Philosophy Now Forum

Do sinful souls, who are born as plants and animals, ever get another human birth?
Smt. Priyanka Seethepalli asked: I have read in one of your articles that some souls are born as fish and trees to train those souls regarding sacrifice. Once that birth is over and God feels that the soul has indeed learnt its lesson, are they born as human beings again in order to give them a second chance at having a human birth?

Swami replied: Sinners who have used their qualities greed and anger in the wrong direction to commit sins are born as trees. In those births as trees, the souls are quite peaceful, which helps them subside their anger. They also learn to sacrifice their fruits to human beings, which pacifies their greediness and anger. These punishments are given in extreme cases. Once they attain reformation, they are again given human births, depending on the judgment of God. This routine cycle of souls operates mechanically.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 2:00 am Do sinful souls, who are born as plants and animals, ever get another human birth?

Yes, but only if Immanuel Can confirms that, as plants and animals, they have become true Christians.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:00 am

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 2:00 am Do sinful souls, who are born as plants and animals, ever get another human birth?

Yes, but only if Immanuel Can confirms that, as plants and animals, they have become true Christians.

 God is loving every soul and is helping every soul in this world. He never hates any soul. The punishment in the hell is also to reduce madness of materialism of the soul. Suppose, one son becomes mad, the father will take him to the doctor and admits him in the mental hospital where shock treatments are given. Can you say that the father is angry with the son? Similarly, the hell is for the last sort of trial to transform the soul. The madness is never cured and the son has to be retained in the hospital only forever.



 Same is the concept of the permanent hell. These souls cannot be brought into this world because they will bring Chaos in this world, just like the mad son cannot be brought out of the hospital into the society. Some souls are born as birds, animals etc., Here also only the love of God reflects. As a human being the soul was always interested in eating, drinking and sex only. The soul never turned to God. In such case there is no use of the intelligence of the human category, which is meant for analysis of truth. Therefore, the soul is placed in the cycle of animals, which are also happy like the human beings in eating, drinking and sex only. The human being may think that he may loose his beautiful wife and may have to live with a she-buffalo if he is born as he-buffalo. But the point is that when the soul is born as he-buffalo, the she-buffalo is as beautiful as the present ‘Miss world’!.

The grass will be as tasty as the sweet dish in the meals today. The soul cannot estimate the happiness of the animal while remaining in the human body. The same happiness is received by the souls in all types of bodies from eating, drinking and sex. What ever he desired, that is given to him by God without any disturbance. In the human life the spiritual knowledge is often disturbing him in achieving the continuous happiness from eating, drinking and sex. Therefore, God favored the soul by such animal-birth and this is not punishing the soul.

This means God is helping even His enemies. A father will never harm his issue even if it opposes him. He wants always the happiness of the child continuously. The devoted souls want to be with God and derive the divine bliss constantly. God provides opportunity for such devotees also to make them happy constantly by guiding them in achieving the real and highest devotion to Him. Therefore, you can see the same love of God on a devoted soul staying in His abode as an angel and also on a he-buffalo enjoying with the she-buffalo in a mud pond. Both are continuously happy in their own fields! At last God provided what ever the child desired. Of course He tried to convert the soul in the he-buffalo into an angel. When He failed in all His efforts, He has sanctioned the firm desire of the soul. Therefore, God helped all the souls, whether those loved Him or not.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 1:19 pm

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:00 am

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 2:00 am Do sinful souls, who are born as plants and animals, ever get another human birth?

Yes, but only if Immanuel Can confirms that, as plants and animals, they have become true Christians.

 God is loving every soul and is helping every soul in this world. He never hates any soul. The punishment in the hell is also to reduce madness of materialism of the soul. Suppose, one son becomes mad, the father will take him to the doctor and admits him in the mental hospital where shock treatments are given. Can you say that the father is angry with the son? Similarly, the hell is for the last sort of trial to transform the soul. The madness is never cured and the son has to be retained in the hospital only forever.



 Same is the concept of the permanent hell. These souls cannot be brought into this world because they will bring Chaos in this world, just like the mad son cannot be brought out of the hospital into the society. Some souls are born as birds, animals etc., Here also only the love of God reflects. As a human being the soul was always interested in eating, drinking and sex only. The soul never turned to God. In such case there is no use of the intelligence of the human category, which is meant for analysis of truth. Therefore, the soul is placed in the cycle of animals, which are also happy like the human beings in eating, drinking and sex only. The human being may think that he may loose his beautiful wife and may have to live with a she-buffalo if he is born as he-buffalo. But the point is that when the soul is born as he-buffalo, the she-buffalo is as beautiful as the present ‘Miss world’!.

