Dear George,

Tillich's book has arrived and I am looking forward to read it soon.

It seems indeed that we differ about the word "exists", but since my definition of "exists" is more inclusive than yours (I think), because it includes mental/psychic phenomena as well as the obviously physical, this fails to explain why you tick the box "God exists" while I don't. I may claim that Tinkerbell exists (as a figment of some people's minds) and you may claim that she doesn't: fair enough, but I don't consider God to exist EVEN in the sense of Tinkerbell's existence (God is not a mental image, an hallucination, a wishful-thought, a concept, a feeling, etc. etc), then how much more so should you, who adhere to a stricter definition of "exists", state that God does not exist.

So I wonder, is your definition of "exists" broader than mine in some other sense?

Dear Pelican,

"Then who defines the reality of God."

A monkey may say: "Then who peels the reality of God" (considering Him a banana)
A squirrel may say: "Then who cracks the reality of God" (considering Him a nut)
A hedgehog may say: "Then who digs the reality of God" (considering Him an insect)

Only humans feel the need to define God, but God is neither a banana, a nut, an insect, nor mind-food. He is not anything that can be defined, because... He is not a thing!

So why are we, humans, so addicted to definitions?

You complain that Christianity is almost meaningless, but why should it matter? why are we so addicted to finding a meaning? The test of religion, is how well or otherwise it serves in bringing us closer to God, not how well it feeds our hungry minds.

"Do unto others" and respect for life are great religious techniques because they are so effective in breaking the walls of the ego that block our experience of God. I am therefore fully in favour, but I do not consider them as ends for themselves.

The person is more real in the actual character they express than the transient flesh they live within. Yet the character has no physical reality of itself but we can witness the physical effects of the character. It is the actual character that has eternal consequeces over the transient flesh that exists for a mere human life span.

Yututsu, Christianity, and indeed all the religions, were created from a human need for meaning. Definitions give meaning to words that we use, without them we cannot understand anything. If you don't think that 'meaning' is important, then you might as well give up on religion.

God doesn't make sense under close scrutiny of course, because it is a false positive, an ascribed meaning to an unknown and hidden cause of everything we don't understand. I have a feeling that as long as people need some sort of positive explanation for things nobody can yet understand, the concept of God will likely be with us. And economics.

Well said Bugsy:

>> God doesn't make sense under close scrutiny of course, because it is a false positive, an ascribed meaning to an unknown and hidden cause of everything we don't understand. I have a feeling that as long as people need some sort of positive explanation for things nobody can yet understand, the concept of God will likely be with us. And economics. <<

God is the explanation when you don't have an explanation. Some people, such as atheists are not troubled by the great unknown, others require the sense of security that a benevolent higher being may provide. And this would not be a problem, if not for that imposition by religious adherents into the lives of non-religious people.

I suspect the problem for religious people is their fear that non-religious people find religion amusing at best and proscriptive at worst.

'Live and let live' works for everyone.

Dear Bugsy,

Let alone why Christianity or other religions were established - we were not there to judge, so I am willing to accept the possibility that religions (some or all) were initially invented for the wrong reasons. What's important is whether and to what extent do established religions serve us today in coming closer to God.

Thank God He doesn't make sense. A god who makes sense would be a mere silly idol.

The fact that people have weaknesses and are looking for meaning and explanations, has nothing to do with God. If silly people are using the name of God as an explanation for material issues, I consider that sacrilege.

People can do without the concept of God, probably without economics too (obviously in much smaller numbers), but not without God.

Dear Ammonite,

The fear of religious people is that the non-religious/materialistic/humanist people would not follow the "Live and let live" rule. It is not a hypothetical possibility, it is exactly what communism did.

"Thank God He doesn't make sense"

Probably the funniest thing I have ever read on this forum....thank you so much for this.