Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 87 (8891 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-20-2019 9:08 PM
161 online now:
marc9000, Meddle, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (4 members, 157 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 847,739 Year: 2,776/19,786 Month: 858/1,918 Week: 145/301 Day: 28/35 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
22Next
Author Topic:   Can You define God?
onifre
Member (Idle past 998 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 196 of 318 (675461)
10-11-2012 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Phat
10-11-2012 1:42 AM


Re: Right or Wrong
When it comes to subjective beliefs, there is no absolute right or wrong involved.

I didn't bring up the right or wrong scenario, jar did. I'm just clearing up that fact that he hasn't presented anything that can be considered right or wrong. It's just a mess of words that can barely be understood, and clearly contradict themselves.

If you have a set of beliefs that you're trying to convey to someone at the very least they should make sense.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Phat, posted 10-11-2012 1:42 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 998 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 197 of 318 (675462)
10-11-2012 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by jar
10-11-2012 10:24 AM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
The answer is the difference between actually being the thing and simply being asserted to be the thing

But you are not showing the distinction between your method of arriving at your assertion: GOD and the method used to arrive at the other assertions: God, god/s - they are ALL human constructs and caricatures in an attempt to explain the unexplainable.

All the Gods and gods are just that, human attempts to explain the unexplainable.

But GOD, if GOD exists, would be the reality.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't get how you changing the way you spell GOD from God and gods makes any difference. You all arrive at your assertions in the same way, guessing.

Saying "GOD, if GOD exists, would be reality" is as meaningless as saying "God created everything we can see and not see."

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 10:24 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:20 PM onifre has responded

    
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 198 of 318 (675464)
10-11-2012 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by jar
10-11-2012 12:27 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
The clue is in the definition of supernatural. I suggest you look it up. But in case you can't for some reason I'll lend you a hand:

quote:
1.of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to God or a deity.

Do you now understand why Voldermort qualifies as supernatural but Miss Marple (for example) doesn't?

Both are fictional but only one is supernatural.

If you disagree could you reveal what definition of supernatural it is you are applying here?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 12:27 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:24 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(2)
Message 199 of 318 (675467)
10-11-2012 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by Phat
10-11-2012 12:28 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
Phat writes:

Why not?

Well he can in the sense that nobody can stop him doing it. But if he wants to actually communicate with other people they have to know what the hell he is talking about. And given that the thing he believes in is apparently "unknowable" it is debatable (to say the least) that he knows what he is talking about himself, never mind when he is expressing these thoughts to anyone else.

In truth I am rapidly beginning to think that jar has created such a tangled web of inter-dependent personal definitions that coherent conversation with him is nothing but superficially possible.

A Christian who thinks the Christian god is a fabrication. A theist who believes in a supernatural entity that isn't a god. Definitions of of god, God and GOD that are nothing other than personal beliefs and assumptions imposed in the form of something else. A use of the term "supernatural" that apparently only applies to this GOD that really exists as opposed to those other non-supernatural gods.....etc.

The guy is practically talking in tongues whilst approximating English closely enough to make superficial sense.

Phat writes:

He only asserts possible existence, anyway.

He defines his genuinely supernatural GOD as that which is real rather than being one of those other made-up-non-supernatural-gods.

But why is this concept worthy of any more merit, consideration or credence than any "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and put forward as real?

Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Phat, posted 10-11-2012 12:28 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:27 PM Straggler has responded

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


Message 200 of 318 (675494)
10-11-2012 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by onifre
10-11-2012 2:09 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
But I did show my method, I defined the three terms.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by onifre, posted 10-11-2012 2:09 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by onifre, posted 10-11-2012 6:23 PM jar has responded

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


Message 201 of 318 (675495)
10-11-2012 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Straggler
10-11-2012 2:13 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
The clue is also pretty worthless.

Yes, we can assert that something is supernatural but what does that have to do with whether or not the thing is supernatural?

I have never said that humans can't make stuff up.

I've also covered why I can't define something as supernatural; I'm human, I don't know or even have a clue how I could ever determine that something was actually supernatural.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 2:13 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 7:26 PM jar has responded

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


(1)
Message 202 of 318 (675496)
10-11-2012 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Straggler
10-11-2012 2:28 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
But why is this concept worthy of any more merit, consideration or credence than any "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and put forward as real?

But I have never suggested that I think you should consider my posts as "worthy of any more merit, consideration or credence than any "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and put forward as real".

But you are useful as a tool to allow me to post my beliefs.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 2:28 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 7:32 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 998 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 203 of 318 (675501)
10-11-2012 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by jar
10-11-2012 4:20 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
But I did show my method, I defined the three terms.

I know. Point is you don't show a distinction between the methods of arriving at the assertions.

