Well pretty self explanatory. Give your opinion. Don't argue, and don't diss each other.

Format please:

My opinion: He is a figment of our imagination, possibly both

My reasoning: If G-d is all mighty he made evidence like dinosaur bones to disguise himself. If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us. So we couldn't have ever found any evidence because he hid himself infinitely well. So we had to have come up with him in our minds to explain what we couldn't. So he is a figment of our imagination, but there is a remote possibility that he exists but we discovered him for the totally wrong reason.

Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not.

G-d? Why don't you spell it out?

Everything is a figment of our imagination, especially God.

Even if everyone in the world is imagining it at the same time?

G-d? Why don't you spell it out?

Something about not being allowed to destroy the name "God", so if he writes "G-d", it doesn't matter if it gets destroyed.

Even if everyone in the world is imagining it at the same time?

Especially so.

What's a g-d?

Oh... "god." Ah.

To the Original Poster, which god were you referring to in particular? Humanity has invented thousands. Some are similar to each other but many are contradictory to each other.

Something about not being allowed to destroy the name "God", so if he writes "G-d", it doesn't matter if it gets destroyed.

I've heard of this practice before, ... it's stupid. Like using the word 'Tetragrammaton' instead oh YHWH. It's bullshit, because 'Tetragrammaton' becomes another name for God.

phlo why the hell would you say that. It's part of my religion, im Jewish. It is against my religion to destroy the name of G-d. So we write it as G-d so it can be destroyed without going against the law. And phlo i cannot believe you said that.

phlo why the hell would you say that. It's part of my religion, im Jewish. It is against my religion to destroy the name of G-d. So we write it as G-d so it can be destroyed without going against the law. And phlo i cannot believe you said that.

It's bullshit.

Most religions have mindless bullshit as part of the ritual, this is just another example.

It's mindless, because any label you use becomes another name for God, be it God, YHWH, Tetragrammaton, or the 42 letter name.

Well pretty self explanatory. Give your opinion. Don't argue, and don't diss each other.

Format please:

My opinion: He is a figment of our imagination, possibly both

My reasoning: If G-d is all mighty he made evidence like dinosaur bones to disguise himself. If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us. So we couldn't have ever found any evidence because he hid himself infinitely well. So we had to have come up with him in our minds to explain what we couldn't. So he is a figment of our imagination, but there is a remote possibility that he exists but we discovered him for the totally wrong reason.

Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not.Your point is taken even if the "hidden bones" part is not. You are saying that there is no irrefutalbe proof of God.

But I would add that our imaginations could be predisposed to be able to concieve of the concept of God. That would allow a non-scientific decision for faith that was individual and personal but would explain why we cannot prove our view of God to anyone else.

If there was irrefutable proof, we wouldn't be free to decide once we saw the proof.

It's bullshit.

Most religions have mindless bullshit as part of the ritual, this is just another example.

It's mindless, because any label you use becomes another name for God, be it God, YHWH, Tetragrammaton, or the 42 letter name.

I could say that walking on water is BS, that catching a fish full of money is BS, I could say raising from the dead is ridiculous BS, communion is BS, etc. But I don't

Real. There is no other explanation for existence.


Kadark

I could say that walking on water is BS, that catching a fish full of money is BS, I could say raising from the dead is ridiculous BS, communion is BS, etc. But I don't

Oh dear. There's your problem.

I could say that walking on water is BS, that catching a fish full of money is BS, I could say raising from the dead is ridiculous BS, communion is BS, etc. But I don't

You should say it is, because it is. BULLSHIT.

Fedr808, I like your idea in the OP about, "If he is all mighty he would of hidden himself infinitely well from us". Following that logic it wouldn't matter if we were Jews, Christians, Muslims, theists, or atheists, God would be hidden and there would be no irrefutable proof left around for us to find. That leaves no way to find God if you need proof that would be convincing to anyone who was confronted with it.

Under those circumstances we can easily imagine God, i.e. make God a figment of our imagination, and at the same time this God who hid himself "infinitely" would be real. Thus the "both" answer to the poll says that the physics of the universe will always satisfy the scientific method and at the same time there is something supernatural that cannot be detected. In the science world that is not an uncommon set of beliefs IMHO.

However, it seems that you yourself might have a hidden agenda. Do I have any justification for imagining that?

