The thoughts of God

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
God (I think, since none of us are God) would not commit suicide because it's evil and He won't commit an evil act.

Who would punish him? Does he go to some kind of gods hell if he commit suicide? And who would send him there? Gods god?

And what about satan? Can he commit suicide? Does he go to hell (home) for that?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Who would punish him? Does he go to some kind of gods hell if he commit suicide? And who would send him there? Gods god?

And what about satan? Can he commit suicide? Does he go to hell (home) for that?

Irrelevent, because God can't sin.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So God can defy logic?

That sounds a lot like saying God is not a being which exists within the confines of logic, which would lead to any "logical" arguments for God being negated.

Also, why of suicide evil?

PreCISEly! Yes, God is supernatural--He can defy, fold, spindle and mutilate logic.
As for the suicide thing, I didn't bring it up originally and personally, I don't think it is always a sinful act. That's one of those things where I think we all have to tend our own garden on.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
PreCISEly! Yes, God is supernatural--He can defy, fold, spindle and mutilate logic.
As for the suicide thing, I didn't bring it up originally and personally, I don't think it is always a sinful act. That's one of those things where I think we all have to tend our own garden on.

If p, then q; p; therefore q.

How can that logical statement be made illogical without also being made meaningless? If the rules of logic are violated, whether by supernatural agency or not, the result is not some “supernatural logic”—the result is incoherence.

Originally posted by vistesd
If p, then q; p; therefore q.

How can that logical statement be made illogical without also being made meaningless? If the rules of logic are violated, whether by supernatural agency or not, the result is not some “supernatural logic”—the result is incoherence.

you say 'incoherence', I say 'miraculous'...🙂

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
you say 'incoherence', I say 'miraculous'...🙂

Perhaps you misunderstood my point: it had nothing to do with supernature or the miraculous. If a statement is illogical it is illogical. An illogical claim, or a nonsensical claim, gains nothing by applying it to God.

Suppose I say: “Carrots want to save everyone; carrots cannot fail to achieve what they want; not everyone is saved.”

There is a logical contradiction in that sentence. Merely substituting the word “God” for the word “carrots” does not make the sentence more sensible. Calling it “miraculous” does not make it less senseless.

Suppose I say: “Carrots are omnipotent, but that doesn’t mean they can’t fail.” Well, at that point, you should at least ask how I define “omnipotent.”

If someone’s talk about God (or carrots) is senseless, why should I pay any attention at all? Obviously, their concept of God (or carrots) is incoherent—whether or not there is really anything coherent to be said about God (or carrots).

I do not claim that sensible God-talk is impossible. I suspect that some theists trap themselves into senseless God-talk because they are unwilling to relinquish contradictory thoughts about God. A God, for example, who wants (wills, wishes: the Greek word is the same) to save everyone, but who fails in the face of moral evil by human agents, is not thereby incoherent—such a God is simply not omnipotent in the matter. [I just use that as an example.]

If there are things that cannot be sensibly understood—and hence sensibly communicated—about God, so be it. Silence is then called for.

Suppose I say: “Dardyvart is a supernatural creature that has no legs, and walks on three legs.”

You say: “I don’t understand. That makes no sense.”

I say: “It’s miraculous!”

“Miraculous” does not change the fact that you have no idea what I’m talking about—or that I really have no idea what I’m talking about, either. Logic is what makes sure that we know what we’re talking about.

________________________________

EDIT:

Re: “Sensible God-talk”: One does have to distinguish between poetic/metaphorical (and allegorical) speech and propositional speech.

When the poet Dylan Thomas says: “The force that through the green fuse drives the flower”, it is pretty clear that he isn’t making a serious proposition about botany.

I think most (good) God-talk falls into that category. It is only nonsensical propositional speech that I really have a problem with.

Originally posted by vistesd
Perhaps you misunderstood my point: it had nothing to do with supernature or the miraculous. If a statement is illogical it is illogical. An illogical claim, or a nonsensical claim, gains nothing by applying it to God.

Suppose I say: “Carrots want to save everyone; carrots cannot fail to achieve what they want; not everyone is saved.”

There is ...[text shortened]... o that category. It is only nonsensical propositional speech that I really have a problem with.

My opinion is: you know those gibberish sentences you referenced, about carrots and dardyvart? Well that's a perfect example of the VERY BEST of our (human) knowledge and intellect, in comparison to the mind of God. When we put forth deathless prose or meticulous algorithms, God looks at it as the father of a 5-year-old would peruse His son's painting of an alligator. Of course, it looks nothing like an alligator, but a good Father would proudly pat the son on the head and praise him for the work he put into it, then he'd magnetize it to the celestial refrigerator.
It's really simple: God's ways and thoughts andreasons are soooo many light years beyond our comprehension, it would be like teaching an amoeba how to fix a carburator.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
My opinion is: you know those gibberish sentences you referenced, about carrots and dardyvart? Well that's a perfect example of the VERY BEST of our (human) knowledge and intellect, in comparison to the mind of God. When we put forth deathless prose or meticulous algorithms, God looks at it as the father of a 5-year-old would peruse His son's painting o ears beyond our comprehension, it would be like teaching an amoeba how to fix a carburator.

It's really simple: God's ways and thoughts and reasons are soooo many light years beyond our comprehension, it would be like teaching an amoeba how to fix a carburator.

If that is the case, then there is nothing meaningful at all that anyone can say about God.

If there is anything meaningful that we can say about God (or anybody else has ever said about God), then it is within our comprehension—else, it is not to us meaningful.

(I would apply that to what you just said about God, except that I understand what you are driving at. Of course, when you say that God has thoughts and reasons, I wonder if those words have any meaning at all if they are not what we would recognize as “thoughts” and “reasons”.)

EDIT:

Suppose I say: “God is like an alligator.”

But, you think, God is really nothing like an alligator.

You may pat me on the head, but I still have no idea at all what God is like... And if I have no idea what God is like, I have no idea whether or not there is a God... Is there a shukwannit? How can you say yes or no if you don’t know what I mean by “shukwannit”? The letters g-o-d are no more special. If those letters (that sign g-o-d) means just: “That (whatever) which we cannot comprehend”, I’m happy to accept that meaning of that word-sign.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
It's really simple: God's ways and thoughts andreasons are soooo many light years beyond our comprehension, it would be like teaching an amoeba how to fix a carburator.

In other words you know absolutely nothing concrete about God so resort to spewing out nice sounding nonsense. Is it possible that you call 'God', that which you know nothing about and thus cannot really talk about other than saying you know nothing about it? If what you have to say about God is infact meaningless then why bother? If we go back to your child analogy, its like a child who hasn't learnt to speak trying to tell his friend about what colour his latest toy is: "boo da da be da ba!"
Also, since anything we say about God is infact meaningless, we might as well say something like "God doesn't exist". After all he is so miraculous that he can simultaneously not exist and be an ogre and be a little green toad all at the same time - and for all time.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b][b]

(I would apply that to what you just said about God, except that I understand what you are driving at.

I was intrigued by your points until I got to the above sentence, which implies that you think I either have some kind of agenda, or that I am "baiting" you. I'm not sure what you mean by it, but you are WRONG. "YOU" understand what I'm driving at?! Heck "I" don't even know what I'm "driving at"! I just answer as honestly as I can.

Personally I think all those who claim at every chance to know what God thinks and what he wants are clearly deluded. Their arrogance is appalling.

God does not exist because there is no such thing as a first cause. God can not create himself (what would be the need?)and if God was created by something else he would not be god. god is just a concept - a useful tool to explain difficult conceptual stuff to those who do not have the brains to understand what ultimate reality really is.

Is it not strange that God can create the universe which is mind-boggling vast but he can't appear in the sky and say hi once in a while?

The Bible is completely unreliable as a guide to what god thinks and wants as it is full of contradictions and nonsense - so where do all these people who claim such an intimate correspondence get their information? Do they hear voices?

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I was intrigued by your points until I got to the above sentence, which implies that you think I either have some kind of agenda, or that I am "baiting" you. I'm not sure what you mean by it, but you are WRONG. "YOU" understand what I'm driving at?! Heck "I" don't even know what I'm "driving at"! I just answer as honestly as I can.

[/b]LOL!! No, I was not implying that you have a hidden agenda; I certainly did not think you were baiting me.

I just meant that, if you say God’s thoughts and ways are light years beyond our comprehension, there would have to be some comprehension of the nature of God’s thoughts and ways in order to even say that about them—so that there could be a contradiction right there. But that, I thought, would be kind of pedantic—and you could always respond by saying something like, “Well that’s all that I comprehend (or that we can comprehend).” But, then I might respond... Well, you see how that round and round, to no real point.

Yeah, I often have to grapple with my own developing thought, and the discussion helps me to clarify my own thinking as I go—hopefully, anyway.

Be well, PF.

Originally posted by vistesd
LOL!! No, I was not implying that you have a hidden agenda; I certainly did not think you were baiting me.

I just meant that, if you say God’s thoughts and ways are light years beyond our comprehension, there would have to be some comprehension of the nature of God’s thoughts and ways in order to even say that about them—so that there [i]coul ...[text shortened]... nd the discussion helps me to clarify my own thinking as I go—hopefully, anyway.

Be well, PF.[/b]

Sorry I took that wrong, vist. I have learned here that most people who reply to me are filled with venom and are essentially schoolyard bullies...and I do NOT have, nor want, a thick skin. You are correct that the argument would become circular, as my only response would be that I understand those things that God wants me to understand, and not the others. In Revelation, for example, John was told by a celestial being to write down what hee was being shown, but NOT the words spoken by the Seven Thunders. Being me, I've always been quite curious what those Mighty 7 said that was so important or dangerous that John couldn't tell us. But, whaddya gonna do, right? He's God, so I have to wait. 🙂

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
God (I think, since none of us are God) would not commit suicide because it's evil and He won't commit an evil act. As for the other exercises in futility, God COULD do anything--He simply chooses not to do some things---such as committing suicide, asking unanswerable questions or manufacturing gargantuan boulders.

The usual monotheist definition for "evil" is "God's will". By that definition God could commit suicide and it would not be evil.

===================================

Personally I think all those who claim at every chance to know what God thinks and what he wants are clearly deluded. Their arrogance is appalling.

======================================


"Every chance?" by no means. But on some essential areas, hasn't God made His mind known commonly to a huge number of people through the Bible?

=========================================
God does not exist because there is no such thing as a first cause.
=======================================

But there should be a first cause of the number of days. Otherwise how could we arrive at today? We would have had to traverse an infinite number of days to arrive at today.

So the fact of today, strongly suggests there was a cause to create a day #1.

================================
God can not create himself (what would be the need?)and if God was created by something else he would not be god. god is just a concept - a useful tool to explain difficult conceptual stuff to those who do not have the brains to understand what ultimate reality really is.
=======================================

Well, the Bible never says that God created Himself. So I don't know where one would get that argument from.

The incarnation does show God becoming a man in Jesus Christ. In that case He became blended with His creation. The Uncreated was clothed in the created. This is wonder of incarnation.

God the Creator created man (Genesis 1:26). Then God the Uncreated and Eternal self existing and every existing one without origin - became a man - Jesus of Nazareth.

That is a paradox.

==================================
Is it not strange that God can create the universe which is mind-boggling vast but he can't appear in the sky and say hi once in a while?
=====================================


That's interesting. The Bible does show Him appearing in the sky in the Second Coming of Christ.

Since this is such a history concluding event of such splendour and significance, I guess He saves it up not doing it every week or every other decade even.

We do see God visible to the Israelites for a period of 80 days (?) on Mt. Sinai in the book of Exodus. Surprisingly enough, it didn't stop them from making a golden calf to worship and wanting to return to the place that God had just delivered them from - Egypt.

I'm beginning to think that the problem is on man's side.

What do you think?

=================================

The Bible is completely unreliable as a guide to what god thinks and wants as it is full of contradictions and nonsense - so where do all these people who claim such an intimate

======================================

Well, that may have to be resolved at the Last Judgment.

I'd rather bet that it does reveal not only God's mind on a number of things but also how to contact and fellowship with this God.

Then we can commune with Him and linger in His presence and be guided more and more as we learn to walk in the Holy Spirit.

I'm beginning to think the problem is on man's side.