Philosophy of GOD ?

If you are correct in what you say here, IDEAL, why not just call existence..."existence?"

Why go with the "god" nonsense?

If "existence" is what IS...and if you are absolutely sure of it...why on earth call "existence"...god?

By the way, how do you know all this stuff is so -- or are you just guessing?

0 Replies

IDEAL Singh, your thesis contains so many errors of logic that it is laughable. Laughing

First of all, if you want to define existence as "God" that is fine by me, since of course it is the "existence" of the universe that provided the conditions in which human life could evolve.

But you cannot change horses in mid-stream and pretend that you have now also proven the existence of a personal God who has any of the attributes commonly assigned to him by mythology.

There is no Law inherent in the universe as we know it that says God cannot be evil. That is nothing more than wishful thinking.

What force could prevent a God from designing hideous parasites, diseases, defects, greed and lusts that would cause his creations to prey upon each other? Who could prevent him from flooding a world and killing innocent babies? What if he found it amusing to watch his priests abuse his altar boys? Twisted Evil

You list a number of frequently posted but false dichotomies:

Of course good can exist without evil. People could have absolute freedom to do anything they liked, but freely to choose not to harm each other. But people who have been inflicted by their "creator" with mental defects, irresistible cravings and lusts but have not been endowed with the character traits that allow them to resist, do not really have the freedom NOT to act on their desires.

Of course light can and does exist without darkness. The only way you can "remove" darkness is to add light (which is nothing more than photons of certain frequencies), not the other way around. There are always photons around even when they are not in the visible spectrum (CMBR) so there is no true darkness anywhere in the universe. A universe could be completely filled with visible light, if it had no objects to block the light of its stars and create shadows.

You can only remove cold by adding heat. Temperature is a measure of how fast molecules are vibrating due to energy content. Even at Absolute Zero, there is still a small amount of vibration because of Heisman's Uncertainty Principle.

Yes, of course there can be life without death, females without males. The original single-celled life forms that reproduce by splitting are still alive. Each one has a chain of existence stretching back 3.5 billion years, unbroken by death. A number of species of animals have done away with males and now reproduce by parthenogenesis.

If we could eliminate the biological processes that cause aging, we could have eternal youth. The trade off might be a higher cancer rate.

I can easily imagine a beautiful world without ugliness. Why can't you?

I do not know if we were created with a purpose. I only know that I find meaning in my own life without a need to believe in supernatural beings.

0 Replies

Quote:

IDEAL Singh, your thesis contains so many errors of logic that it is laughable.

I hope you had a hearty laugh... Good for people like me and you who invest loads of time sitting on the computer...

Infact you observations made me have hearty outburst as well... Reason... you did not even dare to think outside the boundary walls of mythological personal God...

I could not get from which angle did you conclude that I am claiming or trying to establish the existense of a Personal God, who has any of the attributes commonly assigned to him by mythology.

I am not talking about a Personal God, but talking about a Universal One... Now for that I have to define what type of God I am talking about...

See my idea of so-called God is of "Being and Becoming". The 'being' is having the knowledge and awareness of the essential nature of the divinity of individual and its relation with the the Creator/the Existence...

The spark of divinty in a individual, having the same content as so-called God, has the potential to 'Becoming' a perfect like Him and become one with Him. This awareness is the basis of "Universal Brotherhood" or the "Equality of Mankind" as the "Spirit Consciousness" is same in everyone and every kind of life form from the lowest to the highest. It is this realization which makes me agree to the logic that "All Mankind is One and No enemy and No stranger." Any problem with that ?

The Spirit being divine and everfree and infinite cannot be expressed in a finite way as only the infinte can be expressed only in infinte way, no one can seal the Truth/Infinite in a book and say that is it!! Its just childish. Only a dogma can be sealed and has final conclusion/revelaton... not a Religion. Spiritualism is ever evolving !!!

Start loving every one and you are half way there, but in schematic creeds God is only limited to certain people, it favours the few but damns the rest of the lot. Its a partisan God not a Universal One... thats why schematic creeds lack the appeal of the bliss of Super Soul and is void of Spirituality/Divinity, hence crushing the inituitive spirit of their adherants leading them to neither way and Spiritually Dead.

The God realized person has no abilty to damn any one to hell as he sees divine spark in everything and this has always been the measurement of one's deapth of spiritual experienses. Involution of the Soul/Spirit to the the universal consciousness is the aim of the indic Religions, has been the corner stone of the Indian philosophy, this was and is the main reason that Spritualism has survived and thrived in India only, despite the onslaught of spirtually dead creeds for a millenium.

So, You can say that I believe in a theory where "All Mankind is One and No enemy and No stranger." This awareness is the basis of "Universal Brotherhood" or the "Equality of Mankind".

Quote:

But you cannot change horses in mid-stream and pretend that you have now also proven the existence of a personal God who has any of the attributes commonly assigned to him by mythology.

There is no Law inherent in the universe as we know it that says God cannot be evil. That is nothing more than wishful thinking.

There was no 'Law of Gravitation' before Newton propounded it. but that does not mean that there was no gravitation before the law was propounded. Science is not at all absolute in itself. It is ever evolving and new Laws pave for old established facts. Science can not be a yardstick because it itself is ever evolving.

Quote:

What force could prevent a God from designing hideous parasites, diseases, defects, greed and lusts that would cause his creations to prey upon each other? Who could prevent him from flooding a world and killing innocent babies? What if he found it amusing to watch his priests abuse his altar boys?

Your point ? You did not get what the articles says. Read again the full article. God is not an Object like in case Christianity or Islam etc.

Quote:

You list a number of frequently posted but false dichotomies:

False ? Why ?

Quote:

Of course good can exist without evil. People could have absolute freedom to do anything they liked, but freely to choose not to harm each other.

You said "People could have" but they don't have such a freedom. I agree that it could have better if people could freely choose not to harm each other... but they dont... can you tell me why ?

Quote:

But people who have been inflicted by their "creator" with mental defects, irresistible cravings and lusts but have not been endowed with the character traits that allow them to resist, do not really have the freedom NOT to act on their desires.

This is a beautifull point you have raised... but again you have not done the justice to the article... read again... to be more practical mental defects happen due to carelessness of human beigns... we can say we used our freedom to be careless... cravings and lusts are also human induced... to control them is also in the control of beings...

Quote:

Of course light can and does exist without darkness. The only way you can "remove" darkness is to add light (which is nothing more than photons of certain frequencies), not the other way around. There are always photons around even when they are not in the visible spectrum (CMBR) so there is no true darkness anywhere in the universe. A universe could be completely filled with visible light, if it had no objects to block the light of its stars and create shadows.

You can only remove cold by adding heat. Temperature is a measure of how fast molecules are vibrating due to energy content. Even at Absolute Zero, there is still a small amount of vibration because of Heisman's Uncertainty Principle.

Yes, of course there can be life without death, females without males. The original single-celled life forms that reproduce by splitting are still alive. Each one has a chain of existence stretching back 3.5 billion years, unbroken by death. A number of species of animals have done away with males and now reproduce by parthenogenesis.

If we could eliminate the biological processes that cause aging, we could have eternal youth. The trade off might be a higher cancer rate.

I think you are pretty bizzare in your observations... you opinions seem to be so much dependent on scientific laws which are not at all absolute in themselves.

The above example were just ways of reflecting upon a different perspective. There was no need to take them litereally.

BTW, Why do you need to add light if it is already there? And the fact is shadows do exist... we have to add light to remove darkness... But My point was : Imagine if there was only light all around then we would have never learnt about darkness...

Quote:

I can easily imagine a beautiful world without ugliness. Why can't you?

I do not know if we were created with a purpose. I only know that I find meaning in my own life without a need to believe in supernatural beings.

Well you are again miserbale shortsighted in your arguement... You can now easily imagine beautiful word with ugliness... but my point is : Imagine if there was not ugliness, as now you can imagine... how would you realise if there is anything called beautiful...?

I am not talking about believing in supernatural... its our own free sweet will... Just because you choose to percieve existence this way does not means you are absolutely right or viceversa... even though I would love to hear about your meaning that you have found out...

0 Replies

Once again, IDEAL, if you are talking about existence -- why not call it "existence?"

Why do you want to call it God?

If you are talking about "being and becoming" -- why not call it "being and becoming?"

Why call it God?

If you are talking about knowledge and awareness -- why not refer to them as "knowledge" and "awareness?"

Why call them God?

Why talk about a "Creator" (with a capital "c", yet) and pretend you are not talking about a God very much like the gods all these other people are talking about?

Why do you propose this BELIEF SYSTEM and then go through what you go through when people call you on it.

WHY?

0 Replies

Although suffering from some sleep deprivation,
I humbly offer an excerpt from a journal I have recently written upon, with hopes that it might help elucidate Singh's position, and allow a greater meeting of both your minds:

The ink flows, but the words do not seem to move. Each written word, by the time it is penned, can no longer exist, if it ever even did. The word itself is an abstraction, and so could not physically exist, but only exist in that moment of initial creation, within the author's mind. Once that moment is no more, so is the word, and all that remains is its memory, to be interpreted by another's illusory gaze.