5 of 6
5
Still just fine with the term “God”, but….
Posted: 10 June 2013 11:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 61 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5998
Joined  2009-02-26
brmckay - 10 June 2013 09:11 AM

Write4U - Then you have not understood a word I have said and what’s worse you have not checked out David Bohm, or you would understand that Bohm speaks in terms of Wholeness and Holomovement., exactly the opposite of what you are positing here.

Bohm - (latent excellence which may become reality, Potential)

My apologies then.

Would saying, ‘Latent Excellence/Potential not separable’, carried my point better?  Probably not.

It’s just redundant. The definition of potential includes the terms ‘inherent’ and ‘not separable’.

Maybe the problem is the question of Existence.  Can “Universal Wholeness” actually be said to exist.  Existence, in the usual sense of the word, requires it’s opposite. Non Existence.

How can evidence be gathered in such a case?

???

The Way that can be told of is not an unvarying way;
The names that can be named are not unvarying names.
It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang;
The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures, each after its kind.
(Tao Te Ching; chap. 1, tr. Waley)

It has a name and it is clearly manifest, The Universe.
You keep trying to name something which does indeed not exist, Heaven.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 09:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 62 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  108
Joined  2013-05-31

Write4U - It has a name and it is clearly manifest, The Universe.
You keep trying to name something which does indeed not exist, Heaven.

Sorry, at this point you’re being deliberately obtuse to serve your own agenda.

I will rest my case and let others find the meaning.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 01:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 63 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5998
Joined  2009-02-26

Actually it was in response to someone who declared that heaven is where the stars are. I could have added that of course our sun is a star and we are were the stars are, thus we are already in heaven.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 01:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 64 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  108
Joined  2013-05-31

Write4U - Actually it was in response to someone who declared that heaven is where the stars are. I could have added that of course our sun is a star and we are were the stars are, thus we are already in heaven.

What, you just keep doing it until they go away and you declare yourself the winner?

You are welcome to all those non-existent gods, myths, heavens and hells. 

Not my bag.

——-

I will summarize one more time:

The question of God existing or not existing, is irrelevant. This is beyond the realm of scientific proof.

The only reasonable definition of God is the Emergent Property of Infinite Potentiality.

Existence/Non-Existence not separate.  A paradox.

As a human being my concern with this, is a personal quest for expression of my humanness within the paradox.

What this will be, will be it’s own proof.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 03:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 65 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  497
Joined  2013-06-01

Write4U,

Seems people ask me which way I am going and it must sound like I am saying right & left.

My thoughts are clear to me, my method or communication is mud.

It would be easier if I could use labels that people understood.

Example;
Christian Jesus, Gnostic Jesus, Jewish Jesus, Islamic Jesus.

Christian Heaven, Vedic Heaven, Egyptian Heaven, Gnostic Heaven, Scientific Heaven. 

Same thing for God, atheist, sprite, and on and on.

The people back then had trouble understanding to. Well maybe not the Vedic or Egyptians they really had it together. But most of the history we are dealing with.

What I see is they needed to understand things like calendars and spent time and effort on them. Things like heaven they didn’t deal with, most of the time they just updated older stories. 

So to answer you question about heaven, Scientific Heaven, is where the stars are.
Gnostic Heaven, well you’re here, buddy.
Vedic Heaven, the planets.
Egyptian Heaven, islands in the Mediterranean Ocean.
Jewish Heaven, not clear.
Christian Heaven, not clear.

Zoroastrianism had the first man that was able to visit heaven and hell and return.

I myself have been to heaven; it is located in downtown Los Angeles on the twentieth floor. It has it own elevator and nice too. The door opens and you are met by a couple of really beautiful models, one is handing you a glass of champagne the other will take you to who you want to meet. I can’t remember the name of the modeling agency, but it sure seemed like my idea of heaven.


Brmckay,

God, irrelevant. I couldn’t agree more.

As a personal quest, for me that was over years ago.
My interest now is in trying to stop the damage from Christian and other movements.
They can keep their Christianity for all I care. But we need to knock Christianity down to its knees and kept them out of political movements. They are ruining the country.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 04:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 66 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5998
Joined  2009-02-26

My only purpose is to show Theists that there is not either God or Nothing. There is a scientifically based alternative to God with all the functional properties of God but without motivated intelligence.

The problem lies in providing a logical alternative. Don’t forget that, especially here in the US, few people know anything about the state of science.

I am not quarrelling with atheists, I am one myself.

