Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by NMSquirrel, Jun 19, 2011.
Super natural love of future humans . By example
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
God is not supernatural, who said that? Superman and Thor are supernatural; although yes, it depends on your definition of “god”. Some people have extreme definitions of god, for example: “a person who created the world”, now that is supernatural.
And as for spiritual, that term is commonly misused, I understand it as “related to the spirit”. What is the spirit? As evading as it sounds, it refers to the non-physical part of a human being.
Let’s explore the common use of the word “supernatural”, some say ghosts are supernatural; but if there are ghosts in nature, then they are not supernatural.
And in reference to a “spiritual” person, it is just someone concerned with the non-physical realm (not supernatural, it is perfectly natural, but just beyond the human senses).
If it is outside the 5 senses of a person, is it supernatural? I think not, it is natural, we just don’t recognize it.
Perhaps it is our definition of the term 'supernatural' that poses the problem?
We can now measure, with instruments, several attributes of nature (sound, light frequencies) that fall beyond the normal measure of our senses. A demonstration of those instruments in ancient times would have been 'supernatural' to the understanding of the people of that era.
We seem to have ever applied the title of 'supernatural' to anything that falls outside our understanding of the time, of which spiritual, as you point out is another aspect which is most difficult to place under a microscope.
Yet, surely it is detectable with a stethoscope, for there remains a 'heartbeat' to spirituality that defies our ability to comprehend or explain away.
We can neither prove or disprove god, yet the belief in god remains strong around the globe.
God may well be supernatural if this being exists only as a belief.......a belief with the ability to motivate our species to acts of extremes, both for good or ill......
Certainly a phenomena which remains to be understood, simply because it is a key to knowing ourselves.
Just my thoughts of the moment......Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
yes, i will agree that believers use God as an excuse to not find out,
i do understand there are believers out there, to tell them God did not do it, would be offensive (see my attitude about getting offended,short version equals they feel worthless),
my question has always been 'why are you making that a problem?'
your faith in God should not rest on 'how you feel'
(did i get on a wrong tangent again?)
the other thought was the relationship between what we know and what we don't know, what is the percentage of this relationship, is what we don't know equal to or greater than what we know..if so then the God of 'gaps' takes on a different meaning then if what we do not know is greater than what we know..
it only proves that God cannot be defined.not that he doesn't exist.
'knowable' is different from 'known', it expresses the ability to know, not the certainty to know.
we have the ability to know god, but not in the sense of science,more in the sense of relationships, i 'know' my daughter,i 'know' myself(don't get me started),
reminds me of a conversation i had with a driver when i was hitchhiking along time ago;
Driver,do you know jesus?
Me,I know of him.
so that just supports the view of God within nature,as nothing has been measured that is distinct.
that God does exist.
ppl are looking for a supernatural God,if God is not supernatural, then they are looking for the wrong proof.
there are places in the universe where 'natural laws' fail (center of black holes) so the failure of natural laws is natural? (sorry wrong tangent..)
the bible just states how he made the world, ppl have extended that to mean God created 'natural laws',
so the inflection of 'there was no natural law before god created us' doesn't hold, if there was 'nothing' then the laws had nothing to act on, does not invalidate 'natural law'....maybe just this line of thought though..
If there was no nature there would be no natural law..
so maybe i can't figure this part out..but then again this is God we are contemplating..we will always fall short of figuring him out...
i agree with all this.
Relativity actually predicts black holes, so I don't see how natural law fails here...
So, do you believe god created natural laws or not? If not, where did natural laws come from? (BTW - Not "before god created us". but "before god created anything".)
No offense, but... duh!
But we may not always fall short of figuring out nature.
To some the very idea of faith is anathema when there is zero evidence on which to base that faith.
Why does it take on a different meaning? I don't understand why the scale of the gap should make a difference?
Sure - I for one am not saying that God does not exist.
But if we can not define God then we can not know God (we require a definition, even at the most fundamental level, to be able to identify something).
If we can not know something - how can we know whether God exists or not?
If we can not define God, surely the only rational epistemological position is one of "don't know"... i.e. Agnosticism. And with regard the existence of God, the rational position should thus be one of not holding the belief that
And all that "know" (daughter, self etc) is through direct interaction with, based on a vast amount of evidence built up over time. It IS "know" in the sense of science... you observe, you build up a theory, when the theory is tested and gives the expected result you conclude that you "know".
Okay, it's not laid out in such terms, and is done almost subconciously - but that is roughly what we do.
Not "God within nature"... just "nature".
If I give you a glass of water and say that certain H2O molecules have been replaced with this wonderful new molecule that look, act, taste, behave EXACTLY like H2O molecules... the rational position is that they ARE H2O molecules. Therefore what you considered a glass of water (nature) remains nothing but a glass of water (nature)... and that any talk of a "wonderful new molecule" that is somehow not merely water is just sales-patter.
If God is supernatural then there is no proof (we can only ever know and observe the natural).
If God is not supernatural then he is natural and indistinguishable from the rest of nature... and thus the label of "God" is redundant and merely bringing baggage.
um, see your argument about " And all that "know" (daughter, self etc)"
there is evidence, its called testimonies,and your own testimony is what your faith should be based on, not someone else's. the more you seek the more you will come to 'know' God ('know' in the sense of familiarity)
i'm not telling you my thinking is right or wrong,i'm just sharing my thoughts,that said, this part i was just trying to draw something out of the analogy, i wasn't trying to defend the ppl who use God as an excuse to not know,(ignorance is bliss.)
mental,emotional,physical equals spiritual
what you think about God,
what you feel,about God,
what you know about God,
what you believe about God.
'don't know' still being an unfamiliarity with the subject matter, this does not preclude that one can't become familiar with the subject matter.
until one becomes more familiar with God.
this is what i am saying, the more you seek, the more you will 'know' God.
(funny you mention subconscious,i think God utilizes it more than we think)
this assumes a change, (replaced), if he is there all along, why would he 'replace' himself?
but yes, be aware of the sales-patter, are they offering anything that they are in control of? (salvation is between you and God)
'indistinguishable' only if you do not have the tools to look, the 'equals redundant' only applies if God does not play a part in nature, and by extension humanity.
(did i forget anything?..oops oh yea..)
to a point,after that point the laws of physics breaks down which is why i specified center of black hole.
If you were God,and you created another universe, you would create it utilizing any and all information you have learned throughout your life,you would not be able to create a universe outside your scope of knowledge,IOW you would create a universe that you are intimately aware of, can predict and have influence on, so to say that the laws in that universe did not exist before that universe is inaccurate, as they exist in the universe that you are currently in..(not trying to say God lives(lived?) in another universe,maybe he moved here,dunno,its all speculation.
sorry,long day yesterday,:m:
Separate names with a comma.