Tuddrussell
The Dreamer of the Darkness
- Jun 28, 2011
- 614
- 15
- 35
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Green
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Repent to the one true God.
Proof that two examples of sophistry don't lead us to worthwhile conclusions when mixed.
If we all exist then none of us are god....In other words we all either exist or we don't exist? That's kind of obvious.
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.There is no reason why a human can't both exist and be god, without being the only human that exists.
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.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 wouldn't say it's impossible at all to say that no humans are gods. It may just depend on the context.My point is that it is impossible to say definitively that no humans are gods, or that no gods are human.
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.
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 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.
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.I wouldn't say it's impossible at all to say that no humans are gods. It may just depend on the context.
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.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.
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 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.
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 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.
Generally. Nor do humans create the universe or the earth, and that is something I would to say to Ptah's face!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!)
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'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.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 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 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.
One word: Generally. That is to say usually but not always.Generally. Nor do humans create the universe or the earth, and that is something I would to say to Ptah's face!
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.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 means both without beginning and without end.Eternal does not mean without a beginning, it means without an END.
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.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 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.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.
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).The bible says that we are created in God's image, that implies humanity on its part. Or at least the appearance of such.
Well, have you ever witnessed such an event?One word: Generally. That is to say usually but not always.
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.
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.Eternal means both without beginning and without end.
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.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.
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?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.
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.)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).
Indeed I have, while watching the anime series The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.Well, have you ever witnessed such an event?
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.
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.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.
The immorality of the soul yes. Physical death is the end of our physical existence.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.
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?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.
Yeah, this does not explain how I equivocated any term. In fact I see no relevance in stating the law of identity?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.
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.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?
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.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.)
So that would be a no. That sure says a lot about what you have been saying...Indeed I have, while watching the anime series The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.
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.
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.
Physical existence, not total existence.The immorality of the soul yes. Physical death is the end of our physical existence.
Atemporal does not mean that it doesn't have a beginning either. For one something can become atemporal.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?
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.Yeah, this does not explain how I equivocated any term. In fact I see no relevance in stating the law of identity?
The incarnation of Christ can be human, I am human, therefore I can be the incarnation of Christ. (Simple logic)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.
We are godly, there for God must be humanly.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.
No, it is a yes. It was something that I have witnessed. Do you deny that I witnessed it?So that would be a no. That sure says a lot about what you have been saying...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?