Define: 1. a) to determine or set down the boundaries of b) to trace the precise outlines of, delineate 2. to determine or state the extent and nature of; describe exactly 3. a) to give the distinguishing characteristics of b) to constitute the distinction of; differentiate 4. to state the meaning or meanings of.
We face some problems here. To define God means placing boundaries, outlines, or extents, to something who's distinguishing characteristic is it doesn't have boundaries, outlines or extents. All is not lost. Read the following article.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/brainongod.htm
First off, yesterday's dangling question (effect) is answered dramatically. To wit; "If you contemplate God long enough, something happens in the brain, neural functioning begins to CHANGE." (that dear readers, is most certainly an effect) But we said we had to define something to understand it. How do we define God?
"Our research has led us to the following conclusions: 2) Every human brain assembles it perceptions of God in uniquely different ways, thus giving God different qualities of MEANING AND VALUE."
(note--there are five conclusions; see link for the other four)
Newberg also states; "In fact, the more a person thinks about God, the more complex and imaginative the concept becomes, taking on unique nuances of meaning that differ from ONE INDIVIDUAL TO THE NEXT."
So, the definition of God is: there is no one definition of God.
Pat, Pat, you using sophistry! No, I am simply sharing with you what a neuroscientist came up with from his studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Truth be told, I had never heard of Andrew Newberg before yesterday. Regardless of how absurd it may seem, the only definition of God that matters is the one you hold in your head. And that definition is going to be different than mine (and his, hers, or theirs). This can debilitate you, or liberate you in ways unimagined. The gift is yours to do with what you wish.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZEVOenOwYU
(A review of the God section might be worthwhile)
http://site.baybridgecentral.com/giftgratitudegod/god.html
Friday, June 27, 2014
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Evidence of God
Excluding this from your life would kill you in three minutes. No one is exempt. And the funny thing is, you can't see it, taste it, touch it, hear it, or smell it. It is invisible. Know what I am talking about?
Air.
Seriously, when was the last time you thought about air? It is the most basic, fundamental, essential component for your existence, yet it isn't detectable by any of your five senses. So why do you believe air exists?
Another example. Science claims black holes exist even though a black hole has never been seen. How does science make such a claim? Through observational (or indirect) evidence. That means they can see the EFFECT on the space (matter) around the black hole. They don't see "it," they see what effect "it" causes.
If this is a fair standard of scientific evidence for black holes, why isn't it a fair standard for God? Throughout this web site I have said "try it" (G-G-G) and see what happens. I know if you perceive life as a gift and you respond with gratitude, God will manifest. But what I know means nothing--that is my experience. What is important is what you know. And you will only know God if you have an experience (feel the effect) yourself.
So I think it fair to say we need not see, taste, touch, hear, or smell God, to claim He exists. We KNOW air exists and none of the criteria applies. And similar to a black hole, observing an effect is evidentiary to asserting a claim that it (whatever "it" is) exists. What is fair for the goose must be fair for the gander--or there is no fairness at all. That leaves us with the task of proving whether or not God causes an effect.
In the next post we will examine the definition of the word God. Only by understanding (defining) a thing can we come to know what it actually is. And how can we determine if a thing has an effect unless we define what that thing is?
Air.
Seriously, when was the last time you thought about air? It is the most basic, fundamental, essential component for your existence, yet it isn't detectable by any of your five senses. So why do you believe air exists?
Another example. Science claims black holes exist even though a black hole has never been seen. How does science make such a claim? Through observational (or indirect) evidence. That means they can see the EFFECT on the space (matter) around the black hole. They don't see "it," they see what effect "it" causes.
If this is a fair standard of scientific evidence for black holes, why isn't it a fair standard for God? Throughout this web site I have said "try it" (G-G-G) and see what happens. I know if you perceive life as a gift and you respond with gratitude, God will manifest. But what I know means nothing--that is my experience. What is important is what you know. And you will only know God if you have an experience (feel the effect) yourself.
So I think it fair to say we need not see, taste, touch, hear, or smell God, to claim He exists. We KNOW air exists and none of the criteria applies. And similar to a black hole, observing an effect is evidentiary to asserting a claim that it (whatever "it" is) exists. What is fair for the goose must be fair for the gander--or there is no fairness at all. That leaves us with the task of proving whether or not God causes an effect.
In the next post we will examine the definition of the word God. Only by understanding (defining) a thing can we come to know what it actually is. And how can we determine if a thing has an effect unless we define what that thing is?
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
Suggestion Box
On June 11th I posted Back to the Basics and started a series of posts designed to illustrate the dynamics of how our brain works and responds to sound. (language) I then offered three ways of reacting to events (breathe/acceptance/gratitude) that are the most accessible/effective methods available to us that enhance our well-being. I linked all my suggestions to scientific evidence. At our current level of scientific understanding everything I have presented is indisputable.
I also snuck in a post (We Are Alive--and isn't Marie Digby amazing?) that spoke directly to your attitude toward being "alive." I proposed that if astonishment (astonish: to fill with sudden wonder or great surprise) wasn't part of your outlook, you might consider a course correction. The fact is, there is no cognitive rationale for you even being here.
http://visual.ly/what-are-odds
The tacit message was life is a gift. Your inability or reluctance to experience it as such might be an insight as to what issues you need to address. Or not. You are always the determining factor. If you don't "buy in," nothing occurs. You continue with your life as it was. I would ask one question though; how is that working for you?
So, if you're still reading, I will presume that we have an agreement: you see life as a gift you can be grateful for. These last few days I will present what evidence I have for God being the final part of the equation.
I also snuck in a post (We Are Alive--and isn't Marie Digby amazing?) that spoke directly to your attitude toward being "alive." I proposed that if astonishment (astonish: to fill with sudden wonder or great surprise) wasn't part of your outlook, you might consider a course correction. The fact is, there is no cognitive rationale for you even being here.
http://visual.ly/what-are-odds
The tacit message was life is a gift. Your inability or reluctance to experience it as such might be an insight as to what issues you need to address. Or not. You are always the determining factor. If you don't "buy in," nothing occurs. You continue with your life as it was. I would ask one question though; how is that working for you?
So, if you're still reading, I will presume that we have an agreement: you see life as a gift you can be grateful for. These last few days I will present what evidence I have for God being the final part of the equation.
Monday, June 23, 2014
As Good As It Gets
Well, Gwenn was busy over the weekend. She changed the header of the blog, enabling access in the future under WP Grogan (rather than Gift Gratitude God). What I do with it is moot. My intention is to bring it to a close--Gwenn's argument simply being access, and I have no problem with that. As I mentioned, the actual web site's domain name is not being renewed, so access to everything other than the blog ends July 3rd.
I do wish to explain the "goodness is great if you're good to yourself" quote on the header. It is from a "poem" (not sure it qualifies) in the About Me section. Written years ago as a post script to a friend, she responded favorably to the sentiment. It comes as close as anything else as a "motto" for what it is I promote. To save you time flipping to that section (and perhaps, a future visitor) I will include it here:
Goodness is great if you're good to yourself
And patience is fine if you give yourself time
Trust is must begin with yourself
Loving is due but don't forget about you.
I believe people sometimes get caught in the trap of being "nice." They do and say things they think others want or expect of them. Because the impulse is one of accommodation and not genuine service the ego will (eventually) demand compensation. The tendency then is toward resentment. Instead, the metaphor of a fruit tree illustrates the innate characteristic of "good works." Your nature is to give of yourself. It makes you feel good to do so.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/05/28/helping-others-is-good-for-your-health-an-interview-with-stephen-g-post-phd/
Understanding your impulse, my effort is to refine this instinct to include yourself. Until you learn to be good to yourself, any thought of authentic goodness toward others is flawed. It is conditional and perpetuated only by acknowledgement or validation--rather than a realization of mutual benefit. Including yourself in the equation of being "good" goes a long way in sustaining efforts that fulfill you spiritually. It is a gift you give to yourself.
I do wish to explain the "goodness is great if you're good to yourself" quote on the header. It is from a "poem" (not sure it qualifies) in the About Me section. Written years ago as a post script to a friend, she responded favorably to the sentiment. It comes as close as anything else as a "motto" for what it is I promote. To save you time flipping to that section (and perhaps, a future visitor) I will include it here:
Goodness is great if you're good to yourself
And patience is fine if you give yourself time
Trust is must begin with yourself
Loving is due but don't forget about you.
I believe people sometimes get caught in the trap of being "nice." They do and say things they think others want or expect of them. Because the impulse is one of accommodation and not genuine service the ego will (eventually) demand compensation. The tendency then is toward resentment. Instead, the metaphor of a fruit tree illustrates the innate characteristic of "good works." Your nature is to give of yourself. It makes you feel good to do so.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/05/28/helping-others-is-good-for-your-health-an-interview-with-stephen-g-post-phd/
Understanding your impulse, my effort is to refine this instinct to include yourself. Until you learn to be good to yourself, any thought of authentic goodness toward others is flawed. It is conditional and perpetuated only by acknowledgement or validation--rather than a realization of mutual benefit. Including yourself in the equation of being "good" goes a long way in sustaining efforts that fulfill you spiritually. It is a gift you give to yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)