Ask a Complicated Ecumenical Existentialist Universalist Christian Stuff

[bhsmte]

The characteristics of God are going to be logically drawn out by how we answer the question: did God create the universe or not? That doesn't make it easy, but it doesn't make it blindingly complicated -- not even as complicated as QM.

So if we can make that assumption -- that the universe began to exist and that God was a part of it -- we're well on our way. Nothing overcomplicated here, but it should be complicated, because, again, we're talking about God.

Christianity goes far beyond the universe was created by a God, with the claims it makes.

 

[BL2KTN]

The characteristics of God are going to be logically drawn out by how we answer the question: did God create the universe or not? That doesn't make it easy, but it doesn't make it blindingly complicated -- not even as complicated as QM.

So if we can make that assumption -- that the universe began to exist and that God was a part of it -- we're well on our way. Nothing overcomplicated here, but it should be complicated, because, again, we're talking about God.

How do you know we're talking about "God"? Perhaps we're talking about a god. Perhaps we're talking about a non-personal creator. When you say God, you likely bring baggage with the term. Is this the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh, or is this just any ol' generic god?

 

[Received]

Christianity goes far beyond the universe was created by a God, with the claims it makes.

You're talking about God, not Christianity. We're getting ahead of ourselves.

 

[Received]

How do you know we're talking about "God"? Perhaps we're talking about a god. Perhaps we're talking about a non-personal creator. When you say God, you likely bring baggage with the term. Is this the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh, or is this just any ol' generic god?

Are you saying any monotheistic conception is really polytheistic because there are different conceptions?

 

[BL2KTN]

Are you saying any monotheistic conception is really polytheistic because there are different conceptions?

No. Please answer the questions.

 

[bhsmte]

You're talking about God, not Christianity. We're getting ahead of ourselves.

I am talking about the claims of Christianity and the claims it makes about it's God.

 

[Received]

No. Please answer the questions.

I think you are saying it. That's how I answer your questions. You're saying that it just can't be God because there could be multiple different gods out there, and how do you know you got the right one? My response is that if you don't think multiple interpretations means multiple deities, then you mean that multiple interpretations mean just that -- multiple interpretations. So let's rephrase the problem: am I saying that there are multiple interpretations of God? Uh, yes, very much so. Is this a problem? No.

 

[Received]

I am talking about the claims of Christianity and the claims it makes about it's God.

Right, no argument there. But notice what you just did: went from speaking about God, which implies humble metaphysical beginnings here regarding the universe beginning to exist and how this carves our characteristics of God in general -- allllllll the way to a particular interpretation of theism along personal lines. That's a huge jump to make, and I think you making it implies you sort of want theism to be ridiculous. Imagine if someone did that with physics: so you have A causes B, and you respond: but what about quantum mechanics and the two slit experiment? Whoa, slow down, it sounds like you sort of want all of physics to be questionable because of particular details about a complicated theory. Same with theism.

 

[BL2KTN]

I think you are saying it.

I've noticed you do this tactic with others. It isn't clever. I asked you specific questions that would force you off your script. Instead of answering them you divert in some way that lets you still feel intellectually adept.

I didn't say much of anything. I asked you questions. Answer them:

How do you know we're talking about "God"? Perhaps we're talking about a god. Perhaps we're talking about a non-personal creator. When you say God, you likely bring baggage with the term. Is this the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh, or is this just any ol' generic god?

That's how I answer your questions. You're saying that it just can't be God because there could be multiple different gods out there, and how do you know you got the right one?

I'm not saying anything. I asked you questions to learn more about your position. Now you're projecting, pretending to know what's in my own head better than me, in order to answer different questions. Answer the questions.

My response is that if you don't think multiple interpretations means multiple deities, then you mean that multiple interpretations mean just that -- multiple interpretations.

I don't mean anything. I asked questions to learn more about your position. Thus far you've managed to avoid answering them. Instead you're answering your own questions that uninterest me.

So let's rephrase the problem: am I saying that there are multiple interpretations of God? Uh, yes, very much so. Is this a problem? No.

How do you know there is one God?

 

[Received]

I've noticed you do this tactic with others. It isn't clever. I asked you specific questions that would force you off your script. Instead of answering them you divert in some way that lets you still feel intellectually adept.

I didn't say much of anything. I asked you questions. Answer them:

How do you know we're talking about "God"? Perhaps we're talking about a god. Perhaps we're talking about a non-personal creator. When you say God, you likely bring baggage with the term. Is this the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh, or is this just any ol' generic god?



I'm not saying anything. I asked you questions to learn more about your position. Now you're projecting, pretending to know what's in my own head better than me, in order to answer different questions. Answer the questions.



