Does God exist?

Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by Sensei, May 22, 2011.

  1. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    2
    Oh that was you!!!! I remember responding to a post about Buddhism and at the time I thought I was simply contributing something new to the discussion. I was just using that post as inspiration. My first post wasn't really supposed to be a reply. I thought "some other guy" came along and started arguing with me. I didn't know I was speaking to the same person all along.

    Here was what I was saying:

     
  2. OAT

    OAT Where is the TAO?

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    The same can be said of most things. For example, many ways can be conceived on how an aeroplane can be built … from the downright silly to one that was carefully thought out based on certain principles.

    To suggest that the creation of the world by a Creator God may not be based on rationality seems to suggest that we kiss our brain goodbye for this issue. If we should kiss our brain goodbye on this issue, why not other issues as well?

    It is not in me to kiss my brain goodbye on any issues.
     
  3. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,820
    Likes Received:
    2,204
    OK, but scholars do not consider the Gospel of Thomas a 'gnostic' text, in the sense that it does not relate or reflect the themes of contemporary gnosticism.

    So does traditional Christianity ...

    Roman Catholic ... along with the Orthodox patriarchies, the richest source of traditional commentary and theology, certainly the deepest.

    Well the astral body is no more permanent in its domain than the physical flesh. The soul, which is the source of all bodies, is created, and can be extinguished.

    A body is the manifestation of the soul in a given domain — and the human alone in all creation is created to unite all and every domain in its own being ... the higher and lower in him/herself. No other can do this (other than God). So for me, to realise one sphere of potentiality at the expense of another is a flawed doctrine.

    So the idea of Union in the Catholic Tradition (and Orthodox) reaches beyond the individual, to include the whole cosmos.

    Depends what denomination you're talking about — it's not what RC or the Orthodox teach.

    Quantum physics has no more to offer about God than Newtonian physics.

    In theology and metaphysics, I do not care for anything that can be subject to empirical determination — I seek truth beyond its manifesting forms, they in themselves are too finite, contingent and relative.

    God bless,

    Thomas
     
  4. buddhitakso

    buddhitakso New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    All existence contain with basic elements - Energy, Matter and Space.

    Basic elements would subject to conditional balance and imbalance phenomena.

    Under balance phenomena, 3 basic elements start to integrate with each other to create aggregate activities.

    Under imbalance phenomena, 3 basic elements start to disintegrate from each other to create segregate activities.

    The principle in effect: -

    A stream of balance phenomena would conjure up aggregate activity;
    A stream of aggregate activities would conjure up information;
    A stream of information would conjure up memory;
    A stream of memories would conjure up ignorance;
    A stream of ignorance would conjure up volitional impulse;
    A stream of volitional impulses would conjure up consciousness;
    A stream of consciousness would conjure up body and mind;
    A stream of body and mind would conjure up six sense bases;
    A stream of six sense bases would conjure up contact;
    A stream of contacts would conjure up feeling;
    A stream of feelings would conjure up craving;
    A stream of cravings would conjure up clinging;
    A stream of clinging would conjure up becoming;
    A stream of becoming would conjure up birth;
    A stream of births would conjure up aging;
    A stream of aging would conjure up death;
    A stream of deaths would conjure up segregate activity;
    A stream of segregate activities would conjure up imbalance phenomenon;
    A stream of imbalance phenomena would conjure up new balance phenomenon.
     
  5. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    This is not my experience, many Christians disapprove of it due to its Gnostic notions, and the Vatican has banned it as heretical for exactly this reason. The Gospel of Thomas shows various instances of oneness, which most Christian denominations are staunchly against, for they say that Christ is the only savior - if we are all capable of being as Christ was, their entire system goes out the window. Christianity teaches that you can become part of Christ, it does not teach that you can be the equal to Christ. This differentiation is dualistic.

    I would appreciate any verses that show this in the Bible, certainly most Christians would disagree with your assertion I think. The Gospel of Thomas is clearly influenced by certain Indian schools of thought - which is fitting since Thomas perhaps initiated Christianity in India (it may be valid to say Christ initiated Christianity in India, but this would cause arguments.)

    Why do you say this so authoritatively?

    This is another instance of Christianity creating differentiation, Christians insist on placing humans above other creatures merely because we have developed differently. Of course, you're also adding that God can do this because you believe the physical body of Christ was God. The consciousness of Christ was God, but the body was man. This is explained succinctly in Eastern thought circles.

    Again, please show where in the Bible you gain this because this is not something I have seen in Christian teachings - although I agree since it is consistent with Western thought.

    I am speaking in general as I am not concerned about the 40,000 different branches of Christianity and what they stand for. This isn't intended as offensive, I just find it ridiculous. I have looked into various saints texts and read the Bible, my thoughts on the subject matter is my own however as I am not Christian and thus not obliged to someone elses interpretation. Please, again, feel free to show examples of what you refer to within permissible Christian texts as I am sure much of these thoughts are coming to you from outside texts like the Gospel of Thomas.

    It is the closest science has gotten to God to date, and thus I find it quite interesting. Of course the very nature of its study - physicists researching the nature of the discoveries - renders it incomplete, but all they really miss which is important is the consciousness of God... this of course means they make no correlation yet.

    So you seek truth through blind belief, or are you actively pursuing self-realization in life?
     
  6. luecy7

    luecy7 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    You say here that God has a consciousness, an ego, and that science is very close to God with quantum mechanics, but is not able to achieve understanding him, that which is important: the ego of God? Interesting.
     
  7. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    I stated nothing about ego, I stated consciousness only. You should probably read what Buddha had to say about Brahma and know that through such trains of thought as the Baha'i Faith, Brahma, Allah and Yehwah are exactly the same - in fact Jesus probably used the word Alaha which is quite close thanks to the language relationship between Aramaic and Arabic. The words do not matter, but indeed Buddha states that this being has quite the ego and is full of desire to be known and served. Buddha said he has come to also teach this being, for it is delusional and suffers more than most other beings.

    No, when I refer to God, I refer to the interconnectness of all things as described by Buddha. This being does not have individual consciousness, it is consciousness itself - and scientists are beginning to research this, they are currently trying to confirm that quantum mechanics is responsible for our consciousness. It is a sharing of this consciousness which is referred to as enlightenment.
     
  8. Universalthought2011

    Universalthought2011 Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    I often find myself looking at the way we associate words with what has been imprinted in our collective minds, as truth beyond question. We like to think that through technology and observation we have somehow mastered everything and that we understand the workings of the universe, and creation to the best of our abilities.

    But this is all based on assumptions. Right? There is no question that god exists. But god, the creator of all, is so far removed from what we think of as god, that we can't possibly understand it, and to even come close to it and say it doesn't exist is to be closed minded.

    So the question would be, if everything is energy, and frequency, and matter is just a perception of our senses encountering boundaries. What are we really? are we not part of god?
     
  9. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think your question is the sole purpose of religion, we have already answered the question, but it must be realized by the individual for our perceptions delude us.
     
  10. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you know God, then God exists.

    If God knows you, then you exist.

    Regards,
    Jim
     
  11. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    This is a rather direct interpretation of the words "you have your being in God, and he in you", what if neither know each other though? If you deny God, he doesn't exist to know you, and yet you still remain. This is a logical conclusion, but in this statement, there is also a key to understanding this more completely. God is within you, can there be parts of yourself you do not know? It must be possible to find God within, although it may take some digging. You can accept on theory, despite it being logically flawed, or you can search yourself to see whether he is there.
     
  12. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vizenos [​IMG]
    If you know God, then God exists.

    If God knows you, then you exist.



    Actually it isn't, since I am not familiar with that statement, or with its context, and at first glance, I really don't agree with it. My two statements (note: two statements, not one statement such as the one you have quoted) describe two separate realities, not a single reality.

    Your argument responds to the statement you quoted, but not to the two separate statements I made, which you saw as being the same as the one you quoted. In fact it is your very argument, above, which explains why I do not agree with the statement you quoted.

    "If you know God, then God exists." This is derived from the contrast between two scriptures: Job 19:25-29, and Job 40:3-5, 42:1-6. In
    the former, Job speaks of the God he knows about. In the latter, Job speaks to the God he now knows. They are not the same God. The
    God Job knew about, God as Job conceived of Him, the God of Job 19:25-29, did not exist except in the mind of Job. The God Job saw and and heard and therefore knew, the God of Job 40:3-5 and Job 42:1-6, is the God who exists, the Existing One. But the Existing One did not exist for Job until Job saw Him, heard Him, and thus knew Him.

    "If God knows you, then you exist." This is derived whole and entire from Matthew 7:15-23. If you would, please try to put yourself, just for a moment, in the place of those who stand before God and hear Him say to them, "I never knew you: depart from Me, you who work lawlessness." These are people who had deluded themselves into believing they were doing God's will, when they really only did their own will, and claimed it was God's will. They never thought of themselves as false prophets, or as evil men, yet they claimed to be God's agents when they weren't, and God now says to them, "I never knew you: depart from Me, you who work lawlessness." Kyrie eleison! Can you just for a moment imagine how that would FEEL? Learning that you were never, not even once, what you had flattered yourself that you were, all your life? That the person you claimed to be, that so many thought you were, that you even conned yourself into believing you were, was just an empty myth, and never really existed?

    If you know God, then God exists.

    If God knows you, then you exist.

    In each case, it's not what you think that matters; it's not what you believe that matters; it's what's real that matters.

    Unabuntu!
    Jim
     
  13. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    I would ask how we can know Job is correct, his statement appears to be one of segregation - saying "these are of God, these are not". There is a great secret in the statement "One God", there is a similar secret in the name "Yahweh". Yahweh means "I am what am", everything is God, and since everything is God there is a great oneness about all things. For me, Job is departing from oneness and creating duality. For me, this is not a statement of someone that has realized God.

    If God is telling someone he does not know them, well, to say this to them they have to exist. Thus, we cannot say logically that our existence is dependent on God knowing us.
     
  14. Dream

    Dream New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,677
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Some thoughts from the Perennial Tradition

    Heavy post with interesting vocabulary and puts a lot of things together in a single page. Really nice job on that one, good for reference later.
     
  15. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's odd--I've never seen that in Job. Where do you see it?

    If you check it out, I think you'll find that the most agreed-upon translation is, "I am who am": who, not what.

    Sorry, but we'll have to agree to disagree on that, because I don't accept that statement as true and never will.

    I saw you palm that card, my friend. Your statement above is neither provable nor falsifiable, and therefore neither I nor anyone else is compelled to accept it as if it were.:cool:

    Why? Because Job knew there is a God and knew he wasn't Him? Well, if you can pronounce "everything is God", without even showing us your Pope Card first, then I can pronounce that Job was right, and still is. So there.:D

    Then, as I said to the last person who said something like this, it's most fortunate for me that God will be my judge, and that you are no more God than I am.:cool:

    Sincerely,
    Jim
     
  16. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sorry, it is derived from your conclusion of Matthew and Job.

    The Kaballist and other mystic Jews would disagree...

    This alone will ensure you never experience true religion - religion stems from the Latin legio, meaning to bind. Similarly, yoga means union. This is the nature of all religion, if you see it as something else, then you must name it something else.

    If you would trust the likes of Buddha or Krishna, it is certainly provable... I know this to be fact.

    This is just it, the realization removes self from the picture, we see this in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 - we drop ourselves and arise in Christ. Christ is part of the trinity, thus this has important ramifications that the organizations claiming to be religious deny. The Pope is paid based on dependence of people on Christ, why would he state otherwise? Of course, there are those that state the second coming has been and gone, and that the Pope was notified and ignored this claim. This person, I think, would agree with me.

    I have claimed nothing otherwise, although our awareness of our relationship to God seems to be at different stages.
     
  17. Amergin

    Amergin New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    1
    Why do those who do not know how the universe was created assume it was created by a conscious human like cosmic being? The honest answer is that we do not know.

    I see no evidence for a god. I know a canoe is built by humans, termite mounds built by termites, and coral reefs by tiny animals.

    Humans have evolved large brains with curiosity and inquiry hard-wired into us. This was an evolutionary adaptatiion. Consciousness is the product of billions of axonal nerve circuits, neurons, synapses, and neurochemical receptors. We do not know of any consciousness without some kind of a neural structure.

    If God is conscious, what makes it conscious? Does God have an animal brain like ours? Consciousness developed in a natural selection of primitive neural mechanisms as crucial to survival.

    Conscious has 3 major functions.

    1. Finding food to maintain life and continued consciousness.

    2. Finding a reproductive mate.

    3. Evading predators (using circuit complexes for detecting, identifying, and escaping predators.) Does God fear predators (Theophages).

    I believe that mankind invented God because he designed God on human templates. Man invented God as an explanation for the unexplained. Man explained the unknown with the unknowable.

    Man gave God personality traits of a Stone Age Warlord. That is anger, vengeance, vindictiveness, capriciousness, genocidal actions or rage attacks resulting in killing humans and non-human animals.

    If God created everything, why did he make so many mistakes. If God created humans, why did he make some bright and others stupid? Why did he use an inheritance mechanism (DNA) that is prone to frequent mutations and resulting in deformed humans, born dead humans, psychopaths, mentally challenged, insane, cancer, inherited risks of vascular disease. Why did God design a human back on the structure of the horizontal spine of quadrupeds thus making back pain a common malady?

    If God created the universe why did he make supermassive black holes swallowing stars and solar systems.

    If God created Earth, why did he design plate tectonics that kills millions of humans and non-humans when subducting plates create earthquakes and subduction volcanoes. Whydid he design transform plates that cause devastating earthquakes (in my opinion the Sodom and Gomorrah story is about the Jordan-Dead Sea Transform and collision plate erupting and burying the cities in fire and brimstone with a huge lava flow that caused the magma chamber to empty. That Chamber collapsed over a Km to make the Dead Sea.)

    Why does God's universe have galaxies of billions of stars each occasionally collide with each other in a destructive impact.

    Why did God create our solar system with the asteroid belt, the Ort Belt, and comets that occasionally hit Earth and cause mass extinctions? Why did create life knowing that 99% of all species that ever lived have gone extinct?'

    It boils down to why believe in a god for which there is not a shred of evidence. Our inability to understand creation, formation of galaxies, stars, planets, and evolving life is no reason to invents some imaginary being for which there is no evidence of existing.

    Another reason for inventing gods is our desire to avoid death. When evolving humans observed death close up, they wanted some belief to avoid the fear of dying. They invented a magical soul that contains all of our brain data but lives outside of a dying human. It is all wishful thinking.

    Amergin
     
  18. william b

    william b New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sorry to single this one sentence out but...
    I don't call God by that name. And I don't understand how Muslims can admire Mohamed.
    I'd say yes to Jesus, Buddha, Moses, ...I'd even take L Ron Hubbard over Mohamed.
    And I know this isn't politically correct but the guy killed a lot of people. It wasn't just his followers. He did the killing himself. I just don't accept that a person who kills people for having different beliefs is a holy man. I guess Moses did that too, but he did lead the Jewish people out of slavery. I can at least understand that his people were being wronged before he resorted to killing. And even when he killed an Egyptian by his own hand, he ran off and felt really bad about it.
    By contrast, Mohamed seemed to kill very easily.
    No one questions this, but I think it is right there in history. It's a fact. Even if it isn't politically correct.
    Jesus and Buddha never killed anyone. To me, Mohamed just isn't in the same league.
     
  19. william b

    william b New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...I've already gone through all these arguments about how God can exist. I think people who are obsessed with the question are trying to reason out how THEIR God can exist. Sometimes they are afraid to think that God might be different.
     
  20. Lunitik

    Lunitik Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,611
    Likes Received:
    1
    You should probably read the Bhagivad Gita...

    The entire sonnet happens on the battle field right before a huge war... Krishna explains quite well why Muhammad was justified. It is humorous, however, that both of the people you have listed describe not being judgemental.
     

Share This Page