Define the God you believe in, if you do believe in one (or more) -

[Vastator]

I think She's sitting up there laughing at what fools we are making of ourselves.

Wouldn’t by default..? Ascribing a gender to this deity; imply the belief in a gender counterpart deity? In this case, a male god? Would this not then imply a belief in more than one God? For why would a being be female without there being a male? And if these gods are in fact sexual, as assigning a gender would suggest... Then how many gods have these gods sired?

 

[G.T.]

I think She's sitting up there laughing at what fools we are making of ourselves.

Wouldn’t by default..? Ascribing a gender to this deity; imply the belief in a gender counterpart deity? In this case, a male god? Would this not then imply a belief in more than one God? For why would a being be female without there being a male? And if these gods are in fact sexual, as assigning a gender would suggest... Then how many gods have these gods sired?

Hey man,

As an aside, are you in agreement that it's a mere "buzz phrase" or asinine dogma that any Alien Species or God would look down at us and think we're "so stupid?"

When people say those things I'm wondering what standard they're using...because it seems literally impossible to assume humans are stupid if you're using human knowledge within your logic to determine as much. Segments of humans do stupid things...but "Humanity" as a whole has accomplished so much more than any other known living species. Seems smart!

 

[ding]

Since he's with you and since you the other day said that you'd watch out if you were me when I was talking about Mary...you obviously think he/she or it is watching our behaviors. That, and other things you've said about "it" is how I get the "Daddy" part, but not just from you and your personal interpretations...from others as well. You think God is a mind. That's Daddy, that's what I mean, and you don't get to decide what I mean by what I say and then make some strawman argument against what I mean, when you've never even asked in the first place.

No. I don't believe God is watching us. I believe God is experiencing the material world through us.

You have already explained why you use the term Sky Daddy. You use it as an insult. You claimed you only use it as an insult to people who have first insulted you like that makes it alright. It doesn't. And if that is what you teach, that's a fucked up thing to teach. So besides being a fucked up thing in and of itself, it reveals that you give your power away. That others can literally control your behaviors. Effectively, you are are saying that others make you insult them. That they control you. No one controls me, GT. You can't make me insult you no matter how insulting you are to me.

Your fucked up pretzel logic says that "because you respond the way you decide to respond, THEY controlled you."

At which point in me posting something...

and you responding...

does it go from "you" making the decision on how to respond, to "I" forced you to respond that way?


That's the answer to your pretzel logic "control" theory.

I...me, I determine how I respond to insults. I can change how I do it, I can decide not to do it and I can tl;dr most of the insults in general if I felt like it.


The point where it becomes "Them" controlling "me" is the same point where "I'm" controlling "you" in how you respond to me. You're either projecting, or stupid - - - - or both. I think both.

The pretzel logic is all yours, GT. You literally said you only insult people who insult you first. That's them controlling you.

Please feel free to argue against this, but it is self evident.

 

[ding]

So you are admitting that you carry around grudges?

I have zero doubt about that. But even your grudge argument doesn't hold water GT. Are you suggesting that Emily insulted you? What did Emily ever do to you?

If There Is No God, Murder Is Not Wrong

Or how about Arthur Blair? What did Arthur ever do to you?

Which Child Tells the World Her Life Has Been Stolen?

Or how about the posts that weren't directed at anyone, GT? What about these?

Why Religion Must Be Banished....

The Belief That Life Was the Result of an Accident Is Unscientific

You question your my sanity and level-headedness and wonder what must be wrong with me to do something like this?

You asked me a question, GT. This is my answer to YOUR question.

Yes, GT, I do believe in a creator. No, I don't believe he is magical. Just beyond anything we can relate to because the creator is beyond anything we can comprehend. That doesn't make it magic. That's your oversimplification because it doesn't match your worldview.

I care because I enjoy these kind of discussions. It isn't about being right, it is about learning more. I am always looking for gaps in my beliefs.

And don't you find it odd that someone would criticize someone else for doing exactly what they were doing?

mag·ic
/ˈmajik/
noun

1. the power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.

You merely don't know what Magic means. That's not my fault, it's yours, Ding(bat). Not only is it Magical in component, but it's also magical *thinking* to assert it even exists in the first place, because try as you do and with all your might - - - - - that Nobel Prize and complete and drastic news to humanity, that Origins have been proven, is sitting there for Ding on the internet to present his "proof." Go get it peer reviewed, sherlock.

