No Doubt about Proof.

[TransmutingSoul]

One's own experiences also teach humility. When one forces themselves to engage in various activities and circumstances, life teaches us many things. Reading allows us to witness the experiences of others, so that there is a great deal of learning by vicarious means. I don't believe that a single mentor is necessarily the best source for wisdom. Whatever we're taught from external sources, invariably must coincide with our own understandings of life and the human condition. Thus, again, experience is probably the greatest endowment of education.

Yes I agree, that virtue is indeed a potential within us all. I would offer though, there are many levels of humility, if we wanted to be more humble where could we look?

I know of one teaching that many would know by heart. Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek and Jesus showed us what it meant to turn the other cheek to the extent of crucifixion. How many of us would practice that level of humility?

Regards Tony

 

[rational experiences]

As a human I always observed human behaviour quietly.

I saw many humans display what I would believe are particular human spiritual qualities that assist human learning.

Saw lots of humans doing it and also read books about some super phenomenal human conditions witnessed.

So said to my own self one special human was never true.

As a lot of humans displayed unique human advice

If a human gained leadership from any particular teaching I assess the teaching based on its mutual human merit.

Not on nationality as human support. The advice only.

Maybe it is about time the rest of you do the same.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That works quite well if God is an ideal (rather than an entity with objective existence).

I see all we can know of God is those ideals, as such what is it in us that makes us aspire to those ideals? That is where I see that faith in the Spirit behind creation enters into our frames of reference. That there is an intelligence portrayed in those virtues.

Yes, again, God as an ideal is a workable notion.

I tend to think that the important thing is humans behaving with decency towards other humans. If they do that, does it matter what else they like to believe?

And if they don't do that, again, does it matter what else they like to believe?

A workable notion is great, not all people will believe in a God, but they also want a peaceful productive life. So at least we have a foundation to build upon. there is a saying, One Heart at a Time".

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The proof is in the human heart and intuition not in anything in the world.

Agreed. I also see it is the capacity within all of us.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

OK. How do you define faith?
If there were adequate evidence, like there is for evolution, plate tectonics or heliocentricity, there would be no religious controversy in the world.

What we can also consider is that the proofs the material world offer, are also open to change when new information comes to hand. All truth is really relative to our capacity of mind.

Religious controversy comes about when we argue over doctrinal differences in a spiritual truth that was demonstrated by the person that gave the Message. While they were alive, they were a living testimony to what they offered. After they passed on, the proof of what they offered is only as bright as those that reflect that original teaching.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

No. This is a question of objective truth and epistemology, not social utility.

I am finding our desire for objective truth, is tied to things of this world, but even what we thought was objective can be altered when new discoveries are made. The next giant leap may be when we are visited by far more advanced and intelligent beings not of this planet.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

As a human I always observed human behaviour quietly.

I saw many humans display what I would believe are particular human spiritual qualities that assist human learning.

Saw lots of humans doing it and also read books about some super phenomenal human conditions witnessed.

So said to my own self one special human was never true.

As a lot of humans displayed unique human advice

If a human gained leadership from any particular teaching I assess the teaching based on its mutual human merit.

Not on nationality as human support. The advice only.

Maybe it is about time the rest of you do the same.

I agree when we look at humans we will see the same capacity within them all. This topic is about the possibility that a few Humans were more then Human, not in appearance, but in wisdom of Soul and Spirit.

Regards Tony

 

[RestlessSoul]

You don't need to demonstrate the reality that various people have faith in various gods. I doubt that's in dispute.

The question is, what real entity does the word "God" denote, such that if we find a real candidate we can determine whether it's God or not.

What does the word denote to you? What do you think it might look, or feel like, if God were to become known to you?

 

[blü 2]

What does the word denote to you? What do you think it might look, or feel like, if God were to become known to you?

If God were real [he]'d be a non-human with no Linnaean category. It would then be a matter of exploration and enquiry as to what other qualities and abilities and purposes [he] might have. [He]'d possess real qualities, not imaginary ones like omniscience and omnipotence and perfection, and [he]'d have a metabolism with its own requirements.

One major question would be [his] actual attitude towards humans, which is unlikely to be the one that humans attribute to [him] in fulfillment of their own wishes. What if anything does [he] actually have in mind here? What does Earth have that [he] wants?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

One major question would be [his] actual attitude towards humans, which is unlikely to be the one that humans attribute to [him] in fulfillment of their own wishes. What if anything does [he] actually have in mind here? What does Earth have that [he] wants?

I see that is answered in that our purpose is to know and Love God, most likely in a way that God shows that love to us all. To achieve that, we have been placed in a matrix with an ability to increase our knowledge of Love.

I see God does not need us at all, it is naught but a bounty of Love that wea re here with that given ability.

Regards Tony

 

[osgart]

What we can also consider is that the proofs the material world offer, are also open to change when new information comes to hand. All truth is really relative to our capacity of mind.

Religious controversy comes about when we argue over doctrinal differences in a spiritual truth that was demonstrated by the person that gave the Message. While they were alive, they were a living testimony to what they offered. After they passed on, the proof of what they offered is only as bright as those that reflect that original teaching.

Regards Tony

So perhaps you are saying that the existence of virtues is evidence of God because the virtues don't contradict and there is great intelligence in them.

 

[rational experiences]

I agree when we look at humans we will see the same capacity within them all. This topic is about the possibility that a few Humans were more then Human, not in appearance, but in wisdom of Soul and Spirit.

Regards Tony

In human life a higher spirituality is self owned in body mind and life. By conditions of inherited causes.

As everyone is a human.

Humans ask was Jesus real.

You would say what's in a name. As the descriptive analogy owned conditions not human. Ignored. And the status born human baby attacked man's life occurred. About a Human.

A man lived stigmata sacrificed and what humans said was a human act of causes meant his body demonstrated multiple attacks in phenomena.

As the image man on cross is today still seen in the clouds above the mountains as image. Seen it photographed in cloud images.

If it occurs again not in any science practice as Baha'i statement then science is proven wrong why they argue it's recurrence. No science was practicing then.

Science occult tried to claim it science as Jesus.

I was taught historic first life DNA had mutated to a lesser human before we all died. So today DNA was living at the end before all life was destroyed.

Why the memory end of life is strong now.

My life had died before all life was ended by scientific causes. Why my memory by DNA living remembers today.

Hence we proved life came from a place of spirit versus science claiming it's human thesis owned it's invention by machine formulas. Maths.

Science is who said we never came from a holy place spiritual.

Science then says no it was an evil being in space.

Science then says no spirit is real yet humans living have seen spirit with our own eyes.

We argue with spiritual purposes against two science proposals. As science introduced two by two Phi.

Argues two reasons not for spiritual.

Natural life was natural paired just as two.

Only sex produced the next two.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So perhaps you are saying that the existence of virtues is evidence of God because the virtues don't contradict and there is great intelligence in them.

Yes, I personally see they are indeed the evidence of God.

Regards Tony

 

[osgart]

Yes, I personally see they are indeed the evidence of God.

Regards Tony

Well it's interesting because people possess qualities of their own character. And as I see it there is an objective moral truth to uncover. And in this moral truth is very logical thought given that virtues do exist.

What would honesty be without discretion so that the virtues as a whole reveal goodness itself.
Only things that are of evil intent run contrary to the virtues.

And to embody the qualities of virtues is ideal. So perhaps these ideals speak of an ideal character.

To me it's inescapable that humans always must deal in terms of virtues and vices.

The big problem for me is that in this universe we are but dust mites in an incomprehensibly vast existence. If measured by size humanity is totally insignificant. If measured by ideals, I see nothing ideal about human existence; very far from that. The savage nature of survival in our existence is an ever present reality. People come and go from life too. There doesn't seem to be any plan to natural existence.

The ideals are far removed from reality.

 

[RestlessSoul]

If God were real [he]'d be a non-human with no Linnaean category. It would then be a matter of exploration and enquiry as to what other qualities and abilities and purposes [he] might have. [He]'d possess real qualities, not imaginary ones like omniscience and omnipotence and perfection, and [he]'d have a metabolism with its own requirements.

One major question would be [his] actual attitude towards humans, which is unlikely to be the one that humans attribute to [him] in fulfillment of their own wishes. What if anything does [he] actually have in mind here? What does Earth have that [he] wants?

You see God as something other, something which exists separately from the rest of creation?

I had to look up Linnaean btw. Apparently Linne was a botanist, who labelled things?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Well it's interesting because people possess qualities of their own character. And as I see it there is an objective moral truth to uncover. And in this moral truth is very logical thought given that virtues do exist.

What would honesty be without discretion so that the virtues as a whole reveal goodness itself.
Only things that are of evil intent run contrary to the virtues.

And to embody the qualities of virtues is ideal. So perhaps these ideals speak of an ideal character.

To me it's inescapable that humans always must deal in terms of virtues and vices.

The big problem for me is that in this universe we are but dust mites in an incomprehensibly vast existence. If measured by size humanity is totally insignificant. If measured by ideals, I see nothing ideal about human existence; very far from that. The savage nature of survival in our existence is an ever present reality. People come and go from life too. There doesn't seem to be any plan to natural existence.

The ideals are far removed from reality.

I see the whole purpose to life is to rise above this existence into a spiritual existence.

It has been offerd we are created on the edge of darkness and the beginning of the Light to come. The light is the potential within us and you will note that we are in a creation of opposites. The virtue is the potential the lack of that virtue is the darkness.

The plan is thus of our own choice to embrace that potential. Big topic.

Regards Tony

 

[blü 2]

You see God as something other, something which exists separately from the rest of creation?

In truth I think God exists only as a concept or thing imagined in an individual brain. That would account for the great variety of supernatural beings found across various cultures. And since supernatural beings exist in virtually every culture we know of, I think they must be artifacts of one or more aspects of our evolved nature ─ our natural appetite for answers to questions like weather, fertility, disease, and of birth and death; our wish to influence luck and to account for it; and our gregarious nature where our personal sense of identity exists simultaneously with our need to belong, to have language, stories and songs, customs and beliefs in common.

But if God were real then [he] wouldn't have imaginary qualities; [he]'d be a being from a different background to life on earth.

I had to look up Linnaean btw. Apparently Linne was a botanist, who labelled things?

Yes, he was the father of modern taxonomy ─ often represented as a tree with branches ─ and also among the first to consider that H sap sap must be a variety of ape.

 

[RestlessSoul]

In truth I think God exists only as a concept or thing imagined in an individual brain. That would account for the great variety of supernatural beings found across various cultures. And since supernatural beings exist in virtually every culture we know of, I think they must be artifacts of one or more aspects of our evolved nature ─ our natural appetite for answers to questions like weather, fertility, disease, and of birth and death; our wish to influence luck and to account for it; and our gregarious nature where our personal sense of identity exists simultaneously with our need to belong, to have language, stories and songs, customs and beliefs in common.

But if God were real then [he] wouldn't have imaginary qualities; [he]'d be a being from a different background to life on earth.
Yes, he was the father of modern taxonomy ─ often represented as a tree with branches ─ and also among the first to consider that H sap sap must be a variety of ape.

So only an imaginary God can have imaginary qualities (like omniscience)?

Okay. But if a quality can be imagined, then surely it can exist, even if only as an abstraction? Like Plato's conception of perfect form, divine perfection may be the ideal to which all materiel forms may aspire, but which cannot, in this world, be realised. However, even though such a God cannot (perhaps) be realised in this world, still we can conceive of, and therefore be aware of Him, Her or It.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This has been the subject of many past posts, but I hope to deliver it in a different way and a different light. So how can it be a person can Logically have no doubt about the proof and evidence that brought them to God?

You fail to sell your commodity, since I have no need for a God. I won't buy a dictionary if I do not need it.

 

[blü 2]

So only an imaginary God can have imaginary qualities (like omniscience)?

Okay. But if a quality can be imagined, then surely it can exist, even if only as an abstraction?

But concepts only exist in individual brains and either have an external referent ('this chair') or they don't ('a chair' ie abstraction). And here 'external' means the world external to the self ('nature'), which we know about through our senses. Anything, including God, needs to exist in that external world in order to qualify as 'real'.

Like Plato's conception of perfect form, divine perfection may be the ideal to which all materiel forms may aspire, but which cannot, in this world, be realised.

Well, for Plato there was a Platoland where these things existed independently of the individual ─ the ideal "bed" or "circle" or "hill". He was never clear on how they communicated their nature to individuals. He really meant 'concepts'.

But yes, all mathematical objects are purely conceptual. That's why you'll never see an uninstantiated 2 running around in the wild; nor will you ever see a Euclidean point, line or plane (having 0, 1 and 2 dimensions) in reality / in nature. Nor indeed any infinite quantity.

And so are the big abstractions like life, death, love, hate, justice, dictatorship &c. They're each generalized from instances we observe in nature which are real, while the generalization itself has no real counterpart (whence Cupid and Aphrodite and Mars and so on.)

However, even though such a God cannot (perhaps) be realised in this world, still we can conceive of, and therefore be aware of Him, Her or It.

Be aware of an idea, yes. Be aware of something real? I don't see how, or we'd have been shown examples by now.