How Do You Conceive of God?

[Ren]

God as a concept is real. God as a living being could be real.

Interestingly, there is a proof that theologians like to use sometimes to 'prove' the existence of God, and which begins with the reality of the concept of God. Roughly speaking:

1) God is a concept that everyone has
2) This concept is that of a perfect being
3) A perfect being would be less than perfect if it didn't have existence as an attribute
4) Thus God must exist.

This essentially says that if we can legitimately have the concept of a perfect being, this perfect being must exist, or else it would not be perfect. Obviously this assumes that God is synonymous with "perfect being", which is not obvious; and that existence is an attribute or property of beings, which is (I believe) wrong.

Long story short: I agree with you that the existence of God as an actual being is a matter of possibility only

 

[MoonFlier]

I'm going to update my beliefs, as I often do...

I believe that what some call "God" is in fact one being, every soul being a fragment of that one.
Simply said: There is something there, we are all a part of it. Put a label or labels on it if you must. There is no right or wrong and religions need to stop killing each other over it.

Not very Catholic of me, LOL. Fr. Flaherty is going to be out for me now.

 

[Skrimpshidy]

I believe in the Universe itself. The Universe being neutral. Neither good nor evil. Neither differentiating what we want, be it our biggest fear or or greatest desire.
The Universe itself being energy and the birth place of all things in existence, will give you what your focused on the most.

Live in fear of a thing constantly worried, the Universe will give you that thing because like attracts like. Other way around, think positively about a thing you desire, the Universe will give you that thing.

I believe we are all energy beings, some of us incarnated over thousands of lifetimes in thousands of different dimensions. Not only that, since we are energies, it’s entirely possible a part of us has incarnated in other dimensions almost parallel with this plain we’re on.

I believe, sometimes, just ad the energy splits into multiple versions of you in different dimensions, it can also split and incarnate into two different beings in the same dimension. Which could be part of Twin Flame theory.

I also believe there are other energy beings who have known each other millions of years. The play cat and mouse. Decide to incarnate together in the same plain only to see if they can find each other again.

 

[Ren]

I believe that what some call "God" is in fact one being, every soul being a fragment of that one.

Do you then mean that every being in the universe that is not God, is not really a being, but only a mereological part of the only one being that God is?

Or do you think that every soul is both 'its own being' and at the same time reflect's God's being in some way?

 

[MoonFlier]

Do you then mean that every being in the universe that is not God, is not really a being, but only a mereological part of the only one being that God is?

Or do you think that every soul is both 'its own being' and at the same time reflect's God's being in some way?

Honestly I had to look up "mereological" There is a lot there to absorb, so have that bookmarked for future reading and research.

In this belief I'm working on understanding, every being is part of this one, but with our own independence. We fragment off, live physical lives as humans, mice, goldfish, ants, aliens (haha, I do not not believe) and when we pass on we go back into the one probably retaining those memories and emotions from the life/lives we lived.

This would explain quite a bit when it comes to esp and dreams and reincarnation memories a few rare children exhibit. It also explains many of the religious beliefs in the world today, including Christianity and Hinduism. I think all religions are based on stories, and the stories that have been with us the longest have a root in fact.

It's a nice thought at any rate and is totally a theory in progress.

 

[Ifur]

Honestly I had to look up "mereological" There is a lot there to absorb, so have that bookmarked for future reading and research.

So did I, and this has to do with technical definitions where different terminology can be used to either differentiate or be more clear.

Mereology seems to largely avoid some general abstractions in ontology, even so it's essentially ontology as it deals with categories and things, or classifications.
And to make the distinction clear, what is a memory stick physically, and what is the information. Both can be expressed with categoring it, either as just wholes; or with detailed parts.
The physical "being" also pocess a necessary /transcendental/ property of equivalence, while information can be expressed exact -- where different media has difference mechanical or function differences.
As to claw mereology as lesser than ontology and metaphysica, albeit intended to be much more formally rigid without dealing with the "broader metaphysical questions that are uninterested in maths".
What the concepts actually imply is still interesting philosophically.

