Theism vs. Atheism - Experience or Interpretation?

[Theoryofrelativity]

http://www.brucelipton.com/article/mind-over-genes-the-new-biology

"This new perspective of human biology does not view the body as just a mechanical device, but rather incorporates the role of a mind and spirit. This breakthrough in biology is fundamental in all healing for it recognizes that when we change our perception or beliefs we send totally different messages to our cells and reprogram their expression. The new-biology reveals why people can have spontaneous remissions or recover from injuries deemed to be permanent disabilities.

The functional units of life are the individual cells that comprise our bodies. Though every cell is innately intelligent and can survive on its own when removed from the body, in the body, each cell foregoes its individuality and becomes a member of a multicellular community. The body really represents the cooperative effort of a community of perhaps fifty trillion single cells. By definition, a community is an organization of individuals committed to supporting a shared vision. Consequently, while every cell is a free-living entity, the body’s community accommodates the wishes and intents of its ‘central voice,’ a character we perceive as the mind and spirit.

When the mind perceives that the environment is safe and supportive, the cells are preoccupied with the growth and maintenance of the body. In stressful situations, cells forego their normal growth functions and adopt a defensive ‘protection’ posture. The body’s energy resources normally used to sustain growth are diverted to systems that provide protection during periods of stress. Simply, growth processes are restricted or suspended in a stressed system. While our systems can accommodate periods of acute (brief) stress, prolonged or chronic stress is debilitating for its energy demands interfere with the required maintenance of the body, and as a consequence, leads to dysfunction and disease. "

'belief' is important it would appear

it does not have to be religious, but it has to be positive

 

[Raithere]

"This new perspective of human biology does not view the body as just a mechanical device, but rather incorporates the role of a mind and spirit. This breakthrough in biology is fundamental in all healing for it recognizes that when we change our perception or beliefs we send totally different messages to our cells and reprogram their expression.

Uh. No. Epigenetics is not about the cooperation of our cells with our minds:

EPIGENETICS EXPLAINED This type of inheritance, the transmission of non-DNA sequence information through either meiosis or mitosis, is known as epigenetic inheritance. From the Greek prefix epi, which means "on" or "over", epigenetic information modulates gene expression without modifying actual DNA sequence. DNA methylation patterns are the longest-studied and best-understood epigenetic markers, although ethyl, acetyl, phosphoryl, and other modifications of histones, the protein spools around which DNA winds, are another important source of epigenetic regulation. The latter presumably influence gene expression by changing chromatin structure, making it either easier or more difficult for genes to be activated.
https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/b360905554fdb7d985256ec5006a7755?OpenDocument

Epigenetics is the study of epigenetic inheritance, a set of reversible heritable changes in gene function or other cell phenotype that occur without a change in DNA sequence (genotype). These changes may be induced spontaneously, in response to environmental factors, or in response to the presence of a particular allele, even if it is absent from subsequent generations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

'belief' is important it would appear

it does not have to be religious, but it has to be positive

Belief can have an effect though it is statistically negligible it can be effective on a subjective level... we call it the Placebo effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo_effect

~Raithere

 

[lightgigantic]

Do theists and atheists have different experiences, or do they just interpret common experiences in different ways?

If after prayer someone is cured of cancer - a theist sees a miracle, an atheist sees a chance outcome. Saul's conversion - an atheist sees an epileptic seizure, a theist (including Paul) sees the work of God. Is unequivocal religious experience possible?

Is faith primarily an interpretation invoking God, or does having faith itself lead to a new set of experiences or realisations? I know what I believe, but what do you think and why?

Because a theist attributes all phenomena of existence to god they have a different experience - there is a verse from the gita that shows these views can be completely divergent

2.69 What is night for all beings is the time of awakening for the self-controlled; and the time of awakening for all beings is night for the introspective sage.

In ther words what would be a source of misery for an atheist could be a source of joy for a theist and vice versa - because they both have different needs and concerns. Hell for an atheist is the absence of sense gratification - hell for the theist is the absence of th e opportunity to serve god

I am not sure what you are trying to establish with the last para
wouldn't invoking god (I assume you mean evoking god consciousness) lead to a new set of realisations?

 

[nubianconcubine]

Small children, babies, the infirm all succumbed to wickedness? Every single person on earth except noah and his family? Yeah, right.

well, science has concluded that the area may have been a very deep valley with a thin bit of land separating it from a high elevation lake. when the levy(?) broke for reasons i don't know the valley flooded and killed all but noah and his family. and for the sake of argument, noah told everyone to build a boat but no one else listened because they were all too busy being wicked.
as for the babies, yes. yes that sucks balls, at the expense of eloquence. but i'm guessing that maybe babies of wicked people grow up to be wicked people themselves. perhaps death was an escape from whatever horrors awaited the children as part of such a twistedly morally challenged society.
it reads that while abraham had his visitors, his nieghbors came to his door and demanded that they be let in to "know" them... :bugeye: do you KNOW what that means?! they wanted to rape his visitors...that is some serious wickedness...i wish there was a "gonna-be-ill" smilie.

 

[nubianconcubine]

The functional units of life are the individual cells that comprise our bodies. Though every cell is innately intelligent and can survive on its own when removed from the body, in the body, each cell foregoes its individuality and becomes a member of a multicellular community. The body really represents the cooperative effort of a community of perhaps fifty trillion single cells. By definition, a community is an organization of individuals committed to supporting a shared vision. Consequently, while every cell is a free-living entity, the body’s community accommodates the wishes and intents of its ‘central voice,’ a character we perceive as the mind and spirit.
'belief' is important it would appear

it does not have to be religious, but it has to be positive

you know... that makes me wonder...i am in no way rescinding my beliefs but i wonder if - most, CATO - of the people's need to believe in something bigger than themselves is due to the nature of our bodies. do we need something to unify us the way our bodies' basic units unify to serve us?
whatcha think, ToR?

 

[perplexity]

... due to the nature of our bodies. do we need something to unify us the way our bodies' basic units unify to serve us?

That sounds like god is sex, or vise versa.

-- Ron.

 

[nubianconcubine]

That sounds like god is sex, or vise versa.

-- Ron.

no, no. you must read theory of relativity's post. said something or other about the cells of our bodies working as one to make us - as a whole - run but still having the ability to live independently of our bodies as individual units.
... geez, man...

just kidding, ron. don't hurt me.

 

[(Q)]

well, science has concluded that the area may have been a very deep valley with a thin bit of land separating it from a high elevation lake.

Science hasn't concluded anything because there is no evidence of the ark.

when the levy(?) broke for reasons i don't know the valley flooded and killed all but noah and his family. and for the sake of argument, noah told everyone to build a boat but no one else listened because they were all too busy being wicked.

Sounds more like the story of the ant and the grasshopper. Didn't the entire earth flood?

as for the babies, yes. yes that sucks balls, at the expense of eloquence. but i'm guessing that maybe babies of wicked people grow up to be wicked people themselves. perhaps death was an escape from whatever horrors awaited the children as part of such a twistedly morally challenged society.

Or, a twistedly morally challenged story, to be precise.

 

[nubianconcubine]

Science hasn't concluded anything because there is no evidence of the ark.

Sounds more like the story of the ant and the grasshopper. Didn't the entire earth flood?

alright, alright. "conclude" was a bad choice of words. all i'm saying is science is trying to find a more reasonable explanation for what seems more like a tall-tale. even i can't imagine the entire earth flooding. now if i were to find myself a couple thousand years ago in an environment where it took me 2 1/2 years just to cross about 4000 miles i might assume that the entire earth had flooded, considering my entire world was comprised of about 1600 square miles. i'm thinking the author didn't have our resources and figured the rest of the world was just as wet as noah's.

Or, a twistedly morally challenged story, to be precise.

you'll find that most of the stories in the bible are like that.

 

[(Q)]

Quite frankly, nubian, I don't think science is the least bit concerned about the ark. Since no evidence exists, there is nothing to observe, test or theorize.

 

[nubianconcubine]

Quite frankly, nubian, I don't think science is the least bit concerned about the ark. Since no evidence exists, there is nothing to observe, test or theorize.

:bugeye:
do you ever watch the history channel?
and evidence has been found pointing to the fact that the plagues of the exodus were caused by a volcanic eruption. also historical fact coinciding with it has been discovered.

 

[(Q)]

:bugeye:
do you ever watch the history channel?
and evidence has been found pointing to the fact that the plagues of the exodus were caused by a volcanic eruption. also historical fact coinciding with it has been discovered.

No, I don't watch TV. But from the website, I found this:

"Many people view the Bible as a collection of mythical and legendary tales designed to inform and guide human behavior. But there are others who are inclined to view the scriptures as a true history. Biblical archeologists have uncovered sufficient evidence to support claims that some parts of the Bible, at least, are based on fact. But proof supporting the story of Noah and his famous ark remains elusive."

Please note it states "Biblical archeologists" - are these scientists or theologians?

 

[perplexity]

no, no. you must read theory of relativity's post. said something or other about the cells of our bodies working as one to make us - as a whole - run but still having the ability to live independently of our bodies as individual units.
... geez, man...

That is what I did, lived independently of my mother as an independent unit.

--- Ron.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

you know... that makes me wonder...i am in no way rescinding my beliefs but i wonder if - most, CATO - of the people's need to believe in something bigger than themselves is due to the nature of our bodies. do we need something to unify us the way our bodies' basic units unify to serve us?
whatcha think, ToR?

I agree, I think we see reoccurring and repeating patterns throughout nature, smaller parts of bigger wholes, if a single cell can comprehend/obey the need/instruction for unification why not us? I started a thread stating god was unification ages ago. It got a bit carried away, as I tend to do.

Anyway

Ponder this:

the entire universe could be a single organism

or

a single human being is no more a single organism than are the single cells that make up the human being

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3635972.stm


"Noah's Ark plan from top Moon man

By Pallab Ghosh
BBC Science Correspondent, at the BA festival


The European Space Agency's chief scientist has said there should be a "Noah's Ark" on the Moon, in case life on Earth is wiped out by an asteroid or nuclear holocaust.

Europe's first lunar probe is due to orbit the Moon in November
Speaking exclusively to BBC News at the British Association Festival of Science, Dr Bernard Foing said the ark should be a repository for the DNA of every single species of plant and animal.

Dr Foing is head of Europe's Moon missions, so his thoughts on matters lunar should be taken seriously.

He is concerned that if the Earth were destroyed, there would be little or nothing left of the rich diversity of life on the planet. His solution is to build a DNA library on Earth's satellite.

"If there were a catastrophic collision on Earth or a nuclear war, you could place some samples of Earth's biosphere, including humans, [on the Moon]," he said.

"You could repopulate the Earth afterwards, like a Noah's Ark," he said.

For the time being though, Dr Foing is awaiting the arrival of Europe's first probe to the Moon.

The Smart 1 mission is due to arrive ahead of schedule in November. The spacecraft is testing a range of innovative technologies that should find their way on to many future European Space Agency probes.

It is the first of what he hopes will be a fleet of robotic spacecraft sent to the Moon. They would be used to build a lunar colony. "

So

The story of the Ark proves purposeful afterall

 

[nubianconcubine]

Please note it states "Biblical archeologists" - are these scientists or theologians?

details, details.

the entire universe could be a single organism...

already been there. it's amazing what a gram of marijuana will do to your philisophical side. :m:

Noah's Ark plan from top moon man...

that sounds alot like Titan AE. anyone ever seen it? very good movie. had a great plot and action for an animated movie.

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Diogenes' dog

Well I can only answer that in Islam life or death is from God, so we generally do not pray to extend life, we pray to ease suffering; we do not, I'm afraid, hope for miracles. If a person recovers, it means his/her life is not yet completed, if he dies we say,

Innalillahi wa inna ilaihi raji'un
To Allah we belong and truly to Him we shall return

We also use this dua if we cannot find something we have lost.

Thank you for this samcdkey, your post put this into context for me. People suffer and die, we do not determine how or when - but for a theist the eternal part of us goes on - which is where the sense of it all is found. Not in this world, but in the bigger picture.

Byrd's research has been largely shredded and there are no other relevant studies.

Not so Raithere!! There have been many scientific studies on prayer. Here are 5 for a start (apart from Byrds), some showing positive effects (1,2 &3) others no effects (4 & 5). It's not so clear cut as infidels.org would have you believe!

