Is Existence the Ultimate Power Over God?

[Jameson]

The topic that been touched on in the last few posts is motivation and how the concept of God plays a major part in people's motivation. I think this is an interesting statement / observation. I do agree that for most of the people on Earth, their belief in some kind of supernatural being is a motivation for living, for achieving whatever "greatness" he or she aspires, and gives their life a purpose.

To pose a counterexample I have a friend who is a very devout Christian and goes to Church everyday before school. I know as well as I can know that she truly believes in God and that she is going to heaven yet she acts like her life has no purpose. She is depressed all of the time and lives in a kind of mopey state all the time. It's really saddening. My point question is, why does this person with so much purpose have no motivation for life? Is she an anomaly? Why does her God not give her life the purpose she needs to live happily and with motivation? Is believing in God right for everyone?

I guess the more general question is why do some people place their drive for motivation in untangible things? Do we all need a reason to live? Some people live for God, others seek truth, others "greatness". All of these aren't really concrete, and many times are unatainable.

I agree with many of the other posters, pick your "god" and you will find someone worshipping it and living for it.

 

[totallyclueless]

God n Science

Hmm...after some thought, I discovered this:
I believe 100% in science and 100% in "God"
But its in a different sense...

God and Science are two things that are totally and completely different, like the different dimensions..God would be 4 dimensional, beyond our minds comprehension. but God is not a person, it is just...er...duurr...a THING... See what I mean?! There's no way to prove/disprove God! Because god IS science...sort of...ya know?
MY BRAIN HURTS! I need to stop thinking about this...

The universe must have been created by something...somehow...and just because we don't understand it, or can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't possible!

 

[Jameson]

Hmm...after some thought, I discovered this:
I believe 100% in science and 100% in "God"
But its in a different sense...

God and Science are two things that are totally and completely different, like the different dimensions..God would be 4 dimensional, beyond our minds comprehension. but God is not a person, it is just...er...duurr...a THING... See what I mean?! There's no way to prove/disprove God! Because god IS science...sort of...ya know?
MY BRAIN HURTS! I need to stop thinking about this...

The universe must have been created by something...somehow...and just because we don't understand it, or can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't possible!

4th dimensional? If I'm not mistaken that would be time, but I think I get your point. To say that the universe must have been created is an exclamation of emotion, not a proof in any sense. Many people would agree with you in your statement that God cannot be proven or disproven, although I would not say this is true. I guess that makes you an agnostic theist.

What is the significance of your statements of God vs. Science? Why are these different and why is that important?

Jameson

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

I was personifying life as a whole as if it has it's own mind and behavior, and interpreting that behavior as if it's predictable. I tagged on my own conception of this entity's characteristics (because I can't view it objectively), and reasoned that it's history should dictate it's future (this is a major problem for stock traders). Who could have predicted that Enron was going to fall when it was soaring skywards? So I see this as a problem... What if evolution fails? Perhaps I was thinking too positively. then again, right now I'm assuming that "it" has a goal that is wants to achieve. Did Enron have a goal? To make a lot of money, to make a specific amount of money, to help others with their own lives, or to hurt others' lives? This is a problem, actually, it's an unfalsifiable claim. I can think whatever I want about life, I have simply thought of it this way in this particular conversation.

I think that I assumed in that universe, desire is induced from external things and people only... that should probably be the constraint i was looking for. Desire could also come from within ourselves too, or why not both at the same time. When I use the word desire, I mean "the urge to take an interest in something or someone" or "the process of liking or disliking something or someone" or "the activation of aestetic perception of something or someone".

Jameson, In Michio Kaku's book Hyperspace, he mentioned that the 4th dimension was originally interpreted as what now is known as the 5th dimension until Einstien showed that time is the 4th dimension. The idea of the space outside of space-time ("Hyperspace", of which in a multiverse theory is the space that contains all the possible universes), now defined as the 5th dimension or "4th spatial dimension", was originally termed "the 4th dimension".

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

"To pose a counterexample I have a friend who is a very devout Christian and goes to Church everyday before school. I know as well as I can know that she truly believes in God and that she is going to heaven yet she acts like her life has no purpose. She is depressed all of the time and lives in a kind of mopey state all the time. It's really saddening." - Jameson

perhaps your interpretation of her is an unfalsifiable claim.

 

[Jameson]

Aren't all of our interpretations unfalsifiable? That is why I said "I know as well as I can know that she truly believes in God and that she is going to heaven yet she acts like her life has no purpose." I wanted to make it clear that I cannot prove how she feels or truly know, but only observe as objectively as I can.

I think it's interesting you personify "life". I think you are claiming this world and the universe to be an entity on its own. I'm confused though on this part of your statements.

Who could have predicted that Enron was going to fall when it was soaring skywards? So I see this as a problem... What if evolution fails? Perhaps I was thinking too positively. then again, right now I'm assuming that "it" has a goal that is wants to achieve. Did Enron have a goal? To make a lot of money, to make a specific amount of money, to help others with their own lives, or to hurt others' lives? This is a problem, actually, it's an unfalsifiable claim.

I do not see why it is important to this discussion if evolution fails, and I'm kind of confused on how it could fail, but I think the greater point was your leading to your statements about unfalsifiable claims.

It seems that you carry a view that everything is unfalsifiable. Isn't God? Isn't everything in life if you look at it from the right point of view?

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

I don't think so. There are some things that are verifiable like the claim that we eat food, or the claim that water naturally exists in solid, liquid, and gas form on Earth, or the claim that in a right triangle, the sum of the squares of the legs are equal to the square of the hypotenuse. When I extend those statements into a realm that I can't know about, like if I say that we eat food only because it makes us happy, or if I say that water has a mind of it's own and it goes downhill because it's depressed, or if I say that the pythagoream theorem is true because God made it that way. I don't think everything is, and there may be a way to prove it but I don't know how.

 

[Les Sleeth]

Hmm...after some thought, I discovered this:
I believe 100% in science and 100% in "God" But its in a different sense...

That's exactly how I see it too. Science is a discipline of the intellect, and its potential to reveal truths is strictly in the realm of the physical aspects of creation. That's why when science-only believers conclude the universe is purely physical it is a fallacy; that is, if you rely on a method that only reveals physicalness, then why should you expect to find anything else?

If science and the intellect can't discover/reveal God, then what's left? This is why I keep recommending studying people like John of the Cross, or Meister Eckhart, or Brother Lawrence, or Nanak, or Kabir, or the Greek Orthodox saints . . . these so-called "mystics" claimed that God is felt and not known through the intellect or any external means; further, he/she/it is felt inside oneself. In other words, God might be everywhere, but the only place each person finds he/she/it is inside one's own "heart."

If so, then all the "god proofs" are a waste of time, and so is any attempt to know God by obeying commandments, or worship, or holy rolling, or most of the stuff religious people do to find God. I say, look to the people who practiced inner realization, that's where you find the most impressive reports and the most blissed out practitioners.

God inside is subtle, which is why people have to actually develop their feeling ability not only to feel inwardly (we are naturally "outward" focused), but also to learn to feel what's more subtle. I've speculated that one reason so many science types are atheists is because they aren't that interested in deepening their feeling ability, and instead are more comfortable in the cold, mechanistic disciplines needed for studying physicalness.


Here's some quotes from a few of the mystics I mentioned about the inner path to God:

“Oh, then, soul . . . so anxious to know the dwelling place of your Beloved that you may go in quest of Him and be united with Him, now we are telling you that you yourself are His dwelling and His secret chamber and hiding place . . . Since you know that your desired Beloved lives hidden within your heart, strive to be really hidden with Him, and you will embrace Him within you and experience Him . . .”
John of the Cross, 1542–1591, Spain

“Farid, why wander from jungle to jungle, breaking the thorny branches in search of the Lord? In my heart and not in the jungle does my Lord reside.”
Sheikh Farid, 1173–1265, Pakistan

“[God] lies hidden in the soul, so that man neither knows nor hears it—unless good tidings reach the center of hearing—otherwise it will not be heard of. To hear it, all voices and sounds must die away and there must be pure quiet—perfect stillness.”
Meister Eckhart, 1260-1328, Germany

“Self of my Self, for Thou are but I,
Self of my Self, for I am Thou,
The two of us in one shall never die,
What do they matter—the why and how?”
Lalleswari, 14th century A.D., India

