Reply personal responsibility is a crock: here is why
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Let's change this and use your mental institution scenario. Let's say another doctor gives me a different type of pill. Instead of seeing all of these imaginary people I see everyone else as pink elephants and the doctor claims who looks like a pink elephant as well claims this as the truth. Everyone truthfully looks like pink elephants.
Which is correct exactly?
1. The one in which I'm seeing and interacting with all of these people who are there.
2. The one where none of those people are there.
3. Everyone looks like pink elephants.
Number 1 is what I've been seeing for a lot of my life. The doctor for 2 says he's correct and I'm to take him on faith. The doctor for number 3 says that he is correct and I'm to take him on faith. Same thing with Christianity and Islam. Christians say to take them on faith. Muslims say to take them on faith. Who is correct exactly? Which faith exactly?
Let's quote you exactly and change a word or two. "You’re beginning with the assumption that none of the tenets of Islam can possibly be true and refuse to consider how the tenets of Islam even COULD be. That isn’t logical at all. I’m sorry, but I can’t help a mind that does not wish to understand anything. Best wishes." All one has to do is replace the word Christianity and the holy Bible with Islam and the Koran. Which faith am I supposed to have exactly?
How about we stick to my original intent and not bring poor assumptions into this? I’m not discussing pink elephants or Islam.
Christian faith as described in the gospels is the only way to go. I’m not going to accept any premise to the contrary.
The point is that other people have faith in their religions. Muslims have faith in their truth and Allah which they consider the same Biblical God! They see Jesus as more as a prophet. That's their version of the truth and they believe the "truth" is the only way and all others are false doctrines. So, Islam and Pink Elephants were an analogy of my own.
Christians have faith. Muslims have faith. Jews have faith. Hindus have faith. The ancient Greeks had faith. All the people of the ancient world and the modern world today have faith. They have faith their way is correct and the others are wrong.
So, with this being said, how is faith a reliable guide to determining truth and sussing out what is what?
So, which is the one truth faith? How would I truthfully know? Well, by having faith! See the problem everyone with this sort of circular reasoning?
The faith of the gospels is the only true faith. I’m not concerned about any other so-called “religion.”
You’re missing the point on circular reasoning. Human cognition and, consequently, human reasoning are inherently flawed to begin with. You cannot draw any conclusions without making assumptions about things you’d be expected to prove. In fact, why is it even so important that you have to prove anything, anyway? It’s an epistemic question. Did someone tell you something must be proven (appeal to authority), or did you discover this on your own by already assuming something must be proven (circular reasoning)?
If knowledge is revealed to you by an omniscient being, then you already know your assumptions are correct to begin with. You don’t have to worry about circularity because you aren’t limited by the assumption that knowledge can only come from the human mind and experience. Those are unreliable without requiring more assumptions than necessary (faith only requires one in this case). Then you know all sorts of things, such as whether you’re worshiping the right God. That’s fairly easy—there’s only one. If you know your religion got it right, why bother worrying about some other religion? For you to say what you just said, you have to make yet another assumption that Christianity is wrong.
For this to convince me that Christianity gets it wrong, you have to incontrovertibly PROVE your case that Christianity is wrong. Still waiting on that, btw.
I never said that Christianity is wrong but your version and idea of it is wrong. Let's start off.
Let's presume it is correct as in the way you view God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent. God in your vision can do anything he wants with no limits and boundaries and he knows and has access to an infinite amount of knowledge with no borders or boundaries. This is what I'm assuming how you and most Christians view the properties of God.
Now, proof by contradiction says if we have A and it leads to (B and NOT B) which is considered a contradiction then it must be NOT A.
Remember what you said before where you said that nothing can be and not be in the same instance. This is what is called a contradiction. In other words, one can't have a square circle. An entity can't have mutually exclusive properties.
Now, if God is omnipotent then he should have the ability to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance. And, God should be able to have the knowledge in all of his infinite wisdom to create objects and have knowledge of using the power to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance.
If God is omniscient and omnipotent then things with contradictions must be able to exist and can be made by the supreme being. But, since contradictions are not possible as you even claim then therefore God can't be omnipotent and omniscient as God is not as powerful as claimed.
Or else you hold two simultaneously thoughts at the same time.
1. Contradictions can't exist and God is limited.
2. God can can do anything and has infinite knowledge including how to create contradictory things.
Here is your first proof right here.
FAIL. Contradictions don’t exist. You are imposing something on God that contradicts His nature and character. You’re assumption is that God contradicts Himself. I don’t want assumptions. I want PROOF.
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
The concept of omnibenevolence is an interesting one. I don’t have a problem with the idea of God being all-good, but I don’t thing benevolence from a human perspective is an adequate way of understanding God’s goodness. I don’t accept the premise that God’s perfect goodness demands that God be all-loving. One of the problems of contemporary Christianity is the depiction of God as being all-merciful while glossing over justice. Justice and mercy are incompatible. Exhibiting attributes of justice and mercy means God is executing two opposite ideas at various times as He deems appropriate according to His will.
For example, God need not show mercy at all. If God is all justice, He could have destroyed man in Eden and started clean over. It would have been deserved. There is scriptural evidence of a previous cycle of creation and destruction prior to Eden, but no mention in Genesis of precisely what happened.
If God is all-mercy, then there is no justice. People can run around killing each other if they wish to without any consequences. God need not show justice at all if He prefers not to.
God’s law describes a system of equivalence in which punishment must fit the crime—eye for an eye, and so forth. The Sadducee sect interpreted this literally and ignored everything else. It doesn’t make sense to cause a permanent injury to someone when they can pay for their crimes in other ways: either by paying fines or working it off. The present-day practice of blanket incarceration in the corrections system is so stupid because of its cost to the public, failure to actually reform prisoners, and denial of justice to victims. Basically, if I murder someone, depending on circumstances and jurisdiction, I get a lifelong vacation. Shelter, meals, and no responsibility. It comes at the expense of freedom, of course, but anyone who is willing to murder and face life imprisonment probably doesn’t really care about freedom all that much. By assigning a debt to a crime and giving the criminal the option of servitude if he can’t afford the fine, you show mercy. God’s justice is tempered by God’s mercy as seen by the ancient Israelite principle of “mercy over the law.”
