Originally posted by Soothfast
The absence of a god does not mean that the cosmic ballet cannot go on forever. In a multiverse there is no ending, and all states of being can be realized and explored. A god (at least in the Western version) is an unwelcome device that acts as something like a "main switchboard" or "central hub" that subsumes all souls to its own desires and commands. ...[text shortened]... ologized to you in the "Your Soul" thread, by the way. It was the least I could do.

I have accepted your apology. Let bygones be bygones. Hindu spiritualism does not envision God as a separate tyrranical Lord ruling or controlling us. It says that just as sparks arise from a fire,burn for a moment,and fall back into the fire,we too are parts of God. Our individual souls are in no way different than the Universal Soul. God pervades everyone and everything. The problem is how to realise this,how to cast aside the veil of nescience or Maya or delusion that we are nothing more than our bodies or that the world around us consisting of objects having names and appearances is the only reality.

Originally posted by Agerg
One of the problems many of us have with the word "God" is that we don't know precisely what is meant from theist to the next. Though such things are usually invoked to account for the existence of our universe. It is for that reason I argue that for an entity to qualify for being a "god" it must be capable of creating at least our universe (somehow). Whatever ...[text shortened]... t MUST be maximally great at whatever it does; I see no basis for such a position.

Satan had the courage to rebel against God because God had the habit of
asking questions. This was a clue to Satan that God might not know
everything, for why would an all-knowing God need to ask questions,
he reasoned.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
I have accepted your apology. Let bygones be bygones. Hindu spiritualism does not envision God as a separate tyrranical Lord ruling or controlling us. It says that just as sparks arise from a fire,burn for a moment,and fall back into the fire,we too are parts of God. Our individual souls are in no way different than the Universal Soul. God pervades everyo ...[text shortened]... that the world around us consisting of objects having names and appearances is the only reality.

The Hindu problem is that what they suppose is delusion is reality.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Satan had the courage to rebel against God because God had the habit of
asking questions. This was a clue to Satan that God might not know
everything, for why would an all-knowing God need to ask questions,
he reasoned.

And where did you pick up that little tid bit?

Originally posted by Soothfast
All atheists will become theists if we simply define God to be the natural laws of reality.

The problem is always the "personal" God. Why does God have to have consciousness, personality and be able to think? And what's there to think about if the God knows everything already? So thinking is unnecessary, and therefore so is consciousness and having a personality.

God is the natural laws of reality.

"God is the natural laws of reality."

That will be attractive to those who think they can by worship/sacrifice/whatever, bend that God to their will. Which we all would like do, from time to time.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Hindu problem is that what they suppose is delusion is reality.

Not so, really.Hindu spiritualism does not say that this world as we know it from our senses is unreal or a delusion in totality. It is a dynamic world and we cannot depend on our sensate knowledge of it as the real picture . Many metaphors have been used in our thinking such as a rotating burning piece of wood appearing to be a red circle or we taking a rope lying in the dark as a snake or mistaking a stump of a tree in the dark for a ghost etc.
We do not altogether deny the existence of our world,we simply say that it is not the whole picture nor it is a totally true picture.
The Hindu problem is to pierce the veil cloaking our senses and come to grips with the Ultimate Reality as it were,called Avyakta or Unmanifest,which in essence is God.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
Not so, really.Hindu spiritualism does not say that this world as we know it from our senses is unreal or a delusion in totality. It is a dynamic world and we cannot depend on our sensate knowledge of it as the real picture . Many metaphors have been used in our thinking such as a rotating burning piece of wood appearing to be a red circle or we taking a ...[text shortened]... grips with the Ultimate Reality as it were,called Avyakta or Unmanifest,which in essence is God.

Okay, I stand corrected.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Okay, I stand corrected.

Thanks.We see the things from different angles but the object of our view is the same,God.

Originally posted by Agerg
One of the problems many of us have with the word "God" is that we don't know precisely what is meant from theist to the next. Though such things are usually invoked to account for the existence of our universe. It is for that reason I argue that for an entity to qualify for being a "god" it must be capable of creating at least our universe (somehow). Whatever ...[text shortened]... t MUST be maximally great at whatever it does; I see no basis for such a position.

Hindu attempt at describing God is :- that God is devoid of any attributes and God is having all possible attributes and God neither attribute-less nor is having attributes and is also beyond all this.
Hindu Spiritualism frankly admits that God is beyond Human Speech or Understanding.
Hindu Spiritualism says that God is to be experienced rather than 'described" or "defined".
However there have been some efforts at defining,the most appealing being, God is Satchitanand. By Satchitanand,it is meant that God exists,that God is full of life,that God is all Bliss.But as any Hindu will admit,it is not known to be the last word,simply because we do not know how to describe/define God.
Now I am ready to receive your usual heaps of ridicule and sneering including loads of tooth fairies et al.

