Thread: Who do you "pray" to?

As long as we're likening the "unworthy" to drunks, let me say this: heightened consciousness has nothing to do with how willing one is to accept that which cannot be detected by the senses. Instead, in my experience, it has everything to do with how gullible one is. Because, even through all of this talk in this thread and the other busy thread right now, there is still nothing concrete to prove your case. These are the sensory equivalents to hallucinations. Moses saw a burning bush that spoke?

So, if I'm a drunk, then believers are tripping (figuratively speaking).

Scientific explanations for the parting of the Red Sea, the 10 plagues, and the burning bush. - By Michael Lukas - Slate Magazine

Again, I'm not being confrontational, I'm just playing point/counter-point.

V/R,

Ogie

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

As long as we're likening the "unworthy" to drunks, let me say this: heightened consciousness has nothing to do with how willing one is to accept that which cannot be detected by the senses. Instead, in my experience, it has everything to do with how gullible one is. Because, even through all of this talk in this thread and the other busy thread right now, there is still nothing concrete to prove your case. These are the sensory equivalents to hallucinations. Moses saw a burning bush that spoke?

So, if I'm a drunk, then believers are tripping (figuratively speaking).

Scientific explanations for the parting of the Red Sea, the 10 plagues, and the burning bush. - By Michael Lukas - Slate Magazine

Again, I'm not being confrontational, I'm just playing point/counter-point.

V/R,

Ogie

When i compared drunk to unworthy i meant it detracted from the worth of your senses.

Ogie you said that stuff other people observed, that you have not observed must be hallucinations. This is in effect you beliving something that you have not witnessed yourself, which is exactly what you complain christians are doing, beliving something they have not seen.
You have blind faith that what they saw was hallucination, why not just say you dont know.

You cannot assume or say it is a hallucination if you have not seen it.
People everywhere are becoming aware of differnt things that are new to them all the time, and sometimes they become aware of something and they show it to others and the other people do not have the perception or conception of how it works so they dismiss it.
The earth is flat, the earth moves arond the sun etc. etc.....
Where does the next step in heightened senses end and hallucinations/insanity begin?

V/R
Greg

Originally Posted by GregJDS

Where does the next step in heightened senses end and hallucinations/insanity begin?

Surely in this thread

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Surely in this thread

your hallucinating

Originally Posted by GregJDS

When i compared drunk to unworthy i meant it detracted from the worth of your senses.

Ogie you said that stuff other people observed, that you have not observed must be hallucinations. This is in effect you beliving something that you have not witnessed yourself, which is exactly what you complain christians are doing, beliving something they have not seen.
You have blind faith that what they saw was hallucination, why not just say you dont know.

You cannot assume or say it is a hallucination if you have not seen it.
People everywhere are becoming aware of differnt things that are new to them all the time, and sometimes they become aware of something and they show it to others and the other people do not have the perception or conception of how it works so they dismiss it.
The earth is flat, the earth moves arond the sun etc. etc.....
Where does the next step in heightened senses end and hallucinations/insanity begin?

V/R
Greg

Greg, I'm with you. I don't claim to know anything other than that which can be proven or at least not disproven using scientific method. I claim to be agnostic, but only as it pertains to the possibility that a supreme omnipotent/omniscient being could have something to do with the way the universe works. For example, why are the laws of physics the way they are, and not a different way... like, say gravity repelled instead of attracted. So, it's easy to disprove religion (Bible, Qur'an, etc) using scientific method for all things in history excluding the two following:

1. The first instance of life. That is, the first carbon-based life form out of no life forms. There is some studies that say certain amino acids were formed that gave life the first spark, but there's no way to know for sure because no experiment has replicated it.

2. What triggered the big bang.

Everything else in the existence of the space-time continuum (since we know time is relative), from the beginning of the universe, down to the first few fractions of a second from the big bang, can be explained using the scientific method -- that is, they remain theories that have not been disproved.

Ogie

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

Greg, I'm with you. I don't claim to know anything other than that which can be proven or at least not disproven using scientific method. I claim to be agnostic, but only as it pertains to the possibility that a supreme omnipotent/omniscient being could have something to do with the way the universe works. For example, why are the laws of physics the way they are, and not a different way... like, say gravity repelled instead of attracted. So, it's easy to disprove religion (Bible, Qur'an, etc) using scientific method for all things in history excluding the two following:

1. The first instance of life. That is, the first carbon-based life form out of no life forms. There is some studies that say certain amino acids were formed that gave life the first spark, but there's no way to know for sure because no experiment has replicated it.

2. What triggered the big bang.

Everything else in the existence of the space-time continuum (since we know time is relative), from the beginning of the universe, down to the first few fractions of a second from the big bang, can be explained using the scientific method -- that is, they remain theories that have not been disproved.

Ogie

Back on the thread's topic: Who do you pray to:


So, lets say there was this couple who were told by the medical community (i.e.-scientific evidence) that they were unable to have children, for a number of reasons (not the least of which, the woman was 43 at the time). Not once, not twice, but many times, by many different doctors. Specialists in the field. The test levels are so low that they won't even attempt hormone shots, etc.

So, after that rigamarole, they turn to spiritual guidance in the form of a Christian monastic they knew, who told them to come to her monastery the following week, because as chance would have it a visiting priest was coming with a piece of the True Cross of Christ.

Long story short- they were blessed with The Cross, and a few months later became pregnant, and had a baby boy.

-Perhaps coincidence? Right? One in a million chance. Okay.

In thanksgiving to God a year or so later they go to visit another Christian monastery to speak with the priestmonk there, to share the good news, to thank God, and to ask if they should/could ask God if they could perhaps have another child, and to ask the priest monk for his prayers in those regards.

"Sure, that'd be the most natural thing in the world to ask for..." he says to them.

A couple of weeks later they find out that they are pregnant again.

Coincidence yet again? Or does it start to maybe point toward some evidentiary claims?

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Back on the thread's topic: Who do you pray to:


So, lets say there was this couple who were told by the medical community (i.e.-scientific evidence) that they were unable to have children, for a number of reasons (not the least of which, the woman was 43 at the time). Not once, not twice, but many times, by many different doctors. Specialists in the field. The test levels are so low that they won't even attempt hormone shots, etc.

So, after that rigamarole, they turn to spiritual guidance in the form of a Christian monastic they knew, who told them to come to her monastery the following week, because as chance would have it a visiting priest was coming with a piece of the True Cross of Christ.

Long story short- they were blessed with The Cross, and a few months later became pregnant, and had a baby boy.

-Perhaps coincidence? Right? One in a million chance. Okay.

In thanksgiving to God a year or so later they go to visit another Christian monastery to speak with the priestmonk there, to share the good news, to thank God, and to ask if they should/could ask God if they could perhaps have another child, and to ask the priest monk for his prayers in those regards.

"Sure, that'd be the most natural thing in the world to ask for..." he says to them.

A couple of weeks later they find out that they are pregnant again.

Coincidence yet again? Or does it start to maybe point toward some evidentiary claims?

Is this a true story? If so, I'd not accept any of it unless it could be done in a controlled environment. Without doing so, you can use said "cross splinter" to explain anything that is previously unexplainable. It's only evidentiary if it can be replicated.

So, get a bunch of religious, God-fearing couples who can't conceive, and rub that piece of wood on all of them. If, say 10 of 100 couples had success, then I'd consider it pretty remarkable. Of course there's real no chance any of this is true or possible, based upon what we know about the lack of impregnating qualities of a piece of wood.

Again, this discussion is going to continue around in circles because this is what we believe (or don't). But I'll say this - I was raised Catholic. Baptized, confirmed, eucharist, the whole thing. Years of Bible study, schooling, classes, college discussions. I've read the dogmas, books, epistles, gospels, canon law. It all points to a bunch of things that can't be proven, and that's where I went my separate way.

To me at least this way never anything I could figure out with my mind or with science. Like many of you have said...it just can't be proven. I tried to believe much of my life but it just was not there. I read the bible for a year straight, trying to believe but could not take the final step of faith.

Then one day it just happened, I believed with the very core of my being. Everything in my life changed. With little or no conscious thought or effort, my feelings and direction was different. I have no doubts and the focus of my life changed for the better.

It cannot be explained, or reasoned. I don't especially think it is even a conscious choice to believe. If and when you should, you will. Simple as that.

Tony

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

Is this a true story? If so, I'd not accept any of it unless it could be done in a controlled environment. Without doing so, you can use said "cross splinter" to explain anything that is previously unexplainable. It's only evidentiary if it can be replicated.

So, get a bunch of religious, God-fearing couples who can't conceive, and rub that piece of wood on all of them. If, say 10 of 100 couples had success, then I'd consider it pretty remarkable. Of course there's real no chance any of this is true or possible, based upon what we know about the lack of impregnating qualities of a piece of wood.

Again, this discussion is going to continue around in circles because this is what we believe (or don't). But I'll say this - I was raised Catholic. Baptized, confirmed, eucharist, the whole thing. Years of Bible study, schooling, classes, college discussions. I've read the dogmas, books, epistles, gospels, canon law. It all points to a bunch of things that can't be proven, and that's where I went my separate way.

Yes, it is a true story.

I think the fact that not only one child was concieved, but two after being told that they could not have any counts a repeating the experiment as close as possible in real world conditions.

From what I've heard of that priest's travels with that piece of the Cross, I think the sucess rate would meet your 10 out of 100 mark easily as well.

Can any of it be proven? No, probably not. Can any of it be experienced in your own life? Most definitely yes.