Is G-d real, a figment of our imagination, or both?

Is G-d real, a figment of our imagination, both, or none

  • real

    Votes: 4 21.1%

  • figment of our imagination

    Votes: 6 31.6%

  • both

    Votes: 7 36.8%

  • none

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Total voters
    19
F

fedr808

1100101
Valued Senior Member
Well pretty self explanatory. Give your opinion. Don't argue, and don't diss each other.

Format please:

My opinion: He is a figment of our imagination, possibly both

My reasoning: If G-d is all mighty he made evidence like dinosaur bones to disguise himself. If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us. So we couldn't have ever found any evidence because he hid himself infinitely well. So we had to have come up with him in our minds to explain what we couldn't. So he is a figment of our imagination, but there is a remote possibility that he exists but we discovered him for the totally wrong reason.

Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not.
 
Oh... "god." Ah.

To the Original Poster, which god were you referring to in particular? Humanity has invented thousands. Some are similar to each other but many are contradictory to each other.
 
Steve100 said:
Something about not being allowed to destroy the name "God", so if he writes "G-d", it doesn't matter if it gets destroyed.
Click to expand...

I've heard of this practice before, ... it's stupid. Like using the word 'Tetragrammaton' instead oh YHWH. It's bullshit, because 'Tetragrammaton' becomes another name for God.
 
phlo why the hell would you say that. It's part of my religion, im Jewish. It is against my religion to destroy the name of G-d. So we write it as G-d so it can be destroyed without going against the law. And phlo i cannot believe you said that.
 
fedr808 said:
phlo why the hell would you say that. It's part of my religion, im Jewish. It is against my religion to destroy the name of G-d. So we write it as G-d so it can be destroyed without going against the law. And phlo i cannot believe you said that.
Click to expand...

It's bullshit.

Most religions have mindless bullshit as part of the ritual, this is just another example.

It's mindless, because any label you use becomes another name for God, be it God, YHWH, Tetragrammaton, or the 42 letter name.
 
fedr808 said:
Well pretty self explanatory. Give your opinion. Don't argue, and don't diss each other.

Format please:

My opinion: He is a figment of our imagination, possibly both

My reasoning: If G-d is all mighty he made evidence like dinosaur bones to disguise himself. If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us. So we couldn't have ever found any evidence because he hid himself infinitely well. So we had to have come up with him in our minds to explain what we couldn't. So he is a figment of our imagination, but there is a remote possibility that he exists but we discovered him for the totally wrong reason.

Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not.
Click to expand...
Your point is taken even if the "hidden bones" part is not. You are saying that there is no irrefutalbe proof of God.

But I would add that our imaginations could be predisposed to be able to concieve of the concept of God. That would allow a non-scientific decision for faith that was individual and personal but would explain why we cannot prove our view of God to anyone else.

If there was irrefutable proof, we wouldn't be free to decide once we saw the proof.
 
phlogistician said:
It's bullshit.

Most religions have mindless bullshit as part of the ritual, this is just another example.

It's mindless, because any label you use becomes another name for God, be it God, YHWH, Tetragrammaton, or the 42 letter name.
Click to expand...

I could say that walking on water is BS, that catching a fish full of money is BS, I could say raising from the dead is ridiculous BS, communion is BS, etc. But I don't
 
fedr808 said:
I could say that walking on water is BS, that catching a fish full of money is BS, I could say raising from the dead is ridiculous BS, communion is BS, etc. But I don't
Click to expand...

Oh dear. There's your problem.
 
Fedr808, I like your idea in the OP about, "If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us". Following that logic it wouldn't matter if we were Jews, Christians, Muslims, theists, or atheists, God would be hidden and there would be no irrefutable proof left around for us to find. That leaves no way to find God if you need proof that would be convincing to anyone who was confronted with it.

Under those circumstances we can easily imagine God, i.e. make God a figment of our imagination, and at the same time this God who hid himself "infinitely" would be real. Thus the "both" answer to the poll says that the physics of the universe will always satisfy the scientific method and at the same time there is something supernatural that cannot be detected. In the science world that is not an uncommon set of beliefs IMHO.

However, it seems that you yourself might have a hidden agenda. Do I have any justification for imagining that?
 
Firstly Dedr808, why do you get so worked up about destroying the name of g-d if you think he is probably a figment of your mind (BLASPHEMY!). Second, your ideas about god presupose a monotheasitic abrahamic style god. I simply can't wrap your question around my developing conception of god (the sum energy and consciosness of the universe)
 
okay, ralph your entitled to ur opinion and i respect that. Quantum, consciously i do not have an agenda. Why do you think so?
 
Because I offered support to your OP and you automatically went to the Phlogistician tangent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top