It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

page: 147
23
<< 144  145  146    148  149  150 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2020 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Thanks, dear Itisnowagain, I think you and I, we have something we can agree on, namely, the concept of God, that God the word and name is a concept in our brain/mind, but there is indeed an entity outside and independent of our brain/mind corresponding to the word and name God in our mind.

Now, you bring in the Masons, suppose we just leave them to themselves, and we exert our best effort to work together for a completely concurred on concept of God, and then we go forth together to search for the entity in the object world (as distinct from the concept world) that corresponds to the concept of God we concur on in our concept world.

I want to tell you that at this point in time, for me the entity in the object world corresponding to the concept of God, it is the whole of existence, yes, I mean everything that exists or has existence or what is called reality, as in the statement I am always presenting to people who care and dare to think for themselves, namely:
    Existence is the default status of reality, and reality is the default status of existence, and God is all of existence and reality and the whole object world.


My suggestion is that we leave to themselves thinkers like the Masons and also other thinkers among mankind, because they will or we will get all mired up (stuck in mud) with their ideas, that what we want to determine for ourselves, on the basis of honest intelligent productive thinking on the issue God exists or not, it will never get resolved by us altogether.

I await your reaction to my message here and now.
.



posted on Dec, 16 2020 @ 09:21 PM
link   
MONO



I don't mean that we should not factor in the ideas of thinkers of the past and of today, on the concepts of God and also on my distinction between the object world and the concept world.

Just that we don't get derailed from working together to get to concur on the concept of God, and also on the distinction between the object world and the concept world.

When you have your own conviction on some ideas from past thinkers and also today's thinkers, just present the ideas without mentioning who thought about them, the ideas speak for themselves - no need for any human authority unless you are also convinced that your human authorities are infallible.


.



posted on Dec, 16 2020 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

I could ask you what you mean when you say "God" but that would probably be a bit pedantic.

So, I will say that taking the concepts of a divine being from most world religions I know, the answer is that God is an abstraction, much like "freedom" or "equality" or "love."

Can you define freedom for everyone? Can you count equity or take a picture of love?

God is also a matter of subjectivity. We all too often glorify the objective, when most of our existence (all) is lived in the subjective.

God, gods, angels, demons, heroes, Super Heroes, Jedi, the Federation ... all these can and do exist within our minds and hearts.

For me personally ... a non-theist, God is just another name for random chance. Understanding that, for me, has helped me considerably ... and I am far more able to realize that it's none of my f-ing business what another person believes ... as long as they don't try to control my life based on their belief.


edit on 16-12-2020 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2020 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Thanks Gryphon66 for your post.

Can you accept my division of existence into two parts, namely: the object world and the concept world?

I mean by object world to consist in everything that is outside and independent of the concept world, while the concept world is everything that is in the brain/mind of man.

What are some of the everything in the object world? Examples of things in the object world are the sun, the moon, babies and roses in the neighborhood.

What are everything in the concept world? Examples of everything in the concept world are thoughts, ideas, words, and all outputs of man's brain/mind.

There was a time when there was no man, so at that time there was only the object world.

Now there is the concept world because there is man.

When man goes into extinction from existence, then again the object world is the only world in existence.

The word God refers to a concept in the brain/mind of man, is there an entity in the object world corresponding to the concept God in the brain/mind of man?

Will we find that out by going into the object world to search for such an entity?

.



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius


Will we find that out by going into the object world to search for such an entity?

Where can you go to search for anything (including God) in the 'object world'?
You cannot go anywhere......you are stuck with what is here and now!

It is only in thought (conceptual) that movement seems possible.
Here and now thoughts produce the illusion that there is somewhere or some when else.

This that is here now is all there is.

The seer (perceiver) and the seen (apparent existence) are not two.......a word used for this seer/seen is God.

This is God........always......there is nothing else.
God is not somewhere else......so no one will find God.

God is playing hide and seek with itself😊



edit on 17-12-2020 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 03:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain


Dear Itisnowagain, the object world is all existence or reality, that includes you and me and of course the concept world inside our brain/mind.

All existence is the object world, and the concept world of course is a part of the object world until when mankind becomes extinct.

When you breathe the air into your lungs that is a part of the object world.

