This is for YY - Proof of the Existence of a God.

[YY]

But, the above quote let’s some doubt into the equation – if you believe that we who do not believe in a god as a necessary signpost or beacon to keep us on the right path are limited, than you have badly limited us (especially if we are part of your god anyway).  I don’t know if you understand – we too are not perfect but what reminders do we need?  (our spouses take care of that  )  We don’t think believing or disbelieving in a god adds or subtracts blessings – that’s the foolishness we see in theism – the thanks needed goes to our friends, family, society in general.  If we survive a disease, it is the doctors and accumulated knowledge that have helped us – your” god is everything” belief is fine, but it really is nothing.  Its actually thousands of  times more cool to realize that this huge long evolution on this planet has given civilization what it is based only on random chemical interactions  - imagine THAT -  as YOU keep saying, clear your mind and see it from a new view.

Let me be crystal clear. I may not have stated it, but not everybody needs signposts to remain on track to their own highest good. Personally, I consciously remind myself, I go to church, I talk to friends etc. Those are my sign posts.

I think it's wonderful that so many other people, much better than myslef, theists and atheists alike, are doing such incredible work in the world. I don't know what makes them tick, but whatever it is, it works for them!

I try to maintain the dialog as "my" God or "my belief" in God. I know it's just one of many thousands of interpretations. I know there are millions of people doing good and playing an imporant part in the evolution of our species. Theism is just my preference and a way that I found that works in my life.

Thanks for calling me out on that.

[YY]

If there is this complex god-web, why are there countries with poverty, disease, no access to clean water, etc., so everyone (all of which are apparently god) can attain the finer things in life? If it's just all god, why is god both suffering and succeeding? Why would the god-web interactions support hurting one part of itself to benefit (or to neutral effect) another part of itself?

Just like the God-ocean analogy, the ocean does not have judgement of good or bad when it becomes a tsunami and wipes out Japan. It also does not have judgement of good or bad when it grows the kelp that has the secret ingredient to cure cancer.

I'm sorry if it sounds cold and uncaring, but I'm just trying to explain why there is suffering in the world, especially when it can be said to be caused by "God". God just "is" . . . without judgement.

[Brakeman]

How could such a god create anything? He is everything so before he can create anything his existence means everything is already created.

[hypagoga]

If there is this complex god-web, why are there countries with poverty, disease, no access to clean water, etc., so everyone (all of which are apparently god) can attain the finer things in life? If it's just all god, why is god both suffering and succeeding? Why would the god-web interactions support hurting one part of itself to benefit (or to neutral effect) another part of itself?

Just like the God-ocean analogy, the ocean does not have judgement of good or bad when it becomes a tsunami and wipes out Japan. It also does not have judgement of good or bad when it grows the kelp that has the secret ingredient to cure cancer.

I'm sorry if it sounds cold and uncaring, but I'm just trying to explain why there is suffering in the world, especially when it can be said to be caused by "God". God just "is" . . . without judgement.

So god could equally be nothing.

[Zankuu]

YY, I honestly don't mind if you have a panentheistic type view on life. You aren't hurting anyone with it so more power to you. But since you seem to “get it” and we don't, I've got to grill you about it because I really don't understand.

To add to this: If YY's definition of God as everything is accurate, then God includes rape, pedophilia, torture, murder, and other behaviors we consider disgusting and immoral. If God is life and death, morality and immorality, what's the fucking point of calling existence anything other than what it is?

Hypo: Let's say that the ocean is God. Let's then say that you go swimming and drown in the ocean. Or, you go swimming and get eaten by a shark. Do you really think God Ocean really has any energy into the actions and or results? No.
Conversely, if you go scuba diving and find sunken treasure, see the most brilliant colors and life forms, have sex with a hot chick underwater, God Ocean does not put any energy into your judgement of those actions.

Okay, so this god of yours can't create anything, can't destroy anything, can't exert any energy, can't communicate his personal consciousness, and doesn't care about morality or ethics. Are these statements true to you?

You said earlier that your god sends personal messages. How can God universe relay a personal message if he doesn't exert energy and why would he if he has no moral investment in existence?

This panentheistic belief type has far too many contradictions and vagueness about it.

You are the one who projects judgement on the actions that happen in God Ocean.