“The soul learns that there is no necessity to look for her Beloved outside her own being, and that she can find Him within herself, as on His own throne and in His tabernacle.”
Mother Cabrini, 1850–1917, Italy

“The Eternal Light indwells in the human mind, and the human mindis the emanation of that Light, and our five senses are the Light’s disciples.”
Nanak, 1469–1539, India

“So if man loves through and wants to guard his heart . . . [he] can pay heed to his heart, make progress towards the innermost, and draw nearer to God.”
Mark the Ascetic, 4th century A.D., Egypt

“This mind is not the Buddha—[intellectual] learning is not the Way.”
Nansen, 9th century A.D., China

“Student, tell me, what is God? He is the breath inside the breath.”
Kabir, 1488–1512, India

“The [practice of] the presence of God is an application of our soul to God, or a remembrance of God present . . . in the depth and center of the soul . . . the soul speaks to God heart to heart, and always in a great and profound peace that the soul enjoys in God.”
Brother Lawrence, 1611–1691, France

 

[totallyclueless]

4th dimensional? If I'm not mistaken that would be time, but I think I get your point. To say that the universe must have been created is an exclamation of emotion, not a proof in any sense. Many people would agree with you in your statement that God cannot be proven or disproven, although I would not say this is true. I guess that makes you an agnostic theist.

What is the significance of your statements of God vs. Science? Why are these different and why is that important?

Jameson

I'm trying to say this: God is the opposite of Science and human logic. He defies logic, but that doesn't mean he doesn't exist. If the universe is finite, what would be beyond it? That's what god is...sort of...does anyone get what I'm saying here?!

 

[Les Sleeth]

I'm trying to say this: God is the opposite of Science and human logic. He defies logic, but that doesn't mean he doesn't exist. If the universe is finite, what would be beyond it? That's what god is...sort of...does anyone get what I'm saying here?!

I think I understand what you are saying, but I also think you are asking a question that doesn’t quite make sense.

To say God is the opposite of science is to juxtapose two different categories of things. God is something that is proposed to exist; science is a method for acquiring knowledge. In my opinion, the question is: isn’t the way we try to know God completely opposite of how we try to know through science?

I believe whether God exists or not isn’t the most important question. The only thing a seeker of truth cares about is if there is a way to know for oneself if something exists. If you recognize knowing as the issue, then the efficacy of knowing methods become paramount. That’s why I’ve been referencing those who’ve claimed one can know something through turning one’s attention inward; and then yes, how and what one knows is exactly opposite of how and what one knows through looking “outward.”

Now, which direction do you think science looks? Outward. Exclusively, totally, 100%. So if the introspectionsts are right, then just like you seem to suggest, knowing God (if he/she/it exists) would be accomplished opposite of knowing through science.

 

[totallyclueless]

sob, nobody understands me.
but, looking back at the worlds history, before we knew what stars were made of and stuff, people turned to storytellers and preachers to find out where they came from, why they were here. They used to worship things such as the Greek gods. After a while the stories became so outlandish that nobody took them seriously anymore. Science proved the stories wrong: gods didn't cause lightning, electricity did, etc...
So in the future, science will probably outrule current religions...WAY in the future...perhaps we'll NEVER know where we came from or why we are here...

I guess some things we just weren't meant to find out!

 

[koop117]

Don't know if this was said or not but:

"Santa Clause" does not exist because one can prove that he in fact, does not. No one can disprove God's existence, can they? The answer to that would be "no."

Also, if God is the omnipotent being that He is, He is not bound by the laws of space and time, He created them. Therefore, the laws of physics do not apply.

"Those" Atheists "have an answer for everything don't they! Its too bad its always the same answer!"

Enjoy

Koop

 

[tino lin]

Sintwar.

Sintwar,
I am glad you found "knowledge is power, religion is poision".

 

[Smurf]

Don't know if anyone else caught this but:

My philosophy is this: (And you can quote me on this.)
"My "proof" that god does not exist is your "lack of proof" that he does.
Afterall, why should I have to prove there is no god? You are the one that invented him."
-Me

Well you're right, you're no science guru. Otherwise you'd realize that no theory can ever be proven, only disproven. So, scientifically, the god-believers are right until you prove them wrong.

 

[Smurf]

sob, nobody understands me.
but, looking back at the worlds history, before we knew what stars were made of and stuff, people turned to storytellers and preachers to find out where they came from, why they were here. They used to worship things such as the Greek gods. After a while the stories became so outlandish that nobody took them seriously anymore. Science proved the stories wrong: gods didn't cause lightning, electricity did, etc...
So in the future, science will probably outrule current religions...WAY in the future...perhaps we'll NEVER know where we came from or why we are here...

I guess some things we just weren't meant to find out!

Nonsense, as soon as science finds one thing out.. for example what happens after death. It creates a bunch more questions they have to find answers for. So, until they find those answers religion and mythology will just move on and try to define the answers to these new questions that scientific answers created. Rinse and repeat. Knowledge is infinite.

 

[Lisa!]

yiou may think that it's a stupid question but I'm going to ask it anyway.why athiest people try to disprove God?I mean it seems quite unnecessary.
Suppose there is no God:
there are some people who want to believe this imaginary existence(for any reason they have).I don't know why other people should try to prove them wrong!don't you think that it's a kind of wast of time?
for example,why do we never try hard to disprove UFO or things like that?

 

[selfAdjoint]

yiou may think that it's a stupid question but I'm going to ask it anyway.why athiest people try to disprove God?I mean it seems quite unnecessary.
Suppose there is no God:
there are some people who want to believe this imaginary existence(for any reason they have).I don't know why other people should try to prove them wrong!don't you think that it's a kind of wast of time?
for example,why do we never try hard to disprove UFO or things like that?

Well scientists do work at disproving UFOs and ESP and ghosts, and all. See our skepticism thread. But the UFO fans are not trying to get their ideas into school textbooks, or getting laws passed in Congress to allow the government to support their meetings with public taxpayer money. They are not trying to make sure Supreme Court justices are abductees. The religious, specifically the Christians, are doing these things, and they have to be fought.

 

[Lisa!]

Well scientists do work at disproving UFOs and ESP and ghosts, and all. See our skepticism thread. But the UFO fans are not trying to get their ideas into school textbooks, or getting laws passed in Congress to allow the government to support their meetings with public taxpayer money. They are not trying to make sure Supreme Court justices are abductees. The religious, specifically the Christians, are doing these things, and they have to be fought.

I agree with you.I know most of religious leaders are misusing people's beliefs about God.I think advantages of believing in God is more than disadvantages.The problem isn't with God esp.for ordinary people.I think problem is with religion not God.and even not religion but politiciens and leadres.

 

[Les Sleeth]

The problem isn't with God . . . I think problem is with religion not God.

:!) :!) :!)

 

[Nomy-the wanderer]

For me God is the only truth in this world...
Science isn't reliable enough, even with such a progress and technology, we still know very little, always there's something ne, always there's soemthing we misunderstood..

 

[El Hombre Invisible]

Yes, better we base all our wisdom on one book and one book alone.

 

[Lisa!]

For me God is the only truth in this world...
Science isn't reliable enough, even with such a progress and technology, we still know very little, always there's something ne, always there's soemthing we misunderstood..

I see some people who are always naging about their hard lives and they really don't enjoy it and some of them reject God.I don't know why they tolerate their terrible lives if they don't believe in God in their hearts.How can they be hopeful to the future when there isn't any sign of better future.I think every attempt to disprove God,proves him strongly.Why does human spend whole his life proving or disproving God when there is no God?
if someone show you a manufactured thing and tell you it doesn't have any manufacturer,you won't believe it.I don't know how the hell athiest people can say this wonderful world has no creature.They try to understand God by contractual or human-made rules.this is silly.God creates everything even existence rules,so how can expect him to come into existence under existence rules!

 

[selfAdjoint]

I see some people who are always naging about their hard lives and they really don't enjoy it and some of them reject God.I don't know why they tolerate their terrible lives if they don't believe in God in their hearts.How can they be hopeful to the future when there isn't any sign of better future.

