Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

You know God exists. Now thats either true or its not. Your opinion matters.

Options
1…1617192122…34

Comments

  • Options
    #542
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Nope, according to the dictionary, they are antonyms. It is not circular to state that opposite meaning words have opposite meanings.

    State? You can state what you like. According to the dictionary says nothing about how it came to be according to the dictionary.

    You don't seem keen to be crowbarred from your dictionary-as-authority.

    I thought I showed you fact > proof > evidence>fact circularity? It doesn't seemed to have helped.

    Probably little point in continuing.


  • Options
    #543
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    That's fair enough, you're entitled to believe whatever you wish.

    I think the god/religion people choose/chose to believe in has more to do with where/when they were born than anything else.

    For instance if you were born in Irish in modern times you're likely to be catholic (at least for a few years anyway, huge drop off in recent years), if you born in Saudi Arabia you'd most likely be Muslim, if you were born in Israel you'd likely be jewish if you were born in ancient Greece you'd likely believe in Zeus etc etc

    More than just coincidental that I'd say.

    That there are gods isn't coincidental, yours included. The question is just why they aren't coincidental.

    And for that you have to assess for yourself. As you and I appear to have done. Even if coming to different conclusions.

    One way I assessed was to lift up the bonnet and see what lay beneath. The outward looks may be remarkably different. But the engine is the same.

    Self as god. Answerable only to self, ultimately. As you yourself highlight:
     you're entitled to believe whatever you wish.


  • Options
    #544
    Midster
    Registered Users Posts: 322 ✭✭Midster


    smacl wrote: »
    Why one, why he, why not many? Where did he / she / it / they come from? Basically once you have any creation myth that involves a 3rd party you're not actually answering the problem of creation you're just kicking the can down the road and resorting to another form of mysticism.

    My take on things is that it is more sensible to simply admit to not knowing the answer rather than shoehorn in some invented one.

    Humans have felt, been in communication with, been in the presence of, in some cases been in the company of some kind god since further back than our history books began. And archeology even further back in time.

    Why be so dismissive?

    After all if 99.99999% of those cases were untrue, and wrong, that still leaves at least a small percentage of truth.


  • Options
    #545
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Midster wrote: »
    Humans have felt, been in communication with, been in the presence of, in some cases been in the company of some kind god since further back than our history books began. And archeology even further back in time.

    Why be so dismissive?

    After all if 99.99999% of those cases were untrue, and wrong, that still leaves at least a small percentage of truth.

    Mores the point. The fact that man is a religious animal (a fact not dented by the latest naturalistic religions) is evidenced by long history.

    The slightly transparent trick is to rely on a dictionary for your definition of religious!


  • Options
    #546
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    spacecoyote wrote: »
    That still doesn't answer the question of who created this creator, or why they don't need a creator

    Well if the creator needs a creator then its creators all the way down. Or else the creator doesn't need a creator (whether God or naturalistic creator)

    Them's the logical options. I'm not telling you which one to believe.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #547
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Well if the creator needs a creator then its creators all the way down. Or else the creator doesn't need a creator (whether God or naturalistic creator)

    Or else nothing needs a creator.


  • Options
    #548
    nthclare
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,316 ✭✭✭nthclare


    Hypothetically I think the God of the Bible deserves an accolade as a God of war, and aggression.

    Supposedly he gave us all these defects of character and shortcomings which are naturally ingrained in us.
    Then plays games with our psyche, like come on if it was true he's not exactly stable or fair in his game of toss the coin.
    Im sure the op is on the highway to hell too if its all true and there's only 10,000 place's in heaven anyhow so we're all going to hell according to the Christian doctrinal teachings.

    I have a friend who's a Pagan and he reckons the abrahamic god is an actual demon like Pazuzu in the exorcist, a jin if you like.

    And this Jin or Demon the Abrahamic god is actually more dangerous than lucifer but not as mad as pazuzu.


  • Options
    #549
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    That there are gods isn't coincidental, yours included. The question is just why they aren't coincidental.

    And for that you have to assess for yourself. As you and I appear to have done. Even if coming to different conclusions.

    One way I assessed was to lift up the bonnet and see what lay beneath. The outward looks may be remarkably different. But the engine is the same.

    Self as god. Answerable only to self, ultimately. As you yourself highlight:

    No but what I'm saying is history & geography seem to play a vital role in which god people happen to believe in.

    For instance, lets say you were born and raised in Riyadh to Saudi parent, if you lifted up a bonnet in Riyadh do you think you'd find a muslim engine or a christian engine?

    My money says you might just be muslim, hence geography has decided your faith.


  • Options
    #550
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    nthclare wrote: »
    Hypothetically I think the God of the Bible deserves an accolade as a God of war, and aggression.

