What is the concept of God philosophically?

[Veritas Aequitas]

This is philosophically incorrect, and Aristotle and Maimonides prove and explain this.
God "can do nothing" because He is only actual; potentiality is not inherent in Him.

***This can be proven by physically examining it and it need be verified and confirmed by science***

Science proves based on the law of nature.
Therefore, you believe in the reality of the law of nature.
God is the One law of nature, therefore, you have no reason to doubt the reality of God.

***Why you want God to be 'real' is purely due to psychological, emotional drives and pseudo-rationality.***

But you want the law of nature to be real, otherwise science will not prove anything, only old wives' tales will remain.

You got it wrong with Science.
Science never claimed there are real laws of nature out there that are absolutely independent of science.

But you personally, you believe in the reality of the law of nature, and you will not jump from the roof of a high-rise building, because you believe that the law of gravity is real.

Who said so? Who are you to speak on my behalf?

Regardless of the law of nature in this case, all normal humans are 'programmed' with a fear of height based on the past experience of our ancestors observation that death awaits those who fall or jump from great heights.
It is the same with the inherited instincts re the fear of snakes, poisonous creatures, etc. which do not have to invoke any laws of nature [laws of biology, law of gravity, etc.].

Whatever is the laws of nature are made constructed from the observed patterns within reality to facilitate communications and more refined survival.

As Kant has stated, whatever are the Laws of nature, we humans had created it and many times we changed them to suit our changing views.

[promethean75]

"On the Day of Reckoning, you are forced to consider ALL those you know that have done terrible things"

Here's the technical problem with that. The 'you' being judged on the BIG DAY is not the 'you' who had its reasons for doing the thing that the 'you' now being judged is being judged for doing.

In other words, when David Hume got to heaven and was put before the court, he represented himself, and the trial ended in a hung jury.

You say now i shouldn't have beaten that bloke up because 'i understand things differently now'... but if that's the case, the person on trial is that other you that's long gone, not the you now.

[Janoah]

You got it wrong with Science.
Science never claimed there are real laws of nature out there that are absolutely independent of science.

But you personally, you believe in the reality of the law of nature, and you will not jump from the roof of a high-rise building, because you believe that the law of gravity is real.

Who said so? Who are you to speak on my behalf?

Are you really ready to jump off a tall building?

[attofishpi]

"On the Day of Reckoning, you are forced to consider ALL those you know that have done terrible things"

Here's the technical problem with that. The 'you' being judged on the BIG DAY is not the 'you' who had its reasons for doing the thing that the 'you' now being judged is being judged for doing.

In other words, when David Hume got to heaven and was put before the court, he represented himself, and the trial ended in a hung jury.

You say now i shouldn't have beaten that bloke up because 'i understand things differently now'... but if that's the case, the person on trial is that other you that's long gone, not the you now.

You are not under_standing THE most evil day (i've had far more than even two) where an entity as evil as GOD can be, as omnipotent as it can be, accessing ALL of your brain synapses, driving thoughts into you...making you consider those you love (or even hate - as per the paedo 'friend' example) and suggesting you bet THEM to burn in hell rather than yourself - THAT is the RECKONING.

The ultimate test of FAITH - when you state - I WILL BURN - and then make that call ""NOW""

[Veritas Aequitas]

But you personally, you believe in the reality of the law of nature, and you will not jump from the roof of a high-rise building, because you believe that the law of gravity is real.

Who said so? Who are you to speak on my behalf?

Are you really ready to jump off a tall building?

For your own intellectual sake and not insulting your own intelligence, you need to address the counter points I raised, i.e.

Regardless of the law of nature in this case, all normal humans are 'programmed' with a fear of height based on the past experience of our ancestors observation that death awaits those who fall or jump from great heights.
It is the same with the inherited instincts re the fear of snakes, poisonous creatures, etc. which do not have to invoke any laws of nature [laws of biology, law of gravity, etc.].

Whatever is the laws of nature are made constructed from the observed patterns within reality to facilitate communications and more refined survival.

As Kant has stated, whatever are the Laws of nature, we humans had created it and many times we changed them to suit our changing views.

Why don't you ask me the following which are supposedly the Laws of Nature [Biology and human nature];

Are you ready to stop breathing?
Are you ready to stop drinking water?
Are you ready to stop eating food?

Note this thread I have raised:

It is Impossible for God to be Real
viewtopic.php?t=40229

Kant: It is Impossible to Prove God Exists as Real
viewtopic.php?t=42052

God is a Useful Delusion
viewtopic.php?t=41514

[puto]

Read the Bible, then you will understand concepts. The mere simple contemplation will give you affirmations or negations. You will then possess evidence proven and found by yourself, not an 'opinion' of someone else. With epistemological assumptions of others, you have to trust experience and insights about their 'opinions'. To worry about the argument from ignorance or the Agrippan argument are the adequacy of beliefs which are subjective, to adequacy is chance, to truth which objectively you wish to find. Being, sceptical you will discover the truths that are indubitable. Certainty is doubtable and considered impossible (not able to exist) in an objective reality. Becoming, dogmatic in your approach to truths of the Bible, I wish you luck (true by chance.) So, I recommend taking classes, such as an introduction, which will give you information so desired. Choose your translation carefully, then choose wisely. My best to you on your quest from knowledge to information.

[promethean75]

"You are not under_standing THE most evil day (i've had far more than even two) where an entity as evil as GOD can be, as omnipotent as it can be, accessing ALL of your"

The question is: why would you be anything but hostile toward a god that is conspiring against you?

At the very core of this whole ordeal is conspiracy. The religion is literally a giant conspiracy... and I don't mean the part about it being designed by the ruling classes thousands of years ago... i mean, even if it were true and this god existed, you would be the subject of a conspiracy because god is the ultimate conspirator. Always hiding, tempting, demanding belief without providing real evidence, threatening to burn you for eternity if you don't accept that bad evidence.

Anybody who would bow to something like this is, in my eyes, a pitiful creature.

[attofishpi]

"You are not under_standing THE most evil day (i've had far more than even two) where an entity as evil as GOD can be, as omnipotent as it can be, accessing ALL of your"

The question is: why would you be anything but hostile toward a god that is conspiring against you?

It's not conspiring against me. I ate from the Tree of Life (abortion) and kept returning to the Tree of KnowLedge (good & evil)- -- is was that foolish (SAP) act of mine returning to that when GOD would put me in 3 month stints in HELL - on occasions even put me through the RECKONING. IT has its reasons, and who am I to be too critical of ITS nature upon me?

At the very core of this whole ordeal is conspiracy. The religion is literally a giant conspiracy... and I don't mean the part about it being designed by the ruling classes thousands of years ago...

I am not particularly concerned by mans religious "churches" that were based upon the life of Judeo Christ. Man certainly has conspired to use their power and means to influence their sheep. People should use their own intellect to see through much of that nonsense to get to the truth - re GOD & Christ.

i mean, even if it were true and this god existed, you would be the subject of a conspiracy because god is the ultimate conspirator. Always hiding, tempting, demanding belief without providing real evidence, threatening to burn you for eternity if you don't accept that bad evidence.

There is a GREAT reason "real" evidence does not exist, that is to say, there is a great reason for DOUBT to remain, entropy in my opinion is part of the key to that.

Anybody who would bow to something like this is, in my eyes, a pitiful creature.

Christians don't bow, Muslims do. All Christians are doing in church when they kneel and stand to sing, is showing RESPECT for what Christ went through to instil some faith in man's ultimate virtues - LOVE & TRUST.

[Age]

"You are not under_standing THE most evil day (i've had far more than even two) where an entity as evil as GOD can be, as omnipotent as it can be, accessing ALL of your"

The question is: why would you be anything but hostile toward a god that is conspiring against you?

It's not conspiring against me. I ate from the Tree of Life (abortion) and kept returning to the Tree of KnowLedge (good & evil)- -- is was that foolish (SAP) act of mine returning to that when GOD would put me in 3 month stints in HELL - on occasions even put me through the RECKONING. IT has its reasons, and who am I to be too critical of ITS nature upon me?

If 'this' is, still, what you believe is true, then there is no wonder you were diagnosed with what you were.

The all-loving God was out 'to get' "attofishpi", by making "attofishpi" drink for weeks on end. Now, if this is not Correct, then Correct it. And, while you are at will you inform 'us', here, what you actually 'ate', which you call and claim is 'the Tree of Life', which you put in brackets is 'abortion' somehow?

At the very core of this whole ordeal is conspiracy. The religion is literally a giant conspiracy... and I don't mean the part about it being designed by the ruling classes thousands of years ago...

I am not particularly concerned by mans religious "churches" that were based upon the life of Judeo Christ. Man certainly has conspired to use their power and means to influence their sheep. People should use their own intellect to see through much of that nonsense to get to the truth - re GOD & Christ.

But, what is 'the truth', 're Allah/God and "mohammed/christ", exactly?

Now, if 'you' do not inform 'us' in a purely logical, sound, and valid, easily to understand explanation, then, really, how well do you know what you call is 'the truth', exactly?

i mean, even if it were true and this god existed, you would be the subject of a conspiracy because god is the ultimate conspirator. Always hiding, tempting, demanding belief without providing real evidence, threatening to burn you for eternity if you don't accept that bad evidence.

There is a GREAT reason "real" evidence does not exist, that is to say, there is a great reason for DOUBT to remain, entropy in my opinion is part of the key to that.

So, if there is a so-called 'GREAT reason', why so-called 'real evidence' does not exist, then will you inform 'us' of what this so-called 'GREAT reason' is, exactly?

if no, then why?

you hold onto so many 'beliefs' and make so many 'claims' but never back up nor support any one of them.

Now, as for "promethean75's" claim that God, Itself, is 'always hiding', 'tempting', 'demanding belief without providing real evidence', 'threatening to burn you for eternity if you do not accept that bad evidence' is all just of another one's own 'beliefs' and 'claims'.

'These people', here, back then, really would not 'look at', and thus 'see', things for how they Truly were/are. 'They', instead, would just 'look', and 'see', from their own pre-existing prejudices, just about always, only.

Anybody who would bow to something like this is, in my eyes, a pitiful creature.

Christians don't bow, Muslims do.

But, 'that body', which "atofishpi" is within, may not literally 'bow down', but 'you', "attofishpi", have just been informing 'us' of how 'you' 'bow down' to God, because of 'your fear' for what God can do, and has done to, 'you'.

So, 'you' do 'bow' "attofishpi"?

All Christians are doing in church when they kneel and stand to sing, is showing RESPECT for what Christ went through to instil some faith in man's ultimate virtues - LOVE & TRUST.

you, still, have a long, long way to go in regards to learning, and understanding, here.

[promethean75]

"on occasions even put me through the RECKONING"

Don't pay any attention to that nonsense. Last time god tried that shit with me, i says to em "oh you wanna reckon, do ya? I reckon you can go fuck yourself. Wuddaya reckon about that?"

[Martin Peter Clarke]

God. According to my risibly superficial knowledge of philosophy, is the posited intentional ground of infinite being from eternity (if you're minority presentist, as am I). For which there is no natural need whatsoever. Including the fine-tuned universe fallacy. Lesser Gods are widely available. According to my theoretical Rogerian theology, They were, if I may use the subjunctive in that manner, also Love.

[Janoah]

Who said so? Who are you to speak on my behalf?

Are you really ready to jump off a tall building?

Why don't you ask me the following which are supposedly the Laws of Nature [Biology and human nature];

Are you ready to stop breathing?
Are you ready to stop drinking water?
Are you ready to stop eating food?

Those who are going to live are not ready, because they believe that the law of nature is real, and they will die if they do not eat, etc. Both people and animals, as part of nature, obey the laws of nature.
History knows of cases where religious fanatics jumped off cliffs, believing that miracles can occur with the abolition of law of nature, but miracles with the abolition of law of nature do not exist.
You don't look like a religious fanatic, so you won't jump off a cliff, and You won't refuse food, at most You'll fool Your head with unrealistic verbal schemes, but You won't give up Your faith in the reality of the law of nature, and You'll drink water regularly.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Are you really ready to jump off a tall building?

Why don't you ask me the following which are supposedly the Laws of Nature [Biology and human nature];

Are you ready to stop breathing?
Are you ready to stop drinking water?
Are you ready to stop eating food?

