From concept of God to object of God in existence

This is an invitation to discuss the possibility of having in concept in our mind, and then going to the objective reality of existence outside our mind, to search for an entity corresponding to the concept in our mind, or evidence to its existence though not direct access to it as with our eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and touch, and of course with our conscious attention.

Here is the concept in our mind, God [in concept in our mind] as the creator of everything with a beginning.

So, we go out into the universe and search for God, i.e. an entity that is the creator i.e. cause of everything with a beginning to its existence.

For examples of things with a beginning to their existence: babies, roses, the sun and the moon, stars and the galaxies they belong in, sub-atomic particles, and the universe itself.

All these things have a beginning to their existence, so they are evidence to the existence of an entity in concept in our mind as the creator or cause of everything in the realm of objective existence which have a beginning to their existence.

Everything in existence but having a beginning to their existence, they need a being to bring them to their beginning in existence, because they could not have brought themselves to existence, as prior to their existence they were not around.

What do the folks here say about this idea from yours truly, namely, from the concept of God in our mind, we pass to the world of objective existence outside our mind, to search for at least evidence to an entity corresponding to the concept in our mind, i.e. of God [in concept in our mind] as the creator of everything with a beginning to its existence.

a reply to: Pachomius

Sounds like Tulpa.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Tulpa (Tibetan: སྤྲུལ་པ, Wylie: sprul-pa), nirmita (Sanskrit: निर्मित), or thoughtform, is a concept in mysticism of a being or object which is created through spiritual or mental powers.[1] The term comes from Tibetan "emanation" or "manifestation".[2][3][4]Modern practitioners use the term to refer to a type of imaginary friend.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Pachomius

Sounds like Tulpa.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Tulpa (Tibetan: སྤྲུལ་པ, Wylie: sprul-pa), nirmita (Sanskrit: निर्मित), or thoughtform, is a concept in mysticism of a being or object which is created through spiritual or mental powers.[1] The term comes from Tibetan "emanation" or "manifestation".[2][3][4]Modern practitioners use the term to refer to a type of imaginary friend.

a tulpa requires outside concentration and discipline before it can be manifested. unless you can present an example of a self-made tulpa?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I thought he was plotting a course for the old "Who
created God routine". IDK

a reply to: randyvs

So basically you're saying that he is saying that we created a Creator that created our universe?
Mindblown.

a reply to: TzarChasm

I know of no example. Sorry.

"We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively" - Bill Hicks.

God as a concept.

God is everywhere, and God is nowhere.

God is everything, and God is nothing.

God manifests him/self in all things. Living or otherwise.

Whether by design or accident of evolution senitent life was created to figure it all out.

Through time one day, a long time away people will have the answer they seek.

I view Faith as the journey of self discovery.

It's a journey that begins with a single step, but lasts a lifetime.

Anyway that's how I see it.

originally posted by: Pachomius

Everything in existence but having a beginning to their existence, they need a being to bring them to their beginning in existence, because they could not have brought themselves to existence, as prior to their existence they were not around.

You're whole premise rests on this idea right here and it being true. So before you go any further let's look at it first.

Why does everything in existence require a "being" to bring it into existence??? Where are you getting this universal law from exactly??? What proof do you have to show that some "Being" must bring things into existence before they exist???

After all, our sun didn't need a being to create it. It was created by natural forces such as gravity bringing energy and particles together and crushing them with great force. As we explore our material world around us we figure out how certain laws of physics and chemistry come together and create all sorts of things without any "being" required. Math and geometry show how these things can happen naturally without any "being" being in charge of them to operate.

There is also the issue of answering the question, "If nothing can bring itself into existence then where would the being have come from that created everything else???"

a reply to: Deaf Alien

So basically you're saying that he is saying that we created a Creator that created our universe? Mindblown.

To it's existence yes!

Eternal Salvation! Or TRIPLE your money back!
PRAISE BOB!

