quote:"Well for one he has said so in his scriptures."
Yet the only thing supporting the spiritual validity (that is, that it's the actual word of God) of the Bible is the words of the Bible itself.
Second, there are many other books, many other scriptures, of other religions that make the exact same claim, and whose proponents use the exact same arguement as you make. How is your use of that arguement more useful than the many claims to validity you would say are false?
You asked what evidence I have that God is good, it does little good to ask that purely so you can rip each reason apart. In anycase you are wrong that only source of validity to the claims of the Bible is the Bible itself. Mormons have 3 other books that all corroborate what the Bible says. Yes there is the possibility that these additional books were all made up so of course they agree with the Bible, but there is still the chance they are what they claim to be.
quote:"God describes himself as good."
I describe myself as good too. Doesn't make me so. And if I defined good as "whatever it is that I do" you'd catagorically reject that definition as meaningless and trite, as well you should. If you do the same with God, how is that different, really?
And using the arguement that He IS completely good doesn't necessarily work, because there is no natural law saying He has to, only His own word to that effect. (Statements coming, also, from a book who other religions would reject as false, and whose evidence is no better than the books you claim are true.)
How do YOU know there is no natural law saying God must be good? Are you as timeless as the universe that you can accurately state such things? For all you know there are in fact laws that exist that state the relationship between knowledge and power. You are right even if God himself shows up and says, "Hey BlackBlade I'm a good guy," that by itself is not enough. But there is plenty of pudding to examine.
quote:"And another I have come to that conclusion based on my own years of experience. Finally God himself has impressed on me that concept and certified that it is accurate."
The same claim is made by Muslims, Jews, Hindus, even the old believers in the Greek pantheon. They feel it in their heart, that same very certainty you do, and feel what they believe to be God (or whatever) telling them the Truth. They see visions of their gods, see "signs" of their gods, etc.
And if you claim those are all just deceptions of the Devil... how do you tell the difference, if the feelings feel identical? (Which they seem to.)
Why is it impossible for God to tell men of all faiths in ways they will comprehend that he is good? That does not mean he is the author of every religion, but I don't find it wrong if God tells a Hindu and a Catholic the same day that he is good.
forgive the requote,
quote:They feel it in their heart, that same very certainty you do
There is no way you can possibly know this to be true. Arguements are pretty easy to make if you are in charge of what your opponent and the rest of the world thinks/believes.
You have no idea what the adherents of every religion claim to have felt/experienced? I have spoken to Muslims and Buddhists who had experiences that I believed were of God, but I don't pretend to know better then others about what they have experienced. I have my OWN experiences and they are good enough for me to believe in a God who is good, and in my religion. They are also good enough for me that I think others can profit from trying the same path I am trying to walk.
What is the point in arguing, "You can't prove that God is telling the truth, this could all be an elaborate evil scheme, so what's the point in believing in a God in the first place?"
Well you are right I rely on mere faith that God isn't putting one on me and the rest of the world. So far my faith has not been misplaced, the day I feel it is Ill let you know, and you can gloat all day long.
Mighty Cow:
quote:3: What do we conclude when a great number of people are reasonably confident in completely different and inconsistent truths, or despite their best efforts, get no confidence or certification?
I don't think you conclude much of anything as I cannot sit inside somebodies body and weigh what they are saying with what they are. And again, how can you judge anything by somebody elses account? How do we know they are ALL reasonably confident? I submit that we can't. All we can do is test what those people are saying ourselves and see what experiences come of it.
quote: would disagree with that. I, of course, would never say that there aren't very good people who follow religion. But I don't think it's the religion that necessarily makes them better.
It seems to me that what makes them better is the social aspect, the charity and the good deeds that most religions preach.
If I did not have the experiences I have had I would most likely agree with you. While much of what you said is true, there is more to what a religion can do then that. You are right in that every lesson and virtue that religion could espouse could also be learned in another way. But religion also imbues its adherents with knowledge of the truth. I would think that knowing the truth of say, why do any of us exist at all, or what is the ultimate result of my choices, would give one understanding and purpose, which in turn makes them a better person.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:In anycase you are wrong that only source of validity to the claims of the Bible is the Bible itself. Mormons have 3 other books that all corroborate what the Bible says. Yes there is the possibility that these additional books were all made up so of course they agree with the Bible...
Oh, BB, this brought a little laughter into my day. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:If I did not have the experiences I have had I would most likely agree with you. While much of what you said is true, there is more to what a religion can do then that. You are right in that every lesson and virtue that religion could espouse could also be learned in another way. But religion also imbues its adherents with knowledge of the truth. I would think that knowing the truth of say, why do any of us exist at all, or what is the ultimate result of my choices, would give one understanding and purpose, which in turn makes them a better person.
While this is true, it is not universally true.
I think that believing you know the absolute truth has just as much chance of making you a better person as it has a chance of making you arrogant and overbearing. This is, of course, an anecdotal comment, and should be considered as such.
I happen to believe that always searching for truth and questioning what you know makes you a better person than being happy with the answers we already have. But that's just my personal opinion.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:In anycase you are wrong that only source of validity to the claims of the Bible is the Bible itself. Mormons have 3 other books that all corroborate what the Bible says. Yes there is the possibility that these additional books were all made up so of course they agree with the Bible...
Oh, BB, this brought a little laughter into my day.
Why not return the favor then? My day has been pretty monotonous thus far.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I don't think you conclude much of anything as I cannot sit inside somebodies body and weigh what they are saying with what they are. And again, how can you judge anything by somebody elses account? How do we know they are ALL reasonably confident? I submit that we can't. All we can do is test what those people are saying ourselves and see what experiences come of it.
This point undermines your own testimony. How can any of us know that you are actually confident in your beliefs and experiences?
Further, if you can't trust the testimony or know the validity of claims made by religions other than your own, you equally cannot know about people within your own religion. If you can't rely on what anyone else tells you about God or faith, how do you learn in the first place?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:If I did not have the experiences I have had I would most likely agree with you. While much of what you said is true, there is more to what a religion can do then that. You are right in that every lesson and virtue that religion could espouse could also be learned in another way. But religion also imbues its adherents with knowledge of the truth. I would think that knowing the truth of say, why do any of us exist at all, or what is the ultimate result of my choices, would give one understanding and purpose, which in turn makes them a better person.
While this is true, it is not universally true.
I think that believing you know the absolute truth has just as much chance of making you a better person as it has a chance of making you arrogant and overbearing. This is, of course, an anecdotal comment, and should be considered as such.
I happen to believe that always searching for truth and questioning what you know makes you a better person than being happy with the answers we already have. But that's just my personal opinion.
Well do you agree that the proof that a belief is correct is gratifying? I mean when you believe you have it in you to learn a new language, does your joy disappear when one day you realize you have attained a fluent command of the language?
I just as much as anybody else am always seeking for answers. Hell, if one day Buddha descends from the heavens and says, "BlackBlade you've got it all wrong and here's why," I won't throw a hissy fit I promise.
But it is slightly frustrating and off putting to have people say in effect, "There is no way you can know you are right, the only answer is you are deluding yourself."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But it is slightly frustrating and off putting to have people say in effect, "There is no way you can know you are right, the only answer is you are deluding yourself."
How would you test such a claim to show, even to yourself, that it was false?
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I don't think you conclude much of anything as I cannot sit inside somebodies body and weigh what they are saying with what they are. And again, how can you judge anything by somebody elses account? How do we know they are ALL reasonably confident? I submit that we can't. All we can do is test what those people are saying ourselves and see what experiences come of it.
This point undermines your own testimony. How can any of us know that you are actually confident in your beliefs and experiences?
Further, if you can't trust the testimony or know the validity of claims made by religions other than your own, you equally cannot know about people within your own religion. If you can't rely on what anyone else tells you about God or faith, how do you learn in the first place?
I did not say that. If somebody tells me, "I saw God." I cannot say, "Yes you did," or, "No you didn't." If a million people in a row all say they saw the same thing and relate the exact same account, though it's more credible I still cannot say either way.
You can't know if I am really confident in my own experiences. You only have my word saying so, and I can make arugements that the theological and scientific arguements my religion makes are or are not possible or even plausible. Its up to you to decide if what a religion says is true. Go try meditation and see if produces the results Buddhism claims it will. If you come away from it with the conclusion that meditation is useful but you are not so sure about the whole no meat business, good for you, you have found something useful. If you try the whole Christian prayer thing and decide prayer helps you but you don't actually think a God is hearing your prayers, good for you. If you try fasting during Ramadan with the rest of the Muslims and find there is something to subduing all your needs and desires, then you go away with something valuable.
If you look to the heavens and ask out loud if there is a God and you sudddenly feel seized with a feeling of love and a strong sense of affirmation what else can you say about the experience? Could you have produced the feeling yourself? I suppose so, but that just does not seem like it's the correct answer. If you never have another experience again then perhaps you ought to think again, but if it shows up in strange situations then what can you but accept that its there. Doesn't mean you can prove anything, but if you find a belief system that purifies that feeling and makes it stronger in your life and it reaches a point where it actually starts to guide you and where that feeling becomes almost words in your mind.
That feeling starts to become more valid. I doesn't mean you just give up everything else and listen to only that voice, but what reason do you have outside of healthy skepticism to not give heed to it?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But it is slightly frustrating and off putting to have people say in effect, "There is no way you can know you are right, the only answer is you are deluding yourself."
How would you test such a claim to show, even to yourself, that it was false?
How would you live you life in constant disbelief of what your sense tell you?
How can you know what I have written in this post is actually what I typed out? Your eyes could be lying to you, your mind could be misinterpreting the symbols.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you look to the heavens and ask out loud if there is a God and you sudddenly feel seized with a feeling of love and a strong sense of affirmation what else can you say about the experience? Could you have produced the feeling yourself? I suppose so, but that just does not seem like it's the correct answer
Why not? Some drug users, including LDS converts, have said their spiritual experiences were similar to a drug high. I have an LDS friend who describes his spiritual experiences as being identical to what he feels while doing "energy work" in the martial arts.
For these people, at least, such experiences can be triggered in non-spiritual environments.
quote:How can you know what I have written in this post is actually what I typed out? Your eyes could be lying to you, your mind could be misinterpreting the symbols.
There's little ambiguity in the text. There seems to be quite a bit more in the experiences you describe. Can you show me one of these experiences? I can show you your text.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Could you have produced the feeling yourself? I suppose so, but that just does not seem like it's the correct answer.
Can you explain why?
I already elaborated on what could happen to make the feeling seem more valid. Its in the same post I mentioned it.
You could even play around with what sorts of things could happen to make that experience more genuine to just you.
edit:
quote:Why not? Some drug users, including LDS converts, have said their spiritual experiences were similar to a drug high. I have an LDS friend who describes his spiritual experiences as being identical to what he feels while doing "energy work" in the martial arts.
For these people, at least, such experiences can be triggered in non-spiritual environments.
We still have to use real world feelings to describe such experiences. For me at least I have yet to encounter any sensation or situation where the same feelings were invoked as when I found God.
I am not quite sure what you mean by, "Energy Work."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:We still have to use real world feelings to describe such experiences.
But the fact that some people liken these experiences to other, purely physical, experiences should indicate that such intense feelings are not only possible with a supernatural actor.
quote:I am not quite sure what you mean by, "Energy Work."
Neither am I. His words, not mine. The point is that the supposed influence of the Holy Ghost can be reproduced by someone practicing a ritualistic fighting discipline.
Given these examples, it seems that we're not necessarily talking about a spiritual experience. It appears to be a physical experience to which some people attribute a spiritual cause.
If this is the case - that these experiences are physical and the spiritual aspect is only a matter of individual interpretation, then these experiences are not very useful for determining the truth of a religion.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
MattP: Remember though that just because your friend is an LDS convert even does not mean I can accept that he actually felt God and then converted. For all I know he joined after misidentifying another feeling for the Holy Ghost.
Mormons frequently get together and express their faith in God. Sometimes I have heard a person recount their conversion, and the feelings present at my own conversion remanifest themselves. But plenty of times I recount my own experience and the feelings do not emerge. The point is their experiences can perhaps affirm my own experiences but they do not prove anything about them. If everyone in my church simply died one day, I'd have to reconsider some of the conclusions I have drawn, but Ill cross that bridge if it presents itself. Thus far I believe as my my inteligence and soul dictate I oughtt to.
The timing of when I feel those feelings is one indication to me that they are not just random synapse firings of my brain. Another is that often these feelings turn into words that I can express, or prompt me to take certain actions. When these words are heeded or these actions are taken my life is happier. When I knowingly ignore them or just forget to listen, life is more turbulant.
Now perhaps I simply create meaning for those feelings, perhaps I just think I feel an idea formed from God in my mind and that in reality its my own common sense that prompted me to take action with favorable results. My faith however is the culmination of many events and experiences. I don't point to one moment in my life and say, "This proves it all." But I myself believe I seen enough that the existance of a God is probably if not almost certain. If one day events seem to indicate that there is an alternate and very plausible explanation to all I have seen then I will have no choice but to reconsider what I believe, just as any atheist should reconsider that belief if events dictate that this view is closer to the truth.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"You asked what evidence I have that God is good, it does little good to ask that purely so you can rip each reason apart."
If I accepted them blindly I would be doing a very dangerous thing. And if it can be so easily ripped apart, that isn't good, either.
"In anycase you are wrong that only source of validity to the claims of the Bible is the Bible itself. Mormons have 3 other books that all corroborate what the Bible says. Yes there is the possibility that these additional books were all made up so of course they agree with the Bible, but there is still the chance they are what they claim to be."
Heh. Remember, I'm not a Mormon, I'm a Catholic, and my faith rejects those works. Which is the exact sort of thing I was talking about elsewhere, about the sheer contradictions between faiths. Further, your claims assume you have the one true faith, as Mormons are wont to do. People in my faith would disagree, and would use similar evidence to support them. (the strength of their faith.)
"How do YOU know there is no natural law saying God must be good?"
How do you know there is no natural law saying he must be evil? Or there at all? To discuss whether He's good, as I stated after the message you're replying to, I conceeded that you have to figure that bit out before talking about whether He's good or evil.
"Are you as timeless as the universe that you can accurately state such things?"
Are you, to talk about God's moral standing?
"For all you know there are in fact laws that exist that state the relationship between knowledge and power. You are right even if God himself shows up and says, "Hey BlackBlade I'm a good guy," that by itself is not enough. But there is plenty of pudding to examine."
Then why haven't you shown me any?
That is, none that can be more easily and usefully and predictably attributed to physical means?
"Why is it impossible for God to tell men of all faiths in ways they will comprehend that he is good? That does not mean he is the author of every religion, but I don't find it wrong if God tells a Hindu and a Catholic the same day that he is good."
This is not unreasonable and actually fits my own theological precepts of what God does, based on the way the world really is. Yet there's no proof of this in my mind except that I would like it to be so. It fits the mold, there is no evidence for it.
"There is no way you can possibly know this to be true. Arguements are pretty easy to make if you are in charge of what your opponent and the rest of the world thinks/believes."
Alright. I have what they SAY they feel. And I have what YOU say you feel. Both they and you say the same thing, with the same vehemance and the same insistence that you are feeling it. I also have no evidence that ANY of your claims come from God, other than you say it does. I DO have evidence that the same physical feelings can and have been caused in experiments using electricity to excite certain parts of the brain. Also, drugs such as LSD have been described to feel the same by people who have both had the drug and had religious experiences. Again, I just have what THEY, too, said.
This in fact weakens your arguement, because your claims are indistinguishable from theirs.
"You have no idea what the adherents of every religion claim to have felt/experienced? I have spoken to Muslims and Buddhists who had experiences that I believed were of God, but I don't pretend to know better then others about what they have experienced."
Okay. And I won't pretend to know better about yours. Except it sounds identical to the feelings of others. How is it different, how can you show it's real, other than "I feel it?"
"I have my OWN experiences and they are good enough for me to believe in a God who is good, and in my religion."
That's not good enough for me, unfortunately. My faith is contradictory to yours in the first place. So are the faiths of more than 5.5 billion others. And many of us billions say the same exact words, with equal certainty. You all contradict each other. Who's right?
"They are also good enough for me that I think others can profit from trying the same path I am trying to walk."
*nods.*
"What is the point in arguing, "You can't prove that God is telling the truth, this could all be an elaborate evil scheme, so what's the point in believing in a God in the first place?""
There is no point. I agree and I won't argue that. We cannot know whether God is telling the truth.
A more important question is, "what's the evidence in God in the first place, that cannot be attributed to other, natural means?"
I haven't seen any. Miracles all tend to follow specific things: They follow the same tricks as the placebo effect. Those signs don't work. Other "signs" including even stigmata are seen in other religions, too. Some Muslims get stigmata in the form of the injuries of Muhammad.
"Well you are right I rely on mere faith that God isn't putting one on me and the rest of the world. So far my faith has not been misplaced, the day I feel it is Ill let you know, and you can gloat all day long."
I am not intending to gloat. I do not say your faith is wrong. I'm asking what evidence you have that I should believe you. The same as I would ask for anything else in this world. For something as important as God, I'd say it'd be good to have something other than mere feelings, which have been shown to be in total error, regardless of the strength of one's beliefs, in so many other fields throughout history.
Because of that, how am I to accept that belief is the means to finding the truth about God, when that very same thing has been shown to be completely unrelated to what reality is in all other subjects? Because when people believe something with their whole heart in other subjects, it doesn't make it true in the least. Belief is unrelated to what reality is, whether it's fact or not. And strength of belief doesn't make things any more or less true. This is observable in every othe rsubject. Why does it not count for religion as well?
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: For me at least I have yet to encounter any sensation or situation where the same feelings were invoked as when I found God.
What if -- for example -- you participated in an experiment where researchers applied an electromagnetic field to your brain, and you felt exactly the same way?
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
0Megabyte: Please don't think I am ignoring all the other valuable points you made, I just felt the last two paragraphs were more or less the crux of the matter.
quote:I am not intending to gloat. I do not say your faith is wrong. I'm asking what evidence you have that I should believe you. The same as I would ask for anything else in this world. For something as important as God, I'd say it'd be good to have something other than mere feelings, which have been shown to be in total error, regardless of the strength of one's beliefs, in so many other fields throughout history.
I'm not asking you to believe ME. I'm saying that within the religion I subscribe to there is much of value. I'm not saying anything about believing something so fervently it becomes true. I'm not basing it all on feelings, I've made many posts about what else I take into consideration.
quote: Because of that, how am I to accept that belief is the means to finding the truth about God, when that very same thing has been shown to be completely unrelated to what reality is in all other subjects? Because when people believe something with their whole heart in other subjects, it doesn't make it true in the least. Belief is unrelated to what reality is, whether it's fact or not. And strength of belief doesn't make things any more or less true. This is observable in every othe rsubject. Why does it not count for religion as well?
I don't think there is as much space between belief and reality. I agree that reality should effect belief and not vice versa, but it is still belief that leads us to discover what reality is.
I've never said you must believe in God before He will manifest himself to you. Every religion has guidelines for finding God. In my own religion it prescribes a study of the doctrine, a test of its tenats, and upon inquiry God reveals the truth of the doctrine by the power of the holy ghost.
Now you claim that drugs and that in fact people of many other religions have the exact same exerience as the one I described. Put simply I do not think that is true. There are perfectly plausible explanations that include God that explain the existance of so much diversity of opinion.
What if a Muslim prays to God and says, "Please protect my family while I am away," and he feels God affirm that it will be done. He later says to you, I am quite certain Islam is true as I have felt God's presence in my life more distinctly as I have followed its principles. Did God lie to him? I don't think so. Has he incorrectly extended the implications of the experience? Perhaps; perhaps not. It easy to come up with myriad like scenarios that ultimately translate into generations of faithful religious devotion.
There is also the supernatural circumstance where say a person prays to God and becomes posessed by some entity and utters in tongues, and afterwards is convinced they have found God and his truth. I honestly believe there are counterfeit experiences with God just as there are genuine. Visions of the eyes, whispers in the ear, dreams, all these things are certainly possible. I can see any of these things being a bonefide communication from God or a deception of the devil. No doubt you will ask me how to tell the difference, I don't have a universal rule of thumb. I just have that my own experiences have thus far lead me into happier circumstances, when they fail me in a direct or prolonged way, I'll start doubting.
You do not know the story behind even half of those you claim all believe ernestly that their religion is correct. I have outlined two types of communique one IMO genuine, one IMO a deception. Between the two groups though you could easily produce thousands of seperate religious persuasions all with adherents who believe they have the truth. I do not think you can accurately say they have all had the exact same experience that *I* have had. Nor can I accurately say, "I KNOW none of them have had the same experience I have." Is it possible? Surely! But I'm still taking a lifetime of situations, observations, experiences, and coming to the conclusion that I am making the best choice I can.
I have been exposed to MANY people of various faiths. Much of what they have in their religion has augmented that which I have found in my own. My religion is not a database of all that is true. It is however a dicipline designed to open a person into accepting all that is true. It does actively involve God in the truth seeking process.
You can argue all day any experience I have can be replicated by science or what have you, but until you actually experience it yourself you cannot say that with a certainty.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: For me at least I have yet to encounter any sensation or situation where the same feelings were invoked as when I found God.
What if -- for example -- you participated in an experiment where researchers applied an electromagnetic field to your brain, and you felt exactly the same way?
Then I'd conclude one of two things.
1: God apparently uses my brain when he communicates with me.
2: I am not so sure God has communicated with me.
Just replicating the feeling would not be enough, I'd have to see a natural explanation as to what would trigger that rare feeling, as well as a good explanation for its enigmatic behavior.
This feeling is not invoked the same way my other feelings are.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: For me at least I have yet to encounter any sensation or situation where the same feelings were invoked as when I found God.
What if -- for example -- you participated in an experiment where researchers applied an electromagnetic field to your brain, and you felt exactly the same way?
Then I'd conclude one of two things.
1: God apparently uses my brain when he communicates with me.
2: I am not so sure God has communicated with me.
Just replicating the feeling would not be enough, I'd have to see a natural explanation as to what would trigger that rare feeling, as well as a good explanation for its enigmatic behavior.
This feeling does is not invoked the same way my other feelings are.
BB, I'm curious. I may have asked this before, and I'm sure others have, but I just want to ask again.
Let's say this feeling you've had is genuine. Let's say that god actually has communicated with you. How do you know which god this is? What in the feeling you get says "Mormon" or "Catholic" or "Muslim"?
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Let's say this feeling you've had is genuine. Let's say that god actually has communicated with you. How do you know which god this is? What in the feeling you get says "Mormon" or "Catholic" or "Muslim"?
While I believe that if a Mormon/Catholic/Muslim all simply ask out loud, "God are you there?" They may get the exact same experience and get a feeling identical to what I have felt numerous times. The same goes for, "God is it right for me to belong to a religion?" I think God could easily encourage somebody for the time being to be a faithful Muslim and down the road give him/her further direction.
