Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

How do we KNOW there is a God?


pellinore

Recommended Posts

I'll say straight off I'm an atheist. However, I am always open to changing my opinion, even when I don't have evidence myself either way: I was taught as a child Pluto was the smallest planet in our solar system, now I am told it isn't a planet. I am happy to believe this. Either way. How would I know?

I was also told that airplanes fly because they have wings which are curved on the top and flat on the bottom, meaning the air has to travel further over the top of the wing than the bottom in the same time, meaning fewer air molecules on the top, less pressure, therefore upward lift is generated. (I knew as a child this didn't make sense, as aircraft with flat bottomed wings can fly upside down, and aircraft with fully symmetrical wings can fly. But I accepted it). I am now told this is not how aircraft fly, it is because of vortexes and updrafts generated by airfoils that need complicated math to explain. I accept this new knowledge, as I am open to - anything really, if it make sense.

So: What is it that makes religious people know that there is a God? If you are like me you were indoctrinated in childhood: you went to Sunday school to learn the scriptures, you learnt to pray at night before bed (but never to ask for selfish things like you hoped gran would have her cancer taken away, or that you would get the Winchester repeater cap-gun in the toy shop window because God didn't do medicine or expensive things), and never to blaspheme.

But as an adult, what is it NOW that makes you KNOW God exists?

Edited by pellinore
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, pellinore said:

But as an adult, what is it NOW that makes you KNOW God exists?

Years of research into reincarnation tells me God, or the creator exists. It has nothing to do with organized religion, which is a human construct used to control the masses spiritually, financially, and politically. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wasn't indoctrinated as a kid. So I was free to end up knowing God exists via my own experiences.

Happy New Year to you all!

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm an apatheist (I don't care whether or not God exists) but I believe, that for those who do believe, it is more of a 'faith' than a 'knowing'.

For many, it does them good and I'd never begrudge them for that. For some, it does them ill and that's usually someone else's doing.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pellinore said:

But as an adult, what is it NOW that makes you KNOW God exists?

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him."

If you can only believe based on provable fact or evidence, then you will likely never believe.  The older I get and the more I understand about the immensity of our universe, the easier it is to grow in faith.  The idea that our observable universe that obeys laws that our species has learned to quantify, could have sprung into being from nothing, IMO requires more faith than I possess.  The greatest evidence of His reality comes from watching human beings as they go through their existence searching for a meaning.  Those who worship at the altar of science, STILL worship.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have an active thread on Tanya Luhrmann's research on how and why some people confidently believe:

I would also add a possible role for spontaneous episodic "revelatory" experiences, for example, the sort of thing discussed by Canadian psychiatrist and Walt Whitman exegete Richard Bucke more than a century ago in his book Cosmic Consciousness. These are unsought temporary disruptions of normal cognitive functioning with astonishing force. They are not necessarily supportive of theism (Bucke's own experience wasn't), but they can be.

There is also a "middle way" (or middle ways plural) of sought-after experiences elicited methodically. James Joyce had a theory of "aesthetic arrest" wherein art might be crafted to excite extraordinary experience (his own first taste of this seems to have been spontaneous, his virtual transfiguration of his eventual wife, Nora Barnacle, when he first beheld her from afar). Tennyson used what sounds like mantra meditation, although I suspect there was more to it. American business man Napoleon Hill used a Luhrmann-like method, interior dialog (vividly imagined meetings with famous people of achievement in his case), which spawned a spontaneous visionary encounter with Abraham Lincoln.

There is a curious parallelism between Carl Jung's "active imagination" (the 150 proof original kind, not the near beer served by Jungian analysts today) and some of the practices of the Golden Dawn lodge (Yeats, Crowley, and such folk). Maybe Uncle Carl did not find proof of God in his visions, but their featured character named Philemon bears a striking resemblance to an angel (and as it turns out Philemon is the "source" of Jung's modern "Gnostic" scripture, Seven Sermons to the Dead).

Of course, most people's belief in their gods is far more tame. I think Jung would agree that one function of conventional religion is to prevent these cognitive intrusions or at least keep them rare and compartmentalized when they do occur. Nevertheless, the answer to your question at least for some people is direct personal experience of no longer being in Kansas, and for some of those, a supernatural interpretation of what's happening.

 

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, eight bits said:

We have an active thread on Tanya Luhrmann's research on how and why some people confidently believe:

I would also add a possible role for spontaneous episodic "revelatory" experiences, for example, the sort of thing discussed by Canadian psychiatrist and Walt Whitman exegete Richard Bucke more than a century ago in his book Cosmic Consciousness. These are unsought temporary disruptions of normal cognitive functioning with astonishing force. They are not necessarily supportive of theism (Bucke's own experience wasn't), but they can be.

There is also a "middle way" (or middle ways plural) of sought-after experiences elicited methodically. James Joyce had a theory of "aesthetic arrest" wherein art might be crafted to excite extraordinary experience (his own first taste of this seems to have been spontaneous, his virtual transfiguration of his eventual wife, Nora Barnacle, when he first beheld her from afar). Tennyson used what sounds like mantra meditation, although I suspect there was more to it. American business man Napoleon Hill used a Luhrmann-like method, interior dialog (vividly imagined meetings with famous people of achievement in his case), which spawned a spontaneous visionary encounter with Abraham Lincoln.

There is a curious parallelism between Carl Jung's "active imagination" (the 150 proof original kind, not the near beer served by Jungian analysts today) and some of the practices of the Golden Dawn lodge (Yeats, Crowley, and such folk). Maybe Uncle Carl did not find proof of God in his visions, but their featured character named Philemon bears a striking resemblance to an angel (and as it turns out Philemon is the "source" of Jung's modern "Gnostic" scripture, Seven Sermons to the Dead).

Of course, most people's belief in their gods is far more tame. I think Jung would agree that one function of conventional religion is to prevent these cognitive intrusions or at least keep them rare and compartmentalized when they do occur. Nevertheless, the answer to your question at least for some people is direct personal experience of no longer being in Kansas, and for some of those, a supernatural interpretation of what's happening.

 

Thanks, this is interesting. I shall have a good read of this later. At first glance, it seems people "just know" God exists. A bit like I "know" an object will fall to the floor if I push it over the edge of a table. 

If we know something, do we need to understand or explain it? Newton thought so, but did his explanation add anything positive to the world? His research was interesting of course, but was it useful?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, pellinore said:

If we know something, do we need to understand or explain it? Newton thought so, but did his explanation add anything positive to the world? His research was interesting of course, but was it useful?

I don't know about need to understand, but curiosity along those lines seems to be a widespread trait in our species.

As to usefulness, Newton's physics is still an exquisite approximation to our current best estimates of many phenomena. Calculus has its uses, too, even if we use Leibniz' notation ('cause Newton's was awkward in comparison). Alchemy? Not so useful to us today (although alchemists seem to have been the pioneers in western medicine for the sounds-good-to-me idea that cures ought not to be worse than the disease). All that Bible exegesis? Probably not useful.

Oh - and although it's just for show today, grab a coin and look for parallel ridges on the edge. Back when coins were gold or silver, those ridges made it harder for people to "shave" coins to accumulate the worthwhile scraps, and still pass the shaved coin off at face value.  Newton did that.

(Does it still have a use today? Well, on coins that lack ridges, I'm thinking of some Euro coins, we have a blunt reminder that now coins are money only because people believe that they are money.  Some fractional Euro and American coin denominations still have their ridges, reminding us that our government is not always candid in its dealings with us mere citizens. Both messages are good to know, eh?)

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, pellinore said:

Thanks, this is interesting. I shall have a good read of this later. At first glance, it seems people "just know" God exists. A bit like I "know" an object will fall to the floor if I push it over the edge of a table. 

If we know something, do we need to understand or explain it? Newton thought so, but did his explanation add anything positive to the world? His research was interesting of course, but was it useful?

“How God becomes real” is actually comprehensive research and argument pulled from many resources about “how” god becomes real for some and not for others. 
 

TM Luhrmann in her book outlines “we have come to understand over the last forty years that humans use two kinds of reasoning patterns.”

“Analytic and Heuristic, system 1 (intuition) system 2 (deliberate reasoning)  or reflective and unreflective beliefs or alief and belief.” 
 

https://sites.pitt.edu/~laudato/DSS/tsld005.htm

‘The big picture take away is that when humans think intuitively, automatically and quickly they come to differ to conclusions then when the think slowly, carefully, and deliberately”  (TM Luhrmann, “How God Becomes Real”).

The one who claim to just know g?d is as a result of many years of front loading and practices depending on the path. 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, eight bits said:

We have an active thread on Tanya Luhrmann's research on how and why some people confidently believe:

I would also add a possible role for spontaneous episodic "revelatory" experiences, for example, the sort of thing discussed by Canadian psychiatrist and Walt Whitman exegete Richard Bucke more than a century ago in his book Cosmic Consciousness. These are unsought temporary disruptions of normal cognitive functioning with astonishing force. They are not necessarily supportive of theism (Bucke's own experience wasn't), but they can be.

There is also a "middle way" (or middle ways plural) of sought-after experiences elicited methodically. James Joyce had a theory of "aesthetic arrest" wherein art might be crafted to excite extraordinary experience (his own first taste of this seems to have been spontaneous, his virtual transfiguration of his eventual wife, Nora Barnacle, when he first beheld her from afar). Tennyson used what sounds like mantra meditation, although I suspect there was more to it. American business man Napoleon Hill used a Luhrmann-like method, interior dialog (vividly imagined meetings with famous people of achievement in his case), which spawned a spontaneous visionary encounter with Abraham Lincoln.

There is a curious parallelism between Carl Jung's "active imagination" (the 150 proof original kind, not the near beer served by Jungian analysts today) and some of the practices of the Golden Dawn lodge (Yeats, Crowley, and such folk). Maybe Uncle Carl did not find proof of God in his visions, but their featured character named Philemon bears a striking resemblance to an angel (and as it turns out Philemon is the "source" of Jung's modern "Gnostic" scripture, Seven Sermons to the Dead).

Of course, most people's belief in their gods is far more tame. I think Jung would agree that one function of conventional religion is to prevent these cognitive intrusions or at least keep them rare and compartmentalized when they do occur. Nevertheless, the answer to your question at least for some people is direct personal experience of no longer being in Kansas, and for some of those, a supernatural interpretation of what's happening.

 

Exceptional add to 8ty. 

Another add to: there have been some human’s that are a testament to the human ability to think logically about things divine, Augustine and my go to Aquinas, especially his arguments the “Five Ways”

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

I wasn't indoctrinated as a kid. So I was free to end up knowing God exists via my own experiences.

Happy New Year to you all!

 

 

 

The interesting observation with you Will is how your faith frame has morphed over time following the same principles as advanced by TM Luhrmann “How God Becomes Real.” In a very real sense it could be self indoctrination and often is. Not arguing this is right or wrong but, your posting history makes a good case for self indoctrination. 
 

You have put a lot of work into making god real for you, very much like the faith frame and incidentals/practices as advanced by TM Lurhmann your posting history is a good reference on how you have done this for ex: you quote  “Look you can think whatever you want but the Urantia Book is, by reading it, a way for God to reveal himself to you” (Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).

 

You go onto quote:Reading the Urantia Book has got to be THE most intense subjective experience of the business of God revealing himself to a person"(Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).
 

 

Clearly this is has been your main tool and one of the most common ways to conjure up “an imagined” as real this is done in part by reading and quoting religious readings in your case the UB according to TM Lurhmann reading scriptures or sharing spiritual narratives over and over is common the world over on many paths as it aids in blurring the lines between what is real and what is imagined. 
 


 

 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

The interesting observation with you Will is how your faith frame has morphed over time following the same principles as advanced by TM Luhrmann “How God Becomes Real.” In a very real sense it could be self indoctrination and often is. Not arguing this is right or wrong but, your posting history makes a good case for self indoctrination. 
 

You have put a lot of work into making god real for you, very much like the faith frame and incidentals/practices as advanced by TM Lurhmann your posting history is a good reference on how you have done this for ex: you quote  “Look you can think whatever you want but the Urantia Book is, by reading it, a way for God to reveal himself to you” (Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).

 

You go onto quote:Reading the Urantia Book has got to be THE most intense subjective experience of the business of God revealing himself to a person"(Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).
 

 

Clearly this is has been your main tool and one of the most common ways to conjure up “an imagined” as real this is done in part by reading and quoting religious readings in your case the UB according to TM Lurhmann reading scriptures or sharing spiritual narratives over and over is common the world over on many paths as it aids in blurring the lines between what is real and what is imagined. 
 


 

 

Yes, the illusion of maya is a shared reality. Repetitive actions can be comforting, an established routine, pleasant and calming. The assurances of certainty are very important as they describe and delineate behavioral boundaries. It's much the same in religious or secular life as both prayer and meditation have a sort of emotion calming placebo effect.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sherapy said:

The interesting observation with you Will is how your faith frame has morphed over time following the same principles as advanced by TM Luhrmann “How God Becomes Real.” In a very real sense it could be self indoctrination and often is. Not arguing this is right or wrong but, your posting history makes a good case for self indoctrination. 
 

You have put a lot of work into making god real for you, very much like the faith frame and incidentals/practices as advanced by TM Lurhmann your posting history is a good reference on how you have done this for ex: you quote  “Look you can think whatever you want but the Urantia Book is, by reading it, a way for God to reveal himself to you” (Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).

 

You go onto quote:Reading the Urantia Book has got to be THE most intense subjective experience of the business of God revealing himself to a person"(Will Due on the thread “Does god reveal himself to everyone”).
 

 

Clearly this is has been your main tool and one of the most common ways to conjure up “an imagined” as real this is done in part by reading and quoting religious readings in your case the UB according to TM Lurhmann reading scriptures or sharing spiritual narratives over and over is common the world over on many paths as it aids in blurring the lines between what is real and what is imagined. 
 


 

 

 

When I was a kid I wasn't indoctrinated with religion, but I was indoctrinated with atheism. I don't think my dad thought of it that way nor intended to indoctrinate me because I know he was just doing his best to protect me from the falsehoods that are tied up with many an organized religion. And for that I'm grateful. 

As I've stated before, this set me free to find out for myself what's true and what isn't. Although there was some pressure to follow in his footsteps. Becoming a father and husband at a very early age (18) set things up in a certain way for me that I don't think my dad ever expected.

You know how kids imitate their parents? I was doing that to honor him when I was having religious conversations with some of the Christians I worked with in my early 20's. Arguing with them that there wasn't a god using the things I heard my dad say as a template. But even while I was doing it, I was already feeling there was something very significant about being a father as it related to what I heard was the fatherhood of God.

Slowly I began to be unable not to be interested in learning things about what I was hearing about religion. Especially Jesus. One of my co-workers who I would often talk with about God and the Bible suggested that I read it. I suppose he sensed that I hadn't yet done that. He was right. So I did.

After I read the book of Matthew, I couldn't help but being impressed that although there were things that didn't make sense and as far as I was concerned, could not be true, I was convinced that Jesus was exactly what was implied about him. That he was the incarnate Creator.

Things progressed from there but I couldn't help but tell myself that if God is all powerful, then he should be able to provide the world with an explanation of what is all messed up with organized religion.

It was about 4 years later that I bumped into the Urantia Book and it was impossible for me not to start reading it. Even though I was cautious, it was quickly becoming obvious that what I had in my hands was authentic and true. So I decided to study it. 

Now you say that I indoctrinated myself. That's something you can believe about me if you want to, but I know that I have anything but been indoctrinated. It's actually been something quite different than that.

I believe that most people that are in the same place as I am with their faith in God comes from their personal experiences. In my case, I wasn't indoctrinated with the things that were written in a book, but rather that the things I already experienced were validated by what I read in a book. You can say that that's confirmation bias, but I know it's actually something quite the opposite, relatively speaking.

The UB emphasizes certain things about the relation between God and man and discloses many other things about man's destiny. What will happen along the way to that destiny, and what will happen when he gets there. In addition to this, many things about God that have been misrepresented over the centuries are explained. Nowhere in the text of the UB is anything indicated that God is looking for something in a person that will exclude him or her from being in a unique way, a part of the journey. The journey, like God, is very real and personal.

So to sum this all up, I just want to share what I've discovered with everyone. Which is why I keep bringing up the UB and what it says. Especially with those that participate in these discussions that seem to be very upset that they don't have what they need to get beyond what seems to me to be a feeling of being betrayed. From everything that I've learned from my experiences in life, from my experiences with friendships, and what I've read in the UB, all of these things will be overcome eventually but in the meantime the gods have done, and are doing everything they can to provide us all with exactly what each of us can handle individually in order to get through to the other side where destiny awaits which the UB presents as being something unbelievably magnificent and positive.

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

When I was a kid I wasn't indoctrinated with religion, but I was indoctrinated with atheism. I don't think my dad thought of it that way nor intended to indoctrinate me because I know he was just doing his best to protect me from the falsehoods that are tied up with many an organized religion. And for that I'm grateful. 

As I've stated before, this set me free to find out for myself what's true and what isn't. Although there was some pressure to follow in his footsteps. Becoming a father and husband at a very early age (18) set things up in a certain way for me that I don't think my dad ever expected.

You know how kids imitate their parents? I was doing that to honor him when I was having religious conversations with some of the Christians I worked with in my early 20's. Arguing with them that there wasn't a god using the things I heard my dad say as a template. But even while I was doing it, I was already feeling there was something very significant about being a father as it related to what I heard was the fatherhood of God.

Slowly I began to be unable not to be interested in learning things about what I was hearing about religion. Especially Jesus. One of my co-workers who I would often talk with about God and the Bible suggested that I read it. I suppose he sensed that I hadn't yet done that. He was right. So I did.

After I read the book of Matthew, I couldn't help but being impressed that although there were things that didn't make sense and as far as I was concerned, could not be true, I was convinced that Jesus was exactly what was implied about him. That he was the incarnate Creator.

Things progressed from there but I couldn't help but tell myself that if God is all powerful, then he should be able to provide the world with an explanation of what is all messed up with organized religion.

It was about 4 years later that I bumped into the Urantia Book and it was impossible for me not to start reading it. Even though I was cautious, it was quickly becoming obvious that what I had in my hands was authentic and true. So I decided to study it. 

Now you say that I indoctrinated myself. That's something you can believe about me if you want to, but I know that I have anything but been indoctrinated. It's actually been something quite different than that.

I believe that most people that are in the same place as I am with their faith in God comes from their personal experiences. In my case, I wasn't indoctrinated with the things that were written in a book, but rather that the things I already experienced were validated by what I read in a book. You can say that that's confirmation bias, but I know it's actually something quite the opposite, relatively speaking.

The UB emphasizes certain things about the relation between God and man and discloses many other things about man's destiny. What will happen along the way to that destiny, and what will happen when he gets there. In addition to this, many things about God that have been misrepresented over the centuries are explained. Nowhere in the text of the UB is anything indicated that God is looking for something in a person that will exclude him or her from being in a unique way, a part of the journey. The journey, like God, is very real and personal.

So to sum this all up, I just want to share what I've discovered with everyone. Which is why I keep bringing up the UB and what it says. Especially with those that participate in these discussions that seem to be very upset that they don't have what they need to get beyond what seems to me to be a feeling of being betrayed. From everything that I've learned from my experiences in life, from my experiences with friendships, and what I've read in the UB, all of these things will be overcome eventually but in the meantime the gods have done, and are doing everything they can to provide us all with exactly what each of us can handle individually in order to get through to the other side where destiny awaits which the UB presents as being something unbelievably magnificent and positive.

No you weren’t because one can’t be indoctrinated into believing God/a god DOESN’T exist. It’s much the same as trying to prove a negative which is equally ridiculous. 
 

So you promote liars? Because that’s what one is if they’re putting words into the mouth of dead people. 
 

So you were basically looking for something that said what you wanted to hear, that’s called confirmation bias. 
 

cormac

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

When I was a kid I wasn't indoctrinated with religion, but I was indoctrinated with atheism. I don't think my dad thought of it that way nor intended to indoctrinate me because I know he was just doing his best to protect me from the falsehoods that are tied up with many an organized religion. And for that I'm grateful. 

As I've stated before, this set me free to find out for myself what's true and what isn't. Although there was some pressure to follow in his footsteps. Becoming a father and husband at a very early age (18) set things up in a certain way for me that I don't think my dad ever expected.

You know how kids imitate their parents? I was doing that to honor him when I was having religious conversations with some of the Christians I worked with in my early 20's. Arguing with them that there wasn't a god using the things I heard my dad say as a template. But even while I was doing it, I was already feeling there was something very significant about being a father as it related to what I heard was the fatherhood of God.

Slowly I began to be unable not to be interested in learning things about what I was hearing about religion. Especially Jesus. One of my co-workers who I would often talk with about God and the Bible suggested that I read it. I suppose he sensed that I hadn't yet done that. He was right. So I did.

After I read the book of Matthew, I couldn't help but being impressed that although there were things that didn't make sense and as far as I was concerned, could not be true, I was convinced that Jesus was exactly what was implied about him. That he was the incarnate Creator.

Things progressed from there but I couldn't help but tell myself that if God is all powerful, then he should be able to provide the world with an explanation of what is all messed up with organized religion.

It was about 4 years later that I bumped into the Urantia Book and it was impossible for me not to start reading it. Even though I was cautious, it was quickly becoming obvious that what I had in my hands was authentic and true. So I decided to study it. 

Now you say that I indoctrinated myself. That's something you can believe about me if you want to, but I know that I have anything but been indoctrinated. It's actually been something quite different than that.

I believe that most people that are in the same place as I am with their faith in God comes from their personal experiences. In my case, I wasn't indoctrinated with the things that were written in a book, but rather that the things I already experienced were validated by what I read in a book. You can say that that's confirmation bias, but I know it's actually something quite the opposite, relatively speaking.

The UB emphasizes certain things about the relation between God and man and discloses many other things about man's destiny. What will happen along the way to that destiny, and what will happen when he gets there. In addition to this, many things about God that have been misrepresented over the centuries are explained. Nowhere in the text of the UB is anything indicated that God is looking for something in a person that will exclude him or her from being in a unique way, a part of the journey. The journey, like God, is very real and personal.

So to sum this all up, I just want to share what I've discovered with everyone. Which is why I keep bringing up the UB and what it says. Especially with those that participate in these discussions that seem to be very upset that they don't have what they need to get beyond what seems to me to be a feeling of being betrayed. From everything that I've learned from my experiences in life, from my experiences with friendships, and what I've read in the UB, all of these things will be overcome eventually but in the meantime the gods have done, and are doing everything they can to provide us all with exactly what each of us can handle individually in order to get through to the other side where destiny awaits which the UB presents as being something unbelievably magnificent and positive.

 

 

 

Will, I am using the standard definition for indoctrination which is defined as accepting a set of beliefs uncritically. This is one of the ways the imagined become real.
As TM Lurhmann states in her book “How Gods Become Real” the mindset that she observed  in the faith frame is more intuitive/heuristic in application this is the front lines of blurring the lines between what is real and imagined. 
 

If I may ask, how does the UB help you? My best guess is the promise of something better beyond this world, 
 

 


 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

No you weren’t because one can’t be indoctrinated into believing God/a god DOESN’T exist. It’s much the same as trying to prove a negative which is equally ridiculous. 
 

So you promote liars? Because that’s what one is if they’re putting words into the mouth of dead people. 
 

So you were basically looking for something that said what you wanted to hear, that’s called confirmation bias. 
 

cormac

I noted the confirmation bias too. Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pellinore said:

This is an interesting exchange. Is Dawkins actually cruel, or kind?:

 

 

I think he's hallucinating. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pellinore said:

This is an interesting exchange. Is Dawkins actually cruel, or kind?:

 

I wouldn’t have called it hallucination, it’s more self-delusion IMO. One believes in one’s respective deity/deities as a matter of convenience to one’s understanding of their place/position in life. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

If I may ask, how does the UB help you? My best guess is the promise of something better beyond this world, 

 

The main thing it helps with is to be able to distinguish clearly between what might be imagined and what is actually real. This is the promise that will make this world a better world way before we get beyond it.

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Which one? Dawkins or the audience member?

 

Dawkins 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

The main thing it helps with is to be able to distinguish clearly between what might be imagined and what is actually real. This is the promise that will make this world a better world way before we get beyond.

 

 

Those that actually try to create a space for a relationship with the imagined of their choice do so by nurturing the ability to blur the lines between reality and the imagined. The end game is to make the imagined real to the person. One can do this with Harry Potter, it is how one creates the feeling of connection.  This is why scripture reading, prayer, going to church, prayer lines, faith frames are common routes used to establish this inner “connection.”

The fine print is this is a very involved process and a lot of work that happens over years. 
 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Those that actually try to create a space for a relationship with the imagined of their choice do so by nurturing the ability to blur the lines between reality and the imagined. The end game is to make the imagined real to the person. One can do this with Harry Potter, it is how one creates the feeling of connection.  This is why scripture reading, prayer, going to church, prayer lines, faith frames are common routes used to establish this inner “connection.”

The fine print is this is a very involved process and a lot of work that happens over years. 

The fine line gets crossed IMO when one has to purposely lie to themselves in order to blur the lines between reality and the imagined. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.