Did you discover god on your own,...

[blurredvision]

I think, therefore I am.

That statement summarizes me, and that's all I need to know for sure is that I exist.

 

[judgejudy]

of course they didn't discover god for themselves, they discovered it in some high school fad.

 

[Moonbeam]

I would have expected, "I chuck wood, therefore I WoodchuckCharlie"

 

[MustangSVT]

AMD- is it such a miracle for a person to live 6 days without food or water?

The thing is, god can not be proven by the ways of science, because like your insert from the book "Night", GOD exists only within a person's mind.

And you say that certain roman and jewish accounts show that Jesus was real? So if you read Enquirer or something similar you believe those things too? There is a difference between a photograph and a person seeing things because people tend to make mistakes. So even if those records are authentic, Jesus could have been a person with certain leadership during a right time. And the word traveled from mouth to mouth altering the truth little by little.

I guess the difference is I question things when they dont make sense, and some ppl just take it as GOD's devine wisdom that cannot be understood by men.

 

[Zucchini]

hehe, anyone play that kids game telephone? sit in a circle and pass a message from one person to another by whispering.. message always gets royally #@%

 

[AMDJunkie]

Considering most people don't live after three days without water, yes, and the fact that they still had the strength to pray and sing. And on those accounts, the Romans confirmed there was a person called Jess Christ with a following, and he Jewish account, written by Josephus if I remember correctly, said there was a Jesus Christ and that he did do miraculous works. Also, rember that these are not Christians confirming this, these are people of groups opposing Christ and His followers, so there it would be hard to find any "Enquirer" factor of made up or exagerated information unless the original documents were tampered with later on. Also, if Jesus was not divine, the crucification story kind of falls apart, for a person doesn't gain such a following simply by preaching and that one of the main reasons the Saudecees and Pharisees wanted to see Jesus crucified was to see if he could escape his own death, so he had to have done some amazing works to make these people think he could do this.

Also forgot to include the miracles at Lourdes and Majegorie(sp?).

 

[~zonker~]

"The thing for me is why was he only here during the time when everyone was illiterate? He needs to have a continuation on CNN. Why
did all these miracles take place in the past. Are all these scrolls just little notes written down by J. Tolken's great ancestors for a
great story book."

Try and find two political analysits who agree on a breaking event or political story that is happening today, this is with all the printed media and live television broadcast. I would hazard a guess that it would make little difference to people who choose or can not believe.

 

[SVTPower]

I'm thinking to other people like me who want to see proof it would make a great difference.
People who are into "Seeing is believing" like me, if I see a guy part a Sea or some action infront of me I'll believe it happened.

 

[MustangSVT]

Hmm it shows that people live 4 mintues without air, 4 days without water and 40 days without food. And do records show the exact time they started the calcuation of no food or water consumed? Does the records show how loud they were singing? or how alive and mobile they were?

So what if the world's tallest man walked infront of you? would you think it's a miracle too? I did not question existence of a person named Jesus Christ, I questioned his powers that ppl believe he has, and i do believe a person can gain such powers of leadership. The records show, that with right situations it can lead to mass suicide or mass murdering.

 

[MustangSVT]

SVTpower,

<< People who are into &quot;Seeing is believing&quot; like me, if I see a guy part a Sea or some action infront of me I'll believe it happened >>



So, if an alien came to earth with far superior technology that can actually control each molecules and atoms to split the sea apart for you, you would think that it's GOD?

It would be interesting if GOD did come to earth and just started to kill people then would these christians think that its GOD? or would it say that its not true god because its killing them?

in church, they preach to live nice and be good and stuff, but clearly GOD doesnt want us to be nice and be good.

 

[SVTPower]

Good point... to us that would be a great feat even in this day... So what makes it so true back when the Bible was supposedly written.
If we went back and shined a flashlight in their eye's they would prolly freak.

 

[SuperTool]

I haven't even discovered the definition of God yet, much less God itself. But one can always hope for more wisdom later in life.

 

[Moonbeam]

As it happens HE was here very recently. His name was Maher Baba and his motto was:

I am the Divinely Beloved who loves you more than you can possibly love yourself

Relax and be happy

Main homepage doesn't respond but this is interesting.

 

[Zucchini]

hehe who am i to doubt the words of good ol baba

 

[Whitedog]

As I knew this thread would turn... into one that only attemps to disprove God's existance.

Have fun.

 

[UG]

Do other animals know of, or experience god?

 

[UG]

<...I knew this thread would turn... into one that only attemps to disprove God's existance...>

You know that Science works to advance knowledge by disproving and casting aside falsifiable hypotheses.

You also know that's not how theism works. Should you be suprised that critical thinking leads people to seek extraordinary proof in support of extraordinary claims?

You also know that over the course of human history the existence of god has been neither proven nor disproven. The ceasation of critical attempts to disprove the claim of the existence of god(s) is no more likely to happen than the unambiguous appearence of its proof before our eyes and impartial instrumentations.

 

[Ornery]

&quot;Anecdotal evidence is fallable; such evidence is subject to personal biases both in its expressions and its interpretations. One must be concerned that the source of such proof is not the imaginations of the interested parties.

A scientific instrument that is without any powers of imagination might make a good impartial witness to such 'markings' as so claimed. Which instrument would you suggest might prove that god is not imaginary?&quot;

Would that &quot;proof&quot; make any difference about the existence of God? I think you might just consider that a new, till now unknown, phenomenon of life in general. Not necessarily a &quot;proof&quot; of the existence of God. Interesting that this might stand science as you know it on it's head. I'm surprised.

Ah hah, maybe I shouldn't be. Just tracked down this ancient experiment by Cleve Backster. The one about the polygraph on the plants that reacted when brine shrimp were killed. I thought this had been confirmed. Guess it's still not accepted:

• &quot;...I think the answer is that if what I am observing is accurate, many of the theories we've built our lives on need complete reworking. I've known biologists to say, &quot;If Backster is right, we're in trouble.&quot; It takes a certain kind of character and personality to cope with that.
  
  The big question I think we need to ask our Western scientific community is the one the Hindu and Buddhist scientists ask me, &quot;What took you so long?&quot; Scientists, and that whole community in general, are caught in a difficult place, because in order to maintain our current mode of scientific thought, they must ignore a tremendous amount of information. And more of this information is being gathered all the time. I think we're going to see a shift in the near future. People in scientific pursuits are stumbling all over this biocommunication phenomenon--it seems impossible, especially given the sophistication of modern instrumentation, for them to miss this fundamental attunement that is happening all around us--and only for so long are they going to be able to pretend it's the result of &quot;loose wires.&quot;
  
  The Plants Respond: An Interview with Cleve Backster July 1997

So, the psychic communication stuff is not cool in the scientific community. And none of it has been reproducible? I'm surprised. If it were reproducible, would this automatically lead to &quot;proof&quot; of God? Oh, how exciting!

Without any &quot;proof&quot; at this point, I'm still convinced there is a connection. Didn't realize that this &quot;connection&quot; was possibly the key to turning all known science upside down though! :Q

Might this quantum theory experiment be headed in that direction:

• Sunglasses for photons
  
  ...It took a long time to convert Einstein's idea into a practicable experiment. However, in Paris in the early 1980s a series of experiments was carried out by a team of French scientists led by Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and Gerard Roger. The apparatus used consisted of a source of light ? calcium atoms ? halfway along a long tube. Pairs of photons simultaneously emitted by the calcium atoms split so that each photon travelled towards opposite ends of the tube. At each end of the tube there were devices which would detect photons. Just before the detectors were further devices, called a light switch and polarizer, that could change a certain property ? the polarization ? of a photon within 0.000,000,01 second of the photon reaching it.
  
  The light switches were ingenious devices. Each consisted of a small cell of water in which two vibrating piezoelectric crystals set up an ultrasonic wave. Depending upon the exact state of the ultrasonic vibration when a photon arrived, the photon either passed through the cell, or was deflected at right angles. The photons then passed through the polarizer, which worked just like sunglasses to change the polarization of the photon. There were two polarizers behind each light switch, set at different angles, so that the photons could be polarized in two different ways.
  
  Why were such high-speed switches needed? Because the speed of the polarization change had to be faster than the time that it took a photon to travel to the end of the tube. This meant that, when the polarization was changed, there must be no possibility of a 'message' passing down the tube to the second photon (because by then the second photon would have reached the end of the tube and entered the detector). As the experiment proceeded, the light switch operated to continually change the polarization of the photons passing through it. The scientists measured the polarization of the photons arriving at each end of the tube. Photons which arrived simultaneously at the tube ends were obviously emitted simultaneously by the same calcium atom and therefore, according to quantum theory, should be linked in some mysterious way.
  
  There were two possible results of this experiment. If quantum theory was correct, the polarization of photons arriving simultaneously at the detectors would always be the same. If quantum theory was incorrect, then the polarization of the photons would not always be the same.
  
  Faster than light?
  
  The results went against Einstein. Aspect and his team found that if one of a pair of photons was polarized in a certain way, its twin at the other end of the apparatus would always be polarized in the same way. It is as if the photons know what is happening to each other, even though there can be no possible communication between them. So, there is a mysterious instantaneous faster-than-light 'action at a distance' between once-linked photons, and presumably between once-linked particles, too. Scientists and philosophers are still examining the implications of this result. According to the Big Bang theory, all particles now in existence originate from a common point at the birth of the universe. Does this mean that there is a hidden connection between all the particles in the universe? How does this web of connections manifest itself?

 

[TheTrueEqualizer]

I see that there are a few enlightened people here, but the number of lost souls is concerning.

I could explain for hours why and how God exsists, but the bottom line is........

Either you get it or you don't.

Hopefully the ones who don't get it... one day will. You will have to grow up, mature, understand why there is a right and wrong, and learn a bit more about life and death.

 

[SirFshAlot]

UG
You know that Science works to advance knowledge by disproving and casting aside falsifiable hypotheses.

fortunately for those of us willing to enjoy them, there are things in life that exist regardless of science's ability to prove or disprove them

think about it; people experienced happiness and joy before science ever existed to analyze it
life goes on without science
life goes on in spite of science

science isn't required to live


But.......if there is a god......oh boy, you atheistic scientists are gonna be eating crow for an eternity, perhaps.

 

[Zucchini]

fortunately for those of us willing to enjoy them, there are things in life that exist regardless of science's ability to prove or disprove them

??What kind of arguement is this? Things exist even though science hasn't gotten around to examining them? Well ofcourse. thats obvious to any scientist. Also, things like happiness do exist. People don't have to be told be some enlightened leader that happiness exists. It is readily apparent.. it can be measured. anyhow, very bad example.

and sure life will go on without science, but life would surely suck, not to mention many many people would be dead. Human suffering and ignorance would increase several fold. but i'm sure you'd love that since it would make people more pliable for religion.

And yet another example of a thiest running out of good arguments will resort to threats. I can't argue with u.. ur going to hell! you forget an ALL POWERFUL ALL GOOD GOD would have no hell. Maybe a fairy tale monster of a god for scaring children, but in reality it would conflict with the very definition of GOD.

and whitedog,

Its your job to prove god exists. There is no observable proof that god does, so its kind of easy to prove that he doesn't

 

[Whitedog]

TheTrueEqualizer,

Nicely said, though I wouldn't say it has to do with growing up, or maturity, but rather just coming to your senses. Even young immature people can understand God. I think the more grown up, and mature people get, the harder it is for them to understand God. They get so caught up in their own intelect they dismiss anything that's not &quot;logical&quot; or whatever...

 

[Zucchini]

&quot;I see that there are a few enlightened people here, but the number of lost souls is concerning.

I could explain for hours why and how God exsists, but the bottom line is........

Either you get it or you don't. &quot;

For hours eh? The problem is you probably wouldn't have any arguements that stood well against critical thought. As for those not agreeing with you being lost souls. I will have to pray for you.

 

[Engine]

>>There is no observable proof that god does, so its kind of easy to prove that he doesn't

Well, not really. &quot;Proving&quot; God's non-existence is just as impossible as &quot;proving&quot; God's existence.

 

[Whitedog]

Zuchinni, I think you're missing a point. We all know life would be &quot;much&quot; worse without science and medicine, but could certainly go on without it. None of us would want that would we? I certainly wouldn't.

The problem is, too many people try to mix up religion with science. Some people think that Science has the answer to everything. And because there is no &quot;sceientific&quot; evidence of God, this drags Science and Religion into the boxing ring.

Science IS Good. I doubt science is the work of the Devil, no sir. If people would just learn to leave science and God apart from each other, I think more people would be able to understand God better. But as long as you let science be the determining factor to every faucet of life, you'll never see anything the same as one who knows and understands God.

It's fact that science has answers to the complicated things most people can't do, like medicine, technology..etc... But there are a lot of things that is not for science to be the judge on.