Within the realms of Mormonism its not hard. You start reading the Book of Mormon and asking if it is indeed true. If God confirms that it is to you, and you conclude that it is indeed true, then there is a ton of truth that follows and must by implication also be accurate.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: [QUOTE]Within the realms of Mormonism its not hard. You start reading the Book of Mormon and asking if it is indeed true. If God confirms that it is to you, and you conclude that it is indeed true, then there is a ton of truth that follows and must by implication also be accurate.
Ah, but that's my point. Is it a feeling, or are these words that you hear? Because if just a feeling, how do you know that god isn't saying "no", but you feel happy because god is talking to you?
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: [QUOTE]Within the realms of Mormonism its not hard. You start reading the Book of Mormon and asking if it is indeed true. If God confirms that it is to you, and you conclude that it is indeed true, then there is a ton of truth that follows and must by implication also be accurate.
Ah, but that's my point. Is it a feeling, or are these words that you hear? Because if just a feeling, how do you know that god isn't saying "no", but you feel happy because god is talking to you?
There is a corresponding negative feeling just as there is a positive feeling. At least this has been my experience and Mormonism describes this feeling in a way consistant with how I have felt it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think God could easily encourage somebody for the time being to be a faithful Muslim and down the road give him/her further direction.
Does this apply to Mormonism as well? Might your confirmation of the truth of your religion be similarly provisional?
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Not according to either Islam or Christianity.
I don't know any Muslims, but I've known several Christians that believed that they were worshiping the same God, but that the Muslims beliefs about him were incorrect. I'm not sure how you would make an argument that they were not the same God, given that both the Christians and Muslims believe they are worshiping the God of Abraham.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure that all the Muslims and Christians I've served on interfaith organizations with believed that we worship the same God. We just think the other group has some incorrect ideas about God. Not a different god, though. Seeing as we all agree that there is only one.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Same God; different understanding. There is just the one. Even when we call God by different names. And understanding of God differs from person to person as well as from denomination. My understanding of God is closer (in some ways) to that of a moderate Muslim than it would be to a fundamentalist Baptist.
I probably have as much in common with some Buddhists as with some Catholics.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Seeing as we all agree that there is only one.
Except when there's three.
And then there's all the saints. And the angels. And the demons. And Lucifer.
...seems strangely crowded to be "monotheism". Granted, they're not THE god, but still. Somewhat misleading.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Saints, angels, demons, etc are not gods. Not just not THE God, not gods.
There is, in monotheistic religions, an absolute distinction between the Creator and the creation. God is on one side of the line and everything else is on the other.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Saints, angels, demons, etc are not gods. Not just not THE God, not gods.
There is, in monotheistic religions, an absolute distinction between the Creator and the creation. God is on one side of the line and everything else is on the other.
But what about the trinity? God, holy spirit, Jesus.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The whole point of the doctrine of the Trinity is to affirm the divinity of Jesus without letting go of monotheism.
You can believe that it's absolute impossible nonsense, but if it's not monotheism it's not trinitarian. Three separate gods would be tri-theism, not trinitarianism.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's fine. I think what I wanted to point out was that, from the view of an outside observer, it looks like someone had pantheism and tried to modify it enough to make it into monotheism.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think God could easily encourage somebody for the time being to be a faithful Muslim and down the road give him/her further direction.
Does this apply to Mormonism as well? Might your confirmation of the truth of your religion be similarly provisional?
Sure why not, I think god would care much more that I be willing to shed all these tightly held beliefs if He should so command then that I have everything right.
quote: So you think God would encourage someone to violate his 1st commandment? I'm not sure I follow.
I fall into the same camp as those who think the God of Christianity and Islam are the same God, but our understanding of that same God are what is different. Obviously there is no way to completely harmonize all the tenets of Christianity with Islam.
Some general authorities of my church have even gone so far as to say that Mohamed was inspired of God to an extent.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I'm not asking you to believe ME. I'm saying that within the religion I subscribe to there is much of value. I'm not saying anything about believing something so fervently it becomes true. I'm not basing it all on feelings, I've made many posts about what else I take into consideration."
There is value in the Church of Latter Day Saints, yes. But you've shown nothing showing it to be true BUT feelings, subjective experiences. Value is one thing. I never disregard the value. But the truth?
I've spoken to some pretty damn good missionairies, I've read from the Book of Mormon. They do not sway me, God does not tell me it's correct in the least. And I find no truth there that is not in other places. No unique truth, and no
In fact, reading it, listening to them, fills me with feelings of horror. Not that I may be wrong, not fear that they may be right, none of the sort. Amazement that they could be so absolutely certain of a thing they have no evidence for.
Horror that they believe so strongly something that they could not in any objective way prove, outside their feelings. That you urge me to experience based soley on subjective feelings that can easily be simulated in a lab without any supernatural aid. And as I've said, feelings, beliefs, are so easily wrong.
"I don't think there is as much space between belief and reality. I agree that reality should effect belief and not vice versa, but it is still belief that leads us to discover what reality is."
Does it? In what way? How does believing something lead us to discover reality?
If you believe in what happens to be correct, that's just luck, as others use that same thing to feel the opposite. The only way to know anything with anything close to reasonable accuracy in the physical world is with evidence, because belief tends to be as accurate as playing roulette to choose what's true.
"I've never said you must believe in God before He will manifest himself to you. Every religion has guidelines for finding God. In my own religion it prescribes a study of the doctrine, a test of its tenats, and upon inquiry God reveals the truth of the doctrine by the power of the holy ghost."
Does He? Or do you just misinterpret it as that? The human mind is pretty damn good at decieving your conscious mind, after all, as has been shown elsewhere.
"Now you claim that drugs and that in fact people of many other religions have the exact same exerience as the one I described. Put simply I do not think that is true. There are perfectly plausible explanations that include God that explain the existance of so much diversity of opinion."
They describe it the same. That's all I go on. You pointed out that I cannot see their thoughts. That applies to you as well as me.
Adn the words you use, the descriptions you use, are the same.
How am I to distinguish?
"What if a Muslim prays to God and says, "Please protect my family while I am away," and he feels God affirm that it will be done. He later says to you, I am quite certain Islam is true as I have felt God's presence in my life more distinctly as I have followed its principles. Did God lie to him? I don't think so. Has he incorrectly extended the implications of the experience? Perhaps; perhaps not. It easy to come up with myriad like scenarios that ultimately translate into generations of faithful religious devotion."
And you are certain that YOU are not falling under the same trap?
"There is also the supernatural circumstance where say a person prays to God and becomes posessed by some entity and utters in tongues, and afterwards is convinced they have found God and his truth."
Is it necessarily supernatural? Show me how to differentiate between natural occasions of intense emotion of that sort, and the real thing.
"I honestly believe there are counterfeit experiences with God just as there are genuine. Visions of the eyes, whispers in the ear, dreams, all these things are certainly possible. I can see any of these things being a bonefide communication from God or a deception of the devil."
Yet how can you tell which is which?
"No doubt you will ask me how to tell the difference, I don't have a universal rule of thumb. I just have that my own experiences have thus far lead me into happier circumstances, when they fail me in a direct or prolonged way, I'll start doubting."
Heh.
Anyway, yes. So, based on the fruits of such communication. Should they be positive, it's at least a good thing, if not from God. If they're negative, then the opposite.
I'll agree at minimum that that's a general good rule of thumb about whether something's good or evil. Whether it's evidence of God is harder. And, again, you may simply be interpreting it incorrectly. A Muslim would certainly say you were.
"You do not know the story behind even half of those you claim all believe ernestly that their religion is correct."
Nor do you. And I certainly have no reason to feel that ALL of them are different than yours, as yours and their claims are identical.
" I have outlined two types of communique one IMO genuine, one IMO a deception."
Yet you have given no way to distinguish between them, other than what's generally a good rule of thumb about mundane things. And if Satan's as sneaky and clever as one would imagine, he'd at least make it seem to the person following his suggestions that things are better, even if, from the objective observer, they are clearly not.
" Between the two groups though you could easily produce thousands of seperate religious persuasions all with adherents who believe they have the truth. I do not think you can accurately say they have all had the exact same experience that *I* have had."
Certainly there's great, vast variety. Whose to say that your particular one is any better, however? You say the same thing as they. Maybe some of them had even more convincing. And since there ARE so very many, of all kinds, perhaps some of them are. How can I know? I just have your word, and those of the millions whose words differ from yours and each others.
"Nor can I accurately say, "I KNOW none of them have had the same experience I have." Is it possible? Surely! But I'm still taking a lifetime of situations, observations, experiences, and coming to the conclusion that I am making the best choice I can."
And my lifetime tells me something different. That's why this is so interesting and inscrutible a topic.
"I have been exposed to MANY people of various faiths. Much of what they have in their religion has augmented that which I have found in my own. My religion is not a database of all that is true. It is however a dicipline designed to open a person into accepting all that is true. It does actively involve God in the truth seeking process."
That's fine, nothing wrong there. But that still assumes God's existence.
"You can argue all day any experience I have can be replicated by science or what have you, but until you actually experience it yourself you cannot say that with a certainty."
Yet everything else in the world can be. Even your feelings, thoughts, memories, emotions, desires, dreams. Your brain can be studied, and the physics of all the world can be explained.
But what I'm asking is this: Where's the proof, outside of your feelings, outside of your assertions, which are contradicted by equally strong feelings of others. Where is the evidence for it? How do you discern between that certainty of your belief and the certainty of a madman that he can fly? Your assertions are contradicted by those of other faiths.
Further, there is no physical evidence for it. It cannot be quantified, experimented on, can it? How do you trust something like that, for the existence of God? For that's they key, God's existence. How can you prove it in a way other than the way a madman claims he can fly?
God has never spoken to me. Not once, no matter how hard I tried and prayed. The only things I got were silence, my own thoughts, or things which I could, using mental gymnastics, construe as signs, and did because I wanted to see a sign there. Because my mind created one for me out of completely unrelated events. Minds play tricks. It's the same sort of mental trick that allows a person to, say, believe all women drivers are bad. They ignore all the times where there is no problem, and focus only on the occasional, coincidental times when there is, and use that to reinforce their false notions. The only signs I got were no different, ignoring any negative answers and grasping for positive ones.
God cannot be quantified, God cannot be predicted, God cannot be explained, and most importantly, God is silent.
You do not know what I've gone through either. My experiences may give me very good reason to question it. But for me, God is silent, regardless of my prayers, regardless of whether I get wrapped up in mass. In Church, the only thing there is my own emotions, the purging of my own negatives, my own feelings. God is not speaking there.
I have heard him spoken of my entire life.
But I have never seen one single hint of him, that cannot be more easily explained by physical phenomona that can be predicted and replicated.
He is absent from me. And this is the first time I've admitted that to myself, right here.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Javert: That's fine. I think what I wanted to point out was that, from the view of an outside observer, it looks like someone had pantheism and tried to modify it enough to make it into monotheism.
If the outside observer studied just a little bit of the history of the religion it would look more like someone (or someones) had monotheism and modified it enough to include incarnation. But I suppose even that much knowledge would disqualify someone from being a truly outside observer.
However, my post that started this tangent was about practitioners of the religions in question, not about outside observers.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I had to phrase it in a way that didn't dismiss the possibility of His existence. As I cannot do that, either.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"He is absent from me. And this is the first time I've admitted that to myself, right here."
So...you've joined the club then? Awesome!
Did you get your name badge yet? We meet on Tuesdays at 7, by the way. And don't forget your sacrificial hamster.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Let's say this feeling you've had is genuine. Let's say that god actually has communicated with you. How do you know which god this is? What in the feeling you get says "Mormon" or "Catholic" or "Muslim"?
