[b]Wikipedia[/b]


Arguments for the existence of God•      

The cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God. It starts with some claim about the world, like its containing entities that are caused to exist by other entities.
•      

The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator god. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, id est that it exhibits order and design.
•      

The ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than which can not be conceived". It starts simply with a concept of God. Alvin Plantinga formulates this argument to show that if it is logically possible for God (a necessary being) to exist, then God exists.[18]
•      

The mind-body problem argument suggests that the relation of consciousness to materiality is best understood in terms of the existence of God.
•      

Arguments that some non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as justice, beauty, love or religious experience are arguments for theism as against materialism.
•      

The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as our existence, are best explained by the existence of God.
•      

The moral argument argues that the existence of objective morality depends on the existence of God.
•      

transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other things we take seriously do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency.
•      

The will to believe doctrine was pragmatist philosopher William James' attempt to prove God by showing that the adoption of theism as a hypothesis "works" in a believer's life. This doctrine depended heavily on James' pragmatic theory of truth where beliefs are proven by how they work when adopted rather than by proofs before they are believed (a form of the hypothetico-deductive method).
•      

Arguments based on claims of miracles wrought by God associated with specific historical events or personages

Arguments against belief in God

Each of the following arguments aims at showing either that a particular subset of gods do not exist (by showing them as inherently meaningless, contradictory, or at odds with known scientific or historical facts) or that there is insufficient reason to believe in them.

[edit] Empirical arguments
Empirical arguments depend on empirical data in order to prove their conclusions.
•      

The argument from inconsistent revelations contests the existence of the deity called God as described in scriptures -- such as the Jewish Tanakh, the Christian Bible, or the Muslim Qur'an -- by identifying apparent contradictions between different scriptures, within a single scripture, or between scripture and known facts. To be effective this argument requires the other side to hold that its scriptural record is inerrant, or to conflate the record itself with the God it describes.
•      

The problem of evil contests the existence of a god who is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent by arguing that such a god should not permit the existence of evil or suffering. The theist responses are called theodicies.
•      

The argument from poor design contests the idea that God created life on the basis that lifeforms exist which seem to exhibit poor design. For example, many runners get a painful "stitch" in their side due to poor placement of the liver.
•      

The argument from nonbelief contests the existence of an omnipotent God who wants humans to believe in him by arguing that such a god would do a better job of gathering believers.
•      

The argument from parsimony contends that since natural (non-supernatural) theories adequately explain the development of religion and belief in gods,[25] the actual existence of such supernatural agents is superfluous and may be dismissed unless otherwise proven to be required to explain the phenomenon.
•      

It is impossible to prove, or disprove, the "pot of gold at the end of a rainbow's" existence, as it is impossible to actually get to the end of the rainbow and check, due to the (circular, and hence "endless") nature of a rainbow.

This "inability to check" is taken by most to be proof that the "pot of gold" does not in fact exist (there is no end of the rainbow for the pot to be at.) For God, this lack of proof, and the similar lack of ability to check it, is taken by some to be "proof of existence." A case of "absence of proof is not proof of absence."

Some see this to be proof that "God must exist, as he/she/it can't be disproved." The absence of proof is taken by others to be the same as the "pot of gold". If you can't get to a place that does not exist, then it's obvious that there is nothing there

Any Comments forum?

http://afceccon.blogspot.com/2010/06/4-what-proof-have-we-of-existence-of.html

Following that logic, something must have made god.

The old question is back hehe.

I don't know what it could mean but exactly when i decid to post in your "remote view of the forum members" tread it happend of receivend the answer you sent. It means that while you were posting this post I was simultaneously posting my one at yours...

Auch! some times it's trick to me to try to express certain toughts in english :D

by the way the first question in those you check at my blog is this one:

What is God?

"God is the Supreme Intelligence-First Cause of all things."