Firstly Dedr808, why do you get so worked up about destroying the name of g-d if you think he is probably a figment of your mind (BLASPHEMY!). Second, your ideas about god presupose a monotheasitic abrahamic style god. I simply can't wrap your question around my developing conception of god (the sum energy and consciosness of the universe)

okay, ralph your entitled to ur opinion and i respect that. Quantum, consciously i do not have an agenda. Why do you think so?

Because I offered support to your OP and you automatically went to the Phlogistician tangent.

consciously i do not have an agenda. Why do you think so?

But you are struggling with these concepts. The supposed respect you give the word God does not sit alongside your own conclusion.

Maybe if your thoughts were more coherent, we could discuss them more easily with you.

Real. There is no other explanation for existence.

At least, none that the indoctrinated Muslim would ever entertain.

At least, none that the indoctrinated Muslim would ever entertain.
Why drag the muslims into this. The telelogical argument is common to all faiths as far as I know.

You guys. This is an opinion thread. That is why I h8 what phlo said cuz she's insulting other people. I do not have a secret agenda. Because i respect your right to have ur own opinion, that's why i didn't address you because i had nothing that i whould argue with u.

Because I offered support to your OP and you automatically went to the Phlogistician tangent.

I am okay with the fact you agreed with me. And i voted both because my opinion does explain why G-d is a figmant of our imagination. But it does not dis prove the idea that there is a G-d. It is just saying we discovered G-d for a totally wrong reason.

It is an interesting twist. But if we were to accept the possibility that God was otherwise infinitely hidden, imagination would be the only way to get there. And if there was any intention for us to get there at all, imagination would then be the intended route wouldn't it?

It is an interesting twist. But if we were to accept the possibility that God was otherwise infinitely hidden, imagination would be the only way to get there. And if there was any intention for us to get there at all, imagination would then be the intended route wouldn't it?

There is also no proof out there saying that he will not make himself apparent at some point in time.;)

Why drag the muslims into this. The telelogical argument is common to all faiths as far as I know.

Only mentioned because Kadark is an indoctrinated Muslim. But hey, I agree with you.

...Is he an idiot savante? That would make sense actually, he can focus and create the universe in 7 days, but then he's awkward and lame and somewhat retarded in every other aspect of existence.
That seems to be the case, I mean unless he was just invented by lame people, who weren't very intelligent, knowledgable or cool.Wow, that is the basic truth and how it can be very funny if you take the world's composit description of God and try to explain it to someone from another planet. It comes out pretty lame for sure.

I would not say that about anyone's particular view of God, but put them all together in a plain brown wrapper and it comes out pretty comical.

Not that there is anything wrong with an individual deciding about matters of God and faith on their own. Anything they come up with is perfectly fine because I think we are all faced with making a personal decision on the subject at some point. One person's decision is as good an any other's IMHO.

Also technically speaking there is no hell in the Jewish religion. So as sorry as it may seem to you, that's where i am going.

... gtfo u rascist asshole.

There are two premises in the above statement. While the latter may or may not be true, on what do you base the former? Just out of curiosity. What in Dr. Lou's post warrants an accusation of racism?

You guys. This is an opinion thread. That is why I h8 what phlo said cuz she's insulting other people.

Get off your high horse. I didn't insult anybody. I called the empty aspects of religion bullshit. I don't feel insulted that people choose to believe in bullshit, that's their opinion and they are free to hold it. I too, am free to state my opinion, and if I think it's bullshit, don't take offense, just realise that some beliefs and practices are rather hard to take seriously.

You are aware of the 'Monty Python' 'Jehovah' scene, I presume?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hlMK7tCks

And he seems to be implying that just because I'm muslim I'm gonna go and blow up a bus. How disrespectful to my faith!

i am disrespectful towards that specific translation of the Qu'ran i think it's like the thirteenth that terrorists use for killing jews and justfiying it. And to any who are curious what i mean by "the thirteenth translation" is that the original Qu'ran was written with no markings like the cross on a t, or a dot above the i, so there are iterally limitless translations of the Qu'ran. Now the fact is that i hate people who use that one specific translation to justify being a suicide bomber. I am not rascist against muslims who do not use that form. But quite frankly the Jewish people of Israel and the world have full rights to be disrespectful against that translation. I mean come on firing rockets into our homeland blowing up busses killing people. We would have full rights to invade Syria, Lebanon, Gaza strip and Jordan. So quite frankly next time you guys come back saying that i am being rascist towards that translation of the Qu'ran ask yourself if it perhaps been deserved., I have known people that were killed because some translator thought that the true meaning of Islam meant blowing other people up. I am perfectly fine with the peaceful Qu'ran.