You need genesis to be allegorical to not sound ridiculous, but then go on ahead and sound ridiculous anyway by believing a sky daddy made himself born as a human and came back from the grave 3 days after he died.

I dont care if genesis is allegorical or literal - - - in either sense, it does not have an answer for the origin of the universe.

It's only supernatural to us because we are material beings, GT, to God it is perfectly natural.

But are you now trying to argue you don't mean it as an insult? Because I am pretty sure you already admitted that you do intend it as an insult. The only contention is whether you were honest in your statement that you only use it as an insult to others when they first insulted you.

A contention I have already disproven using your own words.

No, what you did was a bunch of obsessive searching of my posts because you have an ax to grind - thought you proved something, and didn't. Do you think I'm going to debate you over whom I tend to insult and why? Do you think I'm going to go get on my search function and find the "aha" to suit your fantasy?

I'm not, dinguss. I dont care what you think about why or when I say sky daddy. Consider it a command from Satan himself and me the evilest person that ever lived if ya need to, to get yourself off that o.c.d. thing and save your valuable time! It WAS a command from Satan! I AM evil, hypocritical, wrong, stupid, and everything else!

You said you use the term Sky Daddy as insult. You said you only did it when someone insulted you first.

When did Emily insult you? What did she say that was insulting to you?

When did Arthur Blair insult you? What did he say that was insulting to you?

How about the posts using the phrase Sky Daddy that weren't directed at anyone?

You don't need to search anything. I already provided the link. Besides who here is going to believe that Emily insulted you, GT? C'mon man.

"Do you think I'm going to debate you over whom I tend to insult and why?" - GT, pre responding to this post of ding now begging me to debate it


"Consider it a command from Satan himself and me the evilest person that ever lived if ya need to, to get yourself off that o.c.d. thing and save your valuable time! It WAS a command from Satan! I AM evil, hypocritical, wrong, stupid, and everything else!" - GT, pre responding to all of ding's will be gloats, and cheers and any blah blah blah he wants to say about it.

Ding, you'll literally never un-**** yourself...you're too deeply obsessed with being right on the internet.

See post #27 for who engaged whom.

 

[G.T.]

Since he's with you and since you the other day said that you'd watch out if you were me when I was talking about Mary...you obviously think he/she or it is watching our behaviors. That, and other things you've said about "it" is how I get the "Daddy" part, but not just from you and your personal interpretations...from others as well. You think God is a mind. That's Daddy, that's what I mean, and you don't get to decide what I mean by what I say and then make some strawman argument against what I mean, when you've never even asked in the first place.

No. I don't believe God is watching us. I believe God is experiencing the material world through us.

You have already explained why you use the term Sky Daddy. You use it as an insult. You claimed you only use it as an insult to people who have first insulted you like that makes it alright. It doesn't. And if that is what you teach, that's a fucked up thing to teach. So besides being a fucked up thing in and of itself, it reveals that you give your power away. That others can literally control your behaviors. Effectively, you are are saying that others make you insult them. That they control you. No one controls me, GT. You can't make me insult you no matter how insulting you are to me.

Your fucked up pretzel logic says that "because you respond the way you decide to respond, THEY controlled you."

At which point in me posting something...

and you responding...

does it go from "you" making the decision on how to respond, to "I" forced you to respond that way?


That's the answer to your pretzel logic "control" theory.

I...me, I determine how I respond to insults. I can change how I do it, I can decide not to do it and I can tl;dr most of the insults in general if I felt like it.


The point where it becomes "Them" controlling "me" is the same point where "I'm" controlling "you" in how you respond to me. You're either projecting, or stupid - - - - or both. I think both.

The pretzel logic is all yours, GT. You literally said you only insult people who insult you first. That's them controlling you.

Please feel free to argue against this, but it is self evident.

Who decided that I'll insult people who insult me first? Me...or them?

The end, dumbfuck.

