Christianity

[popeye1945]

Think about it. Santa Claus was just another name for God. They just changed the name; you still believe in Santa Claus! With a different name but the same foundation. I don't want to live in that house!!

[attofishpi]

Attofishpi wrote:

My point being, and as you may have noticed, I use the term KEY words. These words imo have been manipulated through the minds of men unbeknownst to them by this underlying intelligence (GOD) into their current form.

This is the main cause of our disagreement. Simply, I don't believe in that sort of God. I.e. the sort of God who intervenes in history.

Am i correct to infer that you believe in some form of GOD? A spinozan form perhaps?

If you like you may put your theory to the test; suggest any English word and I guarantee I will be able to invent how the word holds an arcane meaning.

Yippy! Now you're talking. Much of the point I am making is regarding the CUMULATIVE evidence, thus any word taken on an individualy account can be almost dismissed.

So have a look at the etymological root of the following two words, of course they have no common root..

EVIL

LIVE

[Age]

God is aliveness.

Aliveness cannot unalive aliveness. That’s why God must be everything including the starting block off which God got off of.

Badness cannot be gotten rid of no more than goodness can be gotten rid of.

Are you, here, suggesting that you can NOT learn, and thus can NOT stop do Wrong and/or 'evil' things?

There’s no way out of this twisted loop, because it’s infinite.

To me, an adult human being, ONLY, would come up with this type of an EXCUSE when 'TRYING TO' reason out and 'justify' their continual abuse of others, children, and ultimately "themselves".

you adult human beings can JUST STOP DOING ALL OF the Wrong, evil, and/or bad things that you ALL do.

[popeye1945]

All words are qualifications and/or limitations!

[Age]

I prefer my own version of God.

of course you do. However we are supposed to be philosophers here and philosophers love wisdom not poor reasoning.

Of course yes I do. Your powers of observation are remarkably astounding.
I’m a philosopher and lover of wisdom too. I reason just like you, like everyone with a brain, who has the reasoning capability to think for themselves.

But, some people some times 'reason' BETTER, [logically], on some things, than others DO, [illogically].

To me, those who SEEK OUT 'wisdom' PICK 'an issue', and 'logically reason' WITH 'others, until an answer, the Truth, and/or a resolution IS FOUND, AGREED UPON, and ACCEPTED. To me, 'they' certainly do not PICK "a side", and then just fight FOR nor AGAINST ANY "side", NOR 'position.

I’m showing my personal version of God according to my personal direct experience, according to how I personally perceive what God means to me, and what I have discovered God to be. Here, I simply put my perception into a narrative, that’s not to say my narrative is an absolute concrete fact. I’m not claiming that.
No one here at this forum has access to the original source codes, that belong purely to God only.

AGAIN, it is BELIEFS like this one, which was what was PREVENTING, BLOCKING, and STOPPING people, back when this was being written, from COMING-TO-LEARN, and KNOW, the ACTUAL Truth of things.

Only God has original authority over the knowledge that is God… am I God, do I have special monopoly of God, hell no, ffs.

AGAIN, these people, STILL, had NOT WORKED OUT, 'Who am 'I', EXACTLY'.

Take it or leave it, there’s no obligation, it’s not like I’m forcing my philosophy down your throat.

But, you do NOT HAVE A 'philosophy', here.

you have ONLY views, beliefs, and opinions, here.

And, OBVIOUSLY, some of them do NOT 'logically follow' and are NOT 'logically reasonable'.

You are a very rude woman. I’m not talking to you ever again, condescending comments like yours, are just not worth my time or energy. You can quote me as you like, if it suits you to do so, but I will never respond to you again.

But, the MAIN PURPOSE OF A 'philosophy forum' is so that human beings can COME TOGETHER, PEACEFULLY, to have Truly OPEN and Honest LOGICALLY REASONED DISCUSSIONS, in order to ARRIVE AT MUTUALLY AGREED UPON and ACCEPTED CONCLUSIONS.

If one just WANTS TO SHARE their OWN PERSONAL VERSION OF ANY 'thing', then they can DO THAT just about ANYWHERE ELSE.

LOGICALLY REASONED DISCUSSIONS do NOT involve things like;

This is MY OWN PERSONAL VERSION OF some 'thing', and i am NOT going to CHANGE 'my version' AT ALL. 'This kind of interacting' is NOT what 'philosophical discussions' were DESIGNED FOR.

In Fact ANY form of 'DEBATING' is NOT what 'philosophy' NOR 'philosophical discussions' ARE ABOUT.

If ANY one HAS or HOLDS A POSITION, A BELIEF, or A PRESUMPTION and WANTS TO FIGHT or ARGUE FOR THAT POSITION, BELIEF, or PRESUMPTION, or AGAINST ANY POSITION, BELIEF, or PRESUMPTION, then there IS a WHOLE INTERNET OF 'forums' set up for that kind of INSANITY.

'Philosophy forums' were set up FOR 'logically reasoned' DISCUSSIONS, until those involved BECOME WISER.

[Age]

Think about it. Santa Claus was just another name for God. They just changed the name; you still believe in Santa Claus! With a different name but the same foundation. I don't want to live in that house!!

you are FREE TO BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY ANY thing you like.

But, besides the characteristic of being another 'male', (ONCE MORE), what else do "santa claus" and God have IN COMMON, in your OWN particular and OWN peculiar versions of the two?

