Luke 11:33 to 36;
No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light. The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness. Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness. If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light.

This is refering to quantum physics and the reverse engineering from duality and the Uncertainty Principle, back to singularity, Divine Light. Currently, scientists are puzzled why after the Big Bang, matter and anti matter didn’t cancel each other out? The reason is free will, and the slight deviation each one of us made to cause the delusion of seperation, which when time is added in, causes duality because of objectification. By reversing the energy flow from outwards and polarization to inwards back to nuetrality at the single eye, the pituitary gland in the brain where duality calculations first occur, then we loose the gravity and relativity that causes the delusion of separation, and we then identify not with the body or mind; but with the infinite only begotten child of God. The Divine light within each of us, which makes up the entire Cosmos. Understanding the reality of who we really are, we loose all fear, and are free from the bondage of time and space. Fear is our jailer. Faith and scientific affirmation of our Faith is our Liberator.

Matthew 6:21 to 27;
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

What can we add? The last sentence. We can only witness, appreciate, and through service to others, give thanks back for the opportunity. For only the human body is created in the whole and exact image of God, and thus only in this body can we know and understand God.

Genesis 9:6;

…. for in the image of God made he man.

Genesis 1:27;

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created them.

Science is the proof of God. Duality is an illusion, and physicsmat Cern is 95% done proving Einstein was correct, and Bohr/darwin were wrong, ” God does not play dice withnthe Universe!”

Understand the physics behind Mother Teresa’s scientific definitin of Hell and you will bhold the Singular Truth of Reality. She stated, ” Hell isn the delusion that some how you and God are seperate!”

Learn howto undo thatnillusion and

Wow. That’s quite a paper you just wrote. Thank you for correcting my spelling mistakes and teaching me about academinc hierarchies. I noticed you are using the word, “ascribe”, and doing it correctly. Very nice. You must be very proud.

While we’re on the topic of spelling, semantics, use of words, grammar, etc, I’ll take this opportunity to offer some valuable insight to understanding the questions you might have about Christianity by letting you in on a secret (well, it’s not really a secret) to effectively reading scriptures. You are obviously very focused on detail and the “letter” of the written word seems to be very important to you. This is just one reason why you appear unable to comprehend the meaning of scriptures and your eyes and ears remain closed. To understand scriptures, you must stop focusing on the “letter” of the written word and seek the “spirit” of what is written.

I have already posted one angelic photo on this site but here it is again. I’m certain you will find a very intellectual and impressive way to declare that it’s a fake or digital hallucination of some sort: http://metasophic.com/IMG_0728.jpg

Re: “If what these folks are experiencing is non-hallucinatory and therefore real, why would it be considered a problem at all…”

Because the experiences can be unsettling or frightening if the subject does not understand what is happening. If the apparition is demonic then giving the person drugs only masks a problem that is best dealt with via intercession. If the apparition is angelic then the only problem would be if the subject is unable to discern what they see and are afraid. But then, you don’t believe in the spiritual. So, if you were a real doctor you would most likely throw them a pill bottle, instead of helping them to understand what is actually happening. You say that you spend time listening and trying to understand what your subjects are telling you. But I gather that you’re not actually open to what they say other than to find ways to impose your atheism on them.

Re: “I have been disappointed. … you have not at all addressed my question of what makes you so sure that your belief in the real existence of a deity is not simply something into which you have been tricked by The Great Deceiver”

First, are you admitting the existence of the “Great Deceiver”? Truly, if a Great Deceiver exists, then one might infer that a Great Source of Truth also exists – that would be God.

Second, it was not apparent that you had asked specifically that question you just stated. I must have missed it. To answer your question, try reading the rest of this site. Beyond that, I believe because I have seen. So, I have no excuse to not believe. I guess I’m just more fortunate than others in that regard but I do not know why I should be.

Re: “I suspect you haven’t addressed it because you can’t do so without abandoning logic”

Come on, now! you are an atheist. I am not. Therefore, whatever you declare to be logical will not necessarily hold as logic with me and neither will what I hold as logical necessarily be logical to you. For instance, what you might refer to as “supernatural” is to me, “natural”.

Re: “Assessing the veridicality of such healing would require…”

Well, how about guy who was deaf for twenty years before I touch him and he is suddenly able to hear? Can’t get much more definitive than that. He was deaf but now he hears. Very conclusive. No need for MRI machines, etc.

God is awesome!

“Conway,

There is nothing wrong with my use of “ascribe”. There is a problem with your use of “subscribe”. But why should we care? We both
know what is meant and to continue that thread of discussion adds nothing and would be moronic.”

Well, as you used the word in your response to my first post, you were correct. But in the post of yours that prompted my comment, you were wrong, and insisting that you were not gets us into one of those schoolyard exchanges of the “Is so!….Is Not!” variety. Not very productive. When I questioned your use of the word “ascribe,” though, I specified wherein you were in error. Now you question my use of the word “subscribe,” but with no reason given. I can’t help but think that that is typical of those who have a religious mindset, to make a bald assertion without any supporting reasoning. But no matter.

“Re: ‘but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist’

Ah. That explains a great deal. I once had a “psychiatrist” quack diagnose me with a dilusional”

The word is “delusional,” Jim.

“disorder after talking to me for less than 15 minutes. Of course, he didn’t wait for me to produce the photographs and videos of angels nor the testimonies of people who had been miraculously healed, etc. But then neither did I because I walked out.”

You have photographs and videos of angels? Please, release them to public scrutiny, so that those of us who doubt that such entities exist can be amazed and can revise our beliefs, once we’ve ruled out photo- or video-processing trickery.

“There are a lot of people who are on medication because they see things and/or hear things that are real. Just because *you* don’t believe doesn’t make them not real. Atheist shrinks tell people they are hallucinating, when they are not, and give them drugs, which rarely solves the problem but covers it up for a while.”

If what these folks are experiencing is non-hallucinatory and therefore real, why would it be considered a problem at all, something capable of being covered up for a while, but then, I take it, likely to reassert itself?

“They just need stronger meds later on. While there are likely to be true mental disorders of this type, not all are so. To give out meds like that is pure atheist quackery and hurts the patient more than you know.

However, that you’re not an actal doctor but a ‘psychologist’ is duly noted.”

Just so you’ll know, in the academic hierarchy, if not in the eyes of the general public, those who hold Ph.D.’s are ranked higher than those who hold M.D.’s. More to the point, however, is that Ph.D. level psychologists, duly licensed in the state in which they practice, are considered to be “real doctors.” We’re just not medical doctors, which may be just as well, because much of what we deal with are not, strictly speaking, medical disorders. As for psychiatrists, who are M.D.’s, what they learn about the mind and about human behavior they acquire in a 2-year residency in psychiatry. Most Ph.D. psychologists have spent anywhere from 5-7 years in formal study of the mind and human behavior. This is why psychologists tend to spend a good deal of time actually listening to and trying to understand those who come to them for consultation, while psychiatrists listen just long enough to decide what chemical they’re going to prescribe.

“I have, indeed, questioned my own sanity but have been evaluated by a real ‘doctor’ and found to be quite sane. You see not all psychiatrists and physicians are atheist.

Some believe in the Truth. Plus, it’s quite difficult to hallucinate someone else’s healing and actally have them verifiably healed by a
third party. That would be quite a feat, indeed.”

Assessing the veridicality of such healing would require, to my way of thinking, some steps that may or may not have been present in what you observed. First of all, was the original diagnosis verified by more than one physician and by whatever laboratory tests, X-rays, MRIs, CATs, might have been relevant? As you are aware, medical diagnosis is often inexact, and many people have been given medical diagnoses that were so far off the mark that the treatment for the illness they didn’t actually have has killed them. Second, was the ailment not one of those, like a broken bone, or a simple rhinovirus, that is known to heal or remit with the passage
of time? Third, if the answers to the first two conditions were “Yes,” was there more than one third party who did the verifying, also backed up by whatever lab tests, X-rays, etc., might have been relevant? Of course, I do not expect you to provide me with this data, since you recognize that, on matters pertaining to theology and the supernatural, you and I are 180° apart, and my argument that people tend to see what they are looking for is a double-edged sword, since people also tend not to see what they are not looking for. But, all things considered, I do subscribe to the belief that events that get called “supernatural” or “miraculous” turn out, upon closer inspection, to be thoroughly natural, and I therefore am likely to ascribe “supernatural” happenings and “miracles” to a deficiency in the comprehension of that fact, and to a faulty analysis of such events.

“Re: ‘here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity’

Good luck with that one. If you were someone like Moses or Elijah or Jesus Christ, himself, you might have a chance at it. However,
what makes you think you’re that worthy to deserve such a sign or treatment from the God you have repeatedly insulted and blasphemed?”

Well, presumably, Jim, were such a sign or treatment to occur, it wouldn’t be for my benefit alone, and I wouldn’t be the only one
experiencing it, which would be one of the factors that would disabuse me of the notion that I might be hallucinating. I’d probably
still have to be persuaded that special effects wizardry wasn’t involved, though.

“Jesus said we should not throw pearls before swine nor give our food to dogs. If you want to have a sincere discussion and be open
to the truth, I am very willing. However, if your goal is to just argue, insult, and try to convice of others your atheist beliefs then
this conversation is over.”