 

[ding]

Since he's with you and since you the other day said that you'd watch out if you were me when I was talking about Mary...you obviously think he/she or it is watching our behaviors. That, and other things you've said about "it" is how I get the "Daddy" part, but not just from you and your personal interpretations...from others as well. You think God is a mind. That's Daddy, that's what I mean, and you don't get to decide what I mean by what I say and then make some strawman argument against what I mean, when you've never even asked in the first place.

No. I don't believe God is watching us. I believe God is experiencing the material world through us.

You have already explained why you use the term Sky Daddy. You use it as an insult. You claimed you only use it as an insult to people who have first insulted you like that makes it alright. It doesn't. And if that is what you teach, that's a fucked up thing to teach. So besides being a fucked up thing in and of itself, it reveals that you give your power away. That others can literally control your behaviors. Effectively, you are are saying that others make you insult them. That they control you. No one controls me, GT. You can't make me insult you no matter how insulting you are to me.

Your fucked up pretzel logic says that "because you respond the way you decide to respond, THEY controlled you."

At which point in me posting something...

and you responding...

does it go from "you" making the decision on how to respond, to "I" forced you to respond that way?


That's the answer to your pretzel logic "control" theory.

I...me, I determine how I respond to insults. I can change how I do it, I can decide not to do it and I can tl;dr most of the insults in general if I felt like it.


The point where it becomes "Them" controlling "me" is the same point where "I'm" controlling "you" in how you respond to me. You're either projecting, or stupid - - - - or both. I think both.

The pretzel logic is all yours, GT. You literally said you only insult people who insult you first. That's them controlling you.

Please feel free to argue against this, but it is self evident.

Who decided that I'll insult people who insult me first? Me...or them?

The end, dumbfuck.

I am controlling your behaviors right now, GT.

 

[Toro]

I believe in the Christian God because of Pascal's Dilemma, the most logical and bullet-proof philosophical thingamajiggy ever.

 

[G.T.]

Since he's with you and since you the other day said that you'd watch out if you were me when I was talking about Mary...you obviously think he/she or it is watching our behaviors. That, and other things you've said about "it" is how I get the "Daddy" part, but not just from you and your personal interpretations...from others as well. You think God is a mind. That's Daddy, that's what I mean, and you don't get to decide what I mean by what I say and then make some strawman argument against what I mean, when you've never even asked in the first place.

No. I don't believe God is watching us. I believe God is experiencing the material world through us.

You have already explained why you use the term Sky Daddy. You use it as an insult. You claimed you only use it as an insult to people who have first insulted you like that makes it alright. It doesn't. And if that is what you teach, that's a fucked up thing to teach. So besides being a fucked up thing in and of itself, it reveals that you give your power away. That others can literally control your behaviors. Effectively, you are are saying that others make you insult them. That they control you. No one controls me, GT. You can't make me insult you no matter how insulting you are to me.

Your fucked up pretzel logic says that "because you respond the way you decide to respond, THEY controlled you."

At which point in me posting something...

and you responding...

does it go from "you" making the decision on how to respond, to "I" forced you to respond that way?


That's the answer to your pretzel logic "control" theory.

I...me, I determine how I respond to insults. I can change how I do it, I can decide not to do it and I can tl;dr most of the insults in general if I felt like it.


The point where it becomes "Them" controlling "me" is the same point where "I'm" controlling "you" in how you respond to me. You're either projecting, or stupid - - - - or both. I think both.

The pretzel logic is all yours, GT. You literally said you only insult people who insult you first. That's them controlling you.

Please feel free to argue against this, but it is self evident.

Who decided that I'll insult people who insult me first? Me...or them?

The end, dumbfuck.

I am controlling your behaviors right now, GT.

Weird. I summonsed you to come fail to explain something.

You came, failed to explain...and now you're trying to drive som ax over meaningless nonsense and devolving into your typical Nun-Speak and o.c.d. to think you're right on the internet.

Damn, that assertion of control over you was powerful. I am an unprecedented Genius. Maybe I'm sky daddy

 

[ding]

No. I don't believe God is watching us. I believe God is experiencing the material world through us.

You have already explained why you use the term Sky Daddy. You use it as an insult. You claimed you only use it as an insult to people who have first insulted you like that makes it alright. It doesn't. And if that is what you teach, that's a fucked up thing to teach. So besides being a fucked up thing in and of itself, it reveals that you give your power away. That others can literally control your behaviors. Effectively, you are are saying that others make you insult them. That they control you. No one controls me, GT. You can't make me insult you no matter how insulting you are to me.

Your fucked up pretzel logic says that "because you respond the way you decide to respond, THEY controlled you."

At which point in me posting something...

and you responding...

does it go from "you" making the decision on how to respond, to "I" forced you to respond that way?


That's the answer to your pretzel logic "control" theory.

I...me, I determine how I respond to insults. I can change how I do it, I can decide not to do it and I can tl;dr most of the insults in general if I felt like it.


The point where it becomes "Them" controlling "me" is the same point where "I'm" controlling "you" in how you respond to me. You're either projecting, or stupid - - - - or both. I think both.

The pretzel logic is all yours, GT. You literally said you only insult people who insult you first. That's them controlling you.

Please feel free to argue against this, but it is self evident.

Who decided that I'll insult people who insult me first? Me...or them?

The end, dumbfuck.

I am controlling your behaviors right now, GT.

Weird. I summonsed you to come fail to explain something.

You came, failed to explain...and now you're trying to drive som ax over meaningless nonsense and devolving into your typical Nun-Speak and o.c.d. to think you're right on the internet.

Damn, that assertion of control over you was powerful. I am an unprecedented Genius. Maybe I'm sky daddy

I wouldn't have expected you to see it any other way, GT.

 

[Vastator]

G.T.

I’d say that any critical observer would use a descriptor like “smart”, or “stupid” within the relative comparison of like, similar, or same things.
Chimps share 98 percent of the same DNA as us. But the cognitive, and intellectual disparity between chimps, and humans far exceeds a 2 percent differential. So when deciding whether a creature is smart or stupid it depends on what it’s being compared to.
Then there is the other factors to be considered. Time, and numbers...
Humans started out with very low population, and no net benefit of previous generations experiences, or advancements. So say aliens pop down and take stock of us today...
How much differently would they assess our smarts; than if they had popped in for observation within the first few dozen generations of our existence? Same creature. Very different observation. I’d say it’s all relative...

 

[G.T.]

I’d say that any critical observer would use a descriptor like “smart”, or “stupid” within the relative comparison of like, similar, or same things.
Chimps share 98 percent of the same DNA as us. But the cognitive, and intellectual disparity between chimps, and humans far exceeds a 2 percent differential. So when deciding whether a creature is smart or stupid it depends on what it’s being compared to.
Then there is the other factors to be considered. Time, and numbers...
Humans started out with very low population, and no net benefit of previous generations experiences, or advancements. So say aliens pop down and take stock of us today...
How much differently would they assess our smarts; than if they had popped in for observation within the first few dozen generations of our existence? Same creature. Very different observation. I’d say it’s all relative...

It's def. relative - I totally agree. Smart, itself as a word, already implies a comparison to something.

 

[dblack]

Gods are networked constructs of human society. I think of them as distributed software systems. A set of principles and values and stories that guide followers in a way that carries out the god's will.

That's interesting.

Are you into simulation theory, or just using Computing terms as analogous?

Just an analogy. That sim theory seems kind of ridiculous to me.

Ok, so back to your definition, then - - - a point of clarification.

You are using God in two different ways - first, you use it as a human construct...then you follow by saying that the construct is made to carry out "God's" will.

If you're not defining God in two different ways...then how that reads to me is that Humans invented God (construct) to do what their invention wants them to do...

That's how I mean it. I see gods in the same way I see human minds, but they are distributed minds - existing in the network of like-minded believers. I came to see it this way after studying how systems can have emergent attributes that act independently of the intent of any individual members of the system.

I know it sounds like I'm dismissing gods as "made up", but that's not my intent. I think they are very real things, with a very real presence. But they have no physical representation outside the actions of believers. They are truly non-material beings. So are we, for that matter.

Well are they human constructs or did they construct humans - - your initial definition implied both but that's not sound.

They evolved alongside humans, as a by-product of human minds and society.

 

[diver52]

This is just a repository for anyone who feels they've got an adequate definition of the "God" they believe in, for future reference.

