On 10 Mar, 14:54, 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. >
Agreed. In fact I did have an automobile accident that was a rather extraordinary sequence of events, but I attribute any extraordinariness to what the brain can do under stress. I hold a view that we all have a 'special purpose' and that we all fulfill it whether or not we realise what that purpose is. Put another way, we all enact the will of God, willingly or unwillingly. > 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. > Again, I completely agree. > 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 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- 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.
