If you could know God, would you want to? And if you wanted to, then why?

we already know them all

www.godchecker.com

we already know them all

www.godchecker.com

i mean know him/them personally. as in have some type of relationship with...

i mean know him/them personally. as in have some type of relationship with...

No, because of the untold suffering that is the price of his botched creation. He is said to have two chances i.e., pre- and post -deluge . and still didn't get it right.

I'm not so sure, this god or gods has hurt a lot of people here on Earth....or at least hasn't helped many people who need it.

Frankly, I dont think god or the gods give a damn either way, so I could care less as well.

we already know them all

www.godchecker.com

thanks for the link!

[QUOTE=Dan the Man84;1784755]I'm not so sure, this god or gods has hurt a lot of people here on Earth....or at least hasn't helped many people who need it.
Frankly, I dont think god or the gods give a damn either way, so I could care less as well.

How about tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes, horrible diseases to name a few things god has created, if you believe he exists, which I don't ?

If I knew God I would know myself

If God exists and I'm told when I receive my judgment that Hell is my next destination then do you think He would honor my request to disappear forever? No eternity anywhere, just gone. I have a feeling He would toss me into Adstar Lake, what do you think?

Adstar Lake is were you will toss yourself, a descend into a mirror reflection of yourself in it and the God you never sought to see.

http://www.ctothejl.com/steveo/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/falling_angel.jpg

Do I know God or what? He would rather see me suffer in Adstar Lake than eliminate me forever. He is not merciful.

If I knew God I would know myself

i have found it to be true that the more i know god, the more i know myself.

Do I know God or what? He would rather see me suffer in Adstar Lake than eliminate me forever. He is not merciful.

can i ask why it is that you're so hell bent? why would you want to go there?

No, because of the untold suffering that is the price of his botched creation. He is said to have two chances i.e., pre- and post -deluge . and still didn't get it right.

so you're saying that he causes the suffering that we all endure? so it's not a consequence of all of our actions? i think it's a consequence of our actions and the more i get to know him, the more he shows me this, and so i change.

so you're saying that he causes the suffering that we all endure? so it's not a consequence of all of our actions? i think it's a consequence of our actions and the more i get to know him, the more he shows me this, and so i change.

You are using an outmoded defence. It is generally said that all good is attributable to god whereas all evil is attributable to mankind because of our sinful nature. It is often said that we choose to sin because god gave us free will.

How on earth is an earthquake a consequence of our actions ? And the same goes for hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanoes and other natural disasters. If god created everything, then he is responsible, not humankind.

It never ceases to amaze me how god gets credit for everything we like without incurring blame for the bad things in life. It is totally illogical.

When has a harvest festival ( thanksgiving ) service ever been cancelled because of a poor harvest ? Someone is bound to say " thank god it wasn't worse ". Can you not see the obvious contradiction here ?

Adstar Lake is were you will toss yourself, a descend into a mirror reflection of yourself in it and the God you never sought to see.

http://www.ctothejl.com/steveo/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/falling_angel.jpg

Will He jump or will he be pushed ? What nonsense !

i have found it to be true that the more i know god, the more i know myself.

The more I know myself, the more I know I realize that there is no God but only people telling us there is a God so they can take your money and control you. Mythology is a very interesting subject to study and if you would just read about mythology you would see that throughout time it was used to control people and gain power and wealth over those who were told to believe in whatever myth was being made up at the time. The Egyptians , as just one example, were all being led by a myth that certain Gods and Goddesses were in control over everyone and the Priests were in charge of offering those Gods offerings to appease them . Just as today , those in charge want your faith and your money to appease the God of today.

As it says in the Quran

"Thou seest not, in the creation of the All-merciful any imperfection, Return thy gaze, seest thou any fissure. Then Return thy gaze, again and again. Thy gaze, Comes back to thee dazzled, aweary." (67:4-5)

The search for God is the wonder of creation.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1979/salam-speech.html

so you're saying that he causes the suffering that we all endure? so it's not a consequence of all of our actions? i think it's a consequence of our actions and the more i get to know him, the more he shows me this, and so i change.

Thousands of children die of starvation each day. Is that a consequence of your gods actions or the actions of mankind?

If the actions of your god, then your god is cruel and immoral.

If the actions, or perhaps the lack of action, of mankind, of which much of the population is made up of theists, then mankind is cruel and immoral, and everyone should burn in eternal hell.

"Go forth and multiply."

He sets the stage.

The more I know myself, the more I know I realize that there is no God but only people telling us there is a God so they can take your money and control you. Mythology is a very interesting subject to study and if you would just read about mythology you would see that throughout time it was used to control people and gain power and wealth over those who were told to believe in whatever myth was being made up at the time. The Egyptians , as just one example, were all being led by a myth that certain Gods and Goddesses were in control over everyone and the Priests were in charge of offering those Gods offerings to appease them . Just as today , those in charge want your faith and your money to appease the God of today.

The god of today is called Mammon.

As a Muslim i worship ALLAH or God.he has beautiful names and attributes.he has no son or a partner. When he says a matter be and it is.

There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearer, All-Seer.” [al-Shoora 42:11].


Muslim believes that islam is the only true religion .THE EVIDENCE COMES FROM quran in which Allah says :whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers”

Allaah, may He be exalted, created mankind to worship Him and to know Him by His names and attributes,


As for u question why we worship ALLAH after we know him
The Muslim must hasten to make the best of every moment of his life and hasten to do good deeds and acts of worship; he should ignore the hardship and enjoy the pain, for that which is with Allaah is precious, for that which is with Allaah is Paradise and also seeking his pleasure in this life too.

It would depend entirely upon which god it was. The OT god is a little bit of an ass, the christian god is a little bit of a pansy, but Thor's pretty cool.

Say: "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. ]17:110

He is Allah, the Creator, the Evolver, the Bestower of Forms (or Colours). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare His Praises and Glory; and He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.]59:22-24

Say: "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. ]17:110

He is Allah, the Creator, the Evolver, the Bestower of Forms (or Colours). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare His Praises and Glory; and He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.]59:22-24

There is disease and sickness on earth. Natural disasters such as tsunamis. earthquakes, floods, destructive hurricanes, and o on. Do these proclaim Allah's glory ?

Muslim believes that islam is the only true religion .THE EVIDENCE COMES FROM quran.

You need not go further with a circular argument. Scriptures do not support scriptures as evidence.

Have glad tidings, for Allaah will cause the sins of a Muslim to be wiped out due to sickness just as fire removes the impurities from iron and silver.” He sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam also said: “The believing man or woman will continue to be afflicted by hardships in themselves and their families until they meet Allaah with absolutely no sins.”

The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “No Muslim is afflicted with harm such as disease or anything else except that Allaah will cause his sins to be removed, as a tree sheds its leaves, as a consequence.”

Almighty Allaah says that which translates as: “And whatever strikes you of disaster – it is for what your hands have earned; but He pardons much.” (Ash-Shuraa: 30).

Preaching is not allowed, tresbien.

i am answering his question according to my belief

Q
Throughout people's lives, from childhood until the time they die, signs of the one and only true God are shown to them in all regions of the earth and in their own souls, until it becomes clear that there is only one true God (Allah). God says in the Qur'an:

"We will show them our signs in the furthest regions (of the earth) and in their souls, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth." (Qur'an 41:53)

If you could know God, would you want to? And if you wanted to, then why?

Sure.

Beats watching TV.

Q
Throughout people's lives, from childhood until the time they die...

... are the result and propagators of cult indoctrination.

Sure.

Beats watching TV.

As u are talking about Tv how about watching and listening to this moving recitation
http://www.islamictube.net/watch/1424706146/WORD-OF-GOD---SURAT-AL-MUDATHIR-&-TRANSLATION

You are using an outmoded defence. It is generally said that all good is attributable to god whereas all evil is attributable to mankind because of our sinful nature. It is often said that we choose to sin because god gave us free will.

How on earth is an earthquake a consequence of our actions ? And the same goes for hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanoes and other natural disasters. If god created everything, then he is responsible, not humankind.

It never ceases to amaze me how god gets credit for everything we like without incurring blame for the bad things in life. It is totally illogical.

When has a harvest festival ( thanksgiving ) service ever been cancelled because of a poor harvest ? Someone is bound to say " thank god it wasn't worse ". Can you not see the obvious contradiction here ?


yes i do see what you're saying. but i blame god for everything ultimately. i still don't really know what to think about free will. i was just talking about it last night with my brother. see, i think that god is responsible for everything because he IS everything, good and evil, and that good and evil are used for good ultimately, and that has to do with law. here's what i was saying to my brother last night. if god is everything, then we are all part of god. so what if our free will really just equates to our identity, and our role in greater good?

As u are talking about Tv how about watching and listening to this moving recitation
http://www.islamictube.net/watch/1424706146/WORD-OF-GOD---SURAT-AL-MUDATHIR-&-TRANSLATION

No.

The more I know myself, the more I know I realize that there is no God but only people telling us there is a God so they can take your money and control you. Mythology is a very interesting subject to study and if you would just read about mythology you would see that throughout time it was used to control people and gain power and wealth over those who were told to believe in whatever myth was being made up at the time. The Egyptians , as just one example, were all being led by a myth that certain Gods and Goddesses were in control over everyone and the Priests were in charge of offering those Gods offerings to appease them . Just as today , those in charge want your faith and your money to appease the God of today.

you are equating god with organized religious institutions.

yes i do see what you're saying. but i blame god for everything ultimately. i still don't really know what to think about free will. i was just talking about it last night with my brother. see, i think that god is responsible for everything because he IS everything, good and evil, and that good and evil are used for good ultimately, and that has to do with law. here's what i was saying to my brother last night. if god is everything, then we are all part of god. so what if our free will really just equates to our identity, and our role in greater good?

u question is in the following
http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996015716&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

Thousands of children die of starvation each day.

"Go forth and multiply."


And watch children die of starvation? Does that decree go for nation's that already have food shortages? Howcome God doesn't amend that command?

Are you sinning if you go forth and multiply in a place where children starve to death or are you sinning if you don't go forth and multiply regardless?

Have glad tidings, for Allaah will cause the sins of a Muslim to be wiped out due to sickness just as fire removes the impurities from iron and silver.” He sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam also said: “The believing man or woman will continue to be afflicted by hardships in themselves and their families until they meet Allaah with absolutely no sins.”

The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “No Muslim is afflicted with harm such as disease or anything else except that Allaah will cause his sins to be removed, as a tree sheds its leaves, as a consequence.”

Almighty Allaah says that which translates as: “And whatever strikes you of disaster – it is for what your hands have earned; but He pardons much.” (Ash-Shuraa: 30).


I don't understand your answer. Is or is not Allah responsible for natural disasters ?

Thousands of children die of starvation each day. Is that a consequence of your gods actions or the actions of mankind?

If the actions of your god, then your god is cruel and immoral.

If the actions, or perhaps the lack of action, of mankind, of which much of the population is made up of theists, then mankind is cruel and immoral, and everyone should burn in eternal hell.

"Go forth and multiply."

He sets the stage.

why do people starve in this world of plenty? due to the consequence of our greed. all of our greed. why would you think that theists are not greedy? you speak like a true bigot. mankind IS cruel and immoral for the most part, and that is why that for the most part, WE ARE IN HELL. and if you think for one second that you don't contribute to that just as much if not more than someone else, then you're not being very objective. we're all in this together mr. supremecy. the way you talk about theists reminds me of the way hitler talked about jews, or the way white supremecists talk about any non-whites.

yes i do see what you're saying. but i blame god for everything ultimately. i still don't really know what to think about free will. i was just talking about it last night with my brother. see, i think that god is responsible for everything because he IS everything, good and evil, and that good and evil are used for good ultimately, and that has to do with law. here's what i was saying to my brother last night. if god is everything, then we are all part of god. so what if our free will really just equates to our identity, and our role in greater good?

If you attribute both the good and the bad to god, I have no argument with you. Have you read Spinoza ? I get the impression that your views are very close to his. He did not believe in a personal god; he believed god was in everything. Does that fit your view ?

THE EVIDENCE COMES FROM quran

so you're saying that you don't have a relationship with god, that you merely read about him in a book, and that you claim to believe in him simply because it is written? this seems like a very limited view of something claiming to be a god, and i wonder why he wouldn't choose to show himself in a genuine way.

if god is everything, then we are all part of god.

And, as is apparent, when you're talking to god you are indeed just talking to yourself. :)

Allah responsible for natural disasters

from quran and the prophet Mohamed saying.This is the answer
Allah  says in the Qur'an,
"And whatever calamity befalls you, it is due to your own doings and Allah forgives many of your shortcomings." Qur’an 42/30.

Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم explained the Tafseer of this ayah to Hazrat Ali رضى الله تعالى عنه thus,
"O Ali! whatever calamity befalls you; illness, affliction or any worldly calamity; it is the earning of your own hands."

finally, Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas رضى الله تعالى عنه states:
"The nation that is involved in misappropriation of trust (embezzlement), Allah will fill their hearts with terror for their enemies. The nation that is engaged in fornication will experience a large number of deaths. The nation that cheats in measure will have their sustenance curtailed. The nation that legislates against the truth and justice, will experience great bloodshed and the nation that breaks its contracts, will be subdued by the enemy." (Mishkaat)

Allah says,

"If the people of the locality had believed and dopted taqwa (piety), We would have opened upon them the blessings of the heavens and the earth, but they denied and falsified, thus We seized them due to their actions." Qur’an 7/96.
And,
"Why would Allah punish you if you were grateful and believed. And Allah is Most appreciative, All-Knowing." Qur’an 4/147.

why do people starve in this world of plenty? due to the consequence of our greed. all of our greed. why would you think that theists are not greedy?

I never said theists weren't greedy. They are. Their religion taught them that.

mankind IS cruel and immoral for the most part, and that is why that for the most part, WE ARE IN HELL.

Spoken like a true theist. Mankind, as in humans, share a combined genetic nature of self-preservation and altruism. The cruel and immoral part is a result of centuries of theist thought and decision making processes based on their cults doctrines.

and if you think for one second that you don't contribute to that just as much if not more than someone else, then you're not being very objective. we're all in this together mr. supremecy.