I'm only asking questions about your God universe, but to be honest, he sounds exactly like God leprechaun.

a) Is this God personally conscious of its existence as everything? (If you hold this belief good luck explaining it.)
b) Or is this God only conscious of its existence through the consciousness of living beings? (If so, there can be no personal messages it can relay.)

a) I would suspect that this would make more sense. God was aware of his omnipresenece, but that was it, only aware of it. The Universe was created so that God could become an experiential being.

The fact that I would also be a part of God universe coupled with the fact I am not aware of our (original God and I) existence, means that (a) cannot be the case. I would, right now, be a part of God universe and be completely unaware of it.

 

I am grateful and thank God on a daily basis for all of the blessings in my life.

God is grateful and thanks God on a daily basis for all the Gods in God’s God?

This prayer of thankfulness is akin to acknowledgement that there is life, there are others to interact with, at this particular time in the eternity of my existence, I feel joy for things like being able to post on message boards and discuss different points of view with others.

YY, the others to interact with is just God interacting with himself, on himself, out in the vast expanse of himself.

Panentheism is schizophrenic solipsism.

As previously stated, I believe that I gain more blessings and great things with God in my life rather than without.

So what? There are countless children dying of starvation, getting raped, and being murdered. Every. Single. Day. Those humans don't get blessings or great things from God universe. Should they be thankful for God universe's apathetic attitude toward itself?

I believe this is similar to karmic fortune. I try at all times to give out love and empowerment and surround myself with those types of people and I am enjoying my life immensely because of it. Obviously, I am not perfect and need constant reminders, but I have God as a signpost or beacon to keep me on the right path to "my highest good".

We've established that God universe doesn't care if you're good or not though because “God doesn't put any energy into judgment”. And since He's everything he casts no judgment on himself. Therefore he has no moral stance. So you could say you use him to keep you on the path of “pure destruction and evil” and be equally as right.

I hope that explains why I feel I gain from believing in my God.

It doesn't.

So he's everywhere and he is aware that he is everywhere but he doesn't actually know what's happening everywhere?

This was when there was a vacuum and before the universe existed. Also, this is just my version of the story. It's the one I choose to believe. It makes sense. Why not?

Because as it stands your belief doesn't make sense. That's why I'm spending time on this thread. I would like it to make sense and hope that you make the necessary adjustments to make said sense.

Did god write the code or is he literally the code? Was the code written by someone or did it always exist?
Dude... this is the most vague, contorted god of the gaps argument I've ever heard.

God is the code. This is just an example to illustrate the necessity for duality to experience the magnitude of the code.

I created a really delicious Chicken Alfredo, but because I did not become the Chicken Alfredo, I didn't experience the magnitude of the Chicken Alfredo.

Sounds silly, huh?

----------------

Your belief regarding God universe is vague, untestable, and completely inconsistent. Do you see why we're having trouble with your view on existence?

[rbak923]

Moderator edit:  fixed quotes, approved post.  Note, quote is from reply #54.

oh so the claims of some other Christians that God really really does want everyone to believe in it are all just lies then? 

Perhaps, my statement was badly worded. He does want you to believe in him, but you will have to have faith in him. For example, on the SyFy website there will soon be an eposide of "Paranormal Witness" which has an episode titled "The Haunted Highway" in which a young boy's life is saved through an unbelievable series of events. You could watch the episode and think of it as proof of God, but in the end the story is reconstructed from a bunch of eyewitness accounts of what transpired. Please watch it and tell me if this is consistant with the way in which He tries to inspire faith in people in the pages of the Bible.

[MMcNeely]

Ah, this is good. It's all perception and this is where we differ. You believe that YOU are the reason for your success. You think that you are the one who secured your job and you pay your bills on your own etc.

Perhaps your sex in the ocean tire god guided me?  The main difference between your and my perception is that my perception

I believe that there is a complex web of interaction between all things involved that leads me to my happiness in life. You give no credit to the luck of the draw of being born in a country free from poverty, disease, access to clean water, internet, people in your life that help you to acheive and attain the finer things in life. As I believe that God is everything, I believe that everything had a part to play in my success and thank "God" for everything in my life.

Oh, I'm very lucky to have been born in America.  Despite it's obvious social problems it still has one of the best standards of living for the average citizen.  If I were to have been born in a different country my outlook on life would have been different. 

Please explain to me how YOU are responsible for your family's health. I don't take for granted all of the good (and bad) things in my life and I am thankful and constantly remind myself with my prayer of gratitude.

My family's health is more of an indirect responsibility of mine.  I have purchased an adequate health plan and make sure they receive the proper treatment when necessary.

[velkyn]

you can see more of YY's spag here in this thread: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,19301.232.html

As far as I can determine, YY is not a pantheist, but a Christian who doesn't like all of what his god is purported to be, so God gets made vaguer and vaguer so no one can ask YY the hard questions of what his god is like and why the bible shows such a primitive god typical of the Bronze/Iron Ages.

You crack me up. You hate Christians so you try to paint me as a Christian so you are justified in spewing your hate. You've asked the hard questions and I've answered them. Unfortunately, I haven't answered them in such a way that you can spring back with another tired, canned BibleGod response.  Don't worry. Keep waiting. Another unsuspecting born again will fall into your web shortly.

and more lies about me.  Sorry, YY, as much as you would wish me to hate you so you can play martyr, I don't.  You aren't that important.  But I am always pleased to see theists telling lies in a written medium where anyone can look and see your comments for what they are.  Shall I find posts from you, YY that support my conclusion? 

[YY]

Okay, so this god of yours can't create anything, can't destroy anything, can't exert any energy, can't communicate his personal consciousness, and doesn't care about morality or ethics. Are these statements true to you?

No - My version, the one I'm most comfortable, made up of a few versions combined goes like this. God is, was, always has been and always will be the all, omnipresent, omnipotent being. But, there was a time when the Universe, or anything physical for that matter, did not exist. In order for God to know itself, it had to create duality and thus, created the universe and everything in it. Now, imagine source energy or God if you will extending itself into every different thing we comprehend. So, God energy is in the individual people on the planet, any other life form that exists, planets, mountains, plants, the ocean, everything! Once this energy is transformed from source, to thing (or person), and then dies or transforms back to source, it gains experience. God is constantly knowing himself through the experience of the everything.

You said earlier that your god sends personal messages. How can God universe relay a personal message if he doesn't exert energy and why would he if he has no moral investment in existence?

This is something personal to me. it may be different for others. As I stated previously, there are signposts in my life that keep reminding me of the oneness of all. The messages I get from God can be in the form of a beautiful sunset, animals, a song I hear on the radio etc. I feel that my perspective on life, as everyone being from the same source, leads me to live a fun and fulfilling life. These are my messages from God. Even though I can understand that God has no investment in my happiness, I have an investment in my own happiness and thus, see these as signs from God. The fact that there's anything here at all is the easiest reminder of our unity on a source level.

The fact that I would also be a part of God universe coupled with the fact I am not aware of our (original God and I) existence, means that (a) cannot be the case. I would, right now, be a part of God universe and be completely unaware of it.

You can be completely unaware of it just as you are unaware of anything that happened to you before you were born. On this plane, we process data with our 5 senses. Before you had ears to hear, eyes to see etc, you only had consciousness - which gave you a different means to process data (awareness).

I am grateful and thank God on a daily basis for all of the blessings in my life.

God is grateful and thanks God on a daily basis for all the Gods in God’s God?

If you were a citizen of the United states, you and all of the other citizens could be classified as "American". It would be just as logical that you were grateful to your country and thanked the USA every day for the opportunities and blessings it provides.

YY, the others to interact with is just God interacting with himself, on himself, out in the vast expanse of himself.

Same as above

So what? There are countless children dying of starvation, getting raped, and being murdered. Every. Single. Day. Those humans don't get blessings or great things from God universe. Should they be thankful for God universe's apathetic attitude toward itself?

I can't answer for them, but yes, those are horrible things. I could say that those things are happenings that are part of the makeup of the game. If you play football, you risk getting your neck broken. It's a horrible thing, but it might happen. I guess some would rather just not play. Then again, you could also just break an arm, leg, have a concussion, and go on to lead a stellar career and enjoy the heck out of it even with those accidents.

We've established that God universe doesn't care if you're good or not though because “God doesn't put any energy into judgment”. And since He's everything he casts no judgment on himself. Therefore he has no moral stance. So you could say you use him to keep you on the path of “pure destruction and evil” and be equally as right.

I'd say this is true if this was the type of life you want to lead. All actions have reactions and consequence. Please ask prison inmates if they enjoy being locked up or if they'd rather be on the outside. I'd say most of them would rather be free. Their actions of "pure destruction and evil" were limiting thoughts that may not have necessarily led them to their highest good (being free).

I created a really delicious Chicken Alfredo, but because I did not become the Chicken Alfredo, I didn't experience the magnitude of the Chicken Alfredo.