    Interesting book I read which argued that the God of War attributes of God of the Bible are projections. A people taken from paganism by God (whose gods were invariably powerful) projected these attributes onto God.

    God is at war alright. But not with us.


  • Options
    #551
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    No but what I'm saying is history & geography seem to play a vital role in which god people happen to believe in.

    Born here and now and your god is likely to be a naturalistic one. And you'll visit A&A forum where fellow believers congregate.
    For instance, lets say you were born and raised in Riyadh to Saudi parent, if you lifted up a bonnet in Riyadh do you think you'd find a muslim engine or a christian engine?

    My money says you might just be muslim, hence geography has decided your faith.

    Indeed. But as I say, little matter what the outer packaging looks like.

    Of course, you can say your god is different. That it is the real God over all other gods. We shalt have no gods but this God.

    But that's not going to get you far. It doesn't me!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #552
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Indeed. But as I say, little matter what the outer packaging looks like.

    Even though all the different boxes are empty, the believers will still kill each other over the differences in the outer packaging.


  • Options
    #553
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Interesting book I read which argued that the God of War attributes of God of the Bible are projections. A people taken from paganism by God (whose gods were invariably powerful) projected these attributes onto God.

    God is at war alright. But not with us.

    It's impossible for an all powerful god to be at war.


  • Options
    #554
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Born here and now and your god is likely to be a naturalistic one. And you'll visit A&A forum where fellow believers congregate.

    Indeed. But as I say, little matter what the outer packaging looks like.

    Of course, you can say your god is different. That it is the real God over all other gods. We shalt haveno gods buy this God.

    But that's not going to get you far. It doesn't me!

    Not really sure what any of that means, not even sure I was supposed to.

    Lets try something more basic:

    Define the god you believe in. Who is he? Where is he? What did he do?

    I mean the word god has been used many times in this thread but to me it's empty and meaningless. For me no god ever has existed, but we might aswell try and define it because I haven't a clue what you even mean by 'god' at this point.


  • Options
    #555
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    It's impossible for an all powerful god to be at war.

    All he needs to do is create own willed beings and the potential for war comes about.

    He's not all powerful. He can't sin, for instance.


  • Options
    #556
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Not really sure what any of that means, not even sure I was supposed to.:

    What do you believe in. Say when it comes to answering questions like "who am I, where did I come from, where am I going, meaning of my life?"

    Whatever you believe in to answer those questions is your god. If your answer is right then your god happens to be God too.


    Define the god you believe in. Who is he? Where is he? What did he do?

    Per above. The precise works aren't as relevant as your getting satisfactory answers.

    I mean the word god has been used many times in this thread but to me it's empty and meaningless. For me no god ever has existed, but we might aswell try and define it because I haven't a clue what you even mean by 'god' at this point.

    Hopefully the above helps. If you believe in naturalistically sourced answers to those questions then naturalism is your god.


  • Options
    #557
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    All he needs to do is create own willed beings and the potential for war comes about.

    He's not all powerful. He can't sin, for instance.

    So god isn't all powerful? Which of the other Omni-s traditionally associated with god is god not? I would have though all powerful was fundamental to the christian god

    What happens if a god that can't lie spoke the words this sentence is a lie?


  • Options
    #558
    Donnielighto
    Registered Users Posts: 3,761 ✭✭✭Donnielighto


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    What you believe in. Say when it comes to answering questions like "who am I, where did I come from, where am I going, meaning of my life?"

    Whatever you believe in to answer those questions is your god. If your answer is right then your god happens to be God to.





    Per above. The precise works aren't as relevant as the questions the god provides that you fimd satisfactory.




    Hopefully the above helps. If you believe in naturalistically sourced answers to those questions then naturalism is your god.

    There is no good, it's Santa Claus for adults. You are here to procreate and pass on genes per all your ancestors back to single celled ones way back. God doesn't exist, there is no proof and while spiritualism has benefits to some it doesn't carry the threat if violence that so many have used religion for.


  • Options
    #559
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Donnielighto wrote: »
    You are here to procreate and pass on genes per all your ancestors back to single celled ones way back.

    They are the answers your god provides you. Where did I come from and where am I going to? Your belief system in a nutshell.

    There is no proof of this. Only belief.


  • Options
    #560
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    So god isn't all powerful? Which of the other Omni-s traditionally associated with god is god not? I would have though all powerful was fundamental to the christian god

    What happens if a god that can't lie spoke the words this sentence is a lie?

    It doesn't really matter. Your original position relied on an all powerful God (who could do simply anything). Since that's not my position..


  • Options
    #561
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    What do you believe in. Say when it comes to answering questions like "who am I, where did I come from, where am I going, meaning of my life?"

