Real Life Supernatural Experiences

[Russell Nash]

Evans:

No. I'm not antiChristian. Looks like, but no. I'm against ignorance and brainwashing, which today is being represented by Christianity, and "religion" in general. Qumran says that comets are devil's work. Oh, yes???? It is written. The Bible says that the sun stopped (detail, not the Earth but the sun). It is written. How do you call that but IGNORANCE? Millions follow the words of ignorant priests, that wrote God's word, centuries ago. Or the words of a God that didn't even know what a comet was, and probably ignored Copernicus's basic theory. I found a way to deal with ultra-religious people: make them think, they collapse in a few minutes.

[Russell Nash]

Mark:

I heard the same question at around 10, Who created God? However, my atheism derives from astronomy. I always loved astronomy, if I became an engineer and not an astronomer is because my family couldn't afford sending me to another city, 100 km. away, to study astronomy.

Whoever sees the sky at night with the naked eye, wonders: If there is a God who has such an unbelievable power to create all this, why is it that he doesn't stop suffering, death, and evil?

[LadyLovecraft]

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

I understand that something might have happened to Mark Samuels, and others, and I know dozens of cases, but, let's assume that he also saw unicorns, would one believe him too?

:] Just like you said before: as long as Mark (or anyone else) can't prove that he has seen something, it is indeed a matter of believing something.
Would I believe him if he told me something like that in all sincerity? Yes, I would believe that he has seen something he believes to be a unicorn.
Would I believe, that he has seen a unicorn? No, because a) I don't believe in unicorns and b) I'd have to see or experience something as unusual as that myself to believe in unicorns.

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

According to what I'm reading above, he was a religious man (Christian?), then an atheist, and now a Christian again. What next? Can you trust a statement made by a person that changes like that?

Some people are open to changes, some remain with what they've been told or with the set of believes they made for themselves.
To me, life is not only defined by religion, but also by music and literature. I listen to music and react very emotional to it - I have changed my taste in music every now and then, coming across new bands, new songwriters or new artists. I never felt that I became unfaithful to old tastes, rather that I am evolving - realizing that each new influence that fascinates me, brings me closer to who I am.
I've changed my lifestyle along with my musical tastes and looking back I see that each subtle change brought me to where I am now and has shaped me. Now, at the age of 31 I dare to say that I have completed at least that circle.
Just why should I not do this as well when religion is concerned? One is being brought up with a set of (dis)believes and at some point of one's life these ideals should be tested for their validity. Sometimes the religious views remain the same because they perfectly fit one's life(style), sometimes things happen that make one doubt one's religion ... why not change your worldview - or your religion?
I find many religions in my circle of friends ... buddhists, catholics, russian-orthodox priests, atheists - pick your religion. Everyone has told me about their struggles, their doubts and an occasional leap of faith. I can't see why I should find their belief-system less acceptable just because they found a new home. As long as the person doesn't just change their views to be popular or "something else" I am just happy to see that they've found their home.

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

I doubt of his atheism, because someone with strong convictions that refutes the existence of God, is not going to change over the years.

Sometimes the strangest things happen and you turn from an atheist to a christian in no time.
Or the other way around.
I've experienced a time in which I was doubting the meaning of life itself and was begging to be given a reason for this madness ... begging for something, anything to believe in. I have been considering atheism, christian beliefs ... anything. Who knows where I would have "ended up" had I been given a sign or some proof for the existence of a higher being (or at least a reason for this mess).

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

One can really believe in ghost, angels, God, gods, anything, be happy. But, please, provide some proof, not only words.

If any of those who participate in the general discussion could come up with a proof, there wouldn't be a reason for believing. In fact, we wouldn't be discussing anything at all.
I am glad to see that you have have joined the ranks of the Atheists and have obviously found your home and sanctuary there. Yet I can't help but wonder: why do you agressivly demand proof for something that can't in itself be proven? Religion is a matter of believing, whereas science is a matter of explaining things. Whether this "explanation" will be accepted remains everyone's choice.

[LadyLovecraft]

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

Whoever sees the sky at night with the naked eye, wonders: If there is a God who has such an unbelievable power to create all this, why is it that he doesn't stop suffering, death, and evil?

Just exactly why should a "God" that is powerful enough to create a universe, care for that bloody planet? Or it's inhabitants?
Why do "we" think that humanity is worth caring for anyway?

At time I this that Lovecraft was as close as possible to describing "God" when he showed us Azatoth. Sometimes, I want to sing along with Trent Reznor:
"God is dead and no-one cares. If there is a hell, I'll see you there."

[Russell Nash]

Lady Lovecraft:

If I told you, I have over 10 billion dollars. That my real name is Richard Branson. Would you believe me? Of course not. You demand proof, even though you may say, why not? You wouldn't believe that. But, why not? To me, when someone says that he/she experienced something supernatural, but no proof, and the same description of the event seems not too rational, well, I can understand that Mark is not lying, but did he see what he thinks he saw? I repeat, the absence of supernatural evidence refutes supernatural phenomena. Supernatural events may exist indeed, but the explanation of the events is always trivial, they are not supernatural at all.

[Russell Nash]

Lady Lovecarft:

Why should God care? I don't believe in God, I cannot answer, but most religions say that this Being do cares. Why did God create the Universe, in the first place? For fun, need, or why? Religion doesn't say anyhting about God's motives for creation.

But the point is, are supernatural phenomena (like ghosts) related to God? If God doesn't exist, could we have supernatural phenomena? I'm not sure if I remember that, but Maeterlinck spoke of an unknown guest responsible for this phenomena, but I don't really remember. Maybe someone else does?

[Russell Nash]

Lady Lovecraft:

This is a discussion board, I understand. Supernatural phenomena is not studied at Princeton University. Physics, yes. We discuss these things because people still see supernatural events all the time. The ones that found "peace" in atheism like me, tend to explain these phenomena according to Science. The others, name any religion you like, tend to attribute evrything to God. And because we can't discuss God with a person of faith, the discussion cannot go further. I am a free-thinker. I enjoy these discussions: they are funny, very productive, and allow to know the other person deeply.

[Russell Nash]

Profile | Why Did Our Universe Begin? (J. Richard Gott - 2 of 2) | Closer to Truth

[LadyLovecraft]

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

Lady Lovecraft: If I told you, I have over 10 billion dollars. That my real name is Richard Branson. Would you believe me? Of course not.

If you told me you are Richard Branson or even the reborn Son of God, just why wouldn't I believe you? If you told me something like that in a way that makes me believe, that you are serious about that, I certainly would.

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

You demand proof, even though you may say, why not? You wouldn't believe that. But, why not?

It's a safe bet that I wouldn't trust a cheque over 1 million dollars before you've proven your identity to me ...
There are things like religious experiences ideals, tastes, morals or anything that is remotely personal that I accept without requesting proof. When things like "Get in my car, I won't hurt you and get you home safely" are concerned I do not overstrain my trust in people.
I am definitively not one of these overly trusty souls that take everything for guaranteed, but religion is something very personal and a religious experience (and I do include the aforementioned unicorn as an experience) can not be proven - but I would not call someone a liar just because I haven't had that peculiar experience myself.
I (s)he believes in something, that's fine with me as well. After all, it's their life, not mine ...

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

To me, when someone says that he/she experienced something supernatural, but no proof, and the same description of the event seems not too rational, well, I can understand that Mark is not lying, but did he see what he thinks he saw?

If he can't proove that he saw "it", you can't proove that he didn't ... ;]
This is not a question about seeing things from a rational perspective, but a matter of believing, really. If I showed you a red-coloured cat in the distance and told you that you had just seen a fox, the chances are pretty good that you might believe to have seen a fox. Or you may doubt it until you've checked for yourself.
But either way, you have seen something. Until you've verified what you have seen, exactly how do you describe it? Do you have to be able explain and verify everything that you see, hear, smell or taste?
(I'm just being interested ...)

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

I repeat, the absence of supernatural evidence refutes supernatural phenomena. Supernatural events may exist indeed, but the explanation of the events is always trivial, they are not supernatural at all.

Forgive me for saying so, but just because there is an so called explanation doesn't mean that I have to believe in it as well.
Another experiment: One night a see a bright light floating along the treetops. I neither have binoculars nor a flashlight with me, so all I see is this light. It moves strangely, stops, starts to float again etc.
My friend tells me that is probably a weatherballoon, he has been told that tests with such balloons have been planned for this night - and for all he knows, the balloons look exactly like that.
Another friends tell's me about UFO sightings that have been happening lately. He believes in an invasion from Yuggoth.
Having no proof of anything since I've only seen something floating in the air I have to trust my logic, my intellect and in the probabilities.
Still, I have to believe - or am I supposed to ignore what I've seen because I can't prove it?

[LadyLovecraft]

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

Lady Lovecarft: Why should God care? I don't believe in God, I cannot answer, but most religions say that this Being do cares. Why did God create the Universe, in the first place? For fun, need, or why? Religion doesn't say anyhting about God's motives for creation.

If some kind of Higher Being has created this universe it probably happend by mistake. A side-effect, a collection of dust that by a chainreaction of coincidences became an inheritable planet - something that happens, for all I know, every now and than in this vast universe.

Quote Originally Posted by Russell Nash

But the point is, are supernatural phenomena (like ghosts) related to God? If God doesn't exist, could we have supernatural phenomena? I'm not sure if I remember that, but Maeterlinck spoke of an unknown guest responsible for this phenomena, but I don't really remember. Maybe someone else does?

I have picked the topic of religion for the vast amount of experiences that people can relate to - I didn't mean to connect religion and ghosts by all means.
I firmly believe that there can be supernatural experiences without a God - to me, anything that I label as "supernatural" is something that cannot be explained by my knowledge of science. But, after all, it only translates to: "something I can not explain, yet".