If God is something real for you, how do you imagine who/what that is?

[Whateverist]

When I was a young kid I imagined God as a beardy guy in the sky. Soon I stopped thinking God was real because it didn't jive with everything else I knew about the world and because my very religious father was away with the navy and my mother wasn't dragging seven of us there alone. I pretty much figured it was just old superstition held together by long habit. I was pretty dismissive and naively thought science was all the reality we were going to get.

Now I think I had been rash. The real decision isn't whether you do or don't think God exists but what you think the word refers to and what value it has had to people since before the written word.

I do think it is real but I see it neither as a who nor a what but simply as something prior. Nothing like a watchmaker let alone a supernatural being or even any kind of being apart from the cosmos. I don't think it has a master plan or plays favorites or offers any kind of immortality whether in suffering or happiness. The only sense of continuation of life it offers is the realization of being part of something ancient that will go on through other beings when our time is up.

 

[sun rise]

what you think the word refers to

Experiencing Divinity is not about reading something in a book but about experience which is ineffable, beyond words. Poetry, music and dance can hint at the answer. Here's what Kabir had to say:

Are you looking for me? I am in the next seat.
My shoulder is against yours.
You will not find me in stupas, not in Indian shrine rooms,
nor in synagogues, nor in cathedrals:
not in masses, nor kirtans, not in legs winding around your own neck, nor in eating nothing but vegetables.
When you really look for me, you will see me instantly-you will find me in the tiniest house of time.
Kabir says: Student, tell me, what is God?
He is the breath inside the breath.

 

[PureX]

When I was a young kid I imagined God as a beardy guy in the sky. Soon I stopped thinking God was real because it didn't jive with everything else I knew about the world and because my very religious father was away with the navy and my mother wasn't dragging seven of us there alone. I pretty much figured it was just old superstition held together by long habit. I was pretty dismissive and naively thought science was all the reality we were going to get.

Now I think I had been rash. The real decision isn't whether you do or don't think God exists but what you think the word refers to and what value it has had to people since before the written word.

I do think it is real but I see it neither as a who nor a what but simply as something prior. Nothing like a watchmaker let alone a supernatural being or even any kind of being apart from the cosmos. I don't think it has a master plan or plays favorites or offers any kind of immortality whether in suffering or happiness. The only sense of continuation of life it offers is the realization of being part of something ancient that will go on through other beings when our time is up.

Our concept of God often morphs as we live out our lives, ... because it can, and because it can continue to be useful to us that way. God is all of them: the 'beardy guy in the sky', the sinless man nailed to the cross, the voice within that becons us to love, an forgive, and to be kind and generous even in the face of frustration and hopelessness. Whichever of these god-ideas and images we need and can use to help us keep the divine nature of existence in focus as we walk though our life is a good thng.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I have little concern about the reality of the God of the gaps. It's enough that I find the gaps to be awe inspiring.

 

[Quintessence]

The real decision isn't whether you do or don't think God exists but what you think the word refers to and what value it has had to people since before the written word.

In a broader sense, this is the case for all words/labels applied to life experiences. Part of why I find questions like "does X exist" frivolous is because the moment we've put a label to the experience, well... something undeniably real prompted us to do that in the first place? It exists in some sense if we can know or experience it in any way, so the question is what sense and what experience the word is pointing to and what it means to those using it.

I use "gods" to point to that which is sacred. For me, everything in this interconnected, interdependent weave of realities is sacred. Some will balk at the notion and state that if everything is sacred then nothing is, but this misses the point. There is value in understanding all things as sacred that is not had when one does not do so. It cultivates an attitude of gratitude, awe, appreciation, humility, and joy towards all things. That's the value of applying the title of "gods" for me. It is acknowledging that there are many powers and forces greater than I am, that each thing of this world bears gifts and lessons and virtues, and that the world is worthy of living in, exploring, taking joy in.

 

[Whateverist]

Experiencing Divinity is not about reading something in a book but about experience which is ineffable, beyond words.

Absolutely. I haven’t and wouldn’t imply otherwise. But “God/gods” means something to those who believe or disbelieve on that. Here I’m only looking to learn how others think about what that is. So far - and I’m only now catching up - Kabir’s wordx are the only quotes I’ve seen in this thread.

 

[Twilight Hue]

When I was a young kid I imagined God as a beardy guy in the sky. Soon I stopped thinking God was real because it didn't jive with everything else I knew about the world and because my very religious father was away with the navy and my mother wasn't dragging seven of us there alone. I pretty much figured it was just old superstition held together by long habit. I was pretty dismissive and naively thought science was all the reality we were going to get.

Now I think I had been rash. The real decision isn't whether you do or don't think God exists but what you think the word refers to and what value it has had to people since before the written word.

I do think it is real but I see it neither as a who nor a what but simply as something prior. Nothing like a watchmaker let alone a supernatural being or even any kind of being apart from the cosmos. I don't think it has a master plan or plays favorites or offers any kind of immortality whether in suffering or happiness. The only sense of continuation of life it offers is the realization of being part of something ancient that will go on through other beings when our time is up.

