I'd piss on his grave.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:Well it's not really a question that I've ever found myself thinking about. Sorry I can't give a better answer.

That's refreshingly honest. It should also be the stock response of most Christians and Muslims on pretty much all aspects of their faith.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:I'm a theist, let me give my two cents. This is all under the assumption that there's a God.

Among His attributes are omnipotence and being eternal.

You're using a template created by some anonymous long-ago people who were ignorant of the presence and mechanisms of electrical activity in the brain and lacked a germ theory of disease, not to mention a lot of other useful knowledge you take for granted. Here you are, on the internet, using a technology painstakingly developed using scientific principles, and you want to parrot some dogmatic shit about the characteristics of 'god'. If you want to manifest (or at least pretend) such deep ignorance, and use the templates created by the goat-roasters of long ago, carry on splendidly. Granted, some other people with philosophical leanings, who wanted to slice and dice the semantics of potency and temporality took that template and fussed around with it a bit, but that semantics has no pedigree amongst people who have not chosen to be ignorant of the history of an idea.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:Well it's not really a question that I've ever found myself thinking about. Sorry I can't give a better answer.

You're so busy believing in and contemplating your god that you haven't got time or space to think carefully about much of anything else, have you? If you assume there's a god, then you assume there's a god. Department of Tautology Department. How do you propose your question is interesting to anyone without a taste for nose-picking philosophy?

Darwin did not kill god, Laplace did it 60 years before in his astronomical description of the solar system, Darwin just kicked the corpse.

Ironclad wrote:God died on 24 Nov 1859. Anyone with a good bookshelf knows this.

I've got another book that puts it more around 30 CE.

Of course, the bastards couldn't leave him dead and had retcon him back to life 3 days later.

Bloody superhero comic characters.

Matt_B wrote:

Ironclad wrote:God died on 24 Nov 1859. Anyone with a good bookshelf knows this.

I've got another book that puts it more around 30 CE.

Of course, the bastards couldn't leave him dead and had retcon him back to life 3 days later.

Bloody superhero comic characters.

Yeah but that wasn't actually him, as he can't die. It was his son. But it's also him, but not really. Schrödinger's cat, 3000 years before its time.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:I'm a theist, let me give my two cents. This is all under the assumption that there's a God.

Among His attributes are omnipotence and being eternal.

You're using a template created by some anonymous long-ago people who were ignorant of the presence and mechanisms of electrical activity in the brain and lacked a germ theory of disease, not to mention a lot of other useful knowledge you take for granted. Here you are, on the internet, using a technology painstakingly developed using scientific principles, and you want to parrot some dogmatic shit about the characteristics of 'god'. If you want to manifest (or at least pretend) such deep ignorance, and use the templates created by the goat-roasters of long ago, carry on splendidly. Granted, some other people with philosophical leanings, who wanted to slice and dice the semantics of potency and temporality took that template and fussed around with it a bit, but that semantics has no pedigree amongst people who have not chosen to be ignorant of the history of an idea.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:Well it's not really a question that I've ever found myself thinking about. Sorry I can't give a better answer.

You're so busy believing in and contemplating your god that you haven't got time or space to think carefully about much of anything else, have you? If you assume there's a god, then you assume there's a god. Department of Tautology Department. How do you propose your question is interesting to anyone without a taste for nose-picking philosophy?

Now you're picking on the goat herders. Charming.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:Now you're picking on the goat herders. Charming.

The horror. If you want to get your marching orders from the goat-roasters, far be it from me to dissuade you. If you're just tuning in, you're late to that party.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:Now you're picking on the goat herders. Charming.

The horror. If you want to get your marching orders from the goat-roasters, far be it from me to dissuade you. If you're just tuning in, you're late to that party.

Ok.

I thought you ate atheists for breakfast, PK.

What's up? Indigestion?

The OP assumes that this God thingy exists in the Universe at large, etc., etc.

But it doesn't, since its only residence is in the Kingdom of Heaven. And where is that? See Matthew 6:9 and Luke 17:20-21.

[/Bible Thumping Cap]

Spearthrower wrote:I thought you ate atheists for breakfast, PK.

What's up? Indigestion?

No. Malnutrition.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:I thought you ate atheists for breakfast, PK.

What's up? Indigestion?

No. Malnutrition.

Probably allergies. Me, I'm whack-dose intolerant.

felltoearth wrote:What if god was one of us? Just a slob like one of us?

He'd get cancelled after two seasons for low ratings.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:I thought you ate atheists for breakfast, PK.

What's up? Indigestion?

No. Malnutrition.

Probably allergies. Me, I'm whack-dose intolerant.

I'm so sorry to hear that.

Pridefel Knowitelz wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:I thought you ate atheists for breakfast, PK.

What's up? Indigestion?

No. Malnutrition.

Best get munching then, because you're not showing any signs of hunger whatsoever.