to grok god
to grok god
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.
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.
Re: to grok god, p. 2
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
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
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
God EXISTS
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.
There are many biological forms of life, some as yet have still not been discovered so point b) is pointless.
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
What are you implying?
Pure conjecture from someone as yourself that has NO experience of God.
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.
It has, I did it. Again, See Simulation or Divine Reality? - evidence of God\'God' thread here:- viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33214
Again, I don't believe in infinity, so point h) is also pointless.
Another pointless statement made by someone with no experience of IT (God)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.
Not mine.
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?
Re: to grok god
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
It proves the existence of God
It proves that you are God
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: to grok god
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?
Should we summon Age, so that the greatest philosopher ever to live can join in this conversation?
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: to grok god
He has a spreadsheet that proves your video is wrong.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
Re: to grok god
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."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?
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.
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7893
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: to grok god
Okay, you've watched the video as many times as it took you to accept it. Now, let's go here...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
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?
Re: to grok god
How can you say this?
Can't you see that your whole castle collapses?
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: to grok god
So in the RED CORNER ... Roydop "greatest philosopher of all time"
In the BLUE CORNER .. Advocate "best philosopher ever to have lived"
In the BLUE CORNER .. Advocate "best philosopher ever to have lived"
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?
Re: to grok god
Sounds great, Roy, but don't ring us, we'll ring you.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.
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10528
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: to grok god
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.
Re: to grok god
[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.
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.
Re: to grok god
[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.
[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.
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7893
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: to grok god
What can I say?attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 29, 2022 7:06 pmiambiguous 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 Godattofishpi 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.
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?