what is a god

[sci-man]

im wondering about the being called 'god' and just how exactly could a being be a god.

so here are the questions.

1. what is a 'god'

2. how could a 'god' be

3. what proof is there of a 'god'

4. how do you know the bible or some other religious book wasn't just some storybook for kids to behave way back when.

5. when you now look at the evidence is the possibility of a 'god' real or not?

6. how would a 'god' exist/ be made?

 

[iNow]

According to most neuroscience studies, versions of god tend to match our conception / version of ourselves. God is, quite literally, whatever we decide it to be.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2009/11/30/creating-god-in-ones-own-image/

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, sci-man said:

im wondering about the being called 'god' and just how exactly could a being be a god.

so here are the questions.

1. what is a 'god'

2. how could a 'god' be

3. what proof is there of a 'god'

4. how do you know the bible or some other religious book wasn't just some storybook for kids to behave way back when.

5. when you now look at the evidence is the possibility of a 'god' real or not?

6. how would a 'god' exist/ be made?

1

Who cares?

[NimrodTheGoat]

1. The traditional Islamic/Judaeo/Christian God consists of three main traits, omnipotence, omnibenevolent, and omniscience.

2. I haven't read much on "being" or "god", but I am certain some philosophers out there have argued of the meaning "be" and "god". How could God/ a god be? Can existence exist? Descartes thought of such, you may have heard of his rather infamous Dream Argument, and "I think, therefore I am."

3. The sheer numbers of probability in the creation of the solar system, sun, position of the earth, composition of the earth and so on may have resulted in the belief that our existence was not random, when in fact it may just be so. Maybe humans are just too grateful about life to give credit to probability and numbers. 

4. The Bible itself says that it was written by men inspired by God. And I agree with people when they say that self reference is not a good justification. WIP.

5. The possibility is arbitrary. To say the least. You can look at this as how Pascal did once. Search up Pascal's Wager. "Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

6.

Edited April 16, 2018 by NimrodTheGoat
WIP

[Lasse]

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Who cares?

S/he

[Phi for All]

IMO, a god is one inevitable outcome for minds that evolved staring into the shadows, wondering in which the tiger is hiding. Those who were good at guessing correctly must have seemed like magicians. Add a lot of time and imagination and you get all-powerful versions of the ways we see ourselves. 

[Gees]

Sci-man;

I am wondering why you are posting in the Religion forum asking these questions, because according to your profile information, you don't like Religion. I can answer your questions, but doubt that you will understand the answers. The Religion forum is in the Philosophy section, not the Science section, for a reason, so you would need to have some understanding of Philosophy.

Please note that my answers will not make religious people happy, nor will they make scientists happy, as both Religion and Science have theories about "God" and both have some truth in them, but both are inaccurate. Also remember that the first down-vote will stop my explanations. I am only here because you are "following" me, so I suspect that you want information from me.

 

On ‎4‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 11:13 AM, sci-man said:

im wondering about the being called 'god' and just how exactly could a being be a god.

so here are the questions.

"God" can not be a being. Jesus did not claim to be a "God" -- others claimed it. Buddha did not claim to be "God".

 

Quote

1. what is a 'god'

An interpretation of consciousness. This is why I always put the word "God" in quotes, because I am referring to whatever the reader thinks "God" is.

 

Quote

2. how could a 'god' be

A "God" can be in the same way that consciousness can be.

 

Quote

3. what proof is there of a 'god'

The same proof that there is of consciousness, which is very little -- except for the evidence of life.

 

Quote

4. how do you know the bible or some other religious book wasn't just some storybook for kids to behave way back when.

Way back "when", there were not many, if any, storybooks for children. Books, or scrolls, were precious and rare; people who could read and write were more rare. So we can know that things that were written down were important or valuable information for the people back "when".

 

Quote

5. when you now look at the evidence is the possibility of a 'god' real or not?

"God" is most definitely real, just as consciousness is real.

 

Quote

6. how would a 'god' exist/ be made?

"God" may be real, but He does not exists, as far as I can tell.

Now do you understand any of this? (chuckle) You would have to have a very good understanding of consciousness, and probably some familiarity with a few of the theories of consciousness in order to understand my above statements.

