Flores, What Is Your "Working Model" of God?

[matnay]

Flores,

You brought up a good point in an ealier post, that when atheists argue against the idea of God, they are sometimes just arguing against what they perceive to be the God of the believers. Therefore atheists are just arguing against there own idea of God which is not the same God that you know of. At least I think that's what you meant.

Anyhow, the same point can be brought up in the reverse case, when theists argue against atheistic views. I find that often theists don't have much knowledge of the relevent science and logic that is the fundamental reasoning behind our non-belief of God. Therefore you are arguing against what you perceive to be our belief, and you tend to be way off. In other words, we atheists generally have a deeper understanding of scientific concepts and the universe, and you theists are just arguing against a totally different universe.


Perhaps for a change you can explain how your potential energy of being all you can be can be so easily be erased by death. Would you perhaps show us how much energy do you possess at this time, please include all your static, kinematic, and potential energy, and explain to us what happens to this energy when we inject you with a lethal fluid. Of course I forgot that you don't believe in Conservation of energy or Momentum.....

.....I guess all Atheist believe contrary to science that energy is not conserved, but destroyed and lost to maggots and lower forms of life.

Atheists don't believe that this energy is destroyed when a person dies, we believe that it is transformed through various processes- as science would dictate.

And I'm sure you must see my point now.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by matnay
Flores,

You brought up a good point in an ealier post, that when atheists argue against the idea of God, they are sometimes just arguing against what they perceive to be the God of the believers. Therefore atheists are just arguing against there own idea of God which is not the same God that you know of. At least I think that's what you meant.

You are correct.

Originally posted by matnay
Anyhow, the same point can be brought up in the reverse case,

Absolutely, but it's hard to use it effectively when the Atheist is bombarding another person who believe in god with kindergarden misconceptions like god being a living entity man striking lightening bolts.

Originally posted by matnay
when theists argue against atheistic views. I find that often theists don't have much knowledge of the relevent science and logic that is the fundamental reasoning behind our non-belief of God. Therefore you are arguing against what you perceive to be our belief, and you tend to be way off. In other words, we atheists generally have a deeper understanding of scientific concepts and the universe, and you theists are just arguing against a totally different universe.

You are underestimating people's knowledge and assuming a no appreciation for science on theists behalf that is simply not true. I have said before that understanding of the subject is irrelevant to the truth. Whether we understand how we came into existance or not, it will have no bearing on the truth that we exist. Whether we arrive at the sceintific explanation of how an embryo becomes a grown human or not, would not stop the millions of mothers from actually having baby.

The acid test of our understanding is not whether we can take ecosystems to bits and pieces on paper, no matter how scientific, but whether we can put them together into practice and make them work, and guess what, with all our knowledge we can't create any life no matter how small on this very earth or even on the moon or another planet that doesn't lend itself perfectly to life.

Originally posted by matnay
Atheists don't believe that this energy is destroyed when a person dies, we believe that it is transformed through various processes- as science would dictate. And I'm sure you must see my point now.

As what science would dictate? A non existing science. Please remember that science is the study of the universe by man, and thus TOMORROWS SCIENCE DOES NOT EXIST...unless man exist and man think....get it....the universe will exist regardless of whether we understand or not. Man will exist whether he/she study or not. So you say that when we die, we transform to exactly what???? hydrogen Sulphide, Ammonia, Carbon, ect..... Very nice....my emotions, extensive memories, and scientific findings must be made of some real good Nitrogen. Where does consciousness go? Were does extensive memories go? to the maggots perhaps...the most intelligent maggots feed on our intelligence. Where does our brain power go? Lost to dirt? You can throw darts all you want at this subject, but at the end of the day you logic is lacking and do you know why?
Because, what Atheist lack is a datum of normality to explain things from and relative to. Science and studies are random and somehow not connected. A biologist looking at a stream doesn't know what a chemist is doing.

A true solid science of universe studies needs, FIRST OF ALL, a base datum of normality, a picture of how healthy universe maintain itself as ONE organism".....Science needs god my friend, and god doesn't need science.

 

[matnay]

So you say that when we die, we transform to exactly what???? hydrogen Sulphide, Ammonia, Carbon, ect..... Very nice....my emotions, extensive memories, and scientific findings must be made of some real good Nitrogen. Where does consciousness go? Were does extensive memories go? to the maggots perhaps...the most intelligent maggots feed on our intelligence. Where does our brain power go? Lost to dirt?

