What proof do you have of God?

[Ashir]

Do not claim something is a fact without presenting obvious. Saying it happened because it happened is almost as dogmatic as believing something because a book says so (hmm, rings a bell)

 

[Sir Doom]

IBTL:redcard:

 

[jasonwill2]

Do not claim something is a fact without presenting obvious. Saying it happened because it happened is almost as dogmatic as believing something because a book says so (hmm, rings a bell)

Presenting obvious what?

Also how is it dogmatic to say that I saw, say, a deer run off into the woods, or a snake go between my legs? No one else may of been there to see it, but I saw it. It IS FACT THAT I SAW AND FELT SENSATIONS CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESENCE OF DAEMONS. Whether or not you think I was hallucinating, is another matter, but it is still fact that I saw and felt these things. To say I didn't is incorrect.

 

[tumbleweed41]

If you're not sure, but accept the possibility, that is faith.

No. I accept the possibility that there MAY be a possibility that there may be a possibility and so on.

 

[Ashir]

I don't know why I wrote obvious, was supposed to write evidence, sorry.

It's not dogmatic to say you saw that, it is to say that it's a fact that you did.

 

[Curious George]

I don't know why I wrote obvious, was supposed to write evidence, sorry.

It's not dogmatic to say you saw that, it is to say that it's a fact that you did.

You are going to go around and around on this? Let me explain:

He says he saw and felt demons. Now, this is either truth or not. He is not saying technically saying demons exist. He is saying He believes demons exist because he saw and felt them. Thus, if we assume he is not lying simply to deceive then it is a fact that he saw and felt demons. These statements are based from his perception, not from an objective perspective, not from my perspective, not from your perspective. Thus, he acknowledges that you believing he was hallucinating or mistaken in his perception is an entirely different story than suggesting that him seeing and feeling demons is a fact is untrue.

You are playing a semantic battle here and philosophy is not on your side. In order for you to prove that him seeing demons is not a fact, you will have to take on his perception which is impossible. I think Sir Doom was speaking to you about this philosophical problem earlier.

 

[jasonwill2]

I don't know why I wrote obvious, was supposed to write evidence, sorry.

It's not dogmatic to say you saw that, it is to say that it's a fact that you did.

I don't see the difference... saying it happened and stating it as fact is the exact same thing.. it IS A FACT that I saw and felt those things.

You are going to go around and around on this? Let me explain:

He says he saw and felt demons. Now, this is either truth or not. He is not saying technically saying demons exist. He is saying He believes demons exist because he saw and felt them. Thus, if we assume he is not lying simply to deceive then it is a fact that he saw and felt demons. These statements are based from his perception, not from an objective perspective, not from my perspective, not from your perspective. Thus, he acknowledges that you believing he was hallucinating or mistaken in his perception is an entirely different story than suggesting that him seeing and feeling demons is a fact is untrue.

You are playing a semantic battle here and philosophy is not on your side. In order for you to prove that him seeing demons is not a fact, you will have to take on his perception which is impossible. I think Sir Doom was speaking to you about this philosophical problem earlier.

This is exactly what I am trying to tell him, I don't care if he thinks I'm crazy, I know I am, but I've never had the kind of crazy to hallucinate or any history of hallucination, this stuff ONLY happened after I was initated onto my path of Satanism, so I can safely assume that it isn't from mental illness.

So maybe it is hallucinations coming form a source other than mental illness (such as an induced and slightly controlled hallucination brought on by an altered state of consciousness), but either way, real or hallucinated, I did SEE and FEEL things that were not "physical" as far as I could tell.

 

[javajo]

So...if you saw and felt the demons would that not tell you that since demons are real, so is God and his angels? That's kinda what happened to me when I was exploring some other religions way back in my early twenties. Turned me back to fully trusting the Lord.

