God Theory 201

[chikoka]

If someone told you not to walk over a cliff you would die, then you do walk over the cliff and subsequently die , who's fault would it be?
Ofcourse its your fault.
Thats the way it is with god.
He gave us commandments and told us we would die if we dont lisen to them.
If we choose not to listen then its our fault if we die.
Basicaly what im saying that there is an abstract schema called life and to exist in this schema there are certain rules.
Obviously you shouldnt be surprised that you dont have life anymore if you go against life.
Going against life is the same as going to death.
Its not god killing you but you walking over the cliff, so whos fault is it?
All gods commandments can be put into one consice word:

LIVE.

If you decide to go against those commandments is it surprising then if you dont LIVE.

God could have created another schema called X and that schema would have its own rules and regulations.
It would not have living beings because living is something defined within the schema called life.
In this schema Xing would be what would be the equivalent of living in that schema.
(It would have Xing beings).


Quote
---------
people who feel the need to worship the idea of higher beings are incomplete
---------


If you pull a televisions plug out of the wall would it be surprising that it would stop working.
Yet that is what you are saying when you say we shouldnt worship god.
He is the very source of life so is it surprising that if you do not connect to the power source you will stop working (i.e. die)?
That is one of the most fundamental properties of the Life schema.

Now you could ask that since god is all powerfull then why cant he create another schema simmillar to life with the property that you dont have to follow any rules in order to live.

That would be a very good question but the answer is (i think) that god is not really all powerful (Blassfemy!) other wise he would not have had to die for us.
The bible says that the wages of sin is death and so someone had to account for our sins.
In the garden of getsemane ,just before he was crucified ,jesus prayed that
"Lord please let this cup pass from me but not my will but thine".
These are the words of someone going through a terrible experience because of what you and i have done.
Do you think that if there had not been another way Gods will would have been to watch his son die.
Even god has to follow the regulations of the life schema.

As for his claims to be all powerfull i take it to be a praise title just as we are told to love god with all our heart.
Do you really love with your heart?


Quote
-----------
. What kind of egotistical asshole (God) would want people to worship him? Does this God you speak of have the mentality of a toddler or adolescent?
-----------


If god was really egotistical would he come down and wash dirty feet?
Would he have died a horrible death , even the death of the cross just for you?

[arek4321]

Based on your post, your view of life and your "god" is extremely elementary at best. There are no rules which will cease life. This is apparent because crime, in all forms, is just as prevalent now as it ever was. Essentially you are saying that those who do not believe the ten commandments, would not exist; as in anyone who chooses not to believe the rules of your "god", is not considered living. Also, there are countless organisms such as plants, amoeba, etc. that only follow the rule set of nature and nothing else. Morality and aspects of it like the ten commandments are man made entities. Most animals don't even have a sense of identity, forget morals and ethics. Morality is subjective; claiming that those who do not follow your code of morals are not on an equivalent plateau of life than yourself, is one of the most preposterous things i have ever heard. If your rules do anything, they probably limit your view of all things in a fuller sense. I abide by the rules i set forth myself, not anyone else's.

Quote

they reveal how vital is self-exertion to accomplish one's object and, how superficial and futile it is to seek redemption through benignant saviors and to crave for illusory happiness in an after life through the propitiation of imaginary gods or by irresponsive prayers and meaningless sacrifices.

that is the way the human mind works; we tend to admire impressive feats of self-torture and denial.

[chikoka]

Based on your post, your view of life and your "god" is extremely elementary at best

Really its not "my god".
I am an atheist , but i know what i have lost.
I am just trying to paint a logical picture that theism is not completely illogical.

Also, there are countless organisms such as plants, amoeba, etc. that only follow the rule set of nature and nothing else.

In my schema plants do not have the title of living as i have described it.

Essentially you are saying that those who do not believe the ten commandments, would not exist;

I take a black box view of this.
I dont know in what way not following the comandments will kill you .
Obviously it does not do so immediately .
However the inner workings of this system the results mean you will eventually die.

Take my cliff example.
You dont have to know that the force of the impact of your body on the ground will kill you by breaking your organs.
That is irrelevant to the question of what will hapen to you if you go over the cliff . i.e. die.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Basicaly what im saying that there is an abstract schema called life and to exist in this schema there are certain rules.

