Quote:
Originally posted by Aviendha:
Well....I didn't want to go down this track again, but the what the hey!
Once again, somebody is trying to prove the existence of God by asking us to prove other unprovable things. This is obviously a desperate attempt for credibility.
As I have mentioned previously, Love is an emotion, not an actual being or object of any sort. You cannot prove that you love, just as you cannot prove that you are happy or sad. It's not even in the same ballpark as proving that there is a God. God is an actual being (apparently) who created and now holds sway over this Earth. I think proof is not only necessary, but would definitely be available if this were the case.
Second of all, using Santa Claus seems very funny to me. Santa Claus, like God IMHO, is a mademade being to suit a particular person. The difference is, Santa was made with the intention of making kids happy, and has become a way for people to make ridiculous amounts of money. God was made to fill the gap of understanding, that many people feel they have to fill, whereas others are more willing to face up to the more reasonable and rational logic, and funnily enough, has also become a way for people to make ridiculous amounts of money.
Finally, who cares whether Santa Claus exists or not. You can use all the examples that you want of unprovable things. My point is that it really doesn't matter whether we can prove them or not. I think God needs to be proved. If I found out that Santa actually existed, I don't think my life would change very much. God is a different story.
Please don't take this as abuse, it is just my opinion.
Avi.
|
None taken Avi. Thanks for your post.
As far as a desperate attempt at credibility? No. Not at all. I'd go so far as to say, if there's desperation, it lies on the other side of the fence.
If I am wrong, I lose nothing. We are all in the same boat. Wormfood. What happens if I am right?
I'm not so much attacking lack of belief as the approach one get's there. Why would I attack lack of belief? One may as well criticise another person for not loving them. I
What I'm saying is that you cannot with any certainty say anything DOES NOT EXIST. All you can ever say is, "I have not experienced this."
I'm trying to promote openmindedness. An acceptance for allowance of things outside ones experience. That if humans limited reality to that already known, we would have no discovery. What is the point of searching for the YET UNKNOWN, if by virtue of it not yet being known, it does not exist?
Is all that exists that which we know?
There is no proof of alien life. Do we know for certain they do not exist?
How can we? All we can say is we've never seen them on this earth, not that we have scoured every inch of the galaxy and found them to not be there.
Even so, our eyes can only see so far, so small and so close. Our ears can only hear between certain frequencies. Our ability for discernment is limited.
Avi, when I brought up the example of love, I did not say, "prove that you love someone", but "prove that someone else loves you."
Either is disprovable, but it was the second point I was focussing on. The only way you can know if another loves you is if they communicate it. Even then you have to TRUST them. Have faith that they are speaking truly.
What happens when that trust is broken? The relationship is in trouble.
This is the point I was making. There are many things in this world reliant on human testimonies for acceptance into an individual or collective consciousness. By refusing to accept human testimonies about God, yet accepting human testimonies concerning their love (both life changing) one is using double standards.
You have no way to measure my own experience. It would take a lifetime to go through my life piece by piece and show and explain every instance where I have felt God working in my life, felt his presence, or changes.
I'm not trying to change your belief, but change your acceptance of my belief!
The example of love and Santa were soley to highlight that we believe things do or do not exist based on human testimonies, yet if the issue of God is brought up, suddenly human testimony becomes moot.
At the end of the day, you have not experienced God. I have. You cannot invalidate my experience because you have not felt it. Attempting to do so is futile. It is like me trying to tell you that there is no love between you and your husband.
As far as love being an emotion, I think you've limited love way too simply. That "lovey feeling" of attraction can be a chemically driven emtional response, but love itself involves more way than that.
[ 06-17-2002, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]