I do not contribute to the vicious cycle of indoctrination that has warped the minds of theists into believing mankind is cruel and immoral and that their gods are the saviors.

the way you talk about theists reminds me of the way hitler talked about jews, or the way white supremecists talk about any non-whites.

Another ridiculous strawman argument. Or, verbal abuse, you make the choice.

It would depend entirely upon which god it was. The OT god is a little bit of an ass, the christian god is a little bit of a pansy, but Thor's pretty cool.

well the way i envision it, and actually the way i experienced it, was that you are unable to make that determination until you actually got to know him. it would make sense that you would become familiar with him first through what i'm suggesting as an interaction, and then if what you learn about him serves to identify him as one of these labels so be it, and if it doesn't, then so what.

And, as is apparent, when you're talking to god you are indeed just talking to yourself. :)

maybe. i've heard people describe the holy spirit as the collective knowledge.

why do people starve in this world of plenty? due to the consequence of our greed. all of our greed. why would you think that theists are not greedy

i agree with u why there are poor because many think of themelves and do not give charity .Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) said: "If son of Adam were to possess two valleys of gold and silver, he would long for a third. Son of Adam, your stomach is but an ocean or a valley that cannot be filled in with anything except dust."

Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) said: "The destruction that the fondness of fortune leaves on a man is more effective than the deed of two ravenous wolves that attack a shepherd less herd, one from the front and the other from the back. The Muslim's honor, however, lies in his religiosity."

Allah responsible for natural disasters

from quran and the prophet Mohamed saying.This is the answer
Allah  says in the Qur'an,
"And whatever calamity befalls you, it is due to your own doings and Allah forgives many of your shortcomings." Qur’an 42/30.

Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم explained the Tafseer of this ayah to Hazrat Ali رضى الله تعالى عنه thus,
"O Ali! whatever calamity befalls you; illness, affliction or any worldly calamity; it is the earning of your own hands."

finally, Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas رضى الله تعالى عنه states:
"The nation that is involved in misappropriation of trust (embezzlement), Allah will fill their hearts with terror for their enemies. The nation that is engaged in fornication will experience a large number of deaths. The nation that cheats in measure will have their sustenance curtailed. The nation that legislates against the truth and justice, will experience great bloodshed and the nation that breaks its contracts, will be subdued by the enemy." (Mishkaat)

Allah says,

"If the people of the locality had believed and dopted taqwa (piety), We would have opened upon them the blessings of the heavens and the earth, but they denied and falsified, thus We seized them due to their actions." Qur’an 7/96.
And,
"Why would Allah punish you if you were grateful and believed. And Allah is Most appreciative, All-Knowing." Qur’an 4/147.


is this why muslims are involved in so many wars and these people suffer due to them? what do you think that these people are doing so wrong to suffer?

Allah responsible for natural disasters

from quran and the prophet Mohamed saying.This is the answer
Allah  says in the Qur'an,
"And whatever calamity befalls you, it is due to your own doings and Allah forgives many of your shortcomings." Qur’an 42/30.

In other words, natural disasters are mankinds fault due to our shortcomings. Since it is assumed Allah created us, he created us with shortcomings that would ultimately result in disasters befalling us. And he always knew this.

We are his entertainment for cruelty and death as he forgives us in our graves.

"And whatever calamity befalls you, it is due to your own doings and Allah forgives many of your shortcomings."

So which person created Katrina and how did they accomplish it? Blew very hard?

well the way i envision it, and actually the way i experienced it, was that you are unable to make that determination until you actually got to know him.

I never personally met Hitler. I still think it pertinent to call him an ass.

I never said theists weren't greedy. They are. Their religion taught them that.



Spoken like a true theist. Mankind, as in humans, share a combined genetic nature of self-preservation and altruism. The cruel and immoral part is a result of centuries of theist thought and decision making processes based on their cults doctrines.



I do not contribute to the vicious cycle of indoctrination that has warped the minds of theists into believing mankind is cruel and immoral and that their gods are the saviors.



Another ridiculous strawman argument. Or, verbal abuse, you make the choice.

everyone is greedy, and you are all the time segregating and arguing "us and them". if you don't wish to be thought of as a bigot, then don't talk like one.

if were are neglectful , ALLAH GIVES US RESPITE TO REPENT.
Allah's Apostle said, "Allah gives respite to the oppressor, but when He takes him over, He never releases him." Then he recited:-- "Such is the seizure of your Lord when He seizes (population of) towns in the midst of their wrong: Painful indeed, and severe is His seizure.' (11.102)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I never personally met Hitler. I still think it pertinent to call him an ass.

but if you HAD met him, then you would be able to confirm this aspect of him.

but if you HAD met him, then you would be able to confirm this aspect of him.

I think *acceptable* confirmation comes from looking at historical events etc. The same is true of gods.

I think *acceptable* confirmation comes from looking at historical events etc. The same is true of gods.

Depends. One mans insurgent is another mans liberator.

well, the reason i posed this question is because when i was younger i contemplated the existence of god. i did so because i perceived it to be the responsible thing to do, given the magnitude of who he was supposed to be, and what it was all suggested to mean. i see lots of people doing the same things i used to do, and that is, intellectualizing about it. it didn't take much of that for me to conclude that i could never believe in something of this magnitude based solely upon some intellectual rationalization. i would need proof of some sort, and i wasn't exactly sure what that would consist of. i only knew it was a thing i didn't have as of yet. and i contemplated that if god was in fact god, it shouldn't be a difficult or unreasonable thing for him to provide me with this proof that i needed. i also asked myself at that time if i really wanted that proof, and my answer was "no", but i wouldn't have admitted that to anyone else. it would have seemed to me too cowardly or irresponsible. but the truth was that from what i knew about god, an interaction with him, or the proof that it was true, seemed very unappealing to me. and that was due to the fact that what i knew consisted of an unappealing world around me, the unappealing feelings i had inside of me, and the unappealing facade of religious institutions that i had been exposed to while growing up. i envisioned this proof solidifying all of these aspects in my life, and trapping me into a lifestyle and existence that was even worse than what i was experiencing already. i imagined having to give up all of my freedoms, and my very identity; having to follow the rules, customs, and ceremonies of, and being bound by the expectations of, someone or something that i didn't feel a part of, and didn't want to be a part of. i felt like i would be forced into living a lie, and i just couldn't do it. i had told myself when i was young, that if organized religion was really what god was about, then i didn't want anything to do with him, and i guess this mental exercise was affirming that.

i had told myself when i was young, that if organized religion was really what god was about, then i didn't want anything to do with him, and i guess this mental exercise was affirming that.

You're right, a lot of people go through this process. Some of them abandon religion, others abandon theism still others are fearful and cling to the familiar. Everyone is different in what they want/get out of the process.

everyone is greedy, and you are all the time segregating and arguing "us and them". if you don't wish to be thought of as a bigot, then don't talk like one.

I was not taught to be greedy, nor do I feel compelled to pursue greed. Perhaps that is the difference between you and me.

If you don't wish to be thought of as delusional, then don't act it.

and that was due to the fact that what i knew consisted of an unappealing world around me, the unappealing feelings i had inside of me

Those could easily be misconstrued as neuroses and paranoia.

and the unappealing facade of religious institutions that i had been exposed to while growing up.

The cycle of indoctrination is certainly not appealing. Yet, you embrace one of the worst cults ever to befall mankind with one of the most influential and deterministic indoctrinations ever devised.

