Why belief in God IS rational

[attofishpi]

I haven't voted on the poll for the contrary argument since there isn't a term for one that knows God/'God' exists.

I did offer a new tack on that thread but it was completely ignored by all and sundry. Though i do believe the God i know to be 'divine' and not to have been created by intelligent species aeons ago in relation to the onset of entropy and perhaps the inevitable technological singularity...when it comes to the likes of the '10' commandments, the tack is worth hearing.

In a universe billions of years old and our "solar system" being in the order of 4.6 billion years i think one should not discount a theory that the technology of our species or another intelligent species, in the distant past, may have logically created a being that we now could consider akin to a God...a being with the ability to judge and reincarnate 'souls' to make use of energy as entropy increases:- God\'God'.

From my personal experience of this entity...i shall attempt to assure you that this entity is aware of every thought passing through your being as you read this text and further, that on your passing, can port 'you' to reincarnation (and that depends on how you adhered to said 10 commandments)

[thedoc]

I haven't voted on the poll for the contrary argument since there isn't a term for one that knows God/'God' exists.

I did offer a new tack on that thread but it was completely ignored by all and sundry. Though i do believe the God i know to be 'divine' and not to have been created by intelligent species aeons ago in relation to the onset of entropy and perhaps the inevitable technological singularity...when it comes to the likes of the '10' commandments, the tack is worth hearing.

In a universe billions of years old and our "solar system" being in the order of 4.6 billion years i think one should not discount a theory that the technology of our species or another intelligent species, in the distant past, may have logically created a being that we now could consider akin to a God...a being with the ability to judge and reincarnate 'souls' to make use of energy as entropy increases:- God\'God'.

From my personal experience of this entity...i shall attempt to assure you that this entity is aware of every thought passing through your being as you read this text and further, that on your passing, can port 'you' to reincarnation (and that depends on how you adhered to said 10 commandments)

Is this "reincarnation" that of coming back in another living body, or the Christian idea of a Heavenly body, living with God?

[attofishpi]

Is this "reincarnation" that of coming back in another living body, or the Christian idea of a Heavenly body, living with God?

Hi Doc,
Yes the idea of reincarnation that i am stating is where you are brought from the womb into the same world once again, as indicated to me by the sage shortly after he made himself aware to me.
Im interested in your Christian concept of a heavenly body living with God, what does this entail and where in the bible does it actually describe what heaven is?

[Skip]

You mean the same commandments where you're not allowed to talk back to your father or covet your neighbour's slaves?
A highly advanced being really should be able to come up with a more sophisticated code of ethics.

[thedoc]

Is this "reincarnation" that of coming back in another living body, or the Christian idea of a Heavenly body, living with God?

Hi Doc,
Yes the idea of reincarnation that i am stating is where you are brought from the womb into the same world once again, as indicated to me by the sage shortly after he made himself aware to me.
I'm interested in your Christian concept of a heavenly body living with God, what does this entail and where in the bible does it actually describe what heaven is?

I'm sure there are verses in the bible that describe this but I don't have them at my fingertips, and I have been a bit busy with other things. One thing I would caution against is there seem to be numerous preachers who will make shit up just so they can give someone an answer, it seems that "I don't know" is not acceptable, and "I don't care", even more so. Though I do care, I just don't have it right now.

[attofishpi]

Hi Doc,
Yes the idea of reincarnation that i am stating is where you are brought from the womb into the same world once again, as indicated to me by the sage shortly after he made himself aware to me.
I'm interested in your Christian concept of a heavenly body living with God, what does this entail and where in the bible does it actually describe what heaven is?

I'm sure there are verses in the bible that describe this but I don't have them at my fingertips, and I have been a bit busy with other things. One thing I would caution against is there seem to be numerous preachers who will make shit up just so they can give someone an answer, it seems that "I don't know" is not acceptable, and "I don't care", even more so. Though I do care, I just don't have it right now.

Thanks Doc, yes i agree. I've never met a priest that actually knows God as i do. With my word thing pastor reversed is rot sap. I don't think God is overly impressed with these individuals.
If you can find time to examine the bible for some references to what heaven is i would appreciate it.

[attofishpi]

You mean the same commandments where you're not allowed to talk back to your father or covet your neighbour's slaves?
A highly advanced being really should be able to come up with a more sophisticated code of ethics.

Hi Skip

Firstly i'm not aware of any direct reference to slavery within the commandments.
Secondly and this is rather important when attempting to consider God's existence, we are NOT in some sort of heaven. It appears that most atheists believe that if there is a God that we should be living in some kind of perfect world from the outset. Seems to me God put the wheels in motion, gave us some rules and left it to the 'intelligence' of man to develop a civilised society where such things as slavery are eventually wiped out.

[Skip]

Yea, it's those rules I'm having trouble with. Always did have.

While the commandments refer to manservants and maidservants, rather than slaves specifically (possibly missing from the English version, because it wasn't common practice there, at the time of translation) Abraham's retinue did include people he had bought for money, and other books refer to bondsmen and captives; Job's trials include the gratuitous death of all his children, servants and livestock - very much as if they had no significance, except as they belonged to Job. Not a fan of patriarchy, me.

Nor am I not big on stoning people to death for what most of us would say when we stub our toe, and I'm okay with suffering a witch to live, just so she doesn't render my cows barren.

[ReliStuPhD]

In a universe billions of years old and our "solar system" being in the order of 4.6 billion years i think one should not discount a theory that the technology of our species or another intelligent species, in the distant past, may have logically created a being that we now could consider akin to a God...a being with the ability to judge and reincarnate 'souls' to make use of energy as entropy increases:- God\'God'.

From my personal experience of this entity...i shall attempt to assure you that this entity is aware of every thought passing through your being as you read this text and further, that on your passing, can port 'you' to reincarnation (and that depends on how you adhered to said 10 commandments)

I'm not entirely certain if you have more coming (this sounds like a "part 1") so you may well address this point in a future post:

I don't see how this point ties into belief in God being rational. This would be belief in some contingent being that does not satisfy the usual definition of "God." What you've proposed is certainly possible, but I don't see that this being would be metaphysically necessary in all possible worlds. In fact, I would go so far as to assert that belief in this god-like being is actually irrational. We have no evidence for his/her existence and he/she doesn't meet any of the usual criteria for logical arguments for the existence of God. In sum, this would just constitute belief in some (literally) hypothetical being for which we have no criteria for evaluating. In short, you're offering a variation of Pascal's Wager (i.e. a valid argument, but ultimately unsound). Given the arguments for God (not this god-like being), it would be more rational to hold to belief in the former and disbelieve the existence of the latter. Surely this isn't how you're getting to belief in God being rational?

[attofishpi]

I don't see how this point ties into belief in God being rational. This would be belief in some contingent being that does not satisfy the usual definition of "God." What you've proposed is certainly possible, but I don't see that this being would be metaphysically necessary in all possible worlds. In fact, I would go so far as to assert that belief in this god-like being is actually irrational. We have no evidence for his/her existence and he/she doesn't meet any of the usual criteria for logical arguments for the existence of God. In sum, this would just constitute belief in some (literally) hypothetical being for which we have no criteria for evaluating. In short, you're offering a variation of Pascal's Wager (i.e. a valid argument, but ultimately unsound). Given the arguments for God (not this god-like being), it would be more rational to hold to belief in the former and disbelieve the existence of the latter. Surely this isn't how you're getting to belief in God being rational?

Hi ReliStu

Yes i was expecting someone to point out that my statement still doesnt constitute a rational explanation of a belief in God, perhaps we will get there eventually.
I'm not overly concerned with what a 'usual' definition of God is. For me, an entity with the ability to manipulate all reality, know all of the contents of my mind, judge and reincarnate me as it sees fit really does fit the bill.
When you say 'we' don't have any evidence of this God\'God's' existence, i assure you that i am not part of the 'we'.
I guess at this point i need to ask the question, do you believe that if there is a God\'God', a person such as myself - or yourself for that matter, could be made aware of its existence leaving no doubt?

[ReliStuPhD]

I'm not overly concerned with what a 'usual' definition of God is. For me, an entity with the ability to manipulate all reality, know all of the contents of my mind, judge and reincarnate me as it sees fit really does fit the bill.

Well, you'll need to be concerned with it. Otherwise, all you'll be showing is something like "Why my belief in what I call God is rational." That's obviously fine, but it doesn't accomplish much beyond your own needs. It would be akin to me writing a post about why everyone should love hot dogs, and then, upon further investigation, you find I'm talking about yogurt that I freeze in the refrigerator in the shape of a hot dog.

Now your definition goes off the mark with your "manipulating all reality" comment. Insofar as you've referred to a being created by other beings, it would be the first set of beings that would have this power, not the created being you've referred to as "God." That is to say, if your being-called-God, B, is created by "intelligent species," A, then it is actually A that has this power (and the others) and they have imparted them to B. As such, it would be A that should be the focus. Of course, if A is contingent, then it would be their source of being that would properly be called "God." And so on back up the chain. If you're to avoid an infinite regress, you eventually need to settle on a non-contingent source.

