XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
   From: David@block.net   
      
   On 11/5/2015 10:59 AM, mur@. wrote:   
   > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 17:30:29 -0700, David Johnston  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 10/26/2015 11:26 AM, mur@. wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> The whole exercise is pointless   
   >>>   
   >>>       It's obviously beyond your ability to consider in any realistic ways.   
   >>>   
   >>>> until you (or anyone, actually) can demonstrate that any gods exist.   
   >>>   
   >>>       It's obviously beyond your ability to consider in any realistic ways.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Couldn't that be because it's unrealistic?   
   >   
   >      No. As big and old as the universe is it's more realistic to think   
   there are   
   > beings that could be considered gods than that there aren't any anywhere,   
   > whether there are any associated with this planet or not.   
   >   
   >> I mean you certainly can't   
   >> articulate how being a "god" works, so can you consider it in any   
   >> realistic ways?   
   >   
   > Attempt to think realistically basics list:   
   >   
   > 1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.   
      
   Why?   
      
   >   
   > 2. If there is a creator associated with this planet, all   
   > who refer to him refer to the same being regardless of what   
   > they call him or what they think about him.   
      
   So when I talk about the giant cow that licked the Earth out of a big   
   block of salt in Norse mythology, I am talking about a technologically   
   advanced alien?  Rather than just something imaginary that someone made   
   up for a story?   
      
      
   >   
   > 3. Nothing that happens is supernatural, so anything gods do   
   > would be natural for them.   
      
   What is the difference between "natural for them" and "natural for us"?   
      
   >   
   > 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he   
   > could not provide proof of his existence because doing   
   > so would change things too much.   
      
   So then God is a deceiver?   
      
   >   
   > 5. Since the terms omnipotent and omniscient appear to   
   > make themselves impossible, it's unrealistic to try assigning   
   > those particular characteristics to God if he exists.   
      
   I'm not really asking what God isn't.  I'm asking what you think God is.   
      
   --Irrelevant digressions that have nothing to do with God deleted.   
      
   > 13. If gods exist they would necessarily have to be technologically   
   > advanced far beyond we humans on Earth, to the point that they became   
   > gods.   
      
   What is the difference between a technologically advanced alien that   
   isn't a god and a technologically advanced alien that is a god?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)