13
   

Satan (a discussion)

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 08:15 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

I know what the definition of "know" is. (A statement that is both wonderfully circular and logically consistant). You can look at the dictionary definition if you would like. The word refers to an internal state of mine.

I am supporting Neo here. I have no doubt that he knows there is a God. I also have no doubt that some atheists know there is no God.




They can help with that, too, Max.
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 09:21 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

It also seems rather hypocritical for a Buddhist to criticize other people's faith. The Buddhist religion has quite a few things that are just "known" by faith without any reason.

I'm not... you need to re-read what I said... I'm just saying pretty much what you're saying... if someone says that god speaks to them then you can't argue with that... try not to let our past posts cloud your judgement of what I've just posted.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 09:22 am
@igm,
igm wrote:
Sorry neo, not sure the point you're making... given (the content of) my posts Smile
Perhaps this well known nonsense quote applies to what each of us have been saying to each other:
"I know you believe you understand what you think I said; but I'm not sure you realize that what I said is not what I meant."
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 09:29 am
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

igm wrote:
Sorry neo, not sure the point you're making... given (the content of) my posts Smile
Perhaps this well known nonsense quote applies to what each of us have been saying to each other:
"I know you believe you understand what you think I said; but I'm not sure you realize that what I said is not what I meant."

I see of course that is true. I'm just saying that if someone says God speaks to them then only that person can know it is true or possibly true and others either have to take their word for it or not... they 'can't' debate it.. the debate is at an end once someone states that God has spoken to them. It is also possible that this is mentioned in the bible and is not meant to mean 'literally' the spoken word of God but some intuitive realization.

So, to be clear when someone says, 'how do you know god exists' and the reply is god speaks to me then how can that be undermined except by name calling and that won't help the case of the person who asked 'how do you know god exists' in the eyes of the faithful.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 11:11 am
@igm,
I am not likely to say. "God speaks to me."
For me it has been more a process of searching and eventually believing what I found.

I resisted the idea of standards I might have to meet. However, they have proved to be no burden.
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 11:48 am
know1 /noʊ/ Show Spelled [noh] Show IPA verb, knew, known, know·ing, noun
verb (used with object)

1. to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty: I know the situation fully.
2. to have established or fixed in the mind or memory: to know a poem by heart; Do you know the way to the park from here?
3. to be cognizant or aware of: I know it.
4. be acquainted with (a thing, place, person, etc.), as by sight, experience, or report: to know the mayor.
5. to understand from experience or attainment (usually followed by how before an infinitive): to know how to make gingerbread.
6. to be able to distinguish, as one from another: to know right from wrong.
7. Archaic. to have sexual intercourse with.

verb (used without object)

8. to have knowledge or clear and certain perception, as of fact or truth.
9. to be cognizant or aware, as of some fact, circumstance, or occurrence; have information, as about something.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/know



How does something become a FACT?

How many people need to proof something before it becomes a fact? Who decides it now is a fact? For instance a statement 'Given the opportunity, deer will chew gum and marijuana.' - would this be a fact?

OK how many of you have ever seen a deer, let alone one that chews gum or marijuana? and you accept it as a fact?


Best AnswerThis is an astoundingly complex (and good) question which I'll try to answer as simply as possible. Basically, a fact is a practical truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and confirmed. Facts are not opinions and beliefs, statements which are held to be true, but cannot be pragmatically confirmed. In our everyday usage it generally means something that has really occurred or is the case. A fact is something whose truth can be derived from observation, experience or experiment. So for your example to become a fact we would have to observe or experience a deer, when given the opportunity, choosing to chew gum and marijuana. In science this observation would have to be repeated enough times by many different people for it to become an accepted fact. As it is in your question, your statement is merely an opinion or belief and should be prefaced by, "I think/believe/hold the opinion that given the opportunity a deer will chew gum and marijuana. Until I or other people observe this happening, I cannot claim it is a fact". A good word to use in relation to facts is "empirical" - it denotes information gained by means of observation, experiment or experience. All factual information must be based, and be dependent on, empirical evidence that is confirmed by other people. For example you can tell me that you personally have seen deer chewing gum hundreds of times, but until this has been corroborated by empirical evidence, I will not accept your claims as fact. The question of "fact" has occupied philosophers for thousands of years. It's an utterly fascinating concept. Any introduction to philosophy book will deal with it. As a concept, "fact" means different things in Science, in Maths, in History, in Law....

http://answerit.news24.com/Question/How%20does%20something%20become%20a%20FACT?/58609

Wikipedia - An Act of God

Act of God is a legal term for events outside of human control, such as sudden floods or other natural disasters, for which no one can be held responsible.

