Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Kuros]

[The_Eyeball_Kid]

[Rteacher]

Since my posts have been ignored here, I presume my links would be similarly ignored. Therefore, I'll take the liberty of quoting an intelligent Krishna devotee's answer to the "Can you prove God exists?" question. (The key to the answer is that consciousness itself is spiritual...)

The Logic of the Absolute
Given proof of God, would a materialist know how to read it?
by Hridayananda Dasa Goswami

People often ask us, �Can you prove the existence of God?� Proof indicates a conclusive demonstration that establishes the validity of an assertion, in this case the assertion that God exists.

But as soon as we speak of a demonstration, the next question is �To whom shall we demonstrate?� If we speak of evidence or data, we must know who will see and hear it. In other words, who will judge the results of a particular experiment, test, or trial.

Consider a hypothetical example. Doctor Waterport, the famous scientist, has just discovered a sophisticated formula that solves a technical mathematical problem. He proudly calls his colleagues together and presents them with thirty pages of ultratechnical symbols. His fellow scientists pore over the pages and conclude, �Yes, this is the answer we�re looking for.� If Dr. Waterport were to show the proof to an ordinary person on the street, the person wouldn�t even know how to hold the pages right side up. Because he�s not trained in mathematics, the proof would be meaningless to him. Conclusion: Proof demands a qualified audience.

Certainly, any valid proof must be logical. But how we apply logic depends on our previous experience. For example, suppose an apple tree is growing outside your window. One morning you hear a sound like that of an apple hitting the ground, and when you look outside you see a ripe apple lying beneath the tree. Logically, you conclude, the apple has just fallen from the tree.

Your logical statement rests on your previous observation that the apple tree produces apples, that the apples fall to the ground, and that they make a certain sound when this occurs. And your statement appears logical to those with similar experience.

So we apply logic in terms of our experience. Therefore, how can we expect to make God logical to a person who has had no spiritual experience? How can God appear logical to a person to whom the very terminology of the science of God is unintelligible? Thus it is ludicrous when those who are spiritually blind, deaf, and dumb -demand that God be made �logical� to them and that His existence be �proved.�

In general, it is illogical for a person untrained in some field of knowledge to demand that a particular fact pertaining to that field of knowledge be logically demonstrated to him. For example, if someone who has no idea what a number is demands that I logically demonstrate that two plus two equals four, I can�t do it. Similarly, if a spiritual ignoramus demands that God be logically demonstrated to him, his very request is illogical. So how can the illogical demands of atheists be met?

We can easily provide innumerable proofs of God�provided we are free to stipulate that the judge of the data be a person who is spiritually trained. Devotees of the Lord who are advanced in Krishna consciousness can logically, evidentially, and demonstratively deal with the reality of the soul and God. But materialistic fools demand that God, a nonmaterial being, be reduced to a material formula.

It is patently absurd to demand material proof for a nonmaterial entity. Mathematical or physical laws describe predictable ways in which material things interact. God and the soul are not material and thus cannot be reduced to material descriptions.

This does not mean, however, that the soul is outside the jurisdiction of logical discussion. Consciousness itself is spiritual, not material, and thus the study of consciousness, or spirit, is not beyond the scope of human beings.

In fact, all fields of knowledge depend on tangible perception of the soul, since all sciences depend on a conscious scientist who works with consciousness, which is spiritual, not material. In other words, spiritual awareness is intrinsic to all types of awareness, although materialistic people do not recognize that consciousness is spiritual.

So there is no lack of data to prove the existence of spirit, since consciousness itself is spiritual. The problem is that foolish intellectuals whimsically designate consciousness a material, not a spiritual, entity. But as soon as we accept the simple truth that consciousness itself is spiritual, we find that in every stage of awareness and in every field of knowledge our perception of all manner of data is resting on a spiritual experience�the experience of being conscious. And when consciousness studies itself, it reaches the stage called spiritual consciousness, or self- realization. Ultimately, when the self-realized person fixes his consciousness on the source of all consciousness, he reaches the realization of Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

For one who has not perceived the superior pleasure of Krishna consciousness, it will seem illogical to restrict his material enjoyment. A Krishna conscious person, however, perceives that spiritual consciousness is far more pleasurable and satisfying than material consciousness. He further perceives that sinful activities�activities against the laws of God�harm that consciousness. Thus it is entirely logical for a Krishna conscious person to obey the laws of God, just as it is logical for an ordinary citizen to obey the laws of the state.

Ultimately, we must come to the stage of absolute logic, which refers to absolute perception, a perception of things with eternally recognizable properties and eternally established relationships. For example, God is the supreme master and enjoyer and we are His eternal servants. Thus it is absolutely logical for us to serve Him, for we are then situated in our natural, constitutional position. To serve a mundane employer may be logical, but it is not absolutely logical, since after the employer�s death, or upon his bankruptcy, serving him is illogical.

