Also, he has spoken to me on more than one occasion: I've heard his voice.
This is why I cannot ever become an atheist. I may give other theists a hard time and have atheistic tendencies...but at the end of the day: I believe in God.
I've also been in a situation that God spoke to me in such a way that it was a miracle: his advice to me probably saved my sister's life. If for no other reason, this reason alone is my evidence that God exists. One day, we may discover some sort of linking between our brain an future events which proves that we have some sort of very very rare precognition that comes in the form of a voice. No, I'm not talking about intuition. I'm talking about the once in 100,000,000 story where someone "hear's" a stern voice that tells them to stop their car; at night, when it was raining, and pull over; and then a mud-slide occurs less than a hundred feet in front of them (True story.) I'm talking about a deceased great-great-uncle visiting my grandmother in the middle of the night, warning her of a dangerous section on a road-trip the family was to take the next day and they avoided death through his warning (true story.)
These events may one day be explained by science but as of now, they are some freaky fantasy sh*t for which I chose to believe in God.
Maybe 500 years from now, our progeny will look back at things like I've talked about, above, and look at it the same way I look at my ancestors believing in an angry God that makes thunder from the clouds (Thor) or a God that randomly decides to make a good harvest, etc. etc. etc.
Or you will have no problem proving it wasn't explainable in numerous other ways..
Proof that it wasn't auditory hallucination/brain neurology issue: Describe the voice? What he he say? How did the tone sound....? What was his accent?
Intuition could account for that.
Collective consciousness.. ESP.... Witchcraft....Aliens.
Could be any of that stuff: Yet automatically, "God did it" would attempt to choke all lines of further enquiry.
Science will understand it, if you allow your connection with god to be studied, under controlled conditions, testing of his response to your prayers...measuring of your brain/neural activity bio chemistry etc
Cause thats science.
What do you mean, 500 years from now?
Its going on now. Here. The progeny will only have eventually caught us up, I guess.
Strawmannery? Making up words has never been cool. It's called Straw Man, and it's exactly what you're doing.
No. Hitler used the Jewish RACE! Not the religion. There is a difference. If you want to nitpick that, you are a man of God, because you come of a people that believed in him.
So because the Roman Church celebrate Hitler, that makes HIS actions religious? Please. That's beyond a fallcious conclusion. The Roman Church has had so many idiotic notions over the years, that you're barely able to tell the difference between publicity-stunts, greed and religion. They sold tickets to Heaven! That's not religious one bit.
The fact that Germans marched to war has nothing to do with the soldiers believing in God. They listened to a charismatic leader who preached the tainting of the Jewish PEOPLE. He directed the hate to the Jewish people AS A RACE. AS A RACE! Not as a religion. There were people in the Christian crusades that did not believe in God, that was in it for the wealth.
You can not pinpoint religion in historic events, because there are so many other factors involved. The fact that you're trying, shows just how little you know on the topic.
You don't realize how much you're destroying your own case by saying these things about what Sweden hasn't had. You don't really know what you're discussing, do you? You're just replying to the things I write. Your beliefs, words and preachings are all over the place. Sweden was a world power WITHOUT religion. Hundreds of thousands has died by the political blade of Sweden and many other non-religious authorities.
Dozens of MILLIONS died by Stalin, who did not have a pinch of religious reason for what he did.
Gather your thoughts. Think real hard and start structuring your post. Because you are, again, all over the place.
"preemptively deny any religious involvement and amplification of the problem", that is because the problem IS NOT RELIGION! I am not denying the part religious excuses play in all of this, but by the Hellfires, stop blurting out such stupidity that it's because of religion that humanity war. It's nothing but a display of ignorance.
Do you even realize what you said when you said "Religion has earthly business everywhere"? It doesn't even make sense. Humanity's petty craving for control does. Politics has had bigger say in what should be done than religion EVER HAS. Authority. Man's power over man. Religion would be nothing without politics. Politics would be nothing without man's greed and lust for authority.