This "How do you know _____" line of argument is not going to be fruitful. If you ask "How do you know" enough times, you are always going to end up getting to some point along the progression where the only answer can be "I don't know how I know, but I do!"
For instance, how do you aren't just imagining the whole world, like the Matrix? How do you know the rules of math work? How do you know you like chocolate cake - what if someone has implanted false memories of the taste of chocolate cake in your head? You can give explanations for these, and you can give explanations for how you know those explanations, but if you keep asking "Well, how do I know that?" then eventually you will get to that point where either you don't know or don't know how you know.
The truth is, if God is all-powerful then it is reasonable that He can make you experience something in a way that you know it is Him. Being unable to explain how it happens does not mean it doesn't happen.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xaposert: The truth is, if God is all-powerful then it is reasonable that He can make you experience something in a way that you know it is Him. Being unable to explain how it happens does not mean it doesn't happen.
True. However, if the truth is that we created god in order to explain these experiences that we as humans have, we would end up with a world with numerous different gods. Which is what we have.
I'm not saying your argument doesn't have any validity, it does. But it would be so much stronger if every believer believed in the same god.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm currently reading "God is not Great: How religion poisons everything." Has anyone else read this? I'm curious about religious peoples reactions to the book. I tend to agree with a lot of what he writes, but I went into it with many of the same opinions already, so I can't objectively gauge how good it is.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:For instance, how do you aren't just imagining the whole world, like the Matrix?
I don't think this is a valid comparison. A materialist isn't ever going to give you the answer that the lack of an explanation means that we're all just in the Matrix. Many theists are happy to say that anything can happen because God is all powerful, however, which has as much utility as "We're all in the Matrix".
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
First off, 0Megabyte, I greatly appreciate the time and effort you put into your post. I am sure it is not easy to relate the frustrations and lack of cooperation on God's part. You sound to me as somebody who does wish there was a God, but one that you can put a finger on, I can empathize with that.
quote:Originally posted by 0Megabyte: There is value in the Church of Latter Day Saints, yes. But you've shown nothing showing it to be true BUT feelings, subjective experiences. Value is one thing. I never disregard the value. But the truth?
Don't forget the "Jesus Christ" part in the name of the church, TIA. I know it seems I am relying purely on warm fuzzy feelings but that is because relying on scientific evidence when it comes to God is just pure folly. Now I am not discouraging it, but in this forum we compared God to the invisible cat who would not allow himself to be seen with scientific apparati. What is the point of trying to force God into a test tube? He doesn't want to be seen that way. I believe the events in the Book of Mormon literally happened. I believe Jesus Christ actually walked the earth. So I believe there is evidence that will cooroberate what both books say. Are their some holes that have yet to be filled about what the Book of Mormon says? But the coffin hasn't been nailed shut, much of what the book says is consistant with what archaeologists are finding even today.
quote: And I find no truth there that is not in other places. No unique truth, and no
Is that last sentance incomplete? In anycase, all I can say is, that I found plenty in the Book of Mormon that is not to be found elsewhere. I also believe the book is true so far as common human error is taken into account.
quote: In fact, reading it, listening to them, fills me with feelings of horror. Not that I may be wrong, not fear that they may be right, none of the sort. Amazement that they could be so absolutely certain of a thing they have no evidence for.
Well what can I say, I would suggest that horror might not be the best way to handle it. We are not going to smother you in your sleep if you don't believe.
quote: Horror that they believe so strongly something that they could not in any objective way prove, outside their feelings. That you urge me to experience based soley on subjective feelings that can easily be simulated in a lab without any supernatural aid. And as I've said, feelings, beliefs, are so easily wrong.
I'm sorry but those feelings have YET to be recreated in a lab, so that claim is false. And I did not say SOLEY on feelings. I do not just switch my mind off to the facts, I don't know why you keep suggesting I do. Feelings are not as faulty as you are making them out to be. Do you hear a funny joke and start sobbing uncontrolably? In anycase a spiritual communication is not emotion, I just use emotion to describe it because I honestly don't know any other way. But its an experience that feels stronger then anything I could see/hear/touch.
quote: Does it? In what way? How does believing something lead us to discover reality?
If we did not believe that the truth can be made manifest we would still be in caves marveling at fire if it happens to form.
quote: Does He? Or do you just misinterpret it as that? The human mind is pretty damn good at decieving your conscious mind, after all, as has been shown elsewhere.
Look, I can't PROVE that I am not insane outside of my actions. In the same token I cannot prove that I have experienced God, but I can follow the path I feel is correct and the fruits of that path become apparent to the studious observer.
quote: They describe it the same. That's all I go on. You pointed out that I cannot see their thoughts. That applies to you as well as me.
I'm sorry but they don't ALL describe the same thing. I've spent 2 years as a missionary, I've heard ALOT of conversion stories. I joked about somebody saying something like, "Well I got a promotion the same day I didn't eat meat like I normally do so I became a buddhist!" There were lots of those types of stories. There were quite a few individuals who suffered a crisis and then after praying to whatever Taoist God encountered a miracle and that was enough for them. I just don't think you can say everyone is having spiritual experiences where God is telling them all individually that their religion is absolutely correct and true.
quote: And you are certain that YOU are not falling under the same trap?
No, because God has yet to give me the impression, "Here is more truth, but you've got to leave Mormonism to grasp it." That does nothing for you or anybody else, but it is what *I* feel I ought to be doing. I will admit that I'd find it surprising for God to have me study Mormonism so deeply only to uproot me, but it is not beyond the scope of what is possible or what I am willing to do for Him.
quote: Is it necessarily supernatural? Show me how to differentiate between natural occasions of intense emotion of that sort, and the real thing.
quote: I'll agree at minimum that that's a general good rule of thumb about whether something's good or evil. Whether it's evidence of God is harder. And, again, you may simply be interpreting it incorrectly. A Muslim would certainly say you were.
Well congratulations Mr. Muslim. As I've said before nobody else can say, "Hey BlackBlade I know better then you what you have experienced."
quote: Yet you have given no way to distinguish between them, other than what's generally a good rule of thumb about mundane things. And if Satan's as sneaky and clever as one would imagine, he'd at least make it seem to the person following his suggestions that things are better, even if, from the objective observer, they are clearly not.
If we are playing Satan strategist, I would submit that Satan being evil would still seek to make men miserable and hence would not try to improve their lives. Sure he could lie and deceive but he could not duplicate the fruits of a virtuous life.
quote: Certainly there's great, vast variety. Whose to say that your particular one is any better, however? You say the same thing as they. Maybe some of them had even more convincing. And since there ARE so very many, of all kinds, perhaps some of them are. How can I know? I just have your word, and those of the millions whose words differ from yours and each others.
So go out there and investigate them and keep an open mind about accepting unorthodox ideas if they prove to be valuable. I am very certain if that is the sort of mindset you have, you will find God.
quote: That's fine, nothing wrong there. But that still assumes God's existence.
Well yes, if we assumed there was no God we'd have to stop reading at Genesis 1:1, we wouldn't even finish the verse.
quote: Yet everything else in the world can be. Even your feelings, thoughts, memories, emotions, desires, dreams. Your brain can be studied, and the physics of all the world can be explained.
Do we live in the same universe? I live in one where men have yet to acheive omniscience. I agree that in our brief time men have learned much, and our potential for learning more is limitless. But I still believe that knowledge will confirm God's existance not otherwise.
quote: But what I'm asking is this: Where's the proof, outside of your feelings, outside of your assertions, which are contradicted by equally strong feelings of others. Where is the evidence for it? How do you discern between that certainty of your belief and the certainty of a madman that he can fly? Your assertions are contradicted by those of other faiths.
Again until you go out into the marketplace of ideas and test the waters I just don't think YOU can make that claim. Again as a missionary I found plenty of believers in other religions who believed for reasons they saw as good. I simply invited them to give Mormonism a shot and I've yet to see anybody get upset over trying it out.
quote: Further, there is no physical evidence for it. It cannot be quantified, experimented on, can it? How do you trust something like that, for the existence of God? For that's they key, God's existence. How can you prove it in a way other than the way a madman claims he can fly?
There is indeed physical evidence for God. Every person on the earth who believes in a supreme being is evidence of a God. Every temple, mosque, miao errected is an extension of that evidence. All of existance is evidence of some sort of creator. I think what you are saying is that there is no "physical proof" of a God. But even that is not true. I am certain there is a God somewhere he occupies time and space, you could visit him if He so chose it. But God apparently has decided that he does not wish to be found through the means with which we find alot of other things.
quote: God has never spoken to me. Not once, no matter how hard I tried and prayed. The only things I got were silence, my own thoughts, or things which I could, using mental gymnastics, construe as signs, and did because I wanted to see a sign there. Because my mind created one for me out of completely unrelated events. Minds play tricks. It's the same sort of mental trick that allows a person to, say, believe all women drivers are bad. They ignore all the times where there is no problem, and focus only on the occasional, coincidental times when there is, and use that to reinforce their false notions. The only signs I got were no different, ignoring any negative answers and grasping for positive ones.
I am very sorry and can completely empathize with that experience. I used to resent those who said they had found God so easily. I tried so hard to find him and got nothing. I was pretty close to just giving up, but decided to stop worrying about it and just be a good person and not get bent out of shape because God wanted to do things His way. My confirming experience for me happened when I did not expect it.
quote: God cannot be quantified, God cannot be predicted, God cannot be explained, and most importantly, God is silent.
I'm sorry but none of that is true, especially the last part. I certainly hope you will keep listening even if you are convinced nobody is talking.
quote: You do not know what I've gone through either. My experiences may give me very good reason to question it. But for me, God is silent, regardless of my prayers, regardless of whether I get wrapped up in mass. In Church, the only thing there is my own emotions, the purging of my own negatives, my own feelings. God is not speaking there.
I have heard him spoken of my entire life.
But I have never seen one single hint of him, that cannot be more easily explained by physical phenomona that can be predicted and replicated.
Well I encourage you to keep looking, and to keep an open mind. I think eventually you will encounter something that defies simple explanation.
quote: He is absent from me. And this is the first time I've admitted that to myself, right here.
Again I am sure this confession is not easy, don't lose heart. But in anycase you are welcome here to me as a theist or an atheist. If you do decide that you are certain that there is no God I would hope you would not adopt the sneerish and snobish attitude that many an atheist elects to take on.
But I'd be lying if I did not say that I hope you will keep the possibility of a living and loving God open in your mind, even if as yet you have yet to see evidence of it.
I was with my neice playing with a toy camera that had animals inside and every time you clicked the shutter a new picture would appear. She was holding it and laughing and talking about all the animals she could see. When I came over to play with her I realized she was claiming to see animals she could not possibly see as she was not looking into the camera. She was just goinga long with what everyone else was saying about the camera. I am not lying I had to sit down with her about 15 minutes and keep instructing her to hold the camera level with her eye AND open her eyes with an object that close to her face.
Out of the blue, "WOW!!! I CAN SEE A WHALE!!!!" She about knocked me over with the force of her excitment.
Keep looking, sometimes you just need to look at something alittle differently and it all makes sense.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Keep looking, sometimes you just need to look at something a little differently and it all makes sense.
This can go against your argument too. As a species our brains look for paterns that aren't necessarily there. If you look at the woodgrain pattern on a door long enough, you almost certainly will see a face (or some sort of pattern).
If you desperately search for something you will eventually find it...whether it's really there or only in your mind. And that's the problem.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Which is the exact sort of thing I was talking about elsewhere, about the sheer contradictions between faiths. Further, your claims assume you have the one true faith, as Mormons are wont to do. People in my faith would disagree, and would use similar evidence to support them. (the strength of their faith.)
