Hi Hel,
At least with astrology we have proof it works.
No we do not. You would not be able to prove astrology in a court of law, as far as acceptable evidence is concerned, any more than you could prove the existence of 'God'. The very idea of attempting to do such a thing as prove God, or even astrology seems to me most absurd. The idea of proving 'God' would be as preposterous as attempting to 'prove' that I have a nose in the middle of my face, when all I need do is look in the mirror, or at least feel for it.
Astrology is only 'proved' to an individual according to the experiences of that person in relation to the subject. This is the difference between knowledge and understanding. Knowledge is always theoretical, because it is always given second hand via a book or a person for example. Knowledge depends on trust. Understanding, on the other hand is superior to mere knowledge, because in order to understand something you need to have
experienced it at first hand.
So if I say that I
know that the omniscient intelligence commonly reffered to as 'God' exists, then I only know because I have been told so, and knowledge is not proof. Neither God nor astrology can be proved this way. If however, I say that I
understand that God exists, then I understand this through direct personal experience, this is proof, at least to myself, which is the only proof available for such things.
So when you speak of proof that astrology exists, then you refer to the solid resonance that confirms the validity of astrology to you according to the understanding you have gleaned from your experience with it.
Therefore it is my
understanding that there is an all pervading omniscient intelligence in operation behind all things. There would be no point even scratching the surface of astrology without this understanding! I should not need to explain why to an astrologist, it should be as plain as the nose on my face!
And to continue with the breathing analogy - we have proof oxygen exits
Yes we do have proof that oxygen exists, but what is the nature of that proof? It is proved to us through our own understanding which we glean through direct experience. I am breathing - therefore oxygen exists.
We could conduct all manner of scientific experiments in order to prove the existence of oxygen in a court of law, such as producing lists of scientific formulae, to detemine oxygen's composition or mass. However, wouldn't doing this be quite ridiculous when we already
understand that oxygen exists? If it didn't we wouldn't be here. The same can be said for 'God', or what I prefer to refer to as 'It'.
I used the breathing analogy to express how grossly absurd the statement 'I believe in astrology, but don't believe that God exists' is to my own understanding.
We have proof in infinite amounts of energy...but we have no proof god...exists.
This comment is interesting because it is most paradoxical, and confuses me no end. You say that we 'have proof in infinate amounts of energy' but then say, 'we have no proof of God'. This strikes me as most bizarre in it's contradiction, for
what is 'God' if not an infinate amount of energy?!
I have stockpiles of ammunition on standby in preparation for the counter-attack.
Draco