I believe in God. Taking qs
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Whether there are undertones in my language or not doesn't matter to me, and you shouldn't read more into what I have said than what I have said myself.
Also, I'm taking questions or all sorts; I'm not here necessarily to defend my beliefs, but if someone straight up calls my beliefs logically impossible I do expect at least for them to explain why they think that.
Having said that, if you don't have any questions then you need not post here, Nick Treklis. I don't appreciate your insulting or confrontational attitude.
Also, I'm taking questions or all sorts; I'm not here necessarily to defend my beliefs, but if someone straight up calls my beliefs logically impossible I do expect at least for them to explain why they think that.
Having said that, if you don't have any questions then you need not post here, Nick Treklis. I don't appreciate your insulting or confrontational attitude.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Responding to Cahoot,
My God isn't simply the concept of infinity.
My God isn't simply the concept of infinity.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
If that is your answer to my question, which was about belief (in God), then apparently belief is a component in how you define God.
If it is, and for you belief is a requirement for God to exist, perhaps we can discuss. That is, if you're patient and persistent, as my replies are not always immediate.
If that’s just a comment you're making, and not the answer to my question, then take your time in answering. I’m in no rush.
:)
If it is, and for you belief is a requirement for God to exist, perhaps we can discuss. That is, if you're patient and persistent, as my replies are not always immediate.
If that’s just a comment you're making, and not the answer to my question, then take your time in answering. I’m in no rush.
:)
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Hi Turambar,
I have two questions for you. Firstly, how do you reconcile perfect justice (which entails always applying the deserved penalty) with perfect mercy (which entails applying a penalty less than that which was deserved)? Secondly, what is your response to the problem of evil?
By the way, and for your information, folk on this forum tend to redefine God to mean Reality, which they sometimes refer to as the Totality, meaning absolutely everything, and which they hold to be infinite, so that they sometimes also refer to the Totality as the Infinite i.e. on this forum, God, Reality, the Totality and the Infinite are synonyms. This is probably the perspective that Robert is coming from, which might help you to understand his comments a little better. The main issue that I have with this perspective is that as far as I'm concerned, infinity always has a sense in which it is applied - e.g. infinite in the spatial sense, or in the temporal sense, or in the sense of wisdom - whereas folk around here use it in an unqualified sense, so it's in my opinion a little ambiguous. The Infinite? Infinite how and in what sense(s), is what I would like answered.
For the reason of ambiguity due to unqualified sense that I described above, I really can't see any merit to Robert's challenge. You have described God as infinite in various different senses - power, knowledge, locality - and there's nothing contradictory about that. If Robert wants to throw in an unqualified sense of infinity, then, in my opinion, he'll have to explain what he means by it.
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread, just wanted to throw in my "too sense" on the challenges you've already received.
I have two questions for you. Firstly, how do you reconcile perfect justice (which entails always applying the deserved penalty) with perfect mercy (which entails applying a penalty less than that which was deserved)? Secondly, what is your response to the problem of evil?
By the way, and for your information, folk on this forum tend to redefine God to mean Reality, which they sometimes refer to as the Totality, meaning absolutely everything, and which they hold to be infinite, so that they sometimes also refer to the Totality as the Infinite i.e. on this forum, God, Reality, the Totality and the Infinite are synonyms. This is probably the perspective that Robert is coming from, which might help you to understand his comments a little better. The main issue that I have with this perspective is that as far as I'm concerned, infinity always has a sense in which it is applied - e.g. infinite in the spatial sense, or in the temporal sense, or in the sense of wisdom - whereas folk around here use it in an unqualified sense, so it's in my opinion a little ambiguous. The Infinite? Infinite how and in what sense(s), is what I would like answered.
For the reason of ambiguity due to unqualified sense that I described above, I really can't see any merit to Robert's challenge. You have described God as infinite in various different senses - power, knowledge, locality - and there's nothing contradictory about that. If Robert wants to throw in an unqualified sense of infinity, then, in my opinion, he'll have to explain what he means by it.
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread, just wanted to throw in my "too sense" on the challenges you've already received.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
The concept of perfect Justice, or perfect mercy, seems unfathomable and infeasible to me.guest_of_logic wrote:Hi Turambar,
I have two questions for you. Firstly, how do you reconcile perfect justice (which entails always applying the deserved penalty) with perfect mercy (which entails applying a penalty less than that which was deserved)?
How would that work? Whom or what is the final arbiter? It can only ever be the individual ultimately; surely.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
What's your evidence?Turambar wrote:I believe in God.
You believe in inherent morality?wholly good, wholly just, and wholly merciful
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
It should. Identifying your subconscious tendencies is essential in order to make sure your reasoning isn't being hindered by them.Turambar wrote:Whether there are undertones in my language or not doesn't matter to me,
Well if you don't want me to do it, then start doing it yourself.Turambar wrote:and you shouldn't read more into what I have said than what I have said myself.
You used the word "believe" in reference to your conception of god. So, what does belief mean to you?
Actually it was explained to you why your conception of god is a logical impossibility. A thing, or god in this case, can not have qualities and be infinite. A quality only has meaning in relation to it's opposite quality, e.g. good/bad, hot/cold, just/unjust, rough/smooth, this is the nature of duality. So if you define god as having a quality, you are necessarily leaving out the opposite quality, which means you are talking about a finite thing, not an infinite god.Turambar wrote:Also, I'm taking questions or all sorts; I'm not here necessarily to defend my beliefs, but if someone straight up calls my beliefs logically impossible I do expect at least for them to explain why they think that.
It's called compassion.Turambar wrote:I don't appreciate your insulting or confrontational attitude.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
The whole of Nature, that's a pretty straightforward qualification. The only ambiguity is that the whole can't be said to exist, nor not exist. This apparent ambiguity is only superficial, the infinite Nature escapes such classification. Existence is relative, Nature is by definition the All, unbounded and boundaryless. To what is the All relative to?guest_of_logic wrote:The main issue that I have with this perspective is that as far as I'm concerned, infinity always has a sense in which it is applied - e.g. infinite in the spatial sense, or in the temporal sense, or in the sense of wisdom - whereas folk around here use it in an unqualified sense, so it's in my opinion a little ambiguous. The Infinite? Infinite how and in what sense(s), is what I would like answered.
For the reasons of ambiguity in giving God attributes like mercy, justice, good etc, I can't see why such a singular entity can be infinite. Finite, sure, but not infinite. In my opinion, that still needs some explaining.guest_of_logic wrote:For the reason of ambiguity due to unqualified sense that I described above, I really can't see any merit to Robert's challenge. You have described God as infinite in various different senses - power, knowledge, locality - and there's nothing contradictory about that. If Robert wants to throw in an unqualified sense of infinity, then, in my opinion, he'll have to explain what he means by it.
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
I don't think that covers it though. "Infinite in time", or "infinite in space" or "infinite in knowledge" I can understand, but "infinite in nature"...?...Robert wrote:The whole of Nature, that's a pretty straightforward qualification.
Perhaps you mean "infinite in all dimensions". That would make a lot more sense to me, but it would also simply push the question back a little bit, so that I'd then be asking you, "Which dimensions are you referring to?"
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Well since we are taking questions, lets start with the most revealing one.Turambar wrote:Shoot.
Why do you believe in God?
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
The largest perspective possible would necessarily entail absolutely everything, hence the other nom de guerre, "The Absolute".guest_of_logic wrote:I don't think that covers it though. "Infinite in time", or "infinite in space" or "infinite in knowledge" I can understand, but "infinite in nature"...?...Robert wrote:The whole of Nature, that's a pretty straightforward qualification.
Perhaps you mean "infinite in all dimensions". That would make a lot more sense to me, but it would also simply push the question back a little bit, so that I'd then be asking you, "Which dimensions are you referring to?"
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Wow... lots of input/responses since yesterday. I don't know how to quote you guy's sentences, but I will do it the old fashioned way. As I read through I found several different questions, and I'll try to tackle them here.
1) "Why do you believe in God?"
I've never really thought about *why*. I can't imagine not believing in God. Even if I were today to try to just go about and pretend God doesn't exist, I would never be able to convince myself. There's something in me that just *knows* but I can't describe why. My belief may not be purely rational, but I think God is more mysterious than a simple algorithm; and I think that it means something to be human to be a little irrational. To me a world without God would be like a world without music. Where you can hear the noises, but you don't understand that they are arranged beautifully and artfully and mean something more than a collection of sound-waves hitting your eardrum.
2) "Is there an inconsistency with a perfectly just/demanding God and a perfectly merciful God."
To answer your question immediately -- no, I don't believe there is. The point of law and punishment is not simply to punish, but to teach and to manipulate the actions of the governed. The state doesn't make it illegal to drive without seatbelts simply because it wants to ticket people and garner revenue (at least we hope that's not their motive), but instead the state has an interest in our safety and would have us wear seatbelts for our own good. So punishment isn't the end but influencing behavior is. So if God has found you or I guilty of one thing or another, his desire isn't to punish but to effect change. Mercy can come easily if he finds that we are sorry or regretful etc.
3) "Is there a problem of evil?"
Freedom means the ability to choose to obey or disobey. Without the ability to disobey we aren't free. If we think freedom is a desirable or an inherently good thing, then God has good reason to create it. If God has created all things that are beautiful and good, then freedom would be one of those things.
1) "Why do you believe in God?"
I've never really thought about *why*. I can't imagine not believing in God. Even if I were today to try to just go about and pretend God doesn't exist, I would never be able to convince myself. There's something in me that just *knows* but I can't describe why. My belief may not be purely rational, but I think God is more mysterious than a simple algorithm; and I think that it means something to be human to be a little irrational. To me a world without God would be like a world without music. Where you can hear the noises, but you don't understand that they are arranged beautifully and artfully and mean something more than a collection of sound-waves hitting your eardrum.
2) "Is there an inconsistency with a perfectly just/demanding God and a perfectly merciful God."
To answer your question immediately -- no, I don't believe there is. The point of law and punishment is not simply to punish, but to teach and to manipulate the actions of the governed. The state doesn't make it illegal to drive without seatbelts simply because it wants to ticket people and garner revenue (at least we hope that's not their motive), but instead the state has an interest in our safety and would have us wear seatbelts for our own good. So punishment isn't the end but influencing behavior is. So if God has found you or I guilty of one thing or another, his desire isn't to punish but to effect change. Mercy can come easily if he finds that we are sorry or regretful etc.
3) "Is there a problem of evil?"
Freedom means the ability to choose to obey or disobey. Without the ability to disobey we aren't free. If we think freedom is a desirable or an inherently good thing, then God has good reason to create it. If God has created all things that are beautiful and good, then freedom would be one of those things.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Everyone fears questioning the things that make us happy and stepping into unknown territory. We all have the sense that bringing reason to our cherished views makes them slide away from us. You are your reason, and using reason is being a man not a boy. A man questions explores and examines to the end *all territories* before him. Good luck.
- Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Hello Turambar,
Once I found myself in the same situation. My conviction was as solid as rock and very similar to what you're saying here. To my big surprise, now looking back, it was certainly possible to drop the old faith, like a child that stops sucking a mother's breast and wants to chew on something more substantial. The old faith is not wrong, it just wasn't enough if a desire for truth and deeper exploration is present.Turambar wrote: I can't imagine not believing in God. Even if I were today to try to just go about and pretend God doesn't exist, I would never be able to convince myself.
Spinoza calls that that the first type of knowledge, basically opinion, hunches and fleeting images but one can get seriously attached to them, making them seem more solid than they really are. They're not even yet in the category of truths and falsehoods.There's something in me that just *knows* but I can't describe why. My belief may not be purely rational
From my experience that type of appreciation got multiplied by a thousand once I allowed my understanding of God grow, which did mean to lose some of the childish notions that dominate most of the religions. But so much can be given in return although it won't be all art and beauty; truth not always is like that.To me a world without God would be like a world without music. Where you can hear the noises, but you don't understand that they are arranged beautifully and artfully and mean something more than a collection of sound-waves hitting your eardrum.
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Click the "quote" button up the top right of a person's post, and that will insert the quoting tags into the edit window that opens up; you can also add these tags manually. Basically there are opening and closing "quote" tags (i.e. the things enclosed in square braces) and you use them like this (i.e. the second line, below "CODE: SELECT ALL"):Turambar wrote:I don't know how to quote you guy's sentences
Code: Select all
[quote="Person's name"]What the person said.[/quote]
Do you realise that you didn't use any form of one of the words at issue - justice - at all in that paragraph? I don't think that you properly addressed the question: you talked a lot about punishment, but you haven't explained how punishment relates to justice. This prompts my next questions: (1) what do you understand "justice" to mean, and how is it related to punishment? (2) Does justice ever involve rewarding rather than punishing? You don't seem to be using the same meaning that I gave justice in my last post: "applying the deserved penalty" (which I'll amend now to "applying the deserved penalty or reward"). You seem to be trying to say that justice is those (punishing) actions which teach and manipulate the governed.Turambar wrote:2) "Is there an inconsistency with a perfectly just/demanding God and a perfectly merciful God."
To answer your question immediately -- no, I don't believe there is. The point of law and punishment is not simply to punish, but to teach and to manipulate the actions of the governed. The state doesn't make it illegal to drive without seatbelts simply because it wants to ticket people and garner revenue (at least we hope that's not their motive), but instead the state has an interest in our safety and would have us wear seatbelts for our own good. So punishment isn't the end but influencing behavior is. So if God has found you or I guilty of one thing or another, his desire isn't to punish but to effect change. Mercy can come easily if he finds that we are sorry or regretful etc.
I have another two questions for you related to justice. (3) Do you believe in eternal punishment in a hell created by God, and (4) if so, do you believe that infinite punishment for finite crimes is perfectly just?
Here are two new questions based on your answer:Turambar wrote:3) "Is there a problem of evil?"
Freedom means the ability to choose to obey or disobey. Without the ability to disobey we aren't free. If we think freedom is a desirable or an inherently good thing, then God has good reason to create it. If God has created all things that are beautiful and good, then freedom would be one of those things.
5) Is God free?
6) Your answer seems to address human-caused evil and suffering, such as murder, rape and theft, but how do you account for the evil and suffering in the form of death, injury and destruction caused by "natural" disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, droughts and fires caused by lightning?
Good questions. I can think of two possible responses that a believer in divinely maintained perfect justice and mercy might give: firstly, that God is the final individual arbiter, who is uniquely qualified for setting the standards being that He created everything that is not Himself, and that "perfection" entails Him enacting His standards of arbitration perfectly; secondly, that there are, as there are laws of physics, "natural" laws (standards) of justice and mercy which only advanced enough beings are capable of discerning and "proving" - this would be a less likely answer for a believer to give as it subordinates God to these laws/standards (all of this with the caveat that I think that justice and mercy conflict with one another).Ataraxia wrote:How would that [perfect Justice, or perfect mercy] work? Whom or what is the final arbiter? It can only ever be the individual ultimately; surely.
Fine, but that doesn't address my question. In what sense(s) is the Infinite (or the Absolute) actually infinite?Robert wrote:The largest perspective possible would necessarily entail absolutely everything, hence the other nom de guerre, "The Absolute".
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Euthyphro and Socrates dealt with that on the Athens law court steps 2500 years ago. Your theistic friends are going to have to think of another 'proof'.guest_of_logic wrote: Good questions. I can think of two possible responses that a believer in divinely maintained perfect justice and mercy might give: firstly, that God is the final individual arbiter, who is uniquely qualified for setting the standards being that He created everything that is not Himself, and that "perfection" entails Him enacting His standards of arbitration perfectly
What if I have an alternate conception of what is 'perfect' to the big tyrant in the sky? How can i be wrong?
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
By thinking about it, identifying the logic, and grasping the meaning. Why do you ask "actually"? It sounds like the kind of question sometimes asked by Xians to non-believers; "Have you lived everywhen, everywhere, are you omniscient? How do you then know God doesn't exist... ?"guest_of_logic wrote:Fine, but that doesn't address my question. In what sense(s) is the Infinite (or the Absolute) actually infinite?Robert wrote:The largest perspective possible would necessarily entail absolutely everything, hence the other nom de guerre, "The Absolute".
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
That "something that knows" is your intuition, and it's never wrong. If you keep questioning why do I believe, this and that, you can hone your understanding.Turambar wrote: I've never really thought about *why*. I can't imagine not believing in God. Even if I were today to try to just go about and pretend God doesn't exist, I would never be able to convince myself. There's something in me that just *knows* but I can't describe why. My belief may not be purely rational, but I think God is more mysterious than a simple algorithm; and I think that it means something to be human to be a little irrational.
The mystery about God stems from your self imposed ignorance. You wished, as a spirit, to experience being absent from God, in this holographic cosmos. A place where you can pretend that there is no creative intelligence to reality, you just create your own reality, play roles, imagine that you are a descendant of apes, if you so wish. All these things are allowed, your commitment to the illusions depend on how your spirit responds, and how long you want to play the game.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
If your intuition tells you there's a conscious creator type god, and my intuition tells me there's no god like that; then this statement you made is wrong, because one of us has to be right, making the other person wrong.prince wrote:That "something that knows" is your intuition, and it's never wrong.
