God Exists

[arunshanker]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

This sounds quiet crazy, funny and interesting..

This is what someone would have said a century ago about flying at 3.0 mach

 

[C RAVI]

IMO, this concept would be great, if science could achieve keeping humans young ever with all natural vigor and vitality. Otherwise, I don't think any one would opt to be alive during the ripe old age.

If at all people still prefer to be alive as old folks, with all the technological apparatus, I believe, all such immortal humans would be nothing more than Robots.

This is what someone would have said a century ago about flying at 3.0 mach

Would appreciate your views on my above quotes (in blue) too..

 

[C RAVI]

The article makes amusing reading. It shows how funny one can sound when not well grounded in the basic understanding of reality. At least there is one good thing that can come out of this: the bright chance that the western people will come out enlightened.

1) Actaully the article makes interesting reading

2) Actually what is the basic understanding of reality you are talking about here. Is it right for me to assume that you have this basic understanding of reality

3) Is there anything about western people here in this article Do I see a hint of stereotyping here
Here is some critisism on him Biologist P. Z. Myers Kurzweil's predictions as being based on "New Age spiritualism" rather than science and says that Kurzweil does not understand basic biology Please refer : Ray Kurzweil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1) Wheather the article is amusing or interesting, the point is, the article is much fascinating to the technological world.

2) The basic understanding of reality means, the understanding of real life cycle and its reasonable order. The basic understanding of the rule of the nature/GOD and the related ecosystem.

3) Western people are going crazy over technological advancements. They have, with technological advancements, established and devastated. The attack on Hiroshima & Nagasaki is the paradigm of technical devastation by Westerners. Humans gonna survive better by technology and gonna destroy themselves by technology. Gonna say "We are God" and gonna collapse to ashes under the rule of the nature.

 

[C RAVI]

[
1) Very obviously they do not like “observance” which is the act or practice of observing or complying with a law, custom, command, or rule. This actually makes it dogmatic and unquestionable. How can an atheist find common ground in dogmatic rigidity of religion which is the rule



2) Actually visibility is not necessary for proving a hypothesis (Bohrs's or for that matter Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar’s) In fact air is not visible but it does exist one can sense it by other means, in the context of Chandrasekhar’s you can never see a black hole as even light does not escape from it


3) Is the sage right he is demanding visible proof and may not accept any other proof


4) Actually they are in a very different situation


5) To say “need to experience” to experience what? At least in the case of sage there is a clear cut Physics you have mentioned. The sage needs just some good contemporary theoretical physics exposure, probably a tour to CERN ( Large Hadron Collider). But the Atheist needs something very vague like “experience”



6) Difficult to agree with this- change in thoughts and perception arising from observations is what drives science.

1) Theists in this forum (forget about other dogmatic religious leaders outside of the portal, in a phsyical society) are ready to define one single common ground by Atheists to clearly debate on the question of existence of GOD. You may please come up with one such common grounds.

2) That's have the intuition of the subtle mind/subconscious mind, feels and recognizes GOD.

3) You yourself agree that AIR can not be a visible proof but need to be accepted as existing force. The same is the power of the Supreme God.

4) Being in a very different situation is helping humans to enjoy technology. So we don't have any issues with it. But we are worried of its devastations too in coming years, for instance the year 2045.

5) To Experience GOD. To experience GOD, come out of your rational thinking that is believing only technology. Indentifying a Apple as Apple can never charge. But identifying Apple as a edible fruit, helped us to accept Apples to eat. Similarly, rejecting God's existence need not to change. But making attempts towards realization of GOD by Atheists can help them understand the truth.

6) Change in thoughts and perceptions arising out of observations indeed drives Sceince. But that dosen't mean that GOD can be established as Utopia. Don't forget that only humans are blessed to have rational thoughts to identify science/technology and the reality of the rule of the nature/GOD.

