Christianity

[henry quirk]

age,

most people that I know of are CERTAINLY NOT talking about 'a person' when they talk about 'God'.

so, when most of the people you know talk about God, what are they talkin' about?

NONE of them YET KNOW.

They just use the word 'God', like they know what they are talking about.

then some, many, most, or all might be talkin' about God as a person

consider how these folks you know use God: does it seem to you they use the word to describe an event like a hurricane or an agent like a another person?

[Age]

As demonstrated, we are able to be and do all kinds of things regardless of beliefs.

free will is a bitch

Being free of theist belief offers potential and freedom beyond the theist structured stories and limitations.

And, being FREE of ALL BELIEFS offers potential and freedom beyond the human being structured stories AND limitations.

As I have been alluding to, from the outset.

Some people may not be comfortable with that; they may be more inclined towards having structured beliefs (like a roadmap), and identifying themselves through that.

Some people may not be comfortable with that; they may be more inclined towards having structured beliefs (like a road map), and identifying "themselves" through those BELIEFS. Like, for example, the BELIEF that, "There is NO one truth", which path or road some people just FOLLOW, BLINDLY, without EVER looking BEYOND.

Non-theists simply don't feel that need,

OF COURSE "non-theists" simply do NOT feel the need to follow theist structured stories and limitations. But, BELIEVERS, OBVIOUSLY, feel the need to FOLLOW the human structured stories and limitations, which are being BELIEVED.

EXACTLY like you do and SHOW here "lacewing".

and can't subscribe to something that doesn't make sense to them.

NO human being would subscribe to something that does NOT make sense to them. To do so would NOT make ANY sense AT ALL, OBVIOUSLY.

Either way, people demonstrate all types of behavior and capability, regardless of whether they are theists or not.

And, people demonstrate the EXACT SAME behavior that "theist" BELIEVERS follow, when they are BELIEVING (in) some 'thing', like, for example, "There is NOT one truth".

[Age]

lace,

up-thread I said...

Genesis 1:27: So God created man in his own image

This, I think, can be, ought be, taken that we are very much like Him. Not physically (He may have no form, have multiple forms, or look like the FSM), but becuz, like Him, we're persons (free wills) with causative/creative power.

https://www.toptenz.net/top-10-deities- ... nimals.php

all ten entries describe persons (free wills with causative/creative power)

But 'persons', "themselves", do NOT have 'free will'. They exist because of 'free will'.

And, if not EVERY thing, then just about EVERY thing, has causative/creative power, anyway.

each chooses their actions; each acts with intent

Do ALL animals have this ability, or just 'you', human beings, and persons?

there are no mindless forces in the bunch

Is there a human being or person with an ACTUAL 'mind'?

If yes, then HOW, EXACTLY?

[Age]

age,

What IS 'mind', EXACTLY?

It's the part of you that can't be sourced in the brain: personality, reason, free will, conscience, identity

And, what is 'you', EXACTLY?

What is 'free will', EXACTLY?

I take it two ways: it's the faculty that allows one to choose and act for reasons not necessarily sourced in prior events; and it's what we are (persons: reasoning, intending, acting, beings); it's part of you, is you, like mind

So, to 'you', 'free will' is a part of you, and IS 'you', like 'mind', but 'mind' is ONLY a PART of 'you', which can NOT be sourced in the brain.

Where can 'free will' AND 'mind' be sourced, EXACTLY?

What is 'ownness', EXACTLY?

the intuition all men share;

WHY ONLY 'men'? And, WHY makes this DIFFER from 'women'?

the rock-solid, unwavering sense man has that he is his own, that he isn't, and can never be, property (others may treat him as property but he never is property); as I see it, ownness is at the core of morality (what is and isn't permissible between and among men)

But what IS and IS NOT permissible between among 'you' "men" is NOT agreed upon AND accept YET, in the days when this was being written.

So, how do 'you' OVERCOME this apparent issue here?

What is 'conscience', EXACTLY?

it's the moral sense; the internal arbiter of right and wrong reflectn', I think, The Arbiter

Well, how come, 'you', human beings, in the days when this was being written, had NOT been able to ACCESS, successfully, this Arbiter, YET?

What do you think is holding 'you' BACK, and PREVENTING and STOPPING 'you' from ACCESSING the Arbiter, successfully?

-----

the danger of categorizin' things like mind, free will, conscience, and ownness is these categories are artificial and can lead to viewing any or all as things to be examined in isolation from the others

What is SUPPOSEDLY 'dangerous' about doing that?

Surely, when 'you' get it Right, then there could NOT be ANY 'danger', correct?

