Proof that I am God.

[Tuddrussell]

Repent to the one true God .

Who, me or Certainty?

 

[Antarctika]

Me

 

[Tuddrussell]

Now by "Me" you mean yourself and not me? This argument will get nowhere, why can't we all be gods?

I claim dominion over the forest, the animals within, and Time itself.

 

[chris4243]

I know I exist, on account that I can think and something must exist in some form to be able to think. I don't know that I really have a physical body as opposed to being someone else's dream, a computer simulation, etc. Furthermore, other people are smarter than I, and they think and must therefore exist in some form -- though they might be figments of my own imagination. Whatever it is that these other people are, some of them are greater than I.

Proof that two examples of sophistry don't lead us to worthwhile conclusions when mixed.

^What he said.

 

[Tuddrussell]

^How do you know that you are thinking? That your thoughts are your own?

If you are a figment of someone's imagination then it is not you who is thinking. Your thoughts are imposed upon you.

 

[elopez]

...In other words we all either exist or we don't exist? That's kind of obvious.

If we all exist then none of us are god.

If none of us exist then none of us are god.

Either way, not one of us humans are god. That is kind of obvious, not any point you're attempting to make.

 

[Tuddrussell]

There is no reason why a human can't both exist and be god, without being the only human that exists.

Also, if none of us exists that still deosn't mean we can't be gods. We can be a god that doesn't exist.

My point is that it is impossible to say definitively that no humans are gods, or that no gods are human.

 

[Antarctika]

Since without myself, nothing would exist for me, i am the only one cause of everything that exists for sure.

I am God.

 

[elopez]

There is no reason why a human can't both exist and be god, without being the only human that exists.

It depends on what you mean by god. If by god you mean the singular deity of monotheism, there is good reason why a human cannot be both human and God. If by god you mean some deity that could be assembled into a pantheon of gods or goddesses such as in polytheism, then perhaps one may begin to argue a human can be both god and man, but even then it's not as if one could get away claiming he is Ptah or some Hindu deity.

Also, if none of us exists that still deosn't mean we can't be gods. We can be a god that doesn't exist.

I don't see how it wouldn't. If a god doesn't exist we cannot be it to not exist. Nothing may exist if we nor a god did not.

My point is that it is impossible to say definitively that no humans are gods, or that no gods are human.

I wouldn't say it's impossible at all to say that no humans are gods. It may just depend on the context.

 

[Tuddrussell]

It depends on what you mean by god. If by god you mean the singular deity of monotheism, there is good reason why a human cannot be both human and God. If by god you mean some deity that could be assembled into a pantheon of gods or goddesses such as in polytheism, then perhaps one may begin to argue a human can be both god and man, but even then it's not as if one could get away claiming he is Ptah or some Hindu deity.

Why can't a human be the "sigular deity of monotheism," I see no reason why this cannot be the case. I dare you to say that to Ptah's giant jerkyface.

I don't see how it wouldn't. If a god doesn't exist we cannot be it to not exist. Nothing may exist if we nor a god did not.

you say that a human may not exist, and that a god may not exist. There is no reason whatsoever why a nonextant human can't also be a nonextant god.

I wouldn't say it's impossible at all to say that no humans are gods. It may just depend on the context.

I used to be a pagan, and still roll with that crowd, so it's very hard for me to even comprehend "god" and "man" as being mutually exclusive.

We're all just people livin' our lives. The only difference between them is that men don't generally crap thunder and whiz lightning. (I changed it!)

 

[elopez]

Why can't a human be the "sigular deity of monotheism," I see no reason why this cannot be the case. I dare you to say that to Ptah's giant jerkyface.

Because the monotheistic God has properties that a human could not possibly possess. The God of monotheism is eternal, meaning no beginning to existence while us humans would have a beginning to our existence.

you say that a human may not exist, and that a god may not exist. There is no reason whatsoever why a nonextant human can't also be a nonextant god.

Yes, there is. If a human does not exist it could not 'be,' as to 'be' is in a sense to 'exist,' a nonexistent god. That is rather simple.

I used to be a pagan, and still roll with that crowd, so it's very hard for me to even comprehend "god" and "man" as being mutually exclusive.

So you used to be pagan or still are pagan? Which is it? As I said perhaps it is more conceivable from a pagan view point as it would depend on how we define 'god.' It not as conceivable from a monotheistic view point, which again would mean the concept of 'god' needs to be defined.

We're all just people livin' our lives. The only difference between them is that men don't generally crap thunder and whiz lightning. (I changed it!)

Generally. Nor do humans create the universe or the earth, and that is something I would to say to Ptah's face!

 

[Tuddrussell]

Because the monotheistic God has properties that a human could not possibly possess. The God of monotheism is eternal, meaning no beginning to existence while us humans would have a beginning to our existence.

I get the feeling that you are talking about Yahweh, the God of Abraham. He is not "the monotheistic god," he is A monotheistic god. There is also no reason why a human cannot be eternal, nor is there a reason why a god must be eternal.

Eternal does not mean without a beginning, it means without an END.

Yes, there is. If a human does not exist it could not 'be,' as to 'be' is in a sense to 'exist,' a nonexistent god. That is rather simple.

You're equivocating, and it is nothing more than pedantry. Something that does not exist is not subject to the rules of existance. It can be anything, as long as that anything is nothing.

So you used to be pagan or still are pagan? Which is it? As I said perhaps it is more conceivable from a pagan view point as it would depend on how we define 'god.' It not as conceivable from a monotheistic view point, which again would mean the concept of 'god' needs to be defined.

I no longer worship pagan gods, but still consider myself a pagan as that's a large part of who I am. Monotheism is just the belief in one god, it has no dogma or "view." There is no reason why the One True God cannot be human.

The bible says that we are created in God's image, that implies humanity on its part. Or at least the appearance of such.

Generally. Nor do humans create the universe or the earth, and that is something I would to say to Ptah's face!

One word: Generally. That is to say usually but not always.

 

[elopez]

I get the feeling that you are talking about Yahweh, the God of Abraham. He is not "the monotheistic god," he is A monotheistic god. There is also no reason why a human cannot be eternal, nor is there a reason why a god must be eternal.

There is no "A" as in more than one. There is only One. The, as in singular, hence "mono." And yes, there is plenty good reason why a human is not eternal, even if you want to say that it means without an end as we physically die and do have an end to our existence.

Eternal does not mean without a beginning, it means without an END.

Eternal means both without beginning and without end.

You're equivocating, and it is nothing more than pedantry. Something that does not exist is not subject to the rules of existance. It can be anything, as long as that anything is nothing.

Explain the equivocation, please. I am not saying that something that does not exist is subject to the rules of existence. You are. Something that does not exist cannot be anything, as anything cannot be nothing but something and if something does not exist it is nothing.

I no longer worship pagan gods, but still consider myself a pagan as that's a large part of who I am. Monotheism is just the belief in one god, it has no dogma or "view." There is no reason why the One True God cannot be human.

So if you no longer worship pagan gods what part of paganism is still a huge part of who you are? And yes, there is reason why humans cannot be the one God of monotheism as stated above. Only through Christ was God human.

The bible says that we are created in God's image, that implies humanity on its part. Or at least the appearance of such.

If humans were created in the image of God, then it is divine properties that are bestowed onto man. That doesn't mean we are God in totality, but are able to love as God does (though still we are not as loving as God is just as we are not as eternal as God is).

One word: Generally. That is to say usually but not always.

Well, have you ever witnessed such an event?

 

[Tuddrussell]

There is no "A" as in more than one. There is only One. The, as in singular, hence "mono." And yes, there is plenty good reason why a human is not eternal, even if you want to say that it means without an end as we physically die and do have an end to our existence.

The monotheistic god you believe in is called Yahweh, there are other monotheistic gods worshipped by other people some of which are not called Yahweh. So yes, there are multiple monotheistic gods. Just as there are multiple pantheons of polytheistic gods.

I was under the impression that Catholics believed in the eternal soul that we all supposedly posess. If so death is just an end to our lives, but not an end to our existance.

Eternal means both without beginning and without end.

No. It means without an end, everlasting. In the philosophical context it can mean in a timeless state. It does not mean without a beginning. Mengi is a turkish name that means without a beginning.

Explain the equivocation, please. I am not saying that something that does not exist is subject to the rules of existence. You are. Something that does not exist cannot be anything, as anything cannot be nothing but something and if something does not exist it is nothing.

A is A, and can never be Not A. However A can be B, so long as B is not Not A. In other words B=A so long as A=B.

So if you no longer worship pagan gods what part of paganism is still a huge part of who you are? And yes, there is reason why humans cannot be the one God of monotheism as stated above. Only through Christ was God human.

There is more to religion than theism, as a catholic you should understand that more than most. You say that a god cannot be human, and then that God was human. Contradictory much?

If humans were created in the image of God, then it is divine properties that are bestowed onto man. That doesn't mean we are God in totality, but are able to love as God does (though still we are not as loving as God is just as we are not as eternal as God is).

If humans were created in the image of God, then God must therefore be human. (Human in the sense of the adjective meaning relating to humanity.)

Well, have you ever witnessed such an event?

Indeed I have, while watching the anime series The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.

 

[Matariki]

If the OP is God, then that makes me Satan.

 

[chris4243]

It depends on what you mean by god. If by god you mean the singular deity of monotheism, there is good reason why a human cannot be both human and God. If by god you mean some deity that could be assembled into a pantheon of gods or goddesses such as in polytheism, then perhaps one may begin to argue a human can be both god and man, but even then it's not as if one could get away claiming he is Ptah or some Hindu deity.

Why can't a human be the "sigular deity of monotheism," I see no reason why this cannot be the case. I dare you to say that to Ptah's giant jerkyface.

Because the monotheistic God has properties that a human could not possibly possess. The God of monotheism is eternal, meaning no beginning to existence while us humans would have a beginning to our existence.

Is elopez arguing that Jesus isn't God Almighty, or that Jesus wasn't human?

 

[elopez]

The monotheistic god you believe in is called Yahweh, there are other monotheistic gods worshipped by other people some of which are not called Yahweh. So yes, there are multiple monotheistic gods. Just as there are multiple pantheons of polytheistic gods.

Obviously you have no clue what you're talking about as you just made that ever so apparent. There are no other monotheistic gods as the prefix of the word "mono" means one. Yahweh is the same God worshiped by all monotheists it is perhaps that not all may call Him that. Polytheism is the belief in multiple gods and differs from monotheism as that as you have already said ONE God. Not multiple gods, one, singular God.

I was under the impression that Catholics believed in the eternal soul that we all supposedly posess. If so death is just an end to our lives, but not an end to our existance.

The immorality of the soul yes. Physical death is the end of our physical existence.

No. It means without an end, everlasting. In the philosophical context it can mean in a timeless state. It does not mean without a beginning. Mengi is a turkish name that means without a beginning.

I don't even think you realize your own contradiction here. If eternal can mean atemporal in a philosophical sense, then it does mean without beginning as time has a beginning and a being whom is atemporal is not 'in time,' it would thus be without origin. Plus, without origin and end is the Christian meaning of the word "eternal." Where are you deriving your definition of just without end from?

A is A, and can never be Not A. However A can be B, so long as B is not Not A. In other words B=A so long as A=B.

Yeah, this does not explain how I equivocated any term. In fact I see no relevance in stating the law of identity?

There is more to religion than theism, as a catholic you should understand that more than most. You say that a god cannot be human, and then that God was human. Contradictory much?

I never implied all there was to religion was 'theism.' I'm just asking you to clarify something. Shouldn't be so hard if it's a huge part of your life. I said God cannot be human except through in the incarnation of Christ. I don't find that contradicting, no.

If humans were created in the image of God, then God must therefore be human. (Human is the sense of the adjective meaning relating to humanity.)

None of this follows. If humans were created in the image of God, God would still be God as He is bestowing divine attributes to humans, not fore-fitting them.

Indeed I have, while watching the anime series The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.

So that would be a no. That sure says a lot about what you have been saying...

 

[elopez]

Is elopez arguing that Jesus isn't God Almighty, or that Jesus wasn't human?

I am arguing that humans are not God, and while Jesus is God and yet man, he is not any of us but Himself.

 

[Antarctika]

Obviously you have no clue what you're talking about as you just made that ever so apparent. There are no other monotheistic gods as the prefix of the word "mono" means one. Yahweh is the same God worshiped by all monotheists it is perhaps that not all may call Him that. Polytheism is the belief in multiple gods and differs from monotheism as that as you have already said ONE God. Not multiple gods, one, singular God.

Ever heard of Aton?

That was way before Yawhe had ever been thought about.

 

[Tuddrussell]

Obviously you have no clue what you're talking about as you just made that ever so apparent. There are no other monotheistic gods as the prefix of the word "mono" means one. Yahweh is the same God worshiped by all monotheists it is perhaps that not all may call Him that. Polytheism is the belief in multiple gods and differs from monotheism as that as you have already said ONE God. Not multiple gods, one, singular God.

Yahweh is not all the monotheistic gods, he is just the most prominant. He is the God of Abraham, he most assuredly not the Dianic Godess. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or Superman, or Chuck Noris, or Haruhi Suzumiya, or Xenu...

The immorality of the soul yes. Physical death is the end of our physical existence.

Physical existence, not total existence.

I don't even think you realize your own contradiction here. If eternal can mean atemporal in a philosophical sense, then it does mean without beginning as time has a beginning and a being whom is atemporal is not 'in time,' it would thus be without origin. Plus, without origin and end is the Christian meaning of the word "eternal." Where are you deriving your definition of just without end from?

Atemporal does not mean that it doesn't have a beginning either. For one something can become atemporal.

Something that is eternal can have no beginning, and something that is atemporal can have no beginning as well... That does not mean that all things that are one or the other have to be mengi.

Yeah, this does not explain how I equivocated any term. In fact I see no relevance in stating the law of identity?

I chose to ignore that, because it should be obvious. Also, because we are dealing with and in identities I figure that the law of such would be effectively the most relevant.

I never implied all there was to religion was 'theism.' I'm just asking you to clarify something. Shouldn't be so hard if it's a huge part of your life. I said God cannot be human except through in the incarnation of Christ. I don't find that contradicting, no.

The incarnation of Christ can be human, I am human, therefore I can be the incarnation of Christ. (Simple logic)

None of this follows. If humans were created in the image of God, God would still be God as He is bestowing divine attributes to humans, not fore-fitting them.

We are godly, there for God must be humanly.

So that would be a no. That sure says a lot about what you have been saying...

No, it is a yes. It was something that I have witnessed. Do you deny that I witnessed it?