Define God

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

You can't prove something with logic that doesn't exist.

That is exactly what we are talking about. Why don't you verify and validate your beliefs (and understandings about my understandings) before you write some hasty comment.
Why don't you simply write in Google: belief revision wiki ... and read the first reference from the results.

0 Replies

@Herald,

You,

Quote:

Belief revision is a technique of the math logic to verify and validate statements by assigning truth valie to them, usually my means of probability (ranging from 0-false to 1-true). The belief may also have some highly improbable (but still possible to be true) values, like for example 10^-12.

Actually, there is no way to apply math formulas to "true or false" statements.
That's the reason why many who believe in a god can't be proven by "statements or math." Belief in gods are based on "faith" and nothing more. No math formula can be applied to make sense of it.

You,

Quote:

I am awfully sorry that you haven't known that Einstein is the author of the General Relativity Theory ... and that 'people reading your post assume you are the author'.

Don't be stupid! I have 'never' seen the Relativity Theory expressed by formula as in your post. If I've seen it, it still wouldn't make any sense to me, because advanced math is not my thing, and I don't understand it. I rely on readings, common sense, and logic.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

I have to go with the understanding I derive from the following observations

Sure, the point is however, it's not as cut and dried as you would have us believe. One thing is your desire for a reading of the Bible that fits your ideology, another thing is the texts themselves and the meaning of the very words used therein.

neologis wrote:

God did said nothing about any punishment other than death, an event Adam and Eve had no doubt seen in animals if it were to have any meaning. His words in Genesis show that His purpose was for our parents to continue living and and extend Eden throughout the earth. Nowhere does it indicate that He changed his mind about the human race when they ate the fruit.

This is merely your interpretation of Genesis and "what God said."

Quote:

2] There are numerous citations available from the Hebrew texts identifying the state of those who have died.Including the hope of resurrection (Job 14:14,15)

You fail to mention that the book of Job, in 26:5, includes the word rapha, i.e. ghosts of the dead, shades, spirits.

The word is found in various other books from the Hebrew texts such as Psalms, Isaiah, Proverbs and most likely Chronicles 16:12.

neologist wrote:

3] Resurrection of righteous and unrighteous noted at John 5:28 and Acts 34:15.
4] Death is regarded as an enemy which will be brought to nothing (1 Corinthians 15:26)

These passages that talk about resurrection and death don’t necessarily negate the ideas behind the words nekros and thanatos used therein.

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

God told Adam and Eve to "Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)

Then in a tantrum God told Eve 3:16 “I will greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in pain you will give birth to children, and your longing will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

Do you suppose that God changed to female anatomy to a poorer design to cause this change in pain level? Science tells us that as humans evolved to walking upright, changes to the pelvis structure and larger brain size made childbirth more difficult.
The Downside of Upright

2 Replies

@mesquite,

Because Eve ate the apple, she and all women are being punished.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Actually, there is no way to apply math formulas to "true or false" statements.

Assigning belief to statements is not applying math formulas to 'true or false' statements. You assign belief value to the statement, representing to what extend you believe for this statement to be true.
Let's take an example:
'but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee' {Gen. 17:6}
If we assume that the Word of God (in the general case) has truth value of 1, and the pseudo-prophets - value of 0, how much is the truth value of the above statement?
Is it really the Word of God, or is it some mania for governing of some local people presenting their personal aspirations as the Word of God.
1. What is the relation of this pronunciation to the 'creation' of the world (it is in Genesis)?
2. Why should a supreme being ordering in the Ten Commandments:
“You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's.”
make some local person 'father of many nations'. Is this a problem of God, or is this a problem of some local people at the time being, ... and so on.
On the grounds of the justification you assign belief to the statement representing to what extend you believe that this is the Word of God or is something else.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Your attempts to play word games is elementary bull ****! Many believe it's true that god(s) exists; not only the christian god but other gods that man created. Try applying math to any statement that has to do with those "truths?" Good luck!

FYI, human perceptions are subjective. That they believe with all their heart and soul that their god exists is based on "faith." There's nothing in science, math or logic that can prove any of the gods that man worships is factual. NONE.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Yes ci, but my question wasn't why, but how. Perhaps gaining the knowledge of good and evil gave us larger brains. Twisted Evil

1 Reply

@mesquite,

god snapped his fingers, and changed the biology of man and woman.

0 Replies

@mesquite,

neologist, quoting Genesis, wrote:

God told Adam and Eve to "Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)

mesquite wrote:

Then in a tantrum God told Eve 3:16 “I will greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in pain you will give birth to children, and your longing will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

Tantrum? Interesting observation.

mesquite wrote:

Do you suppose that God changed to female anatomy to a poorer design to cause this change in pain level?

No.

mesquite wrote:

Science tells us that as humans evolved to walking upright, changes to the pelvis structure and larger brain size made childbirth more difficult.

Science tells us? You have had better posts.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Your attempts to play word games is elementary bull ****! Many believe it's true that god(s) exists; not only the christian god but other gods that man created.

