Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
thats is true. where the "truth" comes is when we list the traits of your god. We then compare them to the traits of the thing I don't call god. And add more people to the discussion.
If the traits are the same ... then all I can say "I don't call it god." or maybe "You are wrong for calling it god."
I would be completely wrong if I kept repeating that you have no proof of your god.
Well AA, that's the thing about "ALL" as God, relative to traits.
"ALL" is any & every trait too. There is no trait it isn't, or does not possess.
"ALL" is anything you can think of...including the thought.
"ALL" is all. That's why it is God to me.
If "ALL" isn't God...then we shouldn't even have such a word/title.
Though I am totally cool with those that don't consider it God, think of something else as God, or do not think anything is God.
What I do find to not be valid...is for others to tell me that I have no proof the God that I perceive objectively exists.
This is at least within range of the topic and doesn't try to make a spurious case by sneering and bashing.
These do.
Lads, get off the trashtalk and back on topic.
Virtually every mention of me and my views emanating from your posts are sneering, bashing and trashtalk, Arq. How dare you pretend to reprimand anyone else for doing it!
This adolescent finger-pointing and bickering is going to stop. I will keep deleting posts until it does stop. If I have to keep wasting too much time deleting posts I am going to start issuing infractions. It's time to grow up, everybody.
State your positions without the personal remark nonsense. Thank you.
what is a more sound method to evaluate what people say?
1) We have to deal with thiest think so we have determine reliability based on theist-think.
or
2) use data and the scientific method to see what claims are reliable.
there is no such thing as "theist think"
because (a) not all theists think the same way.
and (b) the claims seen on CD made by atheists about "how theists think" are invariably not accurate.
there is no such thing as "theist think"
because (a) not all theists think the same way.
and (b) the claims seen on CD made by atheists about "how theists think" are invariably not accurate.
Yes and no.
What it is actually going on is personality types are expressing beliefs. so look at a cluster B personality expressing atheism and/or theism. Hear I am talking about a faith based atheist, not a rationalist that people call atheist.
and you look for weakness to exploit Tzaph, not strengths to build on; to me anyway. So I struggle talking about forming a rational belief with your type of person. Weather its atheism or theism it doesn't matter to em.
Well AA, that's the thing about "ALL" as God, relative to traits.
"ALL" is any & every trait too. There is no trait it isn't, or does not possess.
"ALL" is anything you can think of...including the thought.
"ALL" is all. That's why it is God to me.
If "ALL" isn't God...then we shouldn't even have such a word/title.
Though I am totally cool with those that don't consider it God, think of something else as God, or do not think anything is God.
What I do find to not be valid...is for others to tell me that I have no proof the God that I perceive objectively exists.
yeah, see that. For me, "God" is like the term "free will". Based on what we know today, they are null terms.
And I agree, saying you have no proof when "everything" is your proof, is pointless. I can't even do it because you have evidence. And if there is one skill set I have, its science.
Its like you are pointing a tree and saying, there is the bark, that is a leaf, those are roots, and you are calling it a big bush. I can't argue anything about it. I only can argue that we usually call it a tree.
This adolescent finger-pointing and bickering is going to stop. I will keep deleting posts until it does stop. If I have to keep wasting too much time deleting posts I am going to start issuing infractions. It's time to grow up, everybody.
State your positions without the personal remark nonsense. Thank you.
yeah, see that. For me, "God" is like the term "free will". Based on what we know today, they are null terms.
And I agree, saying you have no proof when "everything" is your proof, is pointless. I can't even do it because you have evidence. And if there is one skill set I have, its science.
Its like you are pointing a tree and saying, there is the bark, that is a leaf, those are roots, and you are calling it a big bush. I can't argue anything about it. I only can argue that we usually call it a tree.
so how could we close that gap?
As far as Pantheism is concerned...it is really a matter of perception.
I perceive "ALL" as God to me/us...in fact, once that perception "clicked", I wasn't able to view it any other way.
"ALL" is as Godly as it gets.
Just off the fact that everything and everyone is created by and through it (it is the Creator)...from the myriad rearrangements of "ALL"...is enough to establish my perception of it as GOD.
As far as Pantheism is concerned...it is really a matter of perception.
I perceive "ALL" as God to me/us...in fact, once that perception "clicked", I wasn't able to view it any other way.
"ALL" is as Godly as it gets.
Just off the fact that everything and everyone is created by and through it (it is the Creator)...from the myriad rearrangements of "ALL"...is enough to establish my perception of it as GOD.
yup, For me, because I am dork, I need to look at "all" and see what about the system is causing this reaction by people? Obviously I mean everything, but lets just focus on people. What about the system is causing people to be, well, people? Then when I think I have a reason, I pretend I am 100 % wrong and go prove the exact opposite (or some reasonable degree)with the same data. I laughed at the "what if I am wrong thread", I thought, I assume I am wrong ...doesn't everybody?
That's why I go with, "all" is at least, partly living. Living explains your view, trans view, mystics view. It predicts evolution and is lock in to the standard model.
I don't think the whole universe is alive now but it may have been. And some people think if there is a BIG CRUNCH, that since parts of it are aware now, it may wake up when it re-collapses.
But I guess people like me and talking do make money. We kind of agree and there is nothing else to say. Social change is just not good enough reason to deny reasonable conclusions for me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
