Allah, the only Creator.

[Caladan]

Evidently evolution doesn't think so because the more scientists look at the human brain and the way it works the more it seems human biological evolutionary history confirms the presence of a spiritual dimension evolving right alongside of the material one.

There's some questionable scientific sources you use.

Human beings have been worshiping spirits and reacting to spiritual phenomena for tens of thousands of years and you need to ask yourself why even our brains are hardwired to receive spiritual phenomena

I cant argue with you that some people are born into ignorance and stay there, and some adopt ignorance against all common sense.

, e.g. n.d.e.'s, if as you think it doesn't exist. These are the End Times of Atheism and the more science delves into the human mind and the mechanics of Creation the more spiritual aspects are showing up as built into our physical universe.

'the mechanics of creation'.. are you sure you are authorized to use such big words?
modern science supports non spiritual aspect, none, zero, ziltch, nada. spiritual aspects is not even the purpose of science. science explores natural phenomena. ergo of the material world.

 

[biomystic]

There's some questionable scientific sources you use.

Evolution of the God Gene that just recently appeared in the N.Y. Times. I guess their science editor was sleeping on the job...?

I cant argue with you that some people are born into ignorance and stay there, and some adopt ignorance against all common sense.

So thousands of years of human beings reporting and acting upon spiritual phenomena means zip to you and you put others down for their ignorance? This is the Atheist religion speaking that can only be held as a belief system without proof while theistic belief systems have an unbroken history in human thought for tens of thousands of years. So much so nice , that even our brains have evolved ways to process spiritual information.

'the mechanics of creation'.. are you sure you are authorized to use such big words?
modern science supports non spiritual aspect, none, zero, ziltch, nada. spiritual aspects is not even the purpose of science. science explores natural phenomena. ergo of the material world.

Tut, tut, yes, even us Christians sometimes can use these "big words". I majored in anthropology at U.C. Berkeley. They learned us good thar. Where did you go to school?

 

[REASON_236]

No need for creator. the laws of physics and biological evolution are phenomena independent of a need for a deity.

well, u said it. there r laws. and every little bit of this universe is following this law. is it against common sense to believe that these laws were set by someone/something that is intelligent(self aware). for everything that is in order, someone must have put it in order.

 

[Caladan]

well, u said it. there r laws. and every little bit of this universe is following this law. is it against common sense to believe that these laws were set by someone/something that is intelligent(self aware). for everything that is in order, someone must have put it in order.

You can believe whatever you want. the ancient Greeks believed it was Zeus, the Egyptians thought it was Osiris. personally I don't see a benefit in making myself believe what feels fluffy. in fact the idea that there is a god watching my every action seems pretty sick, I'd report him to the police.
Bottom line is, a belief in God is independent of evolution and physics. what you believe in is your private business.

 

[Caladan]

Evolution of the God Gene that just recently appeared in the N.Y. Times. I guess their science editor was sleeping on the job...?

This article is about EVOLUTION, understand? its not about God.

So thousands of years of human beings reporting and acting upon spiritual phenomena means zip to you and you put others down for their ignorance? This is the Atheist religion speaking that can only be held as a belief system without proof while theistic belief systems have an unbroken history in human thought for tens of thousands of years. So much so, that even our brains have evolved ways to process spiritual information.

nice rant. so far I've seen you demonize Judaism and Islam, that doesn't leave much for 'tens of thousands of years' of theism, does it?

Tut, tut, yes, even us Christians sometimes can use these "big words". I majored in anthropology at U.C. Berkeley. They learned us good thar. Where did you go to school?

I don't need to flash my academic experience for credibility, I reflect my academic background through my posts. lets see what you got. so far, not much.

 

[zenzero]

Friend REASON_236,

as a muslim, i believe that the Quran is God's words and the term Allah appeared in the Quran as His name. but if u use another term to refer to God as Islam sees Him then i wouldn't see where is the problem. but the thing is that if i use the term 'Ra' for example, i wouldn't be thinking of God as Islam sees Him. i would be thinking of Him as the Egyptians saw him, The God of Sun.

in the end, its not about which term we use. its about how we 'see' God. according to Islam, Allah is the God that all the prophets worshiped, the Jews and Christians before Mohammed called Him YAHWEH. so the same Allah is also called YAHWEH. it is about how we 'see God and not what we call Him.

Thank you for your response.

The next question goes to a new thread: Are We Humans first?

Love & rgds

 

[biomystic]

You can believe whatever you want. the ancient Greeks believed it was Zeus, the Egyptians thought it was Osiris. personally I don't see a benefit in making myself believe what feels fluffy. in fact the idea that there is a god watching my every action seems pretty sick, I'd report him to the police.
Bottom line is, a belief in God is independent of evolution and physics. what you believe in is your private business.

You don't get the point of social evolution reinforcing God consciousness. Where do think religious beliefs come from? Made up out of thin air? They come from human belief in supernatural beings affecting human life. Now we are seeing that even physical evolution of human mentality reinforces the reality of a very long standing relationship between human beings and spiritual phenomena. Why has this occurred if there wasn't anything to spiritual phenomena? Why has Nature if you don't accept God, evolved our human brains to be conscious of what atheists like you claim is nothing more than fantasies? Human brains have probably been fantasizing about flying ever since the first hominid had a dream in which he or she could fly. We build airplanes and rocket ships now. Perhaps we are inspired by things which are intangible and unmeasurable now but maybe not in our future development, you think? No, I sense your Atheist religious myopia will not allow for things that cannot be measured to be given any credit in human activity. Which of course in the recent past tossed out "love" between people until science came along and verified the brain's chemical activity registering invisible love.

 

[Madhuri]

in islam, a picture of the word 'Allah' doesnt represent God but refers to him and we honor the picture but we dont worship it.

i meant that we cant draw something that is everywhere. but if u'r saying that u r drawing 'part' of him, then by worshiping this part, u wouldn't be worshiping the whole Him. but if u mean that u use a beautiful picture to represent a 'sample' of his whole beauty and worship the whole beauty through this sample(since we cant perceive the whole beauty), then wouldn't u think that using something that He drew for us would be a better representation of a 'sample' of his beauty? like beautiful natural views, sunset, the sea, the mountains, the stars, etc.

i can see how the picture or anything beautiful can represent a 'sample' of His beauty since He is beauty itself.but how can the picture represent his might, eternity, knowledge, compassion, etc.

i was wondering, in the rest of the drawings, is it the same person in this drawing or he can be drawn to look differently?

best regards.

What is most important about our behaviour is our intention. When devotees worship a picture or a deity we are intending to worship God who is present within the deity. Because of our intentions, we believe that God becomes fully present in that deity or picture. Because we are unable to see God in his full extent with our mortal human eyes he becomes consciously present in the deity. Our actions become the equivalent of worshiping God in His full extent (or for those whose intention is to only worship a 'part' then that is what it becomes). It is because our heart and mind see what we want to see in that deity.

It is important to understand that when we are worshiping a picture/deity we do not see the picture frame or statue; we see the Divine. We believe that God is looking out from the picture/deity and appreciating our efforts. We believe that when we offer food to the deities with love and devotion, God (in His full extent) is actually tasting the food and blessing the food that we then eat. It is not just a statue that represents. God is fully present.

When we become more spiritually advanced we can realise that God is fully present everywhere and we can properly percieve it. But until that time it is fantastic to be able to have a focus point such as a deity to build a relationship with God. As a social animal and from experience, I know what the difference feels like. I remember as a small child, 5 or 6 I had a small Krishna clay deity. I fell in love with this deity. It was my friend and my child (God can represent many things according to Hinduism as it is believed that we all have an eternal and unique relationship with Him/Her). I offered Him fruit every day. For so young a person this was a wonderful way for me to begin my experience of loving God. As I have matured I have been able to expand my love outwardly from just the deity to many things such as people and nature and the God manifest within myself. It is not pure love as I am not so advanced, but it is something.

For the same reason that God is percieved differently by each individual then it does not truly matter how one depicts Him. Some people draw God in the form of Krishna or Rama or Lord Caitanya or Shiva. If one feels a special connection with God through the Earth itself then by all means it is not inadequate to depict God as the forests and streams and mountains. It does not matter what the external aspect appreas as because what matters is your intention and your perception and your love. It does not even truly matter if you are only able to percieve one aspect of God and dedicate yourself to it. All aspects of God are mighty and eternal etc.

Does this make sense?

 

[Madhuri]

Also I am not saying that Hindus are right to worship deities and others are wrong. It is stressed in Hinduism that we each have our differences because we are meant to; because we all have unique pathways to God and we are each doing what is appropriate for our self. So some people are attracted to Hinduism because this is our path and right for us and others are attracted to Islam because it is appropriate to them and others attracted to different paths. According to Hinduism, all religions hold truth and all religions are valid paths. As long as the individual is truly seeking truth then they will discover it. But we all percieve truth differently, have you noticed?

 

[biomystic]

Also I am not saying that Hindus are right to worship deities and others are wrong. It is stressed in Hinduism that we each have our differences because we are meant to; because we all have unique pathways to God and we are each doing what is appropriate for our self. So some people are attracted to Hinduism because this is our path and right for us and others are attracted to Islam because it is appropriate to them and others attracted to different paths. According to Hinduism, all religions hold truth and all religions are valid paths. As long as the individual is truly seeking truth then they will discover it. But we all percieve truth differently, have you noticed?

And this religious tolerance marks the difference between revelatory religions and Hinduism. Revelation from God in the Near East seems to have set in motion a utopian goal for religious consciousness, the goal of unification of humanity through monotheistic belief in a single Supreme Being. It is a counter to the problem of too many religious paths creating a sense of chaos about the spiritual world and human concepts of God, i.e., the symbolism behind the Abrahamic discrediting of the Tower of Babel, perhaps an Abrahamic response to the Babylonian Flood myth where Innana or Ishtar, I forget which, gets fed up with all the noise human beings make and floods the world leaving old Babylonian whatshisname, the original "Noah", who sought eternal life to restart humanity.

Because my religious context has been the Abrahamic one, I am prejudiced to see the point of unifying belief in God all around the world in order to end the continual replay throughout history of religious warfare which in our day is still going as strong as it ever has. But the Abrahamic monotheism is a forced one and not true to the reality of multiple ways of perceiving and worshiping God. What to do? The Hindu way, the ecumenical tolerance of everyone believing their own culture's religious take on God and proper social mores, which hasn't stopped religious warfare in India, the same fate that marks today's attempts to have all religious paths equal in value to one another by de-emphasizing scriptural differences, e.g. the Pope trying to cozy up with Jewish religionists. Or do we achieve common religious belief the Abrahamic way, with your Top Dog, oops, Top God, the One and Only Way to believe, still going strong in Islam, weakening in modern Christianity, and also with the majority of Jewish believers backing way off their religion's former intolerance of other religious beliefs due to lack of political power until reestablished in modern Israel where the same signs of religious intolerance are again poking up through the I-P conflict. Then there's there's Ba hai, sort of in between Abrahamic Muslim intolerance and Hindu tolerance, and now this new prophet bozo's claims to another One Way theology, the unification of belief in God as the Great Spirit of Humanity, supposedly bridging the revelatory gap between science, humanism and belief in God.

Me, I just wanna wait until all the bodies stop dropping and let God sort it out..but I can't. I'm on point duty for God and have orders to march forward with the Eternal Truth you all need to hear at least once or a hundred thousand times so we can all move forward together in peace, love, and harmony without squabbling about who's God is God, who's Holy Book is really holy or full of holes, and who's doing the right thing for God and humankind. Simplify the problem by looking for goodness in the acts of anyone whether they believe in Vishnu, YHWH, Allah, Odin, Wakan Tanka, or Santa Claus. Goodness is universally recognized and so God for me is the Source of Goodness in humanity and that's who and what I work for. Amen. (that Egyptian hidden god really gets around..)

 

[Riverwolf]

in islam, a picture of the word 'Allah' doesnt represent God but refers to him and we honor the picture but we dont worship it.

And, at least for me, the pictures do the exact same thing.

i meant that we cant draw something that is everywhere. but if u'r saying that u r drawing 'part' of him, then by worshiping this part, u wouldn't be worshiping the whole Him. but if u mean that u use a beautiful picture to represent a 'sample' of his whole beauty and worship the whole beauty through this sample(since we cant perceive the whole beauty), then wouldn't u think that using something that He drew for us would be a better representation of a 'sample' of his beauty? like beautiful natural views, sunset, the sea, the mountains, the stars, etc.

That's actually what the ancient Indus River Valley people did with the earliest Vedic hymns, and what the people of Japan did and do. What you've described is a form of nature worship, which is, indeed, the root religion of Hinduism. (At least according to what I learned in my Comparative Religion class.)

i can see how the picture or anything beautiful can represent a 'sample' of His beauty since He is beauty itself.but how can the picture represent his might, eternity, knowledge, compassion, etc.

A single picture can depict all of these things depending on the contents. Might can be depicted by a weapon of some sort, and in most pictures, the god is holding a weapon of some sort. Eternity can be depicted by the god sitting on a small representation of the world. Knowledge can be depicted by the holding of a book or scroll, and Brahma is, in fact, holding the Vedas. Compassion can be felt by looking into the eyes of a very well-drawn picture.

i was wondering, in the rest of the drawings, is it the same person in this drawing or he can be drawn to look differently?

best regards.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

 

[Riverwolf]

Evolution of the God Gene that just recently appeared in the N.Y. Times. I guess their science editor was sleeping on the job...?

You're going to have to do better than that.

So thousands of years of human beings reporting and acting upon spiritual phenomena means zip to you and you put others down for their ignorance? This is the Atheist religion speaking that can only be held as a belief system without proof while theistic belief systems have an unbroken history in human thought for tens of thousands of years. So much so nice , that even our brains have evolved ways to process spiritual information.

There are psychological explanations for religious and superstitious behavior.

 

[biomystic]

You're going to have to do better than that.
[/color]

Nope. It's you who has to come up with science-based counter arguments. Good luck with that one because the pop press articles about recent brain research coming out like the one I posted link to are continuing to undermine the whole atheist religiously held belief system that there is nothing to spiritual phenomena because you can't measure it. Well, it's becoming possible to measure it now, the exact same thing that happened with "love" which nobody previously could measure in the human mind but now science has found out testosterone levels show it in operation.

There are psychological explanations for religious and superstitious behavior.

And there are psychological reasons why some people refuse to acknowledge intellectual defeat. It's not enough for atheists to throw out literally thousands of years of recorded human behavior connected with spiritual phenomena as of no consequence, now as you are showing, they want to toss out science observations as well which don't reinforce their atheist religious beliefs.

 

[Riverwolf]

Nope. It's you who has to come up with science-based counter arguments.

The New York Times is not a reliable source of scientific information. No news publication is. Journalists are contracted to use hyperbole, exaggeration, and in some cases, outright lies in order to attract more readers. They can be interesting to read, but useless in a debate UNLESS THEY ARE BACKED UP BY A SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL. In that case, it's better to use such a journal.

Good luck with that one because the pop press articles about recent brain research coming out like the one I posted link to are continuing to undermine the whole atheist religiously held belief system that there is nothing to spiritual phenomena because you can't measure it. Well, it's becoming possible to measure it now, the exact same thing that happened with "love" which nobody previously could measure in the human mind but now science has found out testosterone levels show it in operation.

And there are psychological reasons why some people refuse to acknowledge intellectual defeat. It's not enough for atheists to throw out literally thousands of years of recorded human behavior connected with spiritual phenomena as of no consequence, now as you are showing, they want to toss out science observations as well which don't reinforce their atheist religious beliefs.

I'm not an atheist. That doesn't mean I'm going to just disregard Freud or others simply because he was.

Besides, you should know that, in many tribal religions (including one of the ones that became the one I follow), these "spiritual phenomena" were reinforced with some sort of external helper, such as the drink Soma.

You also have to keep in mind people with mental conditions that cause hallucinations. Such people may have been considered prophets in their day, and even today. I read the teachings of Subramuniyaswami. I believe also that he had an hallucination when he had his "vision" of Lord Ganesha. I'm also very skepticle of the so-called "milk miracle."

Don't forget that our senses are limited and can easily be fooled by illusion. The Sagse knew this, and taught as much.

 

[biomystic]

[/color]

The New York Times is not a reliable source of scientific information. No news publication is. Journalists are contracted to use hyperbole, exaggeration, and in some cases, outright lies in order to attract more readers. They can be interesting to read, but useless in a debate UNLESS THEY ARE BACKED UP BY A SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL. In that case, it's better to use such a journal.



I'm not an atheist. That doesn't mean I'm going to just disregard Freud or others simply because he was.

Besides, you should know that, in many tribal religions (including one of the ones that became the one I follow), these "spiritual phenomena" were reinforced with some sort of external helper, such as the drink Soma.

You also have to keep in mind people with mental conditions that cause hallucinations. Such people may have been considered prophets in their day, and even today. I read the teachings of Subramuniyaswami. I believe also that he had an hallucination when he had his "vision" of Lord Ganesha. I'm also very skepticle of the so-called "milk miracle."

Don't forget that our senses are limited and can easily be fooled by illusion. The Sagse knew this, and taught as much.

I have religious visions and I know the difference between hallucinations and religious visions. I am a full veteran of the psychedelic '60's and have had enough experience with psychoactive chemically induced hallucinations to be certain that my own religious visions are of a different order, one big difference being they come unbidden without drug inducement and they aren't random images continually changing form as drug induced hallucinations do.