I don't mean anything. I asked questions to learn more about your position. Thus far you've managed to avoid answering them. Instead you're answering your own questions that uninterest me.



How do you know there is one God?

How clever am I again?

 

[bhsmte]

Right, no argument there. But notice what you just did: went from speaking about God, which implies humble metaphysical beginnings here regarding the universe beginning to exist and how this carves our characteristics of God in general -- allllllll the way to a particular interpretation of theism along personal lines. That's a huge jump to make, and I think you making it implies you sort of want theism to be ridiculous. Imagine if someone did that with physics: so you have A causes B, and you respond: but what about quantum mechanics and the two slit experiment? Whoa, slow down, it sounds like you sort of want all of physics to be questionable because of particular details about a complicated theory. Same with theism.

No. I have been clear, the claims of Christianity, are simply not reconcilable to me, because in fact, they are quite ridiculous, when you compare them to well evidence reality.

I have always made a distinction between which God?, which I made clear from the start. Could a God of created the universe? Sure, that is possible, either a God created it, or it was natural forces.

Eventually, when you talk of a God, you have to get into the traits of that God and this is where Christianity goes off the rails, IMO.

 

[Received]

BlueLightning:

Whatever ad hominem jabs are the case (you started this, friend)...

You answered in the negative to my question. This means the other possibility is true: that there are multiple interpretations and that's all. This being the case, that's no big deal. You can't possibly be speaking about multiple deities (which you seem to be), so there's nothing to spend time responding to. If you think there are multiple interpretations of deities, that isn't a problem at all.

I wouldn't call that clever. But I sure wouldn't call it unclever either.

Maybe you'd like to take back your answer to the question?

 

[Received]

No. I have been clear, the claims of Christianity, are simply not reconcilable to me, because in fact, they are quite ridiculous, when you compare them to well evidence reality.

I have always made a distinction between which God?, which I made clear from the start. Could a God of created the universe? Sure, that is possible, either a God created it, or it was natural forces.

Eventually, when you talk of a God, you have to get into the traits of that God and this is where Christianity goes off the rails, IMO.

Yes: you start to get into. That's entirely different than saying that all of theism is ridiculous. Right?

 

[BL2KTN]

How clever am I again?

I guess we'll see when you finally get around to answering my exceedingly simple questions.

Whatever ad hominem jabs are the case (you started this, friend)...

Yes, how dare I ask basic questions and then call you on it when you don't answer them.

You answered in the negative to my question.

Since I haven't answered any of your questions (but instead directed you to answer the initial inquiries), please post the question and my answer. You can't since I didn't.

This means the other possibility is true: that there are multiple interpretations and that's all.

No.

This being the case, that's no big deal. You can't possibly be speaking about multiple deities (which you seem to be), so there's nothing to spend time responding to.

It's amazing how you continue to assert I'm saying things when all I've done is asked you questions and repeatedly tried to have you answer them. If you avoid them again, it's going to be apparent you're doing it purposefully to not answer them.

If you think there are multiple interpretations of deities, that isn't a problem at all.

I just want you to answer the questions.

I wouldn't call that clever. But I sure wouldn't call it unclever either.

Maybe you'd like to take back your answer to the question?

Perhaps you are delusional. I haven't answered any question you've asked. I won't either until you answer the original questions I asked, which are very simple and very fair.

How do you know we're talking about "God"? Perhaps we're talking about a god. Perhaps we're talking about a non-personal creator. When you say God, you likely bring baggage with the term. Is this the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh, or is this just any ol' generic god? How do you know there is one God?

Feel free to expound as much as you'd like on the answers. You're not being backed in a corner, you're just being answered extremely basic questions to know more about your position.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes: you start to get into. That's entirely different than saying that all of theism is ridiculous. Right?

No, I never said that all theism was ridiculous.

What I can do, is look at the claims that theism makes and determine whether I feel they are credible.

When I look at Christianity and include my work into the historicity of the NT, I conclude, the claims are likely to be of human manufacture and many of the claims are not believable, IMO.

Gods are a slightly different story. A God could exist and all of the human religious claims of the same, are all wildly wrong.

 

[Received]

Perhaps you are delusional. I haven't answered any question you've asked.

No. Please answer the questions.

.

 

[BL2KTN]

Are you confused about how this works?

I asked you questions, you avoided them and instead asked me new questions. I directed you to answer the questions... twice... and you still haven't. I'll be more than happy to answer your questions once you show that you're capable of such. This isn't difficult; I asked first, you answer first, you ask questions, I answer questions. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[Davian]

<Pulls up a lawn chair>

 

[Received]

Are you confused about how this works?

Last I checked, answering "yes" or "no" indicates a response to a question. You said "no", opening up a response by me based on your response. Help me if I'm confused on this much.

 

[Received]

dp