Supreme Being v Superior Being

[litespeed]

I watched 1010 [A 2001 Space Odysy sequel]. It is as good a place to start as any concerning the rather odd IMHO religion of Aithiesm. Specifically, I have never heard any Athiest even discuss the possibility the Old Testament mght include real 'supernatural' events.

 

Over the years I have spotted more then a few possibilities. The one in common use is Space Ship Ezekiel. I swear the observer describes nothing more supernatural then a helicopter type flying device.

 

Of greater theological interest, however, is Moses's "Tent of the Meeting' where, unless my theological memory fails me, Moses met on many occasions with Yawe (sp), who seemed to simply (beem me down Scotty) showed up with regularity.

 

In fact, the physical requirement to build this tent where very specific in all sorts of ways that would seem unnecessary for the Supreme Being. What supreme being needs a conference room of such speceficity? When I get some time and motivation, I will read some of these passages again.

 

This is all just for jollies. But I really really considered a topic titled "Why rational athiests should be afraid". After all, a Superior Being might have some sort of anthropological experiment ongoing that would, at its conclusion, dispose of experimental residue in any number of ways.

 

We may, of course, hope these Beings have a more sense of Irony and a sense of humor then the Athiets who posted the grumpy and insulting manifesto in Washington State Capital. But there we go again, using that theological term hope yet one more time.

 

Chuckle.

[Moontanman]

I watched 1010 [A 2001 Space Odysy sequel]. It is as good a place to start as any concerning the rather odd IMHO religion of Aithiesm. Specifically, I have never heard any Athiest even discuss the possibility the Old Testament mght include real 'supernatural' events.

 

Atheism is not a religion dude, the reason you haven't heard this is because if you don't believe in the supernatural it would follow that any supposed supernatural events didn't ever happen!

 

Over the years I have spotted more then a few possibilities. The one in common use is Space Ship Ezekiel. I swear the observer describes nothing more supernatural then a helicopter type flying device.

 

Of greater theological interest, however, is Moses's "Tent of the Meeting' where, unless my theological memory fails me, Moses met on many occasions with Yawe (sp), who seemed to simply (beem me down Scotty) showed up with regularity.

 

In fact, the physical requirement to build this tent where very specific in all sorts of ways that would seem unnecessary for the Supreme Being. What supreme being needs a conference room of such speceficity? When I get some time and motivation, I will read some of these passages again.

 

Possibly Dreams and BS to impress the faithful are not possiblities to you?

 

This is all just for jollies. But I really really considered a topic titled "Why rational athiests should be afraid". After all, a Superior Being might have some sort of anthropological experiment ongoing that would, at its conclusion, dispose of experimental residue in any number of ways.

 

We may, of course, hope these Beings have a more sense of Irony and a sense of humor then the Athiets who posted the grumpy and insulting manifesto in Washington State Capital. But there we go again, using that theological term hope yet one more time.

 

Chuckle.

 

You are assuming that there is a supernatural being, an atheist would not make this flawed assumption. so he doesn't have any worries about what a supernatural being is doing or not doing, ever. But if there are supernatural beings in control and this is some sort of experiment maybe being smart enough not to taken in my religion and the belief in things that have no evidence to back them us is what they are looking for and everyone else is just experimental residue....

[HydrogenBond]

One difference between superior being and supreme being is the relative distance between average Joe and that particular definition of being. Superior being will always stay within the range of what we know, but has better stuff. Before computers, the superior being would not have computers either. He is superior but used better analog devices.

 

Supreme being is not limited to what we already know. Even before we knew about computers the supreme being could already have computers, even if nobody has thought of this yet. This more distant being concept, will cause some thinkers of the day, to depart away from what we know and try to extrapolate beyond the status quo of the superior being. Some will begin to conceptualize the concept of computers. This is sci-fi until the state of the art catches up. Then this sci-fi becomes part of the superior being, except he has even better stuff. This helps to extend the state of the art but may not add new art. That needs the more expansion supreme being concept to set the potential of what may be, but does bot exist in essence, yet. Once this essence is define, the superior being will be able to have this too, but even better.

[litespeed]

Moon - You wrote: ".... the reason you haven't heard [athiesm is not a religion]... is because if you don't believe in the supernatural it would follow that any supposed supernatural events didn't ever happen!"

 

First I HAVE heard it is not a religion, but am unconvinced. In deed, it has a crede. Further, your explanation why you believe I haven't heard this is fatally flawed by the simple fact I have heard it.

 

On the other hand, if your fijnal clause is intended to support aithiesm then iit has nothing to do with whether or not I have heard aithiesm is or is not a religion. Accordingly, you need to clarify you thinking on the matter so that further posts make at least some sort of logical sense..

[litespeed]

H2Bond

 

Every monothiestic religion I have heard of flattly states, in no uncertain terms, the Supreme Being is unknowable. This in no way conflicts with any known laws of the Natural World. Supreme being who intervene in the Natural world do not actually contradict this poin eithert

 

However, the 'reported' instnaces of intervention permit us to evaluate the nature of such a being. For instance, Yawe could have given Pharo a very bad case of jock itch for the purpose of 'let my people go'. Instead, he visited horid plaques and death upon Pharos subjects. Since Pharo claimed to be a God, this could be one of the very earliest recorded examples of professional courtisy.

[litespeed]

JUDGEMENT DAY?

 

Whether Yawe of the Old Testament is the Supreme Being, or just a Superior Being, he IS one narcisistic, blood thursty mean son-of-a-*****. Accordingly, aitheist who do not believe in a final judgement must believe neither such being was actually in evidence in the natural world.

 

However, given the long list of Superior beings that have been mistaken for supreme beings over the eons, then athihests who do not believe in a final judgement are, in fact, making a leap of illogical faith. IMHO

[litespeed]

BUT WHAT DO I BELIEVE?

 

Having been raised in the Christian Tradiion I simply involk "The Mustard Seed Exemption" One place or another in the New Testament faith in Salvation Through Christ requires no more then such a mustard seed's worth of faith.

 

I don't even know if black holes are hollow, but am willing to entertain for more then a mustard seed's worth of doubt/belief either way. So, in the end, I simply throw myself on the mercy, or lack there of, of the final court, should one be in evidence. An entire sack of mustard seeds on my belt having been prudently harvested along the way.

[litespeed]

Incidentally, I believe the Aithiest Crede that there are no gods, devels or angels is every bit the equivalent to the various credes that make the opposite assertions; whther these creatures are supernatural in nature, or only mistaken as such.

[litespeed]

Further, it seems manifest to me the Aithest Crede, when displayed next to a manger chrece, reveals itself as a moreally inferior sentiment on iits face. The creche being the hope and belief in the possibility of redemption for all humans. The Athiest Crede ends with overtly hateful sentiments that,while appropriate, perhaps, when compared to the Papal Bulls regarding Crusades, is entirely inappropriate in this context.

[pamela]

Litespeed,

exactly what are you saying in these posts? It is a little difficult to follow your train of thought

Atheism is NOT a religion. It is the affirmation of the non existance of gods, or the rejection of theism.{ paraphrased Wiki}.An individual writing a creed, does not make it a religion.It is simply a statement of belief; belief does NOT equal faith.

I suggest you research Atheism to get a better understanding, a good place to start is Wikipedia.

[litespeed]

Pam

 

I like Wikipedea and it may in fact be a good place to start. But first, I simply state I am not convinced athiesm is not a religion. However, I am making fun of them. Specifically for placing a cranky, illnatured Natural World manifesto in close proximity to a non-cranky manifesto of Christmas cheer.

 

In addition, Athiests seem willfully to resist the possibility 'Supermatural' phenomena they openly despise might in fact be manifestations of the natural world itself. That seems a bit boneheaded to me, at least, and at worst constituestes a postentially dangerous poke in they eye of a Natural Phenomena that seems dangerously deranged. Chucke....

[modest]

First I HAVE heard it is not a religion, but am unconvinced. In deed, it has a crede. Further, your explanation why you believe I haven't heard this is fatally flawed by the simple fact I have heard it.

 

The Hypography thread: 14783, discusses the topic of an atheist’s creed. It is false that all atheists have a creed. It is false that having a creed makes something a religion. It is false that atheism is a religion. In the way non-religious means not religious, a-theism means without theism. You appear to be misunderstanding English words.

 

Incidentally, I believe the Aithiest Crede that there are no gods, devels or angels is every bit the equivalent to the various credes that make the opposite assertions

 

Look up “weak atheist” and “agnostic”. Consider if such a person would have a creed saying there are no gods, devils, or angels.