Gee

 

 

[iNow]

36 minutes ago, Gees said:

I can answer your questions, but doubt that you will understand the answers.

Folks would be less inclined to perceive you as a self-important blowhard... aka aged annoying airhead... if you’d at least put a modicum if effot toward refraining from such passive aggressive unnecessary barbs like this (just one example among a countless many others you seem to seed into every post you make). /nickels worth of free advice

[Gees]

iNow;

 

4 hours ago, iNow said:

Folks would be less inclined to perceive you as a self-important blowhard... aka aged annoying airhead... if you’d at least put a modicum if effot toward refraining from such passive aggressive unnecessary barbs like this (just one example among a countless many others you seem to seed into every post you make). /nickels worth of free advice

Thank you for your nickel's worth of free advice. Well, I am important to me and annoying, especially when irritated. Do you think I have an attitude problem?

Do you remember that it took me seven full pages to convince members of this forum that ALL LIFE IS CONSCIOUS? And that was after Science and Philosophy confirmed that all life is conscious. I understand that many people think that Philosophy is about arguing, but it needs to be a valid argument.

Most people realize that the "God" concept is related to consciousness, but they don't know what that relationship is -- they don't understand it. Since I have studied this most of my life, I have a pretty fair understanding that I would be willing to share with anyone who wants to know. Better yet, I might learn something from someone who actually understands aspects of Religion and "God" that I don't.

So the questions are: Does anyone really want to know or discuss this? And would they believe me if I tried to explain it? Not likely.

You are a science guy and you like evidence, so;

1. look at the first page of the Religion forum, read the titles, and tell me how many of the threads are actually about Religion and how many are actually about Religion v Science.

2. Go to Sci-man's profile and read his opinions on Religion then read this thread and tell me if you think this is an honest sincere inquiry.

If I have an attitude problem, it was handed to me. 

Gee

[iNow]

 

4 hours ago, Gees said:

If I have an attitude problem, it was handed to me. 

Uhuh. You were speaking to a specific individual member. You felt the need to point out “you likely won’t understand.” You do this often. You should work on avoiding that.

Don’t try to conflate your treatment of individual respondents with your perceptions of forums, topic titles, and related exchanges. They’re not equivalent. 

Edited April 29, 2018 by iNow

[Lasse]

5 hours ago, Gees said:

Does anyone really want to know or discuss this?

Yes.

 

5 hours ago, Gees said:

And would they believe me if I tried to explain it? Not likely.

If you can concentrate your recognitions (write shorter) it should not be a problem. I am curious what you think. I understood you interest in consciousness.

I think at some level everything is conscious i.e. everything has a set of physical attributes determine the entities presence and fundamental functions. Ant vs human. Consciousness for me is the level of awareness about those attributes.

Consciousness needs reference points on the path of recognition. For me those are nothing (0) and everything (1). Anything what I can perceive, falls in between this two perceptions. Knowing them makes easier to set further reference points. For me....

Edited April 29, 2018 by Lasse

[dimreepr]

6 hours ago, Gees said:

Well, I am important to me and annoying, especially when irritated. Do you think I have an attitude problem?

Yes, essentially with anyone who disagrees with you, as opposed to your response to those that agree.  

6 hours ago, Gees said:

Do you remember that it took me seven full pages to convince members of this forum that ALL LIFE IS CONSCIOUS?

No, but that seems to be a case in point, ie. did you though? Or did you just write more than anyone wanted to read?

I miss Tar, at least he didn't resort to insults and abuse.

[Strange]

10 hours ago, Gees said:

Do you remember that it took me seven full pages to convince members of this forum that ALL LIFE IS CONSCIOUS?

No it isn't. Unless you are redefining the word "conscious" so as to render it pretty much meaningless.

10 hours ago, Gees said:

And that was after Science and Philosophy confirmed that all life is conscious.

Citation needed.

10 hours ago, Gees said:

Most people realize that the "God" concept is related to consciousness, but they don't know what that relationship is -- they don't understand it.

Of course it is related to consciousness because (conscious) humans invented it.

