


    Message 98 of 318 (675041)
    10-05-2012 11:42 AM
    Reply to: Message 93 by jar
    10-05-2012 9:26 AM


    GOD is a god
    jar writes:

    No, the GOD I mention as GOD is not really a God or a god.

    Huh? So As a self proclaimed believer that GOD is the creator of all that is seen an unseen you are actually an atheist are you? And if GOD isnt a god why on earth are you even raising GOD in a thread about defining the term god..?

    It is just an exercise in definitional nonsensicalness to say that GOD isnt a god.

    Ive provided you with a definition of the term god and whilst this GOD concept you talk about is pretty vague it quite obviously meets the criteria of coming under that label.

    If you don't like my definition can you provide a different one and explain how this GOD thing you speak of fails to qualify?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 93 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 9:26 AM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 99 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 11:47 AM Straggler has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30934
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 99 of 318 (675043)
    10-05-2012 11:47 AM
    Reply to: Message 98 by Straggler
    10-05-2012 11:42 AM


    GOD is NOT a god
    No, I am not an atheist.

    I've explained my position before to you but I'm willing to yet again if it is necessary.


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 98 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 11:42 AM Straggler has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 100 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 11:54 AM jar has responded

      
    Straggler
    Member
    Posts: 10284
    From: London England
    Joined: 09-30-2006
    Member Rating: 3.6


    Message 100 of 318 (675045)
    10-05-2012 11:54 AM
    Reply to: Message 99 by jar
    10-05-2012 11:47 AM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    Go on then. Provide the definition of "god" you are applying. Then explain to me how GOD isn't a god by this definition.

    And then explain how you can qualify as a theist without believing in any god(s)

    I'm intrigued....


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 99 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 11:47 AM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 101 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 12:16 PM Straggler has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30934
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 101 of 318 (675048)
    10-05-2012 12:16 PM
    Reply to: Message 100 by Straggler
    10-05-2012 11:54 AM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    Like I said, I have no problem repeating myself.

    There are three words that are not synonymous, GOD, God and god.

    As I pointed out in Message 93

    quote:
    Of course they would simply because they were identified by a population as a God or god.

    No, the GOD I mention as GOD is not really a God or a god.

    As I said, the one thing they have in common is being Gods or gods, things we as humans have or can describe. Unfortunately, humans are limited by our hardware; we are natural critters and have no experience beyond the natural world. We have no means of testing or even describing anything except in terms of how we experience the natural world.

    The issue as I have said many times in the past is one of specificity. If we consider a phrase like "Christian God" we can get some general agreement but no universal catholic (in the lower case sense) agreement. This appears to be true of all the various Gods.

    Now when it comes to gods we find even greater specificity. We can describe Ganesha or Apollo or Thor in pretty great detail, outline their capabilities and limitations, describe their appearance, list their attributes. Very seldom are they a general or universal ultimate.

    But GOD, if GOD exists is completely beyond anything we find in the Natural World. As long as we too are part of the Natural World we are limited.


    God(s) and god(s) are human constructs.

    The have the attributes we as humans assign to them.

    God(s) are less specific than god(s) as I pointed out.

    GOD though, if GOD exists is beyond human understanding. Humans are limited to understanding or experiencing only that which is natural.

    Edited by jar, : fix link to previous post


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 100 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 11:54 AM Straggler has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 102 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 12:42 PM jar has responded

      
    Straggler
    Member
    Posts: 10284
    From: London England
    Joined: 09-30-2006
    Member Rating: 3.6


    Message 102 of 318 (675051)
    10-05-2012 12:42 PM
    Reply to: Message 101 by jar
    10-05-2012 12:16 PM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    Simply repeating your previous post in this thread is not very helpful.

    Let's start at the beginning - What definition of the term "god" are you applying such that this GOD you speak of doesn't qualify as a god?

    (that is after all the topic here)

    jar writes:

    Humans are limited to understanding or experiencing only that which is natural.

    I've never yet come across a god that isn't supernatural.

    jar writes:

    God(s) and god(s) are human constructs.

    In what sense is an unknowable GOD that is 'the creator of all that is seen and unseen' NOT a human construction? I mean if we have absolutely no way of knowing this thing then (even if by some fluke of chance it exists) it MUST be derived from human imagination. How could it possibly be otherwise?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 101 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 12:16 PM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 103 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 1:04 PM Straggler has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30934
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 103 of 318 (675055)
    10-05-2012 1:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 102 by Straggler
    10-05-2012 12:42 PM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    Let's start at the beginning - What definition of the term "god" are you applying such that this GOD you speak of doesn't qualify as a god?

    And I answered that in Message 101 as well as many, many, many other places.

    God(s) and god(s) are human constructs.

    I've never yet come across a god that isn't supernatural.

    I seriously doubt that you have ever come across anything that is actually supernatural or that you could recognize such a thing if you did come across it as long as you are human.

    In what sense is an unknowable GOD that is 'the creator of all that is seen and unseen' NOT a human construction?

    It might actually exist and I believe that it does.

    It really is that simple as I have explained to you numerous times.


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 102 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 12:42 PM Straggler has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 104 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 1:17 PM jar has responded

      
    Straggler
    Member
    Posts: 10284
    From: London England
    Joined: 09-30-2006
    Member Rating: 3.6


    Message 104 of 318 (675058)
    10-05-2012 1:17 PM
    Reply to: Message 103 by jar
    10-05-2012 1:04 PM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    Straggler writes:

    Let's start at the beginning - What definition of the term "god" are you applying such that this GOD you speak of doesn't qualify as a god?

    jar writes:

    And I answered that in Message 101 as well as many, many, many other places.

    And I told you that repeating yourself isn't the same as clarifying your position.

    jar writes:

    God(s) and god(s) are human constructs.

    Yet there are lots of human constructions which aren't gods (e.g. hobbits). So try again. What definition of the term "god" are you applying such that this GOD you speak of doesn't qualify as a god?

    This is, after all, the topic here.

    Straggler writes:

    I've never yet come across a god that isn't supernatural.

    jar writes:

    I seriously doubt that you have ever come across anything that is actually supernatural or that you could recognize such a thing if you did come across it as long as you are human.

    Yet all god concepts are supernatural. It's part of what qualifies them as gods. By definition.

    Straggler writes:

    In what sense is an unknowable GOD that is 'the creator of all that is seen and unseen' NOT a human construction?

    jar writes:

    It might actually exist and I believe that it does.

    Whether by some fluke of chance it exists or not this GOD you speak of is necessarily a human construction because you have defined it as being completely unknowable to humans.

    How can the concept of something that is completely unknowable to humans be derived from anywhere other than human imagination?

    jar writes:

    It really is that simple as I have explained to you numerous times.

    Ditto.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 103 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 1:04 PM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 105 by jar, posted 10-05-2012 1:30 PM Straggler has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 30934
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 105 of 318 (675061)
    10-05-2012 1:30 PM
    Reply to: Message 104 by Straggler
    10-05-2012 1:17 PM


    Re: GOD is NOT a god
    If GOD exists then it is not a human construct.

    All God(s) and god(s) are just human constructs. They are different from hobbits because humans designated them a God(s) or god(s).

    It really is that simple.


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 104 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 1:17 PM Straggler has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 106 by Straggler, posted 10-05-2012 1:42 PM jar has responded

      
    Prev1
    ...
    56
    7
    89
    ...
    22NextFF
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019