Jesus H. Christ, it's another farking miracle!!!

[shemp]

Allah caused an earthquake that killed 35,000 people just so a 97-year-old woman could be saved by a farking miracle!

God kept me alive (http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040103_1432.html)

For nearly nine days after an earthquake demolished her city, 97-year-old Sharbanou Mazandarani lay trapped under furniture and crumbled masonry, passing fear-filled days and cold nights.

Mazandarani was not ready to give up. And on Saturday, dogs trained to detect humans in rubble located her and rescuers dug for three hours to pull her out of the rubble unhurt.

"God kept me alive," the petite, wrinkled Mazandarani said as she lay on a bed in a makeshift hospital in Bam, covered to her chin with a blue blanket and a brown print scarf tied around her head.

...

"No one expected her to be alive. It's a miracle," provincial government spokesman Asadollah Iranmanesh said.

Hoorah, another goddamn farking miracle! Praise be to Allah the Merciful!

One question: if your farking deity is so merciful and powerful, why did 35,000 people die?

(Answer: these people are all iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidiots!!!!)

[lifegazer]

You have a great sense of humour but little understanding of "The Whole thang".

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by lifegazer
You have a great sense of humour but little understanding of "The Whole thang". :id:

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Mercutio
:id:
Anyone know where I can get a cheap response meter?

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer
You have a great sense of humour but little understanding of "The Whole thang".

oh, right, what does this have to do with unity again? I suppose, by creating natural disasters such as this, the great mind makes it easier to obtain unity, because hey, the less people, the easier it is to unite. I see evidence of the mind carrying that out everyday, little kids with cancer, people suffering with aids, teens dying in car wrecks. Wow, I didn't know that the mind was so wise when it came to seeking unity.

[RabbiSatan]

Amazing lengths people go to for self deception...

I'm still waiting on a response from Muslim Clerics on wether or not the earthquake was a message from Allah. But I have little doubt that America will get blamed for it in the end somehow




Edit: This worries me

On Friday, Iran's state radio, which is controlled by conservatives, accused President Bush of interference in Iran.

So they'd rather let people die than recieve help from the Americans?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill


oh, right, what does this have to do with unity again? I suppose, by creating natural disasters such as this, the great mind makes it easier to obtain unity, because hey, the less people, the easier it is to unite. I see evidence of the mind carrying that out everyday, little kids with cancer, people suffering with aids, teens dying in car wrecks. Wow, I didn't know that the mind was so wise when it came to seeking unity.
If God exists, nobody else does. So tell me who you think is suffering.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

If God exists, nobody else does. So tell me who you think is suffering.

I suppose then if its ok for god to kill 35,000 people, and nobody exists except god, its ok for me to off a few for the sake of unity (after all, if god's going it, there must be a good reason)

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill


I suppose then if its ok for god to kill 35,000 people, and nobody exists except god, its ok for me to off a few for the sake of unity (after all, if god's going it, there must be a good reason)
It's so easy to mouth-off about suffering and death. But don't try and relate it to 'God' unless you're willing to look at "the whole thang" from that God's perspective.
So I ask again: If God exists, then nothing else does. So, in terms of the "whole thang", who has suffered and who has died? Certainly not God. Not really. And even if God had suffered, then it was by God's design, clearly.

Cry about suffering and death if you wish, but don't relate it to 'God'.

[Some Friggin Guy]

Originally posted by lifegazer

It's so easy to mouth-off about suffering and death. But don't try and relate it to 'God' unless you're willing to look at "the whole thang" from that God's perspective.
So I ask again: If God exists, then nothing else does. So, in terms of the "whole thang", who has suffered and who has died? Certainly not God. Not really. And even if God had suffered, then it was by God's design, clearly.

Cry about suffering and death if you wish, but don't relate it to 'God'.

The problem with that theory is two-fold.

1. The fact that the suffering/dying people don't realize they don't exist (according to your theory) and therefore, asfar as they are concerned, their suffering is real.

