An appeal for the logic of religious belief

[Super Universe]

If everything is God, why don't you just call God the Universe?

Second, if God is the entire Universe, how can you know that God is present or not, considering that he must be present at every single moment?

Scientists have built a machine that detects gravity? And that proves only that scientists have built a machine that detects gravity.

Sigh... once again, you forgot to post your evidence that gravity isn't an aspect of God.

 

[Rioku]

You can prove a negative, just eliminate all the other possibilities.

Man I can not believe I never thought of that, I am so much stupider then you!

Scientists have built a machine that detects gravity? And that proves only that scientists have built a machine that detects gravity.

Sigh... once again, you forgot to post your evidence that gravity isn't an aspect of God.

I have an idea, lets use your exact same logic. I ask you this?

Prove that God does not not exist? Aww, now look who is frustrated. :yes:

 

[Rolling_Stone]

If everything is God, why don't you just call God the Universe?

Second, if God is the entire Universe, how can you know that God is present or not, considering that he must be present at every single moment?

Answering for myself, God is that and more. Secondly, I'll quote myself from another thread:

It's something of a misnomer (though I'm guilty of employing it) to say God is infinite. Rather, God is infinity. As such, God shares in your experience but has the advantage of seeing the bigger picture, and is "useless" only inasmuch you elect to keep to God out. The way to invite God into your life is to exhibit a willingness to share your inner life--with all its triumphs and defeats, sufferings and joys--with God (the Infinite), who made the inner life possible to begin with.

 

[rojse]

Scientists have built a machine that detects gravity? And that proves only that scientists have built a machine that detects gravity.

Sigh... once again, you forgot to post your evidence that gravity isn't an aspect of God.

The machine proves that gravity is a phenomena that can be observed without personal opinions getting in the way. Opinions won't matter, personal belief won't matter, psychology will not matter. Either a phenomena will be observed that is consistent with gravity, or there will not. If there is not, we can check the machine is working correctly, reformulate our understanding of gravity, or come up with a new theory that explains all of the phenomena that gravity explains, and explains what gravity did not.

The fact that there is no machine to detect the presence of God makes it an unprovable concept - we can not truly, categorically state that God does not exist, because no one wishes to design a machine that can detect God's presence.

I have pointed that out before, and not received a reply.

As for gravity being an aspect of God, how can I disprove that when you have not made any attempt to allow us to quantifiably measure God and his effects?

 

[Rolling_Stone]

The fact that there is no machine to detect the presence of God makes it an unprovable concept - we can not truly, categorically state that God does not exist, because no one wishes to design a machine that can detect God's presence.

God is seen by the seeing; not by the seen.

 

[rojse]

God is seen by the seeing; not by the seen.

What is that supposed to mean? "God is not seen by the seen?"

 

[Rolling_Stone]

What is that supposed to mean? "God is not seen by the seen?"

Nothing. You have to take it in context: God is seen by the seeing; not by the seen.

 

[rojse]

Nothing. You have to take it in context: God is seen by the seeing; not by the seen.

Still do not get it.

 

[Super Universe]

Man I can not believe I never thought of that, I am so much stupider then you!

I have an idea, lets use your exact same logic. I ask you this?

Prove that God does not not exist? Aww, now look who is frustrated. :yes:

I'm sorry, perhaps you don't understand that this thread isn't about proving God. It's about comparing and contrasting God and gravity.

The athiest side is that God and gravity are very different things.

Can any athiest provide any evidence that gravity isn't God?

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Still do not get it.

You posed the question: "if God is the entire Universe, how can you know that God is present or not, considering that he must be present at every single moment?" The answer is, you don't know know God is there by relying on the physical senses, and for the very reason that caused you to raise the question. That is, we can't see God in the seen, the external, for the same reason an eye cannot see itself. Ours are are the eyes through which the Infinite sees itself, as your question implied, but this kind of seeing is something we have to "wake up" to. And it is in this kind of seeing that we see God.

Dang. The more I look over my answer the more confusing it looks. Want some aspirin?

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Can any athiest provide any evidence that gravity isn't God?

Ever notice how love seems to the spiritual equivalent of material gravity? Maybe they are different ends of the same stick.

 

[Popeyesays]

If everything is God, why don't you just call God the Universe?

Second, if God is the entire Universe, how can you know that God is present or not, considering that he must be present at every single moment?

I said we stand on EVIDENCE, hear it, feel it (evidence), etc.

The universe is NOT God.

God is eve aware of, but He is not contained within any part ofHis Creation.