And the 70 grapes, vs. virgins, yes becasue of the translation that word can either be translated to mean virgins, or grapes.

iI mean come on firing rockets into our homeland

You have no homeland, just some real estate you stole.

You have no homeland, just some real estate you stole.

Dude first off. We've owned that land for thousands of years, any religion out there can call it the holy land, but it's been the Jewish holyland for 3000 someodd years before any of those othe religions even existed. Also it was just a desert before the Jew's colonized it. And the Jewish people got it because a Jewish chemicist in Britain in world war one figured out how to make smoke less gunpowder with materials native to Britain and helped save Britain from the blockade. And he asked for Israel as a Jewish homeland and the British accepted. Now the British deal to the Jews was that we would have a Jewish homeland in Israel, their promise to the palestinians was that they would have a homeland somewhere else. Anyways before the Jews came the muslim population was tiny, it was a freaking desert.

So next time you whine about something phlo look up some history and figure out how a Jewish man saved the British in world war 1

fedr808, you most certainly are a racist.

So next time you whine about something phlo look up some history and figure out how a Jewish man saved the British in world war 1

Your story contradicts itself, did you not notice that?

screw it, this thread has gone down the toilet.

so let me get this straight. You guys are insulting my religion, saying it is bullshit. Calling me an asshole. And YOU GUYS are the oens calling me rascist for defendiung myself?

so let me get this straight. You guys are insulting my religion, saying it is bullshit. Calling me an asshole. And YOU GUYS are the oens calling me rascist for defendiung myself?

All religion is bullshit, and the ONLY person to use the word 'asshole' on this thread, is you.

You don't make defenses by making racist remarks either. It is not excusable.

to hell with it. you guys started this arguement by calling this whole thing i have by replacing the O in G-d with -. So you know what lets just stop because it is a dumb arguement

to hell with it. you guys started this arguement by calling this whole thing i have by replacing the O in G-d with -. So you know what lets just stop because it is a dumb arguement

Your premise was flawed, you showed fake respect to your G-d. I was more interested in your hypocrisy than your question.

>.>

Given up already?

Why have my posts been deleted from this thread? Now that really is peculiar...

God is a belief that is reality

Your premise was flawed, you showed fake respect to your G-d.

Respect cannot be fake, when he has clearly shown such respect to his G-d, for you have seen it and understood it as a respect.

Why have my posts been deleted from this thread? Now that really is peculiar...

your posts were deleted because you were not needed.

your posts were deleted because you were not needed.
Reported!

Respect cannot be fake, when he has clearly shown such respect to his G-d, for you have seen it and understood it as a respect.

Dragon, I know you aren't that bright, but I'll spell it out for you. fedr808 concluded his OP with;

"Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not."

So if he concludes that, why use the term G-d in the first place? It's contrary to his conclusion, so makes the whole OP BS.

Dragon, I know you aren't that bright, but I'll spell it out for you. fedr808 concluded his OP with;

"Conclusion: G-d is probably a figment of our imaginations made to explain thigns we could not."

So if he concludes that, why use the term G-d in the first place? It's contrary to his conclusion, so makes the whole OP BS.

If you had bothered to read more i said, that we discovered G-d for the wrong reason, but it is not saying that he does not exist.

and thanks dragon.

Phlo don't insult people especially when you have loser written across your forehead.

and thanks dragon.

Phlo don't insult people especially when you have loser written across your forehead.

It's Ann Coulter, you know nothing child.

If you had bothered to read more i said, that we discovered G-d for the wrong reason, but it is not saying that he does not exist.

You didn't affirm that you believe he does either, hence the hypocrisy in the OP.

so let me get this straight. You guys are insulting my religion, saying it is bullshit. Calling me an asshole. And YOU GUYS are the oens calling me rascist for defendiung myself?

So you wouldn't care if I said your political beliefs were bullshit, but there's some massive taboo about your spiritual ones?
Why is the word 'religion' now used in the same way as 'race'?

