Does God Exist?

Why would you imagine my persona would be different? What persona do I express on the forums? The way I express and interact is the same in every circumstance and in every encounter. i do not try to project or perpetuate any image. My focus in life is on our common and I speak honestly and I feel, with equals in every instance. I find it strange that persona is even a factor in considering written information. Where does the perception of persona come from?

 

Persona

So you have a name thedope with an avatar which suggests something about your Hipforums persona for a start, the rest of it just seems the way you "talk."

People often use more slang irl and body language may give different impressions/cues as to what is meant. That's why I say it's difficult for me to imagine you as the same irl.

 

.

 

Perhaps the most compelling theistic statement in this thread.

 

God's love shines on each one in this thread daily

 

I see. The avatar is a reflection of my interest and I chose it consistent with my occupation. I lead a contemplative and considerate life even at play I use a more technical language when discussing issues that require fine consideration. Also I distance myself from personal emotional investment in my own rightness and consider things as they are written. i am way more loosey goosey when that kind of correctness is not required.

For example a quote from another thread,

I heard that nobody doesn't like sara lee, but frankly the institutionally processed bakery goods don't suit my pallet but that just might indicate i'm nobody.

As far as the specific words I use they are spontaneous but I will often edit for spelling or if something else comes to mind in reflection.

I am not political in my relations with other people, i'm not running for an office in anyone's life and I don't withhold anything. I've even given my real name publicly in these forums. But ironing out this tension of persona is boring to me in comparison to subject matter and it's emerging effects in real life.

So bringing this exchange into the realm of does god exist, all perceptions and experiences are based on our own devotion to our own invocations. It exist for us in the terms we use because we insist that it is so. This I refer to as the power of god.

In symbolic terms we are created with the power to create through invocation in the image and likeness of a creator who speaks things into existence and imparts to them value. To create the experience of omni benevolence you simply value everything you see with equal and open intent. As it stands we have been taught, programmed, to value things more or less.

 

What is a theistic statement?

 

Love shines through the lover.

 

The . Tikoo posted, It was a joke.

 

I know it was a joke but I didn't assign much meaning to tikoo's period beyond it's apparent brevity.

This is what is in my mind when I see what you wrote, a theistic comment is one on theism however it could also be construed as a comment made by a theist or maybe just one wrapped in theistic terms. So my question was about the substance of meaning of the words used in the joke. I,e, what is a theistic comment. You could even call this exposition a joke on the joke because it is deadpan sense of humor serious.

I don't mean to put you on the spot or harass you. I kind of always call for more attention to ourselves as a group and in a group because nothing we say is idle and behind all our statements are a large foundation of meaning or personal accounting. Into this gestalt is funneled our mental/emotional perceptions of the world and thus our actions toward or reactions to it. It can be tiring to some to think so seriously all the time but for me the tiredness or irritation or strain of considering, comes from being distracted or not paying attention. Sometimes people can't tell if I am serious or I am joking because there is good humor behind both.

Anyway I've probably said more than enough already on the subject for both of us considering it is a joke.

 

The . ist a wondering within the above universally relating to time essence one . Ho ha he hoo

 

i see some kind of an alien with fuzzy paws and a giant head laying on his back, with some asshole's face that looks like george washington coming out of the side of its tummy.

 

I see a bearded man and he appears to be holding a kitty cat. Maybe Jesus found a very special friend.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6b4Vy0aGSU

 

^
His line about it being the only ideology being proteced for criticism seems already incorrect. If it would be so in your environment though, I understand your aversion and urge to make sure how dangerous or deconstructive etc. it is. But understanding an aversion does not make the aversion useful or right(eous) naturally

I do find certain atheists have a kind of evangelistical urge to share their view or at least make sure how worthless they find theistic beliefs. This counts especially for religious theistic belief it seems, which is understandable when you notice the inevitable associations that are connected to religion, but are generally not very useful in solely studying/looking at the use for religion itself. After all, the negative assoications to religion (which is something else than god btw (or theistic belief on itself), which is or at least was what this thread's about) are not really solely religious traits, but human, and therefor not limited or merely typical of religion or religious people or religious ideas/beliefs.

I see a bearded man too, with kind of curly hair. But he reminds me more of a statue of a greek philosopher. I guess some people like to see Jesus in everything

 

Harris' statements in this regard likely refer to social policy and what not but let me attempt to approach this from ingroup perspectives.

Can a Christian criticize the idea that Jesus is the son of God in the way a scientist can criticize the prevailing theory of the big bang and suggest it formed from a black hole or how a particular politicial candidate can dissent from their parties prevailing views on immigration?

 

Certainly (I think, can't talk for ALL christians or christian communities of course but in most civilized parts of the world yes, they can), maybe he just shouldn't get that philosophical in church (but I think he could depending on the specifc church and the local people in it).

 

Why shouldn't (s)he get that philosophical in church?

 

I mean in church quite literally. Church is for a specific purpose(s). It's supposedly the house of God. I think many christians would not bother holding any kind of convo inside (incl. a philosophical one that involves denouncing Jesus as the son of God) but to answer your question I think this is just how it is. Some communities would not appreciate it in their holy house. To be sure though: I am not a christian (so that's why I formulate it sometimes a bit in the general sense). Maybe objectively talking about the christian religion and community may make it seem like that.

 

Did you read the first pages of this thread, Guerilla? I just did and I noticed all kinds of stuff (of me) that we were talking about recently as well. Good/bad, God, proof etc.