Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

The God Logic

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-26 4:49

When we were young we didn't know we would die, the assumption was we're immortal. That delusion came quickly to an end as reality stepped in.

Human:
Mortal
Locally Present
Limited Ability
Visible
Vulnerable
Limited Knowledge
Fallible

God:
Immortal
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Invisible
Invulnerable
All-knowing
Infallible

To have God in your life is to remind yourself of your humanity. To expel God from your life as non-existent is to proclaim that, by default, you are God as no other exists. It is merely a means of debate that will rule in favor of the reality of that situation. To have God in your life isn't indoctrination, it's a logical choice. Without that, reason flies out the window in favor of passion and egotism driving the individual. This is a choice as well.
Free-Will, it is a bitch.

The God you serve now is your future self.

Mind = Blown.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-26 9:01

>>2

Human:
Mortal
Locally Present
Limited Ability
Visible
Vulnerable
Limited Knowledge
Fallible

God:
Mythical
Falsehood
Wars started to please "God"
People murdered to please "God"
No scientific proof that "god" is real.
Disease of the mind
There is no soul for "god" to take to heaven
There is no heaven
There is no hell
When you die you are maggot food

To have God in your life is to remind yourself reminds yourself of your mental weaknesses and shortcomings.  God is a mental crutch for the weak minded and those with no ambitions who can write off their failures in life because "god did not want me to do that".

All all required to serve God or else they have no place in society. Whom do I serve and whom do I trust?

I serve myself and I trust NO one.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-26 10:11

>>1
I actually never thought I was immortal, not to my recollection.  Maybe before 3, but I distinctly remember a conversation when I was talking about a real person having died at age 4; I didn't attend school until age 5 and didn't make the distinction of a "[unique] God" until a year or two later.

To expel God from your life as non-existent is to proclaim that, by default, you are God as no other exists
I figure IHBT but I may as well roll with the punches.  I think you're mistaking atheism and solipsism.  In fact, solipsism doesn't even require substitution of god as most of the time the solipsist realizes they can't grasp control over the delusion that is their mind's reality anyway.  Most people who don't believe in any sort of god don't think they're immortal.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 4:07

>>2
...Free-Will...it is a bitch. Good luck with that one, pal.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 4:12

>>3
You're missing the point altogether.

It's not about the obvious God-traits or rather non-human traits...it's about the less-obvious traits that the ego attempts to convince a human (void of God) to believe as one's own. I've had people tell me they don't require sleep! That's ego! And when a person does as their ego would have them do, they are losing themselves to their passions. Philosophy and psychology both reach this apex. Why some people refuse to even approach such a topic open-minded is beyond me...personally, I think they are afraid of being wrong...or rather, being found out by others to be wrong. Some people just never learn more than they know.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-31 7:50

your argument is flawed, when we were young we didn't know we were going to die, because we didn't know death, we didn't know life, we just were, how can you assume immortality if you don't understand it? What you should seek to define is when we gain a sense of meta self-awareness, a level at which a human being can understand what "that smiley thing in the mirror is"

many psychologists argue that before this time the decisions made are drastically different to the one after.

http://www.societyofrobots.com/robottheory/self-awareness_review.pdf

god was invented by man some thousand odd years ago. forget it. like every other fabricated religion and deity before it. egyptions. mayans.

maybe a better point would be to look at the evolution of personality, free-will, emotion. when did our ancestors cease to search for food, sex, and sleep, and start to smile, frown, and cry.

similarly assume you are raving about the christian deity, as humans our pending doom will have been apparant far before the invention of religion. 2, you are correct, although trust isn't something you can infer from your desire to be atheist, we are social creatures, trust is present on a most minimal level, whether its trust the person in the queue not to shoot you, or some guy with your dry cleaning.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 5:06

You still assume I said anything about being a child and knowing immortality before becoming aware of the possibility of mortality. This is how you're eisegesis of my argument causes your misconception and ergo, skewed point of view because you lack the insight to recall true past events and states of mind logically. You are arguing from your own point of view which is not a youth before the age of 2-3 when self-awareness is usually made apparent. There is a scientific test you can use where you place a sticker on the face of the infant without them knowing what you did and place them in front of the mirror. If they recognize the sticker in the reflection and touch their face, they are self-aware, if they touch the mirror, they are not.

