1) Empiricism. Is it true that if we have not apprehended X with our senses, then X does not exist? Look for counterexamples.
2) Experience. If we can experience an unappehended (with our senses) X, what is the ontological status of X?
3) Evidence. What is evidence? Is an experience (even if unapprehended by our senses, or communicable to others) evidence? — Mariner
There are many different conceptions of "God" and a variety of attributes assigned to those conceptions. It is hard to meaningfully talk about God and perhaps the most astute religious individuals take a rather mystical approach, "behind the veil of perception" or "through a glass darkly". The weakest forms of religion in my view attempt to "put God in a box" or "confine God to human cognitive abilities".I don't believe that there is enough evidence for us to place complete trust and faith in this being that we have not seen, heard, or even experienced. I am interested on all of your views, don't be afraid to comment. — GreyScorpio
laws of physics, — Joel Bingham
the notion of god plays a part in telling them how to live
I am referring to the known and proven laws of physics such as gravitational attraction. — Joel Bingham
however with our current knowledge there cannot be a god. — Joel Bingham
Do the laws of physics change? — Joel Bingham
they’re just discovered giving the illusion — Joel Bingham
Atheism is nowadays equivalent to intellectual laziness. — Johnblegen96
In the end I think the concept of God is about the search for larger meaning and purpose both in individual lives and in the larger world and universe. For some, I suppose, we live, we die, we set our own values and goals and that is all there is and that is enough. Many, however, hope to find larger mea; and this is the decisive moment of the searching and purpose in both their own lives and in the world at large. The notion that the universe is in the final analysis accidental and purposeless just does not satisfy the longing that humans have for larger purpose and meaning and flies in the face of our perception of the world as imbued with beauty, form, striving and creative advance. — prothero
I don't believe that there is enough evidence for us to place complete trust and faith in this being that we have not seen, heard, or even experienced. I am interested on all of your views, don't be afraid to comment. — GreyScorpio
I think if 'GOD' isn't fictitious — BrianW
Not sure there is a logical argument that if God exists, we would be able to understand God's nature. — Rank Amateur
...they don't agree with the fact that there could be a being out there that we are not able to sense — GreyScorpio
As a matter of fact, there is agreement between, for lack of a better term, "religionists" and "atheists" on that point: God is not the kind of being that we can sense. The divergence then is, what kind of being is God? Atheists reply, "an imaginary being". (Note that this is not the same thing as "nothing"). Religionists reply, "a transcendent being". — Mariner
God is an imaginary being but they still believe that Religious people are putting their dependence and faith into something that is not real, whether it be transcendent or not. — GreyScorpio
Christianity always refers back to God being physical, transcendent or not. — GreyScorpio
but his existence is entirely illogical — GreyScorpio
completely disagree - theism is not illogical — Rank Amateur
3 : transcending the universe or material existence — compare immanent — Mariner
If so then I'm also guessing that 'transcending the universe or material existence' also means that he is beyond material comprehension? — GreyScorpio
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.