Real vs fictious divinity

[37818]

Describe then what the Real God should be.

In the words of the Apostle Paul, Acts 17:28, "In Him [God] we live and move and have our being . . . ." God being the uncaused reality in which all existing things exist.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I've no objection to your position (in as little as I know what it is), I'm just pointing out the practical realities that go beyond that.

I mean, you literally talked about things that "we" are, which is exactly what I'm talking about. Regardless of what we think about the deep philosophical questions of reality and existence, for simple day-to-day purposes we all have to make a whole load of practical assumptions.

Yeah, we are a "we" in a limited sense, but we are not a "we" for all practical matters of the everyday world. So even your standard of practical has a limit.
So I accept that you do your life differently in some cases, but I don't care for them as me, because I can do them differently.
In practice that you don't care, is not limited to you and that is the limit of your "we".
You can play normal all you like and however non-normal I can be, if I can be that in practice, then it is normal and real of the everyday world, no matter that you don't care. And it goes both ways.

 

[Muffled]

Beelzebub was a Philistine god which appears to be nothing more that a dumb powerless idol, one that he ark of the covenant knocked over on its face. The Jews tried to elevate it to a spiritual entity by calling it a demon. - Wikipedia

Yahweh is omniscient and omnipotent.

 

[Muffled]

Start by figuring out how the word "real" works.

I believe by that he means not fictional.

 

[Muffled]

Beelzebub was a Philistine god which appears to be nothing more that a dumb powerless idol, one that he ark of the covenant knocked over on its face. The Jews tried to elevate it to a spiritual entity by calling it a demon. - Wikipedia

I believe Yahweh is omniscient and omnipotent.

 

[Muffled]

The statue of the god Shiva in CERN is a real thing. You can even touch that god. How is it not real?

WHY DOES CERN HAVE A STATUE OF LORD SHIVA - Physics only

I believe the statue is real but the concept of God behind it is most likely in error. I realized that there are many literal gods but I can't remember any fictional ones. However there is a great deal of fiction written about literal gods.

 

[PureX]

Possibilities, yes, but logical? How so? Can you show me the algebra?
Maybe "reasonable" would be a better choice, or no qualifier at all.

"Reasoning" is the action of applying logic to information. They are not at odds wit each other.

Logic is pretty black-and-white.

It's not a 'stand alone' phenomenon. It only exists through application, and it is as complex or as simple as the information we apply it to.

As for viability -- I think you mean verifiability -- why not? Why would God not be verifiable?

God precedes and transcends existence as we experience and understand it. So we have no tools with which to explore (or validate our theories about) the realm of God.

For a verifiable claim, isn't it reasonable to withhold belief in the claim till verified, or at least evidenced?
For a non-verifiable claim, wouldn't it also be reasonable to defer belief?

What you choose to believe is irrelevant because you can't know one way or the other. The question at hand is not what to believe, but what to trust. The question is; should we trust that this proposed God-possibility is true? And the answer to that question will depend on the results of our doing so.

 

[Valjean]

"Reasoning" is the action of applying logic to information. They are not at odds wit each other.

Yes, often it is. Logic can be reduced to an algebraic operation, but a belief can be reasonable without formally analyzing it.
Boolean Algebra - All the Laws, Rules, Properties and Operations

God precedes and transcends existence as we experience and understand it. So we have no tools with which to explore (or validate our theories about) the realm of God.

You make a positive claim about god, then go on to admit it cannot be validated. Yet you believe it. Why?
This is what we claim to be unreasonable.

What you choose to believe is irrelevant because you can't know one way or the other.

So, again, why do you preach it?

The question at hand is not what to believe, but what to trust. The question is; should we trust that this proposed God-possibility is true? And the answer to that question will depend on the results of our doing so.

An interesting twist. Can you explain what you mean by results, and how they might justify belief, non-belief, or 'trust'?
What results would justify belief in God?

 

[PureX]

Yes, often it is. Logic can be reduced to an algebraic operation, but a belief can be reasonable without formally analyzing it.
Boolean Algebra - All the Laws, Rules, Properties and Operations

Math is fiction. Like a language. It is meaningless until we 'plug reality into it'. The same is true of "belief". Our beliefs are the fiction that we decide to call "true" (until it's proven otherwise).

You make a positive claim about god, then go on to admit it cannot be validated. Yet you believe it. Why?

For the umteenth time, "belief" is irrelevant. I choose to trust in the possibilities that I conceive of as "God" because doing so works better for me than not doing so. It's as simple as that.

This is what we claim to be unreasonable.

How is anything I've posted so far unreasonable? I think the problem is that you have no idea what theism even is. I think you think it's just some religious dogma that you don't understand, and so don't see any value in; so you reject it.

