Posts: 3,520
Threads: 56
Likes Received: 5,044 in 2,218 posts
Likes Given: 2,785
Joined: Oct 2018
Reputation:
28
04052024, 12:38 AM
(This post was last modified: 04052024, 12:40 AM by epronovost.)
Why Atheism?
(04042024, 08:33 PM)SteveII Wrote: So your belief that ancient Israel and Christians believed in a humanoid God and the transcendent conception is a "post biblical innovations derived from grecoroman philosophy" is flat out wrong. You are welcome to provide references we can explore.
These are the two most famous book on the subject. It's the academic consensus amongst the scholars of the Bible and theologians that early Christians and Jews believed in a humanoid God and that god as a transcendent being is largely a post biblical innovation influenced by GrecoRoman philosophy; the fact you can see this slow transformation in the books of the OT from the oldest to the newest one is evidence of this influence amongst other things.
https://www.amazon.ca/GodAnatomyFrance...db653131c9
https://www.baylorpress.com/9781481311687/godsbody/
Posts: 2,668
Threads: 34
Likes Received: 3,531 in 1,449 posts
Likes Given: 2,927
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation:
30
04052024, 04:16 AM
Why Atheism?
(04042024, 10:19 PM)SteveII Wrote: (04042024, 09:59 PM)Paleophyte Wrote: Emphasis mine. Your own select verses clearly describe a male deity that "sits", "stoops", and has "hands". That's about as anthropomorphic as you're going to get.
I agree. And since anthropomorphic means not actually having those attributes, I'm fine with that.
So what you just said is the opposite of true. Anthropomorphic means having human form or attributes. Sitting, stooping, hands. They're all human.
Quote:These verses you highlight point out nicely my point. If one creates the universe, does one really have to "stoop down" to look at it? The male pronoun (as is 'father')is the language we use to relate to another person. Why in the world would anyone think of God as a male or an actual paternal progenitor? That does not even make sense.
Makes perfect sense once you realize that those verses were the campfire stories of bronze age goat herders who believed in a very human deity.
Quote:It is imagery and relational language: anthropomorphic language.
A book full of imagery and allegory. Got it. Still needs more dragons.
Posts: 23,634
Threads: 508
Likes Received: 29,580 in 14,129 posts
Likes Given: 6,515
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation:
41
04052024, 04:35 AM
Why Atheism?
(04052024, 12:05 AM)brewerb Wrote: (04042024, 11:41 PM)Minimalist Wrote: Of course he will..... ignorant religious shitheads always think their god is real and all the others are phony.
We know that they are all phony!
Better watch out, Steve will pray to his old testament vengeful god, then we'll all be in trouble.
Quetzlcoatl will protect me!
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Posts: 10,396
Threads: 33
Likes Received: 5,818 in 3,862 posts
Likes Given: 7,970
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
24
04052024, 05:52 AM
Why Atheism?
(04042024, 10:34 PM)airportkid Wrote: (04022024, 05:15 PM)Cavebear Wrote: I am sometimes amused that friends sometimes think that there are greater and lesser amounts of infinity.
There are. The infinity of numbers between zero and 1 is a smaller infinity than the infinite set of numbers between zero and 2. The number of discrete infinite sets is itself infinite.
Infinite is not a straightforward mathematical concept, closer to cousin to imaginary numbers (square root of 1). Or that 0! = 1. Or reckoning that the word "before" is inappropriate to describing the beginning of the universe.
The we have a faculty of mind able to make sense of these counterintuitive notions is remarkable.
I agree with some of what you said. But defining infinity using "zero to 1" is complicated by zero. Since zero means "nothing", infinity doesn't quite apply to the concept. This is beyond my math level (I'm better at concepts than long lines of formulas), but it seems to me that you probably can't logically have infinity and nothing at the same time. If that's possible, please send me a link and I'll try to learn something new.
So zero to 1 seems tricky but I'll say there is as much "infinity" between 1 and 2 as there is between 1 and 1,000 or even 1 to Googleplex, etc... That is the whole concept of "infinity" as best I understand it. Infinity is uncountable.
I think I get the concept of "infinity". I know most people think of it as a "really large number", like stars in the inverse or grains of sand. I know better than that. I think of infinity as an idea that is outside of my practical life.
BTW. I liked your suggestions of infinity as related to imaginary numbers. "i", for example. And I assume you mean 0! as "zero factorial"? I sure never contemplated "zero factorial". So I did a search. I found some sites that went into long math details. But maybe the most useful was a math discussion forum where one person said "My Algebra II teacher admits that he doesn't know [why 0!=1]. I have also asked the two physics teachers. Everyone tells me 'because it does'." Another poster said it was because "zero" messes up too many formulas. LOL!
See, I learn something new every day.
Never argue with people who type fast and have too much time on their hands...
Posts: 3,939
Threads: 27
Likes Received: 5,746 in 2,263 posts
Likes Given: 4,638
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation:
34
04052024, 06:06 AM
Why Atheism?
(04052024, 05:52 AM)Cavebear Wrote: (04042024, 10:34 PM)airportkid Wrote: There are. The infinity of numbers between zero and 1 is a smaller infinity than the infinite set of numbers between zero and 2. The number of discrete infinite sets is itself infinite.
Infinite is not a straightforward mathematical concept, closer to cousin to imaginary numbers (square root of 1). Or that 0! = 1. Or reckoning that the word "before" is inappropriate to describing the beginning of the universe.
The we have a faculty of mind able to make sense of these counterintuitive notions is remarkable.
I agree with some of what you said. But defining infinity using "zero to 1" is complicated by zero. Since zero means "nothing", infinity doesn't quite apply to the concept. This is beyond my math level (I'm better at concepts than long lines of formulas), but it seems to me that you probably can't logically have infinity and nothing at the same time. If that's possible, please send me a link and I'll try to learn something new.
So zero to 1 seems tricky but I'll say there is as much "infinity" between 1 and 2 as there is between 1 and 1,000 or even 1 to Googleplex, etc... That is the whole concept of "infinity" as best I understand it. Infinity is uncountable.
I think I get the concept of "infinity". I know most people think of it as a "really large number", like stars in the inverse or grains of sand. I know better than that. I think of infinity as an idea that is outside of my practical life.
BTW. I liked your suggestions of infinity as related to imaginary numbers. "i", for example. And I assume you mean 0! as "zero factorial"? I sure never contemplated "zero factorial". So I did a search. I found some sites that went into long math details. But maybe the most useful was a math discussion forum where one person said "My Algebra II teacher admits that he doesn't know [why 0!=1]. I have also asked the two physics teachers. Everyone tells me 'because it does'." Another poster said it was because "zero" messes up too many formulas. LOL!
See, I learn something new every day.
Zero is not nothing in this context, it is a number. It is simply the lower limit of a range of numbers.
“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.
Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.”
― Napoleon Bonaparte
Posts: 10,396
Threads: 33
Likes Received: 5,818 in 3,862 posts
Likes Given: 7,970
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
24
04052024, 07:30 AM
Why Atheism?
(04052024, 06:06 AM)Chas Wrote: (04052024, 05:52 AM)Cavebear Wrote: I agree with some of what you said. But defining infinity using "zero to 1" is complicated by zero. Since zero means "nothing", infinity doesn't quite apply to the concept. This is beyond my math level (I'm better at concepts than long lines of formulas), but it seems to me that you probably can't logically have infinity and nothing at the same time. If that's possible, please send me a link and I'll try to learn something new.
So zero to 1 seems tricky but I'll say there is as much "infinity" between 1 and 2 as there is between 1 and 1,000 or even 1 to Googleplex, etc... That is the whole concept of "infinity" as best I understand it. Infinity is uncountable.
I think I get the concept of "infinity". I know most people think of it as a "really large number", like stars in the inverse or grains of sand. I know better than that. I think of infinity as an idea that is outside of my practical life.
BTW. I liked your suggestions of infinity as related to imaginary numbers. "i", for example. And I assume you mean 0! as "zero factorial"? I sure never contemplated "zero factorial". So I did a search. I found some sites that went into long math details. But maybe the most useful was a math discussion forum where one person said "My Algebra II teacher admits that he doesn't know [why 0!=1]. I have also asked the two physics teachers. Everyone tells me 'because it does'." Another poster said it was because "zero" messes up too many formulas. LOL!
See, I learn something new every day.
Zero is not nothing in this context, it is a number. It is simply the lower limit of a range of numbers.
Well, I disagree in concept, friendly. Yes, zero is a numeral on our ordinate scale, thanks to the Asian Indians. But it doesn't have an actual "value". Approaching zero from 1 seems like infinity in reverse. Numbers are quantities. Zero is not a quantity. So zero really means "nothing" in quantity. It isn't "simply the lower limit of a range of numbers"; it is the lack of number. You can have "one". You can have less than one. But I don't think you can have zero as a "quantity".
I never thought I would be discussing "nothing" as a quantity, but there I go... The concept of zero is very interesting.
Never argue with people who type fast and have too much time on their hands...
Posts: 3,939
Threads: 27
Likes Received: 5,746 in 2,263 posts
Likes Given: 4,638
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation:
34
04052024, 01:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 04052024, 01:45 PM by Chas.)
Why Atheism?
(04052024, 07:30 AM)Cavebear Wrote: (04052024, 06:06 AM)Chas Wrote: Zero is not nothing in this context, it is a number. It is simply the lower limit of a range of numbers.
Well, I disagree in concept, friendly. Yes, zero is a numeral on our ordinate scale, thanks to the Asian Indians. But it doesn't have an actual "value". Approaching zero from 1 seems like infinity in reverse. Numbers are quantities. Zero is not a quantity. So zero really means "nothing" in quantity. It isn't "simply the lower limit of a range of numbers"; it is the lack of number. You can have "one". You can have less than one. But I don't think you can have zero as a "quantity".
I never thought I would be discussing "nothing" as a quantity, but there I go... The concept of zero is very interesting.
You are conflating ordinality and cardinality.
Cardinality is quantity, so in simplest terms, the cardinality of zero is 'nothing'.
The ordinality of zero is the integer between 1 and 1, for example.
“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.
Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.”
― Napoleon Bonaparte
Posts: 10,396
Threads: 33
Likes Received: 5,818 in 3,862 posts
Likes Given: 7,970
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
24
04052024, 03:52 PM
Why Atheism?
(04052024, 01:44 PM)Chas Wrote: (04052024, 07:30 AM)Cavebear Wrote: Well, I disagree in concept, friendly. Yes, zero is a numeral on our ordinate scale, thanks to the Asian Indians. But it doesn't have an actual "value". Approaching zero from 1 seems like infinity in reverse. Numbers are quantities. Zero is not a quantity. So zero really means "nothing" in quantity. It isn't "simply the lower limit of a range of numbers"; it is the lack of number. You can have "one". You can have less than one. But I don't think you can have zero as a "quantity".
I never thought I would be discussing "nothing" as a quantity, but there I go... The concept of zero is very interesting.
You are conflating ordinality and cardinality.
Cardinality is quantity, so in simplest terms, the cardinality of zero is 'nothing'.
The ordinality of zero is the integer between 1 and 1, for example.
Well, actually "nothing" (a null value) as a "number" is a concept developed by the Asian Indians. From what I've read at various sites, no one had created a symbol for "nothing" before them. I can't find why the symbol for "nothing" was a circle. I might guess it represented an "empty hole" but that is sheer speculation. It would be interesting to know the origin of the symbol...
And where would we be without it? We would have to refer to some extremely wealthy people as multiples of "$999,999,999 plus $1". Very awkward at best. LOL!
Well, it beats Roman numerals. Just out of curiousity, is there even a Roman numeral representing "billion"?
Never argue with people who type fast and have too much time on their hands...