I believe that God is everything. My best example is what I mean is God is like the force in Star Wars. It isn't something that is plainly seen but something that is present in everything. Just how I think of it and it brings me peace.

a reply to: Pachomius

Why do we search for origins? Why does it matter so much? If we created this God in our minds why don't we just create the answers. Who created questions?

originally posted by: LaWnOrDeR92
I believe that God is everything. My best example is what I mean is God is like the force in Star Wars. It isn't something that is plainly seen but something that is present in everything. Just how I think of it and it brings me peace.

So, i guess the best questions would be, is it really like that? An all pervading force? Does it direct humans lives with minor manipulations? Giving to some and taking from others? I mean what use is an all pervading force if you can't tap into it with prayer or some type of meditation, right? Is it mostly good? Is it mostly bad? Is it balanced or seeking a balance? Which would ultimately make it pointless, right?

Does believing in a thing make it real? I don't think so, but i do believe in subjective concepts of reality and i think every human has their own, and that it is unique to them. I think spiritual concepts like these are far more natural to most humans than high science and even plausible theoretical sciences. It's far easier for us to invent a fictional concept that works than actually figure out what objective reality is.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Deaf Alien

I thought he was plotting a course for the old "Who
created God routine". IDK

might as well throw it on the table instead of pretending it will go away if you dont acknowledge it.

originally posted by: Observationalist
a reply to: Pachomius

Why's do we search for origins? Why does it matter so much? If we created this God in our minds why don't we just create the answers. Who created questions?

Maybe the religious folks who have run the world for the last few thousand years were asking the wrong questions? Science has only been properly applied for the last 100 years. Give it as many years as folks have clung to the bible and we'll see how well it out performs anybody's modern god concept.

a reply to: TzarChasm

might as well throw it on the table instead of pretending it will go away if you dont acknowledge it.

Well, so did the OP just get out his little red cook book and recipe
ATS the old bait and ditch?

a reply to: Pachomius

I disagree with your premise. God is completely unnecessary. Our Big Bang could have been the result of a star collapsing to black hole in a previously existing space-time dimension. So God is not needed to exist as a creation cause for our Universe.

I imagine you next counter point would be then who created the star that collapsed to black hole. Well, it's a question of having logical consistency. If you believe having logical consistency is important then consider this line of reasoning. Nobody has ever experience nothingness. Nothingness only exists in our imaginations. We can only imagine that nothingness is even possible. So my argument is since nothingness only exists in our imaginations there is no proof that it ever existed or can exist as a state of being. Since all the evidence points that somethingness exists, therefore, and final conclusion, somethingness has ALWAYS existed.

I understand that many people have strong feelings about nothingness. And many people simply cannot continue living in a world were nothingness never actually happened in reality. Even though many people reading this will think my views are BS and simply will not accept my argument that somethingness has always exists, I will take the high road and concede the following. I can accept this way of thinking as an assumption. Let's just assume nothingness actually happened at some point in the history of time. And in our state of nothingness I will accept your claim that God is the first cause in creating something in the Universe. Although there's a little voice in my head screaming "God existing is something" I will ignore it.

I will accept God created Universe as long as you accept my claim you have absolutely no evidence God actually exists in reality. My hope is you can at least give me something. Maybe you won't. Maybe you believe ALL of existence, or some small part of it, or some experience you had, is ABSOLUTE proof for the existence of God. Then I ask you to consider this idea. We do not experience God the same way you and I experience an apple. I can hold and apple in my hand, and together, we can agree the apple exists. All I am saying is can you simply accept my claim that God does not exist in reality the same way you and I experience an apple. I hope we can at least agree on that small point of argument.

But maybe we can't. Maybe you think YOUR way of thinking of God is ABSOLUTE truth. Okay, I will accept that for you, this is your definition of God. Even though it's not my definition of God, you are okay to use your imagination to believe in a particular idea of what it means to experience God.

Assuming you can accept my claim that God only exists in our imaginations, then consider this. I will prove to you God exists. God is just a word. Nobody denies the existence of the word God. What the word God means is defined by every sentence in which the word God is used. So since God is just a word then God exists in our written and spoken language.

