Can you think of any possibly higher authority over you than the total sum of all that is?
James S Saint said:I am not sure how successful we can be in enforcing syntactic rules like "GOD", "God","god", and "g-d" have different definitions and should not be used interchangeably, but I am willing to voluntarily comply with such definitions (assuming we can agree on what they are!) Sysnonyms for each would be helpful:Btw Susanna,
The all caps version, "GOD", is intended to mean "reality itself", not the "first letter cap" version, "God". Your title is not what was intended. See how easily things become different than their origin intended? Imagine such small variations going on for 6000 years unnoticed.
GOD: Reality (which includes everything, not just what humans can perceive, conceive, and feel)
God: Spirit (which includes all consciousness, transcends good and evil, is mysterious, and may influence Reality in unpredictable ways)
god: Lord (worshiped by humans, by definition anthropomorphic, powerful, capable of reward and punishment, perceivable by and willing to enter into relationships with humans, has a plan for human destiny that is revealed through prophets, is in control of human history, may be referred to by the pronoun "She" although more frequently "He" and is recognized as being greater than both)
g-d: A partial synonym for god (syntactically used by believers in god to indicate reverence for their Lord).
I make this proposal for use on this site to help disambiguate anticipated conversations in future debates. Please note that these definitions are not mutually exclusive. GOD includes God (if Spirit exists) and may be worshiped as god (Lord) by some of us on this site, who may choose to refer to this god (Holy Spirit) as g-d.
Susanna said:I don't see the logic in that. As Woody pointed out, naming one has nothing to do with whether the other exists.So if GOD is only Reality, than God (the person) doesn't exist. I don't see how you can have both.
Also as Woody pointed out. The reason we have different spellings of words is so that we can distinguish which possible meaning a person is referring to when they write. In the case of "GOD" rather than using different letters, I merely suggested using all caps so as to signify to which is being referred.
The definition of a word has nothing to do with the real existence of to what the word refers. The word "unicorn" refers to something we accept doesn't exist. But the idea still needs a definition if it is to be discussed.
James S Saint said:Can you think of any possibly higher authority over you than the total sum of all that is?
Yes, actually I can. But not anything I would reference with the term "authority".
Running the risk of being misinterpreted, may I rephrase the question?
Can you think of anything greater than the sum total of all there is? Yes. The Source of all there is. Non-Being.
All there is, as you pointed out, is "being". One cannot have Being without Non-Being.
Non-Being is difficult for a temporally located awareness to grasp, especially since our entire method of assembling a cognitive reality is currently subjected to the perception of matter, space, and time as "concrete" phenomenon.
Even our meager science and technological advancements have shown these as outdated and inaccurate models of reality. "Matter", at its most fundamental level (well as small as we can see so far, 10ˆ-32m), is not matter. We don't quite yet know what it actually is, but we know it isn't "solid".
Time, relative to the speed of light, is relative to the speed of the observer, as shown by the Special Theory of Relativity. All I need to do to affect a shift in time is move faster, so Time too is out.
Basically, the above quoted definition of reality is currently in question, and is based on an old paradigm. The above quoted definition of God/god is founded in a subjective view of this outdated model of reality. A house of cards…
Which brings us back to the concept of Non-Being. Is Non-Being "God?"
If forced to answer, I would give my answer as "No". Non-Being is so far removed from my ability to grasp that to say that Non-Being is God is to aggrandize the ego which attempts to define that which is beyond syntax. The same as the old paradigm where earth was at the center of the solar system, indeed, the whole universe. (Still is, according to the Great Controversy of the Judeo-Christian mythos.)
James S Saint said:If you want to worship nothingness, then non-being (non-existence) can be your god, but I really don't see the advantage. I suspect that Reality will haunt you regardless of the attempt to ignore it in favor of non-reality worship.