God exists

But by that logic the most faithful person would be the one whose every sense of reason tells them to not believe in God at all.

If he still has faith, very much so. Faith overcomes doubt, so there's "net" more of it, arguably.
 
The leap of faith is his conception of how an individual would believe in God or how a person would act in love. Faith is not a decision based on evidence that, say, certain beliefs about God are true or a certain person is worthy of love. No such evidence could ever be enough to completely justify the kind of total commitment involved in true religious faith or romantic love. Faith involves making that commitment anyway. Kierkegaard thought that to have faith is at the same time to have doubt. So, for example, for one to truly have faith in God, one would also have to doubt one's beliefs about God; the doubt is the rational part of a person's thought involved in weighing evidence, without which the faith would have no real substance. Someone who does not realize that Christian doctrine is inherently doubtful and that there can be no objective certainty about its truth does not have faith but is merely credulous. For example, it takes no faith to believe that a pencil or a table exists, when one is looking at it and touching it. In the same way, to believe or have faith in God is to know that one has no perceptual or any other access to God, and yet still has faith in God.[196] Kierkegaard writes, "doubt is conquered by faith, just as it is faith which has brought doubt into the world".
This is quite correct on intelectual level where you really can observe doubt and faith quite naturally next to each other. On psychic level however this statement is false. You dont need doubt/hate someone to have faith/love in him that would have truly been ridiculous and deeply unsatisfying....
Also psychic faith isnt matter of leap but rather steady and spontaneous flowering of inner strenght...
 
This is quite correct on intelectual level where you really can observe doubt and faith quite naturally next to each other. On psychic level however this statement is false. You dont need doubt/hate someone to have faith/love in him that would have truly been ridiculous and deeply unsatisfying....

"On a psychic (whatever that means) level this is untrue because I find it funny and don't like it."

Also psychic faith isnt matter of leap but rather steady and spontaneous flowering of inner strenght...

"Psychic (whatever that means) faith is steady and spontaneous flowering (whatever that means) because of inner strength (whatever that means)."
 
I hope he doesn't punish us for what happened to Jesus while I'm still alive.

He already has. He allowed you the ability to reject the whole purpose of what Jesus was. The whole point of "let His Blood be upon our own hands" applies to those who view Jesus as a mere mortal who was a sinner and in need of Death. If you do not think that Jesus deserved to die, where would that put you? God never punished any one person or group of people for the death of Jesus nor will he ever. It was God's plan. It was the human condition that put Jesus on the Cross. The only punishment would be not accepting what Jesus did, because one refuses to be part of the human condition that put Jesus on the Cross. If one accepts they are part of the human condition that put Jesus on the Cross, then the only punishment is immortality and a life after the current temporal condition.

If he still has faith, very much so. Faith overcomes doubt, so there's "net" more of it, arguably.

Faith on it's own does not overcome doubt. The only thing that overcomes doubt is realized faith. Realized faith is not just saying one has faith. There has to be a tangible and physical result for faith to overcome doubt.

This is quite correct on intelectual level where you really can observe doubt and faith quite naturally next to each other. On psychic level however this statement is false. You dont need doubt/hate someone to have faith/love in him that would have truly been ridiculous and deeply unsatisfying....
Also psychic faith isnt matter of leap but rather steady and spontaneous flowering of inner strenght...

The faith that people accept is just a feeling and emotional based acceptance. Faith without a tangible and physical component is dead.
 
"On a psychic (whatever that means) level this is untrue because I find it funny and don't like it."
Boy, its like showing a baby how to walk.... Is mothers love for her child intelectual?

The faith that people accept is just a feeling and emotional based acceptance. Faith without a tangible and physical component is dead.
Faith can be of different kind and the psychic one is expression of your purest emotions and will power which can not only function separetly of physical reality but also can challenge, conquer and transform it.
 
Boy, its like showing a baby how to walk.... Is mothers love for her child intelectual?

Kierkegaard's philosophy about this is not based in thinking "intellectually", he is rather emotional and the doubt part plays into his thoughts about angst and free will.

The mother's love for her child is not "psychic", as far as I'm concerned, at least in the understanding I have of the word "psychic", and you have provided no proper definition of it, you just threw it out there and said that Kierkegaard's conception of love was empty (when it is, on the other hand, quite emotionally intense and meaningful).
 
Kierkegaard's philosophy about this is not based in thinking "intellectually", he is rather emotional and the doubt part plays into his thoughts about angst and free will.

The mother's love for her child is not "psychic", as far as I'm concerned, at least in the understanding I have of the word "psychic", and you have provided no proper definition of it, you just threw it out there and said that Kierkegaard's conception of love was empty (when it is, on the other hand, quite emotionally intense and meaningful).
When emotion has enough integrity and strenght as not to be spoiled by confusion or reverted into its opposite I call it psychic. I can imagine this is very complex issue and would deserve deep study but I hope we can agree that there are different kind of emotions and different kind of love.
 
So if God was real, what would he be made of?
 
So if God was real, what would he be made of?

If God exists outside of our universe and is not a part of space-time, he may be made up of unimaginable types of particles which don't even exist here and wouldn't make sense logically.

If that's true about God existing outside of space-time, then any images of him seen by people must be a holographic type of projection into our universe from his plane of existence. As such, it wouldn't be possible to touch God, since anything you could touch would only be a representation of God and not actually God itself.

If God exists, he can probably be made out of whatever he wants though, and that would definitely likely include being made out of cheese. And since he's been around for infinity, chances are he's had a chance to use each one of his powers - including the power to be made out of cheese. I doubt he'd ever come down here and tell us that - it would just confuse us and likely crash the world cheese economy by messing with demand and supply... so we'll never know. It's a matter of faith whether you believe the cheese hypothesis or not.
 
If God exists outside of our universe and is not a part of space-time, he may be made up of unimaginable types of particles which don't even exist here and wouldn't make sense logically.

What if the multiverse and string theories are false?
 
Back
Top Bottom