Can I believe in Ghosts and not God?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"Causing"? I think where we're getting tripped up here is that I believe everything is connected. That does not require a "God." Your body is made up of water, electricity, microbes that aren't "human" but you need to survive. Atoms and particles that stick together. Everything that makes up your body is "you."

Everything that makes up the universe is "us." We are part of a larger, unfathomable machine; just as microbes don't know they are microbes in a human body - we are only vaguely aware that we are fractals of a single unit that works with us as part of it.

Your toenail cells aren't aware of the gut microbes, but they still are connected and work together. It's not that complicated. There is no "God" required. I see it all as just one large Unit.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The Universe was here before we were, for untold billions of years.
The Universe will be here after we are gone, for untold billions of years.
Everything runs just fine without us!
Everything runs just fine with us!
Nothing comes screeching to a halt if the word "god" is not used.

The people who have their heads filled with "god" are those who cannot
accept reality just as it is, straight up.

The first person who invented the god concept was almost certainly a
very fearful and hateful person, who needed a big "sky daddy" to kill
his enemies for him, and to protect him from his fear.

The "god concept" is mostly a weapon, used to hurt others.

If the true intent of the person who goes on about "god" were to help
others, to be loving.. no concepts are required to do that.. not even
a sense of self.

Once "god" is invented, and more specifically one person's or one
groups' god concept is invented, then there is "some ultimate thing"
to fight over..

and if one group doesn't accept another groups' "god concept", then
the very core of what gives (false) stability and comfort is discarded,
which is an "act of war".

The word "god" nearly always leads to strife and suffering.

Erase that hateful word, and much of the strife and suffering in the world
goes away.

"Souls" are actually an "ok" concept, but once you tag on "immortal" or more
commonly the potential for "immortal", then that's a back door way to
bring your god-weapon into the discussion.. as only a 'god' could keep a
soul immortal.. as if that 'god' didn't want your soul to be immortal, then
it wouldn't be.

So likewise, as with the word 'god', 'immortal soul' needs to be erased from
the world, as it is a massive source of pain and suffering.

If nothing, including "souls" and "gods" is immortal, then there is nothing to
separate us.

Then we all become regular humans, who suffer or do not suffer, depending on
whether we have food and shelter and emotional bonds (we are social animals).

The "Universe" is functionally "god", but does not need us to delude ourselves
and kill others for it to exist. It is quite sturdy and not petty and fearful.

I might have addressed this to the thread in general, but I thought you'd
appreciate my words.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Brilliant, Kev. I know exactly what you mean. Thanks for putting the idea another way.

In the words of Edward Abbey:

Please lets not make this a thread about religion, proving or disproving god, It's not in religion and faith.
Keep your posts to ghosts and whether they exist outside of a god construct.
It's about ghosts with a loose god peripheral statement.



Thanks.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I believe ghosts can exist outside of a "god" structure. There are many meanings of "god" tho. I am assuming you mean Christianity.

If you do not believe in the Christian "God" and still believe in ghosts...yes, that is very possible. In fact, many churches will belittle you if you DO believe in ghosts or have abilities to see or converse with them.

Religion and ghosts do not go hand in hand.

Is that what you are asking about?

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
Please lets not make this a thread about religion, proving or disproving god, It's not in religion and faith.
Keep your posts to ghosts and whether they exist outside of a god construct.
It's about ghosts

with a loose god peripheral statement.



Thanks.

if theology is not an element of the discussion in relation to ghosts, then why mention theology in the title? its like talking about the elephant in the room without using the word "elephant". i can appreciate the desire to avoid derailing the discussion, but to be fair...you were the first one to use the word. is this just a conversation about ghosts? what is the question if gods are no longer available for discussion in this context? since the original question used the word god? this is so confusing.

you know what, this is dumb. all you had to do was not put god in the title and no one would be tempted to mention it in the discussion. anyway, im out. have fun with your not-discussion about not-god. but ghosts are great. unless they live in the same house you do.

a reply to: TzarChasm

You are the second religious person in the recent history of this thread that took it upon themselves to come and tell me what I should have made this thread about, if at all.

That's bizzarre controlling behavior.

Thank you for leaving as this is not contributing to the discussion, maybe I'll come to one of your faith threads and madly post off topic atheist discussion demanding you see the enlightened way become an atheist?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

a reply to: veracity

Hey thanks for your reply!
No I didn't mean Christian, I meant any religion really.

Religion and ghosts do not go hand in hand.

That sums it up really.

At its most basic level, god begins as a human concept. Everyone who knows the term, theist, agnostic, atheist, has prescribed or developed one god concept or another. You can believe in the supernatural, the world beyond the confines of the senses, and still have a weak or limited god concept.

a reply to: MrThortan

You worded it really well, you can believe in the supernatural behind our limited senses.

Thanks

Sorry......please forgive me.

I think I said earlier in the thread that yes, I thought it was perfectly reasonable and far more logical to believe in ghosts (I do) but not to believe in "God." I think the fact that you put "God" in the title is why people are making it religious.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

it's OK buzzy, the body of the op doesn't go in to the nature of god or proof of god. That's why this is in metaphysics.

I reread the thread today, and for the most part it is nice discussion, except when a devout person comes in sniping. Odd to say the least. Maybe they need socialization skills lol.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Everything that makes up your body is "you."

This is fundamentally incorrect. How can anything which you call 'yours' be 'you' when you have already separated the subject from the object? This is both grammatically and logically impossible.

a reply to: veracity

Religion and ghosts do not go hand in hand.

On the contrary, religion and ghosts DO go hand in hand when your discussing both in terms of belief. If ghosts are a reality to you, then you wouldn't refer to it in terms of a belief. Believing in ghosts is no different than believing in anything else whether it be God, or rainbow colored unicorns.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: MrThortan

You worded it really well, you can believe in the supernatural behind our limited senses.

Thanks

You are behind your limited senses, because you're the perceiver of them. Are you supernatural?

a reply to: Visitor2012

I don't think in black or white. I believe in what makes sense to me.

That means, and I begrudgingly say this bc I know I will get heat for it, that I believe I was a mermaid in a past life in the waters of Atlantis.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: Visitor2012

I don't think in black or white. I believe in what makes sense to me.

That means, and I begrudgingly say this bc I know I will get heat for it, that I believe I was a mermaid in a past life in the waters of Atlantis.

Why do you believe this as opposed to knowing this? There may be substance to support the belief, but is there substance to support the fact? I'm just asking.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: TzarChasm

You are the second religious person in the recent history of this thread that took it upon themselves to come and tell me what I should have made this thread about, if at all.

That's bizzarre controlling behavior.

Thank you for leaving as this is not contributing to the discussion, maybe I'll come to one of your faith threads and madly post off topic atheist discussion demanding you see the enlightened way become an atheist?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

first of all, not religious. not in the slightest. but go ahead and keep making assumptions about me.

second, i took my cue from YOUR original post and YOUR thread title. maybe think about choosing your words more carefully in the future?

third, you are welcome to find any religious threads at all in my list of authored threads.

fourth, "bizarre controlling behavior" is an amusing description to have thrown at me by someone who tells me what im allowed to discuss in their thread, particularly when the concept im barred from exploring is mentioned in the title itself. dont think of a pink elephant. what, you thought of a pink elephant? shame on you, i just said quite specifically dont think of pink elephants. hey, hold on, you thought of it AGAIN? did you not hear me? you malicious troll, you...

and fifth, you seem to be implying that i am trying to convert you. i am posing questions, not cramming answers down your throat. never once did i say "god did it, so nyaaa" but questions seem to offend you, which is hilarious because you are posting on a DISCUSSION FORUM and then telling us what you dont want to discuss AFTER you mention it of your own volition. you cant just drop a suggestion and then shut people down when they pick it up. but that wont stop people like me, especially after you thumb your nose so graciously in spite of my best efforts to remain reasonable in this exchange. never once did i insult you or question your credibility. your warm welcoming manner (yes, that was sarcastic) has me perplexed and now im proceeding as a matter of principle.

back to the topic at hand: how does one reconcile paranormal activity with a lack of supernatural authority? my question goes out to the entire participating forum, not just the author. perhaps i will even leave the author out of it...yes, i think i will stay for the discussion, but not with you. two can play this game.

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The Universe was here before we were, for untold billions of years.
The Universe will be here after we are gone, for untold billions of years.
Everything runs just fine without us!
Everything runs just fine with us!
Nothing comes screeching to a halt if the word "god" is not used.

The people who have their heads filled with "god" are those who cannot
accept reality just as it is, straight up.

The first person who invented the god concept was almost certainly a
very fearful and hateful person, who needed a big "sky daddy" to kill
his enemies for him, and to protect him from his fear.

The "god concept" is mostly a weapon, used to hurt others.

If the true intent of the person who goes on about "god" were to help
others, to be loving.. no concepts are required to do that.. not even
a sense of self.

Once "god" is invented, and more specifically one person's or one
groups' god concept is invented, then there is "some ultimate thing"
to fight over..

and if one group doesn't accept another groups' "god concept", then
the very core of what gives (false) stability and comfort is discarded,
which is an "act of war".

The word "god" nearly always leads to strife and suffering.

Erase that hateful word, and much of the strife and suffering in the world
goes away.

"Souls" are actually an "ok" concept, but once you tag on "immortal" or more
commonly the potential for "immortal", then that's a back door way to
bring your god-weapon into the discussion.. as only a 'god' could keep a
soul immortal.. as if that 'god' didn't want your soul to be immortal, then
it wouldn't be.

So likewise, as with the word 'god', 'immortal soul' needs to be erased from
the world, as it is a massive source of pain and suffering.

If nothing, including "souls" and "gods" is immortal, then there is nothing to
separate us.

Then we all become regular humans, who suffer or do not suffer, depending on
whether we have food and shelter and emotional bonds (we are social animals).

The "Universe" is functionally "god", but does not need us to delude ourselves
and kill others for it to exist. It is quite sturdy and not petty and fearful.

I might have addressed this to the thread in general, but I thought you'd
appreciate my words.

Kev

so in this...pandeistic framework (is that the right belief system?) souls are living entities, elecromagnetic imprints, pieces of a fractured superconsciousness...? scientists dont even know what consciousness is. they dont know where it comes from, what its dimensions are, any of that. let alone how it survives after death of the organism. how do you even study something like that?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Aww that was a short lived treat, by all means stay and keep my thread alive .

As for how religious you come across...well thats your fault and your posts that make you look RELIGIOUS AND DEVOUT.

You basically told me not to post god in title so yes I find that controlling, and err very bizarre. But keep telling me what to make a thread about, it is making you look very reasonable indeed.

Your post below shows how little attention you have paid to the posts in this thread.

"remnant energy stuff" is pretty vague. almost seems like a synonym for "i dont know, but not god". not that there is anything wrong with that, but why not just say so?

My post 6 rtimes in the of pages you posted in was

I don't know.
I don't have to make the jump to divine if I don't know the answer to something, I don't fill in the gaps on unknown knowledge with "oh it must be god".

It's little embarrassing you just repeated what I spent 6 posts saying. LOL
You funny little fella.