God is perfectly just and perfectly merciful in the sense that justice and mercy exist in an ideal, balanced state. Post-Eden, the punishment for Adam’s sin is not death. It’s being condemned to an eternity in a fallen state. Imagine getting incurable, untreatable cancer attacking your organs, periodically cutting out tumors with flint knives just for temporary relief, and living in constant pain besides. Death is actually a mercy because it concludes a fallen existence of struggle and pain.
The human conception of an all-good being is often founded on the premise that human beings understand goodness better than God. If you aren’t omniscient, then you don’t know, nor are you in a position to know. What God chooses to do with Sodom and their children is up to God. It’s unintelligent to say “But they’re CHILDREN” when you consider that these babies would have been left to die anyway if only their parents had died. In that sense, God shows His mercy on them by bringing them to a quick end—AND their parents, which was better than the parents deserved. To describe God as all-good means accepting both God’s justice AND mercy. But the problem is all-good is normally extended to describing God as all-loving. The Bible shows this is NOT the case.
If you can define omnibenevolence to exclude all-loving, then I don’t have a problem with it. I do believe that God is all-loving in the sense that He loves all humanity. But I don’t think that universal inclusion of unrepentant persons is compatible with mercy, justice, or love. Condemning unrepentant, unbelieving people to an eternity in the presence of the God they spent a lifetime rejecting would just be another Hell.
Let's change this and use your mental institution scenario. Let's say another doctor gives me a different type of pill. Instead of seeing all of these imaginary people I see everyone else as pink elephants and the doctor claims who looks like a pink elephant as well claims this as the truth. Everyone truthfully looks like pink elephants.
Which is correct exactly?
1. The one in which I'm seeing and interacting with all of these people who are there.
2. The one where none of those people are there.
3. Everyone looks like pink elephants.
Number 1 is what I've been seeing for a lot of my life. The doctor for 2 says he's correct and I'm to take him on faith. The doctor for number 3 says that he is correct and I'm to take him on faith. Same thing with Christianity and Islam. Christians say to take them on faith. Muslims say to take them on faith. Who is correct exactly? Which faith exactly?
Let's quote you exactly and change a word or two. "You’re beginning with the assumption that none of the tenets of Islam can possibly be true and refuse to consider how the tenets of Islam even COULD be. That isn’t logical at all. I’m sorry, but I can’t help a mind that does not wish to understand anything. Best wishes." All one has to do is replace the word Christianity and the holy Bible with Islam and the Koran. Which faith am I supposed to have exactly?
How about we stick to my original intent and not bring poor assumptions into this? I’m not discussing pink elephants or Islam.
Christian faith as described in the gospels is the only way to go. I’m not going to accept any premise to the contrary.
The point is that other people have faith in their religions. Muslims have faith in their truth and Allah which they consider the same Biblical God! They see Jesus as more as a prophet. That's their version of the truth and they believe the "truth" is the only way and all others are false doctrines. So, Islam and Pink Elephants were an analogy of my own.
Christians have faith. Muslims have faith. Jews have faith. Hindus have faith. The ancient Greeks had faith. All the people of the ancient world and the modern world today have faith. They have faith their way is correct and the others are wrong.
So, with this being said, how is faith a reliable guide to determining truth and sussing out what is what?
So, which is the one truth faith? How would I truthfully know? Well, by having faith! See the problem everyone with this sort of circular reasoning?
The faith of the gospels is the only true faith. I’m not concerned about any other so-called “religion.”
You’re missing the point on circular reasoning. Human cognition and, consequently, human reasoning are inherently flawed to begin with. You cannot draw any conclusions without making assumptions about things you’d be expected to prove. In fact, why is it even so important that you have to prove anything, anyway? It’s an epistemic question. Did someone tell you something must be proven (appeal to authority), or did you discover this on your own by already assuming something must be proven (circular reasoning)?
If knowledge is revealed to you by an omniscient being, then you already know your assumptions are correct to begin with. You don’t have to worry about circularity because you aren’t limited by the assumption that knowledge can only come from the human mind and experience. Those are unreliable without requiring more assumptions than necessary (faith only requires one in this case). Then you know all sorts of things, such as whether you’re worshiping the right God. That’s fairly easy—there’s only one. If you know your religion got it right, why bother worrying about some other religion? For you to say what you just said, you have to make yet another assumption that Christianity is wrong.
For this to convince me that Christianity gets it wrong, you have to incontrovertibly PROVE your case that Christianity is wrong. Still waiting on that, btw.
I never said that Christianity is wrong but your version and idea of it is wrong. Let's start off.
Let's presume it is correct as in the way you view God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent. God in your vision can do anything he wants with no limits and boundaries and he knows and has access to an infinite amount of knowledge with no borders or boundaries. This is what I'm assuming how you and most Christians view the properties of God.
Now, proof by contradiction says if we have A and it leads to (B and NOT B) which is considered a contradiction then it must be NOT A.
Remember what you said before where you said that nothing can be and not be in the same instance. This is what is called a contradiction. In other words, one can't have a square circle. An entity can't have mutually exclusive properties.
Now, if God is omnipotent then he should have the ability to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance. And, God should be able to have the knowledge in all of his infinite wisdom to create objects and have knowledge of using the power to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance.
If God is omniscient and omnipotent then things with contradictions must be able to exist and can be made by the supreme being. But, since contradictions are not possible as you even claim then therefore God can't be omnipotent and omniscient as God is not as powerful as claimed.
Or else you hold two simultaneously thoughts at the same time.
