• Is Belief in God Rational? A Fresh Look at the Evidence

    From David@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 1 13:03:32 2025
    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn’t blind faith—but a logical conclusion drawn from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//

    --
    Kind regards,
    David

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From IDentity@21:1/5 to David on Mon Jun 2 13:13:25 2025
    On Sun, 1 Jun 2025 13:03:32 +0100, David <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn�t blind faith�but a logical conclusion drawn
    from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//

    "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into
    an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
    - Werner Heisenberg, physicist

    From a conversation with the Indian guru Mirra Alfassa, (AKA "The
    Mother"), many decades ago:

    Q: Mother, can physical science by its progress open to occultism?

    A: It does not call it "occultism", that's all. It is only a question
    of words.... They are making sensational discoveries which people with
    occult knowledge already knew thousands of years ago! They have made a
    long circuit and come to the same thing.

    With the most recent discoveries in medicine, in the applied sciences,
    for instance, they are contacting in this way, with a wonder-struck
    interest, things which were known to certain sages a very, very long
    time ago. And then they present all this before you as new marvels �
    but indeed they are rather old, their marvels!

    They will end up by practising occultism without knowing that they are
    doing so! For, in fact, as soon as one draws close, however slightly,
    to the truth of things and when one is sincere in one's search, not
    satisfied by mere appearances, when one really wants to find something
    and goes deep, penetrates behind appearances, then one begins to
    advance towards the truth of things; and as one comes closer to it,
    well, one finds again the same knowledge that others who began by
    going within have brought back from their inner discoveries.

    Only the method and the path are different but the thing discovered
    will be the same, because there are not two things to be found, there
    is only one. It will necessarily be the same. It all depends on the
    path one follows; some go fast, others slowly, some go straight,
    others, as I said, go a long way round � and what labour! How they
    have laboured!... Besides, it is very respectable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jun 2 08:50:50 2025
    On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 13:13:25 +0200, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by IDentity <[email protected]>:

    On Sun, 1 Jun 2025 13:03:32 +0100, David <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn�t blind faith�but a logical conclusion drawn >>from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//

    "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into
    an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
    - Werner Heisenberg, physicist

    From a conversation with the Indian guru Mirra Alfassa, (AKA "The
    Mother"), many decades ago:

    Q: Mother, can physical science by its progress open to occultism?

    A: It does not call it "occultism", that's all. It is only a question
    of words.... They are making sensational discoveries which people with
    occult knowledge already knew thousands of years ago!

    Specific examples, please, with cites to objective
    references. No vague generalities.

    They have made a
    long circuit and come to the same thing.

    With the most recent discoveries in medicine, in the applied sciences,
    for instance, they are contacting in this way, with a wonder-struck
    interest, things which were known to certain sages a very, very long
    time ago.

    Specific examples, please, with cites to objective
    references. No vague generalities.

    And then they present all this before you as new marvels �
    but indeed they are rather old, their marvels!

    They will end up by practising occultism without knowing that they are
    doing so! For, in fact, as soon as one draws close, however slightly,
    to the truth of things and when one is sincere in one's search, not
    satisfied by mere appearances, when one really wants to find something
    and goes deep, penetrates behind appearances, then one begins to
    advance towards the truth of things; and as one comes closer to it,
    well, one finds again the same knowledge that others who began by
    going within have brought back from their inner discoveries.

    Only the method and the path are different but the thing discovered
    will be the same, because there are not two things to be found, there
    is only one. It will necessarily be the same. It all depends on the
    path one follows; some go fast, others slowly, some go straight,
    others, as I said, go a long way round � and what labour! How they
    have laboured!... Besides, it is very respectable.
    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David@21:1/5 to jillery on Tue Jun 3 12:25:14 2025
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 03/06/2025 10:51, jillery wrote:
    On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 13:13:25 +0200, IDentity <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 1 Jun 2025 13:03:32 +0100, David <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn’t blind faith—but a logical conclusion drawn
    from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//

    "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into
    an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
    - Werner Heisenberg, physicist

    From a conversation with the Indian guru Mirra Alfassa, (AKA "The
    Mother"), many decades ago:

    Q: Mother, can physical science by its progress open to occultism?

    A: It does not call it "occultism", that's all. It is only a question
    of words.... They are making sensational discoveries which people with
    occult knowledge already knew thousands of years ago! They have made a
    long circuit and come to the same thing.

