- - Religion II
( http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136470)
VigorsTheGrey |
03-06-2017 12:46 PM |
Anacalypsis by Higgins
|
LottaKash |
03-06-2017 12:48 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey
(Post 2131695)
A non-material person, I presume, replete with a non-material beating heart (the heart of Jesus) I suppose...and other such absurdities...
|
Yikes Vigors, you seem to be locked into this tiny little box..
Heck, even the scientists who may reject any sort of deity, will on the other hand, allude to "dimensions or realms" that are well beyond man's ancient or current ability to comprehend, as we yet know it...
Perhaps if you replaced "spiritually" with "dimensional" it might go a long way in reassessing some of the conclusions of some of the things that you have dismissed or rejected, as simply not possible...And, perhaps that "dimensionality" may have been expressed in a book somewhere...
|
boxcar |
03-06-2017 01:34 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey
(Post 2131695)
A non-material person, I presume, replete with a non-material beating heart (the heart of Jesus) I suppose...and other such absurdities...
|
But still a person! God is not an "it" such as what Light's pantheism teaches. God is a person -- with a mind, will and affections -- NOT like man's but nonetheless still mind, will and affections.
|
thaskalos |
03-06-2017 01:43 PM |
IMO...only a fool would describe God as a "person", based on something that he has read in a book. Especially when that book clearly states that "no man has looked at God, and lived".
IMO...whatever we say to describe God can, at best, be only PARTIALLY right.
|
boxcar |
03-06-2017 01:55 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
(Post 2131719)
IMO...only a fool would describe God as a "person", based on something that he has read in a book. Especially when that book clearly states that "no man has looked at God, and lived".
IMO...whatever we say to describe God can, at best, be only PARTIALLY right.
|
Only a fool would deny that Jesus was God come in the flesh. What was Jesus: An it?
|
thaskalos |
03-06-2017 01:59 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
(Post 2131724)
Only a fool would deny that Jesus was God come in the flesh. What was Jesus: An it?
|
Even Jesus HIMSELF denied that he was "God in the flesh". "Why do you call me GOOD? Only GOD is good!"...he exclaimed to someone who praised him.
|
VigorsTheGrey |
03-06-2017 02:56 PM |
The sacred heart of jesus...
|
VigorsTheGrey |
03-06-2017 03:13 PM |
|
PaceAdvantage |
03-06-2017 03:18 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey
(Post 2131776)
|
Why the **** do you continue to mock people of faith?
Who the hell are you to be such an asshole? Where exactly do you get off?
Mocking boxcar is one thing...but to throw out these kinds of generalizations and insults to Christians and Jews (primarily...still haven't seen you mock Islam or Mohammed yet) is going over the line.
You need to step back and start acting more adult...accept that there are billions of people in this world with billions of different beliefs and let it end there.
|
VigorsTheGrey |
03-06-2017 04:06 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
(Post 2131782)
Why the **** do you continue to mock people of faith?
Who the hell are you to be such an asshole? Where exactly do you get off?
Mocking boxcar is one thing...but to throw out these kinds of generalizations and insults to Christians and Jews (primarily...still haven't seen you mock Islam or Mohammed yet) is going over the line.
You need to step back and start acting more adult...accept that there are billions of people in this world with billions of different beliefs and let it end there.
|
Me, little ol' me and my pen...? A threat to over 2000 yrs of Christianity and Judaism....I think not....my words cannot possibly alter the faith of the faithful....in fact, it makes them stronger, and affords them the opportunity to reply in their efforts to convert me....I have only presented a picture of what they say they believe in....they believe in the sacred heart of Jesus...they believe that Jesus created the universe, that Jesus wasa Jew who believed (and inspired theTorah)...why is it mockery to present in graphic terms what they believe....? I must have touch a nerve...I could speak also of the absurdities of Islam as well if you prefer...this is after all a thread concerning religion...and with billions of the faithful, maybe a dissenting view might be tolerated....posters can respond for themselves,
Or are you one of those knights that must protect the holy from the profane...my point is that Christianity and Judaism are both pagen through and through, in fact, all human religions are pagen...to maintain otherwise is the classic sign of a religious bigot....it is a false and vicious distinction to draw...and if the monotheists cannot see this...well, go figure...
|
boxcar |
03-06-2017 05:28 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
(Post 2131726)
Even Jesus HIMSELF denied that he was "God in the flesh". "Why do you call me GOOD? Only GOD is good!"...he exclaimed to someone who praised him.
|
No, he didn't! This passage has been discussed numerous times. All Jesus was doing was questioning this self-righteous, covetous rich man's presumption to any man's inherent goodness. This man thought Jesus was merely a "good" man -- a "good" teacher. He had no idea that he was speaking to the Jewish Messiah. Also, Jesus would have contradicted himself several times because in other places he made claim to his deity.
|
thaskalos |
03-06-2017 05:51 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
(Post 2131867)
No, he didn't! This passage has been discussed numerous times. All Jesus was doing was questioning this self-righteous, covetous rich man's presumption to any man's inherent goodness. This man thought Jesus was merely a "good" man -- a "good" teacher. He had no idea that he was speaking to the Jewish Messiah. Also, Jesus would have contradicted himself several times because in other places he made claim to his deity.
|
The truth, of course, is that you have no IDEA what Jesus was doing...regardless of how much you profess that you are attuned to his thinking process. And I defy you to present a single quote in which Jesus claims what you said earlier. That he was "God in the flesh".
|
boxcar |
03-06-2017 07:14 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
(Post 2131877)
The truth, of course, is that you have no IDEA what Jesus was doing...regardless of how much you profess that you are attuned to his thinking process. And I defy you to present a single quote in which Jesus claims what you said earlier. That he was "God in the flesh".
|
Don't get your panties in the wad. I never said Jesus used the formula you stated above.
Secondly, yes, I have a very good idea of what Jesus was doing since the bible teaches the doctrine of Total Depravity, and Jesus himself said that men are evil.
|
dnlgfnk |
03-06-2017 09:36 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
(Post 2131677)
I wonder if Vigors believes in gravity?
|
At least when Actor avoids foundational philosophical questions that may challenge his materialism (e.g., no physical process is determinate; some of our thoughts are determinate; how can thought be a wholly physical process?), he doesn't claim to be interested in philosophy.
|
dnlgfnk |
03-06-2017 10:39 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey
(Post 2131572)
In order for me to believe or disbelieve, one MUST first provide a definition of WHAT GOD IS...No one can do this, because it is impossible to render a description of an immateriality....
One might say that god is "spirit"...Now what exactly is "spirit"..?
"Spirit" might as well be "Bncwebecsdugb" because there is no one to one correspondence here at all, to anything in the real world...it does not make sense to be "a" (meaning "not) "Bncwebecsdugb"....
One cannot be an "a-"Bncwebecsdugb"....an "abncwebecsdugb"....it is just nonsense....
Please provide a testable and provable definition of god, and you might make a believer or disbeliever of me....
|
Let's consider your "Bncwebecsdugb"...
The materialist W.V. Quine proposed an "indeterminacy of translation"...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indete...of_translation
...whereby, for any collection of physical facts, no matter how large, there is nothing about them that entails one specific meaning rather than another. Your improvised word, or any other word, carries no specific, universal meaning in the ink, the type, the shape of the symbols, etc. Such is true of the physical world at large, according to no less than materialist Daniel Dennett, et.al...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indete..._consciousness
...Yet we do exhibit determinate thought in formal thinking... adding, arguing via valid inferences, focusing on my particular argument here in order to respond, etc.
Therefore, how can formal thinking be wholly a physical process?
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:49 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
|
|