Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Relationships involve interactions, so God must exist to have them.
So no, Atheists do not interact with things they don't believe in because that "interaction" would be one sided.
Similarly theists can not have a relationship with an abstract thought in lou of an actual God.
Relationships involve interactions, so God must exist to have them.
So no, Atheists do not interact with things they don't believe in because that "interaction" would be one sided.
Similarly theists can not have a relationship with an abstract thought in lou of an actual God.
The brain is very capable of manufacturing the perception of a relationship, if one has a strong enough need to.
PsychoSarah said:God does exist even to atheists: as an idea. Ideas can be very powerful, so just because something doesn't physically exist in reality doesn't mean that it has no impact on people. Think of all the great works of fiction that helped kids learn to read. None of Dr. Seuss's characters are real, but the wonder and fun they instill in children is real. So perhaps this isn't the sort of interaction most people would consider to be a relationship, but I can honestly say that even as an atheist, the character traits of god have inspired some of my poetry and short stories. God is a really good muse, for art and literature. And you don't have to believe in god to be inspired by god.
We call this a delusion not a relationship.
Fiction exists true, but you don't interact with the caricature in fiction but rather what that caricature represents abstractly.
Sure, the delusion of a relationship, is still a relationship to the person with the delusion. To them, it is very real.
You have heard of the folks who have claimed to have been abducted by aliens and taken aboard a ship and being probed with medical devices. Many of these folks were given lie detector tests and even hypnotized and they passed with flying colors.
To them, their personal experience, was as real as it gets.
As I said relationship requires interaction. What you are talking about seems real but it's just a projection.
Seeming real isn't the standard.
I don't think you are getting what I am saying.
In some people, the human mind is more than capable of manufacturing the perception of interaction in a pretend relationship.
In reality no, but to them, they are.
The problem with much of Christian spirituality is that nobody seems to know how God relates to human beings, especially in a non-salvific context, without saying empty phrases like, "have a personal relationship with Jesus," or "Jesus lives in your heart."
I am feeling a little sentimental. I missed some of the interactions and, more importantly, some of the interactees. Very happy to find some still here.
Hello David - now, that´s a surprise!Hello Eudaimonist. And Received. And quatona. It has been a while. I am very happy to see three friends still here.
To me, the question is: What difference does it make? (I´m not saying it doesn´t make a difference)I believe that that was what I was doing when I was a Christian. I spoke to Jesus and he replied in words and feelings. But I was the one who had put the Jesus handle on a part of myself.
It's not a problem so much a good rhetorical device.
If you can get someone to imagine having a relationship with a personal deity it is much easier for them to believe in that than a complex set of abstract principles.
It's not meant to be a rational A-> B progression but rather a way to help people to suspend their disbelief.
I would agree.
Whenever you have outside sources trying to define what you should be connecting to from a spirtual perspective, you will run into the round peg square hole problem. We are all psychologically unique and discovering without undue pressure is most advantageous. You have the christian concept of God, which one can reconcile and connect with or they cant and to me, that would on each person's psychological makeup.
It's definitely good rhetoric, but I think it's interesting in that most people who say such phrases don't intend it to be rhetoric. They really think something is there even if they don't know what it is. I don't really know how to capture that psychologically, other than comparing them to youngsters who want to join a cool group of kids but have no idea what these kids are about so they use empty phrases.
In my book, God's interaction with humans is almost entirely qualitative. Everyone's personal information (material and immaterial info) is fragmented qualitatively. The false is always at war with the true. God interacts with us in immaterial realm as pure truth, which means He interacts very faintly with human truthiness (a Colbert term, I think), whether religious or not. This is a merciful thing, the Bible's full of language equating the purity of God's essence (Truth) as a "fire" which destroys falsity (kindling). God's a roaring fire of pure truth, which is why He interacts from a distance for now.How, then, does God relate to human beings in a way that transcends belief?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?