It is delusional to say, "There is no Ultimate Reality"

Author: Mopac
Ultimate Reality
God
Orthodox
The Way
The Truth

Posts

Total: 147
#91
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Mopac believes that reality exists and that it is conscious

It's not a far fetched proposition to consider that reality is indeed aware, and even aware on a much larger scale than our own personal observation. This can be easily accepted by looking realistically at the processes involved within our own universe and experience. 
If you can accept that energy exists non-created and omnipresent then how is it you are unable to consider so does awareness? why would you want to do that? because essentially you already accept that somehow inanimate forces produce intelligent processes...we make it easier for you and more realistic by adding awareness to energy. Now you have a logical proposition. 
#92
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
@et
awareness generates energy
Damn changed feet, hope no one noticed.

Topic's author
#93
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@SirAnonymous
But consciousness is still a characteristic of God. This is where my logic applies. Either the Ultimate Reality doesn't have consciousness, in which case people agree it exists but it isn't God, or the Ultimate Reality has consciousness and people don't agree that it exists. Let me make this a little clearer.
P1: The Ultimate Reality doesn't have consciousness.
C1: People agree it exists.
C2: It isn't God.
P2: The Ultimate Reality does have consciousness.
C3: It is God.
C4: Not everyone agrees it exists.
If P1 is true, then C1 and C2 are true but C3 and C4 are false. If P2 is true, the C3 and C4 are true and C1 and C2 are false.

Your argument requires that C1 and C3 are both true, which requires both P1 and P2 to be true. However, they are contradictory, so your argument isn't valid. As a result, you have not established  that this is true:


Whether or not The Ultimate Reality has consciousness, it is God. EtrnlVW ties consciousness to God, but not every conception of God has consciousness. I would like to reiterate that God is not a concept, but The Ultimate Reality.

So this is not my argument.


But this is exactly the problem. When most people say the "Ultimate Reality," they don't mean God. When most people say God, they don't mean the Ultimate Reality. Your argument only works if the other person agrees that the Ultimate Reality is God. In other words, your argument only works if the other person already agrees with you


Most people using language incorrectly does not change what we mean by what we say. Arguing over the meanings of words is a way to avoid understanding us. 

I don't have to argue. All I have to do is assert what I believe, and then people will argue about the meanings of words which obscures the simplicity of what I am saying.

#94
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@Mopac
Whether or not The Ultimate Reality has consciousness, it is God. 
I don't think so. If God doesn't have consciousness, then it - because without consciousness it doesn't qualify as a person - is God in name only. Functionally, a God without consciousness would be like an AI or random chance. Practically speaking, a universe with an unconscious God would be atheistic.
Most people using language incorrectly does not change what we mean by what we say.
Whether or not people are using it correctly is irrelevant. So long as they don't mean the same thing by "reality" or "Ultimate Reality" as you do, your argument is invalid.
Topic's author
#95
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@EtrnlVw
You are describing the nature of created things, not God. Created things are contingent on observation. You are in effect saying the universe is bigger than God, as Merriam-webster defines the universe as "the whole body of things and phenomena observed or postulated"

This is not panentheism, this is pantheism. 


The Ultimate Reality can not be a contingent existence. If God requires observation to exist, that means observation is a greater reality. If observation or any reality for that matter is a greater reality, then that greater reality would be The Ultimate Reality.






Topic's author
#96
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@SirAnonymous
The Ultimate Reality is God.


The existence of God is a given.


You are arguing about the characteristics and qualities of God, not the existence of God.

You are missing what is essential. Whatever The Ultimate Reality truly is, that is God.

If you don't get this, you only confuse yourself by pondering things like consciousness and personhood. 




Topic's author
#97
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@SirAnonymous
Whether or not people are using it correctly is irrelevant. So long as they don't mean the same thing by "reality" or "Ultimate Reality" as you do, your argument is invalid.
I don't argue, I explain what I believe, and watch people argue over the meanings of words.


I am not surprised at all, this is to be expected in a world gone insane. 

Topic's author
#98
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Reality + consciousness = god

Mopac believes that reality exists and that it is conscious, thus he believes in God.

There are people that believe reality exists but do not believe it is conscious, thus these people do not believe in god.

Pretty simple concept. It has been explained to Mopac enough that he definitely understands it by now, he just willfully ignores it because his proto-ontological apologetics fall apart if he does not.

God is The Ultimate Reality, not "reality+consciousness".

Etrnlvw does not express the orthodox, or correct position.

#99
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Mopac
What you mean is:
In Mopac's opinion the god that Mopac believes in is Mopac's ultimate reality.
There that's cleared that up.
#100
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Mopac
God is The Ultimate Reality, not "reality+consciousness".

So god isn't conscious then? God is incapable of thought, action, speech, etc.?
#101
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
It's not a far fetched proposition to consider that reality is indeed aware

Whether he is correct or not isn't the point. The point is that he is trying (poorly) to convince people that they already agree with him when such is obviously not the case.