    Whatever you believe in to answer those questions is your god. If your answer is right then your god happens to be God too.





    Per above. The precise works aren't as relevant as your getting satisfactory answers.




    Hopefully the above helps. If you believe in naturalistically sourced answers to those questions then naturalism is your god.

    Mmmm I see, purple monkey dishwasher it is so.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #562
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    It's impossible for an all powerful god to be at war.
    If the Deity were really omnipotent, he'd be able to create a foe so deadly that even He wouldn't be able to beat it.


  • Options
    #563
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    They are the answers your god provides you.
    And in your case, the godlike creature who provides all of your answers to you is - well - you.

    That's what happens when you declare yourself your own supreme authority!


  • Options
    #564
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    I mean the word god has been used many times in this thread but to me it's empty and meaningless. For me no god ever has existed, but we might aswell try and define it because I haven't a clue what you even mean by 'god' at this point.
    You've hit upon one of the very few innovations which seem to have originated in christianity - the anonymity of the deity.

    Previous deities had names and characteristics, but the christian deity developed with neither - a mirror which allowed believers the freedom to see themselves and reflect their beliefs exactly.

    It's a neat conceptual leap, in all fairness.


  • Options
    #565
    Midster
    Registered Users Posts: 322 ✭✭Midster


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Mores the point. The fact that man is a religious animal (a fact not dented by the latest naturalistic religions) is evidenced by long history.

    The slightly transparent trick is to rely on a dictionary for your definition of religious!

    There is and was no trick, it’s just the truth as history has written it.


  • Options
    #566
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,735 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    robindch wrote: »
    If the Deity were really omnipotent, he'd be able to create a foe so deadly that even He wouldn't be able to beat it.

    On my phone so can't link but from memory the omnipotence paradox is such that omnipotence is not logically possible. Making a being more powerful than yourself for example. Christians typically believe their god is omnipotent within the limits of what is logically possible and theologically comfortable.


  • Options
    #567
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    robindch wrote: »
    You've hit upon one of the very few innovations which seem to have originated in christianity - the anonymity of the deity.

    Previous deities had names and characteristics, but the christian deity developed with neither - a mirror which allowed believers the freedom to see themselves and reflect their beliefs exactly.

    It's a neat conceptual leap, in all fairness.

    Ye I think people's definition of 'god' is often very vague and evasive. It's an attempt to legitimize something which is obviously ridiculous by deliberately convoluting everything to do with their religious beliefs.

    So essentially you're not meant to 'understand' it, you're just supposed to believe it.

    You can't really debate with someone who is completely shut off from logic and outright refuses to give straight answers to straight questions.


  • Options
    #568
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    robindch wrote: »
    And in your case, the godlike creature who provides all of your answers to you is - well - you.

    That's what happens when you declare yourself your own supreme authority!

    One day you might inform all here gathered who you declare your particular supreme authority to be - if not you. And how it is it came to occupy that space without your say so.

    Or you can be a gnat.


  • Options
    #569
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    smacl wrote: »
    On my phone so can't link but from memory the omnipotence paradox is such that omnipotence is not logically possible. Making a being more powerful than yourself for example. Christians typically believe their god is omnipotent within the limits of what is logically possible and theologically comfortable.

    Indeed.


  • Options
    #570
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Ye I think people's definition of 'god' is often very vague and evasive.


    Define the Big Bang (especially the bit about where the singularity came from).

    How's your maths?


    It's an attempt to legitimize something which is obviously ridiculous

    Ridiculous by what measure? And where did the measure obtain its credentials?

    by deliberately convoluting everything to do with their religious beliefs.

    M'lud. Conjecture.

    Sustained.
    So essentially you're not meant to 'understand' it, you're just supposed to believe it.


    Might it be that you don't understand and that they, to a degree exceeding you, do? I understand it to a degree more than you.

    By what standard can I say that, you might ask.


    You can't really debate with someone who is completely shut off from logic and outright refuses to give straight answers to straight questions.

    Who is the supreme authority in your life. If not you?

    Straightforward question.

    I've been told what it isn't: that the authority is not self. But I haven't yet been told who or what it is.

    Definitions are doing the rounds here of late. So a definition of your supreme authrority. Say in less than 20 words.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #571
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Midster wrote: »
    There is and was no trick, it’s just the truth as history has written it.


    What Religion is? Do you think Religion is encapsulated and confined to a sentence in a dictionary?

    Man is full of beliefs. All his religions and all philosophies, including about how he knows, are beliefs.

    Neither his religions nor philosophies can be proven.

    The very fact he is so philosophical, whether he concludes God or Nature, is proof beyond compare that he is about beliefs.


Advertisement