PROOF that GOD Exists......

[Doer]

I'm not confusing spirit with wonder. Wondering is what motivates science, yes. But what generalization is instilled by my parents? That faith is illogical and unnatural? That there exists a black and white difference between empirical evidence and lore? These were not instilled by my parents. Perhaps I missed your point.

I have no point, except to point out you were raised by your parents into a belief system. You were raised in a secular home. You have strong beliefs "faith is unnatural." That points to doctrine, since no one can know that. And by the same token it seems quite likely your definitions of "empirical evidence and lore" are likewise compromised. There is a very slippery dividing line between these two. Lore can turn out to be science and science can turn out to be lore. We cannot escape nature or nurture.

 

[Doer]

"Most absurd thing about religion/theology/metaphysics/spirituality - you are required to hold the belief in order for it to be true."

If we look at this puzzle, we can assign "belief" as a variable. We can then substitute another word, less charged. Let's use prep.

Now, if I told you, to perform the experiment, you first have to prep for it, OK, then? Then I say, this experiment is not part of your Subjective Reality where all the mundane physics and various properties, constants, etc work quite well to create the illusion of Objectivity. HuH?

Yes, you must prep. This experiment requires tuning into the only Objective reality there is, your Self. It is very difficult to create the stillness and wonder required to begin. It requires prep. With no prep, no result. Does that make a bit more sense? You don't take a nurf bat to a knife fight. And when we try to go past the Illusion master, Mr. Mind we are in a contest of free will. Can you actually
muster the will to ignore your mind cloud?

The result of experiencing what is beyond little self, is fascinating, and does not have to be proved in the Subjective "real" world. It's for your Self alone.

 

[Legolandon]

I URGE you all to please go to youtube and type in "nde". There is PROOF what happens to us when we die. Go to youtube and type in "nde" which stands for Near Death Experiences and watch and listen to the hundreds of stories from people who have had heart attacks, cancer, car accidents, shot, stabbed, and listen to their stories of what happened to them. There are videos from people all over the world and their experiences ALL coincide with each other. You will see proof that God and Jesus are real, Angels are real, and Hell is real. Everyone needs to check it out seriously...

And these experiences are not all just from Christians, there are stories from atheists, muslims, every type of person walking this earth. Go to youtube and type in "nde"

In the event that someone dies, followed by revival, there is scientific proof that the human mind will often project very realistic visuals such as a bright light, cloud formations etc. as a result of all endorphines (such as DMT(Strongest known hallucinogen)) releasing in the brain as they are no longer necessary to a dead person.... Coincedence? Highly unlikely!

I am also inclined to ask, what is it your business what a person believes? No loving god would leave the responsibility of saving a humans "soul" from eternal torture (simply because he failed to provide any proof of his existence) to other humans! I think "god" needs to put a lot more effort than he is, to actually make himself recognizable. Starting with, ending his human army used to discriminate, brainwash, and not to mention kill for him.


If you have a reasonable argument to reply with, please post it!

and

 

[Doer]

In the event that someone dies, followed by revival, there is scientific proof that the human mind will often project very realistic visuals such as a bright light, cloud formations etc. as a result of all endorphines (such as DMT(Strongest known hallucinogen)) releasing in the brain as they are no longer necessary to a dead person.... Coincedence? Highly unlikely!

No loving god would leave the responsibility of saving a humans "soul" from eternal torture (simply because he failed to provide any proof of his existence) to other humans!

If you have a reasonable argument to reply with, please post it!

and

Here's the problem, so many attributes, human attributes, have been assigned to IT. Then we use that Abrahmic logic, to banter these traits. "What loving God...?" "Would not a Just God...?" Well, already the speech pattern assumes multiple gods. Worse, it assumes these human traits, Loving and Just are attributes of IT.

Since IT is essential un-knowable except through Self, all assignments of characterizations to IT are man-made, not Objective, since they are uttered into this Subjective soup we call Reality.

 

[afrawfraw]

I have no point, except to point out you were raised by your parents into a belief system. You were raised in a secular home. You have strong beliefs "faith is unnatural." That points to doctrine, since no one can know that. And by the same token it seems quite likely your definitions of "empirical evidence and lore" are likewise compromised. There is a very slippery dividing line between these two. Lore can turn out to be science and science can turn out to be lore. We cannot escape nature or nurture.

