Religion - Warning may offend some veiwers

[Darzeka]

This is going to be a rather large ramble by me about some of my views about religion. It is 3 AM so this may not be too coherent




***********************

WARNING

***********************


If you are really devout to your religion some of what I may write could offend you - you have been warned.

I believe nothing I write here. It is merely conjecture - I have yet to decide which I believe.

I believe that everything is possible (including that something is impossible because anything is possible).








Let me start by saying that I believe in GOD. Not as anyone else thinks of it but I do believe in GOD (I use the term GOD only for the purposes of this post. In the recesses of my mind it is just it).
I also believe in gods, aliens, magic, dragons and many other "mythical" things.



GOD

The thing I call god is the cosmic force that IS everything.

Now this force is so far removed from our sphere of comprehension that we cannot begin to uderstand what it is, if it thinks, anything about it (not above or below mind you, only removed). All I know is that it is there. And that it has no awareness of us.

Just as we are not aware of the microrganisms in the air we breathe - it is not aware of us. More than likely it is not even aware of matter in general. It is not about superior beings only scope and perspective.

I believe that there could only possibly be one of these things in existance anywhere (I know I said anything is possible but here we start to get confused). The problem with saying that anything is possible is that there has to be at least one thing that is impossible to make it true (see I told you - confusion).
To explain this I like to think of the overused word unique.
I am unique.
but anything is possible right?
So somewhere in the universe is a planet entirely populated by me - anything is possible.
And I am truly unique - there is only one thing in existance that is just like e.
An interesting paradox.
GOD is there to solve this. It IS everything in existance. There can only be one everything because there is nothing else.

Orright. We have this thing called GOD that is everything. Why does anything happen? Haven't the foggiest. So why do a group of people claim that this force that doesn't even realise we exist actively affect the course of our lives?

Do they want someone to take responsibilty for their actions?
Do they need the incentive of heaven to be good?
Or is it the fear of hell?
Shouldn't that be the other way around? (back to this later)

Do you talk to those organisms in the air? Would they understand? Are they trying to communicate with us? Are we but gods ignoring the plights of mere mortals?

I think that it is a bit arrogant to think that we can fathom the intentions of this being that we can know what it would want us to do if could comprehend our existance.

This brings me to the nature of good and evil. (A big leap i know but this has been bugging me lately)
Why do we think that just because we think it is right to be kind to other things, keep things alive, everything that is "good" that it is infact a "good" act. Think of something that we consider evil. When they commit that act do they think that it is evil? not likely they are just doing what feels natural.
Compare that to us. We do what feels natural in that we do "good". Could not some higher agent - the gods for ant of a better example yet - actually think of what we are doing as evil when we think it is good?
Why don't we go around killing people? Becuase we would go to jail. Why would they put us in jail? fear? doing what is right and good?

Could not the death of the body merely be the release of the energy that constitutes our soul? Could the body not be a cocoon type thing for the mind? Could the mind/soul not have been trapped in the flesh by accident? Anything is possible. If anyof these were true would not killing the body be a good thing? Freedom and growth. Two things that we tend to cherish on this planet. We may be commiting grievous "evils" whilst commiting "good" deeds on the Earth.
GOOD = EVIL
EVIL = GOOD
So then all you are left with is the reason why we don't do things we are told not to by the powers in our lands. You can do whatever you want as long as you are willing to pay the price.


Heaven and Hell

What happens when you die (we don't know but everyone seems to think that either we go to heaven, hell, limbo or get reincarnated). lets say you go to heaven. Why are you there? You lived you life according to the religion that is right and didn't break the rules. Why are there rules if it is the right way to live? Shouldn't we just do it naturally? Isn't that the way all other animals do it. And if you make it to heaven do you get to do whatever you want - even though it may break a few rules?

Or have you been scoring points with the higher ups by following the rules that you feel uncomfortable following only to live for eternity folowing those rules?
On the other hand you go to hell. In some forms of hell you spend eternity doing that which it was that got you there. Ok lets punish someone who does bad stuff by letting them do it over and over again. Shouldn't this actually be heaven?

Or you spend eternity being tortured and scarred, etc.
Which do you choose? a fun life and a painful afterlife or a life where you follow exceedingly strict rules only to continue to follow them idefinatley.

This sounds to me like blackmail into doing something for someone you don' t want to do.


Gods, Aliens and The Devil

I believe that probably any figure that was ever worhipped is a real god. Not GOD just gods. The God figure held up by most religions is a warped version of the GOD. Where they have mixed the personal nature of gods with the onipresent aspect of GOD.

Now Aliens are beigns not of this region (planet).
Gods are Alens.
By definition gods aren't human and they don't come from Earth. So they are aliens.

This puts new perspective on the gods. They are not that much defferent from other beings only their scope is larger than ours.

Aliens are to us
as we are to dogs.

Now just think of deities as a race (many different races) of college students on a spring break. They decide to mess with the little creatures on that small planet. (Think Stargate here)
this mainly concerns the western God and the Devil. They are always fighting it seems. I believe that the western God actually had a no interference policy put in place - let them work it out for themselves. Oh and one of the ten commandments kinda gives this credit - thou shalt take no other god before me. So there are other gods? and its okay for us to take one after you?
So anyway the Devil decides to play with God. His masterpiece - The Bible. Every thing in it is the work of the Devil. Jesus was the son of the Devil.
Everything that ever came from religion ended in war, bloodshed, mayhem - all goals of the devil.



Timetravel


I think it is impossible. If it were possible time would go no where. If one being could timetravel then time would keep rweinding itself until that being was happy with it and then until the next and then back to the first, futile

What is time? It is the force that keeps everything from happening all at once.

How do you imagine time? Is it a point? a line? a circle?
I think it is a point.
If it were a circle this would mean that everything has happened before and will happen again into infinity. This also means that we have no control over our lives whatsoever and we are just players in a grand play. And it would also mean time travel would be useless. If it has all happened before then the timtravel incident would keep happeneing too, not changing anything.
If time is a point timetravel would require enough energy to stop then rewind the force of time. I think that this would more than likely cause the universe to end.
If it were a line then there would need to be a beggining and I don't think there was a beggining (eveything is possible including and exception to every rule) so there goes that one.

Thats all for now - its 4:20 AM

I may add more later.

Anything you wish to say is welcome. If something is not explained well I will try to clear it up for you when I'm awake.


All but 1

[Melanie]

Sheesh! I hate to see your posts when you're awake! I guess I haven't had much to do lately. I will be watching this thread with keen anticipation :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Interesting fact. There is a part of the brain that is triggered when you pray, who you're praying to doesn't matter. Atheists use this as an argument that god is simply a biological need, Thiests say that the best way for a god to give his people some desire to pray would be to use the simplest mechanism to hand, perhaps by slotting something into their brain.

[fluffydoc]

Doesn't addicting us to praying to him make faith irrelevant?

[Darzeka]

Yeah but this is part of my theory that God doesn't interfere with us down and that the church was started because someone wanted to control the minds of others, into doing things they think are right (or they never had any dates so made everyone else suffer waiting for marriage).

They realised that people want something to believe in so they just make it all up and seeing as how the church wrote most of the acient histories, they wrote it how they wanted it to be seen (they were the only literate people who kept libraries and numbered many scholars).

As you can see I have a dim veiw of churches.

when I am awake I will generally only write something that has fully formed in my mind so normally when I write I discard many trains of thought that die in the ass. When I'm nearly asleep like I was last night I just keep writing - It's kinda trance like (I also do this in exams and finish exeedingly quickly, leave less than half way through after finishing and generally get good marks.)

One of the things about religion and religious people is the really silly things that they believe.
You must be married to have sex??
Existance as a whole was made purely for us?
My religion is the only set of beliefs that is valid and true?
The church are here to help us?
Heaven will be fun??
Jesus died for my sins?
The bible is filled with actual events and people not metaphors?
Rock is the work of the Devil?
Marilyn Manson is evil?
Everyone needs to be brought to Christ? (aren't we meant to come via our own volition?)

I really don't mind that people want to believe in these things (without beleif in something then we are generally sick people) I just don't like when they try to force these things on me and others who don't to hear it. Beleif should be a private thing that is different in each person.

And how do you define prayer? Asking a higher power for help, guidance or comfort? Wanting something really badly that you would pray for it to happen (someone survive a horrific accident for example) but don't but still want it (subconcious praying?)?

and besides addiction implies that we like the reaction and want more or that the body comes to expect it and need it to function normally.
*chuckles* has any died from not praying? Only because they had prayed many times a day for the majority of their life, suffered some great injustice then refused to pray anymore. The body is "addicted" to prayer and when the brain reaction stops the body rebels and in the "rehabilitation" sustains so much damage that the person dies.
Death from not praying. A little bit of fear of the consequenses always has a good effect on following the rules.


Does this brain activity actually do anything? cause a chemical reaction? secrete a druglike substance (the new designer drug - God)? anyone know? Or is it just an antenna like thing that we activate for telepathy becuase we picture God as being so far away and we project our thoughts to it? (another tangential thread about telepathy here I think)

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Everyone needs to be brought to Christ? (aren't we meant to come via our own volition?)

Actually that part is very much an invention of a Church desperate for members, people are meant to come to Christ of their own volition and ask for forgiveness, which will then be granted.

I really don't mind that people want to believe in these things (without beleif in something then we are generally sick people) I just don't like when they try to force these things on me and others who don't to hear it. Beleif should be a private thing that is different in each person.

Agree completely, you can argue about it, but only with the other persons consent.

And how do you define prayer? Asking a higher power for help, guidance or comfort? Wanting something really badly that you would pray for it to happen (someone survive a horrific accident for example) but don't but still want it (subconcious praying?)?

Asking something that you believe in to make something happen, help, a miracle, anything. Has to be conscious though.

and besides addiction implies that we like the reaction and want more or that the body comes to expect it and need it to function normally.
*chuckles* has any died from not praying? Only because they had prayed many times a day for the majority of their life, suffered some great injustice then refused to pray anymore. The body is "addicted" to prayer and when the brain reaction stops the body rebels and in the "rehabilitation" sustains so much damage that the person dies.

Well this is a difficult one to argue, people do recover faster, and from more serious conditions, when there is prayer for them. Scientific studies have confirmed this several times so far. No one has died through not praying, or stopping prayer.

Does this brain activity actually do anything? cause a chemical reaction? secrete a druglike substance (the new designer drug - God)? anyone know?

A bit like exercise, it releases endorphins.

Or is it just an antenna like thing that we activate for telepathy becuase we picture God as being so far away and we project our thoughts to it? (another tangential thread about telepathy here I think)

Now telepathy is a whole other issue, and not one that I believe in unfortunately.

[Sean O]

Very interesting thread. In fact it is so interesting that I just can't bear not to reply with my take on religion. Although at first it may seem like I'm out of my mind, please don't judge me until you've read everything.

I am a Christian, as I was brought up to be, but to be honest, christianity doesn't make much sense to me. There are a few reasons why, so I'll make separate paragraphs for each.

Christianity seems to be geared entirely towards humans. This seems strange, since if it IS the one true faith, what about all the animals? Theyre here with us on this earth, theyre also the children of god, but they don't seem to be all that important compared to humans. This brings me to another point...

THOU SHALT NOT KILL

Hold on a sec, don't jump to conclusions. I'm not opposed to this commandment, in fact, murders sicken me. This rule just doesn't make much sense to me. If it's true, every single animal who ever lived long enough to hunt is going straight to hell. Same thing for anyone whos ever flushed a spider down their toilet. If the rule had been THOU SHALT NOT KILL NEEDLESSLY or IN COLD BLOOD, then things would start to make alot more sense. But, seems like alot of us are sinners. And of course all sinners to go to...

HELL

Which is my next topic. Why would god create all this life, which he/she loves with all his/her heart, and then send it to a place of infinate pain and suffering? Once again, doesn't make much sense. If you don't follow the rules, you go to hell. If you do, you go to...

HEAVEN

Although I like the idea of heaven, I just don't generally believe that when you die, you go there if you have lived a devout life. Reincarnation (spelling?) makes much more sense to me. Just like the earth reuses corpses for fertilization, maybe GOD reuses the spirits of the dead to keep life going? It's my opinion of course, which reminds me...

I HOPE I HAVENT OFFENDED ANYONE WITH THIS REPLY

Keep in mind that I am not trying to bash religion in general. I believe in a greater being just like alot of other people, I just want to express my thoughts, maybe stir up an interesting conversation. I have nothing against any of the religions whatsoever, and I completely respect the beliefs of their followers. But, I've gotten off topic. The point I wanted to get to is...

I THINK THE NATIVE PEOPLES WERE RIGHT

Consider the native peoples' beliefs; everyone and everything is created equal, the only rule you have to live by is to respect one another (this of course, includes animals and plants). The only real disrespect you will have to commit is to kill another animal for food, clothing, etc. To make it right, you apoligize to the fallen animal, and not be wasteful by using everything you can. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? Life made simple.

I really think that any religion with lots of commandments and requirements was just created by the government to keep its people under control 2000 years ago. You wonder how there are so many religions? Different governments need to do/say different things to keep their people under control. But look at the result: religious differences have caused assault, murder, and even wars. People are so blinded by hatred for another religion that they will do things that their own religion forbids.

Of course, its far too late to change anything without massive retaliation, so I suppose we must live with the world we have created. But then again, in my opinion, we can't really depend on god to help us fix all that has happened, since he/she simply created life, for whatever reason.

Religion has separated us. But of course, it has also brought us together. I'm sure that many of you have good friends who you maybe met at church. Religion also brings us solice, because no matter what your beliefs are, we all need to turn to our god for help every now and then. And regardless of whether something happens or not, its always nice to have someone listen. So I suppose religion is whatever you make it to be, if it makes you happy, or a better person, then don't change a thing. If it separates you from others, does more bad then good, consider what you're missing out on.

To finish this up, I'll tell you guys what I think of life. People who sit on their front porch, gaze up at the sky and wonder what the meaning of life is are wasting their time. We won't ever know this, in my opinion. Rather than wondering why, wonder what, meaning what you want to do with your life. Set a realistic goal, then plan how you're going to accomplish that goal.

I'm mentioning this because religion is probably the biggest influence on this decision. Like I said before, it is designed to keep us under control, which is why so many religious people live rich and full lives. Religion gives us direction, something to base our decisions on. Thats why most (if not all) of the people sitting in prison right now are either athiests, or just don't take religion seriously.

I guess to sum all this up, religion is a mixed blessing, but I'd say it does much more good than bad. That's my opinion.

Sean O

[taesujutsu]

Ok Gang,
First let me say that I am an ordained minister,,but please just read on. and you will find out that I am not like others.

The 5th commandmant which state "Thou Shall not Kill", in the
King James bibles, and those newr translations from it , not what the commandment says.

When translated from the Hebrew Literally it states "You shall not MURDER". So yes i can see how it causes confusion.
It is permitable to Kill if defneding ones life or your won. However, to wontly plan to take a life is wrong.
6 of the Ten commandmants came from the commandsments that God gave to Noahid, and are referred to as "Noahide laws", or laws of morality. It is how someone of the Jewish Religion sees a "righteous" Gentile.

Please do not confuse True Christianty with Religious Christianity.
True Christianty follows the teachings of Jesus, and it does not in any way try to force others to believe as we do, nor does it condemn those who do not believe as we do.
You can find the core of True Christianty in the Beattitudes, and the teachings of Jesus.
Religous Christianty follows what is known as the "Pauline doctrine" which was created by the church and based on the teachings of Paul, who among other things, compared himself to Jesus, and state that all Christians are saints, and that we will jusdge the world. Anyway, I am not going to get started on the Pauline Doctrine..

I bleive in a Creator, and I believe that creator has many names, depending who is speaking aobut said Creator. I also believe that we are connected not only to said creator, but also each other by the universal life force. What some of us call the Chi.

I bleive that Jesus was the Son of God, considering the title was used by Jews for Extremely reigheous Jews...but I do not believe he is God in carnate.

Anyway, just wanted to try nd help make some things that have been misunderstood a little cleareer. Please no that I do not mean to offend anyone here..I am only trying to help. :)

Peace,
Tae

[pgm316]

That’s a well written article Sean O, as always with religion a lot of people will disagree with everything you say, but that just proves a lot of the bad qualities religion consist of.

I don’t believe governments created religion, but I do believe they have used it to control people and used it to justify many atrocities. I’m sure there would have been a lot fewer wars without it. I’m not sure how much fewer, because you only have to look at communist countries to see how they’ll justify conflicts in other ways.

But as you say, religion has separated us and even been the foundation for the many “holy” wars. As any intelligent religious person would tell you its totally ludicrous to try and justify war with religion. The ones that would are either very simple minded or brainwashed into believing what is right or wrong. You could argue a lot of the trouble has come from taking the translations literally, but as Tae said, the original texts can be translated to mean different things. I truly believe any text is only a guide to living life in a more virtuous manor and not as a justification for conflict.

I struggle to believe in religion, I like to question things until I can be sure its true or not, which isn’t really possible with religion. Blind faith is something I struggle with, but it doesn’t seem to be with the other people I attended an alpha course with. It was a sort of Christian course to get you kick started into religion. With many of them it was very simple, someone was either good or evil! I didn’t believe that, its too simplistic. Good people can be brainwashed into doing bad things. Even then they said they would pray for the health of evil people if they we’re ill! What about the lives of the people the evil ones we’re killing? I believe in what’s best for the greater good should be done. Then I disagreed with the discussion on greed, having 32” widescreen tv didn’t have to be gluttony. In that case why have a tv at all, wouldn’t a radio be sufficient. They ignored the fact that circulation of money boosts the economy creating wealth and therefore jobs etc. They preferred to live in their own little self righteous world, we’re the attendance at church was more important than being a good person.

The principles of Buddhism sound better to me, even more believable, with the whole reincarnation thing instead of heaven/hell. And it takes into account animals!

Maybe if Bruce Lee had lived a little longer he’d have applied Jeet Kune Do to religion. We could have had the “religion of no religion”. We’re people choose to do whats right for them, to live life in a good and virtuous way without the need to worship gods.

[waya]

Now here is an issue I have difficulties with. My father is Lakota, my mother's family (mostly) is German Lutheran, the rest are Cherokee. So from that end I have been raised in many different beliefs by many people, none of which completely make sense to me anymore because none was fully taught.

I have tried following the Bible, but each version has something in it that contradicts what another version says (leave it to modern translation), and many points there have been fairly well refuted by science. That makes problems for me because I am a generally logically thinking person, so science is usually what I rely more on for answers. Then again that makes little sense because I know I am not an athiest, I know there is "something" I just haven't come to a full conclusion of what I believe it is.

I think this "religion of no religion" isn't a bad idea, at least for some of us lol.

Rob

[energyboost]

I don't belive in religion for 1 reason evrey religion has the same beliefs only warped to controll that section of people. I do believe in a creator that isn't everything but is rather manifested thru evreything from actions in nature to nature itself. When a flag waves in the wind, it's a manifestation of the creator. When dna rewrites itself to adapt and perpetuate itself, when you get kicked in the head and you get knocked out, when you observe how rediculous pop culture is, and wonder when people will search for something more than becoming a product of money and technology, that is the creator manifesting itself. When peoples conciousness shifts before we destroy ourselves it's a manifestation of the creator, all good and bad creates a crazy yet logical balance.

[Spike]

Quote form pgm316:

Even then they said they would pray for the health of evil people if they we’re ill! What about the lives of the people the evil ones we’re killing?

Andy Murray used to have a great sig. regardin this. A tolkien qoute if memory serves

Quote from Waya:

I have tried following the Bible, but each version has something in it that contradicts what another version says (leave it to modern translation), and many points there have been fairly well refuted by science. That makes problems for me because I am a generally logically thinking person, so science is usually what I rely more on for answers. Then again that makes little sense because I know I am not an athiest, I know there is "something" I just haven't come to a full conclusion of what I believe it is.

If you look at things sensibly science is a smuch a leap of faith as religion. You`ll take it on trust that electricity is controlled by protons and electrons and such like, but you`ve never seen one.
You simply believe what you`ve been told, what`s the difference between having faith in a man with a dog-collar or a man with a docterate? it`s still a question of faith.

[Andy Murray]

I got into soooo much trouble at school on this very subject.
The head of Religious Education was also the head of Chemistry (bad haircut and suits as I recall, dandruff too). He was spouting off about God creating the universe in seven days and all that, when I asked him about the 'Big Bang' theory. He sputtered a bit, then foamed at the mouth, before flogging me for insolence. Never answered the question though.
Hope his dandruff's better now!

[TkdWarrior]

why we need religion/GOD? simple so that we can blame someone for our deeds...:D ;)
doodes what r u arguing about?? :D
-TkdWarrior-

[Spike]

we`re not arguing we are debating spirituality.
If you look at the Christian idea of creation, and ignore the flowery language, its` not that far removed form ideas like the big bang or evolution.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

I have tried following the Bible, but each version has something in it that contradicts what another version says (leave it to modern translation), and many points there have been fairly well refuted by science.


There is a lot of doubt over the old testament, and since its not the Christian holy book its kind of irrelevant, the Christian book is the new testament. As for points being refuted by science, no more points have been refuted than backed up.

[TkdWarrior]

spike hey buds but wat i was doin just foolin around...
religion is very sensitive topic so i don't put my nose in there...
no offence intended....
anyways if u r debating spirituality then don't combine it with religion becuase religion is just a path... not a destination...
basically religion is like a kata(a set of pre-defined rules??may be)
and it's being watered down by every so holy man(preist n all) they hav used it changed it for their own purpose...?
if u wanna to be religious, stop following the religion first(it's not like condeming or anything but hav a faith/believe in it) and start questioning the basic belief in u... relgion basically tries to tell u wat is wrong or wat is rite... there's no difference b/w rite or wrong...whenever u r wrong u r rite too...n vice versa...
the quest should be knowing urself, examinng urself...rather than set of rules... even written by god...
-TkdWarrior-

[LilBunnyRabbit]

And yet kata still work, and still benefit you. You can learn from a kata, if you're smart, and know what you're looking for.

[TkdWarrior]

ah ckdstudent u hav a bad habbit nit picking :D
yup u r rite but wat if i say it depends on the bearer?...
set of rules can be misintepreted easily?? can't they...

u know i met a woman who was totally anti-islam u know why? because she thinks in Islam men beats the heck out of woman sometimes even causes death... and she says it's in koran? i asked her resources i found out that happens mostly in Afghanistan/middle east... where Taliban used to hav a regime...
there taliban's guys hav misinterpreted the koran so much it wasn't left as a koran....IT's the power of misinterpretion...
-TkdWarrior-

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Of course it depends on the bearer, that's the whole point. Have to say though that it'd take quite an effort to misinterpret most of the ten commandments.

Thou shalt not kill - not much room for interpretation

[Andrew Green]

Originally posted by ckdstudent

Thou shalt not kill - not much room for interpretation

Actually that leaves A LOT of room for interpretation...

[Sean O]

You sure? as taesujutsu said, translated from ancient hebru, it acually means thou shalt not MURDER, which proved a part of my original relpy wrong.

[TkdWarrior]

yup ckd, andrew is quite rite...
sean o u urself proved it... even u hav got wrong translated...rite..
if in hebru it means thou shalt not murder it means u got the translation wrong...
normally it's not easy to transalte anything entirely in english
hebru to eng or chinese to eng or hindi/sanskrit to english... won't be the same wat it was in the text...

-TkdWarrior-

[Sean O]

Meh. I thought about that for a while, and I think that it doesn't really matter whether its KILL or MURDER.

pgm: With many of them it was very simple, someone was either good or evil! I didn’t believe that, its too simplistic.

I agree, but I look at it in a slightly different way. Everyone can define the screen that they are looking at right now as a monitor, because noone on earth who knew what they were talking about would disagree. There is only one definition. The same thing cant be said about good and evil. Hitler, for example, probably didn't think that what he was doing was evil, because he saw it differently. My point, of course, is that you can't really define good or evil, so therefore pretty much every single religion can be questioned for that matter.

tkd: religion is just a path... not a destination...

This is what I'm getting at. In my opinion, the main purpose of any religion is to shape the way a person lives his/her life. Religion is what caused bin laden to bomb the WTC. Whether all of us see what he did as good or evil, it's just his decision, a turning point in his path of life, if you will, which was influenced by religion.

It's just one of the many reasons that this world is becoming more and more corrupt. The worst part about it is, that if people just stopped and looked at what was happening, I'm sure that almost all of em would change their ways. The thing is that people are so blinded by their beliefs that they are willing to go to great lengths to prove them to others. It's because of that that things have gotten worse.

I'm not a pecimist (spelling?), but I really do think that at this point, attempting to make any huge changes would be catastrophic. Sure, if people chipped away at the problem, things might get better, but in the long run, I think that as the problem was chipped away at, it would be added to, to a much greater extent. Some world we live in, eh?

I suppose the point i wanted to make was for people to seriously think about their religion, and what has come of it?

Sean O

[Spike]

Quote:
You sure? as taesujutsu said, translated from ancient hebru, it acually means thou shalt not MURDER, which proved a part of my original relpy wrong.

actually to be specific, the literal translation is "thou shall not kill without just cause"

which means murder or execution would be acceptable to the right person

Quote:
I suppose the point i wanted to make was for people to seriously think about their religion, and what has come of it?

without religion we wouldn`t be practising MA for one, without religion there would be none

[taesujutsu]

First it is not the "OLD" Testament..it is the Tanakh Second..I do read Hebrew..and Greek. :)

Third..the teachigns of Jesus are from that same Tanakh, and what is know as the tulmed...the wrtings of the sages. Or explanations and discussions of the Hebrew Scripture.

Now it has been said that religions is something we should stay away form..and who ever said it is right...unless you really know what you are talking aobut so you will not offend another...don't talk. Religion is best left in the theology, and Debate clubs...not in martial arts clubs.

The martail arts existed before Buddhism was introduced into it...it will Probably longer after all of us are gone.

The "you will not Murder" have not changed in writing, or meaning in almost 6,000 yrs. To defend yourself or those who can not defend themselves is allowed...that is self preservation...to wontly plan to MURDER somone is not.

In the discussing of religions,,it is am ust to keep it general, so that it does not show the bais of one over the other..that is how you learn. After all, you can not condemn what you do not understand as the old saying goes. For instance, Without Judaism, there would be no Christianity.

At any rrate, I am not getting into it here....if you want to learn more..there are many clubs where you can..here we should just keep it to Martial arts.

Peace and God's blessings,
Rev. Dr. Williams AKA tae

[TkdWarrior]

do i hav to agree again?? ah i hate agreeing with ppl :D
nice post again taejutsu..
-TkdWarrior-

[big e]

i n t e r e s t i n g

[YODA]

Originally posted by big e
i n t e r e s t i n g

Yeah..... but so is soup :D

[Darzeka]

Since I started this thread I have changed or rather refined my views a bit.

I have finally gotten my head around the fact that existence goes on forever. There will be no point where there is nothing, Ever.

So this really makes us a point of energy in existence.
Which means that no matter what we do or how we live we ultimately will not move, grow or change because any of these things unless viewed in our own perspective are nothing.

My only problem with the existence of religion now is the need for rules/laws/commandments.
If existence goes on forever and it is largely the definition of whatis good or bad/evil then we have no way of measuring our actions as either good or bad.

What if everyone here on Earth is arguing over which end to eat an egg from? The lilliputians thought it was a real big deal but to us seemed trivial and silly.

Essentially now I am only doing that which I feel I should do. You know you get that little feeling inside when you just say that isn't right.
This is what I think religion was based on, a coupla people shared ideas on this, found they had similar views and enforced everyone else to follow this too (very simplyfied but the basic is there), because it just made sense to a few people.

[Sean O]

Well, a few things have happened to me since I last posted on this thread, and I now have more to say.

To me, religion is really not much more than what people believe will happen to them after they die. Correct me if I'm wrong, but seems to me like alot of whats in the bible is geared towards heaven and hell, which is of course, the afterlife.

Originally posted by tkdwarrior
religion is a path... not a destination...

Sorry, I need to quote you again tkd. But this time I have to partially disagree. We don't really know whether religion is a path or a destination. I personally think its both. You live your life by the rules that God enforces, so that when you die, you can live in his kingdom. Of course, this only applies to people who believe that.

Originally posted by darzeka
Essentially now I am only doing that which I feel I should do. You know you get that little feeling inside when you just say that isn't right.
This is what I think religion was based on, a coupla people shared ideas on this, found they had similar views and enforced everyone else to follow this too (very simplyfied but the basic is there), because it just made sense to a few people.

Couldn't have put it better myself. This would explain why there are so many different religions in this world, and why they are even further divided among each other (Protestants and Catholics, for example). Although they have different rules, they all come down to what happens when you die. So now I suppose what I'm saying is that religions are theories on just that. It's not really a question of right and wrong. Because everyone sees right and wrong differently, noone can say what is. I guess thats all I have to say for now.

Sean O

[TkdWarrior]

Sorry, I need to quote you again tkd. But this time I have to partially disagree.
no probs mate...i won't mind discussing things... :)
I need to quote you again tkd. But this time I have to partially disagree. We don't really know whether religion is a path or a destination. I personally think its both.
hav to agree here sean no one knows that it's path or destination... but i m saying from my little experiences
i'll put it in MA way...when u r new to MA u learn blocking, u do lots of hard karate style blocking then later u learn deflecting types of blocking which again u do lot later u come to know that it's better not to be there rather than deflecting or blocking...
so does that mean deflecting or blocking is wrong?? NO... because when u r new, ur understanding is not that good(let's say good u cannot judge higher level material) n to u blocking/deflecting seems to be ultimate...when ur standard rises u know that it was not wrong but it was rite due to ur understand at that time...
same goes with relgion when u r new u tends to believe wat ppl says but later with lots of effort n conclusion u tend to format ur own version of religion, later after some more work u tend to realise that what u knew earlier wasn't exaclty rite at ur level now. so again u search for things... if it becomes destination the evolution will stop...
just my 2 cents...
-TkdWarrior-

[wayofthedragon]

Hi guys, sorry I'm late to the discussion.
Religion....hmmmm.....very touchy subject.....
The reason why, is because here everyone beleives something totally different, and there beliefs are what they believe. As for me, I have my beliefs as well, yet I am still an open minded individual. Now I haven't read what everyone else has discussed already because I arrived here so late, sorry:(, but here is what I have to say on the topic. Fist of all, one thing we must all understand is that although we all have various beliefs, there is only one truth. Yet what is that truth? That is what we as humans are struggling with. For we all have several beliefs, yet there is only one truth. We all came from one place, we are all in the human race. As for me, I do believe in God, and I believe in the bible, and I have my personal beliefs in things, but I don't have time to go into great detail of that. Yet we all did come from somewhere, and the same place, be it that we were created, or we evolved, or we have roots from another planet, or all this just is....being there is no meaning to lifeor whatever beleifs some may have. There is only one truth. The thing that we should be doing is trying to find out that truth. And stay true to whatever that truth is no matter what...because in the end, the truth is what will stand.

(I may go into more details later;) )

[TkdWarrior]

wat is truth wotd?
-TkdWarrior-

[wayofthedragon]

He He....what do you believe?
See the thing is, we all have different beliefs.
I'm a Christian
I believe in God
I believe that the whole entire bible is true
I believe that in the begining God created everything
I believe this is the truth, but others may not, others believe soemthing else is the truth. Everyone has there own perspective of what is the truth. Yet, there can only be one truth, that is all I was trying to say.

[TkdWarrior]

No WOTD u didn't get me...it's not about being christian or being hindu, muslim for that matter...truth is truth wherever it is...
but wat is truth?
truth is not about believing in god or bible or anything else for that matter(this is truth to u)...beliefs cannot be held as truth cause watever truth would be it would be universal truth...
-TkdWarrior-

[Sean O]

Thats true tkd. Truth is factual, it's something that noone can argue with because everyone knows its right, And if people do, it's because they were lied to or something. But regarding "the one truth"...

Originally posted by wayofthedragon
Fist of all, one thing we must all understand is that although we all have various beliefs, there is only one truth. Yet what is that truth? That is what we as humans are struggling with.

We're struggling with it because it cannot possibly be answered :). Thats another thing religion does, it makes you think of those kind of questions alot, which I personally think is pretty pointless.

Man, looking back on all my previous posts in this thread, I've pretty much said bad things about religion. Heres a thought; why don't we rather than try and talk about the one truth and such, discuss the good things that religion has given our lives. Should be interesting...

