Really serious to know about God ? Then why dialogues ?

[chinu]

Even if God said that he created the universe, I will still ask for proof and the process. God can fool you believers, but cannot fool atheists like me easily. He should first tell me how he came to be. His creation story in six days and creating Adam from soil and Eve from his ribs is BS. That kind of answers are not going to satisfy me.

If, you believe that there's "someone" who is trying to fool you ? This sense of humor is more than enough to be a theist, which you are NOT

 

[HonestJoe]

Why NOT ? When paused. Its NOT universe, its paused-universe. And this pause was predetermined.

Because the person inside the universe would be "paused" and so couldn't have a dialog.

Yes, he dwells within "His" own creation/story like a spirit of the writer is present in writer's story. But at the same time he's apart from story.

So he can't have a dialog with anyone inside the "story" unless that dialog was predetermined to happen and that would mean God would be subject to predetermination just like everything else. God could leave a fixed message that someone is destined to find at some point but God couldn't engage in a direct dialog with them.

 

[LightofTruth]

I guess, you angry with me ?

No. What's the sense of letters of exhortation to the churches if dialogue is unnecessary?

 

[chinu]

Because the person inside the universe would be "paused" and so couldn't have a dialog.

What made you think that God isn’t capable of pausing the universe excluding someone that he doesn’t want to include ?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Taking the word "Omniscience" into consideration, life is a film / movie produced by God. Reverse and Played....
Being the producer of this movie, "He" very well knows the very next-scene (Future) in advance. So don't try to be over smart here.

IF, you are asking questions, or discussing anything about God, Creation, Purpose of life, Who am I etc. with Another person (fellow-actor). Its just mere dialogues that was told you to speak in the film / movie a long time before this film / movie was started.

BUT-IF, you are closing your eyes and asking the same kinda questions to God-Itself. Than its NOT a dialogue. Because, this time you are NOT interacting with other fellow-actors in the film / movie. This time you are interacting with the Producer (God) itself.

Conclusion is: If you are really serious to know about God, Creation, Purpose of life etc ? Close your eyes and ask questions to God itself.

Otherwise, as I already told above that.. Its just mere dialogues that was told you to speak in the film / movie a long time before this film / movie was started.

If a person never heard of god and closed their eyes they'd have no reference to what they experience cause there's no actual voice.

How do you make dufference of who you're communicating with if not for the dialogue (say scripture) involved to determine if it's one god over another?

Without scripture, tradition, practice, etc how does a religious foreigner know who/what they are experiencing?

 

[chinu]

If a person never heard of god and closed their eyes they'd have no reference to what they experience cause there's no actual voice.

How do you make dufference of who you're communicating with if not for the dialogue (say scripture) involved to determine if it's one god over another?

Without scripture, tradition, practice, etc how does a religious foreigner know who/what they are experiencing?

Like, a new born baby who recognise mother right after the birth.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Like, a new born baby who recognise mother right after the birth.

I get the analogy, but the nature of the two are different: human vs. god.

If the infant had his eyes closed and someone held him, he would not know who that person is until she talks or communicates (dialogues) in a way the baby knows who his mother is.

Since god is unseen, the question is the same.

 

[chinu]

I get the analogy, but the nature of the two are different: human vs. god.

If the infant had his eyes closed and someone held him, he would not know who that person is until she talks or communicates (dialogues) in a way the baby knows who his mother is.

Since god is unseen, the question is the same.

You know who's most troubled when a new born cries ? It none other than a mother. Mother is even more concerned than a father, however both are equal parents.

Its NOT the womb, its the love and concern towards baby that makes mother a real mother, even blind, deaf or dumb baby recognises that love and concern right after the birth.

 

[HonestJoe]

What made you think that God isn’t capable of pausing the universe excluding someone that he doesn’t want to include ?

I'm not saying God couldn't do that but if he excludes any part of the universe, it isn't really being paused. The person he has the dialog with would be returned to the universe changed by the dialog and so the universe will have changed. If everything in the universe is predetermined, that change would be predetermined and so God pausing the universe but excluding that person for the dialog would be predetermined too.

Again, if God can have any effect on a predetermined universe, God's actions must be predetermined too.

 

[chinu]

I'm not saying God couldn't do that but if he excludes any part of the universe, it isn't really being paused. The person he has the dialog with would be returned to the universe changed by the dialog and so the universe will have changed. If everything in the universe is predetermined, that change would be predetermined and so God pausing the universe but excluding that person for the dialog would be predetermined too.

Again, if God can have any effect on a predetermined universe, God's actions must be predetermined too.

After a live dialog with God, the person is NO more a person. Person becomes God itself.

Thereafter, that person is OUT of story. And yes, all this is predetermined.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You know who's most troubled when a new born cries ? It none other than a mother. Mother is even more concerned than a father, however both are equal parents.

Its NOT the womb, its the love and concern towards baby that makes mother a real mother, even blind, deaf or dumb baby recognises that love and concern right after the birth.

The point though is anyone can hold the child but without that communication, the baby can grow up not knowing who his real mother is.

First contact can be any woman. But god is much different. You'd have to have some "distinct" form of communication that a person knows which god (or mystic experience) aligns with what source.

We can make assumptions and draw biased conclusions but the fact is if there's no distinct communication, it could be Jehosaphat for all we know as a god.

What is distinct about god that one can know it's one religion's god without "opening their eyes"?

 

[chinu]

The point though is anyone can hold the child but without that communication, the baby can grow up not knowing who his real mother is.

First contact can be any woman. But god is much different. You'd have to have some "distinct" form of communication that a person knows which god (or mystic experience) aligns with what source.

We can make assumptions and draw biased conclusions but the fact is if there's no distinct communication, it could be Jehosaphat for all we know as a god.

What is distinct about god that one can know it's one religion's god without "opening their eyes"?

Distinct ?

Mother does NOT feed the sleeping baby, until he wake up and cry for the feed.

There’s a lot of difference between the one who is.. “hungry for the knowledge of God” vs “hungry for God”

Being “hungry for the knowledge of God” is no more than a sleeping child to God. Whereas “hungry for God” is like a awakened and crying child.

As soon as the child starts crying, as soon as “He” feeds.

Distinct in communication NOT find because we aren’t really hungry and have not started crying yet. We are like sleeping

He gives plastic/artificial nipple to the one who want to play. And an original nipple to the one who is hungry in real, because he very well knows that a plastic nipple will NOT work in such cases.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Distinct ?

Mother does NOT feed the sleeping baby, until he wake up and cry for the feed.

There’s a lot of difference between the one who is.. “hungry for the knowledge of God” vs “hungry for God”

Being “hungry for the knowledge of God” is no more than a sleeping child to God. Whereas “hungry for God” is like a awakened and crying child.

As soon as the child starts crying, as soon as “He” feeds.

Distinct in communication NOT find because we aren’t really hungry and have not started crying yet. We are like sleeping

He gives plastic/artificial nipple to the one who want to play. And an original nipple to the one who is hungry in real, because he very well knows that a plastic nipple will NOT work in such cases.

Hungry?

Not following. We're talking about anynomous communication without dialogue.

God and mother are different. Their natures are different. One invisible the other visible. The way they "love" if one likes is not the same.

The baby doesn't know who the mother is just the nurturer with whom he or she made first contact.

.....

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Mother does NOT feed the sleeping baby, until he wake up and cry for the feed.

There’s a lot of difference between the one who is.. “hungry for the knowledge of God” vs “hungry for God”

We're not talking about hunger. I just said the child assumes his mother by the first person she comes in contact. Children go their whole lives thinking their mother is their biological mother.

If you have no dialogue (in your OP) than how would one decern what god they experience?

I haven't heard any god religion, pagan, eastern, abrahamic that doesn't have something physical in concert with the spiritual.

Being “hungry for the knowledge of God” is no more than a sleeping child to God. Whereas “hungry for God” is like a awakened and crying child.

As soon as the child starts crying, as soon as “He” feeds.

Not sure how this related either. We're not born with the need for god. That's just environmental,how to say, brainwash.

Distinct in communication NOT find because we aren’t really hungry and have not started crying yet. We are like sleeping

He gives plastic/artificial nipple to the one who want to play. And an original nipple to the one who is hungry in real, because he very well knows that a plastic nipple will NOT work in such cases.

Still not following the hungry analogy.

Distinct meaning abstract mystical feelings aren't enough to say it's X god is the cause. There needs to be context.

 

[chinu]

Not sure how this related either. We're not born with the need for god. That's just environmental,how to say, brainwash.

Yes. we are born with the need/hunger for God. And that's what I was trying to explain with my "Hunger" analogy.

For sure this need / hunger for God arises in one's / soul's life. But when ? That is NOT certain.
But, whenever this need / hunger for God arises, thereafter one is said to be awakened. until then only sleeping.

There's difficulty understanding this analogy because a normal human age is about 70 -to- 80 years. Whereas as per this analogy soul (NOT human) age can be many rebirths. And during this whole period the soul is considered sleeping until hunger/need for God arises.

Who is real mother, or who is not ?
As per analogy, this question arises AFTER the need / hunger for God arises, NOT before.

Analogy says, its useless to talk upon this question UNTIL THEN.

 

[HonestJoe]

After a live dialog with God, the person is NO more a person. Person becomes God itself.

Thereafter, that person is OUT of story. And yes, all this is predetermined.

OK, you're just making stuff up at random now. This is the first time you even hinted that people "becoming God itself" is even a factor here yet if it was always part of the picture, why wouldn't you have mentioned it before?

If you had a consistent and clearly defined idea of how you believe this works, we could have a rational discussion about it but I don't think you're capable of that. You have faith, and you'll just constantly spout whatever you think will support that faith position regardless of how irrational or inconsistent it is.

 

[chinu]

OK, you're just making stuff up at random now. This is the first time you even hinted that people "becoming God itself" is even a factor here yet if it was always part of the picture, why wouldn't you have mentioned it before?

In OP I already suggested that If you are really serious to know about God, Creation, Purpose of life etc ? Close your eyes and ask questions to God itself. What will happen next, or how will God make you familiar with the truth I didn't wrote because when one will come face to face with truth, they'll know themselves. All questions will automatically get end.

If you had a consistent and clearly defined idea of how you believe this works, we could have a rational discussion about it but I don't think you're capable of that.

Nobody on this earth never ever had any such consistent and clearly defined idea that you are looking for.
Yes, ideas can help, or push someone towards the path that leads to God. But, ideas cannot give you real God.

You have faith, and you'll just constantly spout whatever you think will support that faith position regardless of how irrational or inconsistent it is.

No, I have NO faith. I always talk on basis of my own experiences and observations. But, yes its true that sometimes my observations and experiences sounds like already existing faiths.

Hence, I understand your frustration, Joe

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes. we are born with the need/hunger for God. And that's what I was trying to explain with my "Hunger" analogy.

For sure this need / hunger for God arises in one's / soul's life. But when ? That is NOT certain.
But, whenever this need / hunger for God arises, thereafter one is said to be awakened. until then only sleeping.

There's difficulty understanding this analogy because a normal human age is about 70 -to- 80 years. Whereas as per this analogy soul (NOT human) age can be many rebirths. And during this whole period the soul is considered sleeping until hunger/need for God arises.

Who is real mother, or who is not ?
As per analogy, this question arises AFTER the need / hunger for God arises, NOT before.

Analogy says, its useless to talk upon this question UNTIL THEN.

How did you come to that conclusion that we have a hunger for god?

Maybe later in life some people are more acceptable to god than others. Were you around a god-environment? God-household? There are so many factors that influence children (after) they are born where one may say it is of nature and others, which I believe is nurture.

How did you come to that conclusion?

It can't be "must be" (i.e. we believe in god therefore we must have a hunch since birth) or a hunch or feeling (I feel X special mystical feeling it 'must be' from god).

Rebirths? "Technically" there are none. Just one existence and no death of consciousness. Not sure how close I believe this since I never looked into it when I practiced, but that doesn't (more than) imply that we have a hunger for god. Rebirths and the abrahamic god (to which I think we're talking of?) are two separate things (not even that).

 

[chinu]

How did you come to that conclusion that we have a hunger for god?

From observations.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Though I never did understand the idea that my knowing my dog will eat a steak left on the table eliminates my dogs freewill....

What you call "knowing" here, isn't absolute knowledge. What it rather is, is a reasonable expectation based on evidence and past experience with dogs in general and your dog in particular.

If your dog feels sick one day, he might just not touch it.