 

Further, it seems manifest to me the Aithest Crede, when displayed next to a manger chrece, reveals itself as a moreally inferior sentiment on iits face. The creche being the hope and belief in the possibility of redemption for all humans. The Athiest Crede ends with overtly hateful sentiments that,while appropriate, perhaps, when compared to the Papal Bulls regarding Crusades, is entirely inappropriate in this context.

 

Which, of the thousands of personal atheist’s creeds are you talking about? What on earth is a “manger chrece”? Is it a “manger creed”. If so, what is that? Is it “ranger creed”? If so, why is it more or less morally inferior? How can you support such a claim?

 

But first, I simply state I am not convinced athiesm is not a religion. However, I am making fun of them.

 

You are making fun of a group of people by saying their beliefs are morally inferior. This is not necessary as there are easy ways to express your beliefs and get your ideas across without degrading a group of people. Rude and offensive behavior is not tolerated by the staff as it is against the rules.

 

In addition, Athiests seem willfully to resist the possibility 'Supermatural' phenomena they openly despise might in fact be manifestations of the natural world itself. That seems a bit boneheaded to me, at least, and at worst constituestes a postentially dangerous poke in they eye of a Natural Phenomena that seems dangerously deranged. Chucke....

 

I have heard atheists (of various beliefs) attribute events to natural causes that theists (of various beliefs) have attributed to supernatural causes. I have found this common. The star of Bethlehem has been attributed to a comet. The plagues of Egypt have been attributed to the eruption of the Santorini island volcano. What you say not only offensive, it's completely untrue.

 

~modest

[litespeed]

Modest

 

I should have limited my discussion to the creed mischeviously placed near the christmas manger scene in Washington State., and to that branch of athiesm that subscribes to it. My purpose was to simply make fun of these seemignly Grincy people.

 

I am sure you are better versed in the larger matters of athiesm etc. then am I. However, this is the season when most if not all the major Christian religions set aside their profound diferences and celebrate a symbol of hope and joyfulness most of them share.

 

In addition, such religious scenes have been national custom, along with vaious mid winter pagan rituals, and whimsical secular acretions such as Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer. And lets not even discuss at length the self evident commercial implicatins with all their glittery bows and to/from cards.

 

I further remind readers all of this is associated with nothing more then a Bank Holiday. I just wish these characters would go and fart in someone elses refridgerator. Perhaps also post the creed in city hall in New Jersey during Ramadan. Christmas catalogues seem to inaugurate the Christmas Season in September, just in time for such a symultaneous endeavour. Yeah. Like THAT will ever happen.

[pamela]

Litespeed,

it is not nice to poke fun at people Often times that is a reflection of our own insecurites or wanting to elevate ourselves to some false importance over others. You certainly cannot toss all Christians into a bin and say they think alike or have the same ideologies: so why do it with atheists?

We are all different and have varying ideas-that makes for an exciting planet. Enjoy the differences and hold the criticism:)

[Turtle]

...We may, of course, hope these Beings have a more sense of Irony and a sense of humor then the Athiets who posted the grumpy and insulting manifesto in Washington State Capital. But there we go again, using that theological term hope yet one more time.

 

Chuckle.

 

Presumes facts not in evidence. :confused: I'm all for the atheist sign in my state capital building. Let the law reign Supreme and Superior.

 

Dateline Washington State: The atheist sign was stolen! :naughty: My, my, my, my, my! Who would do a thing like that?

 

PS I'm all for the satire and lampoonery of as wide a swath as possible. I see your Chuckle & raise you a Gut-bust. :phones:

[litespeed]

pamela - You wrote: " it is not nice to poke fun at people Often times that is a reflection of our own insecurites or wanting to elevate ourselves to some false importance over others."

 

First, I am nothing if not insecure, but elevate myself to achieve "importance"? I submit my own writings in various cosmologic forums where I know very little about the topic, and understand NOTHING of the mathematics involved. My sole purpose there is to reveal my limited knowledge for the purpose of finding people who could correct, or elaborate on my 'theories'.

 

In addition, I have already been taken to task for writing about athiests in general, and now limit myself in general to discussing the aithiests who placed their manifesto in Washington State. They are bores, and seem determine to violate all the decorum you suggest I have violated. Accordingly, they are fair game!

[litespeed]

Tuttle - You wrote: "I see your Chuckle & raise you a Gut-bust."

 

Have you heard of the dislexic athiest who ponderer if there really is a dog?