Truth

Mr rwingett
Also the the muslims conclude that if they blow themselves up, they will get 70 virgins in the after life.
I bet god has something to say about that nonsense

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Mr rwingett
Also the the muslims conclude that if they blow themselves up, they will get 70 virgins in the after life.
I bet god has something to say about that nonsense

I fail to see where you get your information on what god may or may not think. You can't claim on the one hand that god is outside of our scope of experience and then on the other claim to have any knowledge about his alleged thought process.

Mr rwingett
your conclusion that inteligence is only possible in a sentient being is erronious, because you are placing god on the same level as humans.
god is inteligence,.....not that he has intelligence but he is the intelligence

Mr rwingett
i have not at any time said what god is thinking, or not thinking, but whilst trying to inject some humour in this conversation, you have taken it the wrong way cheeers vishvahetu

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Mr rwingett
your conclusion that inteligence is only possible in a sentient being is erronious, because you are placing god on the same level as humans.
god is inteligence,.....not that he has intelligence but he is the intelligence

Once again...this claim of yours has no more validity than the claim that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. I can see no qualitative distinction between the two.

Mr rwingett
A person may observe a thing, and then coment on that thing, for example, i directly observe the many differant creations throughout this world, and conclude that god is intelligent!
But i have not observed that god died on the cross and then told me, he did it for my sins.....cheers vishvahetu

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
They are all ignorant of real knowledge and truth of god, but they teach their nonsense to the little children, and thus the ignorance spreads, how sad it is.
I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
But their must be some rules
rule 1. ...[text shortened]... feat, which is really not defeat but a new realization
I will start by saying god is not a male

Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
Does this "and the rest" encompass your beliefs, or is this eventuality still in progress?

I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
What about those of us you are already straight? Will you set us gay?

But their must be some rules
Furst, their must be gud speleng...

rule 1. you can not quote from any book
What about books with really, really good quotes?

rule 2. if you beleive something, it doesn,t make it fact
Seriously? I always believed that very same thing!

rule 3. you must adhere to sensability
Like friggin' glue.

rule 4. you must respect logic and reason
Like Tom Cruise in "Magnolia," right? "Respect the logic! And tame the reason!"

rule 5. you must accept a higher power
Except, of course, if you are able to smoke more than the next highest power. Then, you are the higher power, and he is forced to respect you. Or, in lieu of respecting you, he has the option of smoking more. After that, it gets a little fuzzy.

rule 6. you must accept defeat, which is really not defeat but a new realization
I accept your defeat and have come to realize this is very, very new.

I will start by saying god is not a male
Um, start what?

Mr Freaky KBH
Wow, you are seriously witty and funny, thanks heaps because it was starting to get a bit dryyyyyy.....cheers vishvahetu

In regards to the exchange between vishavetnu and rwingett I would like to say that this is the sort of subject that you have to get "into the spirit of". Pure scientific reasoning will not furthur our understanding of the subject,( except for maybe quantum, a branch of science that's still in its infancy), nor will pure spiritual/religous specualtion. We must have a bit of both to proceed.
I see vishavetnu as employing both science and "religon" to arrive at his assertions.
God is not provable by pure newtonian physics. This only maps the "surface" of reality. God is only approachable with starting with a correct premise and following this premise through to its logical conclusions. Cheers to both of you!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Chrisianity, Islam, Judaism, and the rest, do not have or know truth about god and life.
Does this "and the rest" encompass your beliefs, or is this eventuality still in progress?

I will debate any person, of any religion, and set them straight.
What about those of us you are already straight? Will you set us gay?

But their must b is is very, very new.

[b]I will start by saying god is not a male
Um, start what?[/b]

Hey Freaks, you may have missed my question to you in another thread.
Could you please answer the following: Does God have a penis?

I remember Robbie (carrobie)'s explanation of why God is refferred to as "He". His reasoning was along the lines that God displays "fatherly" love and that it,(ie, that god is male), is not to be taken literally. Do you have a similar take?

edit: oh , I've found your answer in the other thread, still you may want to comment on robbies take

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Mr rwingett
A person may observe a thing, and then coment on that thing, for example, i directly observe the many differant creations throughout this world, and conclude that god is intelligent!
But i have not observed that god died on the cross and then told me, he did it for my sins.....cheers vishvahetu

A person may observe a thing, and then coment on that thing, for example, i directly observe the many differant creations throughout this world, and conclude that god is intelligent!


But the way you state this seems to smack of question-begging: The assumption that whatever you observe is a “creation” already presumes a “creator”. I observe many different things in this world; I do not observe that those things are “creations”.

Both the existence of the universe and it’s coherence can be simply taken as brute facts. In fact, it may be that they have to be so taken even to raise the questions of whether the universe was “created” and the nature of such a “creator”. At that level, both you and one who sees no evidence of the universe being a “creation” have started with the same brute facts.

Now, most theists who believe that the existence of the universe stands in logical need of a cause (a “creation” standing in need of a “creator” ), are quite happy to dispense with that need when positing a self-caused or an uncaused god-being. I simply see no need to make that extra (speculative) step before--stopping.

Mr Vistesd
If the universe and everything in it is just a hard fact without thought or logic, then how can the minute details of the workings of the creation be exsplained without a higher inteligence behind it?

Hard cold facts standing alone, would have us live in a world without organized phenomena, such as 1000 differant types of fruit and vegatables to eat, (that taste great), that just grow out of the dirt, WOW

And the fact that we have the 5 senses of the body, so we can navigate this world,and enjoy the things of this world, directly points to an intelligant creator.

But dont think this creator, is like the descriptions given to us by the bible and koran, with all the rules and ritual of the old man......no no no
The creator is beyond conception of the human faculty and is not a male deity.

cheers vishvahetu

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Mr Vistesd
If the universe and everything in it is just a hard fact without thought or logic, then how can the minute details of the workings of the creation be exsplained without a higher inteligence behind it?

Hard cold facts standing alone, would have us live in a world without organized phenomena, such as 1000 differant types of fruit and vegata ...[text shortened]... creator is beyond conception of the human faculty and is not a male deity.

cheers vishvahetu

But--those vegetables do “grow out of the dirt”! 🙂

We do observe how the many things in the universe are connected and affect one another. We do observe that the universe is complex and coherent, and we observe how simpler forms can evolve into more complex forms, etc., etc. We observe all this without observing some intelligent being doing it all.

If you ask, “How could this all be without some intelligent being behind it?”, I could easily counter by asking: “Then how do you account for that being having such an immensely complicated intelligence? How do you account for a being that must be even more complex that the universe itself? Must there be an even more intelligent being who ‘created’ that one? I inherited my intelligence (such as it is) in part from the genetic code passed on by my parents; from where did this god-being get his/her intelligence?” And on and on.

From the complexity we observe, you infer a being whose own existence and complexity remains a mystery. In order to solve the mystery of “how this all came to be as it is“, you appeal to an even more mysterious uncaused being.

All you are doing is “explaining” the complexity of the universe by appeal to some entity that is even more complex. And then, presumably, you are satisfied to stop…

I agree that much of the universe and how it works is (and may well remain) a mystery; the grammar of our particular consciousness may not be sufficient to decipher the entire syntax of the cosmos. But I do not see how appeal to a mystery of an even greater order ("beyond the conception of the human faculty," as you put it) solves that.

Cheers to you as well! 🙂

_______________________________________________


EDIT: One of the "hard cold facts" about the universe is that things are "organized" in a coherent fashion. The universe coheres, or it wouldn't be the universe.

Vistesd
I am not suggesting that god is singular supreme being, but i dare not claim he isn,t either, and i have no exact information what god is.

But i do know that there is a supreme intelligence responsable for everything that we see and conceive of.

It,s not that i know what god is, (but i know what god isn,t.) and a human like man hes not, but having said that, if the supreme intelligence can float planets in space, then i wonder if a deity would be a credible possability.

You see, even if there was a deity, the deity would not be seperate from its creation, the deity would be one and the same as its creation

It doesn,t matter that we cannot describe that supreme power, but the thing is that one should have a gratuital respect for it.

You may ask why have respect for this power, and it is because, if we are personal, then it stands to reason that the source of our personality would have personality as well, and the enquiring heart seeks to connect to its source.

I could go on for hours, but i have not the time at the moment....cheers vishva

Originally posted by vishvahetu
Vistesd
I am not suggesting that god is singular supreme being, but i dare not claim he isn,t either, and i have no exact information what god is.

But i do know that there is a supreme intelligence responsable for everything that we see and conceive of.

It,s not that i know what god is, (but i know what god isn,t.) and a human like man hes not, but ...[text shortened]... o its source.

I could go on for hours, but i have not the time at the moment....cheers vishva

Well maybe not hours, but do go on a bit more when you have time and inspiration. Particurlarly, i would like to know what sort of background you have in spirituality, whether it be practical or theoretic (or a bit of both) in nature?
Also, i would like to know your take on meditation please?