So, again, why do you preach it?

All I "preach" is my own experience. Whatever else you think you're hearing is of your own imagination.

An interesting twist. Can you explain what you mean by results, and how they might justify belief, non-belief, or 'trust'?
What results would justify belief in God?

I choose to perceive 'God' as a divine realm of existence that transcends the physical realm that we humans inhabit. It is the metaphysical the realm of love, forgiveness, kindness, generosity; and of beauty, gratitude, and truth. It is a realm of being that we humans are able to glimpse, and even to occasionally embody, but are not yet able to fully inhabit. It is the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is (for me). And so to embody this realm of being is then also my purpose, as I am a part of all that is. And I find that as I try to live according to my faith in this idealization of "God", my experience of living is greatly improved, and to some small degree, so is the life experience of those around me.

Are any of my conceptions about God as a "divine realm of being" true? I have no idea. Can I prove any of it to you? Nope. But what I can offer you as evidence is that when I try to live according to this presumed truth, my experience of living is improved. And I would suggest to you that if you did the same, you would get a similar result. Nothing I have conceived of or proposed, here, is illogical, irrational, or unfounded. It's just my chosen way of conceiving of that great, mysterious possibility that we humans generally refer to as "God". ...But it cannot be explored abstractly, from a distance. We have to participate in the idea to gain any result from it. And that requires the action of faith. Theism is ALL ABOUT FAITH, not "belief". Because we have to act on faith, first, to get the 'evidential results'.

And that's what you atheists can't accept: this acting on faith, to determine value. You want to sift through the evidence in advance, to determine truthfulness. But God is beyond the reach of determined truthfulness. Your method is inapplicable. And that's what you (meaning all atheists) won't face, won't accept, and so cannot understand.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...
I choose to perceive 'God' as a divine realm of existence that transcends the physical realm that we humans inhabit. It is the metaphysical the realm of love, forgiveness, kindness, generosity; and of beauty, gratitude, and truth. It is a realm of being that we humans are able to glimpse, and even to occasionally embody, but are not yet able to fully inhabit. It is the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is (for me). And so to embody this realm of being is then also my purpose, as I am a part of all that is. And I find that as I try to live according to my faith in this idealization of "God", my experience of living is greatly improved, and to some small degree, so is the life experience of those around me.

Are any of my conceptions about God as a "divine realm of being" true? I have no idea. Can I prove any of it to you? Nope. But what I can offer you as evidence is that when I try to live according to this presumed truth, my experience of living is improved. And I would suggest to you that if you did the same, you would get a similar result. Nothing I have conceived of or proposed, here, is illogical, irrational, or unfounded. It's just my chosen way of conceiving of that great, mysterious possibility that we humans generally refer to as "God". ...But it cannot be explored abstractly, from a distance. We have to participate in the idea to gain any result from it. And that requires the action of faith. Theism is ALL ABOUT FAITH, not "belief". Because we have to act on faith, first, to get the 'evidential results'.

And that's what you atheists can't accept: this acting on faith, to determine value. You want to sift through the evidence in advance, to determine truthfulness. But God is beyond the reach of determined truthfulness. Your method is inapplicable. And that's what you (meaning all atheists) won't face, won't accept, and so cannot understand.

Well, even as an atheist, I do get you. Value is an act of faith. It can't be reached through reason, logic and evidence.

Yet I am too much of an atheist, that I can only get so close as this. I accept your God as God, but I don't believe in him. I do have faith in all the positive values you list as with God and that is as close as I can get.

Regards
Mikkel

 

[PureX]

Well, even as an atheist, I do get you. Value is an act of faith. It can't be reached through reason, logic and evidence.

Yet I am too much of an atheist, that I can only get so close as this. I accept your God as God, but I don't believe in him. I do have faith in all the positive values you list as with God and that is as close as I can get.

Regards
Mikkel

But why would you accept my idea of God? Why would anyone? It's about developing your own, and then trusting in that to see what happens. That's the great thing about the 'great mystery' we call God: we get to conceptualize it however we want. However it makes sense to us. And especially, however it works for us in a positive way. Because it IS a mystery. It's not going to be resolved, or figured out, or verified by we humans. It's going to remain an open question that we can fill in with our highest hopes, and most positive values, and aspirations, and then use as a means of trying to embody them.

Some people prefer to do this by conceptualizing God as a 'personage'. Or as they've seen depicted in some religious story. And that's OK, too - if it's working for them. Because there is no "wrong way" or "right way" that we humans will ever be able to determine. There is only the way we choose, and the results that come from living in accordance with it.