Happy Atheist Forum

Here it is as requested.

I cannot speak for the rest of the Christian faith, but I will put forward my own theological theory. God is Love. However, He also wishes to be loved in return, and this presents a problem. Without free will the human race cannot love God freely, and when someone is forced to love it becomes, at most, a kind of lust or adoration. As such God gave us free will in the hope that He would be loved in return, however we used that free will to turn away from God (see Genesis chapter 3-4). In this we became imperfect and so could no-longer directly experience God (this is the metaphor of the Garden of Eden). At this point you may point out that only Adam and Eve sinned so why should we all be punished. Well the answer is simple; two bad apples infected the lot. Like a pitcher of water when a dot of ink is added, the imperfections of Adam and Eve quickly spread.

However, God does not give up and has, at various stages, handed down/inspired various religious texts to help humanity unite with the God-head once more-this is why most mystical texts have the same underlying message; they came from the same source.

To answer your question about allegory, it is quite simple. The Gospel of Thomas put it well: when Thomas was asked to divulge the secret teachings of Christ ‘Thomas replied, ‘If I tell you what he said you’ll pick up stones and hurl them at me’. It is easy to forget that not so long ago saying the wrong thing could quickly lead to death (see stoning of James the Just, the execution of Cathars etc). The reason texts such as these are written in metaphor and allegory is that when the Inquisition came knocking you could appear more innocent and orthodox than you otherwise would appear.

Most mystical traditions (Cabbalists, Greek Mystery Schools, Indian mystics etc) seem to indicate that the information contained in these allegories could be dangerous in the wrong hands. To use your own example Elisha killed a number of children for calling him bald (the concept of God and His actions in the world would require another few paragraphs, but it is more the power of God rather than God Himself who killed those children) is an anecdote. It may have been true or false, but that is not the point. What it is saying is that those who received that secret information (Elisha) can do great damage (killing children etc). This is yet another reason that this mystical information is conveyed in allegories-it prevents the information falling into the wrong hands.

Obviously the major problem of conveying any information in symbolism is that it is very difficult to interpret (kind of the point), and this the reason for the constant re-interpretation. Hope this enlightened you as to my beliefs concerning metaphor in the Bible.

Question; Is your god all knowing?

Thanks Dagda, appreciate it.    I should start by saying I don't claim to know if there is a God, or what he/she/it might be.   For some reason, the speculation is interesting to me, that's all.  So, on to speculating....

Quote from: "Dagda"I cannot speak for the rest of the Christian faith, but I will put forward my own theological theory. God is Love.

Which brings us immediately to the question, what is love?   Perhaps we assume we know, without really giving it much thought?   Both theists and atheists claim to be working towards a better world, ie. more love etc.   So what is it exactly that we are all reaching for?

QuoteHowever, He also wishes to be loved in return, and this presents a problem.

Well, yea, honestly, that concept has always presented a problem for me.   Hmm...   If we are parents, we might try to recall our most selfless loving moment with our kids.  Now multiply how we felt in those moments by one billion, to make ourselves a God.  

Are we concerned with our kids loving us back in such a situation?   Or is it instead all about us serving them?

QuoteAs such God gave us free will in the hope that He would be loved in return, however we used that free will to turn away from God (see Genesis chapter 3-4). In this we became imperfect and so could no-longer directly experience God (this is the metaphor of the Garden of Eden).

We could, if we wished, translate the theology you've stated in to a more modern "religion" as follows.

Evolution gave humans thought as the tool we would use to survive in our environment.   Other critters got wings, fins, big teeth, etc.  We got thought.

Thought is the ability to create and manipulate abstract symbols that represent reality.   We have the word "apple" inside our mind to represent the real world apple we can eat.

Our mind creates symbols by conceptually dividing reality.   We look out over our environment, and divide it conceptually in to tree, leaves, bark, soil, sky, water, animals, plants, air etc.  Words, the foundation of language and thought, are a dividing process.  

This symbol creating process is very useful for survival, but it introduces an illusion of division, when in fact reality is all one big thing.   Example, sunlight from 93 million miles away is an intimate crucial part of our daily life.   In a very real way, it is inaccurate to say the Sun is one thing, and we are another.

The most problematic division illusion that is created is the illusion of "me", an internal conceptual identity that is experienced as being separate from everything else in the universe.  

And thus, we don't usually don't experience "the Garden Of Eden", ie. the real world, where everything is unified.   Instead, thanks to our immersion in thought, we usually experience a cardboard mirror version of the real world, where we feel very separate and alone.  

And so, we go looking for saviors...

What is love?   Death.  

Death of this pervasive sense of division, of aloneness.

And now, we will turn to page 34 of our hymnal, and sing the Beavis and Butthead theme song together, while we pass the plate.  

QuoteAt this point you may point out that only Adam and Eve sinned so why should we all be punished.

Adam and Eve didn't sin, they simply accepted the method of survival nature had handed them.  They bit the apple of thought.  Or, perhaps it's more accurate to say, the apple of thought bit them.  

QuoteHowever, God does not give up and has, at various stages, handed down/inspired various religious texts to help humanity unite with the God-head once more-this is why most mystical texts have the same underlying message; they came from the same source.

Personally, in my Ignorance Religion, I don't feel God would be obsessed with religion.  I see him as a more practical kinda guy.   In this view, he would use religion to communicate with those who are tuned to that channel.   Imho, the same basic messages can be communicated in different language for those tuned to other channels.   And that message would be....

You are not alone.  You just feel alone.  Because of the way you are made.  It's not your fault.  Don't sweat it.   Don't worry, we'll fix it in time, 100% guaranteed.

Oh my, Reverend Blowhard has been generous enough with his bloviations this Sunday morning...

Thanks for your thought provoking post Dagda.

QuoteMost mystical traditions (Cabbalists, Greek Mystery Schools, Indian mystics etc) seem to indicate that the information contained in these allegories could be dangerous in the wrong hands. To use your own example Elisha killed a number of children for calling him bald (the concept of God and His actions in the world would require another few paragraphs, but it is more the power of God rather than God Himself who killed those children) is an anecdote. It may have been true or false, but that is not the point.

WHAT?
"To use your own example Elisha killed a number of children for calling him bald (the concept of God and His actions in the world would require another few paragraphs, but it is more the power of God rather than God Himself who killed those children) is an anecdote. It may have been true or false, but that is not the point."

so it doesnt bother you that "god is love" but god kills 42 kids with 2 bears. or maybe the power of god is love.. kinda like the idea of a suicide bomber is love.

QuoteIt may have been true or false, but that is not the point. What it is saying is that those who received that secret information (Elisha) can do great damage (killing children etc). This is yet another reason that this mystical information is conveyed in allegories-it prevents the information falling into the wrong hands.

so if i go to church every day for the rest of my life i can perhaps receive the secret info and become a sorcerer... a dungeons and dragons character... and take over the world with my super powers.
but if god is intelligent and as... wonderful as he is made out to be... how is it possible for this important info to fall into the wrong hands. it has to be left to mere human "poets" that make their words sound like utter nonsense to confuse everyone to prevent evil people from obtaining the said secret message....

maybe im just slow and got the completely wrong message.

To confuse things further...

We assume death is a sad regrettable event, something to be avoided.

How do we know this?

Quote from: "Typist"To confuse things further...

We assume death is a sad regrettable event, something to be avoided.

How do we know this?

we watch the body rot, turn into bones, and then finally dust. all of it. can the brain function if it isnt there?
as for any spiritual reasons i am not the one to disscuss that subject. i see no reason to believe i go to a pleasent theme park or a nasty place when i die.

Quote from: "G-Roll"we watch the body rot, turn into bones, and then finally dust. all of it.

True, factual.  

Quote from: "G-Roll"can the brain function if it isnt there?

Don't see how.

Doesn't really answer the question though.  

Upon what basis do we assume life is better than death?

Quote from: "Typist"

Quote from: "G-Roll"we watch the body rot, turn into bones, and then finally dust. all of it.

True, factual.  

Quote from: "G-Roll"can the brain function if it isnt there?

Don't see how.

Doesn't really answer the question though.  

Upon what basis do we assume life is better than death?

the dead dont have sex...

but seriously, what is there observable that makes death seem like a good time? ill make an attempt to open my mind but death seems like a drag to me.
i look forward to you introducing me to seeing death in a whole new light.

Quote from: "G-Roll"the dead dont have sex...

Ha, ha!   Good one.

But,  at the moment of greatest sex intensity, we die for just a moment.   Seriously.  Not physically of course.  But psychologically.   At the moment of orgasm, "me" is gone, dead, non-existing.   And this form of death is very very very popular, eh?

Quotebut seriously, what is there observable that makes death seem like a good time?

None that I know of.  What factual data do we have that death is a bad time?

Some people prefer to believe in heaven.   Other people prefer to believe death of the body is the end of everything.   All of it faith, no data for any of it.

Quotei look forward to you introducing me to seeing death in a whole new light.

Go have some sex, and then let's talk some more.  

Quote from: "Typist"But,  at the moment of greatest sex intensity, we die for just a moment.   Seriously.  Not physically of course.  But psychologically.   At the moment of orgasm, "me" is gone, dead, non-existing.   And this form of death is very very very popular, eh?

So death is one long orgasm?
...
I'm going to go kill myself right now.

Quotebut seriously, what is there observable that makes death seem like a good time? ill make an attempt to open my mind but death seems like a drag to me.
i look forward to you introducing me to seeing death in a whole new light.

ha!! best advise i have received here yet.

QuoteBut, at the moment of greatest sex intensity, we die for just a moment. Seriously. Not physically of course. But psychologically. At the moment of orgasm, "me" is gone, dead, non-existing. And this form of death is very very very popular, eh?

that moment is caused by chemicals in the brain. when we rot "return to dust" the brain is gone along with the rest of us. How would that great intensity come about all on its own? And how would one experience it?