Sounds silly, huh?

It would be more like "I created a really delicious Chicken Alfredo, but I, nor anyone else did not EAT the Chicken Alfredo. Thus, all of the potential awesomeness of that Chicken Alfredo was never realized - and it won't be unless someone EATS it!

[YY]

Perhaps your sex in the ocean tire god guided me?  The main difference between your and my perception is that my perception

Did you finish your thought?

My family's health is more of an indirect responsibility of mine.  I have purchased an adequate health plan and make sure they receive the proper treatment when necessary.

OK, what about the doctors and nurses who went to school for all those years to learn how to treat your family? What about the farmers who raised the food your family eats? What about the insurance companies (this might be a stretch) who pay the bills? What about the drug companies (another point of debate) that make the medicine? What about the activists who did their work to make sure you're not breathing polluted air? What about the trees and plants for that matter that create the oxygen you breathe?

So, when you say that you're responsible for ANYTHING, there are so many supporting factors working together in the past, present, and future that allow you to live the life you do today. I don't think it's such a bad thing to be grateful and say a prayer of thanksgiving to God (everything) for all of the good in my life.

[Alzael]

The problem here YY, is that you never really stopped to consider anything that anyone has said. Rather than actually paying attention to my posts to you, you jumped straight to "atheist understanding" (whatever that is supposed to mean) and "bias" without ever pausing to consider that there may be a point.

I am considering what people are saying. Here's the other problem. Once some of you read that I have no proof that you'd like, they immediately jump to the "insanity" argument.

IT has nothing to do with proof that we would like. It is that you have no proof at all.

 Yes, there are definitions of words which mean that you are right about my arguments being indistinguishable from insanity, but this is why I'm trying to relate to you what effect God has on my life, rather than proving its existence. You can jump to the imaginary friend analogy again, but please tell me how your imaginary friends impacted your adult quality of life and if it changed things for the better or worse.

You can relate it all that you want, however none of it proves anything. Your personal experiences are not evidence of anything. My imaginary friends didn't impact my life because I gave them up when I grew up. If I had kept believing in them then of course they would have had an impact. For one thing, people would have thought I was insane or unbalanced for believing in people that all of th evidence says isn't there. Your problem is that you're doing the same thing, but asking for a pass. You're asking people not to consider your beliefs as being ridiculous or possibly insane, even though they operate on the exact same level and in the exact manner.

It's a logical fallacy called special pleading.

When you get caught up on semantics and proving points, you are reading with "atheist understanding". If you nitpik, you won't get past "prove it". And there's no temper tantrum here. I'm simply trying to relay to you my understanding of God and how this affects my life and this is totally independent of what anyone else on this board does with their life.

And the question that I asked which was why you would bother? Without evidence you're no different than a ranting lunatic. As I said, I've heard it all before form many different theists. What you have to say is no less stupid, no less deranged, and no more realistic than everything else they have ever said. You are not saying anything new or original. It was pointless then, it is pointless now.

Why would you want to bother relaying your understanding, when anything you say is ultimately meaningless to us? Without any evidence nothing you say has meaning to anyone but you.

This is what I meant about you considering what people are saying. You are failing to understand this. You are simply one more person with a tenuous grasp of reality, trying to tell us about what colour the sky is in your little world. Why should we care? This is why proof keeps coming up. Without it, nothing you say has any relevance. No one really cares.

[YY]

IT has nothing to do with proof that we would like. It is that you have no proof at all.

So I take it that you don't care what I say unless I have proof. What the hell does that even mean? Can you not talk about movies because you don't have any proof that Neo is or isn't in the matrix? You sound like a broken record. You also sound like someone who just turns off at the point where you can claim "You have no proof". So why should you even respond if that's the only context you'll consider, proof or no proof? Just ignore me.

You can relate it all that you want, however none of it proves anything. Your personal experiences are not evidence of anything. My imaginary friends didn't impact my life because I gave them up when I grew up. If I had kept believing in them then of course they would have had an impact. For one thing, people would have thought I was insane or unbalanced for believing in people that all of th evidence says isn't there. Your problem is that you're doing the same thing, but asking for a pass. You're asking people not to consider your beliefs as being ridiculous or possibly insane, even though they operate on the exact same level and in the exact manner.

It's a logical fallacy called special pleading.

So the majority of the world is special pleading and you're right right? So call me insane if that makes you feel better about disregarding anything else I say beyond having proof.

And the question that I asked which was why you would bother? Without evidence you're no different than a ranting lunatic. As I said, I've heard it all before form many different theists. What you have to say is no less stupid, no less deranged, and no more realistic than everything else they have ever said. You are not saying anything new or original. It was pointless then, it is pointless now.

Why would you want to bother relaying your understanding, when anything you say is ultimately meaningless to us? Without any evidence nothing you say has meaning to anyone but you.

This is what I meant about you considering what people are saying. You are failing to understand this. You are simply one more person with a tenuous grasp of reality, trying to tell us about what colour the sky is in your little world. Why should we care? This is why proof keeps coming up. Without it, nothing you say has any relevance. No one really cares.

I'm glad you're speaking for the entirety of the message board. Are you also speaking for the people who personal message me? so then why don't you just not care? Why don't you just stop responding if you really don't care? Stop trying to get past the burden of proof and just go back to the safety of your little world where E=MC2 and 1+1=2 (which of course I agree with but have the flexibility to discuss things beyond the burden of proof).

[Alzael]

So I take it that you don't care what I say unless I have proof. What the hell does that even mean? Can you not talk about movies because you don't have any proof that Neo is or isn't in the matrix? You sound like a broken record. You also sound like someone who just turns off at the point where you can claim "You have no proof". So why should you even respond if that's the only context you'll consider, proof or no proof? Just ignore me.

Naturally I care. In the same way that I care about anyone spouting nonsense in front of me. That sort of idiocy tends to spread if it isn't highlighted. It's simply that your words have no weight and are not worthy of actual consideration, because there is nothing to them. They have no more value than any other unsubstantiated opinion.

As for sounding like a broken record. I can only play the notes I'm given. You keep ignoring the questions that I actually asked and bringing this up. So what else am I supposed to respond to? Don't blame me for your own failings.

So the majority of the world is special pleading and you're right right? So call me insane if that makes you feel better about disregarding anything else I say beyond having proof.

Strawman. Not even remotely what I said. I said that your personal experiences are not evidence of anything, which is simply a fact. I said nothing about always being right. Nor did I say that the majority of the world is using special pleading. YOU are using special pleading because you want your ideas (which have no evidence) to be given special consideration over other similiar ideas.

YOu could at least make some attempt at discussing honestly.

Can you not talk about movies because you don't have any proof that Neo is or isn't in the matrix?

Another Strawman, nothing to do with what I said or what I asked. You can, of course, talk about movies. However it's simply an opinion and has no bearing on anything beyond that.

 

I'm glad you're speaking for the entirety of the message board. Are you also speaking for the people who personal message me? so then why don't you just not care? Why don't you just stop responding if you really don't care? Stop trying to get past the burden of proof and just go back to the safety of your little world where E=MC2 and 1+1=2 (which of course I agree with but have the flexibility to discuss things beyond the burden of proof).

I'm perfectly capable of going beyond the burden of proof. However I give such things the weight that they deserve. Which is why I view what you say in the same manner as I view when my little sister tells me about unicorns. Because that is what your beliefs deserve.

As I said, the reason I care is because irrational beliefs need to be pointed out a such. I would hate to see the world that I have to live in become further contaminated by irrationality and idiocy.

Here's a better question, why do you still avoid the questions that I asked initially?

PS. The bold is an Ad Hominem by the way. Are fallacies all you have to work with?

[YY]

Strawman. Not even remotely what I said. I said that your personal experiences are not evidence of anything, which is simply a fact.

Agreed

I said nothing about always being right. Nor did I say that the majority of the world is using special pleading. YOU are using special pleading because you want your ideas (which have no evidence) to be given special consideration over other similiar ideas.

Given - the majority of the world believes in some sort of God. Also given - there is no proof of the existence of God. Thus, the majority of the world is special pleading. And, I'm not asking for any consideration. I'm simply sharing what I believe. I've said it many times before, take it or leave it. I don't have any expectation that you or anyone else will agree.

As I said, the reason I care is because irrational beliefs need to be pointed out a such. I would hate to see the world that I have to live in become further contaminated by irrationality and idiocy.

Then please do something about the tea party.

Here's a better question, why do you still avoid the questions that I asked initially?

Which one? The one about knowing standards of proof? Or the statements saying I'm indistinguishable from someone who is mentally ill. Why don't you respond to that first and then I'll respond to your question (but repost which question you want me to answer in specific). Here's a reminder . . .

