27
   

Is there proof God exists?

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Oct, 2011 06:53 am
@kYRANI,
You need to work on your bullshit stories--you say you were beaten savagely for telling your uncle that you believe that god is everywhere in everything, and now you say your mother was a christian fanatic. You're not at all convincing.

And, in any event, your claims are not evidence based--as you are so fond of accusing others.
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Oct, 2011 07:00 am
@kYRANI,
kYRANI wrote:

You can't know what happen to me as a child and I can't prove it to you. My mother was a Christian fanatic and my father was an atheist and I was not influenced by either of them.

kYRANI wrote:

I told him that God was everywhere in everything and he told my mother and I was beaten savagely for that statement.

Why were you beaten savagely for saying something that sounds Christian? If you said your mother was not Christian then that would go some way towards explaining your mother's actions towards a small child.

I’ll stick with what I said before:
igm wrote:

This doesn't to me have the 'ring of truth to it' ... it sounds to me like a story a preacher would tell to encourage others to become faithful followers. Perhaps it's ESP on my part or just my skeptical nature. My apologies if it is true I of course have no way of knowing.

Also... neatly your father was an atheist... so no influence there either! Mmmm...
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Oct, 2011 12:01 am
@kYRANI,
You wrote
Quote:
The "I" of personal self is only an ephemearal being. It has no independent reality without the existence of the body because it is a collection of physiological reactions to a corresponding collection of ideas. If you meditate though you will arrive at a place where the "I" vanishes and when that happens you find that there is not complete extinction. What remains however is not a personal self but the impersonal self that is universal. It is this impersonal self that is god and has eternal life. There is nothing to be attained. Spiritual life is about realizing reality, what is and has always been and always will be.


I have already described that state. Calling it "God" and romancing about "eternal life" may be merely anthropocentric wish fulfillment, given that such a state can also be drug-induced.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Oct, 2011 12:08 am
Is this nut-cake thread still going on with a new roster of nut-cakes? Sheeesh.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Oct, 2011 12:12 am
@Lustig Andrei,
Smile !
0 Replies
 
Lovee-4ever
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2011 08:38 pm
@ll333,
There is proof everywhere. There is proof because of miracles like the body's of many Catholic saints that have not decayed and there is proof when we think and realize when we are doing something wrong. If God didn't exist, then there would be no right or wrong. There is proof of Him in our very existence. Sadly, people are incapable of realizing that. They want more and more and aren't satisfyed with His mercy. It sickens me how ignorant the world has become.
Lustig Andrei
 
  3  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2011 12:17 am
@Lovee-4ever,
Lovee-4ever wrote:
If God didn't exist, then there would be no right or wrong.


That is one of the silliest, dumbest things I have ever read. Atheist philosophers discuss morality, ethics, issues of right and wrong constantly with no reference at all to God. Why would there be no right and wrong if God didn't exist? Humans are responsible for their behaviour regardless of any reliance on a Supreme Being.
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 11:18 am
@Lustig Andrei,
Atheists do not have a foundation on which to base morality and ethics. For atheists ethics is about choice. Only when a person believes that there is a spiritual realm through which we are all interconnected by our one to one relationshhip with the Supreme Being or Great Spirit or God or whatever we choose to name the nameless, can we have a basis for morality and ethics. We are all interrelated so our behaviour does affect everyone everywhere, no matter how far removed. Ethics is about natural laws and not choice.
Ashers
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 02:36 pm
@kYRANI,
Fritjof Capra's Web of Life says hi!
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 06:22 pm
@kYRANI,
Nonsense.
I am no atheist.
But I try to do the right, the moral, the ethical thing not because God told me to but because I know that it is the right, the moral, the ethical thing to do. Pure and simple. It is, in part, reason that tells me that injuring another person is eventually self-defeating and wrong. Whether it is God who gave me that reason to use is totally beside the point.
I do not fear God. If God is, indeed, love, then there is nothing to fear. I don't act in a moral way because I am afraid of some sort of hell-fire after death; I try to live in a moral fashion because I see it as the right thing to do here on this plane of existence.
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2011 11:23 am
@Lustig Andrei,
My point is not that we should behave morally /ethically out of fear or because God says so etc. I am saying that where there is an interconnectedness between everything in creation then our words and actions and even our thoughts have consequences for everything and everyone else, some slight some more. In the light of our interconnectedness we have a responsibility, it is no longer choice. The consequences are certainly twofold, one is how we affect other and how we are affected by others here in this life and the other is whether we have life or not in the other non-physical /spiritual realm. With respect to the second reason, we also need to distinguish between one of acts of immorality that may be motivated by selfishness or ignorance and those of evil people who act immorally and willful aim to act unethically to do injustices and hurt other people systematically and as lifestyle. We can redeem ourselves of the first kind but the second kind as committed by evil people condemn those people to eternal darkness. It is not a punishment. They do it to themselves. And it needs to be said too that while some evil people hide behind religion others hide behind atheism. These people do not in reality deny god's existence. They are instead haters of god and Justice and Goodness etc.
igm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2011 03:46 pm
@kYRANI,
kYRANI wrote:

My point is not that we should behave morally /ethically out of fear or because God says so etc...

...the other is whether we have life or not in the other non-physical /spiritual realm.

... but the second kind as committed by evil people condemn those people to eternal darkness.

I think there is a hint in what you say of a 'fear' of God's punishment and your notion of a 'spiritual realm', 'evil' and 'eternal darkness' has Biblical overtones and that is one point... that in fact you are making... as I read it.
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2011 07:42 pm
@kYRANI,
kYRANI wrote:

My point is not that we should behave morally /ethically out of fear or because God says so etc. I am saying that where there is an interconnectedness between everything in creation then our words and actions and even our thoughts have consequences for everything and everyone else, some slight some more. In the light of our interconnectedness we have a responsibility, it is no longer choice.


Agreed.
What's that got to do with God?
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2011 09:02 am
@Lustig Andrei,
If we consider only the material realm as all that there is then there is no foundation for interconnectedness. Only when we realize that there is a spiritual realm or non-physical realm, which is a singularity from out perspective, do we have legitimate grounds for interconnectedness or a fundamental relationship between everyone and everything. We cannot conceptualize this realm because it bears no resemblance to the physical plane however it underpins all of creation. The physical and the non-physical are not two distinct realms but in a sense the two aspects of the same reality. That reality is termed in many and varied ways in the various world religions but essentially thery are the mind of God. In Tibetan Buddhism they are called the One Mind, In Eastern Orthodoxy they are called the Holy Mind or the synonymous term of Holy Spirit, (which the Romans misunderstand as to call the Holy Ghost). This the very same that the Muslims call Al'la or The Void. Some scientists such as Paul Davis as it appears naming only the non-physical aspect, have called the Mind of God. As far as Christianity is concerned I believe that the self-made disciple Paul, working for Roman interests sold the Greeks a story about Jesus being God. And it was easy done because the Greeks already conceptualized gods anthropomorphically. And it was only three hundred years earlier that Alexander the Great lived and he was considered a god-man. The Jesus is god story was done for political purposes, not religious. After all the Romans coulld hardly be called spiritual. Their legacy though, in my opinion, has distorted what is god in the Western World. Maybe that is why you see god as something extraneous and impractical.
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2011 09:21 am
@igm,
The existence of evil and eternal darkness as also the existence of a spiritual realm are not the exclusive domain of the bible. One can find these in all world religions. Buddha stood against Mara where as Jesus stood against the devil but the different terms mean the same thing despite the insistance of many Christian in particular to the contrary. Both are adversorial and both aim to prevent the humane /righteous from finding the superconscious state of bliss; whether we call it Nirvana or Heaven again is just language. A rose by any other name is still a rose!
As for acting out of fear (of God) I will quote you Rabia's words, a Persian saint.
"If I should love Thee for want of some heaven, deny me that heaven.
If I should love Thee for fear of some burning hell, burn me in that hell.
But, as I love Thee for Thy own sake alone deny me not Thy everlasting beatitude."
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2011 09:34 am
@kYRANI,
kYRANI wrote:

...That reality is termed in many and varied ways in the various world religions but essentially thery are the mind of God. In Tibetan Buddhism they are called the One Mind...