The grass will be as tasty as the sweet dish in the meals today. The soul cannot estimate the happiness of the animal while remaining in the human body. The same happiness is received by the souls in all types of bodies from eating, drinking and sex. What ever he desired, that is given to him by God without any disturbance. In the human life the spiritual knowledge is often disturbing him in achieving the continuous happiness from eating, drinking and sex. Therefore, God favored the soul by such animal-birth and this is not punishing the soul.

This means God is helping even His enemies. A father will never harm his issue even if it opposes him. He wants always the happiness of the child continuously. The devoted souls want to be with God and derive the divine bliss constantly. God provides opportunity for such devotees also to make them happy constantly by guiding them in achieving the real and highest devotion to Him. Therefore, you can see the same love of God on a devoted soul staying in His abode as an angel and also on a he-buffalo enjoying with the she-buffalo in a mud pond. Both are continuously happy in their own fields! At last God provided what ever the child desired. Of course He tried to convert the soul in the he-buffalo into an angel. When He failed in all His efforts, He has sanctioned the firm desire of the soul. Therefore, God helped all the souls, whether those loved Him or not.

You come here and you post your beliefs. Many, many, many posts. And that's fine.

But with me, it's not what someone believes "in their head" that counts...it's what they are able to demonstrate that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to believe in turn.

Why? Because given that this is a philosophy forum and not a forum that one might find on a website devoted to one or another religious denomination, we are expected to dig deeper in exploring our beliefs.

You believe in a soul, in an afterlife, in a God.

But, again, so do many of these folks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

In fact, they would be insisting that it is you who are on the wrong path, right?

So, what does that tell us? Well, it tells me that what you believe about God and religion is not nearly as crucial as that you do believe something about them. With God and religion you gain access to objectively morality on this side of the grave and immortality and salvation on the other side.

That's the whole point of religion! To comfort and console you all the way to the grave in providing you with a "transcending font" you can anchor your Soul to.


Think about it. Really think about it.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 2:00 am Do sinful souls, who are born as plants and animals, ever get another human birth?
Smt. Priyanka Seethepalli asked: I have read in one of your articles that some souls are born as fish and trees to train those souls regarding sacrifice. Once that birth is over and God feels that the soul has indeed learnt its lesson, are they born as human beings again in order to give them a second chance at having a human birth?

Swami replied: Sinners who have used their qualities greed and anger in the wrong direction to commit sins are born as trees. In those births as trees, the souls are quite peaceful, which helps them subside their anger. They also learn to sacrifice their fruits to human beings, which pacifies their greediness and anger. These punishments are given in extreme cases. Once they attain reformation, they are again given human births, depending on the judgment of God. This routine cycle of souls operates mechanically.

Tree were not once humans.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:06 pm
So, what does that tell us? Well, it tells me that what you believe about God and religion is not nearly as crucial as that you do believe something about them. With God and religion you gain access to objectively morality on this side of the grave and immortality and salvation on the other side.

That's the whole point of religion! To comfort and console you all the way to the grave in providing you with a "transcending font" you can anchor your Soul to.


Think about it. Really think about it.

Atheists and even some scientists say that God does not exist and hence, there is no heaven, hell or any other upper world. On this point, they are in line with Cārvāka, who too was an atheist. But the atheists and scientists claim to support the rules of justice in pravṛtti or worldly life. It is only the hypocrisy of these people.

Actually, they are fully convinced that even if they secretly break the rules of justice in pravṛtti, they need not fear any punishment since, according to them, no God exists. But they externally claim to support justice. This superficial hypocrisy is only to cheat society and get a good name in spite of violating justice secretly.

Their diplomacy is meant to help them in escaping the punishment from the law of the land for their secret injustice. These atheists maintain some external politeness even though they are actually cheating others. On the other hand, sage Cārvāka openly said that the rules of pravṛtti can be broken and sins can be committed without any fear.

We must appreciate both the frankness of the sage and the politeness of the modern atheist. Sage Cārvāka was a great scientist who discovered the essential nature of the soul. His discovery has helped us recognize that the soul is a part of creation and is not the Creator. God is very angry with this perverted ancient scientist not because he denied the existence of God, but because he totally broke the rules of pravṛtti. These rules are the basis for maintaining the balance of society.

After all, the fear of the punishment for sin intrinsically prevents a person from committing injustice. It is much more effective in controlling injustice than any external control such as the law of the land. This intrinsic fear of committing sins is based on the existence of God alone. It is God who punishes the sinner for his sins in unimaginable ways. The sinner may succeed in escaping the punishment from the law of land, but escaping God’s punishment is impossible since it is delivered in unimaginable ways.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:52 pm After all, the fear of the punishment for sin intrinsically prevents a person from committing injustice. It is much more effective in controlling injustice than any external control such as the law of the land. This intrinsic fear of committing sins is based on the existence of God alone.

Lovely, so people aren't really loving, caring, compassionate, it's fear of God that keeps them in line. Deep down they're all murderers and rapists, including you, but the fear of God keeps that in check. What a lovely universe! And truly those who suppressed their desires to kill and rape deserve eternal bliss.

I feel like we need some William Blake just for contrast...

Those who restrain desire do so because theirs is weak enough to be restrained.

― William Blake, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:52 pm

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:06 pm
So, what does that tell us? Well, it tells me that what you believe about God and religion is not nearly as crucial as that you do believe something about them. With God and religion you gain access to objectively morality on this side of the grave and immortality and salvation on the other side.

That's the whole point of religion! To comfort and console you all the way to the grave in providing you with a "transcending font" you can anchor your Soul to.


Think about it. Really think about it.

Atheists and even some scientists say that God does not exist and hence, there is no heaven, hell or any other upper world. On this point, they are in line with Cārvāka, who too was an atheist. But the atheists and scientists claim to support the rules of justice in pravṛtti or worldly life. It is only the hypocrisy of these people.

Actually, they are fully convinced that even if they secretly break the rules of justice in pravṛtti, they need not fear any punishment since, according to them, no God exists. But they externally claim to support justice. This superficial hypocrisy is only to cheat society and get a good name in spite of violating justice secretly.

Their diplomacy is meant to help them in escaping the punishment from the law of the land for their secret injustice. These atheists maintain some external politeness even though they are actually cheating others. On the other hand, sage Cārvāka openly said that the rules of pravṛtti can be broken and sins can be committed without any fear.

We must appreciate both the frankness of the sage and the politeness of the modern atheist. Sage Cārvāka was a great scientist who discovered the essential nature of the soul. His discovery has helped us recognize that the soul is a part of creation and is not the Creator. God is very angry with this perverted ancient scientist not because he denied the existence of God, but because he totally broke the rules of pravṛtti. These rules are the basis for maintaining the balance of society.

After all, the fear of the punishment for sin intrinsically prevents a person from committing injustice. It is much more effective in controlling injustice than any external control such as the law of the land. This intrinsic fear of committing sins is based on the existence of God alone. It is God who punishes the sinner for his sins in unimaginable ways. The sinner may succeed in escaping the punishment from the law of land, but escaping God’s punishment is impossible since it is delivered in unimaginable ways.

Okay, but what does that really have to do with this:

But with me, it's not what someone believes "in their head" that counts...it's what they are able to demonstrate that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to believe in turn.

Why? Because given that this is a philosophy forum and not a forum that one might find on a website devoted to one or another religious denomination, we are expected to dig deeper in exploring our beliefs.

You believe in a soul, in an afterlife, in a God.

But, again, so do many of these folks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

In fact, they would be insisting that it is you who are on the wrong path, right?

So, what does that tell us? Well, it tells me that what you believe about God and religion is not nearly as crucial as that you do believe something about them. With God and religion you gain access to objectively morality on this side of the grave and immortality and salvation on the other side.

That's the whole point of religion! To comfort and console you all the way to the grave in providing you with a "transcending font" you can anchor your Soul to.

I'm not asking scientists or atheists to demonstrate their belief that God does not exist. I'm asking those who do believe in God to demonstrate that, in fact, it is their God, their religious or spiritual path that is "the way" to immortality and salvation.

Why your path and not the path of others? Why your distinction between justice and injustice and not the distinction of others? Why your rendition of Judgment Day and not the rendition of others?

Again, with so much at stake on both sides of the grave.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:59 pm

dattaswami wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 4:52 pm After all, the fear of the punishment for sin intrinsically prevents a person from committing injustice. It is much more effective in controlling injustice than any external control such as the law of the land. This intrinsic fear of committing sins is based on the existence of God alone.

Lovely, so people aren't really loving, caring, compassionate, it's fear of God that keeps them in line. Deep down they're all murderers and rapists, including you, but the fear of God keeps that in check. What a lovely universe! And truly those who suppressed their desires to kill and rape deserve eternal bliss.

I feel like we need some William Blake just for contrast...

Those who restrain desire do so because theirs is weak enough to be restrained.

― William Blake, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell

Suppose, a situation results in which there is a full chance of escaping the punishment from Government, everybody will do the sin without fear and escape punishment here. Therefore, the atheistic-ethical life of human beings is impossible and this word exactly resembles with the word ‘night sun’. Such atheistic-ethical administration is possible only in the limited situations in which the Government (courts and police) can catch the culprit and punish the culprit.

Such situations become very very less in number since there is terrible development of intelligence aided by the advocates, who plead alone for money. In such case, the growth of the sin becomes more and more and the control of sin becomes negligible, which is the gradual fall of a patient in whom the heath becomes negligible and the illness is progressing day-by-day.

Beware that I do not create the concept of existence of God for the sake of control of sin in the society as some liberal atheists often speak that the existence of God was created by ancient people just to control the sin in the society. If this is correct, a lie spoken cannot stand forever and once it is detected as the lie, the expected good results vanish immediately.

Again and again, I am warning that I am not developing the concept of existence of God for achieving just this good result of controlling sin in the society. I have developed this concept of existence of God just from your theory of probability only, which cannot rule out one probability of existence of God as the ultimate cause among several other probabilities. Since all probabilities have equal strength, the probability of existence of God has the strength of any other probability as its right as per the norms of the theory of probability.

I have selected this probability of existence of God by giving more strength based on the wise selection with lesser risk. To explain this wise selection of lesser risk, you can think that there is no loss to you if you lead a sinless life even if really God is non-existent. But, if God exists based on equal strength (50-50) of such probability among other probabilities, you will achieve the greatest benefit of avoiding the hell in future.
Not only this, you will also achieve the greatest benefit here itself by the sinless life since sins leading to more and more luxuries result in several diseases spoiling your happiness here. Not only this, if the sins are avoided, you will not have the tension of the probability of punishments given by the Government. A life without tensions blessed by peace and happiness is the highest wealth. In view of all these advantages, such wise selection of this probability finally results in no risk at all.

Please remember that

1) I have developed the probability of existence of God based on your theory of probability only that was selected by you to establish that even the inert energy could create such well designed universe based on one of several probabilities. I have perfectly followed your view of the inert energy as the ultimate cause and I have taken this probability of existence of God as one of several probabilities based on your theory only.

2) Once the probability of existence of God took birth based on your theory only getting equal strength of any other probability, the wise selection of this probability with lesser risk makes this probability to become more strong than any other probability.

3) The selection of such strongest probability of existence of God indicates no loss to you by following sinless life even if God does not exist (50-50 probability).

4) On the other hand, if God exists (50-50 probability), avoiding hell shows the greatest advantage after your death. 5) If God exists, a sinless life shows highest benefit even in your present life here, which is the eternal happiness and peace in absence of all tensions.

In view of all these plus points, the acceptance of existence of God becomes the wisest inevitable way for a scientist or even atheist.
Even conservative, rigid atheists cannot rule out this existence of God established by the scientific theory of probability only because such conservative and rigid people of atheism do not accept unlike open minded scientists, even if I prove the existence of God based on the scientific logic, which fails to enter the brain of any conservative person like the light failing to enter a room closed on all sides.
However, for the sake of the people like scientists, who open their minds to logic without any conservatism like rooms opened to open atmosphere on all sides, I will also give the analysis of proving the existence of God based on scientific logic.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 5:10 pm

Why your path and not the path of others? Why your distinction between justice and injustice and not the distinction of others? Why your rendition of Judgment Day and not the rendition of others?

Again, with so much at stake on both sides of the grave.

People have experienced the unimaginable God through inference though not through perception. The unimaginable events called miracles performed by the mediated God are experienced directly through perception.

When the smoke coming from the top of hill is experienced by you through perception, are you not imagining or inferring its source, the fire on the hill? Inference is as good authority as perception.

