Definitive Proof that GOD Exists?

[Boss]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

 

[numan]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

[emphasis added]

Humans "have emerged above alll other species of life" ? !!

Whence derives such a quaint and seemingly absurd notion? Has it been revealed to you from the realm of Spiritual Reality with which you are so intimately connected?

I don't know about dolphins and dogs, but my cat certainly practises spiritual rituals and worship. When he wakes up from a nap, he always genuflects and prostrates himself to the Whiskered Deity as devoutly as any Moslem -- and he is convinced that there is a causal connection between him going outside in the morning and his breakfast appearing when he comes back in !!
.

 

[Hollie]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

What nonsense. Your goofy "spiritual connection" canard had nothing to do with the ascension of humans on the planet. It was our relative intelligence and our ability to change the environment, to develop industry and to make meaningful choices that affect our lives.

 

[AVG-JOE]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

I'm still not buying the 'fact' of a spiritual connection. I'll admit to the possibilities, but I think that the probabilities are more likely that Sentience, and the ability to extrapolate from the deaths of others our own frailty spawned spirituality and religion, not the other way around.

It's actually pretty easy to see how God was created in the image of Man.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Subjective v objective

But can you objectively evaluate your own objectivity or it in and of itself subjective based on your own experiences, values and mental state?

I think objectivity is an ideal goal but rarely attained by individuals.


BTW, do you think human memory exists? You seem to keep missing that question somehow, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

But

... religion which was invented as the result of spiritual connection

Playing language games.
**{"spiritual"} = {"religious"}

Dear Gawd, spiritual does not equate to religion.

Reminder: do you think human memories exist?

 

[JimBowie1958]

spiritual evidence...*

Subjective proof!!

A subjective opinion on that, ifitzme.

Do you think human memories exist?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Many people certainly DO have definitive proof that god exists, that's why they believe in god.

It is NOT supernatural, it is very natural. Humans have connected to spiritual nature

"supernatural" <> "natural"
"spiritual" = "nature"
"supernatural" <> "spiritual"*

-------
Except;

Google("spiritual supernatural natural")
Supernatural - Wikipedia ...
Wiki-
"not subject to the laws of physics"
*"In philosophy, popular culture and fiction, the supernatural is associated with the paranormal, religions and occultism."

"In Catholicism... the “Supernatural Order” is the gratuitous production, by God..."

"..."spiritual facts”...referred to as “supernatural” by those who specifically preclude the “extrinsic concurrence” of God..."

"supernatural"="religious"
{"Catholicism","Supernatural"} ={"God"}

----
Also;
Google("Natural Spiritualism")*
Wiki-
"Book searches for the two find no usage for Naturalistic Spirituality before 1956[1] whereas Spiritual Naturalism may have first been proposed by Joris-Karl Huysmans in 1895 in his book En Route - “Huysmans was the first to defect to 'Spiritual Naturalism' and eventually to a form of mysticism;"*he was followed by Maupassant:” and “In 'En Route' Huysmans started upon the creation of what he called ‘Spiritual Naturalism,’ that is, realism applied to the story of a soul. ...”.

Google("natural law in spiritual")
Natural Law in the Spiritual World

Author: Drummond, Henry (1851-1897)
As well as an evangelist and missionary, Henry Drummond was a naturalist. He studied physical and mathematical science before dedicating himself fully to Christian ministry. In 1877, he became a lecturer on natural science at the Free Church College. He used his position to share his faith as often as he could. While he studied in preparation for his lectures, Drummond wrote Natural Law in the Spiritual World, in which he explores how the world of religion and spirituality relates to the physical world. He argued that the disconnect between the spiritual and the physical was entirely illusory and that faith was by no means in conflict with science. Written just a few decades after Darwin’s landmark On the Origin of Species, Drummond’s reconciliation of the theory of evolution with God’s purposes ranks among the most important and influential books concerning Christian faith and scientific progress.*

{"Spiritual Naturalism","Joris-Karl Huysmans","mysticism"}

{"Natural Law in the Spiritual World","evangelist","Christian ministry","religion and spirituality","spiritual and the physical","Christian faith"}


-----
Ergo;

"supernatural"="spiritual"="religion"="Christian"="God"

"supernatural"="spiritual"

------

Conclusion;

If we just string enough terms together with fuzzy definitions such that they overlap, eventually we can get the "logical proof" that we want.**It's just a set theory thing where sets overlap.

a is an element of A and B. *A is like B. c is an element of B and C. B is like C. *Ergo, A is like C.

Do not highlight where*b is not an element of A and B. *A is not like B. b is an element of B and C. B is not like C. *And A <>B <> C.

Ergo, A = C

At best;
All we have to do is say spiritual is natural, that God is natural, therefore physical. *Just ignore the "subject to the laws of physics" part. Then we can say "subjective" is "objective" and we have proof. *Afterall, people are naturally subjective and spiritual.

At worst;
The language is meaningless as there is no distinction between "natural", "physical", "objective", "spiritual", "subjective" which means words can be strung together in any *manner we want and everything is "logical"

Why not, afterall subjective natural, nature is physical, physical is objective. *So, subjective is objective. Formal proofs and informal proofs ar proofs therefore informal proofs are formal*proofs.

And that is, at least, my subjective opinion which by definition cannot be prove wrong and is therefore right. *Given that subjective is objective as subjective is natural, then it is naturally physical and a lack of proof of not being subject to the laws of nature is a failure to prove what is already locigally deduced.

That is bullshit and you know it.

Why do you waste everyones time, except to entertain your fellow nihilists?

BTW, do you think that human memory exists?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Do you think that human memories exist?

So why do you dodge the question? Yes, I think memories exist, DO YOU?

Its an easy fucking question; why don't you answer it?

only in the minds of humans with the exception of writing film or video.

So if human memories exist only in the mind of the person, then does it really exist? Does pi really exist? Does the National Debt really exist? Does love really exist?

the odd thing about that is humans usually remember those pov's more often then the total event...

lol, there are a great many oddities to humanity, and that is a good thing.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Still, your personal hatred for religion doesn't negate human spirituality ...


it is religion, the "Bible" that negates spirituality by substituting a false premise as you have of a primacy for mankind to the exclusion of all other forms of life ...

spirituality is life within the physical form.

Boss the Thumper - immorality ?

I like your posts, Breeze, they really make a man think. It is such a refreshing change from the typical empty-headed rhetoric normally seen in these types of threads, and I can appreciate that.

I think you make a brilliant point, that ALL life is spiritual. I have no argument against that, but it's apparent that humans happen to possess the ability to connect to spiritual nature through human spirituality, which other living things lack.
Now, my mentioning of "immorality" is not a personal judgment, just a suggested reason why Hollie is so hung up on religion, and unable to distinguish between religion and spirituality. I don't know that is the reason, which is why I prefaced the comment with "probably."

The whole moral/immoral thing as it relates to my personal spiritual beliefs, has more to do with disrupting the positive energy flow of spiritual nature. Many things that man has defined as "immoral" are simply disruptive to the spiritual energy, and results in bad things happening. Not all things, but many. It is certainly the case that man has made things "immoral" which have little or no effect on spiritual energy flow, men are often wrong.

This goes back to the point, God does not necessarily have to be a judgemental god, or one that even gives a crap what we do as humans. People like Hollie can't comprehend this, because to them, the word "god" automatically means The God of Abe...the Bible God. I have left the question of what type of god open, because I have no evidence to support any particular incarnation of god. It's even a possibility that "god" is a physical entity, as in, an alien life form from another galaxy. We simply recognize the connection as spiritual because we have yet to figure it out. Just throwing out this possibility, not saying that is the case. In any event, humans seem to have the ability to connect to some force greater than self, and always have. We do not have to define it specifically, in order to determine it does exist.

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death?

Because they don't consider?

How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

I have seen some Democrats pray, so I guess its plausible for dogs to pray too, though I have never seen it.

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

If he knows it, then how can it be unknown?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Are you FINALLY getting to the Argument from Design? !!

.

had a feeling it was going that way.
it presupposes even more then the original post.. and that's goin' some.

I really don't understand how you people extrapolate this stuff from what I say.

Because most of them don't give a flying fuck about the discussion. They are so locked into their own hubris they cant imagine possibly being wrong. They are just so damned smart, how could they be wrong? /s

Finally, there is no presupposition here, I don't have a hidden religious agenda. You people seem to be very paranoid about this, and I have addressed it repeatedly throughout this thread. I am not a Christian, I am not a religious person. Religious people call me an Atheist because I don't subscribe to their incarnations of god. Now... here's the deal, if I really AM a Christian trying to play tricks on you, then I have inadvertently condemned myself to eternal damnation by denying Christ. Why in the hell would I do this, just to trick you? It makes no sense at all. If I really were a Christian believer in the Bible, I would have NO inclination to deny it, and I would spend a lot of time defending and supporting the Biblical incarnation of god in this thread, that's not happening. You can cajole me and ridicule all you like, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

You have them paranoid about whether they have to get more astroturfers on the thread to shout you down and k ill the thread with red herrings and bullshit.

 

[Derideo_Te]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

Another absurd ASSUMPTION based upon NOTHING but your own beliefs. But for the sake of amusement let's put it to the test. Dinosaurs emerged as the dominate life form on the planet for millions of years. Under YOUR idiotic rationale they must have had a "spiritual connection" to your deity too. Given that immortality is one of the attributes of your God and he would have been around when the dinosaurs were worshiping him via their "spiritual connection" does this mean that your God is a reptile?

 

[AVG-JOE]

I like your posts, Breeze, they really make a man think. It is such a refreshing change from the typical empty-headed rhetoric normally seen in these types of threads, and I can appreciate that.

I think you make a brilliant point, that ALL life is spiritual. I have no argument against that, but it's apparent that humans happen to possess the ability to connect to spiritual nature through human spirituality, which other living things lack.
Now, my mentioning of "immorality" is not a personal judgment, just a suggested reason why Hollie is so hung up on religion, and unable to distinguish between religion and spirituality. I don't know that is the reason, which is why I prefaced the comment with "probably."

The whole moral/immoral thing as it relates to my personal spiritual beliefs, has more to do with disrupting the positive energy flow of spiritual nature. Many things that man has defined as "immoral" are simply disruptive to the spiritual energy, and results in bad things happening. Not all things, but many. It is certainly the case that man has made things "immoral" which have little or no effect on spiritual energy flow, men are often wrong.

This goes back to the point, God does not necessarily have to be a judgemental god, or one that even gives a crap what we do as humans. People like Hollie can't comprehend this, because to them, the word "god" automatically means The God of Abe...the Bible God. I have left the question of what type of god open, because I have no evidence to support any particular incarnation of god. It's even a possibility that "god" is a physical entity, as in, an alien life form from another galaxy. We simply recognize the connection as spiritual because we have yet to figure it out. Just throwing out this possibility, not saying that is the case. In any event, humans seem to have the ability to connect to some force greater than self, and always have. We do not have to define it specifically, in order to determine it does exist.

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death?

Because they don't consider?

How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

I have seen some Democrats pray, so I guess its plausible for dogs to pray too, though I have never seen it.

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

If he knows it, then how can it be unknown?

They don't consider?

How the fuck could you possibly know what goes through the mind of AVG-DOLPHIN in this here and now?

___________________


If he, or any other Monkey, says that they know what happens after death, I call 'bullshit!' The most any Monkey is allowed on the subject is an opinion.

Fortunately or not, it needn't be an original opinion.

`​

 

[daws101]

Are you FINALLY getting to the Argument from Design? !!

.

had a feeling it was going that way.
it presupposes even more then the original post.. and that's goin' some.

I really don't understand how you people extrapolate this stuff from what I say. However, since the subject has been raised regarding intelligent design, I don't believe you have offered a better explanation for origin of life or creation of the universe. I don't accept Abiogenesis as a theory, because of several reasons, most notably, the incredible number of variations on the theory itself. And.. even IF we break it all down to the simplest explanations, there is no explanation for why properties of elements react the way they did. Natural forces of wind and water did not create Mt. Rushmore, but even if they did, it does not negate god or intelligence in design. God controls nature, god caused the Big Bang, and you haven't proven otherwise, because you can't.

Finally, there is no presupposition here, I don't have a hidden religious agenda. You people seem to be very paranoid about this, and I have addressed it repeatedly throughout this thread. I am not a Christian, I am not a religious person. Religious people call me an Atheist because I don't subscribe to their incarnations of god. Now... here's the deal, if I really AM a Christian trying to play tricks on you, then I have inadvertently condemned myself to eternal damnation by denying Christ. Why in the hell would I do this, just to trick you? It makes no sense at all. If I really were a Christian believer in the Bible, I would have NO inclination to deny it, and I would spend a lot of time defending and supporting the Biblical incarnation of god in this thread, that's not happening. You can cajole me and ridicule all you like, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

there is no evidence either way for the existence of god or Id.
it what is called a wash.
on the other hand your concept of god is slightly different from the Christian deity but it's is still a belief with nothing but vague emotionally based stories to bolster it.
to any believer it appears real enough. that doesn't prove it is.

 

[daws101]

Many people certainly DO have definitive proof that god exists, that's why they believe in god.

It is NOT supernatural, it is very natural. Humans have connected to spiritual nature

"supernatural" <> "natural"
"spiritual" = "nature"
"supernatural" <> "spiritual"*

-------
Except;

Google("spiritual supernatural natural")
Supernatural - Wikipedia ...
Wiki-
"not subject to the laws of physics"
*"In philosophy, popular culture and fiction, the supernatural is associated with the paranormal, religions and occultism."

"In Catholicism... the &#8220;Supernatural Order&#8221; is the gratuitous production, by God..."

"..."spiritual facts&#8221;...referred to as &#8220;supernatural&#8221; by those who specifically preclude the &#8220;extrinsic concurrence&#8221; of God..."

"supernatural"="religious"
{"Catholicism","Supernatural"} ={"God"}

----
Also;
Google("Natural Spiritualism")*
Wiki-
"Book searches for the two find no usage for Naturalistic Spirituality before 1956[1] whereas Spiritual Naturalism may have first been proposed by Joris-Karl Huysmans in 1895 in his book En Route - &#8220;Huysmans was the first to defect to 'Spiritual Naturalism' and eventually to a form of mysticism;"*he was followed by Maupassant:&#8221; and &#8220;In 'En Route' Huysmans started upon the creation of what he called &#8216;Spiritual Naturalism,&#8217; that is, realism applied to the story of a soul. ...&#8221;.

Google("natural law in spiritual")
Natural Law in the Spiritual World

Author: Drummond, Henry (1851-1897)
As well as an evangelist and missionary, Henry Drummond was a naturalist. He studied physical and mathematical science before dedicating himself fully to Christian ministry. In 1877, he became a lecturer on natural science at the Free Church College. He used his position to share his faith as often as he could. While he studied in preparation for his lectures, Drummond wrote Natural Law in the Spiritual World, in which he explores how the world of religion and spirituality relates to the physical world. He argued that the disconnect between the spiritual and the physical was entirely illusory and that faith was by no means in conflict with science. Written just a few decades after Darwin&#8217;s landmark On the Origin of Species, Drummond&#8217;s reconciliation of the theory of evolution with God&#8217;s purposes ranks among the most important and influential books concerning Christian faith and scientific progress.*

{"Spiritual Naturalism","Joris-Karl Huysmans","mysticism"}

{"Natural Law in the Spiritual World","evangelist","Christian ministry","religion and spirituality","spiritual and the physical","Christian faith"}


-----
Ergo;

"supernatural"="spiritual"="religion"="Christian"="God"

"supernatural"="spiritual"

------

Conclusion;

If we just string enough terms together with fuzzy definitions such that they overlap, eventually we can get the "logical proof" that we want.**It's just a set theory thing where sets overlap.

a is an element of A and B. *A is like B. c is an element of B and C. B is like C. *Ergo, A is like C.

Do not highlight where*b is not an element of A and B. *A is not like B. b is an element of B and C. B is not like C. *And A <>B <> C.

Ergo, A = C

At best;
All we have to do is say spiritual is natural, that God is natural, therefore physical. *Just ignore the "subject to the laws of physics" part. Then we can say "subjective" is "objective" and we have proof. *Afterall, people are naturally subjective and spiritual.

At worst;
The language is meaningless as there is no distinction between "natural", "physical", "objective", "spiritual", "subjective" which means words can be strung together in any *manner we want and everything is "logical"

Why not, afterall subjective natural, nature is physical, physical is objective. *So, subjective is objective. Formal proofs and informal proofs ar proofs therefore informal proofs are formal*proofs.

And that is, at least, my subjective opinion which by definition cannot be prove wrong and is therefore right. *Given that subjective is objective as subjective is natural, then it is naturally physical and a lack of proof of not being subject to the laws of nature is a failure to prove what is already locigally deduced.

That is bullshit and you know it.

Why do you waste everyones time, except to entertain your fellow nihilists?

BTW, do you think that human memory exists?

if it's a waste of time, why the fuck do you keep replying, are you this stupid everyday or do you take weekends off?

 

[daws101]

So why do you dodge the question? Yes, I think memories exist, DO YOU?

Its an easy fucking question; why don't you answer it?

only in the minds of humans with the exception of writing film or video.

So if human memories exist only in the mind of the person, then does it really exist? Does pi really exist? Does the National Debt really exist? Does love really exist?

the odd thing about that is humans usually remember those pov's more often then the total event...

lol, there are a great many oddities to humanity, and that is a good thing.

yes in the mind it does but only there everything else a crude facsimile of them.
Pi is a construct so by definition it only exists as an idea.
the national debt is also a construct all money earned or owed is .
credit cards and electronic transfers are far easier to use then a heard of sheep or a bushel of corn.
love is a chemical reaction as we are 99% chemical that should be no surprise to any one.

 

[daws101]

had a feeling it was going that way.
it presupposes even more then the original post.. and that's goin' some.

I really don't understand how you people extrapolate this stuff from what I say.

Because most of them don't give a flying fuck about the discussion. They are so locked into their own hubris they cant imagine possibly being wrong. They are just so damned smart, how could they be wrong? /s

Finally, there is no presupposition here, I don't have a hidden religious agenda. You people seem to be very paranoid about this, and I have addressed it repeatedly throughout this thread. I am not a Christian, I am not a religious person. Religious people call me an Atheist because I don't subscribe to their incarnations of god. Now... here's the deal, if I really AM a Christian trying to play tricks on you, then I have inadvertently condemned myself to eternal damnation by denying Christ. Why in the hell would I do this, just to trick you? It makes no sense at all. If I really were a Christian believer in the Bible, I would have NO inclination to deny it, and I would spend a lot of time defending and supporting the Biblical incarnation of god in this thread, that's not happening. You can cajole me and ridicule all you like, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

You have them paranoid about whether they have to get more astroturfers on the thread to shout you down and k ill the thread with red herrings and bullshit.

really from my pov the only posters that appear to be agitated or you and boss.
you, because failing and unnecessary political shots are all you seem to do. . with some occasional brownnosing for flavor.

 

[JimBowie1958]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death? How do you KNOW that dogs don't pray?

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

Another absurd ASSUMPTION based upon NOTHING but your own beliefs.

So which system of cognitive thought begins with anything other than axioms?

 

[Derideo_Te]

I don't know, which is why I prefaced my remark with "apparently." We don't see dolphins practicing spiritual rituals and worshiping, or dogs, or any other creature. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but we have no evidence to support it. As best we can tell, humans are the only living things that make a spiritual connection to something greater than self, it is the source of inspiration which enabled us to emerge above all other species of life.

Another absurd ASSUMPTION based upon NOTHING but your own beliefs.

So which system of cognitive thought begins with anything other than axioms?

The scientific method for one since it always begins with a hypothesis.

 

[JimBowie1958]

How do you KNOW that dolphins don't consider a life after death?

Because they don't consider?




I have seen some Democrats pray, so I guess its plausible for dogs to pray too, though I have never seen it.

How do you KNOW so fucking much about the Great UNknown?

If he knows it, then how can it be unknown?

They don't consider?

How the fuck could you possibly know what goes through the mind of AVG-DOLPHIN in this here and now?

Because everything that can rationally consider a situation, problem or question, is also capable of speaking complex sentences in some fashion. Dolphins don't so they don't.

If he, or any other Monkey, says that they know what happens after death, I call 'bullshit!' The most any Monkey is allowed on the subject is an opinion.

Fortunately or not, it needn't be an original opinion.

That isn't true either. Monkeys don't have opinions but people do.

And there is plenty of documentation of near death experiences to know something does happen. There are NDE where the person in question who experienced the effect had 1) no blood in their head, 2) no pulse, 3) no functioning brain, 4) a room temperature body, and 5) their eyes taped shut. And yet they claimed to see and could describe various instrument used on them in surgery and the temporary presence of people who came into the surgery after the NDE person was out and left before they were started on revival.

And the fact that something true isn't 'original' tends to support its truthfulness, actually.