Your god can't help

[likearock 1]

Quote

The general rule is that “he who asserts must prove”, i.e., the burden rests with the plaintiff…..

I agree 100%.

Quote

you claim there is a God, therefore you the burden of proof lies with you.

I made no such claim. There was only one assertion made between the two of us concerning the existence of God:

Quote

Light exists, Gods do not…

Your assertion. Your burden of proof.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I'll go build that anti-matter bomb now...

Be careful, please...

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Jesus is a name...not a noun. He is also the Son of God, another of His names.

Too bad you don't really know what you are talking about.

Too bad you don't know Him like I do.....and that is a fact.
If you find the summer is HOT, HELL is much hotter. Its time you got prayer conditioned.

Names are nouns, therefore Jesus is a noun. QED.

I was saved when I was 12 years old, wanted to be a Southern Baptist Preacher when I was 16, then discovered the first law of thermo when I was 19. Spent several years of my life very actively reconciling the two. Large amounts of beer and hard drugs finally helped me write that last chapter, for me personally.

It would take me 5 minutes to explain it to you over a beer, but _you_ still might not get it. Too bad. You should look into that, and ask yourself:

What reservoirs of energy are in effect when you apply your free will?

You'll come to recognize, after sufficient study, that our science has _not_ identified all the reservoirs of energy that deal with free will. Language is hard, especially when the observations being reported must be the same independent of the observer. That doesn't make the reservoirs of energy any less real, though.

Your thoughts count. Hell, you can even be Jesus yourself, if that's how you want to apply your free will. Good luck. Watch out for the rocks.

BTW - you strike me as a pretty judgemental person, and there is absolutely no reason for that here. Go buy a pair of polarized sun glasses. Maybe god will let you see a rainbow, instead of the white-heaven black-hell thing you currently see.

We are all engines of karma

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

The general rule is that “he who asserts must prove”, i.e., the burden rests with the plaintiff…..

I agree 100%.

Quote

you claim there is a God, therefore you the burden of proof lies with you.

I made no such claim. There was only one assertion made between the two of us concerning the existence of God:

Quote

Light exists, Gods do not…

Your assertion. Your burden of proof.

Ok Ok, im getting a little carried away; obviously I can’t prove the non existence of “god” as much as the next person can’t prove his existence. Pieces of toast with images of the Virgin Mary don’t count as proof….

I think the issue is that I find it hard to understand is (unless it is biological) the human need for gods, were not cavemen any more, we are a highly intelligent (well most of us) highly evolved species, with no need to have these superstitions…

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[Michele 1]

Quote

we are a highly intelligent (well most of us) highly evolved species

Maybe it's exactly that...our intelligence. There are so many things which don't have answers, and will likely never have answers, unless one sees the divine at work. Streetscooby speaks of rainbows and infinite reserves of energy; that, to me, is divine.

Intelligence in no way ameliorates God. And in fact, it takes a great deal of intelligence to understand what faith is about, and what free will is about. It takes a great deal of foresight to see that errors we made when we were young reverberate throughout our lives - in time to not make them in the first place. And failing that, be able to handle the responsibility and to change the path.

I've long held that we are not punished for a sin; we are punished by it. By the effects it has in our lives, by our failing to see that betimes our actions led us to a point of pain.

If you look at that globally, we are still very young, and working towards a more indepth understanding of how our actions have consequences. I think that intelligence - or "evolution" if you'd rather - plays a large role in seeing, learning, and stopping detrimental behavior on a large scale, just as we are applying it in our lives on an individual level.

My faith goes far beyond superstitions, to be honest. And my intelligence carried it there.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Intelligence in no way ameliorates God. And in fact, it takes a great deal of intelligence to understand what faith is about, and what free will is about.

I don't agree with this one statement 100%. I've met many people who are quite simple in their intellect. They are by no means a scholar. However, their understanding of faith and free will is quite advanced. I attribute it to their intense spiritual life, some may call it an interior life with God. For those who believe in God, I have seen that through their faith, God has become their teacher. It is an interior relationship that is not necessarily tangible and the individual has no need to prove it to anyone as it is already proven to themselves. It is a very intimate bond.

Does anyone here believe in private revelation?

_________________________________________
Chris

[JackC 0]

Quote

Does anyone here believe in private revelation?

In a recent study, 39% of people reported experiencing hallucinations at some point during their lifetime. Personally I think that private revelation is not sufficient grounds to justify a belief in absurdities given that some form of psychotic episode is relatively common. I would say the same thing to those who say their belief in God is based on a feeling that there is some higher power. Feelings only indicate a persons emotional state, not what is physically real.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

In a recent study, 39% of people reported experiencing hallucinations at some point during their lifetime. Personally I think that private revelation is not sufficient grounds to justify a belief in absurdities given that some form of psychotic episode is relatively common. I would say the same thing to those who say their belief in God is based on a feeling that there is some higher power. Feelings only indicate a persons emotional state, not what is physically real.

