|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:31 pm
Starlock Captain_Shinzo caeruleus5765 Humans were made in Gods image, perhaps he does enjoy a rest? How are we to know otherwise?
God, from what I have heard, can't die. So, he does not need to eat or sleep and therefor does not need rest.Isn't it fairly well regarded in many Abrahamic traditions that the Bible is NOT intended to be interpreted literally? There are many possible meanings to their God resting on the seventh day; a literalistic "because he needed to" probably isn't the deepest and most profound meaning you could get out of it. sweatdrop In relation to this, maybe it is also important to consider that human descriptions of God are not God. Gods are portrayed with human characteristics because that's what we can understand as humans, but this shouldn't necessarily be taken to mean that the divine actually IS literally human-like or whatever. Just because the Christian God is sometimes depicted as some bearded white guy on a sky throne doesn't mean that is literally what he is. Sorry if this doesn't gel in well with the conversation going on; just had to add in the thought.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:40 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:42 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:18 am
Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Perfection, if we want to look at it in such a way, is the efficiency of doing something. I'm sure when God had this plan, he never meant to get this whole devil problem, he never meant for murder and rape, ect..., and he most likely never meant for Jesus dieing.
Well you can bring in the poet all you like, and I like his idea of something succumbed to ruin actually being perfect, but that does not apply for everything. If I wanted to do something and something else happens that I did not like, that is not perfection.
Unless you want to say that a deity intended suffering so it is perfect, but then that is just a sad, sorry idea.
If you missed a period?
Well I would go over the sentence and see if it needs a period. If it does, then it is wrong and that was not exactly perfect. Meaning of literature and rules of literature are two different sections, however. Your idea could be perfect but not your literature.
I don't know god so I don't know if his mind is limitless. He saw light and thought it was good. That's like me finding a dust bunny and thinking he is some kind of savior.
Bottom line, perfection and intended perfection are two different things here. First of all you say you are sure God never meant to get this whole devil problem. How are you sure? You seem to understand the poet analogy but why can't it work for God and his creation? He's the designer yet you analyze this in a way where he must follow your rules. If he's Omniscient omnipotent and benevolent than we cannot assume that your limitations apply to him. Perfection and what you perceive to be perfection are two different things, unless of course you're one of those people who think that what is true and actual is based solely on our own perception. In that case what I perceive to be perfect would be perfect but so would your own perception of it even if they were different.
Wait, are we speaking of my rules or his rules?
As I recall, god is a all loving omniscient omnipotent god.
For his followers and for his loyal companions, he should lend a hand in following his own rules. You know, like not killing which he HAS done. Sure, he is a being but breaking his own rules seems pretty bad. I think that also proves my point, slightly, that he isn't perfect.
You said he was omniscient and omnipotent.
If he is technically everywhere, then why can't he do some good.
Saves some lives or whatever?
and no, not something that could be a coincidence, I mean actually going down to end something. He is, technically, like Canada when war breaks out. He is always not to be found and not involved.
You tell me that the fault of humans is really an artwork, in the end, for God. But really, from all the lives lost and how history has gone, it doesn't seem exactly perfect. You have tried to tell me that I may not know exactly what perfection is due to myself being limited, even though perfection isn't really that much of a complicated idea, yet you haven't really pointed out that your limits could also mean you are not sure if anything could be perfect.
Ever here the phrase "Satisfy someone and disappoint another".
It stands for the concept that each action has a negative force on something. If a fan spins, it provides comforting cool air but depletes electrical energy.Unless, of course, we cause our own problems and God is simply observing. God did not orchestrate our stupidity, we fall into it largely because of greed. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:44 pm
divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Perfection, if we want to look at it in such a way, is the efficiency of doing something. I'm sure when God had this plan, he never meant to get this whole devil problem, he never meant for murder and rape, ect..., and he most likely never meant for Jesus dieing.
Well you can bring in the poet all you like, and I like his idea of something succumbed to ruin actually being perfect, but that does not apply for everything. If I wanted to do something and something else happens that I did not like, that is not perfection.
Unless you want to say that a deity intended suffering so it is perfect, but then that is just a sad, sorry idea.
If you missed a period?
Well I would go over the sentence and see if it needs a period. If it does, then it is wrong and that was not exactly perfect. Meaning of literature and rules of literature are two different sections, however. Your idea could be perfect but not your literature.
I don't know god so I don't know if his mind is limitless. He saw light and thought it was good. That's like me finding a dust bunny and thinking he is some kind of savior.
Bottom line, perfection and intended perfection are two different things here. First of all you say you are sure God never meant to get this whole devil problem. How are you sure? You seem to understand the poet analogy but why can't it work for God and his creation? He's the designer yet you analyze this in a way where he must follow your rules. If he's Omniscient omnipotent and benevolent than we cannot assume that your limitations apply to him. Perfection and what you perceive to be perfection are two different things, unless of course you're one of those people who think that what is true and actual is based solely on our own perception. In that case what I perceive to be perfect would be perfect but so would your own perception of it even if they were different.
Wait, are we speaking of my rules or his rules?
As I recall, god is a all loving omniscient omnipotent god.
For his followers and for his loyal companions, he should lend a hand in following his own rules. You know, like not killing which he HAS done. Sure, he is a being but breaking his own rules seems pretty bad. I think that also proves my point, slightly, that he isn't perfect.
You said he was omniscient and omnipotent.
If he is technically everywhere, then why can't he do some good.
Saves some lives or whatever?
and no, not something that could be a coincidence, I mean actually going down to end something. He is, technically, like Canada when war breaks out. He is always not to be found and not involved.
You tell me that the fault of humans is really an artwork, in the end, for God. But really, from all the lives lost and how history has gone, it doesn't seem exactly perfect. You have tried to tell me that I may not know exactly what perfection is due to myself being limited, even though perfection isn't really that much of a complicated idea, yet you haven't really pointed out that your limits could also mean you are not sure if anything could be perfect.
Ever here the phrase "Satisfy someone and disappoint another".
It stands for the concept that each action has a negative force on something. If a fan spins, it provides comforting cool air but depletes electrical energy.Unless, of course, we cause our own problems and God is simply observing. God did not orchestrate our stupidity, we fall into it largely because of greed. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:38 am
i believe that the biblical deity is not presented as being imperfect.
G_d demonstrates passion, is known to "repent" and change which is unheard of for a "perfect" being...
this idea of perfection was, i feel, introduced by Greek philosophy, Platonism, and has messed up theology for years.
the diety should not have to be perfect!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:00 am
Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo Because if God DID want to create the devil, that will surely prove my point of him being a fascist.
Wait, are we speaking of my rules or his rules?
As I recall, god is a all loving omniscient omnipotent god.
For his followers and for his loyal companions, he should lend a hand in following his own rules. You know, like not killing which he HAS done. Sure, he is a being but breaking his own rules seems pretty bad. I think that also proves my point, slightly, that he isn't perfect.
You said he was omniscient and omnipotent.
If he is technically everywhere, then why can't he do some good.
Saves some lives or whatever?
and no, not something that could be a coincidence, I mean actually going down to end something. He is, technically, like Canada when war breaks out. He is always not to be found and not involved.
You tell me that the fault of humans is really an artwork, in the end, for God. But really, from all the lives lost and how history has gone, it doesn't seem exactly perfect. You have tried to tell me that I may not know exactly what perfection is due to myself being limited, even though perfection isn't really that much of a complicated idea, yet you haven't really pointed out that your limits could also mean you are not sure if anything could be perfect.
Ever here the phrase "Satisfy someone and disappoint another".
It stands for the concept that each action has a negative force on something. If a fan spins, it provides comforting cool air but depletes electrical energy. Unless, of course, we cause our own problems and God is simply observing. God did not orchestrate our stupidity, we fall into it largely because of greed. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance.You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:04 am
divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo Because if God DID want to create the devil, that will surely prove my point of him being a fascist.
Wait, are we speaking of my rules or his rules?
As I recall, god is a all loving omniscient omnipotent god.
For his followers and for his loyal companions, he should lend a hand in following his own rules. You know, like not killing which he HAS done. Sure, he is a being but breaking his own rules seems pretty bad. I think that also proves my point, slightly, that he isn't perfect.
You said he was omniscient and omnipotent.
If he is technically everywhere, then why can't he do some good.
Saves some lives or whatever?
and no, not something that could be a coincidence, I mean actually going down to end something. He is, technically, like Canada when war breaks out. He is always not to be found and not involved.
You tell me that the fault of humans is really an artwork, in the end, for God. But really, from all the lives lost and how history has gone, it doesn't seem exactly perfect. You have tried to tell me that I may not know exactly what perfection is due to myself being limited, even though perfection isn't really that much of a complicated idea, yet you haven't really pointed out that your limits could also mean you are not sure if anything could be perfect.
Ever here the phrase "Satisfy someone and disappoint another".
It stands for the concept that each action has a negative force on something. If a fan spins, it provides comforting cool air but depletes electrical energy. Unless, of course, we cause our own problems and God is simply observing. God did not orchestrate our stupidity, we fall into it largely because of greed. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance.You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 12:12 am
Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo But allowing it isn't exactly good parenting either. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance.You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson What is your point? They feel bad. That's it. So... isn't that supporting my point, that there IS a way to know right from wrong without God having to specifically come down once a month and say "Hey, you're still not supposed to kill, steal, hurt others..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:39 am
divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo But allowing it isn't exactly good parenting either. Of course it is. I'm sure you've heard the story of native american parents who told their children not to touch the fire once and then let them try it if they didn't listen- It's the best way to learn, to experience. Even then, that's assuming that God must be trying to help us or must be parents to us. I believe life is more of a test than anything else, to see if we are capable of being decent to each other. This makes helping the opposite of, well, helping. If a professor in a class gives out the answers of a test, what did you learn, really? What was the point of the test if he'd just come around and slip everyone the answers?
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance.You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson What is your point? They feel bad. That's it. So... isn't that supporting my point, that there IS a way to know right from wrong without God having to specifically come down once a month and say "Hey, you're still not supposed to kill, steal, hurt others..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:24 pm
Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo But that is like a cause and effect idea.
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance. You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson What is your point? They feel bad. That's it. So... isn't that supporting my point, that there IS a way to know right from wrong without God having to specifically come down once a month and say "Hey, you're still not supposed to kill, steal, hurt others..." So you need to be afraid to be good? A killer who is only afraid for his self is clearly evil, working on a complex where nobody else matters. You don't need to be told this is wrong, and such a coldness is not a normal reaction- It is one that is conditioned and slid into.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:59 pm
divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo But that is like a cause and effect idea.
If you touch a fire, and it burned you,then you wont touch it again because it hurt.
You shoot someone and they die and you get away, then you couldn't tell if it was the right thing to do alone.
Experience is the best way to learn, but as Video Games have taught me, experience is nothing without guidance. You need to be told that killing others is bad to not do it? It does hurt, in your soul. And you feel it. It's whether or not you ignore that pain for worldly gains that is the test and the lesson What is your point? They feel bad. That's it. So... isn't that supporting my point, that there IS a way to know right from wrong without God having to specifically come down once a month and say "Hey, you're still not supposed to kill, steal, hurt others..." So you need to be afraid to be good? A killer who is only afraid for his self is clearly evil, working on a complex where nobody else matters. You don't need to be told this is wrong, and such a coldness is not a normal reaction- It is one that is conditioned and slid into.
Not feeling bad after killing someone is not a normal reaction? To be honest, I don't think there is such a thing as a normal reaction when it comes to killing. There could be multiple kinds of killing.
Besides that, I still can't see how assuming someone would feel bad after killing someone, by an assumption, I mean assuming most would, proves that self experience is good enough.
( Not to mention you proved my point with the heartless person you spoke of. If someone becomes heartless, it is obviously from self experience of life.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 3:11 pm
chessiejo the diety should not have to be perfect!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:01 pm
Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo divineseraph Captain_Shinzo No, you need to know that doing it in your occasion is bad. I mean, not everyone feels a pain nor do I know if they do feel anything. That is more of feeling something then knowing. For all we know, that's just guilt. The reason for such guilt also plays a nice factor. What is your point? They feel bad. That's it. So... isn't that supporting my point, that there IS a way to know right from wrong without God having to specifically come down once a month and say "Hey, you're still not supposed to kill, steal, hurt others..." So you need to be afraid to be good? A killer who is only afraid for his self is clearly evil, working on a complex where nobody else matters. You don't need to be told this is wrong, and such a coldness is not a normal reaction- It is one that is conditioned and slid into.
