whywontgodhealamputees.com

Main Discussion Zone => General Religious Discussion => Topic started by: Lectus on June 16, 2013, 07:53:40 AM

Title: Question to theists
Post by: Lectus on June 16, 2013, 07:53:40 AM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: One Above All on June 16, 2013, 08:04:42 AM
BM.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jontom10 on June 16, 2013, 08:08:43 AM
Cue all theists "oooh no god wouldn't ask that of us these days" "He'd probably just need an extra 50 quid or so"
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 16, 2013, 05:25:14 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

This question is based on a false premise so it has no answer.   It assumes there is an individual with the ability to make choices but there is not.   There is only that which existed in the singularity prior to the big bang in a more complex and spread out form.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: One Above All on June 16, 2013, 05:28:57 PM
<snip>

Ever heard of a strawman?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jetson on June 16, 2013, 05:33:37 PM
This is an interesting question, and one that has me perplexed on certain attitudes.  In person, not on the internet, I have asked this very question to some Christian friends.  When pushed, two of them admitted that they would follow YHWH's orders to kill their own children.  Although, they vehemently defended the position that YHWH would NEVER ask such a thing.

They also admitted that there have been plenty of examples where people have indeed claimed that YHWH asked them to kill their own children, and they followed through.  Of course, everyone immediately considers these people to be sick, or in some way possessed by Satan, or something.  YHWH would NEVER ask such a thing - even though he has, according to scripture.

I asked these people, who admitted that they would follow YHWH's orders, what they believe would happen if they actually followed through, and they each admitted that they would be arrested, and that the defense of "God told me to kill my child" would likely not work, and most sane people would consider them a horrific parent, at best.

Now, when I confront the very important issue of how "crazy" one would appear if they did such a thing, there is complete silence.  Yes, YHWH asked Abraham to kill his son, but he would NEVER ask a modern Christian to do such a thing, even though, according to some murderers today, he did exactly that.

Bottom line - when something like this happens, there is no God.  Simple.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 05:34:37 PM
<snip>

Ever heard of a strawman?

The Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz? ;)

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 16, 2013, 05:38:50 PM
<snip>

Ever heard of a strawman?

I wasn't making a strawman.   I was stating my own view.   Self consciousness is an illusion.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: One Above All on June 16, 2013, 05:40:35 PM
I wasn't making a strawman.   I was stating my own view.   Self consciousness is an illusion.   

My apologies then. I'd refute your view, but, right now, I feel inspired, so I must work on one of my stories.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 16, 2013, 06:39:40 PM
No.  I would not believe I was hearing from god.  I would seek medical attention.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: The Gawd on June 16, 2013, 09:14:12 PM
No.  I would not believe I was hearing from god.  I would seek medical attention.
I ask you this because I respect your general honesty and willingness to answer questions even though the answers at times dont conform to your theology.

Do you feel that Abraham was sick and in need of medical attention (had it been available) when he was willing to murder his son at Yahweh's request? Do you believe that Yahweh was the voice telling him to kill his son?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 16, 2013, 09:33:43 PM
No.  I would not believe I was hearing from god.  I would seek medical attention.
I ask you this because I respect your general honesty and willingness to answer questions even though the answers at times dont conform to your theology.

Do you feel that Abraham was sick and in need of medical attention (had it been available) when he was willing to murder his son at Yahweh's request? Do you believe that Yahweh was the voice telling him to kill his son?

I honestly don't know.  Sometimes I think god was an asshole to ask that of him.  Sometimes I think some man/group of men made that story up and handed it down as a way to demonstrate/demand obedience.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 09:41:18 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

The entity who is asking me to kill my son would have to first prove he is God, and would have to explain why I would have to slay my child.  For example... this being would have to show me the future and show me what will happen if my son is not killed. If this being does prove it, and if this being show's me a proper reason for why my son would have to die.. then so be it.   I cannot kill unless my life or other lives are threatened, so this being would have to be very convincing.

It certainly would have to be more than a big booming voice telling me to do it.   IF that were to occour, I would head to mental health services and tell them what is happening to me.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 09:45:56 PM
So God has to prove to you as being god? Funny. How about you just say "yes" then spin your bullshit reason? There's a thought.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 09:47:33 PM
So God has to prove to you as being god? Funny. How about you just say "yes" then spin your bullshit reason? There's a thought.

-Nam

I would be stupid to just say yes. I have edited my previous post and made an addition while you were replying .  You may want to read it again. 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 16, 2013, 09:54:30 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

The entity who is asking me to kill my son would have to first prove he is God, and would have to explain why I would have to slay my child.  For example... this being would have to show me the future and show me what will happen if my son is not killed.

There should definitely be a better reason than proving my love for him.  How fricken insecure is he?  Sorry, my doubts are showing...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 09:55:14 PM
Um, no. I prefer reading what people actually mean: not the edited version.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 09:57:06 PM
Um, no. I prefer reading what people actually mean: not the edited version.

-Nam

I merely forgot to put that part in. It IS what I really meant. Your asumption about that was false man.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 10:00:05 PM
How can there be an assumption on my part if that was the initial conclusion?

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: ParkingPlaces on June 16, 2013, 10:00:53 PM
If a god does exist and he showed up in front of me with unassailable proof that he is real, and he asked me to kill my son, I'd tell him he may be all powerful but he doesn't have the ability to lay a guilt trip on me. I'd tell him to f**k off so fast I wouldn't have time to include the asterisks. Sure, they might be my last two words, but at least I'd die satisfied that I wasn't a tool for a power-hungry despot.

The why's of his request would be irrelevant. The most he could come up with would be a litany of excuses, and I've learned from a couple of women in my life not to pay attention to any of those.

If I instead decided to do his dirty work for him and then earned a  trip to heaven, it would suck if I had to spend an eternity with the dude that had me to off my kid.

Game playing is something humans do, so they tossed stories like that into the bible in an effort to impress underlings with the supposed power of their "god". Bribery and threats don't work on me that easily. Even the real, human ones.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 10:20:34 PM
How can there be an assumption on my part if that was the initial conclusion?

-Nam

Nam... it is what I actually meant. Even if I had to edit it. If I did not do that, then what I actually meant to communicate would not have been successful.  That last part of my post was a very important part that was omitted by accident.   Your conclusion was indeed a false assumption. You assumed that since I edited my post, I must have posted something insincere.  That assumption was indeed false.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 10:26:00 PM
But not what you actually said.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: neopagan on June 16, 2013, 10:37:18 PM
My answer would be a resounding NO. I don't care if Yahweh broke out his big booming voice, a lightning bolt in the shape of Liberace's candelabra, or a burning Bush.

 I think ol Abe should have havetold hi  go  to f-off and gone back home to his wife and the slave he was sexually assaulting. What a loser...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 10:41:18 PM
But not what you actually said.

-Nam


Damn your frustrating.  It IS what I meant to include in what I said.  Jeeze... >:(
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jetson on June 16, 2013, 10:49:14 PM
But not what you actually said.

-Nam


Damn your frustrating.  It IS what I meant to include in what I said.  Jeeze... >:(

Don't let it bug you... ;D
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 10:50:53 PM
How do I know you're telling the truth? You added it after-the-fact. All we have here are our words. Whether someone believes it or not is up to the person saying what they mean when they state it. If it were an adage, that's one thing. "I would like to add..." but that's not what you did; you edited it to sound less stupid (it still sounds stupid by the by).

Ex: I tell you I own the Bible. That I have read 15 versions of the Bible. How do you know that's true? How does anyone? Initially they don't until they get to know me, and even then there's no guarantee that they'd believe me.

Everyone has this dilemma on the web; or in person. Especially unknown people.

Get it yet?

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 10:57:07 PM
Quote
but that's not what you did; you edited it to sound less stupid (it still sounds stupid by the by).



That is another false assumption on your part Nam. As for the rest of what you said..that could be true of anybody.  No kidding.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 11:06:32 PM
It's not an assumption, it's an opinion. Stop using "assumption" to fit everything.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 11:20:54 PM
It's not an assumption, it's an opinion. Stop using "assumption" to fit everything.

-Nam

You assume I edited it to sound less stupid.  Your opinion IS a false assumption. I am not that stupid Nam.  Those little tricks do not work on me.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 16, 2013, 11:31:35 PM
So you agree it was stupid?[1] also, you haven't proven to me that you're not stupid[2].

-Nam
 1. you are so easy
 2. in reference to you being just like every other Christian out there
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 16, 2013, 11:58:05 PM
So you agree it was stupid?[1] also, you haven't proven to me that you're not stupid[2].

-Nam
 1. you are so easy
 2. in reference to you being just like every other Christian out there

Everybody is stupid to a certain degree.

I am not so stupid as to not have known you would respond with something like that.  I saw it coming a mile away.  Your types always do. 

I also haven't proved that I am stupid either.   8)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 12:06:10 AM
No, everyone's an idiot. ;) my type? Please, enlighten me? If you actually know my type there's a +1 in it for you. I'll give you a hint: it's one word: no cheating.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 17, 2013, 12:07:26 AM
No, everyone's an idiot. ;) my type? Please, enlighten me? If you actually know my type there's a +1 in it for you. I'll give you a hint: it's one word: no cheating.

-Nam

Troll   ;)  but a pleasant one.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 12:11:57 AM
Wrong. Trolls don't last 8,000+ posts on this website. So sorry. You'll learn pretty soon.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 17, 2013, 12:14:50 AM
Wrong. Trolls don't last 8,000+ posts on this website. So sorry. You'll learn pretty soon.

-Nam

That is fair and I meant no insult with the word I guessed.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 17, 2013, 12:18:01 AM
Nam..  you never said that I could have only one guess.

How about ..funny.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 12:20:28 AM
You can't insult me. Actually the one and only thing that I found insulting in the past really has no effect on me anymore. This doesn't mean I can't get upset or angry (none of which concerning our conversations) but that's usually toward things I find ignorant but not insulting.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 12:21:45 AM
Nam..  you never said that I could have only one guess.

How about ..funny.

I am funny, at times. Most of my positive karma is from making people laugh but that's not it, either.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 12:55:47 AM
So you agree it was stupid?[1] also, you haven't proven to me that you're not stupid[2]

-Nam
 1. you are so easy
 2. in reference to you being just like every other Christian out there

5 Stupid Quotes

Stupid is as stupid does, Sir.  -- Forrest Gump
I don't wanna be a stupid girl.  -- Pink
Stupid man, hitchhiking out of a good life.  -- Lou Reed
Life is hard.  It's harder if you're stupid.  -- John Wayne
The media works in sound bites, they can make you look like a genius or stupid. -- Kato Kaelin
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 12:57:07 AM
You can't insult me. Actually the one and only thing that I found insulting in the past really has no effect on me anymore. This doesn't mean I can't get upset or angry (none of which concerning our conversations) but that's usually toward things I find ignorant but not insulting.