 

[Ashir]

You are going to go around and around on this? Let me explain:

He says he saw and felt demons. Now, this is either truth or not. He is not saying technically saying demons exist. He is saying He believes demons exist because he saw and felt them. Thus, if we assume he is not lying simply to deceive then it is a fact that he saw and felt demons. These statements are based from his perception, not from an objective perspective, not from my perspective, not from your perspective. Thus, he acknowledges that you believing he was hallucinating or mistaken in his perception is an entirely different story than suggesting that him seeing and feeling demons is a fact is untrue.

You are playing a semantic battle here and philosophy is not on your side. In order for you to prove that him seeing demons is not a fact, you will have to take on his perception which is impossible. I think Sir Doom was speaking to you about this philosophical problem earlier.

But he has provided no proof of him not decieving us.

I don't see the difference... saying it happened and stating it as fact is the exact same thing.. it IS A FACT that I saw and felt those things.

Nope

This is exactly what I am trying to tell him, I don't care if he thinks I'm crazy, I know I am, but I've never had the kind of crazy to hallucinate or any history of hallucination, this stuff ONLY happened after I was initated onto my path of Satanism, so I can safely assume that it isn't from mental illness.

you can never safely assume

So maybe it is hallucinations coming form a source other than mental illness (such as an induced and slightly controlled hallucination brought on by an altered state of consciousness), but either way, real or hallucinated, I did SEE and FEEL things that were not "physical" as far as I could tell.

Or you think you did.

 

[jasonwill2]

So...if you saw and felt the demons would that not tell you that since demons are real, so is God and his angels? That's kinda what happened to me when I was exploring some other religions way back in my early twenties. Turned me back to fully trusting the Lord.

No offense, but you are ignorant as to my beliefs. An "angel" is just a fancy name for a daemon (notice the archaic spelling and it's specific meaning in ancient times) working for Yahweh. Also, I hold that Ha-Satan IS God, so it only strengthened my faith in Ha-Satan as real, as well it was having one of these experiences that finally made me admit I was a Satanist, specifically it was Succubi:

About admitting I was a Satanist (part of a two-post story):

...and recalled something, a dream I had about a year before. I had written it down in a notebook, and pulled it out....started to feel a VERY strong presence, like something following me, begging me. I knew it was here, and I recalled then why the dream was so different. There was a girl in it, and it felt so real, and then I realized it WAS real. At some point I finally told her, after making sure she wouldn't kill me, "okay", and she fed. It was amazing, and all that pent-up sexual energy, made for a very vivid experience. I knew that at that point, the fact that I was messing with a daemon (later named her Kate), and that I was so drawn to Satanism, now reading Satanic material on a regular basis for quite some time, along with how it just clicked for me in every imaginable way, that I WAS a Satanist, and that for all those months before I just didn't want to admit it. Those last 6 months before dropping out? I knew in the back of my mind that I was a Satanist in some way, as I have writings going on about Satan from back then.

That was on the 20th of May, 2011, which I can infer from the document I made about Kate on my computer. It referred to her as being "very active" starting two days prior, and it was created on May 22nd. I consider that day my awakening to my Satanic nature. And so what was long-awaiting to be broken from inside, finally came to my admission as I have Kate permission to feed on me. I suppose I was always a Satanist, and Satan always called to me, and that I was just blind/unaware before. I have mixed feelings of how I got to where I am. Mostly, I wish I just knew back when I was younger, as I could of really used the Satanic understanding I do now. But I suppose this is how Satan intends things to be, that you have to work through blood and sweat to achieve the truth, and the lessons of strength and love.

In the months that followed, I re-discovered "my darkness", you could say, but it isn't the same as before; it's 10 times better. Sure, it has some of the old elements, but it has so much more stuff now I can't even articulate what it actually entails other than it's my base identity once all labels are stripped away. It's almost like some awesome twist of emotion that is at one time utter determination to defy all those people in my life who told me I couldn't do it, or tried to brainwash me into their hate-mongering/truth-blinding religions that condemned me, and at other times mindless impulses and pure ecstatic adrenaline. Sometimes I don't know which I want, to be an animal, or to be a 'god'. Actually I know what I want, I want to be both at the same time.

