God, Your Imaginary Friend

turbot

OK,

I'd like to explore here the extent to which you recognise that god is like an imaginary friend? You may or may not believe in God more than imaginary friends you believed in as a little kid.

Not only this, but if you ask kids, who practice the same faith, in different parts of the world to draw pictures of God, there pictures will carry likenesses relative to their locality. This means, their pictures are different.

Does this mean that God has many faces? Or does it mean they are workshipping different Gods?

Do you think that religious wars are primarily about two people arguing about who's imaginary friend is better?

Medina

Before we get into a discussion can you clarify something.

Are you saying is God LIKE an imaginary friend? Or that to you God is an imaginary friend people have made up?

turbot

I'm saying that god is, isomorphically, the same as an imaginary friend, albeit one who you may continue to believe in and ascribe more power to, whereas some kinds stop believing in their imaginary friends, and others continue to do so.

Medina

Are you one of those people who believes in coincidences, in luck, in Darwin, and that the earth and all its ecosystems and human beings created themselves?

And for someone who deliberately interpreted another poster so literally and with such sarcasm for the other posters use of language in 'life within' thread, I think you really are shooting yourself in the foot by trying to write so intelligently you appear pedantic.

Good luck with that theory.. I wonder what this imaginary friend will say to you when you die.

Zombrex

turbot wrote:

OK,

I'd like to explore here the extent to which you recognise that god is like an imaginary friend? You may or may not believe in God more than imaginary friends you believed in as a little kid.

Not only this, but if you ask kids, who practice the same faith, in different parts of the world to draw pictures of God, there pictures will carry likenesses relative to their locality. This means, their pictures are different.

Does this mean that God has many faces? Or does it mean they are workshipping different Gods?

Do you think that religious wars are primarily about two people arguing about who's imaginary friend is better?

Woow, you have a lot going on there, more than enough for 4 or 5 threads.

I'm not sure you accept the existance of God, so why do you want to know what face he has (who says he has a face?)

There is thread on the Atheist forum about the paradoxes of the god(s) concept, maybe your post would be better suited to there.

turbot

Are you one of those people who believes in coincidences, in luck, in Darwin, and that the earth and all its ecosystems and human beings created themselves?

What I believe in probably wouldn't fit into your systems of categorization.

If you attempted to force fit me, it may lead to your systems of categorization being categorized as only that: your best way so far of making sense of the world.

Provided you don't mistake your generalisations for the whole and only truth, at least you're less likely to offend a superbeing from ignorance.

If god sent Jesus, how do you know he didn't also just send me, to liberate you from

And for someone who deliberately interpreted another poster so literally and with such sarcasm for the other posters use of language in 'life within' thread, I think you really are shooting yourself in the foot by trying to write so intelligently you appear pedantic.

Oh? Why don't you reponse to my questions then, one by one, and see what happens to your faith... they were not sarcastic, they were exploratory. You may find it helps you adhere to the kind of wisdom espoused in the quote within your signature.

Good luck with that theory.. I wonder what this imaginary friend will say to you when you die.

Maybe there will be lots of really fun imaginary friends and the party will begin. I think you honour the universe by having a good time in it, and that includes whatever part of your experience you describe as god. I think it's more holy to have fun and be wise, that follow archaic rules taught to you by someone else (who alludes to their source being an external archetype they say you should be subserviant towards, namely "God"). And it's not that none of their advice is useful, but llike an TV station that carries advertising, the medium is the message, and when that message teaches people to route their spirituality through organisations instead of universe direct, they may discover, after not doing what they wanted, and sacrificing their quality of life for a sold-dream of what those people said God said, they were wrong. Not only this, but many people mistake the ads being run by the TV show, for what God may have actually said, including with themselves.

Don't you think it's such disrespectful sloppiness to make statements like God said "insert comments" when in fact, its the persons understanding they are citing on behalf of God. Otherwise, we have a forum full of people who are claiming to be channels. There is nothing wrong with this, except most people would argue that channelling is the work of Satin, a silky smooth fabric that is the cause of all your lifes problems, such that you don't have to take responsibility for your own personal development and figure out this part of your psychology to empower you.

Scofflaw

Medina wrote:

Are you one of those people who believes in coincidences, in luck, in Darwin, and that the earth and all its ecosystems and human beings created themselves?

You say that like it's a bad thing.... also, no-one believes that anything "created themselves".


cordially,
Scofflaw

robindch

> Are you one of those people who believes in coincidences, in luck, in
> Darwin, [...]

Just to correct you on a minor point which is frequently misunderstood by religious people. Nobody believes "in Darwin" because this more-or-less implies that Darwin is a god. A minority of the general public, and an overwhelming majority of relevantly-qualified professionals, do accept that the modern version of the ideas that Darwin first developed in the mid-nineteenth century adequately explains a very wide range of physical facts concerning the world around us.

But nobody "believes in Darwin". Such people do not exist.

I hope this clears up this point for you.

Medina

Thanks Robindch for clearing up my grammatical errors

turbot wrote:

Provided you don't mistake your generalisations for the whole and only truth, at least you're less likely to offend a superbeing from ignorance. .

This is the only thing I can acknowledge in all the things you said here. And a fair point. Not sure 'generalisations' is the right word because I didn't make any that I can see.

turbot wrote:

I think you honour the universe by having a good time in it, and that includes whatever part of your experience you describe as god. I think it's more holy to have fun and be wise, that follow archaic rules taught to you by someone else (who alludes to their source being an external archetype they say you should be subserviant towards, namely "God"). And it's not that none of their advice is useful, but llike an TV station that carries advertising, the medium is the message, and when that message teaches people to route their spirituality through organisations instead of universe direct, they may discover, after not doing what they wanted, and sacrificing their quality of life for a sold-dream of what those people said God said, they were wrong. Not only this, but many people mistake the ads being run by the TV show, for what God may have actually said, including with themselves. .

Turbot, can I ask if having fun and a good time is your 'motto' for life as such why are you searching for God and trying to find out what He consists of or what His place is in this world?
If life is about having a good time, why does God come into the picture at all?

Do you think maybe a part of you, is searching for its origins? For your Maker? For the truth of life? And yet you seem to think you already have found your own truth that life is for enjoyment. I don't have the answer only my own beliefs, theories and opinions and neither does any other poster.

mountainyman

robindch wrote:

> Are you one of those people who believes in coincidences, in luck, in
> Darwin, [...]

But nobody "believes in Darwin". Such people do not exist.

Why are you so close minded. How can you say that no one believes in Darwin. I suppose you think that the Origin of the Species wrote itself in a koranee stylee. No chance my friend; Darwin existed and his insight changed the way we view the world.

Nevertheless Mendel was much much more important; Darwin conceived natural selction as an aesthetic insight but WITHOUT some understanding of genetics it would just be supposition.

Unless you are referring to the Australian town in which case I agree with you. Australia is a myth. Ludicrous, they'd fall off.

MM

mountainyman

turbot wrote:

Oh? Why don't you reponse to my questions then, one by one, and see what happens to your faith... they were not sarcastic, they were exploratory. You may find it helps you adhere to the kind of wisdom espoused in the quote within your signature.



Maybe there will be lots of really fun imaginary friends and the party will begin. I think you honour the universe by having a good time in it, and that includes whatever part of your experience you describe as god. I think it's more holy to have fun and be wise, that follow archaic rules taught to you by someone else (who alludes to their source being an external archetype they say you should be subserviant towards, namely "God"). And it's not that none of their advice is useful, but llike an TV station that carries advertising, the medium is the message, and when that message teaches people to route their spirituality through organisations instead of universe direct, they may discover, after not doing what they wanted, and sacrificing their quality of life for a sold-dream of what those people said God said, they were wrong. Not only this, but many people mistake the ads being run by the TV show, for what God may have actually said, including with themselves.