QuoteNone that I know of. What factual data do we have that death is a bad time?

Some people prefer to believe in heaven. Other people prefer to believe death of the body is the end of everything. All of it faith, no data for any of it.

everything comes to a stop at death. that to me constitutes as a bad time. being removed from existence doesnt seem cool. and IMO any experience that can only seem positive by coming up with a pretty poetic reasoning is bad. its like sugar coating a terd. under all those sweet layers is....

i agree there is no data and its all up for reasoning and speculation. i also suppose we will find out first hand before science (or anyone else) can explain it to us.

Quote from: "kelltrill"So death is one long orgasm?

You got me, no idea.   All I was saying is that orgasm seems like a form of death.

Quote from: "kelltrill"I'm going to go kill myself right now.

There is a simpler solution, but I'm not gonna mention it on this family friendly forum.   You'll have to figure it out on your own.  

Quote from: "G-Roll"that moment is caused by chemicals in the brain.

Right.

Quotewhen we rot "return to dust" the brain is gone along with the rest of us. How would that great intensity come about all on its own? And how would one experience it?

You got me.  

Quoteeverything comes to a stop at death.

This is one THEORY that many people share.  There is no evidence to prove this theory, just as there is no evidence to heaven theories etc.

Quotethat to me constitutes as a bad time.

Well, we are wired to survive, so that's understandable.    

But logically, if there really is nothing, it doesn't quite follow to label nothing a bad time.   Sounds more like a place where bad times are no longer possible?  

Quotebeing removed from existence doesnt seem cool.

Unless of course, we wear a Beavis and Butthead T-shirt to our own funeral, in which case we are awesome rad cool!

Quoteand IMO any experience that can only seem positive by coming up with a pretty poetic reasoning is bad. its like sugar coating a terd. under all those sweet layers is....

It's not really that poetic to point out the fact that we simply don't know.  

Quotei agree there is no data and its all up for reasoning and speculation. i also suppose we will find out first hand before science (or anyone else) can explain it to us.

Ok, we're on the same page.  

What are the implications of understanding we have no data, and it's all up for reasoning and speculation?

QuoteUnless of course, we wear a Beavis and Butthead T-shirt to our own funeral, in which case we are awesome rad cool!

Lol i have no argument for your beavis and butthead logic.

QuoteThis is one THEORY that many people share. There is no evidence to prove this theory, just as there is no evidence to heaven theories etc.

Agreed for the most part. Although outside of a idea of heaven i don’t recall any positive theories being brought up. I have no idea what your take on heaven is, or if you feel it even exists... but, blah, blah, blah...
Its almost like saying, i don’t have to try and smoke crack to really know if its bad for me.

QuoteBut logically, if there really is nothing, it doesn't quite follow to label nothing a bad time. Sounds more like a place where bad times are no longer possible?

True, but a good time isn’t possible by the same logic. An eternity of nothing sounds like a bad time IMHO.

QuoteIt's not really that poetic to point out the fact that we simply don't know.

No i wasn’t referring to that. I found your comment of comparing death to intense positive experiences, such as an orgasm to be admirable, and even a bit of poetic. A philosophical poetic comparison... if there is such a thing...
Anyways i enjoyed it and once thought myself perhaps something in death existed on and a dream like state was entered. Then the realization that (as obvious as i now see it and deem it obvious) without brain function, or a brain at all. How can one enter any state?
In no ways do i claim to know all these answers, it is all my speculation and ignorant thoughts.  

Quote from: "G-Roll"I have no idea what your take on heaven is, or if you feel it even exists...

Yes, heaven exists!!  

As philosophy nerds, enthusiastic speculators in to the realm of the unknown, manic typoholic blowhards, and all around goofy joke-sters, we have found heaven....

... in this forum!  

Is Whitney the real Jesus????   For us, perhaps it is so!  

Proof that theists are right about everything!!

Quotebut, blah, blah, blah...

No, that is incorrect, completely false and totally wrong.  

The right answer is, yada, yada, yada.

QuoteNo, that is incorrect, completely false and totally wrong.

The right answer is, yada, yada, yada.

i stand corrected.

QuoteIs Whitney the real Jesus????

or deeper still, does she have a beard?

Quote from: "SSY"Question; Is your god all knowing?

No idea.

Quote from: "Typist"Which brings us immediately to the question, what is love? Perhaps we assume we know, without really giving it much thought? Both theists and atheists claim to be working towards a better world, ie. more love etc. So what is it exactly that we are all reaching for?

What indeed. I think the best description of love I have ever read was by a fictional character (obviously the author had a hand in it); love is understanding. Not understanding as in ‘I get you’, but a deep understanding or empathy with another being. This is a pretty lame description but this brings me to a second point: I think this is probably the wonderful thing about love; it is an experience thing-difficult to explain, but I think most people probably instantly understand what love is-it is when we begin to try and philosophise about it that things become muddled.

Quote from: "Typist"Well, yea, honestly, that concept has always presented a problem for me. Hmm... If we are parents, we might try to recall our most selfless loving moment with our kids. Now multiply how we felt in those moments by one billion, to make ourselves a God.

Are we concerned with our kids loving us back in such a situation? Or is it instead all about us serving them?

Not being a parent I would not be able to comment with any authority, but I suspect that most parents would like to be loved in return. God (like a parent) has watched humanity walk out on Him, and realises that He can no longer interfere with humanity; we must come back and ask for help. Although the simile that God is like a parent is quite good, but we must be wary of it-God is not a human parent and so probably does not think or operate in the same way. I think it is probably humanity trying to give God human dimensions so as to better understand Him.

Quote from: "Typist"We could, if we wished, translate the theology you've stated in to a more modern "religion" as follows.

Evolution gave humans thought as the tool we would use to survive in our environment. Other critters got wings, fins, big teeth, etc. We got thought.

Thought is the ability to create and manipulate abstract symbols that represent reality. We have the word "apple" inside our mind to represent the real world apple we can eat.

Our mind creates symbols by conceptually dividing reality. We look out over our environment, and divide it conceptually in to tree, leaves, bark, soil, sky, water, animals, plants, air etc. Words, the foundation of language and thought, are a dividing process.

This symbol creating process is very useful for survival, but it introduces an illusion of division, when in fact reality is all one big thing. Example, sunlight from 93 million miles away is an intimate crucial part of our daily life. In a very real way, it is inaccurate to say the Sun is one thing, and we are another.

The most problematic division illusion that is created is the illusion of "me", an internal conceptual identity that is experienced as being separate from everything else in the universe.

And thus, we don't usually don't experience "the Garden Of Eden", ie. the real world, where everything is unified. Instead, thanks to our immersion in thought, we usually experience a cardboard mirror version of the real world, where we feel very separate and alone.

And so, we go looking for saviors...

What is love? Death.

Death of this pervasive sense of division, of aloneness.

And now, we will turn to page 34 of our hymnal, and sing the Beavis and Butthead theme song together, while we pass the plate.

QuoteAt this point you may point out that only Adam and Eve sinned so why should we all be punished.

Adam and Eve didn't sin, they simply accepted the method of survival nature had handed them. They bit the apple of thought. Or, perhaps it's more accurate to say, the apple of thought bit them.

QuoteHowever, God does not give up and has, at various stages, handed down/inspired various religious texts to help humanity unite with the God-head once more-this is why most mystical texts have the same underlying message; they came from the same source.

Personally, in my Ignorance Religion, I don't feel God would be obsessed with religion. I see him as a more practical kinda guy. In this view, he would use religion to communicate with those who are tuned to that channel. Imho, the same basic messages can be communicated in different language for those tuned to other channels. And that message would be....

You are not alone. You just feel alone. Because of the way you are made. It's not your fault. Don't sweat it. Don't worry, we'll fix it in time, 100% guaranteed.

Oh my, Reverend Blowhard has been generous enough with his bloviations this Sunday morning...

Thanks for your thought provoking post Dagda.

Agree with almost everything you said here.

Quote from: "G-Roll"

QuoteMost mystical traditions (Cabbalists, Greek Mystery Schools, Indian mystics etc) seem to indicate that the information contained in these allegories could be dangerous in the wrong hands. To use your own example Elisha killed a number of children for calling him bald (the concept of God and His actions in the world would require another few paragraphs, but it is more the power of God rather than God Himself who killed those children) is an anecdote. It may have been true or false, but that is not the point.

WHAT?
"To use your own example Elisha killed a number of children for calling him bald (the concept of God and His actions in the world would require another few paragraphs, but it is more the power of God rather than God Himself who killed those children) is an anecdote. It may have been true or false, but that is not the point."

so it doesnt bother you that "god is love" but god kills 42 kids with 2 bears. or maybe the power of god is love.. kinda like the idea of a suicide bomber is love.

This is quite complex, so stay with me. In Psalm 82 it says ‘Ye are gods’, Christ talks about the Kingdom of Heaven being within the person and Genesis talks about being made in the image of God. What does this mean? The power of Heaven is within the human; Gnostics called it Gnosis. When a miracle happens it is not because some Zeus like God has arbitrarily chosen a person to cure, but because that person, or someone close to them, has broken that barrier between their soul and God (even if only for an instant) and used that power to cure. This can be done in the unconsciousness, so when that miracle happens, God is declared the sole cause. However, what can be used to cure can be used to kill. That is what Elisha did; God did kill 42 children, but only because Elisha used the power of the Kingdom of Heaven.

so the televangelist on the tv is real?

And this whole idea is based on psalms 82 sounding familiar to a sentence in genesis?
Honestly it isn’t complicated. You believe in magic.

Quote from: "Dagda"

Quote from: "SSY"Question; Is your god all knowing?

No idea.

From what knowledge or information did you form your theory? You have yet to provide any proof as to why your theory should be taken seriously, do you have anything to back this up?

Quote from: "Dagda"I think the best description of love I have ever read was by a fictional character (obviously the author had a hand in it); love is understanding. Not understanding as in ‘I get you’, but a deep understanding or empathy with another being.

How about a lowering, or in an ideal perfect world, elimination, of the boundaries between one person and another?   Is that sorta what you're saying too?   If yes, then a next question might be, what creates the boundaries?

QuoteI think this is probably the wonderful thing about love; it is an experience thing-difficult to explain, but I think most people probably instantly understand what love is-it is when we begin to try and philosophise about it that things become muddled.

An experience thing.   Versus an abstraction thing.  I vote we dive in to this as deeply as we can.    Maybe love is always there, and it's the abstractions that cover it up, and create the boundaries?

So....God wants people to love him but created people in a manner that allowed them to become flawed so that they couldn't participate in a direct relationship with him.  Then when he creates books to allow a quasi-relationship to occur via the imagination he allows it to be written in code so that his loving message can't be known to everyone.

That makes a lot of sense....  

Quote from: "Typist"Upon what basis do we assume life is better than death?

I think it's more of an issue of a god allowing children to be ripped to death by bear teeth (what a horrible way to die) than it is an issue of a god causing the children to die.  If the verse said that the children vanished into the afterlife is wouldn't be that nasty of a verse (assuming that they don't go to hell).

Quote from: "Whitney"So....God wants people to love him but created people in a manner that allowed them to become flawed so that they couldn't participate in a direct relationship with him.  Then when he creates books to allow a quasi-relationship to occur via the imagination he allows it to be written in code so that his loving message can't be known to everyone.

That makes a lot of sense....  :pop:

Quote from: "Whitney"So....God wants people to love him but created people in a manner that allowed them to become flawed so that they couldn't participate in a direct relationship with him.  Then when he creates books to allow a quasi-relationship to occur via the imagination he allows it to be written in code so that his loving message can't be known to everyone.

That makes a lot of sense....  

Well we are made in the image of God, so if God has human flaws...

Honestly, atheists take the bible more literally than fundamentalists!

Quote from: "SSY"

Quote from: "Dagda"

Quote from: "SSY"Question; Is your god all knowing?

No idea.

My theory is not based on psalm 82, but I have found that many people surfing the web (myself included) tend to have a great fear of a colossal wall of text in a forum. As outlining the ins-and-outs of my entire life philosophy would probably take up pages, I thought I would keep it simple. I would be more than happy to answer specific questions.

As to believing in magic, I wouldn’t use that word because it has so many unfortunate connotations. Why don’t we call it a belief in the collective unconsciousness. The placebo effect is well documented. People do better when they believe they are going to do better. This is evidence of the power of the human brain over the human body. Of course if I came up to you before these studies were conducted and said that I believed that the mind held great power over the body, you probably would have said that I believed in magic. I think this is the way the human mind works; something it does not understand it tends to brand as heresy (in this modern world that would be magic) and mock it. Perhaps this is being needlessly insulting, but then I am just returning the favour.  


From what knowledge or information did you form your theory? You have yet to provide any proof as to why your theory should be taken seriously, do you have anything to back this up?

I assume you mean my theory as a whole rather than my theory if I have any idea whether God is all knowing or not. Actually I do. Scientific stuff too, although I am loathed to called it a theory-I have to do much more investigation before I step into that minefield. However, I was asked to set up a new thread about my theological beliefs on the basis that I would discuss them theoretically/philosophically. Of course if everyone wishes me to go off at a tangent I suppose I could, but would rather keep it philosophical at this stage.

Quote from: "G-Roll"so the televangelist on the tv is real?

And this whole idea is based on psalms 82 sounding familiar to a sentence in genesis?
Honestly it isn’t complicated. You believe in magic.

My theory is not based on psalm 82, but I have found that many people surfing the web (myself included) tend to have a great fear of a colossal wall of text in a forum. As outlining the ins-and-outs of my entire life philosophy would probably take up pages, I thought I would keep it simple. I would be more than happy to answer specific questions.

As to believing in magic, I wouldn’t use that word because it has so many unfortunate connotations. Why don’t we call it a belief in the collective unconsciousness. The placebo effect is well documented. People do better when they believe they are going to do better. This is evidence of the power of the human brain over the human body. Of course if I came up to you before these studies were conducted and said that I believed that the mind held great power over the body, you probably would have said that I believed in magic. I think this is the way the human mind works; something it does not understand it tends to brand as heresy (in this modern world that would be magic) and mock it. Perhaps this is being needlessly insulting, but then I am just returning the favour.

Quote from: "Dagda"

Quote from: "Whitney"So....God wants people to love him but created people in a manner that allowed them to become flawed so that they couldn't participate in a direct relationship with him.  Then when he creates books to allow a quasi-relationship to occur via the imagination he allows it to be written in code so that his loving message can't be known to everyone.

That makes a lot of sense....  

Well we are made in the image of God, so if God has human flaws...

Honestly, atheists take the bible more literally than fundamentalists!

Actually, I take it less literally than the majority of people...I don't think it was ever intended to be read as if all the stories are real.  The problem comes in when you start trying to apply it as a rule book for life.  What I said above was completely based on pointing out the issues with what you said, not what is in the bible.  The bible isn't exactly clear on the perfection or imperfection of God.

I see no reason why anyone would want to worship an largely flawed being that has a temper and gets mad at it's children for not doing what it wants even though it doesn't try to interact directly with them anymore due to some odd flaw in his creation equation.

Quote from: "Whitney"I see no reason why anyone would want to worship an largely flawed being that has a temper and gets mad at it's children for not doing what it wants even though it doesn't try to interact directly with them anymore due to some odd flaw in his creation equation.

Personally, I worship nature.  You know, the measurable real world we can see with our own eyes.   And I do mean worship.  Just spent an entire week in the woods, doing nothing but wandering around all day, connecting with reality.

And if we connect with nature, and examine it closely, we see it is filled with incredible peace and beauty.   And some really nasty ugliness too.   And everything in between.

Whether we call it God, or Nature, I sense it contains all things.   It's bigger than all the little categories our human minds are obsessed with.

I don't see the point in "worshiping" nature either.  Enjoying a nature hike isn't worship.  Anyway, dagda is talking about God of the bible...not an animist-like god so you are off topic.

Quote from: "Whitney"I don't see the point in "worshiping" nature either.

Ok, let's make the point, and try to steer back on topic.

Billions of people want to have the worship experience, and are going to continue doing it, whether you like it or not.    And you don't like it.  Facts.

If you don't want people to worship Jesus and the Bible, you might help implement your plan, reach your goal, by offering them something else to worship, ie. the real world which can be observed and measured.

Quote from: "Whitney"I see no reason why anyone would want to worship an largely flawed being that has a temper and gets mad at it's children for not doing what it wants even though it doesn't try to interact directly with them anymore due to some odd flaw in his creation equation.

Really? I suppose I am the opposite way about. A big thing in Christian theology is forgiveness, and I think forgiveness is impossible unless there is some understanding as to what drove the ‘sinner’ to commit the act which led them into ‘sin’. If someone drives into the back of my car because they had a moments laps of concentration, I could probably forgive them as I understand that it is all too easy for the mind to wander. However, if I was perfect I might not be able to understand, hence forgive, the driver for running into the back of my car. This is a bit of a trivial analogy, but I think it illustrates my argument. A perfect God cannot relate to we humans (relation comes through similarities), and I think this creates somewhat of a tyrant; divine justice is handed down irrespective of the context of the action. However, a God with the same kind of Mind as humanity can empathise with the human condition far more thoroughly; indeed, this flawed God becomes far more personal and, in my opinion, a far more worthy deity than the perfect tyranny that your image of God would represent.

But there are already imperfect beings with flawed, human-type minds and the ability to forgive....us!

So, philosophically speaking, of what use is such a god, or belief in such a god, to me? to anyone?

What is the point of a god? Why not cut out the middle man and make the best of ourselves?

Quote from: "Typist"And you don't like it.

You need to stop putting words in people's mouths.  Me personally not seeing the point in worshiping something doesn't equate to me wanting to make people stop worshiping things.  I swear you say things on here just to cause arguments and I'm getting tired of it.

Dagda...I still don't see the point of worshiping something that would then basically be the equivalent of a supernatural parent.  I don't worship my parents, but I do love them.

QuoteYou need to stop putting words in people's mouths.  

And you need to stop claiming I have, when I haven't.   It's utterly clear how you feel about worship.   And you have every right to feel that way.  So why should we pretend otherwise?

QuoteI swear you say things on here just to cause arguments and I'm getting tired of it.

It's actually physically impossible for any of to cause an argument on a forum.  Takes two to tango as the saying goes.  

Logic. Facts.  Clear minded thinking.  That's what atheists are promoting, right?  How about we all drop our victim poses, given that it's factually impossible for us to be victims here?

QuoteDagda...I still don't see the point of worshiping something that would then basically be the equivalent of a supernatural parent.

Right.

You don't see the point.

Billions of others do see the point.

Everybody can do whatever they want.

So what?  Where's the problem?

Quote from: "Dagda"Really? I suppose I am the opposite way about. A big thing in Christian theology is forgiveness, and I think forgiveness is impossible unless there is some understanding as to what drove the ‘sinner’ to commit the act which led them into ‘sin’. If someone drives into the back of my car because they had a moments laps of concentration, I could probably forgive them as I understand that it is all too easy for the mind to wander. However, if I was perfect I might not be able to understand, hence forgive, the driver for running into the back of my car. This is a bit of a trivial analogy, but I think it illustrates my argument. A perfect God cannot relate to we humans (relation comes through similarities), and I think this creates somewhat of a tyrant; divine justice is handed down irrespective of the context of the action. However, a God with the same kind of Mind as humanity can empathise with the human condition far more thoroughly; indeed, this flawed God becomes far more personal and, in my opinion, a far more worthy deity than the perfect tyranny that your image of God would represent.

Your concept of flawed gods reminds me a lot of Greek mythology where the gods and goddesses were often 'flawed' in some way.  Zeus was a womanizer, Hera was jealous, etc.  While I see the Greek mythology as nothing more than mythology, I do like the Greek concept of God/s far more than the Christian concept of God for this very reason.

Dagda

Answer these question, and please, do not refer to the bible.

a) Why do you think the universe was caused?

b) If it was caused, why do you think there was only one cause rather than several?

c) If there was only one single cause of the universe, why do you think it was intelligent?

Just a quick question for my own personal enjoyment...

Dagda and Whitney, will you both define 'worship'?  I think a definition (or even a brief start to a definition) would help in the discussion quite a bit.

Quote from: "Ihateusernames"Just a quick question for my own personal enjoyment...

Dagda and Whitney, will you both define 'worship'?  I think a definition (or even a brief start to a definition) would help in the discussion quite a bit.

 "idolize: love unquestioningly and uncritically or to excess; venerate as an idol"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&clie ... d=0CAYQkAE (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=LSn&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:worship&ei=cZeES5-vIcSXtgfilZ31Ag&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved=0CAYQkAE)

Worship can mean (and indeed does mean in the modern context) what Whitney has just described, however Christianity is quite old and the terminology takes a while to change in conservative institutions. Worship originally meant to respect or honour. As such if you called a Judge ‘Your worship’ it did not mean that anyone actually thought the judge a god, but instead that they were honouring the person and the institution they represented. As such many people worship their parents. Obviously in contemporary Christianity God is worshiped in the form Whitney outlaid, but I would be interested to know if you would feel more comfortable worshiping a god as you do a judge?
I must apologies in my justification for the worship of a ‘flawed’ being. I outlined the worth of that worship rather than the point of it. Basically the point of worshiping God is as follows; humanity has constructed mental/spiritual barriers between themselves and the God. These have been erected in defence of the Self-by its very nature the Self cannot survive when subjected wholly to the Universal God/Tao/whatever. However, God is as much a part of our minds as anything else, and in erecting these barriers we shut a part of our selves out. The point of spirituality is to find that happy balance between Self and Selfless.
Perhaps you think I am talking complete garbage, but consider this; resent studies into the more spiritually active members of society have found that, as a general rule, they tend to be happier and healthier than their counterparts (thanks to a mild case of schizophrenia, but never mind). This I believe is because in their spirituality, they have begun to break down the barrier between God and Self, and as such have begun to feel the effects of becoming a whole being again-connecting to the collective unconsciousness if you like. Therefore the point of worshiping this flawed being is to re-connect with oneself.
On reading this I can see that it very much appears that this is New Age mumbo-jumbo, but I do hope that at a theoretical level at least you can see the sense of the argument, if not necessarily agreeing with it-by sense I mean that it makes sense as long as you accept basic premises (e.g. holes are at a minimum). Of course I must delve deeper into the scientific and philosophical material before coming forward with any kind of factual evidence, but I can promise that this ‘theory’ or preposition was inspired by a reading of scientific material.

Quote from: "notself"Dagda

Answer these question, and please, do not refer to the bible.

a) Why do you think the universe was caused?

b) If it was caused, why do you think there was only one cause rather than several?

c) If there was only one single cause of the universe, why do you think it was intelligent?

A)   No idea why it was caused, but as to how I am drifting toward the idea that something does not happen unless it is observed, therefore the Universe could not have been created until humans saw the Universe, but humans did not see the Universe until after it was created. A never ending paradox.
B)   Could have been several, I suppose. Why did the Roman Empire fall? NO one reason. Perhaps the Universe is similar. Perhaps not.
C)   Might not have been intelligent in the way humans understand it. Perhaps the Universe just popped into existence. Perhaps consciousness itself just happened to make the Universe happen. Probably never know. Personally I am more interested in the creation and development of Mind rather than material Universe.

Dagda

QuoteBasically the point of worshiping God is as follows; humanity has constructed mental/spiritual barriers between themselves and the God. These have been erected in defence of the Self-by its very nature the Self cannot survive when subjected wholly to the Universal God/Tao/whatever. However, God is as much a part of our minds as anything else, and in erecting these barriers we shut a part of our selves out. The point of spirituality is to find that happy balance between Self and Selfless.

Assuming for point of discussion that god is part of our minds, then why worship?  Doesn't the act of worship separate the mind from god, ie. mind is worshiping part of itself?  This type of prayer seems to be developing separation of the mind from the other so you comment doesn't make sense to me.    

QuotePerhaps you think I am talking complete garbage, but consider this; resent studies into the more spiritually active members of society have found that, as a general rule, they tend to be happier and healthier than their counterparts (thanks to a mild case of schizophrenia, but never mind).

What you refer to was not a study but a survey.  People who believe in gods self reported that they were happier.  No brain scans were done to see if the happiness centers of the brain were more active with theists.  However such studies have been done with atheist Buddhist monks and these atheists do have more active happiness centers.The original article from Harvard is no longer up. The below is a report of the study by the Wall Street Journal.  http://psyphz.psych.wisc.edu/web/News/M ... _11-04.htm (http://psyphz.psych.wisc.edu/web/News/Meditation_Alters_Brain_WSJ_11-04.htm)

Using the brain scan called functional magnetic resonance imaging, the scientists pinpointed regions that were active during compassion meditation. In almost every case, the enhanced activity was greater in the monks' brains than the novices'. Activity in the left prefrontal cortex (the seat of positive emotions such as happiness) swamped activity in the right prefrontal (site of negative emotions and anxiety), something never before seen from purely mental activity. A sprawling circuit that switches on at the sight of suffering also showed greater activity in the monks. So did regions responsible for planned movement, as if the monks' brains were itching to go to the aid of those in distress.

Dagda

Quote from: "notself"Answer these question, and please, do not refer to the bible.
a) Why do you think the universe was caused?
b) If it was caused, why do you think there was only one cause rather than several?
c) If there was only one single cause of the universe, why do you think it was intelligent?

QuoteA)   No idea why it was caused, but as to how I am drifting toward the idea that something does not happen unless it is observed, therefore the Universe could not have been created until humans saw the Universe, but humans did not see the Universe until after it was created. A never ending paradox.
B)   Could have been several, I suppose. Why did the Roman Empire fall? NO one reason. Perhaps the Universe is similar. Perhaps not.
C)   Might not have been intelligent in the way humans understand it. Perhaps the Universe just popped into existence. Perhaps consciousness itself just happened to make the Universe happen. Probably never know. Personally I am more interested in the creation and development of Mind rather than material Universe.

I think you will make more progress if you eliminate the words god and creation from your process.  There is no absolute necessity for the universe to have a beginning let alone a creator. This just begs the question of who or what created the creator.  Better to move forward in your exploration from the point that existence exists and is ever changing, because, it may be more a fact than any unchanging/eternal gods.

That brings us to the concept of mind.  What do you mean by mind?

QuotePeople do better when they believe they are going to do better. This is evidence of the power of the human brain over the human body.

I agree with this part.

QuoteOf course if I came up to you before these studies were conducted and said that I believed that the mind held great power over the body, you probably would have said that I believed in magic. I think this is the way the human mind works; something it does not understand it tends to brand as heresy (in this modern world that would be magic) and mock it.

No.
You stating that the mind has powers that affect the body (like attitude, will, and confidence) is totally different than claiming to harness the powers of heaven to wreak havoc on the earth. Or to use jesus powers as a healing method. Its honestly silly. Just as silly as if i where to claim if i spin around in a circle really fast i can travel back through time and i wont even be dizzy when i get there.
I will agree to disagree seeming we see this from two totally different sides. I doubt anything fruitful would come from our dialect anyhow.

QuotePerhaps this is being needlessly insulting, but then I am just returning the favour.

Fair enough, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
On a friendly note.... i don’t see you as stupid, and find other posts of yours insightful... just i couldn’t let this one go...

Quote from: "G-Roll"No.
You stating that the mind has powers that affect the body (like attitude, will, and confidence) is totally different than claiming to harness the powers of heaven to wreak havoc on the earth. Or to use jesus powers as a healing method. Its honestly silly. Just as silly as if i where to claim if i spin around in a circle really fast i can travel back through time and i wont even be dizzy when i get there.
I will agree to disagree seeming we see this from two totally different sides. I doubt anything fruitful would come from our dialect anyhow.

I fear that there has been a misunderstanding. I believe that the Kingdom of Heaven has the potential to reside within all of us. When the ‘powers of Heaven’ are called down upon the earth, it is a mere extension of the mind-body relationship (the mind effects the material Universe out with its own body). As such it is an extension of the placebo effect-where as in those studies the mind was proven to affect the body, I am proposing that the mind can also affect reality in unusual ways. When this collective mind comes together, we call it God.

Quote from: "notself". I think you will make more progress if you eliminate the words god and creation from your process. There is no absolute necessity for the universe to have a beginning let alone a creator. This just begs the question of who or what created the creator. Better to move forward in your exploration from the point that existence exists and is ever changing, because, it may be more a fact than any unchanging/eternal gods.

That brings us to the concept of mind. What do you mean by mind?

Why would I remove the word God? This is the name which I feel comfortable with when describing the ideas in the thread.
You do not have a problem with the Universe having no beginning, but find it difficult to except that a creator has no creator?
What is mind? What indeed. Is the mind eternal or trapped in the body? Does it reside in the brain or out with space-time? What is its relationship with the material Universe? Is it the brain or something more? I think I agree with Jung; the brain is not the mind. Beyond this it is hard to say. I would like to think it survives bodily death, but that could be my own bias. Its relationship with the Universe is probably more concrete and direct than we first supposed, but this, I think, means that it can not reside out with space-time (how can something out with reality affect that said reality?) If this is so, where does mind reside? In the brain seems too simplistic (where about?), so we are left with the problem of a disembodied mind following us around. A tough question for which I think there is no easy answer.

Quote from: "Typist"Our mind creates symbols by conceptually dividing reality. We look out over our environment, and divide it conceptually in to tree, leaves, bark, soil, sky, water, animals, plants, air etc. Words, the foundation of language and thought, are a dividing process.

This symbol creating process is very useful for survival, but it introduces an illusion of division, when in fact reality is all one big thing. Example, sunlight from 93 million miles away is an intimate crucial part of our daily life. In a very real way, it is inaccurate to say the Sun is one thing, and we are another.

The most problematic division illusion that is created is the illusion of "me", an internal conceptual identity that is experienced as being separate from everything else in the universe.

And thus, we don't usually don't experience "the Garden Of Eden", ie. the real world, where everything is unified. Instead, thanks to our immersion in thought, we usually experience a cardboard mirror version of the real world, where we feel very separate and alone.

I like these thoughts - your "cardboard mirror version of the real world" is very accurate.  

I was an atheist until I met God.  Unfortunately I bounced off Him into religion, which has little in common with Him.  It was there I learned to separate and isolate - concepts foreign to Jesus' teachings...  

Genesis: (a) God said, "Let us make man in our image..." (b) God said, "Don't eat this fruit..." (c) God said, "Look! Man ate the fruit and has become as one of us, to know both good and evil..."  The fact that Adam's intro to evil has made him more like God indicates that the original Adam was not the finished product.  Like all living things, God is reproducing Himself, and we are / will be the new but not separate (The two shall be one) Almighty.  

My reality / your entertainment....

Peace I/s

I enjoy the watchmaker's argument. You look at God and see human characteristics. Therefore, we conclude there was a human creator behind him.

QuoteDagda

Quote from: "notself". I think you will make more progress if you eliminate the words god and creation from your process. There is no absolute necessity for the universe to have a beginning let alone a creator. This just begs the question of who or what created the creator. Better to move forward in your exploration from the point that existence exists and is ever changing, because, it may be more a fact than any unchanging/eternal gods.
That brings us to the concept of mind. What do you mean by mind?

Why would I remove the word God? This is the name which I feel comfortable with when describing the ideas in the thread.
You do not have a problem with the Universe having no beginning, but find it difficult to except that a creator has no creator?

I have a problem with a creator because I see no necessity for a creator.  Why does your world/universe view require an god to complete it? What does a god add to your thinking other than magic?

Quote from: "Dagda"What is mind? What indeed. Is the mind eternal or trapped in the body? Does it reside in the brain or out with space-time? What is its relationship with the material Universe? Is it the brain or something more? I think I agree with Jung; the brain is not the mind. Beyond this it is hard to say. I would like to think it survives bodily death, but that could be my own bias. Its relationship with the Universe is probably more concrete and direct than we first supposed, but this, I think, means that it can not reside out with space-time (how can something out with reality affect that said reality?) If this is so, where does mind reside? In the brain seems too simplistic (where about?), so we are left with the problem of a disembodied mind following us around. A tough question for which I think there is no easy answer.

Mind is a word like the word self.  It doesn't exist on its own but rather is a term used to describe a process of interaction between form (the body), sense perception (the ability to touch, see, etc.), feeling (sense identification such as hot cold), mental formations (thoughts) and consciousness.  Self is a concept like mind that is made up of the interactions of the same five things.  Self does not exist as a separate entity either.

Your belief in god and eternal mind is unsupported even by your own thought process.  You spent an entire paragraph circling the drain on the subject because your concepts of god and mind are magical thinking. What does the concept of god do for you other than give you the illusion that you have a daddy in the sky?  Why do you need a god?

Quote from: "notself"Mind is a word like the word self.  It doesn't exist on its own but rather is a term used to describe a process of interaction between form (the body), sense perception (the ability to touch, see, etc.), feeling (sense identification such as hot cold), mental formations (thoughts) and consciousness.  Self is a concept like mind that is made up of the interactions of the same five things.  Self does not exist as a separate entity either.

I disagree. Try and remember your first memory. Got it? Well according to physics, you were not actually there. Not one atom that was you then is you now. So how can there possibly be a continuity between you then and now? Obviously you are not two different people, but what is providing that continuity? I believe it is mind. Of course you can disagree with this interpretation, but please don’t pretend that your definition of mind is somehow more justifiable than mine. We simply don’t know enough about physics yet to ascertain whether mind exists.

Why must there be a God? Although it is (perhaps) conceivable that we got here without some kind of God, that is not the same as saying that we got here without some kind of God. This Universe had a beginning, a cause. There may or may not have been a Universe before that, and there may or may not be an endless line of repeating Big Bang to end scenarios, but this Universe had a beginning. This cause or beginning we call God. Of course we (atheists included) are guilty of projecting their own image of God onto this cause. Even if this cause was gas, or colliding atoms, this effect created or caused this Universe, therefore is called God. However, as seen above, I think this cause was something more than colliding atoms, at least in the creation of mind.

Quote from: "Ellainix"I enjoy the watchmaker's argument. You look at God and see human characteristics. Therefore, we conclude there was a human creator behind him.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that because God has human characteristics is the Christian tradition, you conclude that He is an invention of humans? Well that is a nice preposition, but can you back it up, or were you just adding you own thoughts to the debate? I, of course would disagree. God has human characteristics because we are made in His image. That and humans tend to give everything human characteristics. For instance, if I say the tree looked fierce, I have placed a human characteristic on a tree so as to better describe the characteristics of the tree. This does not mean trees are human inventions.

Quote from: "Dagda"For instance, if I say the tree looked fierce, I have placed a human characteristic on a tree so as to better describe the characteristics of the tree. This does not mean trees are human inventions.

So far, I've really liked (albeit disagreed with some of it) every point you've made. But this tree analogy... not apple and apples. Sure, you say a tree looked fierce you've anthropomorphized the tree, and it most certainly doesn't make the tree a human invention. But there is evidence the tree exists because I can see it, touch it and carelessly smack in to it in the woods. Unlike a God with human characteristics.

And why wouldn't the Christian God be human like? Most made up God's that are now considered mythology had human characteristics, and they were juxtaposed with things that could be seen or experienced: the sun, the sea, the moon, the wind, lightning, rain, stars, and not one of those things appears remotely close to human. So why wouldn't the Christian God, and any future human created Gods carry resemblance to its followers?

Hismikeness

Quote from: "Dagda"

Quote from: "Ellainix"I enjoy the watchmaker's argument. You look at God and see human characteristics. Therefore, we conclude there was a human creator behind him.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that because God has human characteristics is the Christian tradition, you conclude that He is an invention of humans? Well that is a nice preposition, but can you back it up, or were you just adding you own thoughts to the debate? I, of course would disagree. God has human characteristics because we are made in His image.

So god is a watch?

PS... that is not a preposition; that is a pronoun.

Quote from: "Dagda"

Quote from: "Ellainix"I enjoy the watchmaker's argument. You look at God and see human characteristics. Therefore, we conclude there was a human creator behind him.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that because God has human characteristics is the Christian tradition, you conclude that He is an invention of humans? Well that is a nice preposition, but can you back it up, or were you just adding you own thoughts to the debate? I, of course would disagree. God has human characteristics because we are made in His image. That and humans tend to give everything human characteristics. For instance, if I say the tree looked fierce, I have placed a human characteristic on a tree so as to better describe the characteristics of the tree. This does not mean trees are human inventions.

I think your tree analogy is bad.

No one claims that a tree has supernatural powers or created the entire universe. No one has any trouble believing that a tree exists. If you tried to convince someone that a fierce-looking tree they have never seen exists, they would have no trouble believing as they have already seen thousands of trees.

Quote from: "Ellainix"No one claims that a tree has supernatural powers or created the entire universe. No one has any trouble believing that a tree exists. If you tried to convince someone that a fierce-looking tree they have never seen exists, they would have no trouble believing as they have already seen thousands of trees.

I agree with Ellanix - Experiential knowledge trumps hearsay, and we tend to trust that which we can extrapolate from experience.  The less we can relate new to old the less we trust.

The Christians in the book of Acts had experienced God.  Their experiences sound fun and exciting, but are they real?

"Are you experienced?" ~ Jimmy Hendrix

Peace - I/s

didnt read all this, but to the op: why did god create two bad apples? and to the people talking about why life is better than death, the obvious answer is evolution. critters that didnt see the reason in staying alive died and didnt have as many children.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"

Quote from: "Ellainix"No one claims that a tree has supernatural powers or created the entire universe. No one has any trouble believing that a tree exists. If you tried to convince someone that a fierce-looking tree they have never seen exists, they would have no trouble believing as they have already seen thousands of trees.

I agree with Ellanix - Experiential knowledge trumps hearsay, and we tend to trust that which we can extrapolate from experience.  The less we can relate new to old the less we trust.

The Christians in the book of Acts had experienced God.  Their experiences sound fun and exciting, but are they real?

"Are you experienced?" ~ Jimmy Hendrix

Peace - I/s

I have experience all sorts of things when I am in deep meditation including an episode of overwhelming joy.  If I were a Christian I would say that these experiences proved there was a god.  As an atheist and a Theravada Buddhist, I know that these experiences were the result of a deeply concentrated mind.  All of these 'god' experiences are from the mind alone.

Quotequote="Dagda"]

Quote from: "notself"Mind is a word like the word self.  It doesn't exist on its own but rather is a term used to describe a process of interaction between form (the body), sense perception (the ability to touch, see, etc.), feeling (sense identification such as hot cold), mental formations (thoughts) and consciousness.  Self is a concept like mind that is made up of the interactions of the same five things.  Self does not exist as a separate entity either.

