18 Jul 12
1 edit
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelWhat is your belief aout God ? Do you know God ?
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelSimple answer: no, none; no way, shape or form, whether big "G" or little "g", whether "one" or "many".
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelI don't plan to tell you why you are "wrong." I tend to say I lack belief in God but that only works when discussing some agreed-upon concept of God. Usually that depends on some believer saying something about the god they believe in and I look inside myself and find myself lacking belief in that as a real entity. So all I could say to you is I lack belief in whatever might be your formulation of god, but that depends on you providing your formulation. I do admit that the word "god" and especially "God" makes me think of the conventional Western Abrahamic god of the Bible, which I find that I not only lack belief in, but think is an incoherent mish-mash of an idea that many self-styled believers disagree and argue and fight over.
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
I can see the value in exploring what you think, perhaps looking for improvements in your thinking. But the only thing we would have to go on are your words and to be fair, we should start fresh. What you have said in this thread so far indicates that you are talking about a big "g" God. Does that usage come from thinking of "God" as a person's name, like "Steve," or is it more along the lines of a hallowed principle, like "Truth?" Also, why do you use the word "god" or "God" at all instead of some other word? This is all we really have to go on, so far, if we start fresh.
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelWe've all been over this ground countless times.
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
I do not see how another rehash will settle anything.
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelYES. Is that simple enough? Lol
Point blank question: Do you believe in "God" (with a big "g" ) in any way shape or form?
I do, but my concepts of "God" do not seem to coincide with any other posters here except maybe a few who seem to deny the existence of "God".
I feel I am all alone in my beliefs and yet no one can come close to explaining to me why I am wrong.
But lets just keep it simple to start with, eh?
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitI have to agree with you too.
Simple answer: no, none; no way, shape or form, whether big "G" or little "g", whether "one" or "many".
Because it is everywhere and in everything it can be said to be nowhere and in nothing.
I'm making an arguement for the positive in this thread.
18 Jul 12
Originally posted by JS357The word is tainted, yes. But it is a very useful word when looked at in the right spirit.
I don't plan to tell you why you are "wrong." I tend to say I lack belief in God but that only works when discussing some agreed-upon concept of God. Usually that depends on some believer saying something about the god they believe in and I look inside myself and find myself lacking belief in that as a real entity. So all I could say to you is I lack belief i ...[text shortened]... other word? This is all we really have to go on, so far, if we start fresh.
No, not like in "Steve", lol
19 Jul 12
there are many concepts of god. the popular concept among christians and other religionists is that of a stagnant god. one who is defined in an old dusty tome and does not change. they look forward with hope and anticipation to a spiritual lobotomy where they will reside forever sucking on the nipple of their god. their concept of god is based on the god of the gaps; they abide in an ever shrinking universe.
having described the stagnant god of what we don't know, there is another god concept; the god of what we can know. this is the state of perfection which humanity strives for, a state of ever increasing knowledge, in unraveling the language of god and becoming whole. this is the true spiritual journey, one which our religionist friends have not learned. our universe does not shrink with increasing knowledge, it expands.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
19 Jul 12
1 edit
Originally posted by karoly aczelIt sounds you are drawn toward Apophatic theology. Edit: Although not completely, as no outside definition can be expected to hit the mark as to what is internal. It seems paradoxical to think that words for what is inside such an approach, can fully apply.
The word is tainted, yes. But it is a very useful word when looked at in the right spirit.
No, not like in "Steve", lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophatic_theology
In brief, negative theology is an attempt to achieve unity with the Divine Good through discernment, gaining knowledge of what God is not (apophasis), rather than by describing what God is. The apophatic tradition is often, though not always, allied with the approach of mysticism, which focuses on a spontaneous or cultivated individual experience of the divine reality beyond the realm of ordinary perception, an experience often unmediated by the structures of traditional organized religion or the conditioned role-playing and learned defensive behavior of the outer man.
Reference #1 at that link appears to be its main source.
I note you did not rule out a similarity to hallowed principles like Truth, as a explanation for the big "G" in "God".
I am tempted to believe too, that you concern yourself less with the ontological content expressed by belief in God, in favor of the attitudinal content, where one's choice of attitude is not subject to proofs and argumentation.