Christianity

[henry quirk]

If man is gifted by god, I think that makes you a theist.
What makes you think this idea makes sense?

If a deist's God creates man with reason, conscience, and free will, how is this not a gift?

It makes sense to me. I'm willin' to discuss it, but -- as I have no holy book to advise me, no holy men to direct me, no coffers to fill, and no compulsion to convert anyone -- I couldn't give two drizzly shits if my deism makes sense to you or anyone.

Oh, Henry, that's so intemperate, and hostile!

Yep. I know who I'm contendin' with: sculptor is no buddy of mine and his interest in my deism is motivated by distaste, not curiosity. That doesn't mean I won't talk with him; it does mean I ain't gonna pretend the conversation is anything but a hostile one.

Deity just means god. You're deluding yourself if you think you are any different from any other bog-standard religious nut.

I didn't refer to deity: I boldly said, say, God.

As for the rest of your brilliant comment: meh....same old, same old.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

If a deist's God creates man with reason, conscience, and free will, how is this not a gift?

It makes sense to me. I'm willin' to discuss it, but -- as I have no holy book to advise me, no holy men to direct me, no coffers to fill, and no compulsion to convert anyone -- I couldn't give two drizzly shits if my deism makes sense to you or anyone.

Oh, Henry, that's so intemperate, and hostile!

Yep. I know who I'm contendin' with: sculptor is no buddy of mine and his interest in my deism is motivated by distaste, not curiosity. That doesn't mean I won't talk with him; it does mean I ain't gonna pretend the conversation is anything but a hostile one.

Deity just means god. You're deluding yourself if you think you are any different from any other bog-standard religious nut.

I didn't refer to deity: I boldly said, say, God.

As for the rest of your brilliant comment: meh....same old, same old.

You often refer to yourself as a 'deist' as if that's a cut above belief in 'god'

[Veritas Aequitas]

Deity just means god. You're deluding yourself if you think you are any different from any other bog-standard religious nut.

I didn't refer to deity: I boldly said, say, God.

As for the rest of your brilliant comment: meh....same old, same old.

You often refer to yourself as a 'deist' as if that's a cut above belief in 'god'

Deism means believing in a reasoned_out-God [deism] in contrast in believing in a personal-God out of blind faith and driven heavily by emotions [theism].

Note also,

• The difference between pantheism and deism is that pantheism is the belief that the universe is in some sense divine and should be revered pantheism identifies the universe with god but denies any personality or transcendence of such a god
  while deism is a philosophical belief in the existence of a god (or goddess) knowable through human reason; especially, a belief in a creator god unaccompanied by any belief in supernatural phenomena or specific religious doctrines.
  https://wikidiff.com/pantheism/deism

I have no issues with theism, deism, pantheism, and the likes, so if one need and MUST believe in a God then go ahead with it. The only theism I have issue is that of Islam which is inherently evil laden.

BUT whichever the God,
God is an impossibility to be real.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Deism means believing in a reasoned_out-God [deism] in contrast in believing in a personal-God out of blind faith and driven heavily by emotions [theism].

Oh right. A completely different thing entirely

[Dontaskme]

*No. In context, the placeholder God is the symbol or name of the being (person) who created the universe.

But symbols are the created. In the same context, the artist's painting is an object of the artist's desire, the painting is the created - which implies it must have had a creator....Which can only mean one thing....the creator is infinite in nature and every created thing is an inseparable expression couched within that infinite creator...so that tells us that there is only the Creator ...which is mental. The Creator is mental...in the context I will show you here>

The artist/creator is never in the painting it creates, the painting is always of the artist/creator. What that means, is that creation in and off itself is self-creating with itself alone. It needs no outside agency to create it. Which means either you are God or God is you..which is the same thing. There is no other way to explain God...right?

If you do not agree with what I have said, then I would appreciate your critique.

[Age]

Age,

If you REALLY WANT to continue discussing this, then I am MORE THAN HAPPY TO.

Yes, let's continue.

We can pick up from here...

age: So, a 'man' is therefore just a member, or belongs to, the group known as human beings.

Just a herd member, yeah?


age: Each 'man' is just FREE.

Yes, exactly.


age: LOOK, you BELIEVE you have the, so-called, "right" to KILL people just because they touch IMMATERIAL things

Nope.


age: There are a multitude of other examples I could provide.

You haven't provided even one yet.


age: BUT you BELIEVE you ALREADY have the 'right' to KILL human beings DEAD if they "touch" your stuff, correct?

Nope.


age: And YET here you are being the VERY FIRST ONE to CLAIM that you can SHOOT people ["other" men] DEAD if they touch your toothpick.

Nope. Never said it. Never hinted at it.


age: You do NOT have to say. 'my world', for us to KNOW what exists in 'your world'.

You say that I've said if someone touches my stuff, even if it's a toothpick, or they're standing in a building, which I claim is mine, I believe I have the 'right' to forfeit that person's life, liberty, or property, in part or in whole.

I never said it. Never even hinted at it.


age: ANY one only has to look through your writings to SEE what you have written.

