Are you Certain There is no God?

[Nakosis]

We can know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know.

Then you have more certainty then I do.

That's quite a wrong and insulting term to use in that case. It's like claiming that anything anyone cares about, or finds meaning and purpose in, is just random existential 'noise': is insignificant. I dare say you don't consider your own needs, desires, ethics, etc., "arbitrary".

No insult was intended.

"Lack of belief" is just meaningless negative gibberish. Either assert something, or don't.

I'm simply asserting that We can know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know.

 

[Nakosis]

This conscious Whole is God.

Since "God" is often used to describe an all-powerful, omnipotent, and omnipresent creator being, this only makes sense if it is referring to the undivided Universal Whole of existence, whatever that is (it can never be actually described or experienced due to the need to dice it up into digestible chunks).

So as a conscious extension of this Whole, I can describe it as being conscious itself. This is God. I can accurately say that I am God, or you are God. My cat is God. That pile of raw sewage is God. Or rather, all pieces of God.

Perhaps God is something else.

You've experienced something an decided to consider it to be God. Ok, often people define God as something they've experienced.

Maybe God is something we are not aware of, something we haven't experienced. Perhaps someday we will find that whatever we defined God as is not true.

Other folks define God as something else. I feel people lack the knowledge to define God as anything, but you have. Your certainty belongs to you.

 

[Bird123]

I am certain there is no good reason for me to believe in God.

Why?
I see no reason to believe anything in the Bible.
I see no reason to believe that God communicates to us either individually or through messengers.

One can of course choose to believe otherwise but there is no argument or evidence which compels one to make either choice. Right?

The choice to believe in these things, like the Bible is purely arbitrary.
Why I don't believe is the same reason I don't believe Harry Potter is anything more than a fictional character, I've no reason to.

Do you feel compelled to believe in God?
Do you feel belief is necessary?

I don't see it but perhaps you can explain it.

Believing has never ever been important to God. That has never been what it's all about. On the other hand, believing is crucial to religion. Without people believing, religion would have no followers. Without followers, religion could not exist.

Simply because one can not agree with holy books, does not mean God does not exist. I have found no religion that really understands God at all. Though holy books claim to come from God, in reality, they are all creations of mankind.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Nakosis]

Believing has never ever been important to God. That has never been what it's all about. On the other hand, believing is crucial to religion. Without people believing, religion would have no followers. Without followers, religion could not exist.

Simply because one can not agree with holy books, does not mean God does not exist. I have found no religion that really understands God at all. Though holy books claim to come from God, in reality, they are all creations of mankind.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

But you understand God, I assume?

I suppose this is what is meant by a personal God. God is what we say God is according to our personal experience. I don't believe I have the power to define God, or anyone does but I can only speak for myself.

I've have had different experiences of God thru differ religions. Maybe all are God. Maybe none are God. Does God change depending on what we believe?

 

[PureX]

Then you have more certainty then I do.

To know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know is not "certainty", it's self-evident. One of the very few truth propositions that are.

I'm simply asserting that We can know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know.

I see no correlation between proclaiming "unbelief" and this assertion. Care to explain?

 

[Bird123]

But you understand God, I assume?

I suppose this is what is meant by a personal God. God is what we say God is according to our personal experience. I don't believe I have the power to define God, or anyone does but I can only speak for myself.

I've have had different experiences of God thru differ religions. Maybe all are God. Maybe none are God. Does God change depending on what we believe?

To question is the start on the journey to Discovery.
I find you very intelligent not to blindly accept beliefs.

God is actually Someone. If God exists, then God can be found. God can be found.

People choose to see God as they see a Ruler. How little do they really know. God is Unconditional Love. This physical world does not exist for God. It exists for us. The goal has never ever been to Believe.

Be who you must. It's a part of the plan!! Choose what you want to Discover in life. Strive to make the best choices in life. You will find in time God values you as much as anyone regardless of any beliefs.

All the secrets of the universe stares us all in the face. Can you see? God hides nothing. How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? The knowledge was always there waiting to be Discovered. God places knowledge around us all. It waits for those who are ready.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[viole]

Let's play this one part at a the time:

Are you the result of something else than you, i.e. you are the effect of a causation that is not you and which limits what you are and what you can do?

It depends on the ontology of time we consider. Since I am a B theorist, the answer is no. Or, better, the question is meaningless.

ciao

- viole

 

[Nakosis]

To know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know is not "certainty", it's self-evident. One of the very few truth propositions that are.

Kind of what I'd expect anyone to say about their truth propositions. It is clearly self-evident until it isn't.

I see no correlation between proclaiming "unbelief" and this assertion. Care to explain?

Because I'm not talking about unbelief. I'm talking about lack of belief. If we accept our lack of knowing then what knowledge do we have to place any trust in?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It depends on the ontology of time we consider. Since I am a B theorist, the answer is no. Or, better, the question is meaningless.

ciao

- viole

So we do philosophy different as ontology. Well, let us stop there.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Kind of what I'd expect anyone to say about their truth propositions. It is clearly self-evident until it isn't.



Because I'm not talking about unbelief. I'm talking about lack of belief. If we accept our lack of knowing then what knowledge do we have to place any trust in?

None. I have beliefs that apparently work. You have beliefs you apparently consider special, so you call them knowledge as to different them as different from other beliefs.

 

[PureX]

Kind of what I'd expect anyone to say about their truth propositions. It is clearly self-evident until it isn't.

Then all you have to do is explain how it isn't. Do you know everything that could be known? Can you tell us what knowledge you're lacking?

Because I'm not talking about unbelief. I'm talking about lack of belief. If we accept our lack of knowing then what knowledge do we have to place any trust in?

There is no such state as "lack of belief". There is no such state as a "lack" of anything. It's incoherent gibberish.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Then all you have to do is explain how it isn't. Do you know everything that could be known? Can you tell us what knowledge you're lacking?
There is no such state as "lack of belief". There is no such state as a "lack" of anything. It's incoherent gibberish.

Any "negative" is not "real" as an actual state, because it is always another "positive", if you check. Atheists are not without positive beliefs about the world. They just have beliefs as "not theistic", but they are in effect always some other positive beliefs.

 

[PureX]

Any "negative" is not "real" as an actual state, because it is always another "positive", if you check. Atheists are not without positive beliefs about the world. They just have beliefs as "not theistic", but they are in effect always some other positive beliefs.

And that's fine. My objection is their hiding those positive beliefs behind this endless litany of "unbelief", so they won't have to defend what they do believe, even as they attack the beliefs of others. It's petty, and spiteful, and disingenuous. And all the more-so when it's pointed out to them, and they double down with insults because their egos feel attacked.

 

[viole]

So we do philosophy different as ontology. Well, let us stop there.

Yes, but that is an ontology strongly supported by physical findings. Not made up by philosophers

Ciao

- viole

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, but that is an ontology strongly supported by physical findings. Not made up by philosophers

Ciao

- viole

Yeah. Whatever rocks your boat. I have yet so come across a version of science, that was not grounded in philosophy of science. But if you can do that, all the power to you.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And that's fine. My objection is their hiding those positive beliefs behind this endless litany of "unbelief", so they won't have to defend what they do believe, even as they attack the beliefs of others. It's petty, and spiteful, and disingenuous. And all the more-so when it's pointed out to them, and they double down with insults because their egos feel attacked.

As sub-variant is that they go for sane. They are sane and we are not in effect. They hide it in fancy words, but it is there.

 

[Nakosis]

None. I have beliefs that apparently work. You have beliefs you apparently consider special, so you call them knowledge as to different them as different from other beliefs.

Yes, there are things that I rely on from experience. Though I tend to be skeptical to the point that if one day they stopped working, I wouldn't be terribly surprised.

 

[Nakosis]

Then all you have to do is explain how it isn't. Do you know everything that could be known? Can you tell us what knowledge you're lacking?

In some case yes. I don't know how the universe started or if it even had a starting point. Questions I don't have answers to.

There is no such state as "lack of belief". There is no such state as a "lack" of anything. It's incoherent gibberish.

I don't see it as a state. I see it as an acknowledgement. Accepting a lack of knowledge on a subject to place any trust into any belief.

So if it makes more sense to say I don't trust any beliefs about God. My judgement is, there are no beliefs about God worthy of consideration.

 

[PureX]

My judgement is, there are no beliefs about God worthy of consideration.

There are no beliefs about anything worthy of consideration. Only propositions.

 

[Nakosis]

There are no beliefs about anything worthy of consideration. Only propositions.

proposition
2a : an expression in language or signs of something that can be believed, doubted, or denied or is either true or false

One "can" choose to accept one of these positions or one can choose not to. I choose not to accept any of these positions about the proposition on God.