|
|
Post by Maverick on Dec 26, 2003 18:24:01 GMT -5
In order to have an intelligent conversation about the existence of a deity, we must first define what we are talking about. With that in mind, I propose the following question to our theistic posters:
What is god? How do you define the deity you believe in?
|
|
|
|
Post by dragonfly on Dec 26, 2003 21:34:49 GMT -5
I am not strictly speaking atheist but nor do I believe in any god or deity as defined by any known religious group.
I believe that the true form of God(or Gods)if it exists (or did exist) can not be percieved or comprehended by humanity ...However I believe that the existing religions have tried to explore and define to the best of their ability and the limited confines of the human mind the sense of God.
I think most humans throughout time have sensed the presence of a creator which they then represent through the distorted lens of culture and personal experience.I think this creating force exists.
If there is a creator I find it hard to concieve of one defined by our terms of good and evil.I also have difficulty with believing in an intervening God or one who responds to prayer (if there is one, the criteria for intervention is not clear cut as many terrible things happen to many supposedly good people)However life and the processes governing life are amazing and so incredible things do happen but wether it is the hand of god who knows?
I do think I believe in an intelligent "something" beyond my powers to concieve of.I have somehow sensed it....you can argue that its my imagination because certainly thats a possibility. But there are or have been stranges forces at work upon our earth....evolution does not explain adequately all forms and patterns of life.Can I say I sense a soul? For what purpose we were made ...or indeed anything was made I can not even fathom a guess....but I feel something and I also yearn for this something .
|
|
|
|
Post by droskey on Dec 27, 2003 14:54:13 GMT -5
I think that this is a good thread because, debate about gods almost always revolves around definitions. However, rarely do people, atheists, theists, etc. bother to define what they are debating.
I think that it is impossible to conclude that gods do not exist. However, it is possible to be almost certain that a particular type of god does not exist.
I think dragonfly expressed things eloquently from her point of view. I would have said things differently for my part. Several things that dragonfly mentioned merit further examination.
dragonfly
This could be the case. However, if God is unknowable (an agnostic point of view) then why talk of God at all?
dragonfly
This resonates with me quite a bit. I just don't see evidence of an intervening god. The universe doesn't appear to work that way. And I really have trouble with the fundamentalist Christian and Muslim view of an angry judgemental god. Again, I see no evidence of such a being.
I think a lot of non-fundamentalist definitions of gods are such that one can replace the word "god" with the word "universe" and not change the meaning too much. I've never had a mystical experience. The universe is a surprising place. Conciousness is a strange and wonderful experience. But I'm not convinced that there is a universal consciousness (god). If such a consciousness exists, it may not be possible for us to know of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by pieisgood on Dec 28, 2003 23:45:16 GMT -5
Since I don't believe any God to exist, my contribution is this: God seems to be comparable to Santa in a few ways. Here are 2 Calvin and Hobbes comics (Bill Waterson, Maverick  ) that might show what I mean: 1) Radio: (music) he sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake. He knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake! Calvin: Santa Claus: Kindly old elf or CIA spook? e.g., he is an omni present (lol) being with the ability to reward good and bad. 2) Calvin: Hobbes, I've been thinking about this Santa stuff. Who is this guy? Why all the secrecy? If he's real, why doesn't he show himself so everybody can know about him? Hobbes: Well, I guess those are just tough questions that nobody knows the answer to. Calvin: Yeah, well, I've got some of the same questions about God. e.g., this supports a half theistic/half agnostic point of view. Assuming a god does exist, as far as I'm concered the major questions about god are unanswerable; meaning that there is a God but there's nothing we can do about it to help/hurt him (unless I'm wrong... my theistic knowledge is very limited. Please correct me if so). that's it ;D -pieisgood |
|
|
|
Post by dragonfly on Dec 30, 2003 15:36:57 GMT -5
I hope more people who believe in a God or more than one reply to this thread.
Jacopo said "if God is unknowable(an agnostic point of view) why then talk of God at all"
Such discussion is essential for several reasons.The most important in my mind is that religious belief has been the largest force to shape and define humanity as it is today and was in the past.
If human beings are going to on a larger scale reject religion and all it entails then we are going to become a very different animal,answerable only to ourselves and each other.
Major cultural change or definition can only come from intelligent disscussion on the subject.Also it is the only way that one day the truth will be found.I say that I find God unknowable (and I know many others do to) but perhaps I shall be proved wrong.....But only if people talk about it!
Either God exists in some form or not.Either God is only a reflection of a fundamental human need or our need and belief is a reflection of Gods existance!
|
|
|
|
Post by droskey on Dec 30, 2003 16:41:43 GMT -5
draqonfly
I agree that religion is a very powerful force. Therefore, I think that it is valuable to discuss religion and it origins, values and goals. However, religion would be a powerful force regardless of whether God exists or not. Religion is powerful because people believe it and act on it, not necessarily because God exists.
