Faith

[Derideo_Te]

I would not be surprised if this Country declared belief in God a mental illness.

That would be unconstitutional.

 

[Bonzi]

I

I would not be surprised if this Country declared belief in God a mental illness.

That would be unconstitutional.

I owe you a bunch of replies. Am on the road....

 

[Derideo_Te]

I

I would not be surprised if this Country declared belief in God a mental illness.

That would be unconstitutional.

I owe you a bunch of replies. Am on the road....

No rush. This is an message board.

Travel safely.

 

[Capstone]

"Faith makes things possible", or so the writing on my favorite coffee mug tells me. Viewing "faith" as a synonym for 'confidence' (overly simplistic though this may be) the truth of the aphorism has seemingly been borne out by personal experience. Barring faith in the reliability of the apparent effects of gravity and the solidity of the ground beneath my feet, the intentionality behind my very first steps in life may not have been possible, even though I knew nothing about the specifics of 'gravity' or 'solidity' at the time I took those wobbly steps. The immediate effects in the world adjacent to my toddling body were such that knowledge of the details of their inner workings wasn't necessary to prompt my intention to make it on my own two feet from the corner of the couch to my mother's waiting arms. I didn't know what they were called or even that they existed as autonomous physical principles, but I was nonetheless intimately acquainted with their effects and this acquaintanceship defined the parameters of 'possible actions' in relation to the intention in my budding mind.

How this relates to religious faith can be seen most clearly in the distinctions between the respective natures of the things in which believers and non-believers tend to place their most cherished confidences.

 

[Bonzi]

"Faith makes things possible", or so the writing on my favorite coffee mug tells me. Viewing "faith" as a synonym for 'confidence' (overly simplistic though this may be) the truth of the aphorism has seemingly been borne out by personal experience. Barring faith in the reliability of the apparent effects of gravity and the solidity of the ground beneath my feet, the intentionality behind my very first steps in life may not have been possible, even though I knew nothing about the specifics of 'gravity' or 'solidity' at the time I took those wobbly steps. The immediate effects in the world adjacent to my toddling body were such that knowledge of the details of their inner workings wasn't necessary to prompt my intention to make it on my own two feet from the corner of the couch to my mother's waiting arms. I didn't know what they were called or even that they existed as autonomous physical principles, but I was nonetheless intimately acquainted with their effects and this acquaintenceship defined the parameters of 'possible actions' in relation to the intention in my budding mind.

How this relates to religious faith can be seen most clearly in the distinctions between the respective natures of the things in which believers and non-believers tend to place their most cherished confidences.

Faith is reliance.

Faith in a religious sense is reliance on God, and no one else.

 

[Capstone]

Faith is reliance. ...

I can live with that. Notice that I specified "confidence in the reliability" of the sort of things in which we place our faith (as believers or non-believers, as the case may be).

...Faith in a religious sense is reliance on God, and no one else.

Well, since you're saying that as an implicit believer in the reliability of the claims and writings of the men who brought you the dictates and holy writ of your preferred religion (claims to 'divine inspiration' notwithstanding), I can't help but wonder as to the truth of your statement, even from a purely religious standpoint.

 

[Bonzi]

Faith is reliance. ...

I can live with that. Notice that I specified "confidence in the reliability" of the sort of things in which we place our faith (as believers or non-believers, as the case may be).

...Faith in a religious sense is reliance on God, and no one else.

Well, since you're saying that as an implicit believer in the reliability of the claims and writings of the men who brought you the dictates and holy writ of your preferred religion (claims to 'divine inspiration' notwithstanding), so I can't help but wonder as to the truth of your statement, even from a purely religious standpoint.

Depends what you are relying on....
You can look at the Bible as written by men
Or you can look at the Bible as being inspired by God through men....
Where are you placing your faith?

 

[Capstone]

Depends what you are relying on....

Not in this particular instance.

...You can look at the Bible as written by men
Or you can look at the Bible as being inspired by God through men....
Where are you placing your faith?

In the latter case, you're still relying on the truth/accuracy of a man-made doctrine. That you've chosen to believe in this doctrine as a means of bolstering your reliance on the invisible entity on which the doctrine itself relies...doesn't circumvent the question of the trustworthiness of the human element involved. Your belief that these men were/are inspired of God relies, first on foremost, on the truth of their writings, claims, and teachings. Obviously, if those writings, claims, and teachings have been false all along, then your reliance on them as God-inspired truths has been badly misplaced.

 

[Bonzi]

Depends what you are relying on....

Not in this particluar instance.

...You can look at the Bible as written by men
Or you can look at the Bible as being inspired by God through men....
Where are you placing your faith?

In the latter case, you're still relying on the truth/accuracy of a man-made doctrine. That you've chosen to believe in this doctrine as a means of bolstering your reliance on the invisible entity on which the doctrine itself relies...doesn't circumvent the question of the trustworthiness of the human element involved. Your belief that these men were/are inspired of God relies, first on foremost, on the truth of their writings, claims, and teachings. Obviously, if those writings, claims, and teachings have been false all along, then your reliance on them as God-inspired truths has been badly misplaced.

Nope. It's about Faith and revelation.
Are you a born again Christian?

 

[TrinityPower]

there is no evidence any gods exist.

..there is no evidence He doesn't exist

there were no answers so mankind answered those questions with their souls.

Soul is intangible… if you believe there is a soul, you just contradicted yourself about God unless you prove scientifically that there is a soul .. How do you measure soul? Any empirical evidence for the existence of soul?