You haven't showed anything of the sort. You've claimed that he has, and you've pointed out "flaws" in the Bible. Flaws you haven't proven. You have proven NOTHING! Get that into your thick little genitalia!
You haven't covered any of it Do you even know what you write?!
No Thats not what Im saying at all:
IM saying he used it to motivate his own people.
Which he did. Successfully.
Right. So I ive already covered that: If these people have a non-religious perchant for violence then tackle THOSE problems in their pertinent ways.
Again this takes NOTHING away from the things you keep ignoring/refusing to acknowledge...Heres one of them:
"WHERE ARE YOUR ATHEISTIC SUICIDE BOMBERS?"
Where are the ones that blow themselves up in weddings and markets for the idea of 70 atheistic virgins?
Anyways. Still no proof for god. Despite all these earth shaping things being done in his name.
Oh hark at you stamping your feets...!!!! lol
You must be getting very frustrated.
I love it when trolls let their frustrated anger come out nakedly.
The personal insults in lieu of proof of god: Seen lots of that before......
Well, maybe convincing trolls is no longer necessary.
People with reasonable minds will have read it, checked it, realised im right.
Religion is man made and perpetuated, and actions of the fairy tale's followeres affect earth= Earthly business.
Still please continue with your abusive distraction tacts.
The joy of receiving your little gems of projection is exquisite.
Its pretty clear that as Ive abused you not once, that Ive been reasonable in my arguments....yet the SAME OLD SAME OLD troll stuff emerges with you, doesn't it.
Prove that God exists and the respect given to the one religion that is correct about god is due, and I'll admit it and change my position...
'Til then, Im just gonna have to file you under 'troll'. Sorry.
__________________
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Those who fought in the name of God were recognized as the Milites Christi, warriors or knights of Christ.[3] Christian fighters believed that victory was achieved through divine intervention or aid from God, and they took great pride in their beliefs.
Crusades
The Crusades were a series of military campaigns—usually sanctioned by the Papacy—that took place during the 11th through 13th centuries in response to the Muslim Conquests. Originally, the goal was to recapture Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the Muslims, and support the besieged Christian Byzantine Empire against the Muslim Seljuq expansion into Asia Minor and Europe proper. Later, Crusades were launched against other targets, either for religious reasons, such as the Albigensian Crusade, the Northern Crusades, or because of political conflict, such as the Aragonese Crusade. In 1095, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II raised the level of war from bellum iustum ("just war"), to bellum sacrum (holy war).[4]
[edit]French Wars of Religion
Main article: French Wars of Religion
In 16th Century France there was a succession of wars between Roman Catholics and Protestants (Hugenots primarily). These series of wars were known as the Wars of Religion.
[edit]Thirty Years War
Main articles: Thirty Years War and European wars of religion
In the first half of the 17th century, the German states, Scandinavia (Sweden, primarily) and Poland were beset by religious warfare. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism figured in the opposing sides of this conflict, though Catholic France did take the side of the Protestants but purely for political reasons.
Taiping Rebellion:
Inspired by a formerly illegal Protestant missionary tract in China, the core of the Taiping faith focused on the belief that Shangdi, the high God of classical China, had chosen the Taiping leader, Hong Xiuquan, to establish his Heavenly Kingdom on Earth.
The Taiping rebels, professing this new creed, were able to mount their rebellion and recruit multitudes of followers in their sweep through the empire. The Taiping rebels denounced the divine pretensions of the imperial title and the sacred character of the imperial office as blasphemous usurpations of Shangdi’s title and position. In place of the imperial institution, the rebels called for a restoration of the classical system of kingship. Previous rebellions had declared their contemporary dynasties corrupt and therefore in need of revival; the Taiping, by contrast, branded the entire imperial order blasphemous and in need of replacement.
The Bible, in particular a Chinese translation of the Old Testament, profoundly influenced Hong and his followers, leading them to understand the first three of the Ten Commandments as an indictment of the imperial order. The rebels thus sought to destroy imperial culture, along with its institutions and Confucian underpinnings, all of which they regarded as blasphemous. Strongly iconoclastic, the Taiping followers smashed religious statues and imperially approved icons throughout the lands they conquered.
