Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Is God the Wholly Other?

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:39:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Theists on one hand say, that, God is the wholly other. Yet, atheists claim there is no need for such a god. Even though I would agree with the atheistic viewpoint, in response to theism, I would have to admit, the concept of god is not completely unnecessary. If we see God as being nature itself, not apart from it, and define God as that which we know of our physical Universe, why does there remain a contention among the concept of god and the atheistic viewpoint? I see it rather as a game of semantics, unless the atheist does not see the Universe as a far more complete organism but rather as a colossal machine with independent parts.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:43:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:39:35 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Theists on one hand say, that, God is the wholly other. Yet, atheists claim there is no need for such a god. Even though I would agree with the atheistic viewpoint, in response to theism, I would have to admit, the concept of god is not completely unnecessary. If we see God as being nature itself, not apart from it, and define God as that which we know of our physical Universe, why does there remain a contention among the concept of god and the atheistic viewpoint? I see it rather as a game of semantics, unless the atheist does not see the Universe as a far more complete organism but rather as a colossal machine with independent parts.

I see what you are saying. And yes it is always a semantic game. Perhaps the debate should be over duality.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Go and research Pantheism. Deism. Pandeism. Ignosticism. Apatheism.

Then come back. I assure you, it'll help broaden your views on the ridiculousness of how we attempt to "know God", even as atheists do.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 12:20:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Go and research Pantheism. Deism. Pandeism. Ignosticism. Apatheism.

Then come back. I assure you, it'll help broaden your views on the ridiculousness of how we attempt to "know God", even as atheists do.

The problem is that Atheists have this love affair with trying to discredit Christianity. Even when they argue against Theists in general, nine times out of ten the Christian God is the one they have in mind for trying to discredit.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 12:20:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:39:35 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Theists on one hand say, that, God is the wholly other. Yet, atheists claim there is no need for such a god. Even though I would agree with the atheistic viewpoint, in response to theism, I would have to admit, the concept of god is not completely unnecessary. If we see God as being nature itself, not apart from it, and define God as that which we know of our physical Universe, why does there remain a contention among the concept of god and the atheistic viewpoint? I see it rather as a game of semantics, unless the atheist does not see the Universe as a far more complete organism but rather as a colossal machine with independent parts.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "wholly other." I've never seen that term used.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 12:26:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:20:08 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Go and research Pantheism. Deism. Pandeism. Ignosticism. Apatheism.

Then come back. I assure you, it'll help broaden your views on the ridiculousness of how we attempt to "know God", even as atheists do.

The problem is that Atheists have this love affair with trying to discredit Christianity. Even when they argue against Theists in general, nine times out of ten the Christian God is the one they have in mind for trying to discredit.

Because nine out of ten times it's a Christian they're arguing with. I get what you mean, but like you for example. You're either Christian or you're not.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:18:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Go and research Pantheism. Deism. Pandeism. Ignosticism. Apatheism.

Then come back. I assure you, it'll help broaden your views on the ridiculousness of how we attempt to "know God", even as atheists do.

If you were to read the post a tad bit more closely, you would realize the argument is not in support of theism or atheism but rather pantheism.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:40:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Then what are you doing in the Religion forum?

Though, granted I think this forum is lacking originality. The Theist/Atheist threads are shallow, stale, and old. I expect there to be far more interesting threads in the religion forum on a site of this intellectual capacity.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:47:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:20:34 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by the "wholly other." I've never seen that term used.

It's a theological term used by the famous theologian Rudolf Otto. It denotes, that, God is absolute in the sense of needing nothing else to be made complete, not even the Universe or Creation, itself.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 1:03:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 12:26:38 PM, M.Torres wrote:
At 4/23/2012 12:20:08 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Go and research Pantheism. Deism. Pandeism. Ignosticism. Apatheism.

Then come back. I assure you, it'll help broaden your views on the ridiculousness of how we attempt to "know God", even as atheists do.

The problem is that Atheists have this love affair with trying to discredit Christianity. Even when they argue against Theists in general, nine times out of ten the Christian God is the one they have in mind for trying to discredit.

Because nine out of ten times it's a Christian they're arguing with. I get what you mean, but like you for example. You're either Christian or you're not.

I suppose that could be true, but I don't think there's any way to really be sure. Unless you mean that Christians are the Theists that are most outspoken about their beliefs.

But Theism comes in many forms, from envangelical religions like Christianity, Islam, or Mormonism, to Deists who believe in a God who remains detached from human affairs, to pantheists, to polytheists, etc.

It really shouldn't be assume that the person you're talking to is a Christian.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 1:04:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:47:56 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 4/23/2012 12:20:34 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by the "wholly other." I've never seen that term used.

It's a theological term used by the famous theologian Rudolf Otto. It denotes, that, God is absolute in the sense of needing nothing else to be made complete, not even the Universe or Creation, itself.

Ah, okay. I've actually never read anything by Rudolf Otto. This seems to be a response to the common atheist objection that God can't be perfect, otherwise He wouldn't have the "need" to be loved, or He wouldn't have been lonely so He'd have no reason to create humans.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 10:17:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 1:04:14 AM, KeytarHero wrote:
Ah, okay. I've actually never read anything by Rudolf Otto. This seems to be a response to the common atheist objection that God can't be perfect, otherwise He wouldn't have the "need" to be loved, or He wouldn't have been lonely so He'd have no reason to create humans.

To me, God doesn't need the Universe; God is the Universe. In that sense, God has need of nothing.

Yet, the objection most people have to pantheism is the same obstacle Spinoza faced; namely, if God is one, in the sense, that, nothing exists other than God, then, relationships are made impossible. For, in order to form a relationship, there must be more than one. This is a problem I still find rather difficult, to say the least. Yet, in considering physics, we are faced with the same dilemma, the particle-wave theory of atomic energy. Yet, also, on the one hand, Einstein's assertion, that, there are no tears in the fabric of space, yet space and time are relative.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 2:01:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:40:09 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 12:12:07 PM, M.Torres wrote:
Seriously. I'm sick of all the Theist/Atheist threads lately.

Then what are you doing in the Religion forum?

Though, granted I think this forum is lacking originality. The Theist/Atheist threads are shallow, stale, and old. I expect there to be far more interesting threads in the religion forum on a site of this intellectual capacity.

The religion forum would be far more interesting if the threads were deeper, I agree. However, can one really expect the ignorant to stay out of the discussion while people who have studied the philosophy and science for and against religion lead the discussion? Furthermore, I think there is a profound lack of atheists, or any other form of non-theism for that matter, who have a strong philosophical background. That is not to say that there are no legitimate arguments for those positions, but very few members of this site, if any at all, advocate them. Instead the religious forum is a hotbed for logical fallacies and ad hominem assaults.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.