Faith IS unnatural. It's not some opinion I hold. And you're confusing secular home with Atheist home. I was raised without practicing religions, not being taught to disapprove of them. The doctrine I received was to value education, use critical thinking, and base my decisions on facts. Lore can coincide with science, but lore is communication, science is observation. Science can be trusted because the results have been determined by ALL backgrounds. No one ever asked me what side of science I'm on. I disagree we can not "escape" nature or nurture. Is religion Natural? Does any other species on earth practice it? Has it ever been done before? No. Imagine a Tuna having faith that the shark won't eat him. Ha! Every other animal makes decisions based on experience and observation. It's already been proven Religion doesn't instill nobility or transitivity. When we as a species can stop talking to ourselves in corners wearing fancy night gowns, we might progress.

 

[afrawfraw]

"Most absurd thing about religion/theology/metaphysics/spirituality - you are required to hold the belief in order for it to be true."

If we look at this puzzle, we can assign "belief" as a variable. We can then substitute another word, less charged. Let's use prep.

Now, if I told you, to perform the experiment, you first have to prep for it, OK, then? Then I say, this experiment is not part of your Subjective Reality where all the mundane physics and various properties, constants, etc work quite well to create the illusion of Objectivity. HuH?

Yes, you must prep. This experiment requires tuning into the only Objective reality there is, your Self. It is very difficult to create the stillness and wonder required to begin. It requires prep. With no prep, no result. Does that make a bit more sense? You don't take a nurf bat to a knife fight. And when we try to go past the Illusion master, Mr. Mind we are in a contest of free will. Can you actually
muster the will to ignore your mind cloud?

The result of experiencing what is beyond little self, is fascinating, and does not have to be proved in the Subjective "real" world. It's for your Self alone.

How one perceives the universe is dependent on so many things. One huge one is emotions. I want an Objective understanding of the Universe. Objective means without influence of personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. I want a greater understanding. This is how I learn. By having everyone look at the universe. Then I can start to figure out what is uniform, and what my projections are, which makes me understand me more. Sigh.

 

[Dr.J20]

believe? im trying to save you from falling into this shit like all the fucking people in our nation have. the 1 person who will agree with you is just as ignorant to science as you are. read about the pinneal glad before you go off trying to categorize dimethyltrytamine as a "controlled substance", it exists in your brain already. DMT= dimethyltryptamine if you didnt understand. now please, go on and tell us how the release of this chemical in your brain proves that god is real. please do. id love to hear all the proof you have.

Not that this is proof or anything, but some dmt researchers are postulating about the fact that all living things have dmt--plant and animal--meaning it may be the molecular basis for some kind of interspecial communication; now that's probably not really what you'd call "God" but it may be a link to some kind of notion that all carbon based life is connected in some way--even a neutral way.

Also, lets be clear here, it isn't kind to lambast someone because he may or may not know about the physiological realities of the pineal gland, but, in fairness, we, as a species, don't know everything about ourselves, much less our world and universe. Also, you haven't read every piece of philosophy, religious or otherwise, which has a great deal to bear on the discussion of the existence of God; so, all i'm saying it isn't necessary to use knowledge aggressively
be easy

 

[Zaehet Strife]

The result of experiencing what is beyond little self, is fascinating, and does not have to be proved in the Subjective "real" world. It's for your Self alone.

^and even so, these concepts you hold without facing up to the burdens of proof, are not true... they are only true through your own individual subjective perceptions, nothing more, nothing less.

these experiences or concepts are what we make of them, and are all dependent on the environment we grew up in, how we were raised, and the culture that was instilled in us as we grew from babyhood to adulthood.

as you experience "self" these experiences will be different depending on all of the factors stated above.

 

[Dr.J20]

Faith IS unnatural.

Primal man heard thunder and developed belief to explain it until science showed what it really was; if science never disproves something does it mean that thing exists? certainly not, but all it means is science has not proved it.

No one ever asked me what side of science I'm on.

You must have missed those "is light a particle or wave?" and "why do the effects of gravity change at the quantum level?" debates in the history of science.

Does any other species on earth practice it?

While I do tend to agree with you here, we can't directly communicate with most species and would have a hard time answering whether the concept of religion exists in animal social groups.

It's already been proven Religion doesn't instill nobility or transitivity.

