God
- Auteur de la discussion user_1919
- Date de début
Subtle_Nod
Elfe Mécanique
- Inscrit
- 12/11/07
- Messages
- 258
BrainEater a dit:
Perfect knowledge and punishment?
He created you knowing that afterwards things would happen. His knowing of them before your birth makes them his wrong doings not yours.
You never quite answered that bit.
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
Subtle_Nod a dit:
There are no mistakes, just a few happy little accidents. - Bob Ross
Subtle_Nod
Elfe Mécanique
- Inscrit
- 12/11/07
- Messages
- 258
Forkbender a dit:
Rhetoric. Pretty words and all but it wouldn't even be an accident if God was all knowing.
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
Subtle_Nod a dit:
Subtle_Nod
Elfe Mécanique
- Inscrit
- 12/11/07
- Messages
- 258
Forkbender a dit:
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
We are building on your assumption that God does not have knowledge of the future. In my opinion this doesn't imply that there are 'mistakes', as the universe is then by definition without goal. By quoting Bob Ross I wasn't trying to make a point, btw, I just like the quote.
I think nobody here seriously believes in a punishing God, correct me if I'm wrong. You can try and have a religious argument with people who don't agree on the terms and definitions of the argument, but that's just a silly waste of time. You can try it elsewhere on some Christian Fundamentalist forum, but I guarantee that that is a waste of time as well.
Again, what God are you trying to prove does not exist?
I think nobody here seriously believes in a punishing God, correct me if I'm wrong. You can try and have a religious argument with people who don't agree on the terms and definitions of the argument, but that's just a silly waste of time. You can try it elsewhere on some Christian Fundamentalist forum, but I guarantee that that is a waste of time as well.
Again, what God are you trying to prove does not exist?
BrainEater
Banni
- Inscrit
- 21/7/07
- Messages
- 5 922
GOD a dit:
no i wanna 1) discuss about god
2) teach you about god
you can choose between one of the two for my intention to write in this thread
peace.
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
^Too much Alan Watts...
:lol:
:lol:
Subtle_Nod
Elfe Mécanique
- Inscrit
- 12/11/07
- Messages
- 258
GOD a dit:
I was providing the opposition with some words so that I may say how annoyed with them I am: I think I said: What gets me most is...
I don't feel I've been answered directly on what I was asking yet, but that's okay. If that is how the world is today, I'll see what tomorrow brings.
GOD
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 14/1/06
- Messages
- 14 944
I think we should be talking about what god is, if there is something we can call god and not picking up old , obviously false definitions of what god is , what we might call god and then dissproving them .
Probably it would be better to start from the beginning , a begining , and not from christian or other religeous dogma .
Is there more to life than meats the eye ? What is it ? How do we experience it ? How can we experience it ? How can we define it ? and ?????
Probably it would be better to start from the beginning , a begining , and not from christian or other religeous dogma .
Is there more to life than meats the eye ? What is it ? How do we experience it ? How can we experience it ? How can we define it ? and ?????
Subtle_Nod
Elfe Mécanique
- Inscrit
- 12/11/07
- Messages
- 258
GOD a dit:
I'm for that.
The earthly philosophy of Christianity is quite interesting and appliable for atheist or not, charity is a good way to live with each other, also I think that the Bible has interestin moral and philosophical thoughts (I am very fascinated by the Genesis)
But I agree with GOD (and as I think with other) that on a religious, non-earthly way, you can´t apply Christianity or any other religion at all. No Religion can bring you nearer to God than you yourself. Of course you can share theological opinions (monotheism e.g.) but Christianity as itself isn´t a way to God.
Now to my vision of God. I see God as the Ideal, Perfection, Chaos, the Ultimate, it is the thing we cannot reach but we all try to. In the Bible we are all images of God and so are we all the images of Perfection, but being only images, we can´t but we try to. Warning: I don´t mean a personification of Perfection nor do I mean something that thinks and influences our lives by force. I don´t know if my point is clear...
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
I think God is the ground of all opposites. Seeing everything you consider yourself separate from as your master (=willing to learn from opposition), reduces the antagonism and brings you closer to the ground from which both you and the 'other' originate. At least, that's how I would express it right now.
I think i understand where subtle_nod is coming from. I had similar discussions like this back in the days when I was a serious believer.
The dogma was "God is all-knowing and all-powerful." The assumption was that God was an anthropomorphic being, if even a "spirit entity", man was created in god's image and therefore had qualities of god inherent in him.
The logical fallacies that stem from the above assumptions ultimately led me to question a great many other things about my faith.
Nowadays my view of what god is, has changed significantly, and is far more metaphorical than literal.
I like the viewpoint implied here about an all-knowing god. If the universe is a grand machine with many parts, then if you know the workings of all the parts you should be able to predict what happens next. When you consider that a simulation cannot be of any less complexity than that it is attempting to simulate, then for an omnipotent god to be aware of every detail in the universe at once god would need to fundamentally be at least as complex as the universe. if god can contain the universe with it's multitude of life and awareness--if you simulate life and awareness in full detail--is the simulation alive--but here we verge into a different category completely...
The dogma was "God is all-knowing and all-powerful." The assumption was that God was an anthropomorphic being, if even a "spirit entity", man was created in god's image and therefore had qualities of god inherent in him.
The logical fallacies that stem from the above assumptions ultimately led me to question a great many other things about my faith.
Nowadays my view of what god is, has changed significantly, and is far more metaphorical than literal.
I like the viewpoint implied here about an all-knowing god. If the universe is a grand machine with many parts, then if you know the workings of all the parts you should be able to predict what happens next. When you consider that a simulation cannot be of any less complexity than that it is attempting to simulate, then for an omnipotent god to be aware of every detail in the universe at once god would need to fundamentally be at least as complex as the universe. if god can contain the universe with it's multitude of life and awareness--if you simulate life and awareness in full detail--is the simulation alive--but here we verge into a different category completely...
