God vs Science: Is there a point?

[ENTP Logician]

As I already explained, I have lost touch with the original source, so cannot provide one. All I can tell you is that there was such a source originally. Having said that, the understanding of the quote in question comes as an intuitive one, and so stands upon its own. That process is an internal one, and amounts to one tapping into one's own Buddha nature. IOW, the Buddha nature by which he realized the message of the quote is the same nature everyone possesses as well. It is not knowledge that comes via Reason, Logic, or Analysis.

Siddhartha was not the only Buddha. There are many. There is Buddha, then there is universal Buddha nature.

Intuition is not a reliable means of confirming information.

Also if you do not have a source any skeptical person is justified in not believing you.

 

[godnotgod]

The nature of the unicorn, which is beyond reason, logic, and analysis cannot be proved or disproved rationally.

If mysticism was reliable it could be proven with logic, but since it cannot then it is not reliable.

I can accept the unicorn on faith as well but that does not make the unicorn exist.

'Unicorn' we know as a mental fantasy; the experience of the mystic is real, but since it is beyond Reason, cannot be proven or disproven by such methods.

No one has verified seeing a unicorn; but we have many verifications of the mystical experience by practitioners around the world, independent of one another in different times and places.

The sceptical prisoners in Plato's Cave can only verify the existence of the Sun by going to see for themselves.

 

[godnotgod]

Intuition is not a reliable means of confirming information.

Also if you do not have a source any skeptical person is justified in not believing you.

That is up to them, but they can still go see for themselves if the quote is true or not via their own inner insight. IOW, each of us is the source.

Intuition is not the goal, but only the pathway to higher consciousness.

 

[ENTP Logician]

That is up to them, but they can still go see for themselves if the quote is true or not via their own inner insight. IOW, each of us is the source.

Intuition is not the goal, but only the pathway to higher consciousness.

If my intuition tells me that murdering virgins is the path to higher consciousness should I listen to it?

 

[ENTP Logician]

'Unicorn' we know as a mental fantasy; the experience of the mystic is real, but since it is beyond Reason, cannot be proven or disproven by such methods.

No one has verified seeing a unicorn; but we have many verifications of the mystical experience by practitioners around the world, independent of one another in different times and places.

The sceptical prisoners in Plato's Cave can only verify the existence of the Sun by going to see for themselves.

No one has verified seeing a deity.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Does anyone honestly think that this debate will end with one side actually winning the debate?

Yep, one day. Ezekiel 38:23.

 

[godnotgod]

If my intuition tells me that murdering virgins is the path to higher consciousness should I listen to it?

Yes. But you will never hear such a message, unless it comes from your thinking mind. As I said, the intuitive mind is only the pathway.

 

[godnotgod]

No one has verified seeing a deity.

But mystics have repeatedly verified the powerful transformation of consciousness that leads to the enlightened state.

 

[ENTP Logician]

Yes. But you will never hear such a message, unless it comes from your thinking mind. As I said, the intuitive mind is only the pathway.

A host of mental disorders would beg to differ.

 

[ENTP Logician]

But mystics have repeatedly verified the powerful transformation of consciousness that leads to the enlightened state.

And a bunch of people wrote about dragons and unicorns.

 

[godnotgod]

A host of mental disorders would beg to differ.

Sure, due to some form of thought. Delusion arises to practitioners in the spiritual practices too, but a good teacher can direct a student out of that maze. Delusion is an aspect of mind. When the activities of the mind come to a halt, where is delusion?

 

[godnotgod]

And a bunch of people wrote about dragons and unicorns.

The enlightened mind sees beyond all such fantasies.

 

[godnotgod]

A host of mental disorders would beg to differ.

I would venture to say that we find a plethora of those mental disorders primarily in the West, where Logic and Reason seemingly reign supreme, creating an atmosphere where the much-needed nourishment that spirituality offers is seen as suspect, on a par with shady practices, nourishment which clinical science fails to deliver.

 

[ENTP Logician]

Sure, due to some form of thought. Delusion arises to practitioners in the spiritual practices too, but a good teacher can direct a student out of that maze. Delusion is an aspect of mind. When the activities of the mind come to a halt, where is delusion?

Incorrect. The part of our minds that processes rational thought are suppressed during both delusions and religious experiences.

 

[ENTP Logician]

The enlightened mind sees beyond all such fantasies.

I just add deities to that list.

 

[james bond]

I have to ask both sides:

Why is it necessary to prove or disprove the existence of any god from any belief system?
Say someone SOMEHOW proved that God is real, ok.
Say someone SOMEHOW proved that God isn't real, ok.

Either way, we are battling each other, not literally, over supernatural beings that we as humans know almost nothing about. Either way, whats the point?
Non-Believers, given everything you found out thus far, and say God is proven real (SOMEHOW), would your beliefs or stances on such a being change at all? And same in reverse to Believers, say God was proven to be not real (SOMEHOW), your beliefs change at all?

Based on how Science & Religion works, neither can honestly prove the other wrong. Science & Religion has a guess for what happens after death (I say guess cause frankly no one really knows for a fact), so even if we die, comeback & try to say "I saw God!" even if the person in question was a well-known Scientist who was highly against anything to do religion & deities, the rest of the science community would still find a way to discredit that person (ex. Hallucinated). And same for Religious people, a highly devout believer comes back from death & says "Nothing happened, I saw nothing", the religious side would simply say "Oh that person is lying" or "The devil got to them!" etc.

Does anyone honestly think that this debate will end with one side actually winning the debate?

From my pov, the truth will win. It always does. There is only one truth.

The truth is no one will prove God. He is unproveable. Just as no one will disprove God. If it is a false god (I see this small 'g' so often), that atheists believe exists, then they will be disproved.

You're using the word proof. In science, there is no proof. That's mathematics.

So, what is the point of this post?

 

[ENTP Logician]

I would venture to say that we find a plethora of those mental disorders primarily in the West, where Logic and Reason seemingly reign supreme, creating an atmosphere where the much-needed nourishment that spirituality offers is seen as suspect, on a par with shady practices, nourishment which clinical science fails to deliver.

And you would be very wrong. They are primarily diagnosed in the west because we often have more logic and reason while in many other places they cannot be due to the lack of sciences.

 

[godnotgod]

Incorrect. The part of our minds that processes rational thought are suppressed during both delusions and religious experiences.

Perhaps so, but the authentic mystical experience is well past delusion and religion. What occurs along the path to many, if not all, aspirants, is a period when the ego is found out, and puts up a horrendous fight to stay in control, using every trick in the book to do so. This must be overcome for spiritual progress to be made.

 

[ENTP Logician]

From my pov, the truth will win. It always does. There is only one truth.

The truth is no one will prove God. He is unproveable. Just as no one will disprove God. If it is a false god (I see this small 'g' so often), that atheists believe exists, then they will be disproved.

You're using the word proof. In science, there is no proof. That's mathematics.

So, what is the point of this post?

Uh... by definition an atheist does not believe in any form of god.

 

[ENTP Logician]

Perhaps so, but the authentic mystical experience is well past delusion and religion. What occurs along the path to many, if not all, aspirants, is a period when the ego is found out, and puts up a horrendous fight to stay in control, using every trick in the book to do so. This must be overcome for spiritual progress to be made.

Do you have any proof of that?

If not then why should I believe you?