quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 And that refutes any of Renegade's direct and pointed counterpoints to your arguments how? He answered you directly at every point made. He did so in a consistent and logical manner. I'm sorry about your frustration, but please get over it, do yourself and everyone else a favor and put together a worthwhile counterargument to Renegade's points or kindly concede and make a respectful exit. Or you could continue to kick and scream as this post aptly demonstrates and answer nothing, but I personally hope bigger things from you myself.

I'm not really kicking and screaming.

I'm just a little frustrated that, like I said, he is looking at life and ideas through his specific lense, and his response (or what we are calling here a rebuttal) just backed up this assertion.

His concept of what I was trying to say was completely lost on him, yet he still attempted to argue back about it.

Basically, he is taking the information he wants to take, and using it as he will, thus leading to error upon error. Much of his idealogy in life is most likely that - based on, and in substance, error.

He actually said I was a Deist!

If he had taken even a moment to let it "sink in" like he claimed to have done, he would never, ever, ever have made himself into a joke by assuming that I of all people believe in the small-minded view of "God" that he seems to see.

Like I said - his mind divides things into categories that are easy for him to understand, and that's why he makes these errors. I was just pointing out frustration in the process, and I know that it isn't entirely his fault. Human beings learn from their environment and from the data they've collected, and we are taught largely to think of things like the idea of God in the small-minded ways he is presenting to us here; the difference between him and anyone else? He's trying to use lingo he doesn't need to use to attempt to appear more intelligent than he actually is. Whether it's ego-driven to make others respect his ideas and points, or whether its self-imposed to make it easier for him to believe in the boundaries he's set up for himself (just like the stereotypical idea he presents that everyone who doesn't see his way must be).

I guess it's fairly simple to see when someone in sincere and actually intimately knows themselves and their presentations of ideas, and when they are posing as something to press an agenda.

So tell me... am I trying to press an agenda?

Am I even debating? Or was I trying to discuss?

Did I become slightly frustrated (yes, slightly.. I'm actually pretty relaxed! :grin because I felt I was losing some sort of imaginary debate? Or did I become frustrated because we approach ideas as feeling the need to debate, thus limiting overall progress of all parties involved?

peace,
jay

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 but I personally hope bigger things from you myself.

kinda reminds you of a twisted version of me, huh?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I'm not really kicking and screaming. I'm just a little frustrated that, like I said, he is looking at life and ideas through his specific lense, and his response (or what we are calling here a rebuttal) just backed up this assertion. His concept of what I was trying to say was completely lost on him, yet he still attempted to argue back about it. Basically, he is taking the information he wants to take, and using it as he will, thus leading to error upon error. Much of his idealogy in life is most likely that - based on, and in substance, error. He actually said I was a Deist!

1. no, what he actually said was that you are a theist.
2. you were the one who took his words as literally as possible, whilst ignoring his disclaimer that they are open to interpretation and debate. not to mention that you were refuted in that approach just as well.

it's amusing that you are the one complaining about straw men.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Like I said - his mind divides things into categories that are easy for him to understand, and that's why he makes these errors. I was just pointing out frustration in the process, and I know that it isn't entirely his fault.

and that is something you are impervious to...how?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Am I even debating? Or was I trying to discuss?

are you saying you weren't discussing an opposing point?
even supposing you weren't, which doesn't seem to be the case, are you implying that discussing is somehow superior to debating?

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade First of all, I want to stress that I'm not creating this topic to debate the existence of God. If you want to debate that specific issue then there are plenty of other threads here for you to do that in. For this topic, however, the arguments for or against God are largely irrelevent and I would prefer it if they weren't raised.

Not to get off topic, but I don't think it's possible to prove the existence of God. You can't prove the existence of something you can't define. Or maybe I should rephrase that. Human language doesn't possess the capability to define God. A list or description of different characteristics is not a definition. And keeping certain characteristics described in the three main monotheistic texts, such as being omnipotent and infinite etc, the logical implication is that you can't define "him."