I didn't say that you were insane. I said that your beliefs were indistinguishable from insanity.

Which still makes you indistinguishable from someone who is mentally ill.

If I said this, I'd be called a Christian liar by some . . .

PS. The bold is an Ad Hominem by the way. Are  fallacies all you have to work with?

No, but it's something I'm trying to get you to work with. I understand that we cannot, so we've met an impass. Which is fine, there are a lot of other things to discuss.

[Gnu Ordure]

Having just read this thread, I would like to at least commend YY for his attitude. He is remaining calm and polite in the face of unwarranted abuse.

MMcNeely contributes to the discussion (the entire post):

I'd have to say that all that is the biggest load of crap I've ever read... next to the Bible of course.

That's not an argument. It's childish name-calling. And kudos to YY for rising above it.

I've reported MMcNeely's post, not because it's horrendously offensive, which it isn't, but simply to get YY some protection from the Mods.

[YY]

Having just read this thread, I would like to at least commend YY for his attitude. He is remaining calm and polite in the face of unwarranted abuse.

MMcNeely contributes to the discussion (the entire post):

I'd have to say that all that is the biggest load of crap I've ever read... next to the Bible of course.

That's not an argument. It's childish name-calling. And kudos to YY for rising above it.

I've reported MMcNeely's post, not because it's horrendously offensive, which it isn't, but simply to get YY some protection from the Mods.

Much appreciated Gnu!

[Gnu Ordure]

Maybe I should support YY more directly. I was a pantheist when I joined WWGHA three years ago, and having engaged in hours and hours of religious and philosophical discussions since then... I'm still a pantheist. Sorry.
 
So I understand YY to a certain extent.

Here's a question:

Do you people agree that some truths are self-evident?

(And bear in mind that the US itself is based on that assumption, according to the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal etc etc).

In which case, I declare (my own personal declaration of independence!) that pantheism is self-evidently true.

I offer no proof of my self-evident truth - by definition, none is required. And I'm not interested in persuading other people to see the world the same way I do, so I rarely mention my pantheism.

In Kurt Vonnegut's novel Breakfast of Champions, at one point he writes himself into the book and interacts with the characters he's created. He asks one of his characters, Kilgore Trout, What is the purpose of life ? Kilgore replies :

To be
the eyes
and ears
and conscience
of the Creator of the Universe,
you fool.

In this case, the creator of Trout's universe is Vonnegut. (And if you read the book, you'll see exactly why he creates Trout as his conscience. It's a matter of life or death...)
 
But step up a level, and Vonnegut is also saying that he himself is the conscience of his own Creator - whoever that may be.

Which is what YY is saying, in part.

[MMcNeely]

I've reported MMcNeely's post, not because it's horrendously offensive, which it isn't, but simply to get YY some protection from the Mods.

So, why would that warrant me getting reported?  I didn't call YY any sort of childish name in that post.  If I said that I believed that a flying pink unicorn is god, you would believe that to be a load of crap.  So, why is it so bad that I think that some mystical ocean tire sex god is a load of crap?  YY's version of God is confusing, contradictory, and only based on his imagination.  It is a compilation of dozens of other belief systems and lacks any sort of logical thought pattern.  He existed, but didn't exist.  He created things to know himself, and gains knowledge of himself through the actions of the world (murder, rape, incest, etc.)  Any religion that has a "perfect being" is garbage.  Because true perfection cannot coexist with imperfection and would either correct the issue or eradicate it completely.

[Brakeman]

Pantheism
First published Tue Jun 4, 1996; substantive revision Tue Jan 25, 2011

Pantheism is a metaphysical and religious position. Broadly defined it is the view that (1) “God is everything and everything is God … http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pantheism/

What a load of crap! That is as stupid as the bible!

It's basically, I see wooo everywhere! even my piss is woo! Magic! Woo! everything is more that it is!

Reality is not enough! Woo!

Are you serious?

[MMcNeely]

Watch out Brake... that kind of stuff can get you reported!  lolz

[velkyn]

Here's a question:

Do you people agree that some truths are self-evident?

(And bear in mind that the US itself is based on that assumption, according to the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal etc etc).

In which case, I declare (my own personal declaration of independence!) that pantheism is self-evidently true.

I offer no proof of my self-evident truth - by definition, none is required. And I'm not interested in persuading other people to see the world the same way I do, so I rarely mention my pantheism.

