Page 7 of 7

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:08 am
by Prismatic567
iambiguous wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:A classic substanceless response from someone who is only really capable of arguing through a series of numbingly abstract "general descriptions". General descriptions of...of what exactly?

Certainly not of the conflicting goods embedded in the abortion wars.

Cue the next Problem Statement.

[I apologize for the "tone" of this post. In part it revolves around my propensity for polemics, and in part it reflects my increasing reluctance to take you seriously.

We appear to be embedded in two very, very different ways of construing the world around us. The is/ought world in particular.]
Note Philosophers throughout the ages has deliberated on there can be no 'ought' from 'is'.
There are also philosophers who has introduced views that has resolved these two contrasting dichotomy.

Note one among many is the Yin-Yang complementarity to interact the two opposites spirally into productive and progressive drives and waves that are positive to the individual and humanity.
Neil Bohr the father of quantum physics got his breakthrough from the philosophy of Yin-Yang and thus the Tao symbol in his Coat of Arms.

Image
http://www.numericana.com/arms/bohr.htm

There are many other philosophers [notably Kant] who expounded the complementarity of 'is" and "ought" in interactive and 'entanglement' mode.

Your problem is you* prefer to be an ostrich to revel in your agony [mental] rather than take the trouble to lighten your philosophical and psychological burden.
* I have encountered many like you [friends, relatives, posters, others] and it is unfortunate their brains are hardwired to such a state.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:56 pm
by Greatest I am
iambiguous wrote:[

Right. Just as the critical problem with No God is no immortality, no salvation and no divine justice. Does your "Framework and System strategy" have a solution for that too?
.]


Indeed. The better secular law that you would not give up for your God's laws.

Do you think you can get good morality from a genocidal God who kills and never does the moral thing of curing instead?

I think you are looking at satanic morals and think them good, just as you liik a a genocidal Yahweh and think that prick to be good.

Regards
DL

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:00 am
by Serendipper
surreptitious75 wrote:
What natural phenomenon exists that is absolutely perfect [ God is not an acceptable answer ]

What natural phenomenon exists that is not absolutely perfect? And what is imperfect about it?

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:07 am
by Prismatic567
Serendipper wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote:
What natural phenomenon exists that is absolutely perfect [ God is not an acceptable answer ]

What natural phenomenon exists that is not absolutely perfect? And what is imperfect about it?
The critical element of the question is 'absolutely perfect.'
Absolutely perfect meant a perfection that is 'totally unconditional'.

E.g. of perfection that is conditional;
A perfect score of 300 points in a 10-pins-bowling game is perfect only in accordance [as conditioned] to the rules of the Ten-Pin Association.
A perfect score of 100/100 in an objective test is conditioned to the criteria set.
The above examples are thus not totally unconditional.
As I have claimed everything empirical and empirically possible is conditioned by something.

God is the only thing that is claimed to be totally unconditional, i.e. it cannot be conditioned by anything but exists by itself. Thus God's perfection cannot be conditioned by anything else, it is absolutely unconditional, thus of absolute perfection.

I gave the reason why God MUST be absolutely perfect by default so as to avoid having to eat the shit of another greater God.

This is what has been going on within Christianity.
The Islamic God emerging within 610-632AD claimed as a God of absolute perfection condemned the Christian God as a bullshit God.

    Quran 37:152 [Yusuf] "Allah has begotten children"? but they are liars!

For more, note this;
http://www.islamicity.org/quransearch/a ... d=cv&-find

To counter the above St. Anselm -circa 1093 to 1109 came up with the idea of the Ontological God of absolute perfection thus keeping on par with the Islam claim on Allah.
If the Christian God is not an absolutely perfect God, then it will be subjected to the derogatory condemnation by Islam in the Quran, thus condemned to eat the shit of a greater God.

So the Christian God or any God has no choice but has to claim to be an absolutely perfect God and those who are aware of this limitation will change and shift their thoughts [which is so easy] to that of an absolutely perfect God.

Do you have any counter for this or you do not mind believing in a God that is inferior to another?

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:48 am
by Serendipper
Prismatic567 wrote:
Serendipper wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote:
What natural phenomenon exists that is absolutely perfect [ God is not an acceptable answer ]

What natural phenomenon exists that is not absolutely perfect? And what is imperfect about it?
The critical element of the question is 'absolutely perfect.'
Absolutely perfect meant a perfection that is 'totally unconditional'.

E.g. of perfection that is conditional;
A perfect score of 300 points in a 10-pins-bowling game is perfect only in accordance [as conditioned] to the rules of the Ten-Pin Association.
A perfect score of 100/100 in an objective test is conditioned to the criteria set.
The above examples are thus not totally unconditional.
As I have claimed everything empirical and empirically possible is conditioned by something.

You didn't answer the question of what natural phenomenon is not absolutely perfect.

God is the only thing that is claimed to be totally unconditional,

Who cares what people claim? I don't give shit. People claim lots of stupid stuff.

I gave the reason why God MUST be absolutely perfect by default so as to avoid having to eat the shit of another greater God.

That makes no sense because the greater god cannot exist, therefore the lesser god cannot eat its shit.

The Islamic God emerging within 610-632AD claimed as a God of absolute perfection condemned the Christian God as a bullshit God.

So what? Let them claim it. They could claim they shit lollipops too.

If the Christian God is not an absolutely perfect God,

Well, the christian god is not perfect. He flubbed up:

Gen 6:6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

The NIV says:

6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.

Perfect gods do not have regrets.

Do you have any counter for this or you do not mind believing in a God that is inferior to another?

I'm fine with the inferior god. I said "deal" before and you said "nope".

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:19 am
by Prismatic567
Serendipper wrote:What natural phenomenon exists that is not absolutely perfect? And what is imperfect about it?
The critical element of the question is 'absolutely perfect.'
Absolutely perfect meant a perfection that is 'totally unconditional'.

E.g. of perfection that is conditional;
A perfect score of 300 points in a 10-pins-bowling game is perfect only in accordance [as conditioned] to the rules of the Ten-Pin Association.
A perfect score of 100/100 in an objective test is conditioned to the criteria set.
The above examples are thus not totally unconditional.
As I have claimed everything empirical and empirically possible is conditioned by something.

You didn't answer the question of what natural phenomenon is not absolutely perfect.

God is the only thing that is claimed to be totally unconditional,

Who cares what people claim? I don't give shit. People claim lots of stupid stuff.

I gave the reason why God MUST be absolutely perfect by default so as to avoid having to eat the shit of another greater God.

That makes no sense because the greater god cannot exist, therefore the lesser god cannot eat its shit.

The Islamic God emerging within 610-632AD claimed as a God of absolute perfection condemned the Christian God as a bullshit God.

So what? Let them claim it. They could claim they shit lollipops too.

If the Christian God is not an absolutely perfect God,

Well, the christian god is not perfect. He flubbed up:

Gen 6:6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

The NIV says:

6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.

Perfect gods do not have regrets.

Do you have any counter for this or you do not mind believing in a God that is inferior to another?

I'm fine with the inferior god. I said "deal" before and you said "nope".
It is your discretion to accept an inferior God to another's greater God. If that is the case, then your lesser God is vulnerable to have to eat the shit of the greater God.

Point is you are not the majority and in any group there are always perverts.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:13 am
by Serendipper
Prismatic567 wrote:then your lesser God is vulnerable to have to eat the shit of the greater God.

There are no greater gods. You have proven there are no greater gods, yet you still believe greater gods can shit.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:44 am
by Greatest I am
Serendipper wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:then your lesser God is vulnerable to have to eat the shit of the greater God.

There are no greater gods. .


If there are no greater and lesser Gods, who is God talking about with his first commandment?

Place no other God before me.

Regards
DL

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:37 am
by Karpel Tunnel
Greatest I am wrote:
Serendipper wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:then your lesser God is vulnerable to have to eat the shit of the greater God.

There are no greater gods. .


If there are no greater and lesser Gods, who is God talking about with his first commandment?

Place no other God before me.

Regards
DL

Either God was a polytheist himself when he said this or he was suggesting that those other gods were not real, just facets of his Godness or misrepresentations, or poor symbols for some of Godspowers
and/or it was a human doing marketing.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:01 pm
by Greatest I am
Karpel Tunnel wrote:[

If there are no greater and lesser Gods, who is God talking about with his first commandment?

Place no other God before me.

Regards
DL

Either God was a polytheist himself when he said this or he was suggesting that those other gods were not real, just facets of his Godness or misrepresentations, or poor symbols for some of Godspowers
and/or it was a human doing marketing.[/quote]

Your last is likely right.

Someone said, the first religion was created when the first con man met the first sucker.

History has proven that that is likely a true statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7BHvN6rZZA

Regards
DL

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:04 pm
by Karpel Tunnel
Greatest I am wrote:
Your last is likely right.

Someone said, the first religion was created when the first con man met the first sucker.

History has proven that that is likely a true statement.
I truly doubt that. I can go along with the monotheisms to some degree being like this, but shamanic religions come out of natural processes where we (in my sense) notice life and agency or (in the current scientific sense) assume agency when we should not (that is anthropomorphize). There happens in children and adults, I posted links to this in the Brain creates religion thread. For personal reasons atheists and others must make it a negative reason - cowardice, conning, serach for profit) a negative motive. Even if there is no God, there are other more likely explanations. I get and share the rage at organized religions, but it's just a fairy tale that assholes or cowards are the root of this.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:07 pm
by The Eternal Warrior
Greatest I am wrote:
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
If there are no greater and lesser Gods, who is God talking about with his first commandment?

Place no other God before me.

Regards
DL

Either God was a polytheist himself when he said this or he was suggesting that those other gods were not real, just facets of his Godness or misrepresentations, or poor symbols for some of Godspowers
and/or it was a human doing marketing.


Your last is likely right.

Someone said, the first religion was created when the first con man met the first sucker.

History has proven that that is likely a true statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7BHvN6rZZA

Regards
DL



Actually, it took a while for the first con man to arise within religion after finding out that the first sucker was right about their idiocy in being stuck on God's cock.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:52 am
by Greatest I am
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
Your last is likely right.

Someone said, the first religion was created when the first con man met the first sucker.

History has proven that that is likely a true statement.
I truly doubt that. I can go along with the monotheisms to some degree being like this, but shamanic religions come out of natural processes where we (in my sense) notice life and agency or (in the current scientific sense) assume agency when we should not (that is anthropomorphize). There happens in children and adults, I posted links to this in the Brain creates religion thread. For personal reasons atheists and others must make it a negative reason - cowardice, conning, serach for profit) a negative motive. Even if there is no God, there are other more likely explanations. I get and share the rage at organized religions, but it's just a fairy tale that assholes or cowards are the root of this.


Religions are basically tribal units. They appease our need of fellowship.

Add what this link tells you about our natural tendency to have an itch that there is something else going on and think of the first con man who put two and two together and there you are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IqYHiejTVM&t=369s

It might be a tad more complicated and likely is but without knowing the intent of the old shaman and medicine women etc., I doubt that we will ever know. Especially given that the oldest worshiping place I know of is 75,000 years old and it was a serpent worshiping cult or tribe.

Regards
DL

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:38 am
by Greatest I am
The Eternal Warrior wrote:[
Either God was a polytheist himself when he said this or he was suggesting that those other gods were not real, just facets of his Godness or misrepresentations, or poor symbols for some of Godspowers
and/or it was a human doing marketing.


Your last is likely right.

Someone said, the first religion was created when the first con man met the first sucker.

History has proven that that is likely a true statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7BHvN6rZZA

Regards
DL[/quote]


Actually, it took a while for the first con man to arise within religion after finding out that the first sucker was right about their idiocy in being stuck on God's cock.[/quote]

Ride, ride, ride.

Regards
DL

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:11 pm
by Karpel Tunnel
Greatest I am wrote:Religions are basically tribal units. They appease our need of fellowship.
That's certainly one truth amongst many.

Add what this link tells you about our natural tendency to have an itch that there is something else going on and think of the first con man who put two and two together and there you are.
it's not an itch for everyone, just for the masses. For some it is regular experience that something else is going on, in additions to what the masses notice.

It might be a tad more complicated and likely is but without knowing the intent of the old shaman and medicine women etc., I doubt that we will ever know. Especially given that the oldest worshiping place I know of is 75,000 years old and it was a serpent worshiping cult or tribe.
Shamans etc. are still here, there are unbroken traditions. Pantheists and others have always been around despite what the monotheists and technocrats have done to their societies. I take it your mentioning it was a serpent worshiping cult functioned as some kind of dismissal. Whatever works for you.

Re: Will Theists Accept A God That is Inferior to Another's?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 5:43 pm
by Greatest I am
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:Religions are basically tribal units. They appease our need of fellowship.
That's certainly one truth amongst many.

Add what this link tells you about our natural tendency to have an itch that there is something else going on and think of the first con man who put two and two together and there you are.
it's not an itch for everyone, just for the masses. For some it is regular experience that something else is going on, in additions to what the masses notice.

It might be a tad more complicated and likely is but without knowing the intent of the old shaman and medicine women etc., I doubt that we will ever know. Especially given that the oldest worshiping place I know of is 75,000 years old and it was a serpent worshiping cult or tribe.
Shamans etc. are still here, there are unbroken traditions. Pantheists and others have always been around despite what the monotheists and technocrats have done to their societies. I take it your mentioning it was a serpent worshiping cult functioned as some kind of dismissal. Whatever works for you.


Not at all. I was showing a fact and I do not dismiss facts.

In fact, in the early CE, many if not most of the mystery schools had some serpent aspects to them. That is a truth even for countries on other continents.

That may be why Christianity vilified the serpent in Genesis as compared to the original Jewish view that did not vilify the serpent.

Regards
DL