Sean O

[wayofthedragon]

I got'cha now tkd;) Also, good post sean o
Religion does make you think about all of these questions a lot
and being that there's so many religions, we all think about these things differently, with different views and outlooks and thoughts.
This is where all the confusion comes in at.....however looking at the truth......
one of the truth is that there is a God, and he is creator of all things. however with different religions we all have different ideas on who this God is. Some even say there are several gods while some say theres only one, and some say there is one but in 3 persons, yet is still one. and some get so fed up till they say hey...there is no God
The truth there is that there is a God, but with so many religions, there comes the confusion. Yet only one of these ideas can be true.
Another truth is that there is life a life after this life....in which we will be in a better place with God, where there will be no more suffering...no more dieing, etc...heaven if you please...
However some people believe we go to heaven as soon as we die if we are good, some believe we don't go until God comes to take us back, and that when he comes every eye will see him, some believe we will be raptued and taken in secret, some believe we are just reincarnated, some believe that when we die, we just walk around on eart as gohst, some believe there is nothing else after this world has ended. Some people believe this world will never end. Yet only one of these can be true
Then there are moral laws which most of us agree on , that it is wrong to kill, steal, etc.....This is a truth, every one can agree that it is wrong to do those things, and that it's right to always do whats right, and treat everyone as a brother, as they would want to be treated, etc...
But with so many other beliefs up in there, it confuses people, they need to know the ultimate one truth, but there is so many belifs tainted with error. This is why people are struggling, and why it can't be answered....because depending on what a person believes, it will always be answered defferenly from anothers belief, this is why "religion" is such a touchy subject. but there is only one true belief..which is it? Or are we all wrong, and its even simpeler than we could ever imagine?

[morphus]

Religion............"Imagine no religion, its easy if you try".


I believe in god - but i don't believe in religion.

Religion causes wars, though it's not the only cause!:)

[Sean O]

"You have to gaze in awe at the biggest load of bull**** of all... religion. Religion has acually convinced people... that theres an invisible man, living in the sky! And this man can see every single thing you do, every minute of the day... and he has a list of 10 specific things he does not want you to do... And if you do any of these things, he is going to send you to a place filled with FIRE, and PAIN and MISERY, where you will suffer for all eternity! But, he loves you...."

- George Carlin, Comedian

Just wanted to see your reactions to this. So go ahead and reply.

[TkdWarrior]

morpheus ur comment reminded me of song may be i hav written it somewhere in this forum anyways...
no offence to anyone...song from corporate avengers
"bible is bs, koran is a lie, bhagvad gita didn't fall from the sky these r the book written by man they caused war now follow if u can"
strong words but it's a truth...
wotd wat u said is ur own belief it cannot be taken as truth(i gave u definition) find out the ultimate truth in ur live, there's only one truth... the one truth is .......................................

-TkdWarrior-

[wayofthedragon]

Religion does cause wars....Have you not heard....more people have died in the name of religion than of anything else.....

[TkdWarrior]

hey wotd u forgot to fill in the blank ;) :D :p
the truth is ........
-TkdWarrior-

[wayofthedragon]

The truth is........
I am the truth.
That's right guys, I hold all the answers to life....
Really.
I won't hold back anymore
Come with me if you want to live.
If you really want to know the truth
I'll give you two pills
a red one and a blue one.
I just hope you chose the right one:D

[TkdWarrior]

hahahaha... wotd
u r one heck of dude... ;)
-TkdWarrior-

[alnesstsd]

And how do you define prayer? Asking a higher power for help, guidance or comfort? Wanting something really badly that you would pray for it to happen (someone survive a horrific accident for example) but don't but still want it (subconcious praying?)?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Would this not be the same as meditation/visualisation??

[pgm316]

Well aparantly prayer is a conversation with God. It isn't supposed to be about asking for things.

[khafra]

Pray, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner, confessedly unworthy.
-- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary (1911)

[Andy Murray]

I personally found, that I was picking holes in the fairy stories of the bible from an early age.

I'm not an aethiest, but I'm certainly agnostic.

My devoutly religious Grandmother asked me one day, aged all of 7 years old;

"You don't believe in God do you Andrew?"

"No" I replied meekly.

"So what do you believe in?" she asked.

"I believe in myself, and living to what I believe to be moral" I replied ( I was precocious as a child)

The problem religion has as I view it, is not what we ourselves believe, but how we regard others beliefs.

[Darzeka]

I've had some thoughts recently pertaining to this.

At the core of all religion is a basic set of rules/guidelines that will make life on earth more pleasant for most of the people.

Now to me this sounds like a parent or ruler or governing body trying to get all the people to play nice. Now in order to get them to follow these guidelines there needs to the rewards and punishments.

The one fact that makes me disbelieve in heaven and hell is that time is eternal and so is the energy that constitues me. My energy may very well go something like heaven or hell but will eventually go somewhere else and eventually recreate me.
This is why I have no fear of being wrong in this regard.

Now I like the core idea behind religion. It's just the people who enforce it, believe in stupid things, can't think beyond our planet and existence because it would reduce thier own importance and people who believe in good and evil as manifested by beings that make me vocal about these things.

My belief is that we should all strive to be happy. That is the only thing we can do.
But we must also allow others to be happy.
Now if someone is happiest whilst making someone else unhappy then who am I to say who should be happy.
But then there are also people who are happiest keeping the people who are happy while making others unhappy from doing that.
This will go on forever stating what makes everyone happy.

Now this also involves my skewed view on good and evil.
Good and evil are abstract thoughts. There is no absolute manifestation of either anywhere.
Good and Evil are purely the ends of a scoring spectrum of events you witness or experince going from things that you don't think a nice and things that are nice.
What I think of as good and evil are differnet from someone elses. I am neither good nor evil though I will look at my actions and judge them closer to one than the other. I have the capability of doing anything and generally what I think of as good will coincide with what makes me happy.

I see someone do something that I think of as evil. They have the capacity to do anything too. They are not evil, only thier actions are. It makes me happy to stop the evil actions.
To do this I enlist someone elses help. Then we see more evil and so set about stoppng that too, growing larger.

Soon this group of evil fighting people are very large but all have slightly different views on good and evil and so someone needs to set a standard that will sufice for everyone's code of good and evil. We now have a set of rules/guidelines. Now we go about stopping evil everywhere.

But people keep doing the evils things and we need a bigger punishment for them that will stop them doing evil things. Enter big angry deity.
This code of good and evil is passed from generation to generation and is changed over time but always with the punishment and rewards there like a cattle prod and a carrot.

The creation of a religion.

[Andy Murray]

Mankind has this big question always in the back of the mind.
Why am I here, what is my purpose?

There is a sense of fulfillment in going to a place of worship and going through the rituals inherent for many people. It gives them a sense of purpose, and answers the questions with 'maybe, but you shouldn't ask this you know'.

I don't feel this necessarily makes anyone a better person, as no sooner are they out of Church on a Sunday, but they're cutting people up on the roads, feeling 'holier than thou'.

[TkdWarrior]

<The problem religion has as I view it, is not what we ourselves believe, but how we regard others beliefs.>
hey nice point andy...

i m normally an Anti Religion kind. i believe in all of them n i shun all of them...
as i already said about religion
it should be a path not a destination...
then u hav the choice to choose the path.
religion should give u the freedom , freedom of thought, freedom of self explanation, freedom of being even then religion should go beyond that... so when u put some rules/karma/dharma u r restricting the very Nature itself.
to me Religion is not some sort of code of conduct. if a religion teach me that my god is better than ur's then i don't think i'll follow it... ppl do lots of things even knowing why they r doing it?
they don't hav any idea...
for ex in Hinduism the Mantra's r recited by millions of hindu's all over the world...why ? they don't know... because their parents were doing it n their parents were doing it so they do it...
Mantra recitation needs Proper Method without that it's only some words spoken. with method it's more than any powerful qigong/meditation. it's stablises ur body/mind/spirit n unify it...
but hell even Pandits(preists) do it everyday...
u can go into deep trance state with simple word like "OM" but i see no one having that sort of experience.
it happens with every religion.

i don't think to express sprituatlity one needs a Religion...
spirituality goes beyond any boundaries.
but still ppl need religion...why?
just to cover their shallow image of self... they r afraid to come out...they r used to bound...may be insecurity too...
ppl looks for Quick Fix on every problem they face... they don't dig out themselves...they just need a patch or stitch here or a stitch there to just make it work... they don't hav time(or they dont like to spend) n then later if something goes wrong they need someone to blame at... if not god then relgion's good choice...

-TkdWarrior-

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
I personally found, that I was picking holes in the fairy stories of the bible from an early age.

I'm not an aethiest, but I'm certainly agnostic.

My devoutly religious Grandmother asked me one day, aged all of 7 years old;

"You don't believe in God do you Andrew?"

"No" I replied meekly.

"So what do you believe in?" she asked.

"I believe in myself, and living to what I believe to be moral" I replied ( I was precocious as a child)

The problem religion has as I view it, is not what we ourselves believe, but how we regard others beliefs.

Good post! :)

I consider myself an aethiest too. I might not have enough faith to be a good Christian, but I don't have enough faith to believe theres abosolutely nothing!

I often wonder what the scientific answer would be. If a load of scientists sifted through all the relgious history, what would they decide is true? Or at least the most likely answer.

Science can explain a lot of things, ie how the Earth was created after the big bang etc. But they have no idea how that incredably large ball of matter was just lieing around in space! ;)

[Cain]

I seriously believe god does not exist, and I come from an extremely religous family, all rituals n prayers, but I am the only one who does not believe all these things are necessarry, I feel every man is for himself, I do not not depend on any god to help me and niether do I think I will be helped.

For eg by saying a prayer I am not going to pass an x'am unless I study [or cheat ;) ]

To make things happen, we have to make them happen, not wait for them to happen

|Cain|

[Spike]

"For eg by saying a prayer I am not going to pass an x'am unless I study"

ah, but that`s because God answers all prayers, even if the answer is no

"I consider myself an aethiest too. I might not have enough faith to be a good Christian, but I don't have enough faith to believe theres abosolutely nothing!"

That means you`re ont an atheist, just because you don`t accept the one called Jesus as being the Christ doesn`t mean you`re an atheist

[pgm316]

Doh! I meant I'm agnostic, I said aethiest in my previous post and I've left it too long to change it!

Sorry Spike!

[Terry Matthes]

Here is my take on all religions. . . . . It doesn't matter what you belive in, as long as you have that belief. I think we have a more spirit than we give ourselves credit for. One of the ways of releasing that spirit is through faith. You can have faith in God, Allah ect. I just think that faith makes us stronger people, and without it you can become stuck when there is no one else to turn to. In summary:
Faith = Good
Fighting over faith to me is like a martial artist trying to prove which art is best. It all depends on the individual and we are all working towards a similar goal, so what's the point? ^_^

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Terry Matthes
Here is my take on all religions. . . . . It doesn't matter what you belive in, as long as you have that belief.

Surely there more be more to it than personal preference!? Or I could decide to be Buddhist because its more fashionable. Or Jewish and decide Jesus is no longer the son of God. Or some crazy cult that lets you, well you know what I mean :D

So I couldn't say it doesn't matter, on the other hand I wouldn’t say whats right or wrong, thats the personal preference ;)

[Terry Matthes]

I think you missed my point.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Terry Matthes
I think you missed my point.

Maybe you missed mine ;)

Originally posted by Terry Matthes
It doesn't matter what you belive in, as long as you have that belief

How can you say that :confused: That really makes a mockery of what religion is and thats against what religion tells us as well.

On the other hand, I'm more of an agnostic, so I don't have great faith in anything. I'd like to think living life in a good way even if your not a believer is good enough for any God.

:Angel:

[c_storm51]

Personally, I have been exposed to religion through family and school and made my own choices - I think it's basically a story that was created to make people years and years ago more confident in themselves - i.e. why they were there and where they were from. You'll notice that in most religions, Man always gets the better deal and no matter what happens, you can 'get away with it'. I can't put it any better than Andy, but ultimately a lot of arguments, even wars are centered around a diffence in religious belief and that bothers me. As far as I'm concerned, anyone is entitled to believe what they want, and I totally respect that. However, what really gets my back up is when someone trys to force their views/beliefs/opinions on me by telling me I'm totally wrong....I'll happily 'discuss', though ;) Good thread...!

[pgm316]

Originally posted by c_storm51
I think it's basically a story that was created to make people years and years ago more confident in

But many different stories made up by different cultures, and often a lot of historical events to back up many of the claims. Theres a lot of evidence, that erm doesn’t prove all that much. Or does it, I’m really not sure. For people with good faith its absolute proof. Maybe it only proves people want to believe. :confused:

[c_storm51]

Well put....it's a well know fact that if you want to believe something, or you want to see something...you will. The mind is a very powerful thing...!!!

[Spike]

"On the other hand, I'm more of an agnostic, so I don't have great faith in anything. I'd like to think living life in a good way even if your not a believer is good enough for any God."

"good" is a very subjective term and a lot of different god`s would disagree on it

[pgm316]

Thats true Spike. Whats good to one person can be very evil to another. I think whats most important is your intentions are good.

[Sean O]

Pgm, I think terry mathes' point wasn't just that whichever religion looks "coolest" is the one you should go with, I think he meant that like a martial artist may take to kicking or grappling more than other things, a certain religion may better fit into someones lifestyle.

But if thats not the case for modern times, then it has to do with how you were brought up, and how a certain religion fit into your ancestor's lifestyles.

[Jack]

My views regarding religion are somewhat unusual but I will explain. I will compare my views to Christianity here...

Christianity believes in God. God to them is an external entity, which, when opened to, will give unconditional love, support, and forgiveness.

I believe "God" to not be an external entity, but as an internal part of us all. "God" is in us all, I call it the "higher self" and it is inside eahc and every one of us. If you truly open up to the part of you deep down inside, you will find the same unconditional love, wisdom, guidance, and support that Christians may find from God, or Muslims from Allah.

By believing in a god and putting faith in a god - you are asking a higher power for help - To me, this higher power is something within me already that just needs coaxing out - I am my own god - my own creator - I choose my life, and choose to live it in a positive way making good impressions on those I meet along the path.

I think all religions are just different boats all heading down the same river, and they're all going to find the same shores.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Sean O
Pgm, I think terry mathes' point wasn't just that whichever religion looks "coolest" is the one you should go with, I think he meant that like a martial artist may take to kicking or grappling more than other things, a certain religion may better fit into someones lifestyle.

But if thats not the case for modern times, then it has to do with how you were brought up, and how a certain religion fit into your ancestor's lifestyles.

So if you like a ly in Sunday monring Christianity doesn't fit with your lifestyle and you decide to be Hindu :confused:

I wasn't trying to pick on Terry Mathes, my comment was generally about the way people pick religions. Its just like shopping for many people, picking the one that fits in with them or looks the most interesting. Why bother picking one at all?

Maybe it doesn't matter what you pick, in that case we might as well just follow Jacks comments, just living in a good way could be enough.

[Mr Heel Hook]

.The term Good and bad are not as subjective as people think. Many people will argue that Good and evil are perceptions of ones own mind and ideals. That is true to a degree, but still there is something inside you that knows the difference, and that...gut feeling...is universal. From the time you are born you have that feeling inside you. What is wrong, and what is right. Every decisions no matter how rash or how thought out starts with that primal feeling inside of you. The basis of all you choose starts from that tugging inside of you. However, how often you choose to listen comes from your own will. Two different things? Of course. You may know that that bowl of ice cream will taste damn good, but it's not a part of your diet.
You want it anyway.
Your will faltered even though that gift feeling said it was a bad idea.
You see a wallet on the floor and open it up. Oh my, a few crisp hundred dollar bills are in it. How nice. But then that feeling starts tugging at you and you have a need if you will, to try and find the owner. But then again it breaks down to your will once more. Some people would just see it as "finders keepers" but even still there would be that moment of reluctance to do so.
I believe God gave us that one gift and lets us choose what to do with it. But, I believe he gave it to us as a whole. All of man kind. Some people just forget to hold onto it as long as others do. That can be factored in as religion, culture, upbringing, and society. But it's still there, even with the battered ages of selfishness and greed. To me, God is not something that commands my destiny or every aspect of life. I believe God left this world to us, and gave us something...a gift even greater then his own angels: The gift of free will. As trite as it might sound, I believe life is just a test.
What will you do with it?
If you have a good life, will you forget those around you who don't?
If you have a terrible life, will you turn to drugs, murder, and or worse?
What is laid before you no matter how terrible can be shaped by you.
Does this mean I am saying seek your salvation in God? I don't know, I myself hardly ever attend church or anything like that. I don't think that is necessarily Gods message. I think that inner feeling is a guide, the one that he gave us all to use. It's a guide to help us decide what to do no matter how hard it gets. Like I said so many times, it's that gut feeling you feel for on for almost everything.
Should I do this or not?
It's not as cryptic as it sounds. It just is what it is.

[Darzeka]

I think we have similar ideas Mr. Heel Hook but the thing that most people don't realise that what they "feel" is right isn't necesarily what other people "feel" is right and they need to accept that due to the belief that we should have free will, allow them to decide what is right.

[Sean O]

I'm not trying to take a shot at you either. I was just trying to clarify things a little. It seemed like you didn't quite get what he was saying.

Here is my take on all religions. . . . . It doesn't matter what you belive in, as long as you have that belief.

That doesn't mean that the right religion is the one everyone is doing, it was just a statement about people judging religions other than their own. It doesn't matter which religion you follow, as long as you follow devoutly.

Pgm, I think terry mathes' point wasn't just that whichever religion looks "coolest" is the one you should go with, I think he meant that like a martial artist may take to kicking or grappling more than other things, a certain religion may better fit into someones lifestyle.

Maybe lifestyle was the wrong word to use, but I wouldn't go as far as "So if you like a ly in Sunday monring Christianity doesn't fit with your lifestyle and you decide to be Hindu." What I meant is that if you look at the religions of different countries and regions, then you can see their faith has affected their culture, and therefore, their lifestyle. Of course, theres more to it. If you aren't a devout christian, then you probably don't feel the need to go to church every Sunday, but if you are devout, then you would want to go.

I think that aside from true athiests, we all believe in a creator, and all of us, before we declare a faith, have our own ideas of how we came to be, how we should live our lives, etc. But it's subconcious, so we don't know it yet. So then we look at all the religions and see which one makes the most sense to us. Maybe the stories in the bible and the ten commandments makes more sense to one person. Maybe the neutral, tranquil ways of budhism makes more sense to another. Whatever. So it IS kind of personal preference, just not the way you were thinking of it (unless you were, but didn't say anything).

[Ti-Kwon-Leap]

I have a hard time with ANY set of beliefs that teach a person to live disharmoniously with their surroundings.

I also think that to perpetuate ignorance by teaching that belief is the same as truth is also a huge disservice.

On a brighter note, having a pre-packaged set of beliefs answers those nagging questions to which no human (as of yet) has any definative answers.

The choice to live an exemplary life should come from genuine strength and compassion and not fear of eternal torture.

I believe in the possibility of God, not the various "proofs".

God, if your listening to this, please protect me from your followers!
:Angel:

Let me just say in conclusion that religion can be used for good or bad and it HAS.;)



If you understand, things are just as they are; if you do not understand, things are just as they are.
--Zen proverb

[pgm316]

I'm still having a hard time with religion. I'm somewhere between athiest & agnostic, I think...............

Maybe its a good idea to edge are bets, and be a bit religious just in case it is all true, to avoid the fires of hell :D

Nothing has jumped at me though, I was dragged to a few church groups that tried to convert me to a Jesus freak. Nice people with some semi convincing arguments. Same with the buddhist centre I visited.

Two very different religions, both good groups of people, but then so are the martial arts groups! God knows what I should do........ :p

[zen_tiger_claw]

... this mind, though endless and withought beginning, has never varied. it has never lived or died, appeared or dissapeared, increased or decreased. it's not pure or impure, good or evil, past or future. it's not true or false. it's not male or female. it doesen't appear as a monk or a layman, an elder or a novice, a sage or a fool, a buddha or a mortal. it strives for no realization and suffers no karma.
it has no streingth or form. it's like space. you can't possess it and you can't lose it. its movements can't be blocked by mountains, rivers or rock walls... no karma can restrain this real body. but this mind is subtle and hard to see. it's not the same as the sensual mind. everyone wants to see this mind, and those who move their hands and feet by its light are as many as the grains of sand along the Ganges, but when you ask them, they can't explain it. it's theirs to use. why don't they see it?

...only the wise know this mind, this mind called dharma-nature, this mind called liberation. neither life nor death can restrain this mind. nothing can. it's also called the unstoppable tathagata, the incomprehensable, the sacred self, the immortal, the great sage. its names vary but not its essence.

...understand?...

[TkdWarrior]

it's all perception dude :)
-TkdWarrior-

[Ti-Kwon-Leap]

Quote: "...understand?..."

Answer: "Yes"

[zen_tiger_claw]

perception?

[TkdWarrior]

perception?

Yes. Religion is just a name of ur perception...

can mind of Dharma nature/thagata percieves?
-TkdWarrior-

[zen_tiger_claw]

do you want me to simplify it?

most of the worlds religions serve only to streingthen attachments to false concepts such as self and other, life and death, heaven and earth and so on. those who become entangled in these false ideas are prevented from percieving the integral oneness.

and greed for enlightenment and immortality is no different than greed for material wealth. it is self-centered and dualistic, and thus an obstacle to true attainment. therefore these states are never achieved by those who covet them; rather, they are the reward of the virtuous.

i'm only trying to help the people that want it. i don't care about being better than you at phillosophy, TKD warrior, so please dont stress.

[TkdWarrior]

well i dont' care too...no need to prove or being better...

but amazingly u do think like me that's why i was wondering?
even then my last quetion about mind of drama nature is not completely ansered n it was sinscere question...
if u don't like it, don't answer...
-TkdWarrior-

[zen_tiger_claw]

well your question doesent really make sence...
"can mind of Dharma nature/thagata percieves?"
please rephrase...

[TkdWarrior]

ZenTigerClaw: <<...only the wise know this mind, this mind called dharma-nature, this mind called liberation. neither life nor death can restrain this mind. nothing can. it's also called the unstoppable tathagata, the incomprehensable, the sacred self, the immortal, the great sage>>

TkdWarrior :<<can a mind of dharma_nature/Thagata percieves too?"

ok in ur first paragraph u r talking about mind n it's nature, and about perception of mind thru images/illusion(that wat i understood).
so my question is simple about the mind of thagata or Dharma nature? does it also percieves the imagination like others or it hav different set of perception(something like paradigm shift?)
-TkdWarrior-

[Ti-Kwon-Leap]

If I may...
What zen_tiger_claw was describing is a clarity of perception, or seeing things as they really are, uncolored by pre-defined rules or views or beliefs. It is an uncluttered state which allows true freedom...

[TkdWarrior]

thnx TiKwon... I do Understand wat's ZenTigerClaw is saying.
when i m saying about perception is almost as same as him but i don't think about thagata/Dharma Nature or mind in that state. thats why the question... i think ZenTiger understand wat i m asking?
-TkdWarrior-

[zen_tiger_claw]

r u talking about the dharma nature in itself?
it's just a phrase. dont fuss over it.
it represents your true self. (have you gone to my 'ego' forum?)

[TkdWarrior]

yup it was intresting post from u... and i m getting wat u r saying in here too...
-TkdWarrior-

[pgm316]

Originally posted by zen_tiger_claw
do you want me to simplify it?

most of the worlds religions serve only to streingthen attachments to false concepts such as self and other, life and death, heaven and earth and so on. those who become entangled in these false ideas are prevented from percieving the integral oneness.

and greed for enlightenment and immortality is no different than greed for material wealth. it is self-centered and dualistic, and thus an obstacle to true attainment. therefore these states are never achieved by those who covet them; rather, they are the reward of the virtuous.

i'm only trying to help the people that want it. i don't care about being better than you at phillosophy, TKD warrior, so please dont stress.

Most of the worlds religions?

Good post, but it was that statement that got me curious, are you religious at all?

And which religions don't; streingthen attachments to false concepts ?

[zen_tiger_claw]

i'm not religious. i follow myself and am true to myself, {saying 'self' as true self}. i am spiritual, but not religious.

'some religions' meaning religious religions. that's most of them.
the real religions are the ones with no religion.
hard to explain really.
the spiritual person has no religions as such and has no name or explanation for whom they worship, other than the 'creator' or the 'father'. it is there. i believe it, because it's deffinite. but 'it' is you. you know? it's indeed hard to find yourself under the ego, but it is there, it's not some 'other' signifficant being (like jesus or buddha). and worshipping them would be perceptuous.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by zen_tiger_claw
i'm not religious. i follow myself and am true to myself, {saying 'self' as true self}. i am spiritual, but not religious.

'some religions' meaning religious religions. that's most of them.
the real religions are the ones with no religion.
hard to explain really.
the spiritual person has no religions as such and has no name or explanation for whom they worship, other than the 'creator' or the 'father'. it is there. i believe it, because it's deffinite. but 'it' is you. you know? it's indeed hard to find yourself under the ego, but it is there, it's not some 'other' signifficant being (like jesus or buddha). and worshipping them would be perceptuous.

Many people seem to follow this path of self-discovery. Abandoning any organised religion to follow their own spiritual journey.

Maybe its time we created a cult, obviously it can’t be a recognised religion until it achieves tax exempt status! But, why not have a religion that allows people to follow their own paths.

We could take Bruce Lee as our prophet, wait, before you confirm I’m crazy. It would be like JKD, a path of self discovery instead of a set syllabus ie religion. The religion of no religion would give the self discoverers a path to walk their journey of self discovery! ;)

[TkdWarrior]

Many people seem to follow this path of self-discovery. Abandoning any organised religion to follow their own spiritual journey.

Maybe its time we created a cult, obviously it can’t be a recognised religion until it achieves tax exempt status! But, why not have a religion that allows people to follow their own paths.
pgm can u give a shot why many ppl try to find out this self discovery?
can't u become free with religion like u can do with CMA(any other MA except the one Bruce followed :p)????
-TkdWarrior-

[pgm316]

I suppose people want to find out what they believe is right without being told!

One place that gave you a taste of all would be interesting :)

[TkdWarrior]

<I suppose people want to find out what they believe is right without being told!>

LoL, Exactly they don't even time to find good excuses :D rest assured they won't find freeness in freedom...
-TkdWarrior-

[Aqira]

interesting the mind of no mind has more words than concept alone

[zen_tiger_claw]

whe'll make our own style to suit the religion!

[zen_tiger_claw]

(sorry previous thoughts...)
if we make a religion out of no religion, we will eventually be bound to it and it will inevitably be a religion.

[Aqira]

only because it is conceptualized in the material mind and itself is material

[pgm316]

Originally posted by zen_tiger_claw
(sorry previous thoughts...)
if we make a religion out of no religion, we will eventually be bound to it and it will inevitably be a religion.

Maybe it shouldn’t be called a religion for the same reason JKD isn’t called a martial art.

"Using no way as the way : Using no limitation as limitation"

"Using all ways : bound by none"

A process, an individual process. A process using the philosophy of self exploration and using existing religions as a starting point, a "hub to the wheel".

I copied most of that off the JKD thread and Yoda's posts to be more specific! ;)

[Ti-Kwon-Leap]

LOL! just use whatever doctrine fits the moment.
Hey, isnt that what televangelists do? :D

[Jack]

I was thinking a week or two about my beliefs and how it was a process of self-discovery and finding what works for you - taking nothing from other formed religions, or taking bits that worked for you - and it struck me to be a very similar attitude to that of Jeet Kune Do.

[Tosh]

Originally posted by pgm316
I suppose people want to find out what they believe is right without being told!

One place that gave you a taste of all would be interesting :)

To quote the 13th Apostle w/ re to RELIGION and BELIEFS

"I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier."

:D

Follow your own code I say.

[Cain]

My Jedi senses sense Yoda's presence :D

|Cain|

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Jack
I was thinking a week or two about my beliefs and how it was a process of self-discovery and finding what works for you - taking nothing from other formed religions, or taking bits that worked for you - and it struck me to be a very similar attitude to that of Jeet Kune Do.

:D My point exactly, our religion will be a process and that process will be JKD!

[zen_tiger_claw]

we will call it 'the way'

[zen_tiger_claw]

first ever teaching of the WAY

Rely on Peace
To activate your
Manifold powers;
Pacify your environment
And create a beautiful world.

:)

[Darzeka]

So you are all becoming Toaists then?

[Mo Lung]

Originally posted by Darzeka
So you are all becoming Toaists then?

:D

As soon as you codify any form of thought and call it a religion, it will become abused. If you don't call it a religion, but simply write down what you think is the best way of living, that will eventually become dogma.

There will always be people that are desperate to control others and dogmatic religion was the best gift people like that ever received. Control a person's beliefs and you control the person.

A world with no religion would be a much more peaceful place. Follow your own way indeed.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Mo Lung


:D

As soon as you codify any form of thought and call it a religion, it will become abused. If you don't call it a religion, but simply write down what you think is the best way of living, that will eventually become dogma.

There will always be people that are desperate to control others and dogmatic religion was the best gift people like that ever received. Control a person's beliefs and you control the person.

A world with no religion would be a much more peaceful place. Follow your own way indeed.

Would a world without religion be more peacefull, kind of ironic that religion teaches peace and gets accused of causing war. Maybe your right, but on the other hand, would people simply find other things to fight in the name of. Thats just the nature of people.

If you look at most conflicts, religion isn't really the cause, but the insane leaders of the countries or group.

Or we could become buddhist, they haven't started a war yet! ;)

Our new religion, won't be a religion, but a philosophy! :D

[zen_tiger_claw]

yes. not a religion, but a phillosophy. good.

something that has to be brought up is discipline. christians have none of this, as they believe their discipline will come after death. buddhists, i think, have too much discipline. taoists welcome discipline.

you should know that 'nei jin' (internal force) and enlightenment can only come to those who are free of bondings. (lust, desire, cravings). < these are true sins.
all other sins are created to make people happy. right. but what happens when someone breaks these rules? people are unhappy.
they are unhappy because they have bound themselves to "richeousness"(spelling).
understand?

so let go of desires (for good or evil), and you will become enlightened.

[Mo Lung]

Originally posted by pgm316

Or we could become buddhist, they haven't started a war yet! ;)


That doesn't mean that blood hasn't been spilled in Buddhism's name....

[zen_tiger_claw]

buddhists don't kill animals let alone other people. they're vegetarians.
blood is sacred and should not be spilt forth from any creature.

[Mo Lung]

Sure, in theory. But blood has been spilled in Buddhism's name in the past.

After all, it's one of the ten commandments that thou shalt not kill, but millions have died at the hands of Christians.

[pgm316]

The actually meaning isn't thou shalt not kill, its though shalt not murder. Which is quite different. And why religion is often used as an excuse for many things. Often not the reason the war was started. I think in most cases war would have been started anyway, excuses and justifications are often looked for to ease the conscience of murderers.

Blood has been spilt in Buddhisms name? What does this mean exactly. I doubt you'll find any Buddhist teachings that justify the spilling of blood.

[Mo Lung]

Of course not. But then again, most religious teachings don't advocate the spilling of blood, but still people have died in their name.

[zen_tiger_claw]

let's put it this way...
a buddhist monk would never murder anybody. people die always in training. monks kill people in their martial arts. it's just what happens. people die. but the real sin is the intention. the desire for death will bring death. same with life. if your intention is to hurt... you'll hurt.
i say that buddhists never kill anything because they have lost all trace of desire. if one dies, it is not the fault of another man. christians are not taught this, either are Taoists or muslims.
get what i mean. there is death but no murder.

[Mo Lung]

You're assuming that every Buddhist is a perfect paragon of Buddhism and totally enlightened.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by zen_tiger_claw
let's put it this way...
a buddhist monk would never murder anybody. people die always in training. monks kill people in their martial arts. it's just what happens. people die. but the real sin is the intention. the desire for death will bring death. same with life. if your intention is to hurt... you'll hurt.
i say that buddhists never kill anything because they have lost all trace of desire. if one dies, it is not the fault of another man. christians are not taught this, either are Taoists or muslims.
get what i mean. there is death but no murder.

There really should be little difference with Christians and Muslims. Both teach peacefulness, tolerance, acceptance of other people and religions. I know its hard to believe but thats the truth!

Very few people that claim to be true followers really are. In reality they only are when it suits them, using the name of religion for there own agendas. But can you blame the religion for that? It would be like beating someone to death with a rock and then blaming the rock!

[zen_tiger_claw]

yeah i'm talking about a true buddhist.
buddhists, like all people, can murder. it's an individual process. but i'm talking about the hardcores. a hardcore christian would murder because their religion is so confusing it would drive you insane(talking from experience). muslims murder all the time, they teach peace but, like christians, they despise sinners. even the bible says that if a man does something like sleeps with animals or his dads wife, you should kill him. confusing when the bible says THOU SHALT NOT MURDER so repusely.
i also read that if a man even speaks badly about his parents, you should kill him. ?????
Taoists don't have rules as such saying "don't do this", or "don't do that". they just live in nature.
so all in all buddhists are alot less likely to murder. they have no desires. meaning they don't need to kill. they could very well kill anyone they please, but they don't.

[Darzeka]

For something to be in somethings name it doesn't need to be done by a follower of it.

For blood to be spilt in buddhism's name all it would take would be for some do-googer to stop a person trying to beat up a buddhist by killing the other person. If the reason for the original attack was because the person is a buddhist then the do-gooder would be defending the rights of the buddhists and saying that buddhism is worth defending and spilling blood over.

To say someone has no desires would be a grosse assumption. We all desire at least one thing otherwise we would all be dead.
These Taoists all desire to live. This one deisre leads itself to other deisres - to eat, breathe, drink, and whatever else is required to live. Then they desire to experience eveything and to become one with all thier surroundings.
If you truly do not desire anything you would die.

I don't know where this comes from but I first saw it in a Raymond Fiest novel.

"may all your dreams but one come true"
Why? What is a man without dreams - dead.

