It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Zanti Misfit
With all due respect, that's where we will have to disagree
I have been promised a time when all evil will be destroyed, that a time in the future a rest from all the turmoil is promised.
Freedom and peace will be the very nature of existence
Not based on a star wars, the force scenario, but a place where love is the law
That is what I believe, you may choose otherwise
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
I have not said that I was "OK with" anything. The facts of life do not depend on whether we approve of them. The question of whether there is a self-conscious entity creating the universe does not depend on whether we approve of what he is doing.
When we claim to be acting as moral judges over the universe, we are the ones behaving with narcissistic self-importance.
originally posted by: TzarChasm
You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight. That is dangerously naive bordering on totally asinine. Absolute power corrupts.
1 John 4:7-8 King James Version (KJV)
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
originally posted by: TzarChasm
You are dodging the issue. You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: TzarChasm
You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight. That is dangerously naive bordering on totally asinine. Absolute power corrupts.
The question of "permissability" is irrelevant, because none of us would have the power to do anything about it.
You don't seem to grasp the point that the universe is not under democratic control. You can't get rid of something just by disapproving of it. I might think that the Atlantic Ocean's power to drown me is immoral and unacceptable, but if i find myself in the middle, it will drown me anyway. Frothing up in self-righteous indignation would not help.
The issue does not affect the basic definition being offered.
originally posted by: TzarChasm
Frothing in self righteous indignation gave me the country I was born in. Give me freedom or give me death, etc. Your spineless attitude has historically given tyrants the power they need to oppress entire nations.
Obviously not, because they don't create everything there is and bring it into existence, which is the starting point of the definition.
Elon musk, bill gates, and mark zuckerberg are all gods by your "definition". They all create and communicate.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: TzarChasm
Frothing in self righteous indignation gave me the country I was born in. Give me freedom or give me death, etc. Your spineless attitude has historically given tyrants the power they need to oppress entire nations.
A comparison with human politics is thoroughly misleading, because human figures of authority are vulnerable, so that resistance has a plausible chance of being effective.
There is this difference; if the Creator is a tyrant, then resistance has no power of any kind to win "freedom".
So resistance becomes pointless. You can call him a tyrant as much as you like, but you are still stuck with him.
Under those conditions, resistance cannot be called "courage"; it is just a bone-headed refusal to accept realities. All this is argued out in Paradise Lost Book2.
But of course your narcissistic sense of self-importance prevents you from recognising that.
Obviously not, because they don't create everything there is and bring it into existence, which is the starting point of the definition.
Elon musk, bill gates, and mark zuckerberg are all gods by your "definition". They all create and communicate.
Since the premise is "defining the Christian God", and knowledge of the specifically Christian God is derived from the contents of the Bible, it is legitimate to draw upon the contents of the Bible in framing the definition.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
I repeat the reply given to another poster;
Since the premise is "defining the Christian God", and knowledge of the specifically Christian God is derived from the contents of the Bible, it is legitimate to draw upon the contents of the Bible in framing the definition.
"Creating everything that exists" is part of that content.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
Nevertheless, that is the task I set myself in this thread; "Defining the Christian God".
Your comment amounts to saying that I should have written a different topic instead. I chose to do this one.