God vs Science: Is there a point?

[Rick O'Shez]

See, you're using the small 'g.' That is what I am referring to. What is the small 'g?' Does it stand for a false god?
Here is what I learned about atheism, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God."

There is a convention that "God" with a capital G refers to the monotheist Abrahamic god. But there are many other gods, for example in Hinduism and Paganism. Atheism is a response to theism generally, not just monotheism.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But theism is the belief in the existence of any form of deity not just yours.

Indeed. People seem to forget about polytheism.

 

[godnotgod]

Is there a point to asking questions about God period? We can't prove anything about him. We probably can't know anything about him. He's probably incomprehensible to even the smartest possible being in the universe.

All of that supposes that God is some 'other' in relation to ourselves. But what if it is true that God is none other than ourselves, and that we have been playing a kind of hide and seek game with God, and when we find out our true nature, there will be much merriment and celebration.

So the first step in finding out if what I am suggesting has any validity, is to ask the question: Who is it that is asking if God exists or not?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Who is it that is asking if God exists or not?[/COLOR]

Try answering your own question, and then apply it to your new-age God substitutes like "Cosmic Consciousness" and "Ultimate Reality".

According to you the big bang was an "event in consciousness". Theists will claim that God did it. Both are unsubstantiated religious beliefs.

 

[godnotgod]

Try answering your own question, and then apply it to your new-age God substitutes like "Cosmic Consciousness" and "Ultimate Reality".

According to you the big bang was an "event in consciousness". Theists will claim that God did it. Both are unsubstantiated religious beliefs.

That the BB was an event in consciousness is not a religious belief. It does not say there is a God involved. The BB occurred in a timeless and spaceless condition. Consciousness is also not in time or space. There is nothing else that is timeless or spaceless. This 'material' world that emerged from the BB is an illusion, according to Buddhism (Sunyata), Hinduism (maya), and Quantum Physics (virtual reality/possibility), and therefore does not exist, let alone in time or space. In fact there is no time or space even now, although science tells us that it was 'created' at the moment of the inception of the BB. It is only a conceptual overlay, ie 'space-time).

 

[Rick O'Shez]

That the BB was an event in consciousness is not a religious belief. It does not say there is a God involved. The BB occurred in a timeless and spaceless condition. Consciousness is also not in time or space. There is nothing else that is timeless or spaceless. This 'material' world that emerged from the BB is an illusion, according to Buddhism (Sunyata), Hinduism (maya), and Quantum Physics (virtual reality/possibility), and therefore does not exist, let alone in time or space. In fact there is no time or space even now, although science tells us that it was 'created' at the moment of the inception of the BB. It is only a conceptual overlay, ie 'space-time).

What a horrible new-age stew of misrepresentation, pseudo-science and fabrication.

 

[godnotgod]

What a horrible new-age stew of misrepresentation, pseudo-science and fabrication.

So you disagree that the BB did not occur in a timeless, spaceless state?

Did you previously say that consciousness and their objects arise together, according to the Heart Sutra?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So you disagree that the BB did not occur in a timeless, spaceless state?

Your question is meaningless, we currently have no idea about "before" the big bang, or what state it "occurred" in. It seems that the big bang CREATED time and space, beyond that it is all question marks.

There is no support here for your new-age beliefs about the big bang being an "event in consciousness" and consciousness not being in time or space. As usual you are muddling lame pseudo-science with religious beliefs about consciousness, making spurious connections and arriving at nonsensical conclusions.

 

[godnotgod]

Your question is meaningless, we currently have no idea about "before" the big bang, or what state it "occurred" in. It seems that the big bang CREATED time and space, beyond that it is all question marks.
.

Well, DUH! If time and space came into existence at the inception of the BB, then the BB must be occurring in a timeless, spaceless condition. Note that I never said anything about a 'before' state. In reality, there is no such 'before', as there is no such thing as time. There is only this timeless spaceless present moment that is none else but consciousness.

Stop confusing time with change.

Stop confusing the illusion of change with reality.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Stop confusing time with change.

Stop confusing science with your new-age dogma and religious beliefs. Stop hijacking threads to preach your Chopra-inspired nonsense.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Really? You have not heard of it?

Terrific! Thanks for posting it.

 

[serp777]

All of that supposes that God is some 'other' in relation to ourselves. But what if it is true that God is none other than ourselves, and that we have been playing a kind of hide and seek game with God, and when we find out our true nature, there will be much merriment and celebration.

So the first step in finding out if what I am suggesting has any validity, is to ask the question: Who is it that is asking if God exists or not?

All of that supposes that God is some 'other' in relation to ourselves.

No it doesn't. I just said we probably can't know anything about him. That includes that we don't know any of his characteristics.

But what if it is true that God is none other than ourselves, and that we have been playing a kind of hide and seek game with God, and when we find out our true nature, there will be much merriment and celebration.

What ifs are irrelevant. It seems that its unlikely you could prove that or know that to be true.

Who is it that is asking if God exists or not?

Why would we assume that it matters? We don't know and we probably can't know.

 

[godnotgod]

Stop confusing science with your new-age dogma and religious beliefs. Stop hijacking threads to preach your Chopra-inspired nonsense.

STOP RUNNING OFF AT THE MOUTH. YOU'RE MAKING A MESS.

 

[godnotgod]

No it doesn't. I just said we probably can't know anything about him. That includes that we don't know any of his characteristics.

Yes, 'him', and 'his', as in 'self and other'. It is a duality of subject/object; observer/observed; self/other.

What ifs are irrelevant. It seems that its unlikely you could prove that or know that to be true.

Just sayin'. You and I may very well turn out to be the very thing we seek. The proof would be in the pudding, and you would know beyond any doubt, should you suddenly wake up to the fact of your own godmanship.

Why would we assume that it matters? We don't know and we probably can't know.[/QUOTE]

Well, the literature is filled with many who have asked just that question, and have found the answer. Do you know who is asking the question when you ask it? And if you don't, don't you want to know? Or is it OK with you that the questioner remains a mystery? And if you can answer the question, then who are you?