Soul is your mind will and emotions. The brain and mind are not the same. Research information about dr Caroline leaf

 

[defcon4]

there is no evidence any gods exist.

..there is no evidence He doesn't exist

there were no answers so mankind answered those questions with their souls.

Soul is intangible… if you believe there is a soul, you just contradicted yourself about God unless you prove scientifically that there is a soul .. How do you measure soul? Any empirical evidence for the existence of soul?

Soul is your mind will and emotions. The brain and mind are not the same. Research information about dr Caroline leaf

Thank you. (I couldn't help but to notice your "provocative" avi in the positive sense of the word and I do like it) Dr Caroline Leaf's theory (I just read a rebuttal in this short period of time) is nothing new. The sages of ages taught similar things in occult circles. Those philosophical ideas are more widely available nowadays but they key is hidden to the door unless it is revealed to the seeker through a master personally.

 

[defcon4]

there is no evidence any gods exist.

..there is no evidence He doesn't exist

there were no answers so mankind answered those questions with their souls.

Soul is intangible… if you believe there is a soul, you just contradicted yourself about God unless you prove scientifically that there is a soul .. How do you measure soul? Any empirical evidence for the existence of soul?

Soul is your mind will and emotions. The brain and mind are not the same. Research information about dr Caroline leaf

There are some teachings that the soul is the home of spirit and the body is the home "temple" of the soul. I still don't know what your position is of the soul being tangible or intangible or what was the suggestion about Dr. Caroline Leaf.

 

[TrinityPower]

there is no evidence any gods exist.

..there is no evidence He doesn't exist

there were no answers so mankind answered those questions with their souls.

Soul is intangible… if you believe there is a soul, you just contradicted yourself about God unless you prove scientifically that there is a soul .. How do you measure soul? Any empirical evidence for the existence of soul?

Soul is your mind will and emotions. The brain and mind are not the same. Research information about dr Caroline leaf

There are some teachings that the soul is the home of spirit and the body is the home "temple" of the soul. I still don't know what your position is of the soul being tangible or intangible or what was the suggestion about Dr. Caroline Leaf.

The mind and brain are not the same and the portal to the spirit is thru the mind

 

[Derideo_Te]

there is no evidence any gods exist.

..there is no evidence He doesn't exist

there were no answers so mankind answered those questions with their souls.

Soul is intangible… if you believe there is a soul, you just contradicted yourself about God unless you prove scientifically that there is a soul .. How do you measure soul? Any empirical evidence for the existence of soul?

Soul is your mind will and emotions. The brain and mind are not the same. Research information about dr Caroline leaf

There are some teachings that the soul is the home of spirit and the body is the home "temple" of the soul. I still don't know what your position is of the soul being tangible or intangible or what was the suggestion about Dr. Caroline Leaf.

There is measurable data for reaching a spiritual state. In essence it is a meditative self induced trance state of mind. This can be scientifically measured and replicated.

What is more interesting is that this same mental state can be detected in other mammals besides ourselves.

The problem arises when religion misinterprets this state of mind to be "evidence of a soul" and "communing with God".

If that is correct then other mammals also have souls and commune with God according to the physical evidence.

The reality is that we have the ability to self induce this state of mind for some reason and so do other mammals. There is probably some evolutionary benefit to going into this state that has yet to be determined by science.

 

[defcon4]

The mind and brain are not the same

I had no quarrel with that.

the portal to the spirit is thru the mind

I have no quarrel with that either.
Mind control needs will power. Will power needs concentration. That's the hard part. How long can you hold an image with closed eyes? Try it. Let me know.

 

[defcon4]

If that is correct then other mammals also have souls

There are belief systems stating exactly that.

 

[defcon4]

This can be scientifically measured and replicated.

What do you mean measured? Is it photographed similar to photographing the aura? Or is this mental activity detected by electronic devices? The latter indicates only the nature of brain activity since our nervous system actually operates based on electric impulses, correct?

 

[Derideo_Te]

This can be scientifically measured and replicated.

What do you mean measured? Is it photographed similar to photographing the aura? Or is this mental activity detected by electronic devices? The latter indicates only the nature of brain activity since our nervous system actually operates based on electric impulses, correct?

Here is an overview. There are links to specific studies within the reference section.

The neuroscientific study of spiritual practices

 

[guno]

This can be scientifically measured and replicated.

What do you mean measured? Is it photographed similar to photographing the aura? Or is this mental activity detected by electronic devices? The latter indicates only the nature of brain activity since our nervous system actually operates based on electric impulses, correct?

Here is an overview. There are links to specific studies within the reference section.

The neuroscientific study of spiritual practices

So the basis is nature not "supernatural"

 

[Derideo_Te]

This can be scientifically measured and replicated.

What do you mean measured? Is it photographed similar to photographing the aura? Or is this mental activity detected by electronic devices? The latter indicates only the nature of brain activity since our nervous system actually operates based on electric impulses, correct?

Here is an overview. There are links to specific studies within the reference section.

The neuroscientific study of spiritual practices

So the basis is nature not "supernatural"

Yes!

I call myself a spiritual atheist because that aspect of myself is real and it would be silly to deny what exists.

Where I have a problem is that religion has taken that obscure mental aspect of ourselves and exploited it to use for their own nefarious purposes.

I can reach this trance state whenever I have a massage and afterwards it can feel like I reached the same "high" that I used to get when I was stoned on marijuana.

There is no connection to any "supernatural" power at all. Just a feeling of both physical and mental wellbeing.

All natural and perfectly legal with no need for any holy books, prayers or hymns.