What is the evidence you looking for?

[TagliatelliMonster]

What would be evidence enough for you to say, "yes religions or spiritual teaching is true" or " yes now i understand God do exist"

I don't know, what have you got?

How should I know? Theists can't even properly define gods or spirits in falsifiable ways... I don't really know what kind of evidence is capable of detecting those things literally defined as being undetectable.

 

[stvdv]

A i understand it there are around 33 million gods in india, which one?

In India there is only 1 God, but, like in the West they tell little children some tales, about many Gods, as Advaita is beyond child's understanding. So, when you grow older, and are interested in higher spiritual education, very quickly all these millions of Gods fly out of the window, and 1 remains.

Easy to blame a myth

More difficult to let go of a myth.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I don't know, what have you got?

How should I know? Theists can't even properly define gods or spirits in falsifiable ways... I don't really know what kind of evidence is capable of detecting those things literally defined as being undetectable.

I have been thinking a lot since i made this OP and i think i come to the conclution that there is no evidence a believer could present that would be "good enough" for non believers. That is not to say i will mock non believers. I come to rest that there will never be a way to prove it, as long the non believers does not try to do an effort in following a spiritual teaching at least for some time, and i mean to seriously try to gain some of the wisdom from the teaching.

So hereby i rest my case and will no longer try to explain spiritual practice or it's teaching to non believers, it is just not worth my time but if someone do try their best to follow a spiritual path i will of course answer questions they may have.

I can only say that all the answers i gained in my Cultivation has given a personal answer to me. I can not speak for others.

 

[stvdv]

So hereby i rest my case and will no longer try to explain spiritual practice or it's teaching to non believers, it is just not worth my time

I came to the same conclusion. I only explain it if they beg for it

But even then I might say "much more satisfying to figure it out for yourself"

 

[Spirit of Light]

I came to the same conclusion. I only explain it if they beg for it

But even then I might say "much more satisfying to figure it out for yourself"

True, the only way to get an answer within spiritual practice is to do the hard work to enlighten to it on a personal level, no matter how much other try to explain it is on a personal level that the answer lays.
Example my teacher can explain something from the teaching, but it is up to me to grasp the wisdom within those words from my master, not his obligation to "give" me the enlightenment

 

[rational experiences]

Historically humans spiritual nature was naturally attuned with everything and we needed nothing, everything just existed in mutual support.

Science took that living experience away from us.....hence to teach a less son was to learn the less son first to become that Teacher.

Teaching therefore owned an original spiritual purpose to bring enlightenment against the self destructive expressed human Nature that is found in the expression of the sciences, to discuss everything that you are not...to change everything that you are.

 

[ChristineM]

In India there is only 1 God, but, like in the West they tell little children some tales, about many Gods, as Advaita is beyond child's understanding. So, when you grow older, and are interested in higher spiritual education, very quickly all these millions of Gods fly out of the window, and 1 remains.

More difficult to let go of a myth.

33 Million Hindu Gods and Goddesses by astrologer in india

But they are made of 33 core gods

Yes, thousands of years and still clinging on

 

[stvdv]

Example my teacher can explain something from the teaching, but it is up to me to grasp the wisdom within those words from my master, not his obligation to "give" me the enlightenment

Yes, I am amazed on RF, how many times I see people "expecting" the proof to be given to them (even from God). If not then "not existing". The opposite of how a scientist should "work" IMO.

 

[Spirit of Light]

33 Million Hindu Gods and Goddesses by astrologer in india

But they are made of 33 core gods
View attachment 40470


Yes, thousands of years and still clinging on

I might be wrong here, but if i understand hindu religion they focus on one Main God or deva as What they mainly follow, but it would not surprise me that there are a total of 33 million Heavenly beings in heavenly realm. I do not think hindus actually follow every single of those 33 million

 

[Aupmanyav]

33 Devas: That was the Indo-European / Vedic scheme. Then they came to India.
Amanaki, there are all kinds of Hindus. 33 million Gods, 33 Gods, 3 Gods, Goddesses, one God, no God. There is no 'ism' that is not practiced in Hinduism including the left-hand paths. All generalizations about Hindus fail. Perhaps the least Common Denominator in Hinduism is 'duty' (dharma).

 

[stvdv]

Yes, thousands of years and still clinging on

Yes, with Google, you can get any answer you like. So, for all who search there will be something they enjoy.

Information on Hinduism for Kids.

First line in yellow, most people try "not to see". I wonder why?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I have been thinking a lot since i made this OP and i think i come to the conclution that there is no evidence a believer could present that would be "good enough" for non believers.

The problem is that I can't say what evidence, or kind of evidence, would be good enough for me to accept X exists, without having X clearly defined in such a way that it even can have evidence.

What kind of evidence would support X, is ultimately determined by how X is defined.
So before we can even discuss the issue of evidence, X has to be defined properly. Otherwise, there is nothing to talk about, really...

That is not to say i will mock non believers.

No mocking / offence taken at all.

I too have been thinking about this question as it is not the first time it's been asked.
My conclusion is what I wrote above: the concept of evidence in support of X, only starts making sense once X is properly defined... as that definition, is what ultimately determins what the evidence should be like.

I come to rest that there will never be a way to prove it, as long the non believers does not try to do an effort in following a spiritual teaching at least for some time, and i mean to seriously try to gain some of the wisdom from the teaching.

That wouldn't result in evidence or proof. It would be indistinguishable from self-deception.

So hereby i rest my case and will no longer try to explain spiritual practice or it's teaching to non believers, it is just not worth my time but if someone do try their best to follow a spiritual path i will of course answer questions they may have.

I can only say that all the answers i gained in my Cultivation has given a personal answer to me. I can not speak for others.

And I can only say that that means nothing to me.

Which you seem to realise and acknowledge.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, I am amazed on RF, how many times I see people "expecting" the proof to be given to them (even from God). If not then "not existing". The opposite of how a scientist should "work" IMO.

The opposite of that would be to simply accept things to exist without any proof or evidence.
I'm fairly certain that that is not how science is supposed to work...

 

[Spirit of Light]

The problem is that I can't say what evidence, or kind of evidence, would be good enough for me to accept X exists, without having X clearly defined in such a way that it even can have evidence.

What kind of evidence would support X, is ultimately determined by how X is defined.
So before we can even discuss the issue of evidence, X has to be defined properly. Otherwise, there is nothing to talk about, really...




No mocking / offence taken at all.

I too have been thinking about this question as it is not the first time it's been asked.
My conclusion is what I wrote above: the concept of evidence in support of X, only starts making sense once X is properly defined... as that definition, is what ultimately determins what the evidence should be like.




That wouldn't result in evidence or proof. It would be indistinguishable from self-deception.



And I can only say that that means nothing to me.

Which you seem to realise and acknowledge.

Yes i understand that what non believers see as "evidence " can only be produced as physical evidence you can see touch or smell.
So as i Said, i ser no reason to discuss further with non believers because it always end up in the proving or disproving area of discussion, but each time it endes with no result either ways. So to not make RF to a negative area it's better to not continue discussion

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, with Google, you can get any answer you like. So, for all who search there will be something they enjoy.

Information on Hinduism for Kids.

First line in yellow, most people try "not to see". I wonder why?

View attachment 40471

I love the line

Yes, with Google, you can get any answer you like. So, for all who search there will be something they enjoy.

Did you use Google?

Because about half way down the page, not highlighted in yellow is ...

Other Hindu gods include

And of course there is the sentence stating Most Hindus have a personal god... to whom they pray regularly


I am thinking your example is really quite contradictory.

@Aupmanyav post #90 nailed it

 

[Aupmanyav]

First line in yellow, most people try "not to see". I wonder why?

The problem of generalization. All Hindus do not believe what these lines say. This is not correct. Most Hindus are polytheists.
Wikipedia gives a partial list of Hindu Gods and Goddesses here: List of Hindu deities - Wikipedia

The image mentions that this is information for kids and not adults who have studied Hinduism. It may not be correct to give wrong information even to kids.

 

[rational experiences]

If someone asked a question what is the evidence......everything is seen, evidence.

Evidence is looked at, as being enabled to be looked at.

If what is evident is seen then what is not seen is not evident nor evidence.

Being a lawful argument, for it is stated that a God owns a LAW.

LAW to be applied has to own evidence.

If science said, using science caused science to change....the LAWS of what was relative, first evident...then the evidence would also change. Which would bring new LAWS to consider, the LAWS of destruction.

Hence what the bible was written for....to defend the rights to life on our entity planet Earth GOD...the ONE GOD....stone.

As the first which stated categorically that it superseded all other scientific evidence against self, which includes the spiritual Nature....as seen in the Vedic scripts...that animals had been involved in God reactions...how it was depicted when it speaks about the nuclear attack that human science in the past/Temples with pyramid use had caused.

For science is actually its own mistake. And nuclear power plants already own that proof in modern times, plus the release of nuclear reactions in our Nature and how it was abused by science testing....as if science owns all legal rights above that and beyond. When the rights were given back to the equal humanity and people on One Planet theme....One God.

Holy cow for instance, do not eat...in the past nuclear attack ate it. The cow was then given a human reverence as a God deity...for what harmed they caused it...so it became new law. Evidence in modern day life, cows and cattle mutilated in ground UFO attacks.

 

[stvdv]

I am thinking your example is really quite contradictory.

True. Like I said, in Hinduism, all can choose as many Gods as they fancy (even zero Gods). So, it always contradicts. Knowing that, I can't be bothered with it. Whatever works for someone, let him do it. I am fine with it. And then we have not even started with "defining the word God". Probably if you ask many people, there will be all different definitions about the word God.

So, anything said or claimed about God, IMO, is just a personal view. And this has been going on for ages. If the truth had been discovered, someone would have written it down. But it seems to me, that the truth can't be proven in words, which kind of makes sense to me. The universe is immense, we humans won't be able to know all and everything about it. And God is said to be beyond that. This makes it unsolvable for humans in my view. Even bright ones like Einstein were not able to really solve it. Of course they also had personal opinions about God.

So, knowing all this, for me, it makes not much sense to debate on God. I can't prove God exists, and I can't prove God does not exist. And people still don't all agree on 1 useful definition. Still it is an interesting quest. This seems to be the biggest of all Koans (kind of 'unsolvable riddles')

 

[stvdv]

The opposite of that would be to simply accept things to exist without any proof or evidence.

True. In both cases, people don't do effort. Of course when you put in a lot of effort, gives not guarantee either (so far, even the smartest guys on earth could not prove or disprove the existence of God).

I'm fairly certain that that is not how science is supposed to work...

True.

 

[stvdv]

The image mentions that this is information for kids and not adults who have studied Hinduism.

And even adults can't prove or disprove the existence of God; hence we call it "believe" and not "knowing".
To me, it's about developing discrimination and common sense.

It may not be correct to give wrong information even to kids.

I fully agree. My parents gave me wrong information as a kid, and when I found out a few days later, I was really upset.

Giving wrong information means to me, that you don't take the kid serious. So you teach your kid not to take himself serious (in a way).
Educating children is not easy of course, especially if a parent is not enlightened him/herself. So it's a tricky job, to do it right.
No wonder, the world is still messy. On the other hand, amazing how much people achieved already.