You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
God
- Thread starter BlueMoonie
- Start date
mammutly said:As regards defining God:
The unifying force. The connectedness of everything. The thing that is left when all noise and questions stop - an appreciation/realisation of oneness and completeness that the lattice of definition cannot really hold. To define God is to reduce God. Define perfect according to it's constituent parts? I think not EJ. Your question is rooted in what philosophers might term a category mistake.
But anyway, I've had a stab at it for you.
Can you try it again, but this time without the hyperbole?
If it helps, this is my personal definition when I use the word God:
God - the world's first programmer. The designer of the rules which govern the laws of physics, the entity which started the moment of creation and has done exactly nothing since that point. No appearing on toast, no starting off mankind, no talking to people or becoming Jesus, none of that at all. He hears no prayers. Just the designer of the Universe. Man happens to have grown out of this Universe, which was in no way designed, formulated or shaped to support it. Various species across the Universe all exist with absolutely no thanks to God; they grew out of a series of flukes.
I don't particularly believe that above, but that is what I meant when I was speaking of God before.
allan harper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 14,505
1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.<br /><br />-- Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:39 pm --<br /><br />1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.
ElanJo
Well-Known Member
mammutly said:As regards defining God:
The unifying force. The connectedness of everything. The thing that is left when all noise and questions stop - an appreciation/realisation of oneness and completeness that the lattice of definition cannot really hold. To define God is to reduce God. Define perfect according to it's constituent parts? I think not EJ. Your question is rooted in what philosophers might term a category mistake.
But anyway, I've had a stab at it for you.
I'm genuinely interested in this, so bear with me whilst I try to understand exactly what you mean.
The unifying force. The connectedness of everything. The thing that is left when all noise and questions stop - an appreciation/realisation of oneness and completeness....
So the first part is what "God" is and the second part are the emotions you feel when thinking about this?
To define God is to reduce God.
Aren't you kind of defining God when you say that?
Define perfect according to it's constituent parts? I think not EJ. Your question is rooted in what philosophers might term a category mistake.
Can you elaborate on this?
BulgarianPride
Well-Known Member
allan harper said:1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.
-- Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:39 pm --
1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.
12+12=102, that is a fact. :)
allan harper said:1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.
I hate this. You may think that you are being philosophical, and all deep or something, but it's a crap argument that has being made a thousand times.
1 + 1 = 2 is a fact. The numbers 1 and 2 are symbols we use to relate an idea of a quantity, not unlike N. The fact is, the sum of the two quantities denoted by symbols 1, make the quantity denoted by the symbol 2. That is a fact, not an agreement.
allan harper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 14,505
Damocles said:allan harper said:1 + 1 = 2 is not fact its an agreement.
I hate this. You may think that you are being philosophical, and all deep or something, but it's a crap argument that has being made a thousand times.
1 + 1 = 2 is a fact. The numbers 1 and 2 are symbols we use to relate an idea of a quantity, not unlike N. The fact is, the sum of the two quantities denoted by symbols 1, make the quantity denoted by the symbol 2. That is a fact, not an agreement.
Na mate its called fishing, i seen it posted on another forum and didnt know what they was on about. so waited for you to be online and just laid the bait, cheers.
BulgarianPride
Well-Known Member
But then he is responsible for gravity... He designed the rules / formulas that everything in this universe has to obey, and if we never find the Unified field theory then wouldn't that be direct proof of god? He couldn't himself make it as one, so he creates two systems. One of the very large, one of the very small with different types of governing equations.Damocles said:mammutly said:As regards defining God:
The unifying force. The connectedness of everything. The thing that is left when all noise and questions stop - an appreciation/realisation of oneness and completeness that the lattice of definition cannot really hold. To define God is to reduce God. Define perfect according to it's constituent parts? I think not EJ. Your question is rooted in what philosophers might term a category mistake.
But anyway, I've had a stab at it for you.
Can you try it again, but this time without the hyperbole?
If it helps, this is my personal definition when I use the word God:
God - the world's first programmer. The designer of the rules which govern the laws of physics, the entity which started the moment of creation and has done exactly nothing since that point. No appearing on toast, no starting off mankind, no talking to people or becoming Jesus, none of that at all. He hears no prayers. Just the designer of the Universe. Man happens to have grown out of this Universe, which was in no way designed, formulated or shaped to support it. Various species across the Universe all exist with absolutely no thanks to God; they grew out of a series of flukes.
I don't particularly believe that above, but that is what I meant when I was speaking of God before.
But if everything is unified then that would also be proof of god?
And if god did create this universe who then created him. This is all one big circle. there will always be questions that is why nobody can ever say god exists or does not. That why you believe or you don't.
mammutly
Well-Known Member
lloydie said:mammutly said:As regards defining God:
The unifying force. The connectedness of everything. The thing that is left when all noise and questions stop - an appreciation/realisation of oneness and completeness that the lattice of definition cannot really hold. To define God is to reduce God. Define perfect according to it's constituent parts? I think not EJ. Your question is rooted in what philosophers might term a category mistake.
But anyway, I've had a stab at it for you.
So if there is a unifying theory found, then that is god?
Your suggestion that you're not allowed to define god is disturbing.
I ddn't mention anything about 'allowed' or 'not allowed'. Feel free to define to your heart's content.
ElanJo
Well-Known Member
BulgarianPride said:But then he is responsible for gravity... He designed the rules / formulas that everything in this universe has to obey, and if we never find the Unified field theory then wouldn't that be direct proof of god? He couldn't himself make it as one, so he creates two systems. One of the very large, one of the very small with different types of governing equations.Damocles said:Can you try it again, but this time without the hyperbole?
If it helps, this is my personal definition when I use the word God:
God - the world's first programmer. The designer of the rules which govern the laws of physics, the entity which started the moment of creation and has done exactly nothing since that point. No appearing on toast, no starting off mankind, no talking to people or becoming Jesus, none of that at all. He hears no prayers. Just the designer of the Universe. Man happens to have grown out of this Universe, which was in no way designed, formulated or shaped to support it. Various species across the Universe all exist with absolutely no thanks to God; they grew out of a series of flukes.
I don't particularly believe that above, but that is what I meant when I was speaking of God before.
But if everything is unified then that would also be proof of god?
And if god did create this universe who then created him. This is all one big circle. there will always be questions that is why nobody can ever say god exists or does not. That why you believe or you don't.
Your whole belief is an argument from ignorance.