Seemingly God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks!

Post by **Sushan** » July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm

This topic is about the July 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Truth Is Beyond Belief!: Some thoughts to make you think about the power of your thoughts…by Jerry Durr

God and man each create something from nothing. God has created the world; man is creating his thoughts and beliefs about the world.

(Location 57 - Kindle version)

According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?

stevie · Post by **stevie** » July 6th, 2022, 12:25 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?

Since there is no evidence of "god" the question doesn't make sense for me.

Post by **LuckyR** » July 6th, 2022, 3:13 am

Part of the problem with defining gods is that there isn't a common word to define a being superior to humans, yet in the same basic category as humans.

As the smartest and most powerful being within their perception, humans created the concept of gods to define more powerful than humans. Later some gods graduated to omnipotence (with all of the inherent paradoxes and illogical aspects of that concept).

Tegularius · Post by **Tegularius** » July 9th, 2022, 3:47 pm

Obviously, since what humans are gods inherit.

Post by **Sy Borg** » July 13th, 2022, 2:23 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm
God and man each create something from nothing. God has created the world; man is creating his thoughts and beliefs about the world.
According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?

Well, the Sun created the Earth, and the Earth created a biosphere, which created countless species, including a particular posse of simians. The nature of humans reflects the nature of biology generally, which in turn reflects the dynamics of Earth's geology, which in turn reflects the dynamics of the Sun.

Choose your god - the Sun, the Earth or its biosphere. Their creativity dwarfs that of humans in both scope and sophistication, given that humans are but a part of the biosphere, which is but a part of the Earth, etc.

Sure, humans personify these things (and trump them by going universal) but this humanising of overwhelmingly powerful cosmic and natural phenomena is a way of feeling as though humans have some control. A personified volcano can be petitioned, be influenced with sacrifices and other rituals. A volcano without human qualities simply blasts when the magma of gas below achieves a certain pressure.

Post by **Sushan** » July 23rd, 2022, 12:26 am

stevie wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 12:25 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?
Since there is no evidence of "god" the question doesn't make sense for me.

We may not have physical evidence about a God. But we have this so called concept, and I think it is quite enough for a philosophical discussion. When was actually philosophy was based on facts and proof rather than discussions and arguments?

stevie · Post by **stevie** » July 23rd, 2022, 12:32 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 12:26 am
stevie wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 12:25 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?
Since there is no evidence of "god" the question doesn't make sense for me.
We may not have physical evidence about a God. But we have this so called concept, and I think it is quite enough for a philosophical discussion. When was actually philosophy was based on facts and proof rather than discussions and arguments?

Sorry but in order to be able to consider your question I have to mentally affirm the concept "god" and I have no basis for this affirmation.

Post by **Sushan** » July 23rd, 2022, 1:28 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 3:13 am Part of the problem with defining gods is that there isn't a common word to define a being superior to humans, yet in the same basic category as humans.

As the smartest and most powerful being within their perception, humans created the concept of gods to define more powerful than humans. Later some gods graduated to omnipotence (with all of the inherent paradoxes and illogical aspects of that concept).

Humans created God. They needed some features to that God, and inevitably that God got many features of the human. Later, as you said, they wanted this God to be a superior being. So some powers were given to that Godly figure. Yet, seemingly the similarities to humans have remained.

Post by **Sushan** » July 23rd, 2022, 1:30 am

stevie wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 12:32 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 12:26 am
stevie wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 12:25 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?
Since there is no evidence of "god" the question doesn't make sense for me.
We may not have physical evidence about a God. But we have this so called concept, and I think it is quite enough for a philosophical discussion. When was actually philosophy was based on facts and proof rather than discussions and arguments?
Sorry but in order to be able to consider your question I have to mentally affirm the concept "god" and I have no basis for this affirmation.

I totally understand your dilemma, and there is no need for apologies. Thank you for your input

Post by **Sushan** » July 23rd, 2022, 1:32 am

Tegularius wrote: ↑July 9th, 2022, 3:47 pm Obviously, since what humans are gods inherit.

It is believed that the God created humans. But I do not think creating humans from nothing cannot inherit Godly features to humans. Though the God is called 'Father', I do not think it is referred in the sense of a biological father.

Post by **Sushan** » July 23rd, 2022, 1:40 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 13th, 2022, 2:23 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 5th, 2022, 2:40 pm
God and man each create something from nothing. God has created the world; man is creating his thoughts and beliefs about the world.
According to this author God and Man are similar in ways more than just the looks. Do you agree?
Well, the Sun created the Earth, and the Earth created a biosphere, which created countless species, including a particular posse of simians. The nature of humans reflects the nature of biology generally, which in turn reflects the dynamics of Earth's geology, which in turn reflects the dynamics of the Sun.