1) Sicher F, Targ E, Moore D 2nd, Smith HS. A randomized double-blind study of the effect of distant healing in a population with advanced AIDS. Report of a small scale study. West J Med 1998;169:356-63. PMID 9866433.
2) Harris WS, Gowda M, Kolb JW, Strychacz CP, Vacek JL, Jones PG, Forker A, O'Keefe JH, McCallister BD. A randomized, controlled trial of the effects of remote, intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients admitted to the coronary care unit. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:2273-8. PMID 10547166.
3) Leibovici L. Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2001;323:1450-1. PMID 11751349.
4) O'Laoire S. An experimental study of the effects of distant, intercessory prayer on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Altern Ther Health Med 1997;3:38-53. PMID 9375429.
5) Aviles JM, Whelan SE, Hernke DA, Williams BA, Kenny KE, O'Fallon WM, Kopecky SL. Intercessory prayer and cardiovascular disease progression in a coronary care unit population: a randomized controlled trial. Mayo Clin Proc 2001;76:1192-8. PMID 11761499.

In other words what would be a source of misery for an atheist could be a source of joy for a theist and vice versa - because they both have different needs and concerns. Hell for an atheist is the absence of sense gratification - hell for the theist is the absence of the opportunity to serve god. I am not sure what you are trying to establish with the last para
wouldn't invoking god (I assume you mean evoking god consciousness) lead to a new set of realisations?

I think you've got to the nub of my question LG. Does invoking "God consciousness" lead to new realisations/experiences? Or does it merely reconfigure our interpretation of the world. My guess was that most atheists would deny any new experiences, while most theists would say that the quality of their experience was different from that of atheists.

Your answer that atheists and theists experience the same things differently has got me thinking... So, is God part of everyone's mind (the ground of our being), which theists learn to value and develop an awareness of, (which leads to new awareness) but which atheists don't, because their worldview excludes that awareness? Or is God an encounter with something "different" and outside of us?

 

[lightgigantic]

I think you've got to the nub of my question LG. Does invoking "God consciousness" lead to new realisations/experiences? Or does it merely reconfigure our interpretation of the world. My guess was that most atheists would deny any new experiences, while most theists would say that the quality of their experience was different from that of atheists.

Atheists would probably say that because they do not consider (what to speak of having the experience) that god is an objective phenomena - just we would say having an experience of an imaginary glass of water would not lead to any new experiences (one would still be thirsty) - this however says nothing about what would happen if a thirsty person came in contact with an objective glass of water

Your answer that atheists and theists experience the same things differently has got me thinking... So, is God part of everyone's mind (the ground of our being), which theists learn to value and develop an awareness of, (which leads to new awareness) but which atheists don't, because their worldview excludes that awareness? Or is God an encounter with something "different" and outside of us?

Well according to the Vedic scriptures god is both within everything and outside of everything - like for instance the very fact that our mind behaves in a certain way is because it is influenced by the way god thinks (made in the image of god), and also god is within the heart of the living entity to provide knowledge, remembereance and forgetfulness (in accordance with the desire of the living entity), but beyond this, god exists as an independant personality - in other words god is both all pervasive and localized.

But if a person cannot perceive god within their own heart then there is no value in endeavouring to perceive god outside of oneself - which tends to be the situation of not only the atheist but also the progressive theist - therefore there is always a focus on purity in theistic pusuits to enable the proper vision to develop

 

[euphrosene]

I would be interested to know how it is exactly theists know a god was at work? ...

Speaking personally, there is a real experience of some higher power ie outside of myself, yet equally being at one with it...

Beethoven, Handel and many huge creative talents wrote that their God worked through them.... or that it was not them, but God.

As a substantially lesser talent, I can still empathise with that when I write or paint something rather good.... although I might actually use words like 'God alone knows where that came from '...

 

[KennyJC]

How rather typical for people to imagine God only in the pretty parts of life.

I volunteer that God works through me when I have a bad curry and I produce a stinking pile of watery poo.

And shouldn't the lyrics to "all things bright and wonderful" be changed to make mention of the parasitic wasp which eats worms from inside? All God's work my friends.

At least your silly notion would have some depth to it if you bear mention to these things.