[Age]

Attofishpi wrote:

My point being, and as you may have noticed, I use the term KEY words. These words imo have been manipulated through the minds of men unbeknownst to them by this underlying intelligence (GOD) into their current form.

This is the main cause of our disagreement. Simply, I don't believe in that sort of God. I.e. the sort of God who intervenes in history.

Am i correct to infer that you believe in some form of GOD? A spinozan form perhaps?

Out of the ABSOLUTELY UNCOUNTABLE number of OTHER DIFFERENT 'forms' or 'versions' OF God, WHY did you pick 'that one', ONLY?

If you like you may put your theory to the test; suggest any English word and I guarantee I will be able to invent how the word holds an arcane meaning.

Yippy! Now you're talking. Much of the point I am making is regarding the CUMULATIVE evidence, thus any word taken on an individualy account can be almost dismissed.

So have a look at the etymological root of the following two words, of course they have no common root..

EVIL

LIVE

YEP God THEREFORE MUST exist.

[Age]

All words are qualifications and/or limitations!

Which means 'what', EXACTLY?

It might actually MEAN that UNTIL the Right ORDER of words, with Right definitions, IS FOUND the ACTUAL Truth OF and ABOUT God, and ALL things, will NOT BE UNCOVERED, right?

[attofishpi]

Attofishpi wrote:



This is the main cause of our disagreement. Simply, I don't believe in that sort of God. I.e. the sort of God who intervenes in history.

Am i correct to infer that you believe in some form of GOD? A spinozan form perhaps?

Out of the ABSOLUTELY UNCOUNTABLE number of OTHER DIFFERENT 'forms' or 'versions' OF God, WHY did you pick 'that one', ONLY?

If you like you may put your theory to the test; suggest any English word and I guarantee I will be able to invent how the word holds an arcane meaning.

Yippy! Now you're talking. Much of the point I am making is regarding the CUMULATIVE evidence, thus any word taken on an individualy account can be almost dismissed.

So have a look at the etymological root of the following two words, of course they have no common root..

EVIL

LIVE

YEP God THEREFORE MUST exist.

FUCK OFF IDIOT - YOU ARE NOT BELINDA

[promethean75]

Why not?

Because there can be only one?

[Age]

Am i correct to infer that you believe in some form of GOD? A spinozan form perhaps?

Out of the ABSOLUTELY UNCOUNTABLE number of OTHER DIFFERENT 'forms' or 'versions' OF God, WHY did you pick 'that one', ONLY?

Yippy! Now you're talking. Much of the point I am making is regarding the CUMULATIVE evidence, thus any word taken on an individualy account can be almost dismissed.

So have a look at the etymological root of the following two words, of course they have no common root..

EVIL

LIVE

YEP God THEREFORE MUST exist.

FUCK OFF IDIOT - YOU ARE NOT BELINDA

TO BELIEVE that 'God exists' one ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT 'the words' 'evil' AND 'live', hey "attofishpi"?

[attofishpi]

TO BELIEVE that 'God exists' one ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT 'the words' 'evil' AND 'live', hey "attofishpi"?

And therein lies the short sighted incapable of comprehending what is being stated that your feeble brain is only capable of.

Did you not read the part above where I state that looking at accounts of these words on their own proves nothing...its the CUMULATIVE lists of KEY words that need to be taken into account for the EVIDENCE to amount. I am certain you will not understand why that is the MOST important aspect of what I am attempting to convey...re GOD.

[Age]

TO BELIEVE that 'God exists' one ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT 'the words' 'evil' AND 'live', hey "attofishpi"?

And therein lies the short sighted incapable of comprehending what is being stated that your feeble brain is only capable of.

Did you not read the part above where I state that looking at accounts of these words on their own proves nothing...its the CUMULATIVE lists of KEY words that need to be taken into account for the EVIDENCE to amount.

AND, you OBVIOUSLY MISSED the POINTS ABOUT,

So-called 'key words' NOT BEING what one human being called "attofishpi" BELIEVES they are. And,

your so-called CUMULATIVE LIST is of about a dozen and so words short, ONLY.

And, if you WANT TO REALLY TALK ABOUT 'shortsightedness', then let 'us' PROCEED. See, just like you DO NOT and WILL NOT ACCEPT the 'evidence' IN the words that 'I' PROVIDE 'you', NOT one OTHER SINGLE human being IS ACCEPTING the 'evidence' in the VERY, VERY SHORT LIST OF WORDS, which you PROVIDE, here.

I am certain you will not understand why that is the MOST important aspect of what I am attempting to convey...re GOD.

you, STILL, have NOT COMPREHENDED that your, LAUGHINGLY, so-called CUMULATIVE LIST is relatively ABSOLUTELY NOTHING compared TO the ACTUAL LIST OF WORDS, which are NOT just 'evidence' FOR God, and FOR God's existence, but which ACTUALLY PROVE WHO and WHAT God IS, EXACTLY, which IN TURN PROVES that God does ACTUALLY EXIST.

ONCE AGAIN, 'these people', here, WERE SO, SO FAR BEHIND, as well as, STILL, being SO, SO LOST, and CONFUSED. As DEMONSTRATED, ONCE MORE, by 'the one' known as "attofishpi", here.

[Age]

"attofishpi's" 'MOST import aspect', here, is based on NOTHING but a couple of dozen words, ONLY, and which NO one ELSE even 'sees' what "attofishpi" does ANYWAY.

[attofishpi]

Do you ever self analyse and consider that what you write is garbage?