Proof that our divine eternal soul spirits exist is lost to discovery by science in the chaos of complex dynamic systems. As such I do not claim to know that I am divinely inspired. About the most I can say is that I believe that I am divinely inspired. If in fact I am divinely inspired then to think, believe and expect I am divinely inspired may strengthen my divine inspirations and allow me to make the best possible use of my divine inspirations. In addition, ornamenting my model of self and world with the myth that I am divinely inspired produces in my mind the most powerful emotional responses of joy, faith and love imaginable. That my will guides my mind by choosing from amongst a limited number of thought, feeling and action possibilities made available to my mind by my body is a truth. That my will is guided by the divine eternal essence of finite self and infinite world is a myth. However, for all I know, it may be true that my divine eternal soul is revealing this very myth to me. Obviously, if my concern is with devoting energy, space, and time to ideas that produce powerful emotional responses of joy, faith and love, then I should think, believe, and expect this myth is true.
2006-09-30 03:21:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by H.I. of the H.I. 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Very good question. All miracles had been see only by people who were alive at that era but only the miracle of Islam that is ever lasting for all humans to keep on seeing it tell last day. It is the QURAN. You may say it was made up. Just read it in depth with open minde and you will find out that this can not be made up by any human. This really must be words of God, the true God. Try for yourself, you sound a smart person. Best translations are here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
2006-10-01 20:21:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by haggobti 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think some people need to look up the difference between subjective and objective truth, *cough* 'The Scientologist' *cough*. Unfortunately just because I really really really believe something, doesn't make it so... There is this little something called reality that always gets in the way.
LRH was a conman and a fraud.
Scientology isn't a religion its a destructive cult.
It's history is easily traceable having only came about in the 1950's.
It's history is something like this:
Hubbard gets involved with an Sex Magick group led by Jack Parsons, under Aleister Crowley the OTO satanist. He cons Jack and steals his mistress, they run away with his boats and money. Jack sues and gets some of his cash back.
LRH comments that to make money one should start a religion.
LRH pulls dianetics out of his ****, being a rework of amongst other things, freud, but rewritten very poorly and without a true knowledge of humans or the mind. He did no research and tested none of it.
Dianetics takes off initially becoming a fad craze. Like all fads, this dies out, and LRH recieves poor reviews from around the country. Dianetics starts to fail, esp. when Hubbard's first clear fails to even remember the colour of LRH's tie.
So Scientology is born to avoid the ridicule by becoming a religion and also to keep hold of taxes. Scientology makes even more ridiculous claims than dianetics.
Scientology then proceeds to get itself banned and investigated by almost every single govt. on earth.
They proceed to commit crimes left, right and centre, resulting in Operation Snow White, and Operation Freak out amongst others.
After a multitude of law trails, of dead scientologists, of abused scientologists, and generally not helping anyone, we have the Church of Scientology...
There is no proof of anything of scientology, because Hubbard made it all up.
Here is the true story of scientology & LRH.
http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/bfm/bfmconte.htm
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.xenutv.com
http://www.lermanet.com
http://www.whyaretheydead.net
In scientology they always use the expression "What's true for you is true for you", except what it really means is this "What's true for LRH is true for you, or you are wrong". You are not allowed to disagree with 'source' in scientology, it cannot be wrong, only you didn't apply or learn the 'tech' properly.
2006-09-30 23:53:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by Xenu.net 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
In some religions, historical accuracy is unimportant. Most Buddhists would not care if Buddha never really existed. And many scholars of Taoism believe that Lao Tzu (author of the Tao Te Ching) might not have existed. With these religions, the words of the books are only a finger pointing to truth--the finger is not important for itself. The words are wise whether the stories are literally true or not. Such religions are "self-validating" because it is the follower who deems the religion to be true.
Scientology is a relatively new religion. I believe the principles are based on the book "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard. But I could be wrong on that, I'm no scientologist.
2006-09-30 03:49:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by rabid_scientist 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
On Buddhism:
Gautama Siddhartha, the founder of Buddhism, was the son of a king (the ruler of the Sakyas, I believe?) and as such, his existence is documented in lineages. Many of the sutras of the Tripkata are considered to have been written directly by him, and thus far more proof supports that case than not.
2006-09-30 03:27:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by angk 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't know too much about Hinduism , all I know they are very peaceful people.
About Islam, there are no prove what so ever or any eyewitness for Muhammad clime.but there are so many proves that he was a liar.He invented God that reflected his own narcissistic reveries, with this tool he could do any and say anything and claim it is the word of Allah and this way he could silence any critic.Islam it is not religion it is cult.No of fens folks but this is the truth.to prov Islam cult watch the Islamic world and you will know yourself.
2006-09-30 04:19:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Proof?
What is true for you is what you your self observe to be true. If you by your self observe that you are a spiritual being and not a body that's all the proof you need. Beyond that all that is left is your own observations and personal believes.
I liked the awnser of Aung S, very similar to mine.
Why you want someone else's proof when you can have your own observations.
2006-09-30 18:02:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Actually, there's little (if any) proof outside of the bible that Jesus existed.
The few historical documents are either hearsay or of questionable origin (ie. edited)
Please see below for more information...
To answer your overall question: there's no evidence for faith - it's belief, not fact.
2006-09-30 03:22:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by joetho 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
ultimately all knowledge is self knowledge,in reality there is only one self with the whole existence superimposed upon it ,true religious knowledge cannot be obtain through stale doctrines that limits a humans spiritual evolution.truth lies in philosophy only ,in philosophy you are shown the royal road to truth through inquiry of the mind, the universe and the individuals meaning amidst the constantly changing world
2006-09-30 03:28:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by gasp 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Lets talk about reality..... not other unimportant things.
Try buddhism. No one force you to believe. It's on your own.
Please pay a thorough check at the following link. Make sure you read the whole page. If possible, the whole website.
2006-09-30 03:35:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by AAA 2
·
0⤊
2⤋