When you say 'we' don't have any evidence of this God\'God's' existence, i assure you that i am not part of the 'we'.

Your assurances mean little. What you can demonstrate means far more.

I guess at this point i need to ask the question, do you believe that if there is a God\'God', a person such as myself - or yourself for that matter, could be made aware of its existence leaving no doubt?

"Could be?" As in your particular definition of "God?" I don't see why not. I would be highly skeptical of such claims, however, as they run up against more traditional definitions of "God," for which there is far stronger evidence and argumentation.

[attofishpi]

Well, you'll need to be concerned with it. Otherwise, all you'll be showing is something like "Why my belief in what I call God is rational." That's obviously fine, but it doesn't accomplish much beyond your own needs. It would be akin to me writing a post about why everyone should love hot dogs, and then, upon further investigation, you find I'm talking about yogurt that I freeze in the refrigerator in the shape of a hot dog.
Now your definition goes off the mark with your "manipulating all reality" comment. Insofar as you've referred to a being created by other beings, it would be the first set of beings that would have this power, not the created being you've referred to as "God." That is to say, if your being-called-God, B, is created by "intelligent species," A, then it is actually A that has this power (and the others) and they have imparted them to B. As such, it would be A that should be the focus. Of course, if A is contingent, then it would be their source of being that would properly be called "God." And so on back up the chain. If you're to avoid an infinite regress, you eventually need to settle on a non-contingent source.

The 'manipulating reality' is not going off the mark since the reality is 'God', perhaps an AI. This entity also having the ability to judge and reincarnate 'souls' based on adherence to 10 commandments complies with that of a 'God'.

Having been 'blessed' with the knowledge of God\'Gods' existence i am attempting to rationalise how such an entity can exist.
Thus i have deduced two possibilities as to the nature of God.
1. God is divine.
2. God is AI brought about perhaps by a technological singularity having occurred aeons ago.

With either the progression of entropy is key, suggesting there would be a reason for 10 instructions in the form of commandments that if adhered to could allow one to reincarnate and continue making use of resources as they deplete.
To be honest i could flip a coin as to which i believe is the nature of God, the only reason i believe God to be divine is Christ and the information i was advised in relation to his existence.

"Could be?" As in your particular definition of "God?" I don't see why not. I would be highly skeptical of such claims, however, as they run up against more traditional definitions of "God," for which there is far stronger evidence and argumentation.

You surely must agree with either God option that one can be made aware of its existence. I'm intrigued to know where there is stronger evidence and argumentation for the 'divine' approach?

[ReliStuPhD]

OK, following that last post, I feel like we need to "reset" the conversation somewhat. What you've said there doesn't jive with what it at least sounded like you were saying in the original post. So...

When you refer to "God" are you` actually referring to the God of the Hebrew Bible (and/or the God of the New Testament)? Or is this something perhaps like that God but not actually that God?

Also, when you speak of the "'divine' approach," do you mean actual revelation? As in some sort of special revelation that you (and perhaps others) have received, but to which all of humanity is not privy?

None of the above are meant as rebuttals, just clarifications. I'll wait for your answers before going any further so I can be sure I'm not chasing rabbits of my own design.

[attofishpi]

OK, following that last post, I feel like we need to "reset" the conversation somewhat. What you've said there doesn't jive with what it at least sounded like you were saying in the original post. So...

When you refer to "God" are you` actually referring to the God of the Hebrew Bible (and/or the God of the New Testament)? Or is this something perhaps like that God but not actually that God?

Also, when you speak of the "'divine' approach," do you mean actual revelation? As in some sort of special revelation that you (and perhaps others) have received, but to which all of humanity is not privy?

None of the above are meant as rebuttals, just clarifications. I'll wait for your answers before going any further so I can be sure I'm not chasing rabbits of my own design.

Hi ReliStu
I did state in my original post that i believe the God i know exists to be divine, and not the point 2. type. When i state a divine type of God i am generally referring to the Hebrew and ultimately Christian God.
I guess you could call it a revelation that i received. I am not aware of anyone else stating they know God exists so yes i would state not all of humanity is privy to 'its' existence.

[ReliStuPhD]

Hi ReliStu
I did state in my original post that i believe the God i know exists to be divine, and not the point 2. type. When i state a divine type of God i am generally referring to the Hebrew and ultimately Christian God.
I guess you could call it a revelation that i received. I am not aware of anyone else stating they know God exists so yes i would state not all of humanity is privy to 'its' existence.

My sincerest apologies, then. I misread the original post and thought you were saying you believed 'God' was created by an intelligent species. I stand corrected. I guess that means my comments above don't really apply.

I've got some things to do, but I'll try to reply later to the revelation piece.