So how do we know if the religious man will discover God does not exist in spite of his belief, or if the atheist will discover that he does, in spite of his belief?

I think the round earth analogy holds.  God either exists or he doesn't.  How many people believe in Him does not impact the answer.

Quote from: wulfgar;250034God as envisioned by Man would not exist without man. That's true.  However, I'd throw in that man's evisioning of God is a limited one.  God will still exist whether man existed or not.

People used to think the world was flat?  Did that make it flat?  Did their change in belief make it become round?

By the same token, man's belief (either a single man or all of mankind) in God is completely irrelevant as to whether or not God exists or not.

It depends on your point of view I would suppose. If God is a fact, then it is your interpretation that he exists regardless of our interpretation. This has many inherent problems with it including a base supposition that we do not understand God in its current form and thus you are practicing (Christianity) a figment of man's collective imagination of what God might want you to act like.

Alternatively, God is a figment of man's collective imagination in the same form as gods have been created throughout history. A tool to make men obey a set of laws, a means for people to feel good about bad things, and a means to comfort mortal creatures aware of their own end.

In th end, it is a choice. To believe a fantastical explanation or not. Did we spring into existence 10000 years ago at the whim of a supreme being who lacked a lot of foresight or are we a natural organism evolved over millions of years to fill a niche? Questions like these are what defines some people, not good or bad, but how they wish to view the world. Good and evil can be perpetrated by either type. One believes that, in doing an bad thing, they "do the will of God or at least they can be forgiven for it" and that makes it o.k. The other believes they are "being smart, getting ahead because this is the only game in town". On the flip side, the answer changes little for the believer in God but for the other, it comes down to "I do good because I choose to, because I believe in helping my fellow man and am not commanded by an external super being". To be honest, both are a bit scary to me.

And to be clear, I am not trying to say there are only two types, just the two we seem to be discussing here.

Bill

Quote from: wulfgar;250034God as envisioned by Man would not exist without man. That's true.  However, I'd throw in that man's evisioning of God is a limited one.  God will still exist whether man existed or not.

People used to think the world was flat?  Did that make it flat?  Did their change in belief make it become round?

By the same token, man's belief (either a single man or all of mankind) in God is completely irrelevant as to whether or not God exists or not.

You might as well just spout gibberish and nonsense.

There is really no meaningful difference between this statement:   God will still exist whether man existed or not....By the same token, man's belief (either a single man or all of mankind) in God is completely irrelevant as to whether or not God exists or not.and this statement:   Floop will still exist whether man existed or not....By the same token, man's belief (either a single man or all of mankind) in Floop is completely irrelevant as to whether or not Floop exists or not.What is floop?  Who fucking cares?  It's clearly unknowable to us, so it's existence or lack of existence is irrelevant.  Arguing the qualities and nature of floop is the intellectual equivalent of masturbation: you can do it all day, but nothing will come of it.

If you can't know God, then God might as well not exist.  You're just jerking off if you think otherwise.  There literally cannot be any point to a belief in an entity that you can't define in any meaningful way without resorting to making shit up.

Quote from: Jackalope;250083There literally cannot be any point to a belief in an entity that you can't define in any meaningful way without resorting to making shit up.

Constructing belief in a personal god of my own understanding quite literally saved my life. Find some material on twelve step programmes and addiction recovery to get an idea of how it works.

Quote from: Drew;250085Constructing belief in a personal god of my own understanding quite literally saved my life. Find some material on twelve step programmes and addiction recovery to get an idea of how it works.

But you really didn't need that construct, you kicked whatever addiction you had with your own willpower and attributed it to a god.

Quote from: Drew;250085Constructing belief in a personal god of my own understanding quite literally saved my life. Find some material on twelve step programmes and addiction recovery to get an idea of how it works.

See, this is the perfect validation of my point.  What is a personal god?  Is that the same thing as God?  Is it something else entirely?

It's impossible to know what you're talking about.  You could have said "Constructing belief in a personal floop of my own understanding quite literally saved my life."  and it would have conveyed the exact same amount of information to me.

I do actually know what you're talking about.  What you call a "personal god" I myself relate to Aleister Crowley's ideas about the Holy Guardian Angel, but I've long thought that the 12 step process was rooted in the European occult tradition.

Quote from: wulfgar;250080So how do we know if the religious man will discover God does not exist in spite of his belief, or if the atheist will discover that he does, in spite of his belief?

I think the round earth analogy holds.  God either exists or he doesn't.  How many people believe in Him does not impact the answer.

Well here's the problem with the round earth analogy IMO. What you're saying is, "God exist with or without evidence or belief" which is meaningless. Personally I have always prefered the concept of faith to the rationalizing of religion.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RockViper;250099But you really didn't need that construct, you kicked whatever addiction you had with your own willpower and attributed it to a god.

It's probably best not to tell someone how they achieved what they did. That is theirs, not yours.

Edit: and for fuck sake (and Drew can correct me if i'm wrong), it ain't that difficult. Non organised religion = personal God. My mother is deeply religious and rejects organised religion. It's a very personal thing to her.

Quote from: David R;250102Personally I have always prefered the concept of faith to the rationalizing of religion.

Amen, Brother.

Quote from: RockViper;250099But you really didn't need that construct, you kicked whatever addiction you had with your own willpower and attributed it to a god.

Actually it was the opposite. I spent over a decade trying to overcome my alcoholism with willpower and almost died as a result. It was only when I extracted my self-will from the equation, admitted that I was utterly powerless over my addiction, and became ready to accept the possibility of an external, spiritual power that could restore me to sanity that things started to turn around for me.

Quote from: Jackalope;250100See, this is the perfect validation of my point.  What is a personal god?  Is that the same thing as God?  Is it something else entirely?

I think this where you might be stumbling. You seem to be looking for a god that has an objective and verifiable existence that can proven to others through scientific means. For me, it's more about symbolic reality and how prepared the individual is to invest themselves into a spiritual life. What do I mean by spiritual? The way it was first put to me in rehab, back when I was an argumentative atheist who simply refused to accept the idea of anything superntaural, was the totality of the quality of my relationship with people, places and things, including myself. I could just about swallow that, and a result I became open to the processes that eventually saved me from the agony of self-annihilation.

QuoteIt's impossible to know what you're talking about.  You could have said "Constructing belief in a personal floop of my own understanding quite literally saved my life."  and it would have conveyed the exact same amount of information to me.

See above. My spiritual life is not about convincing you or anyone else of it's worth. It's about me living in the soloution of my life problem, which is a progressive and fatal illness from which I receive a daily reprieve by following a few simple steps. Ultimately it's nothing more than that. I'm certainly not trying to sell anybody on the idea of the soul or spirit. I didn't believe I had one myself until I came within a hair of losing it.

QuoteI do actually know what you're talking about.  What you call a "personal god" I myself relate to Aleister Crowley's ideas about the Holy Guardian Angel, but I've long thought that the 12 step process was rooted in the European occult tradition.

It could well be. All I can really say is that the source is fundamentally irrelevant to my need for the soloution it supplies. Crowley, Floop, however else you want to label it, all that matters to me is that it works.

Quote from: Drew;250114Actually it was the opposite.

I definitely understand that you believe so, but from my perspective, your "personal god" was simply the placebo which allowed you to leverage your existing willpower. Obviously, you don't agree, because of your personal experiences, but you can certainly understand how, to a rationalist, your behavior doesn't require a god to work.

That said, I think your original point - that religion can do good - is quite true. I believe it does more harm than it does good, overall, but that's just my impression based on my own experiences and the information I've gained over the years; I certainly don't have any sort of statistics available! Anyway, my best wishes on staying clean and sober; you have chosen the more difficult but more healthy of the paths available to you, much to your credit.

Quote from: One Horse Town;250106It's probably best not to tell someone how they achieved what they did. That is theirs, not yours.

Edit: and for fuck sake (and Drew can correct me if i'm wrong), it ain't that difficult. Non organised religion = personal God. My mother is deeply religious and rejects organised religion. It's a very personal thing to her.

Pretty much, although I prefer to use the word 'spiritual' when describing my own journey, simply because that's what feels most applicable to me.

Quote from: Drew;250118What do I mean by spiritual? The way it was first put to me in rehab, back when I was an argumentative atheist who simply refused to accept the idea of anything superntaural, was the totality of the quality of my relationship with people, places and things, including myself.

That sort of spirituality need not include anything supernatural, then, correct? It seems like "spirituality" would be a misleading term for this, but then again, I don't have another!

1) Do People have Souls or Spirits?
Yes. There's no physical evidence and I don't think there ever will be, as I think what the ancients called spirit is really just a reconstruction God does after someone dies, not some sort of measurable entity before that time.

2) Is there a Meaning of Life -or- A Meaning To Life? Again whatever you believe or opinion.
Yes. To glorify God and enjoy Him forever. For people that reject that premise, then no, life doesn't have any final meaning, it's just something you get to play with.