I disagree. Try and remember your first memory. Got it? Well according to physics, you were not actually there. Not one atom that was you then is you now. So how can there possibly be a continuity between you then and now? Obviously you are not two different people, but what is providing that continuity? I believe it is mind. Of course you can disagree with this interpretation, but please don’t pretend that your definition of mind is somehow more justifiable than mine. We simply don’t know enough about physics yet to ascertain whether mind exists.

The cells in the body and their component atoms are not replaced all at once.  Memories are repeated continually as we think.  This is called reminiscing.  It reinforces those memory pathways.  But you must already know all this.  You are just trying to ignore simple scientific and neurological facts in order to cling to your sky mommy.  What does your god do for you why do you need her?

QuoteThis Universe had a beginning, a cause. There may or may not have been a Universe before that, and there may or may not be an endless line of repeating Big Bang to end scenarios, but this Universe had a beginning. This cause or beginning we call God. Of course we (atheists included) are guilty of projecting their own image of God onto this cause. Even if this cause was gas, or colliding atoms, this effect created or caused this Universe, therefore is called God. However, as seen above, I think this cause was something more than colliding atoms, at least in the creation of mind.

No one has identified the beginning of the Universe.  People talk about the singularity and big bang, but there is no idea about the nature of the singularity itself because the laws of physics to not apply.  Now you can call the singularity god, but then you have to realize that your god is no longer with us.  The singularity is now the universe as we know it. Since we are made up of the very matter and energy of the singularity then you might as well worship yourself as your god.

By the way, you never defined what you mean by mind or what you mean by god.  What are the attributes of each?  What precisely do you expect from your god?

Quote from: "notself"All of these 'god' experiences are from the mind alone.

Ah yes, I remember the bliss of Logical Certainty.  Your explanation is plausible, but it doesn’t explain the precognition....

Peace - I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Ah yes, I remember the bliss of Logical Certainty.  Your explanation is plausible, but it doesn’t explain the precognition....

Peace - I/s

... but magic does?

Quote from: "idiotsavant"

Quote from: "notself"All of these 'god' experiences are from the mind alone.

Ah yes, I remember the bliss of Logical Certainty.  Your explanation is plausible, but it doesn’t explain the precognition....

Peace - I/s

"The presognition"? Are you speaking of prediction? If so please give examples of verifiable events.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"

Quote from: "notself"All of these 'god' experiences are from the mind alone.

Ah yes, I remember the bliss of Logical Certainty.  Your explanation is plausible, but it doesn’t explain the precognition....

Peace - I/s

I want to see precognition explained.

Precognition/prediction is the result of taking in various bits and pieces of information, subconsciously organizing the data and coming up with a probability (a hunch).

I got a hunch three times and was correct each time.  The first time was when my husband and I had a fight and he took off in his car.  I stormed around the house for a few minutes and then decided to go find him.  I did not see which way he went or know where he was going.  I went straight to a gas station that was about 4 miles away and found him.  His face went gray.  He thinks I am sort of witchy but in a good way.  

I won't bore you with the other two examples but they are along the same lines.  I think that anyone in my situation could pick up enough bits and pieces to analyze the possibilities and pick the most probable one, i.e. where my husband was. Granted this was my subconscious working but so what?

Nothing spiritual about it.

Yes, I admit that the tree analogy was bad (I really could not come up with a good analogy), but I hope my pint was understood-just because humans feel the need to place human characteristics on non-human things does not mean that they themselves do not exist, just that the characteristics owe more to human psychology than the actuality of the object.

Quote from: "notself"The cells in the body and their component atoms are not replaced all at once.  Memories are repeated continually as we think.  This is called reminiscing.  It reinforces those memory pathways.  But you must already know all this.  You are just trying to ignore simple scientific and neurological facts in order to cling to your sky mommy.  What does your god do for you why do you need her?

Interesting use of the feminine pronoun especially seeing as I have declared God in the masculine anytime I have posted on this forum. This is more because of traditional prejudices and my own imposition of myself on God (I am male therefore God is He). Although I would probably count as a feminist theologian, the habits of centuries are hard to break.

Anyhow, a nice analogy is that of a book. If I slowly but surely remove and replace the pages and cover with identical pieces, I would have the same book at the end. However, I would not technique have the same book, but a book which looks the same as the last one. From what I can remember from my psychology, the theory of reinforcing memory pathways has its own problems; the idea does not seem to operate in Long Term Memory (LTM) which is encoded semantically rather than acoustically-repetition of the memory is not needed in many cases. Let us take an example. Say Jill was sexually abused by her father at age 15, and she has repressed this event for 25 years. However, some emotional event at age 40 breaks through this wall and she can now remember the sexual abuse. As far as I know this is a plausible scenario, but the human body replaces itself every 10 years and this memory has obviously not been reinforced through repetition (was repressed) so how does the memory survive 25 years and two changes of body? Perhaps the memory was replayed in the subconscious, but this seems to be conjecture.

I am quite interested in the idea of the replacement of the body, so could you possibly give me a link to the study which researched into the reinforcing of memory pathways in relation to the replacement of the bodily material?

Of course it brings up interesting moral questions; if we are not the same person we were 10 years ago, can we still be held accountable for a 10 year old crime? Apparently so, but does this mean that we are the sum total of our memories? If this is true, then does this mean that if I forgot I had committed a crime 10 years ago I would no longer be morally responsible?

I think my definition of God can be found above, but as for my definition of mind I simply do not know. I think the mind exists in some context (thanks to various philosophical, theological and scientific breakthroughs ) but as to what it is exactly, I would need further evidence to come to a conclusion. I do not want to be duty bound to protect a definition of mind which later evidence proves to be false. The difference between a person of reasonable and blind faith is that someone of reasonable faith can stand uncertainty.

I suppose I gain rather a lot from God, but am not arrogant enough to believe what I gain from God really plays a major part in any deities day. What do you gain from atheism?

I don't remember all the details right now, but I'm fairly certain I recall having heard it was discovered that memories are made of a certain kind of protein. I could look it up, but then, so could you.

Quote"Dagda"
Interesting use of the feminine pronoun especially seeing as I have declared God in the masculine anytime I have posted on this forum. This is more because of traditional prejudices and my own imposition of myself on God (I am male therefore God is He). Although I would probably count as a feminist theologian, the habits of centuries are hard to break.

Just how old are you that you have habits of centuries.     I find that most theist have trouble with a feminine pronoun.  That's why I used it.

QuoteI think my definition of God can be found above, but as for my definition of mind I simply do not know.

If you cannot define mind then how do you know it exists? What makes it different than a functioning brain?
I must have missed your definition of god.  Would you please repeat your definition and include a list of her attributes?

QuoteI suppose I gain rather a lot from God, but am not arrogant enough to believe what I gain from God really plays a major part in any deities day. What do you gain from atheism?

What do you gain from believing in a god?

As an atheist, I am free to examine all phenomena without having the baggage of a deity who needs to be paid attention to. I don't need to satisfy the needs of a needy god.

Quote from: "notself"I find that most theist have trouble with a feminine pronoun.  That's why I used it.

Pity, I thought I had found another soul who believes in redressing the balance in the language of power in regards to the oppression of the feminine.

Quote from: "notself"If you cannot define mind then how do you know it exists? What makes it different than a functioning brain?
I must have missed your definition of god. Would you please repeat your definition and include a list of her attributes?

I know gravity exists, but I cannot define what it is, just what it does.

Quote from: "notself"

QuoteI suppose I gain rather a lot from God, but am not arrogant enough to believe what I gain from God really plays a major part in any deities day. What do you gain from atheism?

What do you gain from believing in a god?

As an atheist, I am free to examine all phenomena without having the baggage of a deity who needs to be paid attention to. I don't need to satisfy the needs of a needy god.

Ah so you wish to raise yourself up to the objective platform which you think God occupies? To make room for yourself, however, you must kill God.



I suspect that you are trying to hold up a mirror to my faith and show me that my faith is grounded in my own fears and superstitions. As I am an avid reader of Nietzsche and Marx, I have already evaluated my faith in light of this revelation and am happy to admit that my belief in God is personal  (it gives me a sense of peace that I would not achieve otherwise). I do not think anyone would be convinced or interested in my own reasons for belief, and as such I attempt to keep silent on the issue.

Quote"Dagda"   Pity, I thought I had found another soul who believes in redressing the balance in the language of power in regards to the oppression of the feminine.

I also use it for that purpose but most Christians I try it with object.  One even told me that their god had to be male because Jesus referred to "my father in heaven"

QuoteI know gravity exists, but I cannot define what it is, just what it does.

Everyone can see the effects of gravity.  Gravity can be measured by instruments.  None of this is possible with your invisible being. A double blind study of intercessory prayer indicates there is no one listening. http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS00 ... t1=no&vol= (http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870305006496/abstract?browse_volume=151&issue_key=TOC%40%40JOURNALSNOSUPP%40YMHJ%400151%400004&issue_preview=no&select1=no&select1=no&vol=)

QuoteAh so you wish to raise yourself up to the objective platform which you think God occupies? To make room for yourself, however, you must kill God.

You can't kill what doesn't exist.

QuoteI ... am happy to admit that my belief in God is personal  (it gives me a sense of peace that I would not achieve otherwise). I do not think anyone would be convinced or interested in my own reasons for belief, and as such I attempt to keep silent on the issue.

Don't be shy.  I am very interested in knowing why you believe in your god.  What does she do for you?  You can find peace without believing in any god.  I am at peace even though I have a diagnosis of stage 2 breast cancer with a high risk of recurrence.  I belong to a breast cancer forum where the dear Christian women pray and pray and pray.  It has absolutely no affect on anyone's outcome, but as you say it gives them comfort.

Is the only reason you believe in her is that you need comfort?  What does she demand of you in exchange for this comfort?

Quote from: "notself"Precognition/prediction is the result of taking in various bits and pieces of information, subconsciously organizing the data and coming up with a probability (a hunch).

The Bene Gesserit of Frank Herbert’s Dune perfected the art of observation / extrapolation, but I find this explanation unsatisfactory.  I know things I couldn’t know, like the time I wanted to turn left, but Holy Spirit told me to go straight.  He must have known the out of control semi-trailer would careen into that left hand turn lane.  Or when I know specific personal information about someone I just met...

Peace I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"

Quote from: "notself"Precognition/prediction is the result of taking in various bits and pieces of information, subconsciously organizing the data and coming up with a probability (a hunch).

The Bene Gesserit of Frank Herbert’s Dune perfected the art of observation / extrapolation, but I find this explanation unsatisfactory.  I know things I couldn’t know, like the time I wanted to turn left, but Holy Spirit told me to go straight.  He must have known the out of control semi-trailer would careen into that left hand turn lane.  Or when I know specific personal information about someone I just met...

Peace I/s

You could have been perfectly observing the speed of the semi as it was approaching the intersection and observed that there was a high probability that the driver would lose control.  No magical spirit involved.

Quote from: "notself"You could have been perfectly observing the speed of the semi as it was approaching the intersection and observed that there was a high probability that the driver would lose control.  No magical spirit involved.

Maybe you’re right, maybe I did have enough info to extrapolate the danger, but I doubt it.  The truck’s image was in my rear view mirror for over twenty miles.  He kept his distance, and I never saw him swerve.  I paid him no mind at the traffic light, until he bounced over the median into the left hand lane, stopping where my car would have sat...

And then there’s the knowing personal things about strangers...   (And vise versa)

Peace - I/s

Just keep observing your observations.  You can develop the sharpness and quickness of your already great ability this way.  If you automatically think it's a "spirit", then this belief will prevent you from sharpening your senses.

I think the thing I find saddest about believing in all powerful deities is that belief interferes with one's ability to appreciate the complexity and power of one's own brain.

May all our future precognitions be joyful ones.

Quote from: "notself"Everyone can see the effects of gravity.  Gravity can be measured by instruments.  None of this is possible with your invisible being. A double blind study of intercessory prayer indicates there is no one listening. http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS00 ... t1=no&vol= (http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870305006496/abstract?browse_volume=151&issue_key=TOC%40%40JOURNALSNOSUPP%40YMHJ%400151%400004&issue_preview=no&select1=no&select1=no&vol=)

Now I can only get into the abstract so can’t say with any certainty, but if it is the study I am thinking of then it had a few problems. First off it did not seem to state what it had defined as its average percentage mark (the expected rate of complications without the effect of prayer). Also, what prayer was used, for how long and were any steps taken to ensure that the prayers were conducted correctly? There is also the problem of this being only one study among several. When considering the effects of distant healing it is important to have access to hundreds of studies conducted by dozens of independent researchers over a broad period of time and in different locations. This example is intriguing, but is a one off-where is the meta-analysis? For instance, I could quote the 1988 Byrd case which shows the exact opposite of this study, but again this is a one off. If you are basing your assumption that distant mental healing does not work on one study, then that is bad science.  

What does God give me? Well I believe God’s will is in all things, but all things are not the will of God. God is that little voice most people call their conscious. He gives me the strength to carry on fighting for what I believe in. That is what I get from God. What does God get in return? What does a parent get in return for loving and caring for their child?

Out of interest what would you define as the Enlightened state?

Quote from: "Dagda"Out of interest what would you define as the Enlightened state?

The word enlightenment was chosen by the earliest Western translators of the Pali texts. They thought the word would tie Buddhism to the Enlightenment Period of 18th Century philosophers.  The correct definition of the word is "awake".  The title Buddha comes from the word budh which means awake or to know.  "The Buddha" means one who is awake [to how things actually are].

The state of budh "enlightenment" is a state of understanding.

Here is the wording of the study on intercessory prayer as published by the American Heart Association.  The study was funded in part by the John Templeton Foundation and included the hospitals and medical organizations listed below.  The type of intercessory prayer was the same for all groups. The study was published in January 2005.

Abstract
Background: Intercessory prayer is widely believed to influence recovery from illness, but claims of benefits are not supported by well-controlled clinical trials. Prior studies have not addressed whether prayer itself or knowledge/certainty that prayer is being provided may influence outcome. We evaluated whether (1) receiving intercessory prayer or (2) being certain of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with uncomplicated recovery after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

Methods: Patients at 6 US hospitals were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 604 received intercessory prayer after being informed that they may or may not receive prayer; 597 did not receive intercessory prayer also after being informed that they may or may not receive prayer; and 601 received intercessory prayer after being informed they would receive prayer. Intercessory prayer was provided for 14 days, starting the night before CABG. The primary outcome was presence of any complication within 30 days of CABG. Secondary outcomes were any major event and mortality.

Results: In the 2 groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52% (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51% (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95% CI 0.92-1.15). Complications occurred in 59% (352/601) of patients certain of receiving intercessory prayer compared with the 52% (315/604) of those uncertain of receiving intercessory prayer (relative risk 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.28). Major events and 30-day mortality were similar across the 3 groups.

Conclusions: Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.

a Mind/Body Medical Institute and the Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA  b Oklahoma Heart Institute, Integris Baptist Medical Center, Oklahoma City, OK  c Pastoral Care, Integris Baptist Medical Center, Oklahoma City, OK d CareGroup, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA e Section of Cardiac Surgery, Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC f Pastoral Care, Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC g Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, Memphis, TN h Pastoral Care, Memphis, TN i Mayo Physician Alliance for Clinical Trials, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN j Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN k Chaplain Services, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

This study was supported by the John Templeton Foundation. The Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation supported the Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation site only.

Quote from: "notself"Just keep observing your observations.  You can develop the sharpness and quickness of your already great ability this way.  If you automatically think it's a "spirit", then this belief will prevent you from sharpening your senses.

I think the thing I find saddest about believing in all powerful deities is that belief interferes with one's ability to appreciate the complexity and power of one's own brain.

May all our future precognitions be joyful ones.

You think me the Kwisatz Haderach!  Kool!

Tell me, how do I know things I can’t?  I once told a couple I had just met that their son would be exonerated of all charges.  (I didn’t know the meaning of exonerated)  â€œHow did you know we had a son; and that he was accused of a crime?" they asked.  How should I have answered?  (Let me guess: Even though I don’t do local news, I somehow knew that the woman’s son (father’s stepson with a different last name) was in court.  I also had enough subliminal information on the case to determine the outcome.  Wow!  I am the  Kwisatz Haderach!)

And then there was Mrs.W.  When I arrived at her home to bid a remodel job, I found her hopping around the kitchen on one foot.  She had stepped in a hole in her yard and wrenched her knee .  â€œSorry, my husband is coming home now to take me to the hospital, we must reschedule.”  I suggested we pray to the (imaginary?) God.  She felt warmth in the knee, and it was instantly healed.  The power of mind over matter?  (I got the job...)

Peace - I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Tell me, how do I know things I can’t?  I once told a couple I had just met that their son would be exonerated of all charges.  (I didn’t know the meaning of exonerated)  â€œHow did you know we had a son; and that he was accused of a crime?" they asked.  How should I have answered?  (Let me guess: Even though I don’t do local news, I somehow knew that the woman’s son (father’s stepson with a different last name) was in court.  I also had enough subliminal information on the case to determine the outcome.  Wow!  I am the  Kwisatz Haderach!)

And then there was Mrs.W.  When I arrived at her home to bid a remodel job, I found her hopping around the kitchen on one foot.  She had stepped in a hole in her yard and wrenched her knee .  â€œSorry, my husband is coming home now to take me to the hospital, we must reschedule.”  I suggested we pray to the (imaginary?) God.  She felt warmth in the knee, and it was instantly healed.  The power of mind over matter?  (I got the job...)
Peace - I/s

You processed information from overheard but forgotten conversations.  You are in contracting and talk to people all day long.  My sister and her husband are contractors, never watch the news or read the newspaper.  They know everything that is going on in town.  It is almost impossible to not "do" local news. You do not have to have a god or holy spirit whispering in your ear.
 
As for your prayer, the placebo affect explains that along with the fact that the pain passed due to her sitting down and thinking of something else (you and your prayer).  Try analyzing your experiences and look for explanations that that are reasonable but do not include magical thinking.

Quote from: "notself"Try analyzing your experiences and look for explanations that that are reasonable but do not include magical thinking.

I play the markets.  Information, reason, logic and extrapolation are my close companions.  I can see your logic train makes sense, but you lack information.  i.e. In the Chicago suburbs “local” was any town within 45 minutes drive.  Not only was this couple on the edge of local, but their son was to be tried in Chicago, another 45 minutes away.  The petty crime would not have made our area news at all.  (I like national and world news anyway.)  We had no mutual friends, just my business card picked up at a supply house...  The odds I had any info on this is pretty slim.

But still plausible.  And if  I add that over the last 40 years I have seen and experienced similar incidents hundreds of times; and point out that my ability to extrapolate from information I have with friends and acquaintances doesn’t explain how this happens with strangers in far away places like Canada and Scotland; I believe you will still be able to offer a “non magical” explanation...

Peace - I/s

P.S. My ruptured disk has been placebo-ized for over 27 years now...

or...you just got lucky.

It would be more interesting if I actually knew you and you were able to do things like that constantly to people with no other explanation than psychic.

Quote from: "Whitney"or...you just got lucky.

It would be more interesting if I actually knew you and you were able to do things like that constantly to people with no other explanation than psychic.

I am rather interested in investigations into psi just now, and I have noticed that people make this fundamental misjudgement in concern to anything to do with psi: they assume that, unlike every other human ability, it functions at a constant super-human level without the need to practise or refine the technique. In reality studies into psi have shown that (if psi exists) psi can persistently make random events less random-for instance if the chance level is at 2o% the psi might help you score 30%. As psi is rarely refined it tends to remain weak, random and quite unspectacular in the field.

Obviously I would need far more information, but assuming idiotsavant is not lying or mistaken this might be a good case study for clairvoyance, but I think the Mrs. W could probably be explained as the placebo effect unless we can gather more information which points in a different direction. Post more tomorrow.

Please support your comments by providing links to the studies you reference.

Hmm... Psi.  As I said, there’s always another explanation.  At the risk of boring you, let me tell you another story.

Many years ago our immediate family was embroiled in a very difficult and private situation.  We were at a deadlock, and knew not what to do.  My wife, Imwis, bumped into Barb, one of our prophetic acquaintances.  Barb lives far from us, and all our communication with her is face to face.  Without prompting, Barb told Imwis the current situation and the subsequent outcome.  I was center stage in this thing, so rather than tell me this prediction, they gave me a sealed envelope of the transcript. I read the letter five minutes after the surprise resolution - Deja Vu.  The detailed accuracy was stunning...

Would you place this experience under the heading of “Possible PSI”?  And I wonder why you are willing to consider “Possible PSI (if it exists)”, yet reject the idea of “Possible Spiritual / Supernatural (if it exists)”.  Have any of us experienced all there is to experience in this universe?  And in this infinite universe, is there no room for a supernatural / spiritual being?  Why is my explanation so unpalatable?

Peace - I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Hmm... Psi.  As I said, there’s always another explanation.  

Other explanations being possible does not take away your need to cite studies you mention.  Of course, this is only a need if you wish to discuss the topic seriously.

Quote from: "notself"Please support your comments by providing links to the studies you reference.

I know, I know. Since I began this thread I have been combing the web for the Ganzfeld Experimental study. A few years back I found a website which held within it hundreds of Ganzfeld experiments, but this has either been taken off-line, or has been swamped by Dan Brown related sites (the ‘Lost Symbol’ had a Noetic scientist in it). My search continues.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Would you place this experience under the heading of “Possible PSI”?  And I wonder why you are willing to consider “Possible PSI (if it exists)”, yet reject the idea of “Possible Spiritual / Supernatural (if it exists)”.  Have any of us experienced all there is to experience in this universe?  And in this infinite universe, is there no room for a supernatural / spiritual being?  Why is my explanation so unpalatable?

Peace - I/s

The supernatural is possible, but I brought up psi because there are scientific studies which support its existence whilst ‘spiritual beings’ have still to be investigated in any great depth. Stick to what you know, as they say.

Quote"Dagda"

Quote from: "notself"Please support your comments by providing links to the studies you reference.

I know, I know. Since I began this thread I have been combing the web for the Ganzfeld Experimental study. A few years back I found a website which held within it hundreds of Ganzfeld experiments, but this has either been taken off-line, or has been swamped by Dan Brown related sites (the ‘Lost Symbol’ had a Noetic scientist in it). My search continues.

I found something on Ganzfeld experiments.  The experiment doesn't support psi or spiritualism.  The experiment indicates the reactions,  hallucinations, of the brain when sensory impression is reduced.  Here is the link.
http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2008/11/g ... inati.html (http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2008/11/ganzfeld_hallucinati.html)

I have no idea why you couldn't find this information.  I "ganzfeld experiment" and got 69,400 hits including this about the poor methodology of those experiments which supposedly resulted in proof of telepathy.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea ... xperiments (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1865/whats-the-story-on-ganzfeld-experiments)

Quote from: "Whitney"

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Hmm... Psi.  As I said, there’s always another explanation.  

Other explanations being possible does not take away your need to cite studies you mention.  Of course, this is only a need if you wish to discuss the topic seriously.

I don't recall citing any studies...

Quote from: "notself"All of these 'god' experiences are from the mind alone.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Why is my (spiritual being) explanation so unpalatable?

Quote from: "Dagda"The supernatural is possible, but I brought up psi because there are scientific studies which support its existence whilst ‘spiritual beings’ have still to be investigated in any great depth. Stick to what you know, as they say.

I am sticking to what I know, as Whitney explains...

Quote from: "Whitney"It would be more interesting if I actually knew you and you were able to do things like that constantly to people with no other explanation than psychic.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Experiential knowledge trumps hearsay

I've yet to isolate any knowledge I have that isn't related somehow to some experience.  For instance: I "know" that time is maleable. I "know" this because I have experiential knowledge of math.  I trust Albert when he tells me that the formula E=mc2 is simply a higher form of that math.  Others I trust verify this, so I know(?) / believe(?) that time is maleable, even though I've never manipulated time.

I think Daga meant to say "Stick with what you can prove".  I can't prove the things I've told you.  If you're interested, you could hunt down some prophetic Christians in your area and examine them.  But how would you measure such things?    

Peace I/s

What?  No reply?  Dumbfounded are you?

Quote from: "idiotsavant"What?  No reply?  Dumbfounded are you?

Actually, I was just really busy doing more important things.

But, you did just win yourself a warning for being uncivil.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"What?  No reply?  Dumbfounded are you?

Work comes before an internet forum, you see.

Sorry, poor choice of expression.  I've just begun to work on this train of thought, and was hoping for some input.

Peace I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Sorry, poor choice of expression.  I've just begun to work on this train of thought, and was hoping for some input.

Peace I/s

I have a better idea. Tell us what our input is going to be using your special powers, and then when you're correct, we'll all believe in them!
Two birds... one stone.

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Sorry, poor choice of expression.  I've just begun to work on this train of thought, and was hoping for some input.

Peace I/s

I have a better idea. Tell us what our input is going to be using your special powers, and then when you're correct, we'll all believe in them!
Two birds... one stone.

Hint: my input shall have pirates in it...and lasers...and the proper question to get the answer 42.

Love to, but my "special powers aren't at my disposal.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"Love to, but my "special powers aren't at my disposal.

Convenient?

[X] Rather
[ ] Not at all

Inconvenient?

[X] Rather
[ ] Not at all

so you are a x-man?

So it would seem.  

Im so jealous

Quote from: "idiotsavant"So it would seem.  

Ok...either support your view or stop trolling.  I think you've gotten enough play time.

I’m not a Troll - “In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2]“ ~ Wikipedia

I’ve simply shared my experiences and suggested that experiential knowledge is the foundation of all we claim to “know”.  I presented my working theory (view), supported it with an example, and asked for input.  How is this trolling?

Peace - I/s

I fail to see how your point of view is on topic with the OP and not supporting your view is sure to annoy a forum full of people who don't believe things without evidence.  If you continue further without providing any evidence then I fail to see how it could be anything but trolling...unless you just want to say that is simply what you think and there is no reason why anyone should believe you....

OP?  Opening Position?  What is the OP for this thread?  (I’m new to forums)

And no, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.  Just having a friendly conversation...

Peace - I/s

Quote from: "idiotsavant"OP?  Opening Position?  What is the OP for this thread?  (I’m new to forums)

And no, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.  Just having a friendly conversation...

Peace - I/s

OP = Original Post, or the initial post on which we are currently commenting.  Directing the conversation away from the OP is referred to as 'thread hijacking' which is considered indicative of trolling a board.  The best way to avoid trolling is, once the conversation steers too far from the OP, to either start an entirely new thread or to explain why what you're saying does in fact tie into the OP.

You're pretty new here plus you're a theist on an atheist board which is pretty commonly visited by theist trolls, so initially people might be more suspicious of your intentions.  Sincerity doesn't translate well on the internet and is very easily and often faked by trolls in order to be able to continue posting as long as possible on the board they're trolling, so people tend to try to identify and deal with trolls based on actions more than words.  This kind of conversation is better suited for the 'Laid Back Lounge' portion of the forum rather than the 'Religion' part of the forum, in my opinion.  

Also, Whitney is the owner of the forum, so basically as with anything you're enjoying that is supported and perpetuated by someone else, it's best to either respect her wishes for the forum or stop posting.  That doesn't mean not posting your dissenting opinion, but it does mean backing off or calming down when she asks you to.

Quote from: "idiotsavant"I’ve simply shared my experiences and suggested that experiential knowledge is the foundation of all we claim to “know”.  I presented my working theory (view), supported it with an example, and asked for input.

Well, here's my input. Your "working theory (view)" is that you and others have psychic powers. Or something. The examples you've given are made up. They never happened.

And it's Jimi Hendrix, not "Jimmy."

Thanks for the enlightenment Pinkocommie, you have excellent analytical skills.   (Have you ever thought to play the futures market?)

My apologies for hijacking the thread, such was not my intention.

You’re right iami, his name was spelled Jimi.  (Did I mention I can be an idiot?)  But your’re wrong about my “working theory" - it has nothing to do with my bizarre experiences.  I can’t prove those to anyone, so why would I try?  I was referring to my question on the relationship between experiential knowledge and extrapolated knowledge.  

I think I’ll take Pinkocommie’s advice move my question, “How do we know we know?" to the 'Laid Back Lounge' .

  Peace - I/s

There are those who are lost as to the meaning of so called " LOVE ". To believers is an amplyfied word that carries no essence and has been overused. Just take a look around at all the sickness and misseries that most of the inhabittans of Planet Earth are subjected to but in Theology/Christians and the likes, is O'K to have all that. To these ignorant folks their God loves them all equally and even though it has the power to change their destiny it keeps them as they are. The preacher calls on the person on the wheel chair to stand up and walk cause the lord commands it so, the person obeys and stands up and walks after so many years in that chair. Why not go to the hospitals and cure those who are suffering from one thing or another. I know that beleivers will construct an answer to that but to no matter cause " HOSPITAL " will keep on existing. What is LOVE to your God and what is love to you is just an empty shell on the inside but you pretend to care while condenming whoever does not come to your lords supper.