The Physics of God as Seen in Reflection - Proof of God as Verified by Physics

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Hydroman

 

I recommend you read the Hebrew and I believe after time, the answer will come to you.

That would entail me having to learn Hebrew. Grrrrrrrrrrrr, darn you and your wily ways.

reply to post by Hydroman


Here is a shortcut to accessing the text of the Old Testament:
www.helding.net...
Click on the folder icon for Hebrew and download the MP3 files for Genesis 1, 2, and 3.
Listen to the reader pronouncing the Hebrew text and notice what he is saying.
This will give you a clue, untill you get to recognizing the letters and things.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["Light is where it starts."]

The scientific model doesn't state, that the universe starts from an electro-magnetic manifestation. Electro-magnetism is just ONE of the forces present from the start.

Quote: [" The early universe was in a high state of order and low entropy"]

This state of order already being instable and asymmetric from square one, consequently with entropy already potential. This does not 'prove' anything though.

Quote: ["Then, we need to talk about the elegance and synchronization of mathematics that are used to create the geometry of form."]

ANY set of initial conditions (in a cosmos of dynamic causality) would lead to results being synchronized to these initial conditions. It just wouldn't be identical with our cosmos-version.

Quote: ["Then we need to talk about the laws that govern the physics of the universe so that life can exist."]

'Life' as a consequence of the specific initial conditions of this cosmos. With other initial conditions, other kinds of 'life' could emerge. 'Life' is complexity at a certain level, and instability and asymmetry will automatically lead to complexity.

Quote: [" Then we need to talk about the inter-connectivity of all these processes that brings this ballet of irreducible complexity to a balancing point of regularity."]

That's the only remotely pro-argument for a 'design' concept *, and can only suggest a trans-cosmic level of existence. Not 'prove' it. And the "balancing-point" is still unstable and will eventually collapse. We have from the scientific perspective a potential trans-cosmic existence level.

This has abolutely NOTHING to do with specific theist claims.

Quote: ["As stated by Dirac's relativistic quantum mechanical wave equation, we must realize that our universe is parallel to another universe in opposite. Our matter is anti-matter to this mirrored universe. The event horizon between these two represents the projection point of both."]

The only certain interpretation of this is, that it describes a situation 'at rest', which either is a 'vacuum' or a symmetric state of polarities. If it's a 'vacuum' the 'design concept' leads to the question of 'something coming from nothing' *; if it's polarized symmetry, it's an extension to a 'greater' symmetric cosmos.

Quote: [" As stated in Genesis 1:1, God created TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY."]

The general observation, that space, time, matter and energy exists isn't a christian invention with copyright. Besides the mere mentioning of these concepts as it's done in genesis 1, doesn't bring it into the postulated scientific categoty (except be the use of some semantic gymnastics). Furthermore this is a direct contradiction with "light is where it starts", and finally ...several religious/semi-religious models have similar narratives, some of them considerably better than the bible-version.

Apart from that, genesis 1 is from a scientific perspective plain non-sense. Cosmos is e.g. NOT geo-centric.

Quote: [" The LOGOS put this into form as a story (John 1). Logos is the master story teller. Read the Wiki on Logos."]

This is the essense of what is to BE 'proved'. It doesn't prove itself, except by the use of false/pseudo-logic of inductive-category similarities or even more irrational semantics.

Quote: ["This Word that was used to put the universe into motion permiates the universe as the laws that govern and bind it together."]

A postulate, which is pure theist speculation.

Quote: ["As suggest by Dirac's equation, we are on one side of the tree of life (our universe) as God creates the other using our choices to define the other side."]

By introducing the concept 'god' in a respectable scientific hypothesis, you don't 'prove' anything at all. You just twist the overall outcome into something fitting your pre-determined answer. It's non-sense.

Quote: ["God says in the Bible that if any man were to look upon Him, they would be instantly consumed. This is what happens between matter and anti-matter."]

Another false/pseudo-logic 'conclusion', created from the apparantly endless supply of inductive categories. 'Instant consuming' on these premises assumes the existence of a 'god', and a 'god' is not 'proved', because a broad group of natural phenomena (in- or outside Dirac's cosmos-model) lead to 'consuming'. It's a circle-argument.

Then follows some theism in your post (of no importance for the claims of 'scientific proofs') and then

Quote: ["From this point, I go past the laws that govern the universe and Heaven so I am ahead of myself."]