This does not prove that private revelation does not exist. It just states that 39% of humans have at some point experienced an hallucination. I myself had an out of body experience after a blow to the head. I don't claim that to be private revelation, rather an hallucination due to the trauma experienced.

_________________________________________
Chris

[JackC 0]

Quote

This does not prove that private revelation does not exist.

True. But it does raise the real possibility that what some may perceive as personal revelation is much more likely to be nothing more than an hallucination. How do you tell the difference? Both would look like a false sensory perception. And you must ask yourself which is more likely to be true? Hallucinations, which are well known, well documented phenomena, and considerably more common than many people think, or personal revelation, induced by an entity with incoherent properties of which there are no known examples?

My point is that personal revelation cannot be relied upon to indicate the presence of God because there are just too many alternative, common and well documented explainations. Personal revelation is far more likely to indicate some type of psychosis than the existence of supernatural entities.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

True. But it does raise the real possibility that what some may perceive as personal revelation is much more likely to be nothing more than an hallucination. How do you tell the difference? Both would look like a false sensory perception. And you must ask yourself which is more likely to be true? Hallucinations, which are well known, well documented phenomena, and considerably more common than many people think, or personal revelation, induced by an entity with incoherent properties of which there are no known examples?

My point is that personal revelation cannot be relied upon to indicate the presence of God because there are just too many alternative, common and well documented explainations. Personal revelation is far more likely to indicate some type of psychosis than the existence of supernatural entities.

I do agree that hallucinations can happen in which the individual perceives something that didn't exist.

This is a topic that has always fascinated me. For argument's sake, God exists...as I do believe. Using me as an example, I believe God is our creator and is limitless in His power. With this belief it leads me to believe that He can certainly reveal Himself to any individual in any manner of ways. He is the greater being, we the lesser.

I do believe that many cases can definitely be hallucinations, but who am I to say that all cases are?

_________________________________________
Chris

[JackC 0]

Quote

For argument's sake, God exists...as I do believe.

Now that's the part I have trouble with and I fail to see why anyone would postulate supernatural intervention when there is no reason to do so. Surely the more rational position is to say "I do not know if god exists or not, can personal revelation help me find out?". In this case personal revelation doesn't get you any further in your quest since there are more likely and more simple explainations than the direct intervention of an undetectable entity that is more complex than the entire universe.

If you presuppose that God does exist and is capable of revealing himself so us plebs here on earth, then you are assigning the conclusion in order to answer the question, which is bad form.

Quote

I do believe that many cases can definitely be hallucinations, but who am I to say that all cases are?

You don't need to prove that all cases of personal revelation are actually hallucinations. The mere posibility that they could be, and in fact are extremely likely to be, is enough to cast serious doubt on any positive identification of divine intervention. Thus personal revelation is not evidence, I doubt it would stand up in any court of law.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Now that's the part I have trouble with and I fail to see why anyone would postulate supernatural intervention when there is no reason to do so. Surely the more rational position is to say "I do not know if god exists or not, can personal revelation help me find out?".

OK, I'm trying to put myself in your shoes and look at this from your angle. I do see where you are coming from and it makes complete sense. What I am talking about is a step further. I'm not talking about personal revelation to prove God's existence but rather a communication between God and the individual. Let's say it is a proven fact that God exists, everyone knows it. However, He doesn't necessarily show Himself to all humans. In this case, wouldn't it be natural to believe that He may possibly reveal Himself or part of Himself to some humans?

I don't know if I am making myself clear...I may still be looking at it from my angle.

The way I see it is God certainly is shrouded in mystery. Noone can really prove or disprove His existence. It all comes down to faith. I have faith that God does exist, so naturally I would believe that it is within His power to be in communication, whether it be privately, with anyone He chooses.

_________________________________________
Chris

[AlexCrowley 0]

neurotheology has been evolving pretty fast over the last decade.

Finally scientists can point to the area of the brain that reacts to prayer/meditation, they can see the area stimulated and active.

But the question still remains: does the existence of a specialized part of the brain prove its all pure chemistry? or does it prove that we're wired to commune with a higher power? or both?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[JackC 0]

Quote

I do see where you are coming from and it makes complete sense.

BEER!! I've made messes and smells before but never sense.

Quote

What I am talking about is a step further. I'm not talking about personal revelation to prove God's existence but rather a communication between God and the individual.

If God exists (and that is the biggest if in the history of the universe), then personal revelation might be a possible method of communication. But I think you would first have to prove God exists before you could consider it. Even then you would have to rule out all other explainations before you could possitively identify divine intervention.

It seems to me that the question you are asking is "Can personal revelation be a method of communicating with god?", and your line of thought goes something like:

1) if God exists then personal revelation can be a method of communication.
2) God exists
3) Therefore personal revelation is a method of communication.

I get stuck at number 2 but you don't because you honestly believe 2 is true. But you'd have to work very hard to convince me.