Yep. That's what I've said to any number of folks on any number of topics: go see for yourself.


age: If you, LOL, have supposedly NEVER even hinted at the above, then it will NOT be here, for ALL NOR for ANY one to SEE.

It's not here. Go, see for yourself.


age: And, when you SHOOT people DEAD are you NOT forfeiting their lives?

Nope, I'm takin' a life. Whether my takin' it is justified is another matter.


age: Are you suggesting that people only give up their life, liberty, or property COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY?

I hadn't really thought of it that way, but -- yeah -- in context, that's the case.

If you value what's mine enough to take it as yours, to steal it, then you voluntarily risk your life, your liberty, or your property.


age: You quote the "american heritage dictionary", as though that should be one the WHOLE population of earth looks at, listen to, and follows

Fair point. So, which dictionary did you use to look up forfeit?


age: NO one PURPOSES 'loses' ANY thing like their life, liberty, NOR 'property".

If you mean to say no one purposely loses anything like their life, liberty, or property, you're partially right. No one gambles with the intent of losing, but only an idiot gambles not understanding he may very well lose. The skydiver voluntarily risks his life, the stockcar driver voluntarily risks his life, the climber of a vertical rock face voluntarily risks his life, the thief voluntarily risks his life.

Hell, for most folks, just gettin' out of bed in the mornin' entails risk and the possibility of loss.

BUT I have ALREADY replied to ALL of this.

[Age]

But God and the concept of God are the same.

Nope. Man holds an image in his head, one not entirely accurate, of an independently existing being, the first being, the being who undergirds being.


Before there were men there was no God, only nature.

Nope. Before man, before nature, before reality: there was the Creator.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Are you able to explain how this could logically be?

if yes, then will you?

If yes, then GREAT.

But, if no, then WHY NOT?

[Age]

That's wrong.

To know ''there was the Creator'' is to make the Creator a noun.

Nouns are not Creators, they are the Created.

God existed before man. We name Him God or Creator or Maker, we apply the placeholder, we don't manufacture the being we apply the placeholder to.

A placeholder implies a place to take hold of...that requires two things, a holder and the thing it's holding.

While Superman is flying through the air assuring the falling girl, that he is now holding her, and that he's got her, to which the girl replies, you've got me, but who's got you. . see the problem?

No, what EXACTLY and SUPPOSEDLY is the so-called "problem" here?

Until you PROVIDE the perceived ACTUAL "problem" we can NOT provide you with thee ACTUAL solution, and answer.

Truth is, we just CANNOT know the Creator, without making it a created thing.

This is ABSOLUTELY False. We can KNOW things WITHOUT making them created things, OBVIOUSLY.

For there is no one to cross the horizon to get a peek up the creator's shirt. No such horizon ever existed.

There maybe NO horizon, but there ACTUALLY IS one ABLE to SEE and PEEK at what thee ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY.

[Age]

But God and the concept of God are the same.

Nope. Man holds an image in his head, one not entirely accurate, of an independently existing being, the first being, the being who undergirds being.


Before there were men there was no God, only nature.

Nope. Before man, before nature, before reality: there was the Creator.

Nature is an independently existing being. Nature needs no cause ; nature is cause of itself. God is the same as nature plus the sort of intelligent intentions that human beings have.

Very true.

Man's theology is simply nonsense. Quite obvious and simply, man is a concept too.

The moment you make the Creator a noun you kill it along with your own sense of self which is also a noun. Nouns cannot grow. Only verbs grow.

Creation itself is enough unto itself; it needs no outside agency to create it.

Creation does not just need no outside agency to create Creation, Itself, but it is an ACTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY for any "outside agency" to exist.

The moment you accept an outside agency to create it, you fall into a vicious circle.

What do you mean by 'a vicious cycle'?

[Age]

"God is dead" -- Nietzsche

"Nietzsche is dead" -- God.

Anticipating Age:

Man LOL
God LOLL

Wrong AGAIN.

And, ONCE AGAIN, if one GAINS CLARITY BEFORE they ANTICIPATE or make ASSUMPTIONS, then they will NOT be SO WRONG, as OFTEN as they ARE.

[Age]

God existed before man. We name Him God or Creator or Maker, we apply the placeholder, we don't manufacture the being we apply the placeholder to.

*A placeholder implies a place to take hold of...that requires two things, a holder and the thing it's holding.

While Superman is flying through the air assuring the falling girl, that he is now holding her, and that he's got her, to which the girl replies, you've got me, but who's got you. . see the problem?

Truth is, **we just CANNOT know the Creator, without making it a created thing. For there is no one to cross the horizon to get a peek up the creator's shirt. No such horizon ever existed.

*No. In context, the placeholder God is the symbol or name of the being (person) who created the universe.

LOL

This view, thought, or BELIEF is just as ABSURD as thinking, viewing, or BELIEVING that the Universe was created at or by the so-called "big bang".

Some human beings, in the days when this was being written, as CLEARLY PROVEN here, were as BLIND to what thee ACTUAL Truth IS as one EVER COULD BE.

**Sure we can. And not as a created thing but as an existing person. We know He creates.

LOL Who or what is the 'we', which SUPPOSEDLY "knows" a "he" creates?

We know reason, conscience and free will are important to Him.

LOL

Who AND what is the so-called "him", which you "know" things are important to?

We know he trusts us. Seems like a damn good start to me.

WHY do 'you' call human beings "men" and God "him"?

Has the completely and utterly VERY OLD, ILLOGICAL BELIEF that 'men' are somehow more powerful or more worthy of respect DISTORTED 'you', "henry quirk" SO MUCH that that is WHY 'you' STILL use this MOST OUTDATED version of the word/s? Or, do you have some other reason for using this OBVIOUSLY Wrong, False, AND Incorrect usage?

[Age]

*That's pantheism, yeah? I'm a deist: nature/Reality exists, it has beings (persons like you and me) within it. And a being (person) created it. But nature is not a being.

Explain what you think you mean by "I'm a Deist", please.

God exists. He created the universe. He created man.

There is NOW NO wonder WHY these so-called "deists" were NOT being listened to, by REAL critical thinkers.

Calling God a "he", and CLAIMING that a "he" created the WHOLE Universe, Itself, is about as INSANE an idea and CLAIM that could be given.

Man is gifted by God with reason, conscience, and free will (in other words, everything we need to make a go of it).

What does the 'it' word refer to here, EXACTLY?

God is not personally involved in how Reality unfolds.

So, according to 'you', the self-proclaimed "deist", God created the Universe BUT is NOT involved in how Reality unfolds.

WHY this makes absolutely NO sense AT ALL to the so-called "nondeist" can be CLEARLY SEEN and speaks for itself here.

Revelation isn't necessary to suss out God.

Then what, EXACTLY, is NECESSARY to "suss out God"?

[Age]

Explain what you think you mean by "I'm a Deist", please.

God exists. He created the universe. He created man. Man is gifted by God with reason, conscience, and free will (in other words, everything we need to make a go of it). God is not personally involved in how Reality unfolds. Revelation isn't necessary to suss out God.

By what process or means did you arrive at that conclusion based on what evidence, if you care to explain. I'm just curious why anyone believes there must be anything more than the actual world we directly perceive and live in?

Especially considering the Fact that it would be an absolute IMPOSSIBILITY for there to be ANY thing more than thee ACTUAL Universe, Itself.

[Age]

God exists. He created the universe. He created man. Man is gifted by God with reason, conscience, and free will (in other words, everything we need to make a go of it). God is not personally involved in how Reality unfolds. Revelation isn't necessary to suss out God.

By what process or means did you arrive at that conclusion based on what evidence, if you care to explain. I'm just curious why anyone believes there must be anything more than the actual world we directly perceive and live in?

RC, I'd be happy to tell you how I arrived at deism, right after you clear this...

RC,

After a mornin' of tradin' on the black & gray markets you come home to find your wife dead. Her throat is slashed open as is her belly. Your house is ransacked. It's obvious this ain't suicide.

What do you?

...up for me.

(the little ↑ will take you to the conversation we almost had, if you need to refresh your memory)

"henry quirk" WHY do you quote us properly or in a help way, sometimes, but NOT at other times?

Also, By what process or means did you arrive at that conclusion that:God exists. He created the universe. He created man. Man is gifted by God with reason, conscience, and free will (in other words, everything we need to make a go of it). God is not personally involved in how Reality unfolds. Revelation isn't necessary to suss out God.and what "evidence" was this based on, exactly? If you care to explain, then I am just curious WHY ANY one would believe that there must be ANY thing more than the actual Universe, which we directly perceive and live in?

[Age]

God exists. He created the universe. He created man. Man is gifted by God with reason, conscience, and free will (in other words, everything we need to make a go of it). God is not personally involved in how Reality unfolds. Revelation isn't necessary to suss out God.

If man is gifted by god, I think that makes you a theist.
What makes you think this idea makes sense?

If a deist's God creates man with reason, conscience, and free will, how is this not a gift?

Because 'you', human beings, being "gifted" with the power of reason, does NOT mean that 'you' will use this 'power' LOGICALLY. As has ALREADY been PROVED True countless of times throughout human history, as well as through some of the words of "henry quirks".

It makes sense to me. I'm willin' to discuss it, but -- as I have no holy book to advise me, no holy men to direct me, no coffers to fill, and no compulsion to convert anyone -- I couldn't give two drizzly shits if my deism makes sense to you or anyone.

I am CURIOS to LEARN and KNOW how it could even make sense to you that a "he" could create some thing the size of thee Universe, Itself. Are you able to explain HOW this could make sense, to you?

If no, then okay. This lack of ABILITY says and explains ENOUGH.

Oh, Henry, that's so intemperate, and hostile!

Yep. I know who I'm contendin' with: sculptor is no buddy of mine and his interest in my deism is motivated by distaste, not curiosity. That doesn't mean I won't talk with him; it does mean I ain't gonna pretend the conversation is anything but a hostile one.