Contract law:

]In the law of contracts, an act of God may be interpreted as an implied defence under the rule of impossibility or impracticability. If so, the promise is discharged because of unforeseen occurrences, which were unavoidable and would result in insurmountable delay, expense, or other material breach.

An example scenario could assume that an opera singer and a concert hall have a contract. The singer promises to appear and perform at a certain time on a certain date. The hall promises to have the stage and audio equipment ready for her. However, a tornado destroys the hall a month before the concert is to take place. Of course, the hall is not responsible for the tornado. It may be impossible for the hall to rebuild in time to keep its promise. On the other hand, it may be possible but extraordinarily expensive to reconstruct on such short notice. The hall would argue that the tornado was an act of God and excuses its nonperformance via impossibility or impracticability.

In other contracts, such as indemnification, an act of God may be no excuse, and in fact may be the central risk assumed by the promisor—e.g., flood insurance or crop insurance—the only variables being the timing and extent of the damage. In many cases, failure by way of ignoring obvious risks due to "natural phenomena" will not be sufficient to excuse performance of the obligation, even if the events are relatively rare: e.g., the year 2000 problem in computers. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, 2-615, failure to deliver goods sold may be excused by an "act of God" if the absence of such act was a "basic assumption" of the contract, but has made the delivery "commercially impracticable".

Recently, human activities have been claimed to be the root causes of some events until now considered natural disasters. In particular:

water pressure in dams releasing a geological fault (earthquake in China)
geothermal injections of water provoking earthquakes (Basel, Switzerland, 2003) drilling provoking mud volcano (Java, ongoing)
Such events are possibly threatening the legal status of Acts of God and may establish liabilities where none existed until now.

Other uses :

The phrase “act of God”, is sometimes used to attribute an event to divine intervention. Often it is used in conjunction with a natural disaster or tragic event. A miracle, by contrast, is often considered a fortuitous event attributed to divine intervention. Some consider it separate from acts of nature and being related to fate or destiny.

Christian theologians differ on their views and interpretations of scripture. R.C. Sproul implies that God causes a disaster when he speaks of Divine Providence: “In a universe governed by God, there are no chance events”Others indicate that God may allow a tragedy to occur.

Others accept unfortunate events as part of life and reference Matthew 5:45 (KJV): “for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”




BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 11:51 am
@BillW,
be·lieve/bɪˈliv/ Show Spelled [bih-leev] Show IPA verb, be·lieved, be·liev·ing.

verb (used without object)

1. to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so: Only if one believes in something can one act purposefully.

verb (used with object)

2. to have confidence or faith in the truth of (a positive assertion, story, etc.); give credence to.
3. to have confidence in the assertions of (a person).
4. to have a conviction that (a person or thing) is, has been, or will be engaged in a given action or involved in a given situation: The fugitive is believed to be headed for the Mexican border.
5. to suppose or assume; understand (usually followed by a noun clause): I believe that he has left town.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/believe
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 11:53 am
@BillW,
For me, I do not know for a fact know; or, that it is true that there is a God or (as I like to refer to it) a devine source, a higher being. Nor, has it been proven to be more than a theory. But, I certainly do believe.

And, Satan is the opposing force!
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 12:07 pm
@BillW,
I also have a belief that one day God and Satan will become fact and defined within the realms of Quantum Physics. The curtain will be pulled back and voila.

Don't get me wrong, their won't be just a "man" discovered there, it will be wonderful and all powerful - we will be able to explore the universe and dimensions with this knowledge/discovery. Conquer the speed of light, travel at warp speed, become one of the chosen and maybe even be able to isolate our soul when it returns to the God mass so that we may be able to retain individual reasoning for time everlasting.

But, it is just a belief, my God belief and I don't know it, it isn't fact, and certainly isn't the truth. But, I do believe it is a possibility carrying a weight of more than 50.000001%.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 12:41 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

I am not likely to say. "God speaks to me."
For me it has been more a process of searching and eventually believing what I found.

I resisted the idea of standards I might have to meet. However, they have proved to be no burden.


If you searched for Zeus with the same enthusiasm, you would undoubtedly find him also.

If there is a GOD...and the GOD has not revealed itself to you specifically and unambiguously...then you do not KNOW there is a GOD any more than an atheist insisting that there are no gods...KNOWS that there are no gods.

Why don't you just do the adult thing and acknowledge that you do not KNOW that a GOD exists...you just believe (which is to say, guess) that one does?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 12:42 pm
@BillW,
BillW wrote:

I also have a belief that one day God and Satan will become fact and defined within the realms of Quantum Physics. The curtain will be pulled back and voila.

