mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Blogorrhea > jasong

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-02-22, 15:42   #34
rudi_m
 
rudi_m's Avatar
 
Jul 2005

18210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
First step is you have to prove god exists before you can start bestowing attributes like omni*.
How is god defined by the way? I guess if it would exist but not being omni* then it wouldn't match most commonly used definitions of god.

Last fiddled with by rudi_m on 2017-02-22 at 15:42
rudi_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-22, 15:55   #35
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2·3·1,567 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubslow View Post
But for the purposes of "science", empirical observation and inductive reasoning, we accept a certain threshold of confidence to mean "know".
And that's the "leap of faith" I mentioned above.

Overall I think we strongly align in our thinking and our reasoning. But I am often reminded that thinking deeply about very small errors in our observations vs. our theories have led to remarkable insights and discoveries.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-22, 16:01   #36
chappy
 
chappy's Avatar
 
"Jeff"
Feb 2012
St. Louis, Missouri, USA

115710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
First step is you have to prove god exists before you can start bestowing attributes like omni*.
I think you may have things backwards. You need a definition of G-d in order to start talking about proofs.

For example, Jasong's conception of G-d seems pretty unlikely to exist. This all-knowing, all loving being makes the entire universe appear to act in one way, gives humans the ability to see the evidence for the way the universe acts, gives humans the reasoning capability to understand bits and pieces of that working, then says no, the universe doesn't work that way at all and if you believe that you are going to spend eternity in torment.

Those things would seem to reduce to absurdity.

It's no wonder though, since his evidence is his own poor interpretation of what are likely bad translations of stories that people wrote down thousands of years ago from stories that were even older. Other traditions crept in and left marks like viral DNA that we can trace (like the concept of an afterlife which was pretty new and limited to some sects of the Jewish faith in the 1st century BCE.) Some parts were intentionally changed, sections were added later. There were votes by humans on which parts get to be called "scripture" there were deals made between factions on which books make the final cut. (this is how the The Revelation of John made it in last and even a century later arguments were being made about it's inclusion)

At every turn we find modern fundamentalism based on the false assumption that finite human understanding can reliably define an infinite being. And they do so with only the crudest of tools and only the basest understanding of those tools. It would be sad if there weren't so many of them trying to push their agenda on the real world.
chappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-22, 18:28   #37
CRGreathouse
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Aug 2006

3·1,987 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chappy View Post
I think you may have things backwards. You need a definition of G-d in order to start talking about proofs.
My favorite thing about proofs of the existence (or nonexistence) of God is that they implicitly contain a definition.
CRGreathouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-22, 19:15   #38
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×3×1,567 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
My favorite thing about proofs of the existence (or nonexistence) of God is that they implicitly contain a definition.
If I may please share a personal experience... This is sincere.

I "found god" after reading an article in a Scientific American I had purchased. Within it was pseudo code for the Mandelbrot Set.

I coded that up on a Commodore 64 in 6502, and let it run for the night.

My mind exploded the next morning. I'm not exaggerating.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-25, 00:54   #39
jasong
 
jasong's Avatar
 
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005

350510 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
I agree a common fault with Christians. We don't stand a chance of understanding an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God with a finite human brain.
I guess I have to super-careful how I say this.

Let's say you were 100% certain that something was true. Then someone comes along and contradicts that in a non-obvious manner. I would think it would be quite difficult to change your mind, and people might assume you to be close-minded.

I think of Christianity as being similar to The Standard Model. If you take it in discrete chunks, it's easy to make fun of. It's only when you view it as a cohesive whole that stuff makes sense.
jasong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-25, 22:00   #40
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×3×1,567 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong View Post
Let's say you were 100% certain that something was true.
And this is the fundamental error in your thinking. You CAN'T be 100% certain of anything. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you might be "enlightened", and truly "find god".

If you haven't yet read A History of God by Karen Armstrong, I would highly recommend it.

A good friend of mine is a devout Catholic, and also a serious PhD in the medical sciences.

I asked her once if she truly believed there was a "higher being". She said she did, but she also added: "Look, the Bible should not be taken literally. It's a bit like a 'heath and safety' manual. For example, mess with your neighbour's wife, bad things might happen.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-03-02, 01:43   #41
jasong
 
jasong's Avatar
 
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005

5×701 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
And this is the fundamental error in your thinking. You CAN'T be 100% certain of anything. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you might be "enlightened", and truly "find god".

If you haven't yet read A History of God by Karen Armstrong, I would highly recommend it.

A good friend of mine is a devout Catholic, and also a serious PhD in the medical sciences.

I asked her once if she truly believed there was a "higher being". She said she did, but she also added: "Look, the Bible should not be taken literally. It's a bit like a 'heath and safety' manual. For example, mess with your neighbour's wife, bad things might happen.
No offense, but Catholicism means the pope, and I trust him about as far as I can throw him. Being a well loved and respected Christian shouldn't need any sort of recruitment method.
jasong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-03-02, 01:57   #42
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

73×139 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong View Post
No offense, but Catholicism means the pope, and I trust him about as far as I can throw him. Being a well loved and respected Christian shouldn't need any sort of recruitment method.
Not to defend the pope, necessarily, but your response suggests a seiously sectarian basis for judgement. Are you talking about the current pope, or papishness in general?
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-03-02, 18:40   #43
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×3×1,567 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong View Post
No offense, but Catholicism means the pope, and I trust him about as far as I can throw him.
No offence taken. And no offence back, but it seems you didn't really understand what we were saying here. It seems like you don't want to face the possibility that your beliefs could possibly be incorrect.

Not really surprising. But a little saddening.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-03-02, 20:04   #44
chappy
 
chappy's Avatar
 
"Jeff"
Feb 2012
St. Louis, Missouri, USA

13×89 Posts
Default

Is this a surprise to anyone? He's already decided to let a collection of books that he can't read dictate the limits of his supposedly limitless deity.

You would think that the very notion of placing a book above G-d would be enough to cause a little doubt to creep in, but instead it just proves that modern fundamentalist Christianity worships (a particular and not consistent interpretation of) the Bible not a god.

More power to them, if they were honest. Since they are not, point out their hypocrisy with the zeal of the fanatic--it is the only language they seem to understand.
chappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's a good website for reviews of digitally-based content? jasong jasong 0 2015-06-23 22:55
ecm-discuss mailing list archives chris2be8 GMP-ECM 3 2015-04-26 10:34
Good air-cooler good enough for overclocked i7-5820K RienS Hardware 17 2014-11-18 22:58
DISCUSS IT WITH YOUR TEAM! Raman Game 1 - ♚♛♝♞♜♟ - Shaolin Pirates 18 2013-02-22 08:00
My fatalistic(sp?) reason for believing in God. jasong Soap Box 22 2006-05-04 19:26

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:10.

Sun Jan 17 03:10:18 UTC 2021 up 44 days, 23:21, 0 users, load averages: 3.20, 2.70, 2.53

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.