Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57

Thread: God.

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    08-31-2014 @ 07:29 AM
    Location
    Rome.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic, Germanic.
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic.
    Ancestry
    England, Ireland, France, North America.
    Country
    Vatican
    Politics
    American constitutionalism, counter-revolutionary, crusading, the Inquisition, tradition.
    Hero
    George S. Patton, Isabel la Catolica, John Hunyadi, Julius Caesar, Vlad Dracula, and many more.
    Religion
    SSPX, Roman Catholic, Neo-Stoic.
    Age
    37
    Gender
    Posts
    2,254
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 294

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Just for the record here's the link to the entry on God from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm

  2. #22
    Insufferable by many Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"


    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Antarctica
    Politics
    Bros over hoes
    Gender
    Posts
    18,406
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 11,166
    Given: 13,531

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    It is well known today that the total sum of all energy in the Universe is zero because gravity and mass cancel each other.
    It is also known that infinity can not exist and we know that it does not exist since the Universe had a beginning.
    Concept of physical infinity is even rejeceted my mathematicians although not as an abstract form.
    Because of that I was always fascinated that in the Bible it never says that God is physically infinite but it says that God is eternal.

    Christian philosophers were saying for centuries for now that the Universe
    was created out of nothing advancing it under the term "Ex nihilo" which means creation out of nothing.
    If one ought to believe in God wouldnt she or he imagine the God as an eternal intelligence or intelligent nothingness with no physical form which derivates, logarithmize, multiples.... so that the total energy is always zero.

    If we assume that before time there was only eternity what chance is there
    for something to start to exist. Logically there would be no chance.
    What or who broke an eternity.

    As Werner Heisenberg said
    "The first swallow from the cup of natural sciences makes atheists, but at the bottom of the cup God is waiting"

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    08-31-2014 @ 07:29 AM
    Location
    Rome.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic, Germanic.
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic.
    Ancestry
    England, Ireland, France, North America.
    Country
    Vatican
    Politics
    American constitutionalism, counter-revolutionary, crusading, the Inquisition, tradition.
    Hero
    George S. Patton, Isabel la Catolica, John Hunyadi, Julius Caesar, Vlad Dracula, and many more.
    Religion
    SSPX, Roman Catholic, Neo-Stoic.
    Age
    37
    Gender
    Posts
    2,254
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 294

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitebastard View Post
    It is well known today that the total sum of all energy in the Universe is zero because gravity and mass cancel each other.
    It is also known that infinity can not exist and we know that it does not exist since the Universe had a beginning.
    Concept of physical infinity is even rejeceted my mathematicians although not as an abstract form.
    Because of that I was always fascinated that in the Bible it never says that God is physically infinite but it says that God is eternal.
    Physicality cannot be attributed to God because of the limitations of matter, although I'll leave the particulars of energy and matter alone, and anything with any sort of limitation isn't perfect and is therefore not God.

    I think that's the line of some of the reasoning I've seen which says that the divine cannot be, and will not be, human (another criticism of Christianity that I've developed).

  4. #24
    Veteran Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Online
    06-11-2020 @ 12:05 AM
    Location
    The land of the long white cloud
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Sarmatian
    Ethnicity
    .
    Ancestry
    Wild Steppe
    Taxonomy
    Archaic Übermensch
    Politics
    Savage
    Religion
    dem boobiez
    Gender
    Posts
    6,832
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,088
    Given: 3,785

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teyrn View Post
    Well, it should be noted that God for the purposes of this thread isn't some fluffy bunny, generic term but the biblegod. I specifically pulled the opinions of the Jews (i.e. the inventors of our popular form of western montheism) out of the bag of tricks to show how Yahweh isn't the same as Christ- note the total lack of dualistic ideation (good and evil come from God alone), downplaying the fall of man, sin (which the article calls "impotent" before the divine), and so forth. I could probably go over to New Advent and grab/post the Catholic equivalent of this article.
    If you want to understand who the 'biblegod' is read the Book of Genesis once again.

    In the first chapter its explained how someone called God (Creator, The One) created the Earth, populated it with life and finally made human beings on top. All of it in six days and on seventh day He took rest.

    In the second chapter its explained how Adam and Eve were created. Christians believe its detailed explanation of events of the first chapter. But... Original texts never used word God to refer to creator in second chapter. They always call him The Lord. Why is that?

    If you'll consider both chapters as chronological chain of events the story looks very interesting. Some entity called God creating our world and all life on it including humans. Then while He is taking rest another entity called Lord creating extra couple of humans. All following Bible text is pretty much the story of exploits of The Lord via his creatures in the world of humans created by The God.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    08-31-2014 @ 07:29 AM
    Location
    Rome.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic, Germanic.
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic.
    Ancestry
    England, Ireland, France, North America.
    Country
    Vatican
    Politics
    American constitutionalism, counter-revolutionary, crusading, the Inquisition, tradition.
    Hero
    George S. Patton, Isabel la Catolica, John Hunyadi, Julius Caesar, Vlad Dracula, and many more.
    Religion
    SSPX, Roman Catholic, Neo-Stoic.
    Age
    37
    Gender
    Posts
    2,254
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 294

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    If you want to understand who the 'biblegod' is read the Book of Genesis once again.

    In the first chapter its explained how someone called God (Creator, The One) created the Earth, populated it with life and finally made human beings on top. All of it in six days and on seventh day He took rest.

    In the second chapter its explained how Adam and Eve were created. Christians believe its detailed explanation of events of the first chapter. But... Original texts never used word God to refer to creator in second chapter. They always call him The Lord. Why is that?

    If you'll consider both chapters as chronological chain of events the story looks very interesting. Some entity called God creating our world and all life on it including humans. Then while He is taking rest another entity called Lord creating extra couple of humans. All following Bible text is pretty much the story of exploits of The Lord via his creatures in the world of humans created by The God.
    Lord is the English translation of Adonay and Adonay is a substitute for the Tetragrammaton (Yod-heh-vav-heh, Yhvh, no vowels: Yahweh).

    Elohim is used in Genesis, which is the plural of El. It can have a variety of meanings like "gods" but is also used in the sense of a majestic plural:

    http://www.halfshekel.com/one-faq/plural.html

    Or also elohei-ha-elohim, "God of gods," the Elohim whose God is the Lord (Adonay) i.e. deity of the Tetragrammaton.

    Used in the pluralistic sense the term Elohim can refer to the majestic plural, the assembly of heaven (angels/gods whose ruler is Adonay, i.e. they're merely divinized attributes of the Adonay), or it can be seen as a sloppy left-over from the speculative copy-pasta job that was supposedly done to join the Elohist and Yahwist scriptures together into Genesis.

    Both names are used for the same creator in Genesis; demiurgical ideas are something of a later date as the ancient Hebrews had no such conception of multiple deities at work in Genesis.

  6. #26
    Veteran Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Online
    06-11-2020 @ 12:05 AM
    Location
    The land of the long white cloud
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Sarmatian
    Ethnicity
    .
    Ancestry
    Wild Steppe
    Taxonomy
    Archaic Übermensch
    Politics
    Savage
    Religion
    dem boobiez
    Gender
    Posts
    6,832
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,088
    Given: 3,785

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teyrn View Post
    Lord is the English translation of Adonay and Adonay is a substitute for the Tetragrammaton (Yod-heh-vav-heh, Yhvh, no vowels: Yahweh).

    Elohim is used in Genesis, which is the plural of El. It can have a variety of meanings like "gods" but is also used in the sense of a majestic plural:

    http://www.halfshekel.com/one-faq/plural.html

    Or also elohei-ha-elohim, "God of gods," the Elohim whose God is the Lord (Adonay) i.e. deity of the Tetragrammaton.

    Used in the pluralistic sense the term Elohim can refer to the majestic plural, the assembly of heaven (angels/gods whose ruler is Adonay, i.e. they're merely divinized attributes of the Adonay), or it can be seen as a sloppy left-over from the speculative copy-pasta job that was supposedly done to join the Elohist and Yahwist scriptures together into Genesis.

    Both names are used for the same creator in Genesis; demiurgical ideas are something of a later date as the ancient Hebrews had no such conception of multiple deities at work in Genesis.
    Its all good except of one little flaw I selected in bold. There is no direct reference to relation between Elohim of the first chapter and Yhvh from second. It is opening story of entire book, its understanding affecting perception of the whole Bible. Why did authors left such an immense ground for speculations? Lack of knowledge or understanding? Or intention to hide the truth and trick people into following another deity?

    Lets say Elohim is divine assembly that created our world and Yhvh is part of it. We don't know his position in hierarchy but we know he is not the ruler but some kind of a trickster. At the same time he is very capable as he is able to create his own assembly of angels and start his own game.

    Such scenario fit Genesis perfectly while bringing absolutely different understanding of the story. It explains why Yhvh is such arrogant, ruthless and bloodthirsty. He does favor his own creations at expense of the rest of humanity. It explains a whole lot of things and brings a different light on the history of Christianity.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    08-31-2014 @ 07:29 AM
    Location
    Rome.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic, Germanic.
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic.
    Ancestry
    England, Ireland, France, North America.
    Country
    Vatican
    Politics
    American constitutionalism, counter-revolutionary, crusading, the Inquisition, tradition.
    Hero
    George S. Patton, Isabel la Catolica, John Hunyadi, Julius Caesar, Vlad Dracula, and many more.
    Religion
    SSPX, Roman Catholic, Neo-Stoic.
    Age
    37
    Gender
    Posts
    2,254
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 294

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    Its all good except of one little flaw I selected in bold. There is no direct reference to relation between Elohim of the first chapter and Yhvh from second. It is opening story of entire book, its understanding affecting perception of the whole Bible. Why did authors left such an immense ground for speculations? Lack of knowledge or understanding? Or intention to hide the truth and trick people into following another deity?

    Lets say Elohim is divine assembly that created our world and Yhvh is part of it. We don't know his position in hierarchy but we know he is not the ruler but some kind of a trickster. At the same time he is very capable as he is able to create his own assembly of angels and start his own game.

    Such scenario fit Genesis perfectly while bringing absolutely different understanding of the story. It explains why Yhvh is such arrogant, ruthless and bloodthirsty. He does favor his own creations at expense of the rest of humanity. It explains a whole lot of things and brings a different light on the history of Christianity.
    You're not thinking like the ancients but like a modern. To the writer or writers of Genesis Elohim and Adonay were the same deity and no attempt is made to explain any inconsistency away; the unspoken (or unwritten?) implication is that Elohim is Adonay but for whatever reason(s) the two names were used in Genesis.

    Skepticism of the religious writing belongs to an age well after the earliest parts of the Bible were written down (i.e. from the Hellenistic period, 100s of years after Genesis et al. were written).

    However the influence of pagan religions on the writing of the Bible is a topic different from critical examination of the Bible and it's something that Christians, Jews, and religious skeptics often debate amongst themselves. The "host of heaven" as it's called in English, usually in the King James edition of the Bible, is an example of the possible pagan influence- likely influence if you assume that the Bible writers were borrowing the literary forms of the pagans and not the beliefs of the pagans.

  8. #28
    Veteran Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Online
    06-11-2020 @ 12:05 AM
    Location
    The land of the long white cloud
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Sarmatian
    Ethnicity
    .
    Ancestry
    Wild Steppe
    Taxonomy
    Archaic Übermensch
    Politics
    Savage
    Religion
    dem boobiez
    Gender
    Posts
    6,832
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,088
    Given: 3,785

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teyrn View Post
    You're not thinking like the ancients but like a modern. To the writer or writers of Genesis Elohim and Adonay were the same deity and no attempt is made to explain any inconsistency away; the unspoken (or unwritten?) implication is that Elohim is Adonay but for whatever reason(s) the two names were used in Genesis.

    Skepticism of the religious writing belongs to an age well after the earliest parts of the Bible were written down (i.e. from the Hellenistic period, 100s of years after Genesis et al. were written).

    However the influence of pagan religions on the writing of the Bible is a topic different from critical examination of the Bible and it's something that Christians, Jews, and religious skeptics often debate amongst themselves. The "host of heaven" as it's called in English, usually in the King James edition of the Bible, is an example of the possible pagan influence- likely influence if you assume that the Bible writers were borrowing the literary forms of the pagans and not the beliefs of the pagans.
    Its still very suspicious to me. Whats the grounds for such unspoken implications and whats the reasons for usage of two names? If you want to tell a story you want to be as clear as possible. Swapping basic definitions at the start as you please compromising credibility of the whole source and intentions of authors.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    08-31-2014 @ 07:29 AM
    Location
    Rome.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic, Germanic.
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic.
    Ancestry
    England, Ireland, France, North America.
    Country
    Vatican
    Politics
    American constitutionalism, counter-revolutionary, crusading, the Inquisition, tradition.
    Hero
    George S. Patton, Isabel la Catolica, John Hunyadi, Julius Caesar, Vlad Dracula, and many more.
    Religion
    SSPX, Roman Catholic, Neo-Stoic.
    Age
    37
    Gender
    Posts
    2,254
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 294

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    Its still very suspicious to me. Whats the grounds for such unspoken implications and whats the reasons for usage of two names? If you want to tell a story you want to be as clear as possible. Swapping basic definitions at the start as you please compromising credibility of the whole source and intentions of authors.
    That's something the ancient Jewish priests would have to answer I guess. Don't forget that they had two forms of religious testimony, the written part and the oral part. Iirc, the oral part was supplementary to the written part and explained the parts that seemed inconsistent and in need of clarification.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Online
    06-11-2020 @ 12:05 AM
    Location
    The land of the long white cloud
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Sarmatian
    Ethnicity
    .
    Ancestry
    Wild Steppe
    Taxonomy
    Archaic Übermensch
    Politics
    Savage
    Religion
    dem boobiez
    Gender
    Posts
    6,832
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,088
    Given: 3,785

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teyrn View Post
    That's something the ancient Jewish priests would have to answer I guess. Don't forget that they had two forms of religious testimony, the written part and the oral part. Iirc, the oral part was supplementary to the written part and explained the parts that seemed inconsistent and in need of clarification.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
    Thats what makes me even more suspicious. Those Jews would write one thing and tell each "Don't mind that, we are just messing with goyim's brains"

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •