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.
its really simple at this point. None of us really believe in an omni powered knuckled head that some bible thumpers try to push on on us.
so we are left with what we have.
the system around us is alive (size is in question)
the system around us in not alive
past lives
if we use the word belief its ok to describe reality anyway we want
if we say it with any confidence that means we should be ignored
be nice or you are wrong and nobody will repeat what you say unless its smash any god claim
wait and see
deny everything because some of us feel religion is so dangerous
everything but a deity is strawman
wait until somebody else tells us (waiting for it to hold up in some special court)
there is nothing and all spiritual people want to act smarter than they really are.
add any others
this aint all that hard to break down.
But I can see why they have to avoid what we are saying and focus on us. It just doesn't get us anywhere when we are trying to use a statement of belief about god as a weapon to fight religion. It good enough for theist, its good enough for atheist.
Carbon, on this planet, is looked up by plants to form cellulose, after it is extracted from the CO2 in the air.. The O2 is stripped off and released, which is then used by animals. Once that cellulose is "burned" either by fire or other less active processes, the C is released back into he air as CO2. It is a self-perpetuating system, but it is NOT, in any rational meaning of the word "ALIVE"
Apply this to any system on Earth or the rest of the Universe.
These processes are on "auto-pilot" so to speak, but are NOT ALIVE in any rational or accurate meaning of the word. Nor do they, in part, or whole, constitute a "god". They simply aren't/don't..
Why people like pyrite have to go to the lengths they do to pretend that they are, and that they "see", what others don't (perhaps hallucinations) is beyond rational - FAR beyond. They pretend it makes them "special", but in reality in makes them especially-stupid.
In all fairness, they may not even be aware of the irrationality they participate in.
Carbon, on this planet, is looked up by plants to form cellulose, after it is extracted from the CO2 in the air.. The O2 is stripped off and released, which is then used by animals. Once that cellulose is "burned" either by fire or other less active processes, the C is released back into he air as CO2. It is a self-perpetuating system, but it is NOT, in any rational meaning of the word "ALIVE"
Apply this to any system on Earth or the rest of the Universe.
These processes are on "auto-pilot" so to speak, but are NOT ALIVE in any rational or accurate meaning of the word. Nor do they, in part, or whole, constitute a "god". They simply aren't/don't..
Why people like pyrite have to go to the lengths they do to pretend that they are, and that they "see", what others don't (perhaps hallucinations) is beyond rational - FAR beyond. They pretend it makes them "special", but in reality in makes them especially-stupid.
In all fairness, they may not even be aware of the irrationality they participate in.
You still have not given any decent rebuttal as to the objective reason as to "Why they cannot constitute a God"...except that you try to limit "God" to just "Religious Deity" type "beings" that are "alive".
Of course, you can for yourself, limit what constitutes God to just that...but you can't reasonably hold others to that limit.
Especially since it can be absolutely proved as a fact that "God" is known to be defined outside of just Religious Deities, Beings, and things that are "alive" in a anthropomorphic sense.
So...now is your chance: Why is it they cannot constitute a "God" Entity?
You still have not given any decent rebuttal as to the objective reason as to "Why they cannot constitute a God"...except that you try to limit "God" to just "Religious Deity" type "beings" that are "alive".
Of course, you can for yourself, limit what constitutes God to just that...but you can't reasonably hold others to that limit.
Especially since it can be absolutely proved as a fact that "God" is known to be defined outside of just Religious Deities, Beings, and things that are "alive" in a anthropomorphic sense.
So...now is your chance: Why is it they cannot constitute a "God" Entity?
You play childish, silly word games, and act if it is brilliant observation/deduction. It isn't, it is just rubbish. They are so absurd as to be self-rebutting. Dare I say asinine?
What you call absolutely proved is a just a word-game rabbit hole you make numerous trips down, nothing more.
The same way they can't constitute a Toad, or a T-Rex or a Tree or a Trout or a Tern or a Twit.
