Definition of God - one thread to rule them all

Michael 345 said:
:) Beware the double negative it an't no good

:)
Click to expand...
I know I know but half the fun is breaking the rules..I know how precious some folk are with their gramma (spell check fort hard on dat one wrongly insisted on adding an "m" but I got tit right in da end.
I know what I will go for triple negative which will be wrong and right all at once.
Not never gonna say nuttin bout nuffin ever again..can you count them up I think I one upped it...would adding an udder never fix it?
Still suffering OS I guess?
Alex
 
Vociferous said:
Just like a radiator is part of a car, all things can be part of God without encompassing everything it is to be God.
Click to expand...
He didn't say all things are parts of God. He said God is all things.

No, a car is also a radiator, wheels, etc.. Saying "car and radiator" is not superfluous. You can readily say that a radiator, wheels, etc. are part of a car without implying that they are somehow separate from a car. Please, try to use everyday reasoning, instead of atheistic defensiveness.
Click to expand...
There are parts of a car that are not the radiator.

The same reasoning does not apply to his God, as defined. There are no things that are not God, according to his definition.

Understand?

You forgot to post your own definition of God, by the way. Or are you adopting Bowser's?
 
paddoboy said:
The car exists obviously. God is an unsupported myth obviously.
Click to expand...
Again, who said God could be verified at all?


Xelasnave.1947 said:
Yes I asked for... what it is ...not ...what is it like.... the implication being I don't want solid examples that detract from the fact you are explaining something not solid in the least.

And you jump to conclusions for I am not an atheist or a theist but a realist, you know someone who expects before proceeding some reasonable confirmation that the subject matter has some basis in reality. However if your arrogance prevents you from using anything than metaphor, that one selects to make a mist seem solid, then I will not trouble you again and content myself in the knowledge that you ain't got nuttin...
Click to expand...
Who said God was "solid"?

Get busy contenting yourself, mate.

Xelasnave.1947 said:
You are kidding right???
Well perhaps we will have a difficult job pinning down anyone here specifically in this thread but to answer your question with a general observation ... every theist who mentions god and will argue until the cows come home that their god is absolutely verifiable with reference to various miracles and even frequent conversations with their god.

Nevertheless you car example is useless...try harder.
Click to expand...
Yes, and those people probably have no clue what you mean by "verifiable". If you're satisfied playing "lost in translation" to feel good about shooting fish in a barrel, that's on you.

The OP asked for a definition of what people believe, not verification.
 
Bowser said:
And here I thought I was the only one full of it. Need I resurrect Einstein?

E=mc2
Click to expand...
Take it to a separate thread if you want to discuss your misunderstanding of physics further. This one is about definitions of God.
 
James R said:
Take it to a separate thread if you want to discuss your misunderstanding of physics further. This one is about definitions of God.
Click to expand...
If God is everything, then Energy would be one of them--as I told Alex earlier.

What is the best definition of energy?
In general, the word energy refers to a concept that can be paraphrased as "the potential for causing changes", and therefore one can say that energy is the cause of any change. The most common definition of energy is the work that a certain force (gravitational, electromagnetic, etc) can do.

google.com
Click to expand...
 
James R said:
He didn't say all things are parts of God. He said God is all things.
Click to expand...
Please explain the difference. If all things are not part of God, wouldn't the only alternative be some nonsensical state where each individual thing is wholly God? Do you really think that's what he meant? If God is all things and each thing is not wholly God, the only reasonable take is that each thing is part of God.
Please, exercise a skosh of reason.

There are parts of a car that are not the radiator.
Click to expand...
That's a non sequitur. Since no one said all car parts were radiators (I did also mention "wheels, etc."), you may be confused about the metaphor. Car = God. Parts = things. Pretty simple.

The same reasoning does not apply to his God, as defined. There are no things that are not God, according to his definition.

Understand?
Click to expand...
Seems you don't understand. Having no things that are not a part or manifestation of God doesn't make whatever point you may be attempting.

You forgot to post your own definition of God, by the way. Or are you adopting Bowser's?
Click to expand...
God is a large topic. The definition depends on the context. For now, I'm satisfied to discuss the current context.
 
Vociferous said:
Again, who said God could be verified at all?
Click to expand...

I thought I commented earlier...I did please read what I wrote.

Vociferous said:
Who said God was "solid"?
Click to expand...

I thought you did but I guess you didnt and why would you?

Vociferous said:
Get busy contenting yourself, mate.
Click to expand...

Well I will but I am disappointed that you rolled over so easily.

Vociferous said:
Yes, and those people probably have no clue what you mean by "verifiable".
Click to expand...

I bet you are right on the money...making stuff up is not what we mean when we ask for something verifiable.

Vociferous said:
If you're satisfied playing "lost in translation" to feel good about shooting fish in a barrel, that's on you.
Click to expand...

What on Earth are you talking about now?
If someone shot your fish don't blame me..I didn't even know you had fish..how many were shot? Any survivors? Check the security cam and you we see it was not me.

Probably Christians they are obsessed with fish.

OK we have played hide and seek and very enjoyable it was, you are rather good at hiding if I may say so, but no more games why don't you at least try to outline your thoughts and just see if you can talk normally about whatever it was when you became obsessed with the car thing.

I once thought metaphor was the height of expression until someone pointed out that it was similar to swearing...how? Well when you swear you become lazy grabbing an F..k or the like..often folk end up with just one swear word so that word substitutes for every noun, adverb and adjective etc so they forget how to use real words and now here you are in a similar position so comfortable with metaphor that you can not find the real words anymore...you see the problem I expect..It comes from the cults propensity to use silly stories to con the kids you know.

Vociferous said:
The OP asked for a definition of what people believe, not verification.
Click to expand...

Sure but that gives you no licience to talk rubbish...try again...don't listen to those claims that you are unworthy.

And to you also may I wish you happy Easter holidays and hope you remain safe from the virus. Nice chatting as always. I hope you are around when Jan gets back but don't tell him that photo to the left of your posts is your great ancestor as he gets a bit thingy about that sort of stuff.

Alex
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
I thought I commented earlier...I did please read what I wrote.
Click to expand...
Go read that post again. That was a response to paddoboy, unless that's a sockpuppet of yours.

Well I will but I am disappointed that you rolled over so easily.
Click to expand...
What happened to your "I will not trouble you again"?

Yes, and those people probably have no clue what you mean by "verifiable".
Click to expand...
I bet you are right on the money...
Click to expand...
Then why pretend like you're making any point at all to such people? Superficial ego?

What on Earth are you talking about now?
Click to expand...
See, still playing "lost in translation". Does that do anything for you?
If you think you make any point by telling off people who don't know what you mean by "verify", well, that's just rather sad.

Sure but that gives you no licience to talk rubbish...try again...don't listen to those claims that you are unworthy.
Click to expand...
Keep quelling your cognitive dissonance, mate.
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
I know I know but half the fun is breaking the rules..I know how precious some folk are with their gramma (spell check fort hard on dat one wrongly insisted on adding an "m" but I got tit right in da end.
I know what I will go for triple negative which will be wrong and right all at once.
Not never gonna say nuttin bout nuffin ever again..can you count them up I think I one upped it...would adding an udder never fix it?
Still suffering OS I guess?
Alex
Click to expand...
My auto correct finally figured out god has lower case g :)

Need to train technology otherwise it will start to think it is smart than you

:)
 
Vociferous said:
unless that's a sockpuppet of yours.
Click to expand...

That tells me so much you just don't know.;););)

Vociferous said:
Go read that post again
Click to expand...

Don't want to don't have to.

Vociferous said:
What happened to your "I will not trouble you again"?
Click to expand...

I was on my way out and near tripped over your carcass with your legs in the air.

Vociferous said:
Then why pretend like you're making any point at all to such people?
Click to expand...

I don't pretend ( well I was pretending being a stock trader ) you are reading between the lines like someone else I know.

Vociferous said:
Superficial ego?
Click to expand...

As I said I hope you are around when Jan gets back... he is best to comment on ego given his unfortunate first hand experience.

Vociferous said:
well, that's just rather sad.
Click to expand...

I thought I was just confused.

Vociferous said:
Keep quelling your cognitive dissonance, mate
Click to expand...

You too...what is cognitive dissonance?...just joking..and this tells me a little more...even Jan says this about me so I guess the both of you can't be wrong.

Alex
 
Michael 345 said:
My auto correct finally figured out god has lower case g :)

Need to train technology otherwise it will start to think it is smart than you

:)
Click to expand...

My spell checker is controlled by the devil I swear...really I should post something unedited and what I actually typed...it will substitute words that don't even have the same letters...And the simplest of corrections it will miss. It will not go with hell...ever..it puts he'll...I typed h e l l and again he'll.
It can go to help..that was typing h e l l in capitals. It not don't ( that was wont do) it now but Binos the other day it gave bible...which was funny cause that was what I was taking to use in the dark.

Alex
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
My spell checker is controlled by the devil I swear...really I should post something unedited and what I actually typed...it will substitute words that don't even have the same letters...And the simplest of corrections it will miss. It will not go with hell...ever..it puts he'll...I typed h e l l and again he'll.
It can go to help..that was typing h e l l in capitals. It not don't ( that was wont do) it now but Binos the other day it gave bible...which was funny cause that was what I was taking to use in the dark.

Alex
Click to expand...
You my poor soul are lost

The devil is truely smarter than you

But you are at least one up on J:)

:)
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
That tells me so much you just don't know.
Click to expand...
What, that you don't bother to read who a response was meant for? Obviously.

You too...what is cognitive dissonance?...just joking..and this tells me a little more...even Jan says this about me so I guess the both of you can't be wrong.
Click to expand...
I get the impression you think things tell you a lot more than they actually do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top