Intelligence analysts assess the evidence for God

I wish this would happen – competent, professional, skilled intelligence analysts sitting around a table, sifting through factual evidence for the existence of God, in the same fashion as was done recently with the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concerning Iran's nuclear weapons program.

I'd love to be able to listen to the discussion. And see what evidence would be considered worthy of supporting a "Yes, God exists" assessment.

It'd be slim to non-existent, for sure.

Just as the evidence for Iraq having weapons of mass destruction was. Yet the United States intelligence community got that wrong. So why should anybody trust their current conclusion that Iran halted a covert nuclear weapons program in 2003?

Or that God doesn't/does exist?

Well, today I heard Rand Beers of the National Security Network interviewed on talk radio. Beers has extensive national security experience and spoke knowledgeably about how the sixteen U.S. spy agencies did things differently this time.

Basically, they thought things through a lot more independently and critically. Beers said that alternative explanations for intelligence findings were actively explored, rather than trying to fit those findings into prior interpretative frameworks.

Sounds like good advice for anyone assessing the evidence for and against God's existence.

Yes, many have claimed to have received a divine revelation. That's a fact. But there are lots of ways of interpreting it.

I considered a few in my "Who is the guru?" post. By guru I meant anyone who is considered to be God in human form, or at least a conduit for God's messages, which naturally includes Jesus. I noted that Bart Ehrman, a Biblical scholar, says there are four options for considering who Jesus was.

Liar, lunatic, the Lord, or a legend. I added a fourth possibility for gurus: loyalist. Meaning, someone who doesn't speak the truth about what they know (or don't know) about God because it would threaten tradition and an organizational heritage.

Here's what Agence France-Presse (AFP) said in a story about the Iran National Intelligence Estimate:

Senior US intelligence officials said this week they were responding to new information, subjected to more rigorous analysis than in the past, in declaring with "high confidence" that Iran halted a covert nuclear weapons program in 2003.

… And unlike 2002, when US intelligence officials complained of administration pressure to "cherry-pick" intelligence that supported going to war, the intelligence community this time has asserted its independence.

"This is ours," a senior intelligence official said this week, telling reporters that policymakers had no input in the conclusions of the National Intelligence Estimate, as the assessment is called.

The AFP story says that an expert had reached the same conclusion as the NIE two years earlier – that Iran had given up its nuclear weapons program so it could play by the rules while still maintaining a nuclear "breakout" option.

US intelligence failed to see it [the new Iran strategy] sooner, he said, because it was intent on finding evidence to support the assumption that Iran had a nuclear weapons program.

"But if you don't take that assumption and you look for an alternative explanation, it's relatively easy to find."

Exploring alternatives. Open-mindedness. Critical thinking. This is how truth is arrived at, whether worldly or godly. If a policy pronouncement or dogma is taken on faith, reality gets short shrift.

A bit over two years ago I was fired as a speaker by my spiritual organization, Radha Soami Satsang Beas. The reason: my writings on this blog were making people uncomfortable.

In my opinion, that's a good thing. The person who is made most uncomfortable by me is, clearly, me. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

I'm an inveterate questioner and experimenter. I'm my mother's child, as I wrote about here and here. She loved to debate, to learn, to explore new territory in the boundless World of Knowledge.

She died not knowing whether God exists, or not. Just as we all will. The difference is that most people uncritically accept the religious dogma they've been given rather than challenging it. My mother didn't. She never stopped searching for truth that could be counted on, not merely believed.

This is just what intelligence analysts do. The competent ones, at least.

Question, question, question. That's the only way answers will be found.

Comments

[tAo]

You may have been fired by RSSB cult guru Gurinder, but don't dismay... I heard that The Great Golden Guru Sri Donald Trump likes to hire heretics.

[Rakesh Bhasin]

Well said, "Exploring alternatives. Open-mindedness. Critical thinking. This is how truth is arrived at, whether worldly or godly."

- In fact, every seeker after truth does it. Even your own little child does not accept you without enough explanation. How the hell one can pull along in mundane or spiritual pursuits without being rationale.

- Brian, there would have been no question of firing you from giving discourses at any center of RSSB. You should have yourself resigned. I have been visiting weekly satsangs regularly in India and the preachers are expected to be great devotees. It is purely spiritualism that is discussed in such satsangs. I hope that you will also realize the you can not be a preacher of RSSB as well as run church of the churchless blog. It is purely my independent opinion that I have built seeing your postings in this blog for several month.

Undoubtedly, your postings are eye openers. You are really doing a great service for the seekers after truth.

[sapient]

Rakesh,
I don't understand what are you saying. At one side you say that RSSB is 'Science of the soul' and on the other side, you are saying that 'you can not be a preacher of RSSB as well as run church of the churchless blog'. And where this came from 'preachers are expected to be great devotees' ?

What is PATH? What is spiritualism?
Are you saying that blind faith is spiritualism. So if you are questioning yourself or a set of rules then you are not spiritual? Or in other words Brian is not spiritual but you and other RSSB speakers are?

[Rakesh Bhasin]

Dear Sapient,

Strain yourself a little bit and you would understand me what I mean. In RSSB, one has to be so steadfast on the vows (which you know pretty well)and one is all the time repeating the sumiran (an incipid process in the begining), it leaves one with no time but essential worldly duties to discharge.

Who can say that Brian is not spiritual. His blog is rather a preparatory school for all the seekers of truth. I repeat that he is doing an excellent job in my opinion.

I hope that I have put the things in acceptable words.

with regards,

[tAo]

Rakesh,

I must disagree with you on several accounts.

You said: "there would have been no question of firing you from giving discourses at any center of RSSB.You should have yourself resigned."

-- That is perhaps what happened, but that does not mean it was right or reasonable. If Brian was giving proper satsang discourses about sant mat and shabda yoga, then his own personal opinions and internet blog activities outside of satsang should not enter into it at all. It was clearly wrong of RS to fire Brian, and neither should Brian have to resign of his own accord. The reason he was fired is simply that RS can not tolerate anyone having a mind or thoughts or opinions of their own. It is a hierarchy, and it is expected and demanded that satsangis submit and do not question the dogma or the authority of the guru or past gurus, or in any way think for themselves.

"satsangs regularly in India and the preachers are expected to be great devotees."

-- Having blind and unthinking devotion does not necessarily produce good satsang. And also, RS satsangs are NOT traditional satsang in the true sense. RS so-called "satsangs" are actually indoctrination meetings, meetings which are specifically designed to maintain indoctrination and to perpetuate the belief system and the practice. They are not true satsangs where self-inquiry, self-knowledge, and critical thinking is valued, and the reality of one's true essential nature is focused upon and openly shared. RS satsang is none of that. RS satsangs are all about repeating DOGMA, and not about discovering truth.

"It is purely spiritualism that is discussed in such satsangs."

-- That is major bullshit imo. You say "spiritualism", but in what sense? The mere indoctrination and perpetuation of authoritarian guru-cult dogma is not "spiritual" in the true sense at all.

"I hope that you will also realize the you can not be a preacher of RSSB as well as run church of the churchless blog."

-- That's also bullshit. Why the hell not? There is no rule or restriction on free speech or writing of a blog. RS has absolutely no damn business dictating what people can and cannot say or do outside of RS satsangs or RS centers. RS is supposed to simply be a meditation-yoga path, not a controlling authoritarian dictatorship that rules over peoples lives and infrin ges upon their civil rights. This attitide that you have of blind unquestioning obediance and adherence to RS religious cult dogma and authority, is not spiritual at all. There is no legitimate reason whatsoever that Brian or ANY other satsangi should not express themselves on the internet if they so choose. It is absolutely NONE of RSSB's business. This kind of control and suppression of personal liberty that you advocate, really really sucks big time. I am suprised at you. I now see where you are really at. You are a clearly a shill for RS. You don't fool me anymore.

"Undoubtedly, your postings are eye openers. You are really doing a great service for the seekers after truth."

-- That's just more candy-coated bullshit. You are contradicting yourself. That shows you are a phony and a hypocrite. First you say that Brian cannot have his own views and opinions and also be a satsangi. Then you say that he is "really doing a great service for the seekers after truth." You are doing just as Tucson and I suspected. You put up a phony facade in order to get other bloggres to trust you, but underneath the phony surface you present, you are nothing but RS authoritarianism and dogma all the way. I can see exactly what you are up to now. I suspected as much previously, but then both Tucson and I gave you the benefit of the doubt. But now you took the bait and stepped right in the trap and exposed yourself and confirmed my suspicions. So I am certain of what your game is now. You bought yourself a little time for awhile, but now the truth of where you are at is obvious. You are just another RS cult goon. So don't bother trying to convince me otherwise. You and Deepak are probably in cahoots, or else you are the same person posting under differenmt IDs.

Guys like you are all the same... a bunch of phony mindless goons who suck off the RS cult authoritarian guru titty. It's OK to just be a satsangi if that's what you choose, its your life, but don't come here pretending to be something else that you are not.

I hate hypocrites and shills and phony dogma peddlers. As U.G. used to say: "a bunch of lying 'bitches and bastards' you are". So go back to your stupid Radha Soami cult CHURCH and satsangs where you belong.

[Tucson]

To further support Tao's observations above concerning Rakesh..

Rakesh wrote: "His blog is rather a preparatory school for all the seekers of truth."

--In other words, we're all a bunch of ignorant kindergarteners here who aren't smart enough to go to the great University of Sant Mat RSSB. He has a very sly way of veiling his real agenda via overly polite terminology and innuendo, other examples of which I listed in a previous comment.

[tAo]

Yes, I also meant to address Rakesh's statement:

"His blog is rather a preparatory school for all the seekers of truth."

What kind of condescending rubbish is that? ... As if this blog forum is just a bunch of pre-school spiritual neophytes. This blog is no such "preparatory school". It is merely a small blog and forum for Brian to share his thoughts and musings, and for comments. And some of those folks here are not at all at the beginning of their search for truth, but more the opposite.

Rakesh is revealing what he is really about junderneath it all. So I agree with Tucson that Rakesh implies that others here are just "a bunch of ignorant kindergarteners here who aren't smart enough to go to the great University of Sant Mat RSSB."

And yes, Rakesh has had a "sly way of veiling his real agenda via overly polite terminology and innuendo". But it doesn't fly anymore. Rakesh is not here to consider any arguments aginast RS. He is here to play a deceptive little game of subtley injecting his RS dogma into the discussion. That's why he has been so careful and polite, so as to catch others off guard. But I knew I smelled a rotten deal early on. I just had to wait until he revealed himself and what he is really up to here.

You can only play your RS game just so long Rakesh. Sooner or later the truth gets revealed. I don't mind that you believe in RS... thats your personal business. It's more a matter that you're a phony and a shill for RSSB in this blog forum.

Just another example of the typically dishonest behavior of RS followers and cult-goons.

[Rakesh Bhasin]

Dear tAo & Tucson,

I have made a note of your strong reaction. I have been casting my comments in the same tone right from the begining. I am talking in context with what goes on in typicaly punjabi language in parts of Punjab and other parts of north India. Where original scriptures of Indian saints and seers are devotionally sung and explained in the satsangs and that are quite stimulating for furtherence of meditation. That's all.

I can call this blog as the highest university as well. But in such a case everybody will not have access. Prepatory school is a much higher platform than university where one can be moulded.

The way you discuss the things is your business. What agenda may I have? I am liberated from any particular cult. It is the meditation technique alone in which I am interested. Wordly I do not belong to any organization. I have nothing to do with RSSB or for that matter any organization including this blog. I am a free bird.

I had removed all my doubts before initiation. One must remove them before initiation. If one's doubts are not remove one must not get initiated from anyone. Even if the whole life is spent in removing the doubts it is not time lost but time gained.

The problem with this blog is people do not argue with patience. Do not give any solid counter arguements but begin to criticize and start making personal remarks.

I feel the blogerrs should come forward to help each other in understaning the various facets of spiritulism. I would reuest Brian himself to come forward to put the things straight.

with all this, I convey my kindest regards to both of you.

[Deepak Kamat]

Tao,

I am not an idiot, nor am I Rakesh Bhasin, as you seem to suspect. I am very much an independent thinker from Mangalore in South India. Yes, I like provoking people (UG and Osho influence). No, I am not a RS cult goon. Although I was initiated by GSD 7 years ago, I am still full of doubts. Yes, I have read the entire RS literature. I was a believer once upon a time. But the criticism on the internet by David Lane and this blog has forced me to be a doubting Thomas.
That is the reason why I relate to this blog. Even I am an ex-satsangi. The only difference is that I am not angry and I am still open minded. If u say that I am an idiot for this reason, then I am an idiot. Nothing wrong being one, wise guy.

And also, I was even initiated by a Kundalini Guru ten years ago. I did have weird experences in Kundalini meditation.

[tAo]

Rakesh,

My responses to your statements:

"I am talking in context with what goes on in typicaly punjabi language in parts of Punjab and other parts of north India. Where original scriptures of Indian saints and seers are devotionally sung and explained in the satsangs and that are quite stimulating for furtherence of meditation."

-- Like I said before, what you are talking about is mere repetition of sant mat religious dogma.

"I can call this blog as the highest university as well. But in such a case everybody will not have access. Prepatory school is a much higher platform than university where one can be moulded."

-- There seems to be a problem in your use of terms and concepts. Because neither "highest university" nor "preparatory school" is meaningful in this case.

"What agenda may I have? I am liberated from any particular cult."

-- Bullshit. You are full of it. You are clearly no more "liberated" from Radha Soami than all the rest of meditation-practicing and satsang-attending satsangis.

"It is the meditation technique alone in which I am interested."

-- Then why do you go to satsangs and repeat RS dogma?

"I do not belong to any organization. I have nothing to do with RSSB or for that matter any organization including this blog. I am a free bird."

-- More total bullshit. You are clearly in serious denial. Going to RS satsangs and engaging RS meditation IS definitely involvement with RSSB. You may fool yourself and others, but you are not fooling me. You are no "free bird".

"I had removed all my doubts before initiation. One must remove them before initiation. If one's doubts are not remove one must not get initiated from anyone."

-- Another example of how brain-washed you are with RS dogma.

"Even if the whole life is spent in removing the doubts it is not time lost but time gained."

-- No way. That's total brain-washed BS. Doubts are our best friends. Preparing you by getting you to give up your doubts is how RS uses mind-control. To give up doubts, is to give up your critical thinking, and to buy into authoritarian dogma.

"The problem with this blog is people do not argue with patience."

-- That is far from fact or truth. My self and other commenters here have been very "patient" with you. But I am not patient when it comes to lame defenses of spiritual guru-cult bullshit.

"Do not give any solid counter arguements but begin to criticize and start making personal remarks."

-- I have offered numerous, if not excessive and abundant "counter arguments". And so have others as well. You are just not fooling me anymore Rakesh. I don't buy your evasion and denial.

"I feel the blogerrs should come forward to help each other in understaning the various facets of spiritulism."

-- What do you think this blog and its commenters is all about, if not that? I think you are attempting to divert from the issue.

"I would reuest Brian himself to come forward to put the things straight."

-- Hah! Brian should "put things straight" you say? Are you serious? You think Brian is going to vindicate you? You have used excessive politeness and pseudo-respect as a facade in order to subtly inject your RS dogma.

Maybe your problem is with differences in cultural syntax. And even more maybe you are a bit naive and rather uninformed when it comes to spiritual cult dogma and mind-control, especially in sant mat and RS mat. This is all very old news to most of us.

Which makes me wonder why you are here? ...if not to give voice to the standard old RS meditation dogma.

[tAo]

Deepak,

You said: "Yes, I like provoking people (UG and Osho influence). No, I am not a RS cult goon. Although I was initiated by GSD 7 years ago, I am still full of doubts."

-- Well good for you. Keep on doubting and inquiring, and don't believe anything. Find your own unique way and truth.

"Yes, I have read the entire RS literature. I was a believer once upon a time. But the criticism on the internet by David Lane and this blog has forced me to be a doubting Thomas."

You say that now, but that's not what you were saying awhile back, or even recently. You were posting typical Santmat/RS dogma.

"That is the reason why I relate to this blog. Even I am an ex-satsangi. The only difference is that I am not angry and I am still open minded."

-- I can't say for everyone, but I am not "angry", nor do I think that Brian or Tucson are "angry" either. I have nothing to be angry about. Ignorant RS goons are rather annoying though.

"If u say that I am an idiot for this reason, then I am an idiot. Nothing wrong being one, wise guy."

- You don't have to remain an idiot. Just go back and lisgten to U.G., he will cure you. But hey, thanks for recognizing my unexcelled wisdom.

"And also, I was even initiated by a Kundalini Guru ten years ago. I did have weird experences in Kundalini meditation.

-- OK, thats cool. But don't put alot of stock and value and importance in weird experiences. I myself have had many extraordinary spiritual experiences, definitely more than most other folks, but in the end, such experiences don't amount to much of anything. What matters is awakening and Self-knowledge, not mere unusual experiences which are transitory.

[Rakesh Bhasin]

Dear tAo,

Thanks for your comments. I was expecting better comments from end.

[Deepak Kamat]

Tao,
I equally suspect UG.

He is incoherent, also claims that he is special through his calamity experience. Most of the time he is unnecessarily abusive and grossly generalises people.

According to Osho, UG is just a rehash of JK and has a pious ego lurking behind his tall talks. he is dangerous to sadhakas as he discourages all sadhana. One should realise that one does not complete his spiritual journey just by thinking that he has attained.

UG calls for an end to seeking. But seeking has to stop by itself.

UG is also as dangerous if not more dangerous than the RS masters. He also has a theology to sell if not in so many words. He lived like a parasite throughout his life.

As for me, let me be honest enough to say that I am confused. Atleast, I am not trapped in such conceptual thinking.

Having said that let me assert at the risk of being called a RS cult goon, that spiritual transfer or shaktipat is a distinct possibility though it may not mean much in terms of self-realisation.

[Deepak Kamat]

Overpoliteness and artificial humility is a hallmark of not just sasangis -- but almost all members of Guru cults in India. Rakesh Bhasin was not being overpolite. He was just speaking in a traditional sense. After years of Guru shopping, I have realised it.

[tAo]

Deepak has written:

"I equally suspect UG."

-- Suspect U.G. of what? Are you kidding? So you'd rather have a bunch of stale old pseudo-spiritual mumbo-jumbo, than have U.G.'s spontaneous brutal honesty? Apparently so.

"He (U.G.) is incoherent"

-- If thats what you think, then you are definitely not anywhere near ready for what U.G. has communicated.

"also claims that he is special through his calamity experience."

-- He absolutely did not. Your statement is a complete distortion of fact and reality. I spoke to him. I know exactly what he said about that. He never claimed any sort of specialness. So you're full of shit.

"Most of the time he is unnecessarily abusive and grossly generalises people."

-- That's just tough. Spiritually, you are a whiny little wimp. You are afraid of the truth, and you're in serious denial.

"According to Osho"

-- You are so lost Deepak. Osho/Rajneesh was a huge ego-maniac, a sick perverted and manipulative SOB, and one of the biggest intellectual frauds to ever step into the spiritual arena. The mere mention of Osho/Rajneesh makes me want to VOMIT. And so does that slimey-ass pervert and con Sai Baba.

"UG is just a rehash of JK and has a pious ego lurking behind his tall talks."

-- That is absolute rubbish. You don't know what the hell you are talking about. U.G.'s message was nothing similar to J.K. at all. Not even close. You really don't know much about U.G. apparently.

"he is dangerous to sadhakas as he discourages all sadhana."

-- No, it's all the pseudo-spiritual mumbo-jumbo and dogma, and pseudo-gurus that are what is "dangerous" to sadhakas. Seekers become trapped in that shit for their entire life. U.G. was a breath of fresh air, and a slayer of ridiculous spiritual illusions and myths.

"One should realise that one does not complete his spiritual journey just by thinking that he has attained."

-- That was not what U.G. said. He did tell anyone to "think" that they hjave atgtained anything. he said just the opposite in fact. So agsin, you clearly don't know what you are talking about when it comes to U.G.

"UG calls for an end to seeking. But seeking has to stop by itself."

-- The seeking will not stop until the "seeker" sees the futility of the search.

"UG is also as dangerous if not more dangerous than the RS masters."

-- Now we see your hidden RS dogma showing again. Yes U.G. is very dangerous to someone who believes in bullshit spiritual dogma, and fake masters and their guru-cults. He is dangerous becuse he liberates them from that. RS is dangerous in a different way. RS is dangerous because it entraps people (and does not liberate them) for their entire lives in a false spiritual guru-cult and all its lies and fantasy.

"He also has a theology to sell if not in so many words. He lived like a parasite throughout his life."

-- Bullshit. You are a liar. He sold nothing. U.G. even gave away the copyrights to the books that were made out of his conversations. You are just another shill for the RS cult fraud.