I believe that conciousness does not exist to begin with- that it is an illusion perceived by zombies. This belief is no more solid than your belief in God, I admit, and requires a certain counter-intuitive logic that defies common logic. I understand where you are coming from and why you believe what you do, as your belief stems directly from this common logic that we all have. But just as you've noticed a pattern of unity and harmony in nature, I've noticed a pattern of illusion and deception that is hidden from the sight of intuition. Intuition would have you believe that the world is a bright, colorful place, but through science we have come to learn that in fact the world is as dark as that time before birth- that color and sound are abstract interpretations of meaningless fluctuations in matter. Our senses deceive us. Intuition deceives us. I believe time itself is a deception. There's no telling where the deception ends and the truth begins- that is, if there is any truth to this universe at all. This forces me to believe in a universe a million times greater than your God. Your belief does not directly contradict with mine as far as I can tell. Your God may exist, but he only plays a part in an even greater mystery.

 

[Esoteric]

Hey matnay, can you teach a robot how a steak taste like?. Consciousness does exist in my oppinion. We just do not know how yet, if ever.

Originally posted by Flores
As what science would dictate? A non existing science. Please remember that science is the study of the universe by man, and thus TOMORROWS SCIENCE DOES NOT EXIST

Science does not make up truths, it discovers them. As an engineer student, one applies scientific knowledge (Q.T, themodynamcis etc.) to solve practical problems, its stupid to say it wont exist tomorrow. Engineers (from mechanical to genetic) only reinforces the truth of science. If we never existed, some alien in the Andromeda galaxy would still need those laws of nature to harness engineering.

Originally posted by Flores
hydrogen Sulphide, Ammonia, Carbon, ect..... Very nice....my emotions, extensive memories, and scientific findings must be made of some real good Nitrogen. Where does consciousness go? Were does extensive memories go? to the maggots perhaps...the most intelligent maggots feed on our intelligence. Where does our brain power go? Lost to dirt? You can throw darts all you want at this subject, but at the end of the day you logic is lacking and do you know why?
Because, what Atheist lack is a datum of normality to explain things from and relative to. Science and studies are random and somehow not connected. A biologist looking at a stream doesn't know what a chemist is doing.

You created another fantasy world. We just do not know what happens to our consciousness. You have a need to feel in control and have aboslute truth, the lack of which will cause madness and eventually death. A false sense is as good as a real one for you. If saying heaven is where all those feelings go, then fine, but that does not make it absolute truth.

Originally posted by Flores
A true solid science of universe studies needs, FIRST OF ALL, a base datum of normality, a picture of how healthy universe maintain itself as ONE organism".....Science needs god my friend, and god doesn't need science.

That is called the Antrhophric principle (ever heard of it?). Bascially it means that the physical constants of the universe lie within an extremely narrow band. If those constants deviated slightly, then chaos would result and life would be impossible
What you said above is not a trivial statement, SO far, every important physical constant that has been found lie in this narrow band which is comapatible with life. Some peple, ike you, argue that it indicates the existence of a God, which chose this universe to have these physical contants so that life and consciusness would arise.
The problem is that you have such a thirst for absolute answers of mysticism that you fail to see other practical answers. If there is an infinite number of universes (multiverse), then in other universes the physical constant are, indeed, different. They might be a "dead sea" of electrons and netrurinos. But by chance (giving to us by QT), there are other universes in which the fundamental physical constants do make possible for DNA, and our universe happens to be one these places.

So multiverse theory explains why your anthropric principle must hold, and without the need for a God.
What i just did was go back my old point, we have an incomplete knowledge, and creating fantasy worlds for our imcoplete knowledge does us a disservice. WE JUST DONT KNOW!!!. Lets keep searching. I see it as part of growing up for our species, just like the child finding out there is no tooth fairy. Its better there is no tooth fairy, even though a world with a tooth fairy in it is somehow more delightful.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Esoteric
Lets keep searching. I see it as part of growing up for our species, just like the child finding out there is no tooth fairy. Its better there is no tooth fairy, even though a world with a tooth fairy in it is somehow more delightful.