First of all 'bull ****' is written as 'bulshit', and second 'belief revision' can be applied to any statement ... not only to the texts of the Bible.
Let's take for example the statement: 'You can't prove something with logic that doesn't exist.'
This claim is formally true, for one really can't prove anything with logic that does not exist ... but is false in this case, because the method of verification and validation of inferences and statements by means of belief revision exists ... and is dating back to the 1960s.
So the truth value of the statement is fuzzy logic - it may take value of 1 (true) or 0 (false - as in this case) depending on the context, and such are most of the statements.
The false value is inferred in the following way:
The method of belief revision exists - hence 'logic that doesn't exist' is False - hence 'You can't prove something with logic that doesn't exist' becomes False in this case, notwithstanding that it is formally true as a construct.

0 Replies

Mesquite said:

Quote:

in a tantrum God told Eve 3:16 “I will greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in pain you will give birth to children, and your longing will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

Think of God not as a "person" but as a "Law of the Universe" that holds everything together in perfect harmony. But if that law is broken by naughty humans, (such as by Eve disobeying God and eating that fruit ) that natural harmony is disrupted and bad things happen.

2 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Mesquite said:

Quote:
in a tantrum God told Eve 3:16 “I will greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in pain you will give birth to children, and your longing will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”

Think of God not as a "person" but as a "Law of the Universe" that holds everything together in perfect harmony. But if that law is broken by naughty humans, (such as by Eve disobeying God and eating that fruit ) that natural harmony is disrupted and bad things happen.

Eve did not do anything "naughty"...or at least, she did not do anything that she thought was "naughty."

That information was withheld from her...and from Adam.

The god just felt like being disrupted...and then he just felt like making bad things happen.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Eve did not do anything "naughty"...or at least, she did not do anything that she thought was "naughty."

That's a moot point to all but the credulous. But it was certainly to be considered "naughty" in Her daughters. Otherwise crowds would not flock to the Moulin Rouge to see the daughters of Eve being "naughty" with their knickers on.

How would you go about making sure such things were "naughty"? And can you imagine if those things were not "naughty"?

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Eve did not do anything "naughty"...or at least, she did not do anything that she thought was "naughty."

That's a moot point to all but the credulous. But it was certainly to be considered "naughty" in Her daughters. Otherwise crowds would not flock to the Moulin Rouge to see the daughters of Eve being "naughty" with their knickers on.

How would you go about making sure such things were "naughty"? And can you imagine if those things were not "naughty"?

So, Spendius...did you see the movie, Knight and Day?

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

neologist, quoting Genesis, wrote:
God told Adam and Eve to "Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)
mesquite wrote:
Then in a tantrum God told Eve 3:16 “I will greatly increase the pain of your pregnancy; in pain you will give birth to children, and your longing will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”
Tantrum? Interesting observation.

Seemed fitting.

neologist wrote:

mesquite wrote:
Do you suppose that God changed to female anatomy to a poorer design to cause this change in pain level?
No.
mesquite wrote:
Science tells us that as humans evolved to walking upright, changes to the pelvis structure and larger brain size made childbirth more difficult.
Science tells us? You have had better posts.

Is your problem with the science or my wording? I provided a link.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Two more unanswered questions from the guy who declared he answered questions.

How can you ever be wrong about anything?

1 Reply

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:

Eve did not do anything "naughty"...or at least, she did not do anything that she thought was "naughty."
That information was withheld from her...and from Adam

Jesus said "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word from the mouth of God"
God told Evey not to touch the fruit but she thought "He cannot be serious! What's wrong with a nice fruit?" so she munched it and set the universe jangling in disharmony like an out-of-tune-banjo!

Likewise God said to gays "Hey, stop that!" but they ignored him and bingo!-
"HIV/AIDS- Since the beginning of the epidemic, almost 70 million people have been infected with the HIV virus and about 35 million people have died of AIDS"
http://www.who.int/gho/hiv/en/
The moral is that whenever God lays down a law, he doesn't feel the need to explain why, he just says "Trust me, if you disobey me you're gonna be in a world o' hurt!"
I mean, even if he'd have tried to explain why to the citizens of Sodom/Gomorrah, they wouldn't have understood anyway, it'd have gone something like this-
GOD- "Hey, stop that!"
CITIZENS- "Can you explain why we should stop?"
GOD- "Okay, HIV is a member of the genus Lentivirus, part of the family Retroviridae. Lentiviruses share many morphological and biological characteristics. Lentiviruses are transmitted as single-stranded, positive-sense, enveloped RNA viruses. Upon entry into the target cell, the viral RNA genome is converted (reverse transcribed) into double-stranded DNA by a virally encoded reverse transcriptase that is transported along with the viral genome in the virus particle. The resulting viral DNA is then imported into the cell nucleus and integrated into the cellular DNA by a virally encoded integrase and host co-factors. Once integrated, the virus may become latent, allowing the virus and its host cell to avoid detection by the immune system. Alternatively, the virus may be transcribed, producing new RNA genomes and viral proteins that are packaged and released from the cell as new virus particles that begin the replication cycle anew. Is that clear now?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Two more unanswered questions from the guy who declared he answered questions.

How can you ever be wrong about anything?

C'mon...tell me if you've seen Knight and Day.

0 Replies

@mesquite,

mesquite wrote:

... Is your problem with the science or my wording? I provided a link.

Nah. I just thought it interesting that you personalized the word 'science'.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know