I guess that when you say "they don't understand it" you mean they disagree with you?

5 hours ago, Lasse said:

I think at some level everything is conscious

You think rocks and electrons are conscious? 

[Phi for All]

On 4/16/2018 at 9:13 AM, sci-man said:

1. what is a 'god'

On 4/16/2018 at 10:13 AM, iNow said:

According to most neuroscience studies, versions of god tend to match our conception / version of ourselves. God is, quite literally, whatever we decide it to be.

1 hour ago, Strange said:

I guess that when you say "they don't understand it" you mean they disagree with you?

Ultimately, a god seems to be a device for controlling perceptions. Everyone within a religion is allowed (within reason, after adhering to some basic tenets) to have a personal interpretation of what the god means to them, and within that definition the person CAN'T BE WRONG. The believer in a god wants to be perceived as faithful to the mysterious power, and often claims others can't understand what their god has placed in their hearts.

It's not a dice game, it's more of a coin toss. Heads they win, tails you lose. 

 

1 hour ago, Strange said:

You think rocks and electrons are conscious? 

Extra stretchy definitions are supposed to keep one from being trapped by reason.

[Moontanman]

God, as described in the Bible, the Talmud, and Quran is trivially falsified. That is why now days they go for the idea of some being outside time and space, still a silly concept but harder to actually falsify... 

[koti]

This topic would be so much more fun (and scientifically viable) if god was replaced with aliens in the OP. 

[Strange]

27 minutes ago, koti said:

This topic would be so much more fun (and scientifically viable) if god was replaced with aliens in the OP. 

Or unicorns.

[koti]

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

Or unicorns.

I don’t and obviously I won’t have the numbers on this one but I have to disagree...the chance of alien life existing is more than zero and the chance for unicorns existing is more than zero too I guess. But these numbers are different and I’m sticking to that. 

[Phi for All]

11 minutes ago, koti said:

I don’t and obviously I won’t have the numbers on this one but I have to disagree...the chance of alien life existing is more than zero and the chance for unicorns existing is more than zero too I guess. But these numbers are different and I’m sticking to that. 

Belief in the One Horn takes a special kind of person, and it's OK if you aren't enlightened, and don't understand the cosmic wisdom involved (I have a pamphlet if you like). Btw, unicorns destroyed all alien life eons ago, otherwise we'd see them, since aliens can't become invisible like unicorns. And I'm sticking to that. 

[Ten oz]

12 hours ago, Gees said:

Do you remember that it took me seven full pages to convince members of this forum that ALL LIFE IS CONSCIOUS? And that was after Science and Philosophy confirmed that all life is conscious. I understand that many people think that Philosophy is about arguing, but it needs to be a valid argument.

Convincing people of something typically isn't the point of philosophical discussion. Generally clarity and diversity of perspective is. 

12 hours ago, Gees said:

Most people realize that the "God" concept is related to consciousness, but they don't know what that relationship is -- they don't understand it. Since I have studied this most of my life, I have a pretty fair understanding that I would be willing to share with anyone who wants to know. Better yet, I might learn something from someone who actually understands aspects of Religion and "God" that I don't.

By most people do you actually mean most atheists? My impression of ardently religious people's views are that they believe God is related to the human spirit/soul and that our spirits/souls are the source of our consciousnesses. 

On 4/16/2018 at 11:13 AM, sci-man said:

im wondering about the being called 'god' and just how exactly could a being be a god.

I can think of no other way than through the human imagination. 

26 minutes ago, koti said:

I don’t and obviously I won’t have the numbers on this one but I have to disagree...the chance of alien life existing is more than zero and the chance for unicorns existing is more than zero too I guess. But these numbers are different and I’m sticking to that. 

Since there are no Unicorns here on Earth can we agree that any potential Unicorn(s) would be Alien? 

[Prometheus]

This could actually be an interesting topic. The concept of gods has been developed by many (all?) cultures. I wonder how many of these were independent origins - is it something any isolated human society will develop or is it just a contagious idea?