-Nam

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberry.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 01:22:56 AM
You can't insult me. Actually the one and only thing that I found insulting in the past really has no effect on me anymore. This doesn't mean I can't get upset or angry (none of which concerning our conversations) but that's usually toward things I find ignorant but not insulting.

-Nam

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberry.

That's not insulting me, that's insulting my parents. I will defend my mother from such insults to her, my father I don't give a shit about.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 01:37:33 AM
You can't insult me. Actually the one and only thing that I found insulting in the past really has no effect on me anymore. This doesn't mean I can't get upset or angry (none of which concerning our conversations) but that's usually toward things I find ignorant but not insulting.

-Nam

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberry.

That's not insulting me, that's insulting my parents. I will defend my mother from such insults to her, my father I don't give a shit about.

-Nam

Actually, I think hamsters are quite cute, especially those tiny roborovskis.  I'm not sure what an elderberry smells like but I heard the wands made from elder bark are pretty badass.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 01:58:42 AM
Hey, if I could play in my own wheel, and shit pellets, I would love that. ;)

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: screwtape on June 17, 2013, 07:48:53 AM
Nam, WalkingDeath,

Can we please get back on topic?

Thanks.

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: screwtape on June 17, 2013, 08:10:08 AM
The entity who is asking me to kill my son would have to first prove he is God, and would have to explain why I would have to slay my child.  For example... this being would have to show me the future and show me what will happen if my son is not killed. If this being does prove it, and if this being show's me a proper reason for why my son would have to die.. then so be it.   I cannot kill unless my life or other lives are threatened, so this being would have to be very convincing.

It certainly would have to be more than a big booming voice telling me to do it.   IF that were to occour, I would head to mental health services and tell them what is happening to me.


It's been asked already, prior to your post, but what about Abraham?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 22 &version=NRSV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 22 &version=NRSV)

We are not given very much about Abe and yhwh's relationship.  We know they met, negotiated and made a contract.[1]  But it does not make any mention of yhwh proving himself to Abe.  yhwh visited one time and appeared completely indistinguishable from a man.[2]  So it seems to me that if yhwh were to ask you to sacrifice your child, it would be as a test of obedience, like Abraham's.  And you would be unlikely to receive any more proof that it was yhwh than Abe got.  Are you saying you would deny yhwh?

And that is the moral of that story.  yhwh wants blind, stupid obedience.   He wanted Eve and her slow witted mate to follow his every command, amorally and without judgment.  But when they learned morality and exercised judgment equal to his, he punished them.  He demanded Abraham amorally follow his every command.  He demanded it of the hebrew people, who seldom followed and were rebuked horribly for it time and time again.  It was what yhwh wanted from the beginning, but has never been able to get. 

Why was he unable to make people the way he wanted them?  Or why was he unwilling to convince people that his ways were in their own self interest?  Is he a loser?  A failure?
 1. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2017&version=NRSV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2017&version=NRSV)
 2. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2018&version=NRSV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2018&version=NRSV)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 12:00:08 PM
Nam, WalkingDeath,

Can we please get back on topic?

Thanks.


My bad, too.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 12:08:45 PM



It's been asked already, prior to your post, but what about Abraham?

And that is the moral of that story.  yhwh wants blind, stupid obedience.   

When I have read about or heard about this story writers and pastors like to imply (spin)  that Abraham's faith in gods love was so strong that he just knew god would supply the ram (?I think it was a ram) and he wouldn't really have to kill Isaac if he just showed his obedience...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: viocjit on June 17, 2013, 12:28:28 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

The majority of theist will say YES.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 17, 2013, 03:30:13 PM


Quote
The majority of theist will say YES.

If you are talking about the U.S. only I would probably say that you are correct.  Oh and then there is the middle east.  But as for the majority worldwide?  I am not so sure about that answer.  The zealous crazy theists would do it in a heartbeat.  But like I said before, I am sure there would be some who would need some answers first.  If some entity told me to do such a thing,  it would have to prove it is God and would have to give me a very good reason to do such a thing.  I would not do it just because some entity who calls itself God were to answer with only "Because I COMMAND it!"  If that were to happen, I would submit myself to mental health services.

And YES Screwtape... a few of us WERE off topic.   My apologies.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: 12 Monkeys on June 17, 2013, 07:18:21 PM
No.  I would not believe I was hearing from god.  I would seek medical attention.
Does this apply when Gods asks you to do good things or just evil things?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 17, 2013, 07:50:56 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

The majority of theist will say YES.
I suspect that neither of us have data to back up our positions (I'm going by gut and incidental experience with the people I know), but I disagree with this assessment.  I'm pretty sure most of the people I know simply compartmentalize to a significant degree.  They simultaneously hold the positions god is the ultimate authority/whatever he says goes and under no circumstance would I willfully murder my child.  The former position is something that can be said with an extraordinarily high degree of confidence that it will never be tested to the full extreme, and can therefore simply agree with their position without thinking about at all.  The way it is reconciled logically is that it is simply an impossible circumstance for god to ask them to murder their child.  They simply have faith that this is the case - it doesn't really matter what other consequences that logic has (i.e. limitations on god's power, previous cruelty, errors in the bible, etc.).  It simply is.

The latter claim, that they would not cause death to their child, is something that gets tested constantly, as they have direct experience of the child being 'not dead'.

If presented with the question where they were forced to answer honestly, they'd say 'no'.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 17, 2013, 08:11:49 PM
My mom's a Christian and even though, I am sure, she wanted to kill me at some point, she wouldn't; I don't even think if Biblegod ordered her to. Family is very important to her, as it is with many Christians, and people in general.

Also, if they were so hellbent on following Biblegod's laws; then most children today would be dead for not obeying their parents, as it says in the Bible:

Exodus 21:15
Deuteronomy 21:19-21
Leviticus 20:9
Matthew 15:4
Mark 7:9-10

Etc.,

So, I think the actual answer to the question is: no.

-Nam

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 10:31:13 PM
No.  I would not believe I was hearing from god.  I would seek medical attention.
Does this apply when Gods asks you to do good things or just evil things?

I never hear gods tell me to do anything.  I guess my faith isn't strong enough.  I am very skeptical when I hear people talk about conversations they had with god as if they were dialogs.  I sometimes do things because it is the right thing to do.  It may or may not be gods plan.  Right is right with or without a god as far as I'm concerned.  Your next question will be why do I even believe.  I'm not even sure myself.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 17, 2013, 10:39:37 PM

The latter claim, that they would not cause death to their child, is something that gets tested constantly, as they have direct experience of the child being 'not dead'.

My son had surgery to correct a birth defect when he was 6 months old.  It required general anesthesia.  I was actually presumptuous enough to "threaten" god in a prayer that if my son died I would never speak to him or set foot in another church or sing in another choir again.  My son is 'not dead'.  I'm so badass.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 18, 2013, 02:56:20 AM
<snip>

Ever heard of a strawman?

I wasn't making a strawman.   I was stating my own view.   Self consciousness is an illusion.

That very much depends upon how one defines "consciousness" and how one defines "illusion".
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 18, 2013, 03:01:46 AM
If a god does exist and he showed up in front of me with unassailable proof that he is real, and he asked me to kill my son, I'd tell him he may be all powerful but he doesn't have the ability to lay a guilt trip on me. I'd tell him to f**k off so fast I wouldn't have time to include the asterisks. Sure, they might be my last two words, but at least I'd die satisfied that I wasn't a tool for a power-hungry despot.

The why's of his request would be irrelevant. The most he could come up with would be a litany of excuses, and I've learned from a couple of women in my life not to pay attention to any of those.

If I instead decided to do his dirty work for him and then earned a  trip to heaven, it would suck if I had to spend an eternity with the dude that had me to off my kid.

Game playing is something humans do, so they tossed stories like that into the bible in an effort to impress underlings with the supposed power of their "god". Bribery and threats don't work on me that easily. Even the real, human ones.


Took the words right out of my subconscious. Ignore the made-up Yahweh and his absurd arbitrary commands. I need say no more.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: screwtape on June 18, 2013, 08:30:05 AM
When I have read about or heard about this story writers and pastors like to imply (spin)  that Abraham's faith in gods love was so strong that he just knew god would supply the ram (?I think it was a ram) and he wouldn't really have to kill Isaac if he just showed his obedience...

I've heard that excuse as well.  However, I find it weak and unpersuasive.  It is completely non-scriptural and pure speculation.  Why would Abe have expected that?  It is very popular amongst xians to say that yhwh is free to kill us at any time.  He made us, so he has the right to end us.  yhwh gave him the son in the first place, so it is his right to take him back.  This is all yhwh was doing with Isaac.  Only he was asking (demanding?) Abe do it for him.    yhwh has a habit of ordering people to do his killing for him.

Also, there is good evidence that in the original version of the story, Abe went through with it and killed Isaac. [1]

 1. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20275.msg463304.html#msg463304 (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20275.msg463304.html#msg463304)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 18, 2013, 08:55:41 AM
That very much depends upon how one defines "consciousness" and how one defines "illusion".

There is no possibility that a person can ever make a choice about anything.   In the case presented in the OP, an apparent decision will be made and it will be based on the genetics and environmental conditioning of that part of the universe we call the person faced with this choice.  This supposed free agent will have no control over his or her actions whatsoever, free will and awareness itself being completely illusory or not real.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jag on June 18, 2013, 09:17:54 AM
^^^If we all agree with this position, we have nothing left to talk about. Thus, I reject it based on my interest in continuing to discuss whatever catches my attention here.  ;D

That choice may be an illusion, but it allows me to get my way so I'm going with it.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 18, 2013, 10:00:06 AM
My mom's a Christian and even though, I am sure, she wanted to kill me at some point, she wouldn't; I don't even think if Biblegod ordered her to. Family is very important to her, as it is with many Christians, and people in general.

I was thinking about this and I was wondering if a large number of Christians were polled would the responses differ between mothers and fathers?  Would mothers be less willing to kill their children than fathers?  Particularly in the more fundy, patriarchal sects?  I know my initial answer to the question  was a flat out "no" but I am not a good representative of Christians in general...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jag on June 18, 2013, 10:28:39 AM
^^^That's a good question. I wonder a lot of things about the patriarchal movement, but this is a new one.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 18, 2013, 12:23:16 PM
That very much depends upon how one defines "consciousness" and how one defines "illusion".

There is no possibility that a person can ever make a choice about anything.   In the case presented in the OP, an apparent decision will be made and it will be based on the genetics and environmental conditioning of that part of the universe we call the person faced with this choice.  This supposed free agent will have no control over his or her actions whatsoever, free will and awareness itself being completely illusory or not real.

That would depend entirely upon how one defines the terms "choice" and "freewill". Have you read Dan Dennett or any other modern philosophers regarding this subject?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:14:09 AM
Have you read Dan Dennett or any other modern philosophers regarding this subject?

No.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 11:13:22 AM
Have you read Dan Dennett or any other modern philosophers regarding this subject?

No.

Then perhaps you should start there:

http://www.amazon.com/Free-Will-Robert-Kane/dp/0631221026/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1371658358&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=freewill+kane

http://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Evolves-Daniel-C-Dennett/dp/0142003840/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1371658425&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+evolves
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 19, 2013, 03:39:50 PM
That very much depends upon how one defines "consciousness" and how one defines "illusion".

There is no possibility that a person can ever make a choice about anything.   In the case presented in the OP, an apparent decision will be made and it will be based on the genetics and environmental conditioning of that part of the universe we call the person faced with this choice.  This supposed free agent will have no control over his or her actions whatsoever, free will and awareness itself being completely illusory or not real.

That would depend entirely upon how one defines the terms "choice" and "freewill". Have you read Dan Dennett or any other modern philosophers regarding this subject?


I say this to both of you. If God exists, then choice and free will can exist simultaneously.  It would not be an illusion at all.  We exist in this time line, God spans the timeline simultaneously.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 19, 2013, 04:44:52 PM
Biblegod is not about "choice" or "freewill". Biblegod is about "you give everything to me or suffer for all eternity". It's not really a choice if that's your only option.

Get over such pathetic fiction.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 19, 2013, 05:55:24 PM
Biblegod is not about "choice" or "freewill". Biblegod is about "you give everything to me or suffer for all eternity". It's not really a choice if that's your only option.

Get over such pathetic fiction.

-Nam

I can choose to believe it or not Nam.  I can choose to not believe in God and no fear of Judgement or hope of eternal life with nothing to look forward to except for a grave, or I can choose to believe and have something to look forward to, and still risk a grave in Hell. 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 08:31:54 PM
Biblegod is not about "choice" or "freewill". Biblegod is about "you give everything to me or suffer for all eternity". It's not really a choice if that's your only option.

Get over such pathetic fiction.

-Nam

I can choose to believe it or not Nam.  I can choose to not believe in God and no fear of Judgement or hope of eternal life with nothing to look forward to except for a grave, or I can choose to believe and have something to look forward to, and still risk a grave in Hell.

You're quite mistaken here. Belief is not a choice. One must be convinced (by either good/bad, sound/unsound, evidence or argument). If you think it is a choice then please demonstrate by willing yourself to believe in real pink flying unicorns. 

p.s. - "Nothing to look forward to except the grave"?? Is that really what you think? That if you didn't believe in a god you wouldn't have anything (anything at all) to look forward to?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: magicmiles on June 19, 2013, 08:46:27 PM
One must be convinced (by either good/bad, sound/unsound, evidence or argument).

Isn't that hopelesly circular? How do you come to believe that the evidence on which you are convinced to believe is good or bad evidence?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 08:46:50 PM
I say this to both of you. If God exists, then choice and free will can exist simultaneously.  It would not be an illusion at all.  We exist in this time line, God spans the timeline simultaneously.

In my belief nothing we are aware of can exist simultaneously with God.   Things like life, free will, meaning, purpose, thought, awareness and time fall under this category.   They are all illusions.

Definition of NONDUALISM (Mirriam-Webster Online):
1
: a doctrine of classic Brahmanism holding that the essential unity of all is real whereas duality and plurality are phenomenal illusion and that matter is materialized energy which in turn is the temporal manifestation of an incorporeal spiritual eternal essence constituting the innermost self of all things
2
: any of various monistic or pluralistic theories of the universe

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 19, 2013, 08:48:51 PM
You're quite mistaken here. Belief is not a choice. One must be convinced (by either good/bad, sound/unsound, evidence or argument). If you think it is a choice then please demonstrate by willing yourself to believe in real pink flying unicorns.

I choose not to. 

p.s. - "Nothing to look forward to except the grave"?? Is that really what you think? That if you didn't believe in a god you wouldn't have anything (anything at all) to look forward to?

When your dead your dead if there is no afterlife.  Nothing to look forward to when you die.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 08:55:13 PM
One must be convinced (by either good/bad, sound/unsound, evidence or argument).

Isn't that hopelesly circular? How do you come to believe that the evidence on which you are convinced to believe is good or bad evidence?

That would depend upon the claim and depend upon the evidence. Either way, you still don't merely choose to believe something. As Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland has said, "You can't will yourself to believe there is a pink elephant in the room if there isn't." Whether or not you are convinced by good or bad evidence is completely irrelevant to the subject of how we come to believe things. We don't come to believe things by merely choosing. We must be convinced in some way.

Regarding the circularity charge, where and how?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 19, 2013, 08:57:03 PM
In my belief nothing we are aware of can exist simultaneously with God.   Things like life, free will, meaning, purpose, thought, awareness and time fall under this category.   They are all illusions.

As it pertains to the God in the bible,  it mentions a couple of times about how time exists with HIM in a different form that it does with us.  "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end"  and  " But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."-’Peter 3:8-9 "




Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: screwtape on June 19, 2013, 08:58:50 PM
I choose not to. 

Oh, come on, don't be such a wet blanket.  Give it a try.  Seriously.  It's a good experiment and makes a really good point. 

We get a lot of flack from xians about how we choose to reject god.  But it was not a choice for me.  It was a realization that I could not believe any more.  I'm sorry to draw the comparison to Santa, but that is exactly what it was like.  Once I knew Santa was a fake, I could not unknow the things that lead me to that conclusion.  I was kinda pissed, because I felt like I lost something, or someone. 

It was the exact same feeling when I finally admitted to myself I was an atheist.  I'd known for some time that none of it added up and I'd tried to make compromises and excuses.  But I felt like I was losing something again.[1]

I have had a ton of xians tell me I just had to choose god again.  But I can't.  It would be like trying to choose to believe in Santa again. 

So, give it a try. Try to choose to believe in something you know is fictional.  Tell us how it goes.






 1. This guy describes it better:
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25084.msg559484.html#msg559484  (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25084.msg559484.html#msg559484)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 08:58:56 PM
I say this to both of you. If God exists, then choice and free will can exist simultaneously.  It would not be an illusion at all.  We exist in this time line, God spans the timeline simultaneously.

In my belief nothing we are aware of can exist simultaneously with God.   Things like life, free will, meaning, purpose, thought, awareness and time fall under this category.   They are all illusions.

Definition of NONDUALISM (Mirriam-Webster Online):
1
: a doctrine of classic Brahmanism holding that the essential unity of all is real whereas duality and plurality are phenomenal illusion and that matter is materialized energy which in turn is the temporal manifestation of an incorporeal spiritual eternal essence constituting the innermost self of all things
2
: any of various monistic or pluralistic theories of the universe

And we should believe this jumble of solipsist verbiage...why?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:03:03 PM
And we should believe this jumble of solipsist verbiage...why?

Who said you should believe anything?   Belief is an illusion.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:03:39 PM
I choose not to. 

Nice cop-out. Sounds like someone is too proud to admit when they're in error.




When your dead your dead if there is no afterlife.  Nothing to look forward to when you die.

This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you'd have anything to look forward to in life. Besides, why would you want to "look forward" to a non-existent fiction?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:04:47 PM
And we should believe this jumble of solipsist verbiage...why?

Who said you should believe anything?   Belief is an illusion.

And you know this...how? Again, this would depend upon how you would define that term. You are making claims without defining your terms. Rejected.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:05:24 PM
And please explain what is solipsistic about nondualism.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:07:11 PM
And you know this...how? Again, this would depend upon how you would define that term. You are making claims without defining your terms. Rejected.

Who said I know?   Also, knowledge and terms are illusions.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:13:08 PM
And please explain what is solipsistic about nondualism.

If you aren't willing to put your claims (that "all is illusion", or whatever) to the test, and to define your terms, then why should I explain anything? I should just say, "Nope, you're wrong" and leave it at that, right?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:14:53 PM
And you know this...how? Again, this would depend upon how you would define that term. You are making claims without defining your terms. Rejected.

Who said I know?   Also, knowledge and terms are illusions.

Are knowledge and terms also schmarbelfarben, blark, ducka ducka, and schimska?

If you don't know that your claims are true, why are you making them?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: magicmiles on June 19, 2013, 09:17:00 PM

Regarding the circularity charge, where and how?

Well...if I believe something, I have been convinced that it is true, if I correctly understand you. How can you say that the evidence which convinces me is objectively bad? Isn't it just a matter of you being convinced it is bad?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:17:26 PM
If you don't know that your claims are true, why are you making them?

It's just the way I see it.   It's only one perspective.   Believe what you want.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: WakingDeath on June 19, 2013, 09:21:11 PM
I choose not to. 

Oh, come on, don't be such a wet blanket.  Give it a try.  Seriously.  It's a good experiment and makes a really good point. 

We get a lot of flack from xians about how we choose to reject god.  But it was not a choice for me.  It was a realization that I could not believe any more.  I'm sorry to draw the comparison to Santa, but that is exactly what it was like.  Once I knew Santa was a fake, I could not unknow the things that lead me to that conclusion.  I was kinda pissed, because I felt like I lost something, or someone. 

It was the exact same feeling when I finally admitted to myself I was an atheist.  I'd known for some time that none of it added up and I'd tried to make compromises and excuses.  But I felt like I was losing something again.[1]

I have had a ton of xians tell me I just had to choose god again.  But I can't.  It would be like trying to choose to believe in Santa again. 

So, give it a try. Try to choose to believe in something you know is fictional.  Tell us how it goes.
 1. This guy describes it better:
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25084.msg559484.html#msg559484  (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25084.msg559484.html#msg559484)

Okay I digress. There are some choices that I cannot make.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:21:36 PM

Regarding the circularity charge, where and how?

Well...if I believe something, I have been convinced that it is true, if I correctly understand you. How can you say that the evidence which convinces me is objectively bad? Isn't it just a matter of you being convinced it is bad?

This "objectively" nonsense is a red-herring. I'm not concerned with absolute certainty of such things - and neither should you be. How can one be justified in thinking that X evidence is sound or unsound? Once again, that would depend upon the claim being made and the evidence which is being presented to support it.

Generally speaking making the determination as to whether a specific set of evidences/arguments is sound or unsound requires demonstration (in some fashion) to others. Are you trying to argue that all claims are equally valid?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:23:57 PM
If you don't know that your claims are true, why are you making them?

It's just the way I see it.   It's only one perspective.   Believe what you want.

But of course, to use your words, you are seeing an illusion! So your belief that all is illusion is itself an illusion. So reality is not an illusion! Welcome to reality. It's not an illusion. Sorry to disappoint.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:25:32 PM
If you aren't willing to put your claims (that "all is illusion", or whatever) to the test, and to define your terms, then why should I explain anything? I should just say, "Nope, you're wrong" and leave it at that, right?

In solipsism only the self exists.   In nondualism there is no self.   So I was a little confused by your phrase "solipsist verbiage."
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 19, 2013, 09:26:18 PM
If you aren't willing to put your claims (that "all is illusion", or whatever) to the test, and to define your terms, then why should I explain anything? I should just say, "Nope, you're wrong" and leave it at that, right?

In solipsism only the self exists.   In nondualism there is no self.   So I was a little confused by your phrase "solipsist verbiage."

Of course you were confused, b/c you were seeing an illusion, right?

You keep using terms that are extremely vague and indistinguishable from other terms.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:31:51 PM
Of course you were confused, b/c you were seeing an illusion, right?

I was trying to be gracious.   Calling what I said "solipsist verbiage" was rather stupid. 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 19, 2013, 09:53:24 PM
But of course, to use your words, you are seeing an illusion! So your belief that all is illusion is itself an illusion. So reality is not an illusion! Welcome to reality. It's not an illusion. Sorry to disappoint.

It is correct that the belief that this is an illusion is an illusion.   However, the double negative positive you have arrived at is also an illusion because logic is an illusion.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: magicmiles on June 19, 2013, 10:14:23 PM

Generally speaking making the determination as to whether a specific set of evidences/arguments is sound or unsound requires demonstration (in some fashion) to others.

Bold mine.

What happened to having no choice? Can we be in control of what evidence we believe but not in control of believing whatever it is the evidence points us to?

Are you trying to argue that all claims are equally valid?

Valid to who?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 01:28:31 AM
But of course, to use your words, you are seeing an illusion! So your belief that all is illusion is itself an illusion. So reality is not an illusion! Welcome to reality. It's not an illusion. Sorry to disappoint.

It is correct that the belief that this is an illusion is an illusion.   However, the double negative positive you have arrived at is also an illusion because logic is an illusion.

This is called the fallacy of stolen concept. You need a frame of reference (which is NOT an illusion and which you are trying to smuggle in the backdoor) by which to claim it's all an illusion. You've also contradicted yourself. If it's all an illusion than you can't say it's all an illusion b/c that assumes you have knowledge which is NOT illusive. FAIL.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 01:50:52 AM

Generally speaking making the determination as to whether a specific set of evidences/arguments is sound or unsound requires demonstration (in some fashion) to others.

Bold mine.

What happened to having no choice? Can we be in control of what evidence we believe but not in control of believing whatever it is the evidence points us to?

Strawman, I never said you had no choice, period, I said we don't choose to believe things. We are either convinced, or we are not. If you allow irrational arguments to convince you of things (such as a fast talking salesman at your door) then you're likely to believe more bullshit. Is that OK for you? Do you want to be convinced of things by use of bad/irrational reasoning?

To the second question, I thought my previous answer was quite clear. We don't choose to believe things. We have to be convinced (either by good reasoning or bad), and what we choose to accept as sound/unsound evidence can depend upon background knowledge, presumptions, knowledge of proper reasoning (or lack thereof), etc.

Again, do you want to believe things based upon faulty presumptions? As I've asked before, do you even care whether or not your beliefs are actually true? If not then I suppose it doesn't matter if you question your assumption. I do care and that's the difference.
Are you trying to argue that all claims are equally valid?

Valid to who?


Red Herring. Are you a relativist now, or perhaps someone who thinks logic doesn't apply somewhere?

Now look whose dodging...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Timtheskeptic on June 20, 2013, 02:10:01 AM
If there is a God and with no doubt that they are indeed God with all evidence to the contrary and without the shadow of a doubt and they ask me to kill my child (I don't have a child, but i'm being hypothetical) i would not only say no, but i would die fighting him than to ever lay a finger on my own child or anyone's child. Never would i ever appeal to some insecure, megalomaniac, tyrannical deity. It is without question the saddest thing to ever hear stories of religious parents who have murdered their own child because voice in their heads told them to. Very sad indeed. If i did hear some voice in my head, i would immediately seek help.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on June 20, 2013, 08:04:39 AM
If there is a God and with no doubt that they are indeed God with all evidence to the contrary and without the shadow of a doubt and they ask me to kill my child (I don't have a child, but I'm being hypothetical) i would not only say no, but i would die fighting him than to ever lay a finger on my own child or anyone's child. Never would i ever appeal to some insecure, megalomaniac, tyrannical deity. It is without question the saddest thing to ever hear stories of religious parents who have murdered their own child because voice in their heads told them to. Very sad indeed. If i did hear some voice in my head, i would immediately seek help.

Well we differ on that.  If I absolutely knew/believed in god, and the spirit world of paradise, I don't think there is anything I would do to piss him off.  He might have a reason for having me waste my son.  Giving my kid a one way ticket to paradise and having him skip 80 years of human suffering might not be such a bad thing.  Life on earth would be a infinitely less important than eternity in paradise.


Of course I cant imagine what paradise is like,  what could I do for an eternity that would entertain me.  if there is a paradise man it would require me not to be recognisable me to enjoy it.  Imagine eternity doing everything you love the most.  to be crass, I don't think living in a constant state of orgasm would be much fun after a day or two ;D

If I am  me in heaven I might be subject to banishment after receiving my final reward for a good life.  If I still have free will and am subject to the same human weakness as here I am bound to screw up with an eternity of chances to do so.

Perhaps heaven is a collective like the borg you go there to combine into a super collective being but lose your self in the process.  If you lose yourself aren't you essentially dead?   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 10:56:57 AM
Perhaps heaven is a collective like the borg you go there to combine into a super collective being but lose your self in the process.  If you lose yourself aren't you essentially dead?

All of these dualities like self/other, living/dead, conscious/unconscious are illusions.   In reality you have no self now and do not exist, therefore you have no self to lose.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 11:05:58 AM

All of these dualities like self/other, living/dead, conscious/unconscious are illusions.   In reality you have no self now and do not exist, therefore you have no self to lose.

And we should think your claims are the correct interpretation of reality, why? If we shouldn't, then why are you claiming it?

Brahma? Spiritual? "Illusion"? What a great way to obfuscate - just use nonsense words with no coherent meaning and then throw in a big equivocation.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 11:16:01 AM
1
: a doctrine of classic Brahmanism holding that the essential unity of all is real whereas duality and plurality are phenomenal illusion and that matter is materialized energy which in turn is the temporal manifestation of an incorporeal spiritual eternal essence constituting the innermost self of all things
(http://png-1.findicons.com/files/icons/2315/default_icon/256/arrow_up.png)
ILLUSION

...and therefore wrong :)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 11:41:08 AM
And we should think your claims are the correct interpretation of reality, why? If we shouldn't, then why are you claiming it?

It has to resonate with you.   If it doesn't you shouldn't.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 20, 2013, 12:57:03 PM
Perhaps heaven is a collective like the borg you go there to combine into a super collective being but lose your self in the process.  If you lose yourself aren't you essentially dead?

All of these dualities like self/other, living/dead, conscious/unconscious are illusions.   In reality you have no self now and do not exist, therefore you have no self to lose.
What reality are you referring to?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 01:30:14 PM
What reality are you referring to?

God, which is defined as "not two."   In nondualism that is all that can be said about God due to the constraints of thought which is purely dualistic and pluralistic.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 02:51:55 PM
And we should think your claims are the correct interpretation of reality, why? If we shouldn't, then why are you claiming it?

It has to resonate with you.   If it doesn't you shouldn't.

WTF does "resonate" mean? Are you talking about just being gullible, credulous, or willing to accept an incoherent view just to somehow feel 'cool', different, or above the rest? That is certainly what is sounds like.

If you want others to give up their rational minds in exchange for credulous quackery that doesn't square with everyday experience, why not just come out and say so?

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 02:55:49 PM
What reality are you referring to?

God, which is defined as "not two."   In nondualism that is all that can be said about God due to the constraints of thought which is purely dualistic and pluralistic.

Then your term "God" has no meaning and doesn't refer to anything. Attempting to define a proper noun by the mere use of negatives ("Well, it's not a bird!") doesn't explain anything. This is absolutely no different than the Christian who can't define "holy spirit", "Elohim", or "spiritual". This is literally the definition of absurdity. We want to hear what you think your "God" is and not what it is not. If you can't define this alleged 'thing' in positive terms then how is your claim any different from superstition?

I have to ask the same question I ask the Christians: Do you even care whether or not your beliefs are actually true?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: magicmiles on June 20, 2013, 05:58:53 PM
We don't choose to believe things. We have to be convinced (either by good reasoning or bad), and what we choose to accept as sound/unsound evidence can depend upon background knowledge, presumptions, knowledge of proper reasoning (or lack thereof), etc.

Bold mine. This is the problem with your position, as I see it. You seem to think it's possible to separate the belief with the process of reaching that belief. (correct me if I have this wrong - but it seems that way).  I don't think you can - they are totally entwined.

Why do we play a role in choosing what we accept as sound evidence?


Again, do you want to believe things based upon faulty presumptions?

Of course not. And I don't think I do.


As I've asked before, do you even care whether or not your beliefs are actually true?

Of course I do. And I believe they are.


Are you trying to argue that all claims are equally valid?


Valid to who?


Red Herring. Are you a relativist now, or perhaps someone who thinks logic doesn't apply somewhere?

Now look whose dodging...

No dodge. You asked a very broad question. And ordinarily I'd have answered 'no'. But within the context of this discussion, where you seem to be saying that we can't choose what we believe (we must be convinced), but we can choose what evidence we determine is valid (as opposed to being convinced by it) - I think it was reasonable that I asked for more specifics. Rather than asking 'valid to who?' I probably should have asked for some examples.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Timtheskeptic on June 20, 2013, 06:00:29 PM
Well we differ on that.  If I absolutely knew/believed in god, and the spirit world of paradise, I don't think there is anything I would do to piss him off.  He might have a reason for having me waste my son.  Giving my kid a one way ticket to paradise and having him skip 80 years of human suffering might not be such a bad thing.  Life on earth would be a infinitely less important than eternity in paradise.

So you're saying that you think you would be doing the kid a favor? Life here may be problematic and painful, but there's also a lot of good stuff in life to enjoy too. I would have much rather have my kid live that than to kill him or her, especially not even if there's a perfect, wonderful paradise after death. I also would never forgive myself.

Quote
Of course I cant imagine what paradise is like,  what could I do for an eternity that would entertain me.  if there is a paradise man it would require me not to be recognisable me to enjoy it.  Imagine eternity doing everything you love the most.  to be crass, I don't think living in a constant state of orgasm would be much fun after a day or two ;D

I don't know what would paradise would be like myself, if it exists, but i would never like to consider forever praising and worshiping some God as paradise. Now if the paradise is personal and i would spend eternity reading books and playing videos games and even write stories with no need for food, medicine, money, or even sleep, i would be happy with that. Bonus if you throw in a few hotties too (Men and women  ;)


Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 06:06:05 PM
We want to hear what you think your "God" is and not what it is not.

In a pinch it could be defined as "oneness" but "not two" is believed to be better on the grounds that there is a slight inclination to add something to "one."   However the implication is "one" and not something else that isn't two such as three or four.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 20, 2013, 06:48:02 PM
We want to hear what you think your "God" is and not what it is not.

In a pinch it could be defined as "oneness" but "not two" is believed to be better on the grounds that there is a slight inclination to add something to "one."   However the implication is "one" and not something else that isn't two such as three or four.
Do these words form some kind of coherent idea that I'm missing? It's like...absolute maximum woo.  There are no other combination of words that make less sense yet form complete sentences.  Bravo!
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 07:15:13 PM
Do these words form some kind of coherent idea that I'm missing? It's like...absolute maximum woo.  There are no other combination of words that make less sense yet form complete sentences.  Bravo!

Basically, reality is oneness.   Our experience is not of oneness.   It's of "two or moreness."   Therefore, our experience is not real.   

The reason it doesn't make sense is that our thought is inherently dualistic so we cannot comprehend oneness.   It does not make sense and cannot make sense to the rational mind.   It's illogical, contradictory, irrational, unreasonable and paradoxical.     
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 20, 2013, 07:41:52 PM
Basically, reality is oneness.   Our experience is not of oneness.   It's of "two or moreness."   Therefore, our experience is not real.   

The reason it doesn't make sense is that our thought is inherently dualistic so we cannot comprehend oneness.   It does not make sense and cannot make sense to the rational mind.   It's illogical, contradictory, irrational, unreasonable and paradoxical.   
Reality is divided into 31 different pieces.  It is inherently 31-istic so we cannot comprehend seveness.  It does not make sense and cannot make sense to the rational mind.  It's illogical, contradictory, irrational, unreasonable,[1] and paradoxical.

Reality is composed of a mystical rabbit named Frank that imposes his will upon 93% of living creatures in reality.  The other 7% are controlled by 21% of the other 98% of sentient beings.  These sentient beings themselves are composed of mystical rabbit material that is simultaneously black and lopsided.  It does not make sense and cannot make sense to the rational mind.  It's illogical, contradictory, irrational, unreasonable, and paradoxical.
 1. Long live the Oxford comma!!!
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 20, 2013, 08:39:36 PM
Another way to look it at it is in terms of the oneness of the physical universe which is what I was alluding to in my first post in this thread.   In my belief the entire universe is an illusion and that is where most of the paradox comes in.   But within that paradox is a smaller paradox of the oneness of the physical universe.   

Everything in the universe is connected by something such as outer space which is "not completely empty, but consists of a hard vacuum containing a low density of particles: predominantly a plasma of hydrogen and helium, as well as electromagnetic radiation, magnetic fields, and neutrinos. (Wikipedia: Outer space)"    In addition we know that space and time are relative to the observer.   Entanglement shows that information can travel anywhere in the universe instantaneously.   All of this points to oneness.   Whatever energy was in the singularity before the big bang is the same energy we experience.   Only now this energy is more complex and spread out.   But it is still that single or one thing.

Even within these terms you can see how the idea of self/other presents a problem.   For example, atmospheric oxygen is more essential to my survival than are many parts of my body.   And all of my sense perceptions depend on things outside of my body as much as they depend on my sensory organs or brain. So where do I end and where does the rest of the universe begin really?     
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 08:49:59 PM
Bold mine. This is the problem with your position, as I see it. You seem to think it's possible to separate the belief with the process of reaching that belief. (correct me if I have this wrong - but it seems that way).  I don't think you can - they are totally entwined.

A belief IS in fact different from the process of acquiring that belief mate. They are not the same things. One could be skeptical of a neighbor's claim that their house was broken into (perhaps b/c the neighbor is somewhat untrustworthy) but then later be presented with sufficient evidence by which to accept the fact of the situation. The process isn't at all the same as holding a belief after the fact.

Why do we play a role in choosing what we accept as sound evidence?

Why? B/c we are human beings who can choose to be rational (and intellectually honest) or not.



Again, do you want to believe things based upon faulty presumptions?

Of course not. And I don't think I do.

I know you don't. That's partly why we're having this discussion.


As I've asked before, do you even care whether or not your beliefs are actually true?

Of course I do. And I believe they are.

Well you certainly aren't demonstrating that you actually care.



No dodge. You asked a very broad question. And ordinarily I'd have answered 'no'. But within the context of this discussion, where you seem to be saying that we can't choose what we believe (we must be convinced), but we can choose what evidence we determine is valid (as opposed to being convinced by it) - I think it was reasonable that I asked for more specifics. Rather than asking 'valid to who?' I probably should have asked for some examples.

The process of being convinced involves choices (for example what we might ignore or what might cause us to practice confirmation bias), and as I mentioned before, often incorporates background knowledge, assumptions, biases, etc. I was not, however, arguing that coming to believe a certain proposition means we choose ALL of which evidence to accept or reject. Some arguments, sound/unsound evidences, or interpreted/misinterpreted experienced can seem overwhelming for acceptance. And this is why I promote critical thinking, rational discourse, and skepticism.

So again, are all claims equally valid to you? If not, how do you determine what claims are true from what claims are false?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 20, 2013, 08:57:11 PM

The reason it doesn't make sense is that our thought is inherently dualistic so we cannot comprehend oneness.   It does not make sense and cannot make sense to the rational mind.   It's illogical, contradictory, irrational, unreasonable and paradoxical.   

But of course, every claim you keep making is an illusion. So you can't know if it's true, right? So why are you wasting your time trying to speak to people when you have absolute no idea what you're talking about.

-making claims without demonstrating how you know them to be true
-not defining your terms when making those claims
-contradicting yourself throughout nearly every claim

These are 3 solid grounds for doubting your claims.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 20, 2013, 09:31:23 PM
Biblegod is not about "choice" or "freewill". Biblegod is about "you give everything to me or suffer for all eternity". It's not really a choice if that's your only option.

Get over such pathetic fiction.

-Nam

I can choose to believe it or not Nam.  I can choose to not believe in God and no fear of Judgement or hope of eternal life with nothing to look forward to except for a grave, or I can choose to believe and have something to look forward to, and still risk a grave in Hell. 

Not if you actually believe hell exists which obviously you do.

-Nam
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Ron Jeremy on June 21, 2013, 04:22:43 AM
Eternal damnation is far preferable to killing my child, sweetened with the knowledge that I'd stood my ground in front of the monster.

I noticed somebody earlier had said something along the lines of 'god made us, he can do what he wants with us'. What a sad view.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 21, 2013, 09:04:08 AM
Another way to look it at it is in terms of the oneness of the physical universe which is what I was alluding to in my first post in this thread.   In my belief the entire universe is an illusion and that is where most of the paradox comes in.   But within that paradox is a smaller paradox of the oneness of the physical universe.   

Everything in the universe is connected by something such as outer space which is "not completely empty, but consists of a hard vacuum containing a low density of particles: predominantly a plasma of hydrogen and helium, as well as electromagnetic radiation, magnetic fields, and neutrinos. (Wikipedia: Outer space)"    In addition we know that space and time are relative to the observer.   Entanglement shows that information can travel anywhere in the universe instantaneously.   All of this points to oneness.   Whatever energy was in the singularity before the big bang is the same energy we experience.   Only now this energy is more complex and spread out.   But it is still that single or one thing.

Even within these terms you can see how the idea of self/other presents a problem.   For example, atmospheric oxygen is more essential to my survival than are many parts of my body.   And all of my sense perceptions depend on things outside of my body as much as they depend on my sensory organs or brain. So where do I end and where does the rest of the universe begin really?     

So...interconnectedness?  Is this just some kind of poetic, obfuscated, uninformative way of saying that everything is part of one reality?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jag on June 21, 2013, 09:24:01 AM
^^^Well, yes. but where's the fun in just saying it?  &)
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 09:36:39 AM
So...interconnectedness?  Is this just some kind of poetic, obfuscated, uninformative way of saying that everything is part of one reality?

No, indivisibility.   The universe is one thing in which every part is completely interdependent on every other part in one way or another; for example, "93% of the mass in our body is stardust. (Source: http://physicscentral.com/explore/poster-stardust.cfm)."   Intellectually we know this yet our experience is of separateness.   That's a paradox.   It's the nature of reality.     

Our experience is based on perception.   We can perceive things that are not objectively true, as in an optical illusion.   The self/other distinction is also an illusion but this one involves all of the senses, not just sight.         
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 21, 2013, 09:41:15 AM
No, indivisibility.   The universe is one thing in which every part is completely interdependent on every other part in one way or another; for example, "93% of the mass in our body is stardust. (Source: http://physicscentral.com/explore/poster-stardust.cfm)."   Intellectually we know this yet our experience is of separateness.
So...interconnectedness?  Everything is a constituent of the totality of reality - yes I can agree to that.
Quote
That's a paradox.   It's the nature of reality.
I see no paradox.
Quote
Our experience is based on perception.   We can perceive things that are not objectively true, as in an optical illusion.   The self/other distinction is also an illusion but this one involves all of the senses, not just sight.       
Out of curiosity how would define 'objective'?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 21, 2013, 09:44:00 AM
^^^Well, yes. but where's the fun in just saying it?  &)
I'm waiting for some of the things that nebula is saying to show up here:
http://www.wisdomofchopra.com/

nebula,
Do you find some kind of 'deeper' truth when you wrap ideas around ethereal language?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 10:10:08 AM

So...interconnectedness?  Everything is a constituent of the totality of reality - yes I can agree to that.

Bold mind.

Don't you see that the idea of 'things' is merely a mental construct based on a limited perspective?   Where do you end and where does the rest of the universe begin?   Is not your body entirely dependent on oxygen, pressure, gravity, sensory stimuli etc. from your surroundings?   The ingredients of an identity are genetics and environmental conditioning.   But because of a skewed perspective we consider the cells that make up our bodies "us" and everything else "not us."   However, we are a little more than just 'connected' to our surroundings.   They are an integral part of us and ultimately there is no distinction.               
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Dante on June 21, 2013, 10:51:49 AM
  But because of a skewed perspective we consider the cells that make up our bodies "us" and everything else "not us."   However, we are a little more than just 'connected' to our surroundings.   They are an integral part of us

I, for one, might be able to be swayed to this POV, given limited parameters.

Quote
and ultimately there is no distinction.               

This one? Not so much. How is there not a distinction? And further, how does this view you hold shape your reality? Your day to day existence?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 11:48:36 AM
This one? Not so much. How is there not a distinction? And further, how does this view you hold shape your reality? Your day to day existence?

There is no distinction in absolute terms.   In relative terms there is.   I am more me than that rock over there.   But in absolute terms there is only one energy that was released in the big bang in various forms of complexity.     

Thinking in absolutes helps me in two ways:

1.   Contentment: It is impossible for an individual to ever have completeness, wholeness or absolute contentment.   Many atheists allude to this when they talk about how heaven would eventually get boring even if you could have anything you could ever want.   After a while we reckon too much of a good thing turns into a bad thing.   

Others feel that wholeness is possible and strive for it.   The feel incomplete and search for things they believe will bring them absolute contentment.   When they achieve their goals they still do not feel complete, though they don't know what they lack.

Well, my belief is the reason we can never find absolute satisfaction in life is because of this self idea.   It's only a very limited perspective, useful for our survival (i.e. "I need food") but when applied to psychological issues such as contentment it creates problems.   Psychologically, if there is no me there is nothing that can lack anything, hence no feeling that I am somehow incomplete.   There is no need to pursue happiness because there is no me to do the seeking or find the happiness.   It's already right here relatively (compared to when I firmly believed in my individuality as an absolute reality).

