[Guest]

now this will be a friendly argument about atheism verse God

there will be no cussing, funny insults are fine but not just name calling or bashing

I dont know if this topic will survive locking but please keep it open as long as it stays civil as if you dont im afraid this will spill over into other topics, but i understand if you do.

this is a carry over from an arguement in mythical creatures but they asked us to move it

[Guest]

i didnt mean why do u trust mel gibson (i worded it badly/ decided to make fun of him instead of get the point out), all i meant is why do you trust the movie that is baste on the bible when you were questioning the bible. but i guess reading back it wasnt exactly like that

anyway i am willing to present more christian faith topics but if anyone is willing im interested in other religions

i admit my limited contact with non christian or jewish religions has been hippies pretending to be different. I dont think they had any idea what they were talking about. anyway we dont even have to debate the issues if you dont want, just discuss what it is.

i think seeksit brought it up earlier but anyone is welcome

[Izzy]

anyway i am willing to present more christian faith topics but if anyone is willing im interested in other religions

i admit my limited contact with non christian or jewish religions has been hippies pretending to be different. I dont think they had any idea what they were talking about.

I totally think the hippies knew what they were talking about. Personal liberties with psychedelics for all sounds like a pretty good way to live to me.

Sorry I've been inactive, got suspended for a post that vaguely resembled cursing. I'm ready for the next set of subjects if that's what we're doing?

[Guest]

good job izzy i missed you tremendously

yah to be honest i went a similar direction for a while and now im back on earth.. i really wanted to talk about some religion or philosophy that i have no idea about (even if it isnt your personal philosophy)... so im going to wait till tommorow for someone to post and in the mean time think of some christian topics to talk about in the event no one does

[Guest]

I totally think the hippies knew what they were talking about. Personal liberties with psychedelics for all sounds like a pretty good way to live to me.

Sorry I've been inactive, got suspended for a post that vaguely resembled cursing. I'm ready for the next set of subjects if that's what we're doing?

Suspended by brainden? or someone else?

Either way, I may be able to sneak in a few hours of debate, on either side of course.

[Izzy]

Suspended by brainden? or someone else?

BrainDen. Must watch the language. >_>

So.. topic?

[Guest]

BrainDen. Must watch the language. >_>

So.. topic?

Well..... We could gripe about.....

Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hindu, or some other religion.

Or...

We could talk about the relevance of cussing.

Then the usual favorites.

Abortion

Gay Rights

And Ethics in general.

Whichever works.

[Guest]

Well..... We could gripe about.....

Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hindu, or some other religion.

Or...

We could talk about the relevance of cussing.

Then the usual favorites.

Abortion

Gay Rights

And Ethics in general.

Whichever works.

[moderating]

The topic is "atheism vs God". If you'd like to discuss one of the above topics, start a new thread.

[/moderating]

[Guest]

I'm an active member of a Unitarian Universalist congregation here in Maryland. It's a very open-minded, non-credal, liberal religion. I'd be happy to discuss it at length.

Ok this one sounds good. Unitarian Universalist. I did a little reading up on this. I got the impression it is kind of like a book club(no offense). So you got basically anyone joining from all sorts of views all discussing the truth, correct? I think it is a great idea, I would'nt join only because of the organization part about it, and it seems they have sort of church services. But I like the fact that they are open minded towards all forms of religion and folklore. I would'nt mind sitting in on maybe one or two services, only to hear what other people have to say. I noticed most of the people are humanists, and also there are some atheists. I actually saw that some ministers are atheist...There is one thing tho I wanted to know. When you attend these services, what do you talk about with such a diverse crowd? Do they take turns or something? I do understand that some people study certain religions, but don't neccesarily believe. If I were to attend a few that would probably increase my atheism. The more I learn about any religion, the more skeptical I get towards them. Funny huh? I mean I was a skeptic very early in my life. After I read most of the Bible, that really made me pretty much become fully atheist. Maybe I read too many Greek mythology books, I don't know. But once I grasped what was going on(in the Bible) it just made me think of it as more of a myth, and an interesting story. By the way, why do they need to write the bible the way it is? They have changed and retranslated it so many times(well maybe not many times, anyway), why not translate it into common English? Maybe more people would pick it up and actually read it.

But anyways, maybe seeksit(big size only to get your attention) would like to shed some light on his religion for all of us? Like I said, I think it's not all that bad. I like the open-mindedness about it. Not many view it as a religion, but it seems most all religions are being discussed, and even folklore. That's fine by me. I myself am not gonna go out and find the closest UU church and start going, but I think it could possibly be interesting for me, only for the learning and history aspect of it.

Also I was wondering, once again only if you want to share, what do you consider yourself? Humanist, atheist, do you have a Christain point of view, Buddist, Hindu...etc., or are you more towards philosophy? I'm not sure humanists and atheists are that dissimilar. The main thing probably is that humanists could or would be open to change their perspective on certain believes upon further knowledge. I still stand as an atheist, however, I do like learning. Do members take more of a Theological approach, or is it mostly a Religious studies kind of thing?

One more thing. Do people often convert over to any particular religion? It kinda sounds like a school for religions in a way. That could possibly change some members and make them switch to a certain religion after learning more about it. I don't know.

Also like I said I did very little reading up on this, so if I misread something, or didn't understand something the way it is intended, feel free to tear me up about it. I will try to get a better knowledge of it if I get some free time.

Sorry for my questions and comments being all over the place, I thought of most while I was typing this masterpiece.

Edited June 17, 2009 by James8421

[Guest]

i might be wrong but it sounds alot like quakers (not sure they still like to be called that). One of my relatives died and she ask my family to sit in on a couple meetings in her honor. It was very interesting though i got the idea that your experience completely depends on who is there and how comfortable with everyone else everyone is.

and as for these

Abortion

Gay Rights

This is just the recipe for yelling. Ive never heard an argument for either side that convinced anyone to change so I find its just a recipe for anger with out any productive results (or reproductive results).

I dont know if ive said this yet but i really just consider myself christianish (its weird)

being raised catholic, shaped alot of it,but ive looked at parts and decided i dont care. I believe in the basic god of the bible but realize some of it is prolly exaggerated or partially fabricated, i beleive in jesus the man and dont really care if he was God. I beleive he most likely was, but his message is the same and most of the basic fact of the story are documented enough that i beleive them completely. As for the morals and ethics of christians it would take pages so for later if ever. (the only problem with this if jesus claimed to be god he either was god or a blaspheme tho the jews just fix this by saying he never claimed to be god as they dont have the new testament)

also I really dont want to throw us back to christianity but real quick a jewish freind of mine told me this and i dont know if it is true but it is interesting.

Back in those times (maybe still), young jews would study the hebrew bible, all made it to the second level, some made it to the third. Then it was rare that many went further, but jesus made it to the fourth level and studied directly under a master. Jesus did so so quick that he passed to the fifth level (the levels all have names i dont remember them) and his master would have prolly said something like "go and teach" or "go and take followers" as that is what new masters did. This is the supposed hole in jesus's life from teenage (when he was found in the temple i beleive is the last story) to 31 (i really dont remember the exact ages im just recolectmakingup) ...draw your own conclusions as what this means or even if it is true (supposed truth or fact truth).

[Guest]

Regarding James's question, there is a bible in plain english. It's just that it's translated so that it supports a particular religion. Kind of like how the protestants wrote special footnotes supporting their movement in their bible. It's called the New International Version. International being a very controversial term.

Anyway, if we're going to get anywhere, we may as well start at the root of theism in general: The origin of god.

Where did the mighty creator come from?

[Guest]

Where did the mighty creator come from?

I'm working backwards through the posts, so I'll get to UUism in a bit. To address this question, the best answer I've found is based on the religious philosophy called Neoplatonism, rooted in the teachings of Plato. Plato calls this great mysterious entity "The One". And here's the "answer" to the question from his perspective:

