for mature theists only

Are you a mature theist? I really don't want to waste web space on psychobabble-- I want to read other people's stories and learn from their experiences--
thank you

i was not raised in any religion and did not concern myself with god one way or the other until fairly recent years. it was really the more i learned about nature, the more in awe i felt of it. lotsa stuff like habitat niches, the balance of life, spending a lot of time in the desert. nature seems like a whole system of miracles.
then i discovered qawwali (sufi music of south asia) and it felt like coming home, like a connection. i also feel this connection sometimes when i am spending time in beautiful land. i know that doesn't make any sense, but that is my experience.
i believe that god is one for philosophical reasons, but i don't think it matters if he is seen as one or many.

format_quote Originally Posted by wilberhum

Well maybe at 61 I'm going into a second child hood.
But I must admit I don't have your great brilliance.

is this really necessary?

format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs

i was not raised in any religion and did not concern myself with god one way or the other until fairly recent years. it was really the more i learned about nature, the more in awe i felt of it. lotsa stuff like habitat niches, the balance of life, spending a lot of time in the desert. nature seems like a whole system of miracles.
then i discovered qawwali (sufi music of south asia) and it felt like coming home, like a connection. i also feel this connection sometimes when i am spending time in beautiful land. i know that doesn't make any sense, but that is my experience.
i believe that god is one for philosophical reasons, but i don't think it matters if he is seen as one or many.

thank you... that is exactly the sort of read I was looking for..

format_quote Originally Posted by Balthasar21

Personal Sermon / Testimony / Testifying can not be proven .

I didn't ask for proof! I asked for personal experience.
I think the topic question is quite clear?
thank you

I wonder how many people have thought about the fact that insects and flowering plants are dependent on each other. A Honey bee can not survive without flowers and the flowers a honey bee depends on can not reproduce without honey bees. The logical conclusion is both were created at the same time. I'm not a mathmatician, but I would say that odds of both events occuring at the same time are very, very remote.

Then we have lichens. A fungi and a green plant, both dependent on each other. Another symbiotic relationship. Come to think of it these symbiotic relationships are very common. Yet, what are the odds that any of these interdependant creatures would randomly occur at precisly the same time so that both it and it's partner would survive.

Without addressing the subject of your post which btw doesn't make good scientific sense. I'll remind you that this isn't a topic about evolution! I ask you, either to respect the topic --as in address it only as relates to the subject matter (mature Theists!)-- or just simply not participate in this thread!
thank you

format_quote Originally Posted by ranma1/2

There are explainations how these symbiotic relationships have arrived. It is important to remember that the creatures of today are not the same of those in the past. Remember evo is a combination of random mutation with selection. Its a small and gradual process.

Now that is true. At least if scientific explanation was the only possible means of life as we know it.

However, this depends on random chance of things developing. Now let us just look at the odds of some things happening. Look at the eye of a Squid, an Eagle, a Shark and a Horse. A mollusk, a bird, a fish and a mammal. Four totaly different life forms, yet with virtually identical eyes.

With a stretch of the imagination possibly it can be shown that the eye of the Fish, Bird and Mammal were all simply the same eye that developed in the Fish and just carried over as the fish evolved. but, the squid would not fall into that same chain of biological evolution. What are the odds that the same eye structure would form in such diverse creatures on the same planet and all in the same time frame? How come among all the mollusks only the cephalopods developed mammalian type eyes? True for the life of a cephalopod it is essential, but what are the odds it can occur randomly?

Now look at the symbiotic relationships again. What are the odds of this happening routinely out of random chance? Especialy since it occurs among non-related species. Look at the tiny eye-lash mites you are born with, a nearly invisible arachnid that can only live in the eye lash follicles of humans. Yet, virtually all of us are born with them. A creature that apparantly has no biological reason to exist, yet it does and some how is even able to reproduce and pass from one generation of humans to the next. Yet, they could not exist without humans. What are the odds of that happening randomly?

I can accept random developments up to a point, but when it starts to look like the norm, I can no longer even contemplate the odds that would cause all of these "coincidences" to occur randomly on the same insignificant planet and in the same time frame.

Randomization, does not seem to be a very good explanation.

I guess for me it is the inability to believe that the universe created it self in such an AMAZING WAY out of nothing, with no planner behind it. It is just impossible. Seriously, no one would believe me if I told them my house was built by evolution or chance or whatever, so I find it even more ridiculous to think that something as amazing and complex as a human body, or even a single bacterial cell could have been created by time and chance.

Simply amazing, subhanallah!

Like snakelegs, I came to the conclusion of a higher power simply observing nature and my role in it. Like was mentioned, to me it is hard to watch a sunrise in the desert and not feel a little closer to God. It isn't really about doctrine or what religion you call yourself, although those are obviously important, but observing the world in its natural state opened the door to spirituality for me.

Thanks everyone who has shared, it is unfortunate that some left me their stories by PM, out of apprehension that others would rip into their post.

peace!

format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H

Greetings and peace be with you all;

My search for God was a gradual process from the age of about fifty. One of the things that helped clarify my thoughts was trying to find an answer to one question.

Does God the creator of the universe and life exist fully and totally, yes or no?

The God I excluded was the maybe or probable God; because the maybe or probable God can only exist in my mind.

The only answer I wanted to my question was yes he exists fully and totally or there is no God. If and only if God exists then I should strive to make him the greatest thing in my life, because ultimately he is my creator.

In the spirit of searching for God

Eric

Thanks Eric

I had a similar conversation the other day with a scholar, admittedly it was very long, and I wish I could share it as he stated it, because I thought it brilliant. He is also an engineer, and just arrived to G-D by process of elimination I have never seen anyone do it quite that way. He can take anything even a lemon tree and keep getting to the root of it to make his point. He went through the self, "Energy", the universe as a whole, limitations on each. Things in the physical world, information that we have in memory to rely on, I thought it was very impressive.
I often find that each one bases his belief on his field and area of interest, I have known a ship's captain, who often comes to get his medication from my sister's pharmacy to engage in a lively topic about the constellations and religion. I am very attracted to philosophy, philosophy in science, and philosophy in religion.. was hoping I'd get quite a few stories here, but will be happy with the few I have already read.
thanks again!

just happened to see this last night. it may be of interest to some. i found it interesting because i like the questions sheldrake raised. (i like questions).
rupert sheldrake is somewhat regarded as a heretic in the science world.
anyway, i found it quite fascinating. among other things, he says that DNA does not account for everything - such as form. the same DNA will be found in any part of a plant for example, and yet some manifests as petals, some as leaves etc etc.
for those who think music is haram - be warned that there is some music in the video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...01945812&q=BBC