I do not assert that God does not exist. However, I have no satisfactory reason to believe that God exists. In my mind, the universe could be the way it is without God. If we allow the possiblity that God is knowable, then discussion about God once again becomes valuable. My point in my previous post was that if God does exist but is unknowable, there is no point in discussing him/her. He/she has no impact on the world that is discernable. Essentially, this leaves us in the same place as if God didn't exist.
dragonfly
Of course, if God is unknowable, then we are only answerable to ourselves anyway. There is no way for us to know what God would have us do. This appears to me to be the case. If God doesn't exist, then we are only accountable to ourselves.
Being accountable to ourselves is not a lower form of morality. I think the important issue here is that we, as a society, open dialog about what we value and how we are going to realize these values, regardless of whether we do away with religion or not.
I don't advocate actively throwing out religion. Religion has served some purpose. If religion survives, so be it. If it isn't able to survive the changing times, then it should be allowed to change or disappear as it does naturally. However, value systems that disappear have to be replaced with new ones. They will be replaced for good or bad.
dragonfly
There is nothing wrong with discussion. We just have to realize that we may never get an answer. However, we can have meaningful discussions of morality or ethics with or without referring to god. In my mind, these are more important than discussions about whether god exists or not. But with that in mind, a person cannot base a moral system on an unknowable god.
|
|
tamara
Broken-in Plebe
Posts: 96
|
Post by tamara on Jan 2, 2004 10:49:09 GMT -5
God=the Creative Force behind it all, the Cosmic Mother of us all, and one that remains involved with her creation.
That is my bare-bones definition. Just a smidgen past deism.
|
|
|
|
Post by nonny on Jan 2, 2004 12:20:30 GMT -5
I am athiest, but i would like to add that God(if there is one) is soppused to be all knowing and eternal. To go off the santa thing "See is not believing, believing is seeing" (Sata Clause the movie). Just contributing.
|
|
tamara
Broken-in Plebe
Posts: 96
|
Post by tamara on Jan 2, 2004 13:12:22 GMT -5
Well, there is no "supposed to." The deists don't even believe that God is still around....
God's attributes can be discussed, but even if one is wrong about some of the attributes, does not negate theism. Religious people have had all sorts of guesses and arguments over the centuries what God's attributes are... Some of them make sense, some don't (to me).
|
|
|
|
Post by Hilly on Jan 3, 2004 17:56:25 GMT -5
God=the Creative Force behind it all, the Cosmic Mother of us all, and one that remains involved with her creation. That is my bare-bones definition. Just a smidgen past deism. Well regarding this supposed Cosmic Mother of mine, if she is indeed invloved in my life I just don`t see it. To her I say show yourself dammit! Till such time I remain happily atheistic. P.S. My real mom is also a atheist. |
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Jan 4, 2004 12:50:27 GMT -5
God=the Creative Force behind it all, the Cosmic Mother of us all, and one that remains involved with her creation. , your definition doesn't answer my question. All you've done is simply give God different names (Creative Force, Cosmic Mother). But my question still stands: What is God? What is the Creative Force behind it all? What is the Cosmic Mother? |
|
tamara
Broken-in Plebe
Posts: 96
|
Post by tamara on Jan 4, 2004 15:09:53 GMT -5
Hilly, if you ask for her to show yourself in your life while really meaning it, I think she just might surprise you!  Maverick, as I have said elsewhere, basic postulates do not have rigorous definitions and will show circularity, necessarily so. But perhaps I am not understanding your question. What information are you looking for, about God? |
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Jan 4, 2004 16:45:42 GMT -5
Maverick, as I have said elsewhere, basic postulates do not have rigorous definitions and will show circularity, necessarily so. Would I then be correct in stating that you cannot define what you believe in? |
|
|
|
Post by Hilly on Jan 4, 2004 17:25:28 GMT -5
Hilly, if you ask for her to show yourself in your life while really meaning it, I think she just might surprise you! But truly I cannot, for remember I am a atheist. And as my sig states "This above all; To thine own self be true". William Shakespeare. |
|
tamara
Broken-in Plebe
Posts: 96
|
Post by tamara on Jan 4, 2004 19:45:26 GMT -5
Hilly, so I gather. But hey, keep it in mind just in case.  Neither could Euclid. And he did quite well with his system. I am in good company. Neither, I wager, can you. Basic postulates are not rigorously definable (infinite regress). But you did not answer my question: what information are you looking for? |
|
) that might show what I mean:
