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

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Pachomius

(From Willtell) My belief is that everything is God.

Nothing can exist but God.

Creation is an illusion


If you say something exists or God created it, then from what did he create it from? Existing material or something he created. Created it from nothing?

Where did he get the material to create anything?

Ultimately, even creation is an illusion


Most likely everything that exists has always existed

Development and consciousness are more important IMO.

No need to bring in illusion, God created everything that is not God from Himself, i.e. God uses Himself as the material from which to create everything that is not Himself, that is why everything that is not God Himself, they are transient, because anytime God decides to not anymore keep them in existence, they will go into extinction.

Why are some people always bringing up the idea that everything is an illusion, what is the advantage of such an attitude?

So that they can console themselves that whatever things are not welcome in life, no need to feel so bad, because anyway everything is illusion.

That is what I call in Spanish, consuelo de bobo, i.e. consolation for the fool.
.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
We are living in a time where the Bible convinces people God doesn't exist.

Or should I say a time where the Bible is used to prove the inexistence of God.

Go figure.

That is the trouble with the Bible, anyone even a fool can explain it as to prove anything at all.

Nevertheless, it is the source of the biggest religion genre in history at present, i.e. Christians take the Bible seriously, on the other hand, so also Muslims, they take the Koran seriously, that is why they are num 2 in peoples who are into the Muslim religion genre.

Time to take the God of reason instead of the God of religion, seriously: since man has got to have a God.
.

a reply to: Pachomius

Why are some people always bringing up the idea that everything is an illusion, what is the advantage of such an attitude?


It resolves some ontological contradictions associated with the connection between "inner" (self) and "outer" (the non-self) spheres.

In the Yogacara school of analytic Buddhism it serves to heal a kind of schizophrenia caused by the false dualism of "inner" and "outer." The Madhyamaka school also uses this to crack open some ontological problems that are more or less unresolvable otherwise.

It need not be a pessimistic philosophy, or a solipsistic one. However, it can lead to pessimism, defeatism, and nihilism if crudely and superficially applied.

originally posted by: Never Despise
a reply to: Pachomius

Why are some people always bringing up the idea that everything is an illusion, what is the advantage of such an attitude?


It resolves some ontological contradictions associated with the connection between "inner" (self) and "outer" (the non-self) spheres.

In the Yogacara school of analytic Buddhism it serves to heal a kind of schizophrenia caused by the false dualism of "inner" and "outer." The Madhyamaka school also uses this to crack open some ontological problems that are more or less unresolvable otherwise.

It need not be a pessimistic philosophy, or a solipsistic one. However, it can lead to pessimism, defeatism, and nihilism if crudely and superficially applied.

Well, that is some kind of learning, but let you and me just be flesh and blood, okay?

Tell me, are you from your papa and mama, and what are you doing for making a living?

It is most satisfying on the part of very profound self-navel viewing humans, to go into all kinds of abysmal questions like ontological unsolvable questions otherwise, in order just to what?

Tell me, when we can just know that we come from our papa and mama, and this is the only life we have, so better get going and do something with it, so that at the point of departure from this life, we can say to ourselves, I have lived a full life, I had gotten married, earned a living, loved a spouse, brought up kids.
.

a reply to: Pachomius
Well, that's wisdom for you. I'm just some guy who did come from his mama and papa. Pop's passed away but Mom is still going strong. I work a job that isn't very special or interesting and I spend a lot of time reading because I don't have much money to do much else. I've done all kinds of work, none of it special but at least it puts some food on the table.

I live out in the ruins of this place I grew up in. I grew up with a whole bunch of people and first it was rough living in cars and tents and lean-tos but eventually we built ourselves some nice houses. Then came various troubles and debts and the whole thing collapsed. I moved around some, came back, and some years ago I bought a small corner of what we used to have and have been fixing up the little house still standing there. I have to admit it's in rough shape but I keep trying to get the roof to fit right.

I like living out in the woods and driving into town to do my mediocre little job. I get along OK with everyone I suppose, and help out with some community stuff in town. You do favors for people they will do favors for you.

I don't have a woman or kids and don't really care. I just like reading. I get on the net a few times a week and surf it to death, then I log off totally for a few days and work in my garden or read my big pile of old books. A college in Vermont went bankrupt not long ago and I drove down there and bought a ton of books for almost nothing. It was pretty much all I could carry.

So I guess I am doing OK.

a reply to: Never Despise


You tell readers here: "I don't have a woman or kids and don't really care."

It's none of my business, but just look at every kind of living things, they reproduce, even a virus Covid-19 which is dubious to scientists whether it is a living thing or not, it also seeks to reproduce, and thus keep its own taxonomy lasting indefinitely.

So, at least love and reproduce one offspring to achieve the destiny of all living things.

Get busy before the bus leaves the station.

originally posted by: Pachomius
a reply to: Never Despise


You tell readers here: "I don't have a woman or kids and don't really care."

It's none of my business, but just look at every kind of living things, they reproduce, even a virus Covid-19 which is dubious to scientists whether it is a living thing or not, it also seeks to reproduce, and thus keep its own taxonomy lasting indefinitely.

So, at least love and reproduce one offspring to achieve the destiny of all living things.

Get busy before the bus leaves the station.

Merry X'mas and Happy New Year to everyone!

The title of this thread is the following:
"Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not."

Yes, God exists, and I call Him the God of reason, but to indulge in my own God of religion, I call Him the God with His own kind of a Son, Who became man and thus we have X'mas!

Isn't that God of religion? He speaks in the language of man, I mean ordinary man.

a reply to: Pachomius
I would implore you not to think of what follows as an argument, but rather a tool for exploration that I think will take the honest seeker to the feet of Jesus Christ.

The proposition the Christian God exist is what I would call transcendentally necessary. A proposition is transcendentally necessary if and only if it is an essential state of affairs for the understanding of both it's affirmation and it's denial.

Let's start with propositions that aren't about God to see what transcendental necessity is:

Language has meaning.

If language does not have meaning, then the proposition language does not have meaning is meaningless. So to assert that it doesn't have meaning in a meaningful way, would require it to be true that language has meaning. To assert that language does have meaning in a meaningful way also requires that language have meaning. So proposition 1 is transcendentally necessary.

2) There is truth.

In order for the statement, there is no truth to be a reality it would have to be the case that there is no truth. This means it would be true that there is no truth, which is a contradiction. Thus to make sense of the claim there is no truth one must assume that there is truth in reality and that proposition 2 is an example of it. It is also the case that asserting that there is truth assumes that truth is a property of reality. Therefore proposition 2 is transcendentally necessary.

3) Human cognition is basically reliable.

To make sense of the statement our cognition is not basically reliable we must assume that it is a reality that our cognition is a reliable, and the same is true for it's affirmation. This means we have again found that proposition 3 has transcendental necessity.

So above I've shown you three propositions that are similar in that they all must be true of reality for their truth is necessary for understanding both their affirmation and their denial.

The next thing I would draw your attention to is that all three of these propositions rely upon the truth of the other two. If language doesn't have meaning, then neither proposition 2 or 3 are meaningful assertions. If there is no truth, then neither proposition 1 or 3 can be true. If human cognition isn't basically reliable, then it cannot be justified as a reliable tool for accessing the truth of either proposition 1 or proposition 2. These are not the only propositions that have transcendental necessity. There are many, and none of them stand on their own devoid an existential context where there others are also realities. This points to the existence of something that connects and relates all these propositions which are necessary but not sufficient for grounding our epistemology. So what grounds the existence of these things as realities? The Materialist says it's spacetime, matter and energy. The Hindu says it is Brahman. The Taoist, the Tao. The Muslim, Allah. The Neoplatonist grounds it in an impersonal unity. The Christian, in the triune 8God of scripture. What do you say it is?

My suggestion to you is that because we are talking about what connects all these that it to is a proposition that is transcendental and necessary, because of this when your view of reality is wrong the thing you place your faith in to connect these things will crumble.

a reply to: Pachomius

Its rather simple people believe in god so he has an influence on the world. And anything that can cause changes exists. So is there a god as long as people believe yes.

Some brat lies about there being no God and since he's got us trying to prove the self-evident.

It's called chaos.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance
Is there a god and a you though?

Are there two things?

Or is there just this that is?

Thou art that!!



Life, God or whatever name it is labelled; is one without a second.

This that is...... is non dual...... not two.

"Nondual Consciousness: A Dialogue between Rupert Spira and Swami Sarvapriyananda".

This is a discussion about finding out what the term God means......posted only a week ago with 68 thousand views already......with 432 comments.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Out6of9Balance
Is there a god and a you though?

When God sends me to hell He's not going. I have responsibilities. I consider myself a person. God is our Master. Master and student are 2.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Out6of9Balance
Is there a god and a you though?

When God sends me to hell He's not going. I have responsibilities. I consider myself a person. God is our Master. Master and student are 2.

It's a common misconception

a reply to: Itisnowagain

What is?

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

You are not going anywhere.......you are the stillness, the rest, the stable in which movement appears.

Nothing is going anywhere...... it's always just this that is.

The separate thing (person) that you believe you are does not exist....only what is happening appears to exist.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Second time I read this today and now I'm thinking it's actually a nice thing to say.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Pachomius

Its rather simple people believe in god so he has an influence on the world. And anything that can cause changes exists. So is there a god as long as people believe yes.

Dear dragonridr, the verb to believe is not of the same meaning as to know.

For example, someone in the midst of the traffic in a busy street starts shouting, "I believe I will not be run over by speeding vehicles while crossing the street regardless the traffic light is red, meaning no crossing yet to pedestrians."

Compare that person with his belief to this one with his knowledge, this latter one tells himself, "I know I will get run over with crossing the street while the red light on on."

Tell me, which of the two is rational?

.

a reply to: Pachomius

What if they both are right?

originally posted by: Pachomius

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Pachomius

Its rather simple people believe in god so he has an influence on the world. And anything that can cause changes exists. So is there a god as long as people believe yes.

Dear dragonridr, the verb to believe is not of the same meaning as to know.

For example, someone in the midst of the traffic in a busy street starts shouting, "I believe I will not be run over by speeding vehicles while crossing the street regardless the traffic light is red, meaning no crossing yet to pedestrians."

Compare that person with his belief to this one with his knowledge, this latter one tells himself, "I know I will get run over with crossing the street while the red light on on."

Tell me, which of the two is rational?

.

A person of faith in God knows the law of man.

A person of faith would not cross the street where his light is red...... Faith is also knowledge.


Only a individual who have no faith would run a red light. This individual have a lack of knowledge and common sense. His faith is random at best. And he/she is guessing probability of succsess.