Even though God only exists as a word, it has additional meanings that make the word God different than every other word in our dictionary. Some atheists have argue saying God is just a word is not good enough to prove God exists. They claim that claiming God exists as a word is no different than just saying the Flying Spaghetti monster is also equally real. Yes, they both are equally real and only exist in our words and language, but the word God has a special distinction.

The word God is used to represent not only the creator of everything, but also, the cause for everything that is known and unknown by man. God is a space in our minds we use as abstraction for what we do not know or understand. Everything that is beyond our understanding is part of the meaning of God. God represents all mystery beyond our conscious awareness. So in this way, since the Flying Spaghetti monster is just animated pasta existing only in our imaginations, the word God has a purpose beyond just what we imagine what the word God to mean.

So God exists even though we do not have a single shred of evidence he exists in reality.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: TzarChasm

might as well throw it on the table instead of pretending it will go away if you dont acknowledge it.

Well, so did the OP just get out his little red cook book and recipe
ATS the old bait and ditch?

possibly? people do that a lot on these forums. just because the op doesnt answer doesnt mean no one will answer.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Pachomius

I disagree with your premise. God is completely unnecessary. Our Big Bang could have been the result of a star collapsing to black hole in a previously existing space-time dimension. So God is not needed to exist as a creation cause for our Universe.

I imagine you next counter point would be then who created the star that collapsed to black hole. Well, it's a question of having logical consistency. If you believe having logical consistency is important then consider this line of reasoning. Nobody has ever experience nothingness. Nothingness only exists in our imaginations. We can only imagine that nothingness is even possible. So my argument is since nothingness only exists in our imaginations there is no proof that it ever existed or can exist as a state of being. Since all the evidence points that somethingness exists, therefore, and final conclusion, somethingness has ALWAYS existed.

I understand that many people have strong feelings about nothingness. And many people simply cannot continue living in a world were nothingness never actually happened in reality. Even though many people reading this will think my views are BS and simply will not accept my argument that somethingness has always exists, I will take the high road and concede the following. I can accept this way of thinking as an assumption. Let's just assume nothingness actually happened at some point in the history of time. And in our state of nothingness I will accept your claim that God is the first cause in creating something in the Universe. Although there's a little voice in my head screaming "God existing is something" I will ignore it.

I will accept God created Universe as long as you accept my claim you absolutely no evidence God actually exists in reality. My hope is you can at least give me something. Maybe you won't. Maybe you believe ALL of existence, or some small part of it, or some experience you had, is ABSOLUTE proof for the existence of God. Then I ask you to consider this idea. We do not experience God the same way you and I experience an apple. I can hold and apple in my hand, and together, we can agree the apple exists. All I am saying is can you simply accept my claim that God does not exist in reality the same way you and I experience an apple. I hope we can at least agree on that small point of argument.

But maybe we can't. Maybe you think YOUR way of thinking of God is ABSOLUTE truth. Okay, I will accept that for you, this is your definition of God. Even though it's not my definition of God, you are okay to use your imagination to believe in a particular idea of what it means to experience God.

Assuming you can accept my claim that God only exists in our imaginations, then consider this. I will prove to you God exists. God is just a word. Nobody denies the existence of the word God. What the word God means is defined by every sentence in which the word God is used. So since God is just a word then God exists in our written and spoken language.

Even though God only exists as a word, it has additional meanings that make the word God different than every other word in our dictionary. Some atheists have argue saying God is just a word is not good enough to prove God exists. They claim that claiming God exists as a word is no different than just saying the Flying Spaghetti monster is also equally real. Yes, they both are equally real and only exist in our words and language, but the word God has a special distinction.

The word God is used to represent not only the creator of everything, but also, the cause for everything that is known and unknown by man. God is a space in our minds we use as abstraction for what we do not know or understand. Everything that is beyond our understanding is part of the meaning of God. God represents all mystery beyond our conscious awareness. So in this way, since the Flying Spaghetti monster is just animated pasta existing only in our imaginations, the word God has a purpose beyond just what we imagine what the word God to mean.

So God exists even though we do not have a single shred of evidence he exists in reality.

soooo....the literal definition of god is absence of information and ignorance of causality?