Isn't God simply imagination pretending
one (or more) has power/knowledge?
(Top Posts - Distance From Belief
in theism - 081603)

How does God differ from any imaginary entity
that is (for various reasons) treated as a reality,
rather than imaginary? In other words, anyone
can say "God says _____" (insert attribution to
God's emotions, feelings, deeds, purpose, pro-
mises, threats, existence here), but upon careful
consideration, doesn't God simply translate to
imagination pretending one (or more) has power/
knowledge?

Is it a legitimate and morally reputable enterprise,
all that is constructed around the God notion, when
it yields the likes of guys flying planes into buildings
for the same reason (imagining there is a God that
says "_____") that little Tommy asks God for a new
toy?

Is it a testable enterprise, all that is constructed
around the God notion, when anything that happens
can be attributed to it (as being responsible) or dis-
claimed (as being not responsible, with the ultimate
responsibility residing elsewhere)?

Is it a philosophically valid enterprise, when the dif-
ference between God and nothing is indistinguish-
able by virtue of a non-existent God and an existent
God yielding the same result? In other words, if
naturalism is infinite, and a particular form of matter
with the ability to comprehend itself, and to transfer
information about itself and its surroundings to suc-
ceeding generations, resulted at a particular time
and place within that infinite domain ...

... until that form of matter developed a thorough
understanding of infinite naturalism, wouldn't that
form of matter make up explanations for the un-
known? The evidence is clear on that matter, on
earth, and when you combine millions upon millions
of years of naturalistic evolution -with- a particular
form of matter possessing the ability to compre-
hend itself, what resulted was that form of matter
using "make believe treated as reality" in order to
seek advantage in a competitive (and oft-times
hostile) environment. ...

... I am of the firm conviction (but open, believe
it or not, to being convinced otherwise) that God
is simply "make believe treated as reality", passed
down generation-to-generation as a manifestation
of absolute control, absolute authority, absolute
answers for unknowns. When it no longer takes
"make believe" to construct God, that's when it
becomes real, for me, personally. Until then, I
remain convinced that God is simply the ultimate
"make believe" entity, a construct of the imagina-
tion of evolved apes, an expression of ultimate
pretense.

The result of the God construct? Often, not good,
and always, ever-present within the construct, is
the nagging persisting knowledge (for those not
inflicted with temporal lobe disorders and other
psychological afflictions like schizophrenia) that
the ancient "bag of tricks" does *not* reflect
reality, but instead, reflects "make believe treated
as ultimate reality" ...

... That's why so much religious focus is placed
on ritualistic ceremonies, sermons, reading the
ancient mythical literature, inculcating children
into the faith system of the ancients, etc. ... it's
not because God exists that this is done, it's
because God doesn't exist, and many evolved
apes would rather have a "wrong" absolute an-
swer (socially-culturally-religiously acceptable
amongst evolved apes of particular tribes) than
an answer which ends with a question mark, as
in an admission that infinite naturalism leaves
questions unanswered ...

... and when children ask "Why am I here?" or
"Where did we come from?" or "Where am I
going?", the temptation is so strong for evolved
apes to use the ancient myths, that many (not
all) continue to pretend that the ultimate myth
(called God) is true, while knowing (in their
more lucid moments), it's just "make believe
being treated (by most) as ultimate reality" in
a manner reflecting ultimate pretense and (on
a deeper level) ultimate dishonesty. ...

- - -