Nobody chooses to be ignorant.prince wrote:The mystery about God stems from your self imposed ignorance.
I'm going to go ahead assume your intuition told you all of this BS; am I right?prince wrote:You wished, as a spirit, to experience being absent from God, in this holographic cosmos. A place where you can pretend that there is no creative intelligence to reality, you just create your own reality, play roles, imagine that you are a descendant of apes, if you so wish. All these things are allowed, your commitment to the illusions depend on how your spirit responds, and how long you want to play the game.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Think whatever you like. You don't touch me.
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Well I wouldn't call it a proof of, it's more of an explanation, but yes, I pretty much described the two horns of Euthyphro's dilemma with respect to justice rather than morality, except for this bit: "[God] is uniquely qualified for setting the standards being that He created everything that is not Himself". This is something that I have actually seen Christian apologists write, and it's a bit of a bridge between the two horns. I also don't mind Thomas Aquinas's response, as explained on that page:Ataraxia wrote:Euthyphro and Socrates dealt with that on the Athens law court steps 2500 years ago. Your theistic friends are going to have to think of another 'proof'.
Wikipedia wrote:[T]he dilemma is false: yes, God commands something because it is good, but the reason it is good is that "good is an essential part of God's nature". So goodness is grounded in God's character and merely expressed in moral commands. Therefore whatever a good God commands will always be good.
You don't know creation like the Creator, and your faculties aren't perfect like His are, but if you did and they were, then you would have the same standards as Him [the apologist might argue].Ataraxia wrote:What if I have an alternate conception of what is 'perfect' to the big tyrant in the sky? How can i be wrong?
That's not even a grammatically correct answer to my question, let alone a semantically correct one, but if you want to go down this route, then please explain the thinking, logic and meaning to which you refer.Robert wrote:By thinking about it, identifying the logic, and grasping the meaning.guest_of_logic wrote:Fine, but that doesn't address my question. In what sense(s) is the Infinite (or the Absolute) actually infinite?Robert wrote:The largest perspective possible would necessarily entail absolutely everything, hence the other nom de guerre, "The Absolute".
I used that word for emphasis, but it's otherwise superfluous.Robert wrote:Why do you ask "actually"?
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
It made sense to me at the time, but I can understand why the wording may have been cause for frustration.guest_of_logic wrote:That's not even a grammatically correct answer to my question, let alone a semantically correct one, but if you want to go down this route, then please explain the thinking, logic and meaning to which you refer.
"In what sense(s) is the Infinite (or the Absolute) actually infinite?"
If your use of the word 'actually' is superfluous, then are you asking in what 'sense(s)' is the Absolute infinite? - I wouldn't want to confuse myself unnecessarily with ambiguous grammatical formulations.
In a nutshell, the sense in which the Absolute is infinite is purely logical. That which is boundless, boundaryless, void of all content yet which is all content and all potential. This is how the Absolute presents itself to me, to my mind. I am part of it, and it is part of me.
I can't be arsed saying any more than that.
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Yes.Robert wrote:If your use of the word 'actually' is superfluous, then are you asking in what 'sense(s)' is the Absolute infinite?
OK, but do you recognise that the concept of a boundary (or lack of a boundary) implies some sort of dimensionality? It might be three dimensional space, in which lack of boundaries means that space extends infinitely in all directions, or it might be the dimension of time, in which lack of boundaries means that time has no beginning and no end, or it might the imaginary "dimension" in which ideas exist, where lack of boundaries means that there are an unlimited number of ideas, etc. Do you see where I'm coming from now? I'm asking you which of these dimensions you intend when you write of the Infinite.Robert wrote:In a nutshell, the sense in which the Absolute is infinite is purely logical. That which is boundless, boundaryless, void of all content yet which is all content and all potential.
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
In my opinion, once we even imagine the word “that….”, we are necessarily thinking/talking about a ‘thing’, and that necessarily means some “thing” that possess some content/meaning, otherwise we cannot even imagine it. Further more, to then think that that “thing” is void of all content AND YET IS all content and potential, seems to mean logic has left the building. Either we have to go by logic OR faith, I don't think it can be both.Robert: That which is boundless, boundaryless, void of all content yet which is all content and all potential.
Well... I don’t know… please do continue though.
---------
- guest_of_logic
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:51 pm
Re: I believe in God. Taking qs
Agreed wholeheartedly, Sap, except that I don't believe that faith and logic are mutually exclusive. Welcome back from another of your many adventures too.