Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

God: imaginary AND real?

fudgefactorfive said:
come clean, i-am-your-idea. these two threads you've got going: you're trying to establish that God = Love, aren't you ;)
Click to expand...


nah these are both nothing ideas. god means nothing. love means nothing. but it may be that their power is in their vacuum.

up into recently i wasnt thinking in this way at all. i remember thinking that everything made sense without god. i couldnt see where he could fit in. science had hinted at lots of structure in the details, and i could imagine that continuing until it all made sense, all the knots were tied up, and the mystery known.

The thing is i had to use my imagination to fill in the gaps of science. but because science seems so solid, i counted my imaginings onto it as solid too. but there is great mystery. things dont make SENSE with a god or without him.

the only way to experience infinity is by dreaming. there are lots of ways of dreaming. one way is by studying a subject and dreaming into all the gaps you find there, and allowing the mystery inside you, to fill the mystery outside you.
 
i-am-your-idea said:
mr sensible, what is the evidence that you evaluate to put your beliefs in a sensible order?
Click to expand...

There are some things that you have little reason to doubt. Like Fish for example. You can see them, smell them, touch them, hear them (splashing) and feel them (if you're so inclined). Also crucially, you can test your belief in their existence by discussing them with other people who will most likely have similar experiences to you of fish. You're also unlikely to come across other people who have a logically sound argument as to why fish don't exist.

Let's call that belief category A.

In category B, you would place things that there is some room for doubt about. Like God or Life on far away galaxies for example. In those instances you're not relying on your senses and you can't reasonably test your experience against that of others.

As such, a more rigorous approach is needed and you would look at things like falsifiability and whether or not further evidence yet to be discovered or tested will add weight or detract from the credibility of your belief.

What's important though is that you can't reasonably say that your belief in Category B knowledge is as reliable as Category A knowledge. That either kind of idea can exist in your mind is not a good enough reason to say that they amount to the same thing. There are clear and important differences.
 
but your concept of a fish is just stored in your memory and imagination. this is the place where our imagination plays. our imagination effects our direct, present moment reality.

You might find a fish ugly, i might think its beautiful. i am seeing the ugly fish, you are seeing the ugly one- in a way they arent the same fish at all- and that difference is in our imagination.
 
That's all fine. However some people like to claim that line of argument as proof for God's literal existence, which it obviously isn't.

If you want to imagine fish as beautiful, feel free. However I just hope that you never rise to the position of EU fish and maritime affairs commissioner, or if you do that the beautiful fish of your imagination don't significantly affect your policy decisions.

Equally, while nobody can take away the God that exists in people's imagination or can deny how real that experience can be for some people, it's really not the sort of thing that should be given serious weight when deciding important things as religious ideas unfortunately are.
 
G-D cannot be both imaginary and real. G-D is indeed very real. Even if one buys into the theoies of Big Bang, etc., where did the first particle come from? It all had to begin at one point. To deny G-D is foolishness. Of course G-D is not confined to human parameters as in organised religion,etc. HE is omnipotent.
 
rachamim18 said:
Even if one buys into the theoies of Big Bang, etc., where did the first particle come from? It all had to begin at one point. To deny G-D is foolishness. Of course G-D is not confined to human parameters as in organised religion,etc. HE is omnipotent.
Click to expand...
Teehee . . . so who created god? - it all had to begin at one point, no?
 
Spion said:
Teehee . . . so who created god? - it all had to begin at one point, no?
Click to expand...


God exists 'outside' of time, from God's point of view, the beginning and the end are the same, so God needs no creator
 
i-am-your-idea said:
You might find a fish ugly, i might think its beautiful. i am seeing the ugly fish, you are seeing the ugly one- in a way they arent the same fish at all- and that difference is in our imagination.
Click to expand...

so that's where god is? in the differences?

god only exists in every little misunderstanding, every poorly chosen term, every little bickering about the way things are?
 
fudgefactorfive said:
so that's where god is? in the differences?

god only exists in every little misunderstanding, every poorly chosen term, every little bickering about the way things are?
Click to expand...


Despite feeling 'God' I still dont like the word much. Its still has a lot of negative feeling attached to it. The ear shutting effect of Him.

But I would say the power is in everything, including non-things, and lack of things. Teacups are pretty useless without the space inside them. Equally it is the misunderstanding that make understandings sensible. And understandings that make misunderstanding ridiculous.

