There is no proof of God ...

juantoo3 said:
OK...G!d is Love I have no argument with. Perhaps you see something I don't, so I am not in a position to agree or disagree.

I prefer to simplify, not add layers of complexity. The issue is complex enough as it is that most peoples' eyes glaze over at the mere mention of the subject. I find it helps when discussing this subject to prune away excess superfluity.

The OP is whether there is "proof" G!d exists. Objective proof is very rare, to the point it can be said it doesn't exist. However, subjective proof abounds, but subjective proof is not scientifically valid (or so "they" say), I think in part because the experiences are not possible to recreate in a controlled manner.

Not that folks through the centuries haven't tried, I pointed to the weight of the soul as one attempt. There are lots of philosophical, psychological and spiritual / ecstatic exercises that overall in a general sense seem to provide sufficient proof for various individuals...but your mileage may vary...and science doesn't like to deal with "your mileage may vary" scenarios.

Gould rightly pointed to the two competing magisteria of religion and science...though as a meme, science too is a religion at its core (a comment I make that draws ire from "scientists" - typically the armchair type that are more interested in undermining religion). Gould posited that Science and Religion approach questions from different perspectives, which is why they tend to talk past each other.

Using Science to prove G!d is a fundamentally flawed endeavor. Likewise, Religion views G!d through stained glass. Ultimately one must decide and take on faith whether G!d exists. For some, no amount of evidence will ever suffice. For some, no amount of evidence is required. For some, all we have is our subjective experiences and trying to make sense of it all.

In the end, whatever religio-philosophical (that includes science) ideas command our thinking ("memes"), the bottom line is what we do with what we know or believe we understand. Perhaps I see G!d for Whom He IS; but if I do not treat my neighbor as I wish to be treated, then what I believe is worthless and my life is a waste of time and energy. If I see G!d incorrectly, and still do what is right, it doesn't matter...all will be well in the end. When we stand before G!d at the Great White Throne, we aren't going to be asked what faith we followed...we will be asked what we did for our brothers and sisters and neighbors, and what we did for Him. All around the world, all across human time, folks have just wanted the opportunity to live in peace and raise their families as G!d intends. But humans are human, and peace isn't always possible, and intrusions into and encumbrances placed onto our lives must be dealt with.

It isn't about what you believe, it is about what you do with what you believe. That's where the rubber meets the road.
Click to expand...
Totally agreed with your function over form notion/value. Views about reality (metaphysics) may, however, help with doing and being “good.”
Last night, I woke up with a jingly poem that expresses the belief of interconnection in overall reality. The concept in science (Quantum theory) of entanglement rings true to me. The quantum theorists at least have some objective evidence to support the concept. And the concept provides a reason to love, other than it is good. Love is more “consistent “ with an entangled, interconnected, nature of Ultimate Reality.
As you indicated, a person could love well without the “belief” in entanglement. But the belief could prompt the practice of love, acting like a map to the destination called love.

Here’s the poem:

My Name is Quanta

There’s more to me
Than meets the I.
I meet the earth and sky
That greet a stranger
Passing by.

Look all around.
Feel the ground.
You’re beginning to see
That the being before you
Never was just me.
 
juantoo3 said:
Messengers are not required...never have been. Each of us has a direct connection built in...all life has this connection. Doesn't matter if you ignore it or dismiss it, it is there. Why the emphasis among the Yogis (and other adepts) for the Solar Plexus?
Click to expand...
Juantoo, I really like this comment. Spiritually empowering, a gateway to Wholeness. Not that a good messenger or teacher couldn’t help though. But not necessarily “required.” We can learn from the book of life. Wisdom and insight often happens without messengers and teachers per se. Unless you count life’s patterns as being messengers.
 
Aupmanyav said:
Naturally, people are the same everywhere. Concern for future and fear of death created God and then came the so-called messengers. 'God wants you to do this and God wants you to do that. I have direct instructions from God.'
Click to expand...
Aupmanyav,
Back to my earlier thought that maybe wholeness is what “God” actually represents, and that wholeness might be common ground between your reverent atheism and my functional theism.
Wholeness or a high level of integration would be needed to successfully navigate a desired future. We would call upon our wholeness in order to actualize our positive potential. God help us all.
 
otherbrother said:
Aupmanyav,
Back to my earlier thought that maybe wholeness is what “God” actually represents, and that wholeness might be common ground between your reverent atheism and my functional theism.
Wholeness or a high level of integration would be needed to successfully navigate a desired future. We would call upon our wholeness in order to actualize our positive potential. God help us all.
Click to expand...
One advantage of “wholeness” is that it does not require an external being, but does require a going deeper into one’s true self that may not be as stand alone as we assume it to be.
 
otherbrother said:
Aupmanyav,
Back to my earlier thought that maybe wholeness is what “God” actually represents, and that wholeness might be common ground between your reverent atheism and my functional theism.
Wholeness or a high level of integration would be needed to successfully navigate a desired future. We would call upon our wholeness in order to actualize our positive potential. God help us all.
Click to expand...
I do believe in existence of just one entity (Brahman, in my case, i.e., physical energy) constituting (and not making) all things in the universe. That is Advaita (non-dual) Hinduism. But Brahman has no desire, did not create anything. It is not a God. This wholeness does not need worship and does not respond to your pleas. It goes its own way.
 
Aupmanyav said:
I do believe in existence of just one entity (Brahman, in my case, i.e., physical energy) constituting (and not making) all things in the universe. That is Advaita (non-dual) Hinduism. But Brahman has no desire, did not create anything. It is not a God. This wholeness does not need worship and does not respond to your pleas. It goes its own way.
Click to expand...
Not "a" God, it is G!d.
 
It is not even a G!d. What you perceive, existence is but an illusion.

800px-Quantum_Fluctuations.gif
 
Aupmanyav said:
It is not even a G!d. What you perceive, existence is but an illusion.

800px-Quantum_Fluctuations.gif
Click to expand...
Interesting graphic.

If existence is illusion; there is no reality, there is no truth, you and I do not exist.

Perception is illusion, that I would agree with, as each perception is subjective. But reality simply exists, which renders "existence as illusion" fallacious. Reality isn't real because we imagine it to be. We imagine we understand the reality that exists.
 
Aupmanyav said:
Very true. But there is ample evidence of organic compounds floating around in the universe, perhaps seeds of life.
Click to expand...
The components of life came from the universe, so yes that is true. But that is NOT empirical evidence for life that originated from other planets.
 
juantoo3 said:
Interesting graphic.

If existence is illusion; there is no reality, there is no truth, you and I do not exist.

Perception is illusion, that I would agree with, as each perception is subjective. But reality simply exists, which renders "existence as illusion" fallacious. Reality isn't real because we imagine it to be. We imagine we understand the reality that exists.
Click to expand...
'Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya' (Brahman alone is the truth, the perceived is an illusion), so said Sankaracharya in 8th Century.
The reality is 'physical energy' (Brahman). Just its existence creates the illusion of the universe.
What you do not see in the image is 'physical energy' (Brahman) which is omni-present. You see only the effects.
 
moralorel said:
The components of life came from the universe, so yes that is true. But that is NOT empirical evidence for life that originated from other planets.
Click to expand...
I never said that we are from other planets. Organic compounds are found in asteroids. And every star/planet is bombarded with them. No better evidence than our pock-marked Moon.

200w.gif
 
Aupmanyav said:
I never said that we are from other planets. Organic compounds are found in asteroids. And every star/planet is bombarded with them. No better evidence than our pock-marked Moon.

200w.gif
Click to expand...
Soooo you're just telling me what I already know? That the building blocks for life are present all over the universe? Thanks for that. I already knew that. I'm confused as to your point. It appeared you were trying to defend the individual who I used as an example of hypocrisy...
 
Aupmanyav said:
It is not even a G!d. What you perceive, existence is but an illusion.

800px-Quantum_Fluctuations.gif
Click to expand...
I buy that, in terms of an Ultimate Reality within/behind the physical reality we know. But all expressions of overall reality are rooted (nested?) in that, and are not completely isolated from the Real. Each expression of Ultimate Reality is not not real, but, in comparison to the most real, as though a mere illusion. I’m assuming there is a practice to bring greater degrees of the most real to the less real realties, so as to animate, energize, them, either by summoning wholeness, mindfulness, prayer, (Yantra?), practicing integrity (Sutra), or directly sensing the most Real (Dogzen?).
Without a means of channeling the Brahma energy, there would be no usefulness of the concept/belief. It would be a philosophy (metaphysical branch of philosophy), but not a religion.
 
otherbrother said:
I buy that, in terms of an Ultimate Reality within/behind the physical reality we know. But all expressions of overall reality are rooted (nested?) in that, and are not completely isolated from the Real. Each expression of Ultimate Reality is not not real, but, in comparison to the most real, as though a mere illusion. I’m assuming there is a practice to bring greater degrees of the most real to the less real realties, so as to animate, energize, them, either by summoning wholeness, mindfulness, prayer, (Yantra?), practicing integrity (Sutra), or directly sensing the most Real (Dogzen?).
Without a means of channeling the Brahma energy, there would be no usefulness of the concept/belief. It would be a philosophy (metaphysical branch of philosophy), but not a religion.
Click to expand...
Which brings us all the way back to what is the purpose of this forum? Is the “faith” part of “interfaith” belief only, or the kind of faith that actually helps us get through the day, or even thrive throughout it?
 
The least physical thing in human experience is mind. That’s why I think it’s okay to attribute that to Ultimate Reality. Anything beyond mind is beyond recognition, can’t be tagged, oriented to, connected with. Even if mind/Mind is only akin to an icon on the computer screen of reality, it is a link we can use to access what is beyond. For all intents and purposes, the icon suffices. We can use it to enhance our lives.
What was the god the down and out, resource-less, Jewish ancestors discovered? The vast potential of mind, which can create all kinds of means to access and develop resources. The mind is a terrible thing not to fully use.
 
otherbrother said:
The least physical thing in human experience is mind. That’s why I think it’s okay to attribute that to Ultimate Reality. Anything beyond mind is beyond recognition, can’t be tagged, oriented to, connected with. Even if mind/Mind is only akin to an icon on the computer screen of reality, it is a link we can use to access what is beyond. For all intents and purposes, the icon suffices. We can use it to enhance our lives.
What was the god the down and out, resource-less, Jewish ancestors discovered? The vast potential of mind, which can create all kinds of means to access and develop resources. The mind is a terrible thing not to fully use.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about merely having thoughts. That is part-mind. The whole mind behind and within each thought is the Mind worth using fully, as though worshipping “God.”
In Thought as a System, David Bohm, made a distinction between regular thinking, which is usually just recycling old thoughts, and a more fluid, fresh, and wholistic mental activity that he called “proprioceptive” (sp?) thought.
The more fluid and looping mental activity would correspond to the Brahma as energy concept , because the mind opens and flows instead of fixing on discrete objects. And energy seems like the parent of fixed objects or “matter.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top