Isn't that like saying that there's an abstract schema called "existence" and there's a ruling called causality that upholds it? It's beyond debate so far. Actions have consequences, causes having effects. The description of this is called law or way things are. So far religion or religious law does not contradict logic, perhaps only in the attachment to particular forms of that law. The more detailed a law of cause and effect is formulated the more dependent it becomes on countless contextual elements.

All gods commandments can be put into one consice word: LIVE.

Since you're talking about Christianity and Judaism specifically, it would be better to summarize the law according to their own tradition. Jesus answered in Mark 12:28-34 the question about the most important commandment or law to follow, put in my own words replacing love with value to make it sound not so much as a feeling or a clinging:

The most important one is: our most supreme god is singular. Value this supreme one with all your heart, soul, mind and abilities.

The second one is: Value your fellow being like he is the same as you.

There's no higher law than these.

Suffering, anguish, spiritual and moral death and many diseases arise out of not embodying these laws. So by a lack of deeply understanding and recognizing any single, ultimate absolute that has be sought and valued in all what you do and as a result seeing yourself as fundamentally cut-off and different from the people around you and the other side of the world.

The idea of life being a result of following the rules has to do with spiritual life and not just mechanically going through motions and feelings. Spiritual life means to respond to everything in a spiritual way, that is: recognizing and emphasizing the singularity of existence and truth. And thereby undoing the radioactive fallout of your mind.

[chikoka]

ince you're talking about Christianity and Judaism specifically, it would be better to summarize the law according to their own tradition. Jesus answered in Mark 12:28-34 the question about the most important commandment or law to follow, put in my own words replacing love with value to make it sound not so much as a feeling or a clinging:

If you dont value god you will die , so telling us to love god is an indirect way of telling us to live.

[Jamesh]

Christians love life as a quantity, at the expense of quality. They seek an extended period of low level life both here and eternally.

If God gave them a brain why do they choose not to use it to examine the reality that god has created, why do they choose to constrain their mind to the views of those closest to them and the words and delusions of the past. Why are they afraid of greater degree of consciousness, a greater quality of life, here on this earth?

The Herd Force Is Strong in these people, Luke.

[brokenhead]

Jesus answered in Mark 12:28-34 the question about the most important commandment or law to follow, put in my own words replacing love with value to make it sound not so much as a feeling or a clinging:

Do you always change the wording of laws when it suits you? I am afraid your defense won't hold up in court.

The idea of life being a result of following the rules has to do with spiritual life and not just mechanically going through motions and feelings. Spiritual life means to respond to everything in a spiritual way, that is: recognizing and emphasizing the singularity of existence and truth.

But this one will hold up very nicely indeed. The spirit of the Law trumps its letter.

Christians love life as a quantity, at the expense of quality. They seek an extended period of low level life both here and eternally.

That is a very simplistic statement. And it is quite untrue. Fortunately, you are probably not influenceing anybody with your views.

If God gave them a brain why do they choose not to use it to examine the reality that god has created, why do they choose to constrain their mind to the views of those closest to them and the words and delusions of the past. Why are they afraid of greater degree of consciousness, a greater quality of life, here on this earth?

To say what "they" do or fail to do is not only very likely way off base, it is a waste of time and effort. Better to concern yourself with your own shortcomings so you can have a better life.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Do you always change the wording of laws when it suits you?

This is only natural, at least for the law makers!

If it comforts you to know: I'd never change anything without knowing the source of the quote, reading the exact wordings with substantial context in the original language and some of the popular expert commentaries on it. Then after ten years perhaps write a bit about it. Unlike you I'm not a poser of knowledge. Did you really think I just sit down here and type some dumb translation of those texts? There's a bit more substance here, my love-ridden friend.

The Greek ἀγαπάω however, meant during the time of writing: to "have preference for" , "wishing well' or "regarding for the welfare". It's clearly related to simply caring and valuing something close to you, valuing highly is perhaps even better with, I suppose, less possibility to weaken it. One could even suggest that the appreciation is unmotivated by the object compared to other forms. Feelings invoked by something, some situation or someone else cannot have anything to do with it. Valuing god is not some soppy tear-jerking choice. It's just all what's left when everything has left. How can anything be valued higher, how could anything compare, logically?

And of course it's even beyond these words and it should be. Words are utterly meaningless for those who speak them as well as those who listen unless the wording is changed and shifted regularly according to the always changing and shifting realities of those speaking and listening. Same with the whole of the legal bodies in our society and actually the laws are rewritten and rephrased quite often over time. Some even abandoned.