Spiritual Evidence and Proofs of God’s Existence

[nPeace]

If such laws exist and are detectable and testable, why is this not generally known? Why is there no consensus on their objective reality and qualities?

There is a consensus.

Love is a law? Isn't love just extreme appreciation; an individual emotion?

We could accept that if you can demonstrate what you just said... and explain it, since I don't really understand what it means. Can you?

 

[nPeace]

What objective test will tell us whether any claimed proof is a "spiritual" proof or not?

What objective test will tell us whether any claimed "spiritual proof" is an accurate statement about reality or not?

Does the one here count?

 

[Valjean]

Why is proof so important to some people? Seems like a wild goose chase to me.

Red pill, blue pill. Do you want to live in the real world, or a fantasy?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This is a disputed quote from Gilbert Fowler White. Here's a real Einstein quote for you:

Yes -- from Wikipedia ...

There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is.

• As quoted in Journal of France and Germany (1942–1944) by Gilbert Fowler White, in excerpt published in Living with Nature's Extremes: The Life of Gilbert Fowler White (2006) by Robert E. Hinshaw, p. 62. From the context it seems that White did not specify whether he had heard Einstein himself say this or whether he was repeating a quote that had been passed along by someone else, so without a primary source the validity of this quote should be considered questionable.

 

[Valjean]

There is a consensus.


We could accept that if you can demonstrate what you just said... and explain it, since I don't really understand what it means. Can you?

There is no consensus, as any perusal of RF would indicate.
There are countless, different religious doctrines, folk tales and mythologies. Where is the consensus?

 

[nPeace]

There is no consensus, as any perusal of RF would indicate.
There are countless, different religious doctrines, folk tales and mythologies. Where is the consensus?

There are countless scientist. Thousands of scientists do not agree... but there is a consensus among some scientist.
There are countless religious doctrines, which has nothing to do with Christianity, the Bible, or God, as described in the Bible. There is a consensus among Christians - all.

So that you understand clearly where I am coming from...
I have heard persons on here... you may be one, I am sure, who say that the percentage of scientists made up of those thousands who do not accept the evolution theory, are doing so because of a personal bias against the consensus - an agenda.
I'm saying to you, that there is a consensus among Christians. Those who don't agree, are like the percentage of scientists you define.

Hope you understand.

 

[sayak83]

For me, the "transformative effect" and the spiritual values are the strongest proofs.
There are people who think of the Bible like it is some magic portion, where anyone who picks it up should be transformed "by its power".

However, one cannot see the transforming power of the Bible, by the mere possession of it.
Many people possess a Bible, and hardly read it. Some don't even think that it is of much value, other than to hold it in their hand for people to see... as though it's a ticket to a ride to heaven.
You probably heard that some people open it to a random page, and place it above a baby's head.

To see the transforming power of the Bible, one has to read, study, appreciate and apply it.
Only then, would one see the transforming power, because applying its values result in a superior way of life.

This is proof for me, and it can be scientifically tested.
All that is required, is to take all the people who read, study, appreciate, and apply the principles in the Bible, along with thousands of other people, and evaluate the results.

Which of those people are less angry, less sexually immoral, less tolerant of drug or alcohol abuse, less tolerant of the use of harmful substances, like smoking cigars, getting tattooed, less tolerant of dangerous activities - car, motorcycle, snowboarding, etc., racing, less tolerant of using language that is not up-building to the hearer, less tolerant of being entertained by violence, and immorality, and exposing children to these, does not return evil to those that commit evil against them, more peaceable, etc. etc.

I am confident - guaranteed - that those who are applying - living by Bible standards, would all prove to be on one side of the chart, 100%, while on the other side there would be mixed results, none consistently having their "needle" pointing one way.

The only problem science would have in this area though, is that they cannot decide on what is immoral, and people have various opinions on morals, so for example, it may be morally acceptable to some, to "pick fairs", that is pay for sexual favors. Or, one may think it is okay to "sleep with" the neighbor's wife, because "she consents", and don't love her husband, anyway.

So the world's inconsistency, on what is morally acceptable, limits science, and so, it fails to be a good tool for measuring the proofs that exist in reality.

The other thing is, science cannot read hearts, so it is impossible to verify who really is at heart applying the scriptures. Some people are good pretenders.
So, while we have the proof, and it be really proof, science cannot verify it. Nor can atheists disprove it.

I am equally confident that even decades of careful, thorough and appreciative reading and application of what is written in the Bible will not get you that transformative effect. It is DESIRE, honest and sincere desire coupled with dedicated effort to be so transformed which has that effect.
Reading a text with that intention, or meditating with that intention, or doing charity with that intention, or exploring the world with that intention....in fact any and all morally good activity that you embark on with that desire....will, more often than not, lead to such a transformation by serving as a focus of the effort and desire that one has to transform oneself.
A person so transformed mistakenly assumes that the instrument of focus is divine in nature and considers it to be holier than anything in that world. That is a mistake and one that actually limits further expansion beyond that transformation in many cases

 

[nPeace]

I am equally confident that even decades of careful, thorough and appreciative reading and application of what is written in the Bible will not get you that transformative effect.

Have you done that?

It is DESIRE, honest and sincere desire coupled with dedicated effort to be so transformed which has that effect.

Please demonstrate that, because people have been reading the horoscopes for centuries - with sincere desire coupled with dedicated effort, and that transforming effect is not seen.
Do you have any data to prove otherwise?

Reading a text with that intention, or meditating with that intention, or doing charity with that intention, or exploring the world with that intention....in fact any and all morally good activity that you embark on with that desire....will, more often than not, lead to such a transformation by serving as a focus of the effort and desire that one has to transform oneself.

You cannot read any book and learn "charity". You cannot read any book, and learn moral excellence.
Please support your claims with some credible data.

A person so transformed mistakenly assumes that the instrument of focus is divine in nature and considers it to be holier than anything in that world. That is a mistake and one that actually limits further expansion beyond that transformation in many cases

Many people have read the Bible - not with any good intention.
Some have even read it to discredit it, and those who promote it, and have experienced that transforming power.

I know of people who did not want to stop doing certain things, and for this reason avoided the Bible.
I know of persons who were just plain violent, and loved it, but were transformed because they took the time to examine the scriptures. They grew to appreciate its value, and they wanted to imitate what they read, because they saw the practicality of doing so.
For example, Jesus' personality - his example, was one that some people wanted to follow.

These are not mistaken assumptions.
You are making empty claims. That's all.

 

[sayak83]

Have you done that?


Please demonstrate that, because people have been reading the horoscopes for centuries - with sincere desire coupled with dedicated effort, and that transforming effect is not seen.
Do you have any data to prove otherwise?


You cannot read any book and learn "charity". You cannot read any book, and learn moral excellence.
Please support your claims with some credible data.


Many people have read the Bible - not with any good intention.
Some have even read it to discredit it, and those who promote it, and have experienced that transforming power.

I know of people who did not want to stop doing certain things, and for this reason avoided the Bible.
I know of persons who were just plain violent, and loved it, but were transformed because they took the time to examine the scriptures. They grew to appreciate its value, and they wanted to imitate what they read, because they saw the practicality of doing so.
For example, Jesus' personality - his example, was one that some people wanted to follow.

These are not mistaken assumptions.
You are making empty claims. That's all.

Since you asked for evidence, its your turn to go first.
Once you provide your credible evidence for your claims, I will provide mine. Remember that evidence has to be :-
1) You have to independently establish the objective criteria that determines "sincere and dedicated effort at reading, appreciating and applying the Bible" which does not refer in any way the results so obtained.
2) You have to identify the method by which you establish that such criteria is indeed being met.
3) Then you have to establish the objective criteria that determines someone having transformative experience without referring at all to how that transformation was attained.
4) Then you have to establish how you would go about identifying people who had that transformative experience.
5) Then you have to show that there is a 1:1 correspondence (or at least a strong correlation) between the specific effort you mention and the transformative experience you have establishes is happening.

Otherwise it is you who made an empty claim first.

 

[nPeace]

Since you asked for evidence, its your turn to go first.
Once you provide your credible evidence for your claims, I will provide mine. Remember that evidence has to be :-
1) You have to independently establish the objective criteria that determines "sincere and dedicated effort at reading, appreciating and applying the Bible" which does not refer in any way the results so obtained.
2) You have to identify the method by which you establish that such criteria is indeed being met.
3) Then you have to establish the objective criteria that determines someone having transformative experience without referring at all to how that transformation was attained.
4) Then you have to establish how you would go about identifying people who had that transformative experience.
5) Then you have to show that there is a 1:1 correspondence (or at least a strong correlation) between the specific effort you mention and the transformative experience you have establishes is happening.

Otherwise it is you who made an empty claim first.

I did that in my post. Perhaps read it again.
The test I proposed can verify that persons applying scriptural principles in their life do better in all the areas I mentioned.
I also showed the weakness of your scientific methods, to prove or disprove that.
So, your one directional focus, does not work here. Sorry. Claims don't either.

 

[sayak83]

I did that in my post. Perhaps read it again.
The test I proposed can verify that persons applying scriptural principles in their life do better in all the areas I mentioned.
I also showed the weakness of your scientific methods, to prove or disprove that.
So, your one directional focus, does not work here. Sorry. Claims don't either.

Actually you did not. You said you are confident that if a test could be done, it would prove your case. Expectation of confirming evidence is not evidence...you understand that correct?

 

[nPeace]

Actually you did not. You said you are confident that if a test could be done, it would prove your case. Expectation of confirming evidence is not evidence...you understand that correct?

The results of test are not invalid, because science cannot successfully carry it out.
The test is already done. Not by science. Did you read the entire post. Look again, because either you did not understand it, or you are focused on one thing, and one thing only - science.
So read the OP again. Then read my post.
Then ask yourself. Is science the only measuring rod being discussed in this thread? Was that the focus of my post? Take the full post. Not one part... and don't have a one directional mind, when you do.

 

[blü 2]

Why is proof so important to some people? Seems like a wild goose chase to me.

Proof ─satisfactory demonstration ─ is part of the search for what's true in reality (ie in the world external to the self).

If you're not interested in what's objectively true, then it may not be of interest to you.

 

[blü 2]

Does the one here count?

On that link, you said

"To see the transforming power of the Bible, one has to read, study, appreciate and apply it.
Only then, would one see the transforming power, because applying its values result in a superior way of life."

When I read and study the bible, I appreciate it as an informative ancient document. But I don't see how worshiping a God who ordains human sacrifice, invasive wars, massacres of surrendered populations, rape including mass rape, religious intolerance, slavery, subordination of women ─ and so on ─ is pointing me to a superior way of life.

Nor do I understand why it was necessary for Jesus to die, nor (it follows) the morality of a suicide mission such as his, nor how any reasonable person could regard the resurrection as anything but some kind of metaphor ─ as miracles go, we have no eyewitness account of it, no contemporary account of it, no independent account of it, and the six mentions of it in the NT each contradict the other five in major ways ─ you couldn't renew a dog license with evidence of that quality.

The ancients believed in magic but that's no reason why we should do so.

The bible is however a remarkably well preserved ancient set of documents, and they tell us about particular ancient times and places and customs, some of which can be verified by history and archaeology, some of which can be refuted by history and archaeology, and some of which are of indeterminate status.

You said,
"The only problem science would have in this area though, is that they cannot decide on what is immoral, and people have various opinions on morals, so for example, it may be morally acceptable to some, to "pick fairs", that is pay for sexual favors. Or, one may think it is okay to "sleep with" the neighbor's wife, because "she consents", and don't love her husband, anyway."

I assume, then, that you haven't studied the bible's rules about when it's okay to bonk your slaves, or the famous passage about the correct technique for selling your daughter into slavery.

Oh, and the rules about beating your slaves. Not least the rule that if you beat a slave so severely that he/she dies within a day or so, that's murder, and if he/she doesn't die within that time limit, it's not murder or anything else.

And wasn't Jesus ─ or at least the Jesuses of Matthew and of Luke ─ born out of wedlock? That would make him the child of immoral and blameworthy parents in your book, no?

I wonder how you, as a student of the bible, can study these things are not be repelled by them, but on the contrary want to proclaim them as parts of the recipe for virtuous and happy living.

 

[loverofhumanity]

For me, the "transformative effect" and the spiritual values are the strongest proofs.
There are people who think of the Bible like it is some magic portion, where anyone who picks it up should be transformed "by its power".

However, one cannot see the transforming power of the Bible, by the mere possession of it.
Many people possess a Bible, and hardly read it. Some don't even think that it is of much value, other than to hold it in their hand for people to see... as though it's a ticket to a ride to heaven.
You probably heard that some people open it to a random page, and place it above a baby's head.

To see the transforming power of the Bible, one has to read, study, appreciate and apply it.
Only then, would one see the transforming power, because applying its values result in a superior way of life.

This is proof for me, and it can be scientifically tested.
All that is required, is to take all the people who read, study, appreciate, and apply the principles in the Bible, along with thousands of other people, and evaluate the results.

Which of those people are less angry, less sexually immoral, less tolerant of drug or alcohol abuse, less tolerant of the use of harmful substances, like smoking cigars, getting tattooed, less tolerant of dangerous activities - car, motorcycle, snowboarding, etc., racing, less tolerant of using language that is not up-building to the hearer, less tolerant of being entertained by violence, and immorality, and exposing children to these, does not return evil to those that commit evil against them, more peaceable, etc. etc.

I am confident - guaranteed - that those who are applying - living by Bible standards, would all prove to be on one side of the chart, 100%, while on the other side there would be mixed results, none consistently having their "needle" pointing one way.

The only problem science would have in this area though, is that they cannot decide on what is immoral, and people have various opinions on morals, so for example, it may be morally acceptable to some, to "pick fairs", that is pay for sexual favors. Or, one may think it is okay to "sleep with" the neighbor's wife, because "she consents", and don't love her husband, anyway.

So the world's inconsistency, on what is morally acceptable, limits science, and so, it fails to be a good tool for measuring the proofs that exist in reality.

The other thing is, science cannot read hearts, so it is impossible to verify who really is at heart applying the scriptures. Some people are good pretenders.
So, while we have the proof, and it be really proof, science cannot verify it. Nor can atheists disprove it.

NPeace your post is the best I’ve read in years! So true! Putting these teachings into practice can transform the world. That’s the answer. Morally I believe that what God states as moral and immoral is the right definition. In this age though, the condition of the world I would put it down to your assessment that far too few are putting into practice their beliefs or think that just believing Is sufficient.

The answer? A spiritual revival?

 

[loverofhumanity]

What objective test will tell us whether any claimed proof is a "spiritual" proof or not?

What objective test will tell us whether any claimed "spiritual proof" is an accurate statement about reality or not?

The standard or benchmark is the Holy Scriptures and what they teach such as love, justice, compassion basically the virtues. For science one consults mathematics and the microscope etc. For religion - the Holy Books and the virtues they teach. Do they work when practised?

By practising the virtues we can see how they affect reality, real life on the ground. Thoughts, words and deeds of love defeat hate, similarly thoughts, words and deeds of peace eliminate war while strong thoughts, words and deeds of unity promote brotherhood and friendship.

These spiritual teachings from God work for the betterment of the world but only if practised.

 

[loverofhumanity]

If such laws exist and are detectable and testable, why is this not generally known? Why is there no consensus on their objective reality and qualities?
Love is a law? Isn't love just extreme appreciation; an individual emotion?

Because people do not understand that religion too is a science. The science of the love of God. We live in an age of extreme materialism where things spiritual are not yet connected to human happiness. But unless the spiritual and material are balanced, humanity will never know peace nor true happiness because happiness does not come from possessions but from within.

 

[Valjean]

Because people do not understand that religion too is a science. The science of the love of God. We live in an age of extreme materialism where things spiritual are not yet connected to human happiness. But unless the spiritual and material are balanced, humanity will never know peace nor true happiness because happiness does not come from possessions but from within.

Science is a research modality, it questions everything and encourages skepticism. Religion discourages research and questioning, and celebrates lack of skepticism (faith).
There is a method to science: Observation, hypothesis forming, testing, review and retesting. All these are discouraged by religion.
Science relies on empirical evidence. Religion relies on faith in ancient, unsupported texts, often by unknown authors.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The proof is, there is no proof. Nothing. Na da.

So virtues do not exist? Virtues are the essence of what all religions teach. And by practising virtues such as love, justice, unity and compassion there are no benefits? All the virtues are from God. Plato, Socrates and Aristotle all acknowledged God.

After Socrates came the divine Plato who was a pupil of the former and occupied the chair of philosophy as his successor. He acknowledged his belief in God and in His signs which pervade all that hath been and shall be. Then came Aristotle, the well-known man of knowledge. He it is who discovered the power of gaseous matter. These men who stand out as leaders of the people and are pre-eminent among them, one and all acknowledged their belief in the immortal Being Who holdeth in His grasp the reins of all sciences. (Baha’u’llah)

 

[1213]

One of the great accomplishments of RF has been not that of providing a platform for the theism-atheism debate but, rather, to seriously challenge the maxim that there's no such thing as a stupid question.

Why do you think the question was stupid? Because you can't answer it?