☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
My Thoughts On (a) God
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="anon" data-source="post: 195366" data-attributes="member: 19291"><p>Please be patient with my lack of Sikh knowledge, I have been locked in a Sikh family all of my life, my beard, my turban and my family's control over my life are starting to bother me to the point where i have only now just started to look into why i actually do these things. If i have the family pressure to follow a traditional life style I may aswell see where these traditions have arisen... I Say this because this has brought my attention to Sikh History and has motivated my reading Gurbani. </p><p></p><p>I have limited knowledge of Sikh history, philosophy and Gurbani so please excuse any errors and correct mistakes where I have made them</p><p></p><p> </p><p><strong>I do not believe in a god. By 'god' I am talking about a supernatural creator of any sorts.</strong></p><p></p><p>From what I've read the follower of Guru Nanak is must concede that god is a creator. Guru Nanak referred to god as Sat-Kartar if i am not mistaken and the first Sikh prayer any child learns tells us that the god of the Sikhs is KIRTA PURAKH, the creator of all...</p><p></p><p>I'd like to make a little aside here, alot of people on SPN deal with the atheists by likening Sikhism to Atheism, it's odd but quite often sikhs respond with something like:</p><p></p><p>"Silly atheist, you are confusing the Sikh god with the Abrahamic god, no of course we don't believe in the magical man in the sky with a beard who we must submit ourselves to! our conception of God is much deeper, much more complex and your atheist arguments, while relevant in a christian, Jewish or Islamic debate bears NO credence in a debate of Sikh philosophy..."</p><p></p><p>I don't like these responses, these are just words but to me a lot of sikh history, practice and philosophy does indicate a God whose existance can be debated using the same arguements Atheists use in discussions with christians, jews and muslims.</p><p></p><p><strong>The God I believe in has always existed, will always exist and is the eternal Truth. Perhaps it is a supreme reality to which we all belong, maybe it is a universal consciousness to which we are all linked, or perhaps it is nothing more than the cosmic laws which govern our existence. But it is not something I think about a lot, because as Guru Nanak put it, "by thinking, He cannot be reduced to thought, even by thinking an infinite number of times."</strong></p><p></p><p>I'm glad you put the God I <em>believe in</em>, because a sound proof the existence of the god who possesses such a nature you detail would intrest me very much. </p><p></p><p>the God you believe in has always existed, my knowledge of the different forms of the cosmological argument is even less than my knowledge of sikhi but (i paraphrase) Carl Sagan (and i'm sure philosophers before him), have persuaded me that an initial uncaused cause does not necessarily have to be God, Perhaps the initial uncaused cause was the universe itself, it has always existed (although maybe we cant make the claim that it always will). Alot of SPN users liken the universe and god as a single entity "God is the universe" they say. Again they say one thing but to me sikh history and practices really indicate the other. </p><p></p><p>If God from a sikh perspective is the embodiment of the universe (as apposed to the abrahamic man in the clouds) why do sikhs meditate on the universes name? buddhists enjoy the benefits of meditation by concentrating on their breath rather than a man made word for god...</p><p></p><p>Why in an Ardas do Sikhs ask "the universe" for things</p><p></p><p>Why do we need to be good people? why can't i go around killing, torturing, stealing and doing other bad things... is "the universe" going to judge us?</p><p></p><p>to me the sikh god is the man in the clouds, the creator and the judge. </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p><strong>Human intelligence is limited. Our ability to understand and absorb information is limited because we are imperfect, finite beings. We do not live forever and we experience reality subjectively. 'God' (whatever He/She/It may be) has always existed, will always exist and is the objective Truth which pervades every inch of the universe. </strong></p><p></p><p>I don't understand how a being that you do not know the gender/nature of can be the objective truth of the universe (using your statment: Whatever He/She/It may be). To me the truth that "All batchelors are unmarried" is quite an objective truth. My knowledge of logic is even more lacking than my knowledge of sikhism and philosophy but this definition of god as being "truth" seems quite flimsy, poetic and just not very robust to me, it sounds very nice, it would make a nice sing or a poem but i really don't understand what this means... </p><p></p><p> </p><p><strong>We share about 98.6% DNA with chimpanzees. We are smarter than chimpanzees. So let's invent a measure of intelligence which makes humans unique. Let us assume that 'intelligence' is your ability to to, for example, compose poetry, symphonies, do art, math and science. Let's make that the arbitrary definition of 'intelligence' for the moment. Chimps can't do any of that. Yet we share 98.6% identical DNA. The most brilliant chimp there ever was could perhaps do a little bit of sign language; well, our toddlers can do that. Toddlers, babies, human infants. So here's what cocnerns me deeply. Veer deeply. EVERYTHING that we are, that distinguishes us from chimps, emerges from that teensy-tiny 1.4% difference in DNA. It has to, because that is the only difference. The Hubble Telescope, Rocket hips, the moon landing, giant mirrors which have allowed us to see the birth of the universe itself, the future colonization of mars, general relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, Shakespeare, philosophy, religion, EVERYTHING is in that 1.4%.</strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>But maybe we aren't as smart as we think we are. Maybe the difference between chimps and humans isn't actually that large. Maybe it isn't actually that much more impressive that we humans can build spaceships whereas chimps can combine their fingers together to communicate a message. Maybe humans aren't all that great. We tell ourselves that it is a lot, but maybe it is almost nothing. </strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>How do we decide that? Well, imagine ANOTHER life form somewhere out there in the universe, which is 1.4% different from us, in the same way that we are 1.4% different from chimps. Think about that. With a 1.4% difference from chimps, we have been able to capture images of the birth of the universe itself. Well, now go up another 1.4%. What are we to they? We would be drooling, blithering idiots in their presence! They would take Stephen Hawking and roll him in front of their scientists and say "well this one is the most brilliant among them, because he can sorta do astrophysics in his head..." and then someone else would say "aww isn't that cute, little Johnny can do that too! Oh here look, he worked out this astrophysics theory all by himself yesterday, we put it on the refrigerator door, he did it in his elementary school class."</strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Think about how smart they would be! Their toddlers would be more intelligent than the smartest humans. Quantum mechanics would be intuitive to their babies. Whole symphonies, far greater than anything our musicians have ever produced, would be composed by their kids and put up on the refridgerator door, the same way pasta-collages are on our refrigerator doors.</strong></p><p></p><p>you propose one model of intelligence, but then make a number of assumptions, </p><p></p><p>1) that there are indeed beings in the universe that are more intelligent than us (by this model)</p><p>And as for weather or not you claim these beings to be God:</p><p>2) why would these super intelligent beings be interested with us, when we build hospitals we don't care about destroying anthills... </p><p>if these super intelligent being did exist why would he care about how we live our lives? anyway your analogy of super intelligent beings evokes the "Man in the clouds" abrahamic image of God again...</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>So this notion that we humans, with our limited, imperfect brains and subjective understanding of reality, are every going to be able to fully comprehend God, the MOST advanced being in existence (forget about 1.4%, God would be an infinite number of times more advanced than us), is preposterous.</strong> </p><p></p><p>this is a defeatist attitude... i'm sure the thought that I could send messages to someone on the other side of the planet was a preposterous thought in the 11th century...</p><p></p><p><strong>Anybody who claims to have spoken with God is a liar. </strong></p><p></p><p>I think most sakhis would have us believe that Guru Nanak spoke to God and recited Japji to him in Sultanpur?</p><p></p><p><strong>When was the last time you stopped to speak with a worm? Why would God speak with us? Yes, there are religions in which prophets have claimed to have spoken with God and received a divine message. </strong></p><p></p><p>Guru Nanak did...</p><p></p><p><strong>Well some God that turned out to be, because the world today is a better place than it was thousands of years ago in spite of, not because of, those religions (or any religion). If you study the theology of a lot of religions, it is exactly the kind of stuff you would have expected our ancestors to have come up with it. Stoning people to death, blasphemy, smiting, homophobia, none of this stuff is from the most advanced being in existence, it is straight out of the minds of men who lived thousands of years ago in ignorance, back before science, reason and logic.</strong></p><p></p><p>Most Sikhs today would have us believe that in our age of science, technology, drugs and logic we are living in Kaljug, the only pain in my life is that which has come from a 300 year old relgion that makes me keep a beard.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Wanna know how I knew the Gurus were sincere? Because they admitted that God is "incomprehensible" and "inaccessible".</strong></p><p></p><p>I don't know much about debating and arguing so i can't think of a technical term but the phrase "Win-Win" comes to mind.</p><p></p><p>Let's imagine 2 scenarios, one in which god exist's and one in which god does not.</p><p></p><p>The atheist and theist debate: the atheist claims god does not exist, the theist claim's that god is so complex that you cannot prove his existence with modern science, philosophy, maths or logic.</p><p></p><p>in both scenarios, the one in which god exists and the one in which god does not the theist can make same statement... which scenario do we live in? </p><p></p><p><strong>When Guru Nanak was asked about the age of the universe (in Japji), he admitted that he did not know. They did not claim to be divinely chosen, nor did they claim to be perfect.</strong></p><p></p><p>If the Guru's weren't perfect or Divinely chosen then the book the wrote (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji) wasn't perfect or divinely chosen, why should it be so central to our lives?</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Now like I said, I do not believe in a sueprnatural god with emotions/consciousness/sentience, simply because I have no reason to do so. I am not saying that such a god couldn't exist, just that there isn't any evidence to suggest that such a being is real. The philosophy of the Guru Granth Sahib does not depend on the existence of such a being,</strong></p><p></p><p>Im reading japji, im only starting but... to claim that the philosophy of the Guru Granth Sahib does not depend on the existence of god seems crazy to me... </p><p></p><p>There is one god</p><p>his name is true</p><p>he is without fear etc etc...</p><p></p><p>are you really going to claim that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji does not depend on the existance of god? if god didn't exist then Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is really pointless...</p><p></p><p></p><p> which is why I am still able to call myself a 'Sikh' despite my atheistic tendancies.</p><p> </p><p>I will leave you with this (first pauri/stanza of Japji):</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p><strong>It took a while, but I eventually figured out (what I believe to be) the real meaning of this pauri. God (whatever He/She/It may be) will never be reduced to thought by humans.</strong></p><p></p><p>As you stated above the Gurus who wrote Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were not perfect. I'm not going to accept that question of the existence of god cannot be resolved by the human brain simply because a book written by imperfect Gurus said so.</p><p></p><p><strong>We may get a better understanding of how our universe works, just like a chimp may get a better understanding of what a space ship is by exploring its insides and seeing it blast off, but in the end, the chimp will never even come close to appreciating the power, significance and complexity of a space ship, just like we won't ever completely understand God. We are imperfect, finite, limited beings, we cannot fully understand that which is perfect, timeless and limitless.</strong></p><p> </p><p>I think that's quite defeatest.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So I didn't respond to all of your post, but alot of what i read on SPN really bothers me, SIkhs are adamant that their god isn't abrahamic, but it many ways the sikh god is...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="anon, post: 195366, member: 19291"] Please be patient with my lack of Sikh knowledge, I have been locked in a Sikh family all of my life, my beard, my turban and my family's control over my life are starting to bother me to the point where i have only now just started to look into why i actually do these things. If i have the family pressure to follow a traditional life style I may aswell see where these traditions have arisen... I Say this because this has brought my attention to Sikh History and has motivated my reading Gurbani. I have limited knowledge of Sikh history, philosophy and Gurbani so please excuse any errors and correct mistakes where I have made them [B]I do not believe in a god. By 'god' I am talking about a supernatural creator of any sorts.[/B] From what I've read the follower of Guru Nanak is must concede that god is a creator. Guru Nanak referred to god as Sat-Kartar if i am not mistaken and the first Sikh prayer any child learns tells us that the god of the Sikhs is KIRTA PURAKH, the creator of all... I'd like to make a little aside here, alot of people on SPN deal with the atheists by likening Sikhism to Atheism, it's odd but quite often sikhs respond with something like: "Silly atheist, you are confusing the Sikh god with the Abrahamic god, no of course we don't believe in the magical man in the sky with a beard who we must submit ourselves to! our conception of God is much deeper, much more complex and your atheist arguments, while relevant in a christian, Jewish or Islamic debate bears NO credence in a debate of Sikh philosophy..." I don't like these responses, these are just words but to me a lot of sikh history, practice and philosophy does indicate a God whose existance can be debated using the same arguements Atheists use in discussions with christians, jews and muslims. [B]The God I believe in has always existed, will always exist and is the eternal Truth. Perhaps it is a supreme reality to which we all belong, maybe it is a universal consciousness to which we are all linked, or perhaps it is nothing more than the cosmic laws which govern our existence. But it is not something I think about a lot, because as Guru Nanak put it, "by thinking, He cannot be reduced to thought, even by thinking an infinite number of times."[/B] I'm glad you put the God I [I]believe in[/I], because a sound proof the existence of the god who possesses such a nature you detail would intrest me very much. the God you believe in has always existed, my knowledge of the different forms of the cosmological argument is even less than my knowledge of sikhi but (i paraphrase) Carl Sagan (and i'm sure philosophers before him), have persuaded me that an initial uncaused cause does not necessarily have to be God, Perhaps the initial uncaused cause was the universe itself, it has always existed (although maybe we cant make the claim that it always will). Alot of SPN users liken the universe and god as a single entity "God is the universe" they say. Again they say one thing but to me sikh history and practices really indicate the other. If God from a sikh perspective is the embodiment of the universe (as apposed to the abrahamic man in the clouds) why do sikhs meditate on the universes name? buddhists enjoy the benefits of meditation by concentrating on their breath rather than a man made word for god... Why in an Ardas do Sikhs ask "the universe" for things Why do we need to be good people? why can't i go around killing, torturing, stealing and doing other bad things... is "the universe" going to judge us? to me the sikh god is the man in the clouds, the creator and the judge. [B]Human intelligence is limited. Our ability to understand and absorb information is limited because we are imperfect, finite beings. We do not live forever and we experience reality subjectively. 'God' (whatever He/She/It may be) has always existed, will always exist and is the objective Truth which pervades every inch of the universe. [/B] I don't understand how a being that you do not know the gender/nature of can be the objective truth of the universe (using your statment: Whatever He/She/It may be). To me the truth that "All batchelors are unmarried" is quite an objective truth. My knowledge of logic is even more lacking than my knowledge of sikhism and philosophy but this definition of god as being "truth" seems quite flimsy, poetic and just not very robust to me, it sounds very nice, it would make a nice sing or a poem but i really don't understand what this means... [B]We share about 98.6% DNA with chimpanzees. We are smarter than chimpanzees. So let's invent a measure of intelligence which makes humans unique. Let us assume that 'intelligence' is your ability to to, for example, compose poetry, symphonies, do art, math and science. Let's make that the arbitrary definition of 'intelligence' for the moment. Chimps can't do any of that. Yet we share 98.6% identical DNA. The most brilliant chimp there ever was could perhaps do a little bit of sign language; well, our toddlers can do that. Toddlers, babies, human infants. So here's what cocnerns me deeply. Veer deeply. EVERYTHING that we are, that distinguishes us from chimps, emerges from that teensy-tiny 1.4% difference in DNA. It has to, because that is the only difference. The Hubble Telescope, Rocket hips, the moon landing, giant mirrors which have allowed us to see the birth of the universe itself, the future colonization of mars, general relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, Shakespeare, philosophy, religion, EVERYTHING is in that 1.4%. But maybe we aren't as smart as we think we are. Maybe the difference between chimps and humans isn't actually that large. Maybe it isn't actually that much more impressive that we humans can build spaceships whereas chimps can combine their fingers together to communicate a message. Maybe humans aren't all that great. We tell ourselves that it is a lot, but maybe it is almost nothing. How do we decide that? Well, imagine ANOTHER life form somewhere out there in the universe, which is 1.4% different from us, in the same way that we are 1.4% different from chimps. Think about that. With a 1.4% difference from chimps, we have been able to capture images of the birth of the universe itself. Well, now go up another 1.4%. What are we to they? We would be drooling, blithering idiots in their presence! They would take Stephen Hawking and roll him in front of their scientists and say "well this one is the most brilliant among them, because he can sorta do astrophysics in his head..." and then someone else would say "aww isn't that cute, little Johnny can do that too! Oh here look, he worked out this astrophysics theory all by himself yesterday, we put it on the refrigerator door, he did it in his elementary school class." Think about how smart they would be! Their toddlers would be more intelligent than the smartest humans. Quantum mechanics would be intuitive to their babies. Whole symphonies, far greater than anything our musicians have ever produced, would be composed by their kids and put up on the refridgerator door, the same way pasta-collages are on our refrigerator doors.[/B] you propose one model of intelligence, but then make a number of assumptions, 1) that there are indeed beings in the universe that are more intelligent than us (by this model) And as for weather or not you claim these beings to be God: 2) why would these super intelligent beings be interested with us, when we build hospitals we don't care about destroying anthills... if these super intelligent being did exist why would he care about how we live our lives? anyway your analogy of super intelligent beings evokes the "Man in the clouds" abrahamic image of God again... [B]So this notion that we humans, with our limited, imperfect brains and subjective understanding of reality, are every going to be able to fully comprehend God, the MOST advanced being in existence (forget about 1.4%, God would be an infinite number of times more advanced than us), is preposterous.[/B] this is a defeatist attitude... i'm sure the thought that I could send messages to someone on the other side of the planet was a preposterous thought in the 11th century... [B]Anybody who claims to have spoken with God is a liar. [/B] I think most sakhis would have us believe that Guru Nanak spoke to God and recited Japji to him in Sultanpur? [B]When was the last time you stopped to speak with a worm? Why would God speak with us? Yes, there are religions in which prophets have claimed to have spoken with God and received a divine message. [/B] Guru Nanak did... [B]Well some God that turned out to be, because the world today is a better place than it was thousands of years ago in spite of, not because of, those religions (or any religion). If you study the theology of a lot of religions, it is exactly the kind of stuff you would have expected our ancestors to have come up with it. Stoning people to death, blasphemy, smiting, homophobia, none of this stuff is from the most advanced being in existence, it is straight out of the minds of men who lived thousands of years ago in ignorance, back before science, reason and logic.[/B] Most Sikhs today would have us believe that in our age of science, technology, drugs and logic we are living in Kaljug, the only pain in my life is that which has come from a 300 year old relgion that makes me keep a beard. [B]Wanna know how I knew the Gurus were sincere? Because they admitted that God is "incomprehensible" and "inaccessible".[/B] I don't know much about debating and arguing so i can't think of a technical term but the phrase "Win-Win" comes to mind. Let's imagine 2 scenarios, one in which god exist's and one in which god does not. The atheist and theist debate: the atheist claims god does not exist, the theist claim's that god is so complex that you cannot prove his existence with modern science, philosophy, maths or logic. in both scenarios, the one in which god exists and the one in which god does not the theist can make same statement... which scenario do we live in? [B]When Guru Nanak was asked about the age of the universe (in Japji), he admitted that he did not know. They did not claim to be divinely chosen, nor did they claim to be perfect.[/B] If the Guru's weren't perfect or Divinely chosen then the book the wrote (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji) wasn't perfect or divinely chosen, why should it be so central to our lives? [B]Now like I said, I do not believe in a sueprnatural god with emotions/consciousness/sentience, simply because I have no reason to do so. I am not saying that such a god couldn't exist, just that there isn't any evidence to suggest that such a being is real. The philosophy of the Guru Granth Sahib does not depend on the existence of such a being,[/B] Im reading japji, im only starting but... to claim that the philosophy of the Guru Granth Sahib does not depend on the existence of god seems crazy to me... There is one god his name is true he is without fear etc etc... are you really going to claim that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji does not depend on the existance of god? if god didn't exist then Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is really pointless... which is why I am still able to call myself a 'Sikh' despite my atheistic tendancies. I will leave you with this (first pauri/stanza of Japji): [B]It took a while, but I eventually figured out (what I believe to be) the real meaning of this pauri. God (whatever He/She/It may be) will never be reduced to thought by humans.[/B] As you stated above the Gurus who wrote Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were not perfect. I'm not going to accept that question of the existence of god cannot be resolved by the human brain simply because a book written by imperfect Gurus said so. [B]We may get a better understanding of how our universe works, just like a chimp may get a better understanding of what a space ship is by exploring its insides and seeing it blast off, but in the end, the chimp will never even come close to appreciating the power, significance and complexity of a space ship, just like we won't ever completely understand God. We are imperfect, finite, limited beings, we cannot fully understand that which is perfect, timeless and limitless.[/B] I think that's quite defeatest. So I didn't respond to all of your post, but alot of what i read on SPN really bothers me, SIkhs are adamant that their god isn't abrahamic, but it many ways the sikh god is... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
My Thoughts On (a) God
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top