Ignosticism

I kinda didn't finish my thought. The fact that christian stories indicate that their god is subject to cause and effect should allow us to prove whether it exists or not using science. But any proof of nonexistence would be canceled out by christians saying that their god doesn't like to be tested and wouldn't allow proof one way or the other to be shown. This is illogical since their god is supposedly sending all kinds of signs in the first place.

 

Only if the Bible is taken literally. Jewish theologians early on rejected the anthropomorphic description of God in the Old Testament, as did the earliest Christian theologians in the third century C.E.

 

Yes, you are correct, except that it is simply modifying the verb to sit---so I would think that this sentence just requires a double invocation as a future event.

 

Physics is about the b-series not the a-series of time. From that standpoint God is realized as apace still beyond the understood Physics. God becoming for the a-series of read, and full of erroneous possibility re-writing.

 

That's why now you are the atheist.

 

I covered that here;

 

To be outside of time and space is an interesting problem. In some other similar threads I have written extensively about light----light qua light exists outside of time and space according to Einstein's theory of relativity----photons are zero mass particles that are both particle and wave, yet neither particle nor wave. photons qua photons, or light qua light (meaning light as light) exists in a single infinitely small instant---yet in that infinitely small instant all time and space takes place---and that photon is simultaneously at all places that it traveled from the beginning of the universe until its end (and possibly before the beginning and after the end--we don't know). Light qua light is therefore non-existent in our physical reality, it also travels at the speed of time, and according to research in the past 10 years or so---all that exists may be made up of light---trapped in place so that it jiggles in place at the speed of light creating mass. It is trapped by the ground light energy of the universe itself---the zero-point energy field.

We experience time, and in our physical reality we understand light to move through time and space. This is because we live at sub-light speed. We experience light in the moment of Now and it is our primary source of perception. All of reality is lit up in a single infinitely small moment of Now. Yet there are countless such moments of Now. One inifinitely small moment behind is already gone, except for the echo of perception and comprehension within our own beings---beyond that it no longer exists. One infinitely small moment ahead, is only potentiality and does not yet exist. Yet in our minds we experience continuity as our consciousness transcends each single moment of Now.

This implies that the universe itself is an infinitely small flash---yet from a different frame of reference (the physical sub-light speed frame)---it lasts for trillions and trillions of years.

 

,
Ah! You are correct---I was looking for another one, yet I overlooked that one...

My redundancy has shamed me... I must now slice open my belly, releasing all my bowels, bile, blood, and organs onto this freshly waxed floor. ...I knew there was a purpose in me waxing it this morning... Ahhh the futility of all that we do.

I now leave it for the next Mountain Valley Wolf to take over...

 

Transcend to the 'I" and one should have no Gods before God on Earth. You will have the science of either the true Nature, or the falseheaded Man looking for his falsehood of failing knowledge. Got to admit "Mountain" the second will we have failed as scientists. The first will we fear for the Russians begin to believe it true of the wisdom of Love.

 

Don't loose your head dear sir. I spoke incorrectly. The superfluous does not distort meaning but obscures it, you sly dog!

 

I think it is just another ism. If other people have such a need for it than who am I to say it is rubbish or pointless or not? Well, it does seem pointless for me personally but if it doesn't seem to be for others then I hope it does for them what they hope it does

 

Ok, so I take it the God you envision must have the comprehensive powers outside of space and time of all universes. The concept of infalibility eliminates it from ignosticism, although aspects of it have been subtly discussed here and there.

The constraints would be the time it takes to build the house and the space in which it's located, meaning that I was in that location building the house.

I don't see how a God does not become constrained by space and time in all universes it interacts with, which seems to suggest existing in them at some level, without being constrained by them by existing outside of them as well. That sounds like some crazy paradox which makes my ~1250 CC brain hurt.

 

I've looked at all the possibilities, and I'm not strongly attached to any of them.

Think of it like playing a game. During the game, you have to follow its rules, but you can pursue your own individual strategy during the game, and its rules have no impact on the rest of your life.

 

Stengthening the brain cells, Karen. lol I knew it was good for something.....

 

Still doesn't satisfy my conundrum of the rest of my post as it relates to space and time.

 

I think the key work is choice. When you choose to do something that takes up time, are you constrained by the schedule and location? It's a gray area. How good is god at multitasking? Better than me, I hope.

Who knows? Admission to heaven may turn out to be determined by a trivia quiz. I'm ready.

 

Irrelevant if God is unaffected by space and time :mickey:

 

:boxing_smiley:

 

Any humanly bound analogy is going to be constrained by space and time as they exist from our experience. That's why the idea of God interacting with space and time yet existing outside of space and time is a paradox for me.

Choice is a new concept brought up at this point in time of our discussion, however as far as I understand from human perspective, choice allows one to invest a particular direction in their time and space, it doesn't allow one to be unconstrained by it. So even with the concept of choice you are constrained by space and time.

 

I doubt that. I think the most common reasons people contemplate God is that they want to explain, predict and/or control events in their own lives: is there life after this one? Can my wife's cancer be cured? Will I be united with my loved ones in an afterlife? Will people who game the system get away with it? Will the home team win the game? How did the mind-boggling phenomenon of existence come to be? Religion evolved from practical problems of survival: perceiving patterns, perceiving agency in ambiguous situations, finding reasons for hope, meaning, relief from existential anxieties, etc. Concern about where time and space and self-awareness came from are a bit esoteric for most people: subjects which are typically relegated to theological seminaries and philosophy classes. As we've seen in our own limited discussion, these subjects seem to involve paradoxes that make our heads hurt. So why include them in our working definition of God? Except. perhaps to remind us that God is ineffable.