God is strange or are we the weirdos.

[dybmh]

I am not.

Neither of the two parts of your statement above applies to me, as a matter of fact. I have no idea why you think otherwise.

At first you said:

the dialogue is weird and does not match the thread title.

this means you do not understand, it is incomprehensible to you. which makes sense unless you have abandoned non-cognitvism.

Then another atheist brought a dogmatic adapted analogy, but, the dogma was attributed to the original analogy by you in error. Which again makes sense if your position is non-cognition by default.

If someone is incapable of cognition, naturally it makes sense for them to be hostile towards it. It makes sense, but it's irrational. Sour grapes.

Are you familiar with the Aesop's fable. Do they have them where you are? Sour grapes is a story about grapes which are unreachable. So they are assumed to be sour. The one who cannot reach the grapes is hostile towards them. Does that make sense?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, perhaps you were in a rush reading my post. . It says it's an example of skepticism "gone too far".

Cool. Forgive me. In my defense, it's kind of strange to give examples of things to make a point when said examples don't actually happen.

 

[PureX]

"God" is an incomprehensible ideal.

But we humans are very uncomfortable with the idea of anything being incomprehensible. So much so that we will tend to invent "comprehension" where it doesn't exist just so we can pretend that it does, and avoid the discomfort of our not knowing.

We like to claim we are always in pursuit of the truth. But except for relative factuality, we can't ever really know the truth. And what we should be pursuing is honesty, instead of truth. But to do that we're going to have to face our own profound incomprehension. And we don't want to do that. So we chase after fantasies of truth instead of just trying to be honest.

Does this make us "weird"?

It is what it s.

 

[LuisDantas]

At first you said:



this means you do not understand, it is incomprehensible to you. which makes sense unless you have abandoned non-cognitvism.

Then another atheist brought a dogmatic adapted analogy, but, the dogma was attributed to the original analogy by you in error. Which again makes sense if your position is non-cognition by default.

If someone is incapable of cognition, naturally it makes sense for them to be hostile towards it. It makes sense, but it's irrational. Sour grapes.

Are you familiar with the Aesop's fable. Do they have them where you are? Sour grapes is a story about grapes which are unreachable. So they are assumed to be sour. The one who cannot reach the grapes is hostile towards them. Does that make sense?

In case I am not clear yet: I have given up on trying to make sense of your out-of-left-field claims.

 

[dybmh]

In case I am not clear yet: I have given up on trying to make sense of your out-of-left-field claims.

You've never heard of "sour grapes"?

Library of Congress Aesop Fables

You've never encountered someone who is hostile towards something which is beyond their capability for understanding? That's surprising. You've been here a while. Isn't this a profile for science deniers?

Also, racism stereotyping, and bigotry is a form of "sour grapes".

Lack of understanding produces hostility. Usually it requires a sense of entitlement and elitism. I'm this case, if a person feels they deserve the grapes, then they become hostile if they can't get the grapes. So, they conjure up a false perception of the grapes to make themself feel better.

Does that help with your lack of cognition?

 

[danieldemol]

If God created us we simply are as per our creation.
So if we are weird then it is (assuming creation to be true) possible we just came from a weird mind so to speak.

 

[dybmh]

If God created us we simply are as per our creation.
So if we are weird then it is (assuming creation to be true) possible we just came from a weird mind so to speak.

... created with a choice...

Deuteronomy 30:19

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live;

 

[danieldemol]

... created with a choice...

Deuteronomy 30:19

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live;

Relevance?

 

[PearlSeeker]

God
We

 

[John53]

Analogy:

Lovely Lady: You want to go on a date?

Skeptic: Yes, but you got to prove you are real!

Lovely Lady: What, I'm right in front of you, you see me don't you?

Skeptic: It can be that you are robot programmed as a human designed to trick me from Aliens.

Lovely Lady: Bye Weird person.

Skeptic: Aha, I knew it, she was a robot. Nice try Aliens!

The sceptic is sceptical of lovely ladies?

 

[PureX]

If God created us we simply are as per our creation.
So if we are weird then it is (assuming creation to be true) possible we just came from a weird mind so to speak.

I think existence is the expression of a complex set of designated possibilities. That we humans are as we are because this is what it was possible for us to become. And because we became (and are still becoming) cognizant and self-aware beings, we have the option, now, of creating (or re-creating) ourselves, at least to some degree.

