Go ahead and prove it then.
Is God real enough for you?
- Thread starter Cortex_Colossum
- Start date
Go ahead and prove it then.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
That is all well and good, and no one begrudges you your thoughts. (We are all happy to agree that God exists in your mind.)
But when you voice them, and start suggesting they are more than that, you open yourself to having to defend them.
I have become spiritually enlightened. But as someone said not too long before on this very thread, spiritual enlightenment could be a delusion. I do not stake claim to knowing with absolute certainty unless I experience divinity or anatta (soullessness). The "I" could very well be causing my so-called "knowledge" of God and not God itself.
Whatever floats your boat..just please don't ram your boat into mine and sink both in the process
If enlightenment came from god, it would not happen to atheists, and it does.
That's the same video i posted man! great minds think alike i suppose
Presupposes two things -
1. The belief of an atheist definately translates to an actual reality.
2. God actually cares whether or not you believe in him rather than how you act.
I think both are, at the very least, baseless. The stance of the atheist representative of the scientific/intellectual kind is one of a probabilistic rejection of all known current models of God, not a belief concieved as actual facts regarding any or all possible Gods. At least IMO, that is how it should be, since to go any further right now would be to indulge the same irrationality we criticise the theists for having.
Where? Btw, I think there is more to it than that. Our leanings towards agenticity and false positives are quite basic in nature evolutionarily and dawkin's evolutionary reasons for the existence of religion go into this as well. Perhaps as we go deeper in the neuroscience of our minds as social, personally interacting creatures and details of self-image, personality, the self, society and personal interactions are revelated, we can then find God [if he is indeed in the mind of the believer]. Then maybe we can move on to a greater probabilitistic certainty for atheism as well as a more focused research for any possible models in which something like a God indeed does exist.
It's in post #78
All I'm saying is that enlightenment was popularized by a religion that does not depend on god, and the experience itself is not one of god inherently, which should lead one to the conclusion that it's independent of god(s). I think it's reasonable to think that the transcendent experience, for lack of a better term, is universal, and that if you are in a god culture, it becomes an experience of god, thanks to one's preconceptions and expectations, and if you are an atheist, the experience is interpreted in that context.
What you say is true good sir, the the question of our purpose in this vast, mysterious universe is one that may or may never be fully understood or brought to light. Despite the odds i much rather attempt to discern fact from fiction and try to find truth than simply regret questioning what i could or could not have acheived in my lifetime. God may exist...but not in the form or state the the religious community depictes them as. Until then i will contiune to reject the human made gods and the doctrines that are the pillar for them.
I have found enlightenment to be a great destroyer of preconceptions and dogma. If you can still believe in God after that, I think you've managed to ignore the experience. It would be like washing the floor and then inviting your muddy dog to walk all over it. The very idea that the basic question is one of purpose also gets obliterated. Purpose is a human cultural trait that doesn't seem to apply to the universe as a whole.
My previous post was intended for aaqucnaona, but your post are also curiousities to me as well. I am an as the world labels me " atheist" however i try to avoid being dogmatic and more tolerant of theist( despite their obvious larger numbers and political powers) but as i read aaqucnaona's post i realized that in order to pacify instead of agitate i would need to somewhat compromise my what i dissucess or say to him, his though process is logical, there are still mysteries of the human brain and how it created religion and gods. Granted that goes against what i truely wanted to say to aaqucnaona: " All thinking men are athesit" or " Logic kills faith"for me i see no need for " god(s)" in my life or to explan life's mysteries, i don't need to follow one set or rules or doctrines to validate my existance, i find no need to search through hundreds of pages of fairy tales to find a common sense lesson or truth, I Am Alive and that is all that matters...
Last edited: