Proof that Jesus accepts Atheists

[RayBornert]

claim your right to construct godel G statements?

let your answer be public scientific evidence of your godel preference.

now consider the following 2 statements:

a) "love your god"
b) "love your neighbor"

(jesus - circa 30 a.d.)

now refer to these statements as G

now let the variable god, within G, be equal to G.

now let us refer to those that construct this G statement as A.

**********
if my ethics incorporate statement b) above then i cannot indict any member of A without violating the righteousness of my own ethics.

it seems reasonable to assume that jesus embraced his own words and as such i assert that he would not ever indict any member of A. it also seems reasonable to assert that the god that jesus was representing would behave the same way.

ray

[Magic_Man]

I doubt that Jesus would accept a godel statement as an acceptable definition of God.

[BobOjedaFan]

[ QUOTE ]
claim your right to construct godel G statements?

let your answer be public scientific evidence of your godel preference.

now consider the following 2 statements:

a) "love your god"
b) "love your neighbor"

(jesus - circa 30 a.d.)

now refer to these statements as G

now let the variable god, within G, be equal to G.

now let us refer to those that construct this G statement as A.

**********
if my ethics incorporate statement b) above then i cannot indict any member of A without violating the righteousness of my own ethics.

it seems reasonable to assume that jesus embraced his own words and as such i assert that he would not ever indict any member of A. it also seems reasonable to assert that the god that jesus was representing would behave the same way.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

All Atheists know this already. You are trying to prove this to Christians then it won't work. Heres Why....

Premise 1 - There is no proof anything in the Bible is True
Premise 2 - To believe in something without basis is irrational


Therefor Christians are irrational. Good luck using rational arguments to prove something to them.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt that Jesus would accept a godel statement as an acceptable definition of God.

[/ QUOTE ]

this path leads to a debate of how to apply statement b) (i.e. the golden rule)

if i allow you to define your god
if you allow me to define my god

i think we're both applying statement b) correctly.

if i do not allow you to define your god
if you do not allow me to define my god

it would seem that we've incorrectly applied statement b) because we've not honored the preferences of the other.

ray

[PLOlover]

It says right in the gospels that Jesus didn't preach to foreigners although on occasion he made an exception.

Story of woman traveller or something they meet on the road and Jesus and gang agree she is a dog and unworthy but she is nice or something so Jesus makes an exception and blesses her or something.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
It says right in the gospels that Jesus didn't preach to foreigners although on occasion he made an exception.

Story of woman traveller or something they meet on the road and Jesus and gang agree she is a dog and unworthy but she is nice or something so Jesus makes an exception and blesses her or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes there are several references that clearly state that jesus was on a mission to deliver information intended for the jews; but occasionaly he took a gentile detour. back then gentiles represented the unchosen much the same way that unbelievers today represent the unchosen; in the first case it was physical genetics; in the modern case it's mental genetics.

i think you're referring to this account:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/p...;version=kjv#25 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Mar&chapter=7&verse=25&version=kjv#2 5)

there are others as well:
the roman centurion
the samaritan woman at the well
the gadarene
the maimed roman soldier at jesus' arrest

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
claim your right to construct godel G statements?

let your answer be public scientific evidence of your godel preference.

now consider the following 2 statements:

a) "love your god"
b) "love your neighbor"

(jesus - circa 30 a.d.)

now refer to these statements as G

now let the variable god, within G, be equal to G.

now let us refer to those that construct this G statement as A.

**********
if my ethics incorporate statement b) above then i cannot indict any member of A without violating the righteousness of my own ethics.

it seems reasonable to assume that jesus embraced his own words and as such i assert that he would not ever indict any member of A. it also seems reasonable to assert that the god that jesus was representing would behave the same way.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
All Atheists know this already.

[/ QUOTE ]

change that "all" to "some" and i can agree with you.

[ QUOTE ]
You are trying to prove this to Christians then it won't work.

[/ QUOTE ]
add the word "some" in front "christians" and i can agree with you.

[ QUOTE ]
Heres Why....
Premise 1 - There is no proof anything in the Bible is True
Premise 2 - To believe in something without basis is irrational
Therefore Christians are irrational.

[/ QUOTE ]
your axioms are flawed here, but i still understand what you want to communicate.

[ QUOTE ]
Good luck using rational arguments to prove something to them.

[/ QUOTE ]
an actual proof is a little stronger than an argument.

i certainly understand that christians are willing to embrace a set of ideas that can be inconsistent and paradoxical. have mercy on them; some of them have some severe doom hooks installed in their minds.

ray

[MaxWeiss]

Could you pretent I'm a seven year old and explain the construct of your argument in a way I understand?

I don't know what a Godel statement is. I do have "Godel, Escher, Bach" sitting on my bookshelf, but it's just gathering dust at the moment.

[runner4life7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I doubt that Jesus would accept a godel statement as an acceptable definition of God.

[/ QUOTE ]

this path leads to a debate of how to apply statement b) (i.e. the golden rule)

if i allow you to define your god
if you allow me to define my god

i think we're both applying statement b) correctly.

if i do not allow you to define your god
if you do not allow me to define my god

it would seem that we've incorrectly applied statement b) because we've not honored the preferences of the other.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

you might be the dumbest person I know. Love thy neighbor does not mean let him pick his own god, it means help him when he needs help, and if you believe jesus is the way to heaven then you should care so much about his welfare as to spread his word. What kind of drugs are you on when you write this crap?

[bocablkr]

Do you think an atheist would care?

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you pretent I'm a seven year old and explain the construct of your argument in a way I understand?

I don't know what a Godel statement is. I do have "Godel, Escher, Bach" sitting on my bookshelf, but it's just gathering dust at the moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

here is the wiki reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorem

a godel G statement involves a recursive self-reference which is what is constructed in the OP.

godels incompleteness theorem deals with these types of constructs.

the first line in the OP could be boiled down to:

"i like self-referencing statements"

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I doubt that Jesus would accept a godel statement as an acceptable definition of God.

[/ QUOTE ]

this path leads to a debate of how to apply statement b) (i.e. the golden rule)

if i allow you to define your god
if you allow me to define my god

i think we're both applying statement b) correctly.

if i do not allow you to define your god
if you do not allow me to define my god

it would seem that we've incorrectly applied statement b) because we've not honored the preferences of the other.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

you might be the dumbest person I know. Love thy neighbor does not mean let him pick his own god, it means help him when he needs help, and if you believe jesus is the way to heaven then you should care so much about his welfare as to spread his word. What kind of drugs are you on when you write this crap?

[/ QUOTE ]

let me help you get your mind right.

if your neighbor does not have a divine right to define their god then tell us who defines god for your neighbor?

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think an atheist would care?

[/ QUOTE ]

the proof in the OP is either accurate and valid or it is not.

in all fairness the actual wording as stated would require some kind of proof that jesus said those words otherwise the the conclusion would be based upon the axiom - that jesus said those words - and not proof.

most christians are going to accept as axiom or fact that jesus said those words regardless. so any discussion with them would probably involve debates as to how to correctly interpret and apply statements a) and b)

but here is the krux of the issue:

if you can get 2 christians to interpret statements a) and b) differently (i.e. subjectively and not objectively) then you have some type of scientific evidence that they are willing to define their version of god and not let the other do it for them.

e.g.
adam: "jesus would not say that and never did"
bill: "you're wrong, jesus would say that and he did"

ultimately the most important thing to demonstrate to a christian is that even if they point to the bible as the basis for which they derive their definition of god, each of them will claim the divine right to interpret the words they read as they install them into their mind.

nobody can point to a 100% objective method for interpreting scripture which means that all definitions of god within the minds of the readers were constructed subjectively based on the decisions of the reader.

this process can seem objective at times especially if a christian associates with those that happen to be interpreting the same way they are. (i.e. birds of a feather sort of a thing)

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you pretent I'm a seven year old and explain the construct of your argument in a way I understand?

I don't know what a Godel statement is. I do have "Godel, Escher, Bach" sitting on my bookshelf, but it's just gathering dust at the moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

take two seven year olds and give them some crayons and some paper and ask them to draw a picture of god with no constraints suggested other than the crayons and the paper.

consider what a seven year old named adam would do if somebody other than adam attempted to draw on adams paper.

ray

[runner4life7]

NO ONE HAS A DIVINE RIGHT!

If we assume for a moment that A god exists whether its the christian, the jewish, the hindu or any other god, maybe one no one believes in then you DO NOT have this right. If said christian god exists it is clear that loving thy neighbor does not entail supporting and telling him he can believe in whatever he wants and that he is right. How can you possibly believe this. Also stop using the words doom hook and divine right in every post you make.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
NO ONE HAS A DIVINE RIGHT!

If we assume for a moment that A god exists whether its the christian, the jewish, the hindu or any other god, maybe one no one believes in then you DO NOT have this right. If said christian god exists it is clear that loving thy neighbor does not entail supporting and telling him he can believe in whatever he wants and that he is right. How can you possibly believe this. Also stop using the words doom hook and divine right in every post you make.

[/ QUOTE ]

You say "its obvious" and make a lot of hand-waving arguments, did you realize that?

[runner4life7]

thats because it should be obvious.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
thats because it should be obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

And also because your gears tend to grind to a halt when it isnt?

[Duke]

Why on earth would an atheist give a damn about the invisible man accepting him, and why would a Christian care if the heathens get to kick it in heaven with them?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Why on earth would an atheist give a damn about the invisible man accepting him, and why would a Christian care if the heathens get to kick it in heaven with them?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. If I felt some motivation to be convinced, I would. But I haven't heard any good ones that don't require me to ALREADY be convinced. Same can be said for members of any faith about any other faith.

[runner4life7]

Because the bible says to go out into the world and spread his word to unbelievers?

[Dan.]

*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If its required to avoid an eternity of infinite torment it manages to work its way onto my priorities list. Is that what you were asking?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If its required to avoid an eternity of infinite torment it manages to work its way onto my priorities list. Is that what you were asking?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're actually an atheist, you don't believe in an eternity of infinite torment. Ergo, what does this "revelation" matter?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If its required to avoid an eternity of infinite torment it manages to work its way onto my priorities list. Is that what you were asking?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're actually an atheist, you don't believe in an eternity of infinite torment. Ergo, what does this "revelation" matter?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I could be wrong? You seem to have grossly missed the point of Pascal's Wager.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
NO ONE HAS A DIVINE RIGHT!

If we assume for a moment that A god exists whether its the christian, the jewish, the hindu or any other god, maybe one no one believes in then you DO NOT have this right. If said christian god exists it is clear that loving thy neighbor does not entail supporting and telling him he can believe in whatever he wants and that he is right. How can you possibly believe this. Also stop using the words doom hook and divine right in every post you make.

[/ QUOTE ]

jesus very clearly said

"love your god"

notice that he did not say
"love the god that runner4life7 wants you to love"
or
"love the god that ray bornert wants you to love"
or even
"love the god that jesus wants you to love"

i credit jesus' words as being the source of the idea that i am responsible for what gets installed into my mind including but not limited ideas about him and/or the god he represented; i choose the ideas that i install; i have the last word concerning this - not you not church not scripture not religion not science - me and me alone.

i claim this divine right with no obligation to ask anyone for permission - my mind is my property - if i have to ask something or someone for the right it's not really mine is it?

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Because the bible says to go out into the world and spread his word to unbelievers?

[/ QUOTE ]

foul. you've twisted the event.

the admonition was to spread the information jesus had delivered; the information was considered to be very good news (gospel) at the time when compared with the burden of the definition of god that the jews had constructed over the previous millenium.

catholicism then took the good news and jacked it around real good for another thousand years or more;

martin luther helped a bit but we still have a lot of doom hooks in the present faith.

humans seem to have a nearly unlimited capacity to screw over a healthy definition of god.

some say that islam is beginning it's first reformation right now.

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[/ QUOTE ]

you might not care.

the proof is what it is regardless of how you feel.

if anybody attempts to say that jesus and/or the god he represented rejects atheists then i can offer the proof as a contradiction.

it is what it is - nothing more and nothing less.

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*grunch*

If you're an atheist, what do you care if Jesus accepts you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If its required to avoid an eternity of infinite torment it manages to work its way onto my priorities list. Is that what you were asking?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're actually an atheist, you don't believe in an eternity of infinite torment. Ergo, what does this "revelation" matter?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I could be wrong? You seem to have grossly missed the point of Pascal's Wager.

[/ QUOTE ]

pascal had a doom hook in his mind. have mercy on him and consider the times in which he lived and ask yourself if you'd've had the courage to live then as you are now.

just say no to curses and doom hooks.

ray

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think an atheist would care?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be useful to contradict the claim that jesus, and/or the god he represented, rejects atheists.

ray

[runner4life7]

When Jesus said love your god, he most certainly meant him...to even suggest he meant love whatever god you want is...well wrong.

Also, I have A LOT of problems with the catholic church so we can both agree there.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
When Jesus said love your god, he most certainly meant him

[/ QUOTE ]

i just want to point out that your statement here is evidence that you're willing to define god for yourself. i support your divine right to do this; just be sure you return the favor.

i can't agree with your statement because i don't find any new testament evidence of that. but i do find evidence that jesus cared a lot about what people thought about his ideas and definitions:

"Those that remember my ideas and keep them favor me;
God favors those that favor me and I favor them too and
explain myself to them." - John 14:21

if an atheist defines god as the golden rule and then favors the golden rule then that atheist has met 100% of the criteria of:

a) love your god
b) love your neighbor

and john 14:21 would indicate that god favors them just for favoring the golden rule with no additional strings attached.

[ QUOTE ]
to even suggest he meant love whatever god you want is...well wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

he said "love your god"
it's very clear here
they get to choose for themselves
you do not get to choose for them.

you seem to be trying to make the case that god wants to reject those who dont do more than honor the golden rule.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I have A LOT of problems with the catholic church so we can both agree there.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes they are infamous for their curses and doom hooks.

ray

[runner4life7]

First off I don't know why this is the golden rule,

second, I dont know if Im being 2nd leveled or something, but do you really believe that Jesus and God meant love whichever god you so please? I dont need any long answer, just do you believe when in the bible jesus says love your god, that he does not specifically mean the christian god?

[RayBornert]

google the golden rule.

i'm being quite straightforward with you.

if you read the longer admonition of jesus, he emphasized how important it is to like your god.

there is considerable historical evidence that describes definitions of god that are not likeable.

no definition of god has the right to live in the mind of a human if that human does not like it.

imagine for a moment that jesus had a very clear picture of a healthy definition of god - let us say that the definition was easy to favor.

now imagine almost 2 millenia of mankind polluting the definition to the point that some of the results were monstrous.

how is anybody supposed to love a definition of god they do not like - this includes atheists btw.

so while jesus might have suggested that his definition was quite likeable, i am real sure that there were lots of definitions he did not favor (as evidenced by his discussions with the religious leaders). it's a foregone conclusion that he'd not like many of the definitions we have developed over the last 2k years.

again, he very much emphasized that both you and i like the god we define and keep in our mind.

ask any psychologist or psychiatrist what happens to a person if they keep a definition of god in their mind that they do not like for too long.

ray