Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Mantus · 11-13-2003, 10:42 AM

I will try to be clearer up my thoughts on this.

As every one admits there is no rational explanation or proof of god’s existence. The only proof given is a feeling.

This “feeling” does not have a corporal or a rational origin. It is simply there. Therefore this feeling comes before understanding. When some one says they “feel” that god exists then they are saying that their knowledge was obtained from another source. In this case a god. For if the knowledge was obtained from a corporal source then we would be able to share it with others. Therefore this knowledge came from an incorporeal source (outside our senses). If this knowledge did come from an external source then it cannot be corrupted by our senses nor our consciousness. Since the knowledge is simply THERE. So you cannot say that people would interpret god differently in this case. For interpretation would mean that they obtain the concept of god from their senses. Every person who believes in god says that they never used their senses or their rational mind to obtain the knowledge of god. Those that have attempted to obtain the knowledge of god thought their senses have all failed.

To give an example: if some one believes “…in God with very little internal doubt.” and “…also [believes] he is the one described in the ancient Hebrew texts and the one proclaimed by Christ.” Then their source of knowledge must come from the god himself. For they have no rational proof of their beliefs. The person has some very profound and intimate knowledge about the god they believe in. Yet if they came upon this knowledge by way of god, then why didn’t every other culture come upon this same knowledge? There is nothing to misinterpret for the knowledge is supposed to be pure and come from the source itself. If the person, whose quote I used was truly right about god then why doesn’t every other person on the planet have the same knowledge?

The argument that there can be different interpretations of a higher being is flawed. Interpretation of knowledge requires rational though. Which means that if a person obtains a “feeling” and then rationalizes that this feeling comes from god, then there must be rational trail to the conclusion. We would be able to trace his line of thought. Yet we can’t.

There are two possible conclusions to how we obtain the knowledge of a divine being; those are: a) god gives us all basic knowledge of him or b) we simply feel something and then interpret that feeling as the existence of god.

Both cases don’t work. For if a god gave us pure knowledge then all people should see god the same way. Yet we don’t. On the other hand if we simply interpret a “feeling” as god, then we being the imaginative creatures that we are, have simply created the idea of god to interpret the “feeling”.

Since the knowledge of a god from an external source is a flawed concept then that only leave us with the idea that we created god to interpret things we don’t understand in this world. This comes at no surprise since the concept of god is very human and stems from our own nature. We are a selfish animal and feel very comfortable with the idea of a human being (or a being amicable to us) controlling the universe and our own fate. We accept this concept with ease for our most primal instinct (of proliferation) approves highly of this idea, since it ensures immortality, and that is all our gene’s want from us.

note: i am still learning to express myself in an understandable fashion. If any one has any tips (link to websites or books) on improving my comunication/writing skills please dont be shy and send me an e-mail to : guerrilla_poet@hotmail.com

Cheers

11-13-2003, 10:42 AM	#58 (permalink)
Mantus lascivious	I will try to be clearer on this. I will try to be clearer up my thoughts on this. As every one admits there is no rational explanation or proof of god’s existence. The only proof given is a feeling. This “feeling” does not have a corporal or a rational origin. It is simply there. Therefore this feeling comes before understanding. When some one says they “feel” that god exists then they are saying that their knowledge was obtained from another source. In this case a god. For if the knowledge was obtained from a corporal source then we would be able to share it with others. Therefore this knowledge came from an incorporeal source (outside our senses). If this knowledge did come from an external source then it cannot be corrupted by our senses nor our consciousness. Since the knowledge is simply THERE. So you cannot say that people would interpret god differently in this case. For interpretation would mean that they obtain the concept of god from their senses. Every person who believes in god says that they never used their senses or their rational mind to obtain the knowledge of god. Those that have attempted to obtain the knowledge of god thought their senses have all failed. To give an example: if some one believes “…in God with very little internal doubt.” and “…also [believes] he is the one described in the ancient Hebrew texts and the one proclaimed by Christ.” Then their source of knowledge must come from the god himself. For they have no rational proof of their beliefs. The person has some very profound and intimate knowledge about the god they believe in. Yet if they came upon this knowledge by way of god, then why didn’t every other culture come upon this same knowledge? There is nothing to misinterpret for the knowledge is supposed to be pure and come from the source itself. If the person, whose quote I used was truly right about god then why doesn’t every other person on the planet have the same knowledge? The argument that there can be different interpretations of a higher being is flawed. Interpretation of knowledge requires rational though. Which means that if a person obtains a “feeling” and then rationalizes that this feeling comes from god, then there must be rational trail to the conclusion. We would be able to trace his line of thought. Yet we can’t. There are two possible conclusions to how we obtain the knowledge of a divine being; those are: a) god gives us all basic knowledge of him or b) we simply feel something and then interpret that feeling as the existence of god. Both cases don’t work. For if a god gave us pure knowledge then all people should see god the same way. Yet we don’t. On the other hand if we simply interpret a “feeling” as god, then we being the imaginative creatures that we are, have simply created the idea of god to interpret the “feeling”. Since the knowledge of a god from an external source is a flawed concept then that only leave us with the idea that we created god to interpret things we don’t understand in this world. This comes at no surprise since the concept of god is very human and stems from our own nature. We are a selfish animal and feel very comfortable with the idea of a human being (or a being amicable to us) controlling the universe and our own fate. We accept this concept with ease for our most primal instinct (of proliferation) approves highly of this idea, since it ensures immortality, and that is all our gene’s want from us. note: i am still learning to express myself in an understandable fashion. If any one has any tips (link to websites or books) on improving my comunication/writing skills please dont be shy and send me an e-mail to : guerrilla_poet@hotmail.com Cheers Last edited by Mantus; 11-13-2003 at 10:45 AM..