Posts by rawe

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

Thanks for your so very honest response. Even saying you almost never read the Bible other than to look up passages. I also appreciate your comments about why you look up passages. Humans are social animals we survive and thrive in large part because we're willing to help each others. That is what makes the shunning policies of Jehovah's Witnesses particularily cruel.

The cost of an explanation, "cheaper", as I put, is often called Occams Razor. It is the observation that given two possible explanations it is most often true the most economical one is the truth. My moral dilemma comment hints at the problem of suffering, which I don't think is actually easy to dismiss without being illogical. As Witnesses we were told suffering was the result of Adam and Eve being disobedient. We were also told, Jesus, through his father Jehovah, was the creator of all things, including life on earth. This makes the answer to suffering illogical, since a rabbit suffers when it is attacked and killed by a wolf in the same physical way a human child would suffer if they were the object of attack. Yet we would here need to assume, Jehovah through Jesus, would have worked through all the design elements of a wolf would know such would lead to suffering. Likewise humans get cancer and die, it is assume because of sin (Romans 5:12), but dogs also get cancer and suffer in the same way, although we wouldn't assume they too inherited sin from the disobedience of Adam and Eve. I appreciate some Christians argue for a universal application here to cover that -- but I suspect they do so, not because it it logical, but because they've spotted the problem of suffering and are trying to answer it.

As I read this thread I think my thoughts on the steel box are incomplete. It is obvious that we can carry concepts of people, ones not present and even purely imagined ones in our minds. But to suggest Christ is Holy Spirit implies an external entity that can effect you, within your mind, regardless of any barriers. I doesn't matter where you are, it doesn't matter what language you know. This is what I mean by incredible power to communicate. Consider this post, I am writing this in my home in Chandler, AZ. I happen to run Firefox on Ubuntu GNU/Linux. Each character that I type involves literally 100s of thousands of computer instructions being accurately processed within my home computer. But this is only the start, a number of computers connected to the world-wide Internet will process this data, mostly store it and forward it upon demand, until finally it reaches your screen, where you can read it. If you're blind more technology would be used to read the text back to you. If you didn't understand written English our communication break down. If you went into a steel box with no connection to the Internet my message could not reach you. Yet, Christ as a Holy Spirit, effortlessly overcomes any barrier.

On the subject of Bible reading, I would encourage you to read through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. When I was one of Jehovah's Witnesses I eventually was appointed as a ministerial servant then later as an elder. I felt a bit bad that while I had read many large sections of the Bible, even as an elder, I had not read it cover to cover. Since I was riding the bus to work, I used that opportunity to accomplish this task. I feel there is a real difference between how isolated verses sound compared to reading the entire context. I was so thrilled to complete the Bible, I decided to read all the major Holy Books, starting next the Quran, which I read. Then the Book of Mormon, which I started but stopped. I finally got back to the Book of Mormon after I left the faith in 2007. I was encouraged to read it by a co-worker who knew I left the faith, so I did, including the saying the Moroni prayer that is suggested at the end -- that prayer was not answered.

When you serve as an MS or Elder and you have children, as I do, it is required that you have a family Bible study. I think like most, my children did not enjoy yet another sit down Bible study, considering how much we did as Witnesses already. So I eventually reduce it down to reading 2 pages of Bible most week days. When I left the faith in 07, even though I was by that point an atheist, I saw no reason to stop the Bible reading program. Last night we just finished up Philemon and started on Hebrews. So I am close to completing the Bible for the second time. I should mentioned I did make one adjustment after leaving the faith, we read 2 pages of the Bible followed by 4 pages from another book I think my youngest (she is 9) will enjoy. Thus we're nearly complete on the 2nd book of the Harry Potter series. Reading HP was not something I would have allowed while in the faith, but I must say I've really enjoyed these books.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

First let me say, how much appreciate your answers -- thank you. I would like to expand on the woman caught in the act of adultery, which is indeed from John 8. You said...

My Lord says to me again, "John."

I again ignore him, and look through Mark. Again I do not find the passage.

Lets imagine Christ really was the one to say "John" in this instance. One of the things that would imply is Christ knows how to speak English. As far as we know when on earth Jesus spoke Aramaic. Given the time and place he lived he could have also been familiar with Greek, Latin and Hebrew, but certainly not modern English. The universe is an extremely large place, and you are on a planet in orbit the Sun on the outer region of the milky way galaxy. The earth is large too and spinning at a rate of about 1000 miles per hour. Thus Christ would need to know where to locate you. Then he would need some way to trigger the portion of your brain relates to language and hearing, then cognition. If Christ were physically in the same room as you, and could create sound like we do, then of course he could simply say, "John" and you would hear it with your normal sense of hearing.

Next we have to imagine he would have some purpose in doing this. We have to be careful in answer this because it could create a moral dilemma. We must face the question of why such incredible power is used to produce an audible "John" for you, yet there is so much suffering in the world. Many children die each day from malnutrition for example. So why would Christ make "John" and audible artifact to you? Perhaps it was to teach you to rely upon him. Or it could be to give you assurance that this passage is not a spurious. But, notice, it centers on you. The dilemma your mind was facing -- namely not being able to recall where this passage was. This is what I mean by ego-centric, personal (although I do stress, I don't mean to imply this is a negative thing).

If Christ only exists within your mind, then these events would need natural explanation that avoided the supernatural. So... the first thing to suggest, is you must have in the past seen these verses in John. In other words the knowledge of where these verses exist must have been encoded in your brain by some prior experience. I assume that is so? Next there must be some evidence that memory recall within a human mind is not perfect and it is possible to be confused by where to locate this information. I would further suggest there could be some proximate reason why you assumed Mark (i.e. top-of-mind, as advertisers like to accomplish) vs deeper knowledge you also had it was in John. Since the brain is so complex, it may be hard to discover that reason. But it could be as simple as you have been reading Mark recently, especially would my theory work if you had been reading a passge in Mark where Jesus comments on adultery or interacts with a woman. Do any of these suggestions align with your experience?

The difference between these two explanations is the natural one is cheaper and it doesn't create a moral dilemma of any sort. Although it may seem disrespectful to even ask if Christ knows English or not, or where to locate his followers on planet earth, such things would be real problems and being able to address them indicates vast power that leads to questions of how and why such power is used.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

I need to run out to Costco, so this will be just quick reponse on one item...

"Godly power without actually having to exist -- now that is overcoming an amazing deficit! (I really do mean that sincerely)"

Power is the ability to overcome an obstacle and the biggest obstacle anyone could face is not existing. Thus when Jesus was put to death by the Romans, I believe he physically ceased to exist, yet it did not end his power and influence. He is still "with" his followers, such as yourself. Even as an atheist I can acknowledge that power.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Qcmbr,

"Believers do not tend to struggle in understanding why a culturally dead god is fake and a figment of imagination (Zeus, Ra etc.)"

My use of the word 'struggle' was misleading. I do mean struggle, but not in the sense of the mind being conscieously aware of this. In the same manner as the brain fills in the two blind spots. It 'struggles' to do this, but it seem effortless to us. In the same way, I think a believer's mind is seeking to be rational in face of being unable to answer the question: Why do I have this strong belief that I am certain of, but I cannot prove it externally and I am confronted with people who don't believe? It is at this point, some of the rationalizations such as you believed in a false God, you have an unresolved sin, you don't like what God asks of you, etc, absolutely any explanation that reaches a rational conclusion without having to open the door to the idea maybe God does not exist as an external reality.

So when I suggested to Tammy that is what her brain was stuggling with, her response was basically, no, no struggle at all. And I am suggesting that is great insight for us non-believers. It demonstrates a sincerity and not a purposeful avoidance of the conclusion God does not exist, for self-serving reasons. To Tammy, Christ exists, there is no question about it, even while she admits up front the knowledge of this is personal, spiritual and not externally accessible. Please, Tammy, expand on this, since this could sound like I am able to speak to your views.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Soft+gentle,

To be completely honest, I am arguing for a concept that makes sense and continues to dignify both the believer and the non-believer. But I am also exploring, via this thread, the idea. In other words, I would like to bat this idea back and forth to see if it can hold up and remain rational.

