SD  I am totally aware that my proof lies only in my head  plus a few
maybes, though I enjoy my beliefs they are not for every one, though I do
enjoy sharing them.  I do understand your dis belief.. and i will join you
there, because there is the reason why..

...
Allan

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:

> Really though we must understand that "experiences" only serve to
> prove what the person seeks proof of and is highly subject to the
> person's interpretation of the "experience".   I've heard many
> proclaim that God has a special purpose for them because they survived
> an accident when the fact is their survival was most likely based on a
> scientific sequence of events by which they escaped death.  So there
> really isn't any proof whatsoever except in the person's mind.
>
> I have a tendency to challenge believers constantly to see if they
> really do believe or are just getting on board the holy roller wagon
> for whatever reason.  I guess you could consider that a test of their
> faith.  I find that parking lot evangelists are the weakest and are
> just playing the Jesus game because they just got out of jail or need
> to adhere to a drug recovery program.  After the Jesus is the way
> brother opening line comes the plea for monetary donation, to help
> with their recovery of course.
>
> On Mar 10, 8:31 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 10 Mar, 14:21, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I guess this swings over to Fidd's thread (very busy but..) on
> > > Pascal's Wager.
> >
> > To a degree, it does...yes.  No one will be able to prove it to
> > others, but rare experiences serve as proof to a few.
> >
> > > "If I saw no signs of a divinity, I would fix myself in denial. If I
> > > saw everywhere the marks of a Creator, I would repose peacefully in
> > > faith. But seeing too much to deny Him, and too little to assure me, I
> > > am in a pitiful state, and I would wish a hundred times that if a God
> > > sustains nature it would reveal Him without ambiguity.  We understand
> > > nothing of the works of God unless we take it as a principle that He
> > > wishes to blind some and to enlighten others."......Pascal
> >
> > That last line of 'blind(ing) some...' is very true.  But that is
> > necessary in order to test the faith of the faithful.  Thus the VERY
> > important role of atheists.
> >
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager
> >
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye/browse_thread/thread/fbeaab7.
> ..
> >
> > > On Mar 10, 8:01 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > "WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
> > > > That is the question Pat.. and I have no intention of trying to prove
> it.
> > > > nor will I attempt to.
> > > > Allan
> >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Pat <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On 9 Mar, 20:21, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Pat
> > > > > > I have no need to ask for proof of what i know to be true. Nor do
> I need
> > > > > to
> > > > > > create strange arguments..  even science knows that a perfectly
> straight
> > > > > > line will end at its starting point. enjoy your physics and
> geometry I
> > > > > will
> > > > > > enjoy my God.
> > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > My arguments aren't strange, they're logical.  And, of course, you
> > > > > aren't the only reader here.  So, when I address your statements, I
> > > > > address them (your statements) for a larger audience with you as a
> > > > > primary audience. Whilst you may have no need of proof or even
> > > > > examples, others might, so I proffer them.  In my opinion, God must
> > > > > work within a framework of His design and I view my 'job' as being
> to
> > > > > discover and reveal as much of that framework and design as I can.
> > > > > The doctor needn't treat the healthy but not all are healthy and
> some,
> > > > > whilst believing thay are healthy, aren't; and some whilst
> believing
> > > > > they are ill, aren't.  And I have to address them all or I'm being
> > > > > unfair.
> >
> > > > > BTW, your example of a perfectly straight line ending at its
> starting
> > > > > point is only true in the case of a line that extends throughout
> all
> > > > > of space-time (and THAT assumes a curvature TO space-time, which
> > > > > contradicts the 'straightness' of the line).  And, since you didn't
> > > > > specify the length of the line, your example is incorrect, for a
> > > > > straight line that is one inch long will prove your example false.
> > > > > Yet, if the one inch line is drawn around a sphere that has a
> > > > > circumference of one inch, your statement is still false, as the
> line
> > > > > is curved and not straight.  I value geometry and there is much to
> be
> > > > > learned from it.
> >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Pat <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On 9 Mar, 15:32, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Whoa Pat
> >
> > > > > > > > >  That One is beyond gender, which is why He
> > > > > > > > > can't have children.  Although all creatures are, in a
> metaphorical
> > > > > > > > > sense, His children, none are, in reality, because they do
> not grow
> > > > > up
> > > > > > > > > to be omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient.  If any did,
> there'd
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > chaos, as how can you have two omnipotent entities?  Logic
> doesn't
> > > > > > > > > allow for it.
> >
> > > > > > > > With your statement  you just separated God from the rest of
> the
> > > > > > > universe!
> > > > > > > > To me that is one of greatest mistakes made by the religions
> of the
> > > > > > > world.
> > > > > > > > I do not want to separate God as I understand him from from
> his
> > > > > universe
> > > > > > > ,,
> > > > > > > > I only want to be part of it   although it is only the tinest
> part..
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > long
> > > > > > > > as I am part that. That is my dream
> > > > > > > > .....
> >
> > > > > > > > Okay  if you read your statement carefully Or better yet as I
> read it
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > are saying God can not have children,  there is nothing
> metaphorical
> > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > Gods children.  When you have a child Pat both you and the
> woman that
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > involved are nothing  more than the tool the Father Creator
> uses to
> > > > > bring
> > > > > > > > about the new child's life into the universe. As I watch new
> life
> > > > > being