1. Contradictions can't exist and God is limited.
2. God can can do anything and has infinite knowledge including how to create contradictory things.
Here is your first proof right here.
FAIL. Contradictions don’t exist. You are imposing something on God that contradicts His nature and character. You’re assumption is that God contradicts Himself. I don’t want assumptions. I want PROOF.
You know I'm beginning to think I'm talking to a person who talks, behaves and acts like a member of a cult. All you do is parrot the same BS. Do you realize how much you shift the goal posts and talk in circles. You're like the pod people in the invasion of the body snatchers. No reasoning ability at all. Almost like you're programmed like a robot.
Proof by contradiction is valid poof. God is omnipotent and omniscient. So, he has the power and knowledge to create a contradictory entity. Or, if he can't then he isn't omnipotent and omniscient. This is f*****g obvious. You are the most obtuse person I've ever spoken to. It's like banging my head against a brick wall.
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Let's change this and use your mental institution scenario. Let's say another doctor gives me a different type of pill. Instead of seeing all of these imaginary people I see everyone else as pink elephants and the doctor claims who looks like a pink elephant as well claims this as the truth. Everyone truthfully looks like pink elephants.
Which is correct exactly?
1. The one in which I'm seeing and interacting with all of these people who are there.
2. The one where none of those people are there.
3. Everyone looks like pink elephants.
Number 1 is what I've been seeing for a lot of my life. The doctor for 2 says he's correct and I'm to take him on faith. The doctor for number 3 says that he is correct and I'm to take him on faith. Same thing with Christianity and Islam. Christians say to take them on faith. Muslims say to take them on faith. Who is correct exactly? Which faith exactly?
Let's quote you exactly and change a word or two. "You’re beginning with the assumption that none of the tenets of Islam can possibly be true and refuse to consider how the tenets of Islam even COULD be. That isn’t logical at all. I’m sorry, but I can’t help a mind that does not wish to understand anything. Best wishes." All one has to do is replace the word Christianity and the holy Bible with Islam and the Koran. Which faith am I supposed to have exactly?
How about we stick to my original intent and not bring poor assumptions into this? I’m not discussing pink elephants or Islam.
Christian faith as described in the gospels is the only way to go. I’m not going to accept any premise to the contrary.
The point is that other people have faith in their religions. Muslims have faith in their truth and Allah which they consider the same Biblical God! They see Jesus as more as a prophet. That's their version of the truth and they believe the "truth" is the only way and all others are false doctrines. So, Islam and Pink Elephants were an analogy of my own.
Christians have faith. Muslims have faith. Jews have faith. Hindus have faith. The ancient Greeks had faith. All the people of the ancient world and the modern world today have faith. They have faith their way is correct and the others are wrong.
So, with this being said, how is faith a reliable guide to determining truth and sussing out what is what?
So, which is the one truth faith? How would I truthfully know? Well, by having faith! See the problem everyone with this sort of circular reasoning?
The faith of the gospels is the only true faith. I’m not concerned about any other so-called “religion.”
You’re missing the point on circular reasoning. Human cognition and, consequently, human reasoning are inherently flawed to begin with. You cannot draw any conclusions without making assumptions about things you’d be expected to prove. In fact, why is it even so important that you have to prove anything, anyway? It’s an epistemic question. Did someone tell you something must be proven (appeal to authority), or did you discover this on your own by already assuming something must be proven (circular reasoning)?
If knowledge is revealed to you by an omniscient being, then you already know your assumptions are correct to begin with. You don’t have to worry about circularity because you aren’t limited by the assumption that knowledge can only come from the human mind and experience. Those are unreliable without requiring more assumptions than necessary (faith only requires one in this case). Then you know all sorts of things, such as whether you’re worshiping the right God. That’s fairly easy—there’s only one. If you know your religion got it right, why bother worrying about some other religion? For you to say what you just said, you have to make yet another assumption that Christianity is wrong.
For this to convince me that Christianity gets it wrong, you have to incontrovertibly PROVE your case that Christianity is wrong. Still waiting on that, btw.
I never said that Christianity is wrong but your version and idea of it is wrong. Let's start off.
Let's presume it is correct as in the way you view God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent. God in your vision can do anything he wants with no limits and boundaries and he knows and has access to an infinite amount of knowledge with no borders or boundaries. This is what I'm assuming how you and most Christians view the properties of God.
Now, proof by contradiction says if we have A and it leads to (B and NOT B) which is considered a contradiction then it must be NOT A.
Remember what you said before where you said that nothing can be and not be in the same instance. This is what is called a contradiction. In other words, one can't have a square circle. An entity can't have mutually exclusive properties.
Now, if God is omnipotent then he should have the ability to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance. And, God should be able to have the knowledge in all of his infinite wisdom to create objects and have knowledge of using the power to create objects that can be and not be in the same instance.
If God is omniscient and omnipotent then things with contradictions must be able to exist and can be made by the supreme being. But, since contradictions are not possible as you even claim then therefore God can't be omnipotent and omniscient as God is not as powerful as claimed.
Or else you hold two simultaneously thoughts at the same time.
1. Contradictions can't exist and God is limited.
2. God can can do anything and has infinite knowledge including how to create contradictory things.
Here is your first proof right here.
FAIL. Contradictions don’t exist. You are imposing something on God that contradicts His nature and character. You’re assumption is that God contradicts Himself. I don’t want assumptions. I want PROOF.
You know I'm beginning to think I'm talking to a person who talks, behaves and acts like a member of a cult. All you do is parrot the same BS. Do you realize how much you shift the goal posts and talk in circles. You're like the pod people in the invasion of the body snatchers. No reasoning ability at all. Almost like you're programmed like a robot.
Proof by contradiction is valid poof. God is omnipotent and omniscient. So, he has the power and knowledge to create a contradictory entity. Or, if he can't then he isn't omnipotent and omniscient. This is f*****g obvious. You are the most obtuse person I've ever spoken to. It's like banging my head against a brick wall.
