Quick Poll - Do you believe in God?

[Angrboda]

But maybe my imagination isn't powerful enough. It's pretty good though. Can people really imagine a "spaceless timeless infinite being"?

Meaning bubbles up from our language centers, wholly formed, without the sharp lines of the rational. Words and language are slippery and ambiguous, we never have a full, complete grasp on any of it. So it doesn't bother me that the term 'god' never receives a full and complete elucidation; we don't ask that of other words. All the same, as a Hindu I had ideas of what 'god' meant and they were distinct from what a Christian would mean by the same word. So I think this emphasis on the vagueness of the word is just a canard.

[Whateverist]

To me though it just seems that the only useful path to take if discussing gods is verifying what is meant by them. I can attach meaning but very rarely will it coincide with anyone else's meaning. I assume gods are not literal beings but imagined beings which represent the projection of something deep in the mind. It might even have some utility to do so in that it can allow you to connect more to deeper layers (assuming that has any use). But recognizing I am dealing with my projection, I would only ever speak of it in a non-literal, 'as-if' way. It is "as if" a more comprehensively understanding being presents insights at times. That sort of thing.

[Angrboda]

To me though it just seems that the only useful path to take if discussing gods is verifying what is meant by them.  I can attach meaning but very rarely will it coincide with anyone else's meaning.  I assume gods are not literal beings but imagined beings which represent the projection of something deep in the mind.  

Aren't we all projections of someone else's imagination? Do you have a precise definition of who your wife is? Of who I am? Of other people on the forum? It's all projections with fuzzy boundaries. Communication depends on common understandings, but these understandings need not be all that precise. The boundaries that make up the description of an agent include some intangibles and imprecision. They are images in process. And I doubt many theists have thought about it as something abstract; to them it is just another universal, like 'chair' or 'concept'. We understand these things in the intuition first, and the forebrain second.

[robvalue]

But "god" appears to have no boundaries at all to its definition. People said the sun "is God". Some people say the universe/nature "is God". Some people say humans are gods.

It can mean anything, so really it means nothing. I have no idea what a random person may mean by "God" until they tell me. And even then not many people are able to tell me what they think it means in a way that makes any sense at all.

I can imagine Morgan Freeman on a cloud. Maybe that's what theists are thinking too. But unless they actually say as much instead of using evasive language, I have no idea what they're actually trying to describe. "Something powerful" is about as close as I can usually get to understand what they mean.

[Little Rik]

But "god" appears to have no boundaries at all to its definition. People said the sun "is God". Some people say the universe/nature "is God". Some people say humans are gods.

It can mean anything, so really it means nothing. I have no idea what a random person may mean by "God" until they tell me. And even then not many people are able to tell me what they think it means in a way that makes any sense at all.

I can imagine Morgan Freeman on a cloud. Maybe that's what theists are thinking too. But unless they actually say as much instead of using evasive language, I have no idea what they're actually trying to describe. "Something powerful" is about as close as I can usually get to understand what they mean.

How God can make any sense to anyone who is not interested in knowing Him?
Our physical senses can hardly detect a tiny amount of what is around us physically speaking so to detect what 
is even bigger than the physically reality is even more and more difficult.
What we study today will mostly be forgotten tomorrow and what we see today will also be forgotten tomorrow.
Our sense are only able to detect and remember very little of what is there so if we want to know big things the 
only way is to establish a real relationship with the big.
It usually pays off if we act with sincerity but again this type of deal is not available to people who expect the mountain to
go to them.
It is rather the other way around. 

[Tonus]

What about you Ton.
Have you got any physical evidence that back up your believes?
Put it in this way.
In this physical world there is NOTHING fixed.
Everything move and change with no stop in sight so how can you ever believe that anything in this universe is absolute true?
What was true in the past has been cast in the rubbish bin of history and what is true today will also end up in the rubbish bin very soon
so if you really believe that you stand on top of solid foundations you will be quite disappointed soon.
I on the other hand aim on something that is fixed and therefore it is unlikely that will cause bad surprised in the future  but you never know Ton
the future will tell. 

So... your beliefs might be true someday?  Is that what you're clinging to?

My guess is that aside from your religious or spiritual beliefs, all of your other beliefs are based on the same evidence as mine.  Which is why we are able to function every day instead of sitting in a corner unable to move or get anything done.  We eat, sleep, work, and do many things every day in the physical world.  I do zero things in the "spiritual" world.  You might pretend that you do some things in the spiritual world.  But you go completely on blind faith, hoping that someday you might find out whether or not you were on to something.  And your best defense for that illogical approach is that I can't detect it any more than you can, so I can't be sure it's not there.

And it's pretty much the same for everyone else.  Our experiences in the physical world are the same, but our experiences in the "spiritual" world are vastly different and just as impossible to prove.  Wonder why that is?

[ignoramus]

God is real. As real as any other real sensation.
Just not outside the human mind!

It's a pity there's no such thing as mass hallucination though.
That at least will go some way towards explaining the woo...

Why the fuck are we obsessed with woo so much?

If god ever returns, i envisage him more like an autobot than am arab in a gown.

[Little Rik]

What about you Ton.
Have you got any physical evidence that back up your believes?
Put it in this way.
In this physical world there is NOTHING fixed.
Everything move and change with no stop in sight so how can you ever believe that anything in this universe is absolute true?
What was true in the past has been cast in the rubbish bin of history and what is true today will also end up in the rubbish bin very soon
so if you really believe that you stand on top of solid foundations you will be quite disappointed soon.
I on the other hand aim on something that is fixed and therefore it is unlikely that will cause bad surprised in the future  but you never know Ton
the future will tell. 

So... your beliefs might be true someday?  Is that what you're clinging to?
My guess is that aside from your religious or spiritual beliefs, all of your other beliefs are based on the same evidence as mine.  Which is why we are able to function every day instead of sitting in a corner unable to move or get anything done.  We eat, sleep, work, and do many things every day in the physical world.  I do zero things in the "spiritual" world.  You might pretend that you do some things in the spiritual world.  But you go completely on blind faith, hoping that someday you might find out whether or not you were on to something.  And your best defense for that illogical approach is that I can't detect it any more than you can, so I can't be sure it's not there.
And it's pretty much the same for everyone else.  Our experiences in the physical world are the same, but our experiences in the "spiritual" world are vastly different and just as impossible to prove.  Wonder why that is?

Your analysis miss something very important.
You should have asked...........IF YOU ARE NOT SURE 100% WHY YOU CONTINUE?
I continue because the results are coming as my work in that sense go forward and the
more it goes forward and the more the results are coming so why should i give up even if i am not 
100% sure?
Before i engaged in spirituality my life was an absolute disaster.
Now i am in charge of my life.
Now i am in control while before the body-mind control me.
Is this not a good reason to continue?
Wonder why that is? 

---

God is real. As real as any other real sensation.
Just not outside the human mind!

It's a pity there's no such thing as mass hallucination though.
That at least will go some way towards explaining the woo...

Why the fuck are we obsessed with woo so much?

If god ever returns, i envisage him more like an autobot than am arab in a gown.

Yeah.

Everything is very clear.
So you say that...................?    

[Whateverist]

To me though it just seems that the only useful path to take if discussing gods is verifying what is meant by them.  I can attach meaning but very rarely will it coincide with anyone else's meaning.  I assume gods are not literal beings but imagined beings which represent the projection of something deep in the mind.  

Aren't we all projections of someone else's imagination?  Do you have a precise definition of who your wife is?   Of who I am?  Of other people on the forum?  It's all projections with fuzzy boundaries.  Communication depends on common understandings, but these understandings need not be all that precise.  The boundaries that make up the description of an agent include some intangibles and imprecision. They are images in process.  And I doubt many theists have thought about it as something abstract; to them it is just another universal, like 'chair' or 'concept'.  We understand these things in the intuition first, and the forebrain second.

That you and my wife actually say and do things that are part of the consensual reality that other alleged agents in the vicinity acknowledge give you both a huge advantage over the will o-the wisp which 'god' is supposed to refer to.  As to who I am, I admit it isn't a slam dunk.  It becomes downright murky if I try to examine it in the third person.  So I prefer to just claim it in the first person.  But then being is an art, not a science. 

---

God is real. As real as any other real sensation.
Just not outside the human mind!

Ah but Rikky has training from a special-teacher-guy.  He can find meaning both inside and out of his mind.

[Tonus]

Your analysis miss something very important.
You should have asked...........IF YOU ARE NOT SURE 100% WHY YOU CONTINUE?
I continue because the results are coming as my work in that sense go forward and the
more it goes forward and the more the results are coming so why should i give up even if i am not 
100% sure?
Before i engaged in spirituality my life was an absolute disaster.
Now i am in charge of my life.
Now i am in control while before the body-mind control me.
Is this not a good reason to continue?
Wonder why that is? 

Confirmation bias, most likely.  Since giving up spirituality and religion, my life has changed for the better, but religion and spirituality have had little to do with it.  I have taken control of my mind-body-whatever and have taken charge of my life, and religion and spirituality were simply casualties along the way.

In other words, your life could have followed its particular course with or without "spirituality."  You would simply have given it a different name and you'd be none the worse off.  You would assign all good things to that factor and assigned any bad things to another, and that factor would become the engine of your success.  As we learn more and more about the human mind, we are whittling down that particular bastion of ignorance and another gap will shrink until it's too narrow to fit god into.