-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evidence?
- Thread starter Storm
- Start date
PureX
Veteran Member
No it can't. We have no way of even verifying that such characteristics exist, let alone that some being could exist or not exist and possess them. Characteristics such as these are based on the premise of infinity, which we cannot measure or verify.
logician
Well-Known Member
Yes, it can.
PureX
Veteran Member
Then let's see you do it.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Did you even read the OP?
Greetings Nanda. If one looks at all of the experiences reported of every type, inconsistency can surely cause confusion or doubt and most of us would agree with your observation. However, if one selects a certain group of experiences related to Awakening, Enlightenment, or Union with God, a certain consistency is found. I remember reading a book, "Cosmic Consciousness" by Bucke, that put me onto this notion when I was in my early years. (The book was first introduced in 1901, I believe, and no, I am old but I did not read it when it first came out.
) Another book of youth that reinforced this idea was "Truth is One" by Forman & Gammon (1954). My being since those early books has born this out and form the basis for my response above in this thread. Best Wishes,
a..1
Greetings Storm. So far, it looks like you and I are the only ones that agree on your #1 proposition. However, in the big picture we are not alone. Your thread caused me to revisit after some time of absence ye olde Wikipedia in this area. It seems improved and I did find religious experience in the list of arguments for the existence of God which contained a number of references and books. So, unless you wrote the Wikipedia section and made up the references, there are others.
Also, I found this statement in the list of 'Arguments grounded in personal experience,' "Many modern Protestant theologians follow in Schleiermacher's footsteps, and teach that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated; certainty as to this truth is only furnished us by inner experience, feeling, and perception." This supports my answer to your Proposition #2 in my first post above.
Your thread is much appreciated for surfacing some new ideas on old thoughts for me.
Regards,
a..1
rojse
RF Addict
Firstly, I find personal testimony to be quite a weak form of evidence for anything. Everyone has their own ideas of what God is supposed to be like. For example, Philip K. Dick said that God is a satellite called VALIS that sent out radio messages, which is part of an array orbiting the star system Sirius. Do we want to take his testimony on the matter?
For evidence of God, I want God to do something that no man or woman can do, either singly, or collectively. Above that, I want God to do something that I cannot reasonably anticipate a race, or multiple races, of aliens doing, either, with technologies that we cannot even anticipate. Instantaneous matter transportation would work for me. Time travel. The spontaneous creation of matter. Something that will make everyone go wow, because not only can we not do any of these things, we cannot even explain them, should they occur.
Hi Rojse. One must discern from the ridiculous.
Wasn't that already done?
Regards,
a..1
:bow: :angel2:
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
That is not evidence of anything. Its just a bunch of anecdotes and is meaningless.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Religion can neither be proved nor disproved. There is no evidence for either side. To argue the existence of religion is little more than an exercise in futility as it is an issue of faith. Will you believe in something that there is no evidence for? For some people it is no, others yes. What really is annoying is when some religion claims to be based in science and has evidence going for it.
rojse
RF Addict
You say it is ridiculous. But what if I told you that Philip K. Dick predicted that his son had a deadly disease? The doctors checked his son, and said nothing was wrong. PKD asked them to check again, and they found his son had an inguinal hernia, which he would have died from if it was not operated on. Philip K. Dick attributed this to the intervention of Valis.
I am not saying that I believe it, or disbelieve, merely that there are a lot of different claims for different gods.
Wasn't that already done?
I am trying not to sound like an obstinate three year old, but I have not seen this incident, nor do I have any evidence that it occured, apart from a book that, to me, is full of huge inconsistencies. I hope you do not take this as an insult, because I have not meant it to be. There are no independent accounts of this that I can verify, nor has God seen fit to repeat this incident for my benefit, in a way that would make me believe.
Secondly,
Greetings Rojse. In my judgment, the experience of Valis is not in the same class of perennial wisdom that the religious experiences mentioned previously fall into. This comes from what you have posted, but you certainly are justified to correct me to keep an open mind until all the facts are in. Discerning among the possibilities is important but, of course, one can be wrong so each person must find their own way that makes sense to them.
Nothing you have written is taken as an insult, and I consider your post reasonable from your perspective. As the evidence, I was referring to the 'production' of all being - all things that are, the universe - which seems to me to meet your criteria for evidence as you described it. Its beauty and wonder are with us every day so we know it is here, but from your perspective I suspect that you have another explanation for its ultimate source or just wish to leave it open. Your mention of 'WOW' comes to me often through being with nature and through the study of science, among other everyday events & things. Concerning science, we each can grow through what humankind has grown through and many breakthroughs will produce a 'wow' as we learn of them in growing up. Just a simple thing like learning that all the trillion plus 'things' that my self relates to in the world (universe) actually boil down to different arrangements of one thing, can produce a 'wow' when first learned. I can remember the actual 'WOW' to this day that came when I first derived Einstein's E=mC2 (showing the relation of energy and mass) in advanced physical chemistry class (under the Professor's guidance
). Of course, these feeling are no comparison to discovery of God as the source. From your perspective, probably all of this is irrelevant if one has another explanation for the source of all being, or wishes to leave the explanation open. From my perspective, the proposition is made that study of what exists and analysis of being can lead to conclusions of ordered energy (Purex), and the teleological, cosmological, and ontological arguments (plus others) that make the question of God reasonable. That is, these conclusions may not prove 'God is' but they validate that the question 'is there God' is valid and reasonable. My offer is that the answer to the question 'is there God' comes through revelation and direct personal experience within.
Best Wishes,
a..1