You are familiar with Mopacs script right? The whole "you believe reality is real therefore you believe God exists" bit that he does?
#102
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Mopac
You believe that the sky is blue therefore you believe Quetzalcoatl is the real God. 
Topic's author
#103
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
So God isn't conscious then? God is incapable of thought, action, speech, etc.?



I didn't say that God wasn't conscious. I said that consciousness is not what defines God. The Ultimate Reality is God.

If God is conscious, His thoughts are certainly higher than our thoughts. 


Topic's author
#104
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
I'm not trying to convince people of anything. Fools don't learn. They think they understand things already. Arrogance is an essential ingredient to foolishness. After all, no one has a problem with stupid people who are humble.

Obviously, I am of the opinion that atheism is an idiotic position because I only recognize The Truth as God.


Atheists on the other hand have gods, they are simply in denial of them because they are uneducated. Examine the life of an atheist, and you will find their gods in the things that they prefer to reality. The things that motivate them and make life worthwhile for them.


Atheists are simply pagans who lack self awareness. 

#105
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
You are describing the nature of created things
Not at all, how is you don't comprehend that God is also an observer? how can that be so difficult for you to grasp? when did I claim God was created?
, not God. Created things are contingent on observation. You are in effect saying the universe is bigger than God
Nope, you haven't followed what I'm writing.
, as Merriam-webster defines the universe as "the whole body of things and phenomena observed or postulated"
This is not panentheism, this is pantheism.
What I described is panentheism….."is the belief that the divine pervades and interpenetrates every part of the universe and also extends beyond space and time."
That includes the observation of God. 
The Ultimate Reality can not be a contingent existence. If God requires observation to exist, that means observation is a greater reality. If observation or any reality for that matter is a greater reality, then that greater reality would be The Ultimate Reality.
You can't have an Ultimate Reality without first an Ultimate Observer Mopac. This is common sense. What else do you believe God is? 
I'm not sure if you even understand the term you are using, can you link me to a source where you are getting your information? preferably a source from your own Church? I'm already familiar with the definition so please supply a source that correlates with your understanding of it. 

#106
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Whether he is correct or not isn't the point. The point is that he is trying (poorly) to convince people that they already agree with him when such is obviously not the case.

Yes that's true.

You are familiar with Mopacs script right? The whole "you believe reality is real therefore you believe God exists" bit that he does?

Yes, which is why I'm interfering with this thread. Perhaps read my posts herein.

Here's the deal though, Mopac believes God exists despite what you claim you believe. If God exists then an Ultimate Reality exists, that's a no-brainer. I guess what he's trying to say is that sense God exists despite your unbelief, so does the Ultimate Reality whether you claim it or not. What he doesn't understand, is that it is a poor way to reason with someone who has yet to accept that God exists, and it's unfair to claim you are insane for not having that awareness.
He doesn't feel it is necessary to convince you first that God exists, to accept that an Ultimate Reality exists....*shrugs* 

#107
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is God.
1. How do you know?
2. If so, and if it doesn't require consciousness, then "God" isn't God. It's just a synonym for reality. If God is nothing more than reality, then God isn't God.
The existence of God is a given.
Why? So far, the only reason you've given for God to be a given is that, "God is the Ultimate Reality, and no one would deny that there is an Ultimate Reality." As I've explained several times, in order for God to be the Ultimate Reality that everyone agrees exists, God wouldn't be God. If God is God, then most people would not agree that He is the Ultimate Reality.
You are arguing about the characteristics and qualities of God, not the existence of God.

You are missing what is essential. Whatever The Ultimate Reality truly is, that is God.

If you don't get this, you only confuse yourself by pondering things like consciousness and personhood. 
If God doesn't have the characteristics and qualities of God, then God isn't God. If He is, He would be like a unicorn with no horn, hooves, legs, or body.
I don't argue, I explain what I believe, and watch people argue over the meanings of words.
You're missing my point. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the correct usage of the "Ultimate Reality" is. So long as the other person means something different by that term than you do, your argument is invalid.
Topic's author
#108
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@EtrnlVw
The Ultimate Reality is not contingent on an Ultimate Observer. Observation is not what makes God. If the reality in question is contingent, it isn't The Ultimate Reality. 

If you are saying that God is contingent, I would say that this is not the Orthodox understanding. 

Topic's author
#109
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@SirAnonymous
There are plenty of people who do not believe in a conscious God. Greek philosophy is full of many examples. Some forms of Hinduism have examples too.

It is not what makes God.


Is God conscious? That depends entirely on whether or not you see creation itself as an expression of the mind of God. If you don't see that, well, I don't know what to say. It wouldn't be profitable to debate this.

Consciousness is not what makes God who He is.



