Find out if God is real, and connect with him

[Jersey Girl]

delete

[huckelberry]

What if the "said creator of heaven and earth and the creator of our nature" doesn't really care?

If god is the ultimate equations in physics It would not care. I think it is possible for someone to think that a deciding creator is indifferent to humans.

[Morley]

STOP IT. Did you know there's a children's book called Duck! Rabbit!?

Whoever created that cartoon ripped off the book.

I can't get my image to post. Here's a link to it.


https://www.amazon.com/Duck-Rabbit-Amy- ... 8384&psc=1

Ha! I think the image that the cartoon references is older than the book.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/scie ... 21663.html

[huckelberry]

Malkie, a variant point of view,

I am not aware of any reason to think there is more than one god. I know there are different names and doctrines and representatives but I cannot see those as creating different gods. Pastafarianism may well have a more meal orientated cult than others but that does not generate a new god. Some folks may favor noodles while others spaghetti. Even if the noodles go to war that does not divide God.

Do you want to be the one to tell the folks at focus.org that their app is as likely to confirm the existence of, and allow communication with, any (or all!) of the other gods because they are all the same, even though their believers ascribe totally different characteristics to them?

I did take a few minutes to look for this. I found a Catholic site focus.org but despite some wandering around did not see the app you mention. I am not sure I want to spend much time with this app.but am willing to check it out. I also do have some doubts that the noodle believers hear as well as the spaggetti folks.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Up front, I want to point out I’m not being facetious when I ask the following:

I would say that god is the ground of being

What does that literally mean?

… and our ultimate concern.

Why? Concretely, why is a concern in your god our ultimate concern?

That could be said creator of heaven and earth and the creator of our nature which cares. I think that is one thing whether it is a willing planning force or if it is the ultimate equations in physics.

What kind of being, literally, is doing this - this goes back to my original set of questions.

(by ultimate concern I mean the values you have in yourself not religious teaching)

Here we are back into existentialism which defines our relationship with the world that doesn’t require a relationship with a being that is defined by our own values. It just requires we act in the world and with the world authentically and in good faith, which ironically I don’t view a deity doing in any meaningful manner.

- Doc

[Jersey Girl]

STOP IT. Did you know there's a children's book called Duck! Rabbit!?

Whoever created that cartoon ripped off the book.

I can't get my image to post. Here's a link to it.


https://www.amazon.com/Duck-Rabbit-Amy- ... 8384&psc=1

Ha! I think the image that the cartoon references is older than the book.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/scie ... 21663.html

Fine. If you say so. I think I criticized you for this on the other thread. I think it was you. I've got to go.

[huckelberry]

Up front, I want to point out I’m not being facetious when I ask the following:

I would say that god is the ground of being

What does that literally mean?

… and our ultimate concern.

Why? Concretely, why is a concern in your god our ultimate concern?

That could be said creator of heaven and earth and the creator of our nature which cares. I think that is one thing whether it is a willing planning force or if it is the ultimate equations in physics.

What kind of being, literally, is doing this - this goes back to my original set of questions.

(by ultimate concern I mean the values you have in yourself not religious teaching)

Here we are back into existentialism which defines our relationship with the world that doesn’t require a relationship with a being that is defined by our own values. It just requires we act in the world and with the world authentically and in good faith, which ironically I don’t view a deity doing in any meaningful manner.

- Doc

Doc, I hardly mind being back into existentialism. You might consider the possibility my definition of God is more of a statement of what god is not than particulars of what god. After all I mentioned that ground of being could as a possibility be just the ultimate equations in physics. Well that would have to be the structure the equations describe. Neither you nor I know what that structure is or if it makes sense to call it material. It would be the ground of being unless it was based upon something deeper.

Our concerns express what we are, in a way discover what we are and can be. It might be possible to distinguish between concerns which just fritter away and concerns that matter(authentically and in good faith as you mention).

I figure that considering the source or primary order of the universe or our existence there is just one. That does not mean we have a lot of understanding. It might have more possibility for divisions considering ultimate concern but that concern is a result of what we are and that is a natural outgrowth of the rest of the universe we live in and its ground of being.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hrm. It appears your philosophy falls into pantheism. Am I wrong?

- Doc

[huckelberry]

Hrm. It appears your philosophy falls into pantheism. Am I wrong?

- Doc

my own view would be more of an unresolved discussion between Panentheism , classic Christian theology and naturalism.With any of these , well i might wander further some occasions I would like to keep the existential basics noted above.

https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch ... heism.html

Panentheism, (also known as Monistic Monotheism), is the belief, similar to Pantheism, that the physical universe is joined to God, but stressing that God is greater than (rather than equivalent to) the universe. Thus, the one God is synonymous with the material universe and interpenetrates every part of nature (as in Pantheism), but timelessly extends beyond as well. The universe is part of God, but not all of God.

The Neoplatonism of Plotinus (in which the world itself is a God) is to some extent panentheistic with polytheistic tendencies, and philosophical treatises have been written on it in the context of Hinduism for millennia (notably in the "Bhagavad Gita" and the "Shri Rudram"). Many North American and South American Native religions are panentheistic in nature, and some elements of panentheism arise in Hasidic Judaism and Kabbalah, some Sufi orders of Islam, and Eastern and Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christianity.

However, the word "panentheism" (which can be translated as "all in God") was not coined until 1828, by the German philosopher Karl Christian Friedrich Krause (1781–1832), in an attempt to reconcile Monotheism and Pantheism, and this conception of God influenced New England Transcendentalists such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, and was popularized by Charles Hartshorne (1897 - 2000) in his development of process theology in the 20th Century, and has also been adopted by proponents of various New Thought beliefs.

[Philo Sofee]

HA! Now that needs to be shared vastly more around the world... seriously.