My Review of God

[X11Spectator 4520]

I believe I did??

[Anonymous 1]

Jackinov wrote:

Ok well then. I’m going to go on and continue with my point.

I shortened my quoting you to avoid making this too long.

You make the claim that an absence of the existence of God will directionally correlate to morality not existing. Therefore, more formally, your claim is that event A precedes event B where event A is the existence of God and event B is the existence of morality.

In logic form your statement looks like this: A —> B.

You go further to define morality as being objective. Here is where I have to express my dissent. What objective definition of morality are you using? Is it your own? if that were the case then it is not an objective definition, but instead it is a subjective definition because it belongs to you.

The concept of morality is one that is subjective in nature. Look back in time and consider how many philosophers have written on the topic of morality. Everybody has different interpretations of what is right and what is wrong.

My response to such things is this: “Why does one need religion to have morality? Are they mutually exclusive? And, if one is not religious does that mean they are not moral? What does it mean if a person needs religious to be moral?” I believe that morality and religion are independent but may have overlaps in philosophy. One doesn’t need religion to be moral. That’s the predicament in which theists find themselves.

For me, I don’t claim to fully understand the evolutionary machinations behind any organism. But, that is a far stretch from claiming that, in lieu of that, there is a bearded man in the sky that created everything about 10,000 years ago.

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

X11 wrote:

I believe I did??

Not at all- you actually keep proving my point. You say:

X11 wrote:

Morals are culturally dependent and change over time. Early Christians would call most modern Christians highly immoral.

If morals were objective then they are arbitrary, god does not display morals.

He/it displays the most immoral acts conceivable. You ignore almost everything in the bible to come up with your subjective morality like I do.

So in that case, morals are indeed subjective. But THEN you say

X11 wrote:

Scary thing is it seems the only thing stopping some theists from raping and killing everything in sight is fear of p~~~ing god off, morality indeed.

As if it would be immoral objectively- like you just shouldn’t do it, just cause. That’s goes directly against your prior statement.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[AutoliteParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

One doesn’t need religion to be moral. That’s the predicament in which theists find themselves.

I don’t understand why Theists keep dredging up the ‘morality’ issue. There’s a perfectly rational and secular explanation. Check out the last five minutes of “The God Delusion”…

[X11Spectator 4520]

Is it moral to burn a witch or kill your own son because god says so.

Slavery, incest, genocide, eating shrimp, wearing mixed cloth, coveting thy neighbours ass, not believing in something that there is insufficient evidence for, how to beat slaves proper, abusing unruly children, sending bears to kill kids for mocking a bald man, having any blemishes/growths on your skin, working on Sunday……theists have a mountain of bulls~~~ to get thru.

[X11Spectator 4520]

Someone explain this bible morality, what the actual f~~~??

Bible is not a good place to get your morals.

No one whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off shall be admitted to the assembly of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:1 NRSV
Whosoever … hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookback, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken … He shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries. Leviticus 21:17-23 KJV

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

Anonymous wrote:

My response to such things is this: “Why does one need religion to have morality? Are they mutually exclusive? And, if one is not religious does that mean they are not moral? What does it mean if a person needs religious to be moral?” I believe that morality and religion are independent but may have overlaps in philosophy. One doesn’t need religion to be moral.

Very good points. And no, one does NOT need religion to act in a morally correct fashion. The thing about that, however, is which came first and why? Did morals come because of religion, or did religion come because of morals?

Morality OR religion existing in and in of itself makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:

For me, I don’t claim to fully understand the evolutionary machinations behind any organism. But, that is a far stretch from claiming that, in lieu of that, there is a bearded man in the sky that created everything about 10,000 years ago.

Here is something to think about. Scientists are just beginning to scratch the SURFACE of reality, secrets of the universe, the concept of time, quantum mechanics, etc. The big bang is not as universally believed as the starting point of the world as it once was. Scientists are more divided about it. There are multiple theories developing, some of which even say the universe, or some form of it always existed.

My point here is that what people think of as “God” has been misclassified, most often as stereotypically “a bearded man in the sky”.

However, provided he does exist, he would have to exist outside of the space-time continuum, in order to create it, and possess INFINITE knowledge. There would be no actual way to quantify this, and would have to be simplified down in a way that, up till now, would seem ridiculous.

Just my two cents.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[X11Spectator 4520]

You have yet to demonstrate god is in fact moral.

I have given many examples where everyone would agree he is not. I could give thousands more.

Your claim is morality comes from god demonstrate that please and then demonstrate such god exists.

Your latest post pushes god outside of time and space, basically you have conseded that god exists nowhere and never has. That’s what outside time and space means.

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

Autolite wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

One doesn’t need religion to be moral. That’s the predicament in which theists find themselves.

I don’t understand why Theists keep dredging up the ‘morality’ issue. There’s a perfectly rational and secular explanation. Check out the last five minutes of “The God Delusion”…

<iframe width=”500″ height=”281″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/PGOl9IDA3zk?feature=oembed” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>

That’s STILL part of my question however. I watched it and the same issue is prevalent. It’s wrong simply because a buncha people say it is? Ok sure I get it, we don’t want to live in a society where rape and murder is prevalent due to survival yadadadada- that STILL doesn’t actually mean it’s “wrong”, and if you subjectively want to do it well then…

Same thing my first question addresses more eloquently.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

X11 wrote:

You have yet to demonstrate god is in fact moral.

I have given many examples where everyone would agree he is not. I could give thousands more.

Your claim is morality comes from god demonstrate that please and then demonstrate such god exists.

Your latest post pushes god outside of time and space, basically you have conseded that god exists nowhere and never has. That’s what outside time and space means.

You’re answering like you assume I’m a theist. You have yet to debunk my question. I have personally made no claims. I realize it looks like I’m playing devils advocate, and in a way, I am.

I’ve only asked that one question, so this time, pretend that the Bible does not exist and God has never been heard of.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[MACHOParticipant]

Jackinov wrote:

However, provided he does exist, he would have to exist outside of the space-time continuum, in order to create it, and possess INFINITE knowledge. There would be no actual way to quantify this, and would have to be simplified down in a way that, up till now, would seem ridiculous

I agree with this, and furthermore with such a being with infinite knowledge/powers we humans with our limited intellect would be like ants trying to understand mankind! I believe ants will never be able to figure us out neither will humans figure out an all mighty creator! Futile vain efforts.

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[Anonymous 1]

Forgive me Jackinov for not quoting you properly, but I’m still getting used to the ins and outs of the forum formatting.

I wanted to respond to what you said about the nature of God.

If God exists outside time and space, he is atemporal and cannot affect anything. If he exists within time and space, then he is temporal and has the ability to affect events that occur in our universe. The only problem with the latter is that he can also be affected if he is temporal.

It’s either one or the other. It’s either one or the other. If God is atemporal, he cannot affect events. If he is temporal, he can affect events but can also be affected. If that’s the case he isn’t omnipotent. In that instance, God stops being God by definition.

[X11Spectator 4520]

Please demonstrate this infinite knowledge cuck worthy statement is true macho.

Jac, does this help. I think we get our morals initially from our parents/culture. They change with time and place. They started because they make societies function better. Different people have different morals, they all think they are good.

Good and bad are subjective.

We develop a consensus as a society and apply punishment, laws change with time, morals change with time and are constantly being challenged and disputed.

We agree on basic things because we share the same culture, others believe different. There are varying degrees of overlap at different times.

Its no mystery and doesn’t require an invisible magic being outside of time and space.

Help??

[MACHOParticipant]

MACHO wrote:

I believe ants will never be able to figure us out neither will humans figure out an all mighty creator! Futile vain efforts

I’m just a mere mortal ant how could I possibly try to explain the infinity of an endless Universe! or try to imagine what is an immortal entity creator! I rest my case! you either believe or you don’t!

You must own a better Crystal ball than I

[Anonymous 1]

X11 wrote:

Please demonstrate this infinite knowledge cuck worthy statement is true macho.

Jac, does this help. I think we get our morals initially from our parents/culture. They change with time and place. They started because they make societies function better. Different people have different morals, they all think they are good.

Good and bad are subjective.

We develop a consensus as a society and apply punishment, laws change with time, morals change with time and are constantly being challenged and disputed.

We agree on basic things because we share the same culture, others believe different. There are varying degrees of overlap at different times.

Its no mystery and doesn’t require an invisible magic being outside of time and space.

Help??

Essentially, I agree. Morality is subjective by nature. For instance, certain cultures believe it is immoral to put the elderly into convalescent homes. In America however, we may not see it the same way. Some other cultures practice female circumcision while other cultures consider the practice to be brutish.

Morality changes with time, culture, and age, just to mention a few. Morality is not objective; indeed if one wanted to take faith the the Platonic forms one can, but that doesn’t mean there is a chair in some spiritual dimension with no other characteristics besides its “chairness.”

[X11Spectator 4520]

A lot of s~~~ in Sweden now I think is bad by my own standards, the Swedish prolly think they have better morals than me, objective I think not.

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

Anonymous wrote:

I wanted to respond to what you said about the nature of God.

If God exists outside time and space, he is atemporal and cannot affect anything. If he exists within time and space, then he is temporal and has the ability to affect events that occur in our universe. The only problem with the latter is that he can also be affected if he is temporal.

It’s either one or the other. It’s either one or the other. If God is atemporal, he cannot affect events. If he is temporal, he can affect events but can also be affected. If that’s the case he isn’t omnipotent. In that instance, God stops being God by definition.

I’m not sure I get your logic about him not being able to affect what happens in a space-time continuum if he is outside of it. That would actually mean, if he has the power to create a space-time in the first place, he would definitely have the ability to transverse in and out of it, assuming he was out of it to begin with. We would be talking about something that created the laws of physics as we know it- so physics and what should and should not be possible would not apply to him.

But that is what I mean about not being able to comprehend what he is exactly, or how he works, being that we ourselves know very little about the fabric of reality.

But we are working to figure that out, little by little. The more we find, the more we discover we don’t know.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[Anonymous 1]

Jackinov wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

I wanted to respond to what you said about the nature of God.

If God exists outside time and space, he is atemporal and cannot affect anything. If he exists within time and space, then he is temporal and has the ability to affect events that occur in our universe. The only problem with the latter is that he can also be affected if he is temporal.

It’s either one or the other. It’s either one or the other. If God is atemporal, he cannot affect events. If he is temporal, he can affect events but can also be affected. If that’s the case he isn’t omnipotent. In that instance, God stops being God by definition.

I’m not sure I get your logic about him not being able to affect what happens in a space-time continuum if he is outside of it. That would actually mean, if he has the power to create a space-time in the first place, he would definitely have the ability to transverse in and out of it, assuming he was out of it to begin with. We would be talking about something that created the laws of physics as we know it- so physics and what should and should not be possible would not apply to him.

But that what I mean about not being able to comprehend what he is exactly, or how he works, being that we ourselves know very little about the fabric of reality.

But we are working to figure that out, little by little. The more we find, the more we discover we don’t know.

It comes down to atemporal time versus temporal time. An atemporal god is outside of time and cannot affect time. Every event within that universe has already occurred and is occurring at once. It’s a lot like a photograph. Everything has already happened in the photo, you can’t go back and put a hat on George just to change the way he looks. He was already there in the picture when it was taken without a hat.

[anonymousyamParticipant 4605]

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

Who and what God is…. I am not sure. These are just my humble observations. Do with them as you will. What happens after death is obviously the most important question in life.

God is at most a metaphor in my personal beliefs. God is not an existent being but a metaphor for nature.

Theism and Deism is bulls~~~ and when it comes to what happens after death i do not know. My belief is that my existence will end and that my spirit (my personality) will be imparted on someone in my family in the future (like my future great nephew, or my child, or my grandchild or someone who some form of blood relation to myself) but i will be dead and buried (i am not reincarnating into one of them).

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

Remember how much things hurt as a child? You were knew to pain. The tiniest little prick on your finger sent the tears rolling

I have busted my head open before and not have shed a single tear and that was when i was 6 years old a decade ago.

Now to end this my claims on religions are simple it is bulls~~~ till it proven not to be bulls~~~ by evidence. Christianity is bulls~~~, Islam is bulls~~~, Pagan European relgions are bulls~~~ etc.

There bulls~~~ till they can prove they are not bulls~~~ via evidence.

Just an east coast asshole who likes to curse, If you get offended by words like fuck, cunt, shit, piss, bitch or any racial slurs then you just scroll down.

[JackinovParticipant 5229]

Anonymous wrote:

It comes down to atemporal time versus temporal time. An atemporal god is outside of time and cannot affect time. Every event within that universe has already occurred and is occurring at once. It’s a lot like a photograph. Everything has already happened in the photo, you can’t go back and put a hat on George just to change the way he looks. He was already there in the picture when it was taken without a hat.

You know of the multi-dimension theory?

At a certain point time is linear, meaning you could, in theory, walk back and forth along it. You go up a dimension above that, and you see all versions of timelines of that universe. Up another level, and you see all timelines.

A being that could create this would not be tied to any form of physics.Physics that we BARELY understand as it is.

are you a chia pet in man drag

[Author]

Posts