Well as flattering as it is that all you guys care about is me. I really think that you guys should start posting your own thoughts instead of other people's.

screw it, this thread has gone down the toilet.

Some might argue that it began that way. Not I. But some.

No fair you peaked. Yes I, too, would argue it began that way.

Why is the word 'religion' now used in the same way as 'race'?

For Jews, this is because being Jewish implies culture, religion, ethnicity, and sometimes, nationality.

Of course this is actually a bad thing. It demonstrates the insular nature of the sect.

But I agree, calling a religion bullshit isn't racist. I hate how apologetic we have become, and the climate that means barbaric religious practices are excused under grounds of 'culture' (I'm not solely talking about Judaism here, but it doesn't escape all criticism either).

Well as flattering as it is that all you guys care about is me. I really think that you guys should start posting your own thoughts instead of other people's.

I became an atheist when I started questioning things, and not accepting what I was told. Thinking for myself, in other words.

Please, what are you own real thoughts? If you were left alone with pen and paper, without a priori knowledge of scripture, would your thoughts on spirituality echo the Torah and Talmud?

I very much doubt so. Like I doubt any modern day christian would think polycotton an 'abomination' if asked, but it is written in scripture.

Oh, and you haven't really addressed the issue that using G-d, is using another name for God, and thus utterly self defeating. Or is this just another example of the shortsightedness of religious dogma?

Are you done yet so i may get on with my life?

To get on with your life, click here (http://www.sciforums.com/subscription.php?do=removesubscription&type=thread&subscriptionid=180172&auth=d5cd27eaa69b73f7e5cd1c5d99df1a8b).

To get out with your life, click here (http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00429/gun_682_404868a_429188a.jpg).

I opted for both; I believe God is everything; therefore, he is both real -and- a figment of our imaginations (our imaginations are still part of everything ;-)). I also don't really care if people say they 'believe' in God; it's just a word. The most important thing is if they believe in something (something being part of everything, in my view, they still believe in atleast a part of God).

Something else to think about: what is real?

I personally view 2 types of realities; consensual reality, which you could call to be the most real, and personal reality, which while not as real, has strong local effects (I begin to think of things like the forces of gravity, strong and weak forces for some reason).

I also think that the more something affects us, the more real it is; this works in both for both the macro and the micro realities.


Using this logic, a dream can be far more 'real' then one's every day life. I remember a time when I prefered my dreaming hours to my actual waking ones. And I still consider certain dreams I remember to be very meaningful. I also believe that I unconsciously forget other dreams because at times consciously knowing too much can be too much to handle.

I'm a very open man with the people I'm close to, so my dreams are the final holdout for any secrets; I feel they speak of what truly is (as opposed to how things appear) and what may one day be and how both of those things tend to play with each other (patterns getting stronger until they become the official 'reality'; present dreams becoming future reality).

Reposted from a PM, to show how little fedr808 grasps things;



Isn't using G-d for God just another name, and therefore self defeating?"

Umm no, it is not another name it is the name of G-d.

fedr808, that was my point entirely. You replace the label God, with G-d. G-d becomes a new name for God. You defeat yourself, because you are are not allowed to use the name of God, be it God, G-d, YHWH, or 'Tetragrammaton', they are all labels, and names, for the same thing! The practice is therefore utterly self defeating.

If you can't see this, it's pointless carrying on discussion with you.

In fact the only things you can do to solve your dilemma are: make sure it never gets destroyed (not going to happen), don't talk about God, stop with the silly rule.

In fact the only things you can do to solve your dilemma are: make sure it never gets destroyed (not going to happen), don't talk about God, stop with the silly rule.

I'll vote for option 2!

Reposted from a PM, to show how little fedr808 grasps things;






fedr808, that was my point entirely. You replace the label God, with G-d. G-d becomes a new name for God. You defeat yourself, because you are are not allowed to use the name of God, be it God, G-d, YHWH, or 'Tetragrammaton', they are all labels, and names, for the same thing! The practice is therefore utterly self defeating.

If you can't see this, it's pointless carrying on discussion with you.

Yeah i said that. Was it really too compicated for you to understand?

Yeah i said that. Was it really too compicated for you to understand?

You clearly do not understand the implication! You say you cannot use the name 'God', so use 'G-d' instead, which becomes a name for God, and you are not allowed to use the name for God, so cannot therefore use G-d either, and it NEVER ENDS.

