Tell us more about these delusional religious streams where you come from.

You said it, not me, so I was just asking you what you meant by it.

What does it mean that the universe is nature, or the universe is made from nature?

[QUOTE=Susmario;45432025]Thanks for your posts.

Original Position
Do you think it is part of the concept of God that God is loving?

First and foremost God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning; that He is a loving God, that is the corollary by man from His God’s first and foremost credit, and it is founded upon analogy by man on his man’s knowledge of how a mother loves her offspring.

Petjax
[Susmario: God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning] … Are you really that lost? that that statement, even in concept is so far from reality that i can't believe you even mention it, do you have any concept of what the universe is and where it is made from, and what kind of powers and energy it produce's?...

That is the concept in my mind, and if you concur with the concept, we can both go forth to locate God in the universe, using the concept as a road map of sorts. The mind is a most versatile storage, it can contain anything however huge you can see it to be, or however small you see it to be.

concept (ˈkɒnsɛpt)
n
1. an idea, esp an abstract idea: the concepts of biology.
2. (Philosophy) philosophy a general idea or notion that corresponds to some class of entities and that consists of the characteristic or essential features of the class
3. (Philosophy) philosophy
a. the conjunction of all the characteristic features of something
b. a theoretical construct within some theory
c. a directly intuited object of thought
d. the meaning of a predicate

So you start of by calling your god an entity or class or an abstract idea? and if not explain to me how do you see god?, meaning is it a ghost,entity,presence,spirit, a figure that exist/created in the mind of believers? please answer me this question, because i can relate to people that think that something exist without asking me to acknowledge it exist's on forehand

And how can you love something that IMO only exist in the minds of people?, because in the world i live in there is nothing that even remotely proofs the existence of anything in any way, shape or form called god, nor in the world off science.

And how can i concur with a concept that in my eyes is impossible to exist?
For me that is the same as me asking you let us talk about how we can make gold out of water.

Because like for instance aliens, that is a subject that can be discussed, because there is a chance that they do exist, seeing the universe/space is so incredibly big beyond our way of measuring how big it really is, and since earth is in manor of speaking just a dust particle in space, there can be other planets with life on it.

and since the meaning of the word philosophical is: To be philosophical is to stay detached and thoughtful in the face of a setback, or to approach a tough situation in a level-headed way. When his girlfriend left him, Bernard was philosophical: "If she loves me, she'll return."
In ancient Greece, philosophy literally meant a love of knowledge and wisdom. In modern times, the field of philosophy is more specifically the study of how we think through problems. Great philosophers have all sorts of theories about how and why we think and act the way we do, but the word philosophical often just means that you choose to be more thoughtful and look at the 'big picture' when dealing with challenges.

It is impossible for me to speak philosophical or any other way about what you call god, because god does not exist for me, and therefore when i ask you, give me something i as an non-believer in god other then just faith that god exist, like i believe in the evolution, and i can proof it because scientist have by studying the earth proven how we came on this planet and developed in how we are today, can you do the same with the for me myth called god?.

Where do you get the idea that i am religious, do you have dyslexia or some-thing? or are you just judgmental or lazy, because if you just would have taken the small effort of reading some of my post you would have seen why this comment is baseless and wrong.

It means[or what i meant to say] for me that the universe is "part" of nature.

Ok, but this doesnt exactly make sense. If the universe is part of nature, then that implies that nature is some sort of "outside" container for the universe, that the universe only makes up part of nature.

Even if it does make sense, it doesnt really tell me anything. Now you have to tell me what you mean by "nature"

See the above and if you don't understand then i am sorry but i am done with explaining, and frankly i don't understand your fixation with this universe/nature thing, but like i said i am done explaining it, because you don't seem to read, otherwise i wouldn't have to explain it 3 times.
THANK YOU.

You said it, not me. What did you mean by it?

Are you Susmario?

What!!! are you reading alright? where did i ever gave you the idea that i am religious?

I think that everyone may believe what they want, as long if they don't bother me with it, i have worked hard for almost 30 years so i can retire at the age of 45 years, and i have nobody to thank for that then myself and then my family and some friends, and i never needed no church religion or that myth called god, and i can assure you that i am not religious or anything like it, because i can enjoy life very well without it, and i do, so whatever you think i have said that made you believe i have faith in anything other then family,friends and hard work and enjoying life you are mistaking big time.

And for me being susmario?hahahahaha how you ever got that idea is beyond my understanding, that man is talking in a way that is also! beyond my understanding, and i can tell you i am very happy that he is he and i am i believe me, that man thinks way to much and i doubt if he fully comprehend what he is saying and/or understands it completely, because he takes this philosophically talking so far he might be lost in it IMO, i am just a normal guy that just says it like i think it is, and that is ok with me, and he is who he is and that is ok with me also, live and let live is what i say, and i hope he is ok with himself also, and i hope you are ok with yourself also.
OK?

This isn't clear to me. Are you saying God is not in concept loving?

Anyway, I think we are getting ahead of ourselves. I presented an argument for why you are wrong that God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning. You never responded to this argument and I don't think we should move forward until you do. So I'll quote for you again here:

Thanks everyone for your posts.

To Zero-Cyphre:

Actual is opposite to fictional.

Concrete is opposite to abstract.

I like you asking questions like the kinds you do ask.

I thought you were being or playing naive, but I guess you do not possess as broad a terminology as I possess; so I will now take to define words or terms for you, with the hope that when you have more terms and thus concepts in your mind, you will know that God exists in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.


Postscript: Zero-Cyphre? Sorry, I mean Louis Cyphre, best regards.



To Petjax:

You and I exist in actual concrete real factual objective reality, and we are in contact with it by our experience that can save us or kill us or harm us if not kill us, that is what I call the realm of reality.

Now, there is the realm of concepts in our mind, for example, the concept of God, that is why I say the concept of God, in order to distinguish it from the actual concrete real factual objective existence of God independent of concept in our mind.

Another example of a concept in our mind is the flying spaghetti monster, much employed by atheists to blaspheme God out of existence, that is a silly way to argue the non-existence of God.

Concepts in our mind do not affect us directly for better or for worse, unlike say the experience outside your mind of accidentally cutting your face as you shave with a straight folding razor.*

Would you like to talk about the origin of concepts in our mind?


Thanks everyone for your posts, please let us first get busy with God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning, before we go into religions.




*Illustration of a Straight Folding Razor




Annex

I thought you were playing naive, but I guess you do not possess as good a reading comprehension as I possess; so I will now take to spell it out more clearly for you, with the hope that when you have more reading comprehension and thus understanding in your mind, you will be able to answer simple questions.

I did not ask for definitions of those words but what those two adjectives add to your understanding of "objective reality" that is not already included.

He does not like to be asked questions i think, and aldo i do not possess as broad a terminology as susmario, i get the feeling that susmario is really not that interested in what we say or ask, he is only [getting of?] interested in playing the professor, the mentor,the wise one, so he can[or want?,needs?] in his mind be the one that dictates,dominates the discussion and the direction of the topic, and his demeaning/arrogant/condescending way of writing/answering?/lecturing? from time to time does not give that impression either.

See how he systematically avoids?, ignores?, a lot of questions[and he probably says now he can't answer all, or want to stay at one subject at a time] and he keeps coming back to "God in concept is the creator and operator of universe" like that is all he cares[obsesses?] about, and he damn well knows no atheist/non-believer believes anything of that statement, so what is the point? why?, he said he wanted to talk with atheists philosophically. right?, but he forgot to say? he decides what about 99% of the time.

And all i see is some "fancy" philosophical terminology and sentences like it is a contest of who has the broadest? and most advanced?,fanciest?, most difficult? off terminology and sentences and words, but not saying a lot reallyIMO[just like politicians and businessman] and susmario likes to[needs?,has to?IDK] show? that he has a lot of that[and loves to show it], and i know that that kind of talking is normal in the circles of philosophizers and/or very smart and high educated people or writers and circles like that, and i know that he asked to do so by the topic title, so it is implied that if you answer that one is expected to have knowledge/the ability of how to speak philosophically, and like i said before i am just a simple man with not so much interest of saying[aldo writing it is more difficult if you know what i mean] more words then necessary[having had a import/export business for 29 years does that to you i think] and English is not my first language[i am dutch] doesn't make it easier, but i like to think that i have accumulated some ability to be a good judge of character and of what kind of intention a person has[learned it the hard way] so simply put, does a person means what he is saying/writhing and or is he/she holding out/lies to on you, what was in my business the difference between success and failure[bankruptcy/going broke and/or in debt] and to make a long story even longer, i have doubts of susmario's motives of starting this topic where really him wanting to talk to atheists and/or interested of what atheists have to say.

Because i doubt that his level of religious believes/his beliefs in god are healthy and go to deep, and seeing much of his answers[and answering a question with a question] give me the impression that susmario has a lot of experience/knowledge of psychiatry, him being a patient or doctor left in the middle, and i have the impression that his faith is so absolute, that it goes to the limit and/or over of what i consider sane/normal, but his obvious knowledge of the art of higher conversation in word and sentences and philosophically conversation in writing makes me doubt if he is not a professor/teacher/philosopher or some kind of religious man like a priest,pastor, but his way of conducting himself,writing,tone,his obvious need?/desire?, to use for many people difficult/not completely/or not to understand grammar/words/sentences[but hey the title of the topic suggested that so fair enough, my bad/problem] or is he a like i expressed earlier a man with a need?,obsession? to control the topic, his ignoring?,refusing? to answer some/many?, or address questions asked to him, makes me wonder if he wants to have a discussion/debate or just answers/opinions he likes to have answered/addressed, and makes me wonder if he is not maybe like a university professor/academicus,writer,philosopher that had a mental breakdown and/or mental problems, to be honest and bold.

And i want to say this is just my opinion as i see it, i just had to get it of my chest so to speak, and i can be completely and/or partially wrong, but i see myself as a person with above average intelligence[as several IQ test have shown] and interests, and one of them is the question why and how come people believe in what is for me a myth called god[s] although there are weeks i don't think about it lol, and i am person that can be persuaded to change/alter his mind/opinion with facts and arguments, but i don't see/have any fact,proof, that god[s] exist and susmario hasn't/won't/refuses/can't [to] give me any, other that he has faith/believes he does, and then goes on and on and on with his favorite topic "God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning" that is for a non-believer/atheist/scientist simply impossible to believe in. in concept or any other way,shape or form, and that is just a few of the reasons why i doubt his sanity/sense of reality, and the fact his demeanor/behavior and his time to time condescending,arrogant way of presenting/behaving himself pisses me of[pardon my french]

“One day I will find the right words, and they will be simple.”
― Jack Kerouac, The Dharma Bums

“Never be afraid to write what you believe. If the message speaks the truth, others will fear your words for you.”

“Me to Comma: I will never get use to you wanting to butt your way into my sentences -- even if you're right.”
― Buffy Andrews

“I am swimming in a sea of words, attempting to keep my head above water.”

And i am sorry for the long post, and my bad way/style of writing, and my bad way off putting my opinion in writing, and bad writing-technique.

Think that is more then fifty words. Susmario is not going to be happy.

Does it look that i care lol, i have a big chest and so a lot to get of it and not much skill in writing short story's, i am sorry.

But at the other hand i had to say something[yea i know a lot of something lol] about this strange? man, if being asked a question, answer it or say you can't or won't simple.

Well, you raise a good point. A lot of religious argumentation is more focused on technicalities and quasi-philosophical wordplays than anything else. Which makes sense. 3000 years ago "God" was a comforting explanation of lightning in the sky, but these days it isn't really needed. So "God" gets cloaked in increasingly labyrinthine arguments.

This isn't to say we know the answer to everything, but a much more cohesive and cooperative effort to explore our surroundings through philosophy, natural philosophy, academia and science has taught us that answers tend to be found, developed, revised as our efforts trod on. We don't need esoteric explanations that "excuse everything" and their value as answers seem to be little else than having the comfort of an answer.

It's analogous to going through a dark building with a flashlight. You don't have all the answers, you don't have the entire picture... but the sum of your experiences gives more than ample room for reasonable assumptions; theories of brownies and pixies causing noises in the night can safely be discarded. That it would be unreasonable to state categorically that they do not exist does not mean it is reasonable to state that they do.

What about after the power is turned back on in the building and all the lights are on? And you see a person walking around making noise? And the night vision power-backup security cameras don't show any pixies or brownies? Then can you reasonably say categorically that pixies and brownies aren't making the noise? I would say no, not strictly speaking... not in the sense that people tend to want when it comes to philosophical discussions about god(s) -- but, in my experience, no other topic is ever held to this impressive standard of evidence for what we can safely dismiss, and lacking any evidence, assume is false.

We all end up playing word games, even though we don't want to. It is insidious.

No need for sorrys im fine with long posts just dont ask me to write one cause it would take me a few days...

Thanks everyone for your posts.


Now, you are not happy that I appear not to answer your question; so, do it this way, at the top of your post place your question relevant of course to the topic, in less than a 100 words, and I will answer it if it is relevant to the topic of this thread.

What is the topic of the thread? Here, read below, the text enclosed by a line of ++++++++++++++ before and after.


See next post from me, continuation of the present one.

Okay, since you guys I assume to be atheists, you do not have any instructions for mankind to get to anywhere at all.

On my part I have the certainty that God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning exists in objective reality outside our mind.

Now, this is not into any intention to convert you to God, but just an exercise in thinking on facts and logic, for us all theists and atheists to undertake together -- or are you atheists dispensing yourselves to think when you do think, to think grounding yourselves on facts and logic?

As you atheists have nothing of any instructions to give to mankind except that you don't know anything beyond what you see with your eyes and your detection instruments, whereas I have the certainty of my knowledge that God exists, in concept as the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning, I will engage you in thinking on facts and logic and see whether you guys will also come to the knowledge of the existence of God.

So, are you ready and receptive to allow me to lead you into the adventure of thinking on facts and logic, to come to the knowledge of God existing, in concept creator and operator of the universe?

I have this new tack which perhaps I have already used it earlier but not in full blast, now I will bring it up, namely, by asking you to react to this statement from myself, namely:

There has always existed something.

Can you accept the verity or fact represented by that statement?

If not, then you are telling me the opposite, namely:

There has never ever existed something.

That is the diametrically opposite statement to my statement.


So, please do your thinking on facts and logic and do your write-up in less than a 100 words.

Why less than a 100 words? Because if you cannot say something as to feel sure that you have communicated it clearly and definitively in less than a 100 words, that is a giveaway that you don't know what you are talking about.


See you guys again soon.

No, no, and no, it's not. Try again.

Do you get to roll over your 92 unused words to your next post?

What does this mean for your most recent 350+ word post?

Annex:

This isn't a question, but an argument against Step 1 of your argument.

1) Zeus is in concept a god.
2) Zeus is not in concept the creator of the universe.
3) Therefore, not all beings that fall under the concept of god are in concept creators of the universe.
4) If being a creator of the universe is part of the concept of god, then all beings under the concept of god are also in concept creators of the universe.
5) Therefore, being a creator of the universe is not part of the concept of god.

Two questions for you.

Question 1
What evidence do you have for this knowledge? It doesn't have to be "your senses" or "what you can detect with instruments," I want to know what evidence provides YOU with certainty.

Question 2
Could you be wrong?