Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50

Thread: Atheists Are Right, "God" Isn't "Real"

  1. #21
    Senior Member Wychaert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Last Online
    Wednesday, July 10th, 2019 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Ancestry
    Gelderland
    Subrace
    Borreby/Dalofaelid/Nordid
    Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    State
    Gelderland Gelderland
    Location
    Betuwenaar in Salland
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Volks
    Religion
    Odalist
    Posts
    661
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    156
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    94
    Thanked in
    27 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev. Jupiter View Post
    "God is the Unique, and he is so perfect that he does not resemble any of the things that exist or any of the things that do not; you cannot describe him using your human intelligence, as if he were someone who becomes angry if you are bad or worries about you out of goodness, someone who has a mouth, ears, face, wings, or that is spirit, father or son, not even of himself. Of the Unique you cannot say he is or is not, he embraces all but is nothing; you can name him only through dissimilarity, because it is futile to call him Goodness, Beauty, Wisdom, Amiability, Power, Justice, it would be like calling him Bear, Panther, Serpent, Dragon, or Gryphon, because whatever you say of him you will never express him. God is not body, is not figure, is not form; he does not see, does not hear, does not know disorder and perturbation; he is not soul, intelligence, imagination, opinion, thought, word, number, order, size; he is not equality and is not inequality, is not time and is not eternity; he is a will without purpose." - Umberto Eco


    Oke... That didnt make any sence to me.

    He Is this, he is that. And then he is not this nor that.

    Why would you believe in such a thing?
    And can you imagine yourself, what is a live without such thing?
    ''Ginds de Waal, daar weer de IJssel, dan de Maas en ook de Rijn. Geeft ons recht om heel ons leven trots op Gelderland te zijn.''

  2. #22
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    ■eudiskaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, December 21st, 2016 @ 08:34 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Deutsch
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Minnesota Minnesota
    Location
    Twin Cities Metro
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Ethnic Neo-Tribalist
    Posts
    492
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev. Jupiter View Post
    If you're really that unskilled at sitting and pondering the meaning of my words, I'll spell it out for you.

    Fact is not truth. Fact is perception. To establish the factuality of something is to establish something is bound by perception. To even consider factuality as a legitimatizing quality is binding oneself to the whims of subjectivity.
    To think of God in terms of existence or nonexistence is to relegate God to the realm of empiricism, to the world of the manifest. God, being un-manifest, cannot be thought of in terms confined to the manifest.

    Atheists deny God because they do not understand the philosophical perspective necessary to speak on the nature of God.

    tl;dr - Of course God makes no sense in material terms, because God cannot be adequately described or understood in material terms.
    Nope. Fact is truth. By linguistic definition. Knowledge isn't always truth, we can "know"things that are nonetheless not true, but fact always is true, even if we cannot ascertain what fact, or truth is. And you can take your asshat off any time now.
    "So, yes, we are better than others. Our worldviews are better than those of others. This does not need to be universally true, it is enough when it is true for us." - velvet

    "Our blood unity is of infinitely more worth than religious particularities;" - Chlodovech

  3. #23
    Senior Member Rev. Jupiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    Friday, January 21st, 2011 @ 02:20 AM
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Western
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Politics
    Radical Traditionalist
    Religion
    The Noble Path
    Posts
    310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Donar eick View Post
    Why would you believe in such a thing?
    Taking off a blindfold, it would be foolish to deny my surroundings simply because it does not fit with the assumptions I formed while wearing the blindfold.

    Quote Originally Posted by Donar eick View Post
    And can you imagine yourself, what is a live without such thing?
    Rather dull and uninspired. Been there, done that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Der_Erlkoenig View Post
    Nope. Fact is truth. By linguistic definition.
    So instead of criticizing the concept I was conveying you've raised issue with the particular word choice? And changing the focus of the discussion instead of addressing my points is supposed to make you look more intelligent...how?
    To practice magic is to be a quack; to know magic is to be a sage. - Eliphas LÚvi

  4. #24
    Senior Member Rev. Jupiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    Friday, January 21st, 2011 @ 02:20 AM
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Western
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Politics
    Radical Traditionalist
    Religion
    The Noble Path
    Posts
    310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Anyway, this whole thread is hilarious...

    I post a quote explaining that atheists are foolish for positing a definition of God to which they can attach the quality of "falsehood", and they proceed to do exactly that.

    Excellent job proving me wrong, guys.
    To practice magic is to be a quack; to know magic is to be a sage. - Eliphas LÚvi

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, August 6th, 2012 @ 08:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    German/Irish
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Computer CAD/ Civil
    Politics
    Libertarian/Conservative
    Posts
    1,773
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    According to Kardashev scale, a Type 3 civilization would look very close to "Gods" to human beings, and anything above that Type 4 would probably fit the bill in the biblical aspect.

    It really just depends on how far you want to extrapolate the curve does it not?

  6. #26
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Gender
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    115
    Thanked in
    45 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev. Jupiter View Post
    Anyway, this whole thread is hilarious...

    I post a quote explaining that atheists are foolish for positing a definition of God to which they can attach the quality of "falsehood", and they proceed to do exactly that.

    Excellent job proving me wrong, guys.
    We must have read a different thread then.
    Most replies were more about the relevance of God if God cannot be defined by human beings. If God cannot be defined, how can it be relevant to our lives. Are human beings confined to the knowable world or is there more to man? How can you talk about the existence of God when God isn't something you can define, whence do humans get this knowledge?