You’re banging your head against a brick wall because you’re wrong. Contradictory entities cannot exist. AT ALL. If something seems contradictory AND it exists, then it’s not contradictory. One or more of your premises are wrong. Contradictions don’t exist, therefore you cannot prove anything by them. Still waiting on PROOF.
Your error, more specifically, is that you don’t understand the logical law of non-contradiction. You are asserting something is a contradiction when it isn’t and violating the law of identity. You are assuming that Non-Contradiction and Identity are mutually exclusive. The nature of God as non-contradictory is an expression of infinite power and knowledge, not a limitation of them. You might want to check your understanding of “proof by contradiction” in light of the other laws of logic, because what you presented here is not it.
Still waiting on PROOF.
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
I’m also not going to defend God’s actions. I used to indulge in these kinds of discussions until I figured out that I had to accept the premise that God was doing something wrong. That’s not what I believe at all. Go back to Genesis 1. God created the heavens and earth. Everything exists for His pleasure alone. If He wants to burn the damned place down along with everyone in it, He’s free to do that for any reason or no reason at all. Still waiting on your PROOF.
"Go back to Genesis 1. God created the heavens and earth.
Everything exists for His pleasure alone. If He wants to burn
the damned place down along with everyone in it, He’s
free to do that for any reason or no reason at all."
My God As An Anthropology Participant Observer
(Just for Fun)
i Am So Glad i Come Here to Study Religion
As That Applies to 'True Believers'...
The Quote Above Says So Much About
Human Nature And the Personality Disorder
Psychopathy, In General, Applied to Either Human
Or God's In Stories As Of Course Psychopathic Leaning
Folks Write
Stories too;
Better Put
Psychopathic
Yes Very Despicable
Leaders, Have them
Edited As Such to Rule
Over Dominions Kingdom Come
Still To come With Willing Minions...
Picture Trump Holding Up A Bible Upside
Down; Golden Meme of DarKNeSS iNdeed.
You Just Described Trump's Personality, the
Same Way You Describe This Fictional God in An Old
Dusty Antiquated Story, Written By Ghost Authors Copied
And Pasted Together to Achieve Political Aims of 'Leadership'
in Domination Over Dominions Still to Kingdom Come Same Now
In All Colors
(SHades of
Grey Thru
BLacK Abyss)
Of Trump
Psychopathic
Leaning Meme Ways
Of Basically Humans Who
Live For Their Own Pleasure
And Will Burn The Whole World Down
If that Pleases Their Selfish Pleasures in Life;
(Yeah, Like GoinG UNmasked in Church And Walmart
Unvaccinated in A Deadly Frigging Global Pandemic)
No Thanks to that Evil; No Thanks to Despicable Leaders;
No Thanks When Even Chimps Do a Better Job Selecting
Leaders Who Truly Have Far Reaching Empathy for 'The Tribe at Hand';
All oF it; Sort of Like A Good Cop Version of Jesus, The Extreme Altruistic
Hero Who Even Turns the Other Cheek And Loves Enemies Understanding
They Are Part of the Same Overall Nature That The Leader Is; Whoever That
'Jesus' May
Come to
Be Next Now
The Good Cop
Jesus Ape or Human
Or Butterfly Wings
Pollinating Flowers
Year Round In Spring;
True That Other Book Needs
Massive Revision; And A Hero Who
Does Not Contradict Himself Saying
One Day Turn the Other Cheek, And Love
Your Neighbor And God And Enemy All
And Then Goes All 'Mr. Hyde'
(Yes, The Struggle Is Real
For All Of Us Dam Sinners)
And Worse Than 'Jack
the Ripper'
And 'Hannibal
The Cannibal'
In Even Fiction too
And According Again to
Matthew, You Can Say It Doesn't
Exist All You Want to, Yet the Words Are
Clear, the Once Loyal Sheep Are Turned into
Goats And Burned Forever If they Don't Help the
Homeless Jesus on the Street; Yes, Burned For Ever
to the Bone For Being Bad and Not Such a Nice Guy Like Jesus...
If That's
Not A
Contradiction
It's An F in Fairy Tale That it is....
A Bad Fairytale, Where the Hero turns into the Villain by the End of 'The Gospel'....
According to Whoever the Ghost Author Was Then Assigned the Pen Name Matthew Writing that
Or Whatever Psychopathic State Leader, Pope, Priest, or Copy Scribe, Edited the Previous Version....
All You Have
to Be and
Do Is Human
To See This Clear
As Trump's Nose Grows Even Longer too...
And Bad Fairy Tales Do Come True too; 'Trump Life' Is Real;
All The Evidence Revealed Now For the Entire World to See
And Sadly
'Minions'
to do too...
For All the Bidding
Of Their OverLords As Slaves...
Actually That Old Bible Is A Pretty
Good Book, in the Fact, It Obviously
Reflects Human Nature, DarK Thru LiGHT;
Duh, Wonder Who Wrote it...
Obviously More
Than One Person;
And That's Great; If You
Are Gonna Write A Half-Butt
Good Bible; Ya Gotta Get
More Than One View in...
Thank You Very Much,
Your Local
Mostly
Friendly
Hands
On
Anthropology
Participant Observer;
When my Research Paper (Bible); Writing Just One Subchapter Now too of 9.3 MiLLioN Word
EPiC Longest Form Bible Poem, "SonG oF mY SoUL", Yes 7 MiLLioN Words, "Nether Land Bible" Is
Finished (Actually Just Part of The Whole
Never Ending Story) As i Go
i Let You Know; Hehe Now,
Returning
Again and
Again;
So Forth and So on,
God Yes, Sooner Than Soon..

_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
I’m also not going to defend God’s actions. I used to indulge in these kinds of discussions until I figured out that I had to accept the premise that God was doing something wrong. That’s not what I believe at all. Go back to Genesis 1. God created the heavens and earth. Everything exists for His pleasure alone. If He wants to burn the damned place down along with everyone in it, He’s free to do that for any reason or no reason at all. Still waiting on your PROOF.