You are not only ahead of yourself, you haven't caught up to yourself. There has sofar been nothing 'scientific' about your claims, apart from the basic scientific or common knowledge, which is 'neutral' (agnostically not pointing in any specific theist direction), until you introduce false logics and semantic acrobatics to force it into your expectations.

Quote: [" Your turn. Let's hear your version of the laws that govern the universe. Where do they originate?"]

Semantics again. These are two different sets of questions.

A/ The laws of cosmos

AND

B/ A chain of regressive-causality reasoning.

You have several options: AB, A, B, or A and B seperately, Which shall it be?

Quote: ["How do we explain the irreducible complexity of it all in support of living matter?"]

As already said several times: By the asymmetric initial conditions. For anyone with even the simplest scientific understanding, this is obvious.

The key-concepts in all of your theist (mis)use of science are. Polarities, symmetry and entropy. You are far from demonstrating any understanding of the constellation of these concepts, consequently are your premature pseudo-conclusions from them worthless.

Imo your understanding of formal logic could do with some brushing up first.

* Being two facets of the same situation.

Like science, you see the world form only two perspectives. You see it from particle and wave. The universe is three. It is particle, wave and information. The comparison is a computer without programming.

Consciousness is the missing part of matter that is living. Apart from choice there is not collapsing of infinity into choice and action. This last sentence answers all your replies.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You wrote:

["Light is where it starts."]

The scientific model doesn't state, that the universe starts from an electro-magnetic manifestation. Electro-magnetism is just ONE of the forces present from the start.

Quote: [" The early universe was in a high state of order and low entropy"]

This state of order already being instable and asymmetric from square one, consequently with entropy already potential. This does not 'prove' anything though.

Quote: ["Then, we need to talk about the elegance and synchronization of mathematics that are used to create the geometry of form."]

ANY set of initial conditions (in a cosmos of dynamic causality) would lead to results being synchronized to these initial conditions. It just wouldn't be identical with our cosmos-version.

Quote: ["Then we need to talk about the laws that govern the physics of the universe so that life can exist."]

'Life' as a consequence of the specific initial conditions of this cosmos. With other initial conditions, other kinds of 'life' could emerge. 'Life' is complexity at a certain level, and instability and asymmetry will automatically lead to complexity.

Quote: [" Then we need to talk about the inter-connectivity of all these processes that brings this ballet of irreducible complexity to a balancing point of regularity."]

That's the only remotely pro-argument for a 'design' concept *, and can only suggest a trans-cosmic level of existence. Not 'prove' it. And the "balancing-point" is still unstable and will eventually collapse. We have from the scientific perspective a potential trans-cosmic existence level.

This has abolutely NOTHING to do with specific theist claims.

Quote: ["As stated by Dirac's relativistic quantum mechanical wave equation, we must realize that our universe is parallel to another universe in opposite. Our matter is anti-matter to this mirrored universe. The event horizon between these two represents the projection point of both."]

The only certain interpretation of this is, that it describes a situation 'at rest', which either is a 'vacuum' or a symmetric state of polarities. If it's a 'vacuum' the 'design concept' leads to the question of 'something coming from nothing' *; if it's polarized symmetry, it's an extension to a 'greater' symmetric cosmos.

Quote: [" As stated in Genesis 1:1, God created TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY."]

The general observation, that space, time, matter and energy exists isn't a christian invention with copyright. Besides the mere mentioning of these concepts as it's done in genesis 1, doesn't bring it into the postulated scientific categoty (except be the use of some semantic gymnastics). Furthermore this is a direct contradiction with "light is where it starts", and finally ...several religious/semi-religious models have similar narratives, some of them considerably better than the bible-version.

Apart from that, genesis 1 is from a scientific perspective plain non-sense. Cosmos is e.g. NOT geo-centric.

Quote: [" The LOGOS put this into form as a story (John 1). Logos is the master story teller. Read the Wiki on Logos."]

This is the essense of what is to BE 'proved'. It doesn't prove itself, except by the use of false/pseudo-logic of inductive-category similarities or even more irrational semantics.

Quote: ["This Word that was used to put the universe into motion permiates the universe as the laws that govern and bind it together."]

A postulate, which is pure theist speculation.

Quote: ["As suggest by Dirac's equation, we are on one side of the tree of life (our universe) as God creates the other using our choices to define the other side."]

By introducing the concept 'god' in a respectable scientific hypothesis, you don't 'prove' anything at all. You just twist the overall outcome into something fitting your pre-determined answer. It's non-sense.