God gave me the image for Paxcalibur, Sword of Peace, and after wowing and being honored by over 500 Christian Nazareans at Easter in 2003, now Paxcalibur resides in Nazareth, Israel, as the world's most spiritually powerful religious icon having the ability to "speak" God's message of peace without necessity of language to anyone who sees it. My vision of Christ Josephine, a Native American Spirit Woman I saw five years before I knew anything about the Lakota's prophesy of the return of their Savior and founder spirit woman White Buffalo Calf Woman. Now I am a grandfather to three children who are direct descendants of the Lakota's most famous spiritual warrior leader, Sitting Bull and am working with the Lakota tribes on an economic development and ancestral land recovery enterprise. Could all this have happened because of drug caused illusions in my mind? Sometimes God speaks and gives human beings visions to guide them to new ways of being.

 

[REASON_236]

Also I am not saying that Hindus are right to worship deities and others are wrong. It is stressed in Hinduism that we each have our differences because we are meant to; because we all have unique pathways to God and we are each doing what is appropriate for our self. So some people are attracted to Hinduism because this is our path and right for us and others are attracted to Islam because it is appropriate to them and others attracted to different paths. According to Hinduism, all religions hold truth and all religions are valid paths. As long as the individual is truly seeking truth then they will discover it. But we all percieve truth differently, have you noticed?

i think i understand.

correct me if im wrong: Hindus believe in one Supreme Being/God/Creator. He can be worshiped through different representations, pictures, statues, nature etc. that means that all Hindus worship the same God even though they use different pictures or statues. and this God is eternal, all knowing, all powerful, he is beauty itself, all wise, he created the universe and beyond, compassionate and loving, nothing in existence is equal to him. am i right?

 

[Madhuri]

i think i understand.

correct me if im wrong: Hindus believe in one Supreme Being/God/Creator. He can be worshiped through different representations, pictures, statues, nature etc. that means that all Hindus worship the same God even though they use different pictures or statues. and this God is eternal, all knowing, all powerful, he is beauty itself, all wise, he created the universe and beyond, compassionate and loving, nothing in existence is equal to him. am i right?

Yes, Hindus are generally monotheistic.

 

[YmirGF]

From my vantage point, my original identity, my Whole self, created and sustains the being that writes these words. My Whole self is not God though it does have many attributes that are normally ascribed to gods in general. What isn't understood is that I am no different from anyone reading these words. You are manifestations of your Whole Selves, though it is not my experience that many recognize this.

My physical manifestation is an approximation of the Whole Self in flesh and bone. At the same time, I have a rather generous part of my "local" identity that does not exist in physical terms, but is of an immensely rich psychological nature that is quite difficult to describe. Some call this arena of experience the Soul, though I generally disdain the term due to the preexisting religious connotations and much prefer the term personality energy essence or entity.

The purpose of this "current" manifestation is to gain experience in several key areas, to flesh out, quite literally, the understanding of the Whole self. In some terms, "I" am a continuing "what if" experiment and have been given specific attributes that I can draw on throughout my physical sojourn. The reason for the "experiment" is to set challenges in front of myself that I have the ability to solve, although in many cases, I may have to dig very deeply to find my personal solutions. The point is to see how I react under different probable situations and exactly how I arrive at highly creative solutions as I learn how my thoughts and beliefs form the experience I encounter. I am a wee pup, but I am learning how energy becomes matter and to me, that is all that matters. I don't give much thought to gods - any more.

 

[REASON_236]

Yes, Hindus are generally monotheistic.

then it is clear that Hindu and Islam have somehow the same understanding of God the difference is in the way of worship. you say that everyone has his/her own method/way/path/religion and they can all be valid.
Islam claims that we were created to worship. does Hinduism say the same thing or is there a different purpose of creation, or no purpose at all?

 

[Madhuri]

then it is clear that Hindu and Islam have somehow the same understanding of God the difference is in the way of worship. you say that everyone has his/her own method/way/path/religion and they can all be valid.
Islam claims that we were created to worship. does Hinduism say the same thing or is there a different purpose of creation, or no purpose at all?

Our purpose is not to worship, specifically. Our purpose is to discover our true nature and thus the nature of God. Our purpose is to evolve, on a level of consciousness until we become self realised and are thus liberated from the material platform of life and the ongoing cycle of birth and death.

Realising God and Self is very important, and very deep. We have many concepts such as that God is love, God is life. So many things we 'know' intellectually but how many of us really understand the depth and meaning or implications? Almost nobody. We aim to Realise and Realisation is the key to liberation.