God

[Judgment]

atotalstranger: Nope. My purpose is never just to ridicule, but sometimes it's the most adequate mode of response. Your opinion may be that I've added nothing to this thread, but perhaps you're not my intended audience.

That makes little sense. I began this thread - and - the majority of posts have been by me. I should be your intended audience if you wish to debate. You have added nothing but ridicule - so - your intended audience would be those that also ridicule..

 

[BucephalusBB]

We have reached the pinnacle. World populations are increasing to un-sustainable amounts. Resources are being used up at unprecedented amounts. Nuclear proliferation budges the door open to unthinkable destruction. The thousands of years prior have led us to this point - but - we were never at such a vulnerable state.

world populations still have a long way before they reach your pinnacle. Resources are being switched more than being used up. Nuclear warfare will not destroy this earth and where we create vulnerabillity, we also create safety.
If I had to live now or 400 years ago, I am pretty sure nowadays I would be safer on the streets. At least in the west. So you're doing what we call in the Netherlands: Doemdenken.. Thinking the worst..

 

[Judgment]

Bouncing Ball: world populations still have a long way before they reach your pinnacle. Resources are being switched more than being used up. Nuclear warfare will not destroy this earth and where we create vulnerabillity, we also create safety.
If I had to live now or 400 years ago, I am pretty sure nowadays I would be safer on the streets. At least in the west. So you're doing what we call in the Netherlands: Doemdenken.. Thinking the worst..

You need look no further than India & China. The majority of the people - in those places - live in desperate poverty because of overpopulation. As the populations continue to grow food and drinking water will become more scarce.... not just there - but - worldwide.

Resources are not being used up? Our forests are disappearing at alarming levels.
I did not say that nuclear warfare would destroy the Earth - but - it will bring about the destruction of societies and bring unimaginable pain and suffering.

I am not thinking the worst - I am observing the world around me.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Hmm.. and I think it is amazing that you have added absolutely nothing to the debate.
Is your purpose just to ridicule ?

Hey, we're two poor rationalists trying our best to understand a worldview where people are said to be right and wrong at the same time and where there is no universally true conception of God, yet you talk about your conception of God as if it were true. The fact that you do not understand what we are saying, does not mean we are ridiculing you, and I think you would agree that our posts are right for "us".

Let's take a look at one of the posts you say is ridicule.

No! No! No!...and yes!

It was in this thread that I learned that mutually exclusive statements can both be true. This is a demonstration of that.

You are bringing your preconceived ideas of consciousness and are unable to see the yes-ness in your no and the rightness in your wrong.

A couple of times you have told me that my preconceived notions make it hard for me to see your message. I am also continuing to embrace logical contradictions as you have taught.

In the end (which is also the beginning) all of the conceptions of God which I shoot down

You HAVE openly shot down other conceptions of God.

Other God's are easy to defeat -Yahweh & Allah... the two that speak as spoiled rotten angry children - I challenge them to a game of reason

are PART of the whole truth which is not universally absolute, but more like a super opinion on steriods.

I think this is pretty accurate. You have said many times that these religions that you shoot down are all part of a whole truth. You have also said that this truth is not universally absolute, but that it is correct "for you." My phrase "super opinion on steroids" seems pretty appropriate to me.

The meta-knowledge is your core knowledge if you will only see through the illusion of the concave/convex soul. This should help.

OK, so, this was just a way to inject a cool video I found on YouTube. But you DO talk about seeing around the illusion.

 

[Judgment]

Beaudreaux: Hey, we're two poor rationalists trying our best to understand a worldview where people are said to be right and wrong at the same time and where there is no universally true conception of God, yet you talk about your conception of God as if it were true. The fact that you do not understand what we are saying, does not mean we are ridiculing you, and I think you would agree that our posts are right for "us".

Let's take a look at one of the posts you say is ridicule.

I understand all you have said - it is you - that is unable to understand me.
My conception of God is what I believe to be true. It is not Universally accepted.

Beaudreaux: It was in this thread that I learned that mutually exclusive statements can both be true. This is a demonstration of that.

This is your interpretation of what you read - it is not a statement of fact.

Beaudreaux: A couple of times you have told me that my preconceived notions make it hard for me to see your message. I am also continuing to embrace logical contradictions as you have taught.

The logical contradictions are only in your mind.

Beaudreaux: You HAVE openly shot down other conceptions of God.

False. I have denied no path as being a true path, I have denied no God as being a true God, I have denied no person their right to choose.

Beaudreaux:I think this is pretty accurate. You have said many times that these religions that you shoot down are all part of a whole truth. You have also said that this truth is not universally absolute, but that it is correct "for you." My phrase "super opinion on steroids" seems pretty appropriate to me.

If God is everything - the ultimate truth can only be a combination of all. I do not shoot down the entire religions - I point out barbaric teachings within.
I said there is no universal opinion of God among the human race.

 

[roli]

So you're a pantheist then?

I second that motion !!!!!!!!

 

[Beaudreaux]

I understand all you have said - it is you - that is unable to understand me.

My conception of God is what I believe to be true. It is not Universally accepted.

You say you understand me, then in the next sentence you demonstrate that you do not. I don't know why this whole truth thing is so hard to get across to you, but I will try again. I think you may be looking at the phrase "Universally True" and reading it as "Universally accepted as true". It is not the same thing.

Absolute Truth has nothing whatsoever to do with whether people accept it or not. Something that is absolutely, or universally true is true regardless of what people believe. For instance, let's say I assert firmly that it is absolutely/universally true that the earth is spherical. Now there are still people such as members of the Flat Earth Society who believe that the earth is NOT spherical but is flat. If we assert that a spherical earth is an absolute/objective truth, then we consider these people to be WRONG. We say that, while they THINK the earth is flat, they are INCORRECT because their view is different from the TRUTH. Back in 1491 when only a few people believed the earth was spherical and the rest of the world thought it was flat, the minority were RIGHT and the flat earth people were WRONG. How many people accept an idea as true has nothing to do with whether or not it IS actually true. At least not if you believe in the existence of absolutely true ideas.


So, I am asking if your conception of God is TRUE. Not true "for you", but really, actually, absolutely true in reality. There are only a three logical ways to answer this question:

1. My worldview is Correct/True: This means you believe that your worldview as espoused on this thread is true and, that other conceptions of God have to be false because they don't match the TRUE conception of God.
2. My worldview is not Correct/True: This means that you do not believe that your worldview is true and that there is some other worldview that is.
3. There is no Universally/Absolutely True worldview: This means that there is no true conception of God to be found. You do not believe anyone is correct about God, including yourself because the truth does not exist.

If you believe that your worldview is true (#1), then you must say that other worldviews are false because they are not consistent with what you know as the truth. It is nice that you want to be tolerant of other views, but that is a far cry from saying they are not wrong.

If you believe that there is no universal/absolute truth about God (#3), then none of humanity's conceptions of God are true except perhaps that there is no God. For if there was truly a God, there would be something against which worldviews could be judged to be right or wrong. If there is not a God, then there can be no absolute truth about him (exept that he does not exist.)

So, PLEASE let's got to it. Do you believe that your conception of God is Absolutely/Universally TRUE? I am not asking if everyone THINKS it's true. I am asking if it is REALLY true.

Beaudreaux: A couple of times you have told me that my preconceived notions make it hard for me to see your message. I am also continuing to embrace logical contradictions as you have taught.

​

This is your interpretation of what you read - it is not a statement of fact. The logical contradictions are only in your mind.

Exactly! There is no contradiction between "yes" and "no" or "right" and "wrong". It is only in people's minds. This is what I got from your postings such as:

(responding to my question "Do you believe you are correct) Of course. That does not mean that other Gods are not correct.

I have denied no path as being a true path, I have denied no God as being a true God

In the end, when discussing God, it is only all of our opinions.

Correct - If the followers of Allah believe he is the one true God- it is true for them.
Correct - If the 'Truth' is a combination of 'Everything' - then both can be true.

You seem to be teaching that logical contradictions (e.g. people who hold mutually exclusive positions are both correct) are to be embraced. How am I interpreting this incorrectly?

False.

I have denied no path as being a true path, I have denied no God as being a true God...I do not shoot down the entire religions

So, you do not deny Judaism as a true path? Even though you said:

Yahweh, The OT states that you should not work the Sabbath...and - your male or female 'slave' should also not do any work ?? You did not think slavery to be wrong?

Yahweh, The OT states that working the Sabbath or being disrespectful to ones parents are crimes that require a punishment of 'Death'... If you would have told me that this is the word of God and I must obey - I would have told you to F Off!

Yahweh and Allah, The OT and the Koran state that Adulterer's should be stoned to 'Death'... I shake my head in disbelief. (Emphasis added)

​

Is sure LOOKS like you don't believe this is a true path. Or do you want to take back these words?

I said there is no universal opinion of God among the human race.

No, when I asked you if there was a universally TRUE conception of God among the human race you said "no".

 

[Judgment]

Beaudreaux: You say you understand me, then in the next sentence you demonstrate that you do not. I don't know why this whole truth thing is so hard to get across to you, but I will try again. I think you may be looking at the phrase "Universally True" and reading it as "Universally accepted as true". It is not the same thing.

Absolute Truth has nothing whatsoever to do with whether people accept it or not. Something that is absolutely, or universally true is true regardless of what people believe. For instance, let's say I assert firmly that it is absolutely/universally true that the earth is spherical. Now there are still people such as members of the Flat Earth Society who believe that the earth is NOT spherical but is flat. If we assert that a spherical earth is an absolute/objective truth, then we consider these people to be WRONG. We say that, while they THINK the earth is flat, they are INCORRECT because their view is different from the TRUTH. Back in 1491 when only a few people believed the earth was spherical and the rest of the world thought it was flat, the minority were RIGHT and the flat earth people were WRONG. How many people accept an idea as true has nothing to do with whether or not it IS actually true. At least not if you believe in the existence of absolutely true ideas.




So, I am asking if your conception of God is TRUE. Not true "for you", but really, actually, absolutely true in reality. There are only a three logical ways to answer this question:

1. My worldview is Correct/True: This means you believe that your worldview as espoused on this thread is true and, that other conceptions of God have to be false because they don't match the TRUE conception of God.
2. My worldview is not Correct/True: This means that you do not believe that your worldview is true and that there is some other worldview that is.
3. There is no Universally/Absolutely True worldview: This means that there is no true conception of God to be found. You do not believe anyone is correct about God, including yourself because the truth does not exist.

If you believe that your worldview is true (#1), then you must say that other worldviews are false because they are not consistent with what you know as the truth. It is nice that you want to be tolerant of other views, but that is a far cry from saying they are not wrong.

If you believe that there is no universal/absolute truth about God (#3), then none of humanity's conceptions of God are true except perhaps that there is no God. For if there was truly a God, there would be something against which worldviews could be judged to be right or wrong. If there is not a God, then there can be no absolute truth about him (exept that he does not exist.)

So, PLEASE let's got to it. Do you believe that your conception of God is Absolutely/Universally TRUE? I am not asking if everyone THINKS it's true. I am asking if it is REALLY true.

Yes - it is true. But - again - that does not mean that other conceptions of God are false as you keep saying. The truth is a combination of everything - other conceptions of God are 'part' of the God I speak of. They are 'part' of the truth..

You will use this as your 'logical contradiction' "If one is True - one must be false" - however - You do not believe in a God of any kind... BUT - it appears that you believe 'if' a God does exist ( He/she/all) - has a mind like man... with the same hopes and fears - the same logic of man - the same true and false. We are 'part' of God - But - not the complete manifestation - God is so much more - your true and false fade away like the fog in the morning Sun.

'Right' often means that people just adhere to traditional attitudes and beliefs.... and Truth' often means conforming to already held ideas.... and 'Opinion' a judgment.

Beaudreaux: You seem to be teaching that logical contradictions (e.g. people who hold mutually exclusive positions are both correct) are to be embraced. How am I interpreting this incorrectly?

You (like others) believe there is no God... 'You' believe you are correct. Others believe in some type of God... 'they' believe they are correct. Which groups are correct?

Beaudreaux: So, you do not deny Judaism as a true path? Even though you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judgment
Yahweh, The OT states that you should not work the Sabbath...and - your male or female 'slave' should also not do any work ?? You did not think slavery to be wrong?