> > > > > > > born
> > > > > > > > into the universe whether it is a baby   an ant  or insect,
> or even
> > > > > an
> > > > > > > > entire galaxy  I can only sit in awe at the skill and
> abilities of
> > > > > God.
> >
> > > > > > > > His children, none are, in reality, because they do not grow
> up
> > > > > > > > to be omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient.
> >
> > > > > > > > When you start making statements like this you are in my mind
> > > > > separating
> > > > > > > God
> > > > > > > > from his universe. Though it is suttle like placing God else
> where l
> > > > > (he
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > in heaven) in reality you are separating yourself from God.
> or
> > > > > placing
> > > > > > > > limits  like (because they do not grow up to be...)
> > > > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > > > I have no problems with limiting God.  He cannot produce a
> spherical
> > > > > > > cube, for example.  Or, more simply put, God cannot NOT be God.
>  There
> > > > > > > are other limits as well, and they are all logical.  In fact,
> all of
> > > > > > > the negative commandments in the 10 commandments can be derived
> as
> > > > > > > being based on things that God cannot do, therefore we SHOULD
> not do.
> > > > > > > For example, God cannot create, in any single object, a thing
> which
> > > > > > > fairly represents the entirety of God, therefore, we should not
> create
> > > > > > > nor worship idols.  My statement that God cannot have children
> > > > > > > stands.  That is, he cannot beget an entity that can become
> omnipotent
> > > > > > > as there cannot be, logically, two things that are omnipotent,
>  No
> > > > > > > separations involved, only logic.  One cannot be two.  That's
> not to
> > > > > > > say that One cannot 'appear' to be countless.  THAT can be done
> via
> > > > > > > extensions of the One and a given geometry.
> >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Pat <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > On 8 Mar, 20:42, iam deheretic <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Well pat  one of the things I can not explain is what is
> beyond.
> > > > > . .
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > True.  I agree.  Consciousness, in my physics, doesn't
> exist,
> > > > > per
> > > > > > > se,
> > > > > > > > > > > in this 4-D universe, rather, the interface to it
> exists here.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > The concept of a 4--D universeis kind of strange because
> it fails
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > allow
> > > > > > > > > > you to be everywhere at the same time..
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > , that is a very Islamic concept.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > It is not just Islamic and they did not originate
> it..
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > well  ..
> > > > > > > > > > > Again, true.  And Muslims would be happy to agree with
> that.
> > > > >  You
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > to go back to Abraham and, in truth, Noah and Adam,
> before all.
> > > > > > >  It's
> > > > > > > > > > > a Judeo/Christian/Islamic concept, because it is
> described that
> > > > > way
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > those scriptures revealed by "The God of Abraham".
> >
> > > > > > > > > > from what i have read of the koran   they will not like
> my
> > > > > assessment
> > > > > > > ..
> > > > > > > > > > there is to much man in it people trying to be
> important.. and
> > > > > expand
> > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > is said originally
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >  If string theory is true, it allows for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > us, as physical bodies, to exist throughout these
> other non
> > > > > > > > > space-time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > dimensions and move through them as we move through
> those
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > sense.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > So, you're not far off there, either, although I
> wouldn't
> > > > > say
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > are IN heaven, just that you pass through it (and
> hell)
> > > > > while
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > exist here, although at a level which is completely
> > > > > > > undetectable.
> > > > > > > > >  The
> > > > > > > > > > > > > bond of which you speak, I refer to as "that we are
> an
> > > > > > > extension of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the energy that is" and that that energy is God's,
> as there
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > nothing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > else.  As for your last statement, how can you hide
> from
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > which
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > omnipresent and how can you hide your knowledge
> from God
> > > > > when
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > your knowledge, but His, that you have?  The fact
> that the
> > > > > > > > > space-time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > continum contains a permanent record of all that we
> have
> > > > > done
> > > > > > > is a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > clear enough record to refer to and it will last
> for all
> > > > > > > time...by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > definition.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Pat  To me the only important thing is God and my
> > > > > relationship
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > him
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > how to enhance it.. It is enough for me, my
> experience is
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > many
> > > > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > > try to explain what they can not explain the result
> is a mess
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > confusing
> > > > > > > > > > > > beliefs I think that is because they do not  know
> what they
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > talking
> > > > > > > > > > > > about. For me I am in love with my God as I
> understand him
> > > > >  and
> > > > > > > am
> > > > > > > > > > > willing
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> ""Minds Eye"" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<minds-eye%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
(
 )
I_D Allan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.

Reply via email to