Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
23 online now:
Faith, LamarkNewAge (2 members, 21 visitors)
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,719 Year: 18,755/19,786 Month: 1,175/1,705 Week: 427/518 Day: 45/58 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can You define God?
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 246 of 318 (675758)
10-15-2012 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by jar
10-15-2012 9:47 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
Can you tell us what definition you are using of the term "supernatural"...?

Can you explain how you know that this unknowable GOD is supernatural?

Can you explain why something (e.g Voldermort, demons, Thor etc.) cannot be both fictional/non-existent and defined as supernatural?

jar writes:

And again, I have not insisted any knowledge of GOD can only come after death, rather I have consistently said that I see no way I can gain actual knowledge while I am still alive of anything supernatural.

Many have considered sleep (i.e. dreams) or waking trances as methods of interracting with the supernatural. Can you explain why you think death is any more or less likely to provide such knowledge than dreams or waking visions or whatever?

jar writes:

I don't know what conceptual baggage you carry but that is irrelevant to my beliefs or position anyway.

ALL existing terms have conceptual baggage. The reason you call the object of your belief GOD (and yourself a theist) rather than BILBO or GANDALF or whatever is because you are imbuing this thing you speak of with certain very human-construct-godly characteristics.

If you weren't why would this GOD thing be of any relevance at all in a thread titled "Can You define God?"....

To suggest that your terminology is free from cultural baggage is simply an act of gross denial on your part.

Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by jar, posted 10-15-2012 9:47 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by jar, posted 10-15-2012 5:59 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 248 of 318 (675806)
10-16-2012 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by jar
10-15-2012 5:59 PM


Re: What Is GOD?
jar writes:

I have repeatedly said that anything can be asserted to be supernatural but that I do not see anyway to actually determine if something is supernatural.

This of course depends what you mean by 'supernatural'. I have already told you that we can simply examine the entity/concept in question and compare it's attributes to the common definition of supernatural:

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.


This is how demons and Voldermort and Thor and suchlike are commonly defined as supernatural entities regardless of whether they actually exist or not. But you don't like that because it doesn't fit in with the rest of your definition-based pet theory.....

jar writes:

I define and used those terms, GOD, God and god for the exact reason of the nuance.

Then in the name of "nuance" could you tell us what definition of 'supernatural' you are applying as well?

jar writes:

Nor have I said that my terminology is free of cultural baggage, I simply have not speculated on what cultural baggage you carry.

It's your position, your personalised definitions and your conflation of terminology. So it's your conceptual baggage that is relevant here. And it is very clear that you are flip-flopping at will between two contradictory uses of the term "GOD".

The first use of "GOD" is the blank canvas. The conceptless-concept. The thing without attributes. The term that lacks any definition at all. The term that is literally meaningless. This we can dismiss as incoherent, absurd and lacking in any cogency.

The second is the (conceptually baggaged) use of the term "GOD" to describe something that possess enough godly attributes to qualify believers in it as theists and to which all those other human-construct-gods and Gods can be considered "approximations" (your word). But upon examination this non-god necessarily suffers from all the same human-construct criticisms as those other entities you dismiss as human constructs.

It would be very helpful if in future whenever you use the term "GOD" (whether in this thread or any other) you make clear which of these two meanings you are invoking. It would also help if you stopped flip-flopping between the two meanings.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by jar, posted 10-15-2012 5:59 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 10:34 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 250 of 318 (675836)
10-16-2012 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by jar
10-16-2012 10:34 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
jar writes:

You give the definitions:

Yeah. You should try it sometime.....

You aren't going to supply us with the definition of supernatural you are applying are you?

Jar - What do you mean by supernatural?

jar writes:

The issue is whether or not I could actually identify something supernatural.

If that is the issue the obvious question to ask is how you know that GOD is supernatural. How do you know GOD is supernatural?

As a point of comparison - The way we know that Voldermort, Thor, demons etc. etc. are supernatural is because we have defined them as being 'unexplainable by natural law'. We have in effect defined them as being "magical".

Are you simply defining GOD as "magical" too?

jar writes:

Those definitions don't describe the supernatural object, only the limited understanding of humans.

What supernatural object? And how do you know this object is supernatural?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 10:34 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 1:19 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 252 of 318 (675842)
10-16-2012 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by jar
10-16-2012 1:19 PM


Re: What Is GOD?
Can you please tell us what definition of 'supernatural' you are applying?

jar writes:

I don't know GOD is supernatural and I don't know any way I could actually test something to determine if it was supernatural.

So GOD might not be supernatural then?

jar previously 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.

How do you know GOD is supernatural?

As a point of comparison - The way we know that Voldermort, Thor, demons etc. etc. are supernatural is because we have defined them as being 'unexplainable by natural law'. We have in effect defined them as being "magical".

It very much looks like you are you simply defining GOD as "magical" too. Is this the case?

jar writes:

We can test some things and determine they are NOT supernatural. For example, Voldemort is a character in a fiction story.

By conventional definition Voldermort is both fictional and supernatural. What definition of 'supernatural' are you applying such that the term only applies to things that are real?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 1:19 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 1:48 PM Straggler has responded
 Message 254 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-16-2012 2:10 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 258 of 318 (675991)
10-18-2012 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by jar
10-16-2012 1:48 PM


Re: What Is GOD?
When you assert that 'GOD is supernatural' you have absolutely no idea at all what you mean do you?

It is (to use your phrase) a word salad in the most literal sense. Just a combination of definition-less words to which people can apply whatever meaning they are humanly-comfortable with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by jar, posted 10-16-2012 1:48 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 9:56 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 259 of 318 (675993)
10-18-2012 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Thugpreacha
10-16-2012 2:10 PM


BLOP is hubbuluteral
If the terms "GOD" and "supernatural" are literally definitionless then saying something like "GOD is supernatural" has no more meaning than saying "BLOP is hubbuluteral".

So I put it to you that - BLOP is hubbuluteral.

What do you think about that?

Phat writes:

If concept X is devoid of attribute and definition, (in which case the topic would be Can You Define X) we then have a discussion which can go several ways.

If it has no meaning then it can't go anywhere. It's like saying BLOP is hubbuluteral. It's meaningless incoherent nonsense.

Phat writes:

If discussing it with a proponent of X...

How can one be a proponent of X unless they have an idea of what X is? I put it to you that: BLOP is hubbuluteral. I propose this. I am a proponent of this statement.

What is your response?

Phat writes:

...one who wishes X to have a definition

X either has a definition of it doesn't. Which is it? Is X more defined than BLOP?

Phat writes:

...;we can prove to them that X has no definition

How do you prove something has no definition?

Phat writes:

..but even by discussing X, we have given it an attribute...namely a proposal for X to exist or a proposal for x not to exist.

It doesn't even make any sense to ask if X exists unless X is defined as something which can exist. So I ask you - Does BLOP exist?

Phat writes:

Thus, IF X exists is a valid premise, no?

If X is literally definitionless then asking if X exists is no different to asking if BLOP exists.

Phat writes:

Additionally, you may see no point to discussing concept X, yet jar or I may in fact see a point to discussing it.

The two of you are labelling X=GOD and imbuing this supposedly definitionless and attributeless thing with all sorts of shared cultural characteristsics that by any conventional definition qualify it as a 'god'.

Only when implicitly defined in this way does talking about it make any sense whatsoever.

But when confronted with the flaws in this you both retreat back to the definitionless, attributeless concept and start speaking gibberish that is equivalent to discussing if BLOP exists or if BLOP is hubbuluteral.

Take away the shared cultural meaning implict in the terms "GOD" and "supernatural" and any conversation using these terms becomes utterly meaningless.

Phat writes:

Further, since all three of us are in this discussion, as well as others, the idea that it is moot to discuss GOD seems irrelevant.

If the terms "GOD" and "supernatural" are literally definitionless then saying something like "GOD is supernatural" has no more meaning than saying "BLOP is hubbuluteral".

So I put it to you that - BLOP is hubbuluteral. What is your response?

Of course the reason we can talk about GOD in a thread that asks 'Can you Define God?" is because this term GOD you use has all sorts of godly connotations and meaning that are implicit regardless of how much you and jar insist otherwise.

The problem you have is that as soon as you take away this implicit meaning you literally might as well be talking about BLOP.

Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-16-2012 2:10 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:27 AM Straggler has responded
 Message 304 by Thugpreacha, posted 09-15-2017 11:56 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 261 of 318 (676000)
10-18-2012 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by jar
10-18-2012 9:56 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
Is GOD supernatural?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 9:56 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 10:23 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 263 of 318 (676003)
10-18-2012 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by jar
10-18-2012 10:23 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
jar writes:

GOD, if GOD exists will be supernatural.

How do you know this?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 10:23 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 10:42 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 266 of 318 (676013)
10-18-2012 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by jar
10-18-2012 10:42 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
Lots of other people believe that their god is genuinely supernatural too.

jar writes:

I do not KNOW that, I believe that.

It would help if you stopped asserting your irrational beliefs as if they were facts.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 10:42 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 11:31 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 268 of 318 (676016)
10-18-2012 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by jar
10-18-2012 11:31 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
Summary: GOD, and GOD alone, IS supernatural. Because jar says so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 11:31 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:46 AM Straggler has responded
 Message 274 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 11:59 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 270 of 318 (676020)
10-18-2012 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by Thugpreacha
10-18-2012 11:27 AM


Re: BLOP is hubbuluteral
Phat writes:

Start a thread on it.

But we have this one.

Phat writes:

The reason we can talk about GOD,BLOP,or X is that one of us put it out there.

Put what out there? A combination of letters that literally has no conceptual definition or meaning? Something which is literally meaningless.

Phat writes:

So does this mean that the Final answer is that NO, we cannot define GOD?

The final conclusion is that in the absence of any conceptual definition or meaning any use of the term GOD is incoherent and lacking in cogency. Stating belief in a non-concept is just absurd. The only sane response to such a thing is ignosticism.

However when people use this term they are usually implicitly referring to something that is a supernatural, conscious being that is responsible for the creation or overseeing of some aspect of reality. Something like the following dictionary definition:

quote:
1. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) a supernatural being, who is worshipped as the controller of some part of the universe or some aspect of life in the world or is the personification of some force Related adj divine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:27 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:54 AM Straggler has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 271 of 318 (676021)
10-18-2012 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Thugpreacha
10-18-2012 11:46 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
How do you know BLOP alone IS hubuluteral?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:46 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:55 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 275 of 318 (676025)
10-18-2012 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by jar
10-18-2012 11:59 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
Either things need to be tested to qualify as supernatural. Or they can simply be defined as being supernatural.

We know that Voldermort, Thor, demons etc. etc. are supernatural because we have defined them as being 'unexplainable by natural law'. We have in effect defined them as being "magical".

Your insistence that GOD (and GOD alone) qualifies as supernatural is just another example of your self-serving definitions. It is a way of special pleading the object of your own belief as supernatural by definition, whilst insisting that everything else needs to be tested.

jar writes:

If you can present some evidence of anything that really is supernatural then we can test your assertion to see if it holds up to examination.

Have you tested GOD?

jar writes:

What I have said is "GOD, if GOD exists, will be supernatural."

And I have asked how you know this? Are you just asserting your irrational beliefs as facts again?

Please stop doing that.....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 11:59 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by jar, posted 10-18-2012 12:32 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 276 of 318 (676026)
10-18-2012 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Thugpreacha
10-18-2012 11:55 AM


Re: What Is GOD?
I'm ignostic towards that absurdly, incoherent and idiotic question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 11:55 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 12:31 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 279 of 318 (676042)
10-18-2012 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Thugpreacha
10-18-2012 12:31 PM


Re: What Is GOD?
Phat writes:

Its not absurd at all. YOU are the one who proposed it, after all.

As an example of absurdity. Here is the question again. Is BLOP hubuluteral?

BLOP and hubuluteral are terms that have no definition or attributes. They are literally meaningless. So how would you answer that question?

Phat writes:

How do you know that alone(All One) is?

I have no idea what you are talking about. The question is literally gibberish.

Phat writes:

So all we need do is define alone.

Look up alone in a dictionary.

Phat writes:

Then we need to ask how we know that it is

What is what?

We have descended into absurdity again.....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-18-2012 12:31 PM Thugpreacha has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019