Don't get me wrong, their won't be just a "man" discovered there, it will be wonderful and all powerful - we will be able to explore the universe and dimensions with this knowledge/discovery. Conquer the speed of light, travel at warp speed, become one of the chosen and maybe even be able to isolate our soul when it returns to the God mass so that we may be able to retain individual reasoning for time everlasting.

But, it is just a belief, my God belief and I don't know it, it isn't fact, and certainly isn't the truth. But, I do believe it is a possibility carrying a weight of more than 50.000001%.


And how, other than by self-serving guessing, did you arrive at that 50.000001%?
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 12:47 pm
@Frank Apisa,
It's logic - the extra 0000 is for effect - oh, excuse me - "self-serving" logic!

In logic, various words carry various weight )%, 1%, 49%, 50%,51%, 99% and 100%. Sometimes, if one wants to be more percise, 25% and 75% - in the end, self serving Wink
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 12:52 pm
@BillW,
Let's say "almost for sure" = 50.000001%

once again - self serving, but these kinda arguments are always (that = 100%) based on self serving
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:00 pm
@BillW,
BillW wrote:

It's logic - the extra 0000 is for effect - oh, excuse me - "self-serving" logic!

In logic, various words carry various weight )%, 1%, 49%, 50%,51%, 99% and 100%. Sometimes, if one wants to be more percise, 25% and 75% - in the end, self serving Wink


I getcha!

That is part of the problem we are discussing here. There are people like Neo who assert that they KNOW there is a GOD...and other (I'll leave them unnamed, since they are not currently involved) who assert there are no gods. There are people like Max who claim both do KNOW those contradictory things.

And then there are some who want to make it a question of estimates rather than guesses...but who guess about the essential ingredients of the "estimates."

We've talked this to death...it is obvious from the totality of what Neo has said that he (she) does not actually KNOW if there is a GOD, but who has decided to stonewall on the matter.

Where do we go from here?

I cannot help but wonder why anyone has a problem simply acknowledging that they DO NOT KNOW...but guess (for whatever reasons) the way they do???

What causes that????
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:13 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

I cannot help but wonder why anyone has a problem simply acknowledging that they DO NOT KNOW...but guess (for whatever reasons) the way they do???

What causes that????

Gut feeling??? People are partial to a bit of gut feeling...


Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:22 pm
@igm,
igm wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

I cannot help but wonder why anyone has a problem simply acknowledging that they DO NOT KNOW...but guess (for whatever reasons) the way they do???

What causes that????

Gut feeling??? People are partial to a bit of gut feeling...


Well I certainly think the "gut feeling" is the reason they make the guess...and I can even understand why they would be uncomfortable in calling it a guess, so the "I believe" makes sense...and once you get to that point, the move to "I know" makes sense.

BUT what I was talking about was: When it is looked at in detail and it is blatantly obvious we are not truly talking about what the person KNOWS, but rather what the "gut feeling" tells him...

...why does it become almost a life and death situation not to acknowledge that "I KNOW" in inappropriate...and honestly, unrealistic?

Do you follow?
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:26 pm
@igm,
igm wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

I cannot help but wonder why anyone has a problem simply acknowledging that they DO NOT KNOW...but guess (for whatever reasons) the way they do???

What causes that????

Gut feeling??? People are partial to a bit of gut feeling...


My belief is it has to do with faith, if you aren't 100% for sure, then you are failing in your faith. Now your mixing belief with faith and I know, coming up at most at 49.9999%, and then saying it is a fact. But, in truth - you can't get there on that path.
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:26 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I do, it must be a deep psychological defence mechanism... maybe...

There are some wise people who say things like this though:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-69jRoBjCc1Y/T-FH0AI1I5I/AAAAAAAAASc/55YhTkEg4q4/s1600/albert-einstein-intuition-300x190.jpg
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:38 pm
@BillW,
BillW wrote:

My belief is it has to do with faith, if you aren't 100% for sure, then you are failing in your faith. Now your mixing belief with faith and I know, coming up at most at 49.9999%, and then saying it is a fact. But, in truth - you can't get there on that path.

That makes sense to me it would have to be 'all' about faith. The experience of doubt-free faith is worth it even if it may be untrue... but it has to be all encompassing faith and it only works for some and only until a doubt that cannot be overcome arises.. hopefully it doesn't arise for those faithful followers in this lifetime.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 May, 2013 01:38 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank wrote:
If you searched for Zeus with the same enthusiasm, you would undoubtedly find him also.
Zeus has a different name in The Hebrew Christian understanding.

I know where he is and try to stay away.

I shudder to think in my powerlifting days I had the nickname 'Zeus'
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 07:45:02