[paarsurrey1]

[Tiberius47]

[paarsurrey1]

[paarsurrey1]

[Divine Insight]

[paarsurrey1]

[Divine Insight]

I have mention One-True-God who in only attributive* and is neither physical/material nor a spirit. His attributes are manifest in the universe as Absolutes. He is real and not mythical, please.

Regards

___________
*The attributes of One-True-God are mentioned and illustrated amply in Quran.

No, I totally disagree that the God myth you are referring to is real and not mythical.

In fact, the very moment you point to the Qur'an as a description of this God you are asserting that everything you know about this God is based on what is written in the Qur'an. That necessarily requires that the God character you support is based on mythology.

Without that mythological book you would have nothing to point to that would supposedly define your God.

And this is especially true if you are going to claim that your God has set forth any commandments, directives, demands, promises, or ultimatums.

For example, if you claim that your God condemns those who don't believe in or follow the Qur'an then you have already demanded that your God is entirely dependent upon the mythology described by the Qur'an.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you want to set your God free from the Qur'an you'll need to toss the Qur'an out and lay claim to an undefined cosmic entity. Until you do that, you have nothing more than a God character that is totally dependent upon, and defined by, the mythology spelled out by the Qur'an.

[Tiberius47]

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 1 by paarsurrey1]

But we do have evidence - the continual failure of theists to produce a god for examination, is evidence of the absence of any gods.

You might say absence of evidence is not evidence of absence; to which I say, it is when evidence is expected.

[Tcg]

But we do have evidence - the continual failure of theists to produce a god for examination,

I'm not sure exactly what you mean with the phrase, "produce a god for examination". In any case, what you are describing here is a failure on the theist's part. This may or may not be because the god they are backing doesn't exist.

...is evidence of the absence of any gods.

At best, it is evidence the specific god/gods they are backing don't exist.

You might say absence of evidence is not evidence of absence; to which I say, it is when evidence is expected.

The expectation of evidence would be based on the description of the god/gods you are expecting to see evidence for. The absence of evidence may mean that the god/gods you are looking for don't exist. It may also mean that you are looking for the wrong kind of evidence. It may also mean that you are looking for the wrong god/gods.