This is incorrect Buddhism is non-theistic. The Yogācāra school of Tibetan Buddhism can be translated as 'The Mind Only' school. Essentially it means that nothing physical can be found i.e. when examined phenomena are... 'mind only' and an independent physical 'thing in itself' cannot be found to exist in any way whatsoever. Additionally, as an aside they would also not believe in a soul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogacara
igm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2011 09:43 am
@kYRANI,
kYRANI wrote:

The existence of evil and eternal darkness as also the existence of a spiritual realm are not the exclusive domain of the bible. One can find these in all world religions. Buddha stood against Mara where as Jesus stood against the devil but the different terms mean the same thing despite the insistance of many Christian in particular to the contrary. Both are adversorial and both aim to prevent the humane /righteous from finding the superconscious state of bliss; whether we call it Nirvana or Heaven again is just language. A rose by any other name is still a rose!
As for acting out of fear (of God) I will quote you Rabia's words, a Persian saint.
"If I should love Thee for want of some heaven, deny me that heaven.
If I should love Thee for fear of some burning hell, burn me in that hell.
But, as I love Thee for Thy own sake alone deny me not Thy everlasting beatitude."

You show in your reply that you don't have enough in-depth knowledge of Buddhism... I'll just say that 'Mara' is not in anyway a devil or demon and Nirvana is not in anyway a type of heaven.
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Oct, 2011 11:31 am
@igm,
The Tibetan Buddhists have a holy text called the One Mind. And as for Buddhism being atheistic or non-theistic, this is not the case although a lot of people think so, particularly Western Buddhists. Buddha was asked the question what about god or who is god or some such question about god but he did not answer it. He simply told the monk to occupy himself with his practice instead. A lot of people take this to means that Buddha was indicating that Buddhism was atheistic. Buddha did not dispute the religion to which he was born which is Hinduism. He simply disagreed with some of the corrupt practices of the Brahmin cast. Hinduism in contrast appears to be poly theistic when in fact it is monotheistic. Brahman is the God head and all else derives from it. A great deal of the problem of who or what is god is seen in the Christian context, which sees a personal god. This is a very narrow view indeed.
A soul is also a largely Christian idea. The Oneness or God is indivisible but there is also existence wihtin this Oneness which is difficult to intellectually grasp. That is why the mystical experience is necessary to transcend death and merge with the Infinite. In the mystical experience all traces of personal self or personal anything, call it a soul if you wish, vanish. The Identity is that of the Oneness.
kYRANI
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Oct, 2011 11:41 am
@igm,
There is no independent spiritual personage that stands in opposition to god. The devil is just an illusory personality that arises from the conglomerate of like minded toxic /evil people. It is a mind set and nothing else. Mara is in the same vein. When the Buddha sought to understand reality he was confronted by this mindset and had to understand that it has no real power. Evil relies on deceit and misinformation. Heaven is certainly described in different terms in much of Christianity but if you take the words of Jesus Christ and not the stuff that was added on later, especially by Paul, you will find that he was talking about Nirvana, a state of eteranl Bliss that is found in becoming one with God or mergence, self realization are all the same thing. When Jesus said I and my creator /father are one a lot of people thought that he was saying he was god when he was really talking about Union.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Oct, 2011 12:23 pm
@kYRANI,
Isn't selective interpretation great ! No wonder Erich Von Daniken became rich with his "evidence" of extraterrestrials. An eager audience is all you need.

As for your own perseverance here in the face of scepticism...what does this imply about you ? You are obviously too sophisticated to indulge in collecting celestial "air miles", so we are left with a possible "belief reinforcement exercise" which you might be projecting outwards as "convincing others". But the irony is, that according to your pantheistic holism, there is no self and there are no others ! Hence, as meditators have already noted, attempts at communication of such holism is banal ! (from whom to whom ?) It follows that if you are "right", you are wasting your time on this thread ! Wink
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 09:45:30