#110
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@Mopac
There are plenty of people who do not believe in a conscious God. Greek philosophy is full of many examples. Some forms of Hinduism have examples too.
<br>
True, but that's a very different concept of God than the Christian conception of God. However, consciousness is not the sole obstacle here. Power, knowledge, emotion, consciousness, grace, personality, personhood - all of these things and more have the same logic. Most people don't think the Ultimate Reality has those things, so your argument is invalid.
#111
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
I'm not saying God is contingent on anything, I'm saying God IS the Observer, the Ultimate Observer=the Ultimate Reality. Everything else is contingent on that first. 

#112
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
Consciousness is not what makes God who He is.

If God is not conscious, please explain what God is then. What precedes the consciousness (observation) of God?
#113
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
I guess what he's trying to say is that sense God exists despite your unbelief, so does the Ultimate Reality whether you claim it or not.

@Etrnl

That is not at all what he is saying. He is saying that I secretly to believe in God and am just not willing to admit it. Watch this.

@Mopac

As you know I have said many times in the past that I believe reality is ultimately real but I don't believe it is capable of thought or intent or that it posseses personhood etc. Do I believe in God? Please tag etrnl in your answer to this question so they can see it.

@Etrnl

Assuming Mopac gives a straight answer to the above (he sometimes does, though admittedly it is rather rare) he is going to say yes. Another way to think of it is like this:

Statement A: Ultimate Reality exists and is consious. We call this god. Nobody can deny that ultimate reality exists but there are some such as Discipulus that think it is not conscious therefore Discipulus does not think god exists. He is incorrect on that point and I would like to have a discussion with him some day regarding the merits of our opposing views.

Statement B: Ultimate Reality exists and is consious. We call this god. Nobody can deny that ultimate reality exists therefore nobody can deny that God exists. Discipulus says he does not think god exists but that is wrong, he believes reality is ultimately real so that is his god. Either he doesn't know he thinks god exists or he is unwilling to admit it. Since we already agree on this no discussion is really required, I just need to make him realize/admit that he already agrees with me.

Read statement A and B carefully. I think you will find yourself agreeing with A and disagreeing with B. Mopac is the opposite. He says he disagrees with A and agrees with B.
#114
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Mopac
I didn't say that God wasn't conscious.

Okay so you don't say he isn't. Would you be willing to admit that you do think he is?

Also still need to know whether you think Santa is real.
#115
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
I'll agree that there is an ultimate reality, but I don't think it is necessarily knowable. Even if we could deduce that a God exists, I'm not sure that we could say for certain that an earthly religion is correct.
Topic's author
#116
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@SirAnonymous
True, but that's a very different concept of God than the Christian conception of God. However, consciousness is not the sole obstacle here. Power, knowledge, emotion, consciousness, grace, personality, personhood - all of these things and more have the same logic. Most people don't think the Ultimate Reality has those things, so your argument is invalid
God is not a concept, God is The Ultimate Reality.

I can not teach Christianity to someone who thinks they already understand it. In fact, that is my biggest obstacle here. People already think they understand Christianity when they don't.


These words you are using, you don't even know what the church means by these things. The scriptures are written in Greek. All of the ecumenical councils and dogmatic formulations of the church were done in Greek. What is the national church of Greece? The Orthodox Church.

If you really want to learn, go to an Orthodox Church. Come as a child without any preconceived notions. Be charitable when you don't understand. Be humble enough to become a student. Listen to the priest. Follow his direction. If you are faithful, it will eventually click.

This topic is not about Christianity. That is a whole different layer to this onion. This is a topic about God, The Ultimate Reality.  More specifically the foolishness of denying this God.

Even the pagans recognize this God.


#117
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Mopac
I can not teach Christianity to someone who thinks they already understand it. In fact, that is my biggest obstacle here. People already think they understand Christianity when they don't.

Teach us then. Let's start simple, how about you tell us five facts about God? I will even fill in the first two for you.

1) God exists
2) God is ultimate reality
3)
4)
5)

Fill in the other three yourself to teach us a bit about Christianity, then you won't have to whine about how everyone is ignorant of Christianity anymore!
Topic's author
#118
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@EtrnlVw

I'm not saying God is contingent on anything, I'm saying God IS the Observer, the Ultimate Observer=the Ultimate Reality. Everything else is contingent on that first. 



After clearing that up, I wouldn't contradict you on this.


If God is not conscious, please explain what God is then. What precedes the consciousness (observation) of God?
I am not saying that God isn't conscious. I am saying that whether or not God is conscious, what makes God is not the consciousness of God, but the fact that God is The Ultimate Reality.

Do I believe God is conscious? Sure, but tying consciousness to God confuses the issue. It isn't what is essential. Certainly there are those who have conceptions of God that are not conscious.

God is not a conception though, and words are always going to be inadequate when it comes to describing God. Let us remember that if The Ultimate Reality was totally comprehensible, it wouldn't be what it is.



But to be clear, I don't think we really disagree as much as it appears on the surface. 

Topic's author
#119
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If you don't believe there is ultimate reality, say...

"There is no ultimate reality"


If you do, then whether you acknowledge this as God or not, that is what God is.

#120
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
Yeah, read post 119. He actually gave a straight answer this time. You see what I mean now right?