God?

[Kenpo_Mike]

Does anyone here believe that God is just an insercuity in our mind?

Does anyone believe that there is a God (she/he)?

[Adam]

God exists, I just don't pay much attention to him and he seems to repay the favour.

[khafra]

No all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving being exists, obviously--but I think there's more to the universe then science has discovered so far, or may be able to discover at all-and some of it may be sentient.

[Kenpo_Mike]

I was raised a Jehovah Witness, so basically I have always been taught that God exist and if you do something bad then God will punish you. Well, ever since I started taking martial arts, I have been facing my fears straight on and now I am confused to rather or not the belief in God is just an insercurity. However, I do feel there is something out there. So I guess my real question is, if someone does believe in God, are they insecure and cant handle the real ideal of everything?

[Paratus]

I guess I believe in God, but I'll pay amage (if thats how you spell it) in my own way, I don't agree with several aspects of my religion, so I guess I'm non-practicing. I also believe in an after life, if there isn't one whats the point of being here

[Saz]

I think a lot of religion is used to make people feel safe and secure. Like no matter what bad things you do, God will always forgive you etc.

I don't know If I believe in God, but given my run of extreme good luck recently, I think he believes in me :D

[Alex Snyder]

I don't like how modern religions portray him, but I'd have to say that yes, I do believe in my own form of a god. That doesn't mean I go to church, and I don't like to call it god.

I prefer the term "the all".

[Em-em]

I see God as a 'prime mover'

religion, uhh well it was discussed in class. more people died because of religion than HIV

[David]

Many ppl believe in God the Crutch, who maketh life bearable. Paradoxically, these are often the ppl who also say "why does God allow bad things to happen?" Hey, that's not paradox really; just another expression of lack of personal responsibility.

I believe in God, god and gods and I reckon I can generate a new hypothesis describing God's nature, location etc every time I wonder what he/she/it is.

Does God exist if there are no human brains/hearts to conceive him?
Do whales and dolphins have the same issues as us? Sometimes I think whales probably control us or are angels or whatever. Something must be going on in their massive minds and hearts.

And the nature of the universe plays a huge part in settling what/where God might be. Each time I think about a cosmic theory of the universe and it's origins then particular spiritual structures lend themselves to those ideas and not to others.

Bedtime for this Bonzo...

Rgds,
David

[Xia]

I believe in God...but he only does good. I rather let Karma get me in the end.

[booksie_girl]

I don't believe in God, yet I fell that there is something out there. Whether that is just an insecurity in my mind, and the mind of people in general, I don't know. The fact that just about every culture in the world throughout history has had a religion indicates that people feel a need to believe in some greater force. But at the same time, each of these thousands of religions claimed that they were right. ?

[Wearing Grey]

Yep, I beleive in God. And I may be insecure, but I have guns to take care of that aspect of my life.

I have had my prayers answered, I have also had my dreams crushed. Now, looking back at everything, I know it was for good reason and everything fell in place.

I also beleive "He helps those who help themselves" I rely on God for guidance, but not to just do things for me or just give me things. I know 1 million dollars is not going to just drop out of the sky. But I know he will give me guidance to get a job that will support me and not let me go hungry.

Take care, :)

WG

[Levo]

Of course there isn't a God.

There also isn't an Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus!

Every study shows that the biggest indicator of someone's religious beliefs is the religion/culture they are brought up in. Those brought up as Christians on the whole don't grow up to follow Hinduism, those brought up in Judaism on the whole don't grow up and convert to Islam etc etc etc. As that's the case it should be obvious that most peoples beliefs have little to do with "truth" and more to do with indoctrination.

Gods are created by man, not the other way round!

There have been thousands of Gods throughout human history (Greek, Roman, Hindu, Christian, Norse, Pagan etc). The followers of the big three mono-theistic regions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) are atheist about all those other gods other than their own. Why not go that extra step and be free of these creations?

I know we are supposed to be all touchy about this stuff but it's time to stand up. I don't have to respect someone's religious beliefs if they are silly. If I can disagree with people about politics and any other subject why not religion?

One of by best friends is a devout Christian, he is even a Creationist. I respect him as a man and love him as a friend but don't respect his religious beliefs at all. Why should I? If he believed in Astrology or Santa Claus should I respect that?

What you want to be true and what is true are not the same thing.

Nathan

[thiaboxr2]

No need to get all touchy about it. Were just exchanging PERSONAL BELIEFS. Not absalute truth.

Its hard to say what I believe. I do not bother "searching" for a God. I have mixed feelings on this whole aspect of Gods and Religion. Never the less, I respect everyone elses beliefs.

[KenpoDavid]

Originally posted by Levo
Of course there isn't a God...

Nathan

oh wow, the truth is so simple why didn't I see that before now?! Oh wait, maybe it's not the truth that is simple... :p

[Levo]

Don't be afraid of simplicity!

Bull**** likes to hide in artificial complexity and mysticism.

Sometimes the answer is simply simple :D

Don't be afraid of the truth.

Nathan

:Angel:

[Kenpo_Mike]

Levo, how can you not respect someone's belief? By not respecting their beliefs you are not respecting them because their beliefs is no different from that person...

Now I could see if that person pushed their beliefs on you, I wouldn't respect that person either but simply not respecting their beliefs? Remember man... Respect is earned not demanded... If you can't respect someone's beliefs then inturn you wont be respected but if thats ok with you then I guess I am talking to myself then!!!

WAIT NOT AGAIN!!
DOH!!! :yeleyes:

[Kenpo_Mike]

I dont believe in the easter bunny also.... :D

[johndoch]

Maybe there is maybe there isnt at the end of the day I could nt care either way.

But one thing I do think is we should respect everyones beliefs so long as they dont harm anyone. Another thing I dont believe religion causes war its people that cause war through lack of respect, greed etc.

[Samurai_24]

I believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

[Levo]

Originally posted by Kenpo_Mike
Levo, how can you not respect someone's belief?

If it's ridiculous, easily.

I'm sure many Christians wouldn't respect my opinion.

Originally posted by Kenpo_Mike
By not respecting their beliefs you are not respecting them because their beliefs is no different from that person...

I disagree.

Since when does disagreeing with someone mean I can't respect them? I may find one belief they have so totally ridiculous that I can't respect it but I can still like them and admire much about their character.

I know people that believe Astrology has prophetic power, that mediums can actually speak to the dead, that people can levitate by the power of will and many other stupid things. Doesn't mean I don't love them or respect them as a person.

This is fun :D

Nathan

:Angel:

[AsSaSiN]

Not respecting someones beliefs if fine. voicing them in order to affect others, I.E National Front parades, is wrong.

Wow Levo has posted more than 3 times in one session, is he a full timer now?

[Levo]

Originally posted by AsSaSiN
Wow Levo has posted more than 3 times in one session, is he a full timer now?

Nah, was just killing time waiting for my dinner to cook :D

Later

Nathan

:Angel:

[Kenpo_Mike]

A persons belief is what they are.For example: I believe martial arts is an important part of life in general and I think everybody should take it. Now that is a belief... and since I am in martial arts and I believe that, it makes me one and the same with my beliefs. The exception I guess is someone is a hypocrite and has beliefs but dont live by them. If I am making any since?

I still stand by what I said, how can you respect them but not respect their beliefs?

Now disagreeing is another issue. You can disagree with a person beliefs and respect them at the same time.

[Duchovny]

I believe in God, not religion.

[Aegis]

I'm an atheist, so no God from my perspective.

An interesting aside is that I was approached by some obviously fundamental christians last term, who casually explained to me that science is totally unbelievable (apparently they had scientific evidence refuting evolution, old earth, etc, though they didn't seem particularly quick to share it) and that the notion of a single creator was much more acceptible. Needless to say I was somewhat skeptical....

[Tireces]

I believe in "the big guy upstairs" as I like to call the divine being. I think he ("he" of course only being out of refusal to refer to god as a disrespectful "it", I dont give into that god having a gender nonsense) exists. How hr exists, where he exists, what he exists to do, and how he goes about doing it, however, I believe are mostly beyond our limited understanding. Some people justify his non-existence by prayers unanswered. Suppose answering that prayer does more harm than good? I'm sure all of you have been exposed to some story where a human being is given a magical device allowing them to make any wish at all, and the final wish they make is usually to undo all the madness. If a million dollars truly did fall out of the sky to one who prayed for it, it would disrupt the economy of the nation it fell onto. Such an idea is simply "divine counterfeiting". Many will point out imperfections in the bible's recounting of creation or other events as proof that there is no god, and that religion is a farce. These people forget that for a very long time, the bible was HAND COPIED. This means it was subject to the "telephone effect". I'm sure many have played the game "telephone", where a large group of people sits in a circle, and are forced to whisper something into the next person's ear, and many times, when it goes all the way around, the saying has changed significantly. Couple this "telephone effect" with such things as the monks charged with re-writing these books becoming dead bored doing so, and also, poor translation, and you find that maybe the bible isnt at fault, its more or less people who have copied it over the years (what a surprise, humans at fault!). As for religion causing deaths....religion doesnt kill people (unless its something like a suicide cult, of course), people who justify wars with religion kill people. I for one dont know of any religious writing specifically commanding its followers to slaughter all who dont believe the same as they do (not even amongst the satanists). Jesus himself brilliantly said "all who are not against me, are with me", when approached about a fellow who had been "driving out demons" in his name, but despite the good he did, was not a member of Jesus' disciples. Jesus clearly didn't see the man in terms of affiliation, but in terms of the good he did. And one fellow mentioned that people only follow what they were "indoctrined" to by their parents. If so, why have we not all wound up with the exact same religion passed on from the beginning of the first human beings able to formulate it? Why do we have revolutions at all if people are so stuck doing what their ascendants did? Why have religions just "sprung up" in already religiously established cultures? People have the power to think for themselves. Yes, there will always be those who prefer to simply look at issues based on what is "accepted", and what is not. There are even those who simply go along with things because they are "not accepted". But even then, those are their choices, not things they are mechanically stuck doing. I myself believe in evaluating things for yourself. What is accepted or not should play little role in your own thinking. Whats most important is the good that is done. Any god who would call themselves truly perfect would care more for the good done than whether or not it was done to glorify them.

[David]

Tireces, for God's sake, learn how to paragraph! ;)

Levo, I guess bread doesn't exist either. Christians have leavened bread, Jews the bagel and Arabs unleavened. Therefore there isn't one true bread therefore there isn't any bread. :D

I friend of mine, Prof Percy Seymour is a respected Astronomer. He has two 'popular science' books out, one you will have heard of about the star of Bethlehem being a few years before our year zero. The other is called "The Scientific Basis of Astrology". The basic premis of the book is that it is inconceivable that matter at one end of the universe/galaxy/system does not exert an influence on material at the other end. Physics does not allow one thing to not affect another. And when that thing is as sensitive as the developing human being, how hard would it be to imprint it with little forces from afar? Arguments about the precession of the equinoxes etc are mere technical trifles.

With regards creation stories, I am fascinated by them. There isn't one that isn't in some part based in historical fact and the rest is universal truth as represented by a particular culture.

Take the Genesis story, common to Christianity and Judaism. In one reading of it, humans are the least of creation, being made last and demostrating infinite capacity for error ever since.

The idea of the Void is pure 20th/21st century physics. There is such a no-thing as no-time and no-place.

Adam means red-earth man. Eden has been found (http://www.nunki.net/PerDud/TheWorks/Express/Paradise.html). Since the location has been discovered, red-earth man is taken to mean red-earth people, as in the people who lived in the unbelievably fertile red-earth valley.

Don't write stuff off through lack of research, openness to facts yet to be discovered or poor emotional control.

One thing I found amazing in the bible is where it says that only 144,000 people's souls will get into heaven. Now, for most of us that sucks :( This bothered me: where and why is this the number? I'd have more chance in the lottery! Then, when the human genome project was near completion I heard a news story with an interview of a prject scientist. This guy reported that they'd almost finished and it appeared there were [/i]something over 144,000 basic human types[/i] within the species. Bingo! I thought. Life rocks!

Rgds,
David

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Levo
Of course there isn't a God.

There also isn't an Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus!

Every study shows that the biggest indicator of someone's religious beliefs is the religion/culture they are brought up in. Those brought up as Christians on the whole don't grow up to follow Hinduism, those brought up in Judaism on the whole don't grow up and convert to Islam etc etc etc. As that's the case it should be obvious that most peoples beliefs have little to do with "truth" and more to do with indoctrination.

Gods are created by man, not the other way round!

There have been thousands of Gods throughout human history (Greek, Roman, Hindu, Christian, Norse, Pagan etc). The followers of the big three mono-theistic regions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) are atheist about all those other gods other than their own. Why not go that extra step and be free of these creations?

I know we are supposed to be all touchy about this stuff but it's time to stand up. I don't have to respect someone's religious beliefs if they are silly. If I can disagree with people about politics and any other subject why not religion?

One of by best friends is a devout Christian, he is even a Creationist. I respect him as a man and love him as a friend but don't respect his religious beliefs at all. Why should I? If he believed in Astrology or Santa Claus should I respect that?

What you want to be true and what is true are not the same thing.

Nathan

Very good post.

Like you mentioned, if there is a God then why is there so many different religions? Is there one thats right? And why would all the others we so wrong?

Its obvious that religion has become a complicated, ritualised mess created by humans.

The universe is still so complex and un-explained that there may be more to life, I hope! But if thats true I don't believe its understood either........

[Andy Murray]

Everyone is entitled to believe what they will.

If God helps you through the day great.

If you get through it oblivious to his omnipresence, that's great too.

Just get through the day without telling other people how to live their lives.

Live your own.

[Kenpo_Mike]

Well, it says that twice in Revelation. Once in chapter 7 and the second in chapter 13... Let me try to explain...

For the life of Christianity, it has always been said you either go to heaven or hell. So today, people still think that same crap. If your good then your going to heaven with the rest of your family but if your bad, your going to burn forever. That always struck me as wrong. I mean come on, if God is a 'forgving' God then why punish someone forever for their sins? The idea of hell was always used to control people in the church... :D

Anyways... 144,000 is for people who go too heaven. If you get time, look at the scriptures more closely ( I believe it is 7:5 and 13:4?) It says they will rule with Christ as kings and priest in heaven. It didnt say they will be in heaven with family or running around with God on a freaking picnic!

The hope explained in the bible (if you look really close) is a earthly hope. Or to put it in simplier terms, living forever on earth. A great example of this is when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. He didnt raise him to heaven, he simply just raised him from the dead to live as he was. I can provide scriptures if you woud like on every account I have talked about.

This is coming from the aspect of the bible. If you dont believe in the bible then what I have all said has been horse radish! However, if your looking for an exact definition of the bible or looking to what the bible is all about then I recommened talking to a Jehovah Witness. You will be dumb founded when you realize what they teach has a lot to do with the bible!!!!

Good trails to ya!!! ;)

[L0ST 5OUL]

i beleive in god, but not as person up in the cloulds controlling things, but as a supreme intelligence or energy that forms the existence of all. i believe all the problems of the world are manmade illusions separating us from the truth. as for religion, i was raised catholic, but have now found myself without religion, but religious. i accept all religion because when it comes down to it, all religion is striving for the same longing, fulfilment, or goal.

[David]

Originally posted by L0ST 5OUL
...but have now found myself without religion, but religious. i accept all religion because when it comes down to it, all religion is striving for the same longing, fulfilment, or goal.

Amen :)

Mike, Thanks for the correction of detail. Still, my 144,000 explanation still fits. The 'privileged' rulers oing to heaven to help rule the earthly paradise are the archetypes of humanity ie in science-speak, 'genetic' archetypes, of which there are about (exactly?) 144,000.

As for Jehovah's witnesses, I find them very hard going. When I was unemployed, I used to have have them visit every week. Those who I've had frequent contact with often seem beyond recall to themselves. Except one guy... Once, in London, I did convert a JW to the kabbalistic perspective and he kept coming back to learn until I moved away. He used to bring other Witnesses with him but only one of those was interested enough to return.

Rgds,
David

[snailfist]

I have to say the post i've agreed with most on the thread has been Tireces'. I am an RC but am naturally sceptical. Thus for a period of time I experimented with aetheism. I felt for about a month or so that i was smarter than all the little people with their insecurities. Never voiced that opinion, not even fully to myself until afterwards, but it was an element of my experiment. But i gradually became aware of a force, intangible but ever-present, permeating throughout my world making it a better place. And thus i re-discovered God.

I don't believe that all people autonomusly follow the faith they were brought up in. It was because i was told my faith as a fact that i questioned it and rejected it on a lack of scientific evidence. It was through my own experimentation that i concluded that current human science had no concept of even the principles involved in an all-powerful deity. Would an attempt to find God not be best starting with the premise that he knows a little more than we do?

I do believe, over the issue of mutiple faiths, that all who worship the one God (ie. Christians, Jews, Muslims etc. are included, satanists, polygamists etc are not) worship the same god, but through a religion that has a human slant on it and thus will change because of the teachers' and worshippers cultural and individual perspective. I don't for one minute accept that all the old testament prophets were right in everything that they said, for example that wives should be obedient to their husbands all the time, because i perceive an element of opinions of past times in these teachings that now appear so hugely outdated- if God always works in the subtle way that I personally felt His prescence then confusing one's own opinions (or what we perceive this as being one's own- I also believe in a devil who has a more direct fashion of persuasion than God) with His will would be supremely easy.

There is also a huge difference between religious beliefs and a belief in Santa clause. This was used as an example because it is universally hailed as false and would be recognised as such. Religion is not a story made to introduce a little wonder into the lives of small children and dispelled upon maturity- it is a veiwpoint upon the world that has a huge influence upon our actions and morals. And respecting something is not the same as agreeing with it.

[Kwajman]

I find it interesting that many of our greatest scientists, Steven Hawking, Einstein,and others, believe in a god, that the universe as vast and complex as ours could not be a random event. I myself believe in God.

[Marku]

To find out whether god exists or not. I think its one of those things you have to wait and see what happens...but if one exists. thats cool. lol

[snailfist]

Originally posted by Kwajman
I find it interesting that many of our greatest scientists, Steven Hawking, Einstein,and others, believe in a god, that the universe as vast and complex as ours could not be a random event. I myself believe in God.

A very valid point Kwajman. It serves to illustrate that subjecting something to open-minded scrutiny and declaring it to be wrong on a pseudo-logical basis without properly considering the facts are 2 VERY different things.

[Levo]

Not such a valid point actually.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."

- Albert Einstein (quoted in 'The Human Mind', Princeton University Press, 1981).

It's a common lie put across by those promoting religion who wish to cash in on his prestige.

Nathan

[aikiMac]

Time split. AD versus BC. It split. I say the only rational explanation is that the dude actual did rise from the tomb guarded by bad-ass Roman soldiers, and then went around presenting himself to everyone.

And that event is sufficient to prove that God exists. The dude who wrote half the New Testament explicitely admitted that all of Christianity rests upon the Easter resurrection. If Easter happened, then God exists, period, end of discussion, and his name is Jesus of Nazareth. If it didn't happen, then all of Christianity is a lie, though perhaps some other God is real. And that's that.

Easter happened to the very day -- the day, the exact day -- that Daniel predicted it would happen some, what, 600 years before. (Easy enough to look up when Daniel when written.) A prediction like that melts my brain.

So yessiree, I believe there is a God, and his name is Jesus of Nazareth.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by YODA
On August 3rd, 1929 Krishnamurti spoke to a crowd of thousands at a camp in Ommen. The crowd had gathered to hear the man that had been proclaimed a “Messiah” as a child, a “Savior”. Needless to say they where shocked and surprised by the speech that Krishnamurti gave, and the truth that he revealed. Here is a transcript of that famous 1929 speech.


We are going to discuss this morning the dissolution of the Order of the Star. Many people will be delighted, and others will be rather sad. It is a question neither for rejoicing nor for sadness, because it is inevitable, as I am going to explain.

You may remember the story of how the devil and a friend were walking down the street, when they saw ahead of them a man stoop down and pick up something from the ground, look at it, and put it away in his pocket. The friend asked the devil, “What did that man pick up?” “He picked up a piece of the truth,” said the devil. “That is very bad business for you, then” said his friend. “Oh, not at all,” the devil replied, “I am going to help him organize it.”

I maintain that truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my point of view, and I adhere to that absolutely and unconditionally. Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, un approachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or to coerce people along any particular path. If you understand that, then you will see how impossible it is to organize a belief. A belief is purely an individual matter, and you must not organize it. If you do, it becomes dead, crystallized; it becomes a creed, a sect, a religion, to be imposed on others. This is what everyone throughout the world is attempting to do. Truth is narrowed down and made a plaything for those who are weak, for those who are only momentarily discontented. Truth cannot be brought down, rather the individual must make the effort to ascend to it. You cannot bring the mountintop to the valley. If you would attain to the mountaintop, you must pass through the valley, climb the steeps, unafraid of the dangerous precipices. You must climb towards the truth, it cannot be “stepped down” or organized for you. Interest in ideas is mainly sustained by organizations, but organizations only awaken interest from without. Interest, which is born out of love of truth for its own sake, but aroused by an organization, is of no value. The organization becomes a framework into which its members can conveniently fit. They no longer strive after the truth or the mountaintop, but rather carve for themselves a convenient niche in which they put themselves, or let the organization place them, and consider that the organization will thereby lead them truth. . . . .I maintain that no organization can lead man to spirituality.

If an organization is to be created for this purpose, it becomes a crutch, a weakness, a bondage, and must cripple the individual, and prevent him from growing, from establishing his uniqueness, which lies in the discovery, for himself of the absolute, unconditioned truth. So that is another reason why I have decided, as I happen to be the head of the order, to dissolve it. No one has persuaded me to this decision.

This is no magnificent dead, because I do not want followers, and I mean this. The moment you follow someone you cease to follow the truth. I am not concerned with whether you pay attention to what I say or not. I want to do a certain thing in the world and I am going to do it with unwavering concentration. I am concerning myself with only one essential thing: to set man free. I desire to free him from his cages, from all fears, and not to found religions, new sects, nor to establish new theories or philosophies. Then you will naturally ask me why I go the world over, continually speaking. I will tell you for what reason I do this; not because I desire a following, not because I desire I desire a special group of disciples. (How men love to be different from their fellowmen, however ridicules, absurd, and trivial the distinctions may be! I do not want to encourage that absurdity.) I have no disciples, no apostles, either on earth or in the realm of spirituality.

. . . . . . . .If there are only five people who listen, who will live, who will face their faces towards uncertainty, it will be sufficient. Of what use is it to have thousands who do not understand, who are fully embalmed in prejudice, who do not want new, but would rather translate the new to suit their own sterile, stagnant selves? If I speak strongly, please do not misunderstand me, it is not through lack of compassion. If you go to the surgeon for an operation, is it kindness on his part to operate even if it causes you pain? So, in a like manner, if I speak straightly, it is not through lack of real affection – on the contrary.

. . . For eighteen years you have been preparing for this event, for the Coming of the world teacher. For eighteen years you have organized, you have looked for someone who would give a new delight to your hearts and minds, who would transform your whole life, who would give you a new understanding; for someone who would raise you to a new plane of life, who would give you a new encouragement, who would set you free – and now look what is happening! Consider, reason with yourselves, and discover in what way belief has made you different – not with the superficial difference of the wearing of the badge, which is trivial, absurd. In what manner has such belief swept away all the essential things of life? That is the only way to judge ; in what way are you free, greater, more dangerous to every society which is based on the false and unessential? In what way have the members of this organization of the Star become different?

. . . You are all depending for your spirituality on someone else, for your happiness on someone else, for your enlightenment on someone else; and although you have been preparing for me eighteen years, when I say these things are unnecessary, when I say that you must put them all away and look within yourselves for the enlightenment, for the glory, for the purification, and for the incorruptibility of the self, not one of you is willing to do it. There may be a few, but very, very few.

So why have an organization?

. . . .I said last year that I would compromise. Very few listened to me then. This year I have made it absolutely clear. I do not know how many thousands throughout the world – members of the Order – have been preparing for me for eighteen years, and yet now they are not willing to listen unconditionally, wholly, to what I say.

So why have an organization?

. . . .You will see how absurd is the whole structure that you have built, looking for external help, depending on others for your comfort, for your happiness, for your strength. These can only be found within yourselves.

So why have an organization?

You are accustomed to being told how far you have advanced, what is your spiritual status. How childish! Who but yourself can tell you if you are incorruptible? You are not serious in these things.

So why have an organization?

But those who really desire to understand, who are looking to find that which is eternal, without beginning, and without end, will walk together with great intensity, will be a danger to everything that is unessential, to unreality’s, to shadows. And they will concentrate, they will become a flame, because they understand. Such a body we must create, and that is my purpose. Because of that real understanding their will be friendship. Because of that true friendship – which you do not seem to know – there will be real cooperation on the part of each one. And this is not because of authority, not because of salvation, not because of immolation for a cause, but because you really understand, and hence are capable of living in the eternal. This is a greater thing then all pleasure, than all sacrifice.

So these are some of the reasons why, after careful consideration for two years, I have made this decision. It is not from a momentary impulse. I have not been persuaded to it by anyone. I am not persuaded in such things. For two years I have been thinking about it, this, slowly, carefully, patiently, and I have decided to disband the Order, as I happen to be its head. You can form other organizations and expect someone else. With that I am not concerned, nor with creating new cages, new decorations for the cages. My only concern is to set men free absolutely, unconditionally free.

Krishnamurti August 3. 1929

=======================================


Posted by Yoda in relation to martial arts philosophy, but what are peoples thoughts on it in regards to religion?

After reading Levo's post on how different countries have there "own" religion, and how people have created so much of what is religion, it makes Krishnamurti's speach make a lot of sense to me. Maybe religion is more about self and feeling than what has become the man made ceromony of doing :confused:

[Em-em]

Originally posted by pgm316
Maybe religion is more about self and feeling than what has become the man made ceromony of doing :confused:

Hmm, you have a point there pgm316. I think religion is a social understanding, still Im proud to be Catholic

[snailfist]

Originally posted by Levo
Not such a valid point actually.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."

- Albert Einstein (quoted in 'The Human Mind', Princeton University Press, 1981).

It's a common lie put across by those promoting religion who wish to cash in on his prestige.

Nathan

Hmm maybe, but that still doesn't account for stephen hawking or for the "others"- i personally know of both an eminent pathologist and a computer analyst who are both religious believers, and would both employ that kind of logical thought processes mentioned earlier. The main validity of the point lies in the distinction I outlined earlier- the difference between scrutiny and an almost reflexive gainsay of any argument that supports a particular view.

Also, a thought that has also occured to me since i posted before:
one of the main ideas of the atheists is that God was created to ease man's insecurites. Theory: the idea of our behaviour being judged by one who does not sin makes us uncomfortable. thus God was ruled out on "a lack of evidence" to ease man's insecurities. Discuss!

[khafra]

Religion gets exempted from scrutiny by many otherwise logically oriented people because they grew up with it--even if not in their own homes, at least in the society around them.

No less a religious authority than Martin Luther admitted in very strong terms that you can't both think for yourself and believe in the Christian God, literal truth of the Bible, etc: Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God.

[snailfist]

In my case it withstood scrutiny, not avoided it. also many christians do not take the bible literally word for word, there are parts that contradict each other! The fallibility of a given human interpretation of God cannot be used as proof of His inexistence!

[FrankCefalu]

I do not believe in a god. Cuz many say to say there isnt any is too simple of an answer to life. Well your wrong, its too simple to say one being oversees all things that exists. Its not simple to try and find the answers for ourselves.
If god was perfect than no earth would be needed to exemplify it. I believe we are here by mistake and we should be thankful that we are here. I believe if there wasnt a religion the world would be better off. This is a very touchy topic cuz ppl are brought up believing in god.
Ask yourself this, who started religion? God? Or humans? There seems to be no recollection of this in any bible. They never said when the recording of these tales began and by whom. Adam and Eve, The earth beining created in 7 days and so forth.
Okay here is a techinical way of looking at it. PPL centuries ago who wrote this book said the earth was created in 7 days. But, there is no such thing as time. Time was created by the human mind becuae of our nervous system. Our nervous system needs something to describe the passing through points in the universe.
Let em ask you this. Are you gonna believe these ppl who told us back in the Enlightment that the earth was the center of the universe and this was a divine message from god?

---------------------------

Heres my break down. Religion was used as a form of governmental power over the people to remain in control of a large mass. Its very easily done to make ppl not to kill if they know if they are going to hell if they do. Freedom of choice they said you have, what freedom? If you look up freedom it says the free will of making a choice without influencing forces.
Umm.. Okay if you dont follow the bible you go to hell unless ur forgiven by god. PPL religion was created by Human beings. Thats why it is so flawed. Thats why I think religion is dumb. Its a form of manipulation on ppls beliefs.

Remember when a runner winsa race he thanks god, but he doesnt blame god when he loses. Why is it this way? Cuz we are human, and we are dumb creatures.

[GrappleorWrestle]

Originally posted by Samurai_24
I believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

I also believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

[YODA]

I believe in Man - the individual conscious

Spirit - The individual subconscious.

And God - the collective subconscious.

[Paratus]

Sounds like Jung's collective unconcious theory

[YODA]

Originally posted by Paratus
Sounds like Jung's collective unconcious theory

It is.

[Kwajman]

Any thoughts of some of the greats from MA believing, or not believing in God? Parker, Lee, Norris, some of the great Judo, karate, aikido and other MA's i've left out and do not know their names?

[Jackie Li]

ya i believe in God but I dont think God is a he or she, It's a spirit and the creator of life.

[FrankCefalu]

This convo is never going to end cuz there sno proof from either side only opinions. So this almost like a dead topic in a sense eh? And might just cause problems with ppl of conflicting views?

[Kenpo_Mike]

I am asking people's opinion on soemthing... Its not suppose to end... If you dont want to post your opinion about GOd then damn it, dont post!!!

[Guitarboy1212]

Wow. touchy subject. to piss people off, or not piss people off. hmm. God? I do not believe in god, and here is a good quote to support that.

"In this world there are three wrong viewpoints.

First some say that all human experience is based on destiny; second, some hold that everything is created by God and controlled by his will; third some say that everything happens by chance without having any cause or condition.

If all has been decided by destiny, both good deeds and evil deeds are predetermined, weal and woe are predestined; nothing exists that has not been foreordained. Then all human plans and efforts for improvement and progress would be in vain and humanity would be without hope

The same is true of the other viewpoints, for , if everything in th last resort is in the hands of an unknowable God, or of blind chance, what hope has humanity except in submission?" - bukkyo dendo kyokai

This is my belief. I think that God was created to satisfy peoples urges to find out the answers to the unknown, so this god was created so people can feel like that void in there life is filledl. there is no proof that god is real. He is as real as Santa Claus. Wait, I take that back. Santa Claus is more believable now that i think about it. Why? because i get physical evidence that he is real. yep, every year he brings toys to little boys and girls. so i remember when i was little, and i woke up every chrismas, and there was my physical evidence that he was real. presents. what physical evidence do you have that god is real?

[Burabod]

To paraphrase certain Taoist (and other religious/philosophical) sayings, "the God that can be described is not the true God"..."The question of whether God exists or not is irrelevant. Where does the question come from? That is relevant!"..."If God does not exist, then there is a great necessity to invent Him."

Two things I find, and that never fails to amaze me.
One is a mind trying to study itself
And the other is a man
Trying to get an outsider's view of the universe.

--I guess that about sums it up for me. (",)

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Paratus
Sounds like Jung's collective unconcious theory

What should we learn/do from this theory?

[YODA]

Originally posted by pgm316
What should we learn/do from this theory?


Realise that we are all one and treat each other accordingly?

[TheBorderer]

Originally posted by YODA
Realise that we are all one and treat each other accordingly?

Indeed Yoda. Something I try to do (but then as everyone knows it's not always as easy to do!) :) See this is the thing I sometimes don't like with "God" and religion is when you get idiots who do evil things and then say "Yeah but I'm doing it for the good of good", using relgion to justify hatered and prejudice its the ionry in fact of armies from two countries fighting saying "God is on your side". Er... in a case of victory for one side, how can 'he'/'it' (darn words, see this is the problem...) be on one side, expect from maybe the (hopefully) benevlovent sense that 'he'/'it' (whatever!) does not want harm to come to the two armies?


At uni I'm doing a bit of philosophy as an elective, so the wole god thing is part of it. Do I beleive? I duno, maybe there is, maybe there isn't, maybe god is an "entity" of energy or something or happens to just be a 'frame of mind', it is indeed very hard to say (as there is the argument "if there is evil, and god exists why let it exist if god is all powerful?", of course you could say that by the fact that it's human nature to not want help at times and be stubborn that 'god' does not intervine).

It's easy for science tho find out how things work, but not exactly why I mean we could say god exists, but then go onto did god always exists, if not who created god? etc etc No wonder sometimes folk dont like philosophy as it can get very :confused: !

[wayofthedragon]

God......
If there is no God answer these:
How did we get here?
Why are we here?
What is our pourpose in life?
Why is there good and evil and rules to abide by?
Why does every one believe there is something else out there, but don't know what for those who don't believe.....or maybe do know for those who believe in God?
Why does every religion have a God?
Who was the first person to come up with the idea of a God?
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????
I don't think any of those questions can be answered with a sure answer.....hmmmmmm, and maybe there is. Anyway, to share my beliefs....I do believe there is a God. I believe in God: The father, the son, and the holy spirit.
I also believe there is a devil. A Devil who does not want us to believe that this God exists, so then he devises plans to get us no to believe so that we can be in darkness. So that we can live our lives how we want to, without God. This is why there is so much confusion. Because the devil doesn't want the truth to be known. Because he hates God. He wants to be God. So, he trys to set things in a way so that people would look away from God to other things. But there is a God, and there is a devil. And one day, EVERYTHING will be revealed. Now, the devil it trying to keep peoples eyes close to the truth, but God's truth will be revealed, and is being revealed. However it's up to the individual people to chose to accept...............
hmmmm.....okay I'll stop there for now:D

[Levo]

*spits drink all over screen and falls off chair laughing*

Nathan

[khafra]

Heh, but if there is a god, you still have to answer all those questions, plus how did god get here, and why is he doing such a poor job of it, being all-powerful and all? (ie: the problem of evil, etc.)

[David]

Originally posted by Burabod
To paraphrase certain Taoist (and other religious/philosophical) sayings, "the God that can be described is not the true God"..."The question of whether God exists or not is irrelevant. Where does the question come from? That is relevant!"..."If God does not exist, then there is a great necessity to invent Him."

Two things I find, and that never fails to amaze me.
One is a mind trying to study itself
And the other is a man
Trying to get an outsider's view of the universe.

--I guess that about sums it up for me. (",)

Sometimes I get an inexplicable sensation that something inside me knows more than I do about me and my circumstances. This, I think, is me glimpsing my own structure.

Like a clock somehow listening to itself ticking, I cannot fathom the tick or the tock but I know that it has sustained me through everything and that the cause of that knocking and my listening is the embodiment of something awesome in it's age, complexity, intangibility, commonality, experience, surety, diligence, integrity - I could go on beyond forever listing the attributes of whatever this thing is!

Also, with regards the things which make Levo laugh, don't you find it amusing that Science never asks 'Why?' It's always assumed that things started for no reason.

Why is that assumption made..?

Rgds,
David

PS I wanted to say something (a lot) about the predetermination, chance etc but no time now.

[snailfist]

To khafra, the question of God doing a "poor job " is attributed to him giving us our own free will- we are the ones who are screwing up our world. or maybe we aren't- if, levo, you can laugh wholeheartedly at that earlier post, you *_NEED_* to read The Screwtape letters, by C.S. Lewis.

[Falling_link]

In life what happens happens and can not happen any other way, for we live life, we make our choices until the time we die - and then what happens? Do we just blank out and this existance we have beleived becomes nothing, do we go to a higher purpose and watch the world and the universe until the end of time, do we return to some kind of Gaia and give our experiences of life to her, and then get sent out again, do we go a diety in otherwords god and get judged to whether we go to heaven or hell, or do we re-live our life, our memory blank and we do it all over again.
The truth is no one knows, and we will never know until we die, it scares us, so to make ourselves feel better, and have a higher sense of life we live with a religious beleif so life is not scary and gives us a sense of personal strength to carry on with life. We cannot diss each others opinions for we all truly different in how we think.
We may or may not ever know what happens with our lives. This is a hard topic to discuss because people have set beleifs on the existance of God and people will go to war to defend a beleif, people will die and will try to become martars because of what they beleive in. Religions hate each other because they think there religion is right... so what is the right religion is then the next question?

[Levo]

Originally posted by David
Also, with regards the things which make Levo laugh, don't you find it amusing that Science never asks 'Why?' It's always assumed that things started for no reason.

Come on, you really don't see the funny side of someone believing this:

"I also believe there is a devil. A Devil who does not want us to believe that this God exists, so then he devises plans to get us no to believe so that we can be in darkness. So that we can live our lives how we want to, without God. This is why there is so much confusion. Because the devil doesn't want the truth to be known. Because he hates God. He wants to be God. So, he trys to set things in a way so that people would look away from God to other things. But there is a God, and there is a devil. And one day, EVERYTHING will be revealed."

As for why things happen, I have far more respect for people who say a) I don't know or b) here's a possibility and a way to test it than c) believing/making up fairy tales.

Originally posted by snailfist
levo, if you can laugh wholeheartedly at that earlier post, you *_NEED_* to read The Screwtape letters, by C.S. Lewis.

Heard of the book but never read it, isn't it written as letters from a senior demon to another demon giving advice on temptation or something like that? Is it any good?

Nathan

[khafra]

It is good, I've read it as well as the Narnia series long ago and Perelandra series slightly less long ago. As long as you're at it, though, you should probably read his Mere Christianity, a little more intellectually challenging. And go for some Francis Schaeffer, too, best of the bunch in my opinion.

And the debate over free will can go on endlessly, of course, but what about things that can't be attributed to free will? A random occurrence maiming a good person. Sure, it's part of "God's greater plan" for their lives--but couldn't he come up with a plan involving less pain and heartbreak, being that he loves everyone so much?

[wayofthedragon]

So levo are you saying then that you don't believe there is a God,
or is it that you don't believe there is a devil?

Or don't you believe in either???

[Levo]

Originally posted by wayofthedragon
So levo are you saying then that you don't believe there is a God,
or is it that you don't believe there is a devil?

Or don't you believe in either???

I think it's clear I try not to believe in fictional characters at all :D

Nathan

[David]

Originally posted by khafra
... A random occurrence maiming a good person. Sure, it's part of "God's greater plan" for their lives--but couldn't he come up with a plan involving less pain and heartbreak, being that he loves everyone so much?

Please give an example of something that could be considered random.


Originally posted by Levo
I think it's clear I try not to believe in fictional characters at all :D

Why not progress your understanding by considering words such as God and Devil as technical terms. Depersonalise them away from the cartoon image in your head and read it like it's a psychology of morality.

The way your heart and mind are wired is very well explained in the teachings of religion. The main problem for a lot of people is the specific holy names and doctrinaire prescriptions are clearly made-up. The interesting thing about all these made-up names etc is the etymology: every word has reams of meaning inside it for further study of the human condition.

When I was a kid, many people tried to cajole me into believing in Christ the Saviour and God. It didn't work because I didn't understand metaphor: when they mentioned the Throne of God, I took that literally and thought they were fools. To this day I think they were foolish to talk to me like that, as if their force of will would overcome their inability to vocalise the essence of their beliefs. These people knew not what they said.

I am open for the same criticism but seek to learn from that criticism to better understand my position. Understanding my position, develops it into another position and this happens cyclically as in any other learning.

Rgds,
David

[timmeh!]

"we are doomed as human beings to babble inanities as we try to explain the unexplainable! - Don Juan

[khafra]

Awright, fine, David--Stochastic would be a better term than random--but events caused by nobody's exercise of their free will, except in the most spurious, indirect, "butterfly=hurricane" sense. Surely you wouldn't claim that, for instance, the rockslide at Sacred Falls on Oahu a couple years ago that killed a dozen or so people was a neccessary result of someone's act of free will?

[XremeBlvr]

I believe in God. I believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that he *alone* forgives sins. Without him we are lost... but with him we are saved. And I believe that the Holy Spirit convicts us of our sins and draws us closer to the Father. I am saved by the blood of the lamb! And I'm not afraid to tell y'all that. : )

You may believe what you will... but there's no ignoring the prophecies that have come to pass - and more importantly, WILL come to pass, very soon.

"The Spririt clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow decieving spirits and things taught by demons."
1 Timothy 4:1

"He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."
2 Peter 3:9

Mike

[wayofthedragon]

xremeblvr, I second what you said

[David]

Me, too. Jesus *alone* forgives sins. but, as it's in the nature of religions to have such figures, I don't care for limiting it to the Christian one.

Rgds,
David

[XremeBlvr]

Originally posted by David
Me, too. Jesus *alone* forgives sins. but, as it's in the nature of religions to have such figures, I don't care for limiting it to the Christian one.
Rgds,
David

It's kinda hard to have Jesus Christ in another religion. He's not a "figure" or a "character" - he's a real person and God in the flesh... the great I Am the Bible speaks of. Other religions teach there are many paths to God... but there is only 1. Jesus wasn't just a prophet or teacher... he is God. : )

- mike

eta: there are no athiests in hell... ; )

[Megilar]

Somewhere in the bible, there is a story of a particular group of people fleeing from the Egyptians. Their escape route involved going through a particular sea. The story describes that the waters broke apart and created dry ground for the people to cross on.

Nonsense?

In this particular sea, a submerged land bridge (meaning that it is alot higher than the rest of the sea's floor) has been discovered along the path that the bible says. (i'm using particular words for particular objects because it's late).

Stephen Hawkings said more or less that the origins of the universe look as though they *needed* a design, as if someone had designed it this particular way. And with the 140ish statistics that have to be precise for life as we know it, and all 140ish are true for this planet, don't you think that there's something going on? It is statistically impossible for there to be life on other planets. craaaazy stuff.

I am a believer myself, i was brought up that way, and people have been brought up in similar ways for over 4000 years. For those of you who say it's archaic to still believe in 'fables' such as hell and heaven, why would it be any different than it was 200 or even 2000 years ago? Because science is disproving it? Science *is* proving it. The bible even describes the times now, that people disbelieve. Satan works to get you to not believe in god or even him. If you believe in him, than you, more than likely, believe in god, which is just the opposite. There are some clear examples here in this thread. One of the prophets phrophesized over 40 phrophecies, and all have come true. That is statistically impossible as well.

And for those of you who don't care... well... that's your problem.

[David]

You have your little sect and I'm happy for you. I don't think you've convinced Levo with your detailed and incontrovertible essay on truth.

Jeez!

David

[Alex Snyder]

Yes, David, my point exactly. I have my own little world to live in, and others have theirs. As for the unbelievers, well... whatever. I don't really care. It really is their problem, not mine. Anyhoo... i'm off.

[Alex Snyder]

Oh wait... this is my friend's account... hah... i'm megilar. whoops.

[Jacques_Strappe]

I believe God exists, is personal, and knowable. I find it strange how ordinary people try to use science to 'cover up' God when the majority of science's greatest minds were very strong in faith. Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal, Benjamin Franklin, Louis Pasteur, even Darwin. Einstein believed you couldn't truly be a scientist without faith in God. I'm sure that if you asked any of these men that they would say science confirms the existence of God, rather than disproving it. Anyway, I'm new here, so howdy y'all!

[Knight_Errant]

'The faculty with which we ponder the world has no ability to peer inside itself or our other faculties to see what makes them tick. That makes us the victims of an illusion: that our own psychology comes from some divine force or mysterious essence or almighty principle'- Steven0 Pinker in his excellent 'How the mind works'.
(The reason I am quoting him rather than telling you straight is because he says it better than I can)

[khafra]

...I am, of course, and have always been an atheist... Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner
I am sorry to have to inform you that I do not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation, & therefore not in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Charles Darwin, letter to a correspondent, quoted at www.christiananswers.net
Must I really go on, Jacques? You find it strange how ordinary athiests hide behind science; and I find it completely understandable how ordinary believers throw around big names instead of strong ideas.

[Jacques_Strappe]

These quotes found at http://www.humboldt1.com/~gralsto/einstein/quotes.html :

"It is best, it seems to me, to separate one's inner striving from one's trade as far as possible. It is not good when one's daily break is tied to God's special blessing." -- Albert Einstein

God doesn't play dice.
-- Albert Einstein

God may be subtle, but He isn't plain mean. -- Albert Einstein

"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish." --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

"What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." --Albert Einstein

Here's the quote I originally was referencing:

"Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith."--Albert Einstein

While not a Christian, it seems apparent that Einstein believed in God, and that's what my original point was.

About your quote on Darwin: Darwin might or might not have been a Christian. However, as you'll note, I never mentioned Christianity in my original post. You see, khafra, there are other religions in the world besides Christianity. These religions believe in God, too. So you can be a non-Christian and still be strong in your religious and Godly faith. However, since you've brought up the subject of Christianity, here are some more great scientists who believed not only in God, but the God of the Bible: Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin, Boyle, Dalton, Ramsay, Ray, Linnaeus, Mendel, Pasteur(who, by the way, thought Darwin was full of crap), Steno, Woodward, Brewster, Agassiz, Kepler, Galileo, Herschel, Maunder, Da Vinci, Francis Bacon, Samuel F.B. Morse, William Petty, William Derham, James Joule, Henri Fabre, Joseph Henry, Lister.

My point stands: if you could ask any of these men, they would assure you that science affirms the existence of God.
Maxwell wrote:"Lord, it belongs not to my care, whether I die or live. to love and serve Thee is my share, and that Thye guard must give"

Kepler believed:"The chief aim of all investigation of the external world should be to discover the rational order and harmony which has been imposed on it by God."

Kelvin wrote: "With the regard to the origin of life, science...positively affirms creative power."

Joseph Lister( 1827-1912) was the founder of antiseptic surgery, wrote: "I am a firm believer in the fundamentals of Christianity".

So, I think my point stands: Most great scientific minds agree that science affirms the existence of an all-knowing Creator. And that is why I am baffled that people try to use science to 'wipe-out' God.

Originally posted by khafra
Must I really go on, Jacques? You find it strange how ordinary athiests hide behind science; and I find it completely understandable how ordinary believers throw around big names instead of strong ideas.

This is particularly harsh. I never said anything about hiding, and I certainly don't hide myself. I wasn't trying to prove the existence of God with my previous post, just voice one of my conclusions. However, the idea I presented about great scientists agreeing is a strong idea, and I have plenty of strong ideas to tell in addition to strong names if you've the open ears and open mind to sincerely listen, khafra.

[wayofthedragon]

For those who don't believe, God exists, and that it's just foolishness....I guess it makes more sense that we all just came from a big bang huh? Thats really how every thing just started There was a big explosion and everything just droped into order and being. WoW. So that mean we are just a mistake, or a coincident...........No no not at all. Someone created all this. Life is not a coincident

[crjjguy]

"God is a concept by which we measure our pain" JL

"God is dead! He died of his pity for man!" FN
I'm so confused....

[Marku]

the word god has been used as an excuse to execute so many people who they believed to be witches and stuff. so god IS based on what we want him to be. It seems...

Humans were not created from the big bang, we evolved from monkeys :D

[wayofthedragon]

really, so did monkeys come from the big bang

seriously though. people do have different out looks on god and who he is and what he is....but the truth remains that there is still a God

[Tireces]

Originally posted by Marku
the word god has been used as an excuse to execute so many people who they believed to be witches and stuff. so god IS based on what we want him to be. It seems...


That is a supposed image, not who or what God actually is. One can CLAIM to be doing god's will, but theres no real proof of it until god jumps on down off a cloud and affirms it. This is why things like miracles play such a huge role in the process of making someone a saint.

[ninja pimp]

I enjoy reading the Bible and am a Christian. God was always amazing to me but what amazed me more In Romans some where.
"sampson was filled with the spirit of god and he killed 1000 men with the jawbone of a donky", So I said "holy crap i want some of that"! eversince Ive fought under the banner of god and all i believe in. ; )

[Kanja]

I Do Not Belive In God..I Belive In Myself .

[ninja pimp]

well your self has shurly made some mistakes an the only mistake god made i think was making us... i dont remember where ive heard that before but he is not only my god but my friend.

for now ill be gods sword........

[shunyadragon]

Something everyone can agree on is God is a three-letter word.

[RubyMoon]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
Something everyone can agree on is God is a three-letter word.

I disagree.

[47Ronin]

Originally posted by wayofthedragon
For those who don't believe, God exists, and that it's just foolishness....I guess it makes more sense that we all just came from a big bang huh? Thats really how every thing just started There was a big explosion and everything just droped into order and being. WoW. So that mean we are just a mistake, or a coincident...........No no not at all. Someone created all this. Life is not a coincident

Maybe "god" made that "bang".

I look at human life like plants. Cut off its roots and does it go to heaven/hell/reincarnation?

Me, I am still undecided and just wonder when I die if I am going to be buried or burned. The thought of dead bodies under the ground creeps me out!!!(DAMN ZOMBIES):D

Thing is we won't know until we are dead, and I don't see any dead people posting in here now do I?(again, DAMN ZOMBIES.)

[shunyadragon]

Heather

Just saying I disagree and nothing else says nothing. Is not God not a three-letter word?

[RubyMoon]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
Is not God not a three-letter word? No. Er, yes. Um, could you rephrase that?

[Yama Tombo]

Originally posted by Kenpo_Mike
I was raised a Jehovah Witness, so basically I have always been taught that God exist and if you do something bad then God will punish you. Well, ever since I started taking martial arts, I have been facing my fears straight on and now I am confused to rather or not the belief in God is just an insercurity. However, I do feel there is something out there. So I guess my real question is, if someone does believe in God, are they insecure and cant handle the real ideal of everything?

I have ideals of Jehovah Witness myself, I still study and often heard that presented as a question and answer. (Atleast the answer never came from someone religious.) I felt insecure myself in my belief in God. Then I thought maybe everything I'm experiencing is a little too much for me to handle. And you don't have to be a church going person to realize the logic. The logic which is presented in the bible:

For example:
"it is better to give than to receive.."
I was in a pyschology class discussing, some theory about reaching the top of life,"What to do next?" Anyway, the discussion was,"If you reached the top, like being the world's richest person what would you do?" some of the people in the class were like "I'd want to kill myself, because there would be nothing to do." And I answer concerning that comment,"Why you would want to do that? When you can help people around the world who don't have any food." And most everyone agreed in the class.

2 Tim. 3: 16, 17
Then I was talking with an accqaintance of mine not to long ago. He moved from the country and now lives in the city; and he finds the city life shocking and boring. And he is like a turtle with his beliefs (he's stuck in it) He told me,"I believe the bible is something that holds answers that we can understand, I think when we die we understand what that bible is all about." I told him,"No, in 2 Tim. 3: 16, 17 tells us what the bible can do for us and in the begining chapters of Psalms explains that by reading the chapters in hope you may become wise."

What I'm trying to say if you doubt your belief in God, you have more than physical proof to believe in God. And insecurity comes from experiencing stuff that is new.

[jwc]

One way to get an idea of the strength of the arguments for various philosophical and religious positions is to listen to or read debates between their respective experts. Two well known debates are Gary Habermas (Christian) vs. Anthony Flew (atheist) in Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? and William Lane Craig (Christian) vs. Frank Zindler (atheist) in Atheism versus Christianity. Another good resource is The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel.

[shunyadragon]

The logic of debates and arguements on religion is the sound of dogs barking and cocks crowing. Since religion is question of faith and the logic and reason used by those who believe only plays a role to justify ones faith. The arguement of the existence or nonexistence of God or god or gods or Gods is between those who believe through faith and those whi reject through logic.

I've read these debates and others and they bear no fruit.

The main problem with Judism, Christianity and Islam is their books and laws are old and not relavent to today. They all still allow slavery to exist as a social institution and their view of the role of women in society is unacceptable in a modern society.

[shunyadragon]

To yama Tombo

The Jehovah Witness deny they are a church or religion and consider all othe churches and religions as evil. If I undrstand your laws correctly you can't even enter another church or place of worship or socialize in close friendship with people outside your faith.

Even the word God is pagan to the Jehovah Witnesses.

RubyMoon

Rephrase what? You simply have to say more than 'I disagree' for me to give a constructive response.

[stumpy]

I believe in me.
I am an atheist. I don't believe that there is no god, I know it to be true, in the same way that a devout Christian knows that there is a god and Jesus was his son.

I take life on face value. If I achieve my goals, it is because I worked hard and if I fail, then I failed and it isn't because of the influence of any mystical being.

I won't force my "belief" on anyone and don't expect anyone to try that with me. If you are happy and comfortable with your life and ideology, and it isn't upsetting anyone, who cares?

[judojedi]

Originally posted by 47Ronin
Maybe "god" made that "bang".



or maybe that 'bang' made 'god'.

if god made the universe and everything in it, what made god?

i had a discussion similar to this with a catholic friend of mine some time ago and his responce to the above question was 'nothing made god, he made everything', and then got upset.

IMO man made god.

-jedi-
devote atheist

[Yama Tombo]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
To yama Tombo

The Jehovah Witness deny they are a church or religion and consider all othe churches and religions as evil. If I undrstand your laws correctly you can't even enter another church or place of worship or socialize in close friendship with people outside your faith.

Even the word God is pagan to the Jehovah Witnesses.

RubyMoon

Rephrase what? You simply have to say more than 'I disagree' for me to give a constructive response.

Your facts are not far from the truth except:

-They do consider their system of belief as a religion, just not a world religion which is right.

-Though you are right they can't socialize as close friends. Are you saying that it is a bad thing? Though, they are instructed to preach "door-to-door" so I don't quite understand what you're saying.

-No the word god is not pagan to the Witnesses, it's rather they believe the world religions have forgotten the first name of god. "Jehovah God"

Anything else?

[RubyMoon]

"Something everyone can agree on is God is a three-letter word."
"I disagree."
"Is not God not a three-letter word?"
"No. Er, yes. Um, could you rephrase that?"
"Rephrase what? You simply have to say more than 'I disagree' for me to give a constructive response."

"I really disagree."

[jwc]

---------------------------------------------------
The arguement of the existence or nonexistence of God or god or gods or Gods is between those who believe through faith and those whi reject through logic.
---------------------------------------------------

What if logic leads me to believe that there is a God?

As an organic chemist, I believe that science leads me to believe that there is a God and he is one magnificent organic chemist.

[snailfist]

RE: jwc's point:
There is a argument for the existence of God known as the design theory, which goes along the lines that everything in our universe is so intricately designed to levels of atomic size on an infinite scale, it could not be an accident.

If not an accident, then there was intent.

Intent suggests a creator. :D

To judojedi:
The hypothetical nature of God allows scope for him to be of infinite existence. The nature of huge bangs does not allow them to occur for no good reason :p

[snailfist]

As a random thought, do we think this will match Yoda's One Hand... thread eventually?

[Yama Tombo]

And to go along with JWC that is right, and the cycle of life how everything has a pattern. The bible tells us that ,"God is not a God of Chaos, but a God of order..."

Though the bible is not a science book, it does give us some scientific bases of how man was created in the begining chapter of the bible (Genesis) man was created from dirt--well, science tells us that the skin of a human contains the same, if not similar proteins and minerals as does dirt.


Article or Internet source
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minerals Essential to Life

Spontaneous Generation is a theory of life where the minerals in soil along with the gases in the air, touched by a spark of sulfur are mixed together to create living organisms. Now, a more accepted theory is that tiny colloid particles are added to the mix and this colloid may have come from extraterrestrial planets that includes Mars. Naturopaths believe that the colloids consist of proteins that house enzymes.What activates the enzymes is minerals. How can essentially dirt particles that have no life create life? Minerals are magnets that carry a positive charge that pass negative charged energy electrons through proteins to get into the cell to produce inner energy. This process is called ETS for electron transfer system. ETS occurs between the outer membrane and the inner membrane of the cell wall. Within this area lies a chamber that is composed of proteins, enzymes and mineral coenzymes that pass the electron energy. Without these earth metals (minerals), the electron process would stall and the cell would get sick and possibly die. (**my comment: though this is indirect answer to what I posted. life is life, and skin lives.)

Bacteria, humans and all forms of life need minerals to catalyze ETS. Unfortunately, other metals such as mercury, cadmium, lead, aluminum, tin, nickel, etc, block ETS. Dentists introduce many of these toxic metals into the body during dental treatment. Traces of aluminum were found in the blood soon after root canal treatment. Mercury concentrations were found in the blood by chewing food when there are mercury amalgam fillings. The poisonous metal ions get into the blood through absorption via the oral tissues and also by swallowing the metal ions during the digestive process. The best way to remove these toxic metals is to use other metals (minerals) to replace the harmful metals. The harmful metals are then washed away in the body fluids to be eliminated by our body organs. Certain metals replace other metals as mercury is replaced by zinc and copper and magnesium is replaced by calcium This replacement therapy is called chelation.
------------------------------[][][]------------------------------------------------
If you want to read more heres the link http://www.doctorshealthsupply.com/Newsletters/DentalHealth-May.htm

[judojedi]

Originally posted by snailfist
RE:

To judojedi:
The hypothetical nature of God allows scope for him to be of infinite existence. The nature of huge bangs does not allow them to occur for no good reason :p

maybe there was a reason, anyhow, a spontaneous bang is more plausable than some infinite supreme being. to my mind anyway.

if such a being exists, why would he/she/it waste time creating us? and if such a being exists why are their so many non-believers. and if this being exists and he wanted people to believe in him he would do something to prove his existance.....like send his son to earth........but that was 'aledgedly' 2000ish years ago, there are more non-belivers now then there ever was. its about HE proved us hertics/hethens wrong isn't it?

i havn't read through the entire thread so if this is repeating what someone has already said i apologise.

[Yama Tombo]

maybe there was a reason, anyhow, a spontaneous bang is more plausable than some infinite supreme being. to my mind anyway.

if such a being exists, why would he/she/it waste time creating us?
**Why? It was out of "pure wanting" to do so. Why do we waste our time writing poems, making cars, and etc? Because we like what we do.


and if such a being exists why are their so many non-believers.
**Jesus said that there would be those fall away from the religion toward the end of the last days. And God said in the last days that there will be more attitude of selfishness, and people following their own desires. ( I basically rephrase that all together.)

and if this being exists and he wanted people to believe in him he would do something to prove his existance.....like send his son to earth........but that was 'aledgedly' 2000ish years ago, there are more non-belivers now then there ever was. its about HE proved us hertics/hethens wrong isn't it?

** Really, God was trying to show us a perfect model to follow in the foot steps of. And he proved it by being poor and putting up with violent acts against him. And to prove he was a perfect person(or to those who want to say he was an Angel) Even Satan is proof that a perfect creature can fall to imperfection.

[judojedi]

?

next time separate my quote from your responce please.

we make cars for money and write poems for our/others pleasure and for money also.

why you quoting the bible at me, it dosent prove anything.

and was jesus perfect? according to the bible he was quite a violent man himself.

[Michael16]

Unfortunately, I completely agree with Levo. The reason we are here is simply scientific (but this topic still hurts my brain).

I would to pose a few question to those of religious faith:
What form do you believe God(s) take(s)?
How did he/she/it/they originate?

And moving on to the fascinating topic of afterlife:
If life consists of your brain processing information from the various senses and thinking (however that happens), how can there be an afterlife, if it is the brain that allows for it here?

Some people having had near-death experiences claim they have seen themselves drift away from their body- but how can they see their own eyes, the very things that allow us to see?

So if this afterlife is not physical, what is the spiritual? All living things on this earth can be located, found in physical form. If that form is destroyed or stops functioning (as happens in death) then how can there be an afterlife?

Personally, I believe there is no afterlife and that it is something that has been invented for the understandable purpose of lessening the fear of death. (Please persuade me otherwise)

However I don't think there is any reason to fear death, for there is nothing to fear if you are dead.

"Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome." -Isaac Asimov

P.S. sorry if i'm talkin bout something completely different, i read the first couple of pages then realised there were 8!!!

Thanks for reading!

[judojedi]

very good first post michael.

you make some good points, i'm looking forward to the religious responce.

[Yama Tombo]

Unfortunately, I completely agree with Levo. The reason we are here is simply scientific (but this topic still hurts my brain).

--I would to pose a few question to those of religious faith:
What form do you believe God(s) take(s)?
How did he/she/it/they originate?
*On a bases that proves only different believes and with rational thinking you can separate the logical with proof. And on this level you have to go through religious similarities which IS ALOT and see why it believes that way.

---And moving on to the fascinating topic of afterlife:
If life consists of your brain processing information from the various senses and thinking (however that happens), how can there be an afterlife, if it is the brain that allows for it here?
**I see what you mean.

---Some people having had near-death experiences claim they have seen themselves drift away from their body- but how can they see their own eyes, the very things that allow us to see?
***I see what you mean

---So if this afterlife is not physical, what is the spiritual? All living things on this earth can be located, found in physical form. If that form is destroyed or stops functioning (as happens in death) then how can there be an afterlife?
****whats spiritual? invisible relam. But since you seem concern with what is transparent. Bible never says that a spirit replica of ourselves actually leaves the body to go to Heaven. It said that Jesus was resurrected (Definition:To bring back to life; raise from the dead.)and he transcended to heaven. So what does that mean? His whole body went, so that should be biblical clarification for an answer.

---Personally, I believe there is no afterlife and that it is something that has been invented for the understandable purpose of lessening the fear of death. (Please persuade me otherwise)
However I don't think there is any reason to fear death, for there is nothing to fear if you are dead.
******Jesus even said it was healthy for man to contemple how he dies, because he says the father will resurrect them soon. And to reiterate a bit to draw out a point, if we did have spirits why would the bible say that the dead are conscious of nothing?


"Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome." -Isaac Asimov


If gravity holds stuff down on the earth, but stuff floats away in space, whats holding the planets in orbit? Just a thought.


judojedi.
See what I am trying to prove with parallel answers by clarifying concepts by using the bible? You just have to look, you just have to look.

Good day.

[snailfist]

To JudoJedi:

Jesus was not violent, but did upon occason get angry. He ws human, and anger isn't technically a sin. So who could blame the guy?
Not all of man's creation is motivated by a desire for money. Most famous painters died poor, as did Mozart.
I too believe that that bang happened and happened for a good reason- the only difference between us is that I believe that that reason is God.
Regarding the question of a sign- the Bible tells us that Jesus
a)got quite ratty with people asking for a sign, which is understandable considering tuning water into wine was little more than a party trick to the man.
b)It was considered that Jesus' coming and delivering the good news would be the definitive sign to end all signs, i.e. "if they don't get this I can't spell it out much clearer to them"
(Note:This isn't randomly quoting the Bible at you in an attempt at proof; rather it is providing a proposed answer to a question concerning the intentions of God, which only He knows and so requires theological substantiation. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE!)


To michael16 (regarding the afterlife):
Research has been conducted into people who whave those near death experiences- floating above their own body, getting a guided tour of heaven, etc.
Some of these people have had these experiences during operations, in the process of which they have had their brain activity monitored. People have been clinically dead (i.e. had no cerebral activity) at the time when they can later recall quite clearly having these experiences. A Christian suggests that this seemingly non-biological consciousness is down to the existence of a soul- the intangible part of a human that separates us from the animals, that part that goes to heaven when we die.

To Yama Tombo (regarding planets):
More gravity. Gravity is a force that pulls inwards, exerted by all objects. The bigger the object, the bigger the pull. So you don't fly across the room when another person walks in because something so small exerts only a tiny pull, but something the size of the sun has enough gravity to keep the planets in check.

[Yama Tombo]

People have been clinically dead (i.e. had no cerebral activity) at the time when they can later recall quite clearly having these experiences.

I'm sort of interested in that, you have any links?

More gravity. Gravity is a force that pulls inwards, exerted by all objects. The bigger the object, the bigger the pull. So you don't fly across the room when another person walks in because something so small exerts only a tiny pull, but something the size of the sun has enough gravity to keep the planets in check.

So how is the sun maintaining it's ability to suspend itself in a big, huge void away from the millions of other suns?

[snailfist]

Sorry, afraid I don't. There was a documentary on it on BBC a year or so ago.

Because it's not really in a void, but is but a tiny part of a galaxy that is only a tiny part of the universe, and is surrounded by other solar systems that i would assume all affect each other. I'm no expert in the subject, but i understand the basic principle.

[shunyadragon]

Chaos, Randomness and the evolution of life on earth and elsewhere.

In the past there was considerable debate as to whether events in existence occured by pure chance or in a random manner to result in the first life OR by creation by a God or Gods.

Modern math has since demonstrated that nothing in the universe is truely random, there is an underlying pattern to everything. This pattern is called 'Chaos'.

There are two kinds of math equations that are use to show the relationship between variables. They are linear and non-linear.
When graphed linear quations form a straight line, non-linear are curved. The more complex non-linear equations show what is called a chaotic pattern in their results. This chaos pattern is used to describe what was called randomness (events that appear to not have a pattern) in the past. It was found that all events in existence that were at one time to be random showed this chaos pattern. Early tests found this pattern in the repeated roll of dice, weather prediction and commodity and stock prices over time. At present nothing is considered totally random, all events in existence show this pattern.

Common examples of this relationship in nature are that no two snowfakes, clouds, tiger stripes or Maple leaves are exactly alike, but all of them fit the same pattern.

So whether you believe in pure creation or evolution with or without the hand of God the dice are loaded and given a similar solar system and environment within a certain range you will have life evolve in a similar manner.

[Yama Tombo]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
Chaos, Randomness and the evolution of life on earth and elsewhere.

In the past there was considerable debate as to whether events in existence occured by pure chance or in a random manner to result in the first life OR by creation by a God or Gods.

Modern math has since demonstrated that nothing in the universe is truely random, there is an underlying pattern to everything. This pattern is called 'Chaos'.

There are two kinds of math equations that are use to show the relationship between variables. They are linear and non-linear.
When graphed linear quations form a straight line, non-linear are curved. The more complex non-linear equations show what is called a chaotic pattern in their results. This chaos pattern is used to describe what was called randomness (events that appear to not have a pattern) in the past. It was found that all events in existence that were at one time to be random showed this chaos pattern. Early tests found this pattern in the repeated roll of dice, weather prediction and commodity and stock prices over time. At present nothing is considered totally random, all events in existence show this pattern.

Common examples of this relationship in nature are that no two snowfakes, clouds, tiger stripes or Maple leaves are exactly alike, but all of them fit the same pattern.

So whether you believe in pure creation or evolution with or without the hand of God the dice are loaded and given a similar solar system and environment within a certain range you will have life evolve in a similar manner.

Sounds like my theory "Contention Creation Metamorphosis", or simply "survival of the fittest."

[Zamfoo]

the thing about God is there is no "proof" either way that's why we called believing in supreme beings faith. Sure i could put up a bunch of stuff saying there is or isn't God nothing can be proven. It takes faith. Or not your choice i don't care.

[Yama Tombo]

What are you exactly saying?

[snailfist]

Hypothesis: The only reason not to believe in God is down to an individual's perception of probability.

Consider this. The Gospel (thinking particularly of Mark's) could be considered to be what is known as a secondary source to historians- a collection of evidence based on primary sources, which are those dating from the time. What must therefore be ascertained is its reliability.

It has been proven by the research of Roman, non-Christian, historians that there was a character called Jesus living in that part of the world. As these authors would if anything be biased against Jesus, their testimony to his existence can be deemed reliable. Other facts stated in the Gospels have been ascertained. For example, astronomers have calculated that around the time of Jesus' birth, (allowing for slight errors on the part of those who worked out the original calendar) three planets were aligned in such a way is to create the impression that they were one, particularly vivid, star. (I am informed that these three planets apparently have astrological connotations of King, Jews and Bethlehem- not being one to place any credence in astrology, I use this to support the proposed notion of the 3 wise men taking this star as a sign.)

Examples such as these are significant enough in number for books to be written on the topic and for entire TV series to concern themselves with the research into "The historical Jesus".

So, taking the Bible as evidence, that can at least to some extent be considered reliable, it could be argued that a logical, scientific, open-minded consideration of the evidence suggests there is a God, as i have yet to hear any evidence to the contrary!

Thus, anyone who does not believe in a god can therefore not claim to be rational, logical or scientific- merely sceptical!

Any takers to offer an argument against the existence of a God and substantiate it with something other than personal opinion?

[nzric]

A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.

The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."

The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
the tortoise standing on?"

"You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."

Snailfist
Any takers to offer an argument against the existence of fairies living at the bottom of my garden and substantiate it with something other than personal opinion?

Mate - I'd like to debate with you but it's pointless, since you will always say "but god can do anything because he's god".

[Yama Tombo]

This will be interesting to see.

[Zamfoo]

my point was this arguement has no point everyone has their beliefs and there's no reason to fight either way. If you believe great if you don't great. A strict atheist is not going to be convinced by your post that god exists nor a religious person that god doesn't. What you say here, here's the shocker, won't affect anything you'll only reaffirm beliefs already on your side.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by snailfist
Hypothesis: The only reason not to believe in God is down to an individual's perception of probability.

Consider this. The Gospel (thinking particularly of Mark's) could be considered to be what is known as a secondary source to historians- a collection of evidence based on primary sources, which are those dating from the time. What must therefore be ascertained is its reliability.

It has been proven by the research of Roman, non-Christian, historians that there was a character called Jesus living in that part of the world. As these authors would if anything be biased against Jesus, their testimony to his existence can be deemed reliable. Other facts stated in the Gospels have been ascertained. For example, astronomers have calculated that around the time of Jesus' birth, (allowing for slight errors on the part of those who worked out the original calendar) three planets were aligned in such a way is to create the impression that they were one, particularly vivid, star. (I am informed that these three planets apparently have astrological connotations of King, Jews and Bethlehem- not being one to place any credence in astrology, I use this to support the proposed notion of the 3 wise men taking this star as a sign.)

Examples such as these are significant enough in number for books to be written on the topic and for entire TV series to concern themselves with the research into "The historical Jesus".

Frank says:

I saw the program! There were a lot of blue smoke and mirrors in that production.

Nothing has ben proven. First, there are not any records outside the Bible that document Jesus's life during his life. The earliest reference writen by Josephus are to people teaching about a Messiah named Jesus. This is not significant because we have other archeological and writen historical evidence refering to those who teach about Jesus with in a few years after Josephus that is well documented.

PLEASE, Give me one historical reference of archeological discovery that documents the life of Jesus outside the Bible.
The coffins recently found in the Holy lands have not been proven to be real or related to the family of Jesus. The names of the family of Jesus were common names of the time.


Second, the prophecy the Wisemen followed is Zorastrian, another religion by the way with a Messiah and the prophesy was for the return of Zoraster. It doesn't say in the Bible how many wisemen there were.

Astronomical occurances and allignments fortelling the coming of a savior are not unusual and Messiah's all over the world make that claim. Even though there is no mention of Jsus in the historical records of the Jews and Romans during his life, there is references to many perhaps hundreds of men crucified claiming to be the messiah.



So, taking the Bible as evidence, that can at least to some extent be considered reliable, it could be argued that a logical, scientific, open-minded consideration of the evidence suggests there is a God, as i have yet to hear any evidence to the contrary!

Frank says:

Yes, the Bible can be taken to be historically reliable to some extent, but that extent is subject to question. As a religion Christianity iis based more on Roman Theology than the theology of the time of Christ. The concept of heaven, hell and purgatory are very Roman.

For the existece or non-existence of God there isn't any scientific evidence.

Thus, anyone who does not believe in a god can therefore not claim to be rational, logical or scientific- merely sceptical!

Any takers to offer an argument against the existence of a God and substantiate it with something other than personal opinion?

I'm game, you just need to respond!!!:woo: :woo: :woo:

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo
Sounds like my theory "Contention Creation Metamorphosis", or simply "survival of the fittest."

Contention Creation Metamorphosis neeeds more explanation.

Actually a new theory called 'Gene survival' is believed to drive evolution.

I was presenting the modern scientific view of the Chaos based on considerable research. The bottom line is that scientist today do not consider anything as truely random.

Some believe that this underlieing harmony of existence is the thumb print of the Creator.

[Razor_EX]

God is only an illusion, an insecurity in the human mind people look for religion they think they have to have some greater purpose so they basically made god in their heads...

[nzric]

shunyadragon - when you talk about 'gene suvival' I think you're referring to Charles Dawkins' (a leading scientist and an atheist) Selfish Gene theory.

Just clearing that up, in case anyone wants to look into it (well worth checking out). Explains things like animal/human altruism being beneficial for evolutionary survival, without the need for a deity.

[shunyadragon]

Charles Dawkin's Selfish Gene proposal is a part of this new theory. 'Gene Survival' is based on theory that genes will do anything to survive and the evolution of life on earth is the result. I am not sure it explains anything, but it gives a more firm foundation than the old 'Survival of the Fitest' as an explanation of evolution, because much of what we know of evolution to day can not be explained well by 'Survival of the Fitest'.

[nzric]

"...genes will do anything to survive..."

Careful there. I know exactly what you mean but I think to anyone who isn't familiar with the theory, they could take issue with the fact that it seems you are saying genes have a will/motivation (that's wrong, but someone who hasn't done the reading could interpret it that way).

It's too complicated a theory to summarise - I just don't want people to get the wrong impression from your message.

[shunyadragon]

Will has more than one meaning. (Longman Dic. 4. used to describe what always happens in a particular situation or what is genrally true.) I don't think my use of 'will' refers to human will, but human 'will' itself may be interpreted as being the result from what genes will do to survive.

[nzric]

What I mean is that someone new to the theory could get the idea that you mean genes display conscious intent and purpose. That is false. (drifting slightly off topic, but I don't want people to get a false impression of a useful theory)

[judojedi]

Originally posted by snailfist


So, taking the Bible as evidence, that can at least to some extent be considered reliable, it could be argued that a logical, scientific, open-minded consideration of the evidence suggests there is a God, as i have yet to hear any evidence to the contrary!

Thus, anyone who does not believe in a god can therefore not claim to be rational, logical or scientific- merely sceptical!

Any takers to offer an argument against the existence of a God and substantiate it with something other than personal opinion?

you cannot take the bible as evidence. the same historians who you have mentioned proved jesus was a real man, also proved that the bible was written circa 50 years after he died the second time round.

i think its fair to say that the stories about this man jesus became greatly exaggerated over that time period. the people of the middle east have always been great story tellers, you just need to look at the stories about alexander the great, he was immortalised by these people, and stories are still told in syria, iraq and all the other places that made up persia.

has anyone seen the film dogma?
its not a very good movie but it is religion orientated and brings up some very interesting points about the christian faith such as:
jesus's siblings - :eek: what!? i hear you say - i will explain if anyone wants.
jesus's transition from boy to man - papal conspicacy
why jesus is white not arab - papal racist worship
etc etc.
you should watch it for the above reasons, it makes you think.

[nzric]

Just to remind everyone this thread is about whether or not they think god exists, not whether or not there was once a religious man in the middle east called jesus.

Whether or not he lived is a matter of conjecture, and there is no way of proving he was anything more than a jewish cult leader (yes, it was a cult at the time). It does nothing to advance or degrade either argument.

[judojedi]

Originally posted by nzric
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.

The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."

The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
the tortoise standing on?"

"You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."



have you read THE LAST HERO by terry pratchet? it details that the world is a flat plate supported by 4 giant elephants standing on the back of a giant flying turtle. maybe thats where the old lady got her idea. just thought i'd throw that in for no good reason.:p

[judojedi]

Originally posted by nzric
Just to remind everyone this thread is about whether or not they think god exists, not whether or not there was once a religious man in the middle east called jesus.

Whether or not he lived is a matter of conjecture, and there is no way of proving he was anything more than a jewish cult leader (yes, it was a cult at the time). It does nothing to advance or degrade either argument.

okay, good point.
my post about jesus being exaggerated was attemping to disprove he was the son of god and thus disproving that god has tried to show us the way and, in a round about kinda why, saying that god don't exist.
i guess it was sorta abstract. :(

i'll attempt to explain better next time

[nzric]

Sounds like the christian scientist argument that dinosaurs are a clever way of god tricking people into thinking he doesn't exist, so he can torture them in a fiery hell.

I acutally read a convincing book that gave evidence to suggest Jesus was actually Tutenkamen.

The tortise quote is a famous one - it's at the beginning of "A Brief History of Time"

[judojedi]

Originally posted by nzric
Sounds like the christian scientist argument that dinosaurs are a clever way of god tricking people into thinking he doesn't exist, so he can torture them in a fiery hell.

I acutally read a convincing book that gave evidence to suggest Jesus was actually Tutenkamen.



i've not heard that theory about the dinosaurs, but its sound typical.

jesus is tutenkamen??? do you remember the title ofthe book? sounds like something i'd like to read.

[shunyadragon]

The exaggeration and distortion of the Bible and the claims of Christianity is common and ah . . . interesting, but has nothing to do with whether Christ existed who who he was. The purpose of my side of the debate is WHY??? Why the blue smoke and mirrors, exaggeration and trashing evolution with bogus science if the belief in Christ and God is based on faith?

Why do people spend so much time trying to prove something exists when it's existence is beyond the human logic of proof?

I believe Christ was a man who walked on the earth some time about the time people believe he did to share a message from a source beyond our understanding, but because of the vastness of the universe, the diversity of people all over the earth Christ was not the only one in history to share this message.

God is not a chess player with the white pieces.
He is the sea and we are the fishes.

[judojedi]

Originally posted by shunyadragon


Why do people spend so much time trying to prove something exists when it's existence is beyond the human logic of proof?


God is not a chess player with the white pieces.
He is the sea and we are the fishes.


yea, and also why do people try to disprove the existance, it cant be done eitherway. faith does not require proof anyway, you either have faith or you don't. i dont. and never will unless 'he' shows himself or proves himself.....but if he proves himself..then i won't have 'faith', i'll know for sure.

:confused: confused? i am.

nice line about god being the sea, so is the devil the fisherman?

[Shaolin Dragon]

But what would you consider proof?

The idea behind some religions is that God gave us free will. Part of that is the decision whether to believe in Him or not. God is constantly leaving signs that he exists, so long as you interpret them in the right way. If God simply appeared to the world in all His blazing glory, it would kind of defeat the purpose of free will.

[shunyadragon]

Intersting response Shaolin dragon.

'Interpreting signs in the right way', is an interesting problem since most claim an exculsive 'right way' at the exclusion of others.

The universe is the greatest sign of what some people believe is sign of God's creation and others see as just happening without motive or cause.

Interpreting the signs of the vastness of the universe is like blind men reading the signs of God when they discover an elephant for the first time. They are each sure of what each one has found, but everone finds something different.

'So long as' and 'if' reflects yes-no thinking.

'To think yes or no is to be immobile on two feet.'

Ancient Vedic wisdom

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
But what would you consider proof?

The idea behind some religions is that God gave us free will. Part of that is the decision whether to believe in Him or not. God is constantly leaving signs that he exists, so long as you interpret them in the right way. If God simply appeared to the world in all His blazing glory, it would kind of defeat the purpose of free will.

Proof and interpreting the signs in the right way are both traps that defy human logic. See previous e-mail.

The expectation of the return of the Messiah in all religions of the world tops the list as a problem of proof and interpretation. Most expect an extravaganza greater than an special effect of the cinema, but it never happens. No great armies come riding out of the sky to vanquish the evil doers, Christ doesn't come down riding on a cloud, thousands do not rise from the dead and the world doesn't end.

The Messiah comes and goes leaving his message of love and most reject him.

[nzric]

"God is constantly leaving signs that he exists, so long as you interpret them in the right way."

Right way??? You mean as long as you interpret them as signs that indicate god exists - validating your prior bias.

A question: Would the message that Jesus spread be less valid and worthwhile if he were just a man? If not, who cares whether he was or not?

[snailfist]

OK. my last post was a little controversial! (isn't it much more interesting like that though?):D

The turtles has no basis in evidence. The whole point of my last point was to argue that this is exactly what an atheist is doing- stating that what they find probable is true without finding anything to substantiate it.

I was endevouring to substantiate the foundation of my faith. (Actually, the Bible isn't the foundation of mine personally, but that of my church's- an earlier post details my personal discovery of God)

Care to provide any evidence for there being fairies at the bottom of your garden? (I can think of a very non-pc joke to crack there! :Angel: :rolleyes: ).

Shunyadragon, i was not suggesting that those historians acknowleged that Jesus was the son of God, or that they were contemporary. What i was trying to do was say use examples of facts given to the authors of the gospels in order to verifiy their reliability. The point about the star of Bethlehem, for example, would not have been available to the writers through any source other than word of mouth, because the astronomy is more developed now than then.

This will be interesting to see.
Yama tombo, I aim to please!:D

[Shaolin Dragon]

Originally posted by nzric
"God is constantly leaving signs that he exists, so long as you interpret them in the right way."

Right way??? You mean as long as you interpret them as signs that indicate god exists - validating your prior bias.


Actually, the people I have encountered who have witnessed such signs did not believe in God in the first place.
Other people have witnessed signs just as their faith was wavering.
The term "sign" is very subjective also. To someone of deep religious conviction, watching the sunrise could be a sign to them. To others, nothing less than a miracle would suffice; but again, "miracle" is as subjective as "signs."

As for validating my prior bias, I do not consider that I have one. Whilst I was brought up as a Christian I do not subscribe to that religion currently. I am a scientist by nature (and eventually by trade, I hope) and do not feel that science and religion are in any way exclusive of each other.

[Michael16]

I wonder if Kenpo Mike knows what he's started here...

[nzric]

Michael16 - that was probably his plan all along. Kenpo Mike moves in mysterious ways.

"...The turtles has no basis in evidence. The whole point of my last point was to argue that this is exactly what an atheist is doing- stating that what they find probable is true without finding anything to substantiate it..."

The turtles are based on personal faith - which is what all religion, at the root, is based on.

Heard of Occham's razor?

The basis of all religion is to suspend rationality to faith. Belief in god is an irrational act - through the scientific (quantitative) model of the universe, there is no place for god in the scheme of things. I have no qualms over theorising about the existance of god, but when you look at the current models, there is no need for a divine creator. If there were a god, he would be bored, and unnecessary. We can almost see the beginning of the universe with astronomy, and we see stars being born and dying every day; evolution is more than enough to explain the beginning of sentient life, and religious belief in gods is easily found to be (and measurable by looking at primitive cultures nowadays - the evolution of simple animism/shamanism to the socio-political systems of control of modern confucionism, hinduism, islam and christianity) a throwback of our animist beginnings.

"...Care to provide any evidence for there being fairies at the bottom of your garden? (I can think of a very non-pc joke to crack there!..."

Ok - say I have a religious faith in the presence of fairies in my garden (sorry, human fairies don't push my buttons, but it's all a matter of preference!). This isn't far from the craze that swept America about five years ago for guardian angels.

The fairies I believe in are sentient, invisible, ethereal and all-powerful (just like aliens). I don't need proof for their existance because their existence is beyond the physical model of the universe.

See the strange logic? There is no use getting into an argument about the existence of god with a religious person, because belief in a deity is an emotional (not rational) choice based on faith. Moreover, "god can do anything" and "god is perfect" (btw, a philosophical model that should've ended with Plato). He is the ultimate superman, which is why religion has survived what would destroy any other political/scientific system (i.e. Galileo's proofs, Evolutionary theory, big bang, quantum mechanics and chaos theory (which is the antithesis of the religious idea of fundamental order) to name a few). As it is a non-rational belief, there is no argument that could ever 'disprove' god (because proof/disproof is a rational process).

[Yama Tombo]

I'm not arguing here, but I want to point out "You have to accept the good with the bad" I'm not talking about consequence. I'm talking about, if God doesn't exist I would be crazy to say that there were no such things as haunted houses or any supernatural. In Indonesia there is or was a festival for people who want to be demonized. If this stuff isn't going on then there wouldn't be a God.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
Actually, the people I have encountered who have witnessed such signs did not believe in God in the first place.
Other people have witnessed signs just as their faith was wavering.
The term "sign" is very subjective also. To someone of deep religious conviction, watching the sunrise could be a sign to them. To others, nothing less than a miracle would suffice; but again, "miracle" is as subjective as "signs."

As for validating my prior bias, I do not consider that I have one. Whilst I was brought up as a Christian I do not subscribe to that religion currently. I am a scientist by nature (and eventually by trade, I hope) and do not feel that science and religion are in any way exclusive of each other.

Shaolin dragon:

You used a quote commonly used by many Christians to justify their belief when the facts don't fit well. Interpreting the signs of God in the right way, allows a lot wiggle room to avoid simple or logical explanations for the 'signs'.

I am a Baha'i and a scientist, a retired environmental geologist, and I believe in the harmony of science and religion. There aren't two sets of laws to explain things so there is nothing supernatural and there are no miracles or signs that need to interpreted.

[Tireces]

I justify my beliefs by saying that they often keep me from throwing everything aside and losing my mind. My belief has never done anyone harm, though I have. But that was because I was foolish and acting outside my belief. Thats all the justification I need. And if you're going to try and rebuke that, you're just doing nothing better than what so many christians are accused of doing...trying to cram their faith down people's throats. Call me "weak" for believing in god, call me anything you want. It'd be no different than me doing the same for you being athiest. Thats my take on it.

[Shaolin Dragon]

Originally posted by nzric

The basis of all religion is to suspend rationality to faith. Belief in god is an irrational act - through the scientific (quantitative) model of the universe, there is no place for god in the scheme of things. I have no qualms over theorising about the existance of god, but when you look at the current models, there is no need for a divine creator. If there were a god, he would be bored, and unnecessary. We can almost see the beginning of the universe with astronomy, and we see stars being born and dying every day; evolution is more than enough to explain the beginning of sentient life


But we cannot explain why any of this came to pass. Where did the Big Bang come from? Why did the Universe come to pass? If evolution is enough to explain sentience, why hasn't it occured before or again in the vast history of the planet?



Shunyadragon, I agree that there are not two sets of Laws to explain everything. I simply argue that we do not know all of the Laws
;)

Supernatural means "of or involving a power above the forces of nature;" I do not believe in the supernatural. I believe that what people percieve as being supernatural may simply be something that we cannot explain within our narrow understanding of science.

[TheBorderer]

Hmm... interesting...

As far as religion and science is concerend, one could say that, it is (maybe to some rather obviously) the same 'laws' as you will but interepted in a different way. And yes we at present do not know all of the laws, but will there ever be a point where we will? And what then, what happens if we get to the point when we know all the laws? All rather questiosn that actually couldn't be given a definitive answer, in my opinion, as some would say that, our mind is such a way that some things (such as if God is real etc) we can't answer an for and that we just have to acept.

At the end of the day I really like the points made by Tireces, especialyl the "trying to cram their faith down people's throats" part, when it comes to conflict and religion, it seems where that is where the problems start. We should all live and let live, acept that folk will have different views than our own and if they do, fair enough, no point in causing conflict over it!

As usual just my thoughts... :)

[nzric]

Shaolin dragon: "...But we cannot explain why any of this came to pass. Where did the Big Bang come from? Why did the Universe come to pass? If evolution is enough to explain sentience, why hasn't it occured before or again in the vast history of the planet?..."

Common question from people who don't understand the big bang theory - "what happened before the big bang?". Answer: there was no 'before'. Einstein proved the existance of space/time - they are not separate things. The creation of space was also the creation of time. Sounds like philosophy/religious thought, but the difference is that science can back this up with experiments and tests that validate the conclusion (they actually reconfirm the space/time link at every eclipse). Also, the dimensional/bubble universe theories coming out recently are starting to explain the creation of universes.

Why did the universe come to pass? 'why' is a subjective question - there is no reason. Why is the universe perfectly formed to allow for sentient life? that's like a computer asking itself why humans just happen to be perfectly suited to invent a Playstation. If the universe wasn’t perfectly formed for us, we wouldn’t be here to ask the question of why we’re here (can you remember the last 6 billion years of the universe before you were born?).

Why hasn’t sentience occurred before? Well, sentience requires a social hierarchy (for the evolution of culture), a lot of spare time (to develop thought, past that of hunt/escape/survive/sleep needs) a means of communication (e.g. vocal chords) and ability to manipulate surroundings (opposable thumb, in our case). Reptiles don’t have the social structure, lifespan or spare time to develop sentience (any intelligence gained is lost after the death of an individual), and reptiles were the dominant creature for millions of years (after fish, which aren’t able to develop large brains due to survival needs (ocean is more hostile than air), and their intelligence is based on schooling/swarming)..

Mammals are suited to developing culture, and it’s interesting that the social mammals (apes, wolves, dolphins, elephants) are the most sentient (and have highly evolved communication structures). Also, insects (where knowledge can evolve through hive dynamics) have advanced social structures (bee ‘wiggle dance’, termite mound architecture, ant foraging patterns…) that are a different type of sentience (that of a group mind).

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by nzric
Shaolin dragon: "...But we cannot explain why any of this came to pass. Where did the Big Bang come from? Why did the Universe come to pass? If evolution is enough to explain sentience, why hasn't it occured before or again in the vast history of the planet?..."

Frank say's

What was here before the big bang. Science believes today that we are a part of many big bangs. This question cannot be answered conclusively by either science or religion. Religion resolves it by faith. Science looks for evidence.

The pattern of life beginning has occured only once, but . . . there is significant evidence in the earth's history that it has indeed happened at several times in earths history when the the earth went through catastrophic disasters likely caused by one or more large meteorite impacts that destroyed more than 90% of the life on the earth. When this happened animals diversified and evolved again sometimes taking on similar forms, but unrelated to the animals that lived before.

There is also evidence that when similar conditions once existed on Mars long ago and primitive life evolved there.


Common question from people who don't understand the big bang theory - "what happened before the big bang?". Answer: there was no 'before'. Einstein proved the existance of space/time - they are not separate things. The creation of space was also the creation of time. Sounds like philosophy/religious thought, but the difference is that science can back this up with experiments and tests that validate the conclusion (they actually reconfirm the space/time link at every eclipse). Also, the dimensional/bubble universe theories coming out recently are starting to explain the creation of universes.

This a common misunderstand of science. Einsein did not prove anything, he provided us with the foundation of modern physics that provides science with good explanations to help explain the universe we live in. No 'before' is not an answer in science. In science the occurances we observe in the present repeat again and again in the entire history of the existence in the past and the future.

Why did the universe come to pass? 'why' is a subjective question - there is no reason. Why is the universe perfectly formed to allow for sentient life? that's like a computer asking itself why humans just happen to be perfectly suited to invent a Playstation. If the universe wasn’t perfectly formed for us, we wouldn’t be here to ask the question of why we’re here (can you remember the last 6 billion years of the universe before you were born?).

Frank says

As I said before, why and reason are answered by faith in religion and science uses human logic and intelligence to search for the answers and the 'reason' for the universe or life forming and evolving is considered a question of philosphy or religion.

To science the universe forms not on the basis of perfection, but according to underlying natural laws. In a previous post I described the 'chaos theory' that science now believes provides an adaquate explanation for 'Given the same conditions the result is similar'. If the conditions for a big bang occur again, the big bang will occur again. If on another planet in the universe the conditions for life are right, than there will be life evolving there also. This has been demonstrated by what we have found on Mars.

Humans are unique in that they can actually look back in history and plan the futures years in advance.

We can in fact look back billions of years ago thanks to the speed of light. When scientist look out into space they actually see what the universe looked like billions of years ago.


Why hasn’t sentience occurred before? Well, sentience requires a social hierarchy (for the evolution of culture), a lot of spare time (to develop thought, past that of hunt/escape/survive/sleep needs) a means of communication (e.g. vocal chords) and ability to manipulate surroundings (opposable thumb, in our case). Reptiles don’t have the social structure, lifespan or spare time to develop sentience (any intelligence gained is lost after the death of an individual), and reptiles were the dominant creature for millions of years (after fish, which aren’t able to develop large brains due to survival needs (ocean is more hostile than air), and their intelligence is based on schooling/swarming)..

Mammals are suited to developing culture, and it’s interesting that the social mammals (apes, wolves, dolphins, elephants) are the most sentient (and have highly evolved communication structures). Also, insects (where knowledge can evolve through hive dynamics) have advanced social structures (bee ‘wiggle dance’, termite mound architecture, ant foraging patterns…) that are a different type of sentience (that of a group mind).

Frank says

In science 'sentience' can be explained as a product of evolution and 'gene survival'. The chaos theory explains that sentience will evolve in different branches of life in some degree based on the needs of 'gene survival, and that 'Given the same conditions a similar result will occur again and again.' Based on this view it is very likely that 'sentience' will evolve on other planets in the universe.

Randomness or occurances happening by pure chance is no longer considered a part of the universe by scientists today.

[nzric]

I agree. Although I'm skeptical about the mars rock fossils, the universe probably has millions of advanced civilisations in it.

http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm

It all adds up to the fact that the idea of God is irrelevant. There is no place for God in the universe because there would be nothing for him to do.

[killbill]

1.How did religion get mixed up with supernatural stuff? belief has nothing to do with miracles or signs.
2.The question of God is unanswerable by it's very nature, what's important is what you believe and the life you live as a result of your belief
3.The idea of sin creates a counterforce by default, by saying that someone who commits sin will go to hell, you give them the idea "hey i'm already going to hell, i'll just do what i want!"
4.The only type of judment i can believe in is total, have you in your entire life had a net good influence or bad one? in other word i believe a good act can make up for a bad one. (depends on circumstance of course)
5.you may not agree with a religions beliefs but as long as they are preaching peace, love and are helping people, you can't complain
6.It's easy to scoff at those that believe, it's hard to find out what you believe.
7.i'll think of more criticsm later

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by killbill

Careful about 'The sky is blue.' statements that don't carry substance and deepr meaning than obvious safe statements.

1.How did religion get mixed up with supernatural stuff? belief has nothing to do with miracles or signs.

There is a natural relationship between religion, supernatural, miracles and signs. Through out history religon has been associated with the spiritual realms, ie; those realms not known directly by the senses.

2.The question of God is unanswerable by it's very nature, what's important is what you believe and the life you live as a result of your belief

It is obvious to many that god is unknowable directly by logic and reason, but many disagree.

What is important is open to question. Many who have experienced an awakening or an enlightening experience may tell you that what you believe is the least important, because it is likely only about 15% of reality as it is.

3.The idea of sin creates a counterforce by default, by saying that someone who commits sin will go to hell, you give them the idea "hey i'm already going to hell, i'll just do what i want!"
4.The only type of judment i can believe in is total, have you in your entire life had a net good influence or bad one? in other word i believe a good act can make up for a bad one. (depends on circumstance of course)

Muddle, muddle, muddle. Self rationalization only leads to the dog chasing it's own tail.

5.you may not agree with a religions beliefs but as long as they are preaching peace, love and are helping people, you can't complain

Most wars, particularly one's involving religion are between nations or religions preaching peace, love and helping people.

Almost everybody in the world believes what they do IT for peace, love and helping people and other do good thngs, but some people fight over it and do bad things in the name of good. Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tong all felt they were doing good, love peace and helped people. Did they? Mao Tse Tong unified China and set the stage for China to be a world power, but did some bad stuff too.


6.It's easy to scoff at those that believe, it's hard to find out what you believe.

Scoff at who believes in what? I find it easy to scoff at Hitler for what he believed.


7.i'll think of more criticsm later

[judojedi]

my position on the issue of god was summed up a short while ago on a tv show, a guy said

"anyone who is absolutly sure there is a god, is just as ignorant and anyone who is absolutly sure there isn't!"

therefore i'm 99% sure there isn't a god :)

i genuinly believe in each to their own, however i do have a problem with
a) preaching to non-believers in an attempt to convert them to your faith
b) using your faith as justification for murder/hostile acts etc

i live next to a guy who violates both of the above, waving his cross around claiming god is on his side while he scrounges benefits and ................ well any way. you don't wanna hear about that.

i have noticed that this has turned into a atheist - christian debate whereas it should be atheist - religion. there must be some non-christian belivers who wish to put their point accross. personally i'd like to hear from the muslim perspective on god.

[shunyadragon]

i have noticed that this has turned into a atheist - christian debate whereas it should be atheist - religion. there must be some non-christian belivers who wish to put their point accross. personally i'd like to hear from the muslim perspective on god. [/B][/QUOTE]

There is at least one MMoslem or a believer with Islamic sentiments that has posted in some debates. If there are more I would like to hear from them too.

I don't think this has been totally an Atheist-Theist debate. By the way Atheism is considered a religious belief also. Some of them are even organized and call themselves Unitarians which also includes deists and other beliefs not tolerated in other churches.

I'm a Baha'i and my views are expressed here, which like Unitarian is more inclusive belief that actually includes the beliefs of all the religions of the world. In the debate atmosphere I am likely to disagree or agree with anyone and everyone to encourage the exchange of ideas and beliefs.

In some ways Moslems have a similar belief as Jews and Christians. They believe Mohammod is a prophet who revealed the Koran and the law of God. They have a strong belief in One God and reject the use of any pictures and statues of religious figures.

[nzric]

"...I don't think this has been totally an Atheist-Theist debate. By the way Atheism is considered a religious belief also. Some of them are even organized and call themselves Unitarians which also includes deists and other beliefs not tolerated in other churches..."

Yeah, they call themselves "rationalists" too, and it can approach a religion.

But it shouldn't be a matter of religion vs atheism. I disagree with atheism being a belief system as it's NOT a "belief in nothing" (that is against the principles of the term). It is a rejection of organised worship of the supernatural

Just because you lack a belief in religion doesn't mean you're an atheist, or you have a closed-minded aversion to theories.

[judojedi]

can someone clear something up for me, i get confused between agnostic and atheist. one rejects god and one rejects everything that has no proof or something like that. any help.

i wouldn't join any organisation that deals with belif's: catholic, JW, Unitarians, rationalists or anything else. i know what i belive and don't need anyone to tell me what i must belive in order to be in thier 'club'.

i have often wondered about buddism, although some would say its not a religion, more a way of life. there must be some buddist's here who can give their point of view.

[Shaolin Dragon]

Originally posted by nzric
Common question from people who don't understand the big bang theory - "what happened before the big bang?". Answer: there was no 'before'. Einstein proved the existance of space/time - they are not separate things. The creation of space was also the creation of time. Sounds like philosophy/religious thought, but the difference is that science can back this up with experiments and tests that validate the conclusion (they actually reconfirm the space/time link at every eclipse). Also, the dimensional/bubble universe theories coming out recently are starting to explain the creation of universes.

Why did the universe come to pass? 'why' is a subjective question - there is no reason. Why is the universe perfectly formed to allow for sentient life? that's like a computer asking itself why humans just happen to be perfectly suited to invent a Playstation. If the universe wasn’t perfectly formed for us, we wouldn’t be here to ask the question of why we’re here (can you remember the last 6 billion years of the universe before you were born?).

Why hasn’t sentience occurred before? Well, sentience requires a social hierarchy (for the evolution of culture), a lot of spare time (to develop thought, past that of hunt/escape/survive/sleep needs) a means of communication (e.g. vocal chords) and ability to manipulate surroundings (opposable thumb, in our case). Reptiles don’t have the social structure, lifespan or spare time to develop sentience (any intelligence gained is lost after the death of an individual), and reptiles were the dominant creature for millions of years (after fish, which aren’t able to develop large brains due to survival needs (ocean is more hostile than air), and their intelligence is based on schooling/swarming)..

Mammals are suited to developing culture, and it’s interesting that the social mammals (apes, wolves, dolphins, elephants) are the most sentient (and have highly evolved communication structures). Also, insects (where knowledge can evolve through hive dynamics) have advanced social structures (bee ‘wiggle dance’, termite mound architecture, ant foraging patterns…) that are a different type of sentience (that of a group mind).


Science is all about cause and effect. You have the effects (e.g. the Big Bang) but you don't know the cause (I didn't ask what was there before the big bang, I asked what caused it).
Just like "why did the universe come to pass - an effect. There must be a cause, logically.
As for the question of sentience, if it is simply down to evolution, then why hasn't it occured previously in the vast history of the Earth.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
Science is all about cause and effect. You have the effects (e.g. the Big Bang) but you don't know the cause (I didn't ask what was there before the big bang, I asked what caused it).
Just like "why did the universe come to pass - an effect. There must be a cause, logically.
As for the question of sentience, if it is simply down to evolution, then why hasn't it occured previously in the vast history of the Earth.

I answered the question whether evolution occured more than once before. I'll give a few more details. According to the fossil record of the Precambrian the first life forms appeared over a period of time in special conditions that don't exist today. An atmosphere low in oxygen. All the life forms found so far formed most of the possible geometries of carbon, oxygen and nitrogen protein forms possible over millions of years so. Evolution took place more than once during this time under these special conditions. It had a specific order to it, but not all persisted. When the atmosphere became rich with oxygen the organisms especially plants adapted to a low oxygen environment dropped significantly. Another evolution took place by that of plants and later animals that favor an oxygen rich environment. Life exploded into a great diversity to later get zapped by one or more huge metoerites. Over 95% of all life on earth vanished. Evolution had to start over from a limited choice of survivors. It diversified and exploded again in a great diversity of plants and animals only to get zapped again by meteorites and things began again.

The earth's history is too short for much more to take place. Then again we may get zapped again and things will have to start over.

Mars is another story. Apparently based on the fossils in Mars rocks and other evidence primitive life began there too. But the planet dried up and evolution did not have the proper environment to progress, but life may still exist there below the surface of the planet.

The chaos model of math says that under given conditions the same or silimilar sequences of events will take place and in the vast expance of the universe life likely evolved in hundreds of thousands if not millions of planets.

[Yama Tombo]

can someone clear something up for me, i get confused between agnostic and atheist. one rejects god and one rejects everything that has no proof or something like that. any help.

Agnostic is what you just said; Agnostic though believe not in a absolute form of God. Meaning, it's a higher form of life that is indirectly involved with life. Atleast, thats how it was explained to me. I had an accqaintance who claimed agnostic beliefs; he believes that its a "happening" like some particles (or whatever he said) just make life, because its part of particles' function to do so. Hope that helped.

[judojedi]

well yes it did, but only after i read your post 5 or 6 times, i kept getting distracted by a dancing bananna u c. :)

[shunyadragon]

Agnostics don't care if God exists or not. Atheists defintely don't believe in a God or Gods.

[Yama Tombo]

At the end of the day I really like the points made by Tireces, especialyl the "trying to cram their faith down people's throats" part, when it comes to conflict and religion, it seems where that is where the problems start. We should all live and let live, acept that folk will have different views than our own and if they do, fair enough, no point in causing conflict over it!

I'd like to say that bible does encourage it's followers to preach the bible news to people. Though, the bible also limits people how to preach. Now, (I'm saying not saying this with spite, but..) it instructions the one preaching "Do not keep throwing your pearls of truth at swine;"It means if you keep preaching to one who does not want to listen to it, then quit preaching.

[shunyadragon]

Deists believe that if there is a higher power, it (with a small i)wasn't a creator. Something like the Taoist belief, a passive God sitting back on the couch and watching the action like we watch TV.

Theists believe the God is directly involved like the Biblical God.

I am some where in between them all swimming in the sea with the fishes.

[judojedi]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo

"Do not keep throwing your pearls of truth at swine;"It means if you keep preaching to one who does not want to listen to it, then quit preaching.


does the bible really say that? lol

no wonder some christians have a supiorority complex since those who don't belive thier truth are swines.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
Science is all about cause and effect. You have the effects (e.g. the Big Bang) but you don't know the cause (I didn't ask what was there before the big bang, I asked what caused it).
Just like "why did the universe come to pass - an effect. There must be a cause, logically.
As for the question of sentience, if it is simply down to evolution, then why hasn't it occured previously in the vast history of the Earth.

In science you do have a cause for every cause and effect. Cause and effect creates cycles throughout the universe some as short as a nanosecond others trillions of years and longer, but science has not addressed the question WHY. At least not yet. One thing at a time.

The cause of the big bang was mostlikely the collapse of one or more older universe to the conditions that a big bang would occur. Science observes that existence occurs in cycles. Stars with their solar systems and gallaxies with their stars come and go witha bang leaving black holes. Based on these observatins all existence including universes come and go with a bang!!!!!

Now why this happens is another question that science may get around to later.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo
I'd like to say that bible does encourage it's followers to preach the bible news to people. Though, the bible also limits people how to preach. Now, (I'm saying not saying this with spite, but..) it instructions the one preaching "Do not keep throwing your pearls of truth at swine;"It means if you keep preaching to one who does not want to listen to it, then quit preaching.

Well the Christians seem to be following the instructions to the letter. They through swords, arrows, bullets and bombs at those they call swine after they fail to convert them with words.

[Shaolin Dragon]

I am familiar with most of the scientific theories involved in this discussion. The point I was trying to get across was that although science may be able to explain HOW these things are occuring, it doesn't explain the WHY. Untill you can explain the why, you cannot say that God has no place in the Universe.

The point about sentience is that in terms of evolution, humans have been on the Earth for a mere fraction of its history. This raises the question, "why have not other lifeforms on Earth reached a similar stage of evolution?" Also, all other life on this planet is part of a delicate ecosystem. It seems odd that evolution should produce something as destructive to that system as are humans. The third point is more philosophical, and is about the nature of sentience itself- what is sentience? The range of human emotions and intelligence cannot easily be explained by chemical reactions in the brain. If it could, we would have an excuse for doing whatever we wanted - "it's not my fault, it's because of the chemicals in my head."
Hmm.

[snailfist]

An excellent point concerning the question of why?. Shaolin dragon.
And I too would like to hear a non-christian theist stick up for a God!

[nzric]

"...This raises the question, "why have not other lifeforms on Earth reached a similar stage of evolution?..."

I thought I had answered that previously.

Basic sentience is common - even jellyfish (which are something like 98% water) have a simple sentience. Pack mammals have advanced social structures, communication systems and languages. Birds have regional accents. Ants, bees and termites act as elements of a colony - where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts and approaches a basic sentience of a 'hive mind'. Mammals can also learn and have opinions about things, and it has been argued that apes can reach the intellectual level of a three year old.

Humans: Humans are intellectual peacocks. Our brain evolved out of a competing arms race with our intelligence as the weapon. It's natural that, since there have been no checks and balances, we have been getting smarter.

Also, humans have the unique advantage of evolving in a stable, resource-rich environment, with social structures (to evolve culture), with opposable thumbs (knowledge through manipulating environment), as mammals (reptiles can't evolve knowledge - it wouldn't fit their physiology), with infinite (until now) opportunity for population expansion...

"...Also, all other life on this planet is part of a delicate ecosystem. It seems odd that evolution should produce something as destructive to that system as are humans...."

That's a flawed interpretation of an ecosystem. By definition, an animal evolves a trait then spreads and dominates it's environment until it runs out of space or food (look at locusts, herds of wild animals, plagues, or even the basic fox/rabbit models used for undergraduate population study). Our trait is one where we are only now reaching the end of our capacity to grow. It's only been a million years since we walked out of the savannah - a blink on an evolutionary scale. Rent the video 'Rapa Nui'.

[snailfist]

The science is sound.
But why?

[nzric]

What do you mean why? Why does there have to be a reason/meaning of life? Because it's comforting?

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shaolin Dragon
I am familiar with most of the scientific theories involved in this discussion. The point I was trying to get across was that although science may be able to explain HOW these things are occuring, it doesn't explain the WHY. Untill you can explain the why, you cannot say that God has no place in the Universe.

The point about sentience is that in terms of evolution, humans have been on the Earth for a mere fraction of its history. This raises the question, "why have not other lifeforms on Earth reached a similar stage of evolution?" Also, all other life on this planet is part of a delicate ecosystem. It seems odd that evolution should produce something as destructive to that system as are humans. The third point is more philosophical, and is about the nature of sentience itself- what is sentience? The range of human emotions and intelligence cannot easily be explained by chemical reactions in the brain. If it could, we would have an excuse for doing whatever we wanted - "it's not my fault, it's because of the chemicals in my head."
Hmm.

Evolution from the scientific point of view in an opportunistic process. The main reason from the scientific viewpoint that human evolution did not take place in the past is this is the first time for the opportunity of mammilian evolution which gives the greatest opportunity for the evolution of the brain which makes us human. The evolution of the brain is the key to human intelligence. If you follow evolution of the brain from the amphibian, reptilian to the mamilian brain the progress of brain development to the point that this is the first time human intelligence has the opportunity to evolve.

Also the the length of of time for the opportunity of intelligent life to form in the earth's history is not that long from the scientific point of view.

As to the big WHY? of existence, the scientific method is not capable of answering the question. I applies well in understanding the cause and effect of the history of the universe. This knowledge could be used by the spiritual faiths to give more depth and meaning to their understanding of WHY. Science was basically never developed to answer all the questions, neither are our faiths and beliefs.

[nzric]

Thanks shunyadragon - very good points.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by snailfist
An excellent point concerning the question of why?. Shaolin dragon.
And I too would like to hear a non-christian theist stick up for a God!

I am a Baha'i and I believe in God, but I tend to take pokes at people who put God or Gods in their own box.

To a Baha'i God is essentially unknowable by man's efforts. He cannot be defined or limited to any faith, belief or religion. To a Baha'i Gods purpose for humanity was revealed in one way or another to all the peoples of the world since the first human had the emotions and intelligence to know God. The Baha'is recognize the primal reigions of the world like those of the Native Americans as legitimate spiritual and divinely inspired beliefs. Symbolically in Christianity this is Adam.

God's love is revealed to humanity through his messengers or messiahs, but unfortunatly humans tend to mold their religion into their own image, so much of the difference between the religions of the world reflect the cultural difference of the world the religion evolved in. The Jewish religion became distinctly Hebrew in its character. Christianity became a predominately Roman religion. The Hindu religion became Hindu or Vedic in character. Buddhism became distinctly oriental in its nature with aspects of Vedic, Tibetan and Chinese attributes.

Baha'is believe in the unity, universality and oneness of God.

The Arts of the Way (Martial Arts) we practice today are originally inspired by the spiritual teachings of Buddha for peace, harmony and unity and an intimate part of Buddhism. But like the religions of today their character and nature is more warlike than peaceful.

Humans came out of Africa thousands of years ago. Some went west and some went east. When they met again they didn't recognize each other as brothers and sisters.

[judojedi]

hold on fellow rational thinking atheists! we're wrong about the world not being created by god.

The "funny.. I mean Fundamentalists" have it all down.
Using pseudo-science methods and religious thought, they have the
Timeline for the world "Exactly"!
I mean really...... who could ask for anything more?

BISHOP USSHER DATES THE WORLD: 4004 BC
James Ussher (1581-1656), Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland, and
Vice-Chancellor of Trinity College in Dublin
Having established the first day of creation as Sunday 23 October 4004 BC!
WOW!
Ussher calculated the dates of other biblical events, concluding, for
example, that Adam and Eve were driven from Paradise on Monday 10 November 4004
BC, and that the ark touched down on Mt Ararat on 5 May 1491 BC `on a
Wednesday'.

Gosh..Gee Whiz!
Golly!

Dr. John Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, and one of
the most eminent Hebrew scholars of his time, declared, as the result of his
most profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, that "heaven and earth,
centre and circumference, were created all together, in the same instant, and
clouds full of water," and that "this work took place and man was created by the
Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C., at nine o'clock in the morning."

Just think, our Carbon Dating & other methods can't even come close.

John Lightfoot (1602-1675), Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University was a
contemporary of Ussher. Lightfoot published his calculations in 1644, before
Ussher's were completed.

well there you have it, the 'truth' has been known for centuries.

:rolleyes:

[amiller127]

I dont believe in god myself. Not in the christian religious way at least. I dont see this omnipotent, omnipresent deity above us looking down and judging. If there was such a thing then why the hell is he letting us mess up this planet. And if he is there why is he giving George Bush all these chances to be popular and get re elected? :D Of all the people you could have ad as President of America!

Why would a god allow this guy so much luck in his life when old GWB is preaching behaviour from the bible, but living a different life and actually causing harm that need the most help in america. My religoius studies are a bit rusty, but didnt jesus kick out the money lenders and all those people from the temple (or something like that) . He didnt befriend them and let them shape his policies did he. If he had christianity would be so much different today :D

I have started to believe in one thing recently over anything else. Our own abilities as humans. Our brain is so powerfull and complex that if we give it something to work to achieve, it will subliminaly go out and help us get those opportunities. So if your praying and praying for something, your brain will help you achieve it.

To me it doesnt matter though if people have faith in themselves or choose to have faith in a supreme being. At the end of the day if your faith sustains you through the hard times and helps you too keep focus and live a good life then that is excellent.

But im not keen on people using religon to persecute others. Im fed up of fundamentalists giving a bad name to these other members of religons around the world. I dont care what your religeon or who is your god. Most religeous people want a peacfull life and do not want to live in hate. There are enough reasons in the world for christians, muslims, jews etc to have hate in this world. But shouldnt the teachings of religons try to draw you away from hating?

So im fed up of the fundamentalists. Fed up of the hard core christians who feel that they have to impose their exact translation of the bible into others lives. Who try to make people live an unhappy life by making them feel guilty. Im fed up of those supposed muslims who encourage others to kill and be killed in the name of Allah. These people are only looking out for themselves when they call a Jihad, not doing it for the love of their god. Im sure that if there is an Allah, or a God or whatever your belief, if there is going to be a day of judgment, these buggers are going to be in hell!

Hmmm. looking back on that, you wouldnt think i was dissillusioned on religons would you.

And please dont be offended if your a christian or jew or muslim. I actually have no problem with people who are religeous or any specific religon. If its good for your life then great. I just hate it when fundamentals try to impose themselves on the world and others. THATS what I hate.

[judojedi]

here here!

well said amiller127.

[Yama Tombo]

Why would a god allow this guy so much luck in his life when old GWB is preaching behaviour from the bible, but living a different life and actually causing harm that need the most help in america

Matt. 22: 21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Mark 12:17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's

(Caesar was referring to the Rome Government at the time of those days; So Caesar is Government.)


I dont believe in god myself. Not in the christian religious way at least. I dont see this omnipotent, omnipresent deity above us looking down and judging. If there was such a thing then why the hell is he letting us mess up this planet.

God is trying to show us, man can't rule man. And that man needs God, because everything of man's creation ususally fails. (without a doubt)

[snailfist]

And because (as far as current theological hypothesis goes) he intends us to have free will, for reasons best known to Himself.

So the hypothesis goes. I concede that Baha'is have a point in that we are really not qualified to say that with any certainty.

[amiller127]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yama Tombo
[b]Why would a god allow this guy so much luck in his life when old GWB is preaching behaviour from the bible, but living a different life and actually causing harm that need the most help in america

Matt. 22: 21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Mark 12:17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's

Dale 18:37 (PM) And Dale said, please dont quote scripture to me. It means nothing too me personaly and I find it hard to read. Would rather go read the wording of my parents decree absolute than read scripture, even if it is only 2 lines.

And i dont get what it means or how its applicable to my quote. Sorry, im clueless when it comes to that stuff. I can understand an Ikea instruction paper more than I can scripture. And if you saw my table it would scare you!

[khafra]

Yeah, Yama Tombo, but what did iehovah to to Herod when he let the people think he was speaking for god?

And Shaolin Dragon, I'd say anyone that needs a deity to support their morality is pretty spiritually bereft--if you can't act in enlightened self interest without a daddy waiting in the sky to spank you, you've got more problems than your religion.

"Electrochemical reactions determine my actions, therefore they're not my responsibility" is a non sequitur, too. What is the antecedent for the pronoun "me?" Just another product of those reactions, given your premises.

I have a different question to ask--why, with all the excellent theist-targeted humor available, like the landover baptist church and http://www.thebricktestament.com/, is there so little quality response?

I mean, many evangelical tracts come pretty close in spirit, but they fall immeasurably short in the quality of their wit and satire.

[Yama Tombo]

Why would a god allow this guy so much luck in his life when old GWB is preaching behaviour from the bible, but living a different life and actually causing harm that need the most help in america.

Matt. 22: 21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Mark 12:17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's

Dale 18:37 (PM) And Dale said, please dont quote scripture to me. It means nothing too me personaly and I find it hard to read. Would rather go read the wording of my parents decree absolute than read scripture, even if it is only 2 lines.

And i dont get what it means or how its applicable to my quote.

** I guess what I was saying when I quoted that you don't need to worry what the government does, just listen to the government-you'll never be able to change the government. The next person elected might be worse than the one before him.
***God is trying to show us, man can't rule man. And that man needs God, because everything of man's creation (or actions) ususally fails. (without a doubt)

--->khafra: I don't understand your question..

--->Snailfist:** And because (as far as current theological hypothesis goes) he intends us to have free will, for reasons best known to Himself.** Sounds reasonable.

[Shaolin Dragon]

Morality is an interesting one. Is it a universal given? Is it a God given rule? Or is it the product of society? Or is it a personal thing?
For example, if I think there is nothing wrong with killing, does killing people make me a bad person? If society says it's OK to kill, does that make it OK? Or is killing OK in certain circumstances? Or never OK?



I once read a theory about every act being selfish. It suggested that even so-called selfless acts are based on selfish priorities - such as wanting to go to Heaven or not wanting to feel guilty. Interesting.

[khafra]

Morality is personal.
Even if you've decided that you will base every moral decision you make on the Bible, that, itself, was a moral decision you made for yourself. Can't escape it.

The "render unto Caesar" quote was from when some revolutionaries asked Jesus whether taxation was moral, wanting him to lend his voice to their cause. Jesus' answer was quite clever, and indicated that a godly person would work within whatever government was in place.

This has nothing to do with individuals, whether in governmental positions of power or not, prospering. If GWB claims morality and christianity but acts in a manner opposite it, shouldn't he be punished like other christian hypocrites (check out the guy who sold his property and lied about how much of the price he'd donated) or Herod, who was eaten by worms, and died, when he let the people tell him his voice was the voice of god?

[Yama Tombo]

For example, if I think there is nothing wrong with killing, does killing people make me a bad person?

**To me, killing (rather justified or not) is wrong.

If society says it's OK to kill, does that make it OK?

*** If someone says to someone else (without your premission) that its okay to walk in your flat (anytime) and get something to eat, would that still be ok?

Or is killing OK in certain circumstances? Or never OK?

****I have an accqaintance who would tell you,"There are other ways to solve a problem than violence."

*****In historical referrence of the bible, there was a city known as "The City of Refuge." It was established by the high priests by order of God (if you want to believe that or not) Aside from its ordains of God, anyone who committed a sin willingly or unwillingly was given protection from the party that was after them, if granted by the priests. (usually those of guilty acts were rejected.)

I once read a theory about every act being selfish. It suggested that even so-called selfless acts are based on selfish priorities - such as wanting to go to Heaven or not wanting to feel guilty. Interesting.

******The bible says not to question someone's faith. And two, it would be hard to tell if they were doing it for selfish reasons.

[Yama Tombo]

This has nothing to do with individuals, whether in governmental positions of power or not, prospering. If GWB claims morality and christianity but acts in a manner opposite it, shouldn't he be punished like other christian hypocrites (check out the guy who sold his property and lied about how much of the price he'd donated) or Herod, who was eaten by worms, and died, when he let the people tell him his voice was the voice of god?

Though the leader may not be doing such a great job, you still listen to the government-only if it does not conflict with the interest of God.

[nzric]

Wow, I was born on 10th of November - exactly 5980 years after Adam and Eve were tossed out of the garden of eden.

That explains why I'm an atheist and I'm against religion... in 20 years, I'll be 47 - old enough to be well on the road to world domination. 6000 years after the world begun, it's Armageddon on my birthday, 2023.

I am the Antichrist!! :)

[shunyadragon]

God is trying to show us, man can't rule man. And that man needs God, because everything of man's creation ususally fails. (without a doubt) [/B][/QUOTE]

Considering the religious wars, religious persicution, ethnic cleansing, the history of slavery in Christianity, Judism and Islam, and racially separate churches I consider these beliefs to be dismal failures.

[judojedi]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo
[b]

God is trying to show us, man can't rule man. And that man needs God, because everything of man's creation ususally fails. (without a doubt)

how can something usually fail, without a doubt ?:confused:

man can rule man.
man has ruled man for millenia.
the main way man has ruled man, is by inventing an all powerful diety.
in feudal times, cardinals and inquisitors of the catholic faith were the main way kings kept order in thier provinces. kings claimed to be divinly appointed, therefore rebels against the king were also against god.
however the pope usually had power over the kings and faith was above patriotism.

this is why 'faith' in 'god' was perpetuated, a population in fear of god will not rise against the divinly appointed king but would rise against muslim invaders, such a threat was very real in iberia (spain)

in conclusion, god is a tool of mans creation. used to keep the peasants in order. god, in many forms, has been used this way for thousands of years.

[shunyadragon]

The students of Arts of the Way (Martial Arts) should realize that these Arts originate as an intimate part of spiritual disaplines of Buddhism, which is a religion that many Christians consider a 'cult' or inspired by the devil. Praciticing the Arts may be viewed as praciticing Buddhism.

[Yama Tombo]

Originally posted by judojedi
how can something usually fail, without a doubt ?:confused:

man can rule man.
man has ruled man for millenia.
the main way man has ruled man, is by inventing an all powerful diety.
in feudal times, cardinals and inquisitors of the catholic faith were the main way kings kept order in thier provinces. kings claimed to be divinly appointed, therefore rebels against the king were also against god.
however the pope usually had power over the kings and faith was above patriotism.

this is why 'faith' in 'god' was perpetuated, a population in fear of god will not rise against the divinly appointed king but would rise against muslim invaders, such a threat was very real in iberia (spain)

in conclusion, god is a tool of mans creation. used to keep the peasants in order. god, in many forms, has been used this way for thousands of years.

So have I not said fail??? Without doubt, the expectation of ruling successfully and to sustain such has not come about. Man's attempt to control man, through any use has failed in upset. See? You can't expect a man to be successful everywhere, can you?

[judojedi]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo
So have I not said fail??? Without doubt, the expectation of ruling successfully and to sustain such has not come about. Man's attempt to control man, through any use has failed in upset. See? You can't expect a man to be successful everywhere, can you?

i dont fully understand your reply.
your saying that man can only fail right? but man has made many success's, religion being one of them even though its starting to wein now.
ruling successfully and to sustain it has not come about? yes it has. egyptians, inca's, toltect's, etc all ruled (controlled) their people very successfully until they were invaded by foriegn powers.

man controls man very easily and successfully when the controlling man has power to start with. ie, controls the media or preaches from a book.
cults (and religion) control their subscribers through threats of what will happen to them in the after life if they don't do as they are told. who tells them what to do? the preacher. what does he tell them to do? give money usually or kill the non-believers!

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Yama Tombo
So have I not said fail??? Without doubt, the expectation of ruling successfully and to sustain such has not come about. Man's attempt to control man, through any use has failed in upset. See? You can't expect a man to be successful everywhere, can you?

The oldest nation and democracy in the world is still in existence within the United States without the help of Christianity. It is the soverign Five-Nation Native American Conferation. It has not failed despite the ethnic cleansing of Christians to erase it from the face of the earth.

I think secular and non-Christian nations have been the most successful.

[Yama Tombo]

If they can rule forever tell me, you may not see things in my criteria. Aside from that, man is a only temporary means for keeping peace.

[judojedi]

well thats gone way over head...i think :confused:


and that dancing bananna is hypnotising! :p

[nzric]

The Christian God is much more of a failure when it comes to ruling than men. Look at his track record:

Ruled over the angels. His deputy mutinied with a lot of other guys, and god had to kick them all out.
Created Adam and Eve. Ex-deputy sneaks in and tells them they don't have to put up with God's orders. God freaks out, kicks them out and promises to hold a vendetta against Adam & Eve's family forever (very Balkan if you ask me).
God tries to help humans. Humans just want to party and have fun, so God kills them all.
God goes on a rampage, cause nobody will listen to him. Spends millennia taking pre-emptive strikes against people and cities, torching them to the ground for answering back.
God has a change of heart and sends his son down to fix the mess. Son has a few good ideas but his message is lost in the squabbles, although he manages to solve Rome's lion bait shortage for a while. Son manages to foster a cult that survives but breaks into many divisions and is responsible for some of the greatest acts of genocide in history...

And now - Christian rulers in real life...

Spanish Inquisition,
Salem witch burning,
KKK,
Georgetown,
colonialism,
slavery,
catholics vs protestants,
British imperialism,
genocide of indigenous people around the world,
Conquistadors in South America,
IRA,
feudalism,
supression of science,
vatican silence in WW2,
greedy evangalists,
the thirty years war,
the Taiping Rebellion (20-30 million dead),
Christian Ethiopians causing genocide in 5th and 6th century,
WW1.

These are not isolated 'black marks' - Christian social structure is a dismal failure.

[Shaolin Dragon]

You say British Imperialism like it's a bad thing?

[nzric]

Well, gave us a steady supply of natives to mine and work for us for a while, so hey, maybe it was a good thing. Pity that little gandhi guy got in the way huh...

not!

[Yama Tombo]

Ruled over the angels.

Created Adam and Eve. Ex-deputy sneaks in and tells them they don't have to put up with God's orders.

**God told them:

Gen 1: 17: And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

*That was a test to see if man followed. I'll say one thing God did express regret for making man, and wanted to destory all man. As the book goes if were not for Noah's faith, than man would have all been kill.


God freaks out, kicks them out and promises to hold a vendetta against Adam & Eve's family forever (very Balkan if you ask me).

**He never promised a vendetta, and if it was apparent that God was holding a vendetta he would have DESTORIED MAN if he wanted to. Though, he didn't he just punished them.


His deputy mutinied with a lot of other guys, and god had to kick them all out.
God goes on a rampage, cause nobody will listen to him. Spends millennia taking pre-emptive strikes against people and cities, torching them to the ground for answering back.

***Again if he wanted to kill if he wanted to he would have Again, I'll say one thing God did express regret for making man, and wanted to destory all man. As the book goes if were not for Noah's faith, than man would have all been kill.

God has a change of heart and sends his son down to fix the mess. Son has a few good ideas but his message is lost in the squabbles, although he manages to solve Rome's lion bait shortage for a while. Son manages to foster a cult that survives but breaks into many divisions and is responsible for some of the greatest acts of genocide in history...

*****Can you explain blame God for Genocide? Man is the foolish one. Thats why christianity needs to be reproved. If you care or not I don't agree with all supposed "easy-out-way" and if you see in most religious declared wars it has been uncovered that man, himself was using it as personal gain. As I said christianity needs to be rebuked in ways. Even now, man has ruined religion on his own terms.

******Now, this does not contradict my belief in God and to believe he exists.

[Yama Tombo]

This is from another forum. We had a similar discussion about the same thing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strange though, that free will is often given as a argument for the existence of god, yet religion often seeks to take it away. And I'm taking into account the existence of both positive and negative freedom when I say this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thats a total communist view there, it's not taking away the freedom of choice from both sides of right or wrong. Rules are rules in religion as a govermental system as well. Yes, you could say religion is another political bashing party. The violence and the so called "surrender of freedom" are methods taken by religious extremists. The very good willed nature of religion is distorted by it's history or the history created by battles, presecution, and so forth.

As far as christian religion, the bible advices parents not to shield their child's eyes from the world. And extermists may just lock the kid in the house forever and preach until their ears full off.

There is a difference and it's not the surface that defines religion all the time.

[nzric]

When I said vendetta, I was talking about original sin, and the fact that god cursed women to give birth with pain.

Just because you are able to kill everyone but you decide to instead kill everyone except one or two people... that doesn't make you a good person/ruler/all powerful deity.

Christianity needs to be reproved? when in history did it ever work?? Sounds like communism. Great idea but sort of falls down in real life.

[Yama Tombo]

Christianity needs to be reproved?

*Reprove means rebuke by definition

when in history did it ever work?? Sounds like communism.

*Yeah it may sound like communism to you. But usually no one has even really bothered to actually step up or atleast not care to.

Great idea but sort of falls down in real life.

[Yama Tombo]

Besides the whole fact...I think the actually topic

"Does God actually exist? "

A century old argument, was the earth flooded completely? Which relates to Noah's ark.

---There is evidence of an older verision of Noah's ark by another city. Now, opposers for the argument have this in their favor.

Well, research (more like stumble up) revealed that other cultures have stories of a deluge. Like Africa, Asia, Native Americans, and etc. Though, the stories are not explained the same, they tell of a deluge involving a God chosen man, or a God like man saved the life on earth.

Now into contrast to this, a theory that somewhere in the middle-east, near the Dead Sea. Exploration of the Dead Sea showed valley like dips underneath the water, and that led scientist to believe there was a flood. Although, they believe the Dead Sea is a result of that flood (in which that proves it only happened in that one area and no further) And they believed that people that lived in the region slowly traveled out. Thus carrying the story of the flood. Yeah it's not solid evidence of a worldwide flood, later evidence would support a flood.

An excavator was digging and layers exposed signs of life; he kept excavating, until he reached a new layer of hard soil; the layer showed no evidence of life; he continued through the soil, and found similar layers like the layers above the soil layer; underneath the soil he found life in the bottom layers. The strange part about it was in another part of the world. That was evidence of a world wide flood.

Though in excavation that show periods between times of extinction.

The Amonaly in the Turkish mountian, wood was taken from the site. It was radiocarbon dated and showed that the peice of wood found in the mountain 4,000 years old or so. Which is incorrect by science to have been around the date of the flood.

Though in christian p.o.v the earth is 12,000 years old. Not 4.5 billion years.

You be the judge, but since I mentioned this topic. I'm going to read more about it.

[nzric]

I think we're taking a few liberties about the original question. As far as I see it, the question should be; Do you believe;

That there is an entity outside/above our existence
That this entity (he) is conscious
That he is powerful enough to influence things
That he would have an interest in humans
That he would be able to give us things that are beyond our current knowledge (life after death...)
That his best interests are a fit with humans' (i.e. that he does want the best for us)
That humans can't reach the same level of consciousness as the god

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yama Tombo
[B]Besides the whole fact...I think the actually topic

"Does God actually exist? "

A century old argument, was the earth flooded completely? Which relates to Noah's ark.

---There is evidence of an older verision of Noah's ark by another city. Now, opposers for the argument have this in their favor.

Well, research (more like stumble up) revealed that other cultures have stories of a deluge. Like Africa, Asia, Native Americans, and etc. Though, the stories are not explained the same, they tell of a deluge involving a God chosen man, or a God like man saved the life on earth.

Now into contrast to this, a theory that somewhere in the middle-east, near the Dead Sea. Exploration of the Dead Sea showed valley like dips underneath the water, and that led scientist to believe there was a flood. Although, they believe the Dead Sea is a result of that flood (in which that proves it only happened in that one area and no further) And they believed that people that lived in the region slowly traveled out. Thus carrying the story of the flood. Yeah it's not solid evidence of a worldwide flood, later evidence would support a flood.

An excavator was digging and layers exposed signs of life; he kept excavating, until he reached a new layer of hard soil; the layer showed no evidence of life; he continued through the soil, and found similar layers like the layers above the soil layer; underneath the soil he found life in the bottom layers. The strange part about it was in another part of the world. That was evidence of a world wide flood.

Though in excavation that show periods between times of extinction.

The Amonaly in the Turkish mountian, wood was taken from the site. It was radiocarbon dated and showed that the peice of wood found in the mountain 4,000 years old or so. Which is incorrect by science to have been around the date of the flood.

Frank says:

The use of carbon dating itself is based on the radioactive decay of the elements. Different elements decay at different rates and to accept carbon dating means to accept that the isotopes of heavy elements decay at slower rates whch is part of the scientific evidence that the earth and the solar system are billions of years old and the universe is much older.

I am a geologist and in particular I studied geomorphology (The study of the history of different rocks and how they were deposited and made.) Geologists have studied all the rock layers of the world to some extent. There isn't any evidence of a world flood. The seas and lakes of the world changed, grew and shrank in cycles with continental drift (The movement of continents over time). The Dead Sea formed in a rift valley and has grown and shrank over time based on the cycle of the ice ages and climate. The sediments in the Dea Sea valley show no sign of a major catastrophic flood.

There is evidence that the Black Sea was once a Salt Sea Desert Basin like the Dead Sea. The rocks eroded at the Bosperous (sp?) Straits and a great deluge filled the Black Sea to its present level thousands of years ago (far more than 4,000). The result is the Black Sea has two layers. A salty dead sea under a sea with a lower salt content. This is the only known geologic record of a large scale regional flood in the middle east.

This flood occured when Neolithic humans lived in the region and the memory of the flood may have been kept alive in the oral traditions and first recorded in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

There is a great deal of evidence for regional and local castrophic floods on all of the continents at different times in history, but the evidence doesn't match up to a world flood. They were all related to specific local conditions.

The Dead Sea is not unusual and like other salt lakes and seas of the world. They do not result from large scale floods, but form in arid (dry) regions of the world where there is a rift valley (a valley where the earth is spreading apart) and land is subsiding. Our Salt Lake in Utah is an example.




Though in christian p.o.v the earth is 12,000 years old. Not 4.5 billion years.

[Kosh]

I believe god exists, but it is alot older than religion, which is after all a human invention.

I think religion fails when it pressumes to know what god wants or what god's motives are. We have no way of understanding the motives of something like god.

I was raised as a christian (by schooling) but know i choose to be a buddhist, though i still belive that what many religious people refere to as god exists.

There are countless arguments for the existence of god, mostly that it has to exist, by definition.

There are actually very few arguments against the existence of god. The most used one is 'how can god allow evil to happen?', but again this assumes we can fathom its motives, and that good and evil isnt an illusion caused by humans limited understanding of reality and time

[SecurityAdvisor]

I am a Bible-based Christian, so yes, I believe in a God who exhibits both perfect love and perfect justice.

In other words, God has standards (justice), but He also has mercy (love). Unfortunately, as humans we all (I'm including myself here) fall short of His standards.

The Bible tells (in the book of Romans) that the wages of this falling short (sin) is eternal death (hell/seperation from God). Remember, since God is perfectly just He cannot allow sin to go unpunished.

Many of us have a sense of this and and therefore try to do things to "earn" our way into Heaven. Here's the problem with that. We can never know when we've done enough. In fact, the Bible tells us that we can never, on our own, do enough.

Now here's the great news. God knew that we could never earn our way into Heaven, so He arranged for Himself, in the form of His Son, Jesus Christ, to pay the penalty for us.

Think about that for a moment. I'd die to protect my wife, my country, my family, my friends etc. I would not, however, die to protect my enemy. You probably wouldn't either. That's exactly what Jesus did for us though.

If you read the four Gospels (The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) it becomes clear that Jesus lived a perfect life and was was therefore guiltless before God.

When Jesus was put to death for preaching against the religious leaders of His day, He bore every sin that you and I ever committed in the past, commit now or will commit in the future.

After He died on the cross, the Bible tells us that He descended into Hell for three days and then rose again. In doing so, He not only bore our sins, but He paid our penality and defeated death in the ultimate battle of all tme.

All we have to do to get into Heaven is to:

(1.) Accept the fact that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died for our sins.

(2.) Confess our sins before Him in prayer.

(3.) Ask form His forgiveness

(4.) Ask for Him to take a role of Leadership in our life.

(5.) Make a steadfast effort to overcome sin in our life to the best of our ability.

When we do these things we can be assured of eternal salvation. We can also be assured that God will send His Holy Spirit to dwell within us. The Holy Spirit will then teach us, convict us of sin that we still try to hold onto, comfort us when we're being persecuted and to seal us for the day when Christ will return to establish His Kindom here on earth.

Now, I have no doubt, that some of you who read this will think I'm a nut. I learned a long time ago that when one speaks in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that people will become angry. I used to be one of those people.

All I can do is tell you my own experience. You have to make up your own mind as to whether to accept the greatest gift of all time or not.

My experience has been that He does answer my prayers. Sometimes the answer is "yes", sometimes "no" and sometimes "wait", but He always does answer.

I am comforted when there's no reason for comfort. I am challengd beyond my wildest expectations and I have a peace in me that cannot be undone by any human being.

So, yes, I believe in God.

Scott Watson
SecurityAdvisor

[RubyMoon]

Originally posted by SecurityAdvisor
All we have to do to get into Heaven is to:
(1.) Accept the fact that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died for our sins.
(2.) Confess our sins before Him in prayer.
(3.) Ask form His forgiveness
(4.) Ask for Him to take a role of Leadership in our life.
(5.) Make a steadfast effort to overcome sin in our life to the best of our ability. What if I do all of those things you listed, and more, but instead of Jesus I do it in the name of Buddha? Or Muhummad? Or Shiva? What if I do every single thing you mentioned but my experience of Christ is through the Sun god, rather than the "son of God"? What if my savior appears to me in the form of Isis, or Ashtart, or Hecate?

What if I feel the divine spirit spread its wings within my soul and fill my life with love and joy, but instead of Jesus I choose to call it Irving? Am I to be damned?

Do you really believe God is so hung up on semantics?

[nzric]

I only qualify for number 5. Will I burn?

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Kosh

Religion is just a word created by man, religion itself is older than man.

There are countless arguments for the existence of god, mostly that it has to exist, by definition.

There are actually very few arguments against the existence of god. The most used one is 'how can god allow evil to happen?', but again this assumes we can fathom its motives, and that good and evil isnt an illusion caused by humans limited understanding of reality and time [/B]

This actually an old one and not a good arguement. It goes with why does God allow suffering wars, etc. In all religions free will is an important part of all religions including Buddhism. The attributes of the universe and the cyclic rythum and flow of the universe over billions years is a reflection of the nature and image of God.

My view is that God does not have to exist by our logic. God exists.

[Shade]

Good question Rubymoon.

One has to wonder what happens when you have x million people believing in 'God' and 'Jesus' and y million people believing in 'Allah' and 'Mohammed' etc.

Does this mean there is more than one 'god'? or are they in fact the same thing, just with a different name?

[inacan]

One just hopes that in the afterlife, we can all be together in peace and harmony, regardless of what we believed in our physical life.

[Shade]

Good point inacan.

I have to say that I have often wondered what happens to people who lead basically a good life; dont break the law, have respect for others, lead a wholesome existence etc, but either dont believe in God, or are blissfully unaware of the concept (some unknown tribe in teh deepest darkest rainforest for example).

What happens to these people if there is a judgement day? According to the Bible they burn in hell dont they?

That seems a bit harsh to me. If true, I cant say it makes me want to worship a 'god' that would do that to someone. Just my own personal thoughts though.

[nzric]

Shade - also makes you wonder about people like me, who try to lead a good life but consciously reject the notion of a supernatural god/jesus, with full knowledge of the christian way of life.

That's the reason I rejected christianity. I couldn't accept the fact that if you take someone who said they were a christian but only went to church once a year and lived a basically normal self-centered life, then you take a person who is in all respects a saint but chooses to be muslim/buddhist/atheist/whatever... in the christian faith, the token christian will get eternal bliss and the latter person will burn in hell. I personally don't agree with that.

[Shade]

Hear hear nzric, I agree with you 100%.

Looking at websites that provide information on Taoism, just as an example, I am told that there are circa 20 million 'followers' of this religion (not many compared to toher religions but still a significant amount of people). And the Taoist way of life seems to me to be an excellent one in terms of living with compassion, moderation and humility. Why should someone like this be cast into eternal fire?

Out of interest, does anyomne know what happens the other way around? For example, say you had a population that is mainly buddhist, and someone amongst them says 'I dont believe in Buddha' what hapens to them? (substitute any other religion with buddhism also).

Is it just Christianity that has this live in peace and harmony forever or burn thing going on or is it a common denominator in other religions?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SecurityAdvisor
[B]I am a Bible-based Christian, so yes, I believe in a God who exhibits both perfect love and perfect justice.

Frank says:

If God 'exhibits both love and perfect justice,' why didn't Christ come to all the peoples of the world as he did to the Holy Lands to deliver his WORD since it is critical to salvation in the belief of Christians. If God's love and justice is perfect most of the world's population wouldn't be left in the dark.



Many of us have a sense of this and and therefore try to do things to "earn" our way into Heaven. Here's the problem with that. We can never know when we've done enough. In fact, the Bible tells us that we can never, on our own, do enough.

Frank says:

I've heard this quote often along with many people (Other religions) believe you are saved by works.
In reality this is not actually what people believe this. Atheists whose goal is strictly good works don't believe in a heaven to 'earn' their way into. The other religions have variations, but they don't believe you get to heaven by works only.

Despite the claim of 'born again' by some Christians, the books have to balence and a life of sin or hypocrasy won't get you into heaven according to the Bible. Without good works you won't be saved.

[Yama Tombo]

Shuny-->I haven't read all about that excavation, but when I remember where the link I'll show you the article. But I'll give the you around the your of the date it was believe that evidence of a worldwide. "1910" if I remember correctly, but even the archeologist who came about the dig was a skeptic of even of what he found. So, I'll get back with you on it.

[SecurityAdvisor]

Originally posted by RubyMoon
What if I do all of those things you listed, and more, but instead of Jesus I do it in the name of Buddha? Or Muhummad? Or Shiva? What if I do every single thing you mentioned but my experience of Christ is through the Sun god, rather than the "son of God"? What if my savior appears to me in the form of Isis, or Ashtart, or Hecate?

What if I feel the divine spirit spread its wings within my soul and fill my life with love and joy, but instead of Jesus I choose to call it Irving? Am I to be damned?

Do you really believe God is so hung up on semantics?

Hi Heather/Rubymoon,

I don't really think it's a matter of "semantics". God knows who He is and who He's not. Think of it this way, if your friends/husband or boyfriend kept calling you Bonnie or Jennifer, wouldn't you get a bit annoyed after awhile?

I think the crux of your question can be summed up as "Isn't Christianity a bit narrow minded?" The answer is, yes it is. Christ said "I am The Way, The Truth and The Life. No one comes to the Father accept through the Son".

That's not fair by human standards, but then again, we only see part of the overall picture. God sees and knows everything. God created us and can destroy us if He so chooses. Fortunately, God is both just and loving, in that He gave us a way to be with Him forever.

I've often heard people say, that all religeons are basically the same. The people who say this are wrong. Many of the major religeons have markedely different views of God, eternity, truth afterlife etc. They can't all be right. If you don't believe me, that's OK, I'm just some guy on a web page. I would, however suggest that you owe it to yourself to seek out the truth.

If you want some great material on Christianity you may want to check out the following sources:

(1.) The Bible: I suggest you start reading in the Book of John, but that's up to you.

(2.) Evidence that Demands a Verdict By Josh McDowell

(3.) Questions Christians Ask about Christianity, also by Josh McDowell

(4.) The Case for Christ By Lee Strobel

(5.) The Casse for Faith, also by Lee Strobel.

I hope my reply at least somewhat answers your question. The point of my post was to share, what I consider to be the greatest gift of all time, with my fellow martial artists.

Peace be with you,

Scott/Security Advisor

[inacan]

I suppose the mere idea that we are trained to be respectful and peaceful by nature, naturally clashes with the traditional scheme of "us Vs. Them" the "Hellfire vs. heaven-sent".

I too find a problem with the whole idea that if one lives a good life, only to not believe in god or to believe in something contrary to Christian faith that they will burn in hell. I refuse to accept any god who would do such a thing to his creation on a technicality.

[khafra]

God is peaceful and loving, because he has the power to destroy all of us but according to a not entirely consistent set of rules he spares some?

(See illustration at http://pfft.keenspace.com)

[judojedi]

i like that illustration. it speaks volumes.

evil and evil i say.

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by khafra
[B]God is peaceful and loving, because he has the power to destroy all of us but according to a not entirely consistent set of rules he spares some?

God is not a chess palyer with the white pieces.
God is the sea and we are the fishes.

[khafra]

"A witty saying proves nothing" - Voltaire

[musashiblade]

Here's the deal...people. If God does not exist, then we are here by ourselves to do whatever we please, and I do mean PLEASE. life would be absolutely meaningless, but you would left to create your own meaning and reason for being here- a very intoxicating idea for the trailblazers and inventors and people who believe they can make it on there own. You know create the world in their own image... (sound familiar). But, if God does exist, then there is a greater than good chance that there is an afterlife or eternal soul that we all possess. This leads to the concept of heaven or avalon or nirvana (many religions have heaven), etc.. the point of many religions in many different cultures and languages is to pick one and stick with it, to roll the dice if you will, to have faith that yours will get you to where you want to be, you don't know which is best or "true", the point is to never lose faith that it is. It's risky,but that is the point. Is anyone picking up the parallel with MA, or spouses, or everything...?......... that is the point.

[Shade]

musashiblade, interesting comments.

Leads me onto a further question. If it were the case that out of all the different religions in the world that one of them is 'true' and gets the followers of that religion to whereever they believe it leads (lets just say 'heaven' for want of a better term) then what happens to everyone who didnt follow that religion?

Lets just for arguments sake say the 'true' religion is Taoism.

What happens to all the muslims? What happens to all the Christians? What happens to all the Buddhists? etc

Also, as i said in an earlier post, what about anyone in this world who basically leads a wholesome existence but either doesnt believe in a god or has no notion of it/them (again, thinking of these small tribes of guys who are sometimes discovered in deep dark rainforests). Where do these people go?

[Gandhi]

Whenever I start to question whether God exists or not, I simply try to comprehend consciousness and I always arrive at the conclusion that he must.

[khafra]

Every religion is different. Christianity is just about the most exclusive. Muslims will let most Christians and Jews stay out of hell. Buddhist would just let anybody, whether they're buddhist or not, keep reincarnating 'til they've freed themselves from the cycle--and they don't reserve enlightenment solely for themselves, it's an individual thing.

Even in Christianity there's differences; Dante would let virtuous pagans and those who died to young to know into the highest circle of hell, indistinguishable from heaven really except for the absence of god. C.S. Lewis couldn't bring himself to believe that god would let anyone, no matter how awful, burn in hell for eternity, he believed that eventually their sins would be expiated in the torment and they'd be let out. The prevailing view among modern evangelicals, at least that I've met, is that if you don't give your life to Jesus you'll burn forever, no matter how virtuous.


And, Musashiblade, the thought has been thought before--the quote "nothing is true, everything is permitted" is attributed to Hassan I Sabbah, the Old Man of the Mountain, leader of an early esoteric sect of Islam. That and Peter J. Carrol's books riffing on Aleister Crowley's "Do what thou wilt" are good jumping off points if you want to see what other people have said on the subject.

runs for my life, avoiding Yoda's swift and sure retribution for offering quotes instead of my own thoughts

[Shade]

Hi Khafra, thanks for the info.

Looks like Buddhism may be a good choice :)

[shunyadragon]

It is true that in principle Buddhists say salvation is an individual thing, but institutional Buddhism today very much believes their the only 'Way' to the top.

After my Zazen lesson I still remember my instructor say, 'There are many ways of meditation and people are seeking to end suffering in may ways, but this is the true way.'

It's interesting that reincarnation is an important part of the belief in Buddhism today, but in Buddha's teaching the journey beyond the present moment is unknown. The purpose of life was to end suffering and enter the river and become one with existence. This journey may be cyclic, but it is basically unknown. Like Christianity with its alien Roman concepts of Heaven, hell purgatory and what ever, Tibetan Buddhist theology has developed into a monopoly game of advancement through different lives and kingdoms to reach nirvana. I actually have a Tibetan board game that shows all the steps.

Another misconception or misunderstanding of Buddhist belief is that to achieve Nirvana by some is to vanish from existence. Others believe in a heaven like Nirvana. The salvation of Nirvana like the Christian heaven was essentially undefined. But to achieve Nirvana means to end separation, suffering and achieve a state of spiritual unity with existence. Where the journey may go from there is also unknown. The journey may be through many kingdoms, worlds or universes.

The earth is not the only ballgame in the heavens.

[Shade]

shunyadragon thats all cool.

Do buddhists believe that non-buddhists burn in a fiery hell for all eternity? Like Christians believe non-christians do?

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Shade
shunyadragon thats all cool.

Do buddhists believe that non-buddhists burn in a fiery hell for all eternity? Like Christians believe non-christians do?

Well, in the Tibetan Buddhist board game things can get pretty nasty for the bad guys, but unlike Christianity, you always have a way out.

[Shade]

hmmmm......dont sound like a very forgiving lot these christians.

I thought they were supposed to be turn the other cheek and do unto tohers as you would have them do unto you? Does that mean i can cast god into the flames, as he would do it to me?

On a serious note, there is sometimes an underlying fear that what if so and so god really DOES exist and because i dodnt believe in them i'm buggered. Trouble is the only sure fire way would be to worship them all, and then you probably get caught out with something in the small print that says 'Thou shalt worship only me' because they seem a bit vain like that some of these gods.

What is a poor mortal to do?

Personally I would have thought it would be better all round if this 'believe in me and you'll be all right jack, but woe betide those that don't etc' was removed from the equation.

I apologise in advance if i upset anyone with this comment, but in my life so far (only 34 years so not that long) some of the rudest and most unforgiving people I have encountered have been devoutly religious folk. But the nicest, friendliest, most warm and generous people have been just plain simple folk who follow no religion, just live by a genuine sense of decency.

Surely that is a bit cockeyed?

[inacan]

I live my life according to my moral principles that are aimed towards love and caring and forgiveness. Just because I don't believe or have absolute faith in something, doesn't mean that I should "Burn" for it.

I'm content in my life, and upon death if I'm given the option of hell or being blinked out of existance, I'll take being blinked.

My job is to make life now happier, whatever will be will be.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by khafra
"A witty saying proves nothing" - Voltaire

In religion and phillosophy to expect proof is a fool.
Even in science all proof is subject to doubt.

What did Voltaire expect to prove.

[khafra]

I was actually replying directly to your previous post, I just didn't quote it in my reply.

What I'm saying, Shunayadragon, is that god isn't the ocean we fishes swim in. God is the mafia enforcer and we're the small business owners who must play by his rules or find our businesses torched and a horse's head on our bed.

SD: "But it's his perfect nature!"

Khafra: People act against their nature all the time--natural liberty is to take whatever you can and do whatever you want. Any time we refrain from that in favour of our civil liberties we're acting differently from our nature, for the benefit of others and ourselves.

Are you saying God gave us more free will than he posesses himself?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by khafra
[B]I was actually replying directly to your previous post, I just didn't quote it in my reply.

What I'm saying, Shunayadragon, is that god isn't the ocean we fishes swim in. God is the mafia enforcer and we're the small business owners who must play by his rules or find our businesses torched and a horse's head on our bed.

Are you defining God? Or possibly describing one viewpoint of god?

One of the many points I was making is the fish can't define the sea.

[inacan]

I've never heard God compared to the Mafia before, very....interesting.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by inacan
I've never heard God compared to the Mafia before, very....interesting.

God has been comared to much worse. He has been cursed and praised to positions not worthy of him or her or it

[SecurityAdvisor]

Originally posted by Shade
hmmmm......dont sound like a very forgiving lot these christians.

I thought they were supposed to be turn the other cheek and do unto tohers as you would have them do unto you?

As Christians we are supposed to forgive others. I'm sorry that that your experience with Christians has been so bad. The sad fact is that many people who would normally be open to what the Bible has to say are turned away from the faith by the behavior of Christians.

That being said, I hope you won't be completely turned away from Christianity. Does hypocrisy exist within the Church? Absolutely. There are hypocrits in all walks of life. Are Christians perfect? Absolutely not! We struggle with sin everyday. What we are is forgiven, not by our own power, but by God's Grace.

Look, I know that I'm not going to convince anyone here. That's OK. My point is this, most people who reject Christ do so, because of their "Pereception" of what Christianity is all about.

Don't take my, or anyone elses word, for it. Considering the consequences, both positive and negative, you owe it to yourself to research Christianity.

I challenge you to do the following:

(1.) Find a local Christian Church that is offerring an Alpha Course. (that won't be difficult, they're everywhere.)

(2.) Actively attend the course and ask questions. It usually takes about twelve weeks (1 night a week) In the course you will be surrounded by people from all faiths, as well as atheists.


The results may surprise you.

___________________________
SecurityAdvisor


John 3:16

[shunyadragon]

It is not the hypocrasy. For hypocrasy is merely to be human and nothing else. If the Alfa course is everywhere than it is common place with the arrogant WAY of the Christian churches and one with the exclusive way preached by those which is the cause of many to suffer that don't believe in your way.

Suffering is the way of separation and to assume an exclusive one WAY is to endorse the separation and suffering you call the hypocracy of others.

[RubyMoon]

Originally posted by SecurityAdvisor
I challenge you to do the following:
(1.) Find a local Christian Church that is offerring an Alpha Course. (that won't be difficult, they're everywhere.) Will you, in turn, go find a Buddhist temple and attend a twelve week course on Buddhism? Will you go to a mosque and learn about Islam? Will you join a Wiccan coven?

[SecurityAdvisor]

Originally posted by RubyMoon
Will you, in turn, go find a Buddhist temple and attend a twelve week course on Buddhism? Will you go to a mosque and learn about Islam? Will you join a Wiccan coven?


No, I won't. I made the challenge to that particular person, because the nature of his posts indicated to me that he was searching for something. If I'm wrong about that, then he is free to ignore my challenge. I've already found what I'm looking for.

BTW, I do have some friends who are Wiccans. They know I'm a Christian and they also know that, because I care about them, I will keep presenting the Gospel. I try to do this in a way that doesn't offend people, but I confess that I'm not always successful.

Let's put it this way. I'm not one of those Christians who stops people in the grocery store and tells tham that they must repent. However, if the subject comes up, I will say me peace.

I find it interesting that this particular thread appears to have generated the most interest. It tells me that there are people who are open to spiritual things, but due to the way Christianity has been portrayed, they reject it without a close examination.

_________________________
SecurityAdvisor

[SecurityAdvisor]

Originally posted by shunyadragon
It is not the hypocrasy. For hypocrasy is merely to be human and nothing else. If the Alfa course is everywhere than it is common place with the arrogant WAY of the Christian churches and one with the exclusive way preached by those which is the cause of many to suffer that don't believe in your way.

Suffering is the way of separation and to assume an exclusive one WAY is to endorse the separation and suffering you call the hypocracy of others.

Many people who were once openly hostile to Christianity have made informed decisions to accept Christ after going through Alpha.

I'm not one of those people, but prior to my becoming a Christian, I was very hostile to the idea of one exclusive way to heaven. I took me a very long time, a lot of research, exposure to Christians who were living according to their beliefs and a great deal of introspection before I decided to make the big commitment.

I'm actually not asking anyone to accept Christ as their personal savior. I'm suggesting that people take the time to learn about Christ and His promise of eternal life. The reason I suggest a personal search is because I'm convinced that anyone who really knows Christ won't reject Him.

____________________________
SecurityAdvisor