One time at the church I used to go to they presented a couple as a shining example. They were old with only a small couple of incomes to live on. They told how a misunderstanding interrupted their income and then that was solved. And how one of them acquired a threatening illness and then got better. Every downer was called a "trial" and every good thing was "a gift from God". I thought, even though I was a believer at that time, that they were kidding themselves. Now I am in their fix, and I still think they were kidding themselves. Hardships are to be dealt with, not ascribed to tests by God, and successes should be enjoyed for their own sake, not for some spirit that somebody told you about.

I think every attempt to disprove God,proves him strongly.Why does human spend whole his life proving or disproving God when there is no God?

Because there are so many people like you who keep telling the world, and particularly the children, that there is.

if someone show you a manufactured thing and tell you it doesn't have any manufacturer,you won't believe it.I don't know how the hell athiest people can say this wonderful world has no creature.They try to understand God by contractual or human-made rules.this is silly.God creates everything even existence rules,so how can expect him to come into existence under existence rules!

This is the simple minded argument from design. It doesn't hold water. Evolution can explain how complex things - oganisms, including us - can come to be without design. We don't need an imaginary Big Daddy to do it.

 

[Lisa!]

Because there are so many people like you who keep telling the world, and particularly the children, that there is.

I don't know who was the first person who told there is a God!and I never try to tell worlds there's a God.He doesn't need us man,believe it.If human wants to believe God,is coz of himself not God.Just look at people who are so religious and you'll get what I'm saying.For them God means hope,love and justice for all...

they are in bad condition for example they're suffering from an incurable disease.so they believe in God coz he's able to do miracles!
they're not popular coz of different reason and they may not to be guilty about it(for example they're ugly or too straight).no matter coz God loves people with internal beauty!
others don't respect their rights and simply bother them coz they can't fend for themselves.they're weak.no matter coz there's a God.he pays them back in this world or even the other world!
I disagree with them somehow.you should do your best to get everything.you shouldn't sit sowhere and expect God to solve all your problems with no movement or attempt by you.It's somhow dangerous.
anyway,people who keep telling people there's a God,are giving people sth.maybe they do it coz they want to get everything from them and make them hopeful about their condition.coz they want to keep them weak.but anyway yoyu can't accused all of them of trying to fool people.believing in God is really useful anyway.somehow being afraid of the other world penalty keep some people away of doing crimes...
but I don't know why are you rtrying to take everything from some people!
you can't blame me coz of telling others there's a God.I'm only 23 year-old.Anyway I want to believe my God and it's very personal thing.not only I'm not hurting the world coz of my beliefe but also it helps world somehow.at least I try to help others coz of my God,I don't do crimes coz my God dislike it...

This is the simple minded argument from design. It doesn't hold water. Evolution can explain how complex things - oganisms, including us - can come to be without design. We don't need an imaginary Big Daddy to do it.

imaginary big dady
that's funny.I never consider him as my dady.although having a supportive dady couldn't be bad.in fact,it's very good.
Evolution!I have no problem with that but I think a very important plan like that need someone to design it and of course control it.
That's interesting that you think you think complex thing don't need a creature!


anyway,Idon't know why are you trying to diprove God?you say I believed in God when I was young,I want to know:
had believing in God ruined your life at that time that now you're trying to help others not to ruine their lives?if yes,are you suportive dady of whole world?I mean you don't need to be worried about others.maybe ithat's one episode of world's huge evolution.(people should believe in God at first and then step by step they'd grow up and nknow there's no God.You shouldn't interfere in evolution.it could be dangerous like interfering in nature!)
Just please tell me:
how does believing in God is so dangerous for world that you're trying to disprove him?
REmember,I told you the problem is with who are misusing people's beliefe.so I don't think that you're doing a clever defence!

 

[selfAdjoint]

anyway,Idon't know why are you trying to diprove God?you say I believed in God when I was young,I want to know:
had believing in God ruined your life at that time that now you're trying to help others not to ruine their lives?if yes,are you suportive dady of whole world?I mean you don't need to be worried about others.maybe ithat's one episode of world's huge evolution.(people should believe in God at first and then step by step they'd grow up and nknow there's no God.You shouldn't interfere in evolution.it could be dangerous like interfering in nature!)
Just please tell me:
how does believing in God is so dangerous for world that you're trying to disprove him?
REmember,I told you the problem is with who are misusing people's beliefe.so I don't think that you're doing a clever defence!

