Philosophy Now Forum

All the odd gobbledygook in the scriptures can only mean one thing - a flaky cross-dimensional connection. Obviously.

Alas, the cheap tech support outsourced from various parts of Asia a few thousand years ago was so out-of-date that when God called about the connectivity problem, He was told by a Customer Service Consultant to check if the twine between the cans was frayed! Worse, they thought the noise of God's dialup connection was demonic in origin.

When He asked to speak to management He was put on hold, and there He remains today, lost in perennial jingles and helpful ads suggesting that He contact them via His internet service.

Maybe God already did and we overruled it with ours.

bahman wrote:How God could fail to convey His message?

'He' didn't fail - i think it did a pretty good job.

seeds wrote:

bahman wrote:
We believe that God is omniscient and omnipotent. This means that there should be one true religion. There are about 4000 religions. How God could fail to convey his message?

I think that God’s implicit message to the world is quite clear:

Be fruitful and multiply and you will understand the reason for it all after you die.

_______

Are you fucking serious?

attofishpi wrote:

bahman wrote:How God could fail to convey His message?

'He' didn't fail - i think it did a pretty good job.

Perhaps some men deliberately fail to understand the message.

So, according to theists... man interprets God’s message, and if the message is not received or wrong, it’s man’s fault –- regardless of a supposedly all-powerful god who should be able to speak the same message to each and every person clearly? And this senseless explanation is chosen over the more realistic conclusion that there is no one and nothing issuing such a message other than man, himself?

Lacewing wrote:So, according to theists... man interprets God’s message, and if the message is not received or wrong, it’s man’s fault –- regardless of a supposedly all-powerful god who should be able to speak the same message to each and every person clearly? And this senseless explanation is chosen over the more realistic conclusion that there is no one and nothing issuing such a message other than man, himself?

Yes, it's willful ignorance, and there is an example on the internet right now, Peacegirl was on this forum for a short time.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14365&p=189972&hili ... ht#p189972

And she is still active over at Freethought Forum. Peacegirl has been active on FF for about 5 years, and I encountered her on a forum before that.

thedoc wrote:

Lacewing wrote:So, according to theists... man interprets God’s message, and if the message is not received or wrong, it’s man’s fault –- regardless of a supposedly all-powerful god who should be able to speak the same message to each and every person clearly? And this senseless explanation is chosen over the more realistic conclusion that there is no one and nothing issuing such a message other than man, himself?

Yes, it's willful ignorance, and there is an example on the internet right now, Peacegirl was on this forum for a short time.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14365&p=189972&hili ... ht#p189972

And she is still active over at Freethought Forum. Peacegirl has been active on FF for about 5 years, and I encountered her on a forum before that.

Doc, I have no idea what you're talking about. I've heard you mention Peacegirl before... you must have a thing for her. What does she have to do with my post?

You bolded part of what I said, and responded "it's willful ignorance". WHAT EXACTLY are you claiming is willful ignorance? Are you respectfully maintaining the context of my entire post, and agreeing that it's man's willful ignorance to blame man for missing a god's message, when it is man himself who creates the message? Or are you separating out one phrase from my post in order to claim that "man's fault" is his willful ignorance of God's message (rather than honestly addressing my entire statement)?

Lacewing wrote: Doc, I have no idea what you're talking about. I've heard you mention Peacegirl before... you must have a thing for her. What does she have to do with my post?

You bolded part of what I said, and responded "it's willful ignorance". WHAT EXACTLY are you claiming is willful ignorance? Are you respectfully maintaining the context of my entire post, and agreeing that it's man's willful ignorance to blame man for missing a god's message, when it is man himself who creates the message? Or are you separating out one phrase from my post in order to claim that "man's fault" is his willful ignorance of God's message (rather than honestly addressing my entire statement)?

If "having a thing for her" includes trying to counter her errors and lies, then I suppose you could be correct, but then I have plenty of good company in that endeavor.

If man created the message that men do not understand, then it's willful ignorance.

If God is the origin of the message and some men still do not understand it, then it is still willful ignorance.

I did address the parts of your post that had any meaning, it seems that you are participating in the willful ignorance yourself. Though claiming that I did not address everything in your post is a useful diversionary tactic, good for you.

thedoc wrote:I did address the parts of your post that had any meaning, it seems that you are participating in the willful ignorance yourself. Though claiming that I did not address everything in your post is a useful diversionary tactic, good for you.

I see, you're just being a jerk. Carry on.

Lacewing wrote:

thedoc wrote:I did address the parts of your post that had any meaning, it seems that you are participating in the willful ignorance yourself. Though claiming that I did not address everything in your post is a useful diversionary tactic, good for you.

I see, you're just being a jerk. Carry on.

Thankyou, I will, I'm just trying to fit in with everyone else on this forum. BTW, can I put that on my resume?

seeds wrote: I think that God’s implicit message to the world is quite clear:

Be fruitful and multiply and you will understand the reason for it all after you die.

Is there a critical amount required in the population before we get a revelation or do we just keep on multiplying in the meantime?

thedoc wrote:

Lacewing wrote:

thedoc wrote:I did address the parts of your post that had any meaning, it seems that you are participating in the willful ignorance yourself. Though claiming that I did not address everything in your post is a useful diversionary tactic, good for you.

I see, you're just being a jerk. Carry on.

Thankyou, I will, I'm just trying to fit in with everyone else on this forum. BTW, can I put that on my resume?

Doesn't seem very ambitious to want to be like anyone else on this forum. I wouldn't put it on my résumé. Easier to get a job and a raise if you claim a relationship with God instead!

Dubious wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Lacewing wrote: I see, you're just being a jerk. Carry on.

Thankyou, I will, I'm just trying to fit in with everyone else on this forum. BTW, can I put that on my resume?

Doesn't seem very ambitious to want to be like anyone else on this forum. I wouldn't put it on my résumé. Easier to get a job and a raise if you claim a relationship with God instead!

I know I'm lowering my standards, trying to fit into this forum, just call me a flawed human being. Since I'm retired my resume doesn't really matter, but it's fun to keep updating it.