• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why converse of G-d is needed by humans?

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
This is because logic and reasoning alone cannot lead to the perfect cognition of G-d.

Everyone’s thoughts are welcome whether one belongs to a religion or no religion.

Regards
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
This is because logic and reasoning alone cannot lead to the perfect cognition of G-d.

Everyone’s thoughts are welcome whether one belongs to a religion or no religion.

Regards

I'm not even sure conversing with God can lead to perfect cognition. Enough folks who talk with God seem a bit off. You get cult leaders who are certain they are prophets and unfortunately enough people who follow their lead.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I'm not even sure conversing with God can lead to perfect cognition. Enough folks who talk with God seem a bit off. You get cult leaders who are certain they are prophets and unfortunately enough people who follow their lead.
If converse between two human being could lead to cognition of one another; why converse between man and G-d cannot lead to perfect cognition of G-d by a human ?Please

Regards
 
Last edited:

Kirran

Premium Member
A human being is very different to God, in almost all interpretations and views. So to say that a human could have 'cognition' of (I take it you mean, be aware of the existence of) a human by talking to them, and then to extrapolate that the same must be true of God, doesn't seem to hold true to me.

Conversing with God, i.e. interacting with God, or feeling the presence of God, or however you'd like to put it, is necessarily a very distorted experience. According to some, it may even be a hallucination, or fooling oneself, etc.

Lots of people believe themselves to have conversed with God. But so many of them come out of doing so saying God is different. They don't all come out with the same experience.

What's more, to say 'converse' with God necessitates that God can consciously return one's side of the conversation i.e. I talk to God, God talks back, is severely limiting the scope of this discussion by leaving out all the non-personal, or transpersonal, experiences and definitions of God, such as my own.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
If converse between two human being could lead to cognition of one another; why converse between man and G-d cannot lead to perfect cognition of G-d by a human ?Please

Regards

My concern would actually be the validation of it being God. A human being is only aware of about 5% of the goings on inside of their head. Since these divine experiences occur as a subjective experience it is possible that they are manufactured/interpreted in the 95% of the brain a person isn't consciously aware of.

The fact is that the subconscious is way more powerful then the conscious and can create such experiences while we are not even consciously aware of our brain creating them.

So are you dealing with God, or the subconscious portion of your brain? I'm not sure this is something we can determine. Kind of like they say the devil can quote scripture, so can the subconscious mind.

We rely on the subconscious brain for our reality. There is no way around that. If you aren't consciously supervising the subconscious, how much can you really trust it?

Faith right? You have to have faith. But say you happen to be dealing with God and I'm dealing with my subconscious mind. How could we know? We are both making the same assumption base on the reality of what we experience.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
A human being is very different to God, in almost all interpretations and views. So to say that a human could have 'cognition' of (I take it you mean, be aware of the existence of) a human by talking to them, and then to extrapolate that the same must be true of God, doesn't seem to hold true to me.

Conversing with God, i.e. interacting with God, or feeling the presence of God, or however you'd like to put it, is necessarily a very distorted experience. According to some, it may even be a hallucination, or fooling oneself, etc.

Lots of people believe themselves to have conversed with God. But so many of them come out of doing so saying God is different. They don't all come out with the same experience.

What's more, to say 'converse' with God necessitates that God can consciously return one's side of the conversation i.e. I talk to God, God talks back, is severely limiting the scope of this discussion by leaving out all the non-personal, or transpersonal, experiences and definitions of God, such as my own.

We cannot generalize from some or many people having hallucinations to others who were not hallucinated.
Very practical, normal and successful persons have had Converse with G-d.

I don't agree with you.

Regards
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is because logic and reasoning alone cannot lead to the perfect cognition of G-d.

Everyone’s thoughts are welcome whether one belongs to a religion or no religion.

Regards
I don't think we could ever know the true God, unless he is willing to reveal himself to us. Happily, God has done this for us, IMO, as any loving father would to his children.
 

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
This is because logic and reasoning alone cannot lead to the perfect cognition of G-d.

Everyone’s thoughts are welcome whether one belongs to a religion or no religion.

Regards

Depends what you mean by God?, As for my opinion, coming from my Hindu perspective, it is through Dhyana/Seva/Yoga/Jnana/Artha/Dharmah/Kama ect that one realizes the Atman, and one sees the Atman in others and Others in ones own Atman, no need for a God here, having respectful conversations with others is good enough. What is the need for a external God, when we our self are it/that (Tat).
 

Kirran

Premium Member
We cannot generalize from some or many people having hallucinations to others who were not hallucinated.
Very practical, normal and successful persons have had Converse with G-d.

I don't agree with you.

Regards

I would like some examples.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Due to the highly emotional nature of the experience confirmation bias is almost impossible to escape. It's not god people talk to, it's their image of god they are talking to. It's a great way to convince oneself that they are dealing with deity though as they will ignore virtually any information that discounts the perception.
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Due to the highly emotional nature of the experience confirmation bias is almost impossible to escape. It's not god people talk to, it's their image of god they are talking to. It's a great way to convince oneself that they are dealing with deity though as they will ignore virtually any information that discounts the perception.

Those who don't believe in G-d also have confirmation bias.
Don't they?

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
Like Muhammad a person of diverse pragmatic qualities who changed the wheel of history in the teeth of opposition by the powers that be in the world at that time.

But one example doesn't support the idea of consistent experience.

Another example is of the Cyrus the Great.

Regards
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Those who don't believe in G-d also have confirmation bias.
Don't they?

Regards
Confirmation bias is a part of our psychological makeup. No one is immune to its effects, however, due to the considerable emotional attachment to ideas about deity, the believer is - in my opinion - more prone to see what they want. Again, it's the emotional attachment to the idea that greases the skids into delusional thinking and experience. For example, in terms you ought to be able to understand, in the Hira cave, Muhammad when through a traumatic emotional episode upon supposedly interacting with Gabriel. Gabriel wasn't especially kind, if we are to believe the various accounts and was more than a bit of a bully. My guess is that this precipitated a psychological crisis for Muhammad who ran home and hid under the skirt of his wife, Khadijah, trembling in fear.

Atheists also have confirmation bias, but their emotional attachment to the idea of no god(s) is generally not that high and so should not be anywhere near as problematic.
 
Last edited:

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Those who don't believe in G-d also have confirmation bias.
Don't they?

Regards

I question anything I accept as truth because of it. I suppose because of it I've become detached to there being a truth, at least a universal truth.

I've had conversations with God and they were to me very profound at the time. They altered my views and understanding of existing. Maybe it was necessary and helpful for me. However as I come to understand more about consciousness and how the mind works I end up questioning the reality that I experience.

So truth for me is whatever I'm experiencing now and being able to make that experience into the one that I want. Beyond that, I'm not sure there is anything else to know.
 
Top