Search for Causes

[The Grand Nudger]

It's neither ( though, for max cynicism..you don't have to choose).  

Modern christian belief has become what Crosby or Polanyi would call naturalistic theism.  Where belief in god rests on items of personal experience and natural observation rather than sacred revelation.  Lek finds himself at the crux of this change, where naturalism™ in opposition - to him..atheism...makes it hard for him to recognize god...when he considers it.  Whereas naturalism™ in content is the ground from which he searches for god as well as the ground from which he makes appeals to us, his fellow naturalists, but not his fellow believers.

If you read my posts, you'll realize I've stated numerous times that I believe because God has revealed it to me.  Is God revealing it to me not sacred revelation?

Unfortunately for your relapse into christianese, no.  That's not how it would be categorized.  You tell us that you've had an experience, and implore us to consider those experiences of others, as well.  You observe the world, life specifically in the human context and life broadly as well...and see god very much in it.  This is naturalistic theism, where belief in god rests on items of personal experience and natural observation...rather than sacred revelation.  Which, for you, would be magic book.  

The ego it must take to imagine that your personal experience amounted to sacred revelation is mind boggling. Call me back in a few thousand years when everyone is worshiping at your altar. Jesus fucking christ......

Some of my fellow believers, whoever they are, agree with me and some don't.  Who do you think are my fellow believers?

I don't make it a habit to go around polling nutters as to which specific christian cult they belong.  It would be pointless in context, since naturalism has crept into every facet of christian belief. It's entirely certain, however, that we are not your fellow believers.  We do not share in your existential faith...and so, when we both look at the same world with the same equipment and apply the same process to the same results in the same overriding functional ideology...we end up with different conclusions. There is a variable present in your calculus of divinity that is simply not present in ours.

Can't even throw you a lifeline to rationality without you arguing against it, huh?  

I'm over here suggesting that you're neither disabled, nor fundamentally dishonest. Rather, that you are using the deepest values you indwell as an indicator of truth.  This is all that distinguishes you from a religious humanist, minimalist religious naturalist, and a literal religion of nature.  The final product of all four of your beliefs is functionally identical precisely because of their shared ideological content regardless of whatever profession a person might make about the linguistic disparities.  This is why you expect others (and us, specifically) to have this experience upon which you predicate your own beliefs - why you can't take the alternative seriously, as you put it...and why you invent hilariously inept reasons for us not to see, or hear...why we don't experience this thing you're talking about.

It's worth remembering, at this point, that I've suggested that we do. WEhy do you think that you and I, experiencing the same things in the same world, would come to different conclusions about it? Just imagine, for a moment - that whatever experience you've had which leads you to rationally conclude that a god exists, is an experience I've also had, which does not lead me to that same conclusion. We are both approaching the experience in question with equal ability to observe and equal measures of rational faculty. We both trust that our experiences tell us about some true thing "out there". What could account for the difference?

[Lek]

Let me say that my belief in God and the supernatural doesn't come from my observation and experience of the natural world.  It comes directly from God.  I can look at the world and say that I recognize God in the world, but that stems from the fact that I believe in God.  I do observe and experience many things in the natural world which are further evidence of the existence of God and the supernatural.  Some examples of occurrences that support the supernatural are the common recorded instances of memories of past lives and near death experiences.  Has anybody ever done an experiment that proves that parents love their children?  The only ones who can prove to themselves that they love their children are parents who possess that love.  The children who experience that love will also recognize it.  They can do all the scientific investigating that they want, but no one else can prove it.

I've heard and read too much to believe that human consciousness all comes from physical mechanisms. Try studying the evidence instead of glossing it over and listing only to the comments of skeptics.  I came upon a lecture by a neurosurgeon who had a near death experience.  If you really want to know about the subject view it on you tube.  It's titled "Eben Alexander: A Neurosurgeon's Journey through the Afterlife".  He tells it better than I have ever heard about this subject and how life-changing it is.  He's undoubtedly a man of science who believed as you do before his experience, but now believes differently.  All you have to do is put on your earbuds and listen.

LadyForCamus and Gae Bolga, these comments are address to your prior posts.

Obviously, Gae Bolga either knows very little about christianity and christians, or he hasn't really read my ideas and beliefs.  If he does know anything about christianity, he would know that they are concepts that are not welcome in christian churches.

[no one]

Which god are we talking about?

Zeus?
Poseidon?
Hanuman?
RA?
Olokun?
Loki?

Or perhaps any of the other 1000's of gods that either don't coincide with your fairy tale view or have drifted into obscurity.

[Lek]

Which god are we talking about?

Zeus?
Poseidon?
Hanuman?
RA?
Olokun?
Loki?

Or perhaps any of the other 1000's of gods that either don't coincide with your fairy tale view or have drifted into obscurity.

There's only one God. These are human attempts to describe or personify God. All religions have myths.

[no one]

So which one has you on speed dial?

[Ranjr]

Let me say that my belief in God and the supernatural doesn't come from my observation and experience of the natural world.  It comes directly from God.  I can look at the world and say that I recognize God in the world, but that stems from the fact that I believe in God.  I do observe and experience many things in the natural world which are further evidence of the existence of God and the supernatural.  Some examples of occurrences that support the supernatural are the common recorded instances of memories of past lives and near death experiences.  Has anybody ever done an experiment that proves that parents love their children?  The only ones who can prove to themselves that they love their children are parents who possess that love.  The children who experience that love will also recognize it.  They can do all the scientific investigating that they want, but no one else can prove it.

Do you agree that belief in God is an emotion, such as love?  And that if proof of love doesn't exist, neither does proof of God.  You say love is something parents believe they feel toward children, and children believe they receive from parents.  Yet that belief only exists within the individuals and is unverifiable by any external means.  

Now, suppose the love parents have for children was indeed measurable.  How would that effect your analogy?

[Lek]

Not sure. I'd need to think about it.

---

So which one has you on speed dial?

Not one totally.

[no one]

How does this one god directly communicate with you? How can you be so sure that this isn't your attempt to personify this described supernatural entity?

[LadyForCamus]

Let me say that my belief in God and the supernatural doesn't come from my observation and experience of the natural world.  It comes directly from God.

So you keep telling us, but you have no way of verifying or demonstrating that to anyone. You must understand why others aren’t convinced? How can we tell if you’re right or not? For that matter, how can you? 

I can look at the world and say that I recognize God in the world, but that stems from the fact that I believe in God.

Yes. That’s the definition of confirmation bias. You’re beginning with your conclusion. 

I do observe and experience many things in the natural world which are further evidence of the existence of God and the supernatural.

No, sorry. That’s just more confirmation bias. You admitted it yourself, even if you don’t realize it.

Some examples of occurrences that support the supernatural are the common recorded instances of memories of past lives and near death experiences.  Has anybody ever done an experiment that proves that parents love their children?  The only ones who can prove to themselves that they love their children are parents who possess that love.  The children who experience that love will also recognize it.  They can do all the scientific investigating that they want, but no one else can prove it.

We have plenty of scientific evidence that the love we feel for our children has its roots in evolutionary biology, Lek. Just do a simple google search. The same goes for all your other examples. Have you ever done any reading on these subjects without the lens of religion over your eyes? Or, at all? Have you ever considered that perhaps you are the closed-minded one by refusing to inform yourself of the possible natural explanations for these alleged experiences? Your thread title is, “Search for Causes”. How hard have you really searched? Perhaps you have a reason to not want to search as hard as you could?

I've heard and read too much to believe that human consciousness all comes from physical mechanisms.

 If you really want to know about the subject view it on you tube. It's titled "Eben Alexander: A Neurosurgeon's Journey through the Afterlife".  He tells it better than I have ever heard about this subject and how life-changing it is.  He's undoubtedly a man of science who believed as you do before his experience, but now believes differently.  All you have to do is put on your earbuds and listen.

So, someone’s personal testimony in a YouTube video should be sufficient to convince me a god exists? Lek, do you believe that humans are abducted by aliens?

[Abaddon_ire]

How does this one god directly communicate with you? How can you be so sure that this isn't your attempt to personify this described supernatural entity?

Described? Lek will not describe the god he believes in except in the most vague terms any more than he will describe the nature of his "revelation".

God revealed something to him? What was that? How was it revealed? How did Lek determine that such came from on particular god?

There will be no answers, because I think Lek knows at some level that it is baloney.