Revisiting God Constructs

[Dejarma]

2 minutes ago, Alex_Rogan said:

After science has answered all the questions, what question remains?

well none apart from why are there no more questions to ask? at this stage we're open to enjoy being alive i guess

Edited March 31, 2024 by Dejarma

[Will Due]

8 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

what?

 

Some people today claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the universe didn't need God for it to have been created. That God does not exist even.

Some of these same people today also claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that a person being born a biological male or female has nothing to do with whether they are actually a man or a woman.

 

 

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, Will Due said:

 

Some people today claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the universe didn't need God for it to have been created. That God does not exist even.

Some of these same people today also claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that a person being born a biological male or female has nothing to do with whether they are actually a man or a woman.

 

 

go away zzzzzzzzz💤

[Alex_Rogan]

1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

enjoy being alive i guess

i like the answer, but the question still remains.

Why?

I'm still mulling over the OP subject. It seemed to wonder about how humanitys concept of god has changed through the course of time.

How bad were the people around Moses that a set of rules had to be written out for them to stop robbing and murdering, among the other things?

Were all ancient people sociopaths that had to learn morality? Maybe it was their society that had to evolve? 

Science is great to define and explain the physical aspects of creation. I think that helps in an honest attempt at understanding god. Less clutter in the mystery.

At some point in time, someone said "what goes up, must come down" and it was profound.

Why are they looking for the God Particle? 

ok. I'm meandering in thought

[Alex_Rogan]

i'm sorry. i can't find the words to convey the thought I'm trying to express. 

[Dejarma]

3 minutes ago, Alex_Rogan said:

Why are they looking for the God Particle?

I think they're looking more for a laugh than anything else-- people either believe in ridiculous primitive crap or they don't.

The vast majority have been indoctrinated from birth, that's why they believe IMO.

It looks like the numbers are dropping though. For example I've three Muslim friends in their early twenties.

All three feel Islam is BS- they just keep up appearances to keep the elders happy- but hey, what do I know 🤐

[Dejarma]

6 minutes ago, Alex_Rogan said:

i'm sorry. i can't find the words to convey the thought I'm trying to express. 

it's ok, no one can in here 😁

[Alex_Rogan]

On 3/29/2024 at 1:09 PM, Sherapy said:

What fundamental qualities or attributes of traditional God constructs are facing scrutiny or disbelief to you in modern times, and why do you think these beliefs no longer hold up or do hold up? 

ok. I was off track in my meandering. Thought it would appropriate to quote paste the OP

[cormac mac airt]

15 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

I think they're looking more for a laugh than anything else-- people either believe in ridiculous primitive crap or they don't.

The vast majority have been indoctrinated from birth, that's why they believe IMO.

It looks like the numbers are dropping though. For example I've three Muslim friends in their early twenties.

All three feel Islam is BS- they just keep up appearances to keep the elders happy- but hey, what do I know 🤐

No, the Higgs Boson has already been found and it wasn’t for a laugh it was to help answer the question of why particles have the mass they do. 
 

cormac

[cormac mac airt]

51 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Some people today claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the universe didn't need God for it to have been created. That God does not exist even.

Some of these same people today also claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that a person being born a biological male or female has nothing to do with whether they are actually a man or a woman.

Those are two separate points. While science does show that God IS NOT REQUIRED for the universe to exist that DOESN’T mean that God/a god does not exist and science doesn’t attempt to address that specific point. 
 

cormac

[+Hammerclaw]

1 hour ago, XenoFish said:

Well I'm also dealing with food addiction which is probably a consequence of having to be on a restrictive diet because of my diverticulitis. Now even more restrictions because of my blood pressure. 5 vial of blood drawn and 2 hours on a heart and blood pressure monitor, wasn't fun.

Edit: Anyways, I'm done for now. 

Curiously, so-called caffeine-free coffee and tea still have just enough caffeine in them to keep you from having withdrawal headaches.

[Will Due]

 

What science shows doesn't matter. 

What matters is what people say science shows. 

 

 

[jmccr8]

10 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

What science shows doesn't matter. 

What matters is what people say science shows. 