My goal in this discussion, as in any discussions I have had with True Believers, is to see whether any vestige of critical thinking ability
remains within those who posit the real existence of a deity. So far I have been disappointed. I notice in passing that you have not at all addressed my question of what makes you so sure that your belief in the real existence of a deity is not simply something into which you have been tricked by The Great Deceiver, whether you term that imaginary entity Satan or The Anti-Christ, and at this juncture I suspect you haven’t addressed it because you can’t do so without abandoning logic. So, to your statement, “…this conversation is over,” I respond, “Roger that.”

Don’t let yourselves be fooled by the antichrist, which include Buddhism and Hinduism. Even the antichrist can make you feel “love”. Even satanists display good works, compassoin, and love. This is all deception designed to lead souls away from Christ.

A duality does appear to exist in the spiritual sense. This is often a source of discussion when people ask, “Why did God allow …?”; Or some will say that, since God creted everything, then he must have created evil.

I don’t believe god created evil but is the source of all that is good. While a duality of good and evil is perceived they are not inter-dependent. So, I will throw this out for discussion:

When you turn on a light at night, does that action create the darkness that is perceived where the light isn’t shining? When there was no light, what created the darkness that existed before? Or, did darkness exist before the light was turned on? What is darkness? Can it be measured? Or is it only light that can be measured? Isn’t total darkness actually a total absence of light? The inside of a box can be completely filled with intense light, thus eliminating all darkness and the perceived duality. If they define each other, where is the darkness that would have to be present in order to define the light?

Coherency and chaos do not define each other. Coherency cannot be defined by a relative measure of an absence of chaos. What would be measured? Therefore, I propose that this statement, “Coherency and Chaos are uncertainty pairs due to Duality. They exist only to define each other.” is false.

If that statement was true, then evil would exist in order to define good – which is absolutely false. When time ends, so will evil. Good will continue to exist after evil is finished. Good will continue to define itself, as it does now.

There is nothing wrong with my use of “ascribe”. There is a problem with your use of “subscribe”. But why should we care? We both know what is meant and to continue that thread of discussion adds nothing and would be moronic.

Re: “but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist ”

Ah. That explains a great deal. I once had a “psychiatrist” quack diagnose me with a dilusional disorder after talking to me for less than 15 minutes. Of course, he didn’t wait for me to produce the photographs and videos of angels nor the testimonies of people who had been miraculously healed, etc. But then neither did I because I walked out.

There are a lot of people who are on medication because they see things and/or hear things that are real. Just because *you* don’t believe doesn’t make them not real. Atheist shrinks tell people they are hallucinating, when they are not, and give them drugs, which rarely solves the problem but covers it up for a while. They just need stronger meds later on. While there are likely to be true mental disorders of this type, not all are so. To give out meds like that is pure atheist quackery and hurts the patient more than you know.

However, that you’re not an actal doctor but a “psychologist” is duly noted.

I have, indeed, questioned my own sanity but have been evaluated by a real “doctor” and found to be quite sane. You see not all psychiatrists and physicians are atheist. Some believe in the Truth. Plus, it’s quite difficult to hallucinate someone else’s healing and actally have them verifiably healed by a third party. That would be quite a feat, indeed.

Re: “here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity”

Good luck with that one. If you were someone like Moses or Elijah or Jesus Christ, himself, you might have a chance at it. However, what makes you think you’re that worthy to deserve such a sign or treatment from the God you have repeatedly insulted and blasphemed?

Jesus said we should not throw pearls before swine nor give our food to dogs. If you want to have a sincere discussion and be open to the truth, I am very willing. However, if your goal is to just argue, insult, and try to convice of others your atheist beliefs then this conversation is over.

I didn’t specify any frightening thing other than death, which I doubt that many would hesitate to call “a fairy tale.” I also doubt that the many natural disasters (often called “acts of God”) that have created human misery for as long as mankind has been in existence, are likely to be seen as fairy tales either, nor any of the many unpleasant diseases/physical conditions to which we may be subject, such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, retinoblastoma, glioblastoma multiforme, scleroderma, Huntington’s chorea, Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker syndrome, fatal familial insomnia, anencephaly — the list can be almost endlessly lengthened.

As for your argument that “there is an an enemy at work that would very much like it if no one believed in anything,” it is self-contradictory insofar as you blame that enemy for fostering beliefs in the defunct deities I mentioned. If the enemy doesn’t want anyone to believe in anything, then why would this enemy foster any beliefs at all? For that matter, how can you be sure that your belief in the deity you call the “one true God” is not another one of “the enemy’s” tricks?

I suppose, of course, that when you speak of this “enemy,” you are referring to Satan. Well, in my book, Jim, Satan is another creation of the human imagination, that has as its function explaining why so many bad things happen in the world. If the deity in whose real existence you seem to believe is indeed all-powerful, how is it that this deity even allows Satan to do any mischief? Or even allows Satan to exist? These questions become more difficult to answer when you consider that another of the attributes of your deity is supposed to be all-goodness. So you’ve got an all-powerful, all-good, all-knowing deity who allows a supremely evil being, Satan, to do mischief to mankind, to whom your deity is supposed to stand in the same relationship as that of a loving father to his children? Jim, the story just doesn’t hang together.

Now, I don’t know exactly what your personal experiences have been — you speak of “the presence of God’s Holy Spirit, angels” and “absolute miracles” — and I don’t question that you have indeed had such experiences –, but in my 40 some years as a clinical psychologist I have talked to many people, some hospitalized, some not, who have had personal experiences that in no way reflected consensual reality, and I guess my first hypothesis would be that you are another such. Understand that this says nothing about your sincerity, only about your state of mind. Nor does it say anything about your intelligence; there are many quite intelligent people who are thoroughly deluded. Case in point, Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, a brilliant mathematician. And there are many quite intelligent people who hallucinate all sorts of interesting things, on any one of a number of sensory modalities — visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile.

In closing, here is the only circumstance I can think of that might make me rethink my position on the real existence of a deity: If the skies were to open and a golden staircase were to unfurl and Jesus the Christ were to descend that staircase accompanied by choirs of Angels, Archangels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Wheels, Thrones, Powers, Dominions, Authorities, and Principalities, all the imaginary denizens of an equally imaginary “Heaven,” then, once I had convinced myself that the spectacle was not a production of Dreamworks’ or Pixar’s CGI wizardry, I would be inclined to say, “Gee, I guess I was wrong.” But until then, the whole Christian mythology, and the whole Islamic mythology, and the whole Judaic mythology, and the mythologies of all the other religions that have clouded and that continue to cloud the minds of humankind, are just that, mythologies. And as I look around at the events in the world, what I observe leads me to conclude that either the deity of whom you speak does not exist in any real sense, or, if that deity does exist in any real sense, then he/she/it is of such a depraved moral character as to make holding him/her/it in any esteem whatsover well nigh unthinkable.

The definition of “ascribe” is “To attribute to a specified cause, source, or origin”. So, I definitely used the correct word and did so deliberately. An atheist will generally “ascribe” that which others believe to be a “miracle” purely to science or some non-supernatural cause.

Thank you for pointing out my typographical error, regarding the word, “difficulty”. That’s very kind of you.

There is an answer to your #3 question, which you will probably reject – but just in case you have an open mind:

You see, there is an enemy at work that would very much like it if no-one believed in anything. So, it caused pagan religions to pop up over the ages, even some that have actual supernatural attributes. We see it now in public schools, where kids are taught about pagan religions and even encouraged to celebrate the pagan holiday of halloween. At the same time, they are not allowed to celebrate Christmas or even mention Jesus Christ in school – yet my grade school son was forced to write an essay on Bhudda as a “history” assignment. Go figure. This is so that the children, who will someday be adults, will become so confused about religion that they end up believing in nothing. Where does this effort to confuse come from? Well, it comes from the antichrist, which is everything that is opposed to “Christ”. From a government perspective, it’s much easier to control people who don’t believe in anything, as well.

Most of the “frightening phenomena” you mention are just fairy tales and, therefore, not frightening. However, having actually experienced the presence of God’s Holy Spirit, angels, etc, and witnessed absolute miracles that could in no way be replicated with any known medical or scientific technology, I have to say that there is absolutely no question that there exists a truly omniscient and omnipotent God. I could go on but I don’t think you would be interested. But if you are sincerely interested in hearing more then I would be happy to continue.

The bottom line is that there really is one true God – and only one. If you ask and are sincere about knowing the truth, you will be shown. Perhaps, not when or how you want to be shown but God will not refuse you if you sincerely want to know the truth. Give it a try and have patience. I believe you will be shown.

Reply: Nope. On the basis of Galileo’s observations, we should have disavowed, and we did disavow, only the notion that a 10 lb. weight falls faster than a 1 lb. weight. This process of revising one’s opinions in the face of contrary evidence is how science progresses.

And by the way, wherever did you get the idea that, according to science, pelicans should not fly? Any scientist worth his/her salt who concluded, on the basis of his/her calculations of the aerodynamics of pelican flight, that the bird should not be able to fly, would, upon actually observing the creature in flight, immediately suspect that something was wrong with his/her calculations, and would simply say, “I have made a mistake somewhere.”