What is a real God?

[Earthling]

Imaginary gods will produce all those effects. I'm talking about a real god, a god with objective existence.

I don't see how an imaginary god could produce any effects other than those of the imagination of the one who's god it is.

And I don't have any useful answers so far. If God is real, what's the objective quality of godness that distinguishes [him] from a superscientist? If there's none, then 'god' is an arbitrary title that humans can bestow, hence can withdraw.

You got it. And, by the way, the term super scientist is pretty much implying divinity, or godness, as you call it. If a scientist is considered super that's pretty much attributing a might that is greater than that of the one attributing it. That's a god.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Imaginary gods will produce all those effects. I'm talking about a real god, a god with objective existence.

And I don't have any useful answers so far. If God is real, what's the objective quality of godness that distinguishes [him] from a superscientist? If there's none, then 'god' is an arbitrary title that humans can bestow, hence can withdraw.

What is a real god apart from culture and people (superscientists)?

What idea of god that can answer your question that is unique and foriegn to the people who believe it (since god is a mystery to believers, how can they explain to you a god they cant explain the nature of themelves)?

God is a name (gods) are names for things and/or people that are revered. It not specific to one type of god.

Gods to believers have specific definitions and cultural traits that make up the existences of their said gods. There are no gods outside culture.

What are you looking for that believers can give you an answer for?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Then that's not my concern here. In this thread I'm only interested in real gods.

Real gods are not seperated from culture. Unless you are asking about a force, spirit, essense, or energy of somesort, what is real to you in which they should share in your definition to answer your question?

 

[Jumi]

Do you think God is / gods are real, or just imaginary?

Some gods are real, but not interesting or special because they are just by definition, ie. god of Rock'n Roll, the Sun or the Universe as god.

The interesting one is that which you can reach. Call it a concept or principle you can experience. You either have that experience or you don't.

If you think they're real, what is 'godness' ─ what real quality does a god have that distinguishes it as a god from everything that's not a god (not least superscientists)?

For one, it wouldn't have any physical manifestation by itself, if it did, it would be a trivial or "movie god". It would interact indirectly and naturally by medium of layers of consciousness.

There are multiple cultural definitions of gods that you've learned about in this thread that satisfy many religionists and anti-religionists alike. I'd say for those gods, a super-engineer is indistinguishable, as is a stage magician with sophisticated and expensive equipment.

 

[WalterTrull]

Brains are local. No brain, no mind. Seems straightforward to me.

That's the argument.

 

[David T]

I'm not arguing. I'm trying to get an answer to a plain question.

I'm not arguing. I'm trying to get an answer to a plain question.

Really? So in Christianity there are about 40,000 denominations, speaking probably every language on the planet.coming from an inpossibly large sum er of traditions. Asking please explain yourselves in Co. Text to 2,000 year old bronze age "esoteric" text. Highly highly esoteric 2,000 years ago. Not only all the above it appears the issues have grown muddier over time not clearer. So if you insist on parading through all that... Good luck.

Now if you are interested in nature well then how one approaches nature determines how one sees it. John Muir is not easy to understand.

 

[Nakosis]

If we ever encounter a particularly powerful being who can do things we can’t – create universes, destroy worlds, read thoughts, restore the dead to life, convert water to wine, become invisible, act remotely, grant wishes &c – what test will tell us whether that being is God (or, a god) or not?

What, in real terms, is ‘godness’? What real quality does God have that a superscientist doesn’t? What objective test must we apply to resolve the question?

I suppose if this being demands we worship them as a God and threatens to flood the world to kill all life on the planet if we don't and provides proof they are capable of such a feat, you might want to consider accepting them as a God.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Whether there's only one God, or whether there are many, either there is a quality of godness that makes God a god, or the gods gods, or God / god is an arbitrary title bestowed by humans. Which is it?

They are not the same. Each are defined by person, people, and culture.

Which god are you speaking of?

Then either God is not real, or God is real but [his] God status is given to him by humans and is not some innate quality of [him]self.

By definition of culture, yes his status is given by to him by humans. Most if not all believers in deity/god say god is a mystery. You cant explain something to another if you cant define it yourself.

What exactly are you asking that believers can give you answers for when they cant or dont want to describe him themselves?

But if you need revelation to know about God then God isn't real hence God is imaginary. If God is real then God is as discernible, as examinable, as any other real thing, and revelation doesn't come into it.

God is not tangible. To some cultures yes, god is a revelation. An experience. Youre trying to find a definition of god that even believers dont even share.

What exactly is it you are looking for if god is not: love, the earth, energy, incarnation, or experience of self?

These things are real; people experience and call these things as gods because they see them as higher or more deeper than themselves and teh mudane world. If not, they would not call them gods. No Pagan. No Hindu. No Muslim. No....

Theres no "one god fits all"

 

[`mud]

Still unanswered:
said Blu 2: In this thread I'm only interested in real gods.
said Roth: Well, what is, in your opinion a real god and what isn't ?
said Artist: Most if not all believers in deity/god say god is a mystery.

 

[blü 2]

Well, what is, in your opinion a real god and what isn't?

A god with objective existence, a god that's not imaginary. I'm looking for a coherent description of what such a god could be, since I have no idea.

Imaginary gods, no problem, of course. They're anything one wants them to be.

 

[blü 2]

But I just got done explaining that you cannot see God as a separate thing. How then can you look for it as one? You can however see God in all things, if you can get past your mind seeing only an ant, if you can get beyond your concept of an ant.

You misunderstand. If God is real, then God is a distinct being with objective existence. If God is imaginary then God can be anything we want.

Unless you're saying that 'God' is a synonym for 'everything', in which case I prefer to say 'everything' since that's nice and clear; and then ask you why anyone would want to worship everything as such.

Existence is not a quality. It's a reality.

To be real, a thing has to have objective existence, to exist independently of the concept of it in any brain. Otherwise its only existence is as something imagined by a brain.

Can you see "art" as a thing apart from the painting? Or do you see art expressed through and in the painting? Is the painting "not art" simply because it is paint on canvas?

'Art' is an abstraction, a human judgment, not a real object. Art is whatever a human chooses to call art, whether sculpture, painting, music, literature, design, architecture, sequences of scent or texture, this photo but not that one, a toilet bowl, wallpaper, a planned garden, on and on. No human present, no art present.

The super-scientist is not the Ground of all Being. The super-scientist has a beginning and an end.

Says who?

The quality of God is the Source of all existence, hence not separate from existence.

This is where you need to tell me how God can be distinguished from mass-energy. Once again, if God is a synonym for mass-energy, I prefer to say mass-energy, and ask why anyone would worship it.

 

[blü 2]

No, I'm saying that "God" is as "real" as anything else is, because both God and reality are metaphysical idealizations that exist in our mind as a manifestation of cognition.

I disagree. Reality was there before I was born and reality will be there after I'm dead. Just by posting here you demonstrate that you think external reality exists, and that you can know about it via your senses,'

 

[Earthling]

A god with objective existence, a god that's not imaginary. I'm looking for a coherent description of what such a god could be, since I have no idea.

Imaginary gods, no problem, of course. They're anything one wants them to be.

You're over thinking it. To say a real god is sort of inaccurate. Because a god doesn't have to be real. If you rephrased that to be a god that's real, that would be more accurate. I've given examples of that. But an outstanding example is the sun. Sun worship is well known. The sun is real.

 

[blü 2]

I don't see how an imaginary god could produce any effects other than those of the imagination of the one who's god it is.

Obviously an imaginary god can motivate particular groups to act in ways that otherwise they might not ─ whether marching into the arena to die as martyrs, or planting bombs on trains, or invading the holylands, or building schools and hospitals. Not that religion is necessary to do these things, not that religion is often used as an excuse for barbarity, but simply that ─ as the Tanakh records ─ it reinforces the social cohesion of tribes, not that sports teams don't do the same thing. But if we've evolved to find gods useful in various circumstances, that doesn't make them real, give them objective existence.

You got it. And, by the way, the term super scientist is pretty much implying divinity, or godness, as you call it. If a scientist is considered super that's pretty much attributing a might that is greater than that of the one attributing it. That's a god.

Leading to the question, who would choose to worship a superscientist? The real task would instead be to learn what the superscientist knows and we don't. Indeed, the failure of believers to use scientific method so as to discover how to perform miracles, or to demand that the armed services prepare to deal with supernatural attack, may suggest to you, as it does to me, that believers in some sense know gods are imaginary, are social focuses for eg group cohesion, aspiration and so on.

But that's not the point of this thread. Here I want to see if believers have a coherent account of a real god. So far no luck.

 

[blü 2]

What is a real god apart from culture and people (superscientists)?

I don't know. Hence this thread.

What idea of god that can answer your question that is unique and foriegn to the people who believe it (since god is a mystery to believers, how can they explain to you a god they cant explain the nature of themelves)?

If I were in that position, I'd reply, I understand your question but I don't know the answer ─ I can give no coherent account of what a real god, or real godness, could be.

 

[blü 2]

Real gods are not seperated from culture. Unless you are asking about a force, spirit, essense, or energy of somesort, what is real to you in which they should share in your definition to answer your question?

I've defined what I mean by 'real' in the OP. That definition is coherent and covers the question I'm asking here.

 

[stvdv]

Then while I respect your explorations, I think you're saying you can't answer my question.
But don't let me put words in your mouth.

The below quote is what an Indian Sage said about "the Divine" and "Bliss". You are free to accept this wisdom or to reject it. It does makes clear that we have to search/find ourselves
But from the below it is clear nobody can give it to you. That is my experience also. I am engineer, very scientific mind. So to accept the below took long time [but works for me now]
Bottomline: If I am perfectly happy in my heart, there is for me no need to search anymore. When I found the solution no more search either, just follow their instructions
I don't say "I experience it 24/7 far from that", but I get glimpses now and then, so my way works for me. And you are right, I can't hand it over to you.

Ancient sages who experienced the fragrance of the Divine searched for the form. They sought Him in forests and bushes. They had renounced everything and made a lot of sacrifices, still they could not find the source. Some even gave up midway, being satisfied with the fragrance that they had experienced. But others, with relentless determination, were able to find the flower eventually. There were yet others who could not experience the fragrance itself due to ‘severe cold’, and were termed atheists. Even though they had the nose they could not experience the fragrance of divine Bliss; they indeed are the unfortunate ones. But those who were able to experience this bliss exclaimed in ecstasy, “Vedahametham Purusham Mahantam (We have realised the Supreme Personality of the Godhead).” How is one to realise this? In every human being, the bliss or Ananda emanates from the heart, just as fragrance from a flower. The heart truly is complete and full.[Divine Discourse, Apr 29, 1998]

 

[blü 2]

The interesting one is that which you can reach. Call it a concept or principle you can experience. You either have that experience or you don't.

But not the experience of something real, something with objective existence ─ which is what I'm asking about.

For one, it wouldn't have any physical manifestation by itself, if it did, it would be a trivial or "movie god". It would interact indirectly and naturally by medium of layers of consciousness.

If it didn't have any physical form to it, it wouldn't be a real god ─ it would only exist in imagination. Such a god is not the subject of my question.

There are multiple cultural definitions of gods that you've learned about in this thread that satisfy many religionists and anti-religionists alike. I'd say for those gods, a super-engineer is indistinguishable, as is a stage magician with sophisticated and expensive equipment.

So if God is real, [he]'s actually a superscientist, you're saying ─ there's no real quality 'godness'. Is that right?

 

[blü 2]

That's the argument.

Okay, noted. Thanks.

 

[blü 2]

Good luck.

Thanks. Looks like I'll need it.