Who is God?

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

I'm pretty sure this topic has been killed dead.

 

[WarK]

I'm pretty sure this topic has been killed dead.

as opposed to killed alive?

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

I'm pretty sure this topic has been killed dead.

as opposed to killed alive?

Yes.

 

[Josephhasfun01]

The reason I ask 'who is God' is because there are many different beliefs about God.

Indeed! 30,000+ versions of christianity alone!

You should consider that not all people are gonna agree on everything.

There's mythology stemming from a Pagonis tic view. Then there is other beliefs in God like the Hindus, Zen Buddhism and New Age, belief. They believe in a pantheist God. this pantheist view believes God is nature. Mythology has it wrong as most all of mythological gods are deemed finite. They can die. Most have not been claimed to have created the universe. Logically gods in this view can be ruled out as plausible.

What, as opposed to gods who have been claimed to have created the universe? The problem there is that such a conception of deity is incoherent. It isn't possible for any entity to be the creator of the universe, because the universe is 'that which is' and encompasses everything that exists. A deity, being something that allegedly exists, can only be a subset of the universe at best, thus could not be the creator thereof. Also, on what basis do you assert that finite gods can be excluded merely on the basis of their finitude?

The cause of the universe has to be timeless and immaterial, nonspatial. Finite gods would have been created.



That is the equivalent to a painter creating himself into the painting.

What? Utterly incoherent.

exactly



In fact there is no evidence Mohammed even existed.

There's a damn sight more secular evidence for the existence of Mohammed than there is for Jeebus.

You can't be serious. Your one of those fundi atheists aren't you?

 

[australopithecus]

You're one of those willfully ignorant theists, aren't you?

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

. The electromagentic field is comprised of elements called photons.

elements called photons

elements ... photons

Please, point out where on a Periodic Table of Elements that a photon can be found.

I'm dying to know what they're made out of.

Sarcasm aside, photons are packets of energy. There is no physical form of a photon, but we can detect them and use them.
Your understanding of Physics is even worse than your comprehension of basic elements of philosophy.

Have you even read a work of Philosophy?

Joseph.

Respond, if you are willing?

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

YEPPERS

 

[Josephhasfun01]

"energy could be considered as an element but energy may or may not be a compound"

I guess energy is immaterial also. So you actually help my argument for the existence of immaterial. We know it exists yet we cannot directly see it.

 

[australopithecus]

I guess energy is immaterial also. So you actually help my argument for the existence of immaterial. We know it exists yet we cannot directly see it.

No one is questioning the existence of the immaterial, what we are rejecting is your nonsense logic that is because immaterial concepts exist, this proves God because God is apparently immaterial.

 

[Josephhasfun01]

I guess energy is immaterial also. So you actually help my argument for the existence of immaterial. We know it exists yet we cannot directly see it.

No one is questioning the existence of the immaterial, what we are rejecting is your nonsense logic that is because immaterial concepts exist, this proves God because God is apparently immaterial.

true. Although it does not prove God to exist it certainly does implicate that things exists that we cannot see. It also refutes materialism.
Christopher Hitchens would have no way to back up his assumption that all the exists is material. How can you rule God out when the existence of immaterial is obvious?

 

[Josephhasfun01]

You're one of those willfully ignorant theists, aren't you?

No. I just can't believe it Austra! How can some one say that Jesus never existed? We might as well say that Abraham Lincoln never existed too.

 

[australopithecus]

You're one of those willfully ignorant theists, aren't you?

No. I just can't believe it Austra! How can some one say that Jesus never existed? We might as well say that Abraham Lincoln never existed too.

Well the fact that there are no contemporary accounts of Jesus, and that all historical references to him occur decades after he supposedly lives would lead someone to question his existence. Whereas there are contemporary accounts of the life and actions of Mohammed. Your assertion is as ignorant as you claim others to be.

And assuming Jesus did exist, the fact a man called Jesus lived 2000 years ago does not make any of the claim of the Bible true.

 

[Laurens]

You're one of those willfully ignorant theists, aren't you?

No. I just can't believe it Austra! How can some one say that Jesus never existed? We might as well say that Abraham Lincoln never existed too.

There is pretty much fuck all contemporary, secular evidence that Jesus existed. All we have to go by is the gospels and the letters of Paul none of which were contemporary and none of which were from unbiased sources.

The best we can say is that there probably was a rambling Jewish preacher who went by the name of Jesus - but there are legitimate grounds for doubting this.

 

[Josephhasfun01]

Well, even supposing that this is true, the same can be said of christianity. Jeebus himself said so, according to your book of wibble:

Matthew wrote:5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall

Jesus did fulfill the law. The law is not expected to be followed. The law is merely used to shed light onto sin to expose it. One can be a Xtian and not follow Jesus.

 

[tuxbox]

1) There is pretty much fuck all contemporary, secular evidence that Jesus existed. All we have to go by is the gospels and the letters of Paul none of which were contemporary and none of which were from unbiased sources.

2) The best we can say is that there probably was a rambling Jewish preacher who went by the name of Jesus - but there are legitimate grounds for doubting this.

1) There are other sources other than what is written in the Christian Bible. There is the Arabic translation of Joshephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" and Publius Cornelius Tacitus also mentions him as well.


2)

It is also not unreasonable to conclude that a Rabbi Yeshua (aka Jesus Christ) did exist. That said, I agree with you that there are grounds for doubt.

 

[devilsadvocate]

I guess energy is immaterial also. So you actually help my argument for the existence of immaterial. We know it exists yet we cannot directly see it.

I'm admittedly no expert in physics, but I have hard time understanding energy as being immaterial. Rather I feel like the term "energy" is an umbrella mathematical abstraction of concrete physical occurrences. In a bit the same way that a thermometer is not any single material thing, but can be realized in many physical ways and has many, what philosophers call, token instances, thermometers are still material things.

 

[Josephhasfun01]

I guess energy is immaterial also. So you actually help my argument for the existence of immaterial. We know it exists yet we cannot directly see it.

I'm admittedly no expert in physics, but I have hard time understanding energy as being immaterial. Rather I feel like the term "energy" is an umbrella mathematical abstraction of concrete physical occurrences. In a bit the same way that a thermometer is not any single material thing, but can be realized in many physical ways and has many, what philosophers call, token instances, thermometers are still material things.

I always love it when you wiegh in advocate. I have done some reading up on energy and it appears not much is known about what it is compised of. thermomters are material but the rising and falling of mercury is still contingent on action and reaction.

 

[Darkprophet232]

There are other sources other than what is written in the Christian Bible. There is the Arabic translation of Joshephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" and Publius Cornelius Tacitus also mentions him as well.

Josephus talks about at least 20 different people all named Jesus, with only one possible being about THE Jesus. This one passage is considered a forgery for two reasons:

1) Josephus was extremely detail oriented; he would spend entire chapters on a single mugging case if it caught his interest. Why would this same man only spare a paragraph for a man who could cure the blind and walk on water?

2) The paragraph is littered with Christian phrasing and terminology, odd for a devout Jew.

Tacitus mentions Jesus as that guy all those cannibalistic atheists worshiped, whom were destroying Rome from the inside. Tacitcus was repeating the Christians belief that a man named Jesus had been crucified 60-some-odd years ago. There were no official records of his crucifixion, so it would have been impossible for Tacitus to know that Jesus had been crucified.

It is also not unreasonable to conclude that a Rabbi Yeshua (aka Jesus Christ) did exist. That said, I agree with you that there are grounds for doubt.

I contend that the existence of a single, non-deity rabbi in Jerusalem is of no importance to debate, regardless of his name. The Jesus of the gospels, on the other hand, who brought a man back to life, rose from the dead, and raised a horde of zombies from a nearby cemetery upon his resurrection, did not exist.

 

[Josephhasfun01]

I contend that the existence of a single, non-deity rabbi in Jerusalem is of no importance to debate, regardless of his name. The Jesus of the gospels, on the other hand, who brought a man back to life, rose from the dead, and raised a horde of zombies from a nearby cemetery upon his resurrection, did not exist.

Why is it not important? You have ruled out Jesus' existence because of miracles? did I get that right?

 

[australopithecus]

I always love it when you wiegh in advocate. I have done some reading up on energy and it appears not much is known about what it is compised of. thermomters are material but the rising and falling of mercury is still contingent on action and reaction.

Energy isn't "comprised of" anything, it's a quantitive description. Again, you've no idea what you're talking about and your 5 second glance at wikipedia doesn't make you an expert on any subject.