Searching for GOD...

[Rhiannon]

Well that is an interpretation of Ippy's post that has not occurred to me at all.

Agreed. Ippy's more than capable of arguing this one.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

You're wrong. Per Susan's advice:

"I think it would help quite a lot if you did not sort of translate what others have said into what you think they have said, or what they meant - as illustrated by Ippy's post."

That’s not what I did.

Fiction is where you know something is made up - it's a positive claim.

So is fact. You have therefore a binary choice – either you think “God” is a fictional character, or you think he exists independently of stories in a book. There is no third option.

All the stuff about method etc is irrelevant for this purpose. So which is it – do you think that “God” is a fact (albeit a non-demonstrable one) or a fiction?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

You say that you believe in a god that can't be defined. Do you then believe your god to be the right one ('true') or is it that you think you have an understanding of god that works for you but that others (Christian, Hindu, pagan etc) are equally valid?

Rhiannon

The latter. I don't concern myself with the truth as it is something that can't be established. And I think the whole God concept was to benefit me in some way - as one of the statements in the Quran as far as I understand it, is that God has no need of my worship.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

That’s not what I did.

So is fact. You have therefore a binary choice – either you think “God” is a fictional character, or you think he exists independently of stories in a book. There is no third option.

All the stuff about method etc is irrelevant for this purpose. So which is it – do you think that “God” is a fact (albeit a non-demonstrable one) or a fiction?

It is not a binary choice. the third option is faith - something you believe in where you cannot make a positive claim as fact that it exists, nor can you make a positive claim as fact that it does not exist.

[BeRational]

It is not a binary choice. the third option is faith - something you believe in where you cannot make a positive claim as fact that it exists, nor can you make a positive claim as fact that it does not exist.

I think you then just say "don't know"

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I think you then just say "don't know"

You can say I don't know and stop there. Or you can take a leap of faith. It's up to the individual.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

It is not a binary choice. the third option is faith - something you believe in where you cannot make a positive claim as fact that it exists, nor can you make a positive claim as fact that it does not exist.

You’re not getting it still. “Faith” just describes the status of a belief, but it’s a belief nonetheless. Either you have a faith belief that “God” exists outside of the pages in a book or you don’t. Whether that faith belief could ever be validated in some way is a separate matter. 

[SusanDoris]

You can say I don't know and stop there. Or you can take a leap of faith. It's up to the individual.

But then, like AB, you have to put on large, opaque, metaphorical blinkers since you do not want to face reality.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

You’re not getting it still. “Faith” just describes the status of a belief, but it’s a belief nonetheless. Either you have a faith belief that “God” exists outside of the pages in a book or you don’t. Whether that faith belief could ever be validated in some way is a separate matter.

I am getting it. You're just not accepting the way words are used in relation to religion. I don't know if God exists outside the pages of a book. I am willing to believe that God exists outside the pages of a book but that doesn't make my belief true because there is no way of demonstrating truth, but truth doesn't matter as the test posed in the book (which I am adopting the position is a message from God) according to my understanding of Islam is faith in something that you have no way of knowing/ demonstrating/ establishing is true.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

You can say I don't know and stop there. Or you can take a leap of faith. It's up to the individual.

You can take a leap of faith into anything you like. Finding the object of that faith to be "meaningful", "beneficial" etc still tells you nothing though about whether you were right. 

[Nearly Sane]

But then, like AB, you have to put on large, opaque, metaphorical blinkers since you do not want to face reality.

This is the mirror image of AB's accusing people of deluding themselves. Do you have any evidence that Gabriella is somehow lying to herself about the reality she lives in?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

But then, like AB, you have to put on large, opaque, metaphorical blinkers since you do not want to face reality.

Ok - are you defining "reality" as that which you can demonstrate to be true. Are emotions reality? For example BHS thought I was experiencing an emotion - being upset. I stated that I was not experiencing that particular emotion. Which one is reality?

Not sure why invoking AB adds anything to your post. Did you find yourself unable to discuss the point without bringing AB into it?

[BeRational]

You can say I don't know and stop there. Or you can take a leap of faith. It's up to the individual.

Agreed, but faith is not a pathway to truth.

So if someone cares about truth, they will never use faith.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

You can take a leap of faith into anything you like. Finding the object of that faith to be "meaningful", "beneficial" etc still tells you nothing though about whether you were right.

I know. I never said it did. That's what I tell my children too - that I or they find it meaningful or beneficial doesn't mean it is right/ true/ fact/ there is any evidence for it. Glad we agree on something.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

I am getting it. You're just not accepting the way words are used in relation to religion.

You try this a lot. It’s a bit like my complaining that you don’t accept my “way words are used” when I keep posting 2+2=5. It’s not the way words are used that’s the problem, it’s their content. 

I don't know if God exists outside the pages of a book. I am willing to believe that God exists outside the pages of a book but that doesn't make my belief true because there is no way of demonstrating truth, but truth doesn't matter as the test posed in the book (which I am adopting the position is a message from God) according to my understanding of Islam is faith in something that you have no way of knowing/ demonstrating/ establishing is true.

Which is more evasion. If there was a gun to your head and someone asked, “Do you believe “God” is a fact or a fiction?” you would presumably have an answer either way. That’s all you’re being asked here. The rationale that gets you to either answer on the other hand and its epistemic value is a different matter.

[SusanDoris]

This is the mirror image of AB's accusing people of deluding themselves. Do you have any evidence that Gabriella is somehow lying to herself about the reality she lives in?

I should have said 'you would have to put on', using the conditional tense.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

You try this a lot. It’s a bit like my complaining that you don’t accept my “way words are used” when I keep posting 2+2=5. It’s not the way words are used that’s the problem, it’s their content.

You can assert that this is what is happening. That is your opinion. You are entitled to it.

Which is more evasion. If there was a gun to your head and someone asked, “Do you believe “God” is a fact or a fiction?” you would presumably have an answer either way. That’s all you’re being asked here. The rationale that gets you to either answer on the other hand and its epistemic value is a different matter.

If someone had a gun to my head I would tell them what i think they want to hear to not shoot me. Or alternatively I may not be that bothered about being shot and dying and I would argue that it is not a binary choice.

ETA: Evasion - seems like that is your word for me not saying what you want me to say. I can't figure out why that is a bad thing. Is it not doing me any favours? Will I be subject to vitriol? Oh no.

[SusanDoris]

Ok - are you defining "reality" as that which you can demonstrate to be true. Are emotions reality? For example BHS thought I was experiencing an emotion - being upset. I stated that I was not experiencing that particular emotion. Which one is reality?

Not sure why invoking AB adds anything to your post. Did you find yourself unable to discuss the point without bringing AB into it?

There were no hidden meanings in my post, butplease feel free to add some of your own if you like.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

There were no hidden meanings in my post, butplease feel free to add some of your own if you like.

I don't know what you mean by "reality" when you say I am not accepting "reality" so I can't answer your question and I don't want to assume you meant something that you didn't. If you don't want to clarify that's fine. Maybe you weren't interested in a response and were just stating your opinion.

[ippy]

Agreed. Ippy's more than capable of arguing this one.

Appreciate the kind words Rhi & Susan, over time Rob'll start on 'Star Trek', just like the rest eventually; 'live long and prosper' Rob.

ippy

[Rhiannon]

Gabriella,

You try this a lot. It’s a bit like my complaining that you don’t accept my “way words are used” when I keep posting 2+2=5. It’s not the way words are used that’s the problem, it’s their content. 

Which is more evasion. If there was a gun to your head and someone asked, “Do you believe “God” is a fact or a fiction?” you would presumably have an answer either way. That’s all you’re being asked here. The rationale that gets you to either answer on the other hand and its epistemic value is a different matter.

'Do you believe God is a fact?'' is worlds apart from 'Is God factual?'

If Gabriella experiences God as real she is entitled to believe in her experiences, whilst acknowledging that they are subjective and possibly/probably false in some way ('god' to her being unknowable/undefineable)

[jjohnjil]

Gabriella has never said God is a fact, so why say she has?  Nor has she said she knows the truth or is even seeking the truth!

Blue has always said he doesn't mind people saying it's true for them, as long as they don't say it's true for others ... and yet this is exactly what's being said here,  What's the problem?

[Bramble]

Gabriella,

I apologise if you've covered this before but may I ask what it is about the supernatural/God that attracts you - in what ways have you benefited from your leap of faith?

[ippy]

I don't know what you mean by "reality" when you say I am not accepting "reality" so I can't answer your question and I don't want to assume you meant something that you didn't. If you don't want to clarify that's fine. Maybe you weren't interested in a response and were just stating your opinion.

I can see into the future Gabriella, Susan clarifies her mailing for you and then you'll want the clarification clarified and thereafter clarifying the clarification, and on and on and on, whatever, you'll stick with your zero evidenced supernatural based belief no matter what.

That's fine if that's your choice and you should always be free to think and believe whatever you like; the kind of superstition based thinking you go for doesn't make any sense to me, but there you go we're all different.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

You can say I don't know and stop there. Or you can take a leap of faith. It's up to the individual.
But then, like AB, you have to put on large, opaque, metaphorical blinkers since you do not want to face reality.

But then, like AB, you have to put on large, opaque, metaphorical blinkers since you do not want to face reality.

If, by facing reality you are implying that Gabriella's faith is therefore demonstrably wrong, then please outline why.

Alternatively, you can outline why your way of viewing things (which presumably requires no faith at all) is the only correct way to approach things.