Author Topic: If a Christian god exists, why does he pretend to not exist? cont. godditit vs n  (Read 2190 times)

Offline Cavebear

One might consider that Shakespeare was a master at creating new phrases. 
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead

From what I've gathered, God hides from us similar to a mother hiding from its developing fetus or how white light hides from the rainbow. The only part of God we directly interact with is it's field nature....which is perfectly still.

God is the border conditions of the universe. Please forgive the absence at your BBQ.

Offline aitm

god is merely the father figure you no longer have or want to have or have never had. The first tag line of religion is to let god take control, don't worry god has it taken care of,  give your concerns to god....replace god with dad and you have your childhood all over again...unless of course your father was of the particular kind that preferred a more priestly approach....
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

There is no Father without a Mother.

Offline SGOS

God hides from us similar to a mother hiding from its developing fetus or how white light hides from the rainbow. The only part of God we directly interact with is it's field nature....which is perfectly still.  God is the border conditions of the universe.
God always sounds more authentic with a poetic description.

Offline Baruch

God always sounds more authentic with a poetic description.

Poetry is true speech ... prose is simply bad poetry ;-)
שלום

From what I've gathered, God hides from us similar to a mother hiding from its developing fetus or how white light hides from the rainbow. The only part of God we directly interact with is it's field nature....which is perfectly still.

God is the border conditions of the universe. Please forgive the absence at your BBQ.
It is beginning to sound like to me that your god is simply was is.  Nature.  Your god does not seem to think or reason or even create on its own; it is just there and stuff happens within it, well, naturally.  Your god does not seem to plan or even know what its creation is doing or will do.  So, why call it god? 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

It is beginning to sound like to me that your god is simply was is.  Nature.  Your god does not seem to think or reason or even create on its own; it is just there and stuff happens within it, well, naturally.  Your god does not seem to plan or even know what its creation is doing or will do.  So, why call it god?

Because it literally rules all phenomenon, internal or external. I don't really speculate on its subject or self-conscious nature.

Offline Baruch


Because it literally rules all phenomenon, internal or external. I don't really speculate on its subject or self-conscious nature.

Sentient beings are its spotty subject or self-conscious nature.  We are the mind of G-d ... as a vast multiple personality, with the personalities interacting in complex ways.  The problem with the word "nature" is that it is a fig leaf as much as "G-d" is.  A personality can't deny the existence of personality, without self contradiction.  Not that this bothered Buddha.  Buddha wasn't a logician, though later Mahayana in one school, tried to make Buddhism logical.  And that logic was way beyond the Greek version.
שלום

Offline Baruch

It is beginning to sound like to me that your god is simply was is.  Nature.  Your god does not seem to think or reason or even create on its own; it is just there and stuff happens within it, well, naturally.  Your god does not seem to plan or even know what its creation is doing or will do.  So, why call it god?

We are the instrumentality of G-d ... we are G-d's means of creating, in the small.  The Creation as a whole, was never created, it is ... just as you said.  My "is" is personal, not impersonal.  I don't think atoms are the ultimate reality ... people are.  Atomic stuff is part of the physicality of human and non-human reality.  Are my fingernails all of me, are there 20 of me?
שלום


Because it literally rules all phenomenon, internal or external. I don't really speculate on its subject or self-conscious nature.
One can make the claim of physical laws as well.  So, for you, god is not  viewing your every action and thought but is just the overall creator of this universe--and all others.  I can accept that much more easily than the god who not only is the creator of the universe, but of a code of conduct as well, who issued it and then disappeared (or appears only to the very faithful) and rules who will and will not exist in heaven.  Your god could easily be called nature.  But why call your god 'god'?  Seems that that will automatically attract the dislike of the traditional theist.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

We are the instrumentality of G-d ... we are G-d's means of creating, in the small.  The Creation as a whole, was never created, it is ... just as you said.  My "is" is personal, not impersonal.  I don't think atoms are the ultimate reality ... people are.  Atomic stuff is part of the physicality of human and non-human reality.  Are my fingernails all of me, are there 20 of me?
So, for you god is too lazy to create everything?  He doesn't have enough time???  And for you people are the ultimate expression of god?  We are the pinnacle??? As for your fingernails, I've never seen them, so I don't know.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline fencerider (OP)

what we really need is Thor's hammer. One good whack on the multiverse and it will crack enough for all 20 Baruchs to fall out in the same place....

so far the best way I can understand Ananta Shesha's description of god is to just call it the primordial ether Ananta Shesha"god is an infinite, formless, unified state of matter"
god is never early, but he is never late either... so true, so true; but I would rather have him show up late than to not show up at all. When was the last time god showed up for anything??? uh never

Offline Baruch

So, for you god is too lazy to create everything?  He doesn't have enough time???  And for you people are the ultimate expression of god?  We are the pinnacle??? As for your fingernails, I've never seen them, so I don't know.

No creation, no Creator.  Time is an illusion ... no creation without time.  So ... G-d doesn't create because G-d doesn't have the time ;-)

Yes, a human is far superior to an atom ... even superior to a paramecium ... though aitm denies that.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2017, 12:33:48 AM by Baruch »
שלום

No creation, no Creator.  Time is an illusion ... no creation without time.  So ... G-d doesn't create because G-d doesn't have the time ;-)

Yes, a human is far superior to an atom ... even superior to a paramecium ... though aitm denies that.
After 'No creation, no Creator. ', you lost me.  God does not create because god is a fiction--he/she was invented by man.  I suppose one could say that humans are superior to an atom.  But what does that mean?  Seems a bit nonsensical to me.  And an atom, currently, is not defined as life.  I don't see any lifeform as being superior to another--just different.  And I'm not saying that all life is equal or should even exist.  And I'm not saying I don't kill other lifeforms--I do.  All of us do, for we have no choice.  We kill, at the very least, life within our own bodies and on our bodies every minute of every day.  Even if we kill ourselves we would then still be killing the organisms that have a symbiotic relationship with us.  Anyway, labeling one life form as superior or inferior does little to add to our understanding of our very real physical world.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?