Griggsy

Originally posted by Griggsy

headheart, your religious experience is only the actions of your mental states ,colored by your beliefs, that thus can never evidence a metaphysical reality!
One can certainly meditate with the whole body.
atanholydevil,you're giving a good layman's opinion as you fathom the reality thereof of - how the mind works whereas headheart emotes nonsense, implying that only believers can know the truth of prayer whereas we others know that prayer is no more effective than meditation and just a form of dishonesty to the self as prayer is merely post hoc- coincidence - and for which believers have several cop-outswhen it doesn't pan out. Did one pray with her whole being? Had one sinned? And so forth.
Studies illuminate no betterment for the prayed for and others.
Ah, that figures, because He has no mind, He cannot act to better matters! That mighty sophist Alvin Plantinga feels that this argument from physical mind is supercilious, but being that himself, he cannot fathom that no, t'is a mighty argument. Supernaturalists cannot assume with faith, the we just say so, that one can indeed have a disembodied mind! One has to evidence that.
This argument substantiates also the atelic one as having no mind, there is no intent and this atelic one itself infuses other arguments, because with no intent there can be no First Cause, no Grand Miracle Worker [ See the thread on Hume and miracles.] and no Grand Designer. Also it underscores ignosticism and see the threads the ignostic-Ockham and ignosticism.
And one cannot define Him or postulate HIm or use faith to instantiate HIm as all that, yes, begs the question.
Soren Kierkegaard, rather than Tertullian, would have maintained the absurd notion that one could believe, because Christianity was indeed absurd. Tertullian rather tried to evidence his beliefs , contrary to the atheist's and other's contention.
This contention of His diisembodiness ranks as just more theological it may be or it must be, guesses.
Thus prayer to a disembodied mind means that one is only talking to herself !
Folks, read the previous posts in this thread about the arguments about Him- that square circle to realize there can be no God. One can poetically, in lower case speak of the god Nature or the goddess Mother Nature, who is insouciant towards us but whom we naturalists pantheists like Quentin Smith [ Please Good FRDB to go to its library to read his essays on eternal Existence..]
One quite well expects Nature to be insouciant but not God as per the problem of Heaven [ See the thread the definitive refutation of free will ....].
Folks , y'all might checkout the blogs Carneades @ Bloggers, and Rationalist @ Google blogspot and post there. Also you might checkout skeptic griggsy's posst and Inquiring Lynn's posts @ Philosophy Forums, which is a good site and also note the content of those particular posts and tell if they're substantial in any post you might make there.
Theology-On Line, Christian Boards and Christian Forums .rank high in my opinion.
Ah, sweet retirement for posting world-wide!