How can one tell the difference from a "self-evident truth" and a delusion?

[RaymondKHessel]

(This repsonse intended for RaymondKHessel)

Whew [singsongy]issues . . . [/singsongy]

My drug of choice is alcohol. I don't do other drugs. And that story - too much detail to be fake haha! I think you can be very lucid and find inspiration in my God. What kind of true omnipresent God is only in the "good"? That's a judgement call on your part.

I don't know why you "shot that god in the face". Were you happy but lazy? Are you happier now?

Don't know what you mean by in the "good"? Did I suggest my personal god was such? My SPAG was one where the godiverse itself wasn't good or bad, but if you were on a "good" path not in a moral sense but "good" as in "proper" or "positive", "where you SHOULD be", you would naturally allign yourself with the all-present super waveform blah blah blah blah...

Anyway, to answer your question, I can't answer your question, because a question like "What kind of omnipresent god etc." hurts my brain box in so many places I can't see straight.

I'm not playing metaphysical patty-cake with you Cochise. I shot pantheist godiverse in the face because I had to ultimately admit there was absolutely no evidence to support it, and I'm not the kind of person who can wander through life surviving on his own bullshit. I need to know that what I know is true, and I found my unproven, unapolgetic SPAG to be, frankly, intellectual lazy and embarassing.

And regarding my happiness, again, I can't really answer that. I've never been the type to tie my happiness to existential concepts or philosophical navel gazing. Friends and family make me happy. A blowjob or a chocolate chip cookie makes me happy. 

Clinging to some nebulous and ultimately meaningless godiverse philosophy I pulled out of my ass just made me half a fucking space case. But I was a full-time musician then, so it worked out okay.

[Hatter23]

We already have a word for the universe. It's called the universe.

There may be multiple universes. There may be dimensions beyond those that we know of.

And there might be a dragon in my garage.

[Hatter23]

Here's a question:

Do you people agree that some truths are self-evident?

(And bear in mind that the US itself is based on that assumption, according to the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal etc etc).

In which case, I declare (my own personal declaration of independence!) that pantheism is self-evidently true.

I offer no proof of my self-evident truth - by definition, none is required. And I'm not interested in persuading other people to see the world the same way I do, so I rarely mention my pantheism.

How can one tell the difference from a "self-evident truth" and a delusion?

They are both delusions. One is to create a legal fiction for the betterment of mankind, that latter one does not help anything.

[Avatar Of Belial]

Ok, YY, I've read through the thread... and I still have no clue why you believe in this god. What purpose does it serve? Anything aside from making you feel like you're a better person? Why can't you do that without this... vague... thing-god you've proposed? How is it any different from everything being just "everything"? What does "God is everything" add to it?

In addition, you say you act this way (like a better person) because you assume everything is "connected" and you think that if everything is seperate you'd have no problem being a selfish bastard, right? Why don't you think you'd be capable of empathy without it?

Also, if you aren't a Christian, why is church one of your "roadsigns"? What purpose does it serve if you don't share the same beliefs?

Since this post clearly require more question marks, here are two more: ??

[Gnu Ordure]

How can one tell the difference from a "self-evident truth" and a delusion?

An example, Velks. I assume that you have an image of the Mona Lisa in your memory banks; please retrieve it and hold it in your mind and look at it. OK?

While you're doing that, you can state this self-evident truth: "I am looking at an image of the Mona Lisa in my mind". Agreed?

It makes no sense for someone else to propose that this truth is incorrect and that you are deluded in your perception - as if your mind had possibly retrieved an image of The Last Supper instead, and you were mistakenly seeing it as the Mona Lisa.

And note that you cannot prove the truth of your statement to anyone else, because only you have access to the evidence.

[Omega]

I believe that God is everything. Proof is that there is anything here at all.

I did not read entire discussion but if you say that god  is everything then then just created synonym for "everything".
It does not need proof because it is definition, and we all know that "everything" really exists.

[Hatter23]

I believe that God is everything. Proof is that there is anything here at all.

I did not read entire discussion but if you say that god  is everything then then just created synonym for "everything".
It does not need proof because it is definition, and we all know that "everything" really exists.

It is an age old opening opening move of an equivocation gambit.

[Omega]

It is an age old opening opening move of an equivocation gambit.

I know that, but if opponent refuses to provide definition of the object of discussion then everything is absolutely pointless.
it turns into  chat that can't lead anywhere.