2. I will use an example to illustrate this (and it is by no means to be considered a threat). You believe your theory, therefore, you know you don't exist. Now, someone who is particularly cruel breaks into your home and spends several days torturing you. There are ways to prevent a torture victim from going into shock, and let's assume that your assailant knows them. Since you "know" you don't exist, does that lessen your suffering at all?

[El Greco]

Originally posted by shemp
One question: if your farking deity is so merciful and powerful, why did 35,000 people die?

Option 1: The earthquake was Satan's work. God was busy at the time. As soon as he found out he did the best he could.

Option 2: Bam citizens were all sinners who should be punished, except a few who have had the thriftiness to repent.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Some Friggin Guy
The problem with that theory is two-fold.

1. The fact that the suffering/dying people don't realize they don't exist (according to your theory) and therefore, asfar as they are concerned, their suffering is real.

People have an identity. Their sensations are real. But my philosophy reduces that identity to God and the awareness of things to an illusion, similar to a dream. Yup, it might make me a crackpot; but what it also does is that it gives a whole different perspective to the concepts of death and suffering.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by lifegazer

People have an identity. Their sensations are real. But my philosophy reduces that identity to God and the awareness of things to an illusion, similar to a dream. Yup, it might make me a crackpot; but what it also does is that it gives a whole different perspective to the concepts of death and suffering. Do you think you'll be able to stick to that 'different perspective' when you are the one being tortured? :(

[Martin]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Yup, it might make me a crackpotMight?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Martin
Might?
Tell you what matey - just explain existence to me and I might start listening to you. Otherwise, I think I'll rely on my own abilities to reason for myself, regardless of the judgements I continually face for it.
There's nothing more liberating than escaping the herd mentality.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

It's so easy to mouth-off about suffering and death. But don't try and relate it to 'God' unless you're willing to look at "the whole thang" from that God's perspective.
So I ask again: If God exists, then nothing else does. So, in terms of the "whole thang", who has suffered and who has died? Certainly not God. Not really. And even if God had suffered, then it was by God's design, clearly.

Cry about suffering and death if you wish, but don't relate it to 'God'.

so why do you give a hoot about unity? God seems to like death and suffering just fine

[The idea]

Originally posted by shemp
if your deity is so merciful and powerful, why did 35,000 people die?
(1) Each of those 35,000 people is now enjoying either 72 virgins or 72 raisins. Either way, it beats living in Bam, Iran.

(2) The deity (like Prince Charles) occasionally gets emotional about architecture. Please excuse His outburst of demolition.

(3) God doesn't like doing things in a sneaky way. So if God had intervened, then He would not have concealed his actions. However, Iranians would then know that God had intervened on their behalf and they would have developed a dangerously exaggerated sense of righteousness and self-importance. On the other hand, that 97-year-old woman is not much danger.

[Martin]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Tell you what matey - just explain existence to me and I might start listening to youNo, I agree - your existence is a mystery.Otherwise, I think I'll rely on my own abilities to reason for myselfOh, dear. Are you sure that's wise?There's nothing more liberating than escaping the herd mentalityYou mean making it up as you go...

[lifegazer]

*Torches his kilt*

[Martin]

While in it?

[Monketey Ghost]

We have a kilt-burning!!
Is there a surer sign of defeat?

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by lifegazer
People have an identity. Their sensations are real. But my philosophy reduces that identity to God and the awareness of things to an illusion, similar to a dream. Yup, it might make me a crackpot; but what it also does is that it gives a whole different perspective to the concepts of death and suffering.

Sounds to me like you're indifferent to death and suffering. Or is that not your "whole new perspective"?

[Beleth]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Tell you what matey - just explain existence to me and I might start listening to you. I'm sorry, what was your explanation for existence again? I forgot whether it answers the question "why does God exist?" satisfactorily or not.

[jlakbj]

Originally posted by lifegazer

If God exists, nobody else does.

Hey, lifegazer might actually have a point here. But why stop there?

If God exists, pi equals 12.
If God exists, red is blue.
If God exists, Mars is populated by 9-foot tall warrior women.

Logic is fun!

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by jlakbj
"If God exists, nobody else does."

Hey, lifegazer might actually have a point here. But why stop there?