The primeval Source of Being is the One and the Infinite, as opposed to the many and the finite. It is the source of all life, and therefore absolute causality and the only real existence. However, the important feature of it is that it is beyond all Being, although the source of it. Therefore, it cannot be known through reasoning or understanding, since only what is part of Being can be thus known according to Plato. Being beyond existence, it is the most real reality, source of less real things. It is, moreover, the Good, insofar as all finite things have their purpose in it, and ought to flow back to it. But one cannot attach moral attributes to the original Source of Being itself, because these would imply limitation. It has no attributes of any kind; it is being without magnitude, without life, without thought; in strict propriety, indeed, we ought not to speak of it as existing; it is "above existence," "above goodness." It is also active force without a substratum; as active force the primeval Source of Being is perpetually producing something else, without alteration, or motion, or diminution of itself. This production is not a physical process, but an emission of force; and, since the product has real existence only in virtue of the original existence working in it, Neoplatonism may be described as a species of dynamic pantheism. Directly or indirectly, everything is brought forth by the "One." In it all things, so far as they have being, are divine, and God is all in all. Derived existence, however, is not like the original Source of Being itself, but is subject to a law of diminishing completeness. It is indeed an image and reflection of the first Source of Being; but the further the line of successive projections is prolonged the smaller is its share in the true existence. The totality of being may thus be conceived as a series of concentric circles, fading away towards the verge of non-existence, the force of the original Being in the outermost circle being a vanishing quantity. Each lower stage of being is united with the "One" by all the higher stages, and receives its share of reality only by transmission through them. All derived existence, however, has a drift towards, a longing for, the higher, and bends towards it so far as its nature will permit. Plotinus' treatment of the substance or essence (ousia) of The One was to reconcile Plato and Aristotle. Where Aristotle treated the monad as a single entity made up of one substance (here as energeia). Plotinus reconciled Aristotle with Plato's "the good" by expressing the substance or essence of The One as potential or force.

[Guest]

I'm working backwards through the posts, so I'll get to UUism in a bit. To address this question, the best answer I've found is based on the religious philosophy called Neoplatonism, rooted in the teachings of Plato. Plato calls this great mysterious entity "The One". And here's the "answer" to the question from his perspective:

The primeval Source of Being is the One and the Infinite, as opposed to the many and the finite. It is the source of all life, and therefore absolute causality and the only real existence. However, the important feature of it is that it is beyond all Being, although the source of it. Therefore, it cannot be known through reasoning or understanding, since only what is part of Being can be thus known according to Plato. Being beyond existence, it is the most real reality, source of less real things. It is, moreover, the Good, insofar as all finite things have their purpose in it, and ought to flow back to it. But one cannot attach moral attributes to the original Source of Being itself, because these would imply limitation. It has no attributes of any kind; it is being without magnitude, without life, without thought; in strict propriety, indeed, we ought not to speak of it as existing; it is "above existence," "above goodness." It is also active force without a substratum; as active force the primeval Source of Being is perpetually producing something else, without alteration, or motion, or diminution of itself. This production is not a physical process, but an emission of force; and, since the product has real existence only in virtue of the original existence working in it, Neoplatonism may be described as a species of dynamic pantheism. Directly or indirectly, everything is brought forth by the "One." In it all things, so far as they have being, are divine, and God is all in all. Derived existence, however, is not like the original Source of Being itself, but is subject to a law of diminishing completeness. It is indeed an image and reflection of the first Source of Being; but the further the line of successive projections is prolonged the smaller is its share in the true existence. The totality of being may thus be conceived as a series of concentric circles, fading away towards the verge of non-existence, the force of the original Being in the outermost circle being a vanishing quantity. Each lower stage of being is united with the "One" by all the higher stages, and receives its share of reality only by transmission through them. All derived existence, however, has a drift towards, a longing for, the higher, and bends towards it so far as its nature will permit. Plotinus' treatment of the substance or essence (ousia) of The One was to reconcile Plato and Aristotle. Where Aristotle treated the monad as a single entity made up of one substance (here as energeia). Plotinus reconciled Aristotle with Plato's "the good" by expressing the substance or essence of The One as potential or force.

So in other words... God is the very fact of existence?

[Guest]

Ok this one sounds good. Unitarian Universalist. I did a little reading up on this. I got the impression it is kind of like a book club(no offense).

That's actually a common "criticism" of UUism: "you guys don't believe in *anything*". But that's far from true. I think it was you who was commenting earlier that there are certain beliefs that you will just not tolerate: bigots, sexists, gay bashers, etc. Well that's the same for UU's. We are also linked by a common "covenant" that consists of seven principles: We affirm and promote 1.) the inherent worth and dignity of every person; 2.) Justice, equity and compassion in human relations; 3.) Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations; 4.) A free and responsible search for truth and meaning; 5.) The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large; 6.) The goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all; and 7.) Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

So you got basically anyone joining from all sorts of views all discussing the truth, correct?

That's a big part of it. Some of us are "seekers". I'm big on Principle #4. My association with the church after 40 years of being a rank atheist/agnostic, has led me to realize that this search for truth and meaning in life is best done in community -- when people talk about these great issues and exchange ideas, each of us fortifies and enhances our own understanding of what we believe. Frankly, that's the main reason why I'm here on Brain Den!

But there are other diverse reasons why people join UU congregations. For some it's as simple as a feeling of finally finding a place they truly belong. I felt that sense myself when I joined. Sometimes couples from conflicting religious backgrounds come here to give their children a neutral but well grounded religious education. Social and even political liberal activists make up a pretty big contingent. Some of them can even cross the line into being "anti-intolerance" bigots We have to sometimes remind them of the first principle (respect for *everyone's* inherent worth).

I think it is a great idea, I would'nt join only because of the organization part about it, and it seems they have sort of church services. But I like the fact that they are open minded towards all forms of religion and folklore. I would'nt mind sitting in on maybe one or two services, only to hear what other people have to say. I noticed most of the people are humanists, and also there are some atheists. I actually saw that some ministers are atheist...There is one thing tho I wanted to know. When you attend these services, what do you talk about with such a diverse crowd? Do they take turns or something?

In some congregations, after the "sermon", there is an "open mic" period where anybody who wants to can come up and give their "rebuttal" or offer other relevant comments. We don't do that in our congregation, though. The subject matter is very wide ranging, about as wide as the congregation is diverse. Favorite themes are social justice issues, ethics, community building, modern takes on religious or theological issues, ... I could go on and on.

But anyways, maybe seeksit(big size only to get your attention) would like to shed some light on his religion for all of us? Like I said, I think it's not all that bad. I like the open-mindedness about it. Not many view it as a religion, but it seems most all religions are being discussed, and even folklore. That's fine by me. I myself am not gonna go out and find the closest UU church and start going, but I think it could possibly be interesting for me, only for the learning and history aspect of it.

You didn't need to get my attention. I like reading these kinds of threads. Our congregation has an active group of Pagans, a bunch of hard-core atheists, lots of "refugees" from oppressive religious childhood experiences (ex-Catholics are heavily represented), and more. We invite speakers from many world religions, and have "field trips" to attend their services.

The history of the UU church is definitely rooted in Christianity, so the services often have a familiar "flavor" to someone from a Christian background. Originally, Unitarians denied the god-hood of Jesus, rejecting the concept of the trinity. Universalists rejected the concepts of original sin and God's final judgment. They believe that every human is intrinsically "saved" a priori. These two religions found so much common ground that they merged in 1961 and immediately lept head-first into the civil rights issue.

Also I was wondering, once again only if you want to share, what do you consider yourself? Humanist, atheist, do you have a Christain point of view, Buddist, Hindu...etc., or are you more towards philosophy? I'm not sure humanists and atheists are that dissimilar. The main thing probably is that humanists could or would be open to change their perspective on certain believes upon further knowledge. I still stand as an atheist, however, I do like learning. Do members take more of a Theological approach, or is it mostly a Religious studies kind of thing?

We have "building your own Theology" classes. We obviously define "theology" broadly. In these classes we discuss what we believe and explore ideas we hadn't considered. Most of it is not studying other religions per se, but rather examining broad concepts that are at the root of many religions.

I have my own rather unique "theology" that is always growing. I believe that in the biggest, outermost shell of reality (see the discussion of "The One" above) there is nothing but indifferent, random chaos. But this chaos has very specific properties that have great potential. So in it, some "Essence that is beyond Being" was able to naturally begat (or permit) little clusters of meaning and purpose to form: meaningful niches can spring out of the chaos because chaos, like everything else, isn't perfect. Notable among these pockets of meaning and purpose is the development of life itself. I believe that DNA is a form of intelligence -- very slowly "learning" the best way to live a good life. In the same way, I believe our Universe's laws of physics and its "choice" of physical constants have been so finely tuned (see arguments for a "designed universe") because they are a form of DNA that "evolved" through a succession of "previous" universes (loop quantum gravity theories allow for the big bang to begin from something finite, not a singularity). So one can think of our universe as a living cell. It will bear child universes through one of several processes already known to physicists. I believe that our personal actions can actually help shape the universe into a better, more welcoming place for the life that evolves in the universes that our universe begets. We do this by "tuning" the constants in the universe in our favor. We are able to do this because our thoughts (meditations, "prayers", ponderings) and our actions propogate as waves throughout the universe (wave-particle duality, quantum entanglement, etc.). I believe that new universes compete for "futures" space in the multiverse, and that the "good" ones win (the good ones are those that are most compatible to creating wise and prudent intelligent living beings). So by enhancing the "goodness" of our universe, we are creating a better place for our universe's children. That's it in a nutshell.

