|
Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sridatta
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 44
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:35 pm Post subject: Proof for atheists |
 |
|
Scientists have to accept the existence of the unimaginable nature from the practical example of the unimaginable limits of this infinite universe. Scientists may reject miracles but they cannot reject the unimaginable limits of space. One instance of the existence of an unimaginable entity is sufficient to prove the existence of unimaginable God. Miracles act as supporting evidence of the same concept.
Miracles are very widely distributed in the world to give proof for the existence of God to every human being, which is the basic requirement. If you pray sincerely in a temple or even in an open place, generally God gives you His answer through a miracle. Many have witnessed this in their lives. Sometimes due to the inevitable fruits of your past deeds, God keeps silent for sometime in spite of your prayers and that time is used for your transformation. Hence, scientists call this as probability or coincidence of events . Hence, God demonstrates specific miracles through His human form, to meet this twisted interpretation of scientists or atheists. Even devotees and demons do specific miracles.
God has given a wide coverage for spreading miracles since it involves the very basic issue of His existence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CP
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Posts: 2875
Location: California
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Scientists have to accept the existence of the unimaginable nature from the practical example of the unimaginable limits of this infinite universe.
No. Most scientists speak of a finite universe that is expanding. You seem to think that all scientists are atheists, which is not so.
Scientists may reject miracles but they cannot reject the unimaginable limits of space.
Scientists would never reject a proven miracle. Scientists search for the truth. A proven miracle (something not to be explained by natural phenomena and laws of nature) would be a great find for any scientist. Scientists do not reject the unimaginable limits of space. Rather, they vividly imagine the limits of space.
One instance of the existence of an unimaginable entity is sufficient to prove the existence of unimaginable God.
What? If God is unimaginable, how is it that you are able to write about him / her / it? God is imaginable. You don't need to mystify God by saying that he is unimaginable.
If you pray sincerely in a temple or even in an open place, generally God gives you His answer through a miracle.
Well, generally the answer Yes to one person's prayer is the answer No to another person's prayer. So, generally, the person praying doesn't get his or her answer through a miracle at all. At best, he or she gets what she asked for--remarkably at the same rate as if he or she had not asked for God's help.
If miracles were the common response to the billions of prayers that are offered up every day, we would experience billions of miracles every day. We don't. That's all right. No need to make anything up.
_________________
You live a new life for every new language you speak. -Czech proverb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sridatta
Joined: 16 Sep 2009
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CP wrote: |
Scientists have to accept the existence of the unimaginable nature from the practical example of the unimaginable limits of this infinite universe.
What? If God is unimaginable, how is it that you are able to write about him / her / it? God is imaginable. You don't need to mystify God by saying that he is unimaginable.p. |
In such case, you cannot use the word �Unimaginable� at all! Then, why that word is created? What is the meaning of that word? If you choose that way, silence only indicates God and some have followed this way also. Suppose you say, �I cannot utter that�. Does this mean that you have uttered that? Therefore, it is one and the same to indicate God through silence or through the word unimaginable. If a word is not assigned, mention of God becomes impossible in the spiritual knowledge. Veda uses the word �Unimaginable� for God (Atarkyah�Aprameyah�).
Even angels and sages cannot speak a single word about the nature of God
Science is very useful in rejecting any non-God item projected as God by the people who are ignorant of science. For that matter, not only science, even angels and sages cannot speak a single word about the nature of God. It is beyond words and can be best explained through silence only. Lord Dakshinamurthy who is considered to be the best incarnation of Shiva in preaching the spiritual knowledge to even angels and sages explains God through silence only (Maunavyakhya prakatita para brahma tattvam). Shankara used here the word Parabrahman and not the word Brahman. Any greatest item in a category can be called as Brahman. Parabrahman is a negative word indicating that God is not Brahman or God is beyond Brahman. Every word is denied in indicating God (Neti neti, Yato vachah.. Veda). The silence of Buddha is also the same. Buddha is also the best incarnation of Lord Vishnu to preach the spiritual knowledge. Science also keeps silent about God.
In the above prayer of Dakshinamurthy, even Shankara told that God cannot be explained by any word. How can you say that Shankara means the awareness or an individual soul is God? If the individual soul is unimaginable, then, you can say that the individual soul is God. You are the individual soul, which knows itself and items other than itself. Awareness cannot be ignorant of itself and other things also simultaneously.
In meditation awareness is ignorant of other things but it is aware of itself. In deep sleep it is neither aware of itself nor aware of other items because it remains as inert energy since the inert energy is not transformed into awareness due to resting nervous system. If you say such inert energy in deep sleep is God, then your argument that awareness is God is contradicted by yourself. You must note one important point here, which is that Shankara used the word Brahman for the individual soul and not the word Parabrahman. Since Brahman means any greatest item in a category, several items can be called as Brahman. Veda, food, life, mind, intelligence, knowledge, bliss, etc were called as Brahman in several places (Brahmaksharasamudbhavam, Annam Brahma, Prano Brahma, Mano Brahma, Vijnanam Brahma, Jnanamantam Brahma, Anando Brahma, etc). All these statements mean that these items are greatest among their own categories. Similarly, the individual soul is greatest among all the items of the creation due to its specific property of knowledge (Jnanitvatmaiva� Gita). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugachevV
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Posts: 2295
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
What does a word have to do with God? Words were invented by mankind.
Why is it that you cannot prove that God exists?
Religion is a man-made invention used to control the ignorant people of the world in former times. In England (and probably in many other countries) the ruling classes used to put one son in the military; one son in the government, one son in charge of farming the land and one son in the church, thus they could control all aspects of the daily life of the masses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
