why is god being god

[Impenitent]

god is being god because god is not being a bee

being a bee is not all it's cracked up to be

neither is being a broken mirror

-Imp

[Fairy]

One is really Infinity (same as 0, or Nothingness)

Hard to express with imaginary numbers.

[Ben JS]

God is another word for an experience that guides us

Oh, so you mean a lesson?
Or an illuminating experience?
Or a guiding experience?
Or a principle?

Direction? Influence? Source of inspiration?

You can define God to be whatever you like,
but know you're unnecessarily shoehorning around.
No one has to adopt or recognize this term.
Existence is - reality is - God? Needless.

No one needs god.
We can get by fine without it.

-

So this is your angle.
Mental gymnastics of religious -
trying to defang that which already granted you mercy.
Unfortunately, fairy tales can't defang the truth.

[Impenitent]

One is really Infinity (same as 0, or Nothingness)

Hard to express with imaginary numbers.

i think therefore square root of negative one

expression is not that hard actually- understanding well...

-Imp

[Ben JS]

To experience the presence of something is to create the absence of it. ( non presence )

An incoherent statement to rest of other incoherent statements upon.
Lovely.

You’re welcome.

Oh, I remember.
You're scorned.
Ol' lass using emotional reasoning.

You 're interested in retaliation, not truth.
So you let the poisons of heart lead you.

My sympathies.
I'll leave you be.

[Fairy]

To experience the presence of something is to create the absence of it. ( non presence )

An incoherent statement to rest of other incoherent statements upon.
Lovely.

You’re welcome.

Oh, I remember.
You're scorned.
Ol' lass using emotional reasoning.

You 're interested in retaliation, not truth.
So you let the poisons of heart lead you.

My sympathies.
I'll leave you be.

Good riddance, fart brained banana DNA

[Martin Peter Clarke]

both belief and non belief are experiences.

Experience: The apprehension of an object, thought, or emotion through the senses or mind

There are infinite non-beliefs.
In order to experience a non-belief,
one must be conscious of said non-belief.

We do not experience every non-belief,
and it's expected that most lifeforms,
don't experience any non-belief.

They are absent of belief,
but do not experience this absence.
Thus, the non-belief to them is not an experience.

Non belief being an experience is an edge case.

In order to hold a belief,
one must be affected by the belief.
Thus, every held belief is experienced to some degree.

Beliefs: always experienced at least once.
Non-beliefs: 99.9% never experienced.

They are not anymore close to being equal in the degree to which one experiences them.

To compare them is very misleading.

How can you say there are infinite non-beliefs, from your experience, than claim we cannot experience every non-belief? If we cannot experience every non-belief we could not know if there are infinite non-beliefs or not.

By reason.

[Eodnhoj7]

God is another word for an experience that guides us

Oh, so you mean a lesson?
Or an illuminating experience?
Or a guiding experience?
Or a principle?

Direction? Influence? Source of inspiration?

You can define God to be whatever you like,
but know you're unnecessarily shoehorning around.
No one has to adopt or recognize this term.
Existence is - reality is - God? Needless.

No one needs god.
We can get by fine without it.

-

So this is your angle.
Mental gymnastics of religious -
trying to defang that which already granted you mercy.
Unfortunately, fairy tales can't defang the truth.

Experience is the central driving power of the human condition, it directs and guides us. Experience occurs in many forms and degrees. The deepest experience is awareness, they are one and the same as awareness is how we interact with all internal and external things. Awareness drives us and guides us.

For someone who claims God does not exist you seem to be driven by your experience of this word or concept you put on a pedestal. For something to be negated it must first exist so to argue against God is to acknowledge God. It would be like saying unicorns do not exist and in doing so see a unicorn in the mind that drives ones interactions with the world, it exists albeit the mind but mind is the medium through which things occur. Don't see this? The scientific method is through the mind and look at all the changes it has allowed.

If you merely say God is nothing, that is fine, because many definitions of God say God is not a thing and is beyond existence.

You give the appearance of a self-righteous bitter atheist who is disconnected from himself...but I do not think that is who you really are or who you really want to be. I am sorry for you, but I have confidence things can get better for you in this part of your life. It is quite easy to be dissolussioned with people and organized religion...and life in general for that matter. You seemed to have a tragedy in this regard like many others. Tragedy isn't the end though...

[Eodnhoj7]

Experience: The apprehension of an object, thought, or emotion through the senses or mind

There are infinite non-beliefs.
In order to experience a non-belief,
one must be conscious of said non-belief.

We do not experience every non-belief,
and it's expected that most lifeforms,
don't experience any non-belief.

They are absent of belief,
but do not experience this absence.
Thus, the non-belief to them is not an experience.

Non belief being an experience is an edge case.

In order to hold a belief,
one must be affected by the belief.
Thus, every held belief is experienced to some degree.

Beliefs: always experienced at least once.
Non-beliefs: 99.9% never experienced.

They are not anymore close to being equal in the degree to which one experiences them.

To compare them is very misleading.

How can you say there are infinite non-beliefs, from your experience, than claim we cannot experience every non-belief? If we cannot experience every non-belief we could not know if there are infinite non-beliefs or not.

By reason.

Good, reasoning is quite helpful. But it has limits...the munchausseen trillemma. All reasoning occurs with infinite linear change, circularity and/or assumptions.

So what does this show? That reason is the occurence of form, spontaneously, within the psyche of the individual and is merely a means of symbols instituting transformation. This process of transformation within the psyche is the dissolution and renewal of how we percieve and how we percieve is fundamentally what constitutes ourselves within our centers. This dissolution and renewal is a metaphorical death and resurrection...something religions have been acknowledging for thousands of years.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

How can you say there are infinite non-beliefs, from your experience, than claim we cannot experience every non-belief? If we cannot experience every non-belief we could not know if there are infinite non-beliefs or not.

By reason.

Good, reasoning is quite helpful. But it has limits...the munchausseen trillemma. All reasoning occurs with infinite linear change, circularity and/or assumptions.

So what does this show? That reason is the occurence of form, spontaneously, within the psyche of the individual and is merely a means of symbols instituting transformation. This process of transformation within the psyche is the dissolution and renewal of how we percieve and how we percieve is fundamentally what constitutes ourselves within our centers. This dissolution and renewal is a metaphorical death and resurrection...something religions have been acknowledging for thousands of years.

Sorry, I should have said common sense. Like Popper's.

[Fairy]

god is being god because god is not being a bee

being a bee is not all it's cracked up to be

neither is being a broken mirror

-Imp

https://youtu.be/4qTFGmgfei4?si=ybP24DbooiwgbLNt

Da ba dee doo I’m so blue being to bee or not to bee

[Eodnhoj7]

By reason.

Good, reasoning is quite helpful. But it has limits...the munchausseen trillemma. All reasoning occurs with infinite linear change, circularity and/or assumptions.

So what does this show? That reason is the occurence of form, spontaneously, within the psyche of the individual and is merely a means of symbols instituting transformation. This process of transformation within the psyche is the dissolution and renewal of how we percieve and how we percieve is fundamentally what constitutes ourselves within our centers. This dissolution and renewal is a metaphorical death and resurrection...something religions have been acknowledging for thousands of years.

Sorry, I should have said common sense. Like Popper's.

Common sense is relative. What appears as common to a third world tribe differs from what appears as common to a 1st world citizen. Even in the modern world common sense is fragmented into cliques due to social media revealing different groups of perceptions among people....or I can point to the obvious and use this forum as an example.

[Impenitent]

god is being god because god is not being a bee

being a bee is not all it's cracked up to be

neither is being a broken mirror

-Imp

https://youtu.be/4qTFGmgfei4?si=ybP24DbooiwgbLNt

Da ba dee doo I’m so blue being to bee or not to bee

the guy in the hat dances good - but nothing on Christopher Walken

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BXtlb0JrT8

-Imp

[Fairy]

god is being god because god is not being a bee

being a bee is not all it's cracked up to be

neither is being a broken mirror

-Imp

https://youtu.be/4qTFGmgfei4?si=ybP24DbooiwgbLNt

Da ba dee doo I’m so blue being to bee or not to bee

the guy in the hat dances good - but nothing on Christopher Walken

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BXtlb0JrT8

-Imp

My exact observation, that guy in the hat gave me goosebumps. What a smooth operator. I just love the excitement of watching dancing electrons, fuck yeah!

Christopher is good too.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Good, reasoning is quite helpful. But it has limits...the munchausseen trillemma. All reasoning occurs with infinite linear change, circularity and/or assumptions.

So what does this show? That reason is the occurence of form, spontaneously, within the psyche of the individual and is merely a means of symbols instituting transformation. This process of transformation within the psyche is the dissolution and renewal of how we percieve and how we percieve is fundamentally what constitutes ourselves within our centers. This dissolution and renewal is a metaphorical death and resurrection...something religions have been acknowledging for thousands of years.

Sorry, I should have said common sense. Like Popper's.

Common sense is relative. What appears as common to a third world tribe differs from what appears as common to a 1st world citizen. Even in the modern world common sense is fragmented into cliques due to social media revealing different groups of perceptions among people....or I can point to the obvious and use this forum as an example.

Indeed. I'm a first worlder. And this is my social medium. All others are utter and complete noise. This forum is afflicted with 98.4% noise. So, common sense reasoning, i.e. the reasoning of the man on the Clapham omnibus. the reasoning that says, yeah, yeah, yeah, we all pull ourselves out of the mire, horse and all, by our own hair, even Kant couldn't escape axioms, but. It's bleedin' obvious that there are infinite non-beliefs, without 'experiencing' any of them. By reason. Again. I mean, what the hell could experiencing non-belief possibly mean? It's syntactic without being semantic. I'm obviously not smart enough. Thank God.