You may say that you have seen both fire and smoke in the kitchen and may say that you have not seen the unimaginable God and unimaginable miracles together anywhere. Okay. In that case, you have seen both mediated God and performed miracle together.

Is it not? Okay. You think the mediated God Himself as the unimaginable God because the mediated God is the source of the unimaginable miracle. Now, you may say that the mediated God is imaginable and visible and can’t be the unimaginable God. Okay.

Then, I will ask you this question:- How imaginable person generated the unimaginable miracle? If imaginable person can generate the unimaginable miracle, why every imaginable person is not generating the unimaginable miracle?

Hence, the imaginable and visible person generating unimaginable miracle must have the unimaginable source of unimaginable miracle in Himself in hidden way. If you say that the entire imaginable person is imaginable only and there is no hidden unimaginable entity in Him, your argument becomes absurd.

All My above questions will hit you like arrows (in such case every imaginable person must generate unimaginable miracle etc.). Hence, you have to agree that in this imaginable person (performing unimaginable miracle) only unimaginable entity must have been hidden. Therefore, you have to agree to the existence of unimaginable God, who is the source of unimaginable events called miracles perceived by everybody.
For the sake of perception of unimaginable events generated by the mediated God, you can see the CDs of Bhagavān Śrī Satya Sai Bāba doing miracles. Hence, unimaginable God is established by scientific logic. You can propagate this knowledge after seeing the CDs of Bhagavān Śrī Satya Sai Bāba.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 4:10 am Suppose, a situation results in which there is a full chance of escaping the punishment from Government, everybody will do the sin without fear and escape punishment here.

1) not everybody. We innately feel empathy. 2) You're missing the point. You stated that fear of God's punishment is what keeps people good. This means that in essence they are not good, but fear keeps them in line. There are people who do not need to be scared into behaving kindly and fairly with others. But in your model people driven by fear to not do harm deserve eternal joy.

That's bizarre.

Again and again, I am warning that I am not developing the concept of existence of God for achieving just this good result of controlling sin in the society.

I don't assume that. So, there is no need to say it to me.

I have developed this concept of existence of God just from your theory of probability only,

My theory of probability?

which cannot rule out one probability of existence of God as the ultimate cause among several other probabilities. Since all probabilities have equal strength, the probability of existence of God has the strength of any other probability as its right as per the norms of the theory of probability.

I don't think that makes any sense. You believe in God because it is one probability? Equal to all the others? How many others are there? If there are two other probabilities (I think you mean possibilities) then there is, if your probability theory is correct, a 33% chance there is a God. Is that what you are saying, that there is a 33% of God or less?

I have selected this probability of existence of God by giving more strength based on the wise selection with lesser risk. To explain this wise selection of lesser risk, you can think that there is no loss to you if you lead a sinless life even if really God is non-existent. But, if God exists based on equal strength (50-50) of such probability among other probabilities, you will achieve the greatest benefit of avoiding the hell in future.

So, Pascal's Wager.
Several problems here: We do not form beliefs like gamblers. We form beliefs based on experience and sometimes argument. We don't say Hey, I'll believe in God just in case. That is not how beliefs form. 2) you keep referring to 'other probabilities', that is plural, so it cannot be 50/50. If there are other probabilities (again, possibilities) then that is at least 3, God+other possibilities. So that's 3 options which means 33%.

Not only this, you will also achieve the greatest benefit here itself by the sinless life since sins leading to more and more luxuries result in several diseases spoiling your happiness here. Not only this, if the sins are avoided, you will not have the tension of the probability of punishments given by the Government. A life without tensions blessed by peace and happiness is the highest wealth. In view of all these advantages, such wise selection of this probability finally results in no risk at all.

The issue of the risk of believing in God is not one I raised. You are not responding to my post here.

Please remember that

1) I have developed the probability of existence of God based on your theory of probability only that was selected by you to establish that even the inert energy could create such well designed universe based on one of several probabilities. I have perfectly followed your view of the inert energy as the ultimate cause and I have taken this probability of existence of God as one of several probabilities based on your theory only.

1) it's not my theory of probability 2) if it is 50%, it is not probable. Probable would be more than 50%. 3) you do not understand statistics. Just because there are two options or whatever number of options does not entail that they all have equal chances of being the case. And even if we take up the idea of Zeux existing, we have COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ETHICAL AND BEHAVIORAL NORMS. IOW your theory here is very confused.

In view of all these plus points, the acceptance of existence of God becomes the wisest inevitable way for a scientist or even atheist.
Even conservative, rigid atheists cannot rule out this existence of God established by the scientific theory of probability only because such conservative and rigid people of atheism do not accept unlike open minded scientists, even if I prove the existence of God based on the scientific logic, which fails to enter the brain of any conservative person like the light failing to enter a room closed on all sides.
However, for the sake of the people like scientists, who open their minds to logic without any conservatism like rooms opened to open atmosphere on all sides, I will also give the analysis of proving the existence of God based on scientific logic.

First you talk, incorrectly, of your argument showing a 50% possibility of their being a God. Now you claim you proved the existence of God. If you were correct and you demonstrated it was a 50% chance, this is NOT proving the existence of God.

As a guru with a number of followers, I would suggest you consult with one who actually understands statistics. What you produced here has nothing to do with how probabilities are calculated in science. I'm not an atheist so you can stop assuming that.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:09 amI don't think that makes any sense. You believe in God because it is one probability? Equal to all the others? How many others are there? If there are two other probabilities (I think you mean possibilities) then there is, if your probability theory is correct, a 33% chance there is a God. Is that what you are saying, that there is a 33% of God or less?

Either GOd exists or not exists. The probability is 50:50%. How it can be 33.33%. If you flip the coin, probability of head or tail is 50:50%. Is it not?

dattaswami wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:22 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:09 amI don't think that makes any sense. You believe in God because it is one probability? Equal to all the others? How many others are there? If there are two other probabilities (I think you mean possibilities) then there is, if your probability theory is correct, a 33% chance there is a God. Is that what you are saying, that there is a 33% of God or less?

Either GOd exists or not exists. The probability is 50:50%. How it can be 33.33%. If you flip the coin, probability of head or tail is 50:50%. Is it not?

Well, 1) you said there were other probabilities plural, so that's at least 2 others.
Then there are many different Gods, with different morals, different practices.
Zeus and Krishna are not the same guy. Perhaps the God of the Christians is really the same as Krishna, perhaps not. But Zeus????? No, this is someone who has very different ideas about violence, what a good or noble person is, how one is more spiritual...and so on.
So, your ideas about what God is, just by mentioning Zeus, now goes down to 33%. But then there are many other conceptions of God - many other conceptions of how to be good and how to practices spirituality'. The odds keep going down.

Further there could be a demiurge or a polytheism. In Hinduism, your base, one can argue - though other Hindus may disagree - that all the gods and godesses are really one, whether Visnu or Brahma. But in other REAL polytheisms, this is not the case.

Further let's look at how ridiculous your statistics are....

dattaswami is either a bank robber or he is not.

So, there is a 50% chance he is a bank robber.

He is either a rapist or he is not.

So, there is a 50% chance that he is a rapists.

Man after we list a few more crimes the odds are getting very high that you are some sort of criminal.

He is either a fish or not.

Your 'logic' would entail that there is a 50% chance a goldfish created the universe. Because it is either true or not.

Seriously you have no idea what you are talking about when you talk about statistics.

dattaswami wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:22 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:09 amI don't think that makes any sense. You believe in God because it is one probability? Equal to all the others? How many others are there? If there are two other probabilities (I think you mean possibilities) then there is, if your probability theory is correct, a 33% chance there is a God. Is that what you are saying, that there is a 33% of God or less?

Either GOd exists or not exists. The probability is 50:50%. How it can be 33.33%. If you flip the coin, probability of head or tail is 50:50%. Is it not?

So, in your earlier post you said that scientists cannot rule out the existence of God. Then you said that God was probable. Then you said that you had proven that God exists. All based on this 50/50 argument.

OK.
Dattaswami is either a narcissist or a good man.
So, there is a 50% chance he is a narcissist. Have I proven that he is a narcissist?

Or
Dattaswami is either a Dalit or he isn't.
So, there is a 50% chance he is a Dalit. Have a I proven he is a Dalit?
Is there any risk in thinking he is a Dalit? Not for me. I don't like the caste system so it would be great if a Dalit became a leader, even if I am skeptical about his teachings. I like the class/caste mobility.
So, there is no risk for me in believing that DS is a Dalit. There is a small benefit. So, I will believe it.

This isn't logic or statistics.

Dalit is either a Republican or he is not.
So, there is a 50% chance he is a Republican.
Well, no. Democrats and Republicans do not divide into 50% and further there are other possibilities. He might be independent. He might be from another country and neither.

Your argument does not show there is a 50% chance there is a god, especially the one you believe in and describe.
50% does not make God's existence probable. Probable is more than 50%.
50% does not prove God's existence, which you ended up claiming you had proven.

You have a poor understanding of human nature. We don't choose beliefs like gamblers choose ways of betting.
We come to believe things via parenting, experience and sometimes through argument.
I can't decide to believe in the tooth fairy because believing in it has no risk and might make me check more often for money under my pillow.
My life leading up to now leads to my beliefs and my own innate tendencies.

How can a guru not know something so basic about human nature?????

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:49 am

You have a poor understanding of human nature. We don't choose beliefs like gamblers choose ways of betting.
We come to believe things via parenting, experience and sometimes through argument.
I can't decide to believe in the tooth fairy because believing in it has no risk and might make me check more often for money under my pillow.
My life leading up to now leads to my beliefs and my own innate tendencies.

How can a guru not know something so basic about human nature?????

Since the behaviour of devotees is bad, you need not negate the existence of God. If the son is wrong, you may say that the father is also wrong but you should not say that father does not exist. The existence of God need not be known from the scriptures. If the scripture alone is the authority for the existence of God, nobody will believe it since any imaginary story can be created by any book. The practical observations of nature revealed the existence of God and scripture is only a record of the conclusions of debates of scientists, who observed the nature and events of life. When the nature was observed, the biggest surprise was about the infiniteness of space without the boundary wall of the universe.

This is a practical enquiry raising anxiety in the minds of the observers of the nature, who are called as scientists. After several debates, the conclusion was that the boundary of the universe is unimaginable since the space is infinite. An international conference on the diameter of the universe was held in which several theories were proposed and the essence of all the theories was only that the universe is infinite on all sides.

Some proposed constant expansion of the universe, which also does not give the correct idea of the unimaginable boundary of the space. One scientist asked that even if the boundary wall of the universe is found by travelling 200 billion light years, which is the supposed diameter of the universe, what should be present after the boundary wall? About 200 research papers were presented and the final conclusion was only that the universe is infinite and its boundary wall is unimaginable.

This unimaginable boundary of the universe is called as God. The unimaginable boundary of the universe must not contain any space and should not have spatial dimensions. Then only it becomes unimaginable. Any entity having even very very small spatial dimensions can be imaginable. If the boundary is imaginable, you are still continuing in the imaginable phase of universe only and the boundary should not be reached [to be unimaginable]. If the boundary has no spatial dimensions, it should be the generator of the space. The reason is that space cannot exist in its generator before its generation. This point again mutually proves that the boundary is the generator of space.

Therefore, the existence of unimaginable boundary, called as unimaginable God, is not mere imagination of some scriptures. It is the conclusion of most practical observations of the infinite space or universe. Added to this concept, sometimes some unimaginable events called as miracles are observed in the life, which cannot be rejected as magic. Whether the miracles, which are unimaginable events, are believed or not, the unimaginable boundary of the universe cannot be rejected at any cost. Therefore, the boundary of the universe is not only unimaginable, but also happens to be the generator of space or universe. Therefore, the concept of God is the result of deep scientific analysis of practical observation of nature only.

The devotees may be wrong. But you should think that how much wrong the devotee will be in absence of faith in God, which results in fear for sin that is punishable in terrible hell. You must have the relative imagination and be satisfied with the relatively controlled cheating of the devotees due to faith in God. God never does any miracle to remove the bad behaviour of human beings. The realisation should come in the minds of the people, which alone results in permanent transformation and for this purpose God comes down again and again in human form to preach the divine spiritual knowledge for the sake of such transformation. Such transformation alone is real for which God is always trying through human incarnations.

You must appreciate that the concept of God develops fear for sin and brings the in-built resistance to crime in the heart of every individual. The concept of God also brings confidence and patience in your heart avoiding the depression of mind due to the victory of injustice. Otherwise, the patience is not developed, which leads to the birth of terrible concepts like terrorism that bring chaos in the society. You must appreciate the concept of God from the scientific analysis of nature and its tremendous benefits in the administration of the balance of individuals and social balance at large. If you throw away the concept of God treating it as theoretical imagination, the society would have been blasted by now in to pieces.