Where do we stand in relation to God?

[chaz wyman]

You still have failed to account for your claim that absolute truth exist. Where does it exist?

Like I said in the beginning, It's everywhere, man only has to unveil it.

Truth is not "OUT THERE" as I told you before. That is your arrogance and pride talking.
Truth is a human artefact.

Truth stands in a relation to concept in correspondence. You don't find it under a rock, were that the case there would be nothing to decide upon, as everything would be true.

[SpheresOfBalance]

You still have failed to account for your claim that absolute truth exist. Where does it exist?

Like I said in the beginning, It's everywhere, man only has to unveil it.

Truth is not "OUT THERE" as I told you before. That is your arrogance and pride talking.
Truth is a human artefact.

Truth stands in a relation to concept in correspondence. You don't find it under a rock, were that the case there would be nothing to decide upon, as everything would be true.

Incorrect, It's what's left when man's false beliefs/assumptions are finally proven to be false, where that which proves them wrong is 'impossible' to be seen any other way. You're hung up on mans words/language as if that has the final say, mans words eventually come to meet the absolute truth. By definition, Absolute Truth is that which is beyond any particular mans words and is a place holder for that of actuality. Many of these Absolute Truths are already known, mainly those that are closest to man, because they were the easiest to uncover.

Example: Man once believed/assumed that if you were sick it was best to bleed you to let the poisons/demons drain from your body, it was a lie. The absolute truth is that, that particular medical technique shall make your body weak due to shock and shall eventually kill you. This my son, is 'absolutely true,' it is 'not' a relation to concept in correspondence, if you don't believe me, the next time you're sick, let me know and I'll come over to bleed you as the doctors of old used to do, if it's just a relation of concept then you'd live through it, capisci?

[chaz wyman]

You still have failed to account for your claim that absolute truth exist. Where does it exist?

Like I said in the beginning, It's everywhere, man only has to unveil it.

Truth is not "OUT THERE" as I told you before. That is your arrogance and pride talking.
Truth is a human artefact.

Truth stands in a relation to concept in correspondence. You don't find it under a rock, were that the case there would be nothing to decide upon, as everything would be true.

Incorrect,

Nope

Maybe you would do better considering some theories of truth before you display your personal naive view of truth on a philosophy website.

[SpheresOfBalance]

You still have failed to account for your claim that absolute truth exist. Where does it exist?

Like I said in the beginning, It's everywhere, man only has to unveil it.

Truth is not "OUT THERE" as I told you before. That is your arrogance and pride talking.
Truth is a human artefact.

Truth stands in a relation to concept in correspondence. You don't find it under a rock, were that the case there would be nothing to decide upon, as everything would be true.

Incorrect,

Nope

Maybe you would do better considering some theories of truth before you display your personal naive view of truth on a philosophy website.

You seemed to be a smart man because you used the words "maybe" and "theories" but then you proved otherwise when you used "naive." You confuse what you "believe" with what is absolutely "true," as if it is you and your camp of fellow thinkers that are right against all others, the sure sign of a fool! Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.' If you used verbiage that not only indicated that your camp is that of theory but that mine was likewise, then you would have shown true wisdom, in keeping with Socrates!

[chaz wyman]

Maybe you would do better considering some theories of truth before you display your personal naive view of truth on a philosophy website.[/color]

You seemed to be a smart man because you used the words "maybe" and "theories" but then you proved otherwise when you used "naive." You confuse what you "believe" with what is absolutely "true," as if it is you and your camp of fellow thinkers that are right against all others, the sure sign of a fool! Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.' If you used verbiage that not only indicated that your camp is that of theory but that mine was likewise, then you would have shown true wisdom, in keeping with Socrates![/quote]

You are getting rather dull.
Socrates was way ahead of you, and would find your position laughable.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Maybe you would do better considering some theories of truth before you display your personal naive view of truth on a philosophy website.[/color]

You seemed to be a smart man because you used the words "maybe" and "theories" but then you proved otherwise when you used "naive." You confuse what you "believe" with what is absolutely "true," as if it is you and your camp of fellow thinkers that are right against all others, the sure sign of a fool! Socrates: 'I only know that I know nothing.' If you used verbiage that not only indicated that your camp is that of theory but that mine was likewise, then you would have shown true wisdom, in keeping with Socrates!

You are getting rather dull.
Coming from a megalo, that's a compliment
Socrates was way ahead of you, and would find your position laughable.
Thanks, I feel so much better, as you display the audacity, to speak for a mind that dwarfs yours, as if you could possibly fathom it's depths. I cry for you, my son![/quote]

[MJA]

As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,

=

[chaz wyman]

As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,

=

First premise false.
Second premise meaningless
Sequitur therefore incoherent.

[MJA]

As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,

=

First premise false.
Second premise meaningless
Sequitur therefore incoherent.

I hope One day you'll see the truth too.
Truth is more simple than thought.

=

[chaz wyman]

As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,

=

First premise false.
Second premise meaningless
Sequitur therefore incoherent.

I hope One day you'll see the truth too.
Truth is more simple than thought.

=

Well, well , well another delusional person that thinks he has been given the truth. Diddums!!

[MJA]

Given the truth?
I am true.

=

[chaz wyman]

Given the truth?
I am true.

=

QED you are delusional.

[reasonvemotion]

MJA wrote:


As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,


CW wrote

First premise false.
Second premise meaningless
Sequitur therefore incoherent.

of course it is false



the correct answer is


Chaz Wyman is God, place a crown (of thorns) on his head and all bow down.

[SpheresOfBalance]

MJA wrote:


As God is One
I am One,
As All is One,
One is All,


CW wrote

First premise false.
Second premise meaningless
Sequitur therefore incoherent.

of course it is false



the correct answer is


Chaz Wyman is God, place a crown (of thorns) on his head and all bow down.

Yes, I see, but believe that Lucifer is closer to the mark.

So why did you change your avatar, now I want to duck, bob and weave when ever I see a post of yours, and find myself quickly scrolling down.

[Mike Strand]

Here are some thoughts I had regarding the title of this topic:

The case can be made that there is no "God" in the commonly held view -- creator of all that is, lover of humanity, possessor of tremendous power and knowledge. Thus there is no basis for many religions - e.g. Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. However, the golden rule is a precept shared among many religions -- in principle, if not in practice -- even with atheism coupled with secular humanism.

In Christianity, for example, the golden rule is touted as the second great commandment. Too bad some religious folks apparently get hung up on less important "commandments" and use religious differences with others as an excuse to engage in the favorite human pastimes of enslavement and homicide and genocide.

If God exists and does not have the usual traits as described above (e.g., if God is not "Love"), this theological/moral criticism of human behavior may not apply.

If there is no God over humanity (or even if there is), then humanity may establish its own rules. The golden rule has the potential to help "save" humanity as a biological species, but not to guarantee this salvation -- there may be another cataclysmic event, similar to the large asteroid that destroyed many species of life. In the meantime, I might look for a way to make life pleasant for me, and my way and your way may differ or come into conflict.