    In stead of calling it hilarious, I would say these are pretty interesting questions.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, August 6th, 2012 @ 08:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    German/Irish
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Computer CAD/ Civil
    Politics
    Libertarian/Conservative
    Posts
    1,773
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    If God cannot be defined, how can it be relevant to our lives. Are human beings confined to the knowable world or is there more to man?
    I would say Gravity is pretty relevant to human beings, and as of yet it has not been defined by modern physics.

    Try jumping off a cliff sometime and see if it is irrelevant.

  8. #28
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Gender
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    115
    Thanked in
    45 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter View Post
    I would say Gravity is pretty relevant to human beings, and as of yet it has not been defined by modern physics.

    Try jumping off a cliff sometime and see if it is irrelevant.
    That's probably why Newton considered gravity to be evidence that God is actively involved with the world in contrast to the cartesian mechanistic model that was common in those days. But gravity still is empirically observable, although we haven't (yet) completely discovered how it works. A definition of gravity might be given in the future, while according to the quote in the opening post a definition of God is impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard
    Are human beings confined to the knowable world or is there more to man? How can you talk about the existence of God when God isn't something you can define, whence do humans get this knowledge?
    As an answer to these questions, I think the following part written by Iamblichus of Chalcis is interesting (It's about the intuitive knowledge of which Ardito spoke.):

    Quote Originally Posted by Iamblichus
    Thou beginnest accordingly by saying: "In the first place, it is to be taken for granted that there are gods." Speaking in this way is not right. For the inborn knowledge in respect to the gods is coexistent with our very being, and is superior to all judging and deciding beforehand. Indeed, it is preexistent both to argument and demonstration, and is united interiorly from the beginning to its own divine cause and is coexistent with the inherent longing and impulse of the soul to the Good.
    If, however, we must speak truly, the conjoining to the divine nature is not knowing, for this is kept separate after a manner by an otherness.
    Prior to this knowing, however, which is as of one individual having knowledge of another, the intimate union as in a single concept is self-originated and indistinguishable. Hence we ought to concede the point as though possibly it might not be granted, not to assume it as a matter of uncertainty'. for it always existed simply in energy. Nor is it proper to put it to proof in this way as though we had authority to judge and reject ; for we are ourselves encompassed in it, or rather we are filled by it, and the very selfhood which we are we possess in this knowing of the gods.
    I have, moreover, the same thing to say to thee in regard to the Superior races which come next in order after the gods. I mean the dŠmons, heroes, and uncontaminate souls.
    For it is always necessary to bear in mind respecting these subordinate races that they have one defined form of essence; also that we put aside from our conception of them the indefiniteness and instability which are incident to the human constitution and renounce the tendency to incline to the other side which arises from attempts to counterbalance the opposition of the arguments. For such a thing is foreign to the principles of reason and life, but is derived from secondary sources, such even as belong to the power and contrariness of the realm of generated existence. It is necessary, however, to treat of them as being of a uniform nature.
    Let it be admitted, then, that with the companions of the gods in the eternal region there is the innate perception of them.
    Therefore, even as they have their being always after the same manner, so also the human soul is conjoined to them by Knowledge according to the same principles; never by any conjecture, opinion or reasoning which have their beginning in Time pursuing the essence which is beyond all these, but by pure and faultless intuitions which it received out of eternity from the gods being conjoined with them in these principles.
    Nevertheless, thou seemest to consider the knowing of divine beings to be the same as the knowing of other matters, and likewise that a point may be taken for granted from opposing arguments, as is usual in debates. But there is no such similarity. For the perceiving of them is absolutely distinct from everything of antithetic character. It is not made valid by being now conceded or by coming into existence, but on the other hand it is a single concept, and coexisted with the soul from eternity.
    I say such things to thee, therefore, in regard to the first principle in us, at which it is necessary for those to begin who would both speak and hear anything whatever concerning the superior races or about ourselves.
    Source: http://www.esotericarchives.com/orac...l_th.htm#chap2

  9. #29
    Senior Member Rev. Jupiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    Friday, January 21st, 2011 @ 02:20 AM
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Western
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Politics
    Radical Traditionalist
    Religion
    The Noble Path
    Posts
    310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    If God cannot be defined, how can it be relevant to our lives.
    God cannot be defined in purely human terms. Thus, he serves as a model for the Absolute to lend context to the philosophical questions of humankind, and through this, the true face of the Absolute is known by purifying the mind of purely human concepts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Are human beings confined to the knowable world
    Certainly not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    How can you talk about the existence of God when God isn't something you can define, whence do humans get this knowledge?
    Intuition, provoked by contemplation and praxis. Through this, God can become known, if not knowable.
    To practice magic is to be a quack; to know magic is to be a sage. - Eliphas LÚvi

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Online
    Saturday, August 25th, 2012 @ 03:47 PM
    Ethnicity
    Danish
    Ancestry
    Danish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Denmark Denmark
    Location
    K°benhavn
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Unemployed
    Politics
    Nationalist, conservative
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    382
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    I am more then a bit confused as to what point you are trying to make. Are you advocating a Deist worldview?

    Because surely you realise that the God you speak of is not the God of the Bible, Quran nor the God of any organised religion.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: Saturday, June 16th, 2018, 01:02 PM
  2. "Thank God America Isn't Like Europe - Yet"
    By Kriemhild in forum The United States
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Monday, November 14th, 2011, 04:58 PM
  3. "Mathematical Proof that the "Quran" is the Word of God"
    By Thorburn in forum Comparative Religion
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: Sunday, November 26th, 2006, 11:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •