17
   

Define "Evidence"

Forums: Science, Religion, Philosophy, Truth, Evidence
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:17 am
There is a good answer in "deep metaphysics" for what "worship" really means...

In blunt simple to grasp terms "WORSHIP" is nothing other then sheer respect for the RATIO of that WHICH IS TRUE ! In a timeless EXISTING reality ! The ratio, order, of things, requires our acknowledgement of UNITY in reality...the common sense word/coinage for this UNITY is LOVE ! (connection)
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:19 am
@Leadfoot,
Except, of course, that the definition of worship is not simply to recognize.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:21 am
@Setanta,
See above...
(...you know what kind of "God" I am talking about so don't kick back...) Wink
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:23 am
From Merriam-Webster-dot-com:

Quote:
the act of showing respect and love for a god especially by praying with other people who believe in the same god : the act of worshipping God or a god


So one might restate the question as why would such a being need our love, or our respect? The concept is made unutterably silly by a contemplation of the scale of the cosmos. Why, in such a vast and almost incomprehensible array of matter and energy, would the alleged creator thereof need the respect and love of some higher order simian types on a speck of dirt in the galactic boondocks of a not necessarily prepossessing galaxy? The concept is an absurdity.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:26 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Sorry, i'm not buying it.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:32 am
@Setanta,
What, you don't believe NATURE has a ratio (order) ?
"Worshipping" is just what you do when you get a lemonade juice and seat down at a beautiful beach sunset listening the waves coming and going...
You acknowledge NATURALLY the order in the world, the connection in reality, the ratio and patterns of all things. You are at home...

..."worshipping" is just "being happy" with the world, with "NATURA" !
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:37 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Maybe in Portuguese, but not in English. Apart from that, you're straying from the question of why an omnipotent and omniscient being--if any such being exists--would need or want to be worshiped. Why would such a being need or want the worship of we poor fools on our little ball of rock hurtling around a small, middle-aged star on the outskirts of a rather ordinary galaxy?
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:41 am
@Setanta,
I see you have not my frame of reference for "god" which is very ungodly like in common sense terms...I am not talking of any "agent" "being" here...check my other reply to Neo on a parallel thread for context...
(Relationship between GOD MAN n NATURE)
Better let me post it here for frame of reference:

MY definition of "God" !


Quote:
Much confusion there Neo...

God didn't create anything ! There is nothing to be "created" which isn't already in "God", TRUTH !
God is NATURE ! How could he not be ?
One doesn't divide nature, that WHICH IS, in two !
God has no past and no future. God is the fact of the matter of our perception of time. He is the past and the future made present. Eternal.
An eternal God cannot will, wish, command, organize, structure, anything. Instead "he" IS ALREADY such things made reality...
Moreover as I often explained already God doesn't need to think as thinking belongs to the realm of incomplete agents that require inquiry regarding an unknown future. Possibility moves our rationality. God is the ratio itself...God being the "future" made reality, made present, has no inquiry to make. Its just like a dead stone on the ordering of all things. Think of it as "frozen maths". The very order of all reality past present and future already made thing. TRUTH !

Its amazing Neo...as a believer one would guess, hope, you had some sort of tangible understanding of deep metaphysics, some "upper class" theology background...but nah, its just Christian common sense believing in a personal agent which is the spit image of a super human...a poor almost childish like idea on what God really is.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:44 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
leaving this thread as fast as a stabbed rat.
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:46 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Why, in such a vast and almost incomprehensible array of matter and energy, would the alleged creator thereof need the respect and love of some higher order simian types on a speck of dirt in the galactic boondocks of a not necessarily prepossessing galaxy? The concept is an absurdity.
So you are saying that love is made obsolete by the unequal status of beings.

Think about that for just a minute...
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:46 am
That echoes of ". . . nature and nature's god . . ." from the American Declaration of Independence. You have just removed your question begging to another level. Why would "nature" need or want the worship of the passengers of this ship of fools?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:49 am
@Leadfoot,
No, i'm not saying that. If you claim to have someone on ignore, it's rather paltry of you to choose to selectively respond when you think you've got a shot at one of what you must consider your profound questions.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:52 am
@Leadfoot,
He doesn't want to...this is talking past each other because humans have "feelings" ya know...we are freaking emotional when it comes to which "gang" is talking about what...oh dear "gang" people silly us...
I am a gangless fellow in a gang world...

There is nothing wrong with saying "god" is Nature and God is unified.
In fact this is the ultimate metaphysical premise science is bounded to...BELIEVING without final proof the world is worth investigating, the world HAS ORDER, RATIO !
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:54 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
In blunt simple to grasp terms "WORSHIP" is nothing other then sheer respect for the RATIO of that WHICH IS TRUE !
Dont know where you got that, but Damn! I agree!
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:54 am
@farmerman,
You can't...you to smart to not be "contaminated" with good thinking...
The "virus" of a logical answering is already installed in your mind by now... Wink
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:57 am
@Leadfoot,
I always write my own thinking...rarely resort to quotes. Philosophy either its personal or is parrot talking.

...I'd like to believe I have a tid bit of "philosophy" in my genes coding...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:58 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
I have had enough of your conceit. You are in no position to expatiate on what i do or don't want to do. I invite you to go piss up a rope. As usual, you just swagger into a thread and behave as though you have all the answers. News Flash!--you don't.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 06:59 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
No, i'm not saying that. If you claim to have someone on ignore, it's rather paltry of you to choose to selectively respond when you think you've got a shot at one of what you must consider your profound questions.
When you start responding with something other than variations of 'You're an idiot', I stop ignoring.

So what ARE you saying? How else can I interpret those words?
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 07:05 am
@Leadfoot,
If you don't puke up idiotic things, such as your invisible friend superstition, expecting others to accept your delusions as fact, then people will probably not tell you that they are idiotic. In fact, i have before pointed out that you seem to show more intelligence than the average holy roller. That doesn't alter that you expect people to accept holy roller idiocies. I said what i meant. You can understand what i said by applying the common definitions of the English language. Unlike holy rollers, that's how most people proceed to communicate. Unless and until they have good reason to do otherwise, they take what people say at face value, even if they don't agree. No "interpretation" is needed.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2015 07:08 am
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:
When you start responding with something other than variations of 'You're an idiot', I stop ignoring.


In the first place, if you have me on ignore, you wouldn't know if i had done that or not. In the second, saying that what you post is idiotic is not the same as saying that you are an idiot. Believe it or not, people are not obliged to take you seriously, nor to consider your pronouncements profound.

I don't give a rat's ass if you have me on ignore or not, almost all of your posts are idiotic because they're products of your superstition.
 

Related Topics

U.S. Lags World in Grasp of Genetics and Acceptance of Evolution - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion? - Discussion by wandeljw
New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
New species of hominid discovered - Question by FBM
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
More (much more) dinosaur soft tissue turning up - Discussion by gungasnake
Must Scientific Knowledge Be Considered Relative? - Discussion by wandeljw
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Define "Evidence"
  3. » Page 7
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 07:04:45
▲ ▼