How spiritual reality can affect physical reality and stays undetected?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, references must be supplied on Wikipedia which have been supplied.
Deny Wikipedia after you have shown the references to be less than credible I suggest.

Have you researched the Wiki footnotes?
 
Because God is the cause of everything and the creator. I am not saying that these atmospheric conditions you mention aren’t present only that the creator of such things is God. He made everything and everything answers to His will always, his permissive or direct will. Nothing ever happens without Him knowing about it (even a bird falling from the sky so we are told). He either directs something to happen, or permits (allows) it to happen.

As to why I think this, well that’s simple - faith. I’d imagine it’s a little thing called the grace of God.
 
Thats a somewhat premature assertion which could only be entertained by someone with a preset bias.
Well, all people should perceive the motion of sun if it was real. That means that all people should see sun moving.
Nature is quite capable producing different effects across a broad spectrum of allegedly same individuals.
I don’t think so.
And who said the sun itself actually moved? Yes it seemed to move, quite the difference.
So it was a hallucination?
So a number of potentially feasible natural scenarios need to be assessed which you seem to exclude from the getgo by the above somewhat unjustified assertion.
Example?
 
We all know what it means to be God.
The issue is why do over religious people feel the need to go straight to God when he created Nature to do all the heavy lifting. Reasonable believers first look to nature for an explanation. It is unreasonable and disrespectful to God to constantly see divine intervention (or demons) at work in every inexplicable natural wonder we come across.
Hence strong divine claims require equally strong enquiries into natural causality first lest we be considered gullible, superstitious or of limited intelligence.

Simply saying “God did it” is not what normal people consider an adequate “explanation” in the face of something abnormal.
That explanation is meaningless, it means the same as “I dont know”…which is more honest.
 
Last edited:
It appears you have not been reading or understanding the other contributions here that disagree with your stance which cover what I have drawn to your attention.
 
Why do you think that God and nature are different things? how can nature be something dependent of God… to me that is extremely odd thinking.
You asked my opinion, I gave it. I am quite pleased you consider me not normal because I will always say God did it… guess what when someone makes a cup of coffee (ordinary thing) I think God did that too… by using the person to do it 🙂 and if He wants to move the clouds into a pretty pattern using all sorts of science I dont understand then well He can do that too. …. ahem cos He made the science . Anyway we can agree to disagree cos I am not normal and as one of those over religious types you mention cos I go straight to God with everything - yes He made the sun move around the earth so I am now having night and elsewhere day… Good night
 
Last edited:
The very fact that many didn’t see it indicates that motion of sun was a hallucination since all should have seen the motion of sun if it was physical.
Not necessarily. If the movement of the sun was real and not just a supernatural imaginative vision, God as well as the good angels by order from God could cause various people not to see it by working on their senses, interior or exterior or both, analogous to a supernatural imaginative vision. I believe it was also reported that after the miracle of the sun, the ground and their clothes were dry which were soaking wet due to the heavy rain that day. So the miracle that day appears to have definitely involved at least some ‘physicality’ or a ‘miracle of nature’.
 
Stat thankyou for your reply. You are in contradiction to your previous comments.
Wikipedia is a very unreliable source.

Look up Our Lady Of Zeitoun .
 
Why do you think that God and nature are different things? how can nature be something dependent of God… to me that is extremely odd thinking.
Because Nature is Creation and God is Creator. Very different beasts.
I thought that was a given on a Catholic forum.
You may not agree but you should understand where mainstream Catholics are coming from and realise that if you want to argue against such a view then it is really you who needs to explain himself on that point rather than mainstream Catholic members.
You asked my opinion, I gave it.
I actually asked you to explain your opinion.
This being a philosophy forum I am observing that reason is a major criterion for discussion and critique of positions.

I have observed the rational weaknesses of your religious view…to me it tends to go down a path that leads to superstition, non-science and ultimately an incommunicable and subjective view of reality that defies objective discussion or correction.

Unless you wish to provide a reasoned response on this, a philosophy thread…
 
Last edited:
The very fact that many didn’t see it indicates that motion of sun was a hallucination since all should have seen the motion of sun if it was physical.
I genuinely believe my kid has seen a dancing sun. There’s a big, long, angsty story attached to that whole weekend, including me trying to break the fourth wall by visiting a priest who could read hearts and give me a clue about some stuff— but we’re driving back home. I’m upset with my 3yo and in a bad mood because of a picture he’d drawn, and he was angry with me for having thrown it away— and we’ve driven the last 150 miles alternating between grumpy silence and terse conversation. We’re going through San Antonio an hour or two from sunset, and my kid asks me out of the blue, “Mommy? Why is the sun doing that?” and I’m like, “What are you talking about?” (insert snappish Mom voice here while I’m maneuvering through rush hour) and he’s like, “It’s pink. And it’s bouncing. And it’s like a really happy smiley face.”

I don’t know if the sun was really pink. Or bouncing. Or a smiley face. It looked like an ordinary sun to me. But he was certainly not at a stage of life where he’d make up stuff in the first place, and if he was going to make stuff up, bouncing smiley pink suns wasn’t his speed. As for me, I wasn’t in a state to be getting any favors directly from God. I asked him about it a couple of times a day or two later, when we were in better moods and cuddling up for bed-- “Hey, remember that smiley sun? Was it real or was it a game?” “It was real, Mommy.”

But I do genuinely think that God worked through my 3yo to give me a pat on the head.

But just like my sense of smell turns into a finely-tuned superpower when I’m pregnant, and I can’t smell a thing when I have a cold, and normally, I’m somewhere in between— the odor is there, but how tuned I am to it varies depending on my situation. The same thing is very true for spiritual stuff-- sometimes you get a glimpse of something you’d normally never experience; sometimes you don’t see what’s happening right in front of your face; but usually, you just bump along like normal and not think about what’s going on.
 
Happy cake day Midori

Stt, The trouble with wiki is anyone can add or edit. Their footnotes can be from anywhere. So entries can be very suspect.

How did they realise the Virgin Mary was appearing? The vibe I guess, these apparitions caused thousands of conversions . Thousands,
 
The existence of spiritual, non-physical, reality is part of all religious belief. Moreover, it is a part of religious belief that spiritual beings can affect physical reality, revelations, visions, etc. The question then is how spiritual thing can affect physical reality and stays undetected?
These are all good questions that demand a response. However, I will not go as far as saying that the lack of response proves that it’s all physical. First prove that it’s all physical.

This is the problem that I tend to run into with materialists. They have not proven how subjective experience is entirely physical. All one needs to do to expose this is point out the differences between the subjective and objective. For example, physical images are observable whereas mental images are not observable to anyone else but the subject. If they were physical, then why can’t we observe each others mental images? Perhaps physical and non-physical are false dichotomies and there are levels in-between?!
 
Last edited:
All one needs to do to expose this is point out the differences between the subjective and objective. For example, physical images are observable whereas mental images are not observable to anyone else but the subject.
Even Aquinas answered this one with a “materialist” solution. A “phantasm” belongs to the bodily powers.
 
Even Aquinas answered this one with a “materialist” solution. A “phantasm” belongs to the bodily powers.
I’d have to get more details on that. I don’t dispute that the mind has a physical cause. What I dispute or question is how a physical cause (“bodily powers” under your view) leads to a non-physical effect. In other words, how does observable neural activity lead to mental phenomena that is seemingly not quantifiable nor observable (e.g. mental imagery and other subjective experience). The strength of my point is more empirical in that we truly do not observe each other’s mental imagery.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top