Do you believe in God and why

[Sunmaster]

Just started to watch "The Kindness Diaries" (season 2), a very beautiful series on Netflix. 
If your heart is in the right place, you will surely enjoy it.
 

 

[teatime101]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

Consciousness it's a very broad definition

My idea of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of living things. Whatever is pre-conscious is presumably bound up in things like electromagnetic forces and chemical reactions.

 

When the simplest prokaryote (single cell with no nucleus) responds to a stimulus, that is a primal kind of consciousness, to my mind.

 

Evolution favours increasingly sophisticated levels of consciousness, for obvious reasons. Intelligence is another favourable trait expressed in more advanced animals.

 

So is consciousness just 'an emergent property' of life, or is it inherent in everything that exists, ie. the observable universe made of energy<->mass. When particles pop in and out of existence, are they manifesting some invisible property of reality that we are, against staggeringly large odds, alive to be conscious of?

 

What I find frustrating is the tendency of people to conjure up magical beings with bags full of miracles, when confronted by 'the mysteries of the universe'. 

 

I prefer to keep an open mind.

 

The universe is very, very big. We are very, very small.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by teatime101

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, teatime101 said:

My idea of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of living things. Whatever is pre-conscious is presumably bound up in things like electromagnetic forces and chemical reactions.

 

When the simplest prokaryote (single cell with no nucleus) responds to a stimulus, that is a primal kind of consciousness, to my mind.

 

Evolution favours increasingly sophisticated levels of consciousness, for obvious reasons. Intelligence is another favourable trait expressed in more advanced animals.

 

So is consciousness just 'an emergent property' of life, or is it inherent in everything that exists, ie. the observable universe made of energy<->mass. When particles pop in and out of existence, are they manifesting some invisible property of reality that we are, against staggeringly large odds, alive to be conscious of?

 

 

Good questions, i have said many posts ago that "consciousness is a name of God" but i'm not interested in proving anything, i just like to read interesting contributions.

In theory the consciousness of the atom has been proved already, although i suspect some will disagree.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiRh4KlxKnpAhUTyDgGHT4EAWQQFjACegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lucistrust.org%2Fonline_books%2Fobooks_the_consciousness_the_atom&usg=AOvVaw3auVLFedd0SJu4mX-buupJ

Personally i believe that consciousness pervades everything, and the more we are spiritually advanced, the more we can explore it.

Yet, if you ask me why humans are self conscious in so many different ways, i would have a hard time giving you a plausible answer.

Perhaps we should ask God ????

[Skeptic7]

3 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

I actually started writing a reply on your baseless attack of Sheldrake's work and your belittling of his theories as just crackpot ideas not founded by any empirical evidence.  Sheldrake is a scientist pur sang and his work is not easily dismissed, exactly because it is done the pure scientific way.  The subjects he studies are often controversial, but not the methods he applies to present his case (e.g. his theory of morphic resonance).

But then I realized the futility of replying in extenso, your opinion being based on a quick Wikipedia look-up and mine on having read some of his work.

So no sources to back up your proof claims? Thought not. To continue...

 

It's not "my attack"...it's what other credible sources say about his "science". And it's not "baseless" except to the woo-crew. He's a guy who had his TED Talk banned. 

 

Here's some other quotes about Sheldrake...

John Maddox, editor of Nature wrote : "Sheldrake's argument is an exercise in pseudo-science". And yet another...

 

Despite having a PhD in Biochemistry, Sheldrake has received a great deal of criticism from the scientific community for his work on telepathy. He views this attack as a refusal to look at the evidence he has collected over the years on this topic; however, none of his experiments has ever been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, suggesting that there is no compelling evidence in the first place.

https://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/07/the-problem-with-rupert-sheldrake.html

 

And for some real skeptical inquiry about Sheldrake's claims from Dr./Professor Michael Shermer...

https://michaelshermer.com/2005/11/ruperts-resonance/

Edited May 10, 2020 by Skeptic7

[Peter Denis]

9 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

So no sources to back up your proof claims? Thought not. To continue...

 

It's not "my attack"...it's what other credible sources say about his "science". And it's not "baseless" except to the woo-crew. He's a guy who had his TED Talk banned. 

 

Here's some other quotes about Sheldrake...

John Maddox, editor of Nature wrote : "Sheldrake's argument is an exercise in pseudo-science". And yet another...

