A thought equally valid in its right to exist as if you said;
"God only exists as reality, faith is absolutely irrelevant because it doesn't create anything. It is better to be the reality and drop all beliefs."

Nothing changes for anybody.

 

This is a really interesting point. And it's what I always try to do. I try to avoid questions like this because at the end there's no point. It's a personal thing, and everybody has their own interpretations (even if sometimes it's very similar or very different). But sometimes "experiencing life" for some people might mean "give it a meaning", which is not bad after all if you think about it.

So the concrete, best view would be:
don't give a damn, respect everybody and live life at your fullest
and the bold part is kind of the preachment of every religion/faith

 

Depends. If by faith you mean the function of thought/feeling mind process it is irrelevant even though such people appear inspired and full of life which to some may appear desirable.
On the other hand sometimes those who drop the act of being a specific person and detach from the "given" roles will appear "wrongly" as having authentic faith. Then I'd rather reduce the description to just: They are authentic.

 

Of course I will, thank you...
...which following that analogy makes you a Peter

 

Last edited: Aug 20, 2016

Personally, I don't believe in God as a separate entity, but I like the idea of a sort of fractal consciousness in which all "individual" things--people, animals, inanimate objects, etc.--are simultaneously a small part of and the entirety of existence. I (you; everything) am (are; is) God.

I do, however, enjoy thinking about God and religion in a philosophic manner, especially the so-called "problem of evil," the simultaneous existence evil and an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God. Simply put, an omnipotent God should be able to prevent suffering, or he should have been able to manifest a universe without suffering, and there seems to be no reason why an omnibenevolent God would cause his creations pain. I'm sure everybody has considered it from time to time, but few people realize how deep and complex the philosophic discussion has become over the centuries. Many philosophers and theologian have published what are known as theodicies, treatises that attempt to reconcile the existence of evil with the existence of a God like that of Abrahamic religions.

For anybody interested, here are some of the most important theodicies:

Best of All Possible Worlds Theodicy
Gottfried Liebniz wrote it, and he argues that of all the possible universes God could have created, from one with no evil to one purely evil, the one we live in is the "best" for reasons we might not understand. A certain amount of evil on a microscopic scale is required to achieve the maximum amount of good on a macroscopic scale.

Evil and Omnipotence
J.L. Mackie doesn't offer a solution, but instead argues that an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God and evil cannot coexist. It is logically incoherent to say that they can. He also attempts to disprove some other solutions that have been offered, many of which slightly limit God's omnipotence to allow for certain things.

The Free Will Defense
Alvin Plantinga puts forth one of the more interesting theodicies, which asserts that God could only grant people free-will if he also allowed for evil; i.e.,if people are truly free to choose any path, they must be free to choose an evil one. Furthermore, making a morally good decision would mean very little if we weren't capable of doing otherwise. Doing good because one chooses to is more meaningful than doing it because one must. One problem with this theodicy is that it limits God's omnipotence. Although we cannot conceive of a solution to the problem, an omnipotent, omniscient entity knows and is capable of everything, so God isn't truly omnipotent if He is unable to create free-will and a wholly good world simultaneously.

Soul-Making Theodicy
Finally, we have John Hick's Soul-Making Theodicy, my personal favorite. Essentially, Hick proposes that God created a universe with evil as a sort of factory for creating mature, moral beings. In other words, we have the opportunity to grow into better people because of the trials and tribulations we face in life. Each time we experience adversity and successfully navigate it, we grow a little spiritually.

Here's a link to a PDF of Hick's actual paper (you can copy/paste it, but I don't think I can link directly to a PDF from the forum):

http://faculty.piercecollege.edu/jo...urse Readings/Hick - Soul Making Theodicy.pdf

Cheers, all! And happy philosophizing. Please remember that doing philosophy requires a dressing gown, a pipe, a gently crackling fire, and a furrowed brow. It should also only be done during the small hours of the morning, obviously.

 

Excellent post.

