Oh God, lets talk about God.

[Mole]

Everything and Nothing

I'm extremely suspicious of the word 'God' due to its etymological history.

I dislike gender-biased terms to describe this ultimately ineffable thing.

I call 'it' (even call it an it is a misnomer, since it's not a thing, entity, or object) the Absolute.

Totality of Everything.

It means nothing to say the totality of everything because the totality of everything exactly equals the totality of nothing.

If we wish to make sense, we need to be specific. And if we wish to make sense about God, we need to be specific about God.

And so we may specify God as Ganesh, the God with the head of an elephant. Or we may specify God as the Trinity, the God with three heads.

And then we can ask a sensible question, such as, what is the probability that Ganesh or the Trinity actually exist?

And although we can't absolutely prove Ganesh or the Trinity exist, or can't absolutely prove they don't exist, we can show that the probability of their existence is approaching zero.

This is why to believe in Ganesh or the Trinity we need to be in entranced by religious practice, where our critical faculties are asleep, and while our imaginative faculties are awake.

 

[Empyrean]

Maybe.

 

[soremfinger]

As we read this particles are coming into existence and going out of existence from nothing.

You see, that's where the so called "scientific" "logic" do NOT compute. "from nothing"!? that's starting to sound like magic. There will always be a source.

And these particles are measurable. So the metaphor of dominos does not apply to the real world.

If the particles are measurable the metaphor of dominoes certainly do apply in the real world. Or am I not understanding your input? But what is "real world"? In so far as science is concern what they know is the perceived and the discovered. What about the unseen and the unmanifested? Are they going to deny they exist just because it can't be perceive? That's their ego talking not logic.

And so the metaphor of God the domino master is also inappropriate.

I don't know what God is but it is define as something infinite and eternal without an end or beginning. So, if you employ that axiom God probably being the domino master certainly is appropriate.

 

[Empyrean]

It's impossible (or merely improbable?) to get rid of assumptions (axioms) when engaging in language or (in the inclusive sense) theory.

I think you have a point, soremfinger.

 

[Mole]

You see, that's where the so called "scientific" "logic" do NOT compute. "from nothing"!? that's starting to sound like magic. There will always be a source.

Not according to quantum mechanics.

And quantum mechanics is our most accurate scientific fact. It is eye wateringly accurate. So far even the most accurate measurements have only confirmed quantum mechanics as a fact.

And quantum mechanics tells us that particles are coming into existence and going out of existence around us right now.

These particle come from nothing and go back to nothing. These particles have no need of a creator.

So to persist with the old metaphor of God as the Prime Mover now makes us absurd.

I think you would do far better to speak to us of your imaginative attachment to God, and indeed your emotional attachment to God.

 

[Empyrean]

Are you sure you're simply not using obtuse language that fails to capture the veridicality of the event? Specifically, regarding 'virtual particles.'

For the inquisitiveness of the forum, here is one possible explanation in more grounded terms:

quantum field theory - What physical evidence is there that subatomic particles pop in and out of existence? - Physics Stack Exchange

 

[soremfinger]

I think you would do far better to speak to us of your imaginative attachment to God, and indeed your emotional attachment to God.

Nice strawman there. On the contrary, I was being logical.
On a side note, it's ironic to witness something (science at Quantum level) which professes logic above all, something which used to ridicule the absurd finds itself dabbling with the absurd and the imaginary (certain critical scientific axioms). A worrying trend, don't you think?

 

[Empyrean]

Nice strawman there. On the contrary, I was being logical.
On a side note, it's ironic to witness something (science at Quantum level) which professes logic above all, something which used to ridicule the absurd finds itself dabbling with the absurd and the imaginary (certain critical scientific axioms). A worrying trend, don't you think?

Drawing on a thread of intuition here -- all science falls back on some philosophical theory of that scientific body, whether it's in the background or foreground.

And that undercurrent philosophical theory is usually grounded in some sort more basic justificatory theory of knowledge.

And knowledge, of course, is never absolute.

 

[Poki]

my entire life i have NEVER been religious, but i have also never said or decided God doesnt exist. i have simply not known. just waiting for proof that i can believe. it finally came in the form of the quuran. because of who i am i need proof that matches what i see. the new testament has alot of dreams and goals, but thats not reality. the quuran to me states reality, who we are as people, draws guidlines within reason, talks about the grey...eye for eye is acceptable, but God loves those who are merciful. it talks about the blind, the ignorant, the challenges we face, etc. in words that actually reach out to me better then anything i have read from the bible. it matches our screwed up society as a whole.

i dont need someone to die for my sin, i am not a victim, nor do i fear god. i own my action, i will stand up for who i am, and i will work on being the best person i can...i OWN that. and like they say, God can see into me and my actions, my words, everything has proven it as long as i can remember.

thats where i stand right now.

i am tossing up claiming muslim, for the sole fact that its the quuran that spoke to me. not that christian or jews or any other religion is wrong. they all tie together for the most part, its the details that split hairs and create the great divide. arguments over what we think, believe, as if any of that is even important. the only reason i argue with my brother who is a christian is because he tries to pull me over as i speak about all the similarities, he talks differences.

i also hold the stance...even if God says its ok to do something i stand behind my belief of value based on people. a core concept of help, love, care and that stands above any rationalization i could even use to justify. anytime i slip its my fault, i will work on it or not, but i own it, not rationalize it away.

anyway....

to each their own...

 

[Empyrean]

Technically I'm a polytheist. I'm aiming for God status myself. Each one of us a manifestation of God. Some in different stages. Sleeping gods. Smart gods. Dumb gods. Retarded gods. Dog whisperer gods. Forum posting gods. Etc.

But, my goal is YahWeh status. That god was off the hook. He had everything, and if you pissed him off it's a wrap for you and your people.

Yeah, he was definitely an asshole god.

I prefer Shiva. Always gettin laid and simultaneously having Buddha-status.

 

[Zangetshumody]

I made a video to practice talking to the camera. Middle school quality. Of course I dive into the heaviest topic to talk about. But I honestly want to know everyones opinion about this. What are your thoughts of God. Do you think God does, or doesnt exist. Why or why not.

My view is a bit different from some of your conceptualization...

I'm of the opinion that God IS free will. The Christian Scriptures describe God in various ways, which, if you have a firm grasp of the doctrine, is quite deep and philosophically profound..

God is a "spirit"... and I think, a better way to understand the full gravity of that... is to look at the way "persons" are regarded by the Christian doctrine. God is not a lover of persons, God wants your soul, while the spirit of man.. is another term for 'the devil'. Salvation can be described and explained in many ways, but in the explanation that includes description of what is 'unholy', is the notion of wanting to give your soul to God; by wanting to cleanse your spirit, purging the 'spirit of Man' out from it, because at the core, to be driven by the spirit of Man, is to be proceed from error.

"Man" is just a vessel, the spirit of man, means the spirit of the vessel (the vessel is merely in the image of God); so in short- don't be driven from the appearance of God (God is true authority, whilst the appearance of God can only be suspended from the perspective of judging good and evil (which obscures and occludes the spirit of discerning/truth)), you must be driven by the spirit of God (truth/real authority) directly. Attaining to appearances, or attaining to true authority, at its core leads one down very different paths: true authority, can only be achieved by truth and discerning (understanding and judgement); while the appearance of authority is driven by external mandates that shelters you with protection, protection that undermines your accountability, responsibility and your free will, because you must accept and be the agent of 'moral' (good & bad) judgments, that you cannot convincingly vindicate, without the blinding mandate of an external authority,- that must be regarded as an unquestioned source of fact. The spirit of truth, is not a individual personage, it is a force of character: it is similar to logic, that to question the concept of truth in itself, is a deviant and self-condemning instinct, that has the traumatization as the idol of its inclination— in this respect, there is a valid insistence that God remains unquestioned: but you should consult the doctrine to fully understand, that God has never existed independently of a vessel, God can only exist inside the mind of a vessel to carry his spirit— this is why it is paramount to the doctrine, that all things were made through Jesus Christ, in the beginning.

Scriptural reference:
Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

__
Treating God like it is some external entity, is to confirm that you are acting from the Spirit of Man. God himself is not a person (let no man say he has seen God at any time..); to really see God, means to know and understand God, and to live through his spirit. God is a word, which is not meant to be anthropomorphized, the first God reference in the bible, is to Elohim, which is translated as "Majesties" (plural). Jehova (the tetragrammaton), literally means: I am that I am (the claim to axiomatic being, creating through the direction of its own accountability); this from a Spirit, that commanded Moses to go to Pharoh, and pronounce:' "I am" has sent me, to demand that you let my people go'.

"The Spirit of Truth", "The Discerning Spirit"... I think I made a post at some point that discussed this sort of theme quite thoroughly, so I will link that when I locate the exact one..

 

[Jaguar]

Some make "God" sound like a person who writes parking tickets for a living.

 

[Zangetshumody]

Not according to quantum mechanics.

And quantum mechanics is our most accurate scientific fact. It is eye wateringly accurate. So far even the most accurate measurements have only confirmed quantum mechanics as a fact.

And quantum mechanics tells us that particles are coming into existence and going out of existence around us right now.

These particle come from nothing and go back to nothing. These particles have no need of a creator.

So to persist with the old metaphor of God as the Prime Mover now makes us absurd.

I think you would do far better to speak to us of your imaginative attachment to God, and indeed your emotional attachment to God.

This is line of reasoning, is far too simplistic.

Did the particles really go out of existence? Did the universe make everyone forget that the particles ever existed, after they had departed? I'm afraid they make Scientific voracity absurd, but not the God of consciousness/the living; and, is it not the essence of a miracle, that: all deterministic traces for the occurrence are absent, yet the event still took place; just because the Scientific explanation is left imagined, doesn't make the event unreal to consciousness/spirituality,— and it is similarly so, throughout the Quantum realm.


Also Mole, I hope you notice that in your other posts on this thread~ your Scientism has abandoned all purchase of a coherent concept of "truth". No-longer can anyone of your elk ever hope to make a simple description for the notion of falsification... now we see the updated bait and switch tactic: probability which approaches falsification, must be regarded as fulfilling the notion of falsification (so we are all blindly commanded, by the God of Statistic!!!).

Please educate me on how you are not prone to the critique, that your God, is simply the God of Statistics (which I might even be forced to surrender to, up to the stipulated significant figure: and then who get's to decide which portions of the statistic— ever becomes manifest..? does the remainder get held over, for the next time-cycle in the absurd quantum-trajectory, or does your statistical God just slot them into another of, the many-other 'many-worlds'..? So many articles of faith still yet unwritten, must be an exciting time to believe for Scientism, and our life through the begotten Statistic).

 

[Mole]

This is line of reasoning, is far too simplistic.

Did the particles really go out of existence? Did the universe make everyone forget that the particles ever existed, after they had departed? I'm afraid they make Scientific voracity absurd, but not the God of consciousness/the living; and, is it not the essence of a miracle, that: all deterministic traces for the occurrence are absent, yet the event still took place; just because the Scientific explanation is left imagined, doesn't make the event unreal to consciousness/spirituality,— and it is similarly so, throughout the Quantum realm.


Also Mole, I hope you notice that in your other posts on this thread~ your Scientism has abandoned all purchase of a coherent concept of "truth". No-longer can anyone of your elk ever hope to make a simple description for the notion of falsification... now we see the updated bait and switch tactic: probability which approaches falsification, must be regarded as fulfilling the notion of falsification (so we are all blindly commanded, by the God of Statistic!!!).

Please educate me on how you are not prone to the critique, that your God, is simply the God of Statistics (which I might even be forced to surrender to, up to the stipulated significant figure: and then who get's to decide which portions of the statistic— ever becomes manifest..? does the remainder get held over, for the next time-cycle in the absurd quantum-trajectory, or does your statistical God just slot them into another of, the many-other 'many-worlds'..? So many articles of faith still yet unwritten, must be an exciting time to believe for Scientism, and our life through the begotten Statistic).

Most are innumerate and statistics is universally hated. Yet it is statistics that gives us our most accurate description of reality.

 

[Mole]

The Christian Scriptures describe God in various ways, which, if you have a firm grasp of the doctrine, is quite deep and philosophically profound.

Christians describe their God as a trinity. They also add they cannot give a rational account of the Trinity, which remains for them a religious mystery.

The doctrine of the Trinity is so shallow it has no rational explanation, and officially remains a mystery.

But interestingly for Christians, the Hindu God, Ganesh, is not a mystery, and Christians believe that Ganesh, the God with the head of an elephant, does not exist.

And Hindus have a complementary belief and believe that the Trinity, the God with three heads, also does not exist.

 

[Mole]

my entire life i have NEVER been religious, but i have also never said or decided God doesnt exist. i have simply not known. just waiting for proof that i can believe. it finally came in the form of the quuran. because of who i am i need proof that matches what i see. the new testament has alot of dreams and goals, but thats not reality. the quuran to me states reality, who we are as people, draws guidlines within reason, talks about the grey...eye for eye is acceptable, but God loves those who are merciful. it talks about the blind, the ignorant, the challenges we face, etc. in words that actually reach out to me better then anything i have read from the bible. it matches our screwed up society as a whole.

i dont need someone to die for my sin, i am not a victim, nor do i fear god. i own my action, i will stand up for who i am, and i will work on being the best person i can...i OWN that. and like they say, God can see into me and my actions, my words, everything has proven it as long as i can remember.

thats where i stand right now.

i am tossing up claiming muslim, for the sole fact that its the quuran that spoke to me. not that christian or jews or any other religion is wrong. they all tie together for the most part, its the details that split hairs and create the great divide. arguments over what we think, believe, as if any of that is even important. the only reason i argue with my brother who is a christian is because he tries to pull me over as i speak about all the similarities, he talks differences.

i also hold the stance...even if God says its ok to do something i stand behind my belief of value based on people. a core concept of help, love, care and that stands above any rationalization i could even use to justify. anytime i slip its my fault, i will work on it or not, but i own it, not rationalize it away.

anyway....

to each their own...

A good muslim practises jihad and seeks to replace liberal democracy and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with Sharia Law.

Can you really see yourself as a jihadi warrior fighting for Sharia Law?

 

[Mole]

And knowledge, of course, is never absolute.

Of course not, for 200,000 years we believed the Sun went round the Earth. And it took all that time to discover we were wrong and the exact opposite is true, and that the Earth goes round the Sun.

And I am prepared to say that the scientific fact of the solar system is absolute, in the sense that we will never go back to the Earth centric system.

And it is true that quantum mechanics is accurate to ten decimal places and counting, so we can safely say, quantum mechanics is approaching absolute knowledge.

And as we approach a limit in calculus, we arrive at absolute accuracy, same with quantum mechanics.

 

[Mole]

Nice strawman there. On the contrary, I was being logical.
On a side note, it's ironic to witness something (science at Quantum level) which professes logic above all, something which used to ridicule the absurd finds itself dabbling with the absurd and the imaginary (certain critical scientific axioms). A worrying trend, don't you think?

What is absurd and imaginary are the beliefs we have held for 200,000 years, such as the absurd and imaginary belief that the Sun goes round the Earth; and the absurd and imaginary belief that the stars set our personality and predict the future, as in astrology; and the absurd and imaginary believe that mbti can show our personality; and our absurd and imaginary belief in preposterous supernatural beings.

All of these absurd and imaginary beliefs fail the reality test, while quantum mechanics has passed every reality test so far, with almost unimaginable accuracy.

 

[soremfinger]

while quantum mechanics has passed every reality test so far, with almost unimaginable accuracy.

What reality test?

 

[geedoenfj]

A good muslim practises jihad and seeks to replace liberal democracy and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with Sharia Law.

Can you really see yourself as a jihadi warrior fighting for Sharia Law?

Superficial assumptions, lame, exaggerated..