Those who are going to live are not ready, because they believe that the law of nature is real, and they will die if they do not eat, etc. Both people and animals, as part of nature, obey the laws of nature.
History knows of cases where religious fanatics jumped off cliffs, believing that miracles can occur with the abolition of law of nature, but miracles with the abolition of law of nature do not exist.
You don't look like a religious fanatic, so you won't jump off a cliff, and You won't refuse food, at most You'll fool Your head with unrealistic verbal schemes, but You won't give up Your faith in the reality of the law of nature, and You'll drink water regularly.

You still get it, perhaps never will.

Living entities [single-cell to complex animals] had been living spontaneously for billions of year to the present without the term 'law of nature'.
Humans had also lived for hundreds of thousand of years spontaneously without the term 'laws of nature'.

It was only not too long ago that humans evolving with time and the emergence of self-awareness and intellectual competency that the concept 'law of nature' as sort of 'regular pattern' was abstracted and established [for good reasons] from their observations and experiences based on basic reasonings.
Such laws of nature are conceptualized and made real by humans; they do not exist by themselves without any association with humans.
There is no credible objective 'Laws of Nature' without the scientific framework and system [FS] which is contingent [imperative, inevitable and necessarily] upon a collective-of-humans.

It is from these abstractions [empirical base 'Laws of Nature'] that the further idea of God was abstracted with Pure Reason for some critical existential reasons.
This idea [not concept] God is a meta-abstraction postulated based on crude reasonings. The idea of God is groundless and illusory but is 'desperately' reified as constitutively real to soothe the natural and unavoidable existential angsts arising from an existential crisis.

You are relying on your primal reasoning [Pure Reason*] to reify an illusory god that is impossible to be real in the real-sense. * Note Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, i.e. primal reason in contrast to the higher rational reason of the more evolved person.
This is like using basic reason that Santa is Real to convince the basic primal reasoning of toddlers and children.
The idea of God [illusory] is the adult version of 'Santa is real' to pacify the primal reasonings that adults still rely upon as constraint by their existential crisis.

Note the common saying, 'there are no atheists in foxholes' i.e. when the existential crisis is triggered severely in the 'foxholes' many will abandon their higher reason and resort to their primal reasonings to cling to a god for salvation.

It is just like a non-swimmer drowning in the middle of a large river, his primal reasoning and instincts will kick in to grab anything that could be possible to keep him afloat including even the smallest piece of a floating branch which is of no help.
A non-swimmer drowning in the middle of a large river, will even grab instinctively any non-expert life-saver to the extent both would be drowned.

The above is the philosophical [soteriological] take of the idea [never a concept] of God.
An "idea" [philosophically] is a meta-abstraction based on Pure Reason [primal reason] without any element of the empirical and experience [past and present of the collective of humans].

A concept-proper in contrast is something that can be verified, reasoned and justified empirically, e.g. the concept of a tree, dog, table and so on.

[Gary Childress]

Almost all the topics here mention God.
But to talk about something, you should have an idea about it, unless you are a parrot.
So, what is your definition of God?
This applies to both theists and atheists.
There is a parable, an atheist came to the Rabbi and said to him,
- Rabbi, I don't believe in God.
And the Rabbi answers him,
- I don't believe in the God that you don't believe in either.

What God do you believe in? Is it the God who can summon horrific punishment on us hapless mortals just for looking in the wrong direction or saying the wrong thing, or whatever? What is the tangible difference between the God of the Bible and an evil demon with way too much power over his helpless victims? If there is a God, then I see no reason to praise or worship God, except out of fear and intimidation, because life can always get really, really ugly and horrible. But yeah, maybe that's all the reason we can hope for to worship God in this fucked up world.

I wonder which is worse, cancer or the treatment for cancer?

[Pistolero]

God, philosophically speaking....is man's idealization of himself.....
God, forever existing in man's Platonic Cave, his own skull.
God, an abstraction, an idea, an ideal...
Mind.....
Man's own mind, his consciousness, projected into a all-encompassing idea...

God of the ancients, is different....
Gods representing the incomprehensible, nature....death....life....the mysterious....the mystical....