Jump to content

Do you believe in God and why


ivor bigun

Recommended Posts

 

14 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

Never pretend the same,

as I have no idea what you really feel, neither can I experienced it, as it is something personal.

 

 

 

Nothing to do with feeling, but with the mind.
And you can experience it if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sunmaster said:

 

Nothing to do with feeling, but with the mind.
And you can experience it if you want.

Why should I.

I am perfectly OK with my way.

I am sure you are with yours.

Different paths, similar ( Or what ever makes you happy to call it ) results.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

So that maybe you can stop guessing and finally know if they are the same, similar or different. ????

Too much  strain I am afraid.

At 71+, and being good with myself the way I practise, I don't want any confrontation with unknown things, and with uncertain results. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

So, one tried to "play the piano" for 2 weeks and then gave up because he couldn't string together a simple tune.

Another one goes through years of music school, practices on their keyboard everyday until finally he becomes proficient and is able to play Beethoven's 9th symphony flawlessly.

Yet, apparently in some very curious parallel universe, the 2 are equally equipped to talk about the art of playing the piano.

 

It's funny that you allow for opinions to differ in fields you think you have no authority in (brain tumor, you said), but for meditation/spirituality (where by your admission you also have no authority), suddenly opinions become all equal.  


I mean, come on guys, even if you're skeptic of spirituality, an atheist, a hard core materialist or whatever, common logic would certainly shout at you in the face to wake t.f. up.

 

 

 

 

But of course, you may have a different opinion....:coffee1: 

What do you mean to "wake T.F. up" not the abbreviation, but wake up to what?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

 

First of all, this has nothing to do with me. I just started practicing meditation regularly, but have had other experiences that gave me insights and I've studied the subject from many different angles. I've never claimed to be an expert, but I do think I know a thing or 2 about it.

I also don't care if you think I'm a knowitall. I know what I know and I try to validate it with rational arguments.

 

Again, I didn't post what I posted to somehow elevate myself above others, but in defense of the subject at hand, which is dear to me and I care that it is portrayed truthfully. If someone comes along who is an expert in meditation, I will gladly let him take over.

 


This is where you got it wrong I think. A specialist in meditation (aka guru, swami, zen master, saint...) can very well be recognized as such by others (at he same or higher level). People feel that there is something special about them, and if you'd ever met such a person, you would know. Just because it's not measurable like radioactivity is, doesn't mean a damn thing.

A specialist in meditation will have one look at you and know if you're good, very good or exceptional in your practice. It is NOT a matter of opinion. 
It's true that there are some who fake it. For us it would be quite difficult to verify if they indeed have "it" or not. For the specialist though, it will be no problem to see through the deception, just like the piano virtuoso can hear your level after 5 seconds of you playing a tune.

 

Regarding this quote from you, can you please elaborate on how this can be possibly be true?

 

"A specialist in meditation will have one look at you and know if you're good, very good or exceptional in your practice."

 

If you wish to say that you were being somewhat hyperbolic here, perhaps for persuasive purposes of your argument, I wont fault you if you say so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

The opposite for me.

I have been seeing the futility of earthy pleasures since i was a kid, yet i used to, and i still conform to the mainstream attitudes for the sake of social life.

Out of curiousity are earthy pleasures being defined here as simply coming from the senses, or is a negative connotation considered such as sin of some action in a religious sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, luckyluke said:

Despite you can not prove this is indeed the case, I am personally prepare to believe you.

 

I can also not prove that I have a similar peace of mind, without meditation, that you claim to have with.

Yes, I think a definition of peace of mind is needed here, then if one says to the other "Me too" then perhaps we are talking about inate personality traits versus some sort of practice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Out of curiousity are earthy pleasures being defined here as simply coming from the senses, or is a negative connotation considered such as sin of some action in a religious sense?

I was no thinking about sins, just earthy pleasures in a very broad way.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

I do that every time I sit down and calm my mind. Can you say the same? 

Bizarre question. 

 

I do it every waking second of every day. Sitting, standing, walking, driving, working, relaxing, reading, studying, watching TV, News, etc...and it begins immediately upon waking up. No need of sitting down and calming of mind to be alert, situationally aware and observant of the reality around us. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The good thing, is that the whole christianity, jews and muslims, with all of them who actually believe in the same family, are not for one second able to aggree and do the world domination thing! Lucky I would say. How hard could it be if you believe in same god, same family and same business. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I was no thinking about sins, just earthy pleasures in a very broad way.

 

So  then looking at art and appreciating it, or swimming,  would be earthly pleasures, if so, and not holding this as an opinion you hold, but have seen it discussed across the board, why would anyone wish to remove or surpress such pleasure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Please, this is not a pissing contest.

The practice of meditation enables you to quiten the mind for longer and longer periods of time, until you learn to observe any arising thoughts and not get carried away by them. This is only the most basic aspect of it, but the all important foundation on which all other states of consciousness are built upon.

Now, if you have the ability to witness your thoughts in this manner without meditating, then I say wow, wish I were you.

If not, then what you define as peace of mind is different from what meditation is about. 

Still good if you have it and feel content with it, but not the same.

IYO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WalkingOrders said:

So  then looking at art and appreciating it, or swimming,  would be earthly pleasures, if so, and not holding this as an opinion you hold, but have seen it discussed across the board, why would anyone wish to remove or surpress such pleasure?

I would never wish to remove or suppress physical pleasures, i think they are there for a reason.

What i meant to say, is that, compared to my friends when i was a kid, i knew that that kind of joy was ephemeral.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

What do you mean to "wake T.F. up" not the abbreviation, but wake up to what?

That there are hierarchies in spiritual practice just as there are hierarchies in any other field of study.
Why would that be an exception? 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Regarding this quote from you, can you please elaborate on how this can be possibly be true?

 

"A specialist in meditation will have one look at you and know if you're good, very good or exceptional in your practice."

 

If you wish to say that you were being somewhat hyperbolic here, perhaps for persuasive purposes of your argument, I wont fault you if you say so.

It may come as a shock to you, but I mean that quite literally.


You believe in Jesus, right?

He was a realized master, fully awake, the top dog of spiritual accomplishments. His disciples had no secrets for him, he could read them like open books. He knew Judas was going to betray him, did he not?

 

The same way, other masters can see right through you. This ability didn't just die out with Jesus. It is a byproduct of mastery and is very common in spiritual literature. Of course it depends on the level of the practitioner, but definitely a well known attainment for a master.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

That there are hierarchies in spiritual practice just as there are hierarchies in any other field of study.
Why would that be an exception? 

I would agree this true, but lets use numerology as an example, or even Catholicism.

 

A numerologist may be expert in his knowledge, but I may think it a load of <deleted>, I might go to this person to learn what I can of the practice, and gain a fountain of knowledge, yet still think its a load of <deleted>.

 

A Catholic theologian   likewise, may be very useful to an an atheist to help him better define his argument refuting Christianity, or better understanding religous though  or dogma. Yet he still may not see any need of such faith or belief in his life, or recognize that the Priest has gained Anything above which the atheist has, no special peace of mind etc, and simply rejects , for himself, anything the Priest say he has to offer, and likewise rejects that he is missing anything. 

 

In your field  of certain branches of meditation you may indeed be expert in its practice, I might indeed recognize you as such, and go to you for knowledge of your practice while at the same time find my own spirirual practices, or lack of them for that matter, to be suffcient, for self. Likewise perhaps I become a follower, for a time and then quit. In any case  I have not failed, I simply reject the path

(hypothetically).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Bizarre question. 

 

I do it every waking second of every day. Sitting, standing, walking, driving, working, relaxing, reading, studying, watching TV, News, etc...and it begins immediately upon waking up. No need of sitting down and calming of mind to be alert, situationally aware and observant of the reality around us. 

Different things.


Being alert is not the same thing as being able to stop your thoughts. In all the activities you describe, your mind is never at rest. The ego gets feeds from your senses and your mind navigates through those actions. When you drive, all your senses are on high alert (or should be), when you walk your mind keeps busy steering your body and keeping balance, when you watch TV your eyes and ears work. There is always an action and one who performs the action. That's the duality of life.
During meditation however, you eliminate all those inputs. That's why it's not possible to meditate while watching TV. During meditation (depending on the preferred technique) you usually focus only on one thing, be it your breath, the point between your eyebrows or a mantra. This helps focusing the mind away from the untameable horses (thoughts).
Meditation is not having happy go lucky thoughts about how magnificent life is; meditation is not having any thoughts, so that something else has the space to be revealed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

It may come as a shock to you, but I mean that quite literally.


You believe in Jesus, right?

He was a realized master, fully awake, the top dog of spiritual accomplishments. His disciples had no secrets for him, he could read them like open books. He knew Judas was going to betray him, did he not?

 

The same way, other masters can see right through you. This ability didn't just die out with Jesus. It is a byproduct of mastery and is very common in spiritual literature. Of course it depends on the level of the practitioner, but definitely a well known attainment for a master.

This so-called ability is not at all an accepted thing, so much as an actual ability. It's unsubstantiated claims...both then and now. There's no evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man who gained deification long after his mundane life. There are very few, if any, contemporary historical accounts of him while he was supposedly performing miracles. The greatest man-god that ever lived and nobody noticed.

 

That should be shocking to the believing masses. All those supposed miracles came decades after his death.

 

I get that you're trying to make a point here, but this needs saying and repeating, as it's been said and ignored earlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

It may come as a shock to you, but I mean that quite literally.


You believe in Jesus, right?

He was a realized master, fully awake, the top dog of spiritual accomplishments. His disciples had no secrets for him, he could read them like open books. He knew Judas was going to betray him, did he not?

 

The same way, other masters can see right through you. This ability didn't just die out with Jesus. It is a byproduct of mastery and is very common in spiritual literature. Of course it depends on the level of the practitioner, but definitely a well known attainment for a master.

In the case of Jesus, I reject Jesus as guru, as I understand him as the Son of God, but understand the argument. I view Jesus power as supernatural, coming from God the Father. My view comes soley from the Bible, certain Church Fathers text, and certain Christian writers. 

 

Additionally my relationship with God comes from prayer and certain techniques of prayer that could be viewed as meditative. All of this self experiencial information, could all be illusion according to science, and I have no proof that my mind isnt playing tricks on me, or lost in defense mechanisms stemming from my subconscious, any more or less than anyone else I think  including a hardened skeptic to all forms of spiritual metaphysical practice.

 

My beliefs in God are maintained by feelings more then mind. Rationality, argues that I constantly question my beliefs and faith. I consider that healthy, my faith is informed my religious text, and the mind, but held in place by the heart, meaning feeling. I maintain I have no proof for God's existance, for me to say otherwise would be a lie to self.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

 

In your field  of certain branches of meditation you may indeed be expert in its practice, I might indeed recognize you as such, and go to you for knowledge of your practice while at the same time find my own spirirual practices, or lack of them for that matter, to be suffcient, for self. Likewise perhaps I become a follower, for a time and then quit. In any case  I have not failed, I simply reject the path

(hypothetically).

Ok, and you point is...?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sunmaster said:
9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

On 1/23/2020 at 7:38 PM, sirineou said:

That's why there is no such thing as the Science of God. there is only belief.  

Some of us have been saying that for 367 pages.

 

On 1/23/2020 at 7:38 PM, sirineou said:

There is no 'science" there is the science of a particular discipline dependant on the scientific process of verification. 

Given science is incapable of proving or disproving the existence of "God", I see no point in bringing science into the discussion. Humans are too primitive to even begin to understand God.

I believe in the existence of God because the evidence is everywhere. However, if one has a closed mind, one will not see it.

I think you're both wrong. ????

Science is the process of learning through intellectual and practical activity through observation and experiment and it is verifiable by others.
Meditation does just that. That's why there are clearly defined teachings and repeatable steps for the practitioner to follow to reach a certain goal. These steps are verifiable by all who embark on that path. Thousands of years of experimenting have refined these meditation techniques to an art form.

Of course, if you look at it from the outside, you'll never understand the first thing about it. You (in a general sense) will also have no authority to pass judgement because you don't have all the data necessary to form a leveled opinion. 

 

If it makes you feel better, we can define the traditional science as "narrow science" and one that includes meditation as a source of knowledge a "broad science". Remember though, that both conform to the prerequisites necessary to be defined as "science" (learning through intellectual and practical activity through observation and experiment and it is verifiable by others).


Now, how many confused emoticons will this get me? ???? ????????

Ok so you got your first confused  emoticon.

How does what you said have anything  to do with what I said? Never mind proving me wrong?

No doubt meditation exists, and it has benefits, such meditation has being studied , using the scientific method, and a system of meditation has being developed. I practice meditation with excellent results, and I believe I have reversed a medical condition ,throw meditation biofeedback.  The only thing that science has not prove  is a metaphysical connection. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

This so-called ability is not at all an accepted thing, so much as an actual ability. It's unsubstantiated claims...both then and now. There's no evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man who gained deification long after his mundane life. There are very few, if any, contemporary historical accounts of him while he was supposedly performing miracles. The greatest man-god that ever lived and nobody noticed.

 

That should be shocking to the believing masses. All those supposed miracles came decades after his death.

 

I get that you're trying to make a point here, but this needs saying and repeating, as it's been said and ignored earlier. 

What proof do you have that Jesus, who you maintain there is little evidence for led a mundane life?

 

This is a contradiction is it not?

 

If you are going to allow that Jesus existed, for argument sake  then it would be a given that his life had to have been more then mundane. 

 

If you are denying his existance all together, and simply claiming such a person as myth, fine, but if he existed it is highly unlikely that other mythical elements would sprout up around an otherwise mundane man.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Ok, and you point is...?

That is my point. Such a person is rejecting the very notion of a path, or the existance of your path, or prefers another path, and sees zero benefit or even truth in what you offer   and in that rejection does not see himself as lacking anything  or see your superiority in anything. He only sees you having an un-needed knowledge in a pseudoscience of sorts. This could be applied across any spiritual discipline to a nonbeliever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

What proof do you have that Jesus, who you maintain there is little evidence for led a mundane life?

 

This is a contradiction is it not?

 

If you are going to allow that Jesus existed, for argument sake  then it would be a given that his life had to have been more then mundane. 

 

If you are denying his existance all together, and simply claiming such a person as myth, fine, but if he existed it is highly unlikely that other mythical elements would sprout up around an otherwise mundane man.

 

 

Because NO historian of the time made any mention or took any notice.

 

And yes...I am a Jesus mythicist. Haven't seen there is enough evidence of even the actual man, so much as the god. 

 

Anything as special a thing as the supposed son of the imaginary YHWH actually doing miracles in the first century would have been documented. Mundane people and events were, but not JC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

That is my point. Such a person is rejecting the very notion of a path, or the existance of your path, or prefers another path, and sees zero benefit or even truth in what you offer   and in that rejection does not see himself as lacking anything  or see your superiority in anything. He only sees you having an un-needed knowledge in a pseudoscience of sorts. This could be applied across any spiritual discipline to a nonbeliever.

Nothing of what you just said contradicts my point that there are hierarchies in the spiritual practice (broadly: novice - practitioner - master).

You just say that there might be people who reject the spiritual path...so what? The hierarchy doesn't disappear because of that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A grammatical error on my part, I meant to say "I am sure there is a lot more to you than religion".

also I did not say Organised religion , I said religion, which is what the practice of God

is  IMO

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:
On 1/23/2020 at 8:14 PM, sirineou said:

But you come to this Thread and it seems to me you do want to talk about it. so we do

Yes, some of us want to debate it, and to learn, but some posters just want to insult and mock. No interest in being open minded. I'm not referring to you, but to the troll(s).

Please point out where I was disrespectful, or where I Mock you.  I was simply responding to when you said 

"What I don't understand is why you seem to be on a crusade to convince those like me that we are wrong, instead of leaving us to our beliefs which do nothing to hurt anyone

to which I replied very politely that i would never want to rob you of your faith. but since you are in this thread I thought you were here because you wanted to talk about such things.

By the way, Your beliefs (not you personally) hurt plenty.

 

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given science is incapable of proving or disproving the existence of "God", I see no point in bringing science into the discussion. Humans are too primitive to even begin to understand God.

I believe in the existence of God because the evidence is everywhere. However, if one has a closed mind, one will not see it.

I don't understand. In the first sentence you say that that Science is incapable of proving or disproving God, and then you say you believe in that you believe in god because there are evidence everywhere. 

two incompatible statements because the Scientific process is an evidence based process.

I think you are confusing indications, with evidence.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...