GOD

[Ocean Breeze]

Maybe "we" could start with defining "God". What is "God"...???

Seems there are as many interpretations of this word as there are people.

Is "God" the SOURCE ........of all things??? Is "God" dynamic and constantly changing??? Is the "God" entity a part of and apart from all things???


Toro: agree completely : "Religion" is a man made institution.

 

[Jo Canadian]

Maybe "we" could start with defining "God". What is "God"...???

Seems there are as many interpretations of this word as there are people.

Is "God" the SOURCE ........of all things??? Is "God" dynamic and constantly changing??? Is the "God" entity a part of and apart from all things???

Toro: agree completely : "Religion" is a man made institution.

Perhaps god is life, and all life is an extention of what we can only call "god" just for the lack of a better term. In that case god may exist at the molecular level, very very small. After all what is the force that makes the elements organize themselves into certain compounds, and under the right conditions can grow into more complex things as time goes on?????

If that's the case the universe may not be gods at all but as life starting from the molecular level, we're just a way for god to reach out and explore what's out there.

Damn I didn't have to smoke anything for that one.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

However, organized religion is a man-made institution. The crimes committed by organized religion does not prove God does not exist. It proves that man is fallible.

See if you can wrap your head around this then...

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Perhaps god is life, and all life is an extention of what we can only call "god" just for the lack of a better term. In that case god may exist at the molecular level, very very small. After all what is the force that makes the elements organize themselves into certain compounds, and under the right conditions can grow into more complex things as time goes on?????

Midichlorians Jo?

 

[Toro]

Vanni, I read the first several paragraphs, and since it was long, I think I got the gist of it. For certain, religion has been used to explain things that hitherto been unexplainable by man. And as science has progressed, it has disproved factual teachings of religion, i.e. God created the world in six days. There are lots of things I have trouble swallowing in the bible. But again, that does not mean God does not exist. You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. You either believe it or you don't.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: GOD

You really should read the whole thing Toro...I'd vote in Gauvin for God...

Vanni, I read the first several paragraphs, and since it was long, I think I got the gist of it. For certain, religion has been used to explain things that hitherto been unexplainable by man. And as science has progressed, it has disproved factual teachings of religion, i.e. God created the world in six days. There are lots of things I have trouble swallowing in the bible. But again, that does not mean God does not exist. You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. You either believe it or you don't.

...what basis do you have for this belief?

I mean when I was a kid, I was a believer in God...but then I was also a believer in the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny and Santa Claus...I started having doubts when I was 7 or 8 years old, so I can't imagine what would inspire someone to believe well into adulthood...

To me, the entire premise of God and Satan is a story to scare dumb people into being good...again, not unlike the boogey-man stories of children...

Nothing I have experienced in my life can be attributed to anything divine...no feeling or sensation would I interpret as being a communication from God...everything I've felt, seen or done has had valid physiological, or psychological relevance that precludes divine intervention...

So...prove that your God does exist, and I'll shut up about it...

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: GOD

To me, the entire premise of God and Satan is a story to scare dumb people into being good...again, not unlike the boogey-man stories of children...

I suppose the 5 Billion people that believe in one form of God or another are dumb.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

However, organized religion is a man-made institution. The crimes committed by organized religion does not prove God does not exist. It proves that man is fallible.

See if you can wrap your head around this then...

good article. (thanks)

Wonder if mankind , from early onset "needed" something to "believe " in or to explain the unexplained to himself.


Don't think it is necessary to "believe " one way or another..... but keeping an open mind to all possibilities. New ideas about this evolve on a periodic basis. Man's brain is dyanamic and inquisitive. It wasn't that long ago that people "believed" the earth was flat. New data brought new knowledge, new knowledge brought new awareness.

 

[Jo Canadian]

Perhaps god is life, and all life is an extention of what we can only call "god" just for the lack of a better term. In that case god may exist at the molecular level, very very small. After all what is the force that makes the elements organize themselves into certain compounds, and under the right conditions can grow into more complex things as time goes on?????

Midichlorians Jo?

Eh? You know I never thought of that, I've had that floating in my head before the first (ie fourth) star wars was made.

:lol: Maybe Lucas is right and we should form a cult around him.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: GOD

To me, the entire premise of God and Satan is a story to scare dumb people into being good...again, not unlike the boogey-man stories of children...

I suppose the 5 Billion people that believe in one form of God or another are dumb.

wouldn't say that at all. That is the difference between BELEIVERS (fixed ideas) and explorative THINKERS.-who don't settle on one fixed idea /concept and stick to it without waver.

Many highly intelligent , capable people are "believers"......and most likely due to their formative upbringing/environment.

 

[I think not]

:lol: Maybe Lucas is right and we should form a cult around him.

They beat you to it

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Maybe "we" could start with defining "God". What is "God"...???

Seems there are as many interpretations of this word as there are people.

Is "God" the SOURCE ........of all things??? Is "God" dynamic and constantly changing??? Is the "God" entity a part of and apart from all things???

Toro: agree completely : "Religion" is a man made institution.

Perhaps god is life, and all life is an extention of what we can only call "god" just for the lack of a better term. In that case god may exist at the molecular level, very very small. After all what is the force that makes the elements organize themselves into certain compounds, and under the right conditions can grow into more complex things as time goes on?????

If that's the case the universe may not be gods at all but as life starting from the molecular level, we're just a way for god to reach out and explore what's out there.

Damn I didn't have to smoke anything for that one.

not too shabby. like your thinking. exploring the abstract...

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: GOD

...what basis do you have for this belief?

I take issue with this comment from the article.

The fact is that the human mind cannot conceive of a spiritual existence. We cannot grasp the thought of life apart from matter. Whatever lives, must have material form. All nature denies that there can be spirit where there is no substance. If reason and experience count for anything, we are forced to the conclusion that those who say that God has neither "body, parts nor passions," simply give expression to what they do not know. God is either something or nothing. If he is something, he must have a body--he must be material. If God thinks, he must have a brain. If he feels, he must have nerves. There is, there can be, no thought apart from brain; and there can be no sensation, no feeling, where there are no nerves. Again, a brain and a nervous system cannot be conceived of apart from a stomach. Whatever lives must eat. No exception to this rule can be imagined. We can reason only from what we know. But how can a being having a body and a brain, a nervous system and digestive organs, be conceived of as a God? How can a being that bears the form of man, or of any other Creature, be infinite in power and in knowledge?

Repeat

The fact is that the human mind cannot conceive of a spiritual existence.

The premise for this argument are the limits of the human mind. Because the human mind cannot comprehend it, it must not exist. Otherwise, one must assume that the limit of the human mind is omniscience. I doubt that.

Nothing I have experienced in my life can be attributed to anything divine...no feeling or sensation would I interpret as being a communication from God...everything I've felt, seen or done has had valid physiological, or psychological relevance that precludes divine intervention...

You're internalizing the argument. The fact that you have not had a religious experience leads you to conclude there is no God. That's fine. I can't argue with your personal experience. We all need a basis for our beliefs. But recognize that others have had a feeling or sensation of the existence of God or a spiritual being. The experience others have had but you lack is the basis for many people's belief.

So...prove that your God does exist, and I'll shut up about it...

You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. You either believe it or you don't.

And no one's asking you to shut up. Its your prerogative to ask such questions.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: GOD

You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. You either believe it or you don't.

So, from your statement above, it would appear that God only exists if you believe in him.

Seems the almighty is more dependent on you than you are on him...

...or her, as it were...

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: GOD

I take issue with this comment from the article.

The fact is that the human mind cannot conceive of a spiritual existence. We cannot grasp the thought of life apart from matter. Whatever lives, must have material form. All nature denies that there can be spirit where there is no substance. If reason and experience count for anything, we are forced to the conclusion that those who say that God has neither "body, parts nor passions," simply give expression to what they do not know. God is either something or nothing. If he is something, he must have a body--he must be material. If God thinks, he must have a brain. If he feels, he must have nerves. There is, there can be, no thought apart from brain; and there can be no sensation, no feeling, where there are no nerves. Again, a brain and a nervous system cannot be conceived of apart from a stomach. Whatever lives must eat. No exception to this rule can be imagined. We can reason only from what we know. But how can a being having a body and a brain, a nervous system and digestive organs, be conceived of as a God? How can a being that bears the form of man, or of any other Creature, be infinite in power and in knowledge?

Repeat

The fact is that the human mind cannot conceive of a spiritual existence.

The premise for this argument are the limits of the human mind. Because the human mind cannot comprehend it, it must not exist. Otherwise, one must assume that the limit of the human mind is omniscience. I doubt that.

Actually, it took me a few reads to dig what he was saying...

What he's saying is that we, as humans, have no frame of reference for a divine being, and so must resort to the fantastic...

 

[Jo Canadian]

The fact that you have not had a religious experience leads you to conclude there is no God.

I'm wondering what constitutes a religious expierience? Every religion has it's symbolism that they relate to religious experiences, but that would only lead to the conclusion that there are more "gods" then if each culture has its own homegrown version of their religious expierience. I've even experienced a few strange things that would be considered supernateral, but there was no religious context with it... :? no I wasn't on anything at the time either.

This all just reminds me of a cartoon I saw where this priest dies and when entering the classic heaven there he finds Ptah the egyptian god looking none too happy, and the priest saying "Shit"

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: GOD

So, from your statement above, it would appear that God only exists if you believe in him.

Seems the almighty is more dependent on you than you are on him...

...or her, as it were...

No. What I'm saying is that, at present, mankind can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. The fact that man cannot prove the existence of God does not mean God does not exist. To give a scientific analogy, 200 years ago, mankind could not prove that electrons existed. Yet that did not mean electrons did not exist. I recognize that the existence of God is seemingly irrational to those who otherwise did not witness great religious events, i.e. the Ressurection. But I also recognize the limits of the human mind.

edited one word

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: GOD

No. What I'm saying is that, at present, mankind can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God.

One can hardly fault us for that, as God has not done such a bang up job of proving his own existence...

I recognize that the existence of God is seemingly irrational to those who otherwise did not witness great religious events, i.e. the Ressurection.

...and you've been privy to some of these religious events then?

Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?

 

[Vanni Fucci]

This all just reminds me of a cartoon I saw where this priest dies and when entering the classic heaven there he finds Ptah the egyptian god looking none too happy, and the priest saying "Shit"

That reminds me of Rowan Atkinson's standup where he's playing the devil...

http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/1842/atkinson.html

Anyway, did you know that the High Priest of Amun was Imhotep and that he was deified as the "son of Ptah"...

A remarkable man was Imhotep, and deserving of deification, in my opinion...

 

[Reverend Blair]

No. What I'm saying is that, at present, mankind can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God.

By the rules of science, it is up to those who believe in a god to prove the existence that god. It is not up to the rest of us to disprove that existence.