Yahweh, The OT states that working the Sabbath or being disrespectful to ones parents are crimes that require a punishment of 'Death'... If you would have told me that this is the word of God and I must obey - I would have told you to F Off!

Yahweh and Allah, The OT and the Koran state that Adulterer's should be stoned to 'Death'... I shake my head in disbelief. (Emphasis added)

Beaudreaux: Is sure LOOKS like you don't believe this is a true path. Or do you want to take back these words?

It is a true path if it is the one you have chosen and accepted. That does not mean that it is a path that I wish to take. I am only pointing out barbaric teachings. I take back none of my words.

Beaudreaux: No, when I asked you if there was a universally TRUE conception of God among the human race you said "no".

There is 'no' Universally true conception of God among the human race - there are too many religions, too many different beliefs.

 

[Judgment]

Roli: I second that motion !!!!!!!!

Hi Roli... Amen to Jesus!

 

[Beaudreaux]

Yes - it is true. But - again - that does not mean that other conceptions of God are false as you keep saying. The truth is a combination of everything - other conceptions of God are 'part' of the God I speak of. They are 'part' of the truth..

You will use this as your 'logical contradiction' "If one is True - one must be false" - however - You do not believe in a God of any kind... BUT - it appears that you believe 'if' a God does exist ( He/she/all) - has a mind like man... with the same hopes and fears - the same logic of man - the same true and false. We are 'part' of God - But - not the complete manifestation - God is so much more - your true and false fade away like the fog in the morning Sun.

(For the rest of this post, please understand that the word "true" means "absolutely true" and not true "for an individual")These two paragraphs really sum up your point of view, in my opinion. From them we can derive some absolute truths about it.

1. While it seems to make you uncomfortable if I point it out, you clearly embrace logical contradictions and your worldview is openly illogical. You inisist that both of the following statements are absolutely true:
   • My worldview is correct.
   • Other worldviews that state that I am incorrect are correct.
2. You do not believe in accepted definitions of true and false and, therefore, do not believe in human logic which is all about true and false and the rules they follow.

You cannott have it both ways. You cannot reject logic in one breath and say that your position is not illogical in the next.

'Right' often means that people just adhere to traditional attitudes and beliefs.... and Truth' often means conforming to already held ideas.... and 'Opinion' a judgment.

Yes, an opinion is a judgement (Hey! I just caught the parallel with your name. Cool!), but Right and Truth have never had the meanings you are assigning. In fact, your definitions are almost direct opposites of their real meanings. If something is absolutely/universally right, then it is right regardless of tradional attitudes and beliefs. "Truth" does not conform to anyone's ideas. It is absolute and universal and values are measured against it, not the other way around.

You (like others) believe there is no God... 'You' believe you are correct. Others believe in some type of God... 'they' believe they are correct. Which groups are correct?

I believe I am correct, but I cannot be sure. One thing I CAN be sure of is that ONE of us is right and ONE of us is wrong. We cannot both be correct.

It is a true path if it is the one you have chosen and accepted.

No! No! No! No! No! God! why is this so hard for you????? Just because someone has chosen and accepted a path does not mean it is TRUE. Everyone cannot all be right, no matter how warm and fuzzy it would make people feel to believe it.

 

[Judgment]

Beaudreaux: For the rest of this post, please understand that the word "true" means "absolutely true" and not true "for an individual")These two paragraphs really sum up your point of view, in my opinion. From them we can derive some absolute truths about it.

1. While it seems to make you uncomfortable if I point it out, you clearly embrace logical contradictions and your worldview is openly illogical. You inisist that both of the following statements are absolutely true:
   • My worldview is correct.
   • Other worldviews that state that I am incorrect are correct.
2. You do not believe in accepted definitions of true and false and, therefore, do not believe in human logic which is all about true and false and the rules they follow.

You cannott have it both ways. You cannot reject logic in one breath and say that your position is not illogical in the next.

We have gone over this.

Post 252# Me: "There is a Universal correctness in many things - like mathematics. But - when speaking of 'right' or 'true' the Universal correctness you speak of - many times - can be found only in the eye of the beholder ... I believe I am right and true with my beliefs concerning God.. Muslims believe their beliefs are right and true... Jews believe their beliefs are right and true... Christians believe their beliefs are right and true, Buddhists believe their beliefs are right and true - you - believe your beliefs are right and true..and so on... There is no Universal Right and True to be found there - only a mixture of ideas."

This absolute Truth you speak of can be fleeting - especially - when discussing God. You can ask 100 people for this Truth and get 100 different answers - and they all believe they have that elusive truth. You are discussing Human Logic - I am discussing God - You will find that the two will seem incompatible at times.

Beaudreaux: Yes, an opinion is a judgement (Hey! I just caught the parallel with your name. Cool!), but Right and Truth have never had the meanings you are assigning. In fact, your definitions are almost direct opposites of their real meanings. If something is absolutely/universally right, then it is right regardless of tradional attitudes and beliefs. "Truth" does not conform to anyone's ideas. It is absolute and universal and values are measured against it, not the other way around.

There is more than one meaning for each word. And 'Truth' can indeed conform to someone's ideas.

Beaudreaux: I believe I am correct, but I cannot be sure. One thing I CAN be sure of is that ONE of us is right and ONE of us is wrong. We cannot both be correct.

The astronauts that journeyed to the moon are the only human beings that were able to see the Earth from a distance - this enabled them to see the entire beautiful world in all its glory. What they saw was a Garden of Eden – a peaceful place – or so it looks from space. They were all struck not only by its amazing beauty but also its amazing fragility. All of these men came back changed – none of the petty concerns of our day to day lives concerned them to the degree they would have before. They were enlightened – And they still try to explain to all they see….

Others are enlightened in a different way. They are able to speak directly to our souls using the gift of words. You hear it from person to person – the light has shone upon them! The beauty in those words transcends time and helps guide us through the smoke and mirrors of our own creation…

My long winded point - The people that believe in these God's feel enlightened - some are lead astray - but... the majority are lifted up - the weak and the weary, the hungry and the strong, the sad and the happy. The Joy and Hope they feel is the truth.

Of course... you can be enlightened by not believing in any God..... And - many of these God's say there is only 'One Way'. With the God I speak of - There is not only one way - there are infinite possibilities. Within the infinite possibilities - Both can be right. All of these other God's are 'part' of the God I speak of - they are as true as you..... What I speak of is not God in the conventional way... So I will be dismissed by most.... what I speak of is not 'God' to you or them... but is as true as me.

Beaudreaux: No! No! No! No! No! God! why is this so hard for you????? Just because someone has chosen and accepted a path does not mean it is TRUE. Everyone cannot all be right, no matter how warm and fuzzy it would make people feel to believe it.

'Truth' often means conforming to already held ideas.

 

[Beaudreaux]

We have gone over this.

Post 252# Me: "There is a Universal correctness in many things - like mathematics. But - when speaking of 'right' or 'true' the Universal correctness you speak of - many times - can be found only in the eye of the beholder

Yeah, we've gone over it many times and your answers always change. You are all over the map with this stuff. You say your worldview is absolutely "true", then you say that worldviews that disagree with you are also absolutely true. You say that your position is logical, then you say that the logic of man "fades away" when discussing God. You say you understand absolute/universal truth, then you say that truth conforms to ideas. You say you would never say that another worldview is incorrect, then you shake your head in disbelief at the teachings of other worldviews. You talk about MY logic as though I invented it when understanding of logic and truth existed hundreds of years before I was born. You talk about truth like it is an opinion (true "for me" is the most amazing oxymoron I have ever read) and you talk about opinion as though it were truth.

You don't even pretend that there is any consistency in your worldview. You change your position with almost every post. How can you not see that you have lost all credibility in this thread?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

[/color][/size][/font]

Yeah, we've gone over it many times and your answers always change. You are all over the map with this stuff. You say your worldview is absolutely "true", then you say that worldviews that disagree with you are also absolutely true. You say that your position is logical, then you say that the logic of man "fades away" when discussing God. You say you understand absolute/universal truth, then you say that truth conforms to ideas. You say you would never say that another worldview is incorrect, then you shake your head in disbelief at the teachings of other worldviews. You talk about MY logic as though I invented it when understanding of logic and truth existed hundreds of years before I was born. You talk about truth like it is an opinion (true "for me" is the most amazing oxymoron I have ever read) and you talk about opinion as though it were truth.

