Can you show me examples of quotes where I have 'humanized' god? Frankly, I
don't remember anywhere where I have directly attributed any characteristic
to a god - other than saying that any god described by humans seems to be
ridiculously petty or trivialized.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:45 AM, [email protected] <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey Chcuk,
>
> That is easy mate.  You are looking at God in the way that Christians
> describe God and you are applying hunman thoughts feelings and
> emotions to God.  Humanzing God in other words.
>
> On Apr 26, 1:46 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > As to the language; yes I understand that different perspectives have
> > different terminologies. However, there is a distinction between the
> > terminology used and the clarity in which that terminology is
> communicated.
> > If you use the word 'cable' to indicate 14 AWG wire and I use 'cable' to
> > indicate CAT 5 we are using two different sets of terminology but we
> still
> > understand each other because we are able to communicate our individual
> > usages of the term.
> >
> > When you refer to 'humanizing god' I don't have any idea what you are
> > talking about.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 6:56 AM, [email protected] <
> >
> >
> >
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hahahhah.  You understand of course Chuck that amongst the hardest of
> > > skills to obtain when starting to work in a realm that you have never
> > > worked before is the lingo?
> >
> > > I work in IT and my brother is a lighting engineer.  Now lucky for me
> > > I too spent some time working with theatre lights, and so when he and
> > > I talk of his trade I understand a fair bit of what he talks about.
> > > The shoe is not on the other foot, and so when I talk techy, I need to
> > > act as a dictionary for him.  I have a similar thing with my dad,
> > > lucky for the pair of us my dad is highly intelegent and over the
> > > years has managed to pick up some of the techy lingo.
> >
> > > In short I understand what RP is saying, and when you begin to
> > > understand the lingo you'll begin to see that his words come from a
> > > place of ratioanlity.
> >
> > > If you look at your last post, above this we can see from the language
> > > you use that you have rationalised your concept of what God may be, by
> > > humanising God.
> >
> > > This must be a mistake mustn't it?  To pidgeon hole the cretor as some
> > > kind of super human, with human emotionals responses?
> >
> > > Understandable but very rational?
> >
> > > On Apr 22, 4:00 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Sorry if I sound insulting but this just sounds like a bunch of
> mystical
> > > > obfuscation. You're not by chance trying to sell some self-help books
> or
> > > > starting your own cult are you?
> >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:07 AM, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > God is aware in the sense that He is all or all emanates from Him
> and
> > > > > thus automatically He knows everything and doesn't have to be aware
> of
> > > > > things like us mortals. In my opinion , we should not conceive of
> Him
> > > > > to be conscious in the way that we are because our consciousness
> > > > > entails duality or is encompassed within borders. He is conscious
> in
> > > > > us , acts in us but in His separate state He is oblivious of all as
> He
> > > > > alone is and creation being changeable and subject to birth and
> death
> > > > > is just an illusion. In my view that which is not permanent can be
> > > > > called an illusion.
> >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:53 PM, ornamentalmind
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > RP, are you suggesting that god is not conscious at all?...that
> all
> > > > > > god is/does etc. is unconscious?
> >
> > > > > > In either case, are you using one of the more common notions of
> what
> > > > > > conscious means…like being self aware and knowing what one is
> doing?
> >
> > > > > > On Apr 22, 1:45 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >> In my view , creation was not a conscious act of God , but
> rather
> > > the
> > > > > >> universe emanated from the unconscious mind of God. He doesn't
> look
> > > at
> > > > > >> us consciously , doesn't connect results with actions , rather
> > > > > >> everything is happening according to laws which exist in His
> > > > > >> unconscious mind. I don't think that any scripture can really
> lay
> > > down
> > > > > >> definitions of good and bad with His authority , rather thinkers
> > > among
> > > > > >> us can lay down rules which appear logical to them and accepted
> by
> > > us
> > > > > >> as such. I don't believe in an after-life and consider this life
> > > > > >> itself to be a spiritual experience.
> >
> > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Chuck Bowling
> >
> > > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:55 AM, [email protected]
> > > > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> >> Hey Chuck,
> >
> > > > > >> >> I guess it depends on what you belive God is.
> >
> > > > > >> >> If you believe that God is the creator then everything has
> Gods
> > > hand
> > > > > >> >> in it,  if you further belive that God is omipitant then God
> you
> > > are
> > > > > >> >> exactly the way that God has designed you to be.