 

Despite having a PhD in Biochemistry, Sheldrake has received a great deal of criticism from the scientific community for his work on telepathy. He views this attack as a refusal to look at the evidence he has collected over the years on this topic; however, none of his experiments has ever been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, suggesting that there is no compelling evidence in the first place.

https://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/07/the-problem-with-rupert-sheldrake.html

 

And for some real skeptical inquiry about Sheldrake's claims from Dr./Professor Michael Shermer...

https://michaelshermer.com/2005/11/ruperts-resonance/

Although I surely do not agree with the dismissal of Sheldrake's work as pure fantasy, I gave your post a ???? because of the referral to 2 (skeptical) articles on his theories.  

Below an inserted quote of Sam Woolfe's article:

 

Sheldrake maintains that the 10 dogmas of science are:

(1) Everything is essentially mechanical,

(2) All matter is unconscious,

(3) The total amount of matter and energy is always the same,

(4) The laws of nature are fixed,

(5) Nature is purposeless,

(6) All biological inheritance is material,

(7) Minds are inside heads and are nothing but the activity of brains,

(8) Memory is stored in material traces in the brain,

(9) Unexplained phenomena such as telepathy are illusory, and

(10) Mechanistic medicine is the only one that really works.

Anyone with a scientific mindset would (and should) be suspicious about someone claiming that these ten points are religiously held dogmas. All of these 10 supposed dogmas are actually claims which have been bolstered by compelling evidence and which have not been falsified. Since the scientific method is inherently non-dogmatic – it involves a self-correcting mechanism where hypotheses which are inconsistent with the data are rejected – if there was real evidence for telepathy, purpose in nature, homeopathy, and so on, then these phenomena could be seriously studied.

 

Each of these 10 dogma's have been discussed at length in this thread, with often interesting points of view from believers and skeptics.

The skeptics always hammer on proof for the outlandish claims made and will only accept evidence that meets their own criteria.  Experiments that provide credulence to other theories than those advocated by the skeptical community, are routinely dismissed by referring to 'other' studies that find nothing.

The believers on the other hand, often refer to personal experience, and texts supporting their experience.

Talking from a personal point of view I have had many telepathic experiences (absolute certainty of knowing before the fact).  All the arguments of the scientific community that there is no evidence for telepathy, are wasted on me because I actually experienced it.  For me it's not a matter of believing, but of knowing.

Imo deep-down skeptics are not so sure about the validity of their beliefs, and therefore need to vent their skeptical world-view mantra to convince themselves.  For sure they will not convince someone that actually experienced the phenomena the skeptics deny.

 

 

[Logosone]

11 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

 

In theory the consciousness of the atom has been proved already, although i suspect some will disagree.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiRh4KlxKnpAhUTyDgGHT4EAWQQFjACegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lucistrust.org%2Fonline_books%2Fobooks_the_consciousness_the_atom&usg=AOvVaw3auVLFedd0SJu4mX-buupJ

 

I almost believe atoms are conscious, if you read the work of Heisenberg and realise his uncertainty principle means science is giving up on predicting and observing with total accuracy at the sub-atomic level, that atoms do what they want, it's not such a far fetched idea.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Logosone

[mauGR1]

31 minutes ago, Logosone said:

I almost believe atoms are conscious, if you read the work of Heisenberg and realise his uncertainty principle means science is giving up on predicting and observing with total accuracy at the sub-atomic level, that atoms do what they want, it's not such a far fetched idea.

Tbh, i'm not familiar with the language of physics, and as time is getting short, i have many other priorities.

But i have to tell you a funny story.

Some decades ago, while meditating, i had a sort of "intuition" of the solar system being a giant atom, and vice-versa, atoms being tiny solar systems.

A couple of years ago, doing a google, i came across Niels Bohr research studies, and he had the same theory. Apparently the solar system resembles an atom of oxygen.

Btw, Heisenberg and Bohr were colleagues, and their research was used to produce the atomic bomb.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi7-K7Q4arpAhVKOSsKHXLYCm8QFjABegQIDRAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.school-for-champions.com%2Fscience%2Fatoms_solar_systems.htm&usg=AOvVaw3dMuF2OVzCWXZ6A1u73rke

[teatime101]

4 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

deep-down skeptics are not so sure about the validity of their beliefs, and therefore need to vent their skeptical world-view mantra to convince themselves.

As the article states 

 

4 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Anyone with a scientific mindset would (and should) be suspicious about someone claiming that these ten points are religiously held dogmas. All of these 10 supposed dogmas are actually claims which have been bolstered by compelling evidence and which have not been falsified.

It's up to proponents of alternative hypotheses (eg, telepathy) to provide some evidence. No-one has ever demonstrated telepathy in a controlled experiment. 

 

Beliefs have no validity in the public domain, whoever you are. 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 5/10/2020 at 2:08 PM, OneMoreFarang said:

WOW! What a powerful god. How did he do that and how long did it take?

Let's say one star a day and it would take billions and billions of days. Or did he do it all within a week?

I'm sorry, but if that's how you think I see no point in responding to anything you write. You keep writing according to religious doctrine and that's nothing to do with the points some of us are making. I keep writing it's nothing to do with religion, and keep getting answers based on religion- not just you of course.

One day you may change your mind, but till then I won't be answering your posts on this thread.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

The believers on the other hand, often refer to personal experience, and texts supporting their experience.

 

4 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

(9) Unexplained phenomena such as telepathy are illusory

I had a phone call from a friend this morning. I had been thinking of them last night for no apparent reason, and it turns out they had been thinking about me over the weekend.

With so much to think about, why would I think of them, FOR NO REASON AT ALL, at the same time as they thought about me, if there was not something unexplainable at work?

PS I have had no contact with them for at least 4 weeks.

Edited May 11, 2020 by thaibeachlovers

[OneMoreFarang]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm sorry, but if that's how you think I see no point in responding to anything you write. You keep writing according to religious doctrine and that's nothing to do with the points some of us are making. I keep writing it's nothing to do with religion, and keep getting answers based on religion- not just you of course.

One day you may change your mind, but till then I won't be answering your posts on this thread.

I quoted you. 

On 5/9/2020 at 10:09 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

God created billions and billions of stars and worlds and life of every sort

[OneMoreFarang]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I had a phone call from a friend this morning. I had been thinking of them last night for no apparent reason, and it turns out they had been thinking about me over the weekend.

With so much to think about, why would I think of them, FOR NO REASON AT ALL, at the same time as they thought about me, if there was not something unexplainable at work?

PS I have had no contact with them for at least 5 weeks.

And what does this have to do with god?

Maybe it was coincidence.

And maybe, maybe, some people can somehow feel when others think about them. Until now many experiments show that is not the case but who knows, maybe one day someone will discover that "frequency". 

But that's for me like if someone just discovered there is a radio or a mobile phone. It has nothing to do with god.

[teatime101]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

why would I think of them, FOR NO REASON AT ALL, at the same time as they thought about me, if there was not something unexplainable at work?

No doubt you have an explanation...

[giddyup]

6 minutes ago, teatime101 said:

No doubt you have an explanation...

God works in mysterious ways.????

[Logosone]

5 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

 

Btw, Heisenberg and Bohr were colleagues, and their research was used to produce the atomic bomb.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi7-K7Q4arpAhVKOSsKHXLYCm8QFjABegQIDRAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.school-for-champions.com%2Fscience%2Fatoms_solar_systems.htm&usg=AOvVaw3dMuF2OVzCWXZ6A1u73rke

That's true, though Heisenberg purposefully argued against a German effort to build an atomic bomb and gave the wrong figures to the German army.

 

 "For some reason Heisenberg was giving a different estimate for critical mass to different people—“a few kilograms” to Otto Hahn, two tons to Walter Gerlach, titular head of the German research effort in 1945."

 

"...in June 1942 Heisenberg argued persuasively, as he had earlier, that building a bomb would be too big, expensive, and uncertain a project for Germany in wartime."

 

 

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2002/04/11/copenhagen-an-exchange/

[thaibeachlovers]

On 5/11/2020 at 6:25 PM, teatime101 said:

No doubt you have an explanation...

Yes. There is more to life the universe and everything than science can explain. It is in that space that God exists.

[Sunmaster]

Been thinking...
 

We all have different names/roles in this life. We all are sons or daughters, most are husbands and wives, some are fathers and mothers, as well as cousins, uncles/aunts, brothers/sisters, grandparents, employees, bosses, partners, friends....yet, none of these labels can truly describe us fully. Not even our own name can give a satisfactory description of our true Self. They are simply labels or symbols of a much bigger, complex "thing". I think we can all agree on this point.

Now, take this reasoning and transpose it unto the concept of All-There-Is. In the same way, but on an infinitely larger scale, any name we bestow on it will just highlight one tiny aspect of the true Being.
We can give it a name, making it a personal deity (Hinduism), we can highlight its ever-changing, impermanent nature (Buddhism), we can know it through nature (animism, paganism), we can choose to acknowledge its male or female qualities, or even choose a bundle of qualities (Christianity: trinity of Father, Son, Holy Ghost). The divine aspects and combinations are truly countless, but none of them will ever give us the full picture.

That's why it doesn't make sense to ask: "Which god are you talking about?" A better question would be: "Which aspect of All-There-Is are you referring to?".
After all, being a son/daughter or husband/wife doesn't fully define you, does it? 