Quote: ["God says in the Bible that if any man were to look upon Him, they would be instantly consumed. This is what happens between matter and anti-matter."]

Another false/pseudo-logic 'conclusion', created from the apparantly endless supply of inductive categories. 'Instant consuming' on these premises assumes the existence of a 'god', and a 'god' is not 'proved', because a broad group of natural phenomena (in- or outside Dirac's cosmos-model) lead to 'consuming'. It's a circle-argument.

Then follows some theism in your post (of no importance for the claims of 'scientific proofs') and then

Quote: ["From this point, I go past the laws that govern the universe and Heaven so I am ahead of myself."]

You are not only ahead of yourself, you haven't caught up to yourself. There has sofar been nothing 'scientific' about your claims, apart from the basic scientific or common knowledge, which is 'neutral' (agnostically not pointing in any specific theist direction), until you introduce false logics and semantic acrobatics to force it into your expectations.

Quote: [" Your turn. Let's hear your version of the laws that govern the universe. Where do they originate?"]

Semantics again. These are two different sets of questions.

A/ The laws of cosmos

AND

B/ A chain of regressive-causality reasoning.

You have several options: AB, A, B, or A and B seperately, Which shall it be?

Quote: ["How do we explain the irreducible complexity of it all in support of living matter?"]

As already said several times: By the asymmetric initial conditions. For anyone with even the simplest scientific understanding, this is obvious.

The key-concepts in all of your theist (mis)use of science are. Polarities, symmetry and entropy. You are far from demonstrating any understanding of the constellation of these concepts, consequently are your premature pseudo-conclusions from them worthless.

Imo your understanding of formal logic could do with some brushing up first.

* Being two facets of the same situation.

edit on 14-7-2011 by bogomil because: grammar

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You have in several threads repeated a practically identical topic, using slightly changed variations of a couple of basic posts, sometimes even using the SAME post on two threads.

Responding to the same pseudo-science and the same sermon several places simultaneously is outside my interest. Last response here.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You have in several threads repeated a practically identical topic, using slightly changed variations of a couple of basic posts, sometimes even using the SAME post on two threads.

Responding to the same pseudo-science and the same sermon several places simultaneously is outside my interest. Last response here.

It's called faith, hope and love. We cannot have hope for anything apart from faith. Faith is defined in one place in this world. Hebrews 11.

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

Faith is confidence in what we hope for. We all hope for life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, honor, freedom, dignity, good will, blessing, long lives, and the list goes on. These values are the fruits of virtue and truth. We cannot separate the hope for any positive value without attributing this value to virtue and truth. Hope is the confidence in Good triumphing over evil. It's about we and not me. God is the origin of virtue from the pages of the Bible. The only place you can find the method to reach hope is in the Bible. God is the author and He is the representative for the list below under the heading of humility. You can only love God if you are humble. You cannot be humble apart from God. There is no hope apart from faith in God.

Self-Pride is the antithesis of faith and hope. The fruit of pride is the few over the suffering many. It is enslavement to the master. It is tyranny of the people. It is greed and selfishness. Instead of confidence in hope for the good of others, self-pride can only lead to more desire and lust for gain. Just like faith, pride finds its origin in the pages of the Bible.

Where do you find hope on this list? Who motivates us to this calling?

HUMILITY...............PRIDE
Chastity...................Lust
Temperance............Gluttony
Charity....................Greed
Diligence.................Sloth
Patience.................Wrath
Kindness...............Envy

Here is where God become great and not just good. None of us can satisfy this list to move hope to love. Not me, and not you. You are I are in this boat together as sinners, utterly locked into the pride on the right. We can try, but the goal is not attainable here.

God is great because He came here to live the list on the left. In doing this for us, He releases us form the bondage of the list on the right. This gift is grace and it is free. Love Him for what He did for us. That's all he requires. Attach Him to the list on the right and you will fail. God lives on the other side and offers and open door to come in if we knock.

Matthew 7

6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

Ask, Seek, Knock

7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
9 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

The Narrow and Wide Gates

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You have in several threads repeated a practically identical topic, using slightly changed variations of a couple of basic posts, sometimes even using the SAME post on two threads.

Responding to the same pseudo-science and the same sermon several places simultaneously is outside my interest. Last response here.

It's called faith, hope and love. We cannot have hope for anything apart from faith. Faith is defined in one place in this world. Hebrews 11.

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

...

...
The Narrow and Wide Gates

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

edit on 14-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

The judgment statements when apart from the hope statements are a part of that holding two things together which intuitively we may wish to hold apart-- of which I wrote previously. I don't want to do an exegesis, here-- it is not necessary-- most can do and have done that already. Matthew 25 has persons surprised that Jesus is ushering them into His Kingdom, rather than judgment.

But because of that, I think, some of us have experiences we do not wish to state for fear of causing undue alarm concerning judgement of those without such experiences. How do I explain?

I have been in situations where most of the people in my life were deeply spiritual and living a life specifically ordered in such a way so as to focus on their spiritual gifts and vocations (callings). Almost all of us could discuss aspects of our experiences with ease, because the experiences were common among us. I'll try to give an illustration:

A man senses, prayerfully, that he is called to a spiritual life which he does not desire to lead. He prays regularly, contemplates scripture, reads spiritual writings trying to understand-- but not understanding why the "pull" is so strong he speaks to no one of it-- does all of this in private.

A mere acquaintance form work, officed in a building down the street, shows up in his office. The man pauses, awkwardly, and says, something like, "I don't know how to explain this, but but I spend a lot of time in prayer and I don't know what your religious views (if any) are, but your image kept coming to mind over the last few weeks in prayer, and all I can get from that is something about telling you that you are supposed to be doing something-- something that has nothing to do with this work we are involved in." Of course to the man struggling in secret, it made perfect sense.

In a short few months, two complete strangers speak to him similarly-- words betraying that they know his secret.

When I lived among those spiritual people, such stories were shared among all of them-- the had had strangers approach them, claiming prayer had driven them to do so, and they had been the persons driven to approach strangers with such "information" even though they did not understand how or why. So common were such things, that they were virtually "every day" experiences.

They knew it was just a gift they shared and nothing to their own credit. BUT! They also knew, sometimes intuitively, sometimes from experience, that those without such experiences would either deny that it could be true, or would lament that they do not have such gifts, and begin to fear that their own faith was in vain. (It breaks my heart when I have witnessed, for example, persons PRETENDING to speak in tongues-- a gift I do not have but a gift I can recognize in others as well as recognize someone pretending). So the persons who have such gifts (and there are many) and having no control at all over them-- just conduits of grace-- do not speak of them unless they have reason to know the other will understand.

But if you live such a life, and have been among others living such a life, when matters of faith are routinely confirmed to the point at which denying such common experiences becomes unreasonable and intellectually impossible,.. then the voice of the nay-sayer does not say what the nay-sayer thinks is being said.

For the one who has lived and seen and heard-- there is a scientific approach: One is trying to understand the Cause for these unexpected but clearly real experiences-- shared in community.

In the post-modern era, finding a community which contains more than one such spiritually oriented person is difficult. Churches tend to have become about law, politics, patriotism, social issues, divisive over tiny points of doctrine, false or intentionally incomplete histories, and more-- the worst being the centering upon money. My point is that the Church and Synagogues are "gatherings" but now so distracted by outside influences that they rarely serve as spiritual gatherings. It is a shame, and for such as me, it is lonely.

The spiritual life has far too much solitary work for most people, and the gifts have little (if any) use unless in community. Yet, our current culture is not about community. College and/or subsequent careers, have us moving far from our former relations. Rarely do we live our adult lives among family and childhood friends and neighbors. MySpace, Facebook and Google-plus would not exist if it were otherwise.

So, here, on ATS, I have seen a gathering of such persons who have lived with at least one foot across the line from the material and into the spiritual. Pardon me, then, if I swat at another who clearly has never encountered such experiences because they falsely assume I could not possibly have any "proof" of the existence of God. Of course I do have proof. I would not live the life I do live without such proof. I am intellectually and emotionally aware, and my beliefs are not of my own doing-- given to me and I fought them until I could not dismiss what had become obvious, so I am also spiritually aware.

I am neither bragging nor condemning, but I am saying there is more than many can see or hear. I would like to share that, but am most frustrated by my obvious inadequacy in doing so. But, a constant, and incessant nagging voice from so many declaring I have not seen what I have seen, have not heard what I have heard-- and all based sadly on the fact that they have not seen or heard-- it is very tiring and does not threaten my faith, but it does threaten my ability to discuss it with others who do share it.

Now how do I say that without bringing about a undue fear of the normal and typical searcher that they may be damned or lost or somehow "less" just because others have been given to hear and see? I didn't ask for it, and it is clearly not any of my doing, or any reward or merit for anything I have done. It makes no sense to me that I have been given spiritual gifts and led, gently (mostly) into a spiritual life, when others much more deserving have not. None the less, it never occurs to me that the more deserving are inferior. My suspicion is that most are superior, that my gifts were given because without them I could not do so well as those who do not have them-- do not need them.

Perhaps some of the nay-sayers might sit back and observe that some of us are not "wishing" or "delusional" we are living what we know-- just as everyone does. I live in a University town. If I go sit in a classroom covering doctoral level physics, I listen and try to understand, but I do not speak or argue with them-- it is not my gift, not my field of study, but merely an interest-- knowing I will not achieve their level of understanding-- that I will not spend my life in that work as they have. Is it too much to ask that I be allowed to discuss theology in a meaningful way with others who can teach me what they know and what they theorize?

There is an academic, and sometimes even scientific, approach to the spiritual life. Astronomy, Geology and Quantum Mechanics, and even such studies as History and Linguists, all use different means from one another and what works to prove a theory in one does not apply to the other, but the approach has commonality: One looks for cause and effect, and in theology and in metaphysics, it is no different; and a lot of our theories, while remaining unproven, work. It is so with Christians, it is so with Jews, it is so with Buddhist, and it is so with most of the ancient religions.

Oh my. You are ripe fruit my friend. Thank you for that. Can I call you St. Augustine?

Here is a favorite quote of mine:

“Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life to carry out; a concrete assignment which demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated. Thus, everyone’s task is as unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.” Victor Frankl

I am of the belief that we are blessed, at times, ahead of our purpose. You may have just found yours. This is the preface to your new book. I look forward to reading it my friend.

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You have in several threads repeated a practically identical topic, using slightly changed variations of a couple of basic posts, sometimes even using the SAME post on two threads.

Responding to the same pseudo-science and the same sermon several places simultaneously is outside my interest. Last response here.

It's called faith, hope and love. We cannot have hope for anything apart from faith. Faith is defined in one place in this world. Hebrews 11.

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

...

...
The Narrow and Wide Gates

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

edit on 14-7-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)

The judgment statements when apart from the hope statements are a part of that holding two things together which intuitively we may wish to hold apart-- of which I wrote previously. I don't want to do an exegesis, here-- it is not necessary-- most can do and have done that already. Matthew 25 has persons surprised that Jesus is ushering them into His Kingdom, rather than judgment.

But because of that, I think, some of us have experiences we do not wish to state for fear of causing undue alarm concerning judgement of those without such experiences. How do I explain?

I have been in situations where most of the people in my life were deeply spiritual and living a life specifically ordered in such a way so as to focus on their spiritual gifts and vocations (callings). Almost all of us could discuss aspects of our experiences with ease, because the experiences were common among us. I'll try to give an illustration:

A man senses, prayerfully, that he is called to a spiritual life which he does not desire to lead. He prays regularly, contemplates scripture, reads spiritual writings trying to understand-- but not understanding why the "pull" is so strong he speaks to no one of it-- does all of this in private.

A mere acquaintance form work, officed in a building down the street, shows up in his office. The man pauses, awkwardly, and says, something like, "I don't know how to explain this, but but I spend a lot of time in prayer and I don't know what your religious views (if any) are, but your image kept coming to mind over the last few weeks in prayer, and all I can get from that is something about telling you that you are supposed to be doing something-- something that has nothing to do with this work we are involved in." Of course to the man struggling in secret, it made perfect sense.

In a short few months, two complete strangers speak to him similarly-- words betraying that they know his secret.

When I lived among those spiritual people, such stories were shared among all of them-- the had had strangers approach them, claiming prayer had driven them to do so, and they had been the persons driven to approach strangers with such "information" even though they did not understand how or why. So common were such things, that they were virtually "every day" experiences.

They knew it was just a gift they shared and nothing to their own credit. BUT! They also knew, sometimes intuitively, sometimes from experience, that those without such experiences would either deny that it could be true, or would lament that they do not have such gifts, and begin to fear that their own faith was in vain. (It breaks my heart when I have witnessed, for example, persons PRETENDING to speak in tongues-- a gift I do not have but a gift I can recognize in others as well as recognize someone pretending). So the persons who have such gifts (and there are many) and having no control at all over them-- just conduits of grace-- do not speak of them unless they have reason to know the other will understand.

