Definitive Proof that GOD Exists?

[Boss]

As a musician, I have witnessed the spiritual habitually. All evidence of the spiritual is the result of the physical. The composer exists first before their spirit lives in their music.

As a musician, you may have witnessed spiritual inspiration. The composer does have to first exist, before he/she can be spiritually inspired. What they produce, is not spiritual, it is physical in nature... they produce a song, a record, music... all physical things, not spiritual. It may be spiritually inspired, or you may realize a spiritual connection to the composer when you hear it, and also become spiritually inspired. This anecdote only supports the very real spiritual nature, which is very much a part of our universe.

You are simply proving that there is nothing even remotely spiritual in your existence.
Thank you.

Music moves the listener spiritually to emotions of joy, sorrow, etc. The physical instruments reproduce the notes, but the spirit that lives in the arrangement of the notes is what spiritually moves the listener. The inspiration for the music does not have to be spiritual. It can be a sunrise, the passing of a friend, the fluttering of a butterfly or the buzzing of a bee, all physical stimuli that express themselves in the spirit of the music.

You've made my point for me, thanks! What you experience is a spiritual inspiration, means it was inspired by spiritual nature. That isn't spiritual nature itself. It is the product of spiritual nature, indeed. But then... everything is the product of spiritual nature.

We relate to reality through our five senses, correct? But what if humans didn't have these five senses? Would there be a reality? Would things still "exist" or not exist? What about Light? What if light did not exist? Spiritual energy and spiritual nature, created these things and bestowed all of "life" as we know it, with an array of "senses" ...we have five, that we generally recognize. Can you determine which plants to pollinate and organize efficient colonization of billions of people working together for a common objective, each knowing what is expected through telepathy? Well, other species have these "senses" that we sometimes call instinct, but it is amazing how they are able to do what they do. Can you carry 100x your body weight? I can't, that's for sure.

The point is, we have no rational IDEA of how many "senses" are available to spiritual nature. We are only capable of understanding a few. Some people have chosen to close their minds to any comprehension of "senses" outside of their limited five. There is no way to reach those people, it is impossible to do, until they open their minds.

 

[JimBowie1958]

FOR JimBowie1958: Yes, I've read many of your commentaries, mostly opposing views, but I have not yet seen you define what it is we mean when we say "God." Yes, I have a (somewhat) clear picture of your cosmic view, you opinion on memory, and disagreed with your thought on the timeline issue (moment to moment) and the cosmological view (in some respects), but I did not see where you defined "God:" its scope, nature, influence, powers and general characteristics. I do understand "The Argument from Motion" (Thomas Aquinas). I think it is one of the great arguments; but I don't find it compelling.

But then, I'm an old man, and I beg your acceptance of my apology if you stated it and I simply don't recall it.

(COMMENT - GENERALIZED)

I find it difficult to follow the discussion when there seems to be a disparity on what the scope, nature, influence, powers and general characteristics of the topic ("God"). How you prove or disprove an "unknown" or "undefined" entity or quantity is very difficult for this poor old Sicilian Boy just trying to make his way through the world.

Is the topic a deity, a Supreme Being, a VMAT2 Gene apparition, limited powers, all powerful, spiritual or supernatural. Is it subject to physical law or is it the creator of all laws? To discuss it, the group must come to some consensus as to what it is.

I don't think we are there yet. We haven't reached a conclusion of what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wow, great response, R.

I will try to answer from my own perspective honestly and completely.

God: a being that exists in part outside of time and part within the flow of various time flows, but our own is all that is relevant for our discussion. In Christianity God the Father is in a constant state of acting and asserting various things within Creation. The Big Bang was His creation event, and the Son is His conception/intent/forethought of what Creation would be. The Father cannot change, is infinite in just about every capacity of power, knowledge and perfect holiness. Time/space sparing from God ultimately; there may be intervening layers of reality between us and His eternal existence but He does have a physical existence. The Son is also eternal and has flowed from the Father through all eternity and the spirit of life and love that they have shared with each other is the Holy Spirit. God is three persons in one being, each manifestations of the nature of Gods interaction with eternity, space/time and internally within Himself.

The ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments I think are compelling but the most compelling abstract argument is derives from the fallacy of infinite regression and the problem of the first moment in time. These would establish that God is a rational concept and plausible if not probable. I do not believe that one can have 100% certitude without forming a relationship with God that can bring one to 100% certitude, but this is rare and not necessary.

I classify myself as between churches, somewhere between Eastern orthodox and Roman catholic. I believe that reason is a means by which we can come to know God initially but faith is required more than reason for the whole journey home.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but note I speak only for myself.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Time began when motion began and ends when motion stops.

Not according to Einstein, as I understand GTR. Time is a part of space and referred to as time-space. You cannot have space without time, apparently.

But even if they were separable, your observation does not answer the first moment problem, and you still have the fallacy of infinite regression that makes your assertion obviously false.

Space/time has to do with the fact that the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object's velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time.

But it does not change the order of sequential events relative to each other. It observes a change in the flow of time and space between different streams of cause/effect change.

For example, two trains pulling a hundred cars on two parallel tracks can have changes in velocity relative to each other but that will not change the order of the cars in each train.

 

[Boss]

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

Nope. You learned to be an atheist or agnostic, you weren't born that way. Your own individual human nature compels you to be spiritually connected to something greater than self. This is why you can go to the deepest darkest uninhabited jungles of the world, and find tribes who have never seen outside civilization, and they are all practicing some spiritual belief of some kind. It is our "natural state" to be spiritual creatures, it is what distinguishes us from chimps who share 98% of our DNA.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. .

Try this Ed.

Sit alone in a dark room, in a quiet part of the evening. Focus on what sounds you can hear, perhaps a clock in the background, the sound of a pet moving, a child moving to the kitchen, a distant train, a radio one of your kids left on.

In each case you sit still and yet can change the focus of your mind from one sensation to another. you can recall memories of past events that make you begin to feel regret, or maybe anger, love or loneliness. You can think of an erotic time or a sentimental one.

What you think of is entirely under YOUR control. That part of you that decides what to think on what to focus on is YOU, it is your will or what some would call spirit.

Those who think that the body or instinct drives the mind are partly right as a person can surrender their self control to what is sensational. But we have the capacity to choose, to ignore and to magnify the things that swirl around us.

This is our soul's best proof of being something other than mere matter driven like an animal from place to place, from instinct to instinct.

It is what we truly are.

 

[Boss]

Spiritual evidence is that which is produced by spiritual nature, and is recognized by those who accept the possibility of spiritual nature. For instance, we have to accept that 70,000 years of human behavior concerning this attribute of spiritual connection, is not the product of wild imaginations or delusions, but that these people are legitimately making a connection to something outside of our material world. If that were not the case, and it was all in our heads, the attribute would have waned over the years, especially with the advent of modern science. We find, the behavior is persistent and constant, across our entire existence as a species, regardless of how many unknowns we answer with science. If it were all a figment of imagination and delusion, the attribute would have been beaten out of man, through thousands of years of persecution and death. If man invented spirituality to cope with death, we'd see evidence of other similar upper primates, fabricating imaginary placebos and security blankets, so they could cope as well.

No, they are making a connection to the spiritual nature WITHIN THE PHYSICAL WORLD. Without the physical there is no spiritual.

Spiritual nature exists (or is present) in our universe, just as physical nature is. Spiritual nature governs physical nature, and was the Creator of physical nature, physics, science, the five senses, light, electricity, gravity, black holes, dark energy, suns, planets, moons, atmospheres, LIFE, "reality", Big Bangs and Big Crunches, etc., etc., etc.

You have not proven otherwise, thank you for playing.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are asserting that it is a mischaracterization that God was born on Christmas morn and found wearing diapers in a manger by the three wise men??

No one believes this??? ....you had better tell the Pope.


lol.....


I guess if anyone would profess to believe what even you are suggesting is bullshit it would be due to ignorance, stupidity or simple lack of integrity.

It is not regarded as a fact that Christ was born on Christmas day. It is a day chosen in ancient times for convenience as it corresponded with the observable winter solstice.

And He wasn't wearing diapers, not a custom of that time.

All of which again demonstrates the ignorance you labor under and why you cant believe as you do not understand what is being discussed to begin with.

LOL... my what big teeth you have there grandpa.


do you believe that God, in the person of Jesus, was born on whatever day of the year?

Yes or no?

If so, and he was not wearing diapers as you claim, did he crap all over mother Mary and Joseph?


Or are you saying that you do not believe that Jesus was God?

You must have noticed that a few other Christians do profess to believe that.

I think at the time they put babies in 'swaddling' garments, not diapers.

And Jesus was born of woman on a specific day, yes, but He existed prior to that and voluntarily took human form.

 

[JimBowie1958]

LOL... my what big teeth you have there grandpa.


do you believe that God, in the person of Jesus, was born on whatever day of the year?

Yes or no?

If so, and he was not wearing diapers as you claim, did he crap all over mother Mary and Joseph?


Or are you saying that you do not believe that Jesus was God?

You must have noticed that a few other Christians do profess to believe that.

What is your point if you have one ?

Jesus was a child and later grew to be a man like any other child. He was 100% human.

My point is that even when I am just repeating what so called believers expect rational people to just believe, THEY DON"T BELIEVE.

The problem is that you fail to repeat the matter correctly because you have apparently not tried to understand what they believed in but only to get enough detail to mock them.

 

[JimBowie1958]

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

Nope. You learned to be an atheist or agnostic, you weren't born that way. Your own individual human nature compels you to be spiritually connected to something greater than self. This is why you can go to the deepest darkest uninhabited jungles of the world, and find tribes who have never seen outside civilization, and they are all practicing some spiritual belief of some kind. It is our "natural state" to be spiritual creatures, it is what distinguishes us from chimps who share 98% of our DNA.

Knowledge of God is apriori.

 

[edthecynic]

As a musician, you may have witnessed spiritual inspiration. The composer does have to first exist, before he/she can be spiritually inspired. What they produce, is not spiritual, it is physical in nature... they produce a song, a record, music... all physical things, not spiritual. It may be spiritually inspired, or you may realize a spiritual connection to the composer when you hear it, and also become spiritually inspired. This anecdote only supports the very real spiritual nature, which is very much a part of our universe.

You are simply proving that there is nothing even remotely spiritual in your existence.
Thank you.

Music moves the listener spiritually to emotions of joy, sorrow, etc. The physical instruments reproduce the notes, but the spirit that lives in the arrangement of the notes is what spiritually moves the listener. The inspiration for the music does not have to be spiritual. It can be a sunrise, the passing of a friend, the fluttering of a butterfly or the buzzing of a bee, all physical stimuli that express themselves in the spirit of the music.

You've made my point for me, thanks! What you experience is a spiritual inspiration, means it was inspired by spiritual nature. That isn't spiritual nature itself. It is the product of spiritual nature, indeed. But then... everything is the product of spiritual nature.

We relate to reality through our five senses, correct? But what if humans didn't have these five senses? Would there be a reality? Would things still "exist" or not exist? What about Light? What if light did not exist? Spiritual energy and spiritual nature, created these things and bestowed all of "life" as we know it, with an array of "senses" ...we have five, that we generally recognize. Can you determine which plants to pollinate and organize efficient colonization of billions of people working together for a common objective, each knowing what is expected through telepathy? Well, other species have these "senses" that we sometimes call instinct, but it is amazing how they are able to do what they do. Can you carry 100x your body weight? I can't, that's for sure.

The point is, we have no rational IDEA of how many "senses" are available to spiritual nature. We are only capable of understanding a few. Some people have chosen to close their minds to any comprehension of "senses" outside of their limited five. There is no way to reach those people, it is impossible to do, until they open their minds.

No, what is experienced is physical stimuli. The composer then arranges the notes to stimulate an emotional response in the listener passing the spirit of the composer to the perceptive listener. The physical composer and the physical stimuli exist first.

There is no spiritual energy. Energy is physical and as such can be measured. There is no way to measure your imaginary spiritual energy.

 

[edthecynic]

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

Nope. You learned to be an atheist or agnostic, you weren't born that way. Your own individual human nature compels you to be spiritually connected to something greater than self. This is why you can go to the deepest darkest uninhabited jungles of the world, and find tribes who have never seen outside civilization, and they are all practicing some spiritual belief of some kind. It is our "natural state" to be spiritual creatures, it is what distinguishes us from chimps who share 98% of our DNA.

Knowledge of God is apriori.

There is no a priori knowledge.

 

[daws101]

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

Nope. You learned to be an atheist or agnostic, you weren't born that way. Your own individual human nature compels you to be spiritually connected to something greater than self. This is why you can go to the deepest darkest uninhabited jungles of the world, and find tribes who have never seen outside civilization, and they are all practicing some spiritual belief of some kind. It is our "natural state" to be spiritual creatures, it is what distinguishes us from chimps who share 98% of our DNA.

bullshit ! if your first sentence is true then it's also true that we learned to be spiritual.
there is no evidence that we were born with inherent spiritual traits, being spiritual is the polar opposite of our "natural state." spirituality is part of culture to have either you need organization on a large scale.
that only happens when more immediate needs are met.
btw no jungle is uninhabited if they were there would be no tribes.

 

[RoccoR]

daws101, et al,

Well, that is what we don't know for sure. But, it would go along way to explaining a few things about fanatical and radical religious followers.

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

(REFERENCE)

• The God Gene - Religion - The Book of Three The God Gene

There are three reasons why people believe in God and or attend services. Some carry genes for just 1, others 2, and a few, 3 reasons. If you inherited all three, you have the God Gene.

The God gene hypothesis states that some human beings bear a gene which gives them a predisposition to episodes interpreted by some as religious revelation. The idea has been postulated and promoted by geneticist Dr. Dean Hamer, the director of the Gene Structure and Regulation Unit at the U.S. National Cancer Institute. Hamer has written a book on the subject titled, The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes.

• The God-Gene: Is Religious Faith and Experience a Biological Misunderstanding? The God-Gene: Is Religious Faith and Experience a Biological Misunderstanding?

(COMMENT)

If it is possible to account for this "spiritual acceptance" or "spiritual existence" that our friend "Boss" is eluding to, then it might be possible to discuss the the scope, nature, influence, powers and general characteristics of the belief in a deity, or Supreme Being.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[JimBowie1958]

Nope. You learned to be an atheist or agnostic, you weren't born that way. Your own individual human nature compels you to be spiritually connected to something greater than self. This is why you can go to the deepest darkest uninhabited jungles of the world, and find tribes who have never seen outside civilization, and they are all practicing some spiritual belief of some kind. It is our "natural state" to be spiritual creatures, it is what distinguishes us from chimps who share 98% of our DNA.

Knowledge of God is apriori.

There is no a priori knowledge.

Sure there is.

That the universe is orderly is apriori and affirmed by the Judeo-Christian faith. Muslims do to for the most part.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well, according to the way I think I'm certain that if even one tenth of the bible is true at the judgment it will be better to have been an atheist than to have pretended to believe that God was wearing diapers on Christmas morn....

maybe you should put that in your pipe and smoke it before you go running for a touchdown.... into the wrong end zone.

I won the game many moons ago. You can believe as you wish.

bullshit! you've never won anything!
looks like the legend in his own mind syndrome has flared up again.

You won't get me to respond to most of your posts but once again ignorance on display. My victory was when I decided to put faith in the creator. Follow along with a conversation before replying so you don't continue to look so foolish.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are simply proving that there is nothing even remotely spiritual in your existence.
Thank you.

Music moves the listener spiritually to emotions of joy, sorrow, etc. The physical instruments reproduce the notes, but the spirit that lives in the arrangement of the notes is what spiritually moves the listener. The inspiration for the music does not have to be spiritual. It can be a sunrise, the passing of a friend, the fluttering of a butterfly or the buzzing of a bee, all physical stimuli that express themselves in the spirit of the music.

You've made my point for me, thanks! What you experience is a spiritual inspiration, means it was inspired by spiritual nature. That isn't spiritual nature itself. It is the product of spiritual nature, indeed. But then... everything is the product of spiritual nature.

We relate to reality through our five senses, correct? But what if humans didn't have these five senses? Would there be a reality? Would things still "exist" or not exist? What about Light? What if light did not exist? Spiritual energy and spiritual nature, created these things and bestowed all of "life" as we know it, with an array of "senses" ...we have five, that we generally recognize. Can you determine which plants to pollinate and organize efficient colonization of billions of people working together for a common objective, each knowing what is expected through telepathy? Well, other species have these "senses" that we sometimes call instinct, but it is amazing how they are able to do what they do. Can you carry 100x your body weight? I can't, that's for sure.

The point is, we have no rational IDEA of how many "senses" are available to spiritual nature. We are only capable of understanding a few. Some people have chosen to close their minds to any comprehension of "senses" outside of their limited five. There is no way to reach those people, it is impossible to do, until they open their minds.

No, what is experienced is physical stimuli. The composer then arranges the notes to stimulate an emotional response in the listener passing the spirit of the composer to the perceptive listener. The physical composer and the physical stimuli exist first.

There is no spiritual energy. Energy is physical and as such can be measured. There is no way to measure your imaginary spiritual energy.

Physical stimuli is a construct of the mind derived from nerve impulses. If one regards the mind to be spiritual, which I do, then ALL stimuli is spiritual.

 

[Youwerecreated]

But first you must die!

Not all will experience death.

buulshit! everything dies ! the resurrections stories are not proof they cannot be corroborated ..

Not at the second coming.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Not all will experience death.

buulshit! everything dies ! the resurrections stories are not proof they cannot be corroborated ..

Not at the second coming.

While I agree with you about the second coming, I have an aversion to make all my play based on an event that Jesus may or may not do in my life time. Seems like its testing God or something.

I would much rather kick ass now than put it all on Jesus shoulders.

 

[Wake]

As I see it there is no concrete proof that a god lives.

I would ask, say, a Christian what he thinks of the Muslim's or Jew's beliefs on the end of days, etc. And, if that person scoffs and claims his religious point of view is correct, I'd ask on what basis his is correct and the other religious folks are wrong.

 

[daws101]

daws101, et al,

Well, that is what we don't know for sure. But, it would go along way to explaining a few things about fanatical and radical religious followers.

humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.

(REFERENCE)

• The God Gene - Religion - The Book of Three The God Gene

There are three reasons why people believe in God and or attend services. Some carry genes for just 1, others 2, and a few, 3 reasons. If you inherited all three, you have the God Gene.

The God gene hypothesis states that some human beings bear a gene which gives them a predisposition to episodes interpreted by some as religious revelation. The idea has been postulated and promoted by geneticist Dr. Dean Hamer, the director of the Gene Structure and Regulation Unit at the U.S. National Cancer Institute. Hamer has written a book on the subject titled, The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes.

• The God-Gene: Is Religious Faith and Experience a Biological Misunderstanding? The God-Gene: Is Religious Faith and Experience a Biological Misunderstanding?

(COMMENT)

If it is possible to account for this "spiritual acceptance" or "spiritual existence" that our friend "Boss" is eluding to, then it might be possible to discuss the the scope, nature, influence, powers and general characteristics of the belief in a deity, or Supreme Being.

Most Respectfully,
R

thanks I read the article in time and have fallowed it since.