Just another “fundi” thought, perhaps both believers and non believers are right, they are just right in their different ways.

God does exist, he exists courtesy of the billions of people who believe in him, they might use different names for him and attribute him different powers, and as each sees him in a different way then they can't all be right about his makeup, in fact if only one can be right while everyone else is wrong.

But to all of them he is GOD. He is as real as "LOVE" "HATE" "FEAR" "AFFECTION" "SORROW" and other such "REAL" things that cannot be empirically proven because they exist only in the thoughts and feelings of the individual human being, but are real and exist nevertheless.

The cliché "God is love" may be more right than it first seems. Who here will say Love does not exist, or even sorrow, yet they cannot be tasted seen felt or otherwise empirically proven. However, for those who have experienced them, they are very very real. And observing the effects on the lover or the grief stricken is no proof as similar effects can be observed in the Theist relationship with their God.

Within the “existence” debate it really does not matter if the God in question is a physical being of some sort or only exists in the mind of men, he still exists equally well in either case, the believer experiences God just as he experiences love, so to the believer God does exist and in that form will only cease to exist when the last man stops experiencing him. And lets not have the old comparison arguments about unicorns, spaghetti monsters etc, they are not "experienced" in the same way God, love, hate sorrow is experienced.

At the same time to the unbeliever God does not exist, but just what God do they not believe in, usually it's the supernatural being that creates worlds, man, etc, and they are quite right, such a being is totally illogical and cannot and does not exist. But that is much to narrow a viewpoint, the "God" in question is a much broader and elusive thing than that. I have no doubt that despite the impossibility of the existence of such a supreme being someone can experience God just as someone can experience love, or sorrow while others may never experience either. And simply because it is not experienced by everyone does not make Love or God anymore unreal, just more debatable.

I know the old arguments will continue about the composition of any given God, in fact it would be strange were it not to continue. However, it will never be resolved as it’s impossible for the believer or non believer to prove something that does not exist. But the actual existence of God, certainly as a concept that affects many people cannot be denied, no more than the existence of Love or Hate. The very fact that we discuss God, both believer and non believer causes him to exist in the first place. So if we accept that a believer can truly "experience" God then it’s not the actual existence or non existence of a God we are debating, as clearly something has affected the believer. It’s the nature of the cause of that effect wherein lies the real debate.

So in the forum of debate there is no such thing as a believer or non believer, we are ALL believers, we just believe differently about the same concept. Perhaps a closer study of Objectum sexuality would cast more light on the subject, or perhaps we are all mentally ill, some to a greater degree than others.

Views: 91

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Such as courage, love, devotion, a better world, peace, etc ?
The equivalence is in the brain of the believer, and its as real to him as it is unreal to us. the brain fools us on a daily basis.
Indeed. I have activated the "God Module" when seeing something insanely beautiful and during my past delving into the occult, meditation (feeling like your consciousness merges withe the universe and such) and the like. I as a young teen experienced the same feelings when I prayed for god to accept me as a christian in front of a southern baptist church.
As they would say, God is within you. Could also be LSD (shows how old I am)
Actually, from what I understand of modern brain science, there isn't any "God Module"; spiritual experiences are the product of various mental systems working in tandem, sort of like our ability for writing - there isn't any "writing module", but we do have fine motor control, symbolic reasoning etc. that allow us to write.
God module, love module, hate module, call them what you will, they are all the same. Personal un-shareable emotions that can take on physical attributes.
I basically agree, but I think it's important not to fudge over the real differences here. The point is that whereas we have specific places in our brains to process abstract reasoning, emotions, store memories, recognize faces, and form cognitive maps, but no such area exists for the contemplation of God.

This is another minor quibble - it's not that cognitive processes can take on physical properties, it's that they do: every one of them, every time. We don't have any reason to suspect that there's anything more going on than what happens materially, in our brains.
I ma not certain to hat areas you refer, I assume the same areas that deal with emotion, such as love and hate etc will also deal with the God emotions.

I have every reason to suspect that there is more going on than my brain can contemplate.
1. I think therefore I am. Any knowledge beyond that can be considered a belief. The term knowledge is subjective to your assumptions. Saying we're all believers is not profound. It is that 'difference' that makes all the difference, because our beliefs about the world are measureed, or should be, in the observable world.

2. You can't change the definition of God because you don't accept the traditional one. If you want to worship the feeling of love do so, but calling it God is dishonest.

3. Go tell millions of people around the world in churches, mosques, and temples how you feel about God, and they'll call you an atheist. And they'll be right.

4. If idea of God is real, the idea of Unicorns is real, the idea of Leperchauns is real...ad infinitum. Everything we imagine and debate is now real. This is not useful. If God is real than everything is real, and reality as a word has no meaning. The point of philosophy is to gain understanding, not lose it.

5. It reads like a long winded ontological argument. These have been refuted for centuries.
Apoligies for the long winded ontological argument, so I hope you will apoligise for the lightweight use of the Unicorns and Leperchauns, as I pointed out there is no comparison between them and world religion other than there is no proof of either which is a rather slim connection.

I think therefore I hallucinate, how do you know what you think is in anyway real, all you know is that you are aware, what you are aware of is another matter.

One does not worship "love" but one may worship the source of that love.

I don't feel anything about God, I do "know" he does not exist in what we would term the "real" world, whatever that is.

The point of philosophy is that there is no point to philosophy.
No one denies the existence of "God" (or countless other imaginary things) as some vague nebulous concept or idea within the brain of the believer. It most certain DOES matter about the objective reality versus the subjective reality. To argue that someone did not experience "X" is assinine. To argue that because you experienced "X" it exists in objective reality is equally assinine.
It is no "nebulous" concept to the true believer, and to dismiss it as such is a mistake that has resulted in the billions of believers in the world today. How can you hope to counteract anything that is not taken seriously.

And there is no argument between the objective reality versus the subjective reality, there is ONLY the subjective, at least until the "objective " leaps up and bites our ass. But that being the case then we must deal with the "subjective "

Most people who "experience" something would argue it exists, to think otherwise would be foolish, but it only exists for them.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

Latest Activity

Randall Smith commented on Sentient Biped's group Food!
2 minutes ago
Randall Smith commented on Richard C Brown's group learnerscoffeeshack
9 minutes ago
Randall Smith commented on Calla's group Nexus Book Club
12 minutes ago
Pat replied to Adam's discussion Political Ideology
14 minutes ago
Maria Vali posted photos
31 minutes ago
Andrew Bradford Hoke posted a status
"My blog on PASTAHCON 2014"
49 minutes ago
Kambiz Nadri posted photos
2 hours ago
Grinning Cat replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Camo cats in the group Atheist Ailurophiles
2 hours ago
Kambiz Nadri commented on Kambiz Nadri's blog post Marrying young girls in Islam.
2 hours ago
Kambiz Nadri commented on Kambiz Nadri's blog post Marrying young girls in Islam.
2 hours ago
Plinius commented on Calla's group Nexus Book Club
6 hours ago
Plinius commented on Sentient Biped's group Food!
6 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service