Quote:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

Please this belongs in spirituality. We all know there is no GOD so what is the god botherers obsession with cluttering the atheist board with scripture readings.

nairbe wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 6:35pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB Please this belongs in spirituality. We all know there is no GOD so what is the god botherers obsession with cluttering the atheist board with scripture readings.

Did you read it? It is NOT a scripture reading. Perhaps I should put it in spirituality though. I am a non believer though.

SOB

No religious nut can answer that.

SOB

Epicurus' problem was to insert morality into the equation.

Who says god has to be moral?

Who says god is a "he"?

Pretty stupid assumption - it can create the entire universe, but can't reproduce without the assistance of a goddess?

Heh who says theres a god?

SOB

Allowing evil to occur would be good if there were some good that was greater than the evil but which could only come into existence if the evil were to be addressed in some way.

If allowing evil to occur results in a greater good, then allowing the evil would not make God malevolent.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 1:53pm:

Heh who says theres a god? SOB

Which god are you trying to debunk?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 1:55pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 1:53pm: Heh who says theres a god? SOB Which god are you trying to debunk?

Pathetic . . . . . .   [smiley=sad.gif]

SOB

well?

The spiral into the Borgian vortex begins.

You arent making any sense. I wasnt "debunking" anything you stupid idiot. I asked who says there is a god? Do you? Does your idiot friend? Does anyone?

SOB

But your op was about god not being a moral entity.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:09pm:

But your op was about god not being a moral entity.

Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:04pm:

You arent making any sense. I wasnt "debunking" anything you stupid idiot. I asked who says there is a god? Do you? Does your idiot friend? Does anyone? SOB

can't answer that until you define "god".

... wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:11pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:04pm: You arent making any sense. I wasnt "debunking" anything you stupid idiot. I asked who says there is a god? Do you? Does your idiot friend? Does anyone? SOB can't answer that until you define "god".

Yep. Bog is arguing against a vacuum. Illogical.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

You cant understand this?

Any god not omnipotent because not able to prevent evil.

Any god malevolent because not willing to prevent evil.

Any god that is not able or willing to prevent evil is not a god.

There get it? If there is any god it is malevolent and not worth worshipping anyway.

Need smaller words?  Need a dictionary?

Its a quote. Its not me saying it. Its Epicurus saying it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:14pm:

... wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:11pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:04pm: You arent making any sense. I wasnt "debunking" anything you stupid idiot. I asked who says there is a god? Do you? Does your idiot friend? Does anyone? SOB can't answer that until you define "god". Yep. Bog is arguing against a vacuum. Illogical.

Yeah dunno why i argue against a vacuum but its addressing me so i try to explain. Its very vacuous though.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB

No it's not. It's a paradox he set up. He is obviously arguing against someone's idea of god. Furthermore, "Epicurus didn’t deny the existence of gods. Instead, he stated that what gods there may be, do not concern themselves with us, and thus would not seek to punish us either in this or any other life."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Funny how we got our quotes from the same link, but you didn't read it all, just taking what suited your already held prejudice, hence why your assertions have been proven incorrect.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:21pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:10pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB No it's not. It's a paradox he set up. He is obviously arguing against someone's idea of god. Furthermore, "Epicurus didn’t deny the existence of gods. Instead, he stated that what gods there may be, do not concern themselves with us, and thus would not seek to punish us either in this or any other life." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Which - if you had read my post just before - you would have noticed i said.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:27pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:21pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:10pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB No it's not. It's a paradox he set up. He is obviously arguing against someone's idea of god. Furthermore, "Epicurus didn’t deny the existence of gods. Instead, he stated that what gods there may be, do not concern themselves with us, and thus would not seek to punish us either in this or any other life." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus Which - if you had read my post just before - you would have noticed i said. SOB

No you didn't.
Why lie, when it's right there for all to see?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You cant understand this? Any god not omnipotent because not able to prevent evil. Any god malevolent because not willing to prevent evil. Any god that is not able or willing to prevent evil is not a god. There get it? If there is any god it is malevolent and not worth worshipping anyway. Need smaller words?  Need a dictionary? Its a quote. Its not me saying it. Its Epicurus saying it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus SOB

Right there

If there is a god its malevolent and not worth worshipping anyway.

SOB

that's not the same thing.

Yes it is - a paradox.

SOB

GOD grant me the strength to endure this idiocy...

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB

No it isn't. You can't even get that right. It's  limited to a very specific type of god. This guy isn't included:

http://media-cache0.pinterest.com/upload/184155072233282879_SDHJn1aF_b.jpg

He's not at all ominopotent - impotent perhaps.