Depends. One mans insurgent is another mans liberator.

Certainly, I was answering the question from my own perspective, (I have no time for any entity that annihilates every single man, woman, child and animal on a planet).

Certainly, I was answering the question from my own perspective, (I have no time for any entity that annihilates every single man, woman, child and animal on a planet).

How did it do that?

Water.

I was not taught to be greedy, nor do I feel compelled to pursue greed. Perhaps that is the difference between you and me.

If you don't wish to be thought of as delusional, then don't act it.

yes q, you are much better than i am in any and all respects, you've already established that. you are superior to me and to the rest and you segregate yourself in light of it, and rationalize abusing others in response to it. kudos.

Those could easily be misconstrued as neuroses and paranoia.



The cycle of indoctrination is certainly not appealing. Yet, you embrace one of the worst cults ever to befall mankind with one of the most influential and deterministic indoctrinations ever devised.

you know q, over the years i have attempted to communicate with you. i've tolerated and even encouraged your abuse to make a point, and that point is made over and over again. and so we have now come to a point where i see it as futile to communicate any further. you have made it abdundantly clear, that you are a shallow-minded, bigoted, abusive hate-monger, whose selfish opinions and unfounded assumptions only serve to display what is arrogance, and i get it, and i am done listening to it, and responding to it. so good-bye.

Allah responsible for natural disasters

from quran and the prophet Mohamed saying.This is the answer
Allah  says in the Qur'an,
"And whatever calamity befalls you, it is due to your own doings and Allah forgives many of your shortcomings." Qur’an 42/30.

Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم explained the Tafseer of this ayah to Hazrat Ali رضى الله تعالى عنه thus,
"O Ali! whatever calamity befalls you; illness, affliction or any worldly calamity; it is the earning of your own hands."

finally, Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas رضى الله تعالى عنه states:
"The nation that is involved in misappropriation of trust (embezzlement), Allah will fill their hearts with terror for their enemies. The nation that is engaged in fornication will experience a large number of deaths. The nation that cheats in measure will have their sustenance curtailed. The nation that legislates against the truth and justice, will experience great bloodshed and the nation that breaks its contracts, will be subdued by the enemy." (Mishkaat)

Allah says,

"If the people of the locality had believed and dopted taqwa (piety), We would have opened upon them the blessings of the heavens and the earth, but they denied and falsified, thus We seized them due to their actions." Qur’an 7/96.
And,
"Why would Allah punish you if you were grateful and believed. And Allah is Most appreciative, All-Knowing." Qur’an 4/147.

Are you saying that humankind is responsible for natural disasters because they deny Allah ?

Q
Throughout people's lives, from childhood until the time they die, signs of the one and only true God are shown to them in all regions of the earth and in their own souls, until it becomes clear that there is only one true God (Allah). God says in the Qur'an:

"We will show them our signs in the furthest regions (of the earth) and in their souls, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth." (Qur'an 41:53)

What signs has Allah shown in, say, China, Japan and Australia ? How would people recognize these signs ?

you know q, over the years i have attempted to communicate with you. i've tolerated and even encouraged your abuse to make a point, and that point is made over and over again. and so we have now come to a point where i see it as futile to communicate any further. you have made it abdundantly clear, that you are a shallow-minded, bigoted, abusive hate-monger, whose selfish opinions and unfounded assumptions only serve to display what is arrogance, and i get it, and i am done listening to it, and responding to it. so good-bye.

I understand completely. Those who are so entrenched in their cults doctrines are the quickest to build defensive walls and make haste for the hills when their indoctrinated and abusive past creeps up to haunt them.

Make no mistake about it Lori, your indoctrination WAS abuse, child abuse. If you care to face it, you may make a clean break from it and free your mind. Or, you could continue to be enslaved in a cult that will maintain it's stranglehold on you until it's too late. Or, maybe it is.

if were are neglectful , ALLAH GIVES US RESPITE TO REPENT.
Allah's Apostle said, "Allah gives respite to the oppressor, but when He takes him over, He never releases him." Then he recited:-- "Such is the seizure of your Lord when He seizes (population of) towns in the midst of their wrong: Painful indeed, and severe is His seizure.' (11.102)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your religion seems to be totally based on fear of punishment.

I have found it to be true that the more i know god, the more i know myself.

Or the more I know myself, the more I know god. :) (without defining "god" to the Christian view)

Your religion seems to be totally based on fear of punishment.

our religion is based on paradise too not hell.

read on youtube how paradise is beautiful
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_K77TdKJdE

I understand completely. Those who are so entrenched in their cults doctrines are the quickest to build defensive walls and make haste for the hills when their indoctrinated and abusive past creeps up to haunt them.



Were you brought up religious? Or atheist?

Make no mistake about it Lori, your indoctrination WAS abuse, child abuse. If you care to face it, you may make a clean break from it and free your mind. Or, you could continue to be enslaved in a cult that will maintain it's stranglehold on you until it's too late. Or, maybe it is.

Someone should tell these people:


"More than one-quarter of American adults (28%) have left the faith in which they were raised in favor of another religion - or no religion at all. If change in affiliation from one type of Protestantism to another is included, 44% of adults have either switched religious affiliation, moved from being unaffiliated with any religion to being affiliated with a particular faith, or dropped any connection to a specific religious tradition altogether."

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=86575

Your religion seems to be totally based on fear of punishment.
MYLES
The difference between u and me is that i believe in the unseen without little doubt and i submit my self to my creator out of love and belief .Look at u self.i always ponder of my self and the world and said nothing come to random.If u want really to go back to u instinct and open u herat to God word, u will experience a cerian inner peace and happiness.u life will be paradise here and in the hereafter.i feel happy when i worship God five times a day but in different time .it takes me only 7 minutes .When i talk to him, i feel iam born again after each prayer.SEEK HELP AND GUIDE FROM HIM BEFORE IT IS LATE.This life is short and the death is imminent.when the screen will remove from u eyes.there is will be no time for regret or appeal.
Abu Mousa al-Ash'ari narrated that the Prophet, sallallahu alayhe wasallam, said, "Verily, for the believers in Paradise, are tents made of a single hollow pear. The length of which would be sixty miles long from all sides, their wives being therein. The believer will go around them (i.e., visit them) and they will not be able to see each other." (Sahih al-Jami)

Noble Qur'an - Al-Mu'minun 23:8-11

Those who are faithfully true to their trusts and to their covenants; And those who strictly guard their (five compulsory congregational) prayers (at their fixed stated hours). These are indeed the inheritors. Who shall inherit the Firdaus (Paradise). They shall dwell therein forever.



Hadith - Sahih Bukhari 4:569, Narrated Abu Huraira

Then Allah [swt] will say (to him): 'I have forbidden Paradise for the disbelievers.'

If you could know God, would you want to? And if you wanted to, then why?
generally we want to know anyone and have an actual personal relationship with them (as opposed to a relationship tempered by issues of say finance - "I want a rich friend so I can have money" - fame, power etc etc) because we feel our life is more relishable by reciprocating with them.

For instance a parent wants to have a relationship with their child (even though they most definitely will lose out financially) or a lover may feel they want to have a relationship with their partner (even though it most definitely will take up lots of time). Why? Because the relishing of the relationship offers something that money, fame, wealth, power, knowledge and beauty can not buy - namely the happiness of love.

As for knowing god (in this sense), since god is the topmost reservoir of lovable qualities, one stands to gain the topmost quality of happiness of love when one comes to the point of personally reciprocating.

If you could know God, would you want to? And if you wanted to, then why?

One can't so why bother ?

One can't so why bother ?
perhaps if one knew how one could, one would also see the value of the effort

I thought mere mortals can't comprehend God ?

Your religion seems to be totally based on fear of punishment.
MYLES
The difference between u and me is that i believe in the unseen without little doubt and i submit my self to my creator out of love and belief .Look at u self.i always ponder of my self and the world and said nothing come to random.If u want really to go back to u instinct and open u herat to God word, u will experience a cerian inner peace and happiness.u life will be paradise here and in the hereafter.i feel happy when i worship God five times a day but in different time .it takes me only 7 minutes .When i talk to him, i feel iam born again after each prayer.SEEK HELP AND GUIDE FROM HIM BEFORE IT IS LATE.This life is short and the death is imminent.when the screen will remove from u eyes.there is will be no time for regret or appeal.
Abu Mousa al-Ash'ari narrated that the Prophet, sallallahu alayhe wasallam, said, "Verily, for the believers in Paradise, are tents made of a single hollow pear. The length of which would be sixty miles long from all sides, their wives being therein. The believer will go around them (i.e., visit them) and they will not be able to see each other." (Sahih al-Jami)

Noble Qur'an - Al-Mu'minun 23:8-11

Those who are faithfully true to their trusts and to their covenants; And those who strictly guard their (five compulsory congregational) prayers (at their fixed stated hours). These are indeed the inheritors. Who shall inherit the Firdaus (Paradise). They shall dwell therein forever.



Hadith - Sahih Bukhari 4:569, Narrated Abu Huraira

Then Allah [swt] will say (to him): 'I have forbidden Paradise for the disbelievers.'

I won't be sorry not to go to paradise. I wouldn't enjoy the company

I thought mere mortals can't comprehend God ?
biologists also cannot comprehend a mere cell either

perhaps one should tell them they can't (so why bother)

perhaps if one knew how one could, one would also see the value of the effort

If this and if that. You are an Ifologist. Try sticking to what facts we have; you might get a pleasant surprise.

We had a rhyme when I was a kid. It went:

If ifs and ands
Were pots and pans
what would the tinkers do.

Tinkers used to go from door to door offering to repair pots and pans that had holes in them, That was before the advent of the throw-away society.

biologists also cannot comprehend a mere cell either

perhaps one should tell them they can't (so why bother)

A totally irrelevant comment.

our religion is based on paradise too not hell.

read on youtube how paradise is beautiful
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_K77TdKJdE

It's what we call the carrot and the stick.

If this and if that. You are an Ifologist. Try sticking to what facts we have; you might get a pleasant surprise.

so far, the fact seems to be that you don't know.

It also seems to be a fact that you think everyone else has the same reservoir of knowledge as yourself.

In sanskrit this is called "atmaman jagat" or "as I think, the whole universe thinks".

A totally irrelevant comment.
it does however indicate the value of knowledge even if it runs short of full comprehension

it does however indicate the value of knowledge even if it runs short of full comprehension

What knowledge about God do you have and how did you verify it ?

generally we want to know anyone and have an actual personal relationship with them (as opposed to a relationship tempered by issues of say finance - "I want a rich friend so I can have money" - fame, power etc etc) because we feel our life is more relishable by reciprocating with them.

For instance a parent wants to have a relationship with their child (even though they most definitely will lose out financially) or a lover may feel they want to have a relationship with their partner (even though it most definitely will take up lots of time). Why? Because the relishing of the relationship offers something that money, fame, wealth, power, knowledge and beauty can not buy - namely the happiness of love.

As for knowing god (in this sense), since god is the topmost reservoir of lovable qualities, one stands to gain the topmost quality of happiness of love when one comes to the point of personally reciprocating.

you know what changed with me, was that i got to the point where i wanted to know the truth barring all consequences...whether pleasant or unpleasant, beneficial or not. i certainly wasn't looking for love or communion at the time i made that decision. i just really didn't care what it meant for me anymore, i wanted to know the truth anyway...just for the sake of knowing what it was.

so far, the fact seems to be that you don't know.

It also seems to be a fact that you think everyone else has the same reservoir of knowledge as yourself.

In sanskrit this is called "atmaman jagat" or "as I think, the whole universe thinks".

I do not think everyone else has the same reservoir of knowledge as I do. You certainly don't, as is clear from your posts

it does however indicate the value of knowledge even if it runs short of full comprehension

And we needed to be told that?You do know that knowledge is belief supported by convincing evidence ? You are still at the belief stage unless you can show me otherwise, So, how about a bit of evidence ? Surprise us !

One can't so why bother ?

it's a hypothetical question, hence the use of the word "if". and btw, i know.

and before you go there trust...that i could give a rat's ass if you believe me.

it's just a question sir...a little mental exercise. assume that you could know.

I thought mere mortals can't comprehend God ?

comprehend or have a relationship with? i would suggest that there are a lot of things that we can experience and interact with but, don't comprehend. i hardly think we comprehend each other as human beings or ourselves entirely as of yet, or if we can...but that doesn't mean that it's not worth interacting.

it's a hypothetical question, hence the use of the word "if". and btw, i know.
Well, you may want to tell some other theists about that because they seem to be unaware. In fact you've said you know God personally, and now you say one can't ?

As for the hypothetical question..
If you could know Roy Wright would you want to ?
:shrug:

and before you go there trust...that i could give a rat's ass if you believe me.
Who said anything about believing you ? I just said it isn't possible to know God and you seem to agree.

it's just a question sir...a little mental exercise. assume that you could know.
Assume banana's were purple. Would you eat them.. ?

comprehend or have a relationship with? i would suggest that there are a lot of things that we can experience and interact with but, don't comprehend. i hardly think we comprehend each other as human beings or ourselves entirely as of yet, or if we can...but that doesn't mean that it's not worth interacting.

You said God can be known, that one can have a personal relationship with him.

perhaps if one knew how one could, one would also see the value of the effort

as far as i understand, all you have to do is to sincerely want to. hence the question. i'm trying to encourage people to be honest with themselves about what their intentions are in regards to knowledge of him. if you don't want it then fine. admit it. but realize that your intentions make that determination.

and please, before you jump down my throat and get all defensive (anyone), know that this is what i've found to be true, based upon my own experience.

as far as i understand, all you have to do is to sincerely want to. hence the question. i'm trying to encourage people to be honest with themselves about what their intentions are in regards to knowledge of him. if you don't want it then fine. admit it. but realize that your intentions make that determination.

and please, before you jump down my throat and get all defensive (anyone), know that this is what i've found to be true, based upon my own experience.

It is kind of circular don't you think ?
What would be the motivation for wanting to know someone you don't know ?

Well, you may want to tell some other theists about that because they seem to be unaware. In fact you've said you know God personally, and know you say one can't ?

As for the hypothetical question..
If you could know Roy Wright would you want to ?
:shrug:


Who said anything about believing you ? I just said it isn't possible to know God and you seem to agree.


Assume banana's were purple. Would you eat them.. ?

sure, why not? and the difference is the use of the term "know". when i say i "know" god, i mean that we've interacted, and have a relationship, much like i would have with any person. but that does not mean that i "know" or that i comprehend everything about him. i can't define him. i can't understand the nature of him entirely, but can describe him, based upon what he's shown me.

sure, why not?
Ok so now what ?

It is kind of circular don't you think ?
What would be the motivation for wanting to know someone you don't know ?

to know what you are able to. to be open to knowledge. if because you can not understand or know everything about someone, do you then reject them?

Ok so now what ?

where's the purple banana? where's roy at?

to know what you are able to. to be open to knowledge. if because you can not understand or know everything about someone, do you then reject them?

I am open to knowledge.
No, I wouldn't reject them.

Fine, I'll answer your hypothetical question..
I wouldn't mind knowing God if he existed. All he has to do is make himself known to me.

What knowledge about God do you have and how did you verify it ?
Kind of a big question but I will try and answer it in a way you might find relevant.

in short, knowing anything (anything of moderate complexity anyway)requires that one adopts the habits of persons who are already in knowledge.

If a person is not prepared to take on such association, their pursuit of knowledge faces difficulties.

Knowing god is greatly dependent on the "state of one's being." (particularly envy)

This is what distinguishes it from other fields of knowledge within empiricism.

I think I have run the analogy of knowing the president by you before - if one wants to know the president (personally), it generally requires that one acquire a "state of being" acceptable to the president (as opposed to trying to get past his 16108 and secretaries and body guards).

Just as there are many things knowable about the president in relation to finance, military and diplomacy, there are many things knowable about god that tends to illuminate one's knowledge of other co-existing things.

For instance it would be difficult how an american could know about the diplomatic, military, financial and legal status of the president without also developing knowledge on what these repercussions have on an american (and also a foreigner) and also the socio-economic geography of things american and non-american (and everything in between).

In the same way knowledge of god also puts into context a range of things like one's self, this world, other people, etc etc, and the limitations/values.

As a practical example, if one knows this about god

BG 5.29 A person in full consciousness of Me, knowing Me to be the ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods, and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attains peace from the pangs of material miseries.

it could be verified by their ability to refrain from sinking into misery and anger when their claim to material possession in this world is challenged by fate. If one didn't display this "state of being", their ability to know god as the ultimate controller of this world is not satisfactory (or merely theoretical).

So to recap, 3 points


Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being

Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge

The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known


The commonest challenge to such knowledge usually is number 2. Generally the substance of a person's reservation about god are due to the persons who represent him.

where's the purple banana? where's roy at?

:rolleyes:

Exactly.

:rolleyes:

Exactly.

but see, from what i know, god is everywhere. god is with you. inside you...

GOD IS NOT A BANANA! GOSH! *giggle*

I am open to knowledge.
No, I wouldn't reject them.

Fine, I'll answer your hypothetical question..
I wouldn't mind knowing God if he existed. All he has to do is make himself known to me.

Thanks. :)

Kind of a big question but I will try and answer it in a way you might find relevant.

in short, knowing anything (anything of moderate complexity anyway)requires that one adopts the habits of persons who are already in knowledge.

If a person is not prepared to take on such association, their pursuit of knowledge faces difficulties.

Knowing god is greatly dependent on the "state of one's being." (particularly envy)

This is what distinguishes it from other fields of knowledge within empiricism.

I think I have run the analogy of knowing the president by you before - if one wants to know the president (personally), it generally requires that one acquire a "state of being" acceptable to the president (as opposed to trying to get past his 16108 and secretaries and body guards).

Just as there are many things knowable about the president in relation to finance, military and diplomacy, there are many things knowable about god that tends to illuminate one's knowledge of other co-existing things.

For instance it would be difficult how an american could know about the diplomatic, military, financial and legal status of the president without also developing knowledge on what these repercussions have on an american (and also a foreigner) and also the socio-economic geography of things american and non-american (and everything in between).

In the same way knowledge of god also puts into context a range of things like one's self, this world, other people, etc etc, and the limitations/values.

As a practical example, if one knows this about god

BG 5.29 A person in full consciousness of Me, knowing Me to be the ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods, and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attains peace from the pangs of material miseries.

it could be verified by their ability to refrain from sinking into misery and anger when their claim to material possession in this world is challenged by fate. If one didn't display this "state of being", their ability to know god as the ultimate controller of this world is not satisfactory (or merely theoretical).

So to recap, 3 points


Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being

Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge

The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known


The commonest challenge to such knowledge usually is number 2. Generally the substance of a person's reservation about god are due to the persons who represent him.


Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being
Setting aside that your analogy doesn't fully fit, how does one attain such a state ?

Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge
You mean like take their word for it ?

The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known
Do I have to take your word for that ?


You didn't answer my question..
What knowledge about God do you have and how did you verify it ?

GOD IS NOT A BANANA! GOSH! *giggle*

My god is. Who are you to say I am wrong?

but see, from what i know, god is everywhere. god is with you. inside you...

Fine, how do I know ?

I could say the same to you about Roy Wright..

GOD IS NOT A BANANA! GOSH! *giggle*

No he isn't, he's a purple banana.

you know what changed with me, was that i got to the point where i wanted to know the truth barring all consequences...whether pleasant or unpleasant, beneficial or not. i certainly wasn't looking for love or communion at the time i made that decision. i just really didn't care what it meant for me anymore, i wanted to know the truth anyway...just for the sake of knowing what it was.

as much as people tend to hate having their experiences contextualized by scripture .....

BG 7.16: O best among the Bhāratas, four kinds of pious men begin to render devotional service unto Me — the distressed, the desirer of wealth, the inquisitive, and he who is searching for knowledge of the Absolute.

each one is a more sturdy platform of enquiry than the previous one.

For instance a person seeking relief from distress is not as steady as the seeker of wealth, etc etc all the way to the knower of the absolute, which seems to be where you said you came in.

These 4 persons, while pious and knowing something about god, are not perfectional.

In other words there is a whole aspect of knowing god that is not approached by these 4 states of being - namely knowing the personal aspect of god. Its kind of like the difference between a person on the street saying something about the president and the wife of the president saying something (one is not in a position of reciprocation with the president, and the other is).

I thought this is what you were asking in your OP

Thanks. :)

You're welcome :)

Will he ?

Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being

Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge

The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known


The commonest challenge to such knowledge usually is number 2. Generally the substance of a person's reservation about god are due to the persons who represent him.

either i don't understand you, or i don't agree with you. i'm not sure which...

but it doesn't seem to me that god requires any type of conformity, only the desire to know him. i didn't know what to expect of him or what he expected of me prior to perceiving this interaction with him, and was completely open...

Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being
Setting aside that your analogy doesn't fully fit
why?

, how does one attain such a state ?
explained in #2

Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge
You mean like take their word for it ?
thats the first stage, but there is the important part of application
For instance if I tell you that you will understand complex biology by going to university, you will only understand that by applying it (and you would only apply it if you accepted my - or someone elses - word that university is the best place to go to learn these things)

The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known
Do I have to take your word for that ?
only until you succeed in application


You didn't answer my question..
What knowledge about God do you have and how did you verify it ?
if I guess rightly, you are not really interested in knowledge of god but the verification of it. true?

You're welcome :)

Will he ?

yes.

yes.

When ? Why hasn't he already ?

why?
Because the president cannot be known to anyone that wants to know him. In other words no one but a select few get to attain the suitable state.
I'm guessing this goes against what Christianity teaches..


explained in #2

thats the first stage, but there is the important part of application
For instance if I tell you that you will understand complex biology by going to university, you will only understand that by applying it (and you would only apply it if you accepted my - or someone elses - word that university is the best place to go to learn these things)

only until you succeed in application
What you are really saying is that religion works for people. I don't disagree.

if I guess rightly, you are not really interested in knowledge of god but the verification of it. true?
No, I'm interested in both.. not one or the other.

either i don't understand you, or i don't agree with you. i'm not sure which...

but it doesn't seem to me that god requires any type of conformity, only the desire to know him. i didn't know what to expect of him or what he expected of me prior to perceiving this interaction with him, and was completely open...
that is the conformity (or the beginning of it at least)
although conformity is not really a good choice of words since its more an innate ability that is uncovered than something acquired

for eg

1. Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being

lust, avarice, envy etc will not be helpful

2. Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge

"birds of a feather flock together"

3. The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known

the more I know about god the more I know about myself, others and this world (in terms of "why" moreso than "what" ... which is the pride and joy of empiricism)

as much as people tend to hate having their experiences contextualized by scripture .....

BG 7.16: O best among the Bhāratas, four kinds of pious men begin to render devotional service unto Me — the distressed, the desirer of wealth, the inquisitive, and he who is searching for knowledge of the Absolute.

each one is a more sturdy platform of enquiry than the previous one.

For instance a person seeking relief from distress is not as steady as the seeker of wealth, etc etc all the way to the knower of the absolute, which seems to be where you said you came in.

These 4 persons, while pious and knowing something about god, are not perfectional.

In other words there is a whole aspect of knowing god that is not approached by these 4 states of being - namely knowing the personal aspect of god. Its kind of like the difference between a person on the street saying something about the president and the wife of the president saying something (one is not in a position of reciprocation with the president, and the other is).

I thought this is what you were asking in your OP


i think i understand what you're saying in that, just because i know he exists, doesn't mean i know him. the more i knew, the more i became intruiged, and the more open and less afraid i was, and the relationship progressed it seems in response to how receptive i was to him and it. there was a lot in the way.

i think i understand what you're saying in that, just because i know he exists, doesn't mean i know him. the more i knew, the more i became intruiged, and the more open and less afraid i was, and the relationship progressed it seems in response to how receptive i was to him and it. there was a lot in the way.

So you knew he existed before you believed in him/knew him ? How did you know he existed ?

Because the president cannot be known to anyone that wants to know him. In other words no one but a select few get to attain the suitable state.
I'm guessing this goes against what Christianity teaches..
all analogies fail somewhere down the track (the reason the president cannot extend himself to everyone is because he is not god)
it was meant to illustrate more how knowing the president is fully dependent on the dictation of the president - which offers an alternative to say empiricial inquiry.



What you are really saying is that religion works for people. I don't disagree.
actually what I am saying is that knowledge is dependent on application - religion (knowledge) works for those who apply it - much like biology (knowledge) works for those who go to university


No, I'm interested in both.. not one or the other.
so if I said "I know god is a purple banana" what would be your next question?

So you knew he existed before you believed in him/knew him ? How did you know he existed ?
its more that the knowledge intensifies under personal reciprocation.

For instance suppose it was suddenly discovered that at birth you were switched with the president's son and were now warmly invited into the loving atmosphere of the white house family.

Do you think your knowledge of the president would undergo any changes?

all analogies fail somewhere down the track (the reason the president cannot extend himself to everyone is because he is not god)
it was meant to illustrate more how knowing the president is fully dependent on the dictation of the president - which offers an alternative to say empiricial inquiry.
I know..

actually what I am saying is that knowledge is dependent on application - religion (knowledge) works for those who apply it - much like biology (knowledge) works for those who go to university
Knowledge is not dependent on application. I can know lots of things and never apply them.
What you mean is that through application you know whether or not the knowledge 'works', which says nothing about the correctness of the knowledge.

so if I said "I know god is a purple banana" what would be your next question?
Take a guess.. lol

that is the conformity (or the beginning of it at least)
although conformity is not really a good choice of words since its more an innate ability that is uncovered than something acquired

for eg

1. Knowledge of god is fully dependent on adopting a suitable state of being

lust, avarice, envy etc will not be helpful

2. Adopting a suitable state of being is dependent on associating with persons who are already in knowledge

"birds of a feather flock together"

3. The further one one knows about the god, the further issues of the self and environment are also known

the more I know about god the more I know about myself, others and this world (in terms of "why" moreso than "what" ... which is the pride and joy of empiricism)


hm...i see. in regards to #2, i really didn't know a lot of people (or any) that felt the way i did, or that talked about it if they did. i've felt pretty alone in that regard, but i didn't care enough to let it stop me. i don't feel alone now.

it turns out i wasn't alone. i was just ignorant and jaded by my surroundings.

My god is. Who are you to say I am wrong?

i'm sorry. is he purple or yellow? am i being close-minded? could he be blue?

its more that the knowledge intensifies under personal reciprocation.

For instance suppose it was suddenly discovered that at birth you were switched with the president's son and were now warmly invited into the loving atmosphere of the white house family.

Do you think your knowledge of the president would undergo any changes?
This suggests that God doesn't know who I am until I present myself to him.
If so, how come ? He created all of us, right ?
If not, he's an asshole for not letting me know him.

Fine, how do I know ?

I could say the same to you about Roy Wright..

you just have to wait and find out. you'll know when you know. you know?

you just have to wait and find out. you'll know when you know. you know?

What if I die before he lets me know him ?

Emnos

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
all analogies fail somewhere down the track (the reason the president cannot extend himself to everyone is because he is not god)
it was meant to illustrate more how knowing the president is fully dependent on the dictation of the president - which offers an alternative to say empiricial inquiry.
”
I know..
so the analogy is ok in as far as one can expect an analogy to be ok?

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
actually what I am saying is that knowledge is dependent on application - religion (knowledge) works for those who apply it - much like biology (knowledge) works for those who go to university
”
Knowledge is not dependent on application. I can know lots of things and never apply them.
I caught the gist of your posts and assumed you weren't interested in discussing faith based knowledge


What you mean is that through application you know whether or not the knowledge 'works', which says nothing about the correctness of the knowledge.
if you don't test knowledge by seeing if it works and if accepting hearsay is ultimately hearsay, how does one determine whether knowledge is correct or not?
“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
so if I said "I know god is a purple banana" what would be your next question?
”
Take a guess.. lol
something like

"hey! you must have applied the same knowledge acquiring processes as me!"

;)

When ? Why hasn't he already ?

i don't know. he drives me nuts, he's so slow. and yet i know he's perfect...

your asshole comment made me laugh. i empathize...

This suggests that God doesn't know who I am until I present myself to him.
only if you take the analogy in a way that it was not meant

If so, how come ? He created all of us, right ?
If not, he's an asshole for not letting me know him.
If someone is indicating a celestial body in the night sky by saying it as the end of a tree branch do you chastise them for their suggestion that a star could be so close as to be on the tip of a branch in the park?
:mad:

Emnos


so the analogy is ok in as far as one can expect an analogy to be ok?

I caught the gist of your posts and assumed you weren't interested in discussing faith based knowledge


if you don't test knowledge by seeing if it works and if accepting hearsay is ultimately hearsay, how does one determine whether knowledge is correct or not?
“
something like

"hey! you must have applied the same knowledge acquiring processes as me!"

;)

With evidence.

only if you take the analogy in a way that it was not meant
I take it you used the analogy to make me see what you meant..
If I draw the wrong conclusion from your analogy it isn't a very good one.

If someone is indicating a celestial body in the night sky by saying it as the end of a tree branch do you chastise them for their suggestion that a star could be so close as to be on the tip of a branch in the park?
:mad:

Hu.. what ??

With evidence.
and how do you propose to test the relevancy of evidence?

For instance if I say, this knife is evidence that you are guilty of murder, or, this purple banana is evidence of the existence of god, what's next if you want to exclude hearsay and any "working processes" of knowledge?
:confused:

Hu.. what ??
confirmed!
:D

and how do you propose to test the relevancy of evidence?

For instance if I say, this knife is evidence that you are guilty of murder, or, this purple banana is evidence of the existence of god, what's next if you want to exclude hearsay and any "working processes" of knowledge?
:confused:

Could you please continue to the knowledge and verification ? I'm getting tired of this.

What if I die before he lets me know him ?

i don't think it would be reasonable to assume he let's anyone fall through the cracks you know? i wouldn't worry about such things if i were you. the best you can do is manage your own intentions. if that's not good enough for him then what does that say about him? worry about what you can control, and not about what you can't. we all have a fair share of responsibility in our life and you're doing well to take that on. i wouldn't want to take on what's his.

What if I die before he lets me know him ?

There's always the next life!
:D

This suggests that God doesn't know who I am until I present myself to him.
If so, how come ? He created all of us, right ?
If not, he's an asshole for not letting me know him.

If you want to see god, you have to play a Black Sabbath LP record at 78 speed. At least, that was an effective method in the '70s (there may have been drugs involved).

Could you please continue to the knowledge and verification ? I'm getting tired of this.
I proposed knowledge is tested by seeing whether it works (or not).
You said this is not true since one can test knowledge with evidence.

I don't understand how one can test the validity of evidence without calling upon whether knowledge works or not.

:confused:

i don't think it would be reasonable to assume he let's anyone fall through the cracks you know? i wouldn't worry about such things if i were you. the best you can do is manage your own intentions. if that's not good enough for him then what does that say about him? worry about what you can control, and not about what you can't. we all have a fair share of responsibility in our life and you're doing well to take that on. i wouldn't want to take on what's his.

I don't worry.
Although I am open to knowledge I haven't seen one shred of evidence to suggest a God exists.. But if someday God makes himself known I would not wipe that under the carpet so to speak. But I highly doubt it will happen (<- understatement).

There's always the next life!
:D

Oh no.. don't start with that stuff lol

If you want to see god, you have to play a Black Sabbath LP record at 78 speed. At least, that was an effective method in the '70s (there may have been drugs involved).

even attempts at humour can not be made without reference to application.

/the irony

If you want to see god, you have to play a Black Sabbath LP record at 78 speed. At least, that was an effective method in the '70s (there may have been drugs involved).

LOL I'm not interested ;)

Oh no.. don't start with that stuff lol

hence application and verification are probably where your real interest lies.

I proposed knowledge is tested by seeing whether it works (or not).
You said this is not true since one can test knowledge with evidence.

I don't understand how one can test the validity of evidence without calling upon whether knowledge works or not.

:confused:

Look superstition works for some people, athletes for example. Does that mean the superstition is truth ?

Now lets see the knowledge.

hence application and verification are probably where your real interest lies.

Fine you go with that.. now let me hear your knowledge about God and how you verified that knowledge. Specifics please.

I don't worry.
Although I am open to knowledge I haven't seen one shred of evidence to suggest a God exists.. But if someday God makes himself known I would not wipe that under the carpet so to speak. But I highly doubt it will happen (<- understatement).

If this day came, how would you know that it wasn't some form of hallucination, or mental illness taking form? Maybe when you think you are able to perceive god, all you are really perceiving is the early onset of Alzheimer's. Malfunctioning human brains are common, and the ability to understand the meaning and purpose of existence is usually a good sign of one.

Look superstition works for some people, athletes for example. Does that mean the superstition is truth ?

Probably not since superstition can be tested (to see if it works) in a way that it doesn't hold for athletes

Now lets see the knowledge.
if you want to see it outside of issues of application while deriding hearsay, there's nothing to see
:shrug:

If this day came, how would you know that it wasn't some form of hallucination, or mental illness taking form? Maybe when you think you are able to perceive god, all you are really perceiving is the early onset of Alzheimer's. Malfunctioning human brains are common, and the ability to understand the meaning and purpose of existence is usually a good sign of one.
I agree. I was talking about an unambiguous experience though. And if the doctor says that there is nothing wrong with me, the experience is worth some thought. But still.. I agree.

Probably not since superstition can be tested (to see if it works) in a way that it doesn't hold for athletes
How ?

if you want to see it outside of issues of application while deriding hearsay, there's nothing to see
:shrug:
Just give me the raw knowledge first.

How ?

provide an example of superstition (even how you could term something as "superstition" without doing so is interesting)

Just give me the raw knowledge first.
so you want to discuss the theoretical nature of god?

provide an example of superstition
Whatever. Anything can be a superstition.

(even how you could term something as "superstition" without doing so is interesting)
I don't know what you mean here.

so you want to discuss the theoretical nature of god?
No, I want your personal knowledge of God.

Whatever. Anything can be a superstition.
particularly if you can bring it into line with 'workable' knowledge

I don't know what you mean here.
If I say that atoms are superstition, how would you bring that claim into check?


No, I want your personal knowledge of God.
then you are going about it all the wrong way

[QUOTE=lightgigantic;1785884]particularly if you can bring it into line with 'workable' knowledge


If I say that atoms are superstition, how would you bring that claim into check?


then you are going about it all the wrong way


There is an abundance of physical evidence to support the existence of atoms. This is not true of god/

By " going about it all the wrong way" I take it that what you are really saying is that you can adduce no evidence to support your claim. Nothing new there.

[QUOTE=lightgigantic;1785884]particularly if you can bring it into line with 'workable' knowledge


If I say that atoms are superstition, how would you bring that claim into check?


then you are going about it all the wrong way


There is an abundance of physical evidence to support the existence of atoms. This is not true of god/
in philosophy they call that "empiricism"

By " going about it all the wrong way" I take it that what you are really saying is that you can adduce no evidence to support your claim. Nothing new there.
not really
its more like the wrongness of demanding that a claim that is not empirical be validated by empiricism.

kind of like the wrongness of demanding that geometry be validated by a thermometer (of course a thermometer works just fine .... for measuring temperature)

of course you will no doubt go on how your thermometerism (aka empiricism) is the truth the light and the way yet it still remains grossly incapable of monopolizing the pursuit of knowledge
:shrugs: