Hermit Philosopher
Selflessly here for you
I'm sorry. Where in my refutation of your sixth sense did I mention anything about evolution? Are you sure you're responding to the right post?
I thought I was sure...
did I respond to wrong post?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I'm sorry. Where in my refutation of your sixth sense did I mention anything about evolution? Are you sure you're responding to the right post?
I thought I was sure...
did I respond to wrong post?
Ah, the sixth sense. I suppose it is possible that some people have a sense that the rest of us don't and that sense allows them to perceive God. Much like the claim of God itself, I have no evidence for such a sense and some problems with the implications of the existence of such a sense.
First of all, if such a sense exists, it has almost no characteristics in common with what we now know a sense to be. Not all normal, healthy people have it. There seems to be no anatomical mechanism for it. It is often described to be sporadic and unreliable unlike our other, always-on senses.
Secondly, what does the existence of such a sense tell us about God? Remember, if God affects the physical world then we are well within our rights to try to derive characteristics of him from his behavior. Apparently, God only gives this sense to a select few, or maybe to a great many people, but it is clear he does not give it to everyone. From this we can derive that God does not want us all to perceive him.
We can also derive that God has no problem revealing himself to our senses since he reveals himself to this one. Why does he not make himself visible or audible? And again, why not to all?
I have to say I'm a little surprised that many monotheists, Christians in particular, have avoided responding to this thread. We have threads going on right now where such people claim that, not only does God interact with the physical world, but that He performs miracles, yet something about this question seems to be off-putting. Maybe they think it's a trap. I dunno.
I don't want you to feel insulted since you seem like a pretty good person, but...
If the Adam and Eve story is a parable/symboloic, that means there was no original sin, no reason for your Christ figure to die, and the entire premise fo Christianity sort of falls apart.
I believe that Jesus really existed and that He healed people.
About the Exodus, I don't know if it is historical or if it is a story, or if it was somewhat true and built up to legendary proportions like Robin Hood was. It happened so long ago. The earliest way to tell these stories was word of mouth. And if there were any earlier copies than the ones that have been found, they probably disintegrated a long time ago.
I watched a show on the science channel or PBS that talked about finding evidence of King David- not King David himself but that of Goliath. They've said evidence may be suggesting that King David really existed. Of course his kingdom was small- we always picture it to be so large. Since it was very small, history would have ignored it, for the most part.
And David was well after the Exodus.
I am also unconvinced, but let's say that this man is correct, that God did heal him and that it was a good thing. That means that people are well within their rights to try and understand things about God based on His physical manifestations. We can reasonably claim that God wanted this man to live, but we can just as reasonably claim that God did not want all the people who he did not save from death that day to die. Why didn't he help them? What does that say about his character and nature?NeoSeeker said:From physical standpoint, as you said there are those who claim God interacts with the physical word, healing people. One step further, there are true believers who feel that God takes care of his/her believers.
Regarding miraculous healing, I know an individual who was pronounced dead at his home, revived on his own at the hospital, went through all sorts of physical trials, but is alive today. He claims this is due to divine intervention. I'd say something mysterious happened, but don't feel like it was a supreme diety at work. All the people in his church are convinced for whatever reason, God saw fit to save him. Can I refute that? No not really, but I remain unconvinced.
I am also unconvinced, but let's say that this man is correct, that God did heal him and that it was a good thing. That means that people are well within their rights to try and understand things about God based on His physical manifestations. We can reasonably claim that God wanted this man to live, but we can just as reasonably claim that God did not want all the people who he did not save from death that day to die. Why didn't he help them? What does that say about his character and nature?
Which leads to my favorite example : the tornado in your neighborhood! All of your neighbors go to the same church. It comes through and knocks everyone house down but yours. You step outside, look up and say "Thanks God for sparing my house!", but what about all of your church going neighbors?? They crawl out of the rubble and ask "Why God why???" Why weren't they deserving?
Which leads to my favorite conclusion : ***** happens. There are no guarantees, if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time your earthly journey is over. In the big scheme, I don't think God (if he/she/it exists as publicized) is really concerned about these kind of Earthly matters. Running the universe takes up most of his free time.
This is why there is a law of Karma. Things that happen to people are for a reason or past action in a previous life. God sometimes intervenes and lessens this Karma if prayed to deeply. Only he knows if that karma is beneficial to the being to be experienced or not. He usually allows people to live freely unless a Divine intercession is made by a Saint or a prayer. That does not mean that he does not protect his saints, for he does, but like I said only when he see's fit. You may choose to believe this or not, but to me its the only justification to the way things work in this world. For if things happened randomely then God would have no control, and that is a contradiction to his power.
This is why there is a law of Karma. Things that happen to people are for a reason or past action in a previous life. God sometimes intervenes and lessens this Karma if prayed to deeply. Only he knows if that karma is beneficial to the being to be experienced or not. He usually allows people to live freely unless a Divine intercession is made by a Saint or a prayer. That does not mean that he does not protect his saints, for he does, but like I said only when he see's fit. You may choose to believe this or not, but to me its the only justification to the way things work in this world. For if things happened randomely then God would have no control, and that is a contradiction to his power.
That is exacly how I see it Kriya Yogi. I see that Karma is the controlling energy of God in which He chooses what the outcome of everything is. He alone chooses whether I succeed or fail. We do the action and according to that action and how it was done, intentions, etc. God will choose what the right outcome should be. But, if one atones, prays, or surrenders to the Lord, he will certainly free one from all evil reactions.
Bhagavad-Gita
Chapter 18 Text 66
sarva-dharman parityajya
mam ekam saranam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo
mokshayisyami ma sucah
Translation
Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.
I can't dispute the idea of Karma any more than I can argue if you are bad in this life, you'll come back as a bug in the next life. It falls within the realm of faith. While Karma could have some impact on your life in a natural event, I believe for the most part, the destruction happens where it is going to happen. Maybe your life is spared, but that is just conjecture.
As far as prayer I can't really make an intelligent argument for or against. Praying, ie, wanting something to happen, if there is a mechanism there, you can't really put a finger on it using logic. Again, you must fall back on faith, and assume someone who has the power to change an outcome is listening to you.
The problem is many don't apply themselves enough or open their minds and yet still say God or faith is nonsense.
YES!!!! Thank you Kriya Yogi for saying this! This is a problem I have with many people, without opening their minds or putting enough work into it, they expect God to show himself. Why would God show himself to an atheist who says "Show yourself!" and has put in no effort? God will show himself to those who work and are devoted to him and have put in the effort, not people who merely say "Show yourself". Then if that atheist where to have a vision of God, they would pass it off as a dream or possible schitzophrenia.
I cannot of course speak for all faiths, but as an ex-Christian, I know that God was understood to be a spiritual being. He was also purported to have interacted directly with the physical world through miracles and the sending of His son to earth. My questions to theists are:
- Is your God a spiritual being?
- Does He exist solely in the non-physical realm or does he directly affect the physical world as well?
It seems to me that if God only exists in the spiritual realm then there is nothing that can be learned about him. If he directly affects the physical world then we can derive information about him through both his actions and by his inactions.
of course "god" doesn't interact in the physical world
that is why there are so many religions
No, not at least in a way that can be comprehended by humankind.
Could you go into more depth about this, xkatz? I see in the Torah that the Jewish God is always interacting with humans and things like this, am I mistaken? I could be, I dont know too much about Judaism. Please Enlighten me
Well TBH, I see G-d's interactions in the Tanakh/Torah as more allegorical than literal in context or in simpler terms- I am NOT a literalist