experiencing god...

[Ana the Ist]

True, that would be the most likely explanation, but until we had established that, we'd be forced to consider the possibility, however unlikely.

Tiberius your message box is full. I think its funny that in nearly every instance in the last 6 posts or so we could remove the words "non-material" or "non-natural" and replace them with the words "non-existent" without changing the meaning or context of the sentences significantly.

 

[Tinker Grey]

True, that would be the most likely explanation, but until we had established that, we'd be forced to consider the possibility, however unlikely.

Given that I have no examples in the history--so far as I know--of a non-natural event, I don't know why I must consider the never-occurring as a possibility.

If I can't establish what actually happened, must I consider that Iggy the magic elf is a possibility? I don't think so.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I want to return to something I was hinting at earlier: If we can observe something, isn't it de facto natural? What would it mean to observe something that isn't natural? In that context, observation doesn't even seem like an applicable term. And if we cannot observe it, did it happen at all?

I.e., I think those that suppose that the non-natural can happen should both define what they mean by the term. And, I think that certainly doesn't mean something merely outside our experience.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I understand what you are saying, but I still don't know how one discerns the non-natural nor do I know what I should expect to observe or even how one observes with doing so through our senses.

I think one apparently discerns non natural things through discernment. I think it is supernaturally inspired, or so the story goes.

If there were a non-natural event, what would it be like? The impact on my senses is natural. How am I detecting the non-natural aspect of the event?

Non naturally, through discernment.

Does my brain get a tickle in some portion thereof that is only tickled by non-natural things?

You will have to discern that for youreself (with a little help from above).

I would have to answer your question "Is the question valid" with no.

So it is notpossible that scientifically predisposed thinkers have a predisposition that might make them miss conflicting views. So everyone but science fans have confirmation bias, but science fans are exempt? I am not saying scientists who have the rigors of journal life to assist them, but science fans who are not participating in science as such.

As to the chicken and the egg, I don't know what metaphysical naturalism is.

It's the idea that only the natural exists.

All I have ever observed is natural.

How do you know the "natural" is natural, naturally existing, and not for instance created?

What reason do I have to incorporate the imaginings (as I perceive them, rightly or wrongly) of other people?

But are you excluding them on principle or observation or what? You can't argue "I have defined obserbved things as natural, therefore things are proven by observation to be natural".

 

[GrowingSmaller]

No, science is not built to test the untestable.

If you have an unfalcefiable belief it is not in the realm of scientific inquiry.

I guess that is right. At least I'll take your word for it at present.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I want to return to something I was hinting at earlier: If we can observe something, isn't it de facto natural? What would it mean to observe something that isn't natural? In that context, observation doesn't even seem like an applicable term. And if we cannot observe it, did it happen at all?

Well idf creation is creation, I suppose it doesn't exist naturally. Therefore there is a scenrio wher observed things are not as natural as they are supposed to be.

I.e., I think those that suppose that the non-natural can happen should both define what they mean by the term. And, I think that certainly doesn't mean something merely outside our experience.

I agree but a genus and species definition of the supernatural is beyond me at present.

 

[Criada]

Mod Hat On

​

This thread has been cleaned up.
Please remember the rules, no mocking God or Christianity, and be courteous to one another.
Thanks
Mod Hat Off​

 

[razeontherock]

I want to return to something I was hinting at earlier: If we can observe something, isn't it de facto natural? What would it mean to observe something that isn't natural? In that context, observation doesn't even seem like an applicable term. And if we cannot observe it, did it happen at all?

I.e., I think those that suppose that the non-natural can happen should both define what they mean by the term. And, I think that certainly doesn't mean something merely outside our experience.

Non-natural is a bogus term. There is also increasing resistance to "supernatural."

Spiritual; that's the key thing here. Spirit is readily observable, but it does take ears to hear, and eyes to see.

 

[Tiberius]

Tiberius your message box is full. I think its funny that in nearly every instance in the last 6 posts or so we could remove the words "non-material" or "non-natural" and replace them with the words "non-existent" without changing the meaning or context of the sentences significantly.

I've cleaned it out now.

And yes, I have been forever unable to see the difference between an invisible intangible god and a non-existent God...

Given that I have no examples in the history--so far as I know--of a non-natural event, I don't know why I must consider the never-occurring as a possibility.

If I can't establish what actually happened, must I consider that Iggy the magic elf is a possibility? I don't think so.

I can see your point, and I don't think that any supernatural explanation is going to be a strong possibility. On the contrary, it will always be the weakest possible explanation for the reasons you mentioned. But just because something has never happened before doesn't mean that it is impossible.

 

[dlamberth]

I can only speak for myself. The question the Op brings up is why I tend to go to the Mystics as my teachers. They talk with wisdom about the presence of God. For the Mystics, God is more than a belief...for those beings, God is an absolute and total reality in their lives. I learn a great deal from them.

In my own spiritual life, because words will never define it or even come close to expressing the experience of the presence of God, I have no way to describe the Divine presence as I experience it. What I do know is that I see it and experience it with in life itself. There is a power of Onesness and Love and Wholeness underneath the very foundation life itself that can not be described in mental concepts with the use of words. How does one describe the experience of the Infinite, or of Love or of Compassion or of a complete and total forgiveness?

For myself, the height of the Divine experience is when I catch glimpse of it with in the hearts of other human beings. When I catch that moment, I'm reminded that all human beings are an activity of God and are equally deserving of being Loved because of the sacredness of the Divine that I see in each and every one them.

Someone mentioned Theresa of Avila's book "The Interior Castle", I agree, it’s a wonderful read on inner mystical prayer. Many of the other Christian Mystics are on my spiritual hero’s list as well. I especial love Thomas Merton as well as St. John of the Cross. The Sufies have been a blessing in my life for learning to open to the presence of God and I’ve even learned a great deal about the presence of God from Judaism, the Hindu’s, American Indian spirituality and even Buddhism.

.

 

[dlamberth]

"Presence is the point of intersection between the world of the senses and the world of the Spirit"

That's from the Introduction of "Living Presence" by Helminski

 

[suzybeezy]

MOD HAT ON

Please note the forum description for Philosophy: The forum for the discussion and debate of general philosophy & epistemology

This thread is closed as this is not General Apologetics. CF no longer has a General Apologetics forum.

Please stay on topic to the forum.

MOD HAT OFF