What I'm making aware is the states of ignorance we are concurrently in and the process of moving from ignorance to awareness. It's that simple. When did you first realize that you had an ego that tries to control you through your emotions and feelings?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 5:16

Oh yes, and one of the common inferences regarding God is that God has to be in the image of Man which is entirely false. God is not equal to man, nor is man equal to God, therefore, to assume that God is in the image of Man because Man is in the image of God is a logical fallacy. Therefore the anthropomorphic attributes associated with God should also be illogical. If you can know yourself and your ego, God is everything else you don't know or can never know or must always try to update in order to know because many things are always changing.

In philosophy, knowing you don't know is the battle.
In psychology, knowing yourself is the battle.

In duality, finding where you stand and what you must do to move is the struggle of life.

All three are parts of the human condition, some observe them, others do not. Choice is also one of those human conditions we must work with.

You can also find strategies that illustrate these points similarly in The Art of War by Sun Tzu.

I'm not the only one that has come to know this about myself.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 11:26

So,if there are so many religious people, why aren't they all Gods?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 12:38

I don't think we're talking about one single thing in this thread anymore.  Actually, I can't follow any logical train of thought between the OP and the latest posts; OP and >>8 are especially good at writing a lot, saying very little, and obscuring their own point by lashing out in numerous directions from one line to another.  Speak plainly and straightforward, not in roundabout ways, and don't be afraid to enumerate.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 15:12

gay

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 15:47

To have God in your life is to remind yourself of your humanity. To expel God from your life as non-existent is to proclaim that, by default, you are God as no other exists.

WHATTHEFUCKAREYOUSAYING?

To live without a computer is to proclaim that, by default, you are a computer as no other exists?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 22:05

>>12
actually, to have a computer in your life can be dualistic as well.

Some people can view themselves so analytically that they think they are emotionless and unfeeling while thinking their computer is somehow a superior piece of technology that is somehow the savior of all mankind.

Other people think that computers are merely over-glorified calculators and nothing more.

Which persona would you perceive as a human behaving as a human and one behaving as a computer?

Also, how is your comparative between God which is more than human is comparable to a man-made device? That's illogical comparatives. There is no comparison nor contrast between a computer and a living person, just as inanimate objects to animate ones. That is what I was referring to as anthropomophism. That kind of comparison is a means to comfort oneself instead of challenge what is known.

Care to try logic again less your neurosis?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-01 23:19

>>13
Some people can view themselves so analytically that they think they are emotionless and unfeeling while thinking their computer is somehow a superior piece of technology that is somehow the savior of all mankind.
Okay, I am definitely calling BS on that one.
And don't say "Singularity;" that would be relying on ignorance and stereotyping.

I think you really are taking this "substitute comparison with God" idea way too far and spreading it way too broadly on far too little evidence.  Trying to say a comparison between the human mind and a computer is a manifestation of trying to find "comfort" using "anthropomorphism" to diminish the challenging of information is either convoluted hogwash or embellishment of a much more simple psychological phenomenon.  (I'm only going to start on "God which is more than human" by asking why God could not be less than human, greater than the universe?  There's no single objective system of existential "greater-than"s that exist except those that are intended to glorify or demean something specific.  Such a state is entirely possible for God unless you say humans are comparable to the universe; but, your previous argument has already negated the meaningfulness of such a comparison.)

I also have my suspicions that you used to sign your posts.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-02 7:55

>>14
Oh boy...we're so beyond the logical point of understanding it's not even funny anymore beings it's already so ridiculous.

The whole point to the understanding of God is to know that there are things we don't know and therefore to account for this objectively and pursue the truths of them axiomatically; by faith.

There is, of course, the possibility of eisegesis occurring during any interpretation, however, accounting for this too can lead to a proper exegesis. In other words, reason and accountability.

Reason for doing something is found after the doing to observe the objective results in order to account for them instead of justifying before hand a decision in order to be content with the results before the actions are made, be what they may, with no necessity for accountability.

Of course, I don't expect anyone who automatically disagrees with me to adhere to my own standards, I'm just attempting to point out some glaring possibilities of contrasting comparatives instead of contradicting ones.

"Sometimes you can know a thing by what it is not."
-Albert Einstein

If you assume that everything that is not you, that you don't know, is God or at the very least not you...you may then attempt to seek God or a method to integrate external things with yourself in a means to reach a reasonable decision void of bias. However, to ignore the possibility that self-interest exists on an automatic level within humans is also a means to promote callousness via ignorance, neglect, abandonment, and forgetfulness. Both are a necessity to be observed, however, the analytical logic of viewing one's own circumstances in order to reach an objective decision AS WELL AS taking on an axiom (an action of unknown consequences) in order to find the reason to do or not to do in order to reach a means to know what to do, when to do it, how to do it, and after having done it; why do it?

Reason before action is bias and contains self-interest (automatic fears and desires imbued).
Reason after action is unbias and contains self-effacement.

When I refer to God as being more than human and humans being less than God it has to do with simple observation.
I am one part of how large a universe? God is all, therefore, God is awesome in size and complexity for which I become humble and grateful for what I DO have.

Now comes a brain crusher.

Glorifying and demeaning labels are judgments which only God should make, and should a man or woman make judgments they are attempting to be God over Man-kind. The natural state of Man-kind before the exile from Eden was innocence. The only way to innocence is to abandon judgment in favor of forgiveness and mercy. Play the devil's advocate.

When it comes down to humans being pompous, arrogant, judgmental, and negative it all leads back to attempting to exert, over all else, control of what cannot nor should not be controlled. Love what you cannot change, change what you cannot love.

Therefore, to attempt to adverserialize instead of attempting to play devil's advocate (which is modest and humble) is just another example of what I'm talking about refraining from.

I have the mind to know that everyone wants everything now, they want it in mass-quantity, mass-quality, instant gratification, power, wealth, good-looks, etc...because all men and women have egos as do I. Some choose to allow ego to decide what they want for them by how they feel to experience these things in the present (forsaking the future) instead of by objective research and conclusion leading to decision to benefit the future by forsaking over-abundance and instant gratification for the moment. Others think that by ignoring both God and Ego they some how are excluding themselves from the awareness of the ordeal of the human condition...they easily forget, less the objective mental reminders, that they themselves are in fact human with vulnerabilities, limited capabilities, fallibilities, and limited knowledge.
Out of sight, out of mind.

The argument for God, as I have researched these past many years, has led me to the immutable truth in self and truth in God as other than self.

Lastly, I would like to emphasize yet again, these words that I have stated are not God as well...these statements are tools for pursuing what may be God in an ever-elusive test to find the mysterious God.

It would also appear that with some who adverserialize themselves against others before questioning to understand is yet another example of ego exuding pride and prejudice over the possibility of a higher-level of consciousness...for their future selves.

Also, yes, I used to sign my posts.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-13 14:06

I hope you all know what a bounded infinity is.

God is a type of bounded infinity -- a word encapsulates time and space. If God exists, he cannot be bounded by a word, thus discussions about him are silly.

God supposedly has unlimited power, and thus, is contradictorily bounded by the word while acclaiming unbounded power.

Your folly in this discussion is naming Him.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-13 17:11

>>16
You're an idiot.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 2:22

>>16
axioms, you dumb motherfucker. Unbounded by known results, yet named thus in order to seek and find the results. Your intelligence is limited and evidenced by your expression of it therein. Please refrain from being a /b/tard on /sci/ from this point forward.

Thank you for your taking the time to read this thoroughly, now that you know you might not know everything there is to know...you may ask yourself, "what do you really know?" and you'll go find out for yourself instead of allowing everyone to do all the work for you and you attempting to take all the credit as well as denouncing the originators of said information.

That is the tell-tale sign of ignorance sporting the "I am always right and know-all" neurosis that grips the majority of megalomaniacal consumers that buy on impulse, compulsion, or just because they "felt like it".

Are you a "just feel like it" kind of person, >>16?

It stands to reason that if you are, you are making irrational decisions which then concludes that your statement while appearing logical is still fallible which is the absolute nature of the human condition; to err is human.

"Know thyself and you will come to know your enemy."

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 9:10

>>18
That is the tell-tale sign of ignorance sporting the "I am always right and know-all" neurosis
That's the pot calling the kettle black.  You really don't try to understand how other people read your posts and your replies to their comments, do you?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-15 12:53

>>19
pot calling the kettle black.

This is me, >>20, calling you, >>19, black...You're black.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-19 3:04

>>19
I'm closed-minded to a closed-mind and open-minded to an open-mind. So when someone has something open-minded to inquire or add, sure...I'll listen intently.

The premise of my logical argument is built upon the premises of;
1) The Golden Rule: Do onto others as you would have them do onto you.
2) Altruism: Do what may kill you to save others.
3) Free-Will: Do what you don't feel like doing.
4) Choice: To do or not to do.
and finally, 5) To know thyself and ego.

Sometimes judging, blaming, and passing the buck is not enough to get something done. God knows the way, because God lives in the instance of the eventuality we are striving toward.

"Sometimes you can know a thing (yourself) by what it (you) is (are) not."

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-19 3:08

>>19
I'll also thank you kindly not to use your inferences from my statements as a basis for your arguments of why your opinion is right and I am wrong. If you want to argue, use logic and not baseless opinion.

Name: Saint Nicholas 2010-10-19 23:50

Exodus 34:14
"For thou shalt worship no other god: For the Lord whose name is Jealous, is a Jealous God."

Jehovah: "He Causes to Become."
Yahweh:  "I Am."

Added together spells out;

"I am HE [who] causes to become Jealous."

truth of fabrication? You be the judge.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-20 3:18

Good and evil, creation and destruction, forethought and forgotten are the x and y chromosome of the nature of our universe. It lives as one being yet knowing the differences between good and evil divides this one beautiful existence into a judged and desolate desert of parasites, viruses, and cattle. Eating, shuffling, and devouring just to move on to other areas that without them seem the only true Eden until it too vanishes all-to-quickly from our sight and equally from our minds.

This sorrow is the state of the beast, take it or leave it...but regardless, it will reside there for an eternity for it was there long before you and will reside long after for evil just as good is its nature.

How can you destroy existence without destroying yourself?

Ponder this as you sit on your toilet thinking. Wonder of this next time you see someone struggling or in a state of sympathy for the woes of the world. Perhaps you may add to their woes and make their thoughts as a reality...and perhaps you may destroy their thoughts with your words and actions and give them something new to ponder...perhaps something impossible now recognized and acknowledged may become possible now that it too is perceived as good and evil.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-20 11:00

Why is this hogwash thread still here? stop replying.  This guy has nothing useful to say.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-21 8:46

>>25
Thanks for your contribution.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-22 8:42

>>25 is stupid. And gay.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-23 0:03

>>25 Is the only good post in this thread.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-24 9:00

>>28
Thanks for your contribution.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-24 10:41

>>29
Thanks for your contribution

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-26 18:52

>>30
You really aren't going away are you? You forgot your period at the end of your sentence...I'm just waiting for it to run on and on and on now.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-26 20:10

>>29
You're welcome.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-12 11:55

Hmm.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 1:13

You see, in reality, The God Logic isn't to prove that God exists, it's to prove that we are human and not Gods. If we were Gods, would this world be suffering as it is? So we are not Gods of this planet, surely, we are just humans thinking or rather wishing we were Gods trying to play God and failing miserably.

If you act human and fail...congratulations...to err is human...you just won the game...and then we all die eventually.

:/

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-05 21:26

Also, to anticipate and thereby please God, serve your future self. The you that has yet to be. Once you do for this future un-present self you enable a future for yourself that is not yours until the time comes.

Just saying, it has its merits. Think it over.

:/

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List