Personally, I hold no belief in anything I'd personally categorize as a God...therefore, I am without definition...however, I'm interested in the Category of discussion and I'd love to see what your concept of your deity might be -

Feel free to drop your definition here!~​

Gods are networked constructs of human society. I think of them as distributed software systems. A set of principles and values and stories that guide followers in a way that carries out the god's will.

That is an excellent analogy.

 

[ding]

That's interesting.

Are you into simulation theory, or just using Computing terms as analogous?

Just an analogy. That sim theory seems kind of ridiculous to me.

Ok, so back to your definition, then - - - a point of clarification.

You are using God in two different ways - first, you use it as a human construct...then you follow by saying that the construct is made to carry out "God's" will.

If you're not defining God in two different ways...then how that reads to me is that Humans invented God (construct) to do what their invention wants them to do...

That's how I mean it. I see gods in the same way I see human minds, but they are distributed minds - existing in the network of like-minded believers. I came to see it this way after studying how systems can have emergent attributes that act independently of the intent of any individual members of the system.

I know it sounds like I'm dismissing gods as "made up", but that's not my intent. I think they are very real things, with a very real presence. But they have no physical representation outside the actions of believers. They are truly non-material beings. So are we, for that matter.

Well are they human constructs or did they construct humans - - your initial definition implied both but that's not sound.

They evolved alongside humans, as a by-product of human minds and society.

Why do you believe that?

And how do you reconcile it with the origin questions?

 

[ding]

This is just a repository for anyone who feels they've got an adequate definition of the "God" they believe in, for future reference.

Personally, I hold no belief in anything I'd personally categorize as a God...therefore, I am without definition...however, I'm interested in the Category of discussion and I'd love to see what your concept of your deity might be -

Feel free to drop your definition here!~​

Gods are networked constructs of human society. I think of them as distributed software systems. A set of principles and values and stories that guide followers in a way that carries out the god's will.

That is an excellent analogy.

How so?

 

[Gracie]

Define? That is too difficult for humanity to understand or for humanity to express. You either have faith in Him, or you don't.

 

[MarathonMike]

I believe in the concept of a multiverse and multiple Gods who are a combination of unimaginable intellect and energy. They create multiple universes and various forms of life for entertainment. They create multiple universes and life because they can and it's fun for them. They do not intervene, they set things in motion, grab their celestial popcorn boxes and enjoy the show they created.

 

[ding]

I believe in the concept of a multiverse and multiple Gods who are a combination of unimaginable intellect and energy. They create multiple universes and various forms of life for entertainment. They create multiple universes and life because they can and it's fun for them. They do not intervene, they set things in motion, grab their celestial popcorn boxes and enjoy the show they created.

Why multiple Gods? Doesn’t that unnecessarily complicate things?

 

[MarathonMike]

I believe in the concept of a multiverse and multiple Gods who are a combination of unimaginable intellect and energy. They create multiple universes and various forms of life for entertainment. They create multiple universes and life because they can and it's fun for them. They do not intervene, they set things in motion, grab their celestial popcorn boxes and enjoy the show they created.

Why multiple Gods? Doesn’t that unnecessarily complicate things?

I've thought about this a lot. I believe there was the Original God (the O.G. lol) who created the original Universe. But that wasn't enough to entertain him. He was lonely. So he created group of Gods similar to himself, his God Friends for lack of a better term. This was far more fun and entertaining and together they created multiple universes, multiple life forms and countless other things we don't even know about. They never intervene, they allow their creations to run their course while they observe and create new forms of entertainment.

 

[ding]

I believe in the concept of a multiverse and multiple Gods who are a combination of unimaginable intellect and energy. They create multiple universes and various forms of life for entertainment. They create multiple universes and life because they can and it's fun for them. They do not intervene, they set things in motion, grab their celestial popcorn boxes and enjoy the show they created.

Why multiple Gods? Doesn’t that unnecessarily complicate things?

I've thought about this a lot. I believe there was the Original God (the O.G. lol) who created the original Universe. But that wasn't enough to entertain him. He was lonely. So he created group of Gods similar to himself, his God Friends for lack of a better term. This was far more fun and entertaining and together they created multiple universes, multiple life forms and countless other things we don't even know about. They never intervene, they allow their creations to run their course while they observe and create new forms of entertainment.

So why can’t man shake this pesky fairness thing?

Why does man prefer right over wrong?