The Art of Debate

[candid]

Luis, I think we are for God's consumption, and God is for our consumption. I think that's called Communion with God. (50)

 

[Sparhawk]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

So, you are saying that 'exists' means only existing in the mind of a given person? <!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

At a certain level, yes. The concept of God, as archetypical as it may be, is something very personal and as different to each as fingerprints. On a grander scale, those who believe in it, know and feel that is something both inside and outside of them.

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

But what if I imagine there to be a second sun in the sky, one I can't point to or help you to see; does it exist the same way that the one we both see does?<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

The key word here is "imagine". Imagination is not experience. If you do "experience" it, the second sun, and share your experience, people will strive to mimic it and/or argue about what your experience really was.

Candid,

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

If God exists, who can be without it?<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody, ergo, those who haven't experienced the presence of God, and if in fact the argument that, what was experienced by those who call it God is in fact demonstrated as something akin the archetypical concept of God, is proven correct, then those without the experience of God should be demonstrated as wrong.

I'm just playing with words. I hope you all realize that...

Luis

 

[Sparhawk]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

I think we are for God's consumption, and God is for our consumption. I think that's called Communion with God.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but there is that little clause in God's plan that calls for his children to have free will. Therefore, children will always play and imagine that he does not exist or will go their way arguing amongst themselves about what he may want to consume or not.

L

 

[candid]

Luis, much more than playing with words. You're playing with ideas. Really good ideas.

I disagree though that imagination and experience are necessarily two different things. Its said that imagination is the mother of invention, and this seems true. Tell a Pentecostal Christian that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit they experienced was just their imagination. Tell the Pope that the Holy Eucharist is not really the body of the Lord, that he just imagines it to be so.

So my question is: Does experience validate the existence of God?

 

[candid]

Luis, who designated God as the father and we as children?

 

[heylise]

Oh no, many posts. Going to post this anyway, although it may be redundant.

I experience God as existing, so he exists.
If someone else does not have this experience, and says God does not exist, I cannot deny that. He is right.
But if I can see God in that person, then God exists there too (not sure if you can say it that way. Has God a here and there? No probably not, it is all the same one *I* see). Not for that person, but for me.
God exists in me, you, animals, things, anything. Because my experience is, that he does.
From someone else's point of view, he may not exist.

I don't think it is an empty premise. A mind is needed for "the archetypical concept of God". Without a mind (or soul, whatever), there is no archetype. I don't think archetypes come in fixed quantities. They are images, one sees it or not. Something is blue, but there is no limit to blue, and not one blue everywhere. And where I see blue, you may see green. Maybe we give different names to the same image, and almost certainly same names to different images. Everyone's God is a bit different. And yet it is all one God, differences don't matter that much. One wave, everyone chooses his own particle.

There is an ability to experience God, or whatever one calls it/him/her. Some use it, others don't. Free choice.

LiSe

(agree with imagination being very close to experience. Other part of the mind, doing more or less the same thing)

 

[RindaR]

__________

LiSe writes:

(agree with imagination being very close to experience. Other part of the mind, doing more or less the same thing)
___________

In support of that, one of the tools frequently used in therapy is imagination - the minds ability to form a image or picture of something that may or may not exist "in reality".

This ability to make a mental image (whether it be visual, auditory or kinesthetic) is central to memory and perception and use of language. Without that ability the vibrations of the molecules in the ear that start with my use of my vocal cords would be meaningless when they hit your eardrum, and the light waves/particles that hit your retina from this screen would likewise be meaningless. (...and then we could discuss abstract and concrete thinking...)

I have often wondered that if we were not truly connected in some interior/invisible/immaterial way, how we could _ever_ in any way communicate?

'Tis a mystery to me, I'm sure, as is God.... and right now I'm ok with that.

 

[candid]

LiSe,

Here's what I'm getting, or maybe just imagining from what you've said:

God is a potential. If someone recognizes that potential, then they can experience God. You can recognize God in a rock and still experience God. So even if another has no belief in God, you seeing God in that person awakens that potential in you. But maybe in them too.

Therefore, God exists?

 

[Sparhawk]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Tell a Pentecostal Christian that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit they experienced was just their imagination. Tell the Pope that the Holy Eucharist is not really the body of the Lord, that he just imagines it to be so.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aha! Well, we do have our senses. Good old Merriam-Webster has this to say about "experience"

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

1 a : direct observation of or participation in events as a basis of knowledge b : the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation
2 a : practical knowledge, skill, or practice derived from direct observation of or participation in events or in a particular activity b : the length of such participation <has 10 years experience in the job>
3 a : the conscious events that make up an individual life b : the events that make up the conscious past of a community or nation or mankind generally
4 : something personally encountered, undergone, or lived through
5 : the act or process of directly perceiving events or reality<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

And then this for "imagination"

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

1 : the act or power of forming a mental image of something not present to the senses or never before wholly perceived in reality
2 a : creative ability b : ability to confront and deal with a problem : RESOURCEFULNESS c : the thinking or active mind : INTEREST <stories that fired the imagination>
3 a : a creation of the mind; especially : an idealized or poetic creation b : fanciful or empty assumption<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Experience is something attached to our senses. Senses, by definition, respond to external stimulus. Imagination, on the other hand, lives and thrives inside our mind. If you touch a flame, you experience the heat and learn not to do it again consciously. Until such a time as you touch the flame and still are afraid of it, you are relying on second hand experiences and teachings that the heat is what you'll experience if you touch it. In that case, you are imagining the consecuences of such an action.

On the other hand, you can abstract with your mind and imagination, concepts such as those that can be brought to be experienced. This is the fundament of Science. The big struggle of humanity is that we have this great concept and abstraction inside our minds, which is the concept of God, that has proven mighty difficult to bring to the light of experience.

As for the Pentecostals, the Pope, Mohamed, the Dalai Lama and the Guru Maharaji of the world, I would never dare to dispute that what what they experience is not God. Read above my statement that the concept of God is as personal as your eye pupils. Who am I to dispute a belief? Dispute derives in conflict. I rather reach a point where, after sharing some ideas and the concepts are irreconciliable, that we all part in peace. But that's me...

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Luis, who designated God as the father and we as children?<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

For the light that shine on me, it wasn't me, Candid. I'm just relying on second hand "experiences"...

L

 

[candid]

Rinda

yes. Here's the line that springs to mind:

Things that accord in tone vibrate together. Things that have affinity in their inmost natures seek one another. Water flows to what is wet, fire turns to what is dry. Clouds (the breath of heaven) follow the dragon, wind (the breath of earth) follows the tiger. Thus the sage arises, and all creatures follow him with their eyes. What is born of heaven feels related to what is above. What is born of earth feels related to what is below. Each follows its kind. ~ Confucius

 

[candid]

Luis

I concede the point.

 

[candid]

Far out, God!

 

[Sparhawk]

Now I have a headache... Philosophy is a hazard to your health... No wonder I hated it in school.

 

[candid]

Luis, yeah but its good excerise, ya gots to admit.

 

[Sparhawk]

Yeah, Candid, what are aspirins for, anyway?

 

[candid]

LOL Luis, I don't know why everyone's got a headache. I feel great!

Seriously, in honor of one another we're too afraid to go toe-to-toe, lest they get stepped on. But there's something to be said about honoring one another through a worthy match, an honest fight, or a strong debate. That was the topic of this thread after all.

Anyway, Ibuprofen works best for me.

With respect all.

Candid

 

[candid]

Anon, when I get there? I'm already here! sheesh!

 

[martin]

Credo (I believe):

Life is a tree. I am a leaf, you are another leaf. The One is the root.
When I go deep inside, through the branches, through the stem, I reach the root. I discover the root as my origin, my center, my core, my deepest identity. I am the root. I am the One.
When you go deep inside you also discover the root as your deepest self, as your core, as what you really are. You are the One.
I am the One, you are the One, we are the One. I am you, you are me. There is only one Being.

And yet we are different, I am not you, you are not me. We are unique leaves on the tree that has the One as its root. Although you and I are eternally One we are forever Two.
How much Two? It depends. Leaves on the same branch are alike and will easily understand each other. Leaves on different branches are less alike and might have some communication problems.
But Two is no less true or holy or inspiring than One. Life is both and longs for both, life embraces the paradox. Without paradox there is no life.
I believe ..