So I think it's somewhat misleading to claim that humans are strictly "God's creations according to God's plan". As though God designed each and every one of us to be exactly as we are, and is therefor solely responsible for it. Because it appears to me that what God "created" was the possibility of our being here, in this general form. and that WE have been creating ourselves as the specific beings that we are. And that WE are therefor responsible to a great degree for those results.

And more importantly, if we are choosing to condemn ourselves as failed or flawed beings, then WE are mostly to blame for that. Not God.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Analogy:

Lovely Lady: You want to go on a date?

Skeptic: Yes, but you got to prove you are real!

Lovely Lady: What, I'm right in front of you, you see me don't you?

Skeptic: It can be that you are robot programmed as a human designed to trick me from Aliens.

Lovely Lady: Bye Weird person.

Skeptic: Aha, I knew it, she was a robot. Nice try Aliens!

Another version where the sceptic doubts in himself in the presence of a lovely lady:

Radiohead - Creep

 

[danieldemol]

I think existence is the expression of a complex set of designated possibilities. That we humans are as we are because this is what it was possible for us to become. And because we became (and are still becoming) cognizant and self-aware beings, we have the option, now, of creating (or re-creating) ourselves, at least to some degree.

So I think it's somewhat misleading to claim that humans are strictly "God's creations according to God's plan".

My thoughts on this are that it is the OP's claim that we are God's creations, and that if God gave us the possibility to become weird God is still partially responsible for giving us that possibility.

As though God designed each and every one of us to be exactly as we are, and is therefor solely responsible for it. Because it appears to me that what God "created" was the possibility of our being here, in this general form. and that WE have been creating ourselves as the specific beings that we are. And that WE are therefor responsible to a great degree for those results.

What "we" do is not a free choice in my opinion. The complete incoherence of free will suggests to me that our responsibility is actually the responsibility of our creator (ie nature) in my view.

And more importantly, if we are choosing to condemn ourselves as failed or flawed beings, then WE are mostly to blame for that. Not God.

Meh, I don't see myself as flawed, again this is an issue you should be taking up with the OP who does see us humans as "the weirdos" it seems misdirected to address me for the flaws of the OP

 

[dybmh]

Relevance?

Sure. It's pretty easy actually.

If God created us we simply are as per our creation.
So if we are weird then it is (assuming creation to be true) possible we just came from a weird mind so to speak.

The key word is "weird". Did you read the OP? Did you understand what's weird about it? It's weird that a skeptic would see something beautiful and assume the worst about it. You are saying that is a person behaved in the this weird way, God must be to blame for the weird behavior. This is characteristic of your posts in the past several months maybe longer. They often blame God, or promote a deist non-interventionst God.

But, the bible says that God gave people a choice. The choice is... to be weird or not. In the verse I brought, the choice is choose life or death. Do you nottice anything weird about that? Again, "weird" is the key-word. It's "weird" that anyone would choose death, right? Why wouldn't someone choose life? It's a weird choice, but God created people granting them the choice to be "weird". That's the way the story is written. Believe it or not, it doesn't matter. That's what's written.

So, it's not correct to blame God for making people weird, because this ignores the choice that is given to be weird or not. If God is granting a choice to be wierd, it is the person who is to blame for seeing something beautiful and assuming the worst of it. That's what's happening in the story told in the OP. It would be like a person choosing death, becausse when presented with the option to choose life they assumed that life wasn't actually life, instead it was being eaten by the ravenous bug-blatter-beast-of--traal.

Get it now? crystal clear I hope? Now maybe it makes sense why I replied the way I did to @LuisDantas' posts which assume the worst for no reason about thread simply because it is incomprehensible to him.

 

[danieldemol]

Sure. It's pretty easy actually.



The key word is "weird". Did you read the OP? Did you understand what's weird about it? It's weird that a skeptic would see something beautiful and assume the worst about it. You are saying that is a person behaved in the this weird way, God must be to blame for the weird behavior. This is characteristic of your posts in the past several months maybe longer. They often blame God, or promote a deist non-interventionst God.

But, the bible says that God gave people a choice. The choice is... to be weird or not. In the verse I brought, the choice is choose life or death. Do you nottice anything weird about that? Again, "weird" is the key-word. It's "weird" that anyone would choose death, right? Why wouldn't someone choose life? It's a weird choice, but God created people granting them the choice to be "weird". That's the way the story is written. Believe it or not, it doesn't matter. That's what's written.