Richard Dawkins said very smartly in his book The God Delusion, (I paraphrase), in regards to the Gods of the past, we are all atheists, modern atheists just go one God more. I remember reading that, sitting in my car outside Costco, after I left the faith in 2007, thinking how brilliant that logic was. Indeed, on what basis do we so smuggly claim Zeus does not exist? Or why is it so easy for us in the modern world to dismiss his existence?

The answer Christians give of course is not really that bad -- namely, Christ continues to be believed because he exists. His power, tied to existence, has defeated wrong and false belief and continuing to insist (or hope?) he doesn't exist is what is delusional.

But, yes, in answer to PunkOfNice, I believe God exists, but only within the minds of believers. And this mode of existence helps explain the difference we sense between Christ and Zeus in the modern world. Of couse there are 7 billion people on the planet and I would not be surprised if at least some continue to hold Zeus as real or even Obi-Wan for that matter. But Christ is a widely held belief.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

"In the God-mind theory, God could leave a person? Is this the opposite of what you have been saying, that God and the person would be inseparable and the same? I could be misunderstanding you, sorry. Perhaps you could rephrase? Thanks : )"

I need to shove off to bed too. Within the framework of the theory, Christ should always be able to reach you. I.e. going into a steel box would not prevent Christ from being there. This is so, because there is no physical barrier involved, because Christ exists within your mind as a construct and obviously that makes 'Christ' part of you, within you. Yet, this does not mean you would be unable to conceive of Christ leaving you. You could, for various reasons feel forsaken.

Think too of the witnessing you do about Christ, what do you actually say to the other person? You may share thoughts you've picked up from the Bible. If you've studied that material and it has influenced you -- that would be natural. But it is not likely you would suggest non-personal concepts. Rather thoughts will tend to focus on person-centric. As Jesus said, "I am with you." Could you imagine, someone speaking about Christ in non-personal ways? For example, would it not seem very odd if a person said, "Christ would like to help you, but he doesn't know what you need, he has never met you." Or "Christ isn't interested in us right now, he is working on plans that he'll be acting on a few thousands years from now."

What all this boils down to is the inescapable fact that all our concepts of others are ultimately within our noggins. We do not even need someone to be physically present for us to think about them. Is it possible to have thoughts about purely imagined individuals who otherwise do not exist in reality? We can, otherwise we could not enjoy watching a fictional character in a movie. Can Obi-Wan Kenobi come with us into a steel box? If we have watched Star Wars and have concept of the character, he can go wherever we go. The concept of him is in our minds -- put there by George Lucas.

But Christ is obviously different than Obi-Wan. Unlike Obi-Wan the concept of Christ, relates to a number of very important things to us personally. Such as a sense of justice, being loved, being supported, having a purpose, or even helping us survive our ultimate demise -- death. I believe it is for that reason the concept tends to drift towards the ego-centric. You might find this strange, but if Christ is truly personal towards the believer, for the most part, even as an atheist, I think that is healthy. It also the importance of these things to us personally, that makes Christ powerful, inspiring and a motivator, even if he does not exist apart from our us. I.e. Godly power without actually having to exist -- now that is overcoming an amazing deficit! (I really do mean that sincerely)

Where we got in trouble as Witnesses was believing that our ability to please Jehovah God rested on unquestioned obedience to Christ's Brothers as represented by the Governing Body. In that model we wound up handing over our intellect to another who could abuse it for their own selfish interests.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

Thank you for responding detail. If I could ask you to expand just a bit more on this point...

"Not voices, no. But I do hear His voice. Not as in with audible ears, but His distinct voice, in spirit, within me. Sometimes in words, sometimes in reminders of scripture that help me to see something He is trying to tell me; sometimes in images or reminders of a known event that will also help me see something; sometimes just in understanding granted."

What are your circumstances when this voice is most apparent? God-of-the-mind theory would suggest that you'll most often hear God's voice when you're able to shutdown other sensory input. So you'll more likely feel closer to God in quiet circumstance than when you're engrossed in some task. For example closing your eyes while saying a prayer is one way of shutting of input and thus pushing your mind into more internal reflection. Postures and places of meditation work this way too. I would add that being under heavy stress may be an exception to this rule, but for different reasons.

"It can totally be separated from me."

Wow! Okay, I didn't expect that. Allow me to take another run at it. If you and God are really one and the same thing, then you will not be able to separate God from yourself. So, for example, if you and God are the same, you should always feel, without exception, God understands you. It would be truly odd, as per this theory, for you to say, "God just doesn't 'get' me." Of course it is common for believers to say, "I just don't know what the Lord wants for me" -- that would simply reflect the person themselves, is unsure of the best path forward. But what should not happen is a true sense of distance and lack of understanding between you and God, as if you could entertain the idea that there was some physical place, say inside a steel box, where God couldn't reach you, if he wanted to.

In contrast the God-mind theory would allow for God to leave you. This view is reflected in dying words of Jesus where he says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?", which of course is quote from Psalms. Two things can explain this, one is simply that an expectation of action on God's part fails to materialize and that confuses the believer. Perhaps more likely is a tendency to self-condemn where we feel some action on our part has offended God.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi Tammy,

Your post is interesting. My theory of the existence of God is that he does exist but within the mind of believers. If that theory is correct it should show up in a couple different ways. There should be nothing that we can objectively measure that would indicate the existence of God as a real external entity. For example the existence of Pluto was theorized before it was actually viewed. The theory the backs our understanding of gravity was used to calculate Pluto's influence and infer existence and then used to actually spot Pluto in the night sky over Flagstaff, AZ.

The second thing that should be true, if my mind-God-theory is correct, is expressions should tend to be ego-centric. I say 'ego-centric' only because I don't know another way to express the idea. I am not meaning to use this phrase in a negative way -- just that thoughts about God should self-reflect. God, in this case, should know you, answer to you, be an intimate companion.

Saying God exists within the mind of believers only, may seem to diminish his stature, but I actually don't think so. It makes God exactly as powerful as the believer is and it turns out humans can accomplish some pretty darn amazing things -- like Ghandi standing up to one of the most poweful nations on earth. Or the monks in Burma taking huge personal risks to engage in political protest.

Here are a few quotes from your post that seemed to me to fit these two categories, first the self-reflection...

"Christ has always been my lifeline. Doubts that I have ever had, have always brought me back to Him. Originally mainly from what He taught; now from what He teaches and speaks. (present tense) I do not believe He is real. I know that He is."

I was particularily struck by saying he speaks to you in the present tense. I assume you don't mean you're literally hearing voices. It seems more like you're saying his teaching resonate with your life in the here and now. Is that what you mean? Also the assertive phase "I know" speaks to internal knowledge and certainty. If my theory is correct, for you to deny the existence of God at this point, would be to deny your own existence. Given that, atheism is simply not going to be rational in this context.

On the inability to objectively measure the existence of God...

"One person cannot prove to another person that there is God. That sort of imperical proof that non-beleivers are asking for. Because you cannot prove the spiritual with tools meant to measure the physical. You have to use different tools."

On the surface it looks like a simple acknowledgement that settling the question of the existence of Pluto is a different task than that for God. Adding the bit about "different tools" and "spiritual tools" is interesting. Some given to thinking in terms of the concrete and literal would simply say these phrases have no real meaning. But to me it more indicates a struggle with trying to express something you know, in a near absolute sense, yet cannot be separated from yourself as an individual. One of the differences that strikes me between believers and non-believers is the degree of self-knowledge. Many believers are certain, they know with little doubt, God exists. Non-believers in almost every case I have observed will say, that they are not certain it can be proven God does not exist.

Lastly, the rational mind...

"But other people lose faith, or set their faith aside, because they do not like what God is (or is not) doing, according to what man has taught them about God. So usually, it is in a false god that they have lost their faith."

Some non-believers might jump at statements like this, to say the conclusion you've reached misses the obvious -- namely that God does not exist -- but even worse it imputes bad motive on the non-believer. But I see this differently. I see this as the believing mind struggling to understand what is essentially a non-rational concept. If you know that God exists, why then do others not believe? This can be made all the more confusing when you meet and interact with non-believers, many of whom you'll discover think and act in much the same way as believers, have the same range of likes, dislikes and morals, etc.

The human mind is constantly seeking to be rational. To make sense of the world around it. For example where your optic nerve connects to the back of your eye it creates two blind spots in your field of vision. But you don't notice them, because your mind simply fills in the void. Other examples of this occur where one is deprived of good information to the senses. You'll see something off in the distance, but not really well enough to recognize it, your mind will just make something up until you get closer to the object. In this context your believing mind is forcing you to come to some conclusion that remains rational. If the non-existence of God is non-rational it must be rejected.

Cheers,

-Randy

544

FINALLY! Can you prove God exists? If you can I won't ask again!

by punkofnice in

i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.

he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.

finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?

rawe

Hi PunkOfNice,

"If god doesn't exist then what's the meaning of life?"

Before I add to this thread, others here may be interested to know PunkOfNice and I know each other from the Ex-Jehovah's Witness Forum and Recovery site on yuku.com.

I self-identify as an atheist, but like most in the category would say there may be no way to prove God doesn't exist. I would also say, I do believe God exists within the minds of believers and he can have a set of shared attributes if those believers talk about such things and reach a consensus view.

What is the meaning of life? Or, as we may have asked a householder: Does life have a purpose? The answer I believe is simple: life has no meaning and no purpose. And that is the problem, our ability to plan with purpose is tied to our survival. Our ability to judge the intent of another mind (animal or human) is tied to our survival. Thus we may not be well equiped to deal with something that has no purpose or meaning.

Perhaps the most ironic thing that comes up in this debate is the word 'chance', so often used by Witnesses. At the most fundemental level it does seem there is an essential randomness at the subatomic level. But we should not let that confuse us into believing the physical systems are primarily driven by chance. In fact the laws of nature as so well defined that concrete predictions can be made. The simple act of watching a weather report shows how this works. Thus the example of the evolution of the eye is not a question of chance. In fact the physical limits on what would work at at biological level for radiation sensor the eyes are, is so narrow only a couple different patterns appear in nature.

But... the ultimate definition of chance and randomness is... God! If a superbeing exists and interacts in a capricious manner with our world, then an amazing thing happens to knowledge. It doesn't become a question of if one can know if God exists or not, it becomes a question of can one know anything at all? And that's the kicker. We can know the world only to the extent we understand the laws of nature and only to the extent that such laws are not violated. If we have to also account for a random capricious law breaker, then we can't really know anything, not even in principal.

Cheers,

-Randy

67

Tech49 on HOURS, TIME, and REPORTS

by Tech49 in

i thought i would share some of my observations on counting field service time, reports, etc.

and how those reports are viewed, to those that are still so fixated on numbers.. i served as secretary on the service committee for many years, and have seen it all!.

i was really disheartened when wt changed the requirement for aux pioneering to allow for 30 hrs, instead of the 50 it has been for so long.

rawe

Hi Tech49,

"Out of 30 people, probably 25% came anywhere near the 30hr commitment they signed up for."

That's interesting. I left the faith in 2007 before the time was dropped from 50 to 30. As a family we tried to Aux Pio every summer. When the time dropped from 60 to 50 I did find I could hit the goal without taking that much time off work. Although I too served as Secretary for a period of time my recall was most who signed up for the 50 hours made it, sometimes with an hour or two more.

For the last couple years before I left it became more obvious that going out in service for most was a sort of ritual, rather than anything truly productive. When my wife's Bible study moved to west side of Phoenix this issue became incredibly obvious. We actually went out to a meeting at the hall who held the territory and after the meeting tried to find someone willing to take the study -- it was a deer-in-the-headlights experience. One congregation member later called my wife and asked her "What are you trying pull?"

Cheers,

-Randy