Originally posted by Soothfast
All atheists will become theists if we simply define God to be the natural laws of reality.

The problem is always the "personal" God. Why does God have to have consciousness, personality and be able to think? And what's there to think about if the God knows everything already? So thinking is unnecessary, and therefore so is consciousness and having a personality.

God is the natural laws of reality.

In the Manifest Universe( or so far undiscovered Multiverse ),you are absolutely right when you state that God is the Natural Laws of Reality. Absolutely.You have hit the nail on the head,so to speak. But that is only halfway in the Hindu thought.It asks:- is this dynamic reality,perceived by our senses,the only one ? That is the question.

Originally posted by Palynka
So why is my question not relevant again?

In retrospect I do think it is relevant sorry. What you are asking is that if someone could look at the state of the world, decide there is no activity by God and therefore conclude there is no God. I don't see that as a solid route to atheism from theism, however I accept that someone else could.

Edit: to qualify that on a personal level; I see wonder in the all the universe, I also see terrible suffering in the world. I wouldn't not arbitrarily select one of those viewpoints in order to move towards or away from theism. Someone else may though.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
Hindu attempt at describing God is :- that God is devoid of any attributes and God is having all possible attributes and God neither attribute-less nor is having attributes and is also beyond all this.
Hindu Spiritualism frankly admits that God is beyond Human Speech or Understanding.
Hindu Spiritualism says that God is to be experienced rather than 'de ...[text shortened]... to receive your usual heaps of ridicule and sneering including loads of tooth fairies et al.

Hindu attempt at describing God is :- that God is devoid of any attributes and God is having all possible attributes and God neither attribute-less nor is having attributes and is also beyond all this.
Hindu Spiritualism frankly admits that God is beyond Human Speech or Understanding.
It is also beyond logic too. Either that or the set of all attributes this god can have is the empty set (whereby having all possible attributes whilst simultaneously devoid of all attributes is true). As such, either way it cannot exist.

Hindu Spiritualism says that God is to be experienced rather than 'described" or "defined".
However there have been some efforts at defining,the most appealing being, God is Satchitanand. By Satchitanand,it is meant that God exists,that God is full of life,that God is all Bliss.But as any Hindu will admit,it is not known to be the last word,simply because we do not know how to describe/define God.
Now I am ready to receive your usual heaps of ridicule and sneering including loads of tooth fairies et al.
I don't believe we've shared any significant dialogue for you to be expecting such ridicule. The tooth fairy device has its place, this is not one of them. If you say you cannot define your god, then I'm prepared to look over the supplementary descriptions of the most supreme being like "God is all bliss" etc... and be content with an answer about the god you are referencing - that you can't define it

Originally posted by divegeester
In retrospect I do think it is relevant sorry. What you are asking is that if someone could look at the state of the world, decide there is no activity by God and therefore conclude there is no God. I don't see that as a solid route to atheism from theism, however I accept that someone else could.

Edit: to qualify that on a personal level; I see wo ...[text shortened]... ne of those viewpoints in order to move towards or away from theism. Someone else may though.

But remember, the experiment is about you stopping to be a theist. The wonders are still there, the suffering is still there, it seems nothing regarding this world would change.

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]Hindu attempt at describing God is :- that God is devoid of any attributes and God is having all possible attributes and God neither attribute-less nor is having attributes and is also beyond all this.
Hindu Spiritualism frankly admits that God is beyond Human Speech or Understanding.
It is also beyond logic too. Either that or the set of all attribut be content with an answer about the god you are referencing - that you can't define it[/b]

The best representation of God given to man for our understanding is
His only begotten Son, Jesus the Christ, who explained Him as our
Father in heaven.

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]Hindu attempt at describing God is :- that God is devoid of any attributes and God is having all possible attributes and God neither attribute-less nor is having attributes and is also beyond all this.
Hindu Spiritualism frankly admits that God is beyond Human Speech or Understanding.
It is also beyond logic too. Either that or the set of all attribut be content with an answer about the god you are referencing - that you can't define it[/b]

When I stated that,as per Hindu spiritualism, God is beyond human speech and understanding,did it not also mean that God is beyond logic? The word God has no denotation. I used to expect a serious dialogue between posters here but have been disappointed to see ridicule being heaped on the believers in the form of tooth fairies and the like. More like the dialogue of the deaf. I do wish though that atheists will sometime come out of their closed system of Logic and dare to test the water on the side of faith. Spaghetti monsters could taste better than dry bones of logic. But I suppose no true frog ever wants to leave his well.