Thread: God Exists

A wonderful story : "GOD Exists"... This is one of the best explanations of why GOD allows pain 'n suffering that I have seen. A man went to a barbershop to have his hair cut 'n his beard trimmed. As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation. They talked about so many things 'n various subjects. When they eventually touched on the subject of GOD, the barber said: "I don't believe that GOD exists." "Why do you say that?" asked the customer. "Well, you just have to go out in the street to realize that GOD doesn't exist. Tell me, if GOD exists, would there be so many sick people? would there be abandoned children? If GOD existed, there would be neither suffering nor pain. I can't imagine a loving GOD who would allow all of these things." The customer thought for a moment, but didn't respond because he didn't want to start an argument The barber finished his job 'n the customer left the shop.Just after he left the barbershop, he saw a man in the street with long, stringy, dirty hair 'n an untrimmed beard. He looked 'n unkempt. The customer turned back 'n entered the barbershop again 'n he said to the barber: "You know what? Barbers do not exist." "How can you say that?" asked the surprised barber. "I am here, 'n I am a barber. 'n I just worked on you!" "No!" the customer exclaimed. "Barbers don't exist because if they did, there would be no people with dirty long hair 'n untrimmed beards, like that man outside." "Ah, barbers DO exist! What happens is, people do not come to me. "Exactly!- affirmed the customer. "That's the point! GOD, too exist! What happens, is, people don't go to him 'n do not look for him. That's why there is so much pain 'n suffering in the world.

Well, "parallel logic" is appears great to common eyes, but doesn't really prove anything. In order to appreciate the concept of God one must master the art of analyzing any question in a time-independent frame. For example, questions like "if God created something at some point of time, then what existed before"? Such questions assume a universal clock that is not part of the system. The human knowledge is heavily reliant on the assumption of Time as an absolute reference frame.

Originally Posted by DrBarani

Well, "parallel logic" is appears great to common eyes, but doesn't really prove anything. In order to appreciate the concept of God one must master the art of analyzing any question in a time-independent frame. For example, questions like "if God created something at some point of time, then what existed before"? Such questions assume a universal clock that is not part of the system. The human knowledge is heavily reliant on the assumption of Time as an absolute reference frame.

dear drbarani,

what you are saying is 100% true.thats the difference between humans and God.
the knowledge of humans is limited.

Nice post, though have read this long before, its worth reading n number of times and making others read it too, who try to showcase a cool attitude by saying that they are atheist

Originally Posted by hathim

Nice post, though have read this long before, its worth reading n number of times and making others read it too, who try to showcase a cool attitude by saying that they are atheist

hathim,

i do not know if atheism is a cool attitude, or any of the resident atheists here, claim it to be such.

why can't we just leave it, as another option - option that may be different from yours or mine, but that may be what is suited for them.

i know of 2 atheists here, and both of them, have been brought up with faith, and i would imagine, that they are far more familiar with the intracies of their faith, that they had reached a point, that to discard religion, appeared to be the right thing to do.

i think, it is only fair, that we give them credit for their knowledge and decision, which came out of their own life experience.

when it comes to faith, or absence of it, there is no 'oneupmanship'. neither faith or faithless is superior to the other. they are two opposing plates on a weighing scale. atleast i think so

thank you.

Originally Posted by kunjuppu

hathim,

i do not know if atheism is a cool attitude, or any of the resident atheists here, claim it to be such.

why can't we just leave it, as another option - option that may be different from yours or mine, but that may be what is suited for them.

i know of 2 atheists here, and both of them, have been brought up with faith, and i would imagine, that they are far more familiar with the intracies of their faith, that they had reached a point, that to discard religion, appeared to be the right thing to do.

i think, it is only fair, that we give them credit for their knowledge and decision, which came out of their own life experience.

when it comes to faith, or absence of it, there is no 'oneupmanship'. neither faith or faithless is superior to the other. they are two opposing plates on a weighing scale. atleast i think so

thank you.

atheists are often very smart people with analytical abilities. What they say, often, is that "a flying sphagetti monster in the sky" is irrelevant for worldy life. They don't venture into spiritual or philosophical arguments. Hence, it is necessary to know where they stop and where religion begins. There exists a fine line there and I have visited both sides.

Originally Posted by DrBarani

atheists are often very smart people with analytical abilities. What they say, often, is that "a flying sphagetti monster in the sky" is irrelevant for worldy life. They don't venture into spiritual or philosophical arguments. Hence, it is necessary to know where they stop and where religion begins. There exists a fine line there and I have visited both sides.

drb,

maybe. may not be.

my objection, was only what i saw was a taunt, re 'who try to showcase a cool attitude by saying that they are atheist '

To me one thing will prove the existence of God. If someone would not give up his good qualities in spite of incessant and huge pressures, it would prove to be a good test for the existence of God. Kali yuga is such a setting where the above type of pressures are exerted on a person and we constantly see people buckle.

What better way to recognize God than through divine qualities in a person?

Originally Posted by DrBarani

atheists are often very smart people with analytical abilities. What they say, often, is that "a flying sphagetti monster in the sky" is irrelevant for worldy life. They don't venture into spiritual or philosophical arguments. Hence, it is necessary to know where they stop and where religion begins. There exists a fine line there and I have visited both sides.

Namaste DrBaraniji,

The inability of atheists to argue and/or to understand the spiritual or philosophical ideas(truths ?)does not automatically prove existence of God. Aethiest have not stopped, they are progressing - progressed from fire, wheel to condoms,computers,satelites and they still going - and they dont have the responsibility prove the existence of pink unicorn or holy/celestial tea pot circling sun.

Also, it is not(is it ?)the duty/responsibility(shame ?)of believers to prove(inability to prove ?)exisitence of God.

Om Hiranya Rethase Namaha

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

Originally Posted by jaisiyaraam

Namaste DrBaraniji,

The inability of atheists to argue and/or to understand the spiritual or philosophical ideas(truths ?)does not automatically prove existence of God. Aethiest have not stopped, they are progressing - progressed from fire, wheel to condoms,computers,satelites and they still going - and they dont have the responsibility prove the existence of pink unicorn or holy/celestial tea pot circling sun.

Also, it is not(is it ?)the duty/responsibility(shame ?)of believers to prove(inability to prove ?)exisitence of God.

Om Hiranya Rethase Namaha

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

In my logic system, atheists and believers are not going in opposite directions, but in orthogonal directions. If they go in opposite directions, then they are under the same scaling system and a simple translation would bring one group to the other side. Only perpendicular movements cannot be reconciled in any manner, since they are linearly independent of each other.