But are they really sensible, are they really ridiculous? When I say yes, and you say no, nothing is absolute.

And when we feel that nothing is absolute. Nothing is really something. There is the mystery. There is your (for want of a better word) God.
 
i-am-your-idea said:
And when we feel that nothing is absolute. Nothing is really something. There is the mystery. There is your (for want of a better word) God.
Click to expand...

shame. I was getting quite into this idea of God as Summed Cognitive Dissonances.

imagine the collective force of the billion and one lazy pub conversations that go round and round because some of the people are using a word that means very different things to them - add up all that time wasted, all those heated arguments, all that wasted heat, radiated off by tetchy drunkards. god's right there - you could put a calorific value on Him, measured in joules. we take in good honest food and beam it out as gibberish.

every time someone didn't quite understand what you asked and cocks things up, meaning everyone has to start all over, or spend all over. sum up all that chasing around painting the forth bridge. you could measure it in miles trodden, burning work off uselessly. there's god's power, which could otherwise walk to the sun and back.

tot up the total combined force of every little religious war over who said they could nick what off who, and then in every war, put together every blow of spear on shield, every arrow that punched through a bone. there's god, in newtons per square inch. there's his power: in being bludgeoned to death.

add it all up; and then I can understand how humans, the creature that can't help inventing agents, would want to worship that power. never mind that it's like a baby worshipping a magnet because it takes everything at face value. we don't care. we're satisfied by filling gaps with any old tat that comes to hand.

that's God, that is: the god of error.

... i mean i think i get you, i-am-your-idea, and actually maybe we see the world in quite a similar way - but it's hard to tell - you're writing very figuratively, and maybe poetry is actually the best way to talk about feelings.

it just doesn't keep you warm at night.

it's too agnostic for me, deifying Mystery. just another ghost-agent
 
gorski said:
Credo quia absurdum, eh?:rolleyes: Nice.....:D
Click to expand...

Maybe its the belief that gets in the way. Stop believing and absurbity is just as absurb if not more so!

A crazy horse, a wild ride. Dare you? Trust in a thing with mad eyes and a soft coat? never ever for ever.

An ex of mine once asked me 'How can you look in yourself in the mirror, after all you have done?'

It was a long time before I could answer his question with 'I am not how'

And I wasn't actually answering to him at all.
 
i-am-your-idea said:
Maybe its the belief that gets in the way. Stop believing and absurbity is just as absurb if not more so!

A crazy horse, a wild ride. Dare you? Trust in a thing with mad eyes and a soft coat? never ever for ever.

An ex of mine once asked me 'How can you look in yourself in the mirror, after all you have done?'

It was a long time before I could answer his question with 'I am not how'

And I wasn't actually answering to him at all.
Click to expand...

but this is the God thread not the love thread. :rolleyes:

Is absurb a verb?:confused:
 
fudgefactorfive said:
... i mean i think i get you, i-am-your-idea, and actually maybe we see the world in quite a similar way - but it's hard to tell - you're writing very figuratively, and maybe poetry is actually the best way to talk about feelings.
Click to expand...

I think I get you too. :) It is hard to tell for definate with these indefinate words, but I'm a guessing we are singing from the same hymn sheet.

I think poetry is a good way to talk about feelings. But everything is a some form of 'poetry'. Maybe poetry is the best 'poetry' for us tho, and thats why we sort of understand each other.

However from my perceptive you do seem a little 'half glass empty'. Are you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dshl
Gödel's Theorem and Roger Penrose
Replies
21
Views
302
littlebabyjesus
littlebabyjesus
Bernie Gunther
Georges Bataille's Accursed Share, Fictitious Capital and Primitive Accumulation
Replies
0
Views
160
Bernie Gunther
Bernie Gunther
Elpenor
The 2025 Trump Regime - what historical comparisons can be made and what context can it be placed in
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
Kaka Tim
Kaka Tim
PTK
The Concept of “Forgiveness” Employed by Nominal Christians in Contemporary European and North American Culture
2
Replies
59
Views
1K
Flavour
Flavour
frogwoman
How would it affect human civilisation if we had to go into a pupa or chrysalis?
2
Replies
30
Views
523
PTK
PTK
Back
Top Bottom