And that is how I got onto that path I am now. Hail Satan, my great tester and accuser! Surely the fires of Hell purify, like walking on hot coals that only hurt when you doubt that you can cross them...

Ha-Satan as God:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/136635-lord-ha-satan.html

But he has provided no proof of him not decieving us.

Why would I lie? I've made oaths to Ha-Satan before and have given him my blood... I'm not making this up, many other Theistic Satanist have felt the experiences I have as well...

 

[Curious George]

But he has provided no proof of him not decieving us.

But to say he is lying is argument ad hominem. It has no relevance to what he says. If you asked "how do we know this is true?" or "how do we know that you are not deceiving us?" then it would be a different story. Descarte offered I think therefore I am. But, how do we test another person's experience? Again, this is very much what Sir Doom already described to you.

 

[jasonwill2]

Short of hooking my brain up to a machine, I don't know how to prove what my sensory organs (skin, eyes) physically sensed.

 

[javajo]

No offense, but you are ignorant as to my beliefs. An "angel" is just a fancy name for a daemon (notice the archaic spelling and it's specific meaning in ancient times) working for Yahweh. Also, I hold that Ha-Satan IS God, so it only strengthened my faith in Ha-Satan as real, as well it was having one of these experiences that finally made me admit I was a Satanist, specifically it was Succubi:

Alright.

 

[Ashir]

But to say he is lying is argument ad hominem. It has no relevance to what he says. If you asked "how do we know this is true?" or "how do we know that you are not deceiving us?" then it would be a different story. Descarte offered I think therefore I am. But, how do we test another person's experience? Again, this is very much what Sir Doom already described to you.

lol wut

 

[jasonwill2]

lol wut

In other words you are not using logic, but irrelevant logical fallacies.

 

[Riverwolf]

Not by definition.

In terms of language, yes. A word without meaning has no definition.

Rather, a demonstration that I have a different definition of it than you do.

One that is clearly not specific enough. Or perhaps in Britain the word is less specific than here, I don't know.

Yes.

Then why did you imply the opposite?

 

[Ashir]

I didn't mean that.

Not specific enough to you. My location has no influence what so ever on what I say, why bring that into this? And clearly this and clearly that, using the word doesn't place a tick by your statements.

Implications are assumptions.

 

[Mr. Skittles]

This seems like a new and interesting topic.

Are you wondering if there is proof that God exists? Because that's fairly easy. This thread is proof that God exists. Otherwise, it would be impossible to talk about it. Then again, you are probably looking for something more than that, eh?

Here you go!

 

[Riverwolf]

I didn't mean that.

Then what did you mean?

Say only what you mean, and make sure that you're conveying what you mean. Be detailed.

Not specific enough to you.

That faith is not necessarily blind is common knowledge among those whom I've talked to. You're only one of a few I've interacted with who have said that all faith is blind.

My location has no influence what so ever on what I say, why bring that into this? And clearly this and clearly that, using the word doesn't place a tick by your statements.

Different regions can have slightly different definitions of words. I'm in California, you in London. The type of English you're speaking is slightly different than the one I am. That's all.

And what does it mean to "place a tick"?

Implications are assumptions.

Well, you made one:

"That's trust, blind trust even."

You felt the need to mention trust, and then go into a further specification that it's "blind" trust, as if not all trust was blind. Then why did you just say that you believe all trust to be blind?

 

[Quintessence]

opcorn:

Don't have much to say. Not interested in beating dead horses that are dead. Instead a suggestion.

Discern what in this realm you find sacred and worthy of giving thanks to. Offer what you feel is appropriate celebration and gratitude. Religion is sometimes much less about belief than it is about action. It is not necessarily belief in or proof of the gods that matters. It is pausing before the morning sunrise, seeing it's beauty, and saying "it's great to be alive!"