Abra,

You are extremely patient. A lot more than me. I feel I have given my most valuable jewels of sacred information and keys to understanding the nature of reality into this thread for those who would have the ears to hear and mind to understand, and I get this:




That is clearly the rudest response I have ever gotten in all my years of being here on Mingle. TexasS is unscientific and unspiritual and has nothing to contribute to his own thread but his disdain for others.

I commend you for being patient with him, but I doubt if he will appreciate it one bit. His agenda is simply to shut people up. He believes he has it all figured out. Goody for him.

I stand corrected, AdventureBegins.

I admire your vision, your wisdom and your intelligence.


And may the force be with you!

we are talking about God with human words and this sounds just a little bit limitated

this could be a positive question ...............are we human forced to guess a reasonable God, by our knowledge?

I agree

science is a function of man limited by man's capacity as human and though the human brain is profound and capable of much more than we know - even now- it is nonetheless human

whereas God is still a difficult perception for even the most intelligent among us - why so many dismiss God's existence

it is easy to discard something we do not understand than to accept things on faith and ask for truth to be revealed

God is all that we do and more than what we can understand

no one sience or philosophy is able to give response, but the spirituality is inside us, so l'd say that we can split up the matirial dimension from the spiritual sense of percive the reality around us

consider that even the exoteric sience or theo-philosophy --------is limited-------to our ability to explain every kind of supernatural phenomenon

There are some people that don't seem to want to be "spiritual."
Its too unscientific for their brains.

Can God make a rock so big that even he can't pick it up?


-Kerry O.

Trite.

I'm not sure who wrote this, but two out of three paragraphs betray significant misunderstandings.

While minor details are debated, the overall idea of the modern theory of evolution is extremely well substantiated, and accepted as fact by most scientists in a variety of disciplines. There is no issue of a 'missing link'. Naturally we don't have a specimen from every generation of every creature on this planet, but we do have knowledge and evidence of hundreds or thousands of intermediate forms.

And as for the 100% myth - of course we use close to 100% of the grey matter of our brain. We also use 100% of the white matter - we just don't use it for 'thinking' - it has other functions in assisting the grey matter. The only reason people still talk about 'not using 100% of the brain' is because we have so many people who are too lazy to research claims before repeating them.

no one in this dimension can give adeguate responses, l can't say God exist because when l talk my voice entering in the matirial dimension ,it lose the spirituality, in this conditions for a not believers or not spiritual ppl become easy to face the divine-idea.
so l insist we have to split up ----------spirito e materia--ab aeternam--------

since the first ancient human-civilization mankind talks about God and this has a own reason


l'm so sorry but can not talk to you in contemporary time l'm Italian living in Venice there is almost 10 hours among us

Just like "If God is omnipotent, how come everything he makes dies?" :)


Or, if "faith can move mountains", why are do people who need to move mountains come to science for bulldozers and high explosives when holy books are so cheap?


-Kerry O.

I think the amount of faith that could move a mountain does not exist in a rational world. But if a single fool had that faith that he could move a mountain, he could probably delude himself enough to believe he moved it.

Scientific studies have proven that if an observer can't believe something that he will simply not be able to see it.

Reminds me of:



Incidentally, in no way do I consider that chart to represent a thorough or complete investigation into these phenomena, there is subtlety here, and refined points to be debated. It does introduce some important questions/perspectives, which are often not considered by 'believers'.

It is probably not a representation of any real investigation. I knew a funeral home owner who used dowsing to locate buried bodies in his cemetery. He actually believed there was some sort of scientific reason his two copper wires could do this. He claimed it was accurate, but to convince me you would have to dig up at least ten bodies. I'm still a skeptic.

A friend of mine who is an herbalist uses a dowsing rod to diagnose people's physical problems. She was hesitant to have me do a tarot reading for her because her Morman religion implied that it was witchcraft. I laughed and reminded her that she diagnoses illnesses with a stick. She was just as much a witch as she thought I was. Of course she had an explanation. It was a bit mystical but it made sense to her.

The point being people use these methods who believe they are normal and scientific.

Farmers and ranchers have been finding water with with dowsers and willow sticks for a long time. They swear by it. It is too expensive to dig a well and hit nothing. I'm quite sure they do this for oil wells too.

Law enforcement uses psychics all the time. People pay dowsers to find things. Will they admit it? Most of the time they won't. They don't like being made fun of. They do it because they are desperate and figure they have nothing to lose. Sometimes it works. It would be hard to keep statistics because it is all done in secret most of the time.

Men who stare at goats!

Well, maybe that explains why so many people still haven't experienced yesterday's Rapture. :)

And it's usually NOT a matter of skeptics not being able to see something, it's the lack of evidence provided by those who claim they _can_ see something that most other people can't.

Hallucination and delusion are the other side of the willful blindness coin.

Or, from the Wikipedia article on philosopher Sir Karl Popper about falsification and scientific theory:




-Kerry O.

No I mean that people who can't believe it literally can't 'see' it with their eyes.

Example given was a group of native Americans who, when ships appeared on the horizon of the ocean, they literally could not see them. It was as if they were invisible.

They have tested this with some animals who were not 'programed' to 'see' or comprehend certain things place in their path.

The Romans didn't 'see' the Visigoths coming over the hill for them, either, yet history tells us how that worked out.

Before the neurodocs at Johns Hopkins fixed it, one Sunday about 7 years ago my congenital arterial defect started leaking an increasing amount of blood into my brain. When the brain/blood barrier is broken, one of the symptoms can be partial blindness. In my case, it was the very first manifestations that something was really wrong. From having been warned about it from practitioners I had during the previous occurrence, I knew that denial was not an option-- in some cases like mine, it gets you very dead. I got ready to go the ER well before the worst of it hit, and because I wasn't in denial about it, I survived it. I had medtechs working on me in an ambulance when my heart went nuts and my breathing stopped for a bit.

Had I been born in the Dark Ages, when faith trumped science, I would probably have been dead before my 35th birthday.


-Kerry O.

That's an interesting story but I wasn't talking about faith.