What is God?

Homepage Forums Theism What is God?

This topic contains 130 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by  Dang Martin 4 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 131 total)
  • Author
  • #3419

    I think that once a Christian starts describing their God as “nature” or the “how of nature” or the most common term, the “God of Nature” that  they are no longer subscribing to the concept of the Christian God (whatever that is).  The onus is now on you (or me) to explain this to them. What they are describing is the “God of Spinoza” which is basically what a deist might claim is possible.

    While I disagree with the concept, at least there is something to it that is conceivable (as a concept) that we can all vaguely understand. I can argue for or against the merits of such a creative force playing a hand in the Universe.

    Christians who suggest that Spinoza’s God is possible or even probable are ignoring the fact that this is not what the Christian (or Muslim) God is reported to be. Their God is a personal god, not a creative force but the actual Creator. The god of nature does not grant eternal life or forgive sins or find your missing car keys. If their idea of god is the God of Spinoza then the onus is on us to point out that they are not actually Christians.

    The reason they often resort to this explanation of god is that the Christian god is not explainable. I cannot ever get a Christian to give me a workable definition that does not contradict itself. It is because it makes no sense that they cannot define it and are left trying to come up with something that seems to make sense. If it is Spinoza’s god they believe in they are deists. They are not Christian theists if they believe in a non-Christian version of God.

    What is God?  This is what a Christian must believe about their God.



    God concept, like any other archaic scientific model, is subject to scientific updating.

    For example, astronomy once included mythical components.

    In a similar way, God concept can be scientifically redefined, such that mythical components are purged:



    Shameless plug:

    Amazon: “Scientific redefinition of God, by an atheist” (free for unlimited users)

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by  God.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by  God.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by  God.


    If you want someone to define a word for you, you should first tell them what you want the definition for.  What are you going to do with it?  Are you trying to figure out what does some author mean by it?  Are you trying to understand some religion?  Are you planning to write something?  Give some details, and if the definition doesn’t immediately jump out at you, then ask others.  But definitions without context are fairly useless.


    Kyrani Eade

    God as the Creator” is a very limited definition, IMO. God is far more than the Creator of the Universe. We cannot say what God is from the limitation of human intellect. The best we can do is say that God is the Ultimate Reality. (Note I am a theist but of no particular religious persuasion).

    God as “the force by which everything evolves.” I disagree with this. A force is a physical, i.e., created. God is not part of the physical reality. The creation is contained within the Mind of God but God does not exist within the creation.

    Everything evolves means everything changes through small steps.

    From a spiritual perspective, I don’t believe that we are evolving but awakening. We, as conscious beings, are awakening, bit by bit, to the highest level of consciousness. The Fall of Adam and Eve was a loss of the higher state of consciousness. I don’t think that they had the highest level of consciousness, i.e., fully awakened, because if they did there would not have been a Fall.

    From a physical body (garment) perspective, the body does make changes (genetic) but I don’t believe that it is chance, random event. I think intelligence is part of the process.

    How do you arrive at “What is the mistake? Falling from pure Peace”?

    I don’t know what you mean by “nothingness”.

    My understanding is that the soul is non-physical and inconceivable intellectually, other than to say it’s primary quality is consciousness.

    Do you take the original mistake as the Fall of Adam and Eve?

    I don’t know what you mean here: “Heaven is Peace, thus Heaven is the nothingness of death.”

    I think we can only say that Heaven is an abode, where souls have peace and bliss, but I don’t know that we can really say what Heaven is. I don’t think it IS peace. Also I don’t see any death other than the death of the body. The soul is eternal. It cannot die.


    @Kyrani Eade.  Welcome to the site.

    (Note I am a theist but of no particular religious persuasion)….

    You seem convinced that Adam and Eve actually existed so you are either a Christian or a Muslim.

    My understanding is that the soul is non-physical and inconceivable intellectually, other than to say its primary quality is consciousness

    Then how do you know it exists?

    Do you believe in a personal god that intervenes in the lives of individuals?


    Kyrani Eade

    @Kyrani Eade. Welcome to the site. (Note I am a theist but of no particular religious persuasion)…. You seem convinced that Adam and Eve actually existed so you are either a Christian or a Muslim.

    First, thank you for your welcome.

    Adam and Eve may have existed or may be mythical. It is not relevant. It is only a spiritual /religious point that is important. I don’t have any problem with Abraham being a mythical man and still have tripped on the first journey down the mountain where he had broken the two tablets with the 10 commandment so that he had to go back up to get another set.

    I do not believe that Jesus is God. I see that as blasphemy. I believe he is an avatar of God, same as Krishna. And an avatar is in the same position as a prophet, so Mohammad as well.

    I have been involved in Sufism and I hold the same position as Muslims, that there is only One God, so I am a Muslim. But I see this as the true position of almost all religions.

    Hinduism, looking in from the outside, appears to uphold the existence of 330 million gods and goddesses, but there is only One Godhead, Brahman. So it is monotheistic. And that is also true of the Ancient Greeks (unlike the Romans). They appear to have 12 gods on Mt Olympus but all those arise out of the One Unknown God, they are attributes of the One God, so they are monotheistic.  They got betrayed by Paul /Saul “the apostle”, who I believe was a Roman agent sent to betray them.

    The Romans by contrast had no conception of a One God. And they worshiped many of their emperors as gods as well. This is one of the reasons why they crucified Jesus for sedition. And why later Caligula looked to incite the Jews by wanting to have his own statute set up in the temple in Jerusalem to be worshiped as God.


    Kyrani Eade

    Kyrani wrote: My understanding is that the soul is non-physical and inconceivable intellectually, other than to say its primary quality is consciousness

    Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote: Then how do you know it exists?

    I will try to explain this, from my own experiences of enlightenment where there is a shift in identification.

    “Normally” we have a sense of personal self, an experiencer. This personal self, arises where there is an identification with the activities of Mind (ideas) AND the subsequent bodily reactivity. This is often called “body-mind” in Buddhism. So there is a perception of a personal self as an experiencer having subjective experiences.

    In an enlightenment experience (we might call a spiritual awakening), the sense of personal self is extinguished and the identification rests with conscious being or consciousness in its most obvious aspect.

    In the enlightenment experience there is no identification with the ideas in neither mind nor the associated bodily reactivity. One identifies as something apart from the body-mind. This means that the identification is beyond or outside of this reality.

    This reality is a Creation (in religious terms) or a simulation/ hologram (in scientific terms). It is essentially made of information, consciously upheld in the One Mind by the Supreme Being or you might better like the term Universal Observer, which has been used by some physicists. (note I believe there are no personal /human minds. It only appears that way because we, as conscious beings can call forth, perceive and thus use information /ideas from the One Mind. )

    When we reach a station, where we are no longer identifying with the ideas in the Mind, then we can see beyond this reality, transcend this reality. We can glimpse the Ultimate Reality.


    Kyrani Eade

    Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote: Do you believe in a personal god that intervenes in the lives of individuals?

    Seeing God as personal or impersonal, is only a matter of how a particular person is able to or chooses to worship. If seeing God as personal (Jesus or Krishna etc.) enables them to develop love for the Divine, then it is a valid position to hold. But it is not necessary as every Muslim can attest. One can be the lover of the Beloved (God) without there needs to be any image of God at all.

    Does God intervene?

    Short answer: yes.

    I believe that God or the Supreme Being consciously upholds the information /ideas in the Mind of God/ One Mind, which brings the physical reality into being.

    At the same time we are created beings, not part of the physical reality, but of the essence of the Supreme Being, i.e., conscious beings.

    As conscious beings, we may (incarnate into some form/) participate in the physical reality. We are not creators of this reality but we can make changes, however those changes are made by the participation of the Supreme Being, even though we may only see it as “asking of the Universe”.

    To explain this in scientific terms, let’s look at the two slit experiment. There has been a recognized Observer Effect, however I don’t believe that this is due to consciousness as many are claiming. I think this is plainly due to asking to see some state.

    In setting up an experiment to observe, we can’t just set up our apparatus to just “look to see what there is”. We can only set up an experiment to see a particular state. Hence we ask of the Universe to see a particular condition and we see the condition we asked to see.

    So when we put a detector near one of the slits or both, we are asking to see particles. And when we do that we see particles and not probability waves. And this can even be done after the wave/particles have past the slits.

    This is also the case in quantum entanglement. Experiments (Bell’s Inequality) have shown that entangled particles really do exist in superposition, i.e., they have all of the possible properties that they may display. If we ask to see some property of one particle, e.g., up spin, we will see up spin in that particle AND the other particle, regardless of how close or distant it may be, will show the complementary property when observed.

    When it comes to asking for personal things, we need to do likewise. I think too many people ask the wrong way. For example they might say “God make me well”. This is too general and doesn’t address the problem. Also I think the person needs to have a good idea of what they are up against in order to ask to see a particular condition.

    Generally speaking, everything in creation can only exist by the involvement of God, the Supreme Being. In the Gita, Krishna says “were I to cease my endless activity, even for a moment, all these worlds perish” (I can’t remember if these were the exact words).

    Thus the very existence of a body, a huge community of 100 trillion cells, cannot sustain their structure and function without the involvement of God, because they are part of the physical reality. But the changes in structure and function arise out of the agency of conscious being that inhabits that body, in accordance to their perceptions and reactions.

    In addition conditions affecting the person’s life and interaction with others and their environment are also subject to the desires of the agency (conscious being ) but the conscious being can also request for particular conditions and be able to realize them in their life. But again it requires correctly perceiving what is wanted and asking in the correct way.



    Just because us homo sapiens do not yet know so very much, you substitute a “supreme being” and call it done. It’s nonsense and reeks of the classic logic fallacies/arguments from ignorance or complexity.

    Then you top it off with with some pseudo-science like icing in the cake.

    It’s OK we don’t yet understand very much;  we are learning more and more each day. I prefer to embrace our ignorance than to bask in a pile of bullshit.


    If your God intervenes does that mean He does not have a plan laid out for humanity? I mean, if He does, then why must He keep intervening? If you accept He has a plan, then why do people keep asking Him to change it? Do you really believe that you can communicate with this Supreme Being that created the Universe?

    BTW your definition of the soul makes no sense. It is theological mumbo jumbo. The idea of the soul, just like God, exists only in your subjective experience – that is, they exist only in your mind.  Trying to give your arguments some credence by introducing quantum entanglement is pointless. It adds nothing to the debate and sounds like something Hamza Tzortzis would say.

    I blaspheme all gods, including your one, on different days. Today I am blaspheming all the gods beginning with the letter “H”. Do you think the Supreme Being that created the Universe is offended by me doing this? Do you think Allah is so offended by the Arabic words “I am Raif Badawi” tattooed on my arm that certain Wahhabis want to see him dead?



    Hermes, Hephaestus, Hera and Hades reject your blasphemy as the weak denial that it is!

    (Horus doesn’t give a shit)


    I have debated with 3 different Muslims in 3 different cities in the last few months. Each of them introduced the “double slit” experiment and used the word “quantum” more than once in their arguments. Funny how Christians do exactly the same. From now on I am going to insist that using the term “quantum entanglement” is neither here nor there…….just to see the reaction!!



    “Neither here nor there”.  OUCH!!!!


    I know! It’s bad 🙂 Theists usually find themselves in an awkward superposition when they try to debate either God or Science with me.


    Kyrani Eade

    There is only one God. There are only differences in naming God and different ways of thinking about God by different people.

    God’s plan is to sort out the good from the bad.

    Those that are good get awakened more and more until they attain eternal life.

    Those that are bad lose more consciousness until they end up in oblivion.

    People can only offend against themselves.

    Funny how atheists can use the physical world and science to try and disprove God but if theists use science, their arguments are automatically invalid.

    The soul may be mumbo jumbo to you.

    I hardly think God is offened. God is probably laughing.

    Blasphemy is to misrepresent God and for those that don’t know God, how can they do anything else?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 131 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.