thomas p. wrote:
> My position is that nobody has presented any evidence to sup****t the
> existence of a deity. Talking about myths and altered states of
> consciousness is not providing evidence.
Neurological studies, as with FMRI, show that something is going on, and
its not in the same place they find delusions.
Secondly, the direct experience of the divine is nothing like the
strawmen you are familiar with like Jehovah, Jesus, or Allah.
Thirdly, we have re****ts from both Occidental and Oriental sources who
were never in contact with each other that nonetheless concur in several
ways. They would all agree that as Nietzsche put it, the Levantine
concept of god is dead.
From the earliest Vedas all the way up to 18th century Bengalese Saint
Ramprasad there's the realization that everything you perceive is part
of a "projected matrix" out of the mind of the divine. Which is rather
like a main frame, which they also all agree, has projected a myriad
realities. If you exist on which which presents you no perceptible
evidence of a divine force, I dont have a problem with it; that would be
a reasonable conclusion. But to say that no such thing can exist on
projected matrixes you are unaware of is not logical.
You are trying to prove a negative. The Bagavd Gita says that there are
divinely created and animated forms which exist solely to challenge the
fulfillment of Kharma. Like cosmic robots or the monsters in a video
game. If you are one of them, the Gita calls them "Avatars", then there
is no reason for you to perceive a divine entity, and I dont have a
problem with it.
For that matter, I dont claim to have a soul either. But clearly, there
is no way I can prove nobody else has one. I dont try. If you do, more
power to you. But why should you giva ****?
lastly, from the Vedas you can see that while you may learn from an
Avatar like me, you cannot teach one anything. So, if you do not learn
anything from this discourse, that dont bother me either.
|