If you want to show a clear distinction bewteen GOD, God and gods then you'll have to show how you arrive at that distinction with some separate type of method.

You made the claim God and gods are assertions to explain the unexplainable and GOD was different. How did you arrive at that and how is it different from how others arrived at God and gods?

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:20 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 7:12 PM onifre has not yet responded

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


Message 204 of 318 (675505)
10-11-2012 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by onifre
10-11-2012 6:23 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
But I have explained how I came up with the nuance; I looked at the God(s) and god(s) that humans have created over the years and I found that there were stages that basically involved the detail of the descriptions.

The gods seem to be pretty well defined, for example the god found in the early Genesis stories is very human, looks human walks around, talks and eats, wrestles with humans and even when he cheats cannot overcome the human.

At the next level we find the "Christian God" as an example, one that is only vaguely defined, formless incorporating paradoxes like the Trinity.

But they were all based on things humans were familiar with whether we were talking about Thor or Coyote or Nun or Ganesha.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by onifre, posted 10-11-2012 6:23 PM onifre has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 7:34 PM jar has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 205 of 318 (675506)
10-11-2012 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by jar
10-11-2012 4:24 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
jar writes:

Yes, we can assert that something is supernatural but what does that have to do with whether or not the thing is supernatural?

Says the man who asserts that the object of his own belief "IS supernatural...."

jar writes:

GOD, if GOD exists would really be supernatural, not because you or I believe or assert or claim that it is supernatural but rather because it IS supernatural.

In what sense is your conclusion here anything other than an assertion?

jar writes:

I have never said that humans can't make stuff up.

The obvious conclusion here is that this is exactly what you are doing. You are making up god(s). Then you are making up definitions to distinguish the object of your belief from all those other false-gods.

Straggler writes:

The clue is in the definition of supernatural.

jar writes:

The clue is also pretty worthless.

How can the definition of supernatural be worthless in assessing whether something (e.g. the fictional entity Voldermort) qualifies as supernatural?

What definition of supernatural are you applying such that GOD does qualify but Thor, Zeus and Voldermort don't?

Is this yet another case of you taking a commonly defined term and redefining it for your own purposes?

Dude you need to create your own dictionary of personal terminology.....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:24 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 7:39 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 206 of 318 (675507)
10-11-2012 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by jar
10-11-2012 4:27 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
Straggler writes:

But why is this concept worthy of any more merit, consideration or credence than any "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and put forward as real?

jar writes:

But I have never suggested that I think you should consider my posts as "worthy of any more merit, consideration or credence than any "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and put forward as real".

If you agree that there is no reasoned argument to give this GOD concept any more merit, consideration or credence than any other "unknowable" entity I can conceive of and that your only reason for doing so is your own personal irrational belief - Why are you arguing with me?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 4:27 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 207 of 318 (675509)
10-11-2012 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by jar
10-11-2012 7:12 PM


HOLD THE PRESS
Shock news!!!!

Theist concludes ALL other gods are false interpretations of the one true god he believes in!!!!!

How unoriginal.....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 7:12 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 7:39 PM Straggler has responded

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


Message 208 of 318 (675510)
10-11-2012 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by Straggler
10-11-2012 7:26 PM


Re: GOD is NOT a god
Well, I've answered all these questions many times in this thread but I don't mind trying yet again.

What I have posted in this thread is a factual representation of my beliefs and a response to the topic of whether or not God can be defined.

As I have said before, asserting that something is supernatural and the thing actually being supernatural are two entirely different things.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 7:26 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by Straggler, posted 10-12-2012 6:41 AM jar has acknowledged this reply

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


Message 209 of 318 (675511)
10-11-2012 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by Straggler
10-11-2012 7:34 PM


Re: HOLD THE PRESS
Please present evidence that I have ever made such a claim.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Straggler, posted 10-11-2012 7:34 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by Straggler, posted 10-12-2012 6:36 AM jar has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 210 of 318 (675525)
10-12-2012 6:36 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by jar
10-11-2012 7:39 PM


Re: HOLD THE PRESS
Sure. It's the map territory thing.

jar writes:

While GOD is the actuality, the reality (assuming that I am right and GOD does exist), God is a human creation, an attempt by humans to put into words their beliefs about GOD.

So we have - GOD is the reality. All those other gods/Gods are just flawed interpretations of GOD.

jar writes:

I have told you repeatedly that I believe GOD is the creator of all that is, seen or unseen.

So the object of your belief is the one true GOD. Not one of those other-human-construct-gods. Yours is the real deal. The truth upon which those other flawed interpretations are based.

In short - All those other gods are false interpretations of the one true god, sorry I mean GOD, that you believe in.....

Like I said - It's depressingly unoriginal of you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by jar, posted 10-11-2012 7:39 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by jar, posted 10-12-2012 9:57 AM Straggler has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
22Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019