> >
> > > > > >> > I believe that god/goddess/gods etc. are icons. They are
> concepts
> > > that
> > > > > help
> > > > > >> > people cope with their own frailties and inadequacies. Whether
> it
> > > be
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > blame bad things on, attribute good things to, or to provide
> us a
> > > path
> > > > > to
> > > > > >> > continue our existence beyond the grave.
> >
> > > > > >> >> If you are a gardner, and you splice together two differant
> > > plants to
> > > > > >> >> gain a desird result, the plant does have a life of it's own,
> but
> > > > > >> >> works in the way you have designd it to.  So in a real way
> you
> > > are
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> >> manipulator of that plants life, your hand is in all that it
> > > does, as
> > > > > >> >> you have designed it.
> >
> > > > > >> > Here I would say that the original design was altered. A much
> > > easier
> > > > > task
> > > > > >> > than the original design.
> >
> > > > > >> > As I may have mentioned in a previous post, I readily accept
> the
> > > > > possibility
> > > > > >> > that some entity may have created this universe. And, I think
> that
> > > > > anything
> > > > > >> > with that kind of power would probably appear to be omniscient
> to
> > > us.
> > > > > >> > However, I also believe that it is VERY unlikely that any
> entity
> > > that
> > > > > could
> > > > > >> > have created this reality would bare even the slightest
> > > resemblance to
> > > > > >> > anything we describe as a god.
> >
> > > > > >> > The reasoning for that seems fairly straightforward to me:
> >
> > > > > >> > Most of the gods we have created seem to be pretty damn lame.
> I
> > > mean
> > > > > come
> > > > > >> > on. You want me to kill a goat, sacrifice a virgin, or set
> fire to
> > > a
> > > > > wax
> > > > > >> > stick in your honor. REALLY??? And you're going to send me to
> hell
> > > for
> > > > > >> > eternity because I thought the neighbor's wife was a hot piece
> of
> > > > > tail?
> > > > > >> > Jeesh. As gods go you suck dude.
> >
> > > > > >> > Another thing. You would think that god would find a better
> way of
> > > > > >> > correcting bad behavior than to fry people for an eternity.
> Even
> > > we
> > > > > lowly
> > > > > >> > humans know that setting someone on fire is not the best way
> to
> > > > > convince 'em
> > > > > >> > to mend their ways.
> >
> > > > > >> > Lastly but not finally. If god created this reality then at a
> > > minimum
> > > > > he
> > > > > >> > created one and possibly infinitely more universes. In this
> one
> > > there
> > > > > are an
> > > > > >> > estimated 300 sextillion stars. That's
> > > 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
> > > > > stars
> > > > > >> > if you're looking for precision. You would think that with all
> > > that
> > > > > stuff
> > > > > >> > floating around out there that he/she/it would have better
> things
> > > to
> > > > > do than
> > > > > >> > make sure that little johnnies prayers are answered with a
> brand
> > > new
> > > > > bike on
> > > > > >> > his birthday.
> >
> > > > > >> > My guess is that any entity capable of creating all of this
> would
> > > see
> > > > > us as
> > > > > >> > a minor infestation of germs at best.
> >
> > > > > >> >> On Apr 20, 5:40 pm, Chuck Bowling <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:32 AM, RP Singh <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >> > > Whatever work I do and the effort that I make , is it God
> > > doing
> > > > > it ?
> > > > > >> >> > > No , I do it all , but It is God who gives me the
> strength to
> > > do
> > > > > it.
> > > > > >> >> > > Without His strength even the resolve to do anything
> wouldn't
> > > > > come to
> > > > > >> >> > > my mind.
> >
> > > > > >> >> > Now when you say that God is giving you strength can you be
> > > more
> > > > > >> >> > specific?
> > > > > >> >> > Is he providing your mitochondria with more ADP or is he
> upping
> > > > > your
> > > > > >> >> > serotonin or dopamine levels to give you a greater feeling
> of
> > > > > reward for
> > > > > >> >> > your accomplishments?
> >
> > > > > >> >> > And, if so, can you tell me exactly how he does that? I
> mean,
> > > is he
> > > > > >> >> > causing
> > > > > >> >> > re-uptake inhibition or is he actually producing a greater
> > > volume
> > > > > of
> > > > > >> >> > chemical messengers at the synapse?
> >
> > > > > >> >> > I guess if it's psychological strength it would have to be
> the
> > > > > latter.
> > > > > >> >> > If it
> > > > > >> >> > were greater physical strength then you'd probably be able
> to
> > > lift
> > > > > cars
> > > > > >> >> > off
> > > > > >> >> > the ground.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to