In fact, getting it Right would SURELY PREVENT and STOP 'danger' from occurring or happening, EVER AGAIN?

each, I think, is part & parcel of the others, none existin' as a quality or substance that can be plonked down under a microscope

But if you have happened to come across these things, and SEE them, then HOW did you do this, EXACTLY?

bein' bold: I'm talkin' about your soul or spirit that coexists or is intermingled with your substance

But who and/or what is the one 'you' refer to as 'your', which supposedly OWNS these things?

we're composite beings,

Who and/or what are 'composite beings'?

I think, who ought be taken as seamless wholes, not pieces and parts

Who, EXACTLY?

And, is there ANY thing that is NOT a seamless whole?

If yes, then who or what is 'that', EXACTLY?

Also, could ANY or ALL of these ACTUALLY be NOT what is EXACTLY True, Right, or Correct?

And, WHY did you ONLY answer the 'what' questions here and NOT the other ones?

[Lacewing]

https://www.toptenz.net/top-10-deities- ... nimals.php

all ten entries describe persons (free wills with causative/creative power)
each chooses their actions; each acts with intent

So, animals are persons?

Well, I guess you will define things however you need to in order to think you're right.

[Age]

age,

most people that I know of are CERTAINLY NOT talking about 'a person' when they talk about 'God'.

so, when most of the people you know talk about God, what are they talkin' about?

NONE of them YET KNOW.

They just use the word 'God', like they know what they are talking about.

then some, many, most, or all might be talkin' about God as a person

But when one is talking about how 'God created the Universe/Everything', for example, then they are CERTAINLY NOT talking about 'a person', because 'you', persons, came into existence some few millions years prior to when this was being written, is a relatively nothing amount of time compared to some PRESUMPTION of when thee Universe was ACTUALLY 'said to have begun'.

consider how these folks you know use God:

Instead of just considering, and ASSUMING, how those human beings use the God word I prefer to ask them DIRECTLY. I then, patiently, just wait their reply, and CLARIFICATION.

That way I can NEVER make a False, Wrong, nor Incorrect ASSUMPTION, nor COMMENT, regarding this issue.

does it seem to you they use the word to describe an event like a hurricane or an agent like a another person?

You just asked me to consider how they use God, but now you asking me if it seems to me that they use 'the word' to describe an event like a hurricane or an agent like a another person?

I do NOT know how to answer this except by asking you to CLARIFY what is 'the word' you are talking about here?

If it is the God word, then I am NOT sure how that relates, AT ALL, to hurricanes or an agent like another person. But if it is some thing else, then we will just WAIT, for you.

Also, if I was to consider how some human beings use God, then it would NOT seem to me they use 'the word' to describe an event like a hurricane or an agent like another person, AT ALL, anyway, and by the way.

[Age]

https://www.toptenz.net/top-10-deities- ... nimals.php

all ten entries describe persons (free wills with causative/creative power)
each chooses their actions; each acts with intent

So, animals are persons?

Well, I guess you will define things however you need to in order to think you're right.

'Confirmation bias' does occur and happen in 'you', human beings, FAR MORE than 'you' even realized YET, in the days when this was being written.

As has ALREADY been PROVED, IRREFUTABLY, True just throughout this forum.

[Lacewing]

Lacewing: Being free of theist belief offers potential and freedom beyond the theist structured stories and limitations.

mebbe so, or mebbe it offers meaninglessness and despair

Uh, I've never seen that to be the case. Some people might want to think that's the case in order to try to justify the necessity and rightness of their own beliefs -- but it's so ridiculous, it's laughable.

[henry quirk]

age,

But 'persons', "themselves", do NOT have 'free will'. They exist because of 'free will'.

I disagree


Is there a human being or person with an ACTUAL 'mind'?

yep (you, for example)

[henry quirk]

lace

So, animals are persons?

no

the list you offered wasn't of animals: it was of gods

a coyote is not a person

Coyote, the Trickster is (or, more accurately, was envisioned to be)

[henry quirk]

age,

Instead of just considering, and ASSUMING, how those human beings use the God word I prefer to ask them DIRECTLY. I then, patiently, just wait their reply, and CLARIFICATION.

okay

have you asked them?

if so: what did they say?

[henry quirk]

lace,

I've never seen that to be the case.

221738DC-6235-4AA7-889A-46EE1CAFE0E2.jpeg

[Lacewing]

the list you offered wasn't of animals: it was of gods

Lacewing: Do you think that all gods throughout human history have been imagined as persons?

cite one who hasn't been taken or seen as a person

They were imagined as animals. Done.

[Lacewing]

Lacewing: I've never seen that to be the case.

Where do you get your experience and impressions about life, Henry?

[henry quirk]

the list you offered wasn't of animals: it was of gods

Lacewing: Do you think that all gods throughout human history have been imagined as persons?

cite one who hasn't been taken or seen as a person

They were imagined as animals. Done.

B23BBE06-5FA7-410D-AFFE-77C116989BE5.png

animal or god?