Also true monotheism seems only to have occured once in the world but has spread to become the dominant belief system. From what little i know of Jewish history their culture, centred around a monotheistic mythology, was paramount in surviving disasters, diasporas, slavery and wars. The late Romans seemed to take on this idea of identity through a central god to unite their empire. The Sassanid empire tried a similar thing with Zoroastrianism but failed - much because Islam burst out of Arabia. So was there really something in this idea of monotheism that could unite people that other belief systems lack? Maybe having a king above kings is familiar enough to comfort people. But the Chinese and Japanese certainly don't lack cultural identity throughout their history, but do lack a singular god - the Chinese actually moved away from monotheism even as Europe moved towards it. And so on...

Through historians and archeology (and possibly observing other developed social animals?) we might even be able to have a reasonable go at answering some of these questions. Got to me more interesting than the normal 'God exists, no it doesn't' discussions.

[Moontanman]

27 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Belief in the One Horn takes a special kind of person, and it's OK if you aren't enlightened, and don't understand the cosmic wisdom involved (I have a pamphlet if you like). Btw, unicorns destroyed all alien life eons ago, otherwise we'd see them, since aliens can't become invisible like unicorns. And I'm sticking to that. 

 Unicorns as described in the Holy Bible are real and i can prove it... 

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=unicorn&qs_version=KJV

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhinoceros

The whole Unicorn thing we usually think of is a medieval fantasy and nothing to do with the unicorn of the bible...   

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-unicorn.html

Quote

Whether the re’em refers to a rhinocerous, or an auroch, or some other horned animal, the image is the same—that of an untamable, ferocious, powerful, wild animal. What we do know is that the Bible is not referring to the mythological “unicorn,” the horse-with-a-horn creature of fairy tales and fantasy literature. It is highly unlikely that the KJV translators believed in the mythological unicorn. Rather, they simply used the Latin term that described a “beast with a horn.”
 

 

Edited April 29, 2018 by Moontanman

[Lasse]

9 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

 Unicorns as described in the Holy Bible are real and i can prove it... 

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=unicorn&qs_version=KJV

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhinoceros

The whole Unicorn thing we usually think of is a medieval fantasy and nothing to do with the unicorn of the bible...   

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-unicorn.html

 

The whole unicorn concept is most likely based on rear observation of genetic mutations and their misinterpretation by humans.

Similar to the dinosaurs skeleton based dragon fantasies.....

http://www.momtastic.com/webecoist/2010/09/21/honking-their-horn-10-amazing-real-unicorns/

[koti]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Belief in the One Horn takes a special kind of person, and it's OK if you aren't enlightened, and don't understand the cosmic wisdom involved (I have a pamphlet if you like). Btw, unicorns destroyed all alien life eons ago, otherwise we'd see them, since aliens can't become invisible like unicorns. And I'm sticking to that. 

If you got anything rolled inside that pamphlet I'll take it. 

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

Since there are no Unicorns here on Earth can we agree that any potential Unicorn(s) would be Alien? 

How can we be sure if they are invisible? 

[Phi for All]

3 hours ago, Prometheus said:

This could actually be an interesting topic. The concept of gods has been developed by many (all?) cultures. I wonder how many of these were independent origins - is it something any isolated human society will develop or is it just a contagious idea?

Also true monotheism seems only to have occured once in the world but has spread to become the dominant belief system. From what little i know of Jewish history their culture, centred around a monotheistic mythology, was paramount in surviving disasters, diasporas, slavery and wars. The late Romans seemed to take on this idea of identity through a central god to unite their empire. The Sassanid empire tried a similar thing with Zoroastrianism but failed - much because Islam burst out of Arabia. So was there really something in this idea of monotheism that could unite people that other belief systems lack? Maybe having a king above kings is familiar enough to comfort people. But the Chinese and Japanese certainly don't lack cultural identity throughout their history, but do lack a singular god - the Chinese actually moved away from monotheism even as Europe moved towards it. And so on...

Through historians and archeology (and possibly observing other developed social animals?) we might even be able to have a reasonable go at answering some of these questions. Got to me more interesting than the normal 'God exists, no it doesn't' discussions.

The various pantheons of gods never seemed to get along, and perhaps worshippers eventually saw that as non-deific behavior. A single god doesn't get betrayed by sibs and offspring.