But if you live such a life, and have been among others living such a life, when matters of faith are routinely confirmed to the point at which denying such common experiences becomes unreasonable and intellectually impossible,.. then the voice of the nay-sayer does not say what the nay-sayer thinks is being said.

For the one who has lived and seen and heard-- there is a scientific approach: One is trying to understand the Cause for these unexpected but clearly real experiences-- shared in community.

In the post-modern era, finding a community which contains more than one such spiritually oriented person is difficult. Churches tend to have become about law, politics, patriotism, social issues, divisive over tiny points of doctrine, false or intentionally incomplete histories, and more-- the worst being the centering upon money. My point is that the Church and Synagogues are "gatherings" but now so distracted by outside influences that they rarely serve as spiritual gatherings. It is a shame, and for such as me, it is lonely.

The spiritual life has far too much solitary work for most people, and the gifts have little (if any) use unless in community. Yet, our current culture is not about community. College and/or subsequent careers, have us moving far from our former relations. Rarely do we live our adult lives among family and childhood friends and neighbors. MySpace, Facebook and Google-plus would not exist if it were otherwise.

So, here, on ATS, I have seen a gathering of such persons who have lived with at least one foot across the line from the material and into the spiritual. Pardon me, then, if I swat at another who clearly has never encountered such experiences because they falsely assume I could not possibly have any "proof" of the existence of God. Of course I do have proof. I would not live the life I do live without such proof. I am intellectually and emotionally aware, and my beliefs are not of my own doing-- given to me and I fought them until I could not dismiss what had become obvious, so I am also spiritually aware.

I am neither bragging nor condemning, but I am saying there is more than many can see or hear. I would like to share that, but am most frustrated by my obvious inadequacy in doing so. But, a constant, and incessant nagging voice from so many declaring I have not seen what I have seen, have not heard what I have heard-- and all based sadly on the fact that they have not seen or heard-- it is very tiring and does not threaten my faith, but it does threaten my ability to discuss it with others who do share it.

Now how do I say that without bringing about a undue fear of the normal and typical searcher that they may be damned or lost or somehow "less" just because others have been given to hear and see? I didn't ask for it, and it is clearly not any of my doing, or any reward or merit for anything I have done. It makes no sense to me that I have been given spiritual gifts and led, gently (mostly) into a spiritual life, when others much more deserving have not. None the less, it never occurs to me that the more deserving are inferior. My suspicion is that most are superior, that my gifts were given because without them I could not do so well as those who do not have them-- do not need them.

Perhaps some of the nay-sayers might sit back and observe that some of us are not "wishing" or "delusional" we are living what we know-- just as everyone does. I live in a University town. If I go sit in a classroom covering doctoral level physics, I listen and try to understand, but I do not speak or argue with them-- it is not my gift, not my field of study, but merely an interest-- knowing I will not achieve their level of understanding-- that I will not spend my life in that work as they have. Is it too much to ask that I be allowed to discuss theology in a meaningful way with others who can teach me what they know and what they theorize?

There is an academic, and sometimes even scientific, approach to the spiritual life. Astronomy, Geology and Quantum Mechanics, and even such studies as History and Linguists, all use different means from one another and what works to prove a theory in one does not apply to the other, but the approach has commonality: One looks for cause and effect, and in theology and in metaphysics, it is no different; and a lot of our theories, while remaining unproven, work. It is so with Christians, it is so with Jews, it is so with Buddhist, and it is so with most of the ancient religions.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Oh my. You are ripe fruit my friend. Thank you for that. Can I call you St. Augustine?

Here is a favorite quote of mine:

“Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life to carry out; a concrete assignment which demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated. Thus, everyone’s task is as unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.” Victor Frankl

I am of the belief that we are blessed, at times, ahead of our purpose. You may have just found yours. This is the preface to your new book. I look forward to reading it my friend.

That was very kind. I am no St. Augustine-- but he is a hero of mine.

I just read the Wikipedia article on Viktor Frankl, of whom I had not heard-- but his teachings and experiences are very familiar-- perhaps exposed to him in some class long ago, perhaps mentioned in passing. I may have another hero in him. Now on my "to read" list. Thank you.

Purpose-- nearly all consuming in importance to me (because I have no apparent one).
Writing a book-- I try. But I have nothing of value to say-- I seem to only be able to say what others already know, and it means nothing to those who do not know -- and only that would have purpose, albeit I admit reading someone else state what I need to read (or hear) stated is useful.