The Deist god isn't included either. That's non-interventionist, not necessarily good or evil, and possibly even dead.

muso wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 5:24pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:10pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB No it isn't. You can't even get that right. It's  limited to a very specific type of god. This guy isn't included: http://media-cache0.pinterest.com/upload/184155072233282879_SDHJn1aF_b.jpg He's not at all ominopotent - impotent perhaps. The Deist god isn't included either. That's non-interventionist, not necessarily good or evil, and possibly even dead.

Conveniently skipping the post where i went into it in more detail i see.

Doesnt matter. There is no god so why do you want to know which one? None of them exist.

SOB

LOL.

which post was that?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:33pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:19pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You cant understand this? Any god not omnipotent because not able to prevent evil. Any god malevolent because not willing to prevent evil. Any god that is not able or willing to prevent evil is not a god. There get it? If there is any god it is malevolent and not worth worshipping anyway. Need smaller words?  Need a dictionary? Its a quote. Its not me saying it. Its Epicurus saying it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus SOB Right there If there is a god its malevolent and not worth worshipping anyway. SOB

And again 3rd time

SOB

yeah, seen that one.

Perhaps it's just not as informative as you seem to think it is.

What's this thing about worshipping? Your atheism is very Judeo-Christian oriented. Many Deists don't  worship for example.

You can't quite grasp the many types of deities that are believed to exist by different people. Some Hindu philosophy says there are as many gods as there are people. It comes from the archaic belief that all life is divine. What does divine mean? In this context, it means "living". 

Gods can be defined by anybody. Here you can chat with God  ;)
http://www.titane.ca/main.html
He makes more sense than you do, even though he's a computer script.


Quote:

Me: Hey God God: Hello child. What's your name? Me: Jehovah God:   Welcome to my chat room,  Jehovah. What are the Lottery numbers for this Wednesday? God:   You tell me.

I bought a god in Africa. Google thinks it's a god, and some people think Google is a God too.
http://www.crystalinks.com/olokun.jpg

THe guy who sold it to me told me it was a god. It's a term he used. I can touch it and feel it, but you don't believe in any gods regardless of whether or not they exist.  :P

I dunno. Was i on about worshipping?

Atheism = lack of belief in a deity.

There ya go.

Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 6:18am:

I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB

Do you know anything about Hellenic gods?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 3:08pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB Do you know anything about Hellenic gods?

a lil not a lot . . . .why? do you?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 3:47pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB Do you know anything about Hellenic gods? a lil not a lot . . . .why? do you? SOB

The Greek pantheon were largely detached, and anything but "good". Most of them had very human attributes. Yes, and people did worship malevolent deities.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 3:47pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB Do you know anything about Hellenic gods? a lil not a lot . . . .why? do you? SOB

Is there anything that you know more about than nothing-to-a-lil? (Other than Star Trek). 


Keith Dunno.That's who you are.

http://www.spike.com/video-clips/k71q25/the-office-keiths-appraisal

Soren wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 10:47pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:47pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB Do you know anything about Hellenic gods? a lil not a lot . . . .why? do you? SOB Is there anything that you know more about than nothing-to-a-lil? (Other than Star Trek).  Keith Dunno.That's who you are. http://www.spike.com/video-clips/k71q25/the-office-keiths-appraisal

Heh i know a troll when i see one.

you will never know what i know because im not going to tell you. I bet i have a lot more education than you and your HS diploma in needlework though.

SOB

muso wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 7:14pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:47pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I dunno. Was i on about worshipping? Atheism = lack of belief in a deity. There ya go. Anyway as far as the quote goes I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered that if there was a god it was malevolent. Why would anyone worship a malevolent god? Fear? SOB Do you know anything about Hellenic gods? a lil not a lot . . . .why? do you? SOB The Greek pantheon were largely detached, and anything but "good". Most of them had very human attributes. Yes, and people did worship malevolent deities.

lol. And religion has come a long way hasnt it?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27^th, 2012 at 6:18am:

I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered[sic] that if there was a god it was malevolent.

He hadn't figured out that God was malevolent at all.  He was stating a paradox, asking a riddle or, if you like, a question of sorts.  Your attempted explanation of the "Problem of Evil" is simplistic and flawed.

Frances wrote on Jun 28^th, 2012 at 10:27am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 27th, 2012 at 6:18am: I thought it was interesting anyway that he figgered[sic] that if there was a god it was malevolent. He hadn't figured out that God was malevolent at all.  He was stating a paradox, asking a riddle or, if you like, a question of sorts.  Your attempted explanation of the "Problem of Evil" is simplistic and flawed.

you know it all explain it then - insulting the statement isnt an argument

SOB

---

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 28^th, 2012 at 10:43am:

explain it then - insulting the statement isnt an argument

I did - on the first page of this thread - and you chose to ignore it.  Ignoring a statement isn't an argument.

Good luck Frances. Nice to see a traditionally religious person taking up the Spot challenge.


Quote:

Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then 'tis time to do't.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our pow'r to accompt?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?

Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

The issue here is "what is evil?". Sometimes what we perceive as evil may not be evil.

Let us take George W Bush for an example. Why was Bush allowed to live? Perhaps his living serves to teach mankind many lessons about good and evil, so overall, the existence of Bush is a good thing, even though he was an evil person.

God may also use someone like George W bush to test the good people in the world. If they pass the test, God will reward the good people. So there is another good coming out of the existence of George W Bush.

... wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 1:21pm:

Who says god is a "he"? Pretty stupid assumption - it can create the entire universe, but can't reproduce without the assistance of a goddess?

God must avoid disparity. The assumption is not only safe,
it's logically valid.  (I'm GA, just signed up)

GA wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 7:03pm:

... wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 1:21pm: Who says god is a "he"? Pretty stupid assumption - it can create the entire universe, but can't reproduce without the assistance of a goddess? God must avoid disparity. The assumption is not only safe, it's logically valid.  (I'm GA, just signed up)

By that, I mean that god must be asexual, since to be one sex means there must be another sex to complement it.  And if god is everything, how can that be?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

buggers like you can't explain freedom, nor can you work with it in a political domain.

So you seek, in your stupid, ungainly way to suppress it by attacking some buggered notion of god that  you have developed just for that purpose.



(And never mind that your quote is not from Epicurus)

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 28^th, 2012 at 6:03am:

Heh i know a troll when i see one. you will never know what i know because im not going to tell you. I bet i have a lot more education than you and your HS diploma in needlework though. SOB

Your mind is revealed with every post, every word you type.

Anyone with a HS diploma in needlework is smarter than you. They have,  at the very least, demonstrated an ability to follow a smacking pattern.

You, on the other hand, have a mind like chaff thrown to the wind and no amount of education could make the least difference to that. You are a scatter-brained goldfish in human form  with a memory spanning all of 8 seconds.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ...

John Smith wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 8:56pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ...

Is that how it was 'explained' to you? Fascinating.
What did you make of it? (other than being baffled)

Soren wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 9:13pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 8:56pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ... Is that how it was 'explained' to you? Fascinating. What did you make of it? (other than being baffled)

I told you what i made of it ... learn to read you cretin

Soren wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 8:36pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB buggers like you can't explain freedom, nor can you work with it in a political domain. So you seek, in your stupid, ungainly way to suppress it by attacking some buggered notion of god that  you have developed just for that purpose. (And never mind that your quote is not from Epicurus)

Awww the religious nut is offended . . . . .

SOB

Soren wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 8:49pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 28th, 2012 at 6:03am: Heh i know a troll when i see one. you will never know what i know because im not going to tell you. I bet i have a lot more education than you and your HS diploma in needlework though. SOB Your mind is revealed with every post, every word you type. Anyone with a HS diploma in needlework is smarter than you. They have,  at the very least, demonstrated an ability to follow a smacking pattern. You, on the other hand, have a mind like chaff thrown to the wind and no amount of education could make the least difference to that. You are a scatter-brained goldfish in human form  with a memory spanning all of 8 seconds.

Oh what an on-topic post. Addressed the topic and really contributed to the conversation. not.

SOB

John Smith wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 8:56pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ...

Yeah hollywood knows that well. Always have a "bad guy" no matter how subtle to balance the good guy.

SOB

John Smith wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 10:56pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 9:13pm: John Smith wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 8:56pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ... Is that how it was 'explained' to you? Fascinating. What did you make of it? (other than being baffled) I told you what i made of it ... learn to read you cretin

Yeah, you told us that both 'long winded scriptures' and the short pseudo-Epicuros quip baffled you.

... wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 7:26pm:

GA wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 7:03pm: ... wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 1:21pm: Who says god is a "he"? Pretty stupid assumption - it can create the entire universe, but can't reproduce without the assistance of a goddess? God must avoid disparity. The assumption is not only safe, it's logically valid.  (I'm GA, just signed up) By that, I mean that god must be asexual, since to be one sex means there must be another sex to complement it.  And if god is everything, how can that be?

The male is an equal representation of both man & woman.
This is not just at the chromosomal level, it extends thru to
our anatomy.

All depictions of Nature should be feminine, Mother Nature,
Lady Luck etc, as Nature would guarantee disparity.

Soren wrote on Aug 19^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

John Smith wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 10:56pm: Soren wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 9:13pm: John Smith wrote on Aug 18th, 2012 at 8:56pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB the way it was explained to me once was that you cannot have good as we know it without evil ... if everything was good, how would we know it? we would have nothing to measure it against therefore he must allow evil, pain and suffering just to give us perspective ....my thought were that another long winded scriture would have sufficed ... Is that how it was 'explained' to you? Fascinating. What did you make of it? (other than being baffled) I told you what i made of it ... learn to read you cretin Yeah, you told us that both 'long winded scriptures' and the short pseudo-Epicuros quip baffled you.

not half as much as you do ... I didn't think humans were capable of such stupidity until I read some of the crap you put up

peoples anxieties about who god is or whether he / she exists always seem to lead to anger and spite.

this seems paradoxical.

i feel its because the suppressed consciousness of our impending death and most peoples inability to ponder this fact more than superficially (due to anxiety) causes them to be ultra scared whether they have got the ultimate idea right or wrong.

it could be seen as a life gamble, a game of russian roulette with 3 of the 6 chambers loaded, deerhunter style.  no wonder people become emotional.

but the truth indeed seems to be in the paradox.
sob is confused granted, but there is nothing wrong with confusion and it should be embraced as the natural state.

all is in chaos but all is perfect exactly as it is (paradox).

its interesting that people mention the greeks because their rather confined system of logic.  A is A and cannot be A and non A at the same time is possibly the source of much of this confusion.

in my opinion , and this is just mine and works for me, god cannot be approached in rational thought (if indeed he/she exists)

in the same way you could not explain the character of an orgasm to a 6 year old through logical arguement, or you could not explain the taste of a mango to someone by saying it is a combination of fructose . cellullose and a beta carotene.  these things . like god, can only be experienced.

here in lies where the light (again confused though he may be) has some insight that logical science may not be able to explain.

jesus said 'i am the way, the truth and the life"
buddha said "i am enlightened'

neither really pointed to some benevolent or malevolent cop in the sky who is sort of running the show.

i hope christians, moslems and all other folk who believe in god can get past that idea which is really quite infantile.

i doubt there are pearly gates with st peter waiting outside.  or an oasis with 72 virgins.  it seems unlikely

aquascoot wrote on Aug 19^th, 2012 at 8:23pm:

peoples anxieties about who god is or whether he / she exists always seem to lead to anger and spite.

Yes, Buddhist thought is that the root cause of suffering is identified as ignorance of the true nature of things. What you describe is a type of craving that leads to suffering.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 2:09pm: But your op was about god not being a moral entity. Then you dont understand the op. It is saying there isnt a god @ all. Any god. SOB

No. It is saying that God is either less powerful than assumed or less good than assumed... and since he is less than... why worship the thing.

Epicurus, it could be said, is questioning the definition of God and the existence of Evil given that definition of God. Epicurus also goes on to point out that humanity is not served by Gods which fit the paradox.

What is not at question however, which you have not made explicit Spot, is that the existence of supernatural entities with 'god like' qualities was never drawn into question.

Not sure what you are trying to say and dont care either. There are no gods.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2012 at 5:16am:

Not sure what you are trying to say and dont care either.

Why do you not care about what i am trying to share with you?


Quote:

There are no gods.

Epicurus, the man you use to support that claim, disagrees with you, and the Epicurean argument you present, does not support your view that there are no gods.


Quote:

SOB

Sappho

Sappho wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2012 at 6:36am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 22nd, 2012 at 5:16am: Not sure what you are trying to say and dont care either. Why do you not care about what i am trying to share with you? Quote: There are no gods. Epicurus, the man you use to support that claim, disagrees with you, and the Epicurean argument you present, does not support your view that there are no gods. [quote]SOB

Sappho[/quote]

I dont want to get into a semantics session. Thats why.

I only had the 1 quote.I never claimed to have read his "works". I dont care if he agrees with me - i was trying to start a conversation but that was a long time ago before i discovered that this forum is really about insulting ppl as much as you can get away with - not discussion.

SOB

If you do not want to discuss what your opening post means because that would engage a semantic argument, i have to ask, what kind of conversation did you hope for?

Also, why do you continue engage this sub forum when you have concluded that it is only about insulting people?

Sappho wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2012 at 5:38am:

If you do not want to discuss what your opening post means because that would engage a semantic argument, i have to ask, what kind of conversation did you hope for? Also, why do you continue engage this sub forum when you have concluded that it is only about insulting people?

What do you mean engage this subforum? Up to now when you engaged me i hadnt posted in here in months.

something other than semantics

SOB

I've seen that quote by Epicurus before but am unfamiliar with the rest of his philosophical works. At first I assumed he was referring to the multi-theist religion called christianity which includes God, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

But if he was greek then he must have been referring to the pantheon of gods they idolised. Zeus the animal rapist, Apollo the warmonger, Athena the nymphomaniac. Probably got that all jumbled with the Roman pantheon.

He was saying god(any gods?) is/are contradictory to what holy texts describe either by being fallible or supportive of evil. Anthropomorphic thinking. Evil is ofcourse an abstract quantity. A matter of perspective. Israelis see Palestinians as evil and Palestinians see Israelis as Evil for example. I see them both as evil. There is no evidence of deities but super advanced alien life with seemingly godlike powers are possible and in fact mathematically likely somewhere in the universe.

Frances wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 1:54pm:

Allowing evil to occur would be good if there were some good that was greater than the evil but which could only come into existence if the evil were to be addressed in some way. If allowing evil to occur results in a greater good, then allowing the evil would not make God malevolent.

k, so in the xtian fantasy, god created the devil. general consensus would be that the devil is evil.
what greater good could there be in creating the devil?

I have never understood why people get all tied up with questions about gods existence of what god might or might not want from us. Its a reactionary argument about someone asserting that they have some particular and infallible information on the subject conveniently and invariably without any more proof than "coz it says so in a book"
Why I ask do people not instead ask the questions.
What reason to even think there might be a god?
What reason if there is a god would he be interested in a slightly clever monkey like creature on one insignificant planet among billions?
Why if there is a god and he is interested should i give the smallest of craps about it?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus

All things are full of gods. (Thales, On the Soul 405a)

mutation wrote on Nov 28^th, 2012 at 11:43pm:

I have never understood why people get all tied up with questions about gods existence of what god might or might not want from us. Its a reactionary argument about someone asserting that they have some particular and infallible information on the subject conveniently and invariably without any more proof than "coz it says so in a book" Why I ask do people not instead ask the questions. What reason to even think there might be a god? What reason if there is a god would he be interested in a slightly clever monkey like creature on one insignificant planet among billions? Why if there is a god and he is interested should i give the smallest of craps about it?

Yes it is a mystery.




In our lives [if we have any common sense at all], we would eventually come to the knowledge, that in our daily choices, it is smarter to make good choices, rather than to continually make poor choices.

And [if we have any common sense at all] we come to understand that there is a difference [in the consequence], for each type of choice.

If we make a commitment  to becoming a tradesman or to learning some other vocational skill, in the development of our skills in any work that we choose to do, we learn how impportant it is to make good choices, so as to be able to acheive a good outcome from our efforts.

In this life, if we commit to searching for God, and to seeking God's righteousness, God joins with us, and teaches us how to make good choices,
....although each final choice we make, always remains our own.

[God's righteousness ??? What has 'righteousness' got to do with living ??? hmmmmm? that is what men always ask. pretending not to know the answer.     :P     ]







Luke 11:9
And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10  For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11  If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12  Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13  If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?



+++



Go your own way.

Nobody compels us, in what we decide to choose, day, after day.

Love the world, and all that it offers to you.

No one will stop us from choosing to be a foolish child.

Follow your own path.

Or, choose to seek a better path.



But if you choose to be a foolish child, don't then say that the consequences are unfair.

God can be our beneficial [and forgiving] 'father', OR, God can be our judge.

You choose.

mutation wrote on Nov 28^th, 2012 at 11:43pm:

I have never understood why people get all tied up with questions about gods existence of what god might or might not want from us. Its a reactionary argument about someone asserting that they have some particular and infallible information on the subject conveniently and invariably without any more proof than "coz it says so in a book" Why I ask do people not instead ask the questions. What reason to even think there might be a god? What reason if there is a god would he be interested in a slightly clever monkey like creature on one insignificant planet among billions? Why if there is a god and he is interested should i give the smallest of craps about it?

You can buy a god here:
http://www.dollsofindia.com/sold/sculptures/brass/13?nonjsmsg=HK34+added+to+favorites

They definitely exist, and for the bargain price of $153.50 SALE 17% off
$127.40 for Lord Mahavir, you too could have a god in your life.   ;D

They don't have much power, except maybe to captivate your imagination.

You can also find God here:

https://www.google.com.au/search?as_q=God&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=

magpie wrote on Nov 19^th, 2012 at 5:20pm:

Frances wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 1:54pm: Allowing evil to occur would be good if there were some good that was greater than the evil but which could only come into existence if the evil were to be addressed in some way. If allowing evil to occur results in a greater good, then allowing the evil would not make God malevolent. k, so in the xtian fantasy, god created the devil. general consensus would be that the devil is evil. what greater good could there be in creating the devil?

In the realms of xtian fantasy you would fashion the devil to create and develop fear, driving the practitioner towards (the non-existant) god. If you interchange evil and fear in the minds of the fantasists for the purposes of a religious construct it works.

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2012 at 6:52pm:

You can buy a god here: http://www.dollsofindia.com/sold/sculptures/brass/13?nonjsmsg=HK34+added+to+favorites

I know that you jest muso.

But no.

Those are idols.

Idols.

Only idols.


Agree ?








Quote:

They definitely exist, and for the bargain price of $153.50 SALE 17% off $127.40 for Lord Mahavir, you too could have a god in your life.   ;D

Yes, idols, made by men, exist.








Quote:

They don't have much power, except maybe to captivate your imagination.

The 'power', is in the imagination of men, man.

Idols themselves, have no power.


Agree ?








Quote:

You can also find God here: https://www.google.com.au/search?as_q=God&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=

Where is God muso ???


muso said...

Quote:

"....you too could have a god in your life."

Deuteronomy 4:27
And the LORD shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen, whither the LORD shall lead you.
28  And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.
29  But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.


Deuteronomy 30:1
And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee,
2  And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul;
3  That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.
4  If any of thine be driven out unto the outmost parts of heaven, from thence will the LORD thy God gather thee, and from thence will he fetch thee:


1 Samuel 16:7
But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.






Numbers 16:5
And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company, saying, Even to morrow the LORD will shew who are his, and who is holy; and will cause him to come near unto him: even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.

Matthew 22:14
For many are called, but few are chosen.








God is calling us.

God is saying to us;

"What is right ?     ....Do it.
Or at least be sorry, for your pride and for your mistakes."



'But blessed are......your ears, for they hear.'

Yadda wrote on Dec 7^th, 2012 at 11:21am:

[ I know that you jest muso. But no. Those are idols. Idols.

I like teasing militant Atheists. It amuses me.  Some people call idols "Gods". Atheists by definition don't believe in any gods of any definition.

This might be from your era  ;)

Quote:

There’s a one-eyed yellow idol to the north of Kathmandu,     There’s a little marble cross below the town;     There’s a broken-hearted woman tends the grave of Mad Carew,     And the Yellow God forever gazes down.

http://wallpaperscraft.com/image/cat_paw_face_emotion_gray_985_preview.jpg
I see nothing.

Great cat pic, muso!

Are You There, People? It’s Me, God

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/shouts/swarte-465.png

Here’s my problem: I don’t believe in people. To me, human beings and their world are nothing more than the product of our collective imagination, a sad manifestation of our need to feel important beyond our actual existence. I also can’t help feeling that our lives would be better if no one believed in people; only then would we be able to truly deal with our problems without nursing the delusion of a universe that’s completely dependent on us.

The bottom line is that there are no easy answers to the questions we all have about life. Why are we here? Why are we all-seeing, all-knowing and immortal? How are we able to be everywhere at the same time? I don’t pretend to know. I do know, however, that these questions are not made easier by believing there’s a planet of people somewhere out there who depend on us to land their planes safely.

Like most of us, I was raised by parents who believed in the existence of people. Before every meal and every bedtime, we would sit quietly, “listening” to their prayers, and every Sunday morning I was awakened early so we could all go sit on our heavenly thrones for an hour, pretending to be worshipped. How ridiculous that all seems now! At the time, though, I never questioned any of it. In fact, for most of my teens, I spoke to a person named Moses who I believed was completely dependent on my advice. I now realize, of course, that this was nothing more than a delusion I needed in order to break free of my cloying parents and their needs.

As I grew, persistent questions nagged at me. I asked my father: If we have ultimate power over peoples’ lives, why can’t we just make them perfect and alleviate their suffering? That way, they wouldn’t need to pray anymore, and we wouldn’t need to listen! My father shook his head with a long-suffering look as if he’d caught me playing with his best lightning bolts. He explained to me that of course we couldn’t intervene in peoples’ lives like that, because then how would they grow and become purer souls? It’s hard to believe that I actually believed this. Absolutely crazy—the idea that we created people just to torture them!

After rejecting my parents’ faith, I dabbled in different forms of people-belief. For a while, I believed that people became happier when they killed animals for me. Then I believed that I buried a gold tablet for people to find. I even flirted with even flakier religions, believing that the peoples’ sun wouldn’t rise in the morning if I didn’t haul it up with my chariot (I was on anti-depressants at the time). Then, at perhaps my lowest point, I imagined that I had a son who I sent to the people to do with as they wished—some kind of bizarre loaner, I guess.

Then I had a breakthrough: Why did the people I believed in need me so badly? If I truly had dominion over every aspect of their lives, as I was led to believe, why were they so screwed up? I was familiar with the arguments of theologians—that somehow peoples’ sorry existence was further proof of their need for me. But I just couldn’t buy it anymore.

Since throwing off the shackles of believing in people, it hasn’t been easy living in a culture where everyone seems to think they’ve talked to some guy in a desert. When I recently tried to get medical help for my now-senile father—who actually believed that dead people with wings had come to live with him—I was told that my father was “comforted” by this delusion. When will we realize that there is nothing comforting about ignorance?

I’m frequently asked: Don’t you sometimes, late at night, at your lowest moments, wish that you were worshipped? When the chips are down, when you feel completely worthless, don’t you wish you could hear the prayers of billions of people asking you for help and comfort? And I would not be completely truthful if I didn’t say that sometimes, I do. After all, I’m only a god.

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/shouts/2012/12/atheist-god.html#ixzz2GQRj9iW1

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB

You have got this all wrong. (havent looked if anyone has the same view, so sorry if someone already stated this)

Just to be clear
I am not a true believer in the sense of religion. I believe there may be a higher being perhaps, but that is a perhaps. I am neutral, but I do think about it and not block my mind into any box.

The reason you are wrong is
Because you are not looking at it as if god were a teacher --progressiveslol



=====
dam I got to look at the dates of these posts. I dont travel around here often, if at all. Apologies.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 29^th, 2013 at 12:50pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You have got this all wrong. (havent looked if anyone has the same view, so sorry if someone already stated this) Just to be clear I am not a true believer in the sense of religion. I believe there may be a higher being perhaps, but that is a perhaps. I am neutral, but I do think about it and not block my mind into any box. The reason you are wrong is Because you are not looking at it as if god were a teacher --progressiveslol ===== dam I got to look at the dates of these posts. I dont travel around here often, if at all. Apologies.

Where has any god said he was a teacher? Vishnu? Allah? Nope their "prophets" are the teachers.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 5:07am:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 29th, 2013 at 12:50pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You have got this all wrong. (havent looked if anyone has the same view, so sorry if someone already stated this) Just to be clear I am not a true believer in the sense of religion. I believe there may be a higher being perhaps, but that is a perhaps. I am neutral, but I do think about it and not block my mind into any box. The reason you are wrong is Because you are not looking at it as if god were a teacher --progressiveslol ===== dam I got to look at the dates of these posts. I dont travel around here often, if at all. Apologies. Where has any god said he was a teacher? Vishnu? Allah? Nope their "prophets" are the teachers. SOB

I havent seen any god say anything.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 10:22am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 5:07am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 29th, 2013 at 12:50pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You have got this all wrong. (havent looked if anyone has the same view, so sorry if someone already stated this) Just to be clear I am not a true believer in the sense of religion. I believe there may be a higher being perhaps, but that is a perhaps. I am neutral, but I do think about it and not block my mind into any box. The reason you are wrong is Because you are not looking at it as if god were a teacher --progressiveslol ===== dam I got to look at the dates of these posts. I dont travel around here often, if at all. Apologies. Where has any god said he was a teacher? Vishnu? Allah? Nope their "prophets" are the teachers. SOB I havent seen any god say anything.

Yeah yeah semantics but no supposed holy book says any god is a teacher.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 10:49am:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 10:22am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 5:07am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 29th, 2013 at 12:50pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 4th, 2012 at 5:16pm: Quote: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing?Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” --Epicurus SOB You have got this all wrong. (havent looked if anyone has the same view, so sorry if someone already stated this) Just to be clear I am not a true believer in the sense of religion. I believe there may be a higher being perhaps, but that is a perhaps. I am neutral, but I do think about it and not block my mind into any box. The reason you are wrong is Because you are not looking at it as if god were a teacher --progressiveslol ===== dam I got to look at the dates of these posts. I dont travel around here often, if at all. Apologies. Where has any god said he was a teacher? Vishnu? Allah? Nope their "prophets" are the teachers. SOB I havent seen any god say anything. Yeah yeah semantics but no supposed holy book says any god is a teacher. SOB

It is implied in many parts of scripture.

Such as?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 11:13am:

Such as? SOB

Just a quick google of "god is a teacher"

http://www.trulyworship.com/god_my_teacher.html

http://bible.cc/psalms/25-5.htm

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:13am: Such as? SOB Just a quick google of "god is a teacher" http://www.trulyworship.com/god_my_teacher.html http://bible.cc/psalms/25-5.htm

Like i said teaching seems to fall upon the "prophets". Not the actual gods themselves.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 11:54am:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:51am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:13am: Such as? SOB Just a quick google of "god is a teacher" http://www.trulyworship.com/god_my_teacher.html http://bible.cc/psalms/25-5.htm Like i said teaching seems to fall upon the "prophets". Not the actual gods themselves. SOB

But it is implied that god is doing the teaching.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:54am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:51am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 11:13am: Such as? SOB Just a quick google of "god is a teacher" http://www.trulyworship.com/god_my_teacher.html http://bible.cc/psalms/25-5.htm Like i said teaching seems to fall upon the "prophets". Not the actual gods themselves. SOB But it is implied that god is doing the teaching.

No it isnt - not in your links anyway. Its saying jesus and the holy spirit are.

SOB

You have an unnatural obsession with Christianity.

The God of the Pantheists is a teacher (and a lot of other things), because for Pantheists, God is everything, including rocks, oceans, planets, bacteria, other people and you. 

The God of nature is basically natural processes. Natural processes teach us about life. We learn through observation among other things. 

muso wrote on Mar 30^th, 2013 at 3:37pm:

You have an unnatural obsession with Christianity. The God of the Pantheists is a teacher (and a lot of other things), because for Pantheists, God is everything, including rocks, oceans, planets, bacteria, other people and you.  The God of nature is basically natural processes. Natural processes teach us about life. We learn through observation among other things.

Well thats an out of the blue accusation there muso since the only reason i mentioned xtianity @ all was in response to progs link.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 6:20am:

muso wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 3:37pm: You have an unnatural obsession with Christianity. The God of the Pantheists is a teacher (and a lot of other things), because for Pantheists, God is everything, including rocks, oceans, planets, bacteria, other people and you.  The God of nature is basically natural processes. Natural processes teach us about life. We learn through observation among other things.  Well thats an out of the blue accusation there muso since the only reason i mentioned xtianity @ all was in response to progs link. SOB

You, plural.

muso wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 9:48am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 31st, 2013 at 6:20am: muso wrote on Mar 30th, 2013 at 3:37pm: You have an unnatural obsession with Christianity. The God of the Pantheists is a teacher (and a lot of other things), because for Pantheists, God is everything, including rocks, oceans, planets, bacteria, other people and you.  The God of nature is basically natural processes. Natural processes teach us about life. We learn through observation among other things.  Well thats an out of the blue accusation there muso since the only reason i mentioned xtianity @ all was in response to progs link. SOB You, plural.

Since plural, I think you will find if you google "god is a teacher", christianity is pretty much all you get at the top.

So no unnatural obsession. Just a public tool that has one.

....as long as the God is male

Chimp_Logic wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 12:19pm:

....as long as the God is male

The devil is a woman......Hilary Clinton, well! sort of female-ish....a little bit no?

Can God create a stone that is too heavy for him/her/it to lift?

miketrees wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 7:36pm:

Can God create a stone that is too heavy for him/her/it to lift?

You have fallen into the God paradox, child.
Of course not!
*unlock the God Paradox Scrolls for a mere $99.99 pm and understand the secrets of the Universe. Amex not accepted.

miketrees wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 7:36pm:

Can God create a stone that is too heavy for him/her/it to lift?

Yes there are no limits to what God can do or not do

She can create stone outside of herself if she wishes  -  in a location where she doesn't have access

God can impose limitations upon herself and then reverse them

She is extremely clever and creative

Beautiful wallpapers artsfon.com/

Chimp_Logic wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 10:37pm:

miketrees wrote on Mar 31st, 2013 at 7:36pm: Can God create a stone that is too heavy for him/her/it to lift? Yes there are no limits to what God can do or not do She can create stone outside of herself if she wishes  -  in a location where she doesn't have access

Now that is what I call Chimp Logic

A Pastor ( by definition someone who has decided to appoint himself the spiritual & moral compass for a cohort of deludees) somewhere in the USA has just finished his first year of not believing in God anymore.

His rationale (possible sic) is that he wanted to have a relationship with reality.

This Topic was moved here from Atheism by freediver.