"Go back to Genesis 1. God created the heavens and earth.
Everything exists for His pleasure alone. If He wants to burn
the damned place down along with everyone in it, He’s
free to do that for any reason or no reason at all."
My God As An Anthropology Participant Observer
(Just for Fun)
i Am So Glad i Come Here to Study Religion
As That Applies to 'True Believers'...
The Quote Above Says So Much About
Human Nature And the Personality Disorder
Psychopathy, In General, Applied to Either Human
Or God's In Stories As Of Course Psychopathic Leaning
Is God really a psychopath?
Anything that you create or purchase is your possession. It is your decision whether to keep it, break it, fix it, destroy it, discard it. If it is wrong to discard anything one possesses, then one should never flush the toilet. One shouldn’t even have a toilet because one’s poop belongs to him and should never be destroyed or discarded. Or perhaps people should just not poop. Anyone who poops and discards it must be some kind of psychopath.
The false premise I think I see in your post is symptomatic of the human tendency towards envy of God’s position and role in the universe. This is directly related to Adam’s sin, the arrogance of believing that man can improve on perfection. This is built on the false premise that God is lower or subservient to man.
The relationship of man to God is precisely that of possession to owner. Because we are self-aware of our own identity and personality, we are a bit hypersensitive to the idea that any human being could be the possession of another intelligent agent. The Bible does not outright forbid humans as chattel, but the Bible does strongly discourage trade in involuntary servitude. Our value of freedom makes it difficult to understand our role as the possession of a divine Creator, but the difficulty of this fact doesn’t make it less true.
My original question was about whether God is a psychopath. Whether He is or not is ultimately irrelevant. But the latitude to create and destroy at will does not imply that God will always do so. Feeling sorry for Sodom is just an expression of disapproval for what God did. Human disapproval of something doesn’t mean God was wrong for doing it.
And what’s with invoking Trump’s name every chance you get? Trump has no power anymore. Why are you letting Trump live rent-free inside your head?
Is God really a pychopath?
"Is God really a psychopath?"
Of Course God Is A Psychopath too...
Of Course God Is Trump too...
In FacT, God Is All, The
Real Three Letter
Word,
Now,
At
Essence At Least too...
And Form At Least too...
Do You Even Understand
What i Sing, The Old Antiquated Bible is Also God too
And So IS Holy S888T too... Particularly 3 8's in A Row HAha...
Dude, All i Need Is Foot Prints on the Beach; Namely Mine to Be God Here Now...
Yes i am God too...
And So Are
You Like
Trump too...
And It's True You
CANNOT PROVE MY
FAITH UNTRUE NOR
ANYONE ELSE WHO
CANNOT SEE GOD ME TOO...
God Is A Smile on A Dog's Face; Even
When The Dog Is Not Smiling...
So On And So Forth
Now Never Ending Story
This Bible For Real Now True too...
It's All God; Some Folks Have Smaller Ones, Not me...
Dude, This is the 21st Century; How About Evolving
Out oF Old Books
Of Poetry...
Nah...
No
Need
Now No
Bother
i'll Do It..

_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Is God really a pychopath?
Dude, This is the 21st Century; How About Evolving
Out oF Old Books
Of Poetry...
Nah...
No
Need
Now No
Bother
i'll Do It..

Why assume Biblical writers couldn’t get it right the first time? A well-known problem with evolution is that mutations that deviate too far past any given traits result in organisms that cannot survive. Taken as a metaphor, variations in religion that stray too far past how scriptures can reasonably be interpreted results in a new religion altogether. Since the gospels already delineate how God and man relate, anything claimed as an evolution of the gospels is a false religion.
My UNDERSTANDING of God’s relationship with man has evolved along with how I’ve come to understand certain things in the text. I’ve been reading in Job a little bit lately, and I was moved by the passage about saying that God had protected his possessions, and without them Job would curse God. What caught my attention was the subtle hint that something was somehow wrong with Job even having so much wealth to begin with. It’s very subtle, and I realized that the implication is that Job somehow got his wealth through dishonest means, as though Job has special favor and protection when that wealth could be put to better use if others had access to it. It’s almost as though Satan is calling God out for greed and corruption because there’s no way God could possibly command so much favor with a righteous man without buying it. Satan’s victim mentality is apparent from the start. Job the man proves that there is no need to abandon your principles in the face of suffering and loss. God as Sovereign does not need Job’s devotion, and Satan’s experiment involved putting God on trial rather than Job. The question is one of whether God has value besides what man believes man is entitled to.
God’s response to Job in the conclusion of the book appears mean-spirited, but God is not bullying Job. God is just asking Job after everything he’s been through whether he still regards God the same way as before. God asks “Who is this who conceals my counsel with ignorance?” Job’s response to God is not out of shame or guilt, but honesty. When Job spoke of things he didn’t understand, he was speaking from the voice of faith.
In my current state of mind, this is exactly what I mean regarding the discussion with Cube. No person, whether believing or unbelieving can understand all that God is. Faith and obedience don’t require understanding. But when God does reveal Himself to us, we can no longer speak from a place of ignorance or lack of understanding. Job also says that before he’d just heard rumors about God. Job’s words were not false before, so when Job repents in dust and ashes, he means that his words before take a whole new meaning after God reveals Himself. What Job merely HEARD about God is confirmed; they aren’t merely rumors, and human words aren’t even sufficient to describe all that God is. Job stands as a witness that after all that has happened, his understanding and devotion to God has deepened, not withered. Satan has failed in this experiment and trial because God proves it IS possible for man to love God for more than just what God provides, that God possesses much more value than all the possessions the world has to offer, and that Job’s devotion is authentic and not gained through ill means.
I couldn’t tell you how many times I’ve read Job, but it’s been a few times. 5 years ago I’d never have viewed Job the way I do now. We are all works in progress. But it is not the religion or scripture that has changed, but rather my appreciation of it. All I can tell you is that the way I’ve heard this taught in the past as though I have so much to feel guilty about and what specific things I should feel guilty about is something I think has been in error. I think a lot of Christians are sad people because of poor teaching, and it’s a waste.
^^^
Why me God?
Yeah AngelRho, i surely Will Relate to 'the Old Biblical Story of Job', Yes,
The Question of 'Why me?, is one That Most of Us Experience More Than
Once in Life; Today, 6.4.21, Would Have Been the 24th Birthday of my Only
Child Ryan, A Name That Means 'Little King' In Irish And In His Case Born With
Enough Issues, Living Only In Pain for 51 Days With Never A Smile to Understand
It's A Far Stretch to Only
Call God LiGHT Yes
There is DarK
And the
'Story
Of Job' Addresses
That Reality Of Life
Through Metaphors as all
Words We Use Attempt to Provide
Some Consensual And Mutual Understanding
Of Existence Both For Us And Others True If Possible too...
Yes, Existential Intelligence
That the Very Limited And
Antiquated Yet Still Very
Useful Tool, The Scientific
Method, Is Poorly Used for Stuff
Like the Discrete Measurement of
How Even Our Every Day Reality of
Human Consciousness Comes to Be;
The Way We Experience Life Now And Of
Course We Are Very Limited Creatures in Terms Of
Even How Other Animals Than Us Perceive So Much More
of Reality; This God That Is Real Within Outside Inside Above
So Below And All Around to Perceive in Ways We Will Never Be
Able to Imagine too; Some of Us More; Some of Us Less; And in Reality,
Metaphors Are the Symbols We Use And Come to See In Nature As Symbols
To Make Life A 'Rorschach Test' Where As You Thoughtfully And Soulfully Relate
The Metaphors Used in the Bible You Relate to Now Differently Than When You Were Younger
And Viewed Your Reality Different That Which Of course means it's ever Changing Now
For Every One Else Now too; And Back to 'Job' You've Already Likely At Least Passed
Over my Story in Real Hell on Earth More Than Once; So i Will Not Re-Elaborate
'The Story of Job', i've experienced in Life as So Many Other Folks Experience
Their 'Job' Stories Differently too; i've Studied All Major Religions;
Love Binds And There Is A Common Kingdom of Heaven
That Ascends And Transcends Bringing Greater
Soulful Mindful Awareness That
Many Cultures Describe
Differently With
Metaphors too;
Secularly Described
As Autotelic Flow And True
With All the 'Frission' That May
Come with that in A True Worship
in Great Thanks And Praise in Gratitude
For the Aesthetic Experience of All Of Nature Now;
Where of Course for All Practical, Intents, And Purposes
For The Fact That i Go Places in my Inner Existence That Some
Folks Cannot Even Imagine Exists in Bliss and Nirvana Now It Might
As Well Be Named Supernatural to them; Yet All Natural to me as Before
in My Life i only Caught
Short Glimpses
Of What
May Be Described
As This All Natural Kingdom
Of Heaven in Nirvana And Bliss
Of Autotelic Flow And Frission
iN The Glory of This Existence
Now; Yes it is Rather Sad that So Many
Folks Don't Experience Heaven On Earth
in Paradise Within Now; Yet if They Only Believe
It Exists After Death; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy That Becomes too...
It's Not Like it's Not Already Mentioned in Luke 17:21; It's Just that
No One Provides Much Hint of How To Get There Now; For It's True If Every
one Could Generate Their Own Heaven Within; So Much More There Will Be to
Give And
Share And Care
Than Take And Hoard
In Callous Ways Just for the
Sake of the Reality of Being Complete
Enough Whole Within Spirit Wind of Bliss, Yes
All Around Experience of God Now, Yes Above
So Below, Within, Inside, Outside In Accord With
These Metaphors;
Some Folks
Just
Don't Reach
As Far As They Might
Otherwise Experience Heaven Within;
Just With An Open Soul to Start With As True There are So Many More Doors to Open;
i'm still Opening them; Yet It's Worth Noting That Words Are Never Enough to Describe
The Experience of the Potential Of What Some Folks Come to Term of God A Force And
Energy
That
Goes
Far Beyond
The Mundane in Life
Where Even The Mundane
Becomes Divine Providence Now...
This Intervention is All Around Now...
It's Like UFO'S, Some Folks Get A Glimpse;
Others Are the Helm
of the Ship...
And to be
Clear that's
A Metaphor;
Jury Still Out
On that one too..
Anyway, Thanks For Your
Thoughtful And Soulful Response...
It's Not My Worry How Folks Find God;
i for one Needed No Words, Before i Could Speak at
Age 4, One Hundred Percent That i've Lived With
No Separation (God) Forevernow at 3...
So True CuLTuRE
Spoon-Fed
Will take This
God Experience Free Divine
Away; Fortunately We Come to Be
Reborn This Way
Again...
Those
Who
Do at Least..

_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
I do wonder though. In all of AngelRho's sophisticated BS he may have given me a certain idea and if his idea of God exists maybe this may contribute to how certain things could be possible. Even if not, I still think it is awesome.
AngelRho says that you can't have anything be and not be in the same instance. But, what if the assumption we're working on is that there is such thing as an instance and that instance is always so. What if all instances are but temporary.
Let's look at an example and let's say we have a variable that can have the values True or False. But,does this value have to be 100% true all the time or 100% false all the time.
Let's say we have the variable we will call var.
var can have either true or false. But, this presumes that it is always 100% true or 100% false. What if this variable var can be 80% true and 20% false? Or, 1% true or 99% false? Or 50% true or 50% false? Instead of being an on or off switch it becomes more of a dial like a light dimmer.
Now let's take this variable var and we rotate the dial meaning we change the values. As we increase it to be 100% true it becomes less false and vice versa.
Now, what if one could rotate this dial faster? Maybe 2 miles an hour? 10 miles? 1000 miles an hour? 10,000 miles an hour? What if it was possible to rotate to the speed of light and beyond.
And, what if we could rotate at such faster and faster speeds that we can't even tell the position of the dial and the velocity of the rotation of this dial back and forth goes faster and faster to infinity. In such a way the position could be any and all positions.
So, maybe with infinite velocity and speed maybe it could be possible to have certain things be and not be getting closer and closer to both being true at the same time as we reach infinity.
AngelRho
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
AngelRho says that you can't have anything be and not be in the same instance. But, what if the assumption we're working on is that there is such thing as an instance and that instance is always so. What if all instances are but temporary.
Let's look at an example and let's say we have a variable that can have the values True or False. But,does this value have to be 100% true all the time or 100% false all the time.
Let's say we have the variable we will call var.
var can have either true or false. But, this presumes that it is always 100% true or 100% false. What if this variable var can be 80% true and 20% false? Or, 1% true or 99% false? Or 50% true or 50% false? Instead of being an on or off switch it becomes more of a dial like a light dimmer.
Now let's take this variable var and we rotate the dial meaning we change the values. As we increase it to be 100% true it becomes less false and vice versa.
Now, what if one could rotate this dial faster? Maybe 2 miles an hour? 10 miles? 1000 miles an hour? 10,000 miles an hour? What if it was possible to rotate to the speed of light and beyond.
And, what if we could rotate at such faster and faster speeds that we can't even tell the position of the dial and the velocity of the rotation of this dial back and forth goes faster and faster to infinity. In such a way the position could be any and all positions.
So, maybe with infinite velocity and speed maybe it could be possible to have certain things be and not be getting closer and closer to both being true at the same time as we reach infinity.
Ummm...I think you lost me there. Things being true/false simultaneously AND in the same sense violate non-contradiction. It is possible for something to simultaneously true AND false in a different sense, or things can both be true/false in the same sense but at different times.
Schroedinger’s cat is generally accepted from what I understand is a metaphorical application of non-contradiction since either the cat is alive or dead. The state of particles when not one state or the opposite is assumed to be simultaneously both AND neither state. The Man In The High Castle fictional series has an interesting take on this. The NAZIs build a quantum machine that allows travel between their world and an “alt-world.” So-called “travelers” have the ability to move between worlds without the machine, but only if the traveler doesn’t already exist in the alt-world. If you die in this world, alt-you can travel to this world. But you cannot simultaneously coexist with your alt in the same world.
I don’t give much credence to QM. The behavior of particles is interesting, but I don’t have to worry about my couch disappearing with me into another universe once I sit on it. I am convinced, however, that driers are portals through the multiverse and someone out there is wondering where the heck all these socks are coming from.
For Those Of Us Who Speak, Hear, And See, We All Have Stories
to Tell And Yes Helen Keller Did too; And True When We Do Not
Speak, Hear, And See Like Her, Our Other Human Potentials May
Flourish Without So Many Other Abstract Constructions Human
Create That Become More Distraction Than Ladder
To Explore A Higher
Realm of Being
Now Beyond Speak,
Hear And See; And True
On the Autism Spectrum This is More
my Purview As There Are Some on the
Autism Spectrum With 'Spidey' Senses and Feelings
Connecting to All Even Beyond Sight, Hearing, And Speaking
Where Others May Experience Life More Cold And Aloof And Very
Material Reductionist in Detail Parts Instead of Big Picture 'Seeing More Of LIfe'
That Again May Be Far Beyond our Common Ways of Seeing, Hearing, And Speaking Now;
And Of Course the Old Bible
Has Metaphors to Relate
This in Verses That
Do Speak
to Seeing Without Eyes
And Hearing Without Ears
And This is the Beauty of Poetry
As Poetry Attempts to Bring Back
The Ineffable to Those Who Have Not Yet
Developed The Ability to 'See And Hear And
Speak' This way Yet And True in Many of the Verses
of the Bible the Ghost Authors And It Doesn't Matter Who they
Are Bring This Reality Back to the Rest of the Village At Least In Part;
Like The 60's And the Rock And Rollers Who Went on Psychedelic Drug Trips
And Brought That Back in their Deep Poetic Lyrics And Music too Expressing
Deeper Parts of Human
Potential That
Drugs
Assisted
Them to See And
Hear And Speak More
Than through Just Organs
of Eyes And Ears and Speech..
As It's True Musical Instruments Extend
Our Natural Abilities to Express Emotions With
Our Vocal Chords And It's True Emotions Heal Human
Beings by the Beneficial Neurohormones And Neurochemicals
That Flow All Over our Flesh and Blood Being Now; Is THAT all Our
Flesh and Blood Being, i will Surely Say No With 100 Percent Surety in Energy of Faith in LoVE
'FoRCE NoW' as i regularly experience Miracles This Way Each And Every Day And Have
Found my own Ways to Enhance These Other Ineffable Human Potentials Beyond
All Distance, Space, Time, and Matter That Surely Relates to Newer Theories of
Quantum Mechanics too Yet Still The Same Is True Since i Intuited Reality as
A Non-Verbal Autistic Child; i Am The Forest, The Tree, And The Leaf; i Feed
The Tree As Leaf; i Fall To Soils And Feed the Soul of the Rest of the Forest
Green Basically The Never Ending Circle of Existence Now And i Spiral
Dance Sing Like the Milky Way
Around Darkness
Of Black
Holes too
For as Some Theories
In Quantum Mechanics Suggest
As Balance Comes in Spin And Torsion
Of Stars Spiraling Into Black Holes New
Universes Are Birthed And Eternity is Eternally Now;
So How Did i Realize This At Age 3 Before i Could Speak
i Am
i
Just Am
All of This That Is too
i for one See Everyone Else
All of Existence Naturally Of Course
The Same Way Differently; If i Was Distracted By
Speaking At That Age Would i HaVE iNTuiTeD
That Then; i'll Never Know, Yet i Did then And Eternally Do Now Same
Differently Now True
i Had the Benefit
Of No Black And
White TV Until Age 7
And Not Even A Radio;
Just me Down Town in my
Grandmother's 100 Year Old
Shot-Gun Home on the River Bank;
Just me Standing There Looking Into Eternity
Over The River into And as The Forest And River too...
