What do you believe and why?

Indeed the only thing we can say about your God is that it exists. We can be certain about literally nothing else about it. 

That might in itself be the cosmic joke.

But it is pretty much the only thing you can be 100% certain of. Everything else? You can only be so sure.

Then our beliefs are not dissimilar though I will probably continue referring to the concept you think of as God simply as reality. Thank you for telling me what you believe and why.

Well, now you know that is what God means, and so that will be your good news.

It is not news. It is simply an odd way of reffering to the concept. I am still an atheist and I would consider you to be also by my definition of atheism.

No, I am a Christian, and this is the God of Christianity. Atheism towards the one true God is nonsensical.

So I would disagree.

I am a monotheist, I simply cannot accept that there is no truth, which is what atheism professes when it denies my God.

Atheism is a position that comes from ignorance of what the God concept refers to and so now that you know this, you can now say without shame and with sincerity that you are a monotheist. If you so wished.

And if you were to perform the experiment of spreading this conception of God, you'll come to understand persecution for the sake of righteousness on a whole new level, and you'll see just how unreasonable supposedly rational people are when you talk about God.

So yeah, you are atheist in the sense that Christians were called atheists in ancient rome, but I would call you a monotheist as you acknowledge the One God.

Well, I would if you now, recognizing God were to acknowledge God as being God.

If you wish to identify as a christian I won't argue with you but I am an atheist. I do not believe that your God is a god.

Buy you just said you beliwved my God.

I accept that some reality exists even if it is not the one I perceive. If that is all your god is then I accept that if it is more you did a poor job of explaining your beliefs.

If you defined god as a giant ball of nuclear plasma around which the earth orbits I would recognize that as what I refer to as the sun and I would agree with you that it exists but I would not accept that the sun guides the fates of humans unless you could demonstrate that to me. You may call the sun a god and then I suppose your god (the sun) would exist but I would not believe the sun was a god.

It is the same with reality. Something probably exists (all though we cannot be certain) and if you choose to call that something a god then I agree that what you call god exists but I would not classify it as a god personally.

So one more time would you classify a mindless collection of matter and energy moving according to the laws of physics that is completely unrelated to the supernatural in any way a god? If so then what you refer to as a god does appear to exist though I do not call it that, if not then I ask again what do you believe?

Once again, you are not respecting the difference between the word "god" and "God".

The Ultimate Reality is God.

If you aren't going to have an honest exchange, what is the point of this wearisome back and forth? 

We are not talking about a god, so quit using that word. It doesn't mean the same thing. We are not speaking Arabic, which makes the distinction between God and god through the words Allah and illah respectively. We are speaking English, where this capital letter makes a difference.

You think you have understanding, and that is why you are struggling in your conversation with me. You are not open to actually being taught. You think you know better.

See, we spent how many pages sinply establishing a definition that you have been very resistant to accepting, and now you are going to backslide again?

You have likely forgotten my original post.

Why are you wasting my time? Why are you pretending to care about what I believe? If you want to know, you need to become teachable. Your questions are stupid. I never said anything about aupernatural things or the laws of physics. What does that have anything to do with what I'm saying?

You are hopelessly superstitious, and you'd be better off chucking away your preconceptions. You can't understand me with all this baggage you think is knowledge.

Reality ---fermions and bosons---  is best associated with a sine-wave pattern.

Beyond that ie. aggregates of fermions and bosons form molecules and then were getting into various geometriocal patterns.

3 or 4 kinds of spiral are common to many if not all biologics DNA-RNA  aka biological organisms aka biological life.

Spiral, sphericals and ellipiticals galaxies.

Clusters of galaxies form long filament type shapes and that could similar to ligaments or tendons.

Oh yeah there is the common photos of similarity between all the stars and filaments compared to neurons of the brain.

Still no bilaterlism of God/Universe.

There is no argument that can prove God doesn't exist.

Would you classify a mindless collection of matter and energy moving according to the laws of physics that is completely unrelated to the supernatural in any way God? If so then what you refer to as God does appear to exist though I do not call it that, if not then I ask again what do you believe?

It sounds to me like you think you understand how everything works. You don't know if God is mindless or not. You want God to be mindless, that is what it sounds like. I wonder why.

What does any of this have to do with God being The Ultimate Reality? 

Whatever The Ultimate Reality is, that is what God is.

I define reality via  clear definitions of realtiy you do not ergo meaningless hot air dribble is what you have to offer in these regardsd.

Ultimate reality? Maximal reality? Macro-reality? Really big reality? Super-reality?  All hot air labels unless accompanied by clear definitions. 

You have none. You have zip. You have nada..

Your ignorance of language is not an argument.

If you'd like, I will be happy to facilitate your education.

Repeating "ultimate reality is God" is not education.  It is a pontificating hot air balloon *(O)* and not education.

What Ive learned from you comments is that I believe you, and other bible thumpers, have not any shred of valid, rational, logical common sense in regards to God.

SPACE(>*<)  i  (>*<)SPACE = texticoninc expression for fundamentals of "G"od'*U"niverse and that identity inherently inclusive of God/Universe.

Your argument is simply to deny the definition and replace it with another.

Your argument is to refer to a rock as a duck.

You don't get it. When I say, The Ultimate Reality is God, I am saying that this is the definition of the word. And it is not arbitrary, this is the same understanding of the concept that has been held for thousands of years.

I thought we had agreed that truth has nothing to do with what we want but simply is as it Is? In any case is a rock mindless? If a rock is not mindless we can talk about your definition of mindless if a rock is mindless then I have no reason to believe that what you refer to as God is not also mindless.

Why is it important to you that God is mindless?

Why can't you say I don't know?

But your mind is real, therefore God clearly has a mind, and isn't mindless.

That is a non sequitur. 

You can't accuse me of that when you are literally asking me if a rock has a mind.

You are desperately trying to justify yourself, that is what it looks like to me.

Actually I thought that was a pretty straightforward question. Do you believe that a rock has a mind? You could say yes, no, maybe or I don't know but reality at large seems to display as much of a mind as a rock does.

Maybe when you take the complexities of the universe as a whole all together, by comparison you display as much of a mind as a rock.

A universe, I might add, that you a part and product of. You yourself are like a cell in the body of the society you live in. Would you say that society is mindless because it's mind operates very differently than your individual self?

A rock does not display enough of a mind to compare things.  The act of making a comparison (whether it is a good comparison or not) is a display of more mental power than a rock would seem to possess.

I would say society does not have a mind though individuals in a society do. In any case when I ask if reality has a mind I am not asking if reality contains minds.

Maybe reality does, and to outright deny the possibility seems foolish to me given the complexities of the universe and our relatively narrow and limited perspective.

I don't know. It isn't relevent to me.

I don't deny the possibility but it has not been demonstrated to me that reality has a mind and until it is donstrated yo me I have no reason to believe that it does.

I'm not expecting you to believe that God has a mind. If God has a mind, God has a mind. If God doesn't have a mind, God doesn't have a mind. Though it is written...

What do you expect me to believe based on your testimony?

Also why do you keep quoting the bible if the bible is unconnected to your argument?