One more thing. Do people often convert over to any particular religion? It kinda sounds like a school for religions in a way. That could possibly change some members and make them switch to a certain religion after learning more about it. I don't know.

I don't have any personal knowledge of anyone who converted to a traditional faith after learning about it in a UU congregation, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has occasionally happened.

[Guest]

So in other words... God is the very fact of existence?

fact? (read the bottom line of my signature )

"The One" is the very mystery of existence.

The Tao Te Ching addresses this well:

"The enigma of things deepens into the fathomless beyond.

From mystery to mystery is the Gateway

into the streaming wonder of Existence."

Edited June 17, 2009 by seeksit

[Guest]

Before this thread fades away

To unfathomable uncertainty

And certain insanity

It is time this conversation

Moved into a different alley.

[Guest]

The totality of being may thus be conceived as a series of concentric circles, fading away towards the verge of non-existence, the force of the original Being in the outermost circle being a vanishing quantity. Each lower stage of being is united with the "One" by all the higher stages, and receives its share of reality only by transmission through them. All derived existence, however, has a drift towards, a longing for, the higher, and bends towards it so far as its nature will permit.

This is a really new way of looking at things for me so im rereading these ideas every time i log on but im pretty sure my mind explodes more and more every time. but are you saying that the force is vanishing as in as it makes people and things it is diminished. Therefore are you saying time will end from this as we all derive reality from him.

this is weird(new) for me because if i understand it right it is kind of one of those things that if we dont exist neither does he(she it). but if this is true then we both had to come into existence at once and (this is about when my brain stops working for an hour or two)

ok i just read more and dont know if the immediately above is right but i am thinking i understand another part. So the world kind of started with a set amount of good, being, godishness. As we are created some of this is imparted to us thus diminishing what is left to give a way. So as the world goes on more and more of this being is in people (dead and alive?) and less of a share is left. and now i cant find where i got any of this from in the posts

[Guest]

This is a really new way of looking at things for me so im rereading these ideas every time i log on but im pretty sure my mind explodes more and more every time. but are you saying that the force is vanishing as in as it makes people and things it is diminished. Therefore are you saying time will end from this as we all derive reality from him.

Your brain exploding is reality trying to tell you that you're following a course of logic in trying to understand something that transcends logic. Relax and just kind of bathe in the ideas that the words expressed, let them swirl around and connect with one another like colors blending on an artist's pallete. If possible, try to *feel* the combinations of words and try to ride with the flow as they move. If none of that makes any "sense" it's because we're talking about things that are unfathomable to any of our physical senses or faculties. In simplest terms, people say "you just have to believe". I say "you just feel the one-ness." Buddha thought of it as "Nirvana". If you can wrap your brain around infinity, then you're half way there.

this is weird(new) for me because if i understand it right it is kind of one of those things that if we dont exist neither does he(she it). but if this is true then we both had to come into existence at once and (this is about when my brain stops working for an hour or two)

I think this captures the essence of it. You stopped separating yourself from the object you were trying to understand. You blended with it instead. No more observer and observed. When your brain stopped working, maybe you were there.

ok i just read more and dont know if the immediately above is right but i am thinking i understand another part. So the world kind of started with a set amount of good, being, godishness. As we are created some of this is imparted to us thus diminishing what is left to give a way. So as the world goes on more and more of this being is in people (dead and alive?) and less of a share is left. and now i cant find where i got any of this from in the posts

The way I interpret this, as our identity forms we partially separate from "The One" or "The Tao" or "God", but what is diminished is not the source. There is no less of that than there was before. What is diminished is how purely we reflect the source from which we came - the reflections are clouded and imperfect. When we go on to identify other objects they are even further from the source, so their reflections of it are even more imperfect.

For me, the bottom line is this: Paradox (contradiction) is the very stuff of which reality is constructed. You can struggle with this logically and get no closer to it, or you can smile. In that moment of smiling you recognize yourself as at one with this universal essence and discover that you are at peace with it.