The same way a mountain range can't be a motorcycle.
If you think these answers are silly, it is only because your question/assertion is silly. You're hangiing onto rubbish with both hands, thinking it is a bolt of fine silk. Well, it isn't and it can't. They just aren't, and it is MORONic to assert that they are be.
Last edited by Salty Water; 06-08-2021 at 06:07 PM..
You play childish, silly word games, and act if it is brilliant observation/deduction. It isn't, it is just rubbish. They are so absurd as to be self-rebutting. Dare I say asinine?
What you call absolutely proved is a just a word-game rabbit hole you make numerous trips down, nothing more.
The same way they can't constitute a Toad, or a T-Rex or a Tree or a Trout or a Tern or a Twit.
Ahhhh, yes...the "word game" argument.
The bogus argument y'all break out when you have no real argument or evidence against it.
Nope...it's not any kind of "word game". And I can prove that.
If it is...Tells us, objectively, how it is a "word game"?
Word & terms are words & terms...they have known meanings and definitions.
I can PROVE the definition of "G-O-D" comports with what I perceive as God.
I CAN PROVE IT...and you can't prove it doesn't.
You want the proof...AGAIN?
As usual you have no real rebuttal or argument that is logical and reasonable...just like I thought.
You play childish, silly word games, and act if it is brilliant observation/deduction. It isn't, it is just rubbish. They are so absurd as to be self-rebutting. Dare I say asinine?
What you call absolutely proved is a just a word-game rabbit hole you make numerous trips down, nothing more.
The same way they can't constitute a Toad, or a T-Rex or a Tree or a Trout or a Tern or a Twit.
The same way a mountain range can't be a motorcycle.
If you think these answers are silly, it is only because your question/assertion is silly. You're hangiing onto rubbish with both hands, thinking it is a bolt of fine silk. Well, it isn't and it can't. They just aren't, and it is MORONic to assert that they are be.
You are right...No definition or meaning of "Mountain Range" is a motorcycle....or a Toad, T-Rex, Tree, Trout, Tern, or Twit.
But that is inconsequential to the fact that the definition and meanings of "God" are The Supreme and/or Ultimate Reality, also Something of Supreme Value.
So...I play no "word game"...that really is the definition and meanings. And you know it.
It is actually Y'all playing, "Definition and meaning of word ignorance".
Here...educate yourself: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/god
The very 1st line, and #3 is the God I perceive.
You have no real rebuttal for that (except insults indicative of your character), and you know it. So, you just trash-talk.
You are right...No definition or meaning of "Mountain Range" is a motorcycle....or a Toad, T-Rex, Tree, Trout, Tern, or Twit.
But that is inconsequential to the fact that the definition and meanings of "God" are The Supreme and/or Ultimate Reality, also Something of Supreme Value.
So...I play no "word game"...that really is the definition and meanings. And you know it.
It is actually Y'all playing, "Definition and meaning of word ignorance".
Here...educate yourself: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/god
The very 1st line, and #3 is the God I perceive.
You have no real rebuttal for that (except insults indicative of your character), and you know it. So, you just trash-talk.
I tire of your silly word games, so I will cut you lose to ply your nonsense on someone else, if they will listen. I think most people, like I now have become, are listened-out with you. Ciao.
I tire of your silly word games, so I will cut you lose to ply your nonsense on someone else, if they will listen. I think most people, like I now have become, are listened-out with you. Ciao.
Still no logical rebuttal of any substance...gotcha.
Time to say goodbye & run away so you don't have to actually produce a real data based argument.
Byyyyyyyye Salty! Take good care!
Yeah...those that are full of it, tend to view those that aren't, as "hollow".
Put up another ten thousand or so posts that bash and mock the beliefs of others. That might pep you up some.
What I think the other poster should do is stop worrying about being entertained, and start thinking about whether or not his postings are furthering whatever his vaguely stated beliefs are.
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.