I think, maybe, I can bridge that in fiction. I am trying, have tried, and will try again, but just now "my muse" seems to be on vacation. I am published in print, but that was back when I did newspaper reporting-- assignments that have nothing to do with what is inside-- or even what is important to me (and Yes, I had an Editor who made short sentences out of all my "--" connected run-ons!); but I still maintain, that it is how we talk, but just not how we write).

Frankl's "pain of existence" and the spiritual relief not because it makes the pain go away, but because it makes it meaningful and even purposeful is my story as well-- the private story of many.

Lastly, you speak of out of time-- as if we are not in synch. Like many, my spiritual life has a mix of the immediate and the "out of time" as if, "This will have meaning when it needs to have meaning, and then will come understanding."

Right. I've observed blessing in my own life that seems undeserved. From youth, I've had some sort of amazing luck and blessing when others seem to lack this luck. As God works on me over time, I begin to see what He saw form the beginning. I would never have guessed that I was going to write a book, only have minimal writing skills. When I started on the book, it was with a paper in a graduate class that motivated me forward. I can't explain it, but I couldn't stop. It came over me like a rushing wind and just came out in the correct order, chapter titles and format. It's now being used in education courses at the university level and used by several high schools across the country for professional staff development. I have never promoted it, except from within the book itself. It sells by word of mount. I cannot claim credit for the book, only that my life experience allowed me to reflect on the truths that appeared.

From this starting point, I realize that the book was a jump-start for another direction. I have no idea where it is leading. I just sit back and follow where it leads. God has had His hand in my life for many years and it is obvious to see as I witness it happening.

Good talking.

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Oh my. You are ripe fruit my friend. Thank you for that. Can I call you St. Augustine?

Here is a favorite quote of mine:

“Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life to carry out; a concrete assignment which demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated. Thus, everyone’s task is as unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.” Victor Frankl

I am of the belief that we are blessed, at times, ahead of our purpose. You may have just found yours. This is the preface to your new book. I look forward to reading it my friend.

That was very kind. I am no St. Augustine-- but he is a hero of mine.

I just read the Wikipedia article on Viktor Frankl, of whom I had not heard-- but his teachings and experiences are very familiar-- perhaps exposed to him in some class long ago, perhaps mentioned in passing. I may have another hero in him. Now on my "to read" list. Thank you.

Purpose-- nearly all consuming in importance to me (because I have no apparent one).
Writing a book-- I try. But I have nothing of value to say-- I seem to only be able to say what others already know, and it means nothing to those who do not know -- and only that would have purpose, albeit I admit reading someone else state what I need to read (or hear) stated is useful.

I think, maybe, I can bridge that in fiction. I am trying, have tried, and will try again, but just now "my muse" seems to be on vacation. I am published in print, but that was back when I did newspaper reporting-- assignments that have nothing to do with what is inside-- or even what is important to me (and Yes, I had an Editor who made short sentences out of all my "--" connected run-ons!); but I still maintain, that it is how we talk, but just not how we write).

Frankl's "pain of existence" and the spiritual relief not because it makes the pain go away, but because it makes it meaningful and even purposeful is my story as well-- the private story of many.

Lastly, you speak of out of time-- as if we are not in synch. Like many, my spiritual life has a mix of the immediate and the "out of time" as if, "This will have meaning when it needs to have meaning, and then will come understanding."

Dont think thats proof of god and why do I say that, simple look anywhere on this planet and you find evidence that MAN created god(s).

Hundreds of different beliefs around this planet all with their god(s) all with creation stories for man and the universe can they all be right NO can they all be wrong YES!

The reaso we have god(s) is to explain things that man could not understand take for example Thor the Norse god of thunder, primative man couldn't understand what caused thunder so they make up a god to explain it.

Its the same for all god(s) its a good story nothing more nothing less!

Names of gods link below pick whatever you want to believe in!

www.lowchensaustralia.com...

See what a great imagination the humn race has.

Originally posted by wmd_2008


Dont think thats proof of god and why do I say that, simple look anywhere on this planet and you find evidence that MAN created god(s).

Hundreds of different beliefs around this planet all with their god(s) all with creation stories for man and the universe can they all be right NO can they all be wrong YES!

The reaso we have god(s) is to explain things that man could not understand take for example Thor the Norse god of thunder, primative man couldn't understand what caused thunder so they make up a god to explain it.

Its the same for all god(s) its a good story nothing more nothing less!

Names of gods link below pick whatever you want to believe in!

www.lowchensaustralia.com...

See what a great imagination the humn race has.

Nomads living in tents didn't know physics or the four components of the universe. Their language is entirely abstract, with a morphology unlike anything in existence. Many have stated that the Hebrew language is otherworldly in its complexity. It can only be equated to a programming language. Sorry, but the proof is all around you. Only God and His people represent what is true to all we know as a species. Apart from ancient Hebrew/Phoenician, our language would be grunts. Apart from the Bible, no English. Apart from the Hebrew scientists and Nobel scholars, we would not be at the stage of development that we are today.

We take most of our world for granted today. We are where we are because there is a God guiding us as we develop. The Hebrew people have been the light on the path to this movement.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


All god(s) are stories it is so obvious if you think about it, how can every part of the world have stories of gods creation etc with no two the same. MAN created god its that simple when man saw something he couldn't understand it was the work of a god for example Thor the Norse god of thunder.

Religion like politics is a job creation scheme for the boys!

No proof of any god from any part of the world absolutely NONE strange don't you think, religion shows how easy it is to fool the gullible.

All you do is get them young brainwash them at school and at their place of worship weeek in week out then one of two things will happen they will believe without question or they will think for themselves and see that's it is just a story!!!

The proof of God that a person seeks will never be found in hearing or seeing. Confucius said it 2500 years ago: "I hear and I forget. I see and I learn. I do and I understand." All I can really tell you here is that you lack vision and understanding from hearing only. Once you start doing, you will see and understand. God can only be seen by understanding from actions.

When two become one, then God is revealed. The two I refer to are your soul and your mind. Equanimity leads to understanding and sight from within the mind. The soul is the part of yourself that your mind is raising like a child. If your soul is allowed to rule your kingdom, then your intellect will only see what the soul demands. Your awareness is only centered on the self and the mind becomes blinded from the truth. As soon as you expand your awareness, you begin to see that the consciousness is more than the physical body it resides in. The intellect must rule the soul and raise it to a higher consciousness and awareness. This is only done by expanding away from the self and to a state of altruism in benefit to others.

You say that man creates God. This is true. Man can only recreate God in himself to finally see the truth of the matter. Man is a son of God. We are the prodigal son that has gone from home in the wilderness of the earth. We are wandering here to find our 'self' and confront it by the trials of living. Heaven is the place of rest where trials are not the focus. The relationship is the focus in heaven. Without the initial education by trial, we merely take the relationship for granted. You cannot die. You can only take on a new body and be born again. John 3 tells it all. Either you are born into the water (blood / material world), or you are born back into the spirit and return home. You can only "rise up O God" if you judge the earth for what it is and go back home.

Psalms 82:

5 “The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”

8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

All god(s) are stories it is so obvious if you think about it, how can every part of the world have stories of gods creation etc with no two the same. MAN created god its that simple when man saw something he couldn't understand it was the work of a god for example Thor the Norse god of thunder.

Religion like politics is a job creation scheme for the boys!

No proof of any god from any part of the world absolutely NONE strange don't you think, religion shows how easy it is to fool the gullible.

All you do is get them young brainwash them at school and at their place of worship weeek in week out then one of two things will happen they will believe without question or they will think for themselves and see that's it is just a story!!!

reply to post by wmd_2008


One more quote from the Gospel of Thomas:

(83) Jesus said, "The images are manifest to man, but the light in them remains concealed in the image of the light of the father. He will become manifest, but his image will remain concealed by his light."

(84) Jesus said, "When you see your likeness, you rejoice. But when you see your images which came into being before you, and which neither die not become manifest, how much you will have to bear!"

The image is the reality that is mentioned in the video above. We are at a time in history that the veil has been torn and we are peeking through. The above two quotes are all science needs to unify their perspective of reality. Apart from faith, science will remain blinded to the reality of the image we live in. We are 'in' the image of God. LINK There is only one place this image can be seen clearly. That's in the Bible. All streams in the great river of life will lead you back to the source. LINK

If you dare to read, you'll start to learn but forget. If you dare to see by actions, you'll start to learn and remember. If you continue on this path to expand awareness, you'll understand. Faith is built on actions.

Gospel of Thomas Simplified

reply to post by SuperiorEd



So your quoting from the bible sorry the story book WRITTEN BY MAN so if I now quote from Harry Potter will that mean we have a small percentage of the population who are wizards!