M.Y,
Same thing for God, atheist, sprite, and on and on.

In the list above you lump in Atheists. IMO, that is incorrect.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 05:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 67 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  497
Joined  2013-06-01

Absolutely the atheist fit into the category of words that have different meaning to different people or groups.
As atheists we have meanings and the Christians have meanings.
One is that God exists, we know that because man created god. But God is irrelevant.
Two is that God never existed and is a made up story.
Three is that we are all part of God so you cannot have mankind without God.
Four the Christian view, God exists and Atheists are just non-believers in God.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 06:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 68 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04

Mike, Your point #3 doesn’t compute with me, and seems to contradict your point #1.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 06:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 69 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  497
Joined  2013-06-01

And it should. The reason is that you have one understanding and definition for God. And if you look, God is also on the list of more that one meaning.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 06:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 70 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04

That doesn’t clear things up for me.  And I am not trying to be obtuse.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 June 2013 07:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 71 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  497
Joined  2013-06-01

No, and I didn’t think that.

One is that man created god, therefore he exists, maybe not as the creator but he still exists like Santa Clause & Bugs Bunny exist in the mind. It’s like a cake. Once you make it, it exists. Eat it and it’s gone, but the fact is it still existed and just by talking about it is proof it exists.

Three is the actual real god in the Gnostic form. You and me and the rest of mankind. You are the son of god.
Now, most of the teachings are still buried or destroyed. But we have gotten more data in the last fifty years than in the last 2000 years on Gnostic teachings.
Now do people pray to god? And how much of what we know was just in a conversion stage and not meant to be the finial or whole religious thought.
The answer would be yes, you pray to god. But you are the son of god. So you are praying to your father. Ever heard that before, like in church. The father of all mankind.

Seems a little out there, I know. But look at the older religions like the Rig Veda. They were also self-managing religions that had self judgment of good and bad. And an upper figure head. For the most part they were reborn to try and move up the Cass system to the upper levels of rebirth. You had levels of heaven too. Some of the Jewish think that way, that god has a special place in heaven for them. Years ago it was a special heaven. But they gotten away from that.

To some atheists the only God is the one who created heaven and earth.
That makes many of today’s religions all atheists. Do we really want to do that and is that in agreement with the thinking of the rest of the world? Or are the atheists turning to self serving thinking?

If this does not answer the question, just ask. More that happy to try again.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 09:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 72 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  108
Joined  2013-05-31

Mike Yohe - God, irrelevant. I couldn’t agree more.

Not what I said.

brmckay - The question of God existing or not existing, is irrelevant. This is beyond the realm of scientific proof.

I’m describing the nature of what I call God, and that nature, as the foundation of my interaction with it, is not irrelevant since I exist, at least so it seems, relative to it.

[ Edited: 13 June 2013 09:34 AM by brmckay ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 09:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 73 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  497
Joined  2013-06-01

I took it that God in the way as described by atheists is irrelevant, because god showed up in all cultures around the earth in history. Mankind has always had gods of many types.
Therefore to define the definition of “Atheist” to just a narrow few is wrong. Should include all gods.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 11:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 74 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
Mike Yohe - 13 June 2013 09:36 AM

I took it that God in the way as described by atheists is irrelevant, because god showed up in all cultures around the earth in history. Mankind has always had gods of many types.
Therefore to define the definition of “Atheist” to just a narrow few is wrong. Should include all gods.

Mike, the majority of people here and in atheist discussion groups already agree with you that atheism extends to all religions. Because we are mostly North American here, and the dominant belief presence happens to be Christianity makes it a target for discussion over others. I think that people just naturally leave out understood conditional clauses that narrow the focus to a subgroup of atheist because it would be too superfluous to have to constantly remind the readers of something we already know. For instance, this is a forum that is mostly American. So it should be granted that if one uses the term, “Christianity” in a context that seems to imply that it is the ‘anti-atheist’ sole target, you have to give the person using it charity of fairness and assume they truly know there are other theisms out there that exist and deserve just as much attention.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 11:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 75 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  108
Joined  2013-05-31

Mike,

Thanks for clarifying.

I think that I understand what you are saying.  Just didn’t want my last statement to get watered down.  Took several weeks to get to it.

It’s getting harder, the more I talk about this, to consider myself atheistic. Just differently theistic.

Probably don’t have much more to contribute to the discussion. But, will follow it for awhile and try not to butt in.

Been nice meeting everyone.  Thanks.

Profile
 
 
   
5 of 6
5