"As for me, let me be honest enough to say that I am confused. At least, I am not trapped in such conceptual thinking."

-- Yes you are rather confused... that's quite obvious. So therefore don't be going around saying lame bullshit about U.G. that is not factual or true.

"Having said that let me assert ... that spiritual transfer or shaktipat is a distinct possibility though it may not mean much in terms of self-realisation."

-- Shaktipat is just another one of many illusions that phony gurus use to manipulate naive seekers. And self-realisation, as the great majority of seekers conceive it to be, is also another big illusion.

Sorry, but my karma done run over your dogma. Dead Dogma.

[tAo]

Typo Correction for:
Posted by: tAo | December 13, 2007

"One should realise that one does not complete his spiritual journey just by thinking that he has attained."

-- That was not what U.G. said. He did NOT tell anyone to "think" that they have attained anything. He said just the opposite in fact. So again, you clearly don't know what you are talking about when it comes to U.G.

[Deepak Kamat]

Tao, you are displaying symptoms of fascism.
Your arguments flow almost along these lines:
Put up or shut up. (if you don't agree with me)
My way is the only way (in your case UG's end to seeking is the only way).
All other contrararian contentions are dogma. (However you claim that your dogma is the gospel truth).
You take sadistic pleasure in ripping other's arguments (another sign of a fascist).
Let me tell you that even UG or for that matter all those who hold that end of seeking is the goal are also theocrats.

[Deepak Kamat]

Anyway, I would like to know Tao's position on astral travel, OBE and NDE. Is it just another RS fraud or a stark reality of esoteric school? And I hate semi-atheistic-advaitic reply like: It has got nothing to do with enlightenment. it is in your mind etc. I hope you will give me a pointed answer.

[tAo]

Deepak,

It is obvious to me that you are unable to understand other points of view. I have never said or evn implied that "My way is the only way", or "UG's end to seeking is the only way", or "claim that your dogma is the gospel truth". You are grossly misrepresenting me again. Moreover, you don't even understand what "facism" means. My opinions have nothing to do with facism. And I simply don't agree with your views about U.G. which are quite clearly erroneous. Nor am I being "sadistic". You just can't handle when someone points out that you do not understand issues such as U.G. nearly as much as you pretend to. You are basically full of crap when it comes to issues as such as U.G.

Here's just one example out of many - You said (about U.G.): "that end of seeking is the goal". U.G. never said any such thing was "the goal". In fact he did not speak in terms of goals at all. No one has said that you must follow or agree with U.G. But don't come off acting as if you are an expert on U.G when in fact you are clearly unfamiliar with and don't understand what his views were at all. I met the man, I spoke with him. I know exactly what said and thought and meant, and its not at all how you portray him. So that is why I say you are full of shit when it comes to understanding U.G. and his views. You think you know it all and have the last word with your bogus conclusions... but its quite obvious that you are merely a rather inexperienced spiritual neophyte.

As for your query, I am simply not intertested in discussing such nonsense as "astral travel, OBE and NDE". You are talking just like William. You don't want to hear the truth, you just want to play games with metaphysical bullshit.

Because of your presumptious attitude and your totally bogus conclusions about U.G., I have nothing more to say to you or to discuss with you. You are not interested in awakening to reality. And I am not interested in debating with an ego-tripper like you.

I hope you find your way to reality someday. Good-bye.

[tAo]

Douglas Rosestone, who had been with and knew U.G. Krishnamurti ever since the late 1960s, had this to say about U.G.:

"He is the most subversive human being that ever walked on this planet earth, much more subversive than all those religious leaders mankind has been following for 2,600 years to no purpose. Yes, I am including the Buddha too. U.G.'s subversiveness is so complete that nobody wants to believe it. Everything that you believe in, everything that you put your faith in, your hope in--your desire for continuity, of not only yourself, but of your family, your civilization--all that will go. You won't believe any of it any more. Nothing will have any meaning. And when all this meaning goes, then you will really make it. Only then you will hear what U.G. is saying.... That takes courage."

http://www.well.com/user/jct/ugbio/ugbtitle.htm

[Deepak Kamat]

Can UG really negate the feel-good factor that comes with meditation?

[Moongoes]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXyLbU1GGqU