Scientific Proof proving GOD has PERSONALITY.

[Godsnmbr1]

God is a word, humans invented it. What you're suggesting is asinine.

Would you rather use words that have no definition? How the hell would anyone know what you're talking about?

I use the word because it's currently the most accurate available in our common language. Notice I wrote most accurate, not simply accurate. And I'm fairly sure you still don't know what I'm talking about so your last question seems a bit redundant. I guess some people are just able to understand the implied difference between God and a god and some people aren't. So it goes...

[Rlyeh]

I use the word because it's currently the most accurate available in our common language. Notice I wrote most accurate, not simply accurate. And I'm fairly sure you still don't know what I'm talking about so your last question seems a bit redundant. I guess some people are just able to understand the implied difference between God and a god and some people aren't. So it goes...

So you use a word that has a definition but criticize humans for defining it.

Makes perfect sense..

Some people are just natural BS artists.

[Godsnmbr1]

So you use a word that has a definition but criticize humans for defining it.

Makes perfect sense..

Some people are just natural BS artists.

I had hoped you could think beyond the bounds of dictionary.com

Language is supposed to be an evolving medium, after all. But think of me as you will. Doesn't mean much in the end.

[Englishgent]

I use the word because it's currently the most accurate available in our common language. Notice I wrote most accurate, not simply accurate. And I'm fairly sure you still don't know what I'm talking about so your last question seems a bit redundant. I guess some people are just able to understand the implied difference between God and a god and some people aren't. So it goes...

You accused somebody else of being arrogant a few posts back. There are none so arrogant as those who think they know something that non believers dont know!

[over9millionyearsold]

You think of God as a title, or just a name. A status or a category. I can understand this because I used to think that way as well. Then I realized my mistake. You will too, someday. If you want to.

Edit: As for your example, do you really not see the difference between Dog and a dog? It's not comparable to the difference between God and a god, but it's there nonetheless.

It is a title/name, by definition and by our language. The dog called Dog is a dog. Just as in the same fashion as human, cat, or fish. God, as Christians like to posit, is a god. One of many gods that have ever been worshiped and that are being currently worshiped.

"...but it's there nonetheless."

Really? What kind of statement is that? You are claiming a distinction where there is none - literally. I don't know what implication you are proposing with the capitalization, but certainly it's not anything congruent with the English language. I'm having a difficult time understanding what you are trying to express here. Perhaps you should elaborate further rather than just saying, "it's there".

The human mind is very prone to hallucination, especially by itself. Your consciousness is, hopefully, equipped with reason and logic; the very tools which you have to combat against such delusions and hallucinations. No one is immune to this. One's ability to logically reason with themselves and detect these falsehoods is the way to truly appreciate of how the world around us is.

EDIT: Additionally, language does evolve. It does so with consensus, so people can't start making up words and meanings for existing ones and using them to communicate. Otherwise you couldn't read anything without having to ask the author for the meaning of each word. There is a reason we have a dictionary and definitions for words. So people can understand what you mean.

Edited January 10, 2012 by over9millionyearsold

[randym23]

I immediately regret wasting my time opening this thread.

i concur.

[Sensible Logic]

I wonder which man wrote those.

You honestly don't see how ridiculous it is for a human being to try to define God? How humorous it is to link to dictionary.com as evidence? Maybe arrogance would be the more appropriate word...

Based on that, I suggest that we remove any text from the human written bible that attempts to define any aspect of God.

[Paracelse]

Whose definition? Certainly not mine. There's quite a difference between a god and God. God, by definition, has no definition.

Your god is simply a god to someone else, doesn't mean because you happen to believe in him makes him superior.

[Godsnmbr1]

Your god is simply a god to someone else, doesn't mean because you happen to believe in him makes him superior.

I'm convinced that many of you start writing your replies before even reading the posts. It's not my God. I don't believe in him.

[Godsnmbr1]

Based on that, I suggest that we remove any text from the human written bible that attempts to define any aspect of God.

I suggest you stop looking at a book for a definition of God. The Bible has a lot that's worth reading, true, but it's buried within thousands of years worth of nonsense.

[ChloeB]

Of course it does. God is All, remember? Looking for objective truth, no matter the context, will always end with a greater understanding of God. I just wonder how many of the dismissive posters in this thread actually have a complete idea of what they're dismissing.

I heard something talking about God as the ALL, and it said that if God is the ALL, it's basically the same as nothing. That kind of makes sense in a way. I mean like my pen is God, my shoes are God, doesn't really leave anything independent to be God, so why would we separate a word for that? And before you get cranky, I'm honestly just asking you. I always kind of liked that idea of God, like Brahman, but that does kind of makes sense to me as it is the same as nothing.

Edited January 10, 2012 by ChloeB

[Sensible Logic]

I suggest you stop looking at a book for a definition of God. The Bible has a lot that's worth reading, true, but it's buried within thousands of years worth of nonsense.

Guess you missed the point of my post.

[ChloeB]

About God being the ALL, this is what I was talking about @ around 7:40.

[Sensible Logic]

Of course it does. God is All, remember? Looking for objective truth, no matter the context, will always end with a greater understanding of God. I just wonder how many of the dismissive posters in this thread actually have a complete idea of what they're dismissing.

Looking for objective truth that leads to a greater understanding of God implies that you do not now nor will you have a complete idea of God since to have a complete idea of God implies a complete understanding. Since you do not nor will ever have a complete idea of God why would you expect others to?

It is not a dismissal of God so much as a dismissal of the claim that God exists despite there being insufficient evidence to support the claim.

I am certain that God's existence is both fact and truth to you but those are subjective. As subjective as the claim that God is all. If they were objective there would be no skeptics concerning it.

[Rlyeh]

I had hoped you could think beyond the bounds of dictionary.com

Language is supposed to be an evolving medium, after all. But think of me as you will. Doesn't mean much in the end.

What good is language when you want to ignore meaning?

[Mr Walker]

I fnd urantia fascinating especaioly he chronicled "history " of jesus and his family with bits about how his father died etc. That doesnt mean i believe(or disblieve) it. Just that i find both the process, peopleand documentation of this all fascinating. Not scientific at all mind you, but then it is not really in the realm of science.

I know full well that god has a personality. He is a sapient evolved being and you dont evolve sapience without evolving a personality .

Of course, the personality he reveals to me may be tailored especially for me. There is no guarantee that another will find a similar personality when they encounter god. This is true for the whole urantia chronicles. Like the biblical writers might also have been, they may be a personal revelation rather than meant for public consumption.

[Lion6969]

Can some one illustrate quite simply what this proof is…top much mumbo jumbo!

[Ely]

Oh, I forgot. You won't believe me but one other I girl I missed the opportunity was a Spanish blue blood aristocrat. She was a petite girl with a huge breast and average but cute face. I keep remembering all the women I missed. I also miss a Venezuelan heiress who was my classmate, who was somewhat pretty but she had a heart of Gold. Later I found out that she really wanted to sleep with me. Thank you, Jesus for ruining my life.

So I guess you guys have a picture how I feel about Jesus and Christianity. Thanks to his 'eternal truth' I missed a lot in my life.

i am Angry also with religion in general and Christianity and with the Luciferian Illuminati Evil Conspirators who removed & edited with Evil intentions etc so many passages from Jesus' Teachings (according to several investigators & researchers):

SEXUAL HOPE FOR US HUMANITY FROM JESUS OF NAZARETH HIMSELF LIBERATING OUR SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS FOREVER AND DIRECTLY:

The Life and Teachings of Jesus, part 4 of 4 of the Urantia Papers Revelation, also posted at my Unexplained Mysteries-Scientific Proof proving GOD has PERSONALITY post, today.

Jesus' words in the Urantia book, page 1610

http://www.urantia.o...through-samaria

my emphasis

(1610.1) ^143:2.6 “Salvation is by the regeneration of the spirit and not by the self-righteous deeds of the flesh. You are justified by faith and fellowshipped by grace, not by fear and the self-denial of the flesh, albeit the Father’s children who have been born of the spirit are ever and always masters of the self and all that pertains to the desires of the flesh. When you know that you are saved by faith, you have real peace with God. And all who follow in the way of this heavenly peace are destined to be sanctified to the eternal service of the ever-advancing sons of the eternal God. Henceforth, it is not a duty but rather your exalted privilege to cleanse yourselves from all evils of mind and body while you seek for perfection in the love of God.

Jesus telling us we are free to be with ANY woman (in my case), and with ANY man (in women's case) (excepting most family members and those we don't accept personally etc):

page 1900

http://www.urantia.o...h-jump-result-0

emphasis mine

(1900.2) ^174:3.2 Jesus knew, and so did the people, that these Sadducees were not sincere in asking this question because it was not likely that such a case would really occur; and besides, this practice of the brothers of a dead man seeking to beget children for him was practically a dead letter at this time among the Jews. Nevertheless, Jesus condescended to reply to their mischievous question. He said: “You all do err in asking such questions because you know neither the Scriptures nor the living power of God. You know that the sons of this world can marry and are given in marriage, but you do not seem to understand that they who are accounted worthy to attain the worlds to come, through the resurrection of the righteous, neither marry nor are given in marriage. Those who experience the resurrection from the dead are more like the angels of heaven, and they never die. These resurrected ones are eternally the sons of God; they are the children of light resurrected into the progress of eternal life. And even your Father Moses understood this, for, in connection with his experiences at the burning bush, he heard the Father say, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ And so, along with Moses, do I declare that my Father is not the God of the dead but of the living. In him you all do live, reproduce, and possess your mortal existence.”

Jesus in Urantia clarifies that it is rather self-forgetfulness, not self-denial, and other parts in Urantia go against personal self-denial.

page 1609

name='The Urantia Papers, published 1955']2. Lesson on Self-Mastery[/b]

(1609.2) ^143:2.1 The Master was a perfected specimen of human self-control. When he was reviled, he reviled not; when he suffered, he uttered no threats against his tormentors; when he was denounced by his enemies, he simply committed himself to the righteous judgment of the Father in heaven.

(1609.3) ^143:2.2 At one of the evening conferences, Andrew asked Jesus: “Master, are we to practice self-denial as John taught us, or are we to strive for the self-control of your teaching? Wherein does your teaching differ from that of John?” Jesus answered: “John indeed taught you the way of righteousness in accordance with the light and laws of his fathers, and that was the religion of self-examination and self-denial. But I come with a new message of self-forgetfulness and self-control. I show to you the way of life as revealed to me by my Father in heaven.

(...)

The Urantia Papers Revelation is in the international public domain, several websites have its entire 2097 pages online.

LuisMarco Eli, 28, Mexico City

Edited September 2, 2012 by CSLewis

[Ninhursag]

Oh Poor Me

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Well I know God has a sense of humour vis a vie the Platypus.

[Lion6969]

Hey, maybe you should type origin of religion in google... there is no such thing as god.. As we evolved so did religion, our ancestors worshiped Sun as good God and Moon as Bad/Evil God. And so in early steps of our evolution we learned the word of religion... Once they burned Grain and food and other personal belongings as sacrifice/gifts for more prosperous year, now you give your money away to church. They do absolutly nothing except sell lies... This is what "religion" has come to!

How are you so certain there is no god, based on what proof?

Lack of evidence does not negate the existence or non existence of anything, neither does it mean there is no evidence, it's just lack of, leaving open possibility for evidence to be discovered to swing it either way!

This thread is a waste of time....

Edited September 5, 2012 by Lion6969

[CS Lewis]

Thanks so much for starting this thread!

I had never heard of the Backster Effect until I read the book by David Wilcock, The Source Field Investigations.

Fascinating information!

Yep: The Source Field Investigations is another book Confirming the GOD REALITY. (...) (!)

Edited May 18, 2013 by CS Lewis

[CS Lewis]

[(Page.paragraph) Paper:section.paragraph]

(2.2) 0:1.2 DEITY is personalizable as God, is prepersonal and superpersonal in ways not altogether comprehensible by man. Deity is characterized by the quality of unity — actual or potential — on all supermaterial levels of reality; and this unifying quality is best comprehended by creatures as divinity.

(27.3) 1:5.1 Do not permit the magnitude of God, his infinity, either to obscure or eclipse his personality. “He who planned the ear, shall he not hear? He who formed the eye, shall he not see?” The Universal Father is the acme of divine personality; he is the origin and destiny of personality throughout all creation. God is both infinite and personal; he is an infinite personality. The Father is truly a personality, notwithstanding that the infinity of his person places him forever beyond the full comprehension of material and finite beings.

(29.1) 1:5.11 Primitive religion had many personal gods, and they were fashioned in the image of man. Revelation affirms the validity of the personality concept of God which is merely possible in the scientific postulate of a First Cause and is only provisionally suggested in the philosophic idea of Universal Unity. Only by personality approach can any person begin to comprehend the unity of God. To deny the personality of the First Source and Center leaves one only the choice of two philosophic dilemmas: materialism or pantheism.

(23.5) 1:2.2 The eternal God is infinitely more than reality idealized or the universe personalized. God is not simply the supreme desire of man, the mortal quest objectified. Neither is God merely a concept, the power-potential of righteousness. The Universal Father is not a synonym for nature, neither is he natural law personified. God is a transcendent reality, not merely man’s traditional concept of supreme values. God is not a psychological focalization of spiritual meanings, neither is he “the noblest work of man.” God may be any or all of these concepts in the minds of men, but he is more. He is a saving person and a loving Father to all who enjoy spiritual peace on earth, and who crave to experience personality survival in death.

[Arpee]

Read the criticisms of the Urantia Papers. It has inaccurate information in there.

[CS Lewis]

Wrong.

There are 2 free books online Confirming the Urantia Papers Reality. And also we cannot forget the Accurate Scientific Predictions of Urantia.

1. The Birth of a Divine Revelation--The Origin of The Urantia Papers by Ernest P. Moyer
   
2. A History of the Urantia Papers by Larry Mullins
   

• Science and Evolution in the Urantia Papers: http://truthbook.com/index.cfm?linkID=101
  

.LuisMarco., 29, Mexico City