A logical evaluation of the Universe resulting in God.

[bertatberts]

Because it matters not what he believes, it is what you believe that makes you a SPAGer.

[JeffPT]

On this SPAG thing... I feel like this only has significance if it is an unconscious process.... I believe in god. I don't really think believing in a Bad god is of much use.

Unless, of course, God really is bad.  In that case, believing in a bad god is just accepting the truth, and there are plenty of good reasons to accept the truth.  Accepting that god doesn't exist is much the same.     

If you accept that the books describing a single deity are infused with the thoughts and ideas of the cultures who wrote them, the only thing you can say is probably true is the base message.

Actually, that's not necessarily true.  Another thing you could possibly say is that the base message is the one that appeals to the most people, and therefore has the best chance at survival over other messages.  The base message doesn't have to be true at all... all it has to be is believed. 

I found that to be that god loves us and wants us to treat each other lovingly and respectably... I found that to be a pretty reasonable aditude for god to have, and as I said if one cannot know the true nature of god no sense in not giving god the benefit of the doubt.

The message that god loves us and wants us to treat each other lovingly comes from the people who teach you that.  It doesn't come from observation of reality.  It can't.  It only takes a few moments of observation to see that.

I disagree that god deserves the benefit of the doubt, however.  Coming from your position, I can see why you think he does, but if you start with the belief that god is good and that he loves us, how can you ever allow new information to change your mind about whether or not he is worthy of worship or even worthy of defending?  Can't you see how that would be a perfect barrier against any sort of realization that your starting premise - that god is good - is wrong? 

What evidence do you have that god loves us?  What would evidence against such a position even look like to you? 

[mhaberling]

this thread is kniw completly off topic... look your.jumping into a discussion that has gone from one.thread to another and have missed some things i dont really want to explain again... i might start a new thread sooon oon this issue but with xmas coming up i dont think lill have time to properly respond for now... i.would like to finish up my debate with azdgari if he has anymore to say... (his perspective on math is strange but fasinating) other than that im not responding to questions

[12 Monkeys]

12 monkeys why do you want to hold me to something you consider a story?

hence the question bible-God,creator,supreme being...and how you came about a belief without holy books or churches

[12 Monkeys]

this thread is kniw completly off topic... look your.jumping into a discussion that has gone from one.thread to another and have missed some things i dont really want to explain again... i might start a new thread sooon oon this issue but with xmas coming up i dont think lill have time to properly respond for now... i.would like to finish up my debate with azdgari if he has anymore to say... (his perspective on math is strange but fasinating) other than that im not responding to questions

BECAUSE YOU CAN'T!!!!

[Jag]

this thread is kniw completly off topic... look your.jumping into a discussion that has gone from one.thread to another and have missed some things i dont really want to explain again... i might start a new thread sooon oon this issue but with xmas coming up i dont think lill have time to properly respond for now... i.would like to finish up my debate with azdgari if he has anymore to say... (his perspective on math is strange but fasinating) other than that im not responding to questions

That's too bad. I wish you would reconsider - you bring an interesting perspective to the conversation. Obviously, we're likely to argue every point you make here, but that doesn't mean we don't want to talk to you. We argue, that's what we do.

If nothing else, you would be better prepared to defend your position on other boards that are perhaps a bit less ... demanding. This can be a tough place for believers. You're doing a fine job so far - I haven't noticed anyone calling you an idiot, so you must be at least holding to your stated beliefs. You chose a very difficult topic and stuck with it - don't quit now!

Happy holidays to you and yours in any case.

[mhaberling]

Jag.. I wouldnt mind finish up our conversation on apetite for truth... what that message was reffering to is this SPAG argument. Which I have no problem with answering, but its a large enough to deserve its own thread, and I really don't want to do that until after christmas...

Back to our discussion..

You say you would rather know the truth than not know it, Know lets say the box is about a mile's walk away, and it is a bit chilly outside... do you walk a mile in the cold weather to find out the Truth...

(if this doesn't make sense tell me cause its been a while since we have had regular conversation)

[ParkingPlaces]

Ask me, ask me! I walked half a mile last night in the cold to take my garbage out.


Of course that would mean I'd have to read the whole thread to figure out what this is all about, and I may be too lazy for that.

[carstensenscott]

First off Im going to make a very simplified review of the argument,

The truth is definite, The existence of a metaphysical requires a mind to hold it or a know-er of the truth, thus God exists...

^^^What the hell is this bologna.
Truth and definite in the religious nature are not compatible. blah blah blah bahl lahb albh...god exists. Holy shit that was convincing. 

[mhaberling]

carsensenscott

if you didnt read the op that wont make much sense to you... if you didnt read the op you dont care to make discussion as much as you want to make rude missinformed comments comments...

[carstensenscott]

SORRY BUT IT READS LIKE THIS TO ME. IT MAKES ME FEEL LIKE I AM BACK IN CHURCH AND THEM RAMMING THE SERMONS CATCH PHRASE DOWN YOUR BRAINWASH TUBE.

[Azdgari]

Fair enough... You are correct... I hope there is an objective morality, but if I would learn of it and not agree I would say I would still value my own morality over it. I'll give you that.

Well, in that sense, your own morality is an objective morality.  It objectively exists, encoded in your brain matter.  A god's morality would also exist, encoded in whatever way thoughts are encoded without a substrate.[1]  Valuation is intrinsically tied to the valu-er, and thus cannot be objective.  A value without a valu-er would not be held, would not exist.

On math... Axioms I think are to broad of catagory for this argument... Axioms like the one that defines equality is inherenfly true. This makes it descriptive instead of definitive

That choice of axiom is much more useful for describing reality.  But it is not the only possible one.  A system where [a != a], would not function for anything useful past that point.  But it would still exist.

Perhaps another angle on this is needed, though.  Labels.  They are subjective.  Please identify a whole-number quantity of something in nature without dividing it from its environment via a human-created label.

1.	Nobody's ever explained how that might be possible in the first place.  But that's definitely a discussion for another thread.

[Jag]

lets say the box is about a mile's walk away, and it is a bit chilly outside... do you walk a mile in the cold weather to find out the Truth...

I'm curious to see where you are going with this, so:
Sure, I'll walk a mile in chilly weather (dressed appropriately, of course - I live in MN, and you and I may have different definitions of "chilly" lol) to get the box. Now what?

[ParkingPlaces]

Don't do it Jag, its a trap!!!!   


Or not.


I too am wondering where he's going with this. A mile, I'm old and I can do that.


Luckily, I live in the banana belt here in Montana, so cool would be like, you know, 65°.

[mhaberling]

Haha I'm from South Dakota... I feel your pain.. (I was thinking about 15-20 degrees, cold but not unbearable) This conversation started by you claiming you didn't have an appetite for truth. But you would rather now than not know and you are willing to go through a negative experience to find it. Off of that I would say you do in fact have an apetite for truth.

Ill give an example for the opposite. I do not have an appetite for the Justin Beiber Christmas album. I would not walk a mile in the cold to get it, I wouldn't walk halfway across a warm room to get it.

[Jag]

^^^That's what I thought - I didn't say that, I said I DO.....didn't I?

Now this makes more sense. Miscommunication, no big deal.

Carry on.

[Cyberia]

It is impossible to conceive a universe in which 1+1 = 3 or 4*4 = 15.

No, it isn't.  The answer is simple.  A universe that isn't governed by conservation would have the properties you suggest.  In a non-conserved universe, 1+1 might very well equal 3, or 8, and they would think it's so weird that in a conserved universe 1+1=2.

[Graybeard]

Fair enough... You are correct... I hope there is an objective morality, but if I would learn of it and not agree I would say I would still value my own morality over it. I'll give you that.

Well, in that sense, your own morality is an objective morality. 

But surely, mhaberling's morality is created by mhaberling alone and would be, by virtue of his own experiences, unique to him? It thus express itself as subjective.

It objectively exists, encoded in your brain matter.

You will note the difference between the adjective and adverb. All abstracts exist objectively but are subjective.

Valuation is intrinsically tied to the valu-er, and thus cannot be objective.  A value without a valu-er would not be held, would not exist.

If we are into semantics, if you give me a valuation and then die – I have that valuation but the valuer does not exist. However, I agree that as all valuations are nothing more than guesses, valuations are subjective.

[mhaberling]

It is impossible to conceive a universe in which 1+1 = 3 or 4*4 = 15.

No, it isn't.  The answer is simple.  A universe that isn't governed by conservation would have the properties you suggest.  In a non-conserved universe, 1+1 might very well equal 3, or 8, and they would think it's so weird that in a conserved universe 1+1=2.

Can you actually conceive a universe that isn't governed by conservation? I could claim there could be a universe in which your relative speed is determined by the height of the pastrami sandwich your holding, and the only thing stopping faster than light travel is that large sandwiches tend to fall over and the high cost of pastrami... But if I'm honest with myself I can't really conceive that universe as actually existing...

[Azdgari]

Graybeard, you appear to have missed my point there, which was that only in the trivial sense of "objectively existing" can anyone's values be objective.

And yes, "Graybeard valuing X to Y degree" does cease to exist when you die.