You don't even pretend that there is any consistency in your worldview. You change your position with almost every post. How can you not see that you have lost all credibility in this thread?
[/font]

Logical consistency and clarity of meaning do not lend themselves to the cultivation of an esoteric and profound aura.

 

[Judgment]

Beaudreaux: Yeah, we've gone over it many times and your answers always change. You are all over the map with this stuff. You say your worldview is absolutely "true", then you say that worldviews that disagree with you are also absolutely true. You say that your position is logical, then you say that the logic of man "fades away" when discussing God. You say you understand absolute/universal truth, then you say that truth conforms to ideas. You say you would never say that another worldview is incorrect, then you shake your head in disbelief at the teachings of other worldviews. You talk about MY logic as though I invented it when understanding of logic and truth existed hundreds of years before I was born. You talk about truth like it is an opinion (true "for me" is the most amazing oxymoron I have ever read) and you talk about opinion as though it were truth.

You don't even pretend that there is any consistency in your worldview. You change your position with almost every post. How can you not see that you have lost all credibility in this thread?

My position has never changed - I have only explained my position when questioned. I have answered every question given to me as lucidly as I can.
It is not healthy to be so self righteous simply because you can not comprehend.

And.. the elusive 'Truth'. Some claim no knowledge of it, some claim to be the righteous owners of it - and some spend a lifetime seeking it. When a sweeping statement is made.. such as... 'The Truth is a combination of 'Everything' - then - the door is opened for ridicule and calls of blasphemy.. How can he be right if she is right and their truth is not the same? How indeed yell the cries! But...Looking through their eyes, their souls becomes known, listen to the cries, they will hear their your own.

You have a limited knowledge of what 'Truth' can mean. There is not just one theory as you seem to believe.

Consensus theory
Main article: Consensus theory of truth
Consensus theory holds that truth is whatever is agreed upon, or in some versions, might come to be agreed upon, by some specified group. Such a group might include all human beings, or a subset thereof consisting of more than one person.
Among the current advocates of consensus theory as a useful accounting of the concept of "truth" is the philosopher Jürgen Habermas.[21] Habermas maintains that truth is what would be agreed upon in an ideal speech situation.[22] Among the current strong critics of consensus theory is the philosopher Nicholas Rescher.[23]

As far as losing any credibility... That is in the eye of the beholder. An atheist will enter this arena with their mind already made up - any mention of a God 'at all' will bring up a red flag. Those that already believe in 'Any God' at all - will already have their mind's made up... if what I speak of does not match with their beliefs I will be thrown out in to the wind. The cards were stacked before me before I began.... I am well aware of this. I am not looking for anyone's acceptance - and I stand by all I have said in this thread.

 

[Judgment]

atotalstranger: Logical consistency and clarity of meaning do not lend themselves to the cultivation of an esoteric and profound aura.

The Stranger... the one that has added nothing here. Take my hand, I also help you aboard the ship of fools..... I can see your cabin from mine.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The Stranger... the one that has added nothing here. Take my hand, I also help you aboard the ship of fools..... I can see your cabin from mine.

Sorry fella - not on that cruise.

 

[Judgment]

atotalstranger: Sorry fella - not on that cruise.

Your self righteous posts say differently.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Your self righteous posts say differently.

Hey, take it easy, bro. His posts are true for him and part of the everything that is truth. How dare you call him self righteous.

 

[Beaudreaux]

You have a limited knowledge of what 'Truth' can mean. There is not just one theory as you seem to believe.

You do realize that the consensus view of Truth indicates that your beliefs are not true, right? I don't see anything NEAR a consensus on this potpourri of logical contradictions.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

I believe.... God is bigger than most religions realize & there is only one true God. God is every Atom & Molecule & Quark, God is your PC and the desk it sits on, God is Me & You, God is all of our thoughts, God is every Heaven & Hell... every religion, God is the Trees & Rocks & Oceans, God is the Earth & Solar System, God is the Galaxy & Universe - every Universe and every dream, God is - All That Is. Debate anyone?

Welcome to Hinduism...