The Christian Mystery of God in a short fatal sample

To me, God is inner utter dislike along with cant do anything about it but take such an enternal dislike time out put afar off and apart from WANT (which is 1. certain, 2. joy, 3. reason actualize, 4. self, 5. diverse selves for joy-type experiences)

What do you think? Does that define God to the T? Or not? Why not?

If I want to be just like the silver surfer (sweet!!!), but cant, then I am no reason nor am certain. Certain is when you have sole essential ability to be how you want, when you want, etc.

Christians dont have WANT nor are for WANT. Think I'm lieing?

When anyone stops you from doing what you want, then you see what I mean in how they done themselves in the ancient behind mystery of things before there was surface given for those things to even show up a description.

Christians, if you asked God if you could be like the silver surfer, and God said no, then it sucks not to be the one in charge of what actuality may or may not hold in store to come to for diverse selves which should be deemed under the "be fruitful and multiply" aspect.

 

No, because what you have written is mostly unintelligible. Quite honestly, I can't make out enough of what you've written, to even figure out what concepts you want discussed.

 

sign related is back..

 

Trying to define God is like saying you can create your parents.

 

:smilielol5:

 

sign related dwells inside all of us. :cheers2:

 

I'm at a loss. I don't understand this.

 

To me, it seems like they began to wonder what time was. And gathered that time was "all knowing".
That, then derived into God...

 

god is omniscient

 

I can define 'god': god is a creation by man created so many people could deal with their miserable lives and not fear dying so much.

 

If that helps you sleep at night.

 

Have some pumpkin pie and have a think about that.

 

Read some Durkheim, or any humanities theorist.

Durkheim identified religion as a social phenomenon that originated in totemic beliefs.

 

To quote Chris Tucker, "I don't understand the words that are coming out of your mouth", or in this case typed out message

 

I dunno personally I think if you were only living about 30 years and spent everyday of your life trying to survive, that having a belief of a higher power and a better place to go after your short life is ended would be a soothing thought. That's just my opinion.

 

You can make the same kind of statement towards Atheists, but it doesn't necessarily have to be true. I can say that atheists are the way that they are because they want to be free from objective morality and not have to worry about their relationship with their creator; it can offer them comfort and make life easier for them. But that may not be the case, their could be another reason.

 

I think you're both right, but incomplete. Religion and atheism are multi-causal and multi-functional. Daniel Dennett, in Breaking the Spell, identifies more naturalistic explanations for religion than you could shake a stick at, and it would be easy to turn them around and apply most of them to atheism. But there aren't many studies of why people are atheists. Why is that? Atheists sometimes reply that atheism is simply a lack of belief in God, and is the default position which everyone would have if they weren't subjected to religious indoctrination. If a Christian offered such a naive explanation, it would confirm the atheists' suspicions that we're all a bunch of dolts and nutcases. I suspect it might have something to do with the mindsets of secular researchers who study why people are religious. I think it would be fascinating to look at the brain functioning and chemistry of atheists, to analyze their dopamine and serotonin levels, and to do an MRI of their thought processes. This sounds like a job for atheist guru Sam Harris, who does that kind of research on religious folks. I suspect it might be too close to home for Sam to do with atheists. Or maybe Daniel Dennett might do a study of all the sociological and psychological influences on atheists growing up to see at what point they became atheists and why.

I'll leave that line of inquiry to the atheists, and confine myself to people who believe in God. Let me just outline some of the relevant categories. Belief in God can be functional for society (social control;opiate of the masses), for elites (clergy, politicians, fat cats), and for individuals. For individuals, there is the possibility that brain physiology and chemistry play a part. Barbara Hagerty, in Fingerprints of God, presents findings relating various religious phenomena to hyperstimulation of the temporal lobe, dopamine and serotonimn levels, the DRD4 gene, the VMT2 gene, theta waves, and gamma rhythms, but concludes there is no way to be certain whether or not, and to what extent, these might account for ordinary religiosity or spirituality.

Generally speaking, individuals acquire religious ideas in as many ways as there are theories of psychology. Behavioral conditioning/learning is certainly at work. Most of us learn our beliefs at a tender, uncritical age, and have them reinforced regularly in rituals. I can remember the time and place my mother told me, as a pre-schooler, why I existed ("to love and serve God and be happy with him in Heaven"); I can remember, as a five year old, listening to Sister Laurencia's original sin lecture--very dramatic, with chalk being used for the sin and the eraser being used for God's Saving Grace! If my parents were atheists, who knows what they would or wouldn't have told me, but if they told me nothing, they'd leave a vacuum which I'm sure someone else would fill.

Besides behavioral conditioning, various psychological needs and defense mechanisms may also be at play. You mentioned a need "to deal with their miserable lives and not fear dying so much". To the best of our knowledge, humans are the only animals on our planet who can anticipate their own death and the death of loved ones. So it can be comforting, I suppose, to think of a better world that we and they will go to when we die. I personally don't have that belief, for myself or my departed parents and brother, so I'd have to look for other needs to satisfy. Historically, and even today, one of the major reasons why people believe is to enlist supernatural power to control events in their lives. If all else fails, pray: for health, safety, victory for the home team, whatever. When my mother and brother were dying of cancer, all the religious institutions in town were praying for them, including the local mosque. They both died, so it doesn't always work (its efficacy with amputees also seems to be limited) but there are enough perceived success stories to give people faith and hope that it can.

For me, belief in God and religion perform the functions of explaining and giving meaning to the fascinating phenomenon of existence. I'm well-aware that other people give other explanations and find meaning elsewhere. For many people, religion provides pat answers so that they don't have to think any further and can spend their time watching TV, earning a living, enjoying time with their families, socializing, etc. If I'd only listened to my mother, I could have been one of those, instead of an internet discussion junkie hoping to find another clue. I spend much of my time listening to alternative explanations and re-evaluating my own position, but so far the God hypothesis makes more sense to me than the alternatives. But that might just be my parietal lobe, dopamine and childhood conditioning talking!

 

I don't think much of anything important can be "proved". I see no reason to believe religion is more closely tied to chemical levels than atheism is and I suspect that atheism is more than simply a product of a purely dispassionate search for truth. In a world of theism, atheists must have a strong reason not to believe, and that's usually related to some human need, experience, or other influence. Anyhow, we'll never know until we do the studies.