Sociopath Community

AppleGenius said: 

Turncoat said: 

We are talking about it, therefor some level of ability to recognize it is there, which is itself an understanding. 

I would dispute that.

With what? BT is getting to a similar angle, that while not a full understanding it is still at the very least a form of recognition, which still falls into the guidelines and poses that the being in question is not 100% incomprehensible. 

The only other explanation would be the deities being a placeholder for something else, meaning your idea to "go read The Bible" wouldn't help someone any further than them choosing not to. 

How did you infer that without the law of excluded middle?

The only other explanation available to us with what we have to work with, that itself works as a tentative placeholder in the discussion in lieu of a closer answer. 

Past a point you have to accept Occam or Nothing, and the latter poses no room to find what may be past those placeholders. We only have what we're given to work with, but that does not mean we should do nothing. 

We don't know that, there may be a logic to God that is not Human logic, but otherwise akin to human logic if we go with any of the accounts where we were made to be like lesser versions of the god(s) in question.

You're still trying to understand the incomprehensible.

There are some elements attributed to God in the texts, which unless those are a fallacy grant us something to work with. 

If the texts of at least one of the many religions are to be taken as an account of the situation (rather than anything else), deities do seem to have restrictions and laws that, at the very least, they hold themselves to to such a point as to show a sense of consistency. Much like how humans have the free choice to do things unlike themselves, how often will you find them doing that versus falling into their own pathological consistency? 

This may be a case where having the ability to do anything may not mean that the one in question will do it.

How did you infer that from the text? Again, you or I don't understand God. You're still trying to understand something that is beyond our understanding.

Are you going with the premise that the books on God(s) are wrong? 

Meh, you're not really getting the argument. Nevermind.

AppleGenius said: 

Meh, you're not really getting the argument. Nevermind.

Probably for the best. 

What I don't understand is why? Is this some kind of joke? God puts us here without direction. Just seems a cruel and unlikely God.

Why not just come out and say hello it's me God. Why the mystery?

LiYang said: 

What I don't understand is why? Is this some kind of joke? God puts us here without direction. Just seems a cruel and unlikely God.

Why not just come out and say hello it's me God. Why the mystery?

So you think there is a God or not?  On the one hand, it sounds like you're saying "life can't just be a joke, there must be more or something behind it", and on the other saying "but if God were real, why isn't he making himself known better?"

Both of these are outside of the intended scope of this thread, kind of.

Where this is at is kind of like:

Existence or non-existence of God --> the nature and knowability of God --> the existence and nature of free-will.  Where the arguments have been concluded and are as given premise for the one succeeding it.  Perhaps they do deserve their own threads.

Buttered Toast said: 

LiYang said: 

What I don't understand is why? Is this some kind of joke? God puts us here without direction. Just seems a cruel and unlikely God.

Why not just come out and say hello it's me God. Why the mystery?

So you think there is a God or not?  On the one hand, it sounds like you're saying "life can't just be a joke, there must be more or something behind it", and on the other saying "but if God were real, why isn't he making himself known better?"

Both of these are outside of the intended scope of this thread, kind of.

Where this is at is kind of like:

Existence or non-existence of God --> the nature and knowability of God --> the existence and nature of free-will.  Where the arguments have been concluded and are as given premise for the one succeeding it.  Perhaps they do deserve their own threads.

Yeah, why the mystery?

If I were God and I made a place like Earth I would make it a happy place. After all, I'm all powerful. A God that make a shitty place full of sickness, killing, death, disease and pain is kinda a failure. Which is a contradiction.

This contradiction alone is suspicious.

Buttered Toast said: 

.

---

TL;DR -- Predestination doesn't make sense and is pointless, unless you consider God lobotomized himself and it's all just a masturbatory illusion.  The alternative, the Eternal Now, offers more room for free will and meaning, without excluding anything that really makes God himself.  It's stupid and unevolved to think otherwise.

 I do believe predestination is different than determined destination, where the subjects choices determine where they're headed.

In this case where we're going isn't simply a place, but an entire plan of existence. It's likely we'll still be able to explore this universe.

One could say the Earth itself is in heaven, simply because it has a place among other heavenly bodies in the heavens/universe.

If one is destined to go to say, heaven, that doesn't mean going to a fancy city, but more like a universe, or perhaps we'll have access to all worlds.

Free will as we are does have boundaries, first by consequence, followed by the impossible. In short we're free within set boundaries, otherwise I'd have explored Jupiter, and survived it long ago. Our free will is basically us having the privilege to make choices with the people and things at our service and disposal.

Regardless if we recognize the next life to be as we imagined it would be or not, it'll be by description "a place" prepared for us, similar to how the Earth was prepared for us.

.

You mentioned God is time, but I'd reckon time was an intentional effect when space was created. Scientificly speaking space and time are unified. Time violations do occure on Earth but that's insignificant compated to how time works over even greater distances. God has no beginning and no end, those are time based. From what I gather, we'll know eternity. It might not be possible to measure with time where it doesn't exists and we're unable to feel any difference between a day and a millennia. No past, no future. 

Of course while I have little idea on how God is doing all of this, with my limited understanding I'll settle for time being his.

Time, free will, what you call you. All things that are borrowed, but if it's all an illusion, then for now to say the least it's matter over mind, and it would likely matter the same if it were vice versa and the shackles came off and you can do anything at the speed of thought. What will still hold weight in that case would be our principles. Regardless if the, lets say, final destination is a good or a bad one, and you're all powerful, you'll still be prone to concensus by a society of others just as or more powerful. That of course is speaking from the perspective of duality, which we're bound by in this state of being.

LiYang said: 

Yeah, why the mystery?

If I were God and I made a place like Earth I would make it a happy place. After all, I'm all powerful. A God that make a shitty place full of sickness, killing, death, disease and pain is kinda a failure. Which is a contradiction.

This contradiction alone is suspicious.

 The danger in discussing God is always to anthropomorphize him/her/it.  The disease isn't a failure.  Maybe humans are for not figuring out how to survive it or live better despite it.  God made the disease as he made anything else.  How will you figure evolution?

And God-As-Mystery is more complex than simply being dispelled by saying "hello".  There is the incomprehensibility of absolutism and infinity just inherent in our natures, among so much more.  It's more complex than you make it.

Maninist said: 

Buttered Toast said: 

.

---

TL;DR -- Predestination doesn't make sense and is pointless, unless you consider God lobotomized himself and it's all just a masturbatory illusion.  The alternative, the Eternal Now, offers more room for free will and meaning, without excluding anything that really makes God himself.  It's stupid and unevolved to think otherwise.

 I do believe predestination is different than determined destination, where the subjects choices determine where they're headed.

In this case where we're going isn't simply a place, but an entire plan of existence. It's likely we'll still be able to explore this universe.

One could say the Earth itself is in heaven, simply because it has a place among other heavenly bodies in the heavens/universe.

I'm of a similar belief.  The universe has so much in it unknown already.  It is Creation.  It's a little strange to wish for more when we've hardly tasted all that it has to offer.  That's kind of simplistic terms, but the sentiment is there.

If one is destined to go to say, heaven, that doesn't mean going to a fancy city, but more like a universe, or perhaps we'll have access to all worlds.

Free will as we are does have boundaries, first by consequence, followed by the impossible. In short we're free within set boundaries, otherwise I'd have explored Jupiter, and survived it long ago. Our free will is basically us having the privilege to make choices with the people and things at our service and disposal.

This is basically where I am with this, too.  Parameters.  This is our effective free will.

Regardless if we recognize the next life to be as we imagined it would be or not, it'll be by description "a place" prepared for us, similar to how the Earth was prepared for us.

.

You mentioned God is time, but I'd reckon time was an intentional effect when space was created. Scientificly speaking space and time are unified. Time violations do occure on Earth but that's insignificant compated to how time works over even greater distances. God has no beginning and no end, those are time based. From what I gather, we'll know eternity. It might not be possible to measure with time where it doesn't exists and we're unable to feel any difference between a day and a millennia. No past, no future. 

Stephen Wolfram's Physics Project has come to some conclusion that on a very fundamental level, time and space are divorcable.

Of course while I have little idea on how God is doing all of this, with my limited understanding I'll settle for time being his.

Time, free will, what you call you. All things that are borrowed, but if it's all an illusion, then for now to say the least it's matter over mind, and it would likely matter the same if it were vice versa and the shackles came off and you can do anything at the speed of thought. What will still hold weight in that case would be our principles. Regardless if the, lets say, final destination is a good or a bad one, and you're all powerful, you'll still be prone to concensus by a society of others just as or more powerful. That of course is speaking from the perspective of duality, which we're bound by in this state of being.

 I agree with some of this.  This is a training grounds of sorts.  The constraints are humbling, but for a reason.  There is much we take for granted and very much act as children in the cosmos while we do.

Buttered Toast said: 

LiYang said: 

Yeah, why the mystery?

If I were God and I made a place like Earth I would make it a happy place. After all, I'm all powerful. A God that make a shitty place full of sickness, killing, death, disease and pain is kinda a failure. Which is a contradiction.

This contradiction alone is suspicious.

 The danger in discussing God is always to anthropomorphize him/her/it.  The disease isn't a failure.  Maybe humans are for not figuring out how to survive it or live better despite it.  God made the disease as he made anything else.  How will you figure evolution?

And God-As-Mystery is more complex than simply being dispelled by saying "hello".  There is the incomprehensibility of absolutism and infinity just inherent in our natures, among so much more.  It's more complex than you make it.

Danger?

I don't see this as complex. The fact that God is hidden in darkness is suspicious. All things good and true are exposed in light not hidden in mystery and darkness, the contradiction is obvious.

 "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." Jphn 3:20