OK I'll join a philosophy exercise:
Since the whole world that we know is an internal flow of mind and the symbolic language that came out of effort to simplify data flow the question of other universes doesn't arise. Anything being outside is an idea that can exist only in relation to a set of other ideas both being held within same mindiverse. We learned there are other planets, other galaxies, we might learn there are other universes, eventually all outsides are bound to "come" inside. Language will grow to accommodate more of inside as our minds expand.

Narrow mind (small cup) likes polarities, good and bad, it is easier than holding numerous view simultaneously (multi.view).
Almost everything can be termed evil or not depending on the context (state of mind). Same with suffering. What is pure suffering for some may be a total passion for others (i.e. dangerous extreme sports or jihad). Maybe as kids we didn't like some challenges that we do now. Most of evil and suffering can be easily solved by building up mental and physical stamina resulting in willpower to develop problem solving skill. Tendency to decode personal reality with terms of good and evil, suffering, hard problems etc. may be viewed as mental weakness, lack of skill and if done a lot it turns into a immobilizing habit.
Thus we have periods in human history when not a lot of problems were solved.

We are equipped with a powerful multi-tool to shape and reshape our experience of the existence. Typical thought processes and language are linear tools good for something, talking yourself into doing something for example but certainly not sufficient for measuring the whole. Why would anybody use words to hold the water when a cup will do a better job. Some think if they add more words and speak faster they'll eventually succeed in holding the water.

We do have or can develop different skills so a wise thing to do before attempting to solve any question would be to ask ourselves if the tool we use currently is sufficient for the task and if not stop and talk ourselves into building another one which will at least have a chance in theory. I'd suggest that for the questions about the intelligent creator and purpose of existence anything related to words is as futile as it gets, turning inwards towards unchanging self from time to time gives a chance and will result in a bit of growing anyway.

 

I think God is one's subconscious. Example: Pray for work, then the next day you will be motivated from within to find a job.

You do so believing God will help, this will make you more confident and motivated. Increasing your chances of working.

This explains why bad things still happen, and why some things can't be controlled. I don't know if an all powerful entity exists.

Believing is the key, believe in yourself, believe in others, believe everything's gonna be OK, and it probably will be.

This keeps you positive and takes the pressure off. Letting you do your best. Is this spiritually?

 

In practical terms yes in philosophical I'd say no.
Being positive is positive, being relaxed is relaxed, being spiritual is growing towards spirit (our personal witness of our mind/world) and at the same time growing away from identification with specific roles we were taught to be.

Bad things don't happen, universe is eternal flow of change and sometimes elements of the flow relate to us more and we say things happen but only our partiality to specific personal roles (each with its own set of interests and desires) makes us call them bad or good. Since you got the power of association it is up to you to use it rationally or not. If being positive helps the role you chose, good for your role and maybe not so much good for you.

I don't know what "all powerful entity" means for you but maybe a "powerful enough" exists since obviously "some word" is holding us alive, makes us wake up and continue where we left off, makes us act with amazingly complex mind/body functions which all are obviously happening weather we like it or not. There is so much built-in intelligence that it's really funny to search for it outside let alone question it.
It holds your subconscious and mine which are not the same, only the witness is.

If God means the creator of what exists he/she/it could only create out of himself/herself/itself which makes everything a part of god.
If the creator is intelligent the matter is as well therefore it is natural that matter awakens (evolves) in numerous life forms.
Since "what is" is built out of vibrations making more waves pushes you away and making less closer.
To understand subtle reality making less vibration is "good".

I'm totally fine with yes and no answer to OP question, within mind both can happily live side by side.
Who is witnessing that mind remains to be discovered on individual level.

 

Oh yes.. Much more than you think

 

False dilemma sophism... Basic manipulation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

 

There is an afterlife. I experienced it when I was a teenager. I "died twice on the operating table. There are more who experienced the same as I did.

 

Religion isn't even in the equation, but God is.

 

Not all really negative. There are some which gives peace and do not concern themselves with the things around them. Look them up.

 

Religion and spirituality are no longer synonymous.
The former seeks to impose.
The latter seeks to expose.

 

Intelligent God? ROFL

Have a look around...