 

 

Hi Will

Other than obviously wrong you are being vague, which people the ones like you that misrepresent what science discovers?

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

What science shows doesn't matter. 

What matters is what people say science shows. 

 

 

I've never known anyone to expend so much effort in trying and indeed succeeding in making absolutely no sense.

[eight bits]

On 3/29/2024 at 4:09 PM, Sherapy said:

What fundamental qualities or attributes of traditional God constructs are facing scrutiny or disbelief to you in modern times, and why do you think these beliefs no longer hold up or do hold up? 

If I recall correctly, a few years ago we had a discussion about people's "images of god" (imagines dei as Uncle Carl put it). The idea being that the ontological reality of gods is unknowable, and the full-bore, omni-everything, capital-G God isn't even discussable - ineffability being one of his attributes (and you can't even say that God has attributes, or call God him).

What we can discuss is what people think about gods. About that there's plenty to discuss.

One thing is that the parts that go into a typical imago dei are also attributed to beings who aren't considered "gods," but are more than natural in some other sense. I think the earlier thread was back in the Game of Thrones era and I posted up this imago deae of a fictional character who wasn't a goddess, and yet the title mother of dragons set her apart from the girl next door:

The sure sign that something psychological is going on: the fictional death of that character was received poorly, more so than the deaths of many well-known real-life people receive from the general public.

Notice also that there's no question of "belief." The woman is entirely imaginary, living in a world that never existed. And that simply doesn't matter: she isn't speaking to the part of the psyche that notices that "winter" refers to a season in real life, not an era.

Sorting all that out is way above my pay grade. As to the Christian version, I am just empirical about it. Mark's gospel is compelling theater, even though I don't believe a word of it. Whether there was or wasn't some poor schmuck who was crucified for being a minor nuisance to Temple commerce, I don't know. I do know he didn't walk on water or feed thousands with a couple of Fishwiches. And it doesn't matter that I know that just as it doesn't matter that I know that there are no fire-breathing dragons.

And if there was some poor schmuck who got killed? He stayed dead, and he's not coming back, no more than Mohammed or Joseph Smith is coming back. Nevertheless, I sincerely wish my Christian readers here a Happy Easter (today in the western church; May 5th for the Orthodox). Conquering death is a powerful idea, a worthy component of an image of God.

Edited March 31, 2024 by eight bits

[XenoFish]

22 minutes ago, eight bits said:

One thing is that the parts that go into a typical imago dei are also attributed to beings who aren't considered "gods," but are more than natural in some other sense.

Wouldn't this be along the lines of a man-myth? Meaning someone great or admired has a myth that builds around them, perhaps even after death. Taking them from a mere mortal to God-like. Even to the point where the original person it's based on is forgotten. Leaving only the myth.

[Piney]

40 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Wouldn't this be along the lines of a man-myth? Meaning someone great or admired has a myth that builds around them, perhaps even after death. Taking them from a mere mortal to God-like. Even to the point where the original person it's based on is forgotten. Leaving only the myth.

That was probably Odin, some other of the Aesir and various Hindu gods who most likely were some sort of leaders or high priests. 

It's interesting that the Han Chinese and some other ethnic groups around modern China will "deify" a well respected person but their background story still says they were mortal, but to the Indo-Europeans these deified ancestors became full on gods. 

[+joc]

7 hours ago, Dejarma said:

I think they're looking more for a laugh than anything else-- people either believe in ridiculous primitive crap or they don't.

The vast majority have been indoctrinated from birth, that's why they believe IMO.

It looks like the numbers are dropping though. For example I've three Muslim friends in their early twenties.

All three feel Islam is BS- they just keep up appearances to keep the elders happy- but hey, what do I know 🤐

See below:

7 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

No, the Higgs Boson has already been found and it wasn’t for a laugh it was to help answer the question of why particles have the mass they do. 
 

cormac

...just adding on...

Einstein's theory of gravity predicts that the Universe began in a singularity – a state of zero size and thus infinite density and gravitational force, which would prevent it expanding. link

What is the Higgs boson?

In our current description of Nature, every particle is a wave in a field. The most familiar example of this is light: light is simultaneously a wave in the electromagnetic field and a stream of particles called photons. In the Higgs boson's case, the field came first. The Higgs field was proposed in 1964 as a new kind of field that fills the entire Universe and gives mass to all elementary particles. The Higgs boson is a wave in that field. Its discovery confirms the existence of the Higgs field.

Particles get their mass by interacting with the Higgs field; they do not have a mass of their own.  The stronger a particle interacts with the Higgs field, the heavier the particle ends up being. Photons, for example, do not interact with this field and therefore have no mass. Yet other elementary particles, including electrons, quarks and bosons, do interact and hence have a variety of masses. 

The Higgs boson can't be “discovered” by finding it somewhere but has to be created in a particle collision. Once created, it transforms – or “decays” – into other particles that can be detected in particle detectors. Physicists look for traces of these particles in data collected by the detectors. The challenge is that these particles are also produced in many other processes, plus the Higgs boson only appears in about one in a billion LHC collisions. But careful statistical analysis of enormous amounts of data uncovered the particle's faint signal in 2012. link

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The more we understand about the universe, the more the concepts of God are diminished. 

[+joc]

8 hours ago, Alex_Rogan said:

For example, I see much of the ancient doctrines as being attempts at early sociology.

I see much of science as defining the fingerprints of God.

After science has answered all the questions, what question remains?

Why?

 

Science isn't really about answering all the questions.  Science is about defining the truth.  Pure and simple...some things we think are true, some things we think are not true.  Science defines the truth, in a way that is provable. 

God is a concept...the fingerprint of God then would be, the origin of how man came about a mental construct of God.  The more science defines truth in a provable fashion, the weaker the concept of God becomes.  One day it may vanish into the mindset of Myths and Mythical Legends.  In all honesty, there are a lot of people that cling to their concepts because, Mama told them it was true.  For many it is hard to replace Mama's truth with scientific discovery.  Because Mama doesn't trust Science.  And people of 'faith' see Science as an enemy of their concept.  

It is Easter Sunday Morning...today millions and millions of people will hear the same exact sermon:  Why we are so sure that everything the Bible says about Jesus is  true.   I must go now because, it is my turn to be one of those millions and millions of people who go to a Church today.  I'll be all dressed up and observing the masses as they collaborate their Conceptual Minds into one great big old Handwave to the Almighty.  And everybody will hear a pastor say He is risen!  And the congregations will all reply, He has Risen Indeed!  So predictable. But you know what else is predictable...that in about 6 hours I will pull that spiral ham out of the oven that  has been roasting at 220 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Happy Easter! 

 

[Dejarma]

8 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

No, the Higgs Boson has already been found and it wasn’t for a laugh

I know. Followed it with great interest at the time. I worded it wrong- I meant maybe they named it the God Particle for a laugh, s==t happens

Edited March 31, 2024 by Dejarma

[Dejarma]

6 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

oops!

 

Edited March 31, 2024 by Dejarma

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, joc said:

Science isn't really about answering all the questions.  Science is about defining the truth.  Pure and simple...some things we think are true, some things we think are not true.  Science defines the truth, in a way that is provable. 

God is a concept...the fingerprint of God then would be, the origin of how man came about a mental construct of God.  The more science defines truth in a provable fashion, the weaker the concept of God becomes.  One day it may vanish into the mindset of Myths and Mythical Legends.  In all honesty, there are a lot of people that cling to their concepts because, Mama told them it was true.  For many it is hard to replace Mama's truth with scientific discovery.  Because Mama doesn't trust Science.  And people of 'faith' see Science as an enemy of their concept.  

It is Easter Sunday Morning...today millions and millions of people will hear the same exact sermon:  Why we are so sure that everything the Bible says about Jesus is  true.   I must go now because, it is my turn to be one of those millions and millions of people who go to a Church today.  I'll be all dressed up and observing the masses as they collaborate their Conceptual Minds into one great big old Handwave to the Almighty.  And everybody will hear a pastor say He is risen!  And the congregations will all reply, He has Risen Indeed!  So predictable. But you know what else is predictable...that in about 6 hours I will pull that spiral ham out of the oven that  has been roasting at 220 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Happy Easter! 

 

Love this. Happy Easter to you and yours. Let us know how the ham turns out. 

[MrsGently]

On 3/29/2024 at 9:09 PM, Sherapy said:

...

What fundamental qualities or attributes of traditional God constructs are facing scrutiny or disbelief to you in modern times, and why do you think these beliefs no longer hold up or do hold up? 
 

...

well the Christian God is utterly useless, that's the problem why less people want to have anything to do with it. Dogmatic threatening and 'judging' without offering any sort of actual help or interference.

People nowadays want God to repair their stuff or to make them rich, that is the modern spirit, make a wish and the universe will give it to you, that is what people are looking for today in spirituality. The afterlife is of much less concern than this one life.

 

Quote

...The tension between human attempts to define or comprehend a singular, transcendent God and the mysteries that lie beyond human cognition undergirds my quest...

The attempt to make God something that it never was in the context of Christianity is what creates tensions. God is this human called J.C. who got out of his total service of this one God: crucification and eternal torture so we can sin to our hearts content.

The Christian lore just doesn't make sense that is why less people are willing to follow the doctrine because we have better education and can see the huge issues arising from the really just 'stolen' or incorporated (some might say incoherently jumbled together) material. Christianity only really survived that long because of its imperial power structure and the fact that they put themselves on top of the big four in life birth, adulthood, marriage and death.

 

Personally I do believe in a God, alas not as consequence of my urge to be punished, but because life and the encompassed consciousness and intelligence are the 'mysteries beyond human comprehension' as you put it and for that to make sense it is just a natural step at this point to see God as the intelligence that naturally emerges as 'organizing agent' out of the sum of consciousness/life in the universe, just as our personality and awareness emerge from us 'being alive' and the consequent need to steer this thing/meatbag through life in a way that makes it 'progenitor of life'

[eight bits]

6 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Wouldn't this be along the lines of a man-myth? Meaning someone great or admired has a myth that builds around them, perhaps even after death. Taking them from a mere mortal to God-like. Even to the point where the original person it's based on is forgotten. Leaving only the myth.

 

5 hours ago, Piney said:

It's interesting that the Han Chinese and some other ethnic groups around modern China will "deify" a well respected person but their background story still says they were mortal, but to the Indo-Europeans these deified ancestors became full on gods. 

Personally, I think people really like the "nest" of related ideas:

People can become gods, people can become "like" gods, gods are "like" people, gods are people, gods can become "like" people, and gods can become people.

You can see the different religions and cults playing around in the nest. And as a nephew of my Uncle Carl, I see the fascination as primal. At the public level, there are the mass market religions and cults (Mormon gods were people, and people - well, men anyway - can become gods of their own planets).

Even at the individual level, though: psychiatrist R.D. Laing in his book The Politics of Experience tells of a patient whose delusion was that he was God - but not in any simple way, rather as part of a "systematic" theology in which any person could be called upon to serve as God for a time - something sufficiently arduous that "God" is only too happy that the next person takes up the chore for their own time being God. The patient shouldered his responsibility and then relinquished his role.

(And that's the myth of Atlas and Hercules - two gods-or-demigods bearing the weight of the world, each in their turn. The variation in the patient's "theology" would be that Hercules would need to find somebody else to carry the weight - Atlas has already done his time.)

And as an aside:

4 hours ago, joc said:

And everybody will hear a pastor say He is risen!  And the congregations will all reply, He has Risen Indeed!

On May 5th, many Romanian friends will celebrate Easter. Most of the ones I know are atheists, but still they will salute each other Hristos a inviat! and respond Adeverat a inviat!. Romanian is not an impoverished language, Happy Easter plain and simple is available: Paste fericit. But once upon a time, God became a man, and that man became God - you don't have to believe it to celebrate the idea.

[+Sherapy]

15 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Some people today claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the universe didn't need God for it to have been created. That God does not exist even.

Some of these same people today also claim that science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that a person being born a biological male or female has nothing to do with whether they are actually a man or a woman.

 

 

This is more reflective of a lack of understanding about science. Also, god is defined as beyond human comprehension, so the fairest conclusion is we don’t know one way or another at this time, humanity has no way of evidencing god. Claiming otherwise is one’s personal agenda at play.