 

[ShivKC]

Actually visibility is not necessary for proving a hypothesis (Bohrs's or for that matter Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar’s) In fact air is not visible but it does exist one can sense it by other means, in the context of Chandrasekhar’s you can never see a black hole as even light does not escape from it

arun, i found it quite difficult to comprehend and make a coherent understanding of your posts, since it was posted with too much of quotes and questions. let me repost the same, and will try to address it as a passage to you.

the whole of our discussion comes to one single point. what is the common methodology one should adopt to show his proof to another.. be it maths/science/philosophy. here i avoid the world religion, and keep it under the shadows of philosophy.

lets say,

how would neil bohr explain and make understand his discovery on physics, to a common illiterate sage/ Aristotle the philosopher/ charles darwin (biologist), where all these three individuals are masters in their own subject, but poles apart from each other?

before posting your response, kindly collaborate it with your earlier post, and the questions you posed to me. this will help us to exchange in a meaningful thoughts exchange.

 

[ShivKC]

once death is conquered, will there be a need for God?

sh.kunjuppu,

As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods?

there is a good possibility that science may conquer death in future. a step further, it may even stop the killings/accidents/natural disaster, and make a dead man walk. its all about a human trait called 'quest', searching for 'the ultimate' in every thing.

like how science searches for anti-matter, maths for infinity, philosophy for ultimate axioms, religion too is on the pursuit of searching for an 'ultimate super power' which we call it as god. just like science, this is just another path in humans trait called 'quest'.

so what will happen if death is conquered and Tutankhamun rules nile delta once again?

2 bn will be singing R.E.M, "there is a truck stop instead of st.peters!!" and those sect of human race will be on the look out of new path to reach god. a mass conversions in the offing and christianity/easter will be added to the pages of history, under the title extinct religions, in line with their counter part roman/greek/egyptian gods...

however, scripturally,islam/Hinduism/judaism will find it easy to reconcile with this new invention, and continue their pursuit in exploring the super power called GOD.

and, 'there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio!!'

 

[tks]

Message from GOD!!!

This is GOD!
If you are theist - close this thread - I am angry at Brahin for starting this and tired of your Me-awful posts!

If you are atheist - I am going to disappear since I cant take your posts anymore!

Grow up, Me-Damn people

 

[renuka]

This is GOD!
If you are theist - close this thread - I am angry at Brahin for starting this and tired of your Me-awful posts!

If you are atheist - I am going to disappear since I cant take your posts anymore!

Grow up, Me-Damn people

Ok that was GOD in Saguna mode.

OK this is GOD in Nirguna Mode :Hey Saguna why are you fighting with the Manavas?
Ekam Advaita Brahman both Atheist and Theist.

BTW just take it easy..You cease to exist Finally and will merge in Me!!

Saguna: What ??? I will no exists finally?

Nirguna: You didnt know that?Hey cool man..when even I am not supposed to exists for some here why are you getting worked up??

 

[arunshanker]

3) Western people are going crazy over technological advancements. They have, with technological advancements, established and devastated. The attack on Hiroshima & Nagasaki is the paradigm of technical devastation by Westerners. Humans gonna survive better by technology and gonna destroy themselves by technology. Gonna say "We are God" and gonna collapse to ashes under the rule of the nature.

Are you sure it is that the westerners only have gone on with technological advancements. What about Japan- they are in the East. Can you think of any thing (technological advancements) that has helped Humans

 

[renuka]

Ravi you wrote:

3) Western people are going crazy over technological advancements. They have, with technological advancements, established and devastated. The attack on Hiroshima & Nagasaki is the paradigm of technical devastation by Westerners. Humans gonna survive better by technology and gonna destroy themselves by technology. Gonna say "We are God" and gonna collapse to ashes under the rule of the nature.

I feel Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a tit for tat for Pearl Harbour.

During Japanese occupation in Malaysia they tortured enough people and used to use babies as target practise for their sharp instruments and beheaded so many people for nothing at all.
Some of their torture still haunts many here in Malaysia.

 

[arunshanker]

You yourself agree that AIR can not be a visible proof but need to be accepted as existing force. The same is the power of the Supreme God.

Actually I mean that there need not be a visible proof for everything and whats more it is not “accepted as existing force” it is matter and its composition is known. But it is not the case with God

To experience GOD, come out of your rational thinking that is believing only technology.

Do you mean we have to come out of rational thinking to experience God. Rationality is not equal to “believing only technology”

Don't forget that only humans are blessed to have rational thoughts to identify science/technology and the reality of the rule of the nature/GOD

How sure you are about this. Are you sure that animals don’t have any thoughts rational or not. Do we know what animals think.
Could you explain “reality of the rule of the nature” in acceptable scientific terms

 

[arunshanker]

arun, i found it quite difficult to comprehend and make a coherent understanding of your posts, since it was posted with too much of quotes and questions. let me repost the same, and will try to address it as a passage to you.

the whole of our discussion comes to one single point. what is the common methodology one should adopt to show his proof to another.. be it maths/science/philosophy. here i avoid the world religion, and keep it under the shadows of philosophy.

lets say,

how would neil bohr explain and make understand his discovery on physics, to a common illiterate sage/ Aristotle the philosopher/ charles darwin (biologist), where all these three individuals are masters in their own subject, but poles apart from each other?

before posting your response, kindly collaborate it with your earlier post, and the questions you posed to me. this will help us to exchange in a meaningful thoughts exchange.

I have tried my best in the earlier post

 

[arunshanker]

IMO, this concept would be great, if science could achieve keeping humans young ever with all natural vigor and vitality. Otherwise, I don't think any one would opt to be alive during the ripe old age.

If at all people still prefer to be alive as old folks, with all the technological apparatus, I believe, all such immortal humans would be nothing more than Robots.

You are spot on here

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

This is GOD!
If you are theist - close this thread - I am angry at Brahin for starting this and tired of your Me-awful posts!

If you are atheist - I am going to disappear since I cant take your posts anymore!

Grow up, Me-Damn people

Mr.tks,

Please have patience. You have waited upto 1263 posts. May be someone will
make God barge in and say Hello because HE himself is tired by now.

 

[arunshanker]

Originally Posted by ShivKC http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/6798-god-exists-post90943.html#post90943
"atheists find, more honoured in the breach than in the observance , and are not interested in finding a common ground.
My post –“Very obviously they do not like “observance” which is the act or practice of observing or complying with a law, custom, command, or rule. This actually makes it dogmatic and unquestionable. How can an atheist find common ground in dogmatic rigidity of religion which is the rule”
C RAVI’s Post - 1) Theists in this forum (forget about other dogmatic religious leaders outside of the portal, in a phsyical society) are ready to define one single common ground by Atheists to clearly debate on the question of existence of GOD. You may please come up with one such common grounds.
Now can we say that Theists are more honored in observance than breach as against the original statement of SHiv KC "that atheists find, more honoured in the breach than in the observance"
Like I said observance is simply following a rule without questioning- how can there be a common ground when there is basic conflict

 

[arunshanker]

This is GOD!
If you are theist - close this thread - I am angry at Brahin for starting this and tired of your Me-awful posts!

If you are atheist - I am going to disappear since I cant take your posts anymore!

Grow up, Me-Damn people

This is an order from the Moderator
what about the people who are neither
As I see the thread cannot continue because the theist has been asked to close this thread and if closed the atheist cannot post

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Somtime back,I was listening to a religious discourse by Shri.Haridasa about
orissa legend Jayadeva.,I remember to have heard that God himself wrote two verses (when Jayadeva was not in the house)which Jayadeva wanted to write but hesitated to write and took 'Pazhaya Amuthu"from the hands of Smt.Jayadeva.
Can any one explain who could have written the two verses apart from 'GOD'.
PS:- I am a believer in the existense of"God".I took his special permission for this post.

 

[arunshanker]

I dont know if I am displeasing someone here with my posts. Actaully I am just questioning and trying to put my views
I hope I am not offending anyone here
I welcome FB friend requests from people here in the forum my FB page is here https://www.facebook.com/arun.k.shanker

 

[C RAVI]

Are you sure it is that the westerners only have gone on with technological advancements. What about Japan- they are in the East. Can you think of any thing (technological advancements) that has helped Humans

Mr.Arun

I said Westerners show caused the devastating impacts of Technology....in continuation to my statement that, Humans gonna survive better by technology and gonna destroy themselves by technology. Gonna say "We are God" and gonna collapse to ashes under the rule of the nature.

Ravi you wrote:


I feel Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a tit for tat for Pearl Harbour.

During Japanese occupation in Malaysia they tortured enough people and used to use babies as target practise for their sharp instruments and beheaded so many people for nothing at all.
Some of their torture still haunts many here in Malaysia.

Renuka,

I don't understand what's so ambiguous in my post!!!!!!

My post was not about justifying war crimes!! My post was not about who deserve what as tit for tat..

Please refer my replies to Arun in this very same post, above..

I was highlighting clearly the benefic and negative impacts of Technology that's emerging out of human's rational brains, that want to believe only technology and not GOD...

 

[arunshanker]

I said Westerners show caused the devastating impacts of Technology.

Actually is the west only to be blamed -During World War Two, Japan used chemical weapons during the Second Sino-Japanese War

I was highlighting clearly the benefic and negative impacts of Technology that's emerging out of human's rational brains, that want to believe only technology and not GOD...

Technology, science and rationality are not the same
In the invention of wheel was a great technological innovation it was done before most religions evolved

 

[C RAVI]

1) Actually is the west only to be blamed -During World War Two, Japan used chemical weapons during the Second Sino-Japanese War


2) Technology, science and rationality are not the same
In the invention of wheel was a great technological innovation it was done before most religions evolved

1) Mine was just a paradigm of technological devastation. It has nothing to do with exclusive blames on westerners. However, FYI, the nuclear weapon was first developed and administered by US. and that's the last in wars, to date.

-Courtesy Wikipedia..


The secret U.S. project to create the first atomic weapon was known as the Manhattan Project. Working in collaboration with the United Kingdom and Canada, with their respective projects Tube Alloys and Chalk River Laboratories,[SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP] the project designed and built the first atomic bombs. The scientific research was directed by American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, and the overall project was under the authority of General Leslie Groves, of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Hiroshima bomb, a gun-type bomb called "Little Boy", was made with uranium-235, a rare isotope of uranium extracted in giant factories in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The atomic bomb was first tested at Trinity Site, on July 16, 1945, near Alamogordo, New Mexico. The test weapon, "the gadget", and the Nagasaki bomb, "Fat Man", were both implosion-type devices made primarily of plutonium-239, a synthetic element created in nuclear reactors at Hanford, Washington.[SUP][14][/SUP] Preliminary research began in 1939, originally because of fear that Nazi Germany would develop atomic weapons first. In May 1945, the defeat of Germany caused the focus to turn to possible use against the Japanese.

2) Existence of Technology and Sceince is the very reason of Rational Brains. This same rational brain has paved the way towards Theism. Just becasue, today we could see possibilities of many out dated impossibilities with the help of science and technology, does not withstand the Atheists claims today that, the concept of GOD is paradoxical.

Many great Maharishis have achieved realization of GOD with the help of their rational thinking.

Atheism exists from time immemorial along side Theism and would continue as such. This will be the only balanced modues operandi of the Nature for better human survival.

Realization of GOD and experiencing the spiritual energies are purely for an individual for his/her personal life, that would also help his/her better social life.

 

[arunshanker]

1) Mine was just a paradigm of technological devastation. It has nothing to do with exclusive blames on westerners.

Actually that is what I wanted to know if you had anything against the westerners. Now I am clear as you have said "It has nothing to do with exclusive blames on westerners"

2) Existence of Technology and Science is the very reason of Rational Brains. This same rational brain has paved the way towards Theism. Just because, today we could see possibilities of many out dated impossibilities with the help of science and technology, does not withstand the Atheists claims today that, the concept of GOD is paradoxical.

Can it not be said other way round - Existence of rational thinking gave rise to technology

Just because, today we could see possibilities of many out dated impossibilities with the help of science and technology, does not withstand the Atheists claims today that, the concept of GOD is paradoxical

Is the above statement decisive in every way. I mean "does not withstand the Atheists claims today that" is conclusive, implying that the discussion is closed

 

[C RAVI]

Actually that is what I wanted to know if you had anything against the westerners. Now I am clear as you have said "It has nothing to do with exclusive blames on westerners"




Can it not be said other way round - Existence of rational thinking gave rise to technology


Is the above statement decisive in every way. I mean "does not withstand the Atheists claims today that" is conclusive, implying that the discussion is closed

No Mr.Arun not at all...My statement is not decisive, implying the closer of discussions.

I have stated "Just because, today we could see possibilities of many out dated impossibilities with the help of science and technology, does not withstand the Atheists claims today that, the concept of GOD is paradoxical", only as affirmation from Theists in general. This has nothing to do with the continuity of discussions, among we members here..



Rational Brains paved way for Science and Tehnoclogy...Science and Technology having been achieved, paying way for further enhancing the strength of Rational Brains to dwell more into Science and Technology...

This game is no wrong in any way. This would for sure offer many sophestications to fellow humans if not to the scientist himself/herself during his/her life time, doing all research work.

But realization of GOD and spiritual involvement for one's personal life would for sure offer immese clarity, satisfcation and pleasures, till one's death. This spiritual experience can never ever be valued low or NIL, having science and technology in hand.

 

[ShivKC]

I have tried my best in the earlier post

arun, may be one of us is having a comprehending problem !

i read them all, refined it and had put back that question, so that we both will have a common root to take on the discussion. my attempt on that post is, what are the modes by which you are able to submit the proof when questioned (keep aside religion here), so that, based on your view, i can present the proof in similar tone.

that's why i took 3 individuals as eg, who are experts in their own subject, but knew nothing about the basics of other persons knowledge. but still they convinced the other. for eg, every child in the 8th std strongly agrees with bohrs model, though none of them has seen it, without any strong proof. how that happened?

with this approach , could you pls attempt to answer this below situation again.

how would neil bohr explain and make understand his discovery on physics, to a common illiterate sage/ Aristotle the philosopher/ charles darwin (biologist), where all these three individuals are masters in their own subject, but poles apart from each other?

 

[arunshanker]

arun, may be one of us is having a comprehending problem !

for eg, every child in the 8th std strongly agrees with bohrs model, though none of them has seen it, without any strong proof. how that happened?

Firstly it is theoritcal physics these hypothesis and others are prooved mathematically and physically discerned or detected again as I said visibility is not the only way to prove things in science. The proof of these hypothesis is contested with peers, reviewed and refereed and most importantly tested for repeatability and only then it is accepted in science.
Again you mention "none of them has seen it" actually you cant see everything like I said you cant see air or the oxygen and nitrogen in air but they are detected by known physical laws. Please note it is not the same as "you cant see God" but still God is exists - only thing here is God cannot be detected or discerned by the known physical law

how would neil bohr explain and make understand his discovery on physics, to a common illiterate sage/ Aristotle the philosopher/ charles darwin (biologist), where all these three individuals are masters in their own subject, but poles apart from each other?

It is not that hard if all of them are open to learning and questioning (like I said get them on a tour to CERN) put them on a short course of theoretical physics -also please refer to the sites I had linked on the CERN site which is developing a microscope to view atoms. Involve them in active discussion and questioning sessions (I mean encourage them to question). In fact encourage them even to see if they can improve upon the concept. Here in fact the person trying to prove the point will also learn.