 

I see the most of skeptics always talk against religions, the few just talk they believe in nothing but science not referencing religion. Well i believe the first ones have a serious problem with religions when they were children, so they grew with this thought against all they realize as ridiculous and unbelievable. The second ones simply have a lack of introspection, analysis and a closed bondage to science but "they can't see the forest because of the trees".
In my opinion although there is no certain proof of the existence of God, there is enough evidence that we can observe in the universe, when we have enough evidence we can at least suppose that could be a fact, i.e.: I am walking in the desert and suddenly see human tracks, so i'm sure there must be someone walking ahead, although I can't see him.
Well, scientists are severe in saying that as we advance in knowledge, we need less and less the existence of God, but still they fall short to explain the basic questions that prove the evidence of the great mind that created everything.
Some of that questions are:
-If nothing is nothing, (by logic) it has no properties, even to create anything, then why or how does all the Universe was created from nothing? Scientist talk and have many hypothesis but those are not certain answers. Now Stephen Hawking says that "nothing" created all the matter in the Universe at the beginning. That is a ridiculous, illogical and unscientific assertion moved I think by mediatic and marketing needings. With a normal IQ you can realize that nothing has no property to create something, nothing is nothing, period. ( I don't believe in religious -biblical or some- creation).
-If the Universe is chaotic and enthropic, why is there also a tendency to order, that order which lead to create life as we know? If the Universe was only chaotic, life never would become to be.
-All of the attributes of the Universe measured by science are so well fine tuned, that if just one (and only one) of them (constants) had another value (slightly infinitesimal difference), this Universe could not stand by itself.
-Why there is a tendency or capacity for the creation of life? It could have been the possibility that the Universe never tend to form any kind of life and be lifeless. You can argue: It is because of genetical code, and DNA. But that does not explain why the lifeless chemical world tend from scratch to form such complex structure that has the property of duplication and carry specific information to create life. Could it be that DNA could be formed but had no capacity of duplication, or the structure could not represent any useful information to create life. As analogy you cannot create a complex software program without all the background prepared by the intelligent mind: Electronics, informatics, computers, machine language, programming code, compilers. It does not simply happen virtually.
-Why does intelligence exist?, It could be that life could be formed but never reach intelligence because the nature of that life never had the requirements to reach it. Only bacteria, plants basic life form such as worm, but not a brainded complex being.
-Why does consciousness exist? Why I am I, why you experiment, think and be only in your body, not in other one. It could be that nature formed intelligent but not conscious beings, like robots that only respond to sensations or or chemical reactions between the environment and their bodies.
- How can science can explain in terms of measures, math and chemistry: emotions, hope, admiration, nostalgy, friendship, affection, pride, the need to create: art, and so, so many other spiritual related characteristics. It could be that nature created intelligent and conscious beings, but they were emotionless, just to fulfill the object of reproduce themselves without the capacity of experimenting and feel the beauty of the Universe.
-Finally: Why is the Universe so beautiful? There is light so we can see, sound to hear. Why music gives us such a pleasure!, when it could be dark and silent, photons transmitting no light. No colors, etc.
You may say it was by chance, and that would be your god (or "nothing" as you like), randomness. I believe all this was designed and pre programmed by an almighty-intelligent mind, because by my experience randomness or chance leads to chaos, to nothing.

 

Last edited: Aug 21, 2016

godonlyknows

 

My point was, this nagging question has plagued the human race for thousands of years. What one "believes" or does not, is so personal that it is impossible not to have divided camps on the subject. I will agree with you however, that for the most part, the comments expressed in this thread have not spiraled into a vortex of "negativity"; but I've learned over the years, that [that] is usually NOT the norm. Let's hope that this discussion will continue to buck that trend. We'll see...

BTW, I've read each and every comment. Hence, my current response. Stay cool...

 

Last edited: Aug 21, 2016

I was referring to natural disasters and similar things that everyone would judge as bad, not my own personal meaningless thoughts about what might be good or bad. I do appreciate and respect your thoughts and insight on the matter. In many ways I am still searching for what I personally believe.

 

Insiteful. Thanks Does this mean if we take god out of the equation we can still be spiritual? I think so.