Is knowledge of God natural knowledge?

[InvestigateTruth]

I would like to discuss natural knowledge and the knowledge of God.
This is my understanding when I say “natural knowledge”. My Tibetan Book of the Dead, I Ching, Bible, and other religious texts have taught me that God’s existence is something that is self proving. We are born with knowledge of His existence; it in intrinsic knowledge. Attachment to suffering, ego, and material life clouds our vision. Knowledge of God is something that can be obscured.
God becomes clear when we detach ourselves from our ego; this is the process of discovering God.
Do theists agree that knowledge of God is natural knowledge? What do atheists think of this concept? Does it seem silly?

I agree it is natural, but not in a sense that as soon as a child is born he knows God. But if one has a clear and clean heart he will be lead by God in His own ways. That is recognition of Messengers or Manifestations of God, otherwise no one have access to God Himself.

 

[rational experiences]

A human egotist should first ask are you natural?

Then you should ask what does your science practice?

To change natural by natural man thinking. Design. Building. Control by man's thoughts. Convert destroy transform his words.

Are you a God brother man,?

Answered is yes I think I bodily own all gods powers personally and bodily as a single thesis a human.

Is space it's own form natural?

Yes. Not a human when you think and see.

Same as stars gases sun planets not a human.

And you ask as the theist of God is God natural.

Man taught a human is present as a human thinking instantly. So you wouldn't pretend you were space infinite stars sun's gases or planets.

To bring your human natural mind to the only place you lived. It was not taught as a thesis but to make you know you are only a human.

Human men what did you claim God was?

Everything he said as mass owned any form first. O God his symbol.

So I said O maths one and infinite number as mass was not owned by my calculus actually.

I taught mass created was any one form as mass O within mass so I could not claim singularity by ego of man ownership as singular thinking.

Why I stated no man is God in the same teaching I theoried man was God so was life sacrificed.

Why I wrote a book about man's unnatural egotism.

 

[rational experiences]

Human life.

Planet earths presence.
Heavens present natural bodies in a mass.

We live inside of a an amassed heavens.

Years of human two parents sex the baby the baby grows lives dies. Human.

Consciousness always humans inside earths heavens just human.

Before a human the teaching human is no human. No human consciousness either.

Human by state before them a recording status is first exists before them always.

Recording image and voice or sound recorded. A state only.

Memories first two humans only. Long time deceased recorded in the state.

A man adult father memory. A woman adult mother memory.

Human consciousness only as the natural argument no thesis science allowed.

Reason human thesis did not exist before a living human.

A self aware teaching.

Memories however state. A human placing their arm through our heavens by gesture teaching said we came from just through here.

Ground zero no empty space. Space not in the topic.

Human parent said once I was an eternal being who entered earths atmosphere that instantly changed my body type into ground states highest form.

Water oxygenated human being. Spiritually natural a human being.

Who can say God bodies came from the same place but were burnt as a mass release and own forms nothing like my own.

Memory itself.

Human reasoning how do I know I am spiritual?

Memory human parents says you are.

Conscious self human awareness how we express also knows.

Father memory sAw our mother emerge as he came out of the eternal first.

Humanity I believe in my holy human father realisation.

Either you believe yourself created by another humans scientific singularity theme which owns themes burning suns burning radiation in space....or living always only inside heavens as a spiritual advice.

Was the only human choice. Believe in humans theorising about machine reactions in reality sciences invention or your owned spirituality.

 

[Sheldon]

(1) God’s existence is something that is self proving. We are born with knowledge of His existence; it in intrinsic knowledge.

(2) God becomes clear when we detach ourselves from our ego; this is the process of discovering God.

(3)What do atheists think of this concept? Does it seem silly?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Since this is a subjective and bare claim, yet uses the universal plural "we", I shall answer in the same fashion but in the singular, and say that I know no such thing, thus at least as far as I am concerned the claim is false.

(2) This is quite obviously a no true Scotsman fallacy, and therefore prima facie seems irrational by definition. As no objective evidence is offered that's all I can offer.

(3) Yes, it seems as if you are simply asserting what you want to believe, and you have used what appears to me at least, is a common logical fallacy.

Hope my candour doesn't offend.