I'd like a source on this one.

be easy

 

[Doer]

OK, less specific. Most folks I get these stories from have a very specific Type of first memory. I'm always wary about pre-loading the subjects' memory with too much input. IAC, I am most interested in which sense conducted your first memory. So, without details of the events, when the memory is produced for you now, is it a visual, a sound, a feel on skin? Like that.

It's OK, my mom claimed to have a memory of her as a 6 month old, sitting on the porch. But, when pressed for the sense or senses that were involved, she really could not recall any sensation details about this "memory."

 

[Dr.J20]

^and even so, these concepts you hold without facing up to the burdens of proof, are not true... they are only true through your own individual subjective perceptions, nothing more, nothing less.

you might consider reading up on the phenomenological perspective on the intersubjective constitution of reality via perspectival perception.

 

[afrawfraw]

Fire at will!

 

[afrawfraw]

I propose we rename the thread: "Proof WHY gods exist."

 

[Illegal Smile]

I think when you die you go wherever you were before you were born.

 

[Zaehet Strife]

you might consider reading up on the phenomenological perspective on the intersubjective constitution of reality via perspectival perception.

Ive been trying, but i cant find a good source, would you be so kind as to provide me with a link please?

Or, if you could explain simply the point you are trying to get across. Im thinking that your point is that "truth" has the same validity if it comes from science and experimentation than whats within our own minds and our imagination.

If this is so, i have to disagree.

Without carrying the burden of proof for all the thoughts you have within your mind, you have no basis for knowledge, just basis for imagination.

Religion/spirituality/metaphysics/theology, these subjects all require belief in order for them to be true. Science does not, gravity does not, math does not.

 

[Dr.J20]

To those who so adamantly cleave to truth, proof, fact, while I agree these things are important, what of the aesthetic?
This is only a tangential departure, a detour really, a different way of approaching the existence of god.

there is no proof or truth value to an aesthetic production, we can scientifically detect it, but no science on earth can unravel why or how all of art functions, behaves, interacts with and effects us. art has a marked and measurable effect on human individuals and societies, including effects on progress of the species, yet cannot be reduced scientifically to a manner of absolute goods, truths, positives, etc. Certainly a piece of art is a subjective phenomenon, the question, "what is art?" is contentious, but, nonetheless it has a measurable, though inexplicable, and unpredictable, effect on people. it fits into reality, has an effect on humanity, but is not of the same category as science, and yet can elicit progress.

be easy...sorry for the multi-posts

 

[Dr.J20]

Zaehet,
Sorry, i don't have a link per-se but looking into merleau-ponty would be a good start...maurice merleau-ponty and edmund husserl would be my two recs. for people to read on phenomenology right now, sartre gets into it in later work, and that's good too.

no, the point is most definitely not that "truth" has the same validity whether it comes from the mind or science/experimentation; rather, it says both participate in a communication such that being cosubstantiates reality; thus, that we exist, so does the reality we can study with science and observe with perception but, also, that we do these things constitutes reality in a simultaneous exchange that has always gone on. the only difference is the level of detail in our perception...i'm grossly oversimplifying this right now though, the intricacies are perplexing an fascinating and do ultimately lead you into some really good questions to ask of yourself, society, and existence

be easy

 

[Zaehet Strife]

Im not sure if this is a question or a statement. Science allows me to appreciate beauty to the fullest. Understanding just how a rainbow works with the bending of light and prisms in water. Being able not only to see the beauty of the flower, but also understanding what exactly is going on inside this biological structure fills me with a sense of appreciation and wonder.

As with everything including art, music, taste, these things are all subjective. As we all know people find more or less pleasure in looking at different things, people like different music and have different tastes.

My point is exactly this: Religion/spirituality/metaphysics/theology, these subjects all require belief in order for them to be true (in some way shape or form). Science does not, gravity does not, math does not.

 

[Zaehet Strife]

As science continues to unravel the fabric of the cosmos, i am sure many more, if not all of our deepest desired questions will be answered, and most likely they will be answers that we probably wont like very much lol.

Imaginations give us the subjective truths we want,
Theology gives us the subjective truths of others,
Science gives us the closest approximation to the objective truths in this reality.

 

[afrawfraw]

My money is on the Mold theory. We're probably a colony of what another species calls something like bacteria or mold. "Timmy! You better get that pizza out of your room or it's going to human. You don't want your room all humany, do you!?" Lol.