Searching for GOD...

[floo]

God is never around when needed! My vicar daughter has the sad task of doing a funeral visit this morning to the parents of a six year old boy who had the same condition as a that lad who was sponsored by a footballer. No doubt many prayers were said for the boy's recovery, but god had its earplugs in!

[SusanDoris]

What bluehillside said, and which you quoted above, was:

What you were actually asked was whether or not you believe a god exists outside of stories about him in a book.

I do not recall seeing an answer to this, and - I'm going to  play the blind card' here because it is very difficult for me to track down info in posts - please would you simply quote your words which answer it? Thank you.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

BHS isn't. If you think this leap of faith gives you something like, "this is a complete guess but one I find helpful nonetheless" that's one thing; if on the other hand you think it gives you a "I think it gives me a factual truth even though I have no way to demonstrate that either to myself or to anyone else" that's another.

All you're being asked is which it is.

To me, a leap of faith can be classed as a guess. I have no idea if we are using the word "guess" in the same way - no doubt you are about to drill into the detail and try and figure that out though.

Not sure what you mean by "I think it gives me a factual truth". You will have to explain how I label something a factual truth if I can't demonstrate it as true?

For example, if I say I love my husband but I am unable to demonstrate it for him to know I love him - is it a factual truth that I love him?   

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

What bluehillside said, and which you quoted above, was: I do not recall seeing an answer to this, and - I'm going to  play the blind card' here because it is very difficult for me to track down info in posts - please would you simply quote your words which answer it? Thank you.

Susan

To keep it simple for you - I believe in a God that exists outside the pages of a book. For me to call it a fact I would have to be able to demonstrate it. For me to say I know it is true I would need a way to demonstrate it. Without evidence to demonstrate it, I think I can only say I believe it.

I am not claiming it is a fictional character.

[Rhiannon]

Susan

To keep it simple for you - I believe in a God that exists outside the pages of a book. For me to call it a fact I would have to be able to demonstrate it. For me to say I know it is true I would need a way to demonstrate it. Without evidence to demonstrate it, I think I can only say I believe it.

I am not claiming it is a fictional character.

Gabriella, do you believe that God as outlined in your holy texts shapes what you think God to be? Or do you have a sense of what God is and wants without them?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Calm down Vlad, you've been away a week, and in your rush to find something to label with an 'ism' you seem to have missed the fact that I was expressing a view rather opposite to what you seem to think I was saying.

Why is it a surprise to you that religion persists after Darwin...........as opposed to after eight.....or after dark........or apres ski?

[Alan Burns]

Using the personal incredulity of C.S. Lewis to support your own - interesting approach.

What you label as personal incredulity is what I see as logical impossibility.

If you truly believe that the meaningless fluctuations of atoms can define your innermost thoughts and feelings then you must be guilty of a serious case of personal optimism.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What you label as personal incredulity is what I see as logical impossibility.

If you truly believe that the meaningless fluctuations of atoms can define your innermost thoughts and feelings then you must be guilty of a serious case of personal optimism.

They either don't understand emergence or do but idolise reductionism too much, Alan.

[SusanDoris]

Susan

To keep it simple for you - I believe in a God that exists outside the pages of a book. For me to call it a fact I would have to be able to demonstrate it. For me to say I know it is true I would need a way to demonstrate it. Without evidence to demonstrate it, I think I can only say I believe it.

I am not claiming it is a fictional character.

Thank you for your answer 
On the subject of fictional characters - they do not have to be claimed to be fictional, they are clearly so, as stated by the authors, as classified by publishers and the fact that they are fictional is evident to all who like to check on these things. God/god/s remain fictional until an objective  fact turns up to alter the classification!  

[Shaker]

Vlad and "Crashes and" as a tag team ... that can only mean one thing - an -ism frenzy.

[Shaker]

God is never around when needed! My vicar daughter has the sad task of doing a funeral visit this morning to the parents of a six year old boy who had the same condition as a that lad who was sponsored by a footballer. No doubt many prayers were said for the boy's recovery, but god had its earplugs in!

Mysterious ways indeed.

[Maeght]

What you label as personal incredulity is what I see as logical impossibility.

Obviously you do. Its not though.

If you truly believe that the meaningless fluctuations of atoms can define your innermost thoughts and feelings then you must be guilty of a serious case of personal optimism.

Its not a belief, its what the scientific evidence to date indicates. If there was crecible evidence to support an alternative then I would of course accept that but there isn't - ceertainly not from you whose argument consists almost totally of personal incredulity and belief.

Did you by chance what the programme on Saturday about the brain ? Fascinating stuff. Next week it looks at what makes you you. I would recommend it.

[Nearly Sane]

Thank you for your answer 
On the subject of fictional characters - they do not have to be claimed to be fictional, they are clearly so, as stated by the authors, as classified by publishers and the fact that they are fictional is evident to all who like to check on these things. God/god/s remain fictional until an objective  fact turns up to alter the classification!

So Socrates is fictional?

[Gordon]

What you label as personal incredulity is what I see as logical impossibility.

If you truly believe that the meaningless fluctuations of atoms can define your innermost thoughts and feelings then you must be guilty of a serious case of personal optimism.

In addition to your seemingly ubiquitous personal incredulity you seem especially fond of the fallacy of composition these days.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Mysterious ways indeed.

Once again God's promises are being ignored in order to suit the antitheist cause. Knowing the case against God is weak, hence the guffing on about agnostic atheism, the antitheists try to portray God as the bad guy causing sin and suffering but ,at the same time ignoring his words of hope.

A bowdlerised God indeed. .

[ekim]

For example, if I say I love my husband but I am unable to demonstrate it for him to know I love him - is it a factual truth that I love him?

Now, you're getting to the difficulty of these discussions.... the inner truth v the external truth, and, of course, the 'I' which is in the state of love.

[Shaker]

Once again God's promises

God's promises seem to have about as much going for them as "Crashes and"'s grasp of logic or your grasp of English.

are being ignored in order to suit the antitheist cause. Knowing the case against God is weak

Entirely to the contrary - the case against God is, as far as I'm concerned, irrefutable.

hence the guffing on about agnostic atheism

This is a perfectly sound concept - which part of it are you struggling with, beginning, middle or end?

the antitheists try to portray God as the bad guy causing sin and suffering but ,at the same time ignoring his words of hope.

See my first response above.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella, do you believe that God as outlined in your holy texts shapes what you think God to be? Or do you have a sense of what God is and wants without them?

Rhiannon

I think it shapes God in so much as I think there are lots of different attributes that serve to illustrate motivations in people for different circumstances and personalities that I think it helps to be aware of - I think some people relate to some attributes better than others. I think there is a recurring theme of having faith and a sense of gratitude and a sense of humility.

But I also there is a lack of detail and there are a collection of stories and metaphors that illustrate certain ideas and I think religion has been developed from the messages in the book whereby people have tried to flesh out what they think God wants.

I interpret the ideas in the book and take into account what other people have said to construct some values to live by, which I hope are not bad - in the moral sense of "bad". But it's guessing as my perception of every situation I find myself in has not been played out and described in the book or other people's interpretations. So there are conflicting possibilities for me to choose from when deciding my approach or response to a situation.

Edited to take out the word "should" in the 2nd line as that sounds like preaching rather than people having the freedom to decide fo rthemsleves

[Walt Zingmatilder]

the fact that they are fictional is evident to all who like to check on these things.

same old guff, ''it's all there between the lines if you know what youre looking for.........etc,etc ad guffinitum''

You need to demonstrate God is fictional. That shouldn't be too difficult since you claim it as a fact.

And where are the antitheist lords of logic on this forum???They should be all over this one............        Away channeling Leonard Sachs no doubt.

[Alan Burns]

Today our church celebrates the life of saint Maximilian Kolbe
He was a Polish Franciscan friar, who volunteered to die in place of a stranger in the German death camp of Auschwitz, and was slowly starved to death.
Here are two of his quotes:

No one in the world can change Truth. What we can do and should do is to seek truth and to serve it when we have found it.

The most deadly poison of our time is indifference.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Thank you for your answer 
On the subject of fictional characters - they do not have to be claimed to be fictional, they are clearly so, as stated by the authors, as classified by publishers and the fact that they are fictional is evident to all who like to check on these things. God/god/s remain fictional until an objective  fact turns up to alter the classification!

You're welcome Susan.

Regarding your point "as stated by the author. It becomes a bit circular if the claim by the author is that the author is God. The traditional understanding is that Prophet Mohamed recited the words of God. 

[Maeght]

Today our church celebrates the life of saint Maximilian Kolbe
Here are two of his quotes:

No one in the world can change Truth. What we can do and should do is to seek truth and to serve it when we have found it.

The most deadly poison of our time is indifference.

Yes, we should always seek the truth of a situation and indifference is an issue. Not sure what that has to do with this thread though.

[Alan Burns]

Yes, we should always seek the truth of a situation and indifference is an issue. Not sure what that has to do with this thread though.

Searching for God is seeking the truth

[SusanDoris]

So Socrates is fictional?

There was an excellent  (audio)  book I read  a few years ago, can't remember name of author, which was giving evidence for Socrates by way of the space he left. That is good enough for me. I think that evidence that he was fictional would have turned up by now. It will, however, not makea huge difference to the world today, since belief in his existence has notcaused any world-wide religions and their associated disasters. On the other hand any fact that turns up a bout God/god/s certainly would!! :

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

I already covered this…etc

Yeah right. So let’s try to summarise rather than indulge in endless tit-for-tat. So far as I can discern:

1. You think that there’s some relationship between the benefit of a belief and its objective truthfulness, only you don’t have an argument to take your from the former to the latter.

2. You think that something you call “God” does exist outside of stories in a book, albeit as a fact that can’t be demonstrated to be a fact.

3. You haven’t made an argument after all that takes you from deciding that something is possible to it being therefore “not difficult” to believe.

4. What you have said instead though is that, once the brake of impossibility is taken off, then it frees you to take a “leap of faith” rather than validates wherever the leap happens to land.

5. Despite where it lands being unverifiable, you think nonetheless that its associated rules (about what to eat and when for example) are authoritative.

6.You think that “supernatural” is a useful term to discuss the possibility that something does not “conform to the natural world”, apparently oblivious to the same line of reasoning leading to “four-sided triangles” being a useful way to discuss triangles that do not conform to the three-sided paradigm.

Incoherence is incoherence regardless of its object.

7. Finally, you resort to the “well if you can’t understand the special way logic works for religious claims” line when you essay the old, “You're just not accepting the way words are used in relation to religion” canard. Words are words – they don’t get to have special meanings just for you when you attach your pick of the available gods to them (a phenomenon I’m trying to name and get into the OED by the way: “Vladdism”).

I wish you well, but I think we’re done here.