 

[rational experiences]

When hu man's claim God the man is my advice then science is involved in the advice.

As God became man's scientific argument. Reasoned why.

Yet science was never owned by natural man or practiced by natural man until he chose to impose it.

So if man says pre existing states. Recording of image and voice owned transmitting of said state is a long time before he as a man god existed.

As earth just a stone planet gets recorded and imaged back is not any man god. By image or speaking voice.

The state however to record transmit existed a long time ago. Naturally.

So if you ask the scientist did you cause man the God in earths cloud body.... the answer is yes he did. Why he knows by science status that he caused it.

As you cannot argue about what man of science knew he caused as science the practice taught us he caused it.

As proof in science states...statements.

Why man believes he invented God the man.

As the argument is he did versus why he claims science didn't.

The argument is men of science sacrificed human life by science causes.

So the teaching is why did natural man invent science originally.

The answer is he wanted as a man to return to the eternal.

As it is in his science thesis statement. He wanted to cause it by machine conditions.

A confession. As a machine did not invent human life.

 

[stvdv]

I like to consider that if the potential is not there in the first place, it can not be taught.

Exactly

And @Xavier Graham SA in his OP gives away (freebee) how to get to experience God. So, if you are genuinely interested to experience Divinity, you just have to put into practice the advice as given in the OP. What more to say. I have been practicing it since ca. 1990, and I know it works (miracles)

 

[DNB]

It perhaps falls under the category of being unfalsifiable, but this is what I understand. Introspection is self-illuminating. Hypothetically, our consciousnesses and souls have God’s essence in it. Since God is within us, it is provable if we look within. Meditation will allow us to see God. And once you’ve seen God, what more proof do you need? You have seen Him, God has been discovered. We are attached to God, and it is our ego that separates us. The belief is that we have all of the tools within us to discover God within. We are not merely smart apes, we are God like creatures.
I guess this can be labeled as a mere belief.

No, it can be labelled as an indelible fact. Since we are created in His image - we are spiritual beings by anyone's esteem, both the concept and awareness of God's presence is intrinsic within us all.. There is not one society or culture since the beginning of history, that has not had some form of divine recognition or worship, not one.
Natural revelation is as axiomatic, there is no other explanation for creation except for design and intent , and no other explanation to man's behaviour besides his ontological dimension of spirituality.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Exactly

And @Xavier Graham SA in his OP gives away (freebee) how to get to experience God. So, if you are genuinely interested to experience Divinity, you just have to put into practice the advice as given in the OP. What more to say. I have been practicing it since ca. 1990, and I know it works (miracles)

I see the advice is offered across many religious texts.

It becomes our challenge to see naught but God in all things.

Regards Tony

 

[rational experiences]

If all things that exist get recorded and imaged back. It is a message notified.

The human scientist says image recorded of anything is a state and it's spirit. As image as a recording is not physical.

Image and recordings itself. Then it is not a science.

It is a scientist human thought awareness only.

If that human scientist says if the state imaged recorded voice and feedback is nuclear science changed the reason the state exists first as recording ....then humans said messages change.

Feedback only. Interference in life. Experienced by the living consciousness.

Human consciousness says science nuclear caused attacks in heavens gas spirit that changed our natural heavenly messaged feedback.

As we are conscious natural first spiritual.

A human teaching.

Now I must write about the causes as a human science notified life changed.

I became a spiritual messenger to try to save my family from evil satanic hu man science choices.

Past life attack was a science chosen satanic cause. Cause effects arrived back naturally from cosmos changed. The human advice.

Baha'i message.

Yes the cosmos attacks sacrifices life. Proving it never created life as it attacks life the message.

Warned before in Jesus event.

Warned before Moses event.

Recorded in vision reason why the dinosaurs died.

Effect science origins caused all attacks. Known.

In my dinosaur vision it said my human brother the scientist caused it. The attack. Yet he was not living then.

Encoded in visionary advice is real.

Baha'i history Muslim was who revered stone that hit earth were taught it attacked life yet atmosphere gods status saved life.

Bahuallah tried to reason science as it was re emerging again as satanisms. Sun theories. In human community.

The same retaught human reasonings again and again. Science satanisms lied. Human known wisdom of destruction.

 

[DNB]

I would like to discuss natural knowledge and the knowledge of God.
This is my understanding when I say “natural knowledge”. My Tibetan Book of the Dead, I Ching, Bible, and other religious texts have taught me that God’s existence is something that is self proving. We are born with knowledge of His existence; it in intrinsic knowledge. Attachment to suffering, ego, and material life clouds our vision. Knowledge of God is something that can be obscured.
God becomes clear when we detach ourselves from our ego; this is the process of discovering God.
Do theists agree that knowledge of God is natural knowledge? What do atheists think of this concept? Does it seem silly?

The concepts of morality, love and hate, justice and equity, are all innate within is. They are not societal derivations in order to improve one's lifestyle, but over-arching principles that affect man whether or not he has a vested interest in its implementation - any atrocity from around the world elicits his sympathy. No other creature on earth but man, conceives of, and establishes rules and regulations that are meant to protect, punish, recompense and rehabilitate all actions that are deemed morally incorrect, ...despite the often equally practical benefits.

Again, you will never see a Buddhist cat, a Hindu dog, a camel with a burka on its head, or an eagle with a mezuzah on its nest. Only man has this capacity - and it's not intellect, for if there is no God, then the spiritual man is an utterly demented fool.
The spirit of man, is the evidence of a source for this dimension - and stardust and protoplasm do not have this essence or capability..

 

[rational experiences]

Science believing themes such as holograms created the physical life.

Are mind affected daily.

As earth a mass body is physical mass recorded so are other bodies in space without earths water oxygen status.

Water owns oxygen. Recording never did the sun.

Water on earth oxygenated by trees owned our life sacrificed recorded. Two holy bodies away from a state.

So you would preach satanisms. God the earth owned image with the sun first.

Not human but god mass so you would not gas burn us to death. By sun theisms claiming suns light and not gods earth light creates life.

As the sun voids it's burning mass alight via empty cold space to remain as a sun energy mass.

If theisms say by machine I want to put my space thesis theoried into earths atmospheric natural state. Is I want to invent it myself.

Imposing visionary just space themes his intent was to burn us all to death by machine. As to invent is his actual meaning to invent his thesis via his human wisdom. His machines.

To impose forced invented machine states upon natural as gods terms.

God of man is garden nature oxygenation in water for human life. Always was taught

When man set the bush on fire man's human life got sacrificed his science teaching.

Reasoned.

Fish and whale life lived in massive sea water bodies and pressures.

Changed their nature and beached washed upon the shores where man walked.

As their bodies were UFO irradiated changed.

Man's earth evidence the land sea vanished. His built cities found under the sea.

The taught flood said water was lifted up witnessed. It said the sea parted.

The story said it came crashing down on places where humans lived and travelled as evidence.

The sea floor would demonstrate soil dirt in its substrate as evidence.

The advice in the movie water world.

Science says the flood of earth never created life.

As life is lived on the bared ground is correct. Naked ground.

The man god science they'd said God man with garden nature.

No human man nor woman in theory.

Yet man about God was theorising. Is his Satan proven man's confession.

The theory proves he placed his mind into owning the theory.

Intention no human inferred. The theory says so.

The theory science reheard said man had put maths space womb theory at his side instead of his life natural equal partner.

An equal human female woman.

It was his satanic confession.

As Sion was how to convert the natural God mass.

Only humans living just as humans claim visionary human as Satan idealisms.

By feedback image. A holy human Satan their ideal.

So when you teach the man's science confession as it was written his man's space maths womb science hurt his life body.

He told you all it had.

He was married in fact to his satanic God theory in his theist consciousness.

Instead of natural communion with his holy female sister. As father and mother. Sister and brother.

His unholy stories were what satanic science caused to natural life. By his God man theist choice.

 

[stvdv]

I see the advice is offered across many religious texts.

What do you see as "the advice" as given in the OP?Just to make sure we talk about the same "advice"

 

[rational experiences]

Science believing themes such as holograms created the physical life.

Are mind affected daily.

As earth a mass body is physical mass recorded so are other bodies in space without earths water oxygen status.

Water owns oxygen. Recording never did the sun.

Water on earth oxygenated by trees owned our life sacrificed recorded. Two holy bodies away from a state.

So you would preach satanisms. God the earth owned image with the sun first.

Not human but god mass so you would not gas burn us to death. By sun theisms claiming suns light and not gods earth light creates life.

As the sun voids it's burning mass alight via empty cold space to remain as a sun energy mass.

If theisms say by machine I want to put my space thesis theoried into earths atmospheric natural state. Is I want to invent it myself.

Imposing visionary just space themes his intent was to burn us all to death by machine. As to invent is his actual meaning to invent his thesis via his human wisdom. His machines.

To impose forced invented machine states upon natural as gods terms.

God of man is garden nature oxygenation in water for human life. Always was taught

When man set the bush on fire man's human life got sacrificed his science teaching.

Reasoned.

Fish and whale life lived in massive sea water bodies and pressures.

Changed their nature and beached washed upon the shores where man walked.

As their bodies were UFO irradiated changed.

Man's earth evidence the land sea vanished. His built cities found under the sea.

The taught flood said water was lifted up witnessed. It said the sea parted.

The story said it came crashing down on places where humans lived and travelled as evidence.

The sea floor would demonstrate soil dirt in its substrate as evidence.

The advice in the movie water world.

Science says the flood of earth never created life.

As life is lived on the bared ground is correct. Naked ground.

The man god science they'd said God man with garden nature.

No human man nor woman in theory.

Yet man about God was theorising. Is his Satan proven man's confession.

The theory proves he placed his mind into owning the theory.

Intention no human inferred. The theory says so.

The theory science reheard said man had put maths space womb theory at his side instead of his life natural equal partner.

An equal human female woman.

It was his satanic confession.

As Sion was how to convert the natural God mass.

Only humans living just as humans claim visionary human as Satan idealisms.

By feedback image. A holy human Satan their ideal.

So when you teach the man's science confession as it was written his man's doace

What do you see as "the advice" as given in the OP?Just to make sure we talk about the same "advice"

Don't know why the program responded the way it has.

My human answer says natural is a
Human first owning no scientific thesis.

Basic human advice for any human.

If a hu man says a God told me how I was created. For what logical reason?

As a human you already owned your human presence.

If I can say to men with machines you didn't invent my life. It would be because they use machines to attack my life.

Their expressed Nonsense. I am not a design. Built or controlled by a man's thoughts.

Yet the programmer a man of invention. Builds lots of machines. Encoded computer programs. Discusses AI. Reviews human mind contact mind control. Programs the program now says it works.

Contact. Mind choice manipulation.

Ask a simple question for a theist. Did you ask why a natural human could mind contact mind coerce another human? Without you studying it or copying it,?

I bet his answer would be no.

I bet he never included I machine caused life attack before and the natural heavenly mass caused it. Natural cause effects.

Seeing science never owned the presence natural mass or any one single change within natural mass.

Wait a minute today using science manipulation they too now cause physical change. Oh they must all be gods.

Is how a human feeling powerful by machine conditions lies daily. As if the machine is a bodily extension of their own self.

Why consciousness human said mother space womb human maths zero as machine causes at side hurt my life. You evil female. Talking to his man theist self who became homosexual because of the attack.

Who now pretends he is a female.

All the reasons he personally lied as man the theist machine owner.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

What do you see as "the advice" as given in the OP?Just to make sure we talk about the same "advice"

As per the opening OP.

Regards Tony

 

[RestlessSoul]

What evidence, or argument, do you rely on for supposing that this "natural knowledge" of divinity is really knowledge, rather than mere belief in something that may or not be the case? After all it is something of an old chestnut that the existence of most conceptions of God is neither provable nor disprovable, due to the way the concept of God is usually specified cf. Russell's teapot etc. So how do you conclude it is self-proving?

Or do I smell a get-out in this idea of detachment from ego, viz. is it considered egotistical to even question whether God exists.

It’s not egotistical to question whether God exists. The intellect is not the ego - the ego does not ask questions - and when detached from emotion, the intellect can act as a torch in the darkness. But the ego will go to any lengths to co-opt our thoughts, insisting that it is the creator and ruler of our world, the only inner voice we need to listen to. It fills the mind with worldly clamour, drowning out the sense of God; an ego drunk on pride and unchecked by humility, will afford a man little peace.

