God is not complex

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: God is not complex

#121  Postby hackenslash » Jan 05, 2014 4:45 pm

Ah, well. Mick apparently thinks that the universe qualifies neither as a being nor an entity, insofar as he answered the question at all.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21439
Age: 51
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: God is not complex

#122  Postby Nebogipfel » Jan 05, 2014 5:10 pm

And yet at some point, this supremely abstract not-a-being must also become a character who creates universes, parts seas, turns people into pillars of salt, impregnates virgins and feels emotions such as love, jealousy and hate. Oh, and is three persons in one not-a-person.

Otherwise, whither Christianity? :think:
Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion
-- Carl Sagan
User avatar
Nebogipfel
 
Posts: 2085

Country: Netherlands
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: God is not complex

#123  Postby Matthew Shute » Jan 05, 2014 7:03 pm

Mick wrote:
What i said was that properly speaking, god is not a being. We can use it in the analogous sense, or we can simply understand that the English language is not all too catering to talk about the divine.


I wonder... what is the best medium for discussing an incoherent and sewn-together mish-mash of fumbling medieval metaphysics and labyrinthine Catholic dogma haphazardly derived from the ravings of a mythology cooked up by pre-scientific desert denizens?
:think:
"Change will preserve us. It is the lifeblood of the Isles. It will move mountains! It will mount movements!" - Sheogorath
User avatar
Matthew Shute
 
Name: Matthew Shute
Posts: 3676
Age: 42

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: God is not complex

#124  Postby Rumraket » Jan 05, 2014 7:06 pm

hackenslash wrote:Ah, well. Mick apparently thinks that the universe qualifies neither as a being nor an entity, insofar as he answered the question at all.

Since god is probably nonexistant, I'm actually inclined to agree with him. :lol:
Half-Life 3 - I want to believe
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 13206
Age: 39

Print view this post

Re: God is not complex

#125  Postby Rumraket » Jan 05, 2014 7:07 pm

Nebogipfel wrote:And yet at some point, this supremely abstract not-a-being must also become a character who creates universes, parts seas, turns people into pillars of salt, impregnates virgins and feels emotions such as love, jealousy and hate. Oh, and is three persons in one not-a-person.

Otherwise, whither Christianity? :think:

Que "mysterious ways" babble...
Half-Life 3 - I want to believe
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 13206
Age: 39

Print view this post

Re: God is not complex

#126  Postby Nebogipfel » Jan 05, 2014 7:30 pm

Matthew Shute wrote:
Mick wrote:
What i said was that properly speaking, god is not a being. We can use it in the analogous sense, or we can simply understand that the English language is not all too catering to talk about the divine.


I wonder... what is the best medium for discussing an incoherent and sewn-together mish-mash of fumbling medieval metaphysics and labyrinthine Catholic dogma haphazardly derived from the ravings of a mythology cooked up by pre-scientific desert denizens?
:think:


Latin?
Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion
-- Carl Sagan
User avatar
Nebogipfel
 
Posts: 2085

Country: Netherlands
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: God is not complex

#127  Postby VazScep » Jan 05, 2014 8:16 pm

Nebogipfel wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:
Mick wrote:
What i said was that properly speaking, god is not a being. We can use it in the analogous sense, or we can simply understand that the English language is not all too catering to talk about the divine.


I wonder... what is the best medium for discussing an incoherent and sewn-together mish-mash of fumbling medieval metaphysics and labyrinthine Catholic dogma haphazardly derived from the ravings of a mythology cooked up by pre-scientific desert denizens?
:think:


Latin?
Lolspeak
Here we go again. First, we discover recursion.
VazScep
 
Posts: 4590

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest