How did he learn about “God”?
- From his teacher - Sawan Singh. Did you do any research?
Was he told about “God” from someone else, his parents perhaps? Yes, that is where I suspect Kirpal Singh learned about “God”, from his parents.
His teacher - Sawan Singh. No need to make up what is not true.
Just about every spiritual or religious person (if not all) learn about “God” as children, from the people who raise them.
Sweeping statement again we have is books and all dedicated to his teacher. The sign of a true human being who claims nothing for the knowledge he has but says it is his Masters.
This is a serious problem as children will believe almost anything including true and untrue things.
More sweeping statements. Parents always wants the best things for their children. Not necessary what you want them to teach their children. Which in my opinion has no moral agenda or leader. You need to fix that problem first to claim it is a problem of others.
Simply having a desire to know “God” proves nothing.
It proves that one has that desire. Because that sets up their determination for the rest of their life on who and what they want to be.
Some children may also have a desire to know Santa Claus, however eventually children figure out the truth or they are told the truth that Santa Claus is imaginary.
Nonsense -- we are talking about real people and their desire to know what they know - not imaginary ones. Selective Bias at work and you do not see it.
There is no evidence that Santa Claus actually exists. So, where is the evidence that “God” actually exists?
One is a story to feed our minds to be a better human being the other is what our individual consciousness being part of the all consciousness. There is evidence the theists have been saying exists - Life comes from God. They know this and you don't. Neil De Grasse said he did not know where life comes from and not afraid to admit that. Theists say they know where life comes from and is not afraid to say that.
The word “Idiot” as defined by Merriam-Webster:
1 usually offensive : a person affected with extreme mental retardation
2 : a foolish or stupid person
I think the first definition is no longer proper, someone would have to be fairly insensitive to call someone with a mental disorder an idiot. The possibility does exist though that someone might simply appear foolish or stupid and actually have an unknown mental disorder causing their behavior.
The second definition is likely (and maybe more often) the intended meaning behind using the word “idiot”. Someone who is foolish or stupid.
The word “foolish” as defined by Merriam-Webster:
1 : lacking in sense, judgment, or discretion
2 a : ABSURD, RIDICULOUS
b : marked by a loss of composure : NONPLUSSED
3 : INSIGNIFICANT, TRIFLING
The word “stupid” as defined by Merriam-Webster:
1 a : slow of mind : OBTUSE
b : given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner
c : lacking intelligence or reason : BRUTISH
2 : dulled in feeling or sensation : TORPID <still stupid from the sedative>
3 : marked by or resulting from unreasoned thinking or acting : SENSELESS <a stupid decision>
4 a : lacking interest or point <a stupid event>
b : VEXATIOUS, EXASPERATING <the stupid car won't start>
It is fair to say, people who assume things with zero supporting evidence for their assumptions are idiots.
No it is not fair at all. You are making sweeping judge mental statements. Very inappropriate for someone to select such a bias about another human being they have no knowledge off. You should first try to prove he is an idiot through something he has said or written or know because you were in his class. But to base your judgement on something so intangible is based on your selective bias processing. Human psychological error - not science.
For instance, if I were to assume that aliens from another planet are stealing my socks to fuel their intergalactic space ships, I would be an idiot. If I were to assume my 14-speed bike can fly me to the moon, I would be an idiot.
Indeed your idiocy would have started with your assumption without evidence.
I can’t speak for Graybeard, but for me it would be my educated stance that Kirpal Singh is an idiot. I say that not as an insult, but as a evaluation.
That's what I am worried about. Your ability to make claims about other people who you do not know and have not studied and you would call that an educated stance. Don't you think it is Selective bias?
What someone wants to be from an early age has nothing to do with being an idiot.
Obviously you have not been paying attention. Everyone if free should be allowed to follow their dreams, to have their purpose of life fulfilled. Who gave you the dictatorial powers over what should or should not be studied? If you say you want people to have morals you would need to have an authority be it the king, the state , the army or the President. You need a moral authority. Theists say God is that moral authority.
Interesting enough, this “urge” to learn and know things has developed over millions of years through evolution and is what has helped the human race survive.
Whose story is that??? You don't really know what life is or how it survives.
We want to know if there is a lion in the bush that is about to kill us, we want to know about the trails used by animals so we can hunt, we want to know about the cycles of the seasons so we can learn what time of year is the best time to plant crops.
Observation is one of the things we use to navigate the world, but it is not the only thing. Feral children would prove you are not on the right track.
Unfortunately, simply wanting to learn or know things isn’t enough as a person has to put work into learning and knowing, and has to care if what they learn or know is actually the truth.
I am sure if you read Kirpal Singhs books you would find that this is very important to him and to his followers.
Some people however take the easy way out of doing the hard work it takes to learn and know things, and just make stuff up like “God exists and created the universe”.
Yes some do - however it does not apply to Kirpal Singh. Knowing God is not the same as saying God did it.
How many book has he written? What education standards did he reach? - What lack of attention to detail in the books he has written has indicated he lacked intelligence on the subjects he taught? Clearly if you were going to say he was an idiot I would have expected a better research than sweeping statements based on your personal group bias.