Edited June 18, 2009 by seeksit

[Guest]

i like this that it is just a general idea of the world and nature and past then I get the idea you beleive whatever you beleive. You have the core ideology to hold the people together and to have a group identity, but peoples ideas are separate enough that they cannot be defined by it.

Religion is one of those things that is good and pure, but then people get into it. Religion cannot exist (or serves no purpose) without people, yet people seem to find ways to destroy it.

But then what is the solution. Do you join these imperfect (to say the least) religions or do you go on your own. There is no solution that works.

If you go out on your own your God starts to bend to your will. You define him as you please. You rationalize him or with him. People (me-ish) in this position often forget we are made in God's image and start making there god in their image, what they want. The fact that if God or this being exists changes as you change makes your ideology impossible to be true (tho at any single moment its possible)

if you go with a religion you are going with a set set of beliefs (at least to an extent). These beliefs have been around for however long and are true enough for them to have lasted this long. They have some basis in the past and therefore truth or rather past experience and interaction. The things they believe however are not pure anymore. They were the pure "this is what we beleive" but then time and human interaction have corrupted the dogma, culture, and tradition. and at the same time some past "truth" needs to be changed. and goes without saying whos to say it was anywhere near right in the first place.

My teacher used to say there is no your truth, there is only the truth. but the problem is if you dont beleive in their truth, then you have to define your truth or live with maybes and ifs. eventhough your truth is no more likely then theirs it works for you. Therefore I have come to the conclusion that if anyone's truth works for them without hurting others, then God or the being sees this.

the only thing that is destroying the world (other then carbon) now is intolerance and fear of it. We are so afraid of being accused of intolerance that we dont address our problems with some things. People are so afraid of not being polite that they PC themselves to death and never have a real discussion about the hard things to talk about so people can grow. If people ignore theyre problems the problems often grow.

this is not at all what i started talking about but i totally forget what I meant to talk about.

[Guest]

For me, the bottom line is this: Paradox (contradiction) is the very stuff of which reality is constructed. You can struggle with this logically and get no closer to it, or you can smile. In that moment of smiling you recognize yourself as at one with this universal essence and discover that you are at peace with it.

The universe is indeed created of paradox, but not in the fashion you speak it. But this isn't about antimatter. This is about letting go, letting your soul become one with the insanity, succumbing to the will. You smile as you become immersed in the calling of an unknown will. His call shall be your call, whatever it may be. Know this: In all things logic is master, logic decides what is real, and logic decides what cannot be. Logic is God.

[Guest]

First of all, final, I found myself agreeing with everything you said in #44, even if you were rambling.

The universe is indeed created of paradox, but not in the fashion you speak it.

You're absolutely right. It is not possible to speak of it correctly, or even to conceive of it in its fullness.

But this isn't about antimatter. This is about letting go, letting your soul become one with the insanity, succumbing to the will. You smile as you become immersed in the calling of an unknown will. His call shall be your call, whatever it may be.

You seem to be anthropomorphizing something that is pretty far beyond human reach. I would replace the word "insanity" with "flow" and the word "will" with "current".

Know this: In all things logic is master, logic decides what is real, and logic decides what cannot be. Logic is God.

The last three words, standing alone, make a first rate paradox. Reading the words that come before those three, however, I come away with the impression that you may not fully appreciate this paradox; but maybe I'm reading your intent incorrectly. Anyhow I believe in fallible imperfect gods. Therefore logic is a perfectly adequate candidate to be a god. But how does such a god address issues of beauty, art, joy, all the logical paradoxes presented in the Paradoxes forum here on BD, all the counterintuitive issues in physics like which one of a thousand absolutely identical uranium 238 atoms will be the first to suddenly spontaneously release an alpha particle and why that particular one, etc., etc.?

[Guest]

First of all, final, I found myself agreeing with everything you said in #44, even if you were rambling.

You're absolutely right. It is not possible to speak of it correctly, or even to conceive of it in its fullness.

When I spoke of paradox and contradiction, I was talking about the relationship between matter and anti-matter, and yes, it can be conceived. Depending on the complexity of the universe, by what it is not certain. There is only so much room in the human brain, but we are capable of making machines that will store it for us.

You seem to be anthropomorphizing something that is pretty far beyond human reach. I would replace the word "insanity" with "flow" and the word "will" with "current".

I will humor you in saying that insanity could be replaced with flow, but the will, is the will, the want, the desire, the mission of the master as I speak it.

The last three words, standing alone, make a first rate paradox.

Explain please.

Reading the words that come before those three, however, I come away with the impression that you may not fully appreciate this paradox; but maybe I'm reading your intent incorrectly. Anyhow I believe in fallible imperfect gods. Therefore logic is a perfectly adequate candidate to be a god.

But how does such a god address issues of beauty, art, joy, all the logical paradoxes presented in the Paradoxes forum here on BD, all the counterintuitive issues in physics like which one of a thousand absolutely identical uranium 238 atoms will be the first to suddenly spontaneously release an alpha particle and why that particular one, etc., etc.?

All of these can be explained, by logic, but that is for another thread.

[Guest]

the will, is the will, the want, the desire, the mission of the master as I speak it.

Logic is God.

There's a lot you're not saying about your beliefs. Would you care to elaborate. I'm really curious.

I said that "Logic is God" is a paradox and you obviously find it to be a straightforward statement. I can explain my position, but in order to try to help put my explanation in terms you can relate to, I need to know more about your position or belief system. Do you believe there is an underlying "master" who you've refered to as "him"? How is this "master" related to Logic and to God? You repeat that this master has a will, want, desire, mission. Can you describe those and how they influence the daily lives of human beings. How do you go about explaining the existence of this master and this unseen motive force of "will"?

All of these can be explained, by logic, but that is for another thread.

To help quantify the gulf between the way you and I think, you have to understand that I do not agree that these things can be "explained" by logic, if by "explained" we mean resolved (leaving no unanswered question).

[Guest]

Haven't had much time to read and post here for a bit, but if I read correctly are we talking about God, "The One", "The Creator"?

Obviously I'm sure most of you are aware I do not believe in any such being, but I'll throw in my 2 cents about what and why I think the way I do.

First of all, someone mentioned "The One". By that do you mean some sort of God being? Or more of an idea? The problem I have with this The One is, if you believe there is such a being that created everything (Earth, Universe, whatever), then would it be a stretch for me to say you should believe in an Infinate amount of "The Ones"? If he/she was the creator, and you believe in creation as a way of reasoning, then something had to have created him/her, and something created that one, and something created that one....ect....to infinity. Or do you assume it just appeared one day to do all this? I take a more scientific approach. At least traceing back, it won't lead to an end or beginning that isn't there(I suppose noone knows for sure yet). I do kind of accept the Big Bang, but still have doubts about it. But to me it seems a bit more logical in the way I think and percieve things around me. Also don't think I am in any way missing out on anything because I do not think as deeply about creation, or trying to find the truth, I simply think more in the realm of what the heck is happening in our Universe, and why is it doing what is does, stuff like that. Even though to be honest I don't dwell on that a whole lot either. I just live my life to the fullest, and have as much fun as I can before I am gone. We will all find out the truth one day......when we're dead .

One more thing since I think we are talking about God (if not sorry, I only skimmed thru the posts).

This is another problem I have with God (the Bible one), and a question at the same time. Reply to it if you'd like. God created man in the image of himself right? Dinosaurs were on Earth long before man, and I asked a theist one time, who created the dinosaurs, of course his answer was God. So did God then create dinosaurs in the image of himself then too, was he a dinosaur? Go even further back, now is God a bacteria? Thats more less a joke, but still, there is no mention of any other species prior to Man in the Bible. I would think there would be some reference to the exisitence if God did in fact create these as well. I'm sure alot of people hear that one often, but if you'd care to share what you believe about that, go ahead.

So basically thats where I'm at. To me some of you think way too deep into what you're looking for, but on the otherhand I watch, read, and think alot about scientific things, just not so much that it consumes my thoughts(afterall there may be just as many unknows out there as there are in religion, just to me, science has more logic and makes more sense to me). But perhaps we can team up and each take a front. You guys search for this One, and I will look up to the sky for answers. First one to post an answer(that is accepted worldwide) I'll put up a 10$ reward

Edited June 19, 2009 by James8421

[Guest]

42

Thank you. Thank you very much.

You may PayPal my reward to seeksit@IDontReallyWantTheSteenkeenMoneyAnyway.com

[Guest]

You may PayPal my reward to seeksit@IDontReallyWantTheSteenkeenMoneyAnyway.com

that's funny