If God exists, pi equals 12.
If God exists, red is blue.
If God exists, Mars is populated by 9-foot tall warrior women.

Logic is fun!
Errr... did you pickle your brain over the festive season?

If an omnipresent and omnipotent entity exists, then where else can another entity exist, and what power can it have? Have a large coffee... the answers are nowhere and none.
If God exists, then nobody else does.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Beleth
I'm sorry, what was your explanation for existence again? I forgot whether it answers the question "why does God exist?" satisfactorily or not.
Asking why a primal-cause exists is a reflection upon your rational limitations squire.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Ipecac


Sounds to me like you're indifferent to death and suffering. Or is that not your "whole new perspective"?
Not at all. Peaceful unity will be a wonderful fulfilment of days.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Not at all. Peaceful unity will be a wonderful fulfilment of days.

Oh, of course. How obvious.

[jlakbj]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Errr... did you pickle your brain over the festive season?

If an omnipresent and omnipotent entity exists, then where else can another entity exist, and what power can it have? Have a large coffee... the answers are nowhere and none.
If God exists, then nobody else does.

Hey, settle down, I was agreeing with you! If God exists, then no one else does! And yet - I exist. Hmm... what does that say about your omnipresent and omnipotent God?

I'm newish here, so I apologize if you've had this discussion before. I imagine you'll tell me that I have no proof of my existence. I will reply to you that I have far more evidence for my own existence than you do for your God's. I'm not sure what you'll reply to that. I doubt you'll actually present evidence - I'm guessing you'll repeat yourself and I'll just end up agreeing with you again.

[fishbob]

People have an identity. Their sensations are real. But my philosophy reduces that identity to God and the awareness of things to an illusion, similar to a dream. Yup, it might make me a crackpot; but what it also does is that it gives a whole different perspective to the concepts of death and suffering. You and Hannibal Lechter.

Not at all. Peaceful unity will be a wonderful fulfilment of days. While being slowly suffocated beneath tons of rubble. Nice and peaceful.

Get a clue, guys. You can't answer The Mighty Shemp with these goofy little homilies.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Asking why a primal-cause exists is a reflection upon your rational limitations squire.

no its not, its a serious critique of your philosophy that you cannot answer. Attempting to diminish his intelligence does not make the question go away.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Not at all. Peaceful unity will be a wonderful fulfilment of days.

What about all the things I mentioned that would not go away? Certainly, the world would still be full of death and suffering.

[shecky]

Let there be no doubt... that earthquake was the work of God allright... What we have now is the moral clarity we need. Now is the time to organize forces to destroy God, before he unleashes his terror again on innocent human beings.

[Beleth]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Asking why a primal-cause exists is a reflection upon your rational limitations squire. I wasn't asking why a primal cause exists. I was merely asking you to answer a question, using your belief set, that you had previously asked someone else to answer using theirs. If you can't answer it either, it is unreasonable to require someone else to answer it before you start conversing with them.

So I will repeat the question, without the extra information which you found offensive:

What is your explanation for existence?

[Beleth]

Originally posted by lifegazer
If an omnipresent and omnipotent entity exists, then where else can another entity exist, and what power can it have? Have a large coffee... the answers are nowhere and none.
If God exists, then nobody else does. The thing you are overlooking is that this is a classic reductio ad absurdum argument.

Your logic is best broken down like this:

1) If an omnipresent and omnipotent being exists, then nothing and no one else exists.

2) God is an omnipresent and omnipotent being.

3) God exists.

4) Therefore nothing and no one else exists but God.

To come to the conclusion in line 4, you have to verify the veracity of the first three lines. None of these lines is intuitively obvious, as is evidenced by the amount of dissent you are encountering here.

If all of the first three lines are correct, your conclusion states that I do not exist. I tend to disagree with that assessment, as you might imagine. That's why I classify this as a reductio ad absurdum argument - you have reached a conclusion which I believe is absurd, therefore one of your three premises must be false. You have not yet proved all three of them true to anyone else's satisfaction yet. You may believe very strongly in them, but logic requires more than merely a strong belief in the truth of the outcome.



(edited for typos)

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Beleth
The thing you are overlooking is that this is a classic reductio ad absurdum argument.

Your logic is best broken down like this:

1) If an omnipresent and omnipotent being exists, then nothing and no one else exists.

2) God is an omnipresent and omnipotent being.

3) God exists.

4) Therefore nothing and no one else exists but God.

To come to the conclusion in line 4, you have to verify the veracity of the first three lines. None of these lines is intuitively obvious, as is evidenced by the amount of dissent you are encountering here.

I have not presented an argument for God's existence in this thread. I merely stated that if God exists, then no other entity does.

If all of the first three lines are correct, your conclusion states that I do not exist.

Another common misconception of my philosophy: to imply such a God exists doesn't mean that 'you' do not. It simply means that 'you' are God, perceiving itself as 'you'.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
"Asking why a primal-cause exists is a reflection upon your rational limitations squire."

no its not, its a serious critique of your philosophy that you cannot answer. Attempting to diminish his intelligence does not make the question go away.
A primal-cause cannot be effected by something else, by default. Or else, such an entity cannot be a primal-cause.
So, a primal-cause just is.
Asking where God comes from isn't very smart.

[Beleth]

Originally posted by lifegazer
I have not presented an argument for God's existence in this thread. I merely stated that if God exists, then no other entity does. Well, that's half of it, yes. If God exists, and He is omnipresent and omnipotent, then no other entity exists. It is entirely possible that a non-omnipresent, non-omnipotent God exists simultaneously with other entities.

Another common misconception of my philosophy: to imply such a God exists doesn't mean that 'you' do not. It simply means that 'you' are God, perceiving itself as 'you'. But I am not God.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

A primal-cause cannot be effected by something else, by default. Or else, such an entity cannot be a primal-cause.
So, a primal-cause just is.
Asking where God comes from isn't very smart.

If this argument applies to god, why does it not apply to reality and the universe. Does that mean, that people who ask where the universe comes from are not very smart?

Oh, btw, repeat assumptions, check, insult the intelligence of others, check

[Suezoled]

Originally posted by lifegazer

A primal-cause cannot be effected by something else, by default. Or else, such an entity cannot be a primal-cause.
So, a primal-cause just is.
Asking where God comes from isn't very smart.

Concerning god:
Don't ask, don't tell. Don't look, don't be punished. Don't question, don't suffer. Unless you're one of those 35000 people who died, many of whom probably experienced a great degree of terror and pain before dying. Yeah. Real good.

I'm still waiting for Lifegazer's Hamster to come out with the Third Testament.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Beleth
Well, that's half of it, yes. If God exists, and He is omnipresent and omnipotent, then no other entity exists. It is entirely possible that a non-omnipresent, non-omnipotent God exists simultaneously with other entities.

By what sense can an entity be finite in both presence and power, yet be labelled a God?

But I am not God.
You perceive yourself as Beleth. That's all you know.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
"A primal-cause cannot be effected by something else, by default. Or else, such an entity cannot be a primal-cause.
So, a primal-cause just is.
Asking where God comes from isn't very smart."

If this argument applies to god, why does it not apply to reality and the universe.

Show me a non-dependent primal-cause which exists within the universe.

Does that mean, that people who ask where the universe comes from are not very smart?

No, since the universe is an effect... being full of effects.
A primal-cause is a non-dependent and non-effected effector of proceeding states.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Suezoled
Concerning god:
Don't ask, don't tell. Don't look, don't be punished. Don't question, don't suffer. Unless you're one of those 35000 people who died, many of whom probably experienced a great degree of terror and pain before dying. Yeah. Real good.

Again, my philosophy - which sees only God - does not condone suffering, but certainly objects to ~others~ who want to complain to God for its existence.

[jlakbj]

Originally posted by lifegazer

By what sense can an entity be finite in both presence and power, yet be labelled a God?

in many senses... the Greek mythological sense for one. And please note that a being that is not "omniscient and omnipotent" need not be finite in both presence and power - just in one. If there were an omniscient being with absolutely no power - or just your standard human powers of speech, thought, action, etc. - it wouldn't be unreasonable to label that being a god. Same for an omnipotent being too stupid to tie its own shoes.

You perceive yourself as Beleth. That's all you know.

And yet if I am God - an omnipotent and omniscient God - wouldn't I know that? I'm a pretty pathetic all-powerful and all-knowing being if I can't even free myself from the constraints of what a particular human body can sense.

[switched focus from Beleth to me because I didn't know Beleth's gender; Beleth, please feel free to snatch it back :)]

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by jlakbj
in many senses... the Greek mythological sense for one.

"Sense", I asked. How can reason justify the definition of 'God' as anything finite?
Clearly, if an entity is finite, then it lacks presence and power (and probably all-knowledge of a system it does not exist in completely).
An entity proclaiming itself as a God where it has limited presence and power (and knowledge), is surely deluded. Not to mention the fact that this allows all other finite entities in that system to label themselves as God too.
Clearly, an irrational state-of-affairs. From a reasoned point-of-view, the definition of God must equate to an omni-God.

And please note that a being that is not "omniscient and omnipotent" need not be finite in both presence and power - just in one. If there were an omniscient being with absolutely no power - or just your standard human powers of speech, thought, action, etc. - it wouldn't be unreasonable to label that being a god. Same for an omnipotent being too stupid to tie its own shoes.

I specifically used omnipresent and omnipotent. Besides, it's impossible to be omniscient and finite, especially considering QM.

And yet if I am God - an omnipotent and omniscient God - wouldn't I know that? I'm a pretty pathetic all-powerful and all-knowing being if I can't even free myself from the constraints of what a particular human body can sense.

As perceived, through inner-sensation.
No man has seen one measure beyond his own awareness. The whole universe, as you see it, exists within yourself.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Show me a non-dependent primal-cause which exists within the universe.


In the case of materialism, if you wanted to identify a primal cause, it would be the existence of the universe. (Just as your primal cause is the existence of a mind).


No, since the universe is an effect... being full of effects.


Sigh, you ability to view things from another's viewpoint is seriously lacking. You say you understand the materialism viewpoint. Now, view the universe from that viewpoint, and answer the question in respect to that viewpoint.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

As perceived, through inner-sensation.
No man has seen one measure beyond his own awareness. The whole universe, as you see it, exists within yourself.

Shall I point out once again that your philosophy does not even agree with this statement?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
In the case of materialism, if you wanted to identify a primal cause, it would be the existence of the universe. (Just as your primal cause is the existence of a mind).

The universe is a bunch of different effects, none of which can lay-claim to being the primal-cause of the rest.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

The universe is a bunch of different effects, none of which can lay-claim to being the primal-cause of the rest.

Is not the workings of your mind a "bunch of different effects" are any of these effects the primal cause, or is it the existence of the mind. Why apply more scrutiny to the primal cause of the universe than to the primal cause of the mind?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill


Is not the workings of your mind a "bunch of different effects" are any of these effects the primal cause, or is it the existence of the mind. Why apply more scrutiny to the primal cause of the universe than to the primal cause of the mind?
I think the universe does have a primal-cause. In fact, imo, it has to. The only problem is that it cannot be one of the effects within it.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

I think the universe does have a primal-cause. In fact, imo, it has to. The only problem is that it cannot be one of the effects within it.

You are right, it isn't one of the effects in it. The primal cause of the universe is, the universe. What then is the primal cause of the mind, if not, the mind?

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
You are right, it isn't one of the effects in it. The primal cause of the universe is, the universe.
Think about what you're saying here. Every-thing in the universe is an effect, but no-thing in the universe is its cause. But this does not mean - and I hope you agree - that "absolutely nothing" is the cause of this universe of effects?
So, please tell me what it is that you say caused this universe of effects. (Not the effects themselves, remember.)

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Think about what you're saying here. Every-thing in the universe is an effect, but no-thing in the universe is its cause. But this does not mean - and I hope you agree - that "absolutely nothing" is the cause of this universe of effects?
So, please tell me what it is that you say caused this universe of effects. (Not the effects themselves, remember.)

The mere existence of the universe is the primal cause of anything that occurs within the universe.

Now, what part of your mind is the primal cause for your mind? (same question as you are asking me)