I speak from my own experience.

 

[Heyo]

I think that a predisposition for believing in Gods, or other agencies, is natural. It appears to have provided survival advantages, and that is why it has probably been naturally selected.

ciao

- viole

Assuming agency in inanimate objects or forces is a human trait, we agree on that. But is that really the same as

We are born with knowledge of His existence; it in intrinsic knowledge.

as @Xavier Graham SA says? Is animism the same as monotheism (which the quote seems to favour)?

 

[stvdv]

As per the opening OP.

Regards Tony

Seems I had a different "advice" in mind

 

[blü 2]

I would like to discuss natural knowledge and the knowledge of God.
This is my understanding when I say “natural knowledge”. My Tibetan Book of the Dead, I Ching, Bible, and other religious texts have taught me that God’s existence is something that is self proving. We are born with knowledge of His existence; it in intrinsic knowledge. Attachment to suffering, ego, and material life clouds our vision. Knowledge of God is something that can be obscured.
God becomes clear when we detach ourselves from our ego; this is the process of discovering God.
Do theists agree that knowledge of God is natural knowledge? What do atheists think of this concept? Does it seem silly?

Since we have found virtually zero cultures without supernatural beliefs of some kind, it seems reasonable to suppose that their source is the evolved human response to attribute explanations to unknown phenomena and questions. Rather than go without answers to questions about weather, natural phenomena, drought, plague, fertility, luck in war, luck in hunting-gathering, luck in love and so on, not to mention death, birth, dreams, altered mental state and the like, we make up explanations about beings with intentions and powers.

If this was based on authentic supernatural visions then the world wouldn't have so many different kinds of religions ─ all the visions would tend towards a single model.

But there are, so we can rule out the idea that the supernatural is in any meaningful sense a part of objective reality. Rather it's a part of our human and tribal psychology.

And since the Enlightenment, as we in the West have come to understand a widening range of subjects through reasoned skeptical enquiry, the grip of the gods on our cultures has loosened as the cultures underlying them change with that knowledge.

What seems to have been the great accelerant this century ─ indeed arguably since the 50s after WW2 ─ is the coming of better and better mass communications, till the cell phone married with the net is now portable in every pocket, and we don't rely on physically assembling in order to feel we're in our society, and as a result the old centers of authority ─ the politicians, the newspapers, the intelligensia, the churches ─ are no longer "in command" of the masses.

And supernatural religion is emerging as one of the losers.

 

[ChristineM]

I would say its down to years, maybe decades, but not centuries when we will see more change happening, big change on a global scale. It is already recorded that America and its peoples will suffer in this process, but they are the forerunners to a greater peace.

I see all that we can embrace in this age, to create an ever advancing civilization, has already been written by Messages given by God.

It is an interesting daily perusal and observation of how the world affairs unfold in relation to mankind's capacity to embrace what is already offered.

Regards Tony

If that's what makes you comfortable. History indicates otherwise and there is no reason to believe the future will offer any great difference as far as religion is concerned. It seems to be a repeated cycle

 

[exchemist]

It’s not egotistical to question whether God exists. The intellect is not the ego - the ego does not ask questions - and when detached from emotion, the intellect can act as a torch in the darkness. But the ego will go to any lengths to co-opt our thoughts, insisting that it is the creator and ruler of our world, the only inner voice we need to listen to. It fills the mind with worldly clamour, drowning out the sense of God; an ego drunk on pride and unchecked by humility, will afford a man little peace.

I speak from my own experience.

Oh I agree, hence my suspicion that "letting go of ego" might be a way of dressing up unquestioning acceptance of what one has been taught. Though in this case it seems my suspicion was ill-founded, I'm pleased to say.

I can recall from my Catholic upbringing that there can sometimes be an undercurrent of suggestion that it is better to accept teaching meekly than to question it. By questioning, one is in effect setting oneself up as a judge, so I can sort of see the argument. But it goes right against the principles of a liberal education of course, in which one is encouraged to evaluate and to judge ideas, rather than accepting them uncritically.