[Neeranam]

I hand over my life and Will to God every morning. Left to my own devices, I make a mess of things.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

I hand over my life and Will to God every morning. Left to my own devices, I make a mess of things.

I think every day is a gamble that we will go to sleep at the end of it. So many ways to die that it's a wonder we survive at all.

Being locked up for Corona has meant that I'm way less stressed, though I'm more likely to die of lack of exercise than Corona.

[Heppinger]

On 5/13/2020 at 7:58 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes. There is more to life the universe and everything than science can explain. It is in that space that God exists.

You can feel it when you take your shoes off and stand in the grass or dig your feet into the sand or dirt, there is a connection.  Like the roots of a mountain.

[bert bloggs]

19 minutes ago, Heppinger said:

You can feel it when you take your shoes off and stand in the grass or dig your feet into the sand or dirt, there is a connection.  Like the roots of a mountain.

i just get dirty feet????,sorry ,but i just dont believe in God ,i am a bit like those who came before the Jews who invented him.

[Heppinger]

5 minutes ago, bert bloggs said:

i just get dirty feet????,sorry ,but i just dont believe in God ,i am a bit like those who came before the Jews who invented him.

But can you feel a connection to the earth? A feeling you don't get when you have a piece of insulating rubber between your skin and earth.

[bert bloggs]

11 minutes ago, Heppinger said:

But can you feel a connection to the earth? A feeling you don't get when you have a piece of insulating rubber between your skin and earth.

sorry ,no ,the only time i ever felt at one with the earth was in my twentys once when i was smoking grass . i felt as if i was in a cornfield with the wind in my hair(i kid you not)

by the way i think its great that you believe ,must be a comfort to you ,me i just am comforted that when i die ,thats it ,end of . mind you i have and have had a good life .

Edited May 15, 2020 by bert bloggs

[Heppinger]

43 minutes ago, bert bloggs said:

sorry ,no ,the only time i ever felt at one with the earth was in my twentys once when i was smoking grass . i felt as if i was in a cornfield with the wind in my hair(i kid you not)

by the way i think its great that you believe ,must be a comfort to you ,me i just am comforted that when i die ,thats it ,end of . mind you i have and have had a good life .

Only if you came from nothing would you return to nothing.  You didn't come from nothing as the overlords would like you to believe. Next time when you smoke some weed make sure your in nature and can lie down on the grass. 

[CMNightRider]

Instead of continuing to post nonsensical remarks about which God to believe in and denying Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, you people should give serious thought to what the Bible tells us about what is coming our way.  I would not want to be a non-believer during the Tribulation.  I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

 

The End Times - Before the Tribulation
 

Rapture—The Rapture is when Jesus returns to the sky and takes up the believers, dead and alive, so they will not have to suffer God's wrath during the Tribulation. They are judged at the Bema Seat of Christ, rewarded for their good works, and given glorified bodies. The marriage supper of the Lamb will also take place. There are no precursors to the Rapture; it could happen at any time. 

 

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 3:11-4:5; Revelation 19:7-9

 

 

[Peter Denis]

14 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

...

Rapture—The Rapture is when Jesus returns to the sky and takes up the believers, dead and alive, so they will not have to suffer God's wrath during the Tribulation. They are judged at the Bema Seat of Christ, rewarded for their good works, and given glorified bodies. The marriage supper of the Lamb will also take place. There are no precursors to the Rapture; it could happen at any time.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 3:11-4:5; Revelation 19:7-9

Well, I guess only honest efforts will let you earn your place in Heaven...

 

[thaibeachlovers]

25 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Well, I guess only honest efforts will let you earn your place in Heaven...

 

I'm sorry that you think this thread is the comedy show and can mock those that take the subject seriously. You don't have to agree with him, but that is taking it a bit too far.

[Peter Denis]

31 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm sorry that you think this thread is the comedy show and can mock those that take the subject seriously. You don't have to agree with him, but that is taking it a bit too far.

Actually I don't take the subject of believing in God lightly and have previously made several serious contributions.

I do not consider injecting a bit of humor in the thread 'making it a comedy show' and it's not my intention to offend anyone when doing so.

Previous serious attempts to respond to posts that are taking the Scriptures literally proved to fall in deaf man's ears.

Ignoring such posts is of course also an option, but I prefer a light-hearted touch to express my (serious) opinion on the matter.

[pineapple01]

GOD.?. Why such a short name.

[Skeptic7]

44 minutes ago, pineapple01 said:

GOD.?. Why such a short name.

Yud-Hey-Vav-Hey. Do you believe now?