 

[Ifur]

Do you then mean that every being in the universe that is not God, is not really a being, but only a mereological part of the only one being that God is?

Or do you think that every soul is both 'its own being' and at the same time reflect's God's being in some way?

I'll just references my reply to @MoonFlier as this is perfectly in line with antiquity.
So choose a word or concepts, but a "god" in the underworld/subconscious, creation in the cosmos is "good", but not an angel or a daemon, spirit, deus or gods.
The whole concrete versus abstract concerning consciousness and how it works, mereology seem to deal with "nature" as inherently explainable by numbers.
Which is also perhaps perfectly valid, but not quite the same as the importance of language and erkennen and the transcendetal.

 

[Ren]

Honestly I had to look up "mereological" There is a lot there to absorb, so have that bookmarked for future reading and research.

So did I, and this has to do with technical definitions where different terminology can be used to either differentiate or be more clear.

It's a bit of a technical term for sure, and is only really meant to refer to the study of the part-whole relation in philosophy This may seem quite an innocuous affair in appearance, but when it comes to metaphysics and ontology (as @Ifur mentions) the question of the part-to-whole relation can be quite fundamental. For example, a monism that presents itself as "oneness" can sometimes be shown to be a dualism or pluralism from a different (mereological) perspective.

Honestly I had to look up "mereological" There is a lot there to absorb, so have that bookmarked for future reading and research.

In this belief I'm working on understanding, every being is part of this one, but with our own independence. We fragment off, live physical lives as humans, mice, goldfish, ants, aliens (haha, I do not not believe) and when we pass on we go back into the one probably retaining those memories and emotions from the life/lives we lived.

This would explain quite a bit when it comes to esp and dreams and reincarnation memories a few rare children exhibit. It also explains many of the religious beliefs in the world today, including Christianity and Hinduism. I think all religions are based on stories, and the stories that have been with us the longest have a root in fact.

It's a nice thought at any rate and is totally a theory in progress.

Personally, I don't believe in reincarnation, but I do believe that there is a oneness and that each and every being expresses this oneness in a certain way. However, I do not think that this oneness has to be conceived theologically. Why associate it necessarily with something god-like, or even with a being? Perhaps it is more akin to a principle, or a force. My theory is also in progress though

 

[Ifur]

It's a bit of a technical term for sure, and is only really meant to refer to the study of the part-whole relation in philosophy This may seem quite an innocuous affair in appearance, but when it comes to metaphysics and ontology (as @Ifur mentions) the question of the part-to-whole relation can be quite fundamental. For example, a monism that presents itself as "oneness" can sometimes be shown to be a dualism or pluralism from a different (mereological) perspective.

Just as interesting, I think perhaps mereology lends itself to category theory as the apropriate epistemological distinction. And for the holy sake of metaphysical puns, a branch of maths and whether parts in one body is equivalent to parts in another -- their being having the same nature or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_theory

Almost as if language games are also threatening maths, to make a tip of the hat and wag of the finger.
Edit: Should have said wag of a fiery poker.

 

[Skrimpshidy]

It's a bit of a technical term for sure, and is only really meant to refer to the study of the part-whole relation in philosophy This may seem quite an innocuous affair in appearance, but when it comes to metaphysics and ontology (as @Ifur mentions) the question of the part-to-whole relation can be quite fundamental. For example, a monism that presents itself as "oneness" can sometimes be shown to be a dualism or pluralism from a different (mereological) perspective.



Personally, I don't believe in reincarnation, but I do believe that there is a oneness and that each and every being expresses this oneness in a certain way. However, I do not think that this oneness has to be conceived theologically. Why associate it necessarily with something god-like, or even with a being? Perhaps it is more akin to a principle, or a force. My theory is also in progress though

This is similar to my belief that we are all energies. We resonate on different frequencies. Where you can be around low energy people (Negative, self loathing, spiteful, hateful, selfish, etc...) where they will inevitably start draining the positive energies of the opposites. All energies are tied together in the cosmos.