Regards,
Scott

 

[rojse]

You posed the question: "if God is the entire Universe, how can you know that God is present or not, considering that he must be present at every single moment?" The answer is, you don't know know God is there by relying on the physical senses, and for the very reason that caused you to raise the question. That is, we can't see God in the seen, the external, for the same reason an eye cannot see itself. Ours are are the eyes through which the Infinite sees itself, as your question implied, but this kind of seeing is something we have to "wake up" to. And it is in this kind of seeing that we see God.

Dang. The more I look over my answer the more confusing it looks. Want some aspirin?

You have completely lost me now. An eye cannot see itself because it is itself. However, we can see what is external to us, so I do not see why we would not be able to see God.

 

[rojse]

Scientists have built a machine that detects gravity? And that proves only that scientists have built a machine that detects gravity.

Sigh... once again, you forgot to post your evidence that gravity isn't an aspect of God.

I think I have found a theosophical way to argue with you about gravity and god in this regard.

My first argument is that if you are going to go with gravity being an aspect of God, then it must follow that if we can explain gravity, we must be able to explain part of God. It also follows that if gravity, what is seen as a naturally-occuring phenomena, is God, then many other phenomena, such as electricity, plate tectonics, and so forth, would probably also be other aspects of God. If you are going to attribute natural phenomena to God, when we are able to affect all these phenomena you claim to be aspects of God, does that we ourselves are gods, and that God would be just as good as we are? No doubt you have some clever argument as to why this is not so, which I do look forward to hearing.

My second argument is that you often claim that God's workings cannot be understood, because he is infinite and so forth. However, if we do end up understanding gravityk, then it cannot be God, because it is understood.

 

[Rioku]

I'm sorry, perhaps you don't understand that this thread isn't about proving God. It's about comparing and contrasting God and gravity.

The athiest side is that God and gravity are very different things.

I understand what the thread is about, and my point it that this thread is useless. For two un-ignorable reasons. Number one, there is no evidence for a God. Number two, there is no concrete definition for a God. Without both of those there is not reason to compare gravity to God.

The athiest side is that God and gravity are very different things.

That is incorrect, the only thing atheists have in common is there belief there is no god. So, no atheist would compare god to gravity because no atheist believes there is a god. If they try to compare in some way they are trying to show everyone how it does not makes sense to compare the two.

 

[kai]

We have hammered each other over the fact that God is not evident in the universe.

Think about this:


"...the existence of an unseen force at work in human history is no less plausible and no less scholarly as an explanation for events than it is to consider the influence of unseen forces at work in the natural world (e.g. gravity)"...John S. Hatcher, The Ocean of His Words p 27

Does considering that make a difference in how you feel on the subject?

Regards,
Scott

none at all ! and gravity is a bad example we can all see it at work.

 

[Super Universe]

I think I have found a theosophical way to argue with you about gravity and god in this regard.

My first argument is that if you are going to go with gravity being an aspect of God, then it must follow that if we can explain gravity, we must be able to explain part of God. It also follows that if gravity, what is seen as a naturally-occuring phenomena, is God, then many other phenomena, such as electricity, plate tectonics, and so forth, would probably also be other aspects of God. If you are going to attribute natural phenomena to God, when we are able to affect all these phenomena you claim to be aspects of God, does that we ourselves are gods, and that God would be just as good as we are? No doubt you have some clever argument as to why this is not so, which I do look forward to hearing.

My second argument is that you often claim that God's workings cannot be understood, because he is infinite and so forth. However, if we do end up understanding gravityk, then it cannot be God, because it is understood.

I agree with your first argument but let me better define it. Are your bones you? They are inside of you, they are dead tissue that helps form you, but are they you? While the earth is like a single cell in God's body it is still just one cell.

I don't often claim that God's workings cannot be understood, in fact I most often claim the opposite. That's why we exist, to learn about God's great creation, to grow, and evolve. People always wonder "Why would God do this" and all the while those same people are having children.

 

[Super Universe]

The plain simple fact is this, if you don't see God reporting for work everyday in the universe, in a baby's laughter, in children at the playground, in a winter storm, in a rising sun, then you're not supposed to see it.

Go on and live your life for yourself because there is nothing anyone can say to prove it to you.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

You have completely lost me now. An eye cannot see itself because it is itself. However, we can see what is external to us, so I do not see why we would not be able to see God.

Because we don't see the seer.

 

[lunamoth]

Ever notice how love seems to the the spiritual equivalent of material gravity? Maybe they are different ends of the same stick.

Awesome post! Frubals!