Quote

Let's say it is a proven fact that God exists, everyone knows it. However, He doesn't necessarily show Himself to all humans. In this case, wouldn't it be natural to believe that He may possibly reveal Himself or part of Himself to some humans?

I thinks that's another question. Just because something exists, doesn't necessarily mean it wants to communicate. A crude example, I'm pretty sure that Jennifer Anniston exists and I'd love for her to reveal herself to me (in part or in whole, I'm not fussy). I know that she loves her fans and since I am one, she must love me which is admitedly a huge leap of faith, but she still wont return my calls.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

I thinks that's another question. Just because something exists, doesn't necessarily mean it wants to communicate. A crude example, I'm pretty sure that Jennifer Anniston exists and I'd love for her to reveal herself to me (in part or in whole, I'm not fussy). I know that she loves her fans and since I am one, she must love me which is admitedly a huge leap of faith, but she still wont return my calls.

Don't have time right now to post a deep reply, so I'll just agree and say that Jennifer Aniston is quite 'divine'.

_________________________________________
Chris

[philh 0]

When we jump out of plane we fall. One explanation is that the mass of the planet creates a curve in the fabric of space/time larger than the one my body creates and so I fall along the path created by gravity. Another explantion is that there is an air spirit called Bob. The air spirit picks each skydivier and throws them to the ground. Some people feel a deep connection with Bob they feel his presence, they build great machines to summon him. They have faith that Bob exists, but it isnt blind faith becuase they have felt the living Bob. No one can prove that Bob does not exist.
Now i hope you will all agree the latter explantion is not very believable. The reaosn is because we have to assume an invisible spirit when we have a perferctly reasonable explantion in the form of gravity. The same is true with god. It is much more reasonable to follow natural explantions like hallucination or perhaps mild pyschosis to explain revelations than to assume it was Bob, god , Santa, Jesus or Yoda. Well maybe not Yoda.
Ancient men did not understand gravity, hence the belief in river sprites, they did not understand lightning hence the belief in sky gods ( Thor, jehovah etc not Olav, Airspeed etc). One can understand their mistaken beliefs . Unfortunately these mistakes have been bred into our culture and it is up to us to realise oops our ancestors made a mistake.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

When we jump out of plane we fall. One explanation is that the mass of the planet creates a curve in the fabric of space/time larger than the one my body creates and so I fall along the path created by gravity. Another explantion is that there is an air spirit called Bob. The air spirit picks each skydivier and throws them to the ground. Some people feel a deep connection with Bob they feel his presence, they build great machines to summon him. They have faith that Bob exists, but it isnt blind faith becuase they have felt the living Bob. No one can prove that Bob does not exist.
Now i hope you will all agree the latter explantion is not very believable. The reaosn is because we have to assume an invisible spirit when we have a perferctly reasonable explantion in the form of gravity. The same is true with god. It is much more reasonable to follow natural explantions like hallucination or perhaps mild pyschosis to explain revelations than to assume it was Bob, god , Santa, Jesus or Yoda. Well maybe not Yoda.
Ancient men did not understand gravity, hence the belief in river sprites, they did not understand lightning hence the belief in sky gods ( Thor, jehovah etc not Olav, Airspeed etc). One can understand their mistaken beliefs . Unfortunately these mistakes have been bred into our culture and it is up to us to realise oops our ancestors made a mistake.

Sounds like you've got it all figured out.

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

When we jump out of plane we fall. One explanation is that the mass of the planet creates a curve in the fabric of space/time larger than the one my body creates and so I fall along the path created by gravity. Another explantion is that there is an air spirit called Bob. The air spirit picks each skydivier and throws them to the ground. Some people feel a deep connection with Bob they feel his presence, they build great machines to summon him. They have faith that Bob exists, but it isnt blind faith becuase they have felt the living Bob. No one can prove that Bob does not exist.
Now i hope you will all agree the latter explantion is not very believable. The reaosn is because we have to assume an invisible spirit when we have a perferctly reasonable explantion in the form of gravity. The same is true with god. It is much more reasonable to follow natural explantions like hallucination or perhaps mild pyschosis to explain revelations than to assume it was Bob, god , Santa, Jesus or Yoda. Well maybe not Yoda.
Ancient men did not understand gravity, hence the belief in river sprites, they did not understand lightning hence the belief in sky gods ( Thor, jehovah etc not Olav, Airspeed etc). One can understand their mistaken beliefs . Unfortunately these mistakes have been bred into our culture and it is up to us to realise oops our ancestors made a mistake.

Sounds like you've got it all figured out.

Also humans are animals that need to know everything, and aren’t satisfied with the fact that there are things in the world we don’t understand, and may never… instead of accepting this gap we make up explanations for them, and therefore we believe that this gap in our knowledge is filled.
So people believe in Gods as they like the warm fussy illusion that all the loose ends are tied up, and everything is explained, because God fills the gap for them….

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[Zenister 0]

actually once you recognize that it is the story, (and what you learn and take from it to become more than you currently are,) that REALLY matters..... even Yoda has value....

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.