[quote=Zeta-Flux;199280]Can you make a succinct list of some of these objective evidences?[/quote]Sure, but I'm a bit surprised you ask -- surely you've had thoughts of God? I know I have. I think the vast amounts of written discussion of God by people (e.g., Torah, Bible, Koran) is sufficient objective evidence that people have ideas of God, without requiring a formal confirmation, but there _are_ MRI studies of a more direct connection.

(I hope you haven't misinterpreted my "objective evidence that God exists as an idea in human minds" as being "objective evidence that God exists [I]only[/I] as an idea in human minds".)

Here are a couple of quickie references to short summaries in [I]Scientific American[/I] of studies reported in other journals:

1. "God on the brain? Scientists map religious thoughts with scans"

[URL]http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=god-on-the-brain-scientists-map-rel-2009-03-13[/URL]

The next one is about brain activity during religious experience. Will you consider "religious experience" to be close enough to "thoughts of God" for this list?

2. "Brain Activity Altered during Religious Experience"

[URL]http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=brain-activity-altered-during-relig-08-12-24[/URL]

BTW, this second one introduced me to [I][I]Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science[/I][/I] ([URL]http://www.zygonjournal.org/[/URL]), which looks to me at first glance like it might be a good source for our discussion.

Is that what you had in mind?

Correct me if I'm wrong:
cheesehead, you are religious and/or believe in God?
And Zeta-Flux, you are either agnostic or atheist?

[quote=flouran;199872]Correct me if I'm wrong:
cheesehead, you are religious and/or believe in God?
And Zeta-Flux, you are either agnostic or atheist?[/quote]You got it backwards. :smile:

[QUOTE=cheesehead;199873]You got it backwards. :smile:[/QUOTE]

Ah. Mea Culpa :smile:

Are you agnostic or atheist?

[QUOTE=flouran;199874]Ah. Mea Culpa :smile:

Are you agnostic or atheist?[/QUOTE]Cheesehead: I'd advise pleading the Fifth Amendment on that one...

Paul

[quote=cheesehead;199873]You got it backwards. :smile:[/quote]
As the actress said to the bishop.

[quote=xilman;199878]Cheesehead: I'd advise pleading the Fifth Amendment on that one...

Paul[/quote]
Are you a liar?

[QUOTE=xilman;199878]Cheesehead: I'd advise pleading the Fifth [...] on that one...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=davieddy;199892]Are you a liar?[/QUOTE]

No, his children don't honor him.

[QUOTE=flouran;199874]Ah. Mea Culpa :smile:

Are you agnostic or atheist?[/QUOTE]

Neither. He's primarily a mistheistist: he's too stupid to understand the philosophical stuff, but he definitely knows that he wants to hate people who believe in a god because he thinks that makes him a scientist. Unless they are African-American theists like Obama, of course, because that would be racist. Unless the African-American theist is an outspoken Republican like Michael Steele, in which case it's OK to hate him again, because the KKK doesn't really hate him as much as they hate Obama.

[QUOTE=cheesehead;199871]Sure, but I'm a bit surprised you ask -- surely you've had thoughts of God?[/quote]

In your rephrase you wrote: "There is plenty of objective evidence that God exists as an idea in human minds. The latter phrase ("God exists ... minds") can be summarized as "Man created God" in a consciously sincere twist on the well-known phrase "God created Man"."

From your previous posts I assumed that you were implicitly meaning that "God exists [i]only[/i] as an idea in human minds." This interpretation seemed to be backed up by the clarification/summary: "The latter phrase ("God exists ... minds") can be summarized as "Man created God" in a consciously sincere twist on the well-known phrase "God created Man"." But from what you just said (at the top of my post), I'm uncertain whether you are saying this. As there are two main options, let me address each one.

Option 1: You were only claiming there is objective evidence that people think about God.

This is rather trivially true, and seems to be a significant retraction.

Option 2: You were claiming there is objective evidence that God exists only as an idea in human minds.

In this case, nothing on your list gives objective evidence for this statement.

[QUOTE=Zeta-Flux;200049]
You were claiming there is objective evidence that God exists only as an idea in human minds.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with cheesehead here only partially. There [B]is[/B] a difference between the "idea of God" and God.

[B]Case I:[/B]
If God exists in all "His glory" then He is an infinite entity (as purported by the monotheistic faiths, which I believe you are an adherent of). For us to fathom God in His true form would not be feasible because as finite beings (humans), we cannot possibly perceive the infinite (in fact, we can hardly begin to understand our own universe which in itself is not an infinite entity and may indeed be part of a network of other equally unfathomable parallel universes). Thus, all we can understand (at least to the best of our cognitive abilities in current practice) is an "idea of God". This "idea of God" [B][I]is[/I][/B] indeed finite and therefore is more within the grasp of humans than the actual God (that is, [B]if[/B] He exists). Sadly, even this "idea of God" does not suffice in a larger socio-ethical paradigm as it is easily corrupted and twisted by humans for their own means. But this idea is all that we have been able to "grasp" of God (so far) and this idea is pursued by monotheistic faiths (though they may alter this idea to better fit the tenets of their religion).

[B]Case II:[/B]
Now, on the other hand, God may not even exist. However, this "idea of God" may still exist since both are easily separable from one another. Humans [B]do[/B] have excellent imaginations and this "idea of God" can be used to decree a set of basic rules to ensure the survival of an isolated community (i.e. the people under Moses' rule whilst in the desert), this idea can be used to thwart people towards a political platform, and so on and so forth.


My point is: the "idea of God" and God Himself are two very different things. To state that the "idea of God" is an [B]accurate[/B] representation of God is entirely false because one cannot represent the infinite in terms of finite components. The reason why I find arguments over the existence of God pointless is because the debaters are essentially basing their arguments and substantiations on the corruptible "idea of God". No one can truly convince another that God exists because that person does not even know for sure. If God does indeed exist, then one cannot know entirely because the idea of existence that we as humans believe in has only been viewed as a finite construct and not an infinite one.

Anyway, those are my two cents :smile:

[QUOTE=flouran;200050]If God exists in all "His glory" then He is an infinite entity (as purported by the monotheistic faiths, which I believe you are an adherent of). For us to fathom God in His true form would not be feasible because as finite beings (humans), we cannot possibly perceive the infinite (in fact, we can hardly begin to understand our own universe which in itself is not an infinite entity and may indeed be part of a network of other equally unfathomable parallel universes).[/QUOTE]I am not an adherent of a faith that purports many of the things you bring up. For instance, we believe that humans are literally spirit children of God, and hence capable of being like our Father.