The Instigator
zeromeansnothing
Pro (for)
The Contender
Skynet
Con (against)

God is Inanimate (by default)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Skynet has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/12/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 238 times Debate No: 93641
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

zeromeansnothing

Pro

Religious Writings and evolved Dogma spend quite a bit of time on 'God Description'


Take the Christian Trinity notion as an example of this.

Words of a mysterious 1st Century man are supposed to clearly identify and underpin the Trinity notion.

He tells the people(allegedly) that he will send the Holy Spirit after he has returned to his Father. He speaks directly to his Father, both on the Cross and at the River Jordon, before the John Baptism. We now sacrificially endow our young Christians with this 'Holy Spirit' at Confirmation. If there is a better example on this planet of 'circular deduction' then I cannot think of it.

This is a complete usurpation of the Yahweh caricature and an evolution in Religious Holograms.
This is also a usurpation of the primitive notion of God as depicted in the Genesis Eden narrative.


Look at this Eden Description and extract the following truth from it.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Also take a look at John 1 and see how the 1st Century man had to be placed back in pre-time. What a fudge of words!



The Word Became Flesh




In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcomea it.



Let us get a grip here and go back to the purport of the Genesis Myth.

It clearly describes God as basic 'Life Potential', or more accurately 'a place' for life to begin'

God is just that, ie the infrastructure of our existence, ie the place where life began.



The 'collective consciousness' of life is, by default, 'God's Spirit', working to create. It is this Spirit that is perceptible to all life forms. Jesus is a Spirit creation as is Nelson Mandela and Dan Aykroyd (God Bless Him).

God is by default 'Inanimate' and without consciousness of any sort.
God is the House in which we live and to which we have become emotionally attached. It is home to mice and spiders as well( at least mine is)

Can you accept my words or can you debate effectively to the contrary?





Skynet

Con

This is one of the oddest opening rounds I have ever read. I hope it will go someplace interesting.

The "meat" of what Pro is saying seems to be that "God is...'Inanimate' and without consciousness of any sort."

Holograms and sacrificial confirmation and circular tax deductions and befuddlement at John chapter 1 (?) and maybe some kind of Unitarian argument in there should be clarified by Pro in round 2 in the context of how these things support the main point Pro is trying to make.

I counter God is conscious. I would even say God is Uber-conscious. (That's some German lingo for you.)

Copy and pasted from dictionary.com, this definition looked pretty non-controversial, unless you are coming from a far-Eastern mystical perspective, which these debates normally aren't:

Conscious:
1.aware of one's own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc.
2.fully aware of or sensitive to something (often followed by of):
conscious of one's own faults; He wasn't conscious of the gossip about his past.
3.having the mental faculties fully active:
He was conscious during the operation.
4.known to oneself; felt:
conscious guilt.
5.aware of what one is doing:
a conscious liar.
6.aware of oneself; self-conscious.
7.deliberate; intentional:
a conscious insult; a conscious effort.
8.acutely aware of or concerned about:
money-conscious; a diet-conscious society.

"without consciousness of any sort" would mean all I have to do is show that God fulfills ONE of these definitions, and I win. (I should note that Pro always refers to the Christian, Biblical God, and writes of Him as if he DOES exist for the sake of his argument. This closes the door on any kriticing on his part as far as saying "well God doesn't exist, therefore he isn't conscious," because that would shift the debate from the characteristics of God, hypothetical or real, to whether or not God exists.)

"Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light."
God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day." (Genesis 1)

From Genesis 1, God takes conscious action (speaks, creates) is aware of the quality of the result of the action, and judges the action that he just took. Further action is taken upon the results of his prior action, and God continues to act in this manner throughout the rest of the Creation Week. This fulfills at LEAST 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 of the definitions of conscious.

I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 1
zeromeansnothing

Pro

Skynet: 'This is one of the oddest opening rounds I have ever read. I hope it will go someplace interesting'


Firstly, Skynet, thank you sincerely for clarifying your position on these matters within your profile information and also for engaging with me in this debate/discourse. Let me 'cut to the chase' here.

Skynet, imagine if I declared total and unquestioning faith in the New York Times. I declare that it's every word is 'Gospel' and I declare that my God's name is not Allah or Yahweh or .............but something else, whatever ie 'The Gray Lady'. I then declare that, Henry Jarvis Raymond, is the child of this person, derived and sent from this Divinity to save me. Imagine if I did that, Skynet. Would people be justified in dismissing my 'belief position'? Would my belief premise be strong? Would I justifiably be regarded as being obscurely delusional?


Your submission is there for all to see. It is extremely weak. IMHO Let others decide on this summation of it. You have a copy and paste definition of a word that I gave you. You state the often heard plea of the unconvinced, ie "without consciousness of any sort" would mean all I have to do is show that God fulfills ONE of these definitions, and I win.'

Your declaration that God has consciousness because it literally states that he spoke is almost laughable. Read back slowly on your own logic here, for example.

"Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light." this leads you to deduce the following..............From Genesis 1, God takes conscious action (speaks, creates) is aware of the quality of the result of the action, and judges the action that he just took.

My God!


I must now credit you with introducing a small element of intrigue and interest to your submission when you interject that.............

Skynet: 'I would even say God is Uber-conscious'

This is a vague attempt at a summation of some sort. If a house is conscious of it's inhabitants then God is in fact 'Uber-conscious'. If a new builds design is inherently comfortable for its eventual occupants then again your God is 'Uber-conscious'.

Allow me to be bluntly direct with you here, Skynet. You state, regarding my first submission, that I cannot retract my reference to Yahweh as being a real God. I regard Yahweh as real to the people who believed in him, ie the Tribes of Israel. Yahweh was forged by them from many conflicting 'God Definitions' of the time. They accepted one of many origin myths, ie the Eden Myth and they claimed and eventually owned this Yahweh God through an Abrahamic Pact that they verified with their words and actions. Yahweh is a legitimate figurehead God for these people, both past and present.

The Christian version of this Old Testament 'God' is a castle build on an egg shell. It is a fudge that resembles the Disney Caricatures of Greek Mythology. It is a pyramid of lies and nonsense build on an Isaiah prophesy of a Messiah for the Israelites. This stuff is posthumously plastered on to a first century mysterious preacher and with a little bit of Greek and Roman 'Olympus' treatment you find poor John declaring that Jesus was actually there at the start of time. I have introduced my self to you so that you are under no illusion as to my dismissiveness of your Christian stance. This submission is uncomfortably long for me at the moment so that I will leave my examination of the Eden description of God to later in the thread. Thanks
Skynet

Con

I did not really expect you to FF, but I have had so many debates where my opponent FF for lack of interest or time or whatever reason, that I feel that I should thank Pro for simply showing up. So thanks.

Ok, the New York Times and The Gray Lady:
It doesn't really matter what my beliefs are. I could just as easily play 'devil's advocate' in any debate I chose where I defended a side in reality I do not believe. Debates are judged not on the personal or professional or whatever merits of the debater, or even whether the debater is actually correct, but the quality of the argument. Atheists regularly vote for Theist positions and visa versa on DDO because a poor argument can be made for the truth, and a good argument can be made for a lie. Debate is as much about honing one's mind as it is finding the truth. So I say the first point Pro makes in R2, basically calling me crazy, is irrelevant.

Pro did not provide a definition of the terms he used, as is common in debate. So I provided my own, very plain, uncontroversial, broad definition of consciousness from a customary source, which seemed fair to me, and is common practice on DDO. Note Pro does not take issue with my chosen definition.

Pro also makes an absolute statement in the opening: "God is by default 'Inanimate' and without consciousness of any sort." Absolute statements are invalid if any exception is found. I provided a few strong exceptions. Pro's absolute is invalid. Pro responds with incredulity, taking The Gray Lady's name in vain, and abruptly moves on to his next point without further argument:

Pro asserts he is not arguing that God is hypothetically or actually real. ("You state, regarding my first submission, that I cannot retract my reference to Yahweh as being a real God.")

But he did.

"The 'collective consciousness' of life IS, by default, 'God's Spirit', working to create. It IS this Spirit that IS perceptible to all life forms. Jesus IS a Spirit creation as is Nelson Mandela and Dan Aykroyd (God Bless Him).

God IS by default 'Inanimate' and without consciousness of any sort.
God IS the House in which we live and to which we have become emotionally attached."

I understood from the beginning Pro is an athiest, so it follows that if he is using "IS," the present form of "be" or "to be," he is referring to God as actually existing for the sake of argument. I think in R1 I put it pretty well why Pro can't kritic his own debate.

Also, I referred to God as "Uber" conscious because I provided several examples over the required one example of God being conscious to win.
Debate Round No. 2
zeromeansnothing

Pro

Let us look at the Genesis/Eden Story that you use as proof of a 'talking conscious' God. Take a real look at it because it is fascinating and insightful.

Genesis 1King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.............................................(Don't stop here)


What you have here is a 'pre-historical' origin myth.
It is an attempt by people approx 4000 yrs ago to pen this verbal rendition of the start of the world and it is marvellous.
What does it describe?

It describes a formless space, formless by our own definition of same and formless in that it is totally dissimilar to what the people are looking at both then and now. This is the place where life is going to slowly emerge from. This is a place where wind and gravity and movement and geothermal activity and cosmic energy is laden with the potential for this magic to happen.. This is God, the inanimate space ready to facilitate this emergence that is life. God's spirit through movement and change and shadow and..........suddenly creates life. This becomes, a consciousness aware of itself and its origins. Collectively this is matter becoming aware.
You say you are a scientist,Skynet, you explain this to us. You run with the Trinity as a Born Again Christian. I have shown you God the inanimate space, I have explained the 'Holy Spirit' to you and I can explain the 'Jesus teachings' within this context too if you so desire. Again thanks for bothering with this thing at all. I am going on holidays on Sunday for a week. If you get a reply back to me asap I will reply on Sat. If not I may be forfeiting a few rounds so please delay your submissions in that case. I'll be back writing around the 24th Thanks

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by zeromeansnothing 7 months ago
zeromeansnothing
Hi Agingseeker,

Sorry for the delay, in responding to your observation. You make a 'kinda' point. Let me ask you a question. Do you love your house in the same way you love your parents/ friends etc. Do you consider your house/flat an inanimate place?
Posted by Agingseeker 7 months ago
Agingseeker
In-animate is a privative word, it has no positive content. You are not saying anything.

It is like saying that a song is not purple.
Posted by zeromeansnothing 7 months ago
zeromeansnothing
Get a night's sleep and check it out 'in the cold light of day'.
Posted by skipsaweirdo 7 months ago
skipsaweirdo
Most of your post seems nonsensical, but I am stoned a d it is 4 am.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.