What happened was, my wife died. Now don't go imagining that I blamed god for this; I didn't. But what did fall upon me with a crash was that their whole afterlife story was a crock. The afternoon before she died we gathered with a priest at her bedside - she was in a coma - and he gave her the last rites and we all said the Our Father (what Protestants call the Lord's Prayer). As she had been doing in her coma she moved her head and randomly grimaced. And we all said "Look! She's smiling, she heard it!" I said it too, but I knew I was lying as I said it. When all the fuss about Chiavo was in the media, and they were saying she responded, though her brain was all but totally destroyed, I experienced that lie again, only this time the Congress and the President were pushing it.

So all the piety got sucked out of me and I looked at my beliefs and my reasons for them coldly, and reached my conclusions.

I am not trying to prove there is no god, iI think that is a foolish project from a rational standpoint. But I am very much against the people who want to push god on the public - a specific, Christian god. Fooey on that!

 

[Loren Booda]

God allows us to seek redundancy.

 

[Lisa!]

What happened was, my wife died. Now don't go imagining that I blamed god for this; I didn't. But what did fall upon me with a crash was that their whole afterlife story was a crock. The afternoon before she died we gathered with a priest at her bedside - she was in a coma - and he gave her the last rites and we all said the Our Father (what Protestants call the Lord's Prayer). As she had been doing in her coma she moved her head and randomly grimaced. And we all said "Look! She's smiling, she heard it!" I said it too, but I knew I was lying as I said it. When all the fuss about Chiavo was in the media, and they were saying she responded, though her brain was all but totally destroyed, I experienced that lie again, only this time the Congress and the President were pushing it.

So all the piety got sucked out of me and I looked at my beliefs and my reasons for them coldly, and reached my conclusions.

I am not trying to prove there is no god, iI think that is a foolish project from a rational standpoint. But I am very much against the people who want to push god on the public - a specific, Christian god. Fooey on that!

Sorry to hear that.Hope we both get the truth one day.Please forgive me if I was impolite during our discussion.
but you know I'm really afraid of people who don't believe in anything.I know most of people ,religious or athiest , aren't really trusty coz they just think about their personal benefit but you know I don't know how is it possible to trust an atheisttrust when there's no belief to force him not to hurt others.Without God, world would be evev worse than now!

 

[selfAdjoint]

Sorry to hear that.Hope we both get the truth one day.Please forgive me if I was impolite during our discussion.
but you know I'm really afraid of people who don't believe in anything.I know most of people ,religious or athiest , aren't really trusty coz they just think about their personal benefit but you know I don't know how is it possible to trust an atheisttrust when there's no belief to force him not to hurt others.Without God, world would be evev worse than now!

With respect, Lisa, this is just an undeserved stereotype. You might as well say Jews are not trustworthy, or Chinese. Your notion that people have no ethics unless they expect to be punished by God sells the human race short. In fact I never noticed that the Christians I knew were so very, very, ethical in business matters. They seemed to keep teir Christianity and their business ethics in two separate compartments.

 

[Lisa!]

With respect, Lisa, this is just an undeserved stereotype. You might as well say Jews are not trustworthy, or Chinese. Your notion that people have no ethics unless they expect to be punished by God sells the human race short. In fact I never noticed that the Christians I knew were so very, very, ethical in business matters. They seemed to keep teir Christianity and their business ethics in two separate compartments.

Yes,really I agree with you.I have to admit that most of time,religious people are really untrusty.They're irresponsible.But please answer my question:what forces you to be responsible and try not to spoil othres' rights?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Yes,really I agree with you.I have to admit that most of time,religious people are really untrusty.They're irresponsible.But please answer my question:what forces you to be responsible and try not to spoil othres' rights?

When I was a Christian, they taught that you shouldn't be fair and good to others because you would be rewarded in heaven, but rather you should be so wonderfully full of Jesus' love that it just spilled over into your actions with others. Surprise! This works just as well without Jesus. I am so appreciative of my wonderful humanity that I can't not share it with my fellow humans!