Don't you think it's such disrespectful sloppiness to make statements like God said "insert comments" when in fact, its the persons understanding they are citing on behalf of God. Otherwise, we have a forum full of people who are claiming to be channels. There is nothing wrong with this, except most people would argue that channelling is the work of Satin, a silky smooth fabric that is the cause of all your lifes problems, such that you don't have to take responsibility for your own personal development and figure out this part of your psychology to empower you.

This is good I am glad that you have realised the power of Satin which God has condemned (except for honeymooners) but women can find even more expensive substitutes like those ridiculous Egyptian sheets. Why do sheets have to be that strong?

Also your claim that the Median is the message is absurd I amd typing this from my blackberry and I can't see anything written in the middle of the road.

OK I'll have a closer look at the mediaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahn Bump Thump

turbot

Turbot, can I ask if having fun and a good time is your 'motto' for life as such why are you searching for God and trying to find out what He consists of or what His place is in this world?

Firstly, I'm quite confidently spiritual, and I am not searching for "God" nor do I think I can find "God" outside of me, except, depending on how I define god, in everything I experience through every sensory system I have.

If life is about having a good time, why does God come into the picture at all?

God helps me to have a good time, because I understand "god" differently to many Christians.

Do you think maybe a part of you, is searching for its origins?

Yes and No. Can you tell I'm a polarity responder?

For your Maker?

Do you think I was made? Does that mean you too are made up? Are you a manifestation of something that was first imagnary? Ever considered plastic surgery? What about people who make the most of themselves? Or remake themselves? Or find themselves on holiday in India (or not, as they are not in India often)?

For the truth of life? And yet you seem to think you already have found your own truth that life is for enjoyment. I don't have the answer only my own beliefs, theories and opinions and neither does any other poster

Your last sentence is, in my humble opinion, the wisest one I've seen you write so far.

robindch

> [Medina] Thanks Robindch for clearing up my grammatical errors

Not a grammatical error, but a classification error. And, as mountainyman has helpfully, if rather rudely, shown us, it does need to be pointed out sometimes!

> [mountainyman] Why are you so close minded. How can you say that no one believes in Darwin.

I can say it quite easily -- in this case by typing a reply, as I did earlier on.

As for what I think you mean, rather than what you wrote, which is to question my assertion that that nobody "believes in Darwin", I'm afraid that you're mixing up the verbs "believe in" and "believe". A quick definition for the first is to have a firm conviction in the truth of an abstract concept. The second (without the "in") means to have a firm convction in the truth of a concrete something or other. As Darwin is not an abstract concept, you can't say that you "believe in" him. Makes no sense. However, as I said, it's a common mistake that religious people make -- they're used to declaring that they "believe in" this abstract concept or that, and frequently port over the same usage to other arguments, where it isn't appropriate. You can "believe Darwin" if you like, but (as I tried to make clear), his ideas have undergone some serious revision in the last 150 years, so it's perhaps not the wisest course of action.

> I am glad that you have realised the power of Satin which God has condemned

Satin as well? Good heavens, I thought god had adjudicated only against mixed clothing in general in Levitucus 19:19: "Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.".

Hope this helps

Medina

turbot wrote:

God helps me to have a good time, because I understand "god" differently to many Christians.

Ok Turbot can you make a stab at answering these questions for my poor ignorant self seen as you have all the answers here.

What do you understand God to be?
What evidence do you have to support your idea of God?
If God helps you have a good time, when times are tough is God not there for you?
If God helps you have a good time, do you think you could have a good time without His help?
Do you think you need Him?
How can an imaginary friend help you?
How do you know whether God is helping you to have a good time or a bad time if He is only an imaginary friend?

ISAW

turbot wrote:

OK,

I'd like to explore here the extent to which you recognise that god is like an imaginary friend? You may or may not believe in God more than imaginary friends you believed in as a little kid.

Not only this, but if you ask kids, who practice the same faith, in different parts of the world to draw pictures of God, there pictures will carry likenesses relative to their locality. This means, their pictures are different.

Does this mean that God has many faces? Or does it mean they are workshipping different Gods?

Do you think that religious wars are primarily about two people arguing about who's imaginary friend is better?

Good questions. I think this is very similar to the idea of the "watchmaker God" who makes the universe and the laws of physics (if indeed such laws exist is open to question) and walks away. I believe the classical response to this is why should God be so callous not to intervene in nature? Christians would believe that Christ was the ultimate in intervening.

wolfsbane

turbot said:

I'd like to explore here the extent to which you recognise that god is like an imaginary friend? You may or may not believe in God more than imaginary friends you believed in as a little kid.

For some people, their god is exactly like the imaginary friend: they believe in him when it is convenient.

Not only this, but if you ask kids, who practice the same faith, in different parts of the world to draw pictures of God, there pictures will carry likenesses relative to their locality. This means, their pictures are different.

Does this mean that God has many faces? Or does it mean they are workshipping different Gods?

They could be mistaken in their imagery of their particular god. Or their god could be legitimately imaged in many ways.

Do you think that religious wars are primarily about two people arguing about who's imaginary friend is better

Yes. That's because there is only one True God, and He is not to be imaged. Jesus Christ is the only true image of God that exists, and that is of His character/personality. And we are forbidden from making a physical image of Christ, He being God. All the pictures used to represent Him in books, etc. are no more legitmate than an attempt to portray a male figure. Even then distortion is evident, for he is usually portrayed as European rather than Middle Eastern.

Better by far to have no physical picture of Christ in our minds. We need to have a picture of His personality, His embodiment of all that is holy, just and good; God manifest in the flesh.

MeditationMom

God, Devil, Angles, Archangles are all imaginary friends. Even your friends are imaginary friends. Even YOU are just imagination. Until you wake up to this imagination of YOU, friends, God, Devil etc you will not know the Truth. Once you know the Truth there is nothing that can be said about it. Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Krishna and so many others tried, and look at the confusion in the world. Not a bad idea to just enjoy your life in gratitude and keep your mind and heart open to insight and revelation. Wonderful question.

UU

MeditationMom wrote:

God, Devil, Angles, Archangles are all imaginary friends. Even your friends are imaginary friends. Even YOU are just imagination. Until you wake up to this imagination of YOU, friends, God, Devil etc you will not know the Truth. Once you know the Truth there is nothing that can be said about it. Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Krishna and so many others tried, and look at the confusion in the world. Not a bad idea to just enjoy your life in gratitude and keep your mind and heart open to insight and revelation. Wonderful question.

Oh MeditationMom, that was really nice. It was probably the most enlightening thing anyone has said so far on this thread. Thus, you deserve an applause for that *clap & cheers* !

MeditationMom

by UU- *clap & cheers* !

Deep Bow - at your service, always MM

dave.saved

UU wrote:

Oh MeditationMom, that was really nice. It was probably the most enlightening thing anyone has said so far on this thread. Thus, you deserve an applause for that *clap & cheers* !

was it or is it just throwing you more and more away from the truth, the truth that is found in Jesus?

MeditationMom

by dave.saved- was it or is it just throwing you more and more away from the truth, the truth that is found in Jesus?

Your Love and Trust in Jesus will serve you well in your efforts, dave.saved. There are over a billion different imaginations in the world about Jesus - who he was, who he is, his qualities, what he said and what he meant etc - everybody has a slightly different idea in their minds. The same is true about Buddha, Mohammed and others. Otherwise why all the debate and wars even?

The important thing is to Love and Trust. For you Jesus is your friend, your most beloved and treasured friend. Who could ask for a better friend - real, or imagined? Very lucky to have this friend.

John Doe

robindch wrote:

But nobody "believes in Darwin". Such people do not exist.

It would be, as Terry Pratchett said, like believing in the postman.