I certainly have no qualms about God being real in people's minds and imaginations , that's your personal realm where anything goes.

Anything past that however is total bullocks as it pertains to the way the actual natural universe works.

God is alive in one's mind, but quite dead in the world.

 

[crossbody]

As for me, God is my Creator, my LORD, and my Love. I worship God in Spirit and in truth by faith through Christ Jesus my Lord and Savior. God is Abba Father which art in heaven. God is my healer, helper, provider, guide, etc... He is Jehovah my everything. Amen

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In a broader sense, this is the case for all words/labels applied to life experiences. Part of why I find questions like "does X exist" frivolous is because the moment we've put a label to the experience, well... something undeniably real prompted us to do that in the first place? It exists in some sense if we can know or experience it in any way, so the question is what sense and what experience the word is pointing to and what it means to those using it.

It seems like you're assuming that the concept of a thing is, in some sense, the thing itself. I don't see how this could work.

The classic thought exercise is to draw a bicycle from memory. Express the concept on the page with as much detail as you can, making it as accurate as you can. When you're done, look at it and - giving yourself as much latitude for drawing skill as you want - look at it critically and ask yourself "is this a bicycle? Does it have any critical differences from an actual bicycle? Would it actually function like a bicycle functions?"

Our concepts are approximations of the things they refer to. Models of the things, not the things themselves. They don't include anything that the person is unaware of or thinks is unimportant.

 

[Quintessence]

It seems like you're assuming that the concept of a thing is, in some sense, the thing itself. I don't see how this could work.

Nah, that's not quite right. I assume the concept of a thing is a thing itself. Ideas are things. Ideas exist, in of themselves.

 

[Whateverist]

In a broader sense, this is the case for all words/labels applied to life experiences. Part of why I find questions like "does X exist" frivolous is because the moment we've put a label to the experience, well... something undeniably real prompted us to do that in the first place? It exists in some sense if we can know or experience it in any way, so the question is what sense and what experience the word is pointing to and what it means to those using it.

I use "gods" to point to that which is sacred. For me, everything in this interconnected, interdependent weave of realities is sacred. Some will balk at the notion and state that if everything is sacred then nothing is, but this misses the point. There is value in understanding all things as sacred that is not had when one does not do so. It cultivates an attitude of gratitude, awe, appreciation, humility, and joy towards all things. That's the value of applying the title of "gods" for me. It is acknowledging that there are many powers and forces greater than I am, that each thing of this world bears gifts and lessons and virtues, and that the world is worthy of living in, exploring, taking joy in.

I agree. Just because many want whatever it is "God" has meant to people over the years to conform to the way they would like a new species of lizard to be described, doesn't mean that is appropriate or even possible.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Nah, that's not quite right. I assume the concept of a thing is a thing itself. Ideas are things. Ideas exist, in of themselves.

When someone asks "does God exist?", do you understand them to mean "does God (the idea) exist?" and not something like "does God (the idea) correspond to something that exists objectively, outside our heads?"

If your particular worldview and base assumptions makes the answer to the question "does God exist?" obvious, you can infer from the fact that people actually ask the question that they have a different worldview and base assumptions than you do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I agree. Just because many want whatever it is "God" has meant to people over the years to conform to the way they would like a new species of lizard to be described, doesn't mean that is appropriate or even possible.

Why wouldn't it be appropriate?

 

[Whateverist]

Why wouldn't it be appropriate?

It would be inappropriate if it were a category error..

 

[siti]

Just because many want whatever it is "God" has meant to people over the years to conform to the way they would like a new species of lizard to be described, doesn't mean that is appropriate or even possible.

I wonder if a "taxonomy" of "gods" might actually be a very useful thing to have. It might help us to understand what people are talking about when they say the word.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It would be inappropriate if it were a category error..

Are you saying that it is a category error?

 

[The Hammer]

"If God is something real for you, how do you imagine who/what that is?"

Which God? There isn't just a single one.

 

[Whateverist]

"If God is something real for you, how do you imagine who/what that is?"

Which God? There isn't just a single one.

If we’re looking for something along the lines of a Marvel comic there likely is not even one. But that would indicate we don’t know what to look for and perhaps do not even know what “God” means.

 

[Whateverist]

Are you saying that it is a category error?

Yes. God is only recognizable as a gestalt and cannot be deduced from a compilation of all demonstrable facts. It isn’t an empirical matter nor a question of pure logic. If it has any validity at all you’d need access to insight afforded by the depths of your humanity.

 

[The Hammer]

If we’re looking for something along the lines of a Marvel comic there likely is not even one. But that would indicate we don’t know what to look for and perhaps do not even know what “God” means.

I appreciate your response, and can forgive the ignorance of polytheism. I was not suggesting anything comic book, what made you assume I was?

God(s) mean many things to many people.