Will this convert you to believe in God?

[NDS]

Raising someone from the dead seems like very solid evidence of a higher being, especially if the person who brought about the rising of the dead claimed to be a servant of God. When I say "to raise someone from the dead" I'm talking if someone came up to you, brought you to a cemetary where your parents or grandparents had been buried for years, dug them up, opened the coffin, and touched their skeleton causing them to reform into a human.

[Arsalan]

I dont believe in that so no

[snake river rufus]

A higher being is the only thing that could raise someone from the dead?
Well,,,perhaps.
Let me know as soon as this happens :rolleyes:

[NDS]

I dont believe in that so no

You seriously wouldn't believe in God if someone raised your 20 years dead Grandpa from the grave? Wow. I mean, we're all entitled to our beliefs, but how would you rationalize that?

A higher being is the only thing that could raise someone from the dead?
Well,,,perhaps.
Let me know as soon as this happens :rolleyes:

What else could raise someone from the dead? I know you can consider an afterlife without God like Buddhism and others but if it could be done without God wouldn't we have seen it done already?

[ashura]

Raising someone from the dead seems like very solid evidence of a higher being, especially if the person who brought about the rising of the dead claimed to be a servant of God. When I say "to raise someone from the dead" I'm talking if someone came up to you, brought you to a cemetary where your parents or grandparents had been buried for years, dug them up, opened the coffin, and touched their skeleton causing them to reform into a human.

The answer would still be no. Religion has always been a easy answer for things that we can't explain at the time and this would be another example of that. Could it be possible that this reviver is some agent of some god? Absolutely. But how could we possibly verify such a thing? I am not, after all, an atheist because I refuse to believe in gods, but because I'm an unable to believe in gods.

[snake river rufus]

What else could raise someone from the dead? I know you can consider an afterlife without God like Buddhism and others but if it could be done without God wouldn't we have seen it done already?

Penn and Teller?
Are you saying that the reason we have not seen it already is that there is no god?

[NDS]

Penn and Teller?
Are you saying that the reason we have not seen it already is that there is no god?

No, the fact that we haven't seen it already and the fact that it isn't happening all the time to me shows that it obviously is impossible for "us" to do it without something greater than us doing it for us. If dead people walking the earth as ghosts could re-enter their bodies and become alive again, then the one's who got the shaft in the afterlife would be re-entering their earth bodies by the thousands. So we can rule out the ability of any "soul" in the afterlife being able to raise themselves or another soul from the dead.

We can also rule out technology, unless someone has already built some kind of Death Raiser 2000 machine. I haven't seen it on the market yet.

What surprises me is that the people who answered "no" to the poll question didn't answer "maybe." You have to be at least inclined to believe in a higher power if you witnessed that, to me at least.

[Asguard]

Firstly i would look for the hidden wires:p
Secondly i would look for a scientific explination

You shouldnt belive an explination for something just because they tell you it is so
you COULD say that it was "magic" as well

[NDS]

Firstly i would look for the hidden wires:p
Secondly i would look for a scientific explination

You shouldnt belive an explination for something just because they tell you it is so
you COULD say that it was "magic" as well

Did you read the first post? If your dead GRANDPARENT or PARENT of 20 or more years who you witnessed die and get buried firsthand was dug up out of the grave and regenerated, you wouldn't believe? That in itself is hard to believe.

[Asguard]

so would CPR, defib ect be hard to belive if i went back in time and used it on someone in the middle ages. Just because you cant explaine it doesnt mean that its god or magic

[snake river rufus]

No, the fact that we haven't seen it already and the fact that it isn't happening all the time to me shows that it obviously is impossible for "us" to do it without something greater than us doing it for us.

But since it is not, nor has ever happened,, by your reasoning wouldn't that be evidence in the 'no god' column?

[lightgigantic]

I voted no also (and I am a theist)

establishing the existence of god and/or one's connection to god requires an element of philosophy and while mystical presentation can assist such a discussion (if a person could do that, people might be inclined to actually listen to them), it all comes back to philosophical realization and the ability to communicate that to others for their edification.

IOW if a person can raise someone from the dead and I still remain at the mercy of lust/wrath/envy/etc despite seeing them perform miracles/applying their instructions, something is missing from the equation since my (so-called) knowledge of god doesn't have any practical implications.

[chris4355]

Believing in god would simply be jumping to conclusions. I would just look for a scientific solution.

Its kinda like looking at a magic trick, many of them appear so unbelievable its almost too easy sometimes to just feel its supernatural, though it really isn't.

[Asguard]

hell a CAR looks magical if you dont know how they really work. That doesnt mean because i dont understand mechanics or how an internal combustion engine works that god exists

[NDS]

I voted no also (and I am a theist)

establishing the existence of god and/or one's connection to god requires an element of philosophy and while mystical presentation can assist such a discussion (if a person could do that, people might be inclined to actually listen to them), it all comes back to philosophical realization and the ability to communicate that to others for their edification.

What philosophical realizations? What are the top 5 truths of reality that you have learned over the years? Seriously, I would like to know. Anyone devoted to any religion is searching for the truth of reality. What have you found to be the 5 main truths so far in your personal search. I'm not asking out of spite, I really want to know. Also, why do some Buddah followers spend years meditating in solitude and still come to the conclusion that no "God" exists, just a different realm or something. Thanks.

[Sarkus]

Anyone devoted to any religion is searching for the truth of reality.No - they're looking for the "truth as dictated by their religion".
Science is searching for the truth of reality.

:D

What have you found to be the 3 main truths so far in your personal search. Ooh - good question.
I'd have to plump for...

- Uncertainty at the quantum level (can't know both position and speed etc)
- Gravity sucks!
- Most people are irrational.


:p

[Orleander]

It would have to be God standing there personally raising the person from the dead. Then I'd believe.

[Asguard]

ahhh but how would you KNOW he\she\it was god?

[Orleander]

women's intuition :D

[Asguard]

which doesnt consitute scientific evidence and there for can be discarded:p

sorry:p

[NDS]

Ok Asguard, I see your point. There's no way tro verify 100% that something was God or not. But still, something like raising from the dead is pretty convincing.

[Asguard]

as i said, if i went back 200 years and applied modern medicine then i would have a fair chance of doing exactly THAT. You don't think a defibrillator would seem mystical to someone 200 years ago?

[SnakeLord]

It would be a possibility amongst other possibilities. Of course if we accepted the notion then we'd undoubtedly be faced with the question: Which one?

[ashura]

It would be a possibility amongst other possibilities. Of course if we accepted the notion then we'd undoubtedly be faced with the question: Which one?

Great answer.

[Asguard]

look i am studying medical science, which can seem pritty mysterious. What your reaction be if there was someone convulsing on the ground. Thrashing around like they were possesed. I walk up to them and do something you dont see and they imediatly stop. I tell you that i excised the demon, would you belive me?

Hell no, you would ask what the drug i just injected into there but was

[Star-gazer]

If someone showed you a horse with a horn, whould you believe it was a unicorn.

[spidergoat]

Raising someone from the dead seems like very solid evidence of a higher being, especially if the person who brought about the rising of the dead claimed to be a servant of God. When I say "to raise someone from the dead" I'm talking if someone came up to you, brought you to a cemetary where your parents or grandparents had been buried for years, dug them up, opened the coffin, and touched their skeleton causing them to reform into a human.

How do you know it's not sorcery?

[Myles]

Can I see it happen first and then make my mind up ?

[p-brane]

Can I see it happen first and then make my mind up ?

Whom are you asking?

[lightgigantic]

What philosophical realizations? What are the top 5 truths of reality that you have learned over the years? Seriously, I would like to know. Anyone devoted to any religion is searching for the truth of reality. What have you found to be the 5 main truths so far in your personal search. I'm not asking out of spite, I really want to know.
Kind of a broad subject
:eek:

In short though there are 5 essential aspects to understanding god and how things relate to him

Isvara - god
Jiva - the living entity
Prakrti - material nature
Kala - time
Karma - material activity

You can find these things explained in more detail by scrolling down here (http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/index.htm)till you come to "Tattva"

If these topics are understood properly and are practiced accordingly, one should be able to disassociate from the cultivation of issues of lust/anger/wrath.
Merely seeing something mystical won't cut the mustard - for instance science has been able to achieve many mystical things , but it hasn't made anyone more sober in their outlook of life.

Sometimes as a consequence of spiritual advancement mystical types of abilities develop, but they are not the fruits of actual spiritual discipline.

eg - SB 9.21.12 -I do not pray to the Supreme Personality of Godhead for the eight perfections of mystic yoga, nor for salvation from repeated birth and death. I want only to stay among all the living entities and suffer all distresses on their behalf, so that they may be freed from suffering.

Also, why do some Buddah followers spend years meditating in solitude and still come to the conclusion that no "God" exists, just a different realm or something. Thanks.
they are working out of a different theoretical foundation (one of four)
this is dealt with here (http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/buddhism.htm)

Buddhists have access to a type of liberation (namely the cessation of material pangs) but because such a notion of perfection doesn't accommodate the existence of the living entity and god as eternal truths, eventually they fall down from such a state, being inevitably attracted to the sphere of activity again. (If one doesn't have recourse to spiritual activity - ie activity in connection to god - then that means one must seek activity in the material world)

[spidergoat]

Buddhism involves liberation from symbolic knowledge, such as "God". It's got nothing to do with perfection.

[NDS]

How do you know it's not sorcery?

I don't know that. Now I'm just really fucking confused about everything like I was before. Thanks guys! (lol)

Lightgigantic,

Isvara - god
Jiva - the living entity
Prakrti - material nature
Kala - time
Karma - material activity

Ok, I read your link and see that they use a bunch of big words and say the same things over and over again (though I'm not really sure what that is).

I know we've talked about this before but that was eons ago and I forgot everything (my memory sucks). We were talking about what is the optimum relgion, or the optimum way to live life if I want to reach the pinnacle of existence (Nirvana, Heaven, being a God, etc.)

From your last post it seems to me (I may be wrong) that you are suggesting that Buddhism is NOT the optimum religion. There are ways of living which are "better" than Buddhism in terms of accomplishling the goal I mentioned above the fastest and most efficient way. Am I right with this (that you think Buddhism is inferior to other religions or ways of thinking)?

Aside from that, what truths have you personally found about the true reality that I should know. I know that guys like Victor Zammit (victorzammit.com) are saying that the Catholic church and the Christian doctrine as whole that "bad" people burn for eternity is bogus. He points out that whoever translated the Bible mistranslated the word "eon" to mean "eternity" only when eon was used in relation to punishment.

Clearly, Hinduism doesn't believe in an eternal "hell," only temporary hells where people get burned for a while but not forever. Would you say that Victor Zammit is correct in terms of this mistranslation of the word "eon" in the Bible as meaning eternal? If so, doesn't this say that the Christian/Catholic teachings of the true "reality" are FALSE in this sense, and that therefore the Christian/Catholic way of thought is INFERIOR to other ways of thought in this regard?

Again, you've always said that the best way to attaining the pinnacle of existence (Nirvana, Transcendence, etc.) is to have a better understanding of reality. You say that there is a supreme God being with his/her own personality. The Buddhists don't believe this, so according to you they are WRONG on this one fact of reality. You say that there is no eternal lake of fire (the literal one which the Bible speaks of). The current Bible translation says there is. Is this current Bible translation wrong?

Now you might say this isn't a big deal and that "every religion is right" like VitalOne and yourself to some extent used to constantly say.

But there is a quote in the Bhagavad Gita which says something like "where you end up immediately after you die depends greatly on what you are thinking at the moment of death." If this is true, then the Christians/Catholics who believe the current translation of the Bible (eternal hellfire) will most likely be very scared and think they are going to burn forever at the moment of death. This obviously will bring them to a bad place in the afterlife.

So my point is, is the Christian/Catholic teaching of the afterlife FALSE or not OPTIMUM?


One more thing:

In Christianity, one attains the highest level of existence (heaven) by simply believing a certain fact (Jesus was Son of God). That's it, there you go.

In Hinduism, one attains the highest level of existence (Nirvana, Moksha, etc.) by undertanding the truth of the reality of nature and through Dharma, correct actions (whatever those are).

So you can't say that Hinduism is true and also say that Christianity or any other religion is equal to Hinduism, because according to you it's not (otherwise you wouldn't be a Hindu and believe what your sect of Hinduism believes). According to you, Hinduism (or whatever specific sect of Hinduism you are) will lead you to Moksha or Nirvana much faster and much more efficiently than Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, a different sect of Hinduism, or any other religion or sect of a religion.

[Myles]

Whom are you asking?

You because its just a hyothetical. I can't imagine ever seeing such a thing unless it were some kind of trick. The hum,an brain is irreversibly damaged withinh half an hour of death. That's a fact.

[spidergoat]

All statements are false.

[Myles]

What philosophical realizations? What are the top 5 truths of reality that you have learned over the years? Seriously, I would like to know. Anyone devoted to any religion is searching for the truth of reality. What have you found to be the 5 main truths so far in your personal search. I'm not asking out of spite, I really want to know. Also, why do some Buddah followers spend years meditating in solitude and still come to the conclusion that no "God" exists, just a different realm or something. Thanks.

They are searching for the truith of reality, and have been for thousands of years, but they are using the wrong approach. Hence, nothing will be found by them that is not some sort of self-delusion

[Myles]

women's intuition :D

What stock should I buy on Wall Street or London tomorrow ?

[visceral_instinct]

When I see that happen, or I see some concrete evidence, then I will believe.

[spidergoat]

Raising someone from the dead seems like very solid evidence of a higher being, especially if the person who brought about the rising of the dead claimed to be a servant of God. When I say "to raise someone from the dead" I'm talking if someone came up to you, brought you to a cemetary where your parents or grandparents had been buried for years, dug them up, opened the coffin, and touched their skeleton causing them to reform into a human.

This might cause me to believe in Zombies.

[NDS]

This might cause me to believe in Zombies.

Lol, okay. But there is something very wrong to me with the statement: "Nothing can prove to me that a God exists."

That's like saying, "Nothing can prove to me that the world is round." It is just as absurd as that statement.

Person 1: "Person 2, the world is round. See this picture from space? It proves it."

Person 2: "No it doesn't. The picture is fake. Someone created the picture. The world is definetely flat."

Person 1: "But if you fly around the earth you end up at the same point where you started."

Person 2: "All this proves is that the planes navigating equipment is fucked up."

etc. etc. etc.

[Cris]

No. I can imagine future technology that could take a sample of the corpse, e.g. dna, and reconstruct the person to an earlier live form. Reconstructing memory might be an issue.

The thread raises the idea though that if something qualifies as a god then it must be able to perform miracles. This issue was highlighted in the 300 year research on Q (the origins of Christianity) that showed that the earliest Christian writings made no reference to miracles and that the miracle stories all appeared at the same time later. The speculation was that as the Jesus idea began to take form it was noted that as a god he would need to be seen to have performed miracles to qualify - and hey presto - suitable stories were immediately generated.

[spidergoat]

Bury the ship Columbus used to discover America on the moon, with a nice carving on the front that says, God wuz here. I would believe that.

[NDS]

No. I can imagine future technology that could take a sample of the corpse, e.g. dna, and reconstruct the person to an earlier live form. Reconstructing memory might be an issue.

The thread raises the idea though that if something qualifies as a god then it must be able to perform miracles. This issue was highlighted in the 300 year research on Q (the origins of Christianity) that showed that the earliest Christian writings made no reference to miracles and that the miracle stories all appeared at the same time later. The speculation was that as the Jesus idea began to take form it was noted that as a god he would need to be seen to have performed miracles to qualify - and hey presto - suitable stories were immediately generated.


Yeah, that goes with this verse:


John 20:30-31

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

NKJV

So the Bible itself states that it mentioned the miracles to persuade people to believe in Jesus. Apparently God, who wrote the Bible through his disciples, admits that we need help to believe in Jesus.

[spidergoat]

I don't see how a miracle would prove anything. It would have to be something so extremely unlikely that there is no other explanation. Say, everyone on Earth suddenly found themselves holding an updated Bible, with new sections relevent to our times.

[NDS]

Ya, the new Bible will be one sentence: "Serve us, the priests, or burn forever."

You make a good point though. I would love a new Bible to come out which summarizes all the best points of the Old and New Testament, and gives us the main principles that we really need to know. What good is a really long book if no one gets anything out of it (or the mass of people)?

[Saquist]

Raising someone from the dead seems like very solid evidence of a higher being, especially if the person who brought about the rising of the dead claimed to be a servant of God. When I say "to raise someone from the dead" I'm talking if someone came up to you, brought you to a cemetary where your parents or grandparents had been buried for years, dug them up, opened the coffin, and touched their skeleton causing them to reform into a human.


Absolutely...
but just as in bible times some did not put their faith in Christ because of alterior motives. The same would be true to day. Fittingly the time for such miracles are consigned to the past for now.

[NDS]

I'm saying, if someone ripped up by Grandpa's grave, opened the coffin, and touched his skeleton (with his bare hands!!! No technology involved) causing him to reform into his former human self, I would be very inclined to believe in God. Your level of potential faith would have to go up, no matter who you are.

[Saquist]

all it really takes is deductive reasoning
(from my perspective) but I can see how rising dead could make such an influence.

[NDS]

I could never tell myself, "There is no God, no matter what." That seems illogical. We don't know if the physical realm is the only realm. We don't know a lot of things. And we don't know what we don't know. Anything imaginable is possible plus infinity. True some things are more likely than others, but still, anything is a possibility.

[SnakeLord]

I'm saying, if someone ripped up by Grandpa's grave, opened the coffin, and touched his skeleton (with his bare hands!!! No technology involved) causing him to reform into his former human self, I would be very inclined to believe in God. Your level of potential faith would have to go up, no matter who you are.

How would you know it isn't just a highly advanced alien? How do you distinguish between a highly advanced alien and a god? Well, we could assume that god is alone in being omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. The problem is testing those things. You could never establish it was any of them unless you were too.

[ashura]

I could never tell myself, "There is no God, no matter what." That seems illogical. We don't know if the physical realm is the only realm. We don't know a lot of things. And we don't know what we don't know. Anything imaginable is possible plus infinity. True some things are more likely than others, but still, anything is a possibility.

I agree, but this is also why you can't jump to the conclusion that the existence of God (which one?) is what's behind the ability to raise the dead. We don't know lots of things, and it could just be that there is some way to raise the dead even 20 years post mortem that was discovered via science.

[Michael]

I said almost.
I would first think: shit - I'm losing my mind or I've been drugged.
But assuming that weeks go by and I can see that this person is indeed my dead relative AND they are telling me the are a servant of a God and everyone can meet this person as well (so it's not just in my head) - then I'd think either (a) they didn't really die (but suppose I know for a fact they did and I did see the body reincarnate from bones into a human flesh so the second option is (b) something has a lot of power to be able to do this and maybe it wants me to think of it as a God.

I think in the end I would still want a rational answer. I'm going powerful alien race - Oh Xenu how could I have doubted you :p

[NDS]

Yeah, true there's no way to verify it as being God. But if you (you in general) were God, what would you do to prove your existence to your people that you created if they will rationalize everything as being technology, magic, aliens, etc.? We always ask for proof of God's existence, yet there's nothing God can do to prove 100% that he exists. So we can't bash God for not proving his existence. Given that, it would be nice to see some kind of amazing miracle like a sea being split in half to grow a belief off of.

[SnakeLord]

But if you (you in general) were God, what would you do to prove your existence to your people that you created if they will rationalize everything as being technology, magic, etc.

I simply would have given them the innate knowledge that I exist. Done, nobody argues. Nobody lands planes into buildings because their image of god differs to yours. Just an identical innate understanding of me.

The theists will inevitably chime in that "faith" is essential to know who really believes.. The whole statement is ludicrous if for nothing else because being omniscient I already know everything.

[CutsieMarie89]

It would not force me to believe in God, but I would think it was amazing.

[Michael]

I simply would have given them the innate knowledge that I exist. Done, nobody argues. Nobody lands planes into buildings because their image of god differs to yours. Just an identical innate understanding of me.Great idea Snake!

[NDS]

Yeah, I agree with you on the point that "how can someone just choose to believe something." In Christianity, one must "choose" to believe something. How can you choose to believe something? To me, you need some kind of evidence, such as a miracle, to grow a belief out of. The Bible seems to agree with me too from the verse above. Like you said before SnakeLord, I can't just choose to believe in Leprachauns out of nowhere. It's not possible, no matter how hard I try.

Interesting idea with the giving people the innate knowledge of my existence (if I was God). I guess that would work. The only problem I guess would be the free will aspect. How much does knowing about the true nature of reality affect ability to choose. On the other hand, if we had innate knowledge of God's existence and the existence of the spiritual realm and Nirvana, then maybe we would have the choice to go there when we're ready instead of going to hell for eternity or turning into a frog in our next life.

Your point brings up another question. Lightgigantic always talks about how the goal in life or attaining Nirvana/Mocksha is in realizing or understanding the truth about the nature of reality, the classic Hindu doctrine. Like you said SnakeLord, why not just give everyone that understanding right off the bat? What's the point of blinding us? What is it accomplishing, besides suffering?

The Buddhists give us the eight noble truths or whatever for ending suffering. How about no suffering at all?

[SnakeLord]

Like you said before SnakeLord, I can't just choose to believe in Leprachauns out of nowhere. It's not possible, no matter how hard I try.

Indeed it is true and everyone knows it. One does not and cannot force upon themselves belief in anything. That belief must come from external experiences. Alas the theist tends to read anything into the most simplest, and stupidest, of things to protect his belief. My brother, who - after doing time for selling cocaine amongst other substances, became one of these christians that damns people like me to hell whenever we catch them out. So he spoke of miracles and stated how after finding a mole of some sort on his arm he prayed and the mole vanished. I asked him how he justified the removal of a mole by praying in comparison to the praying to save some poor 3 year old girl from rape and slaughter. At that stage I was doomed to hell once more. The beauty of it is that the belief, once established, is self protecting.

I got a cold.. My brother came round and said he was going to pray for me. I told him to shove it up his ass. Anyway.. a week later and I'm feeling much better...

"See, prayer does work".

What a f***ing tosspot.

But as stated, these things are self protecting. Even the smallest, and most pathetic, of things will be seen as confirmation of their beliefs. I see people like this all the time. The only difference between the people I see and theists is down to the risk that their freedom carries. While religion is clearly ultimtely the largest risk, it is too overwhelming in majority to do much about.. For the time being.

[NDS]

Ya, I don't like the people out there who are way over dramatic about their beliefs and who will say that every little positive thing that happens in their life is God's doing. And those same people will say that every bad thing that happens is simply God's work as well. So they can rationalize everything towards their own views. If they get a raise at work, God did it. If they get fired, God did it for their good. So no matter what happens one can say, "God did it." Instead, people who genuienly believe something should save the drama and work on their own life unless a clear opportunity presents itself to intervene.

Etiher way, the fact that mediums exist for example and the fact that scientists have verified their "psychic" knowledge strongly indicates the existence of a "soul" or "afterlife" of some kind to me. How can mediums know what they know and see and talk to dead people? That's freaky.

[Saquist]

What's wrong with that?
It's there life and only they have experienced theire life, maybe they're right maybe it's coincidences but they're the only ones that can make that determination.

[SnakeLord]

Etiher way, the fact that mediums exist for example and the fact that scientists have verified their "psychic" knowledge strongly indicates the existence of a "soul" or "afterlife" of some kind to me. How can mediums know what they know and see and talk to dead people? That's freaky.

Show me one scientific verification of anything "psychic". Show me one verified dead person talker, one genuine "medium". What next.. you actually believe in your "stars" and get tarot done frequently? The beauty is that nobody sees the con for the con it is. Indeed they pay those con merchants for the privilege of being conned. How many people do you think phone for their star chart or phone those porn lines thinking they're actually talking to someone sexy?

As for "soul": http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/mind.html

As for the afterlife I can only direct you to one of my threads concerning it. The whole idea, if given real thought, is so stupid as to be unworthy of real consideration. I leave it with you.

[Myles]

Yeah, that goes with this verse:


John 20:30-31

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

NKJV

So the Bible itself states that it mentioned the miracles to persuade people to believe in Jesus. Apparently God, who wrote the Bible through his disciples, admits that we need help to believe in Jesus.

That's typical. If he is so mighty why doesn't he make it a straightforward business to get to know him. Doesn't he know that sane people do not believe in miracles ? Jesus as depicted in the Bible was an illusionist. Who would believe that Lazurus ,whose body would be putrefying after three days, could be brought back to life.The brain is irreversibly damaged within half an hour after death.

[sisyphus__]

Face it. This thread belongs in only one place: parapsychology.

[glaucon]

Face it. This thread belongs in only one place: parapsychology.

Inextricably correct.



By the by, what the F does necromancy necessarily have to do with a deity???

[lightgigantic]

---------- NDS ----------



Lightgigantic,

Isvara - god
Jiva - the living entity
Prakrti - material nature
Kala - time
Karma - material activity

Ok, I read your link and see that they use a bunch of big words and say the same things over and over again (though I'm not really sure what that is).
what is the same thing that is repeated?

I know we've talked about this before but that was eons ago and I forgot everything (my memory sucks). We were talking about what is the optimum relgion, or the optimum way to live life if I want to reach the pinnacle of existence (Nirvana, Heaven, being a God, etc.)
A good general principle of any endeavour is to have the association of like minded people.
As for the optimum religion, that depends on where some one is situated.

The highest is this
BG 12.8: Just fix your mind upon Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and engage all your intelligence in Me. Thus you will live in Me always, without a doubt.

The lowest is this
BG 12.11: If, however, you are unable to work in this consciousness of Me, then try to act giving up all results of your work and try to be self-situated.

with the further range of descending value between texts 8 and 11 (http://vedabase.net/bg/12/en)

Actually the whole 12th chapter is a good over view of different levels of religious practice in general

From your last post it seems to me (I may be wrong) that you are suggesting that Buddhism is NOT the optimum religion. There are ways of living which are "better" than Buddhism in terms of accomplishling the goal I mentioned above the fastest and most efficient way. Am I right with this (that you think Buddhism is inferior to other religions or ways of thinking)?
There is a type of religious fatalism, probably prominently culturally established by some abrahamic theistic scholars around the 12th century, that you either get it spot on or are lost to hell.

Buddhism is sometimes defined as upadharma in the vedas, meaning it deals exclusively with subreligious principles (ahimsa, humility, etc). When I suggest that buddhism is somehow lesser, I mean to suggest that there is not a completeness in the practice since the philosophy doesn't adequately deal with issues of the self.

It is true that there are many non-existent and false aspects of the material self, but as a further point there is an eternal nature to our individual existence. Coming to this realization necessitates a concomitant realization of god - IOW realization of our eternal individuality is realized to the degree that we realize god.

The perfection of buddhism offers a type of liberation where one merges into transcendence, but because we are eternally individual, the need for activity pulls one from that state of liberation. We are pulled towards activity. - kind of like if you had a really dreadful life of harassment and pain at the hands of others, and somehow left it to eternally reside in a vacant field by yourself, sooner or later you would want to do "something" - a fuller picture has activities that can also be performed while in a state of liberation. These transcendental activities are unalloyed activities of love and devotion towards god and things connected to god.

The notion of dissolving the self is attractive for someone who's sense of self is ultimately painful (which is what the material self actually is - but due to the nature of illusion we don't perceive it). The discipline of buddhism involves breaking that material illusion of the self. A further religious principle is not only dissolving the material self but coming to understand the nature of the real self.
The difference may appear very slight but the implications are vast. (http://vedabase.net/bg/4/35/en)

In the absence of realizing god, we are left with a focus on subreligious principles, and/or, dry mental speculation/book knowledge about god, none of which offer a steady platform of existence. These things advance the cause of religious causes but are not perfections.

Aside from that, what truths have you personally found about the true reality that I should know. I know that guys like Victor Zammit (victorzammit.com) are saying that the Catholic church and the Christian doctrine as whole that "bad" people burn for eternity is bogus. He points out that whoever translated the Bible mistranslated the word "eon" to mean "eternity" only when eon was used in relation to punishment.
I agree
A god that punishes anyone for eternity (what to speak of persons who are slightly skewed in their religious sentiments) offers a very difficult to worship. Actually the truth is the opposite - god pays more attention to the good things we do rather than the bad things - if it wasn't the case, there would be no scope for anyone leaving the material world once they chose to enter it.

Other things to know - well there's tons. :eek:
A good place to start might be understanding what is the unique nature of god, since that is fundamental to understanding what is unique about our selves.

In the vedas, a common word for god is bhagavan, which means possessing all opulences (commonly categorized as six in nature)

Here (http://krishna.krishna.org/Articles/2001/01/00232.html)is an audio lecture on it that gets straight into it (after a first minute of sanskrit recitation)


Clearly, Hinduism doesn't believe in an eternal "hell," only temporary hells where people get burned for a while but not forever. Would you say that Victor Zammit is correct in terms of this mistranslation of the word "eon" in the Bible as meaning eternal? If so, doesn't this say that the Christian/Catholic teachings of the true "reality" are FALSE in this sense, and that therefore the Christian/Catholic way of thought is INFERIOR to other ways of thought in this regard?
The understanding of hell might not be sound, but there are many other things that are valid, just as there are many other things that are valid in buddhism. What seems to be lacking in christianity is detailed information of god, and also, detailed information of the self.

Once again, if there were more sincere christians or buddhists in the world, I wouldn't be complaining (since sincerity in religion is all about devotion to god, and since god is not ultimately a religious fanatic - he is not christian, muslim or hindu - a sincere christian is a million times better than an insincere hindu - another common article of miscommunication in theism is "the lowest of our guys is greater than the highest of your guys" - lol)

Again, you've always said that the best way to attaining the pinnacle of existence (Nirvana, Transcendence, etc.) is to have a better understanding of reality. You say that there is a supreme God being with his/her own personality. The Buddhists don't believe this, so according to you they are WRONG on this one fact of reality. You say that there is no eternal lake of fire (the literal one which the Bible speaks of). The current Bible translation says there is. Is this current Bible translation wrong?
Lets just say the modern bible has complex hermeneutic issues - I don't think it is practical to take the view that every word and every syllable of the bible is non-different from god. I would say that this is the case with the vedas, on the provision that it is approached in connection to a disciplic succession (http://www.harekrsna.de/artikel/faq.htm#parampara)

Now you might say this isn't a big deal and that "every religion is right" like VitalOne and yourself to some extent used to constantly say.

But there is a quote in the Bhagavad Gita which says something like "where you end up immediately after you die depends greatly on what you are thinking at the moment of death." If this is true, then the Christians/Catholics who believe the current translation of the Bible (eternal hellfire) will most likely be very scared and think they are going to burn forever at the moment of death. This obviously will bring them to a bad place in the afterlife.
actually the implications of this verse

BG 8.5: And whoever, at the end of his life, quits his body, remembering Me alone, at once attains My nature. Of this there is no doubt.

BG 8.6: Whatever state of being one remembers when he quits his body, O son of Kuntī, that state he will attain without fail.

BG 8.7: Therefore, Arjuna, you should always think of Me in the form of Kṛṣṇa and at the same time carry out your prescribed duty of fighting. With your activities dedicated to Me and your mind and intelligence fixed on Me, you will attain Me without doubt.

BG 8.8: He who meditates on Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, his mind constantly engaged in remembering Me, undeviated from the path, he, O Pārtha, is sure to reach Me.

In short, what one will be remembering at the time of death depends on the nature of one's consciousness in regards to one's activities.

http://www.salagram.net/karma-animalnature.jpg

So my point is, is the Christian/Catholic teaching of the afterlife FALSE or not OPTIMUM?
I would say it is false, but the point of religion is to a positive attraction to god and not just merely a negative attraction to hell- IOW unlike the issue with buddhism and the nature of the self, the exact details of hell are not so important. It's simply enough to know that its a place one wouldn't want to visit (or alternatively, visit again).


One more thing:

In Christianity, one attains the highest level of existence (heaven) by simply believing a certain fact (Jesus was Son of God). That's it, there you go.
I think even sincere christians would admit that there is more to "believing" in jesus than lip service - IOW "believing" can be unpacked to include a whole lot of procedures in line with jesus's teachings.
For instance if a man says that he believes his wife is the most attractive woman deserving of his full attention yet his actions indicate otherwise, it tends to indicate a lack of sincerity.

In Hinduism, one attains the highest level of existence (Nirvana, Moksha, etc.) by undertanding the truth of the reality of nature and through Dharma, correct actions (whatever those are).
And part of understanding that is to accept a spiritual master (http://vedabase.net/bg/4/34/en)
In one sense, jesus is the founder guru of christianity (at the head of the disciplic succession to god)


So you can't say that Hinduism is true and also say that Christianity or any other religion is equal to Hinduism, because according to you it's not (otherwise you wouldn't be a Hindu and believe what your sect of Hinduism believes). According to you, Hinduism (or whatever specific sect of Hinduism you are) will lead you to Moksha or Nirvana much faster and much more efficiently than Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, a different sect of Hinduism, or any other religion or sect of a religion.

Actually the issue is not so much about denomination since these things are only means.
Generally there are two approaches to the problem of achieving transcendence

BG 12.1: Arjuna inquired: Which are considered to be more perfect, those who are always properly engaged in Your devotional service (aka dualists) or those who worship the impersonal Brahman, the unmanifested? (aka monists)

to which the reply is

BG 12.2: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Those who fix their minds on My personal form and are always engaged in worshiping Me with great and transcendental faith are considered by Me to be most perfect.

the short way

BG 12.3-4: But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, unchanging, fixed and immovable — the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth — by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons, engaged in the welfare of all, at last achieve Me.

and the long way.

PS - skinwalker - if you want to edit this post because it contains too many scriptural quotes, can you please PM me first?

;)

[SkinWalker]

Please Take Sermons and Preaching to a Theological/Superstition Site or PMs

[Reiku]

I need not proof. I should have been dead a long time ago... well... not that long... about five years ago.

[lightgigantic]

I need not proof. I should have been dead a long time ago... well... not that long... about five years ago.
death .... banned from sciforums ....

you've had quite a life

:p

[fusion4577]

how is this being risen from the dead, and who say's it is a christian/jew/muslim god but not a "pagen" god(if any, could nutcase workin expermint or kids pulling a weird prank)

[Hapsburg]

What else could raise someone from the dead?
A Haitian? :confused:

[one_raven]

What else could raise someone from the dead?

That's the whole problem in a nutshell.
"I don't understand it, so it must be God."

[onlinerotter1]

commun mob discussion.....the mou(greek--means "my god")...why people stuck on the word (god, christianity, deth, afterlife etc.) everything is placed in the right way of nature. if someone find the proof of the existent of god ( whats kinda difficult), but than he has found the answer of "why me exist). but i think thats not the point. the whole point is to understand and o find an acceptable way to get the knowledge about things are really are. Ask u self whats menkinds way is: burn, growing up, get an adult and being in the position to make another men(kid), getting older and dieing. thats nature way. before and after is just a combination of all descrption of humans mind. just for this.....everything needs power to live and to exist. also human. sokrates said in the composium that god is energy (everywhere).....human exist just to product this energy. how and all the other question needs answers with a lot of time for explaining. ( im trully sorry for my english).i believe. the soul is humans energy. human get positive and negative expirence. he loadet it....(scince said: when human is sleeping he fill up his battery....) i believe when he is sleeping he emptyed his battery.....when god is energy than this energy needs to get supported. and this is humans work. for this and only for this he exist, like a part of the whole energy. when he diet ...his energy is gettin "back" to the whole energy of universe, just to get comibinated with it and than to be a part with other particles of energys, when a new human is getting born. this aswers to all relions, to all philosophys and its logic... and thays all....

[NDS]

That's the whole problem in a nutshell.
"I don't understand it, so it must be God."

Well, to me, the other end of the problem is, "I don't understand it, but it can't be God."

Basically, from what I've seen on this poll and the comments, there is really nothing that God (assuming he exists) can do to prove his existence to humans who are ready to deny literally any phenomenon as possibly being caused by a god. Why do atheists keep asking for evidence of God's existence, when literally nothing, not even the most outrageous miracle, can prove to them that he exists?

Anything is possible to me. There could be another realm of existence which none of us can understand with our limited thinking capacities, but, to use your point, just because we can't understand it doesn't mean that it can't exist.

It's also interesting though to note that, assuming God made us, it is impossible for anyone in the world to ever have 100% faith in the existence of a God because of the limited thinking capacities he gave us. Even Jesus said that if someone had the faith of a mustard seed, then they could move a mountain. So this tells me that no one has ever had 100% faith or even close to that, because it is impossible to have 100% faith in something which can't be proven through our senses. And again, even Jesus said, "Why have you forsaken me" on the cross which says that maybe not even he had 100% faith, but something less than that.

So no christian, muslim, or anyone can say with 100% belief that God exists or that Jesus was the son of God because it just isn't possible. They can make themselves "think" that they believe with 100% perfect undoubting faith, and kind of manufacture that belief in their head, but it still isn't 100% genuine. There is always some doubt, in everyone, including possibly even Jesus (not to say Jesus couldn't have been son of God without 100% faith).

Using SnakeLord's example of the Leprechaun existence, I can never make myself truly believe with 100% certainty that leprechauns exist, but I can definetely make myself believe that I believe that leprechauns exist, like a "surface" belief which isn't a true belief but a created one.

That said, it still doesn't make it impossible that something exists which we can't fully believe in or understand. That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[fusion4577]

That's the whole problem in a nutshell.
"I don't understand it, so it must be God."

this acutaly my theory on why god truly exisist