(July 7, 2014 at 9:25 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: I never quite understand what people mean by God. If God is mind, then all available evidence and intuition derived from experience suggests that mind is fundamentally physical. This is probably the most controversial point for reasons unbeknownst to me--is there ANY reason to assume the contrary? Because it poses more problems for scientific inquiry? Is that it?
Well then, it seems that God is thus physical--some 'philosophers' have even gone so far as to suggest that God dwells in his own special time and space-- all of this obviously unnecessary as physics has unveiled enough to sketch a purely natural explanation for the Universe that omits God.
So I ask again, what is God?
This is addressed by Igtheism/Ignosticism, also called Theological Noncognitivism. Essentially in this view there is no cognitively significant definition for god. Theologians have called god many things including love. Remember this phrase "God is Love". If god is love then essentially god is z mixture of dopamine, oxytocin and other chemicals that are also synthetically produced!
Drug pharmacies thus "make god"! On a daily basis I may add.
This constant shifting around of who and what god is does theism no favors and just blurs everything entirely. You should not expect a meaningful and coherent explanation for what god is or is not because god has been everything available that can be perceived or unperceived. With this poor logic god is everything that does not need to be relabeled