[zen_tiger_claw]

today in my daily meditaion something miraculous happened.
i was sitting in a forest of nature not far from home, and i was in perfect harmonization. i sat for a long time just listening to the calls of the birds and feeling the soft grass.
i just let go of the world and let the Qi of nature flow through me.
i had no desires... no desire for enlightenment, or spiritual well beig, i just sat. and i was enlightened.
i'm not trying to pick a bone with you but untill you experience this, don't say you are dead withought desires.
desire is the only true sin. withought it we are at complete oneness with our selves and with nature.
i know it sounds corny. there's no way to explain it..
but it happened.
i was enlightened.
this happens all the time to alot of other monks also.
it is indeed out of the ordinary, but it happens.
and it can happen to you if you stop saying it can't.

and related to your other comments...
that buddhist wouldn't be spilling blood for another buddhist.
he would be spilling blood for the life of an individual.
but it is true there is no excuse for his death.
and to kill to protect the rights of a buddhist would be exploiting the buddhist himself... so you are partially true.

[Mo Lung]

A fundamental flaw of Buddhism. If you work towards having no desires then you are left with one over-riding desire. The desire to desire nothing. ;)

And Buddhists don't have the monopoly on enlightenment.

[Brad Ellin]

"You're assuming that every Buddhist is a perfect paragon of Buddhism and totally enlightened."
I must be doing something wrong then. I am not enlightened, but I am a Buddhist.

"Blood has been spilt in Buddhisms name? What does this mean exactly. I doubt you'll find any Buddhist teachings that justify the spilling of blood."
True that you probably won't find anything in Buddhists teacings that justifies the spilling of blood, but yes, it has been done in the name of Buddhism. After the introduction of Buddhism in Tibet, one of the rulers of Tibet attempted to forcibly convert people, much like the Christian Crusades. Name escapes me, but give me a day to find it.
Even monks aren't immune, Devadatta was a cousin to Budddha, who joined his Sangha after hearing one of Buddha's lectures. Eight years before Buddha's death, Devadatta tried not once, but three times to assasinate him, so that he (Devadatta) could be head of the order. Needless to say, he failed. (When referring to Buddha, I mean of course Shakyamuni) ref: The Shambala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen.

[Mo Lung]

Originally posted by Kurohana
"You're assuming that every Buddhist is a perfect paragon of Buddhism and totally enlightened."
I must be doing something wrong then. I am not enlightened, but I am a Buddhist.


Ah, but are you a perfect paragon of Buddhism? ;)

Nice post. That's some of what I was getting at, but didn't want to ruffle any feathers too much.

:)

[Brad Ellin]

Nope, not a perfect paragon. But the quote said "You're assuming that every Buddhist is a perfect paragon of Buddhism", abd to assume without facts is just as dangerous as to accept everything on faith without evidence. Question everything. If you are a true beleiever in whatever faith or religion you choose, you will find the evidence to confirm your faith. A Catholic priest upon meeting and talking to a Buddhist monk said "This Buddhist is going to make a Catholic out of me yet"

[Guitarboy1212]

You said that you think time travel is impossible. But it is. Time and space are directly related, that is why many scientists use the term spacetime. The reason why people haven't traveled to the past, is because many scientists have proven this is impossible, but it is possible to travel foward in time. The simplist way I can explain this is that time always goes foward no matter what. But if someone were smart enough to fiqure out how to travel through time, then they would be smart enough to realize the fact of Why would you. Most people would be able to answer this easily, but to a scholar, who has studied the universe, and realized this question, the answer would be very hard. The reason why it would be so hard is because for him to travel though time, he would have to understand the entire universe, and if he understood that, then he wouldn't have to travel time.

[YODA]

My brain hurts.....

MORE BEER!

Ahhhhh..... that's better :D

[Guitarboy1212]

I'm buddhist, And i'll tell you it takes a long hard work to become enlightened. When I became enlightened, I saw that their was no need for meditation. In fact i saw that their wasn't a need for anything. I'm just playing their game. Now I do things to satisfy others. Nothing is really pleasurable for me anymore. I lie to my teachers when they ask me if I want to go to college. I lie to my parents and friends when they ask me what I want to do. For you see I don't want to do anything. I don't want to go to college. I don't want to play any games. The only reason I do martial arts now is to better strengthen my body. I no longer wish to fight people for the mear pleasure, but if they wish to fight me i will accept because that satisfys them. I only wish to put away with my material life and go to China or Japan and study with the monks. Maybe in that life, I won't have to lie.

[grandmaster mat]

that really confused me! ill read through it again :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

You said that you think time travel is impossible. But it is. Time and space are directly related, that is why many scientists use the term spacetime. The reason why people haven't traveled to the past, is because many scientists have proven this is impossible, but it is possible to travel foward in time. The simplist way I can explain this is that time always goes foward no matter what. But if someone were smart enough to fiqure out how to travel through time, then they would be smart enough to realize the fact of Why would you. Most people would be able to answer this easily, but to a scholar, who has studied the universe, and realized this question, the answer would be very hard. The reason why it would be so hard is because for him to travel though time, he would have to understand the entire universe, and if he understood that, then he wouldn't have to travel time.

Oh goodie, time travel. One of my favourite topics. Glad to see that you know that by current theory travel into the past is impossible, however you wouldn't need to understand the entire universe to travel into the future, all you need to do is travel at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.

[YODA]

Originally posted by ckdstudent

all you need to do is travel at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.


You'd have to shed a few lbs though :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Given that you'd probably be dead from the acceleration, or from hitting a small particle of dust at that sort of speed (meaning the dust has about enough momentum to punch a large hold through you), its kind of hypothetical.

[Guitarboy1212]

Yes but to go (correction: it's not an appreciable fraction of the speed of light it's) the speed of light squared, you would have understand how the entire universe works

[YODA]

Sure it is - but assuming you had the technology to travel at that speed it's not much of a stretch to assume you'd have some kinda mega "particle busting through yer head proof" suit on :D

[Spike]

You`ve got all the lingo down pat YODA.

Speaking of time travel, what was it like a long time ago in a galaxy far far away

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Yes but to go (correction: it's not an appreciable fraction of the speed of light it's) the speed of light squared, you would have understand how the entire universe works

In theory you can't actually exceed the speed of light, so I'm not quite sure where you got that from unless you checked E=mc^2 which has nothing to do with time travel, or at least not in the present discussion. Trust me on this one. And no, you wouldn't have to understand how the entire universe works, technically every time there's a space mission the astronauts travel into the future, albeit by an amount that you can barely even measure. Even if you just run somewhere relativistic effects kick in, but in such infinitessimally small ways that you just won't ever notice.

[zen_tiger_claw]

you's are getting very 'physical' here, and in a martial arts "phillosophy" forum i'm not too impressed. no-one has yet mentioned travel in the mental/spiritual world (which seems more possible than going -forward- so fast you go -back- in time... sounds pretty stupid)
i'm just guessing...

memories? they are the past. the past is the only thing that is known, but it's the most misunderstood. physically going back in time is impossible. maybe scientifically it is, but do you think god (the creator-whoever he is-) would allow it?

but the limits of the mind go far beyont time travel. why? because the mind's limit is no-limit!

look here. i can move my spirit from my body. it's all to possible.
something else i can do is put my own spirit in someone elses body. i feel their emotions and actually feel their heart beating.
any one can do it.
why not use memories to put yourself in a past person? the easiest would be yourself.
remember the worst thing that has happened to you... that is where the emotions will rise. now put youself there again. "be" in that place and "feel" it.
it can be done...

[Guitarboy1212]

THERE IS NO CREATER. It's a stupid belief made up, so people think the world was made for them and revolves around them. I hate to believe it but your wrong. We don't live a fairy tale where someone makes it just for us. The main example that people give for having a creator, is this.

"If you find a watch lying around, do you think that it just fell there out of nowhere. (the other person is now supposed to answer no) well then where do you think it came from?(the person answers "well someone made it")well thats the theory of a creator"

Sounds great, but if you were smart you would then realize that this belief contradicts itsef. It states that everything is created by a creator. Well acording to the theory, someone would have to have made the creator, and someone would have to have made the creator who created the creator, and it's a neverending hole. It would never stop. which brings us to the belief that their is no you or me or anything around us, but that can't possibly be, so I suggest you keep looking for a better answer.

PLEASE DO NOT BE EFFENDED BY THIS POST!

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Guitarboy1212
"If you find a watch lying around, do you think that it just fell there out of nowhere. (the other person is now supposed to answer no) well then where do you think it came from?(the person answers "well someone made it")well thats the theory of a creator"



You wouldn't look for a brand, like Timex or Casio?

[Spike]

I`d just pocket it and move on, but hey that`s me.

Guitar boy, can you prove there`s no creator?

I`m not saying what my beliefs are, but until you can prove conclusively that someone`s beliefs arew rong, don`t call them stupid, it`s just plain rude.

[Guitarboy1212]

sorry, but according to the belief it says that everything that is here is created by a creator, so like I said, wouldn't that mean the creator was created, and the creaters creator was created. And the creaters creaters creator was created. I mean it's an endless cycle. I just think theres a better solution to why were here.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

you's are getting very 'physical' here, and in a martial arts "phillosophy" forum i'm not too impressed. no-one has yet mentioned travel in the mental/spiritual world (which seems more possible than going -forward- so fast you go -back- in time... sounds pretty stupid)

Physics is philosophy, just a mathematical formalisation of philosophy, although in many other cases the maths drops out entirely and its purely a conceptual system.


memories? they are the past. the past is the only thing that is known, but it's the most misunderstood. physically going back in time is impossible. maybe scientifically it is, but do you think god (the creator-whoever he is-) would allow it?

Memories are also fallible, for all we know our memories have no allegiance to anything that's actually happened, anyone who's hallucinated will probably appreciate that you can think that anything is real. However, if you think you've travelled in time, or inhabited someone else's body, and you remember it, who's to say it hasn't happened?


THERE IS NO CREATER. It's a stupid belief made up, so people think the world was made for them and revolves around them. I hate to believe it but your wrong. We don't live a fairy tale where someone makes it just for us. The main example that people give for having a creator, is this.

I offer you the standard challenge that I offer anyone claiming that there is, or isn't a god. Prove it.


"If you find a watch lying around, do you think that it just fell there out of nowhere. (the other person is now supposed to answer no) well then where do you think it came from?(the person answers "well someone made it")well thats the theory of a creator"

Actually that's just one of several hundred different theories, based on things such as the freezing point of water, boiling point of water, down to the most basic quantum mechanics and up to the movements of galaxies.


Sounds great, but if you were smart you would then realize that this belief contradicts itsef. It states that everything is created by a creator. Well acording to the theory, someone would have to have made the creator, and someone would have to have made the creator who created the creator, and it's a neverending hole. It would never stop. which brings us to the belief that their is no you or me or anything around us, but that can't possibly be, so I suggest you keep looking for a better answer.

Take the idea that the creator created the universe in its entirity. Our universe also contains time, now that would mean that before our universe it wouldn't matter how long it took for a creator to simply be, because once it was, it would always have been, since there was no time for it not to have been in.

[Guitarboy1212]

I wish someone would bring up the Big Bang theory here. It's not what most people think it is. well here it is:

Basically, it says that space is like a ballon. and it started out as empty space. (many scientists proved that the universe constantly gets bigger, and then back to it's normal size again...imagine it like a big belly, and when the person breaths in it gets bigger and when they breath out it gets smaller) Anyway, these periods of the universe getting bigger and smaller, caused heat, because of friction. After a long time (try several trillion years) This heat slowly built up enough to create a small star. Here's how stars work. They start making elements, from the beginning of the chart of elements to the end. First, I think is hydrogen, so it's a hydrogen star. When it get's to big, it's own gravity condenses down into the next element, and the star goes along the same process. When it gets to a certant point, it gets to dense, so it puts all it's energy into exploding. (this has been proven by satilite pictures of blown up stars). When it blows up it sends tons of elements scaterring. and the heat from the explosion causes another star to form. The left over gravity, causes the elements in space to condense into planets. This keeps on happening for trillions of trillions of years, creating multiple solar systems, and here we are.

The thing I like about the Big Bang theory is that it explains how we got here from nothing, unlike the creator theory, which starts with something. It uses science to show how we got here. (ex. friction from the universe expanding and then getting smaller again.)

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Basically, it says that space is like a ballon. and it started out as empty space. (many scientists proved that the universe constantly gets bigger, and then back to it's normal size again...imagine it like a big belly, and when the person breaths in it gets bigger and when they breath out it gets smaller)

No scientists have ever proved anything, merely gathered evidence to support an opinion. Its also not known whether there is enough mass in the universe to halt the expansion or not, so it may just continue expanding.


Anyway, these periods of the universe getting bigger and smaller, caused heat, because of friction.

In an empty universe, which is supposedly what we had before the big bang, there is no matter, so there is no friction. What's supposed to have happened is the spontaneous creation of large amounts of matter and antimatter through quantum effects (I forget the technical name for this particular effect unfortunately, particularly unfortunate since I have an exam on it on Tuesday). Naturally the matter and antimatter annihilated each other in a massive burst of energy, but for some unknown reason there was an imbalance in the amounts, so some matter was left over. This process repeated, each time with the universe gaining more matter. Eventually there was enough to cause a super-super-nova which spread the matter through the universe.

That's the simple version, the more complex one is one that I still don't understand and goes into the decay of the universal superforce into two other forces, which then decayed further into the four that we know today. At the same time it requires changes in the laws of physics, which seem to actually have happened. Personally I find the creator story more likely.


Here's how stars work. They start making elements, from the beginning of the chart of elements to the end. First, I think is hydrogen, so it's a hydrogen star. When it get's to big, it's own gravity condenses down into the next element, and the star goes along the same process. When it gets to a certant point, it gets to dense, so it puts all it's energy into exploding.

Stars start off as hydrogen, and as hydrogen they remain because they can only burn hydrogen, and they burn it into helium through nuclear fusion. Eventually when they get low on fuel their gravity overcomes the internal pressure and they compress down, this can provide a burst of energy which then causes them to explode into a supernova, with the side-effect of producing the heavier elements such as gold and uranium. All of the gold on earth was once inside an exploding star.


When it blows up it sends tons of elements scaterring. and the heat from the explosion causes another star to form.

New stars generally form in nebulae, which admittedly are the remnants of older stars, but the heat of the explosion has nothing to do with it, the gravitational attraction of the growing star is what causes it to ignite.

There's also the fact that each 'generation' of stars is smaller than the last by a degree of magnitude. I believe the current estimate is that we're somewhere between the fifth or sixth generations, but I'll have to check that, it might well be more or less.


The thing I like about the Big Bang theory is that it explains how we got here from nothing, unlike the creator theory, which starts with something. It uses science to show how we got here. (ex. friction from the universe expanding and then getting smaller again.)

No, it requires you to start off with an empty universe and the universal superforce, which then break down into actual matter. It uses scientific theory and observation to explain the universe's existence, but it does not explain that time before the creation, or just at the beginning as creation began.

[Guitarboy1212]

Hey ckdstudent, there is friction with out matter.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Seeing as friction is actually caused by matter moving through or across each other, it would be kind of difficult to get friction without matter.

[Guitarboy1212]

well if the universe has an end, couldn't the walls rub together and cause friction every time it expanded, and then went back to it's normal size again.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Umm, only if the end of the universe actually has walls. Made of what exactly? How did they come to be? What's outside the walls? What happens if the walls get punctured? What happens if god wants to redecorate? What colour wallpaper is it?

If the universe has an end, then it doesn't have walls in any form that we're equipped to understand, the end of the universe is usually taken to mean the furthest point that matter has reached, with anything beyond that being pure vacuum, completely empty, without even vacuum energy to fill it.

[Guitarboy1212]

hey just a theory

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Sorry, its just that we're taught that whenever you come up with a theory you should consider its implications as much as possible, and check them however you might be able to.

[Mo Lung]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
If the universe has an end, then it doesn't have walls in any form that we're equipped to understand, the end of the universe is usually taken to mean the furthest point that matter has reached, with anything beyond that being pure vacuum, completely empty, without even vacuum energy to fill it.

What's vacuum energy? What's a "pure vacuum" as opposed to space?

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Vacuum energy is the infrared energy which keeps space at 5K rather than 0K, pure emptiness, or pure vacuum is the extent of space beyond where this energy reaches, i.e. where the vacuum is completely empty of all energy as well. Although the slight problem may be that due to quantum physics matter may appear there anyway, unfortunately its not exactly easy to test this.

[Greg-VT]

There is a theory that the universe is constanly expanding, still 'exploding'. And as the universe expands, so does the matter with it. So there may not be 'pure vacuum' as you say ckdstudent, just constant matter with the explosion.

[YODA]

It's also believed that this expansion is slowing down and will eventually stop.

