Blu

Draygomb,

I think you totally disregarded what I wrote in my reply to you.

Who says God needs to be conscious like you and all human beings are consciuous? You are again defining God by linking human attributes to God. All these items like rock, heat and electricity are all aspects of earth and of the physical realm.

God-Universe is Energy perhaps. But definitly not conscious like a human mind. It doesn't work like a physical being.... I would even say that it doesn't think like a human being... doesn't sense like a human being.... Doesn't feel like a human being... It is far beyond human. This is something people seem not realize when they think of God whether they believe in God or not.

God is thought to be beyond the phyiscal, beyond time and space and not governed by the laws of physics or science we have on Earth.

What makes a human being conscious? Are our perceptions items of consciousness? God doesn't have perceptions. What is God then?

God-Universe is nothing you can comprehend in human terms. God-Universe is more complex then that.

Define "First Cause".

Was there time before the beginning of the human mind? Was there time before the beginning of Earth? Was there time before stars, the solar system etc? God-Universe is beyond time and space. Was the creation of the Universe etc sequencial? There is absolutely no way to determine what came first, second and third? Whos says God is a Cause?

It is far beyond Cause. People who already made up their minds have lost a very important ability to make discoveries because the mind is no longer open. They read other points of views but do not think about them. They automatically take on a defensive and try to figure out ways to discount all that goes counter to their already set beliefs.

Look on the world with the child-like spirit of discovery. Instead, of the pessimistic spirit of closed mindedness. In this world anything is possible. If this is true for this world, imagine what could be true beyond the physical realm.

Megatron

Draygomb:

Issues of "first cause" and "God" are not completely related.

Why do you define "God" as conscious, (again, humanizing the unknown) and the "first cause"?

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Zero Angel ]</p>

Jayhawker Soule

This is the same silly New Age mantra used to justify a "personal investigation" of ufos, past life regression, paganism, and virtually every other form of spiritualism ('every form' since, of course, "we're all one"). Tell me: having now opened yourself to these possibilities, what selection criteria do you employ to choose between the Green Man, Kali, and Jesus?

Draygomb

This isn't that difficult.

I define God as the Conscious, First Cause.

Conscious because if it is unconscious it can't think or be aware. This isn't to say that it is conscious on our level. Again, What reason would there be to worship a magic rock even if it could produce universes?

The First Cause because if something was created then whatever created it would be more worthy of the title of God.

That's it. That's all the more complicated it gets. Perhaps if you could explain why god doesn't need to be one or the other.

If god isn't conscious then how do you distinguish god from a rock?

If god isn't The First Cause then how do you distinguish god from every other conscious enity?

If you don't like my definition give me yours.

Draygomb

Zero

I couldn't get Koy to explain his problem. Perhaps you could explain it to me as you seem to be having the same problem.

WJ

Blu,

Very good points. As we've seen before, the atheist's march becomes political. Notice how words like 'new age' are thrown about! Ironically, this is precisely the problem with atheism. Platonic mathematical essences don't teach us anything *new*.

Another note on politics and religion. Why do people postulate them so? Because they both require faith!

Keep up the good work!

Walrus
------------
Atheists, stay exactly where you are in life; Being is not good for you.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: WJ ]</p>

Megatron

In this thread, the problem is that First Cause and God are two separate ideas... cross-defining the two is logical error since First Cause does not necessarily have anything to do with a God, and could have possibly happened before God.

britinusa

True, but that's not what Blu and his/her fellow xians believe. They think God created this 100 billion galaxy universe, not the other way around.

Blu, its really very simple. God is either conscious or unconscious. Do you think He was unconscious when, for example, he presented Moses with the Ten Commandments?

Draygomb

Zero If we're supposed to worship god because he is greater than the universe, then shouldn't we worship the first cause because it is greater than god? Besides, if the first cause could have created god then it could also have created the universe or multiple gods. My solution is to cut to the chase and go for the greatest of them all.

[ March 05, 2002: Message edited by: Draygomb ]</p>

Diggler St.

I appologize if I offended anyone my making my statement sound like I was putting words into anyone's mouth, like claiming to know everything. That wasn't my intention...


Draygomb:

I see what you are saying about logic and square circles. However, some logic, to me doesn't necessarily satisfy the non-existence of a God. Now I don't believe in God, remember that, but my reasoning goes farther than simple logic such as square circles and I'll show you why, at least how I see it, simple logic did not convince me.

When something is illogical, or logically paradoxical, or an antimony meaning this something is impossible.

Take this statement as true, “God can do anything”. Even though the suggested question is: what is it God can’t do (like your square circles), let’s ask: what is there that can be done

If my coffee table did not exist, it had never existed. Now would this limit “God” if he/she/it was not aware my coffee table existed? Probably not, considering, for he/she/it to be unaware of the existence of objects that do not, have not, and will not exist says nothing of he/she/it for there was nothing for “God” to know.

Can he/she/it create square circles? Or can he create military intelligence (joke...hee hee)? Well in relation to the coffee table, we talk of something that never existed. To say, “square circle” is to say nothing at all. Basically, words slammed together with no meaning in and of itself; these are words that add up to nothing. Which, in essence, there is nothing for “God” to be unable to create, not limiting “God”. Most theists (and some philosophers), at least the one’s I know, claim “God” cannot do the logically impossible. Or, even better, the logically impossible is not there to be done.