    With the most recent discoveries in medicine, in the applied sciences,
    for instance, they are contacting in this way, with a wonder-struck
    interest, things which were known to certain sages a very, very long
    time ago. And then they present all this before you as new marvels —
    but indeed they are rather old, their marvels!

    They will end up by practising occultism without knowing that they are
    doing so! For, in fact, as soon as one draws close, however slightly,
    to the truth of things and when one is sincere in one's search, not
    satisfied by mere appearances, when one really wants to find something
    and goes deep, penetrates behind appearances, then one begins to
    advance towards the truth of things; and as one comes closer to it,
    well, one finds again the same knowledge that others who began by
    going within have brought back from their inner discoveries.

    Only the method and the path are different but the thing discovered
    will be the same, because there are not two things to be found, there
    is only one. It will necessarily be the same. It all depends on the
    path one follows; some go fast, others slowly, some go straight,
    others, as I said, go a long way round — and what labour! How they
    have laboured!... Besides, it is very respectable.


    Arthur Clarke's Third Law states "Any sufficiently advanced technology
    is indistinguishable from magic." This might seem to follow the spirit
    of what you post above. An important distinction is, while some
    people might regard technology as magic, there is no reasonable way
    magic can be regarded as technology.

    Thank you. I have enjoyed reading the answers here! 🙂

    (Shared with my home group, ACW)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carl Kaufmann@21:1/5 to jillery on Tue Jun 3 11:17:31 2025
    jillery wrote:
    On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 13:13:25 +0200, IDentity <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 1 Jun 2025 13:03:32 +0100, David <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn’t blind faith—but a logical conclusion drawn
    from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//

    "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into
    an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
    - Werner Heisenberg, physicist

    From a conversation with the Indian guru Mirra Alfassa, (AKA "The
    Mother"), many decades ago:

    Q: Mother, can physical science by its progress open to occultism?

    A: It does not call it "occultism", that's all. It is only a question
    of words.... They are making sensational discoveries which people with
    occult knowledge already knew thousands of years ago! They have made a
    long circuit and come to the same thing.

    With the most recent discoveries in medicine, in the applied sciences,
    for instance, they are contacting in this way, with a wonder-struck
    interest, things which were known to certain sages a very, very long
    time ago. And then they present all this before you as new marvels —
    but indeed they are rather old, their marvels!

    They will end up by practising occultism without knowing that they are
    doing so! For, in fact, as soon as one draws close, however slightly,
    to the truth of things and when one is sincere in one's search, not
    satisfied by mere appearances, when one really wants to find something
    and goes deep, penetrates behind appearances, then one begins to
    advance towards the truth of things; and as one comes closer to it,
    well, one finds again the same knowledge that others who began by
    going within have brought back from their inner discoveries.

    Only the method and the path are different but the thing discovered
    will be the same, because there are not two things to be found, there
    is only one. It will necessarily be the same. It all depends on the
    path one follows; some go fast, others slowly, some go straight,
    others, as I said, go a long way round — and what labour! How they
    have laboured!... Besides, it is very respectable.


    Arthur Clarke's Third Law states "Any sufficiently advanced technology
    is indistinguishable from magic." This might seem to follow the spirit
    of what you post above. An important distinction is, while some
    people might regard technology as magic, there is no reasonable way
    magic can be regarded as technology.


    WRT the last sentence, there is an argument I often make in the
    context of fantasy RGPs that magic as presented IS technology. It is
    an intrinsic, understandable, repeatable phenomenon that can be
    consciously exploited towards desired effects.

    That leads to the question of when does something stop being magic
    and start being science? "Girl Genius" has a corollary to Clarke's
    Third Law: Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from
    science.

    The real question, IMHO, is what constitutes "sufficiently
    advanced/analyzed"? Where is that line?

    Carl

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kalkidas@21:1/5 to David on Sun Jun 15 09:41:59 2025
    On 6/1/2025 5:03 AM, David wrote:
    Hello.

    I'd very much welcome reader's views on this recent article:-

    https://aish.com/is-belief-in-god-rational-a-fresh-look-at-the-evidence

    //What if belief in God isn’t blind faith—but a logical conclusion drawn from cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom?//


    God cannot not exist.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)