On reincarnation of God

[TheMeInTeam]

When you choose the measurement standards that everyone must adhere to, you put your thumb on the scale to tip the balance in your favor.

"empirical reality" does not "tip the balance in my favor".

or if it does, that implies a great deal of self-reflection for those with whom reality does not similarly favor...

It is the easiest way to look like you have won the argument. There are times when one set of rules are important, but not always. Rules tend to be about some kind of winning or comparing.

one of the "easiest ways" is to go after the credibility of the poster rather than addressing the arguments presented, a favorite tactic on these boards certainly not limited to you. this has surprising effectiveness, given how it's no more meaningful than skipping the fuss and slinging insults directly.

it has no real credibility greater than making insults though.

There are times when one set of rules are important, but not always.

the set of rules in question are those that govern reality, insofar as we can understand them. when you make evidence-based estimates about something, or measurements to confirm them, there is a presumption you're operating with reality and not playing pretend. if you're not operating in reality, i'm not sure what the point of this discussion is.

Rules tend to be about some kind of winning or comparing.

to my knowledge, empirical reality itself does not care about winning or comparing.

If the only way you can "win" a discussion is to insist that your rules must apply, you have already lost.

this seems to be what you're doing, not what i am doing. your earlier post includes "observing and measuring" evidence of the existence of a deity. people aren't actually doing that, because they can't constrain anticipation to how the world looks with or without the presence of said deity.

that isn't an opinion or fluff. if your model of something will look the same no matter what the measurement says, you're not testing for the thing. you're not making observations that can possibly be relevant to the thing. you can't be. if you were, then it is necessarily possible to describe how the presence of the thing makes what you observe look different than if the thing did not exist.

so let me be clear. i am saying this:

They see it happen everyday and likely could count off instances. Observing and measuring.

is therefore objectively false. a belief about something in reality needs to inform what experiences you expect to have/see/etc.

 

[Narz]

But I gather that a lot of people, some atheists maybe included, don't much like unblinking stares at the world.

What?

We'd be such better gods, I'm sure.

I wouldn't kill a dude's whole family over a bet on how loyal he is to me. Even your run of the mill sociopath might balk at that one.

 

[Farm Boy]

You hate the world, you hate it's God.

Did Job get special treatment, really? I think not. It's not a bet, it seems like that because that's what you'll think it is when you have the faith of a child. Like Job at the start. Rather, it is a promise from God. He'll keep it, too. That I promise you.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Our cultural history is shaped by it (to the extent that everybody knows about Henry VIII and the Church of England, it's very well-covered in school. Or used to be at least).

I suppose it's a basic part of your history curriculum, much like Louis Riel is here. Henry VIII was never part of any history curriculum I took. Everything I know about the Tudors was learned through independent study (some people may learn early Tudor history in the SCA, but since my own persona pre-dates it by several centuries I wasn't really that interested at the time).

Humorously, most atheists I believe, strongly believe in science and proofs. It's my view on strong atheists.

Why is that "humorous"?

You hate the world, you hate it's God.

Did Job get special treatment, really? I think not. It's not a bet, it seems like that because that's what you'll think it is when you have the faith of a child. Like Job at the start. Rather, it is a promise from God. He'll keep it, too. That I promise you.

Ooh, threats!

Seriously, am I supposed to be shaking in my bedroom slippers?

I'm honestly not super-enthusiastic about the planet Venus. So does that mean I hate whatever god the hypothetical lifeforms of Venus worship? (Ben Bova hypothesized lifeforms living in certain layers of the atmosphere)

 

[Farm Boy]

It is also not a threat. <shrugs>

Read in the "if" in front of the first sentence, if that helps. It's not like you'll get a reprieve or worse cookie, either way. I mean, that's sort of the whole book rolled into one.

And I would read a more expansive meaning of "world." The church is "universal." I guess we could quibble about pan-dimensionality if we need to cut everything up into bite sized pieces?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It is also not a threat. <shrugs>

Read in the "if" in front of the first sentence, if that helps. It's not like you'll get a reprieve or worse cookie, either way. I mean, that's sort of the whole book rolled into one.

And I would read a more expansive meaning of "world." The church is "universal." I guess we could quibble about pan-dimensionality if we need to cut everything up into bite sized pieces?

How can something be "universal" if it's not... universal? It may be popular, but popular isn't the same as "everyone."

 

[Farm Boy]

Which part of the church do you need to cut into the bite sized piece? The membership rolls?

Attendance or non-attendance does not change the promise of Job.

 

[El_Machinae]

I wouldn't kill a dude's whole family over a bet on how loyal he is to me. Even your run of the mill sociopath might balk at that one.

The entire story of Job works better from an atheist perspective, where he's constantly being question as to whether he's grateful to be alive and then chooses to be. The problems with the story is that it treats the universe as if it was a person that could intervene but chooses not to.

We don't get mad at gravity for holding us down, cuz we don't think it's morally complicit

 

[Farm Boy]

Which is a moronic impulse to begin with. Understandable. But stupid. Or is it just maximal arrogance? That's probably closer.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Which part of the church do you need to cut into the bite sized piece? The membership rolls?

Attendance or non-attendance does not change the promise of Job.

I really don't care about Job. Honestly, my issue here is how something can be said to be universal when it obviously isn't. No religion is "universal" because there are always people (whether individual or in groups) that either believe something else or don't believe anything.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, that's what I'm responding to whether you care about it or not?

But yes. As far as membership goes, not all children of God style themselves exactly the same.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Well, that's what I'm responding to whether you care about it or not?

But yes. As far as membership goes, not all children of God style themselves exactly the same.

Why are you assuming that all believers believe in your monotheistic god (regardless of which of the 3 main faiths may apply)?

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm not. But you seem to be convinced I do? You going to take my word on it, or yours?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I'm not. But you seem to be convinced I do? You going to take my word on it, or yours?

It appears that we are operating from different definitions of "universal."

You seem to think that the 3 main monotheistic religions are "universal", ie. believed in by everyone (whichever of the 3 may apply).

They aren't.

 

[Farm Boy]

Your word, then. Gotcha.

 

[citizenofdoom]

Why is that "humorous"?

Are you Bayesian or Frequentist? - YouTube
It's just I stand in a different perceptive than others.
It's like how the Dems see Reps stupid and how the Reps see the Dem brainless.
The world already existed.

 

[Narz]

The entire story of Job works better from an atheist perspective, where he's constantly being question as to whether he's grateful to be alive and then chooses to be. The problems with the story is that it treats the universe as if it was a person that could intervene but chooses not to.

Let's be real it's a terrible story.

It's not about gratitude it's about blind faith and obedience and Christianity is not about 'the universe', its very clearly about an anthropomorphic god. Any talk of 'the universe' is breaking the 1st commandment.

If your wife, kids, livelihood and health all get destroyed, sure stiff upper lip and try to appreciate what you do have but if gangsters do that to your family (and again that would be well below all but the most ruthless) and you grovel to them, telling them you think they know best... it's just delusional and pathetic.

 

[Farm Boy]

Shows what you know, doesn't it?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Shows what you know, doesn't it?

I find Narz' post to be well-reasoned.

 

[Farm Boy]

It's still ignorant.