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Keeping that in mind, that question I'm basically asking here is: "Presuming God exists, what are the implications for us as human beings?". If you're confused about the purpose of my question here, I'm basically asking the the question from the perspective of a lay-existentialist in the sense that I'm interested in what it might mean to exist as a human being and how it is that we might endeavour to live. While it should be apparent that the demonstrable existence of God would change the way we view the universe - if only in the most abstract sense - I'm more interested in asking how demonstrating the existence of a God might, in a practical sense, change our lives.

Now having said that, which God? I'm guessing you're reffering to the "God of Abraham and Isaac," that all three monotheistic religions share. Although, they don't agree on what "that God" is like. God (or Yahweh if I remember correctly?) as decribed in the Old Testamant is not the same as the God (or Jesus/Trinity, since I'm still don't have a clear understanding what different Christian denominations consider God to be, I get different and vague answers all the time) of the New Testament who is also different from God as described in the Quran (which claims Jesus is not the son of God, as "Allah begets not nor is begotton," and the trinity concept doesn't exist). If it's any one of those (even though they're all supposedly the same), then I think the answer should be kind of obvious. If it isn't necessarily any one of those. By that I mean all three of them are off mark with their decriptions of God, and "he" is actually different enough for the Judeo-Christian-Islamic texts to become somewhat irrelevant.

The point is, I'm not sure how to answer your question as I don't have a clear understanding of it in the first place. And if the God of the Torah/Bible/Quran is not the one in question, or if it's some "generic" God based on God as described the three texts (or since I thought your "definition" was kind of vague), that would complicate things even more and I guess I'll have to put some more thought into it.

p.s. I kinda skimmed over this thread since I just got my internet back and had to stay up all night to make sure I'd be awake when the cable guy came. If you already answered my questions, my bad.

EDIT: Psy-T's post seemed to be a pretty decent response to the question by sort of shifting the focus of the implication of the existance of God on motivation.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Sigmund Freud - The Future of an Illusion

^^^ The beginning of this book does a decent job at explaining importance of the concept of God or gods in general for that matter, as it relates to the human psyche. Freud focuses on anthropology as well and why humans and humanoids came to manifest concepts of gods. The book is inexpensive and only about 60 pages long. You might even be able to find it for free online.

I'd like to do more than just give references but this topic is too broad. I'm sure we could all argue back and forth for another 10 pages. I just don't have it in me anymore LOL.

___________________
Awesome House Music Blog: http://thegoodmorningpost.wordpress.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T 1. no, what he actually said was that you are a theist. 2. you were the one who took his words as literally as possible, whilst ignoring his disclaimer that they are open to interpretation and debate. not to mention that you were refuted in that approach just as well. it's amusing that you are the one complaining about straw men. and that is something you are impervious to...how? are you saying you weren't discussing an opposing point? even supposing you weren't, which doesn't seem to be the case, are you implying that discussing is somehow superior to debating?

wow.

Did you read his second response to me?

He's arrogant and one-minded, like any fundamentalist; the only difference? he's in the minority.

You're a fool.

Fucking idiot.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby wow. Did you read his second response to me? He's arrogant and one-minded, like any fundamentalist; the only difference? he's in the minority. You're a fool. Fucking idiot.

wow

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby wow. Did you read his second response to me? He's arrogant and one-minded, like any fundamentalist; the only difference? he's in the minority. You're a fool. Fucking idiot.

Sooo are you going to actually respond to his arguments or what? If he's a narrow minded fundamentalist as you so described I'm sure you have a solid basis to logically refute each and every point he made. By the way, ad hominems do not do you justice.

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby wow. Did you read his second response to me? He's arrogant and one-minded, like any fundamentalist; the only difference? he's in the minority. You're a fool. Fucking idiot.

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Sooo are you going to actually respond to his arguments or what? If he's a narrow minded fundamentalist as you so described I'm sure you have a solid basis to logically refute each and every point he made. By the way, ad hominems do not do you justice.

Okay fine. I'll play it your way.