to grok god

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

to grok god

Post by Advocate »

God is real as a concept in a mind, and there are as many versions as there are people who have thought about it.

All versions of god contain logically impossible, mutually exclusive, ineffable, or otherwise ineffable attributes, making them indistinguishable from fiction.

Igtheism is the idea that god cannot be defined sufficiently specifically to discuss rationally, and is metaphysically accurate.

Atheism is the lack of belief in any god. Hard atheism is the positive belief that no version of a god can exist.

Agnosticism is the lack of certainty in ones position about god.

Theology is attempting to explain the impossible in terms of the improbable and is therefore intellectually regressive.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: to grok god, p. 2

Post by Advocate »

a) there is no way to define god adequately to discuss rationally (igtheism)
b) god is real as a concept and there are as many versions as there are people who have thought about it, eg. many more than there are people alive today
c) all versions of god in range of ordinary use contain logically impossible, mutually exclusive, ineffable, or otherwise untestable attributes and are therefore indistinguishable from fiction
d) all potentially meaningful versions of god are personified. the versions that are mere forces are a matter (heh) for physics alone
e) there is no reason to believe a personified entity can exist other than in an Earth -bound and purely biological substrate, as all verifiable minds have been. any hypothesis to the contrary is supposition and indistinguishable from fiction.
f) even if such a being could be defined sufficiently to hypothetically test, finite beings cannot validate infinite things
g) even if there were such a test and we could carry out through, it has not been done
h) nfinite attributes are not logically possible as infinity is a direction or an instruction, not a specific attribute of being. all words that reference the transcendent, like anything infinite, is a mere placeholder for the ineffable
i) even if there was a god and we knew it, the exponential scale of the difference between our minds, in both senses (ours to gods and between the billions of each other), would make it impossible to understand what it wanted or how to go about it. the equivalent would be an ant trying to understand your love life.
j) all claimed evidence or proof for the existence of any god has been definitively refuted in many ways and at many times

In conclusion, there is no Reason to accept belief in god, even if he's real, and faith is unjustified belief - the polar opposite of knowledge
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

God EXISTS

Post by attofishpi »

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am a) there is no way to define god adequately to discuss rationally (igtheism)
God can be defined by its attributes:-
ATTRIBUTES OF GOD:
- What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).
- IT has the ability to KNOW everything within the minds of wo/man.
- IT has the ability to switch ALL matter within our brains - our synapses - making us akin to biological robots - should serendipity or synchronicity be a desired outcome.
- IT has formed key words within the ENGLISH language - the common protocol for communication with anomalies and intricacies beyond natural language etymology.
- IT has the ability to appear to morph matter that you perceive as 'matter'.
- IT has ultimate control over ALL that we perceive as dimensions within our reality.
- IT is KARMIC.
- IT reincarnates US (souls) to within families - or other - that we deserve based on KARMA.


Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am b) god is real as a concept and there are as many versions as there are people who have thought about it, eg. many more than there are people alive today
There are many biological forms of life, some as yet have still not been discovered so point b) is pointless.

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am c) all versions of god in range of ordinary use contain logically impossible, mutually exclusive, ineffable, or otherwise untestable attributes and are therefore indistinguishable from fiction
I tested God, and God tested me which permitted me to ascribe the above attributes.
See Simulation or Divine Reality? - evidence of God\'God' thread here:- viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33214

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am d) all potentially meaningful versions of god are personified. the versions that are mere forces are a matter (heh) for physics alone
What are you implying?

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am e) there is no reason to believe a personified entity can exist other than in an Earth -bound and purely biological substrate, as all verifiable minds have been. any hypothesis to the contrary is supposition and indistinguishable from fiction.
Pure conjecture from someone as yourself that has NO experience of God.

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am f) even if such a being could be defined sufficiently to hypothetically test, finite beings cannot validate infinite things
It has been tested by myself, and I have been tested by IT (God). I don't agree with the concept of "infinity", as far as I am aware, all things are finite.

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am g) even if there were such a test and we could carry out through, it has not been done
It has, I did it. Again, See Simulation or Divine Reality? - evidence of God\'God' thread here:- viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33214

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am h) nfinite attributes are not logically possible as infinity is a direction or an instruction, not a specific attribute of being. all words that reference the transcendent, like anything infinite, is a mere placeholder for the ineffable
Again, I don't believe in infinity, so point h) is also pointless.

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am i) even if there was a god and we knew it, the exponential scale of the difference between our minds, in both senses (ours to gods and between the billions of each other), would make it impossible to understand what it wanted or how to go about it. the equivalent would be an ant trying to understand your love life.
Another pointless statement made by someone with no experience of IT (God)

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 am j) all claimed evidence or proof for the existence of any god has been definitively refuted in many ways and at many times
Not mine.

Advocate wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:20 amIn conclusion, there is no Reason to accept belief in god, even if he's real, and faith is unjustified belief - the polar opposite of knowledge.
No. Faith is the opposite to Doubt.

Two men, on par with intelligence and knowledge:
Man A = atheist
Man B = theist

Indeed the ONLY difference between the two with regard to their reasoning and pursuit of knowledge is that Man B understands that it is wise to believe that there is a God and live his life accordingly, knowing that there may be consequences beyond man's 'justice', indeed, there may be the POSSIBILITY of greater insight.

Which of the two men has the POTENTIAL for greater knowledge?

WHICH ONE IS THE WISER OF THE TWO?
roydop
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by roydop »

Watch this as many times as it takes for you to understand and accept it. https://youtu.be/0k7_nSnYGrU

It proves the existence of God

It proves that you are God
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Excellent, Roydop is of course the greatest philosopher ever to live and Advocate is well known to also be the greatest philosopher to ever live.



Should we summon Age, so that the greatest philosopher ever to live can join in this conversation?
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by FlashDangerpants »

roydop wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 3:50 pm Watch this as many times as it takes for you to understand and accept it. https://youtu.be/0k7_nSnYGrU

It proves the existence of God

It proves that you are God
He has a spreadsheet that proves your video is wrong.
roydop
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by roydop »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 4:35 pm Excellent, Roydop is of course the greatest philosopher ever to live and Advocate is well known to also be the greatest philosopher to ever live.



Should we summon Age, so that the greatest philosopher ever to live can join in this conversation?
I am the greatest philosopher to ever live because my theory concludes/transcends philosophy. The theory results/merges into actual life experience rather than existing only in the head as neverending "blah blah blah."

Today I will abide in perfect peace and happiness and you will be in Samsara. In a year from now you will be even deeper into the hell that is developing exponentially and I will still be in Moksha.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by iambiguous »

roydop wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 3:50 pm Watch this as many times as it takes for you to understand and accept it. https://youtu.be/0k7_nSnYGrU

It proves the existence of God

It proves that you are God
Okay, you've watched the video as many times as it took you to accept it. Now, let's go here...

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path

This part...

"...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages..."

Reminding you of course that this is a philosophy forum derived from Philosophy Now magazine. So the arguments ought to have at least some measure of depth, right?
bobmax
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2022 7:38 am

Re: to grok god

Post by bobmax »

roydop wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:22 pm Today I will abide in perfect peace and happiness and you will be in Samsara. In a year from now you will be even deeper into the hell that is developing exponentially and I will still be in Moksha.
How can you say this?

Can't you see that your whole castle collapses?
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by FlashDangerpants »

So in the RED CORNER ... Roydop "greatest philosopher of all time"
roydop wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:22 pm I am the greatest philosopher to ever live because my theory .......... "blah blah blah."

In the BLUE CORNER .. Advocate "best philosopher ever to have lived"
Advocate wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:46 pm *probably the best philosopher ever to have lived. As that philosopher, i can tell you with some detail reasons why philosophy as a subject matter is stalled
Will we get a submission from Kenneth "future generations will use this site to learn about my journey to greatness" Age?, and if so, what colour does that make his corner?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: to grok god

Post by Harbal »

roydop wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 5:22 pm
I am the greatest philosopher to ever live because my theory concludes/transcends philosophy. The theory results/merges into actual life experience rather than existing only in the head as neverending "blah blah blah."

Today I will abide in perfect peace and happiness and you will be in Samsara. In a year from now you will be even deeper into the hell that is developing exponentially and I will still be in Moksha.
Sounds great, Roy, but don't ring us, we'll ring you. :)
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: to grok god

Post by attofishpi »

iambiguous wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 6:28 pm Sigh...

Just a reminder to the Christians here that, if they are willing, I'd appreciate them bringing their God to a discussion that revolves existentially around these factors:

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in God
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God
attofishpi wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 1:23 amHow many times does one that actually knows God exists have to address the above for you to STFU?

1] to a demonstrable proof of the existence your God or religious/spiritual path

Simulation or Divine Reality - evidence of God\'God' proof BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33214


2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are
championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?


To know God is via Christ - a bloke that went to his death stating he is the path - seems a likely place to start.
In the past 2000 years at some point in ones past life one would have had the chance to discover God via the one man worth.Y of the path.
Clearly most saw no worth in Christ and reincarnated according to their beliefs. Many these days reincarnate into atheist upbringing - it's just a choice one makes in ones current life. Clearly many people are not TRULY interested in the love of wisdom.


3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths

Already addressed above.

4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path


ATTRIBUTES OF GOD:
- What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).
- IT has the ability to KNOW everything within the minds of wo/man.
- IT has the ability to switch ALL matter within our brains - our synapses - making us akin to biological robots - should serendipity or synchronicity be a desired outcome.
- IT has formed key words within the ENGLISH language - the common protocol for communication with anomalies and intricacies beyond natural language etymology.
- IT has the ability to appear to morph matter that you perceive as 'matter'.
- IT has ultimate control over ALL that we perceive as dimensions within our reality.
- IT is KARMIC.
- IT reincarnates US (souls) to within families - or other - that we deserve based on KARMA.


- With the attributes listed above, surely you can see it conceivable that reincarnation would be plausible?
- IF it reincarnates US (souls) to within families - or other - that we deserve based on KARMA. (positive or negative)
-------- surely you can see how the THEODICY argument can be refuted.
- IF IT has the ability to appear to morph matter that you perceive as 'matter'.
- IF IT has ultimate control over ALL that we perceive as dimensions within our reality.
-------- again, surely you can see how the THEODICY argument can be refuted.

Although, you are one of the extreme biased atheist 'godbotherers' - ashamed that you have not refutation of the God as defined above with respect to THEODICY...you refuse on EVERY occasion to attempt to...the reason...you want simple fundamental Christian ideology that is easy to attack, much in the same way the militant atheists do - such as Dick Dawkins. YOU ASKED AT THE TOP FOR A DISCUSSION FROM A CHRISTIAN - go ahead, CHALLENGE ME, or be a coward, as Advocate has demonstrated himself to be on challenging me.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: to grok god

Post by Advocate »

[quote=FlashDangerpants post_id=592609 time=1661792198 user_id=11800]
So in the [color=#FF0000][b][size=150]RED CORNER [/size][/b][/color]... Roydop "greatest philosopher of all time"
[quote=roydop post_id=592599 time=1661790129 user_id=10617]
I am the greatest philosopher to ever live because my theory .......... "blah blah blah."
[/quote]


In the [color=#0000FF][b][size=150]BLUE CORNER[/size][/b][/color] .. Advocate "best philosopher ever to have lived"
[quote=Advocate post_id=483173 time=1607107604 user_id=15238]
*probably the best philosopher ever to have lived. As that philosopher, i can tell you with some detail reasons why philosophy as a subject matter is stalled
[/quote]

Will we get a submission from Kenneth "future generations will use this site to learn about my journey to greatness" Age?, and if so, what colour does that make his corner?
[/quote]

Doesn't matter. Blue wins. The criteria I can meet > the criteria anyone else has ever been able to meet, including meta-philosophy.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: to grok god

Post by Advocate »

[quote=roydop post_id=592599 time=1661790129 user_id=10617]
[quote=FlashDangerpants post_id=592583 time=1661787309 user_id=11800]
Excellent, Roydop is of course the greatest philosopher ever to live and Advocate is well known to also be the greatest philosopher to ever live.



Should we summon Age, so that the greatest philosopher ever to live can join in this conversation?
[/quote]

I am the greatest philosopher to ever live because my theory concludes/transcends philosophy. The theory results/merges into actual life experience rather than existing only in the head as neverending "blah blah blah."

Today I will abide in perfect peace and happiness and you will be in Samsara. In a year from now you will be even deeper into the hell that is developing exponentially and I will still be in Moksha.
[/quote]

I challenge you to a duel. May the best philosophy win.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: to grok god

Post by iambiguous »

attofishpi wrote: Mon Aug 29, 2022 7:06 pm
iambiguous wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 6:28 pm Sigh...

Just a reminder to the Christians here that, if they are willing, I'd appreciate them bringing their God to a discussion that revolves existentially around these factors:

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in God
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God
attofishpi wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 1:23 amHow many times does one that actually knows God exists have to address the above for you to STFU?

1] to a demonstrable proof of the existence your God or religious/spiritual path

Simulation or Divine Reality - evidence of God\'God' proof BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33214


2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are
championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?


To know God is via Christ - a bloke that went to his death stating he is the path - seems a likely place to start.
In the past 2000 years at some point in ones past life one would have had the chance to discover God via the one man worth.Y of the path.
Clearly most saw no worth in Christ and reincarnated according to their beliefs. Many these days reincarnate into atheist upbringing - it's just a choice one makes in ones current life. Clearly many people are not TRULY interested in the love of wisdom.


3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths

Already addressed above.

4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God or religious/spiritual path


ATTRIBUTES OF GOD:
- What we perceive as reality, is 'generated' by this entity at THE most finite sub-atomic scale where either an event occurs or it doesn't - ergo, it has binary control over ALL matter, that includes our very own grey matter (if it wishes).
- IT has the ability to KNOW everything within the minds of wo/man.
- IT has the ability to switch ALL matter within our brains - our synapses - making us akin to biological robots - should serendipity or synchronicity be a desired outcome.
- IT has formed key words within the ENGLISH language - the common protocol for communication with anomalies and intricacies beyond natural language etymology.
- IT has the ability to appear to morph matter that you perceive as 'matter'.
- IT has ultimate control over ALL that we perceive as dimensions within our reality.
- IT is KARMIC.
- IT reincarnates US (souls) to within families - or other - that we deserve based on KARMA.


- With the attributes listed above, surely you can see it conceivable that reincarnation would be plausible?
- IF it reincarnates US (souls) to within families - or other - that we deserve based on KARMA. (positive or negative)
-------- surely you can see how the THEODICY argument can be refuted.
- IF IT has the ability to appear to morph matter that you perceive as 'matter'.
- IF IT has ultimate control over ALL that we perceive as dimensions within our reality.
-------- again, surely you can see how the THEODICY argument can be refuted.

Although, you are one of the extreme biased atheist 'godbotherers' - ashamed that you have not refutation of the God as defined above with respect to THEODICY...you refuse on EVERY occasion to attempt to...the reason...you want simple fundamental Christian ideology that is easy to attack, much in the same way the militant atheists do - such as Dick Dawkins. YOU ASKED AT THE TOP FOR A DISCUSSION FROM A CHRISTIAN - go ahead, CHALLENGE ME, or be a coward, as Advocate has demonstrated himself to be on challenging me.
What can I say?

If you were a reader of Philosophy Now magazine and found out that there was a discussion forum on the internet derived from the magazine, would you ever in a million years expect to come across "arguments" like this?

:roll:
Post Reply