Does God Exist?

I stand corrected. Good sleuthing. My only quibble would be Jack the Ripper. There are so many wild theories about him that his religious/non-religious inclinations are pure speculation. I'd also take issue with your earlier post absolving atheist mass murderers from their deeds simply because they had religious upbringings. They were atheists when they committed their crimes. It is again pure speculation to attribute them to their childhood beliefs rather than their adult beliefs. Most atheists I know, and I'd wager many on this forum, had religious upbringings, and some of them were traumatic. So far, none, to my knowledge, have become serial killers. And so far, neither have I.

 

Airyfox:

Characters like 'thedope' try to deny the self-evidence that god does not exist for us. The part he plays defines his whole no matter how he thrashes about, or lies still. :-D More, thedope, not being everyone, defines everyone, just not more than everyone defines themselves. lol



Why are gods believers unworthy of belief? Their "investment" in god as a no-show! It is their interest that god is gotten up as 'unseen', 'abstract', 'ubiquitous' 'omnipresent', 'disembodied', anything but a person...

 

Hey man, I found Jesus---he was hiding behind the couch the whole time!

(That's not exactly mine---it is a bumper sticker---or based on what I remember of a bumper sticker.)

 

And if I am god is your determination the same? In this genre I exist for your interest.

You say that I am based on what I report. I say that I am as I am created and I also say that god is that which we invoke in case you missed that particular.

I am not really talking about fucking but I do wonder why you would wonder on an effort to make useful error. Ahem,... some people use it for accusation or recrimination or the butt of a joke.

Now is not enough?

I am a copy and I am faithfully reporting my observations.

Back up buddy lest your goings on outpace your becoming.
That there are no idle thoughts is a statement of power. I tell no lie in saying that the abstract is not succinctly physical.

Abstract;
1. existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

 

Their investment?
This character thedope has tried time and again to dissuade you from the god you believe in. The god I put forward is essential to everyone's efforts and is phenomenological. I don't know who you have been talking to as that is not even a piss poor rendition of what I have said.

 

This argument is just as flawed as the one it speaks out against. Both arguments imply that existential, or human, values of good and evil are universals. In response to the concept of God, human values are restricted to physical reality, and from a perspective that is restricted to physical reality death is a finality. From the perspective of a god, who is immortal, death is not a finality, but rather a progression from one state of existence to another.

Just as we cannot understand a godly perspective of death from our limited existential reality, we cannot presume to understand the godly perspectives of other values, such as virtues, morals, and ethics. Good and evil, war and peace, life and death, just like the religious institutions and the ideas of atheism, are all nothing more than human concepts.

 

“The only thing that can possibly save humanity is for God to
rise up within the human soul in the midst of great catastrophe.”
—
Lewis Mumford

 

It doesn't matter what I was determined to find out concerning your thinking yourself god now.
You've claimed to be a facsimile, which tells me you don't believe the self can create.

If you can't say it yourself, forget it. Not everyone invokes god.

I'm sorry if you feel offended. Your saying its only purpose, more, that its only 'useful purpose' is for correction did make me laugh. Error has no purpose. We don't err in order not to.

:-D You're asking for a translation?

Domo Arigato, Mr Roboto.

All thought is embodied. Your dictionary is dumb.

Of course, you believe everyone believes in god in some measure, by virtue of its existence as concept. A poor belief, since it has no measure of its own. Like you said, you put it forward. If you yourself are not the phenomenon by which you claim it to be phenomenological, go on then, off you fuck! ;-D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cShYbLkhBc"]Mr. Roboto- Styx - YouTube

 

He must have thought it needed saving?! Is it a secret that what it really wants above all is its celebration!? :-D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpW6v8bmGQM"]Tango - Understand - YouTube

 

You might derive that from what I said but it is not so. You can only create in like kind or you cannot create unlike yourself.

And in that statement you invoke god per definition, cite or appeal to (someone or something) as an authority for an action or in support of an argument
Who is god that you can determine this? I say god is that which we invoke and this of itself is the entire definition. That which we invoke is the set of all things we invoke and is not substantially represented by any particular claim, all claims having the same phenomenological appearance, that being essential to our efforts.