Excellent post, Esoteric! The human race, it seems, is at a vulnerable stage in its maturity. Perhaps we are at the stage of maturity in finding out there is no Santa Claus and no tooth fairy. As children, we may have been disappointed, I know I was, but we dealt with it and moved on. The things we taught our children, well we knew they weren't the truth, but we propagated the fairy tales for their childhood memories. Today, young children already know there's no Santa Claus. They know where the toys come from! They don't seem to be any worse for knowing the truth. Maybe that's the stage the human race is in. Sure, some children want to hold onto those fairy tales and desperately believe they are true, but most don't beyond the age of 3 or 4. Children today are just more worldly and mature. So what harm would there be in finding out there's no God or Jesus? The toys still come every year at the same time with or without Santa Claus! Parents are relieved when the secret has been told so they don't have to go on pretending anymore. Isn't that what Christianity is--a fairy tale? Isn't it about time to let the children in on the secret? I think it is. Although, these children haven't matured enough to realize it's just a fairy tale.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
Excellent post, Esoteric! The human race, it seems, is at a vulnerable stage in its maturity. Perhaps we are at the stage of maturity in finding out there is no Santa Claus and no tooth fairy. As children, we may have been disappointed, I know I was, but we dealt with it and moved on. The things we taught our children, well we knew they weren't the truth, but we propagated the fairy tales for their childhood memories. Today, young children already know there's no Santa Claus. They know where the toys come from! They don't seem to be any worse for knowing the truth. Maybe that's the stage the human race is in. Sure, some children want to hold onto those fairy tales and desperately believe they are true, but most don't beyond the age of 3 or 4. Children today are just more worldly and mature. So what harm would there be in finding out there's no God or Jesus? The toys still come every year at the same time with or without Santa Claus! Parents are relieved when the secret has been told so they don't have to go on pretending anymore. Isn't that what Christianity is--a fairy tale? Isn't it about time to let the children in on the secret? I think it is. Although, these children haven't matured enough to realize it's just a fairy tale.

MW,
Your attempt to liken god to the toothfairy and Santa cluas is very disapointed, speically after the indepth discussion I have had about singularity, hamony, datum of normality of the universe, the big picture, ect....

Keep searching is that what you guys seem to be suggesting? well, let me tell you that? Science could search for a little alley of truth using the following:
1-A good map road that shows how things are in relation to another.
2- Science can drive randomly using various disciplines that don't talk to each other in the dark without having a clue what it's looking for.
3-Science can ask a stranger about the way.

It's sad, but the Atheists on this board are following number 2, while the theists seem to follow number 3.
Without a strong basis and a guiding map, science will never find it's way. Science is lost.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Flores
MW,
Your attempt to liken god to the toothfairy and Santa cluas is very disapointed, speically after the indepth discussion I have had about singularity, hamony, datum of normality of the universe, the big picture, ect....

Keep searching is that what you guys seem to be suggesting? well, let me tell you that? Science could search for a little alley of truth using the following:
1-A good map road that shows how things are in relation to another.
2- Science can drive randomly using various disciplines that don't talk to each other in the dark without having a clue what it's looking for.
3-Science can ask a stranger about the way.

It's sad, but the Atheists on this board are following number 2, while the theists seem to follow number 3. Without a strong basis and a guiding map, science will never find it's way. Science is lost.

Flores, I was referring to Jesus and used "God" in that context. Sorry if I was ambiguous. I do believe in God, and I think I've made that clear in my previous posts. The God I believe in doesn't have an identity, however, because I believe God is a pure positive force of energy. Jesus, on the other hand, is mythological. I do believe in the interconnectedness of all creation. I also believe that someday science will be able to explain God and interconnectedness. My God is one and the same with your God. I thought you knew that! One day I believe we will all be on the same page, but unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be anytime soon. As I've also said in the past, the Qur'an teaches more truth than the Bible. I've personally experienced that Muslims have more respect for their fellow human being than do Christians or Jews. I was in no way denying God. Perhaps all I did was prove that I'm a lousy writer.

 

[Flores]

Absolutely not, You are a great writer, but I wanted you to clarify yourself further. I know that you don't want to imply to others that the human race is lost. Many people just like you have their compass straight. The compass does exist, but not everyone chooses to use it.

You're still my soul sister.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Flores
Absolutely not, You are a great writer, but I wanted you to clarify yourself further. I know that you don't want to imply to others that the human race is lost. Many people just like you have their compass straight. The compass does exist, but not everyone chooses to use it.

You're still my soul sister.

Whew.... Don't scare me like that! Sometimes my mouth get's ahead of my brain.

 

[Esoteric]

Originally posted by Flores
1-A good map road that shows how things are in relation to another.
2- Science can drive randomly using various disciplines that don't talk to each other in the dark without having a clue what it's looking for.
3-Science can ask a stranger about the way.

It's sad, but the Atheists on this board are following number 2, while the theists seem to follow number 3.
Without a strong basis and a guiding map, science will never find it's way. Science is lost.

Which one are you using, 3?, how the heck do you ask God to point the way?. You can not be using 1, as your road map is complete delusion. Besides, I wish it could be that easy that you can talk this "stranger" and ask for all directions.
we would never need science, engineering, medicine, Marx, Decartes, Russel, Newton, Copernicus etc., how perfect would that be?, we could just sit on our asses all day waiting to be let into heaven...

Heres a quote i think you missed.

"...I can not prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him I would be a liar."
Einstein.

btw, Science seeks to understand the world around us, we are not lost. We know more then ever, the time when we were really lost is when all we had was religion. Did religion help us understand gravity?, how hominids came to be?, thermodynamics?, DNA?, psychology? etc. Is it that diffiucult to see we understand the world around us even more?. Science is even closer to understanding "the mind of god" then your own religion ever was.

To quote Richard Dawkins from Oxford University,

"If science has difficulty explaining something, then be sure as hell no one else is going to explain it."

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Esoteric
Heres a quote i think you missed.

"...I can not prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him I would be a liar."
Einstein.
"

He indeed would be a liar, because he doesn't have enough information to convince that there is a god. He never says above that he doesn't believe in god, but below he is telling us clearly that he believes in god. I believe exactly as Einstein did, that religion is very important but it's blind without science, which is the tool of understanding.

"God is subtle, but he is not malicious."

"God does not play dice with the world."
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" (Pais 1982, p. 319).

"Nature shows us only the tail of the lion. But I do not doubt that the lion belongs to it even though he cannot at once reveal himself because of his enormous size" (Pais 1982, p. 235).

"Innovation is not the product of logical thought, even though the final product is tied to a logical structure" (Pais 1982, p. 131).

"One has been endowed with just enough intelligence to be able to see clearly how utterly inadequate that intelligence is when confronted with what exists. If such humility could be conveyed to everybody, the world of human activities would be more appealing."

"The more success the quantum theory has, the sillier it looks. How nonphysicists would scoff if they were able to follow the odd course of developments!" (Pais 1982, p. 399).

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Flores
Einstein cannot "prove" there is a personal god. Can any of us "prove" it? Proving a "personal" god would be up to individual perceptions. Proving the existence of the One God will be explained (in time) by quantum physics.

Just as I have explained my conception of the One Spirit of God, the Christians on the forum have accused me of having a different god (possibly even Satan) because they didn't want to associate my belief in God with their belief in God. Sadly for them, there is only one God.

 

[Esoteric]

Originally posted by Flores
He indeed would be a liar, because he doesn't have enough information to convince that there is a god. He never says above that he doesn't believe in god, but below he is telling us clearly that he believes in god. I believe exactly as Einstein did, that religion is very important but it's blind without science, which is the tool of understanding.

Don't get too happy, Einstein is speaking about the God of Spinoza. It is in no way related to any christian or muslim God.

"I can not accept any concept of God based on the fear of life or the fear of death or blind faith. I can not prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him I would be a liar."

"I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."

"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God."

btw, In the last quote, Einstein is admitting he was wrong about doubting Quantum Mechanics and the whole "God does not play dice" thing.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Esoteric
Don't get too happy, Einstein is speaking about the God of Spinoza. It is in no way related to any christian or muslim God.

Now, go all the way back and read my first posts about my working model of god, you'll find that I believe in the same god that Einstein believe in....YOu call it spinoza, pinoka, medioca, or anything you please....the name have no importance. Islam means submission to this superior power that Einstein believed in...... Muslims exactly like Einstein believe that our god is far more superior than us, that he doesn't have a will like ours, something far more superior, that he's not concerned totally with us, but with the context of us and how we satisfy his universal order and the harmony equation, our judgement is not a circuit court judgement, but an account of our lives that our own actions have already recorded, our destiny satified the universal harmony:

"My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."

Unlike christians, we make no claims regarding our destiny after this life is complete. The Quran tells us explicitly that noone knows the hereafter except god, noone knows the meaning of judgement except god....Noone knows shit beside this life except for god. That's excatly what Einstein is saying.

 

[everneo]

if i tell you how einstein's god is impersonal you would call einstein by all bad names. in respect to einstein i don't want to drag him in here.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by everneo
if i tell you how einstein's god is impersonal you would call einstein by all bad names. in respect to einstein i don't want to drag him in here.

I would never call Einstein bad names.. I love the man. Yesterday I was testifying infront of the school board to keep the Montessori magnet program in the public schools and I used one of his Quotes to get a basic definition for the term education; He said:

"Education is what is left after you have forgot everything you learned in school."

 

[Jenyar]

Religion is what is left after you have forgotten everything you thought you knew about God.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Jenyar
Religion is what is left after you have forgotten everything you thought you knew about God.

Amen to that. Religion is a way of life, not learned and memorized prayers and testemonies.

"Religion is what we are when no one is looking or listening"