21 Nov 10
Originally posted by 667joeThis is how prayer actually works:
To my theists friends........Have you ever had a prayer "answered" in such a way that it could only be explained as a miracle as opposed to occurring based on an explanation not involving a supernatural power?
First of all God doesnt listen to all the prayers that people send up to him, and then decides to answer some prayers, and not the others....because all prayers have already been answered.
How is it that all prayers have been answered?.....well there is a process for getting what you want in life, or creating your own reality that you experience, and its by the process that you use all the time, consciously or unconsciously.
Every thought you have, and every word you speak, and the deeds that you do, create your reality, and your doing this all the time........and thats how you have the life that you find yourself in at present, you have created it.
With praying, you speak some words and have some thoughts about what you desire, and direct that towards the God that you believe in, and if those words and thoughts are strong enough, you will manifest the desire of your particular prayer.
God is not hearing your prayer, and then granting your desire,( actually he is, but not directly) but you are forefilling your desires yourself, by the process of thinking, speaking and action.......this is how humans create in this world, and everything that you have ever accomplished in your life, has been done with this process...
This process was created by God, so humans can forefill their own desires, and when a person prays, there activating the laws of attraction and creation.
It can then be said, that using this process is like having your prayers answered, because God is the author of the process, (and is the process itself), thats why the process has power....God power.
And everyone has this power to create, as long as they believe in what they speak, think and believe in what their doing.......and the process works for any desire, even if it is a negative desire, because the process is impersonal and acts for all people, all the time. (God is no respector of persons)
This is how faith healing works, and this is how the christian science of healing works......its not Jesus healing the person, but its the process
working.
The process will not work for wishfull thinking, but the person must have belief and faith in the words they speak, the thoughts they have and the deeds that they do.
21 Nov 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuClap trap!
This is how prayer actually works:
First of all God doesnt listen to all the prayers that people send up to him, and then decides to answer some prayers, and not the others....because all prayers have already been answered.
How is it that all prayers have been answered?.....well there is a process for getting what you want in life, or creating your ...[text shortened]... ave belief and faith in the words they speak, the thoughts they have and the deeds that they do.
22 Nov 10
6 edits
Originally posted by twhitehead=========================================
Why does this keep coming up in this forum? What does your list of "pagan writers who refer to Jesus Christ" have to do with anything? Do you think it constitutes evidence for something? If so, what?
If I (a pagan) mention Jesus Christ in a book, does that constitute evidence for something? What? If I don't count for you list then why not?
Are you und g that anyone would dispute, after all, here you are on this forum, so Christians do exist).
There is not one single writer who claims to have actually met Jesus in person whether they be pagan or theist.
===================================
Many writers since the resurrection of Jesus have claimed to have met Jesus. Many writers claim to have continuous fellowship with Jesus Christ. For about 20 centuries this has gone on.
By "in person" you probably mean as a physical man. You assume that Christ cannot be met "in person".
Your criteria and priorities are not those of God. God's priorities are about dispensing Christ the Person into human beings that He may blend, mingle, and be incorporated with them.
Your priorities are that God, if He does exist, may be kept far away from you. And certainly you have no desire that He would enter into your being to blend with your life.
So many writers have claimed to have met Christ. Here's one - Paul - "But when it pleased God, who set me apart from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me that I might preach among the Gentiles, immediately I did not confer with flesh and blood... "
God's priorities are in this stage of history to reveal Christ in and INTO people's innermost spiritual being. This is very real. This is a much more subjective relationship between man and God that God wants - Christ to be dispensed into the receiver as divine life, interwoven with his.
"[T]he last Adam became a life giving Spirit. "(1 Cor. 15:45)
Because you do not give a flip about living unto God or living through God, you're only interest, if any, is writers (other than the 12 disciples) would meet Jesus "in person" outwardly in His physical presence.
One day you will realize that "Christ mak[ing] His home in your hearts by faith,"[/b] is not sentimental talk. It is actual.
(I used the term "pagan" only for ease of communication.)
23 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by 667joeNo,no joe. Thats one of vishvas better posts. Its not perfect but it gives a theists general impression on the subject of prayer. I dont think there was even any abuse or condecension OR wild assumptions.
Clap trap!
Claptrap may be an appropriate response for the science forum , but for us poor miserable spiritualists, its not too bad.
Anyway I thought this was about magic vs reality.
In my take on linguistices I see no difference between the two.
So I have to assume you are reffering to some sort of newtonian reality vs some kind of Harry Potter magic. Is that in the right ballpark?
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelReality vs views that hold up like a house of cards.
No,no joe. Thats one of vishvas better posts. Its not perfect but it gives a theists general impression on the subject of prayer. I dont think there was even any abuse or condecension OR wild assumptions.
Claptrap may be an appropriate response for the science forum , but for us poor miserable spiritualists, its not too bad.
Anyway I thought this was ...[text shortened]... ome sort of newtonian reality vs some kind of Harry Potter magic. Is that in the right ballpark?
26 Nov 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelI put trust in what can be verified. What is so hard to understand about that? It's really a very simple and direct concept.
Huh? Sorry, I'm a bit slow...
I sincerely want to know if you subscribe to the static,3-d,newtonian-type model of our reality,(as your posts seem to indicate)?
26 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by 667joeSurely you dont need to trust what is already verified?
I put trust in what can be verified. What is so hard to understand about that? It's really a very simple and direct concept.
And when you say "verified" , i assume you mean verified by the "scientific community".
What is so hard to understand that I just want a general brief description of what you mean by "reality" ?
Actually the closer you get to the "truth" , the more simpler these concepts are to understand.
(And while, (imo), I think these concepsts become simpler, the actual practice of these concepts becomes more difficult).
I have confused, and complicated this thread, but it was not my intention.
What I'm trying to do is to gleen what your take on this stuff is.
For example , it seems that you think there is an accepted, undisputed version of reality that we all share. If someone with a theistic point of view(for example) comes along, it seems you are ready to be the ultimate skeptic, arguing from the view that we all share the same reality.(Is that right?)
So (in attempt to simplify and undersatand), could you tell me wether you think we all share the same reality, or if it varies from peron to person?
(If you dont define reality, then we cannot continue this discussion)
26 Nov 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelWe all share the same (material) reality; we differ in our perceptions & of it.
Surely you dont need to trust what is already verified?
And when you say "verified" , i assume you mean verified by the "scientific community".
What is so hard to understand that I just want a general brief description of what you mean by "reality" ?
Actually the closer you get to the "truth" , the more simpler these concepts are to understan ...[text shortened]... peron to person?
(If you dont define reality, then we cannot continue this discussion)
26 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by AgergYes, and these perceptions, which seem fear-based,( whether consiously or not), largely shape the world that we live in. We create our own world, and we are responsible for it. We dont own it, we are custodians/ caretakers for future generations.
We all share the same (material) reality; we differ in our perceptions & of it.
Yes we share the same base material reality. We (especially our brains) have been shown to be similar to that of animals (limbic system).
In my (paradoxical) view of the world I see the "creative principle", ("God" or whatever), as creating the conditions that have spawned all life as we know it.
From one point of view you could say that this process took some 15 billlion years.
From another point of view, you could say that it was instantaneous as Spirit is outside of all time.
But again, I'm tangenting all over the place. (Sorry)
So basically, I agree with your comment, but it leaves me wondering how you see these "perceptions" of reality ? Do you think they matter as much as say...me?
(when I say "matter" , I mean do you think we have the potential to change our reality(s)? )