I am not offended in laughter but I hear a call for understanding.
You have a purpose and error only exists in relation to it. It is obvious that people put error to other purposes besides correction as I have said to accusation, recrimination, the butt of a joke, incarceration, and murder. Error is miscreant in that it is not intended.

And I didn't deny it. I said the abstract is not succinctly physical. A dictionary does not speak for itself but it is a record of our agreements. You are going back on your word here by trying to silence the damned dictionary.

See what I mean you people with eyes? I do not believe everyone believes in god on that basis or any other. I say god, by the standard definition I have put forth is essential to everyone's efforts. You have digressed from holding me to my words so that you can feel allied with the atheists, that is you are regarding not what I have said for what I have said but through your own associations and when you do that all you hear are your own echos and they lull you to sleep.

 

You "logic" is absolutely dependent on there actually being a supreme being. That is your flaw and your assumption. If God is a superego collective and religion evolved from mans need to justify the unjustifiable then you are demonstrating my point perfectly. Thanks for trying to justify the unjustifiable and dismiss Gods "evils" as incomprehensible.

 

The if then argument is yours not his. You did not touch on his argument. You are more saying something and then congratulating yourself for saying it and it represents an intellectual vacuum.

 

within the oblivion , what is true ? may you still relate sensibly and
perhaps even more honestly ? well , you won't know until someone
who witnesses what you do tells you . should the report be positive
even joyful then there is no darkness in you . likely , you love god ,
god being a relation to all of life all at once unconditionally . this
relationship cannot be contrived -

it's sort of the difference twixt a happy drunk and a grumpy one .

 

thedopelganger:

True, so who is this copy you profess to be?

LOL It's not all we invoke and not everyone invokes it. The babies are all out there at this moment, content to murmur their very best affirmative gurgles.

God is not the set of all things we invoke, but your word for it. It's what you want it to be, within reason, or the want of it. It's your little hidey-hole. You never had a final reply for my asking how our good, ( now anything at all we happen to invoke lol ) is made better for your calling it god.

LOL! No, error's not anything but error for its being unintended.

The abstract is physical. I'm not going back on my word in any way. You may continue, in error, to appeal to your dictionarys definition.

"The standard definition[sic]" lol Do you want me take you on your word, or hold you to your words thedope? :-D Language is made up of associations. Some hold, others don't. You mentioned power before. Is your power of association greater than mine? Your eyes, are they clearer? You think yourself awakened at the same time as thinking you're not your body. You're dreaming.

 

If God doesn't exist, what are His evils? Do your arguments presuppose an Abrahamic God? BTW,the existence of that "superego collective" you're always ranting about is an interesting pseudo-scientific amalgam of Jungian and Freudian psychobabble.

 

tikoo:

Like thedope and I, but we're both really happy drunks. ;-D

 

That "superego collective" you're always ranting about is an interesting pseudo-scientific amalgam of Jungian and Freudian psychobabble. In Freudian theory, a "superego" is something all of us have--which means you,too. It's your conscience, and generally speaking, it's a good thing to have one. It keeps the id in line. In Jungian theory, the collective unconscious is,likewise, something that's inescapable. It's part of all of us--you and I included. To try to deny it or escape it is folly. And yes, it's the source of religious beliefs, which Jung thought were a good thing. In both systems, fighting with your unconscious is not considered to be good mental health.

 

Life's authority and in inheriting it am a wielder of it.

Are you saying satisfaction is not worthy of god?

Nice of you to say but not what I said. Again, That which we invoke is the set of all things we invoke and is not substantially represented by any particular claim.

In retrospect I don't remember anything wrong with the initial reply. Our understanding is better communicated by putting name to common time and place.

You are being obstinate in the face of facts.

Yes as I put forward and demonstrably the root definition based on our common experience which is the association upon which our language is formed.

You are the one dissociating.

I am not a nail fungus nor a nail and my dream is being hammered out.

 

Sigh. Another thread hijacked by the warring oracles.

 

A vacuous albeit emotionally inspired blind alley. Do you have a complaint about something in particular besides you can't keep up or have been overpowered? My stated desire has been agreement in terms. Refinement in terms can hardly be called war even though I regard your statement as a stink bomb.