Do you KNOW God does not exist?

[Guy Threepwood]

hey Guy,
If a 'god' would desire 'love' from one that it created,
why didn't the 'god' instill the emotion to start with ?
Why does the created have to generate the 'love',
why is it not present in the entity of the created ?
As to 'controls', the creator has to be blamed for that, doesn't it ?
Or what about free will, does the created get credit for any of that ?
Why is the created doomed to death because of the lack of 'love' ?
Seems to be circular once again !
And it seems to be the 'death factor' given to the created by this 'god',
seems like a condemnation short of 'love' in reverse, doesn't it ?
Somewhat circular again !
~
Sorry....more salad, no olives !
I guess it's the dis-belief that causes the lapses,
one can't believe in something that doesn't exist to start with !
~
'mud

If you had that power, if you could plant a chip in somebody's brain to force them to love you, would you do it?

Tempting perhaps, but you would soon realize that you would destroy any possibility of love by doing this yes?

 

[leibowde84]

... whose mastery has reached the point of being "worship-worthy".

In any case, you've failed to make a decent case that there is such a thing as a unworshipped god.

... and it's not that important, anyhow: conceptually, when someone asks me "do you believe in God?" I can ask them "what do you mean by 'God'?" and get some sort of explanation.

We can go a step beyond this and ask ourselves "what does anyone and everyone mean by 'god'?" If we explore this a bit, we'll come up with a whole range of answers, some conflicting. We'll also identify holes where we aren't sure how some people define "god".

... but there's one thing we can be sure of: every single concept of "god" that anyone has ever had is something that can be conceived. Anything that is completely beyond the knowledge or perception of humanity is not - and cannot be - what people refer to when they say "god", because such things are completely, utterly unavailable for people to refer to at all.

"Worship worthy" is very different than "worshiped". I would agree that the meaning of the term "god" in the guitarist example would mean "worship-worthy", in a light-hearted, non-literal way. But, if you look at the dictionary definitions, "god" has a different meaning than "God". I'm not sure that anyone could accurately say that the guitarist was "God", but rather they would be saying that the guitarist is "a god". So, maybe that is not a good example.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

In past discussions we have explored the existance of the 'center' of the Cosmos.
Some call it the 'universe', meaning 'one','The All', an entity without end.
Now.....does 'GOD' exist ? Was it the causation ? Is it the energy of "The All' ?
If we could find the center of the 'The All', we'd know the answer !
The problem that I see, is the question of the belief, not the existance !
We cannot find a center, and we do not know of any edges !
Soooooo....if a 'GOD' does exist, I would think it is hiding,
somewhere beyond the light beyond the light, beyond the uttermost edge.
~
The large question in my mind, why does it hide ?
~
'mud

Same again Mud, you cannot force faith, love, belief, or they are meaningless- we each have the freedom to find God ourselves, we must have the choice to believe otherwise

So we at least have a rationale for why God would want to be discreet. But for the great lotto tumbler which accidentally spat us out for no particular reason.. why does that hide itself so well?
Yet another strange conscience?

 

[Koldo]

Why would the next life be worse? Of course it takes courage to face the unknown rather than to drown oneself in materialism.

It takes even more courage to leave our wishful thinking behind. I wish you courage.

 

[Unification]

You don't have to assert that there's nothing but the material world to assert that if a god doesn't have effects on the physical world, it doesn't exist:

- a god is an object of human worship. If a thing isn't known to humanity, then it can't be worshipped by humanity. If it isn't worshipped by humanity, it isn't a god.

- a god is relevant to humanity in some way. A god that may as well not exist is irrelevant and therefore not a god.

There may very well be all sorts of stuff out beyond the limits of our perception, but all of it's utterly unknown to us and therefore ineligible to be the "god" or "God" that anyone has ever referred to.

Consciousness isn't an object.
Light isn't an object.
Love isn't an object.
Peace isn't an object.
Wisdom isn't an object.
Knowledge isn't an object.
Mind isn't an object.
Inspiration isn't an object.
Experience isn't an object.
Being isn't an object.

These are all manifested into objects.

Like the myth says, "I(matter) and my Father(consciousness) are one.

Life is worth ship to me. All life. Naturally super.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"Worship worthy" is very different than "worshiped". I would agree that the meaning of the term "god" in the guitarist example would mean "worship-worthy", in a light-hearted, non-literal way.

The speaker is saying, hyperbolically, "I worship this guitarist and you should too."

But, if you look at the dictionary definitions, "god" has a different meaning than "God".

Yes - "God" is a proper noun for one particular god. The definition of "god" applies to God, but the characteristics of God do not necessarily apply to gods in general.

I'm not sure that anyone could accurately say that the guitarist was "God", but rather they would be saying that the guitarist is "a god". So, maybe that is not a good example.

"Clapton is God" was a huge thing in the 70s.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Consciousness isn't an object.
Light isn't an object.
Love isn't an object.
Peace isn't an object.
Wisdom isn't an object.
Knowledge isn't an object.
Mind isn't an object.
Inspiration isn't an object.
Experience isn't an object.
Being isn't an object.

These are all manifested into objects.

I think you're confusing different meanings of the word "object". When I say that a god is an object of worship, I'm not saying "a god is an object" in the sense of a physical thing that we could pick up and carry around. It just means that a god is something toward which worship is intentionally directed.

 

[Koldo]

In any case, you've failed to make a decent case that there is such a thing as a unworshipped god.

Hmm...
I can think of a made-up ( by myself ) being that I would refer to as 'god' and that isn't worshipped by anyone ( me included ). Actually, a lot of them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Hmm...
I can think of a made-up ( by myself ) being that I would refer to as 'god' and that isn't worshipped by anyone ( me included ). Actually, a lot of them.

What would make it a god?

How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg?

 

[Koldo]

What would make it a god?

How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg?

Its power over nature.

 

[leibowde84]

The speaker is saying, hyperbolically, "I worship this guitarist and you should too."


Yes - "God" is a proper noun for one particular god. The definition of "god" applies to God, but the characteristics of God do not necessarily apply to gods in general.


"Clapton is God" was a huge thing in the 70s.

whatever is said, I feel like the intended meaning is the lowercase version of "god". do you not agree?

 

[`mud]

hey Guy,
Other than the words of humans writing in their scriptures,
we have no indication of the existance of any or all 'gods' !
We also have the indication that nearly no women write these words.
It seems to be a chauvinistic trait, maybe self praise in a reflective attitude.
Having 'love' or any emotion for these ghosts of imagination,
would be foolish endeavors at best, or insanity at the worst !
These imaginations exist only in the minds of forlone people,
those that wish that their 'souls' will float to some heavenly rest.
I have mentioned, didn't I, that everyone will become a memory,
all people should wish that memories of them will be remembered.
Love from loved ones will be intensly more important,
than any 'love' for an invinsible 'god'.
But....go ahead and 'worship' and 'love' your 'gods',
I can only hope that you will be remembered fondly as well.
~
'mud

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

whatever is said, I feel like the intended meaning is the lowercase version of "god". do you not agree?

I think we're getting off-track. Whether we take my position (that "god" implies "object of worship") or yours (that "god" implies "master"), the conclusion is the same: for a thing to be a god, it must (among other things) have some sort of relationship with humanity.

... and if you don't like that, there's still the idea that inconceivable things can't possibly be concepts, and therefore can't be part of someone's concept of "god".

In any case, the term "god" describes a relatively narrow spectrum of ideas.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Its power over nature.

Exactly what power does "a made up being" have over nature?

Also: what do you mean by "nature"?

 

[viole]

I am only curious of how many people on RF state that they 100% KNOW God does not exist.

I am gleaning from new knowledge I learned from RF of what atheism and theism compared to agnosticism and gnosticism.

The former pair focuses on belief. Therefore, God "could" exist even though atheist disbelieve it.

Meanwhile, gnostics Know God does Not exist. There is no room that He "could" because He does not.

I know. I know. It would be ignorant for someone to say God does not exist. However, just because a theist claims He does, does not mean there is or should be reasonable doubt it is true.

This is not to debate God's existence. I am just curious of who Believes God does not exist with those who Know He does not.

NO strings and exclusions attached.

I think you are equivocating knowledge with absolute certainty. If you equivocate the two, things like scientific knowledge would become an oxymoron, to be replaced by scientific agnosticism, which sounds silly.

I know god does not exist in the same way i know that the planets are not carried around by invisible angels. Am I 100% certain that planets are not carried around by invisible angels? Nope.

Ciao

- viole

 

[leibowde84]

I think we're getting off-track. Whether we take my position (that "god" implies "object of worship") or yours (that "god" implies "master"), the conclusion is the same: for a thing to be a god, it must (among other things) have some sort of relationship with humanity.

... and if you don't like that, there's still the idea that inconceivable things can't possibly be concepts, and therefore can't be part of someone's concept of "god".

In any case, the term "god" describes a relatively narrow spectrum of ideas.

I agree with everything you said here except for the idea of "god" or "gods" being somewhat limited. My original point was that the term "god" is so vague that it is not falsifiable.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think you are equivocating knowledge with absolute certainty. If you equivocate the two, things like scientific knowledge would become an oxymoron, to be replaced by scientific agnosticism, which sounds silly.

I know god does not exist in the same way i know that the planets are not carried around by invisible angels. Am I 100% certain that planets are not carried around by invisible angels? Nope.

Ciao

- viole

How can you know and not be certain? That sounds like you Believe angels dont carry planets; but, believe in something doesnt make it true. Likewise the opposite. If you say Know, there is no exclusions. It leaves out possiblities and claims certainty.

 

[Magic Man]

This, of course, all depends on the definition of "God" you're using. If you mean the standard theistic god who created the universe and has been intimately involved in it the whole time, then I am 100% sure it does not exist. There are other definitions of "God" that either do or could exist, though. However, I don't particularly like using that term for them.

 

[Koldo]

Exactly what power does "a made up being" have over nature?

Also: what do you mean by "nature"?

None if it doesn't really exist. But if it were to exist, then it would have such a power, and that suffices for me to call it 'god'.

By nature, I mean 'universe'.

 

[viole]

How can you know and not be certain? That sounds like you Believe angels dont carry planets; but, believe in something doesnt make it true. Likewise the opposite. If you say Know, there is no exclusions. It leaves out possiblities and claims certainty.

Well, no.

To see that, ask yourself the question. Does the sentence "scientific knowledge" make sense to you?

Ciao

- viole