Is needing or wanting to worshiping a God a human defect or benefit?

[Greatest I am]

u confuse everything with urself, means that objective perspective or things realities or life is not u

it means also to point at the principal factor of existence fact and possibilities being else

else is not the other

u r relative to another objectively so another doesnt matter, when objective existence is its free superiority out of absolute realities fact

so else matter, from what else is completely free from u while u r in principle as a conscious being, free or at least a freedom right

different freedom realities is the reason of objective existence being in forms

surely that is also how opposites is a way of making existence when the will is meaning cheapest powers possible without including its own presence inn lso

so all what is said about individuals fears or wills for eternity is a lie

wat matter is only the truth which existence came first

like if conscious dont care about being true then it doesnt bother to stop being, n if it does care about smthg to b then it would accept nonbeing since it would b active independant will

the problem with death as we know it is being killed by others or by else powers negative towards being self conscious

the fear is never else will

it is always due to truth

getting killed is pointing else inferiority above urself while oneself cant picture being below zero to see it coming right
and when onself cant b but true so seein all first objective fact before its own means adds

being outside in concept of truth dimension is the reason of fear, bc it is not possible to b outside truth dimension, as if truth is saying that there is smthg wrong from the start and individuals are left alone

I agree with some sentences but the rest I can't see what you are saying. And I know three languages.

Can any one here translate if they understand this poster?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

What is a greater defect, worshipping a god or defending the action? Perhaps they are equally flawed or quite different. Everybody who believes in a god is entitled to a reason. I mean you just can't say 'I believe in a god' and leave it at that. Certain adjectives should be sufficient to impart your reason. For example, if I was to say creator god or malevolent god then it's pretty much understood by others where my reasoning lies. However if I were to say ' I believe in a creator god who desires to be worshipped' then maybe I'm starting to stretch it. Defenders of deities would sometimes like us to think their belief is so simple that it only consists of a god and everything that's ever been written about it. (at least the good stuff). One belief that happens to cover just about everything. How far can a belief expand before it begs for an eye roll?

Is defending worship a lesser thought than the actual conceiving of a god? As far as deity belief goes, would not a secondary incidental thought be classified as more defective than the principal idea? At least god belief begins to answer some questions for the believer but defending a totally indeterminate fact, no matter how, is apt to be more flawed.

Well put.

Defending what is written is ok when justifiable. To do so when no good argument can be made is willfull blindness to whatever is written.

The Job story is a good example.

[video=youtube;QeOfzN8ZTAM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeOfzN8ZTAM[/video]

Regards
DL

 

[absols]

I agree with some sentences but the rest I can't see what you are saying. And I know three languages.

Can any one here translate if they understand this poster?

Regards
DL

u r a liar, it is too obvious that my english is too poor, so there cant b any to translate while all to my individual efforts value

so if u really were interested the least about anything i said u would quote the sentence i made to get the meaning right, not asking others to say my words instead of me just to kill the fact of my presence being the exclusive source of my post

saying that u agree without pointing the object of ur agreement prove ur unexistence in truth, as if the object is the writer to agree with while u r at the same time denying him since asking others means about its own words
so obviously u enjoy passing ur time by thinking knowing what everyone is waiting for ur agreement to just think more carefully how to manipulate that to urself favors

 

[Greatest I am]

Thanks for this.

I guess we are done from what little I understand of what you wrote.

Regards
DL