In conclusion, logic is a secondary process that follows the primary process of consciousness. We are conscious, for example, that numbers have particular values and properties, and based on this perception, we can state that a particular mathematical equation is either logical or illogical. Similarly, by purifying our existence through the practice of Krishna consciousness, we can perceive the values and properties of God, and thus we can discern that a particular statement about God is either logical or illogical. By confirming our analysis with the Vedic literatures, which are standard reference works of spiritual science compiled by realized devotees, we can perfectly understand the science of God in Krishna consciousness.
http://btg.krishna.com/main.php?id=205

[Justin Hale]

[Czarjorge]

RTeacher, I think you are somewhat being ignored because you are falling into the same trap that peel does, only doing it with far more class and much less crass. You are essentially denying Christian contribution to the argument and the Christian understanding of "God" because you feel the Vedas had sealed the final word on what "God" is long before Christ was even born. Or so it seems to me, please feel free to correct me.

Do you believe that Krishna and the Christian/Jewish/Muslim God are one in the same or distinct? What about Buddha?

Also, have you any understanding/knowledge of Coptic Christianity? The Coptic Christian idea is a sort of amalgam of Platonism and Christianity. Their understanding of Christ being that Christ is Logos, or infinite knowledge, and by "knowing" Christ a devotee can "know" Logos, similar to the Vedic goal of attaining Krishna Consciousness.

I've often wondered at the tendency of religions to trumpet their "guy" as the one and only. Perhaps Christ, Krishna, Buddha and any others of their ilk, are the same person, or emanate from the same place. Perhaps the existence of a "God"-ly/ish person is merely part of the natural state of humans. Every so often a new one comes along as a sort of reset to human understanding. Or perhaps they are all messengers from some greater being, or place, sent to lead humans to greater understanding and to give them the opportunity to rise to a higher plane of existence.

[Rteacher]

I'll try to answer without rambling to much off on tangents ...

There is only one Supreme Orininal Absolute Person (SOAP? )

Anyway, that's Krishna. His transcendental, eternally youthful form has two arms and two legs.

The two arms-two legs part jives with the Christian conception of man being created in God's image, but in the vague Christian conception God is often portrayed impersonally as almighty and omniscient while incongruously existing some very old cranky guy who has nothing better to due than judge people and punish them forever for thinking the wrong thoughts.

As far as I know (and based on my experience with one bearded guy who kept coming to the Krishna temple trying to offer huge joints to the Deities...) the Coptic conception involves drug-altered states of consciousness...

The Krishna consciousness conception (free of drugs...) conceives of God as Krishna - the all-attractive Supreme Enjoyer who has his own neverending transcendental pleasure pastimes that we (innumerable spirit-souls) can also take part in eternally (once we get over all of our material addictions and purify our conciousness by chanting holy names of God.

Although in the Gaudiya (Bengali) Vaishnava tradition Krishna is considered the original form of God, there are innumerable four-armed Vishnu expansions (each with a different transcendental name and his own self-luminous planet in the spiritual universes...)

My understanding is that the Buddha who appeared on earth is an empowered avatar of Vishnu with a particular mission to stop misuse of Vedic animal sacrifice and to trick atheists into worshipping God. I've also heard that there is a four-armed Buddha Vishnu form in his own planet in the spiritual universes...

Christ is the same name as Krishna. The Greek word Christa came from the Sanskrit Krsta, which also refers to Krsna.

Jesus, however, is the perfect - but not only - son of God, who descended from the highest heavenly planet to compassionately elevate very fallen souls. He is considered a universal spiritual master empowered to carry out a difficult preaching mission.

The Vedic view is also complicated by the existence of 32 million demigods, "superhumans" empowered to regulate various functions universal administration.

Many "Hindus" worship these demigods for material benedictions, but that is considered less intelligent by great sages and spiritual masters who transmit Vedic knowledge in four lines of disciplic succession that go back over 5000 years to when Krishna was on the planet in his transcendental dark bluish form.

Krishna also manifested four-armed Vishnu forms, and a gigantic Universal Form when He spoke Bhagavad-gita at the onset of a world war (which He arranged to rid the earth of all demonic kings...)

Most devotees like the two-armed form the best:

[Czarjorge]

Essentially you're saying that Christ, as child of God, is in fact the child of Krishna?

Also, I don't believe most Coptic Christian traditions involve the use of drugs. Their idea was similar to gnostic ideas, that Jesus was in fact absolute knowlege, and rather than being a leader was the bridge between humanity and logos. Somewhat similar to Buddha's role in Buddhism, a teacher that can lead other humans to transcendental knowledge.

I admire the steadfastness of your faith, but I wonder about the tendency of those highly religious to think their faith is the one true faith. I didn't bother looking, but are there historical examples of Krishna's followers killing people who disagree with them? I certainly know of a few times when Hare Krishnas in the US have done some repugnant things. Any group that thinks they're completely right has great potential to do completely wrong things to other people.