So, it's not correct to blame God for making people weird, because this ignores the choice that is given to be weird or not. If God is granting a choice to be wierd, it is the person who is to blame for seeing something beautiful and assuming the worst of it. That's what's happening in the story told in the OP. It would be like a person choosing death, becausse when presented with the option to choose life they assumed that life wasn't actually life, instead it was being eaten by the ravenous bug-blatter-beast-of--traal.

Get it now? crystal clear I hope?

Ok, but the bible only claims man has been given free-will in my view.
It doesn't demonstrate it as I see it.

Hence I think given the absence of a free choice or free will it is reasonable to blame God for any weirdness present since we never really had a choice if that's the way we are.

 

[blü 2]

Analogy:

Lovely Lady: You want to go on a date?

Skeptic: Yes, but you got to prove you are real!

Lovely Lady: What, I'm right in front of you, you see me don't you?

Skeptic: It can be that you are robot programmed as a human designed to trick me from Aliens.

Lovely Lady: Bye Weird person.

Skeptic: Aha, I knew it, she was a robot. Nice try Aliens!

Better analogy.

Someone: There's this lovely lady.
Skeptic: Really? Where?
Someone: She's not here.
Skeptic: Where is she?
Someone: Everywhere.
Skeptic: Just not here at this moment?
Someone: Ahm, well, yes, here at this moment.
Skeptic: Where?
Someone: All around you.
Skeptic: There's a lovely lady all around me right now? ¿Ché?
Someone: Yes, all the time.
Skeptic: Please show me a photo.
Someone: Ah. There aren't any photos.
Skeptic: There's a lovely lady but she's not here and she's all around me and there are no photos?
Someone: Well, if you put it that way ...
Skeptic: I won't take up any more of your time. Have a nice day.

.

 

[dybmh]

Ok, but the bible only claims man has been given free-will in my view.
It doesn't demonstrate it as I see it.

It doesn't matter. The bible only claims a creator-god too. And that was presumed in your reply. You presumed the bible's truth in order to blame God.

Hence I think given the absence of a free choice or free will it is reasonable to blame God for any weirdness present since we never really had a choice if that's the way we are.

I know what you think, and I know you think it's reasonable. But the "weirdness" as described in the story in the OP is a choice. It is not designed, intentional "weirdness". The "weird" behavior in the OP is just like a person choosing "death" instead of choosing "life".

That's the relevance of my comment.

 

[Link]

Better analogy.

Someone: There's this lovely lady.
Skeptic: Really? Where?
Someone: She's not here.
Skeptic: Where is she?
Someone: Everywhere.
Skeptic: Just not here at this moment?
Someone: Ahm, well, yes, here at this moment.
Skeptic: Where?
Someone: All around you.
Skeptic: There's a lovely lady all around me right now? ¿Ché?
Someone: Yes, all the time.
Skeptic: Please show me a photo.
Someone: Ah. There aren't any photos.
Skeptic: There's a lovely lady but she's not here and she's all around me and there are no photos?
Someone: Well, if you put it that way ...
Skeptic: I won't take up any more of your time. Have a nice day.

.

Can be.

 

[LuisDantas]

Get it now? crystal clear I hope? Now maybe it makes sense why I replied the way I did to @LuisDantas' posts which assume the worst for no reason about thread simply because it is incomprehensible to him.

If you say so.

I maintain that you are simply not talking anything that makes sense.

 

[PureX]

My thoughts on this are that it is the OP's claim that we are God's creations, and that if God gave us the possibility to become weird God is still partially responsible for giving us that possibility.

What "we" do is not a free choice in my opinion. The complete incoherence of free will suggests to me that our responsibility is actually the responsibility of our creator (ie nature) in my view.

Meh, I don't see myself as flawed, again this is an issue you should be taking up with the OP who does see us humans as "the weirdos" it seems misdirected to address me for the flaws of the OP

So, by this reasoning Adolf Hitler’s great grandmother is “at least partly responsible” for the deaths of millions of people. Which is both absurd and untrue.

The moment we become self-aware (cognizant of our own cognizance) we gain the ability to override it’s compulsions. And even if we choose no to, it’s still a choice, and not a compulsion.

“Flaws” are judgment determinations that we can make because we have free will.