2.   The small details of life:  Negative emotions are easier to detail with.   In absolute terms when someone cuts me off in traffic it is a certain form of complexity in the universe, nothing more.  This leads to less anger.  With no individual there is no free will.   So any past mistakes I've made were unavoidable.   This leads to less regret.  With no self there is nothing to lose therefore nothing to fear, etc.       
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Dante on June 21, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
But in absolute terms there is only one energy that was released in the big bang in various forms of complexity.   

And how does that fit in with your god belief? Why is a god necessary for this worldview? And, is your god belief biblegod?[1]
 1. apologies if I've missed the answer before
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 01:59:23 PM
And how does that fit in with your god belief? Why is a god necessary for this worldview? And, is your god belief biblegod?[1]
 1. apologies if I've missed the answer before

-It fits in by being an example of the contradiction between what our sense perceptions tell us about reality and what we know intellectually about the overall oneness of the universe.  The sense of self causes us to have a limited perspective in which "oneness" doesn't make sense.   But oneness does make sense if you ignore your sense of self and sense perceptions and conceive of the universe in terms of one energy, the single energy of the singularity.   I was just pointing that out to jdawg70 who suggested "31ism" in response to "oneness."   

-A god is not necessary when the oneness of the universe is viewed as the absolute reality, which incidentally is not my belief but just an example of oneness that we are all familiar with.

-No.  I subscribe to the basic, nondualist definition of God which is simply "not two."   Meaning is an illusion therefore any words used to describe God, even the words "not two" are illusions.   So that is as far as that goes.   "Not two," with the implication of "one."   That is as close as we can get to describing the ultimate nature of reality.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Dante on June 21, 2013, 02:08:31 PM
-No.  I subscribe to the basic, nondualist definition of God which is simply "not two."   Meaning is an illusion therefore any words used to describe God, even the words "not two" are illusions.   So that is as far as that goes.   "Not two," with the implication of "one."   That is as far as we can get to describing the ultimate nature of reality.   

Wow, now I'm even more confused. But you do have a worldview I've always found to be interesting.

So, you do believe in a god, and for sake of discussion, we'll call it "one". Now, is this "one" seperate from the universe, or is it the universe? Is this "one" sentient?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 21, 2013, 06:15:22 PM
-It fits in by being an example of the contradiction between what our sense perceptions tell us about reality and what we know intellectually about the overall oneness of the universe.  The sense of self causes us to have a limited perspective in which "oneness" doesn't make sense.   But oneness does make sense if you ignore your sense of self and sense perceptions and conceive of the universe in terms of one energy, the single energy of the singularity.   I was just pointing that out to jdawg70 who suggested "31ism" in response to "oneness."   

-A god is not necessary when the oneness of the universe is viewed as the absolute reality, which incidentally is not my belief but just an example of oneness that we are all familiar with.

-No.  I subscribe to the basic, nondualist definition of God which is simply "not two."   Meaning is an illusion therefore any words used to describe God, even the words "not two" are illusions.   So that is as far as that goes.   "Not two," with the implication of "one."   That is as close as we can get to describing the ultimate nature of reality.   
I'm sorry, but you just don't seem to be talking about a coherent concept.  It's simply infathomable.  That's why I did the snide jab with "31ism" or whatever I typed...you could apply any random jumble of words and you would have conveyed exactly as much information.

So far as I can tell there is no difference between the statements you are making and random words picked from a hat.  I realize this may sound offensive, but please try not to take it that way.  But the words you're typing, as you yourself have pointed out, are nonsense.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 07:37:25 PM
So, you do believe in a god, and for sake of discussion, we'll call it "one". Now, is this "one" seperate from the universe, or is it the universe? Is this "one" sentient?

For the first question, God is one with the universe which paradoxically is not the same as being the universe.   Keep in mind that there are limits to communication in any life form.   Discussing God is a bit like two minnows in a pond discussing the ecosystem of the earth through body language.

In nondualism, the universe is thought of in various ways.   One is that it is a changing, temporal manifestation of a deeper unchanging, eternal reality and the analogy used for this is that the universe is like waves on the surface of a deep lake.   In this case the universe is real.

But the kind of nondualism I'm into says that it is an utter illusion with no reality at all and the metaphor is that it is like a dream.   In this case the universe is a 'dream of separation' that only seems to takes place.

As for the second question, no we cannot say that God is sentient because aware/unaware is a duality and God is nondual.   For that matter existence/nonexistence is a duality so we can't even say that God is.   The only words that even get close to working are "not two" without the "God is" in front.   But even "not two" is based in duality because two/not two is a duality.  This is just a limitation of thought and language, both of which are inherently dualistic.   There is no way around it.                 
       
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: JeffPT on June 21, 2013, 09:00:02 PM
So, you do believe in a god, and for sake of discussion, we'll call it "one". Now, is this "one" seperate from the universe, or is it the universe? Is this "one" sentient?

For the first question, God is one with the universe which paradoxically is not the same as being the universe.   Keep in mind that there are limits to communication in any life form.   Discussing God is a bit like two minnows in a pond discussing the ecosystem of the earth through body language.

In nondualism, the universe is thought of in various ways.   One is that it is a changing, temporal manifestation of a deeper unchanging, eternal reality and the analogy used for this is that the universe is like waves on the surface of a deep lake.   In this case the universe is real.

But the kind of nondualism I'm into says that it is an utter illusion with no reality at all and the metaphor is that it is like a dream.   In this case the universe is a 'dream of separation' that only seems to takes place.

As for the second question, no we cannot say that God is sentient because aware/unaware is a duality and God is nondual.   For that matter existence/nonexistence is a duality so we can't even say that God is.   The only words that even get close to working are "not two" without the "God is" in front.   But even "not two" is based in duality because two/not two is a duality.  This is just a limitation of thought and language, both of which are inherently dualistic.   There is no way around it.                 
       

I think I speak for a good many of us here when I say... Uhhh, what?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Nam on June 21, 2013, 09:09:15 PM
Uh, what?[1]

-Nam
 1. oh, my bad
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 21, 2013, 10:25:46 PM
I think I speak for a good many of us here when I say... Uhhh, what?

The answer to this question is that there is no answer.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 21, 2013, 11:21:27 PM

-It fits in by being an example of the contradiction between what our sense perceptions tell us about reality and what we know intellectually about the overall oneness of the universe.  The sense of self causes us to have a limited perspective in which "oneness" doesn't make sense.   But oneness does make sense if you ignore your sense of self and sense perceptions and conceive of the universe in terms of one energy, the single energy of the singularity.   I was just pointing that out to jdawg70 who suggested "31ism" in response to "oneness."   

-A god is not necessary when the oneness of the universe is viewed as the absolute reality, which incidentally is not my belief but just an example of oneness that we are all familiar with.

-No.  I subscribe to the basic, nondualist definition of God which is simply "not two."   Meaning is an illusion therefore any words used to describe God, even the words "not two" are illusions.   So that is as far as that goes.   "Not two," with the implication of "one."   That is as close as we can get to describing the ultimate nature of reality.   

Can you not see how you are utterly contradicting yourself in these statements?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 21, 2013, 11:29:10 PM

The answer to this question is that there is no answer.

Then stop pretending to know it.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: JeffPT on June 22, 2013, 06:39:54 AM
I think I speak for a good many of us here when I say... Uhhh, what?

The answer to this question is that there is no answer.
But isn't 'there is no answer' an answer?

I just blew your mind...
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 22, 2013, 07:46:25 AM
Then stop pretending to know it.

Only in unknowing can we know.   Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cloud_of_Unknowing
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 22, 2013, 10:35:26 AM
Then stop pretending to know it.

Only in unknowing can we know.   Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cloud_of_Unknowing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cloud_of_Unknowing)

Did you even attempt to use your brain before making this statement?

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_non-contradiction

Just because you can open your mouth and have words come out doesn't mean those words will make any sense. So too, regarding "all is illusion", saying it is so doesn't make it so. I already refuted this idea entirely in a previous post, and since you are still maintaining and unwilling to admit when you are in error I can reasonably conclude that you are intellectually dishonest.

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Dante on June 22, 2013, 10:47:58 AM
So, you do believe in a god, and for sake of discussion, we'll call it "one". Now, is this "one" seperate from the universe, or is it the universe? Is this "one" sentient?

For the first question, God is one with the universe which paradoxically is not the same as being the universe.   Keep in mind that there are limits to communication in any life form.   Discussing God is a bit like two minnows in a pond discussing the ecosystem of the earth through body language.

Being one with the 'verse, while not being the 'verse, seems a tad dualistic. Amiright?

Quote
In nondualism, the universe is thought of in various ways.   One is that it is a changing, temporal manifestation of a deeper unchanging, eternal reality and the analogy used for this is that the universe is like waves on the surface of a deep lake.   In this case the universe is real.

Sure, I can go with that. But I still see no reason to ponder a god. I mean, what you're saying is a hypothetical to which many scientists, as well as atheists, give thought. It's entirely plausible that the 'verse is cyclical, unending, and quite possibly eternal. And the present iteration, our present reality, is a mere blip, or wave if you like, in the unending cycle.

Quote
But the kind of nondualism I'm into says that it is an utter illusion with no reality at all and the metaphor is that it is like a dream.   In this case the universe is a 'dream of separation' that only seems to takes place.

Now this? This I don't get. Reality IS. How can it not? It's not an illusion, in as much as an illusion is something that isn't real. This reality is real. You are not being decieved. It's possible we're not in agreement on the definitions here though. It's possible you're attempting to use poetic license to make your case, in which case I get it. If not, if you're using the words as defined in most english dictionaries, well then, I'd have to say you're probably wrong. And, if you disagree and tell me you're right, then you're going to have to present some evidence that this is all illusion. Because I can prove, to you, that I indeed am "real".

Quote
As for the second question, no we cannot say that God is sentient because aware/unaware is a duality and God is nondual.   For that matter existence/nonexistence is a duality so we can't even say that God is.   The only words that even get close to working are "not two" without the "God is" in front.   But even "not two" is based in duality because two/not two is a duality.  This is just a limitation of thought and language, both of which are inherently dualistic.   There is no way around it.             
 

So, in a non-dualistic worldview, things do/do not exist? At the same time? That's just silly, my friend. Again, reality IS. It's every day. Go stub your toe on your coffee table, and then tell me it's an illusion. Double dog dare ya.

Reality cares not for your feelings, nor for your beliefs.

And as far as your god being/not being sentient, well, I'm still as confused as ever. You basically attempt to say things in incoherent ways, incomplete thoughts, and try to pass them off as "mystical". Sorry Charlie, but you're just espousing bullshit, as far as I can tell. Sure, our language has limitations, but the ability to pass on information, to share thoughts and concepts, has been refined for hundereds of thousands of years. Talking in riddles is for children.