Choose your god - the Sun, the Earth or its biosphere. Their creativity dwarfs that of humans in both scope and sophistication, given that humans are but a part of the biosphere, which is but a part of the Earth, etc.

Sure, humans personify these things (and trump them by going universal) but this humanising of overwhelmingly powerful cosmic and natural phenomena is a way of feeling as though humans have some control. A personified volcano can be petitioned, be influenced with sacrifices and other rituals. A volcano without human qualities simply blasts when the magma of gas below achieves a certain pressure.

Personification is something that humans have been doing for ages. Many rituals have been based on this concept. And at some point they created a concept of a human like superior being called God. So, this God resembles the humans that created him.

Yes, humans are a part of everything that you mentioned. So either few or many qualities are common to these components of this common universe.

CIN · Post by **CIN** » July 23rd, 2022, 7:21 pm

It seems pretty obvious that God does NOT resemble man. Unlike man, God understands how universes come into being. Unlike man, God understands how quantum entanglement works. Unlike man, God knows what dark matter is. Unlike man, God understands what consciousness is and how it relates to the brain. Unlike man, God knows whether there is life after death, and if so, what it is like. Unlike man, God is not led to make plans and perform actions by the mere secretion of hormones. Unlike man, God is not embodied. Unlike man, God was not born, and will not die. Unlike man, God is perfectly good. Unlike man, God is omnipotent. Unlike man, God is following this discussion and yet will not feel tempted to add his comments to it, even though he knows far more than all of us here put together.

Isn't the whole point about God that he is NOT like man? Isn't that precisely why we conceived of him?

Post by **LuckyR** » July 24th, 2022, 4:03 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 1:28 am
LuckyR wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 3:13 am Part of the problem with defining gods is that there isn't a common word to define a being superior to humans, yet in the same basic category as humans.

As the smartest and most powerful being within their perception, humans created the concept of gods to define more powerful than humans. Later some gods graduated to omnipotence (with all of the inherent paradoxes and illogical aspects of that concept).
Humans created God. They needed some features to that God, and inevitably that God got many features of the human. Later, as you said, they wanted this God to be a superior being. So some powers were given to that Godly figure. Yet, seemingly the similarities to humans have remained.

Further proof that regardless whether gods exist or not, humans would be psychologically driven to invent them.

Post by **Sushan** » July 25th, 2022, 10:06 pm

CIN wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 7:21 pm It seems pretty obvious that God does NOT resemble man. Unlike man, God understands how universes come into being. Unlike man, God understands how quantum entanglement works. Unlike man, God knows what dark matter is. Unlike man, God understands what consciousness is and how it relates to the brain. Unlike man, God knows whether there is life after death, and if so, what it is like. Unlike man, God is not led to make plans and perform actions by the mere secretion of hormones. Unlike man, God is not embodied. Unlike man, God was not born, and will not die. Unlike man, God is perfectly good. Unlike man, God is omnipotent. Unlike man, God is following this discussion and yet will not feel tempted to add his comments to it, even though he knows far more than all of us here put together.

Isn't the whole point about God that he is NOT like man? Isn't that precisely why we conceived of him?

I have conceived of my biological father. So I resemble him and he resembles me. It is true that I am not him and he is not me because I have a mother too. I get only the Y gene from my father while I get the X from my mother.

But if we have conceived of God, and there is no mentioned about a Godly mother, should not we resemble God and should not He resemble us? We may not possess His many abilities, but it is not an issue to resemblance.

Post by **Sushan** » July 25th, 2022, 10:08 pm

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 24th, 2022, 4:03 am
Sushan wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2022, 1:28 am
LuckyR wrote: ↑July 6th, 2022, 3:13 am Part of the problem with defining gods is that there isn't a common word to define a being superior to humans, yet in the same basic category as humans.

As the smartest and most powerful being within their perception, humans created the concept of gods to define more powerful than humans. Later some gods graduated to omnipotence (with all of the inherent paradoxes and illogical aspects of that concept).
Humans created God. They needed some features to that God, and inevitably that God got many features of the human. Later, as you said, they wanted this God to be a superior being. So some powers were given to that Godly figure. Yet, seemingly the similarities to humans have remained.
Further proof that regardless whether gods exist or not, humans would be psychologically driven to invent them.

I agree. Some of the earlier humans who had a better IQ compared to peers invented the concept of God in order to exert either power or law and order upon their peers and inferios. But they needed some higher authority, and they created God.