Now, our brain/mind is truly an amazing creation of God, it can grasp the whole of existence by thinking on it i.e. being conscious of it, aware of it, this is the really most fascinating power of our brain/mind, it can and thus grab the whole existence or reality of the whole caboodle of man and the universe and everything with a beginning, including God Himself the creator cause of everything that is not God Himself.

When will you fail to be aware of the entirety of existence? When you lose consciousness, like when you are in profound dreamless sleep, in a fainted state, or get knocked out completely by your boxing opponent, or get anesthetized totally for a major surgical invasive procedure.

That totality wholeness completeness entirety of existence, that is God.

God is the permanent self-existent component of existence, while everything not God Himself, they are the transient components of existence, when God wills them to cease existing, they sort of puff into nothingness.

.



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius
Do you agree or disagree with what I wrote?

Discuss.....tell me what is wrong or right with what I wrote.......or what the videos are saying (the first vid is just 1.37 mins).

edit on 17-12-2020 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 04:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius
What are you??
What is everything??


edit on 17-12-2020 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

We can safely assume the existence of the physical objective world I believe. We can even accept what good science tells us about that world until better explanations coome along.

As I've grown older, I'm not a big fan of seeing anything in terms of absolute binaries (polar opposites).

I can only speak for myself. We abstract our concepts, thoughts, beliefs, and experiences from sensory stimuli. To my way of thinking we have to understand that source is all we know.

If we do not receive information via our senses, then we can't know that something exists or not.

However, it is irrational to believe that nothing exists outside of our senses.

I suppose that might be a third category of "God" but that's purely speculative. Perhaps Mystery or Unknown might be more accurate.



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Thanks Gryphon66 for your contribution.



Gryphon66
For me personally ... a non-theist, God is just another name for random chance. Understanding that, for me, has helped me considerably ... and I am far more able to realize that it's none of my f-ing business what another person believes ... as long as they don't try to control my life based on their belief.


Gryphon66
If we do not receive information via our senses, then we can't know that something exists or not.
However, it is irrational to believe that nothing exists outside of our senses.
I suppose that might be a third category of "God" but that's purely speculative. Perhaps Mystery or Unknown might be more accurate.



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain


Thanks Itisnowagain for your contribution:


    From Pachomius
    Will we find that out by going into the object world to search for such an entity?

    From Itisnowagain
    Where can you go to search for anything (including God) in the 'object world'?
    You cannot go anywhere......you are stuck with what is here and now!
    It is only in thought (conceptual) that movement seems possible.
    Here and now thoughts produce the illusion that there is somewhere or some when else.
    This that is here now is all there is.
    The seer (perceiver) and the seen (apparent existence) are not two.......a word used for this seer/seen is God.
    This is God........always......there is nothing else.
    God is not somewhere else......so no one will find God.
    God is playing hide and seek with itself😊


.



posted on Dec, 17 2020 @ 02:48 PM
link   
In brief words as we have only words to speak out our thoughts:

From my part as a thinker on the God of reason as distinct from the God of religion, it is all God and we are just His creation, He made us and gave us a brain/mind, that we get to know Him to be all the whole caboodle of existence that is reality, and I call that the object world as distinct from the concept world.

But why would He be interested in us knowing Him?

The only reason I can think up is because in some way He is like us, He cares and dares that we get to know Him.

You know, I will now lapse into the God of religion, by trying to contact Him, thus:

Dear God, what do You say, can You just give us a sign of Your presence, please?!

He says: Time to revamp your God of religion.

.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pachomius
In brief words as we have only words to speak out our thoughts:

From my part as a thinker on the God of reason as distinct from the God of religion, it is all God and we are just His creation, He made us and gave us a brain/mind, that we get to know Him to be all the whole caboodle of existence that is reality, and I call that the object world as distinct from the concept world.

But why would He be interested in us knowing Him?

The only reason I can think up is because in some way He is like us, He cares and dares that we get to know Him.

You know, I will now lapse into the God of religion, by trying to contact Him, thus:

Dear God, what do You say, can You just give us a sign of Your presence, please?!

He says: Time to revamp your God of religion.

.

Will a wave ever find the ocean?



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 03:11 PM
link   
One great argument for a God is that we know empirically that NOTHING comes into being out of nothing. And particularly complex beings like humans

Organic or inorganic.

Look at a car. Can something like that exist in a vacuum?

Look at a creature, man, or animal. Can that come into being by itself?

NO to both questions.

So if you say, the parents created that being?

It is irrelevant since all that we are confirming is the impossibility of any complex or not creature coming into existence all by itself.

Somewhere down the line of humans is some kind of superior being or process that has an origin.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 03:17 PM
link   
MONO



The way I see it, mankind is divided between people who do care and dare to investigate the existence of God, and people who don't care and can even be hostile to the idea of investigating the existence of God.

So, I for being a member of mankind I see myself to belong to the group that is into investigating the existence of God.

And I can see that there are at present here two humans who are similar to myself, namely: Gryphon66 and Itisnowagain.

Why do we three care to and dare to investigate the existence of God?

From my part I see it very clearly that without the existence of God our ultimate picture of existence or reality is not complete, and that is not at all a satisfactory factor to my own existence as a member of homo sapiens.

Now, the way I have investigated the issue God exists or not, I have concluded to the existence of God, in concept as the self-existent creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

And here is my method, step by step:

1. Divide existence into two kinds: (a) Self-existence, (b) Existence from another, that is evident to any member of homo sapiens.

2. (b) depends on (a) to come to existence, that is evident to any member of homo sapiens.

3. Therefore God exists, in concept as the self-existent creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

Dear anyone reading my post the present one, please give your comments, okay?
.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Now, knowing the nature of God is different from a belief in God.

According to the esoteric theory, knowing “God” is possible through some developmental paths such as Sufism, Zen Buddhism, Regular Buddhism ( which BTW doesn’t have a traditional belief in a God), Mystical Christianity, Kaballah, Taoism, Vedanta, and some others...And sometimes, in very rare cases, people get enlightened by informal means...miracles, direct perception, but these cases are very rare.

So, just because we have belief in a God doesn’t remotely mean we understand the nature of God.

Some inner developmental aspect which includes the cultivation of higher perceptive capacity must be achieved.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
Now, knowing the nature of God is different from a belief in God.

According to the esoteric theory, knowing “God” is possible through some developmental paths such as Sufism, Zen Buddhism, Regular Buddhism ( which BTW doesn’t have a traditional belief in a God), Mystical Christianity, Kaballah, Taoism, Vedanta, and some others...And sometimes, in very rare cases, people get enlightened by informal means...miracles, direct perception, but these cases are very rare.

So, just because we have belief in a God doesn’t remotely mean we understand the nature of God.

Some inner developmental aspect which includes the cultivation of higher perceptive capacity must be achieved.



Dear Willtell, thanks for your contribution.

Now, I hare already, and forgive me, proposed to all posters to not bring in past or even today's thinkers, but to only present your very own self-thought up ideas on the existence or not of God, otherwise we will get mired i.e. stuck in mud, getting derailed with debating on what exactly does this or that thinker not in this thread, advocates - and that is just plainly not at all productive.

We want honest intelligent productive thinking and writing by and from each one of us here present and contributing.

.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
One great argument for a God is that we know empirically that NOTHING comes into being out of nothing. And particularly complex beings like humans

Organic or inorganic.

Look at a car. Can something like that exist in a vacuum?

Look at a creature, man, or animal. Can that come into being by itself?

NO to both questions.

So if you say, the parents created that being?

It is irrelevant since all that we are confirming is the impossibility of any complex or not creature coming into existence all by itself.

Somewhere down the line of humans is some kind of superior being or process that has an origin.




In other words, there is existence all the time and everywhere, i.e. there has never ever been and nowhere non-existence.

Now, we humans for being of the taxonomy homo sapiens, we know right away from our acquaintance with existence, that there are two kinds of existence, self-existence and existence from another.

Existence from self is in-extinguishable, so that God as a self-existent being cannot extinguish Himself, while man being an instance of existence from another namely God, he can cease to exist from God, and even extinguish himself by suicide.

There, that is one argument for the existence of God, in concept as the self-existent entity that created caused the existence of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

.



posted on Dec, 18 2020 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pachomius

originally posted by: Willtell
Now, knowing the nature of God is different from a belief in God.

According to the esoteric theory, knowing “God” is possible through some developmental paths such as Sufism, Zen Buddhism, Regular Buddhism ( which BTW doesn’t have a traditional belief in a God), Mystical Christianity, Kaballah, Taoism, Vedanta, and some others...And sometimes, in very rare cases, people get enlightened by informal means...miracles, direct perception, but these cases are very rare.

So, just because we have belief in a God doesn’t remotely mean we understand the nature of God.

Some inner developmental aspect which includes the cultivation of higher perceptive capacity must be achieved.



Dear Willtell, thanks for your contribution.

Now, I hare already, and forgive me, proposed to all posters to not bring in past or even today's thinkers, but to only present your very own self-thought up ideas on the existence or not of God, otherwise we will get mired i.e. stuck in mud, getting derailed with debating on what exactly does this or that thinker not in this thread, advocates - and that is just plainly not at all productive.

We want honest intelligent productive thinking and writing by and from each one of us here present and contributing.

.



What makes you think I’m not speaking from my experience and opinion? It’s just that I don’t wish to advance my ego claiming knowledge outside of human understanding or experience. What others know and experience we all have to tread that path.

Your idea of independent ideas IMO is a lost cause since whether we know it or not we all inherit thoughts and ideas consciously and unconsciously from others and can diverge to another perspective but first have to firmly establish an understanding of certain basics.

With your above criteria, you must be having a rough time since you’ll find few independent thoughts of much value IMO.

I have independent ideas above and beyond what I stated above but to express them I KNOW would be, believe me, a waste of time, at this time.
There's a time and place for everything.
One can't tell a prepubescent child about sex until those hormones are in place...if you try it's a waste of time.


And you have to understand, bringing up experts gives any communicator some certified backup to the point their trying to make.

My point was that a mere belief is only the beginning of a God premise since it has a degree of complexity beyond simple belief.

God=complexity, not simplicity...

So the bottom line sure, implicit in my post was the idea of some definition of God and that mere belief is so fundamental it's almost primitive without the nuances.

If you don't want to get into sectarian mumbo jumbo I can get with that intent.

But my first post, regarding a belief in God from a logical empirical perspective to my thinking needed an explanation that the premise: belief in God is a very low level on the developmental path...though potentially a necessary component to better things.

It boils down to comprehensive thinking and shunning of reductionist thinking.



posted on Dec, 19 2020 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pachomius

originally posted by: Willtell
One great argument for a God is that we know empirically that NOTHING comes into being out of nothing. And particularly complex beings like humans

Organic or inorganic.

Look at a car. Can something like that exist in a vacuum?

Look at a creature, man, or animal. Can that come into being by itself?

NO to both questions.

So if you say, the parents created that being?

It is irrelevant since all that we are confirming is the impossibility of any complex or not creature coming into existence all by itself.

Somewhere down the line of humans is some kind of superior being or process that has an origin.










.






In other words, there is existence all the time and everywhere, i.e. there has never ever been and nowhere non-existence.


That’s not what I'm saying.

Again, there is a nuance in that actually there is a thing called non-existence but one has to define first existence to understand nonexistence. In what context?

Everything is contextual, is a fundamental philosophical FACT.

If one doesn’t know or understand the context, then the're lost

What is the context here that I can delineate?

Let's use this.

Existence is a thing. A thing is a creation such as a car, such as a bike, and such as a human being, though a human being has more complex possibilities and can advance or transform to another( higher) state of a thing.
When time erases the car, bike, or human the components of these entities go back to where they came from amongst some basic substances that make up all things one way or the other. Then they are no longer a thing.


They go back to no thing or nothing. But cars and bikes as things literally return to their parts.

This is all context

In a higher context, one can indeed say creation is an ever perpetuating process. Sure, but that misses some of our experience when you go that high in context.

You miss some steps on the ladder.




Now, we humans for being of the taxonomy homo sapiens, we know right away from our acquaintance with existence, that there are two kinds of existence, self-existence and existence from another.


I don't get self-existence. What can you empirically show as self-existent?

The only thing that in theory is self-existent is God IN ABSTRACT.

Something highly unobservable!




Existence from self is in-extinguishable, so that God as a self-existent being cannot extinguish Himself, while man being an instance of existence from another namely God, he can cease to exist from God, and even extinguish himself by suicide.

There, that is one argument for the existence of God, in concept as the self-existent entity that created caused the existence of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.



From that context, the reality is that all is God and God is all.

So on that level, nothing is created or destroyed or extinguished as you say.

Since all is God and God is all.

It's just that the HUman has to connect with his God-self to connect with that lofty context.

He has to see God as all and all as God.

He has to see that separation from God is an illusion.

Because if anything is other than God then it never existed and if it did then it would be equal to God.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 144  145  146    148  149  150 >>

log in

join