Not feeling bad after killing someone is not a normal reaction? To be honest, I don't think there is such a thing as a normal reaction when it comes to killing. There could be multiple kinds of killing.
Besides that, I still can't see how assuming someone would feel bad after killing someone, by an assumption, I mean assuming most would, proves that self experience is good enough.
( Not to mention you proved my point with the heartless person you spoke of. If someone becomes heartless, it is obviously from self experience of life.)So again, how does this come against what I was saying? If you felt like killing someone, for money or for whatever reason, you would feel no guilt except for the fear of being caught? Really? There are many types of killing, this is true. Which is why some are justifiable, such as self defense. Otherwise, if you are a normal human being who hasn't killed their own soul, you will feel something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:22 pm
Captain_Shinzo Semiremis Captain_Shinzo Perfection, if we want to look at it in such a way, is the efficiency of doing something. I'm sure when God had this plan, he never meant to get this whole devil problem, he never meant for murder and rape, ect..., and he most likely never meant for Jesus dieing.
Well you can bring in the poet all you like, and I like his idea of something succumbed to ruin actually being perfect, but that does not apply for everything. If I wanted to do something and something else happens that I did not like, that is not perfection.
Unless you want to say that a deity intended suffering so it is perfect, but then that is just a sad, sorry idea.
If you missed a period?
Well I would go over the sentence and see if it needs a period. If it does, then it is wrong and that was not exactly perfect. Meaning of literature and rules of literature are two different sections, however. Your idea could be perfect but not your literature.
I don't know god so I don't know if his mind is limitless. He saw light and thought it was good. That's like me finding a dust bunny and thinking he is some kind of savior.
Bottom line, perfection and intended perfection are two different things here. First of all you say you are sure God never meant to get this whole devil problem. How are you sure? You seem to understand the poet analogy but why can't it work for God and his creation? He's the designer yet you analyze this in a way where he must follow your rules. If he's Omniscient omnipotent and benevolent than we cannot assume that your limitations apply to him. Perfection and what you perceive to be perfection are two different things, unless of course you're one of those people who think that what is true and actual is based solely on our own perception. In that case what I perceive to be perfect would be perfect but so would your own perception of it even if they were different.
Wait, are we speaking of my rules or his rules?
As I recall, god is a all loving omniscient omnipotent god.
For his followers and for his loyal companions, he should lend a hand in following his own rules. You know, like not killing which he HAS done. Sure, he is a being but breaking his own rules seems pretty bad. I think that also proves my point, slightly, that he isn't perfect.
You said he was omniscient and omnipotent.
If he is technically everywhere, then why can't he do some good.
Saves some lives or whatever?
and no, not something that could be a coincidence, I mean actually going down to end something. He is, technically, like Canada when war breaks out. He is always not to be found and not involved.
You tell me that the fault of humans is really an artwork, in the end, for God. But really, from all the lives lost and how history has gone, it doesn't seem exactly perfect. You have tried to tell me that I may not know exactly what perfection is due to myself being limited, even though perfection isn't really that much of a complicated idea, yet you haven't really pointed out that your limits could also mean you are not sure if anything could be perfect.
Ever here the phrase "Satisfy someone and disappoint another".
It stands for the concept that each action has a negative force on something. If a fan spins, it provides comforting cool air but depletes electrical energy.Political ideology has no place in this discussion, but what qualities of a fascist leader do you think are present in this ultimate being? I'm not going to say there aren't any similarities, there just aren't enough for a good comparison. Which rules has he broken? He gave a lot of rules to the Israelites and told them to follow them but I'm not so sure how those rules would apply to him or anyone else for that matter. How do you know God is always no where to be found? Are you everywhere, because you kind of would have to be in order to make that claim. Perfection is different to everyone, I'd say answering the question of what perfection is is extremely complicated. When you open up that equation and are dealing with an omnipotent and omniscient being and that beings idea of perfection than the question of what perfection is ends up on a whole new level. So we're back to that question I asked in my earlier post. Could perfection be there but we as people cannot fully comprehend it because we are not perfect, or because we do not have the knowledge, the discipline, the wisdom or the capability? This one is not hypothetical. Is it possible?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