The Guinness Book of World Records calls this the "bloodiest civil war" with some 20 million estimated dead.[5]
Further information: Jihad, Divisions of the world in Islam, Islamic military jurisprudence, Islam and violence, and Islamic terrorism
Jihad means "to strive or struggle" in the way of God, and is sometimes referred to as the sixth pillar of Islam, although it has no official status.[6] In the West, Jihad is often understood as "Holy War", but that is in actuality a misinterpretation of the concept of Holy War. Jihad has a broader meaning in Islamic theology. It can mean striving to lead a good Muslim life, praying and fasting regularly, being an attentive and faithful spouse and parent or working hard to spread the message of Islam.
Judaism:
Main article: Milkhemet Mitzvah
In the Jewish religion, the expression Milkhemet Mitzvah (Hebrew: מלחמת מצווה, "commandment war") refers to a war that is both obligatory for all Jews (men and women) and limited to territory within the borders of the land of Israel. The geographical limits of Israel, and therefore of this religious war, are detailed in the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible, especially Numbers 34:1-15 and Ezekiel 47:13-20.
This is such surface level, basic common knowledge that I feel almost embarrassed to have to post it here.....but its on wiki as the 1st hit under religion war.
In George Orwell's, 1984, it was stated, "Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past."
Hitlers use of religion:
Who is going to control the present - fundamentalism or freedom? History is being distorted by many preachers and politicians. They are heard on the airwaves condemning atheists and routinely claim Adolph Hitler was one. What a crock! Hitler was a Roman Catholic, baptized into that religio-political institution as an infant in Austria. He became a communicant and an altar boy in his youth, and was confirmed as a "soldier of Christ" in that church. The worst doctrines of that church never left him. He was steeped in its liturgy, which contained the words, "perfidious Jew." This hateful statement was not removed until 1961. Perfidy means treachery.
In his day, hatred of Jews was the norm. In great measure it was sponsored by the two major religions of Germany, Catholicism and Lutheranism. He greatly admired Martin Luther, who openly hated the Jews. Luther condemned the Catholic Church for its pretensions and corruption, but he supported the centuries of papal pogroms against the Jews. Luther said, "The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves," and "We ought to take revenge on the Jews and kill them." "Ungodly wretches" he calls the Jews in his widely read Table Talk.
Hitler seeking power, wrote in Mein Kampf. "... I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.
Three years later he informed General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church, and the church never left him. Great literature was banned by his church, but his miserable Mien Kampf never appeared on the Index of Forbidden Books.
He was not excommunicated or even condemned by his church. Popes, in fact, contracted with Hitler and his fascist friends Franco and Mussolini, giving them veto power over whom the pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain and Italy. The three thugs agreed to surtax the Catholics of their countries and send the money to Rome in exchange for making sure the state could control the church.
Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and microphones. Acclaimed Hitler biographer, John Toland, explains his heartlessness as follows: "Still a member in good standing of the Church of Rome despite detestation of its hierarchy, he carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of god. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of god..."
Hitler's Germany amalgamated state with church. Soldiers of the vermacht wore belt buckles inscribed with the following: "Gott mit uns" (God is with us). His troops were often sprinkled with holy water by the priests. It was a real Christian country whose citizens were indoctrinated by both state and church to blindly follow all authority figures, political and ecclesiastical.
Hitler, like some of today's politicians and preachers, politicized "family values." He liked corporal punishment in home and in school. Jesus prayers became mandatory in all schools under his administration. While abortion was illegal in pre-Hitler Germany he took it to new depths of enforcement, requiring all doctors to report to the government the circumstances of all miscarriages. He openly despised homosexuality and criminalized it. If past is prologue, we know what to expect if liberty becomes license.
As a young child, I remember my late father, Martin J. Murphy, practicing a speech and loudly quoting the following: "Light up the mountain. Bring out the wild and fiery steed. Let it be known, that I, Gustavus, have insulted the King." Thinking for yourself and speaking your true thoughts - now that's a real family value.
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Hitler's religious beliefs and fanaticism
(Selected quotes from Mein Kampf)
compiled by Jim Walker
Originated: 28 Nov. 1996
Additions made: 07 July 2001
People often make the claim that Adolph Hitler adhered to Atheism, Humanism or some ancient Nordic pagan mythology. None of these fanciful and wrong ideas hold. Although one of Hitler's henchmen, Alfred Rosenberg, did undertake a campaign of Nordic mythological propaganda, Hitler and most of his henchmen did not believe in it .
Many American books, television documentaries, and Sunday sermons that preach of Hitler's "evil" have eliminated Hitler's god for their Christian audiences, but one only has to read from his own writings to appreciate that Hitler's God equals the same God of the Christian Bible. Hitler held many hysterical beliefs which not only include, God and Providence but also Fate, Social Darwinism, and ideological politics. He spoke, unashamedly, about God, fanaticism, idealism, dogma, and the power of propaganda. Hitler held strong faith in all his convictions. He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing statements makes this quite clear:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
Although Hitler did not practice religion in a churchly sense, he certainly believed in the Bible's God. Raised as Catholic he went to a monastery school and, interestingly, walked everyday past a stone arch which was carved the monastery's coat of arms which included a swastika. As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest. Much of his philosophy came from the Bible, and more influentially, from the Christian Social movement. (The German Christian Social movement, remarkably, resembles the Christian Right movement in America today.) Many have questioned Hitler's stand on Christianity. Although he fought against certain Catholic priests who opposed him for political reasons, his belief in God and country never left him. Many Christians throughout history have opposed Christian priests for various reasons; this does not necessarily make one against one's own Christian beliefs. Nor did the Vatican's Pope & bishops ever disown him; in fact they blessed him! As evidence to his claimed Christianity, he said:
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
Hitler's anti-Semitism grew out of his Christian education. Christian Austria and Germany in his time took for granted the belief that Jews held an inferior status to Aryan Christians. Jewish hatred did not spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests and Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years. The Protestant leader, Martin Luther, himself, held a livid hatred for Jews and their Jewish religion. In his book, "On the Jews and their Lies," Luther set the standard for Jewish hatred in Protestant Germany up until World War II. Hitler expressed a great admiration for Martin Luther.
Hitler did not have to parade his belief in God, as so many American Christians do now. Nor did he have to justify his Godly belief against an Atheist movement. He took his beliefs for granted just as most Germans did at that time. His thrust aimed at politics, not religion. But through his political and religious reasoning he established in 1933, a German Reich Christian Church, uniting the Protestant churches to instill faith in a national German Christianity.
Future generations should remember that Adolph Hitler could not have come into power without the support of the Protestant and Catholic churches and the German Christian populace.
The following quotes provides some of Hitler's expressions of his belief in religion, faith, fanaticism, Providence, and even a few of his paraphrasing of the Bible. It by no means represents the totality of Hitler's concerns. To realize the full context of these quotes, I implore the reader to study Mein Kampf.
The purpose of this text intends to dispute the claims made by Christians that Hitler "was an atheist," or "anti-religious," and to reveal the dangers of belief-systems. This text in no way attempts to give endorsement to anti-Semitism. http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm
Theres WAY more in that page, but the wealth of info on this is so vast that Id take up the whole page pasting: so read for yourselves.
__________________
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:31 PM
One of the most noteworthy attributes of Ottoman Turkish rule was Ottoman toleration of different religious beliefs. The Turks of the Ottoman Empire were Muslims, but they did not force their religions on others. Christians and Jews in the Empire prayed in their own churches or synagogues, taught their religion in their own schools and seminaries, and went about their business, sometimes amassing great fortunes. At that time, Ottoman toleration was unique.
The tradition of Turkish tolerance came from both religious belief and practicality.
Turks were Muslims and were tolerant of other religions because of that. From its beginnings Islam had accepted the existence of other monotheistic religions. Jews and Christians had lived in -lands ruled by Islam since the time of the prophet Muhammad. Certain rules had evolved to order the relations between Muslim and non-Muslim: Islam was to be dominant; rulers were to be Muslim. Muslims were not allowed to convert to other religions, nor could non-Muslims attempt to convert Muslims. Non-Muslims were to wear distinctive clothing. In various places at various times non-Muslims were also restricted in certain ways. Perhaps the most important of the special regulations was the demand that Christians and Jews pay a special tax, the jizya, that was not paid by Muslims. This tax was paid by adult Christians and Jews who lived in Islamic states. By common belief, it was based on -an agreement forged between Christians and Muslims in the first days of Muslim conquest. In return for tolerance of religious practice and the protection of the Islamic state, the non-muslims agreed to pay the tax and to accept the restrictions on their clothing, etc.
For those Christians who believed, as did the Muslims, that their own religious group should always be in control, the pact of toleration between Muslims and Christians was a disaster. However, for many Christians and for the Jews, the acceptance of Muslim rule was a real benefit. The Byzantine leaders who had ruled much of the Middle East before the Arab conquest often persecuted those Christians they considered not to be Orthodox in belief. To the Muslims, all the sects were simply Christians, all bound by the same laws, and none subject to persecution. Jewish life was to flourish in many lands.
In practical terms, the extra tax paid by non-Muslims can be viewed as a military exemption tax. Non Muslim males did not pay an extra tax, but they also remained on their farms or at businesses when the Muslims went off to war. For many, this would not have been a disadvantage.
As Muslims, the Ottoman sultans and Turkish generals kept to the laws of Islam regarding non Muslims. When the Ottoman Empire was founded in the early fourteenth century Islamic tolerance had already lived for six hundred years. The Ottomans continued and built upon that tradition.
Ottoman tolerance was based on cleverness as well as on good will. It was in the interest of the Turkish Muslims to be tolerant of other religions. The Ottoman conquerors came upon a vast area where the population was primarily Christian, especially in the Balkans. To these people, religion was the most important element of personal identification. Kings and emperors came and went, borders changed, but Christianity remained. The government was the property of rulers, often leaders who taxed the villagers into poverty and whom the people did not particularly like. But religion was the property of the people and of God. By allowing Christians and Jews to practice their religions, the Ottoman Turks defended against the most likely case of revolt. Farmers were unlikely to revolt in favor of a king they did not care about, but they would readily revolt in defense of their religion. On the other hand, the Ottomans rightly assumed, if religion were secure and taxes were not too high, people would be satisfied with their situations.
For the Ottomans, religious tolerance became a sound basis for government. In almost all Christian states until modem times only one form of religion was accepted. This was obviously not true in the Ottoman domains. There are many forms of Christianity that flourished. By the nineteenth century, when Christian sects had proliferated, Istanbul held churches for Bulgarian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Greek Catholic, Armenian Apostolic, Armenian Catholic, Roman Catholic Assyrian Chaldean, Anglican, Congregational, and other Christians, as well as synagogues for both Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews. In earlier times there were three dominant non-Muslim religious groups -- Greek Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, and Sephardic Jews.
The members of each of the religious preferred to associate with members of their own group. The Ottomans organized governmental life around divisions. Each religious community (millet) kept its own courts, schools, and welfare system. Members of the millet even built roads, water fountains, and communal buildings for their own neighborhoods. The members of millets were pleased to have these functions in their own hands and the Ottoman government was relieved of the necessity of providing them themselves. Had the central government provided for these schools, welfare establishments, courts, etc. of the millets, taxes would have had to be raised and the members of the millets would have been restive at the costs and at the loss of communal control over their own lives. It was a good system for all.
Ottoman religious toleration was not perfect. The Ottoman Empire was definitely a Muslim state and gave preference to Muslims in many parts of government. Only in the last decades of the Empire were non Muslims allowed to gain high office. Muslims undoubtedly felt more a part of the state than did Christians. Just as the king of England had to be an Anglican Christian or the king of Germany a Lutheran.Christian, the sultan of the Ottoman Empire had to be a Sunni Muslim. Official toleration did not mean that prejudices disappeared among Ottoman Muslims, Jews , or Christians. Muslims were undoubtedly the first subjects in the Empire, with greater rights and responsibilities than non-Muslims. Ottoman toleration was not Ottoman equality.
Why, if it was imperfect, was Ottoman religious toleration so noteworthy? Historical comparisons can be made to ideals. Compared to an ideal of a democratic government of complete equality for all citizens, the Ottoman Empire was deficient. Comparisons can also be made to modern times. Compared to today's governments in Western Europe or North America, religious, toleration in the Ottoman Empire was also deficient. Such comparisons help us evaluate history, but they are surely not fair criteria to use to praise or damn peoples of other times. To truly evaluate the Ottomans they must be compared to others who lived in their own time. It is in that comparison that Ottoman toleration is shown to be exceptional and laudable as it was. Ottoman toleration was not so notable because it was perfect. It was notable because it was so much better than what existed elsewhere.
The benefits of Ottoman rule are seen when one compares Ottoman practice with what was occurring in Europe at the time. In Europe only one religion was tolerated and conversion, exile or death was the rule for those who dissented. An example was Spain which, when conquered by Christian rulers, expelled the Muslims and Jews who had lived there for centuries. The Ottomans took them in. While Jews lived through ages of pogroms in Europe they lived in peace among the Turkish Muslims. In their time, the tolerance of the Ottomans was remarkable.
The practicality of Ottoman toleration was also remarkable. The system of the millets was pragmatic and useful, as well as moral. Yet it was exceptional that any government of the time would so set aside its prejudices to benefit the country. No Western government would have accepted the millet system and left so many ordinary functions of government out of its own control. Imagine a Western government in, for example, the fifteenth century that allowed non-Christians to run their own schools, to leave money to their children according to their own laws (not those of the state), to collect taxes to support welfare for its own group, to organize and police its own neighborhoods, to punish transgressors according to its own laws in its own courts. In fact, imagine a European government that allowed non-Christians to live in peace at all. The reality is reflected in the well known fate of the Jews in Europe. One cannot speak of the status of Muslims in much of Europe, because they were expelled when Christians took power. The ultimate intolerance for Muslims of Sicily, Spain or Portugal was exile from their homes and confiscation of their lands. The Ottomans were exceptional in realizing that a diverse group of peoples could actually assist their Empire. Upon hearing that the Spanish king was forcing out Jews, Sultan Beyazid.II, who welcomed the Jews to the Ottoman Empire, is reported to have said that if the Spanish king was mad enough to exile the most industrious of his subjects, the Ottomans would be glad to take advantage of his madness.
The success of Ottoman tolerance can most easily be seen in the fact that large Christian and Jewish communities existed in the Ottoman lands until the end of the Empire. Then it was European intervention and European-style nationalism, not internal failure of the system, that destroyed the centuries-long peace between religions that had characterized the Ottoman system.
Which would be awesome as long as you expect that to hold no weight with anyone else, proof wise.
I mean: Would Syd Barrett's Acid experiences under the scrutiny of your Sync-Cording would have to be true for everyone?
No matter what he hallucinated/believed to be real....?
Even though the doctors and scientists observing wouldnt see the pink nazi elephants with knives his internal experience would portray, except for on the monitors showing his playback...?
Would pink nazi elephants with machetes then be validly worshipped by the rest of the world?
What would happen when other people from other religions (Religions that spit on yours) have equally measurable results? Would you then give way to his experience's validity?
Even if his experience involved decrying yours and exterminating or converting all it's followers?
I submit that the reason you percieved your experience to be "Your god" is that when the mind hallucinates, it calls on things from its own subjective experience.
If you'd been a Muslim: It'd probably be Allah who you'd see,
If its a judeo Christian God prolly something totally different.
If you'd been a traffic warden, a giant "Dont cross" stick might appear to deliver its message....etc etc
__________________
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:47 PM
No past history of schizophrenia in the family or myself: definitely an auditory "hallucination" that also functioned as precognition. That's not outside the bounds of science, yet...but it is highly "hokey pokey" to be "science."
ESP could still be science but it is still taboo and hokey pokey for it to really be "science."
Collective Consciousness? Now we are getting too far into "God" and the discussion becomes much too philosophical to be logical (odd, isn't it?).
Additionally, since the events have only occurred twice in my life, there's no way to "study it" beyond perfect recordings of everything that happens which is many years beyond our current science. (Think of something similar to 7 Days or Final Cut.)
And, it wasn't "prayers": no prayer netted those results. It was completely random.
No, 500 years from now when we discover exactly how these rare events of precognition (not intuition which had nothing to do with it) sometimes occur. Some say luck...but my logical mind calls B.S. on it being luck since it never happened before and it has never happened since then. I say, currently, that it is God or some form of "God." 500 years from now, we may have such a deep and thorough understanding of how the universe works that things that, by all "logical" measures, were precognitive, are actually still based in science. I would like to think that there is something like collective consciousness as that would really help explain a lot but that's just as hokey pokey as believing in God, IMO.
Incorrect. There are some truths that are wonderful bodies of evidence. Those truths are only known to those individuals. Your biased against the subject of "God" is getting in the way of you realizing that.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:44 PM
look you have evidence of this yes or no? can you do it again and get similar results?
no & no so don't try to awe people with your claims
biased? frustration is the word... in the title it says show me evidence. but all im getting is... (prove that god doesn't exist, prove that caesar existed, & questioned is a blue pencil is green or yellow)
and now your story which you yourself only know the truth and you have no evidence to back it up...
__________________
My Reality Is Your Imagination.
Last edited by 0mega Spawn on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:57 PM
Well, and the little sister whose life I probably saved.
No, a sync-cording is a make-believe term for a recording of a person's...brain stuffs. That would be all information stored on the neurons. That means the scientists wishing to view this sync-cording could do so with the proper software and a matrix-like setup.
When we reach that level of "brain" undrestanding, we will truly have wonderful experiences and the legal system becomes inexorably "perfect", as far as measuring behaviors against laws. (Tangent.)
Grumpy troll, aren't you? "Awing" people with my claims was not the goal nor will it ever be. It was simply posting my body of "evidence" that works for me. I have no wish to have a civil discussion about "evidence" with a close-minded troll like you, sir. My posts were for others, not you.
I posted it. It will not be deleted. It is now in your thread for others to read. You must deal with that reality and stop throwing a fit. If you cannot, sign off of KMC or put me on ignore.
There WOULD be a way to provide evidence for such an event: have cameras setup in the two different locations which would show a 'precognitive' response to the event. It's just that....this isn't the Truman Show.
Dude Ive also had experiences that were freaky coincidence.
Could have be fate, Synchronicity, your own higher consciousness/ESP etc...no need to believe its a god, accpeting blindly all that goes WITH that assumption.
It like the folk who'd say: "I know god exists! He answers my prayers 50% of the time." You cant take that as proof.
(Sorry to if I seem to be trivialising your subjective experince.
As a side note: Glad to hear your sister ended up safe.)
Prayer to a god if successful and testable would be accepted as proof in itself if it's existance, but its not. And isn't.
Billions of people have died praying for God to save them.
__________________
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Mar 27th, 2011 at 12:57 PM
I would love to hear those stories, sometime...but not here, of course. If we ever meet up, we can swap stories over an ounce.
And, to that last statement...I absolutely detest it when people say that. You can change out the 50 for just about any number and it still is almost as stupid.
No, no...you're fine, dude. You're approaching the subject civilly. I see a significant difference between your approach and OmegaSpawn's.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 27th, 2011 11:21 AM
Do you even know what you write?!