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 22, 2013, 10:56:19 AM
Did you even attempt to use your brain before making this statement?

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_non-contradiction

Just because you can open your mouth and have words come out doesn't mean those words will make any sense. So too, regarding "all is illusion", saying it is so doesn't make it so. I already refuted this idea entirely in a previous post, and since you are still maintaining and unwilling to admit when you are in error I can reasonably conclude that you are intellectually dishonest.

OK, I'm in error.   You win.   I already said my position is illogical and contradictory.   I will add incoherent to that.   What else do you want?

From my perspective, it is impossible for "refutation" to mean anything because duality, such as truth/falsehood is an illusion.   All viewpoints are only relatively wrong or right.   No thought can be absolutely wrong or right because absolute reality is nondual.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 22, 2013, 11:13:51 AM
Being one with the 'verse, while not being the 'verse, seems a tad dualistic. Amiright?

It's completely dualistic as is all thought.   
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 22, 2013, 11:45:47 AM
And, if you disagree and tell me you're right, then you're going to have to present some evidence that this is all illusion.

Bold mine. 

My belief is that I'm relatively right.   For this I'm into Brian Whitworth's articles on the subject.

http://brianwhitworth.com/VRConjecture.pdf

http://brianwhitworth.com/VRTQuestions.pdf

http://brianwhitworth.com/BW-VRT1.pdf

http://brianwhitworth.com/BW-VRT2.pdf

http://brianwhitworth.com/BW-VRT3.pdf
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 22, 2013, 09:47:27 PM

OK, I'm in error.   You win.   I already said my position is illogical and contradictory.   I will add incoherent to that.   What else do you want?

From my perspective, it is impossible for "refutation" to mean anything because duality, such as truth/falsehood is an illusion.   All viewpoints are only relatively wrong or right.   No thought can be absolutely wrong or right because absolute reality is nondual.

I'm appreciative that you are willing to admit that you position is illogical, but (sorry to say) it doesn't seem very genuine. Why would you hold a belief that you know is irrational?

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, you just contradicted yourself again. You said:

Quote
No thought can be absolutely wrong or right

Is this thought absolutely right?


Like the Christians on here, you seem to be hung up on this idea of absolute certainly - that if we can't have absolute certainty of anything then every view is just as valid as another. Sorry, that's purely absurd (and btw, therefore should be rejected!). What you've done is abandon the one thing that connects you to this world and allows you to separate fact from fiction (your rational mind). If you don't think that's true then I have some land to sell you at a great price.

Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: magicmiles on June 22, 2013, 11:43:20 PM
the one thing that connects you to this world and allows you to separate fact from fiction (your rational mind).

How do you know your mind is rational?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: bertatberts on June 23, 2013, 03:34:48 AM
the one thing that connects you to this world and allows you to separate fact from fiction (your rational mind).

How do you know your mind is rational?
Possibly the fact that you wont accept BS, as a good reason for reality.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: nebula on June 23, 2013, 03:59:27 AM
Quote
No thought can be absolutely wrong or right

Is this thought absolutely right?

No thought, including the one I'm expressing in the sentence I'm writing right now, is absolutely right because 'absolutely right' is an illusion.   Is the following absolutely right?

This statement is false. (A)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_Paradox
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: The Gawd on June 23, 2013, 08:34:18 AM
Quote
No thought can be absolutely wrong or right

Is this thought absolutely right?

No thought, including the one I'm expressing in the sentence I'm writing right now, is absolutely right because 'absolutely right' is an illusion.   Is the following absolutely right?

This statement is false. (A)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_Paradox

Nebs, theists try to do this all the time because their beliefs make no sense, but you are not going to be able to confuse us by stacking incoherent statements on top of each other instead of answering questions. You may as well abandon that tactic. Ask yourself why it is so important that you hold on to your beliefs even though theyre wrong. Really ask yourself that.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 23, 2013, 10:24:09 AM
nebula -

Is all of this ultimately some long-winded, wootastic way of saying that without a solid foundation of logic it is impossible to determine the truth-value of a claim?

'cause if it is...you could just come right out and say it.  Won't hurt.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 23, 2013, 11:07:50 AM
the one thing that connects you to this world and allows you to separate fact from fiction (your rational mind).

How do you know your mind is rational?

1. That would depend upon what you mean by the term "know" (again b/c you religionists are hung up on an absolute certainly for which you do not have)

2. Answer me how you know gravity is real, and you might have your answer
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on June 24, 2013, 11:09:07 AM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

Sticking strictly to the question and assuming God did in fact ask such a thing then I would have to say that I don't know.  I would like to say that I would but I don't think I can honestly answer unless I was actually in that situation.  It's sort of like asking if I would deny God if I were being tortured.  Hopefully I wouldn't but I cannot say for sure what I would do. 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 24, 2013, 06:09:31 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

Sticking strictly to the question and assuming God did in fact ask such a thing then I would have to say that I don't know.  I would like to say that I would but I don't think I can honestly answer unless I was actually in that situation.  It's sort of like asking if I would deny God if I were being tortured.  Hopefully I wouldn't but I cannot say for sure what I would do.

But you believe he asked Abraham to do it, right? So it can't be that weird for you.

This question strikes at one of the core objections we non-believers have with your theology - namely that just because your bible (i.e. - your god) says something is right, doesn't make it right. This is sometimes referred to as the Euthyphro dilemma. Is something morally right merely because god commands it, or does god command it because it is right? If something is moral merely b/c a dictator says so then there is no objective morality b/c the dictator could change it at anytime. But if the dictator commands something b/c it's moral then objective morality exists without the dictator - at which case the dictator is also subject to the moral law (i.e. - he would be acting immorally for asking you to violate it).

In response to your response, you don't know? Really? Would you give in to a murdering monster if he wanted you to exterminate a specific race of people in a concentration camp? There have been many cases where people have gone to prison for slaying their children b/c they claimed god told them to do it. Would you say that absolutely none of them actually got the command from your god? If so, how can you make that claim when your own bible clearly depicts not only god commanding a man to slay his child, but also commanding (allegedly) the slaughtering of hundreds of thousands of people (see 1 Samuel 15, etc)?

But here's the absolute worst part. You say, "I would like to say that I would...[obey the command and slay my child]" WHAT!? Are you serious? You would actually LIKE to say that you would obey a disgusting, vile, dictator? This makes you completely immoral - and really incapable of evaluating and/or making your own moral judgments. Furthermore, if you cannot evaluate whether or not the things in your bible are actually moral or not (b/c you are supposedly 'fallen' or whatever) then how can you make the moral assessment that your god is moral?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on June 25, 2013, 09:07:26 AM
But here's the absolute worst part. You say, "I would like to say that I would...[obey the command and slay my child]" WHAT!? Are you serious? You would actually LIKE to say that you would obey a disgusting, vile, dictator? This makes you completely immoral - and really incapable of evaluating and/or making your own moral judgments. Furthermore, if you cannot evaluate whether or not the things in your bible are actually moral or not (b/c you are supposedly 'fallen' or whatever) then how can you make the moral assessment that your god is moral?

If I believe god existed, he was the god described in the bible, I believed he stood for good, I believed that he held the keys to my eternal torture or salvation...  I would say I would obey while singing his praises. 

My child gets a free trip to paradise, I ensure my free trip to paradise and no one loses.

Perhaps god knows something I don't.  Like the little brat is destined on doing something horrible i.e. he is going to grow up to be far worse than hitler. 



Of course that all assumed I believed in an omnipotent superbeing who dabbled in the existence of humans and held the power of life/death and paradise/hell.

I would like to have the chance to ask why he had me doing this to my son.   

The more likely outcome of this conversation with god would result in me going to seek professional help these days, because even if I believed in GOD as described I still would question my sanity because there are lots of crazies out there and I just might have had a psychotic break.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jaimehlers on June 25, 2013, 11:38:32 AM
Sticking strictly to the question and assuming God did in fact ask such a thing then I would have to say that I don't know.  I would like to say that I would but I don't think I can honestly answer unless I was actually in that situation.  It's sort of like asking if I would deny God if I were being tortured.  Hopefully I wouldn't but I cannot say for sure what I would do.
Frankly, a being who demands the sacrifice of a child (especially when they've been promising that this child is really important and special and will represent the future for your entire people) is evil and does not deserve worship.  However, if they're strong enough, they might be able to compel obedience.

That's what most ancient religions were like - keeping the big guy (whether god, ruler, or gang leader) appeased so that he might not off you and your family as an object lesson to your neighbors.  And once that relationship was established, he had an incentive to treat you at least reasonably well, if only to protect his investment.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on June 25, 2013, 02:46:00 PM
On the whole Abraham killing Isaac thing.  I think the situation may have happened to someone and the story was passed down from generation to generation.  However the conversation was probably due to a midlife onset schitzophrenia.  His conversation for both the killing and when his rational mind kicked back in explains the story pretty well.  When mom asked why were you going to kill our boy he told her about the voices in his head.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jag on June 25, 2013, 03:18:38 PM
^^^Sadly the field of neurology did not yet exists, thus entire generations went on believing that hearing voices in your head meant God was speaking to you. In many cases this belief still holds true - I submit Mormonism for your consideration. Eventually, thanks to religion, people determined that hearing voices in your head might also be caused by demonic possession. Great forward strides there.

Anyone know what criteria they used to determine which was which?



Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Timtheskeptic on June 25, 2013, 04:04:55 PM
If I believe god existed, he was the god described in the bible, I believed he stood for good, I believed that he held the keys to my eternal torture or salvation...  I would say I would obey while singing his praises. 


So you would be singing praise to a biblegod who has done such heinous things in the Bible or even commanded heinous acts. I wonder if you think it was praiseworthy of the God who slaughtered 42 children or when he placed a bet on Job's life.

Quote
My child gets a free trip to paradise, I ensure my free trip to paradise and no one loses.

Actually, what if it's not going to be like that? What if he just sends you and your kid to hell? Besides, even if there is an eternal paradise and it's for sure you'll be there, i would not send my kid up there right away. The world may not be perfect, but i think killing your kid for "keeping them from suffering here on earth" is a stupid argument and insane as well.

Quote
Perhaps god knows something I don't.  Like the little brat is destined on doing something horrible i.e. he is going to grow up to be far worse than hitler. 

Wow, really? So you think a God would want a kid killed so they don't turned out to be like Hitler while there's thousands of murderous people worldwide, rapists and pedophiles and even people who enslaved others and used them in sex trade. Brilliant.



Quote
Of course that all assumed I believed in an omnipotent superbeing who dabbled in the existence of humans and held the power of life/death and paradise/hell.

I would like to have the chance to ask why he had me doing this to my son.   

The more likely outcome of this conversation with god would result in me going to seek professional help these days, because even if I believed in GOD as described I still would question my sanity because there are lots of crazies out there and I just might have had a psychotic break.

You would question, and yet you think the kid would either turn out to be Hitler or would be going to an eternal paradise. *Facepalm*


Or if i misjudge you, which i would apologize, i feel that there just isn't any logical reason to obey anyone who demands you kill your child.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: median on June 26, 2013, 02:17:34 AM

If I believe god existed, he was the god described in the bible, I believed he stood for good, I believed that he held the keys to my eternal torture or salvation...  I would say I would obey while singing his praises. 

My child gets a free trip to paradise, I ensure my free trip to paradise and no one loses.

Perhaps god knows something I don't.  Like the little brat is destined on doing something horrible i.e. he is going to grow up to be far worse than hitler. 

So basically your answer is yes then, that you would obey the wishes of a sick, sadistic, monstrous dictator instead of resisting his immorality? And even more, somehow you think spending an eternity with this being would be "paradise"? WOW. You could say "perhaps" about just about anything you want regarding some invisible, non-demonstrable, deity thing - as could any of us here - but that wouldn't change the fact that you would be choosing to cow-tail to a cosmic Kim-Jong Il. How does that make you feel? Would you still think this god was "holy", "righteous", "perfect", and "just"?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Jag on June 26, 2013, 09:23:00 AM
If I believe god existed, he was the god described in the bible, I believed he stood for good, I believed that he held the keys to my eternal torture or salvation...  I would say I would obey while singing his praises. 


Of course that all assumed I believed in an omnipotent superbeing who dabbled in the existence of humans and held the power of life/death and paradise/hell.

I would like to have the chance to ask why he had me doing this to my son.   

The more likely outcome of this conversation with god would result in me going to seek professional help these days, because even if I believed in GOD as described I still would question my sanity because there are lots of crazies out there and I just might have had a psychotic break.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt because of the very specific way you said this. Here's hoping I wasn't wrong to do so. Please clarify, because it seems I'm the only one, and I may have missed something significant in a different post.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on June 27, 2013, 12:14:29 PM
dude if god asks you to jump you say how High.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on June 27, 2013, 12:26:58 PM
dude if god asks you to jump you say how High.
Alternatively:
If god asks you to jump, you say 'why should I'?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on June 27, 2013, 03:06:12 PM
dude if god asks you to jump you say how High.
Alternatively:
If god asks you to jump, you say 'why should I'?

Or.. Doctor, my clozapine appears to be losing it's effectivness.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: neopagan on June 27, 2013, 03:43:13 PM
dude if god asks you to jump you say how High.

the god of parlor tricks... always the same "dance for me, kill for me, worship me, prove you love me..." all the while, I'll stay completely hidden and unproveable
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: lv99_atheist on June 27, 2013, 10:40:03 PM
Bonus if you throw in a few hotties too (Men and women  ;)

Of course, he says that after he has been with someone in a supposedly monogamous relationship since August of last year (with me.)  >:(
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on July 12, 2013, 12:42:15 PM
dude if god asks you to jump you say how High.
Alternatively:
If god asks you to jump, you say 'why should I'?

Well because if you don't jump you will suffer an enternity of pain, but if you do jump you will enjoy an eternity of joy.   Why???  because I said so!!! 

This is assuming that god has proved himself to me.  When or if god proves his existence and power then I would likely be beholdin to do his bidding. 

How does he prove himself to me is irrelevant once I know in my mind for a fact that this guy controls not only my existence or non existence but my quality of life.  I don't think I need to know the why at that point. 

When my 18 year old daughter asks me why should I clean the living room and I say because.... She had better do it because she knows what I can do to her or for her.  It is up to her to decide if she whishes to be put out on the street, grounded, car privilidges revoked or pay rent.  I can help her with college or not help her.  The god of the bible has the ability to give way better punishments.

Although I would tend to try and give her a reason sometimes because I said so should suffice.  I don't want to go through the effort of saying here are the benefits of a clean livingroom and failure to do it will result in distasteful things.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on July 12, 2013, 12:59:15 PM

If I believe god existed, he was the god described in the bible, I believed he stood for good, I believed that he held the keys to my eternal torture or salvation...  I would say I would obey while singing his praises. 

My child gets a free trip to paradise, I ensure my free trip to paradise and no one loses.

Perhaps god knows something I don't.  Like the little brat is destined on doing something horrible i.e. he is going to grow up to be far worse than hitler. 

So basically your answer is yes then, that you would obey the wishes of a sick, sadistic, monstrous dictator instead of resisting his immorality? And even more, somehow you think spending an eternity with this being would be "paradise"? WOW. You could say "perhaps" about just about anything you want regarding some invisible, non-demonstrable, deity thing - as could any of us here - but that wouldn't change the fact that you would be choosing to cow-tail to a cosmic Kim-Jong Il. How does that make you feel? Would you still think this god was "holy", "righteous", "perfect", and "just"?


Just because I do not understand his motives does not make him a viscious dictator. 

I did not say I would Obey a non-demonstrabe invisible being.  I told you that he had proven himself to me in a satisfactory way.  Meaning I understood him, interacted with him.   That is where I said assuming god proved his existence.

How is it sick to kill people?  on measure it is a finite time vs infinite time in paradise.  There is really no measure of the suffering.  A god that created the universe and man who controlled eternity of paradise can kill you with out guilt if he give you paradise.  Living might well be the sadistic thing but live or die on measure against eternity is really irrelevant.  It is akin to saying that a mom is sadistic for lancing a boil.   Life being a boil compared with paradise.

PS our recent slavey conversations prove that more than likely you would do so as well.  A human with a choice between heaven and hell or heaven an nothing will usually choose life over torture and death.  Everything else is bravado and macho BS and a few really really really strong idealoues. 

Stop making me defend god.  I don't believe in god but in hypothetical world where god was known to exist most people would follow him with out question right up and to killing onself or others. 

 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: LoriPinkAngel on July 12, 2013, 01:52:28 PM

Just because I do not understand his motives does not make him a viscious dictator. 


I think the bottom line is that if something feels wrong it is wrong. If there is no motive that can absolutely explain the need for this action it must not be done.  If any voice or entity or whatever is telling me something that goes against my basic values I'm not going to do it.  Period. 
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on July 15, 2013, 10:55:52 AM

Just because I do not understand his motives does not make him a viscious dictator. 


I think the bottom line is that if something feels wrong it is wrong. If there is no motive that can absolutely explain the need for this action it must not be done.  If any voice or entity or whatever is telling me something that goes against my basic values I'm not going to do it.  Period.

I understand that.  I am just saying if you know this god is real (he has made himself apparent and you know he can do what he says and he is who he says).   I am not suggesting you have a thought and attribute it to god.  No the man makes a personal appearance 900 feet tall to you infront of 50 people who all say wow that was some shit wasn't it.  You know it was god.  Personally in that situation I might defer to his reasons and do as commanded.   

Again is life important at all if paradise is where the person you kill is going.  Would said person thank you or hate you for killing him?
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: jdawg70 on July 15, 2013, 11:03:26 AM
I understand that.  I am just saying if you know this god is real (he has made himself apparent and you know he can do what he says and he is who he says).   I am not suggesting you have a thought and attribute it to god.  No the man makes a personal appearance 900 feet tall to you infront of 50 people who all say wow that was some shit wasn't it.  You know it was god.  Personally in that situation I might defer to his reasons and do as commanded.   

Again is life important at all if paradise is where the person you kill is going.  Would said person thank you or hate you for killing him?
Let's be clear about something - in this case, you aren't deferring to god's reasons, but strictly deferring to his power.

But I get what you're saying at the end of the day.  Personally, I feel that I'm probably weak-willed enough to submit to a being of sufficient power.  I contend that I would have the audacity to ask 'why', but that first lightening bolt up my rear end would have a high chance of me saying 'sorry sir, no more'.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: ParkingPlaces on July 15, 2013, 11:24:15 AM
I understand that.  I am just saying if you know this god is real (he has made himself apparent and you know he can do what he says and he is who he says).   I am not suggesting you have a thought and attribute it to god.  No the man makes a personal appearance 900 feet tall to you infront of 50 people who all say wow that was some shit wasn't it.  You know it was god.  Personally in that situation I might defer to his reasons and do as commanded.   

Again is life important at all if paradise is where the person you kill is going.  Would said person thank you or hate you for killing him?

If the dude shows up 900 feet tall or otherwise makes himself more apparent than he has thus far, I'll be more than happy to take notice, even if I don't like it. And my reason for not liking it wouldn't be because I don't want a god, but because my morals are far better than his and hence, just like politicians, he will have very little appeal.

And in the meantime, since I do not live with the thought of a paradise or any other afterlife, I don't run around killing people because that would end it all for them and that's not my job. Nor is it anyone else's, unless said person is busy killing others and needs to be stopped. A situation which I have not personally had to deal with.

And I have no desire to live infinitely long. That would make everything trivial and take the fun out of things. So not only do I not think there is a god, I'm hoping there isn't, either, because he would ruin everything.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Truth OT on July 15, 2013, 01:13:58 PM
If God asked you to sacrifice/kill your son to prove your love for Him. Would you do it?

If it could be proven and I could be certain that it was in fact the all powerful honest God that is the author and giver of life asking me to do it, I think I may go through with it if IT asked me to and I was given certain assurances.

- I would need to know that God loves and cares for me first
- I'd need to know that my boy can and would be resurrected or would be given the gift of a special post human life that was exceedingly better and more fulfilling than the human existence could offer
- I'd need to know that there was more to life that awaits those that love God than the life we know and understand
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: epidemic on July 15, 2013, 01:20:14 PM
And in the meantime, since I do not live with the thought of a paradise or any other afterlife, I don't run around killing people because that would end it all for them and that's not my job. Nor is it anyone else's, unless said person is busy killing others and needs to be stopped. A situation which I have not personally had to deal with.

And I have no desire to live infinitely long. That would make everything trivial and take the fun out of things. So not only do I not think there is a god, I'm hoping there isn't, either, because he would ruin everything.

Well God may not have only the keys to eternal paradise (which I can't envision how that would be pleasant )  But he may have the keys to the inverse of paradise.  Eternal suffering!!!  That would suck.  We are talking about the ultimate carrot and stick.


Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: ParkingPlaces on July 15, 2013, 01:32:36 PM
And in the meantime, since I do not live with the thought of a paradise or any other afterlife, I don't run around killing people because that would end it all for them and that's not my job. Nor is it anyone else's, unless said person is busy killing others and needs to be stopped. A situation which I have not personally had to deal with.

And I have no desire to live infinitely long. That would make everything trivial and take the fun out of things. So not only do I not think there is a god, I'm hoping there isn't, either, because he would ruin everything.

Well God may not have only the keys to eternal paradise (which I can't envision how that would be pleasant )  But he may have the keys to the inverse of paradise.  Eternal suffering!!!  That would suck.  We are talking about the ultimate carrot and stick.

It can't be the ultimate carrot and stick. It doesn't always work. Omnipotent guys should be better at their job.

Since there is no god, there is no heaven and there is no hell. And that is much better than the imagined alternative anyway.
Title: Re: Question to theists
Post by: Danohk on July 18, 2013, 12:14:14 PM
No, I wouldn't.