Sadly,
Others
Separate
Themselves
From the Greater
Environment That i See
As God Beyond All Words
Seeing And Hearing too
And Yes CuLTuRE
Took That
Away
too Yet
Releasing Freeing
Myself Naked Away From
The Clothes As Cog of that
Machine, Reborn Again the Child
At Three i Am Simply Nature of God
Real Whole Enough Complete Eternally Now;
SMiLes Cubedemon Happy 'Environment Day' to You On this June 5th, 2021 Day;
What i've Come to Learn Is, Write my Own Story, Don't Let Anyone Else Do it for me,
This Way, i Get to Change the DarK into LiGHT And Don't Get Blinded by Lights Either my FRiEnD;
Perhaps this
Deserves
A Song
by "The Weeknd"...
Other than that i Learned
More About Humanity From
Folks With Lower than 70 IQ;
Including My Cats of Course too
In Terms of So-Called Human Standard IQ...
And Literally Too As At the Military Base i Worked at
There Was An African American Janitor Named Arthur
And A Dish Washer Named Tina Both Who Smiled All the
Time Now Then For No Reason Doing the So-Called Mundane of their Jobs
As True Their Pleasure Came From Sharing Smiles With Everyone they met
During A Particularly Stressful Period Working Toe to Toe with the Captain of the
Base, a Female Captain Who Was Not So Nice A Bit More Formidable Than Disney's 'Cruella' hehe...
The XO of the Base Said
i Just Can't
Understand
It Arthur is Always
So God D Happy;
It's Not that
Complicated. Share
A Smile And Don't Think About it hehe...
And Of Course i Was Far Beyond The Ability
to Still Do That then for Just No Worries Other Distracting me...
i Finally Lost the Distractions And Become Wings of a Bird Just Focused on Flight...
No Longer
Blinded
By So Many Lights;
True it Was A Very
'Bloody Ordeal' Quite A Ride to Hell and Back...
Yet Finally i Returned Again, The Child At Three;
The River The Forest Whole Truly Alive to SMiLE
A Living Tree A Leaf in the Breeze The Wind... Yes LoVE SMiLinG NoW..

_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Last edited by aghogday on 05 Jun 2021, 8:17 am, edited 3 times in total.
AngelRho says that you can't have anything be and not be in the same instance. But, what if the assumption we're working on is that there is such thing as an instance and that instance is always so. What if all instances are but temporary.
Let's look at an example and let's say we have a variable that can have the values True or False. But,does this value have to be 100% true all the time or 100% false all the time.
Let's say we have the variable we will call var.
var can have either true or false. But, this presumes that it is always 100% true or 100% false. What if this variable var can be 80% true and 20% false? Or, 1% true or 99% false? Or 50% true or 50% false? Instead of being an on or off switch it becomes more of a dial like a light dimmer.
Now let's take this variable var and we rotate the dial meaning we change the values. As we increase it to be 100% true it becomes less false and vice versa.
Now, what if one could rotate this dial faster? Maybe 2 miles an hour? 10 miles? 1000 miles an hour? 10,000 miles an hour? What if it was possible to rotate to the speed of light and beyond.
And, what if we could rotate at such faster and faster speeds that we can't even tell the position of the dial and the velocity of the rotation of this dial back and forth goes faster and faster to infinity. In such a way the position could be any and all positions.
So, maybe with infinite velocity and speed maybe it could be possible to have certain things be and not be getting closer and closer to both being true at the same time as we reach infinity.
Ummm...I think you lost me there. Things being true/false simultaneously AND in the same sense violate non-contradiction. It is possible for something to simultaneously true AND false in a different sense, or things can both be true/false in the same sense but at different times.
Schroedinger’s cat is generally accepted from what I understand is a metaphorical application of non-contradiction since either the cat is alive or dead. The state of particles when not one state or the opposite is assumed to be simultaneously both AND neither state. The Man In The High Castle fictional series has an interesting take on this. The NAZIs build a quantum machine that allows travel between their world and an “alt-world.” So-called “travelers” have the ability to move between worlds without the machine, but only if the traveler doesn’t already exist in the alt-world. If you die in this world, alt-you can travel to this world. But you cannot simultaneously coexist with your alt in the same world.
I don’t give much credence to QM. The behavior of particles is interesting, but I don’t have to worry about my couch disappearing with me into another universe once I sit on it. I am convinced, however, that driers are portals through the multiverse and someone out there is wondering where the heck all these socks are coming from.
AngelRho, I'm apologize for attacking you. And, I love QM and Schroedinger’s cat. I find it fascinating.
I wonder though. This discussion has intrigued me. I want to see if it is logically possible to prove you right and myself wrong.
I think I may know the underlying assumption that I and a lot of people may have that is faulty. I believe you define a contradiction as being something that is and not is in the same instance.
But, let's go into the concept of instance and take a step back. What an instance is not a solid either or but more permeable but solid enough for us to perceive it as that instance and we as humans were designed this way and existence was designed this way. I'm not sure how to explain it properly. Let's say you have a plastic bag. It looks like a plastic bag, feels like a plastic bag, and behaves and acts like a plastic bag. People would see it and use it as a normal plastic bag. But what if existence or our aspect of existence was designed for this bag to be mostly a bag that would be used as a plastic bag but what the instance we perceive is but a projection for us and maybe there are other instances that this plastic bag is something else altogether.
So, how can God create something which is both is and both isn't.
Maybe imagine this.
https://www.amazon.com/Classic-Viewmast ... B0030BQY6A