To me, proof of God rests in the idea that we are free to believe anything we wish and the outcome is the same...we live and we die.  The universality of the arrangement provides a level of continuity which indicates a purpose.  Argument is interesting to a point, but in the end it comes down to what we feel is right, not so much what we can defend.   

hi  life is a path you walk until you have reached the end,then theres a brilliant light of god's love there and when you walk through it,you are at peace for eternity

love and god bless   love juditha

usetawuz wrote on Jun 16^th, 2010 at 3:24pm:

To me, proof of God rests in the idea that we are free to believe anything we wish and the outcome is the same...we live and we die.  The universality of the arrangement provides a level of continuity which indicates a purpose.  Argument is interesting to a point, but in the end it comes down to what we feel is right, not so much what we can defend.

Why use the word God if everyone believes in something different?

Quote:

The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator god. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, id est that it exhibits order and design.

How can you argue that a god created everything before proving that this god exist?  :o

Quote:

The ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than which can not be conceived". It starts simply with a concept of God. Alvin Plantinga formulates this argument to show that if it is logically possible for God (a necessary being) to exist, then God exists.[18]

This person came up with a concept of something that is inconceivable....hmm, sounds like this person is a god.  In addition, it is logically possible for me to be dead right now, therefore I am.

Quote:

The mind-body problem argument suggests that the relation of consciousness to materiality is best understood in terms of the existence of God.

Pi is also best understood as 3.14, but that in no way makes it true.

Quote:

Arguments that some non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as justice, beauty, love or religious experience are arguments for theism as against materialism.

The only way this could help in arguing for a god, is if "god' were defined as non-physicalness.

Quote:

The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as our existence, are best explained by the existence of God.

So if we didn't exist then this god would also not exist?  :o

Quote:

The moral argument argues that the existence of objective morality depends on the existence of God.

Morality is relative, therefore there is no need to explain it with a god.

Quote:

transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other things we take seriously do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency.

Go look up the definition of logic, science, and ethics; not one of them has anything to do with "god".  I don't see how any of my arguments have refuted themselves thus far. ::)

Why do we have to argue about 'God'? Why can't some people believe in the God of their dreams and others just do what comes naturally? Why do we feel we must be in agreement with another person's view of if/what/who/how/why 'God' is?

If I'm in big trouble, and I'm feeling scared, I don't call out for help from my carpet. I call out for help (in my mind, or outloud) to 'God', whether I want to believe or not. It's a natural instinct. When I'm upset about something, sometimes I swear, and use the name of 'God', whether I want to do it or not.

I don't really know whether we have a real 'choice' in the matter. It seems to me that some societies have been so hard to live in that, without a belief in something greater than our 'outer world', humans have needed something more, to help them develop, as they grew in understanding of so many aspects of their world. A belief in deities, or some kind of 'God', seems appropriate to me, a belief in something, if only in service to others, something greater than what sometimes feels like a lost, or absurd, or painful, or disturbing reality, whatever. You get my drift.

No one should be forced to believe anything, nor do I think attempts to coerce belief really work. Your mind and your beliefs belong to you, so I think lifting your heart and mind up, in ways that are meaningful, which bring more understanding into your life, more compassion, are enough.

Sorry guys I made a mistake and did not click the notify of response button

I will add a little later

Alan

Inventech5 wrote on Jun 16^th, 2010 at 5:50pm:

usetawuz wrote on Jun 16th, 2010 at 3:24pm: To me, proof of God rests in the idea that we are free to believe anything we wish and the outcome is the same...we live and we die.  The universality of the arrangement provides a level of continuity which indicates a purpose.  Argument is interesting to a point, but in the end it comes down to what we feel is right, not so much what we can defend.    Why use the word God if everyone believes in something different?

Supreme being, Creator, God...the discussion was initiated with the word God, so I used it also...however the discussion did not turn on what to call the deity, but rather whether or not there was any proof of his/her/its existence.

Hi people below is my logical thinking about the existence of god

Have you ever thought that to be an absolute atheist takes more faith and is more difficult to rationalize than one like me who believes there is a creator? How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything?

This logic demand that dark nothing morphed into everything, nothing created energy time matter and finally life out of inanimate energy. I see this as a ridiculous assumption; I am left to believe that all existence including mysterious life evolved without reason or purpose. Do you really believe this as a fact?

Let us consider, what life is, how could the unimaginable almost infinitely complex molecule DNA of life came into existence so quickly in relation to cosmological time. Life existed on the primordial earth just a moment after its creation, again in cosmological time?

The universe is unimaginable complex and sustains itself by exact precise fundamental constants, if this harmony differed in the infinitesimal fraction we would simply not exist; indeed the earth itself would not exist.

A billion trillion googolplex monkeys typing for eternity would not produce even one of Shakespeare sonnets. Another analogy, if we took a billion  airplanes, filled them with water, concrete and bricks and dumped the whole continuously on the earth for a billion years, would it magically and randomly form the beautiful Taj Mahal or the Sydney Opera house? But you insist I must accept the beautiful universe a of unimaginable precision came into existence this illogical way

When life needs to evolve due to changing circumstances, does it tell itself to alter its own DNA for the new conditions or could there be a watch maker resetting the watch

I see god adjusting the DNA overlooking his own experiment if you like

Our breathtaking beautiful is expanding and anything that expands must have a beginning. Can you prove there is no god of course you can’t, can I of course I can’t, but at least I can offer circumstantial evidence... Atheism is a faith belief system just like anything that requires belief without evidence.

As an amateur astronomer leaves me with an unshakable belief that am awesome intellect created the universe and everything else

Look out the sparking water that quenches your thirst, the fruit that feeds you, and invigorated your body. There is beauty everywhere and you must search for real ugliness. Go outside on a moonless night and reflect on the wonder of the cosmos that sparkles above you. The great snow capped mountains and streams, the blue sky and the rise of the sun at dawn and its golden glow as it sets.

In the early morning go and listen to the sounds of nature, birds chirping like tiny electrons in the mind of god. The wind that you breathe the precious nourishment supplied by mother earth.

Then explain to me how chance can bring this all about. To me there is a wonderful creative behind all this glory if only we would look at it.

Like all things the universe has a beginning and this demands a creator, for nothing can exist with a prime cause. The universe will end but for that we will just have to wait

Even atheism scientists say our universe is precise, ordered with beautiful mathematical constants. One great astronomer said the universe was less like a great well oiled machine and more like a beautiful ongoing thought

I believe in God, what you believe is your right but to me a godless creation is bleak and cold

What do you people believe, No god or God


Alan McDougall 24/6/2008   

Allan I must confess that I've copied your text and I'll translate it to portuguese and send it to my friends...

Of course I'll tell them who's wrote it. :)

Kardec wrote on Jun 17^th, 2010 at 8:10am:

Allan I must confess that I've copied your text and I'll translate it to portuguese and send it to my friends... Of course I'll tell them who's wrote it. :)

No  problem,. go right ahead and maybe the Portuguese speaking people of Brazil would also like to read it people

Alan

Quote:

Have you ever thought that to be an absolute atheist takes more faith and is more difficult to rationalize than one like me who believes there is a creator? How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything?

No, actually I think it takes an equal amount of faith to (dis)believe in a god.  It's not more rational to say that there was a creator, only more convenient; convenience doesn't truth.  I assume that you're referring to the Big Bang when you say "How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything?".  This shows your ignorance of the subject; matter didn't come from nothing, it came energy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no explanation for "god's" existence other than he's always existed.  This claim is based off what exactly?  :-?


Quote:

This logic demand that dark nothing morphed into everything, nothing created energy time matter and finally life out of inanimate energy. I see this as a ridiculous assumption; I am left to believe that all existence including mysterious life evolved without reason or purpose. Do you really believe this as a fact?

No, I don't believe this, nor does anyone that I know of. :o


Quote:

Let us consider, what life is, how could the unimaginable almost infinitely complex molecule DNA of life came into existence so quickly in relation to cosmological time. Life existed on the primordial earth just a moment after its creation, again in cosmological time?

Wow, your ignorance continues to show: DNA is nowhere near 'infinitely complex', in fact when the structure was discovered, the scientist were shocked by how simple it is.  The age of the cosmos is estimated to be between 13.3 and 13.9 billion years old, and life is said to have begun 3.5 billion years ago.  It took roughly 10 billion years, please explain to me how that is so quick.  :o


Quote:

The universe is unimaginable complex and sustains itself by exact precise fundamental constants, if this harmony differed in the infinitesimal fraction we would simply not exist; indeed the earth itself would not exist.

Scary, isn't it?  :'(


Quote:

A billion trillion googolplex monkeys typing for eternity would not produce even one of Shakespeare sonnets. Another analogy, if we took a billion  airplanes, filled them with water, concrete and bricks and dumped the whole continuously on the earth for a billion years, would it magically and randomly form the beautiful Taj Mahal or the Sydney Opera house? But you insist I must accept the beautiful universe a of unimaginable precision came into existence this illogical way

Well do that test with monkeys, and let me know how it works out.  ;)
What makes you think that the world was beautiful when it was created?  :-?


Quote:

When life needs to evolve due to changing circumstances, does it tell itself to alter its own DNA for the new conditions or could there be a watch maker resetting the watch

I'm sorry, but it's really frustrating that you're talking about evolution when you haven't the foggiest of how it works.  >:(
"natural selection
–noun
the process by which forms of life having traits that better enable them to adapt to specific environmental pressures, as predators, changes in climate, or competition for food or mates, will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers than others of their kind, thus ensuring the perpetuation of those favorable traits in succeeding generations."


Quote:

Our breathtaking beautiful is expanding and anything that expands must have a beginning. Can you prove there is no god of course you can’t, can I of course I can’t, but at least I can offer circumstantial evidence... Atheism is a faith belief system just like anything that requires belief without evidence.

Give me empirical evidence, not circumstantial evidence.  :P


Quote:

As an amateur astronomer leaves me with an unshakable belief that am awesome intellect created the universe and everything else

Great logic!  ;D


Quote:

Look out the sparking water that quenches your thirst, the fruit that feeds you, and invigorated your body. There is beauty everywhere and you must search for real ugliness. Go outside on a moonless night and reflect on the wonder of the cosmos that sparkles above you. The great snow capped mountains and streams, the blue sky and the rise of the sun at dawn and its golden glow as it sets.

Yeah, beauty is everywhere where pain, suffering and evil don't exist.  I'm sure that stuff exists where you live, or maybe you just ignore its existence to conveniently make that statement.


Quote:

Then explain to me how chance can bring this all about. To me there is a wonderful creative behind all this glory if only we would look at it.

No claims that 'chance' brought anything into existence.  :-?


Quote:

Like all things the universe has a beginning and this demands a creator, for nothing can exist with a prime cause. The universe will end but for that we will just have to wait

Why can't that 'prime cause' be the Big Band?  :P


Quote:

Even atheism scientists say our universe is precise, ordered with beautiful mathematical constants. One great astronomer said the universe was less like a great well oiled machine and more like a beautiful ongoing thought

I didn't know that atheism was a science.  Anyway, how is this proof of a god?  :-?

I really hope you actually read my responses!  ;)

Have a good day!  :)

Greetings.

   I believe in one omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God that is the creator of everything in this universe and beyond. As far as any religion goes, I consider them all man made, based on individual and group experiences that guide the belief structure maintaining that religion.

   I agree with Alan that it makes logical sense to believe that an omnipotent creator is responsible for life in this and other worlds. The DNA of life is amazing enough by itself; but now that we have so much evidence based on experiences both past and present from those gifted enough to corroboratively report on focus level / planes of existence beyond the physical, leaves little room for doubt in divine creation.

Ralph

I too, can parse the crap out of anything that is brought up here but frankly, what is the point?  If you choose to disagree, do so, but to pull apart someone's comments sentence by sentence with your materialistic, proof required stuff, is beyond anything I will read in the future.  Two martinis in and three glasses of a fine bordeau and your s"tuff" seems to be a little over the top...c'mon, man, feel the love...the point in which any thought is shared here should be in love...we are all looking and seeking...no one is trying to prove a hard and fast point and no one is getting any leg up for showing up anyone else...you disagree, fine, state it in a respectful, understanding manner that not only makes your  case, but shows the contrast with others...maybe we can agree. 

I recently went to a 20th highschool reunion and a kid I knew (now an older man) stated a comment that I had not heard before..."opinions are like @ssho.es...everyones' got one and everyones' stinks but their own..." .  You are welcome to think what you want, but so is everyone else...

Sorry...I got the impression that we should just be nice...here on this board, with each other, who are obviously looking for our own truths, we should just be nice.  I wish all who read this my best and love an light.  Love Scott.

wrote on Jun 17^th, 2010 at 9:21pm:

Quote: Have you ever thought that to be an absolute atheist takes more faith and is more difficult to rationalize than one like me who believes there is a creator? How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything? No, actually I think it takes an equal amount of faith to (dis)believe in a god.  It's not more rational to say that there was a creator, only more convenient; convenience doesn't truth.  I assume that you're referring to the Big Bang when you say "How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything?".  This shows your ignorance of the subject; matter didn't come from nothing, it came energy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no explanation for "god's" existence other than he's always existed.  This claim is based off what exactly?  :-? [quote]This logic demand that dark nothing morphed into everything, nothing created energy time matter and finally life out of inanimate energy. I see this as a ridiculous assumption; I am left to believe that all existence including mysterious life evolved without reason or purpose. Do you really believe this as a fact?

No, I don't believe this, nor does anyone that I know of. :o


Quote:

Let us consider, what life is, how could the unimaginable almost infinitely complex molecule DNA of life came into existence so quickly in relation to cosmological time. Life existed on the primordial earth just a moment after its creation, again in cosmological time?

Wow, your ignorance continues to show: DNA is nowhere near 'infinitely complex', in fact when the structure was discovered, the scientist were shocked by how simple it is.  The age of the cosmos is estimated to be between 13.3 and 13.9 billion years old, and life is said to have begun 3.5 billion years ago.  It took roughly 10 billion years, please explain to me how that is so quick.  :o


Quote:

The universe is unimaginable complex and sustains itself by exact precise fundamental constants, if this harmony differed in the infinitesimal fraction we would simply not exist; indeed the earth itself would not exist.

Scary, isn't it?  :'(


Quote:

A billion trillion googolplex monkeys typing for eternity would not produce even one of Shakespeare sonnets. Another analogy, if we took a billion  airplanes, filled them with water, concrete and bricks and dumped the whole continuously on the earth for a billion years, would it magically and randomly form the beautiful Taj Mahal or the Sydney Opera house? But you insist I must accept the beautiful universe a of unimaginable precision came into existence this illogical way

Well do that test with monkeys, and let me know how it works out.  ;)
What makes you think that the world was beautiful when it was created?  :-?


Quote:

When life needs to evolve due to changing circumstances, does it tell itself to alter its own DNA for the new conditions or could there be a watch maker resetting the watch

I'm sorry, but it's really frustrating that you're talking about evolution when you haven't the foggiest of how it works.  >:(
"natural selection
–noun
the process by which forms of life having traits that better enable them to adapt to specific environmental pressures, as predators, changes in climate, or competition for food or mates, will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers than others of their kind, thus ensuring the perpetuation of those favorable traits in succeeding generations."


Quote:

Our breathtaking beautiful is expanding and anything that expands must have a beginning. Can you prove there is no god of course you can’t, can I of course I can’t, but at least I can offer circumstantial evidence... Atheism is a faith belief system just like anything that requires belief without evidence.

Give me empirical evidence, not circumstantial evidence.  :P


Quote:

As an amateur astronomer leaves me with an unshakable belief that am awesome intellect created the universe and everything else

Great logic!  ;D


Quote:

Look out the sparking water that quenches your thirst, the fruit that feeds you, and invigorated your body. There is beauty everywhere and you must search for real ugliness. Go outside on a moonless night and reflect on the wonder of the cosmos that sparkles above you. The great snow capped mountains and streams, the blue sky and the rise of the sun at dawn and its golden glow as it sets.

Yeah, beauty is everywhere where pain, suffering and evil don't exist.  I'm sure that stuff exists where you live, or maybe you just ignore its existence to conveniently make that statement.


Quote:

Then explain to me how chance can bring this all about. To me there is a wonderful creative behind all this glory if only we would look at it.

No claims that 'chance' brought anything into existence.  :-?


Quote:

Like all things the universe has a beginning and this demands a creator, for nothing can exist with a prime cause. The universe will end but for that we will just have to wait

Why can't that 'prime cause' be the Big Band?  :P


Quote:

Even atheism scientists say our universe is precise, ordered with beautiful mathematical constants. One great astronomer said the universe was less like a great well oiled machine and more like a beautiful ongoing thought

I didn't know that atheism was a science.  Anyway, how is this proof of a god?  :-?

I really hope you actually read my responses!  ;)

Have a good day!  :)
[/quote]

I happen to know what I wrote about and to say I am completely ignorant on some points points out to me that it is you that is just inventing counter arguments 

In this forum we try not to get too personal, we debate in a friendly way an try not to demean each other, but try to win over each other with sound counter arguments.

I take real umbrage at you telling that I am completely ignorant, when you have no clue as to who I am Read some of my previous posts and you will see I am not the ignorant  idiot you seem to think I am.

The DNA coding is unbelievably complex!! it is the code of physical life and from it come all the life forms we see on earth

For some who tells me it is easy to be an atheist and then goes into long detail indicated to me that is is difficult

If you don't concur with my statements debunk them with sound logic and I will move from my present position of understanding and embrace your atheism

Alan

[quote author=454244575851535B53360 link=1276406448/25#25 date=1276850843 I assume that you're referring to the Big Bang when you say "How could nothing evolve from nothing and become everything?".  [/quote]

How could nothing come from nothing....oh, dear, I am unable to stop this immense impulse to break into song...maybe it's because I was watching a tv show about a glee club last night....I'm sure it's relevant in some way...oh, no, I can't stop myself...here I go....from The Sound of Music....

(-maria-)
Perhaps I had a wicked childhood
Perhaps I had a miserable youth
But somewhere in my wicked, miserable past
There must have been a moment of truth
For here you are
Standing there
Loving me
Whether or not you should
So somewhere in my youth or childhood
I must have done something good

Nothing comes from nothing
Nothing ever could
So somewhere in my youth or childhood
I must have done something good

(-the captain-)
For here you are
Standing there
Loving me
Whether or not you should
(-maria-)
So somewhere in my youth or childhood
I must have done something good

(-together-)
Nothing comes from nothing
Nothing ever could
So somewhere in my youth or childhood
I must have done something good

.......uhm, okay, I'm done now..... :)

hi alan and all    god is there,he exists as he speaks to me and he helps me to live in this world,without him there would be no hope anymore,the dark clouds would stay forever.

god will never leave my side because he knows i would die,he knows what's in my heart,he knows me more than i know me.

he is my salvation,he is my will to go on,he is my guide,he is my shoulder to cry on,he is all,everything that exists around and inside me.

he has spoken to me many times when i go down inside,he lifts me up to fight another day.

i love him with all my heart and all my soul

love and god bless   love juditha

@usetawuz
I'm not trying to argue an opinion, that wouldn't make much sense.

@Alan McDougall
I'm sorry that you got the impression that I think you're an idiot.  Being ignorant has nothing to do with intelligence.  Again, no offense but you're saying things about Evolution  and the Big Bang which are incorrect, which lead me to the conclusion that you're ignorant of the details of said topics, which is worrisome because I don't false information to spread.  In addition, you originally said that DNA molecules are complicated, not the code.   I don't quite understand what you mean by this:

Quote:

For some who tells me it is easy to be an atheist and then goes into long detail indicated to me that is is difficult

Quote:

If you don't concur with my statements debunk them with sound logic and I will move from my present position of understanding and embrace your atheism

I thought that I did debunk with sound logic, if not, please let me know where my logic is flawed.

MUCH LOVE INVENTECH5  :D

wrote on Jun 18^th, 2010 at 11:17am:

hi alan and all    god is there,he exists as he speaks to me and he helps me to live in this world,without him there would be no hope anymore,the dark clouds would stay forever. god will never leave my side because he knows i would die,he knows what's in my heart,he knows me more than i know me. he is my salvation,he is my will to go on,he is my guide,he is my shoulder to cry on,he is all,everything that exists around and inside me. he has spoken to me many times when i go down inside,he lifts me up to fight another day. i love him with all my heart and all my soul love and god bless   love Juditha

Juditha,

You are a beautiful soul and god loves you in a special way just like you love him. Very few people can say that they love god so dearly as you do

Blessings and light

Alan

Aaaah, the big three :). Always and forever lodged in the human beings mind, like the Universe thinking about itself.

1. "Why does anything exist instead of nothing"?
2. "Is death (of a single being and also of this universe) the true end"?
3. "Is there a God(s)?"

Will we ever be able to truly answer these three? Are we even supposed to? We are beings that try to analyze a system from within , trying to put ourselves "without" whereas this is impossible.

At least, for most humans, some of you seem to be able to go "without".

As to the first question, it is the most complex and the most unanswerable. Where does the "big bang" come from? From a singularity of energy, some say. Where, then, does the energy come from? Why did it manage to evolve in such a complex way that the mathematical probablitiy of a relatively stable universe that we have now is close to Nil? Some scientists say that there are multiple universes and that through "trial and error", this one worked, but to my mind this is as much a belief as any other - you cannot prove a universe "without" our own. You can only speculate.

It is just as likely and possible that a great creator force, some being living in a multidimensional way, has structured the universe in a certain way. This would count as "God" to us.

Some of you have knowledge that transcends "normal" knowledge. All we 99% of other human beings have to accept, I belive, that we can NOT answer these questions completely. In fact, we are no further to an answer than Plato or Sokrates were. We still know that we know: Nothing. All the time, new and exciting facts about our existence put everything in a new context (quantum physics, e=mc2 etc.). This will continue to happen I believe.

And this is the great vexing and beautiful point of our existence. We are a part of God`s mind - of the great Universe - thinking about itself. Is it not great? Is it not wonderful?

It is so wonderful that we exist, that we are self-aware, that we can ask these questions. Let`s hope they will, some day, put us to great heights of love and life.

chrwe

Greetings

There are some interesting thoughts in chrwe's post, but that 99% statement cannot stand as fact, nor can the barrier she assumes exists for that '99%' ever opening to 'afterlife' sources of information.

An important part of what this site exists for IMO is to show that anyone with the determination to open themselves to afterlife information can do so. Such determination is not only a state of willpower; sometimes determination takes some adjustments in attitude. Reading Bruce Moen's books is an amazing means of  establishing the most helpful attitudes.

Many many people use their afterlife knowledge and connections in their physical earthly lives--they just don't talk about it. I didn't know that for a fact when I was younger but the more I get involved in this, the more I meet such people who combine their everyday interests in physical life with 'afterlife' knowledge.  Speaking from experience and personal knowledge  I know such people from all walks of life--international statesman, animal whisperers, etc.

You can have a caring heart and a fine brain, but human capabilities still include more, and that more leads to your personal connection with a Supreme Power.

Betson

With regard to Inventech's proposal that the law of evolution invalidates Alan's theories of intelligent design (and ipso facto, evidence that there is a God) I have much to say.  This a perfect example of what I like to call scientific nihilism.  Scientific nihilism occurs when we use our observational senses, produce reproducible "facts" from them, and then theories which describe physical reality.  The end product is then the gradual belief that only this type of evidence is valid or true.  When science is used as a tool for gathering information about the physical world/reality, and is used as a tool for conscious thought, it is a practical technique that adds information onto pre-existing information - building a huge database of knowledge about the physical world.

The scientific nihilist makes the mistake of misusing the scientific method of inquiry as the only true method of gathering information, so that instead of acting as a tool of the conscious mind, the method itself becomes "the law," and consciousness is ignored, or written off as an aberrant part of the physical world. 

In my mind, there is nothing as sad as the scientific nihilist, for they can't see the forest because the trees get in the way.  You see, anyone who uses enough introspection, meditation and exploring discovers that consciousness is primary  - our true existence is that of a perceptive consciousness inserted into the physical plane.  Physical reality, then becomes secondary and a manifestation of consciouness; this concept is what made my old friend on this board, Dave-MBS once  coin the phrase "the primacy of consciousness." 

The primacy of consciousness means that we exist as pure thought on the spiritual or mental plane, and are incarnated into the physcial plane.  When we die, we slough off our physical bodies, but our consciousness persists and explores other realities.  Scientific nihilists base all their information on physical reproducibe data and sensory evidence in the physical plane.  As such, they willingly close themselves off to metaphysical meaning, or other realities that we know stem from the primacy of consciousness.

Yet, in order to dismiss intelligent design in the universe and concepts such as a creator behind physical bodies, scientific nihilists are left with a big dilemma; they can not explain the "how" and the "why" behind what is going on.

Evolutionary theory is invoked, by the observation of natural selection.  Yet the theory of evolution is never explained or explainable.  Yes, we can all understand how a giraffe with a longer neck might reproduce its kind in greater numbers, based on physical advantages.  But the major jumps in evolution, such as the first coherent single celled organism, or the development of a multi-cellular multisystemed organism,  controlled by a conscious brain can not be explained as to the "how" and "why" questions which come up.  To state it simply is a law of nature, is to evade the big question. 

Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to bring two people together when one is a scientific nihilist and the other believes in the primacy of consciousness.  Since consciousness in the mental/spiritual plane operates apart from objective evidence gathered in the physical world alone, it sometimes seems that the nihilist simply can not or will not understand the different language of one who believes that consciousness is primary and creates physical reality.

And so, as Alan poetically wrote, and as we all see, it is so obvious that the universe is a manifestation of a living breathing consciousness; that we human beings are complex entities defying the physical laws of entropy and that these bodies acts as vehicles for conscious manifestation in the physical plane. 

To me, it is sad beyond measure that the scientific nihilist misses all of this.

Matthew

Really great posts from all of you!! Thanks for that, I feel I could ad a little of my own that revolves around God and how we might interact with this supreme entity

The Soul in relation to the Cosmic Mind

The brain is not the soul of mind; it is the hard drive, the processor of your mortal body. The mind downloads constantly onto the brain right up to death and a little beyond and that is why some of us remember events from a near death experience

The “the Soul” personalized is an infinitesimal part of God in man. Just as a drop of water from the ocean has all the ingredients in the ocean, this “the Soul” has all the powers of God.

However, just as a drop of water from the ocean does not make up the ocean, the “the Soul” of one person does not make up God’s “the Soul”. All the drops joined together become the ocean; all the “the Soul’s in the universe together make up God’s Cosmic
Soul”.


Our “Soul” is a microcosm and creates the macrocosm universe and more until it all consolidates into the godhead.

. “The Soul” can become part of the environment and embrace the entire cosmos.

I know this is true, because  during my NDE I became like god for a few wonderful inexplicable moments outside of linear time and space. (Just thought I was godlike)

The speed of thought transfer I think is more than the speed of light. In a millisecond, “the Soul” can reach the farthest galaxy, billions of light years away.

What is thought what consciousness is??

All known tests, will not find any indication of “the Soul”.

There is no single location for the “the Soul”. The human “the Soul” is distributed throughout the human body and its environment.

Every cell has its own “the Soul” and has the ability to function independently or jointly with all the cells of the body.

For example, a neuron is capable of deciding whether it will transmit information to another nerve cell and, if it will, to which one among the thousands of cells with which it is in contact.



Just as each of the thousand pieces of a splintered mirror will show the same reflection of an object as the whole mirror, each cell reflects our “the Soul” and each cell in the universe we humans etc, reflects the Universal Soul called by us as God

Alan McDougall

Bets...truer words were never spoken...I appreciate your ability to respond with calm...mine is usually a little too bombastic for my own taste...

Matthew, your missive was wonderful, clear and enlightening, as usual...I truly appreciated its message, and feel lucky that I was present for the lesson...some we do not want to miss...

Alan, your raw production of extensive input is priceless...do not stop, for all our sakes.

Love and light...

Scott