Are you really that thick you can't see this?

Reposted from another PM.


No the assertion that you are insecure with the idea that people can and will disagree with you, and that you have to insult them until the point they have to agree with you.

Here's the thing. You have the faith you do, because you disagree with all other world religions. I just go one further, and disagree with all of them, yours included. You are insecure, because you cling to faith, where I need none. I have not insulted YOU, but I have called empty religious practices bullshit. If you can't see the difference, you need to take a step back, and look at it with fresh eyes.

If you were secure in your faith, you wouldn't need to ask questions here, you'd be content.

Wow, you know what you should start the atheist kkk.

Seems fedr808 really doesn't understand what is going on here at all. Oh, and when he's run out of arguments, starts spouting spurious bullshit.

Reposted from another PM.



Seems fedr808 really doesn't understand what is going on here at all. Oh, and when he's run out of arguments, starts spouting spurious bullshit.

wow, well i have to say i can't deny what i said. You would make a great atheist kkk. do yuo know what pm even stands for?

Thank God this is in a science forum instead of the religion forum.

Thank God this is in a science forum instead of the religion forum.

amen. :p

wow, well i have to say i can't deny what i said. You would make a great atheist kkk. do yuo know what pm even stands for?

If I choose to publicise a PM, that's my choice. You don't get to say stupid things and get away with it, just because it's a PM.

BTW, I'm now going to report you for making a slur against me and calling me racist. Good day.

wow, im scared. you called my religion bs, all religion bs. Called me ignorant, tons of other stuff. Insult every person whom has posted something other than what you believe in, heck you could even make an atheist bible, or encyclopedia. so take it like a man/woman/other. probably other. quite frankly that was a personal insult not a rascial slur, a slur is like all atheists are retarded because that is insulting all atheists and is a slur, and is not true. Not that i believe it. So reporting me for a rascial slur is false. Adn you ARE racist get over it or stop.

wow, im scared. you called my religion bs, all religion bs. Called me ignorant, tons of other stuff. Insult every person whom has posted something other than what you believe in, heck you could even make an atheist bible, or encyclopedia. so take it like a man/woman/other. probably other. quite frankly that was a personal insult not a rascial slur, a slur is like all atheists are retarded because that is insulting all atheists and is a slur, and is not true. Not that i believe it. So reporting me for a rascial slur is false. Adn you ARE racist get over it or stop.

How am I racist? Quote or be damned.

'Atheist bible', er, the antithesis of atheism there, I think, do you not understand what atheism is? Oh, and please tell me what you think I believe in, you have said I;

Insult every person whom has posted something other than what you believe in

It's not about people having beliefs different to mine, my beliefs don't enter into it, but people holding beliefs which are unfounded, anachronistic, unjustifiable, and now merely exists as part of empty ritual. It's got nothing to do with what I believe, but the practices of an empty, obsolete religion.

And yes, I called all religions bullshit, including yours. You think strapping phylacteries to your forehead is to be taken seriously?

Oh, and where have I called you 'ignorant'? I can't see it.

I knew you were young, your naivety shone through your prose like a beacon.
I called your religion bullshit, because ALL religion is bullshit, so grow the fuck up.
Once you've sicked up all the rhetoric and scripture, and perhaps have an original though, get back to me.
You are insecure, because you cling to faith, where I need none. I have not insulted YOU, but I have called empty religious practices bullshit. If you can't see the difference, you need to take a step back, and look at it with fresh eyes.

Your very colorful with your pm's aren't you? Unlike you the gloves come off for me when they must.

So what don't you get in that or do you need me to break out a thesoraus.

Your very colorful with your pm's aren't you? Unlike you the gloves come off for me when they must.

So what don't you get in that or do you need me to break out a thesoraus.

I didn't use the word 'ignorant' anywhere. You have failed to prove your assertion.

You haven't shown where I used racist terminology.

You have failed.

Your very colorful with your pm's aren't you? Unlike you the gloves come off for me when they must.

So what don't you get in that or do you need me to break out a thesoraus.

u used naivety, you called all religions bull shit etc.

u used naivety, you called all religions bull shit etc.

So where did I use the word ignorant, or make a racial slur?

Oh, I didn't, you lied.