Very good analysis of what G-d is probably like........ logical.... and I believe correct. To my thinking G-d is the most off the scale artistic intellect in the universe / Multiverse and I believe is extremely emotional.............. because investing infinite time in the past in planning and choreographing an essentially infinite number of Big Bang or Big Flash events........ will tend to make One highly emotionally involved in the outcome. https://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/experiences/mellen-thomas-benedict.html#a05
How can God be comprehended within the narrow limits of our knowledge, culture and comprehension. I mean I feel I'm an idiot for being a product of only two cultures and languages and not more... unless of course they believe they are the utmost in intelligence and comprehension. This makes them a 'god' in their own right. ..I guess like Caligula.
What is God like? God is very much like the product of adding 0 to 0 then dividing by zero and multiplying the results by 0. God is like the unicorn eating flowers on Mars. God is the contents of an empty paper bag. It is nothing actually there.
As usual, I'm sure you will follow up your profound accusation with the data required to validate it's accuracy.....I mean you are so well known for your well founded and useful commentary. I can't wait to be astounded.
We're not trying to 'prove' the existence of a deity, just examine what He might be like, based on the visible world. ..trying to follow your line of thought.. so your upbringing has contributed to your perceptions about God, or the supernatural? I am sure that is a common factor with every human being.. we are very much products of our early influences. How does your upbringing color your view about what God might be like, with your experiences? A rational deduction, which was my point, as well. Of course, there could be other information, that we do not have, that can explain this distance.. Stop the universe!! We agree on a couple of points? ..and a pretty consistent one. National parks are evidence of a human consensus about 'natural beauty'. We do not have a clue as to the vast ocean of knowledge out there.. we know a few things, & feel pretty smug about it, but there is a lot more that we do not know. That should give us pause, & make us approach the mysteries of the universe with a little more circumspection & humility. We are not talking about 'need'. Unless you posit the existence of the universe having a 'need' for a Cause, in which case a Supernatural Entity would be 'needed'. And what about your comment about the angst of man? Does that tell you anything about the nature of God? It does to me. I see Augustine's observation about this 'restlessness', & consider his reply to be a rational conclusion. So i consider this 'angst' to be another condition that indicates something about God.. if we presume His existence. For some reason, He has made us 'restless'.. given humanity 'angst', to long for 'something' more, that the physical world cannot seem to fulfill. It is an itch that we cannot scratch.. a hunger than we cannot feed. A thirst we cannot quench. I will conclude another 'trait' of this presumed God.. 5. He has instilled in humanity a longing for spiritual reality, so that humans will grope for Him. He seems to want for us to seek Him. I cannot think of any other plausible explanation for this 'longing', if it was put there by God.
That seems to be a most rational conclusion.. if you posit a Supreme Being, that is able to create the universe, is beyond eternity, infinity, omniscient, & omnipresent, 'off the scale' is putting it mildly. I will interpret your post here as 'awesome', regarding the OP. And i agree. If we presume the existence of God, compared to our finite mortality, He would seem pretty awesome. Ok, we know what you believe. This is not just another thread for declaring beliefs by assertion. We are 'assuming' the existence of God, & making conclusions about this God, based on the evidence. Anybody can ridicule the premise for any thread, & that seems to be all you are doing. But based on your observations, beliefs, upbringing, & intuition, what would you conclude about God, if you were to speculate about His nature?
Last time I chatted with god he told me that he really wishes that his followers would grow up and act like adults who take responsibility for their own lives. The incessant whining and asking for things that he has absolutely no intention of giving them is tedious and he just ignores it the same way a parent ignores a child wanting something they can't have.
Yes but for me, I see no evidence of God, so it is a little difficult to imagine what God might be like I brought up my upbringing only to make the point that my bias was to think that God does exist not vice versa And yes, my upbringing in a religious family did color what I thought God would be like. I was taught that he was loving, that he paid attention to what I did, etc. nowI have a hard time validating the views about god that I was raised with....and when i see other people promoting these ideas of God's nature it seems peculiar to me Yes an unexpected pleasure lol It is an interesting topic by itself but I fear if I go on about it perhaps it will divert from the main topic so I will grant you the point and move on We don't know what we don't know, right? It seems to me that if we contemplate what we "do know" there is ample reason for circumspection and humility My discussion of need was raised only in so far as since i see no evidence driving a perception of god, and therefore see no need to consider the hypothetical existence of god or the character of god Well i think this human predeliction does explain the pervasive human search for god... though i see that as a curious anomaly of human nature rather than evidence of gods existence or character And as I said above, I do not Certainly I am familiar with this sort of thinking. I'm just saying that human angst is an indication of God or God's nature If a person starts out assuming the existence of God, and I guess your conclusions are understandable But if a person starts out with my GM, which is that there is no God, then I think it is equally plausible that mankind would have such angst without any "Need for God" Which is to say, if there is a God, I can see how he would be associated with what you say as far as angst. But I do not see that such angst requires that there be a God[/quote]
There is nothing to contemplate. One's reality is formed by their experiences, and those experiences differ if one has faith, and if one doesn't have faith. To assume the experiences others have are non existent because of one's own lack of faith is arrogance.
The important thing about people turning to God, is their awareness of their own limitations as human beings. This is the start of one's spiritual growth, and God will answer them in a way that will foster that growth even more so.
"Reality" is actually dictated by far more than "Faith". You can have amazing faith that God will cure your dis-ease and pray all you can. But it will not do much when compared to the medical treatment, you will simply die while hoping for a miracle. You can believe your faith will prevent that hurricane from hitting you because you are not the heathen your neighbor is and God will save you....good luck with that because it will not work. You can hope all day for heaven when you die, yet there is absolutely nothing but your hopes to indicate that will send your invisible soul into a paradise equally invisible and non reality based. To "assume" your belief in the invisible supernatural has any effect on tangible matter is folly and ineffective. All it does is make you feel warm and fuzzy while you freeze to death.
In other words spiritual children as just as selfish and self centered as regular children. That says volumes!
Very old thread with very ancient philosophical-God questions. God must certainly be powerful, however if you call Him/Her/It all-powerful (a Hebrew exaggeration meant for flattery in the Psalms) then you arrive at many philosophical dilemmas. God must certainly be kind and loving, however when you call Him/Her/It all-loving then again you arrive at philosophical dilemmas. Calling God all-knowing does not run into any major philosophical dilemmas but humans do have a problem with this, when you consider that God already knows what we humans are going to do before we do it. This is very hard for humans to fathom and causes all sorts of freedom dilemmas. God being all-present all the time is merely a Catholic myth. Overall, God strikes me from a philosophical perspective a lot like any ordinary guy with many of the same desires of ordinary humans, such as a need to be productive, a need to achieve, a need to accrue holdings and dominions over matter and energy. If you think about something that does not make sense then it is probably not true for God.
Not sure if God answers or not, but I am certainly sure that God is out there. The several philosophical proofs of God are proof enough.
[/QUOTE] Atheists ass-u-me-ing that there is no God is a fallacy of argument from ignorance. And atheism is a faith system the same as religion. An atheist simply adopts faith that there is no God. No way to prove it either way, whether rhetorically or scientifically. And religions require "faith".
It is definitely one of the popular terms used for irrational belief in a God, but has many other and more logical uses. I have "Faith" that the Sun will rise, and that my wife loves me.
To think god exists is a belief, to think god exists not is a belief too. So what makes your atheism more real? The example is a very bad example, because a Christian will normally pray for courage and strength to be able to carry a burden. Most people for example think in Europe existed pestilence and then came a medical progress and this was the reason why the pestilence died out. But it was not in this way. The pestilence died out because of prayers and other spiritual deeds. Or with other words: When it had happened it was a miracle. No one had any idea about what are bacteria or what a virus is - but they fought against pestilence and they were successful. Spiritually and really - both. The only good war is a not existing war. But what do you know about a not existing war? What do you know about the flash, which did not kill you? ... Your problem is you don't know what Christians really believe. ... Are you for example able to imagine your soul could be downloaded in a computer and the computer could transform you and load you up in a later time in another kind of body? How crazy would be such an idea? As crazy as the idea of a big bang coming out of nothing or less crazy? Metaphysics is not able to be visible - but this doesn't mean we are not able to say something about invisible things. If you draw a circle for example then this is only an idea without concrete reality - it's "supernatural". A line in geometry is not visible - we make it visible by drawing it. Same with everything else we are speaking about in whatever loud or silent way. We make visible a big part of the invisible world all around us with the help of words, drawings, signs, ... - with the help of "the logos". We say: "In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with god and god was the logos ... " The problem is: You seem to freeze to death outside of our house of "thoughts". But if you enter our warm and fuzzy house then you would lose your "I'm freezing to death"-realism. But do you really freeze to death? What would you really lose? Open the door - believe - in god!
Denial of reality on your part does not alter reality one iota. The big bang did not "come out of nothing". The singularity existed prior to the big bang.