What happens then is unclear....

Will it just stay at that size (and what is beyond that?)

Will it contract again to eventually casue another big bang?

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Actually there will still be pure vacuum, even at the speed of light the universe will not have filled an infinite space yet.

As for the slowing down and stopping of the expansion, its still uncertain as to whether there is enough mass to halt the expansion, or whether it'll just keep growing, or whether there will be a 'big crunch'.

[Guitarboy1212]

There is a theory that the universe is constanly expanding, still 'exploding'. And as the universe expands, so does the matter with it. So there may not be 'pure vacuum' as you say ckdstudent, just constant matter with the explosion.

That's what I've been saying!!! The universe is constantly expanding. BUT NO ONE LISTENS TO ME DO THEY!!!

[Darzeka]

Most of these theories assume that our universe is all that there is in existence. As has been said before you need to disprove this before it can be said and prove it before it can be said.

something can not come from nothing.
Something can not change into nothing.
All the creation ideas are all the same - something changed one from of energy/matter into into another and after the subsequent course of events our planet was formed and we came to be.

Whether this "original" change was conscious or not doesn't matter, it was still a product of all previous actions to that point. There is no randomness, everything that happens happens beacuase of the forces acting on it at the time.

There is no way our intellect can comprehend the begining of time so effectively there was none. No matter how far back we can think there always needs to be something before it to create the subsequent events. Even in the case of spontaneous creation there is the platform into which it created itself.

To argue how our universe was created i think we need to establish the scope as our universe being a tiny corner of an infinite existence, there we can put certain controls into place like the "walls" of the universe and somewhere the "outside" creating forces can originate from. Rather than divine will or divine science just happening.

Time travel. Impossible. If it is possible to travel into the future, the future has already happened so there is no point to me trying to change anything I has just lost my free will. Or I am currently a memory of something in the future and not really real.

To be able to travel through time time needs to be a line that we can jump around on. Time is a point that changes not a point on a line that we progress along.

Even if it were possible to time travel it would be a pointless excersise as you would only be able to watch what actually happened and not effect the outcome. If you travell back in time you would only make yourself move in time not rewind everything. So in the future the past had already happened in which case you are then a part of a concrete past, unable to change anything.
Applying this to our present, we are just the past of the future and so unable to affect evenst outcomes and are just watching to see what happens.

If you could change past events it would lead to all sorts of paradoxes that would make time so unstable to the point where we no longer exist in any sense.

As for being able to travel forward and not backwards??? What would be the point. You could go forwards and not come back?

We only use light as being the fastest speed able to be travelled because it is the fastest thing we can detect. Then we link light to time travel for some reason. There is undoubtably faster energies and things we have no cromprehension of even travelling at these speeds will not change our current "time"

[Mo Lung]

Originally posted by Darzeka
To be able to travel through time time needs to be a line that we can jump around on. Time is a point that changes not a point on a line that we progress along.


Why do you say this as though it were fact? Where's your proof of this statement?

[JessyBlue]

till we have no proove, we do belive.
Beliving -for me- is assuming that something is right what we can not proove.
I only belive in things which are prooven.
In my opinion religion is giving answers to questions we can not answer by ourselfes.
For me that is wron, cause I think it keeps us away from thinking about certain things on our ownl.
For example: Where does mankind come from?
Most religeous people say "god"
But there is no proove that god does exist.
For some (many) questions there is no experiencable
answer, but thinking that god is the answer is lieing to ourselfes, because we cannot accept that there are things we can not know.

My opinion on religion: Religion eats brain
(in German) Religion frisst Hirn

I think people who are serching their answers in god are weak
but it is no shame to be weak, it is just a fact

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Most of these theories assume that our universe is all that there is in existence. As has been said before you need to disprove this before it can be said and prove it before it can be said.

Actually none of them assume that, merely saying that our universe takes up an infinite space in four dimensions does not mean that it also takes up the same amount of space in subsequent dimensions. Think about it like this, if you have a two dimensional universe, like a sheet of paper which is infinitely thin, you can stack an infinite number of them up in a three dimensional space by simply placing them on top of one another. However these further universes if they do exist are merely theoretical, with no evidence yet to suggest their existence.


something can not come from nothing.
Something can not change into nothing.

Check the latest research in quantum physics, particles of matter do just appear and disappear from and to nothing.


To argue how our universe was created i think we need to establish the scope as our universe being a tiny corner of an infinite existence, there we can put certain controls into place like the "walls" of the universe and somewhere the "outside" creating forces can originate from. Rather than divine will or divine science just happening.

But why couldn't it 'just happen'? Why must there always be a previous event?


Time travel. Impossible. If it is possible to travel into the future, the future has already happened so there is no point to me trying to change anything I has just lost my free will. Or I am currently a memory of something in the future and not really real.

No, because there's no evidence either way that the future is or is not fixed. When you use time dilation to travel into the future you're effectively slowing your own personal time (or rather the time aboard your craft) down rather than simply jumping through time, you just move through it at a different rate. Since you cannot then travel backwards through time, I fail to see how this can fix the future.


To be able to travel through time time needs to be a line that we can jump around on. Time is a point that changes not a point on a line that we progress along.

As Mo Lung says, how can you be so sure of this? I can tell you plenty of physicist and theoreticians who would love to have your certainty about time.


Applying this to our present, we are just the past of the future and so unable to affect evenst outcomes and are just watching to see what happens.

If we can't affect future outcomes, why bother doing anything? Everything that is human about us drives us to believe that we can affect what we do, if we can't, if we have no free will, why even bother?


We only use light as being the fastest speed able to be travelled because it is the fastest thing we can detect. Then we link light to time travel for some reason. There is undoubtably faster energies and things we have no cromprehension of even travelling at these speeds will not change our current "time"

Um, hate to break this to you but we actually use light as being the fastest speed because of relativistic effects, i.e. light has a constant speed through vacuum, which does not change no matter what speed you are going compared to the light. If we were to say that light goes at 80mph say, then someone standing still and watching a light pulse would see it travelling away from them at 80mph. They would see someone in a car going at 70mph as nearly going the same speed as the light. The person in the car though would still see the light as going at 80mph *relative to them*. The pedestrian watcher, looking at the car, would see everything in the car happening slowly.

At normal speeds this time dilation is small enough that we can't notice it, however a shuttle launched into space and then brought back down to earth several days later after a high-speed orbit does actually experience a few seconds of time dilation, this has been tested repeatedly and proven. The speed of light is *always* a constant relative to you, regardless of what speed you're travelling at.


There is undoubtably faster energies and things we have no cromprehension of even travelling at these speeds will not change our current "time"

But it does. Sorry, unfortunately years of experiments since Einstein disagree with you.


Beliving -for me- is assuming that something is right what we can not proove.
I only belive in things which are prooven.

Nothing is proven.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by YODA
It's also believed that this expansion is slowing down and will eventually stop.

What happens then is unclear....

Will it just stay at that size (and what is beyond that?)

Will it contract again to eventually casue another big bang?

You'd imagine gravity would make the universe contract again, everything eventually smashing into each other over billions of years, probably take millions more years for it all to settle into one mass and maybe another big bang?

Could have happened countless times already...

What do you think Jimmy?

Its the period of time before the big band that really interests me!

Is it true that everything in the universe grows as it expands? The earth gets bigger? Atoms expand?

Makes God very believable when you consider the alternatives :eek:

[JessyBlue]

"Nothing is proven."

Why?

[pgm316]

Originally posted by ckdstudent


Um, hate to break this to you but we actually use light as being the fastest speed because of relativistic effects, i.e. light has a constant speed through vacuum, which does not change no matter what speed you are going compared to the light. If we were to say that light goes at 80mph say, then someone standing still and watching a light pulse would see it travelling away from them at 80mph. They would see someone in a car going at 70mph as nearly going the same speed as the light. The person in the car though would still see the light as going at 80mph *relative to them*. The pedestrian watcher, looking at the car, would see everything in the car happening slowly.

At normal speeds this time dilation is small enough that we can't notice it, however a shuttle launched into space and then brought back down to earth several days later after a high-speed orbit does actually experience a few seconds of time dilation, this has been tested repeatedly and proven. The speed of light is *always* a constant relative to you, regardless of what speed you're travelling at.



Hard to get my head round light always travelling at a constant speed relative to me.

If light takes so long to travel from the sun to the earth, doesn't it just travel at a constant speed? So if your traveling at light speed in earths direction how can it be going faster?

If you did travel at light speed for 1 year "earth time" how long would that be to the person traveling?

:)

[LilBunnyRabbit]

You'd imagine gravity would make the universe contract again, everything eventually smashing into each other over billions of years, probably take millions more years for it all to settle into one mass and maybe another big bang?

Could have happened countless times already...

Personally I prefer the continuous expansion and repeated big bangs theory, which essentially states that the big bang happens, the universe expands, and continues to expand, and at some point, back in the centre, there's another big bang and another universe starts following (interestingly one of the supposed side effects of this, a reduction in the speed of light over huge periods of time, seems to have been measured).


Is it true that everything in the universe grows as it expands? The earth gets bigger? Atoms expand?

Its quite possible, but there's absolutely no way to measure it, so it doesn't really matter. Equally the universe could be shrinking, or just randomly changing size.


"Nothing is proven."

Why?

I'll try and put it another way. Give me objective, definitive proof of something, anything you want.


If light takes so long to travel from the sun to the earth, doesn't it just travel at a constant speed? So if your traveling at light speed in earths direction how can it be going faster?

Its not going faster, the light is travelling at the same speed, but time for you has slowed down (actually if you're going at light speed the theory states that time for you has stopped, but you'd need an infinite amount of energy to get up to that speed). However to you, travelling slower in time, the light will be travelling away from you at light speed.


If you did travel at light speed for 1 year "earth time" how long would that be to the person traveling?

If they were travelling exactly at light speed, it wouldn't take any time at all. Unfortunately stopping might be a problem.

[johndoch]

If light travels at a constant rate how come it cant escape from a black hole due to the power of gravity? (assuming black holes exist and are not some grey area in some guys calculations)

[LilBunnyRabbit]

If light travels at a constant rate how come it cant escape from a black hole due to the power of gravity? (assuming black holes exist and are not some grey area in some guys calculations)

Now the real fun begins. Okay, light travels at a constant speed relative to whatever's viewing it, but in a black hole problems occur. At the centre of a black hole is a singularity, a place where the rules break down because you've got a calculation involving infinity. Currently theory states that at the point where light cannot escape you have an event horizon, a 'barrier' where time effectively stops. Theories about black holes tend to be very maths intensive, and very strange.

[pgm316]

Thanks for the reply Jimmy, I should have done the same course as you, more interesting than Business Studies :o

Amazing to think you could travel anywhere in the universe with no time loss if traveling at light speed. Maybe one day!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Thanks for the reply Jimmy, I should have done the same course as you, more interesting than Business Studies

Dunno, between us in my physics class we've pretty much funded a coffee shop, paracetemol and pro-plus all by ourselves, and of course the student union.


Amazing to think you could travel anywhere in the universe with no time loss if traveling at light speed. Maybe one day!

Well, no personal time loss. To anyone watching from outside you'd get there eventually, but travelling a light year would still mean that a year had passed outside (allowing of course for local variations in time dilation due to different velocities). So travelling out a hundred light years from earth and then back at light speed would mean that two hundred years had passed on earth (approximately)

[pgm316]

I've got my head round that bit now. But not the reason time slows down for the person traveling at that speed, thats the hard bit....

So not a good job if you have a family then!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

I've got my head round that bit now. But not the reason time slows down for the person traveling at that speed, thats the hard bit....

Ah, if you're getting into reasons you want a philosopher, I just cover effects.

[Guitarboy1212]

"something can not come from nothing."

If something can not come from nothing, then it is impossible for us to be here. According to the "creator" theory, which I'm guessing your baseing this on, says that everything is created. Well if everything is created, then who made the creator, and who made the creator who created the creator, so for us to be in existence, something had to come from nothing

and ckdstudent on your post when you said:

"Actually none of them assume that, merely saying that our universe takes up an infinite space in four dimensions does not mean that it also takes up the same amount of space in subsequent dimensions...... "


And it continues on. That whole thing....

well said

[pgm316]

At some point something must have come from nothing, or at least something that would appear as nothing to us.

I'm not sure if I believe about the fourth dimension like that, if it is so then the other universes would have to be massively different to ours......

Maybe there are other universes in the void we call space.

[Sean O]

I'll try and put it another way. Give me objective, definitive proof of something, anything you want.

I'll take you on. This is a picture of a tree :D.

http://greenparty.ennis.ie/photos/balleen-tree.jpg

[zen_tiger_claw]

i found out something...

creation from a god in 7 days is an impossibillity, because the time it takes for light to travel from the sun to earth is what? a billion years? this could explain the big bang theory...

whe were allready there but all of a sudden... LET THERE BE LIGHT!!!
so that dissipates one theory...

[Jack]

It takes 8 minutes for light from our Sun to reach our planet. :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

I'll take you on. This is a picture of a tree

Is it? How do I know its not a faked picture? How do I know that the tree wasn't just a peculiar optical illusion? Prove to me that the tree was real and not just a figment of my deranged imagination.


creation from a god in 7 days is an impossibillity, because the time it takes for light to travel from the sun to earth is what? a billion years? this could explain the big bang theory...

Unless you take the fact that the Bible isn't meant to be literal, and then remember that at the time people weren't used to thinking in terms of more than maybe hundreds, so a seven day analogy to explain the steps which happened (which do incidentally match up quite nicely) rather than trying to explain that it took billions of years would make sense.

[Sean O]

Oh okay ckd, I get what you were trying to say now.

[Guitarboy1212]

Oh, i see. So it's more reasonable that the entire universe, consisting of millions of galaxies just like ours, was made in 7 days, then it is to understand that it was slowly made over trillions and trillions of years.

[zen_tiger_claw]

piece of advice:
watch matrix reloaded at least 10 times!:love:

[Brad Ellin]

"creation from a god in 7 days is an impossibillity, because the time it takes for light to travel from the sun to earth is what? a billion years? this could explain the big bang theory..."

Slight correction, original translation stated the world was created in 7 "time periods", the time period of a "day" was selected because it was something that the masses were more familiar with and makes the power of God seem more awesome. No one really knows what the original time periods were. They could have been decades or millenia.

Whether one believes it or not is a matter of one's faith or lack of. If you believe it, hey, you may be right. If some scientists believe otherwise, that is their right. If I beleive niether, and instead believe that this world is simply another manifestation of reality that I happen to occupy at this time, that is my right.

Personally, I believe that nothing is impossible. That are just degrees of possibilities depending on the strength of one's faith or convictions.

[Buddhas_Prodigy]

Ithink your are the smartest person i know...
Someone finally has the same beliefs as me

[bob]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
Now the real fun begins. Okay, light travels at a constant speed relative to whatever's viewing it, but in a black hole problems occur. At the centre of a black hole is a singularity, a place where the rules break down because you've got a calculation involving infinity. Currently theory states that at the point where light cannot escape you have an event horizon, a 'barrier' where time effectively stops. Theories about black holes tend to be very maths intensive, and very strange.
i couldn't resist. i'm also a bit of an armchair physicist. light travels at a constant velocity regardless of the velocity of the viewer, but light is, by its nature non-descript. it behaves in the manner of a particle and a wave, no one is really sure what it is or what composes it. photons? what are photons? matter or energy? at a certain point the distinction becomes irrelevant. matter is conposed of energy at different states. so matter consists of a relationship between energy. it is composed of an interaction. that's very strange.
you want to know what's stranger?
how about this one?
there is a place where a group of monkeys believes that they can observe and comprehend the total population of Asia using only a telegraph and a stethescope. know where it is? right here.
we have a bunch of scientists doing 'research' into the nature of the universe, all based on the assumtion that they can understand it. this the main problem with the scientific method. all experiments assume their theorem is correct when designing experiments, so the experiments are not objective, they're illustrative. in Princeton, N.J. experiments were performed to test psychic abilities in people, there was a minor discrepency that could never be accounted for mathematically. Pysicists also performed a series of experiments to test the effects of the observer on the experiment, there were some. i thought the observer was not a part of the experiment, or at least not suppose to be. but that seems impossible.
so back to the monkeys. with the sensory tools we posses as humans we will never be able to comperhend the universe, ask Kurt Godel he knew. not possible, the tools we have were 'designed' to find food, avoid preditors and find way and opportunities to reproduce. to put it another way, can a sculpture ever understand the artist?
light's velocity is constant because we don't understand how it works, maybe some day we will.whos knows? and my point is not to give up, it's meant to clear some of the theoretical fog that surrounds some of the questions of science and religion. it all boils down to faith. to belief. there is no proof, in the realm of metaphysics. everything can be doubted. fifty years ago the speed of sound was impenetable, no one could break the 'sound barrier' now it's the light barrier. there will be something next, but we'll never get out of the box to see it for itself. we'll always be part of it.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

all experiments assume their theorem is correct when designing experiments

Actually all experiments are designed, or should be designed, to disprove the theory.


matter is conposed of energy at different states.

Matter can be treated as frozen energy.

[johndoch]

"Matter can be treated as frozen energy."

Why frozen I would say that nothing in the universe is frozen it is evolving all the time.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Sorry for cutting off halfway through that post, but I discovered that my results were out earlier than expected. I use the word frozen simply to illustrate the fact that essentially you can treat matter as energy staying still, or crystalised, or whatever else you want to call it. If you have another way to describe it feel free, but that's the best I could come up with. As for the universe evolving all the time, not quite true. Its changing all the time, evolution suggests some selectivity which doesn't seem to be present.

[bob]

Its changing all the time, evolution suggests some selectivity which doesn't seem to be present.

evolution suggests nothing of the sort. natural selection is random. it is also limited to evolutionary theory in biology on this planet. evolution is a fancy way of saying changing to fit a set of circumstances, which are also dynamic.

Actually all experiments are designed, or should be designed, to disprove the theory.
yes, they start with if this is true how would i disprove it? it's the if this is true part that i was concerned with.

illustrate the fact that essentially you can treat matter as energy staying still, or crystalised, or whatever else you want to call it.

i fail to see how energy can be staying still or frozen. it's energy. it's composed of a potenial relationship or an ability to do work. these states you describe are limited to matter. can heat stay still? how about electricity? matter is more like a battery or even some semi-conductor, at least according to theories in physics. ever seen what happens when they split an atom? potential becomes actual. like the difference between form and application.

i'd also like to take a moment to say that i mean no disrespct to anyone in these forums. i realize, do to some personal experiences, that my oppinion and previous studies can come off as a bit strong and coarse. this is only due to the great intrest these topics hold for me, and is in no way intended as an attack upon anyone, but sometimes upon the idea that they offer. i appreciate the discussion.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

evolution suggests nothing of the sort. natural selection is random. it is also limited to evolutionary theory in biology on this planet. evolution is a fancy way of saying changing to fit a set of circumstances, which are also dynamic.

What environment would this be exactly? Evolution does require constraints, otherwise its simply random mutation.


yes, they start with if this is true how would i disprove it? it's the if this is true part that i was concerned with.

I see, so what would your alternative method be? You can't test something which isn't a theorem. And you can't try and disprove it without saying 'if this were true then this would happen, so if it doesn't happen then its not true'.



i fail to see how energy can be staying still or frozen. it's energy. it's composed of a potenial relationship or an ability to do work. these states you describe are limited to matter.

I'm trying to describe it in layman's terms. Matter can be described as being static energy, that's all there is to it. I know those states I described are limited to matter, that's the whole point!


matter is more like a battery or even some semi-conductor

No, because when a battery is drained the shell still remains. When you convert an atom into energy, for example in a nuclear reaction, the atom is gone, converted entirely into energy. In a high energy collision the energy doesn't just 'fill up' the particles involved, it actually creates new particles.


ever seen what happens when they split an atom? potential becomes actual.

Actually you get a whole mess of subatomic particles to play around with, as well as enough energy to cause a big crater if its not properly handled.

[bob]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
What environment would this be exactly? Evolution does require constraints, otherwise its simply random mutation.[B]

all evolutionary restraints are relative to the environment. it is simply random mutation, and the things that are lucky fit the circumstances and survive. things that don't fit don't survive.the environment is the restraint


[B]I see, so what would your alternative method be? You can't test something which isn't a theorem. And you can't try and disprove it without saying 'if this were true then this would happen, so if it doesn't happen then its not true'.[B]

the problem is two fold. scientific materialism, which provides the metaphysical basis of empiricism, make certain assumptions. like all religions. they claim that they are providing objective information and that repeatability in circumstances and observable effects is what constitutes knowledge. but they never say this, nor do they ever test the most fundmental hypothesis they have, which would be scientific matterialism. they have a blind devotion to and religious fanaticism about their science. empiricism has limits like all other human tools. in some intsances it produces great things, but this blind devotion is destructive.
the second problem i have is that the experimenter refuses to admit or consider their effect on the experiment. i grant that some ratkiller in a bio lab knows their effect on their subject, and the overall effect on the experiment is inconsequential. this does not hold true in the areas of quantum and theorectical physics. and those are the people who are writing the new metaphysics.

[B]I'm trying to describe it in layman's terms. Matter can be described as being static energy, that's all there is to it. I know those states I described are limited to matter, that's the whole point![B]

o.k.


[B]No, because when a battery is drained the shell still remains. When you convert an atom into energy, for example in a nuclear reaction, the atom is gone, converted entirely into energy. In a high energy collision the energy doesn't just 'fill up' the particles involved, it actually creates new particles.[B]

it doesn't create them it yields them, they are just smaller units. i used the battery example as a metaphor for a storage device. i suppose i could contend that the vessle the nuclear reaction takes place in still remained, but that would be arguing to absurdity.:D


[B]Actually you get a whole mess of subatomic particles to play around with, as well as enough energy to cause a big crater if its not properly handled.

those subatomic particles have half-lives so small that they can not be measured, only derived mathematically. the energy disipates so quickly that it cannot support their continued existence.

[Casado]

Wow, this is a big thread! Well, First I haven't read throught all of this but I just wanted to clear up a few points that I think haven't been dealt with properly.

When mentioning reigion most people mean Christianity, or another monotheastic religion. Hinduism, Buddhism, jainisim and Dowism are often left out of the argument. strange when you think that a lot of people here are studying Eastern based arts. Many of thearguments here cannot be applied to these religions. In Buddhism for example, there is no creator God.

Another point is that people often misrepresent these types of faith. For example not all Hindus believe that Krishna is a little blue boy dancing around. Buddhists do not have to be vegetarian. Daoists do not think that Chi is "supernatural". There is some debate as to wether Buddhism is a relgion at all (although I belive it is).

To clear up some further points, Buddhists have fought battles before (mainly in China), ussually the Shaolin and Tibetans. When the revolutionary government of China attacked the Tibetan monastries and oppresssed the Chinese ones, many other Buddhists in the world believed this was Karmic retribution. However, all Buddhists avoid "harm" to any other living creature. Hence most are vegetarian peace loving people.

Someone mentioned "striving for enlightenment". This is a contradiction to Buddhists because Buddhism tries to achive happiness to all beings by extinguishing desire (which they believe is the cause of discontent). therefore at the most advanced levels of meditation, "non-striving" is the goal. Buddhism isn't so simple as a lot of other belief systems.

Buddhists and Hindus don't believe other religions are "wrong" in the way that say Christianity or Islam does. Rather they feel that they miss the goal or fall short of what is possible. This is why Hindus are especially happy to open temples in old churches: they believe there will be very good Karma left over from the previous occupants.

I hope this helps everyone understand how things are from a Buddhist point of view!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

the problem is two fold. scientific materialism, which provides the metaphysical basis of empiricism, make certain assumptions. like all religions. they claim that they are providing objective information and that repeatability in circumstances and observable effects is what constitutes knowledge.

Actually a good scientist only ever claims that the repeatability is evidence that a particular theory may be a close approximation to what actually happens, assuming that we aren't all a dream in some sleeper's head. Under the circumstances where you can never be sure of anything, repeatability is as good a test as any.


the second problem i have is that the experimenter refuses to admit or consider their effect on the experiment. i grant that some ratkiller in a bio lab knows their effect on their subject, and the overall effect on the experiment is inconsequential. this does not hold true in the areas of quantum and theorectical physics. and those are the people who are writing the new metaphysics.

Evidently you've missed a large number of recent experiments to try and measure the effect of the observer on the experiment. As yet I believe they are inconclusive, other than in the fact that it does seem the observer resolves the experiment.


it doesn't create them it yields them, they are just smaller units. i used the battery example as a metaphor for a storage device. i suppose i could contend that the vessle the nuclear reaction takes place in still remained, but that would be arguing to absurdity.

The energy is converted temporarily into matter, essentially the same as creation except that the overall mass-energy conservation is maintained. The vessel the reaction takes place in however, need not remain. There is no vessel for the energy, just energy, and matter.


those subatomic particles have half-lives so small that they can not be measured, only derived mathematically. the energy disipates so quickly that it cannot support their continued existence.

Again, you probably want to read a few more reports. The existence of these particles is supported by a large wealth of evidence.

[YODA]

Jimmy - you really are a boring git. You know?

[LilBunnyRabbit]

You should meet the rest of my class, compared to most of them I'm the life of the party.

[Cain]

LOL! I'd really hate to come in your class then :D

Darn physicts!!!!





:D

|Cain|

[YODA]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
You should meet the rest of my class, compared to most of them I'm the life of the party.

LOL! I can believe that LOL!

[Sean O]

Getting WAY back to the part where we said that theoretically, travelling back in time is impossible. I remember hearing about a theory where that if you travel faster than light, you could travel back in time. Could you explain that to me ckd?

[YODA]

It's the otherv way around - travel faster than light and you'd go forward in time.

You may ned to shed a few pound when you got there though as at light speed your mass would be a little errrr.... embarrassing :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Getting WAY back to the part where we said that theoretically, travelling back in time is impossible. I remember hearing about a theory where that if you travel faster than light, you could travel back in time. Could you explain that to me ckd?

In theory, yes you would travel back in time. Unfortunately you'd have to at some point be moving at the speed of light, at which point time would be moving at a grand speed of 0 for you, your mass would be essentially infinite, and your length would be 0, so getting faster than light is kind of a problem.


It's the otherv way around - travel faster than light and you'd go forward in time.

Nope, closer you get to the speed of light the slower time goes for you. Theoretically if you go faster, time would reverse.

[Spike]

"You may ned to shed a few pound when you got there though as at light speed your mass would be a little errrr.... embarrassing "

and no one`s gonna believe you`re big boned

[pgm316]

Originally posted by ckdstudent

Um, hate to break this to you but we actually use light as being the fastest speed because of relativistic effects, i.e. light has a constant speed through vacuum, which does not change no matter what speed you are going compared to the light. If we were to say that light goes at 80mph say, then someone standing still and watching a light pulse would see it travelling away from them at 80mph. They would see someone in a car going at 70mph as nearly going the same speed as the light. The person in the car though would still see the light as going at 80mph *relative to them*. The pedestrian watcher, looking at the car, would see everything in the car happening slowly.

At normal speeds this time dilation is small enough that we can't notice it, however a shuttle launched into space and then brought back down to earth several days later after a high-speed orbit does actually experience a few seconds of time dilation, this has been tested repeatedly and proven. The speed of light is *always* a constant relative to you, regardless of what speed you're travelling at.



"The speed of light is *always* a constant relative to you, regardless of what speed you're travelling at."

Thats the bit I don't understand, sounds like a contradiction.

If I'm travelling at half light speed, but light is still the *same* to me, then its going at 1.5 times light speed forward and 0.5 times light speed back. How can that be.

I could understand if it was produced by the object moving at that speed! But even then, if light has a fixed speed through a vacuum, even if its generated by something moving it shouldn't effect that...?

Confussed! :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Thats the bit I don't understand, sounds like a contradiction.

Yes, it does, doesn't it?

Getting my brain wrapped around that has taken the better part of a month. Its not an easy thing to understand. Its simply that absolutely everything is relative to everything else, and the speed of light measured from any frame of reference is always a constant, because otherwise there would be a special frame of reference that you could define as the basis for all others.


If I'm travelling at half light speed, but light is still the *same* to me, then its going at 1.5 times light speed forward and 0.5 times light speed back. How can that be.

How it can be? No idea whatsoever. The fact that it is though has been tested many times. How does chlorophyll turn sunlight and carbon dioxide and water into sugar and oxygen? How do cells know where to go in your body?

[pgm316]

Talking to a Quantum Physicist last night, he was saying how you wouldn't go in a straight line if you continued to out for a massive distance. Not sure if it was because of gravity/shape of universe. He also said there could be other seperate universes not connected with the vacuum, which space occupies. Sounded a bit like the whole forth dimension type thing!

Then the conversation soon ended when the netball team got in the pub and the Stella started talking! :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Talking to a Quantum Physicist last night, he was saying how you wouldn't go in a straight line if you continued to out for a massive distance. Not sure if it was because of gravity/shape of universe. He also said there could be other seperate universes not connected with the vacuum, which space occupies. Sounded a bit like the whole forth dimension type thing!

He was drunk, wasn't he? Its not possible to say what would happen if you go out for a massive distance without testing it. And yes there could be other seperate universes, or an infinite number of them, but personally this one is complicated enough for me.

[pgm316]

Yes drunk and only discussing theories of certain people that I've forgot names of.

[zen_tiger_claw]

hey pplz,
whe've kinda strayed from the religion era.
i suggest that, because there is no literal or practical answer for time travel, we should stop the fooltalk and start learning something usefull hey?

how about what happens after we die?

do you believe in the christians "heaven"?
or do you believe in reincarnation?
state your views.

i think that there are three possible answers to this question. those who believe in a god or gods usually claim that before an individual is created, he/she does not exist, then comes into being trough the will of a god. he/she lives their lives and then, according to what they believe in or doin their life, they go to eternal heaven or hell. others claim that the individual comes into being at conception due to natural causes, lives and then at death, seaces to exist.

the other, of which i believe, is that, like two radio waves, which are not made up of words and music but energy at different frequencies, are transmitted, travel through space, and attracted to and picked up by the reciever from where they are broadcast as words or music. it is the same with the mind. at death, mental energy travels through space, is attracted to and picked up by the fertilised egg. as the embryo grows, it centres itself in the brain from where it later broadcasts itself as a new personallity.

but this still does not answer the question of "where did we come from?"

any suggestions or comments?

[pgm316]

the fooltalk!? :D

Its all fairly hypothetical here!

Doesn't science ie how the universe works/created kind of tie in with religion, I know it does for me! Probably beacuse I don't seem to believe in that much, but I couldn't say nothing! "agnostic"

Most religious people will say they feel its right, I've never felt anything or heard anything to convince me. There probably was someone called Jesus, but the son of God........?

[Adam]

Speaking of JC, he did live without a doubt, but do you think he was able to cure people of their ailments with laying-on-hands?

[Knight_Errant]

Apparently, the man used cannabis in his annointing oils. The guys who came after him were ****ed up in the head, but what a dude...

[LilBunnyRabbit]

because there is no literal or practical answer for time travel, we should stop the fooltalk and start learning something usefull hey?

Yes, because there are so many literal and practical answers in religion, aren't there?


the other, of which i believe, is that, like two radio waves, which are not made up of words and music but energy at different frequencies, are transmitted, travel through space, and attracted to and picked up by the reciever from where they are broadcast as words or music.

I'm not quite sure I follow this, are you saying that radio waves are actually attracted to a receiver? They aren't in any way at all, its simply that they are broadcast over a wide area, and the receiver is within that area.


it is the same with the mind. at death, mental energy travels through space, is attracted to and picked up by the fertilised egg. as the embryo grows, it centres itself in the brain from where it later broadcasts itself as a new personallity.

Well, its novel at least.


Apparently, the man used cannabis in his annointing oils. The guys who came after him were ****ed up in the head, but what a dude...

Where on earth did you manage to get that from?

[Knight_Errant]

The guardian, hee hee hee...

[pgm316]

Originally posted by ckdstudent


Apparently, the man used cannabis in his annointing oils. The guys who came after him were ****ed up in the head, but what a dude...


Where on earth did you manage to get that from?


Didn't you read the bible, a bit like Pulp Fiction in places! :eek:



:D

[Knight_Errant]

Yeah man, an' he must have put stuff in it, 'cos the temptation would be just too great, secret stuff like messages like 'burn bush'- the burning bush and 'try some of this, it's good **** man!' then again it got bowdlerised in the middle ages, so they probably changed or removed the really good stuff, like 'How to construct a bong, step 1:...' :D

[jejanim]

Religion huh? interesting! well...here's my (extremely shortened) take on faith & religious beliefs. Except for Buddhism, my studies have shown me that religion was brought about to explain the unexplainable, make the wrongest of wrongs right, make the rightest of rights wrong, and sometimes vice versa. It helps people cope with situations that they can't seem to deal with on their own, it comforts them when they have nowhere to turn, and it gives them a feeling of validation when they are in need. It's basically a tiny little helper on a person's shoulder that keeps them upright...like a crutch. If i could, I would turn to Buddhism b/c it amazes me. Unfortunately, i'm a city boy and have become to accustomed to my ways. I am an agnostic, i believe in nothing spiritual, but i believe that there *could* be something greater out there, like a god. Religion is one of those unexplainable things. Those who dont believe want to know how people can be dumb enough to believe..and those who do believe wonder how people can be dumb enough not to beleive. There is no right or wrong..because nobody actually knows if there are gods...we just have to go through life doing what is best for us, and what feels good inside. But remember, miracles are for those who don't believe that everything happens for a reason.

gotta go...UFC is on!

jeja

[zen_tiger_claw]

in other words it's a false sense of security.

[zen_tiger_claw]

and about jesus healing people. i believe that's true.
but i also know that thousands of taoists and buddhists who are accostomed to their "chi" can do the same thing. the vital energy inside us can be redirected through our fingertips and can cause unexplainable healing phenomina. :)
christians and their faith crap will never understand...

[YODA]

christians and their faith crap will never understand...

LOL! Great sweeping generalisation LOL!

[Casado]

Burning bush? Is that what happens if your girlfriend drops a cigarette on her lap?

When God made man she was only joking!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

There is no right or wrong..because nobody actually knows if there are gods...we just have to go through life doing what is best for us, and what feels good inside.

Some people find rape, murder and theft to be best for them, and make them feel good inside.


But remember, miracles are for those who don't believe that everything happens for a reason.

Actually, there is a reason for miracles. Think about it for a moment, its pretty obvious.


but i also know that thousands of taoists and buddhists who are accostomed to their "chi" can do the same thing. the vital energy inside us can be redirected through our fingertips and can cause unexplainable healing phenomina.
christians and their faith crap will never understand...

I'm really having to bite m tongue on this one.

[zen_tiger_claw]

i get alot of questions on miracles. it seems they're what make people to believe that there is a god.
BUT...

what is a miracle?
a miracle is a supernatural or scientifficaly unexplainable phenomina. it happens all the time.
but what happens if science finally finds out what causes it and where it comes from? then it's not a mirical any more is it?
people a long time ago thought that disease and even thunder where "miracles" from their gods. but now that we have scientifficaly explained them, they are nothing but natural causes. no longer miracles.
science is ever advancing and there is alot we still do not know about our world. untill we do there will still be so called "miracles", and people will still be wasting their lives on foolish religion!
pretty stupid really isn't it?

[jason]

Hey Sean O...

Here's the deal:

Only humans were made in God's image. The Bible starts out telling us this. Only humans personally had God's 'breath' breathed into them. Animals are creations of God's - not children of His.

Animals do not have spirits, as humans do, since they didn't receive God's spirit upon their creation. Therefore, animals go to neither heaven nor hell.

God doesn't 'send' anyone to hell. People, who have free will, choose whether or not to follow God and accept Jesus' sacrificial death on our behalf. If somone wants nothing to do with Jesus while they're living, it would be cruel of God to force that person to spend eternity with Him. It's our choice.

Hell exists because of the free will also given to angels. When they rebelled against God (I think 1/3 of them if I remember correctly), they were cast out of heaven forever, and into what we now call hell. Humans, choosing not to accept Jesus' sacrifice on our behalf, are basically rebelling against our Creator, and therefore end up there too. That's another reason hell exists.

The Bible tells us, as Christian believers, abscent from the body, present with the Lord. No reincarnation going on there.

Jesus even told the repentent thief on the cross next to Him, "Today you will be with me in paradise". He didn't say, "Today you will be a human (or other) embryo".

We get 1-shot. That's it.

The Bible also tells us, "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment" Pretty straightforward.

Hope that helps a little.

And taesujutsu...

If you don't believe Jesus is God incarnate, then you do not believe in the Bible. Am I off on this?

I mean, Jesus said "I and the Father are one".

I also do not wish to offend anyone, just to share the truth of God's word.

Thanks.

[Spike]

You may believe in the old testament if you don`t believe Jesus is God incarnate

[LilBunnyRabbit]

but now that we have scientifficaly explained them, they are nothing but natural causes.

Really, then explain any one 'natural' phenomena to me completely. And I don't mean the simplified version that science teaches us, but the full in-depth explanation.


Hell exists because of the free will also given to angels.

Hell is not supposed to be fire and bimstone, but simply seperation from God.


If you don't believe Jesus is God incarnate, then you do not believe in the Bible. Am I off on this?

Pretty much, Jews believe in the Old Testament, and not in Jesus as Messiah. Besides, all Bible means is 'Book'.

[Swoop]

I tried to read parts of this thread but decided to stop when I started to wonder what it would feel like to cut my wrists.

I've never been one to write a post that doesn't upset at least one person so I'll throw this bit in for good measure. Religion has been the root cause of every major war. Since recorded time began there has never been a single day of complete peace.

I don't blame religion though. I blame people. This has happened because people a flawed. I had to get vaccinations today for my upcoming trip to colombia, on my way home I saw an old guy lying on the floor. I was the first person to stop and help, the next person stopped 10 minutes later. It was a busy road and even before I got to him I saw cars slowing down to take a look then carry on. People are generally ****, there are only a few good ones.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by Swoop
I tried to read parts of this thread but decided to stop when I started to wonder what it would feel like to cut my wrists.

I've never been one to write a post that doesn't upset at least one person so I'll throw this bit in for good measure. Religion has been the root cause of every major war. Since recorded time began there has never been a single day of complete peace.

I don't blame religion though. I blame people. This has happened because people a flawed. I had to get vaccinations today for my upcoming trip to colombia, on my way home I saw an old guy lying on the floor. I was the first person to stop and help, the next person stopped 10 minutes later. It was a busy road and even before I got to him I saw cars slowing down to take a look then carry on. People are generally ****, there are only a few good ones.

"Religion has been the root cause of every major war."
"I don't blame religion though. I blame people."

So which one do you blame :-D

I don't think war has been the cause of every major war!

If you look into the teachings of religions you'll realise they can't the cause.

Its been used as a great way to justify many, but most are only about control of land and wealth.

[zen_tiger_claw]

ckdstudent,
i wasn't trying to explain how thunder got there.
i was saying that because we know how it got there, it's not a miracle.
if you are trying to ask "where did the thunder initially come from"
it has been scientiffically explained over and over again.
and i believe it is a much better explenation than:

"this dude who always existed just made it happen because he's so extremely powerfull and loving."
or
"the bible says..."

really... it's pretty damn stupid and ignorant to think that.
(not trying to offend you, just wanna make a point)
no-one truly knows where or how things where made and every religion has its own theories. and all that drives them is their faith.
christianity was MADE just like buddhism and hinduism and taoism and jewism, but they're the only one that's not willing to admit it.
and right now any christian on this thread will write back in a desperate attempt to cover it. how?
"the bible says...":Angel:

[LilBunnyRabbit]

i wasn't trying to explain how thunder got there.
i was saying that because we know how it got there, it's not a miracle.
if you are trying to ask "where did the thunder initially come from"
it has been scientiffically explained over and over again.
and i believe it is a much better explenation than:

You misunderstand. I want you to tell me exactly how thunder gets there. And not just by saying that the clouds rub together to build up static electricity which then bolts downwards, causing a massive heating and expansion of air which causes a sonic shockwave. I want to know how two clouds of vapour can rub together, why that should cause a transference of electrons between the two, why the electrons have no weight...

Science explains how, but it never goes deep enough, and is in fact incapable of doing so.


really... it's pretty damn stupid and ignorant to think that.

No more than its stupid and ignorant to accept everything science says becausé 'science says so' which is exactly what you're doing.

[Swoop]

This is getting silly. Some people believe and some people don't. There is no definate proof either way because it's all based on beliefs. I personally don't believe but I'm not going to try to change peoples views.

ckdstudent science is incapable of going deep enough because humans are flawed and it's us that created the study of science just like it is us that created religion. The difference is scientists are willing to admit that we don't have all the answers.

You don't have to be a believer to be a good person and you don't have to be a non-believer to be intelligent. Lets just put this topic to rest.

I love you all!

[pgm316]

Put the topic of religion to rest? :D

No harm in debating it, its the only way many people will come to a conclusion on their beliefs......

You've never studied quantum physics have you swoop!? ;)
It almost gets into religious teritory if you look over some of the recent scientific posts.

[mikelw]

Actually, if translated correctly from Hebrew, the commandment says THOU SHALT NOT MURDER. not that you can't kill, but that you cannot MURDER. HUGE difference.

[pgm316]

ok...........

Its true, but remember murder may be ok in the eyes of the law but not your religions! :eek:

[LilBunnyRabbit]

science is incapable of going deep enough because humans are flawed and it's us that created the study of science just like it is us that created religion. The difference is scientists are willing to admit that we don't have all the answers.

Science is incapable of going deep enough because it can't, you get to a point where suddenly you find that there are no more answers. You can't actually say why something's happening, how its happening, or even what's happening. Look at particle physics sometime.

You'll also find that a larger proportion of scientists are religious than the rest of the population, because we've started to see how the whole thing fits together, and many find it to be far too perfectly designed to be chance.

[YODA]

Originally posted by mikelw
Actually, if translated correctly from Hebrew, the commandment says THOU SHALT NOT MURDER. not that you can't kill, but that you cannot MURDER. HUGE difference.

Who's to say that the Hebrew isn't a translation from another language?

Anyone got an Alpha Centaurian to Hebrew Dictionary handy? :D

[Swoop]

You can't say science can answer some questions but reaches a point where it can't anymore. Science is an ongoing process. There are times when people have said "this is impossible" only to later on find out that it isn't.

Also, the comment you made about a larger than average proportion of scientists being religious, I'd like to see your source on that. Even if it is true it doesn't actually mean scientists study all their lives and then see the light.

I believe every question has an answer and it's just a matter of time before those answers are discovered. To say we will never be able to answer certain things is pretty short sighted seeing as we haven't actually been around for very long. The dinosaurse roamed the earth for 120 million years, after that much time I'm sure humans will have some very deep knowledge.

[pgm316]

I've got Klingon to Hebrew if thats any use? :D

[zen_tiger_claw]

that's exactly what i said earlier.
as science explains more and more things, less and less things will seem so "supernatural" you can't really argue with the fact.
it's happening every day.
i'm not really a scientiffic person and i do believe in the supernatural.
but there is a limit.
=

take the tao for example.
a supernatural force. an unexplainable natural energy that gives godlike streingth and power.
science cannot even dream to explain this.
the difference with this and the creation theory, is that the tao can be felt. it can be experienced and enjoyed.

it does not need to be held together by faith because it "is", not "was"
understand?

if you think of it bluntly, faith is all you have.
believe me, i was a christian for 15 years before i turned buddhist
they (one of the greatest churches in history) preached faith not theory. they taught the bible not themselves.
so you know what i did when i first became a monk?
i sat facing a wall after a tea ceremony and studied myself. studied my emotions and desires.
theory not faith.

we don't try to explain how we got here because we know whatever we say isn't true. nobody knows.
and it's hypocrytical and incompetent to state "thou shalt not lie"
when your pretty much basing your life on one big theory. which has less than a 99.99999% of being true.

P.S.
gimme some wisdom here, not blabber on what the bible says.

[pgm316]

zen_tiger_claw

You criticise chrisitians for preaching faith not theory, then you say don't base your life on theory because life is 99.999% unexplained........ eh? So I'm a little confused of your faith in buhddism, the bible can be as much feeling and emotion, its not about rules and regulations either.

I'm not religious or saying one ways right or wrong, just don't understand the comparison.......

And whats with all the scientist bashing, scientists can only do two things, prove what they know with current scientific knowledge or make theories based on assumptions. You do find plenty of religious scientists that find religion as good a theory as many of the scientific ones!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

You can't say science can answer some questions but reaches a point where it can't anymore. Science is an ongoing process. There are times when people have said "this is impossible" only to later on find out that it isn't.

Actually I can say that, but besides that, look at particle physics. The only way it can actually work is by remaining unexplained to a certain degree.


Also, the comment you made about a larger than average proportion of scientists being religious, I'd like to see your source on that. Even if it is true it doesn't actually mean scientists study all their lives and then see the light.

Well, various articles in Scientific American, Psychology Today, Young Scientist, Focus, along with many of my science teachers being religious, along with a psychology study at my university. However I never said that scientists study all their lives and then see the light, only that scientists tend to be religious more than non-scientists. Its simply more of a bent towards believing in a spiritual element of the universe.


I believe every question has an answer and it's just a matter of time before those answers are discovered.

Fair enough. Then why relativity? I can explain every single little detail of it if you give me a week or so, but I couldn't even dream of saying why. Actually lets go one simpler. Why is the sky blue? Science is how, what, when. Religion answers the why.


To say we will never be able to answer certain things is pretty short sighted seeing as we haven't actually been around for very long.

Grantec, but I wouldn't say its exactly short sighted. For more answers, definite answers, to come out about some topics would require a complete rewrite of physics, which may well happen, but that doesn't bring us any closer to answering any of the why questions.


The dinosaurse roamed the earth for 120 million years, after that much time I'm sure humans will have some very deep knowledge.

I'm sure they will. I'd just like to point out that science is shallow knowledge.


as science explains more and more things, less and less things will seem so "supernatural" you can't really argue with the fact.

I can bloody well argue with it. You tell me what quantum physis *is* if not supernatural!


a supernatural force. an unexplainable natural energy that gives godlike streingth and power.
science cannot even dream to explain this.

the difference with this and the creation theory, is that the tao can be felt. it can be experienced and enjoyed.

Hysterical strength, self induced by voluntary subconscious self-delusion and visualisation biofeedback. Just explained it for you. I may not be right, but the explanation fits the facts.


they (one of the greatest churches in history) preached faith not theory. they taught the bible not themselves.

You weren't listening properly, or possibly you had the wrong teachers. Besides, religion is all about faith. Theory is the domain of science and philosophy.


and it's hypocrytical and incompetent to state "thou shalt not lie"

When did anyone say that?


when your pretty much basing your life on one big theory. which has less than a 99.99999% of being true.

You're somewhat missing the point of faith, friend.


gimme some wisdom here, not blabber on what the bible says.

Wisdom, okay. I believe, I have faith, for no better reason than that I do. It is not a logical faith based on reason, or facts, or theories, it is simply that I believe. In a case where neither proof nor disproof can actually exist, all it comes down to is whether or not you personally believe.


And whats with all the scientist bashing, scientists can only do two things, prove what they know with current scientific knowledge or make theories based on assumptions.

Science never proves anything, it merely backs up theories.


You do find plenty of religious scientists that find religion as good a theory as many of the scientific ones!

Agreed, but religion is a belief system, not a theory. It requires no proof or evidence, although both can help.

[pgm316]

Originally posted by ckdstudent

Science never proves anything, it merely backs up theories.


Agreed, but religion is a belief system, not a theory. It requires no proof or evidence, although both can help.

I'm sure you'll argue about anything for the sake of arguing :D

Whats the difference between proving something and backing up theory.....

And whats religion if it isn't the biggest theory on life.....

We can change words round, but they mean similar things.

Some would say there is a lot of proof and evidence were reigion is concerned, thats what all the stories in the bible are supposed to be, but I do agree it is more faith than proof.

I was reading about C. S. Lewis the highly inteligent author, he tried for many years not to be religious, but he sort of found he couldn't find enough "scientific" evidence not to be.

Somebody said to him you don't need to be religious to find Jesus's teaching of benifit. He said you do! If he wasn't the son of God then he was a madman or worse!

:D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Whats the difference between proving something and backing up theory.....

Simple, proof is proving beyond all doubt. Backing something up is no more than saying 'well this suggests that this theory is reasonably accurate'. Proof is impossible.


And whats religion if it isn't the biggest theory on life.....

A belief system. It requires no evidence, it simply requires belief.


We can change words round, but they mean similar things.

No they don't. Evidence is not proof. A belief system is not a theory. Lets take an example. You believe that one plus one equals two, but there is actually no way to prove this at all. Ask any high level mathematician. Its called an axiom, and is accepted as being true, i.e. believed, in order that mathematics works, but it cannot be proved using maths.

[YODA]

You believe that one plus one equals two, but there is actually no way to prove this at all. Ask any high level mathematician. Its called an axiom, and is accepted as being true, i.e. believed, in order that mathematics works, but it cannot be proved using maths.

Spheroids!

If I have ONE of something - and I get another - I have TWO.

This is obviously where knowledge ends and wisdom begins :D

[LilBunnyRabbit]

If I have ONE of something - and I get another - I have TWO.

Prove it. Not just show me that its true, but actually give me an objective proof. Yours is currently based on nothing more than the fact that one plus one equals two, a circular argument.

[YODA]

Yes - that's true - let's not let the FACTS get in the way of "Science"

Bwaaahahahahaaaaaaa.......

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Yes - that's true - let's not let the FACTS get in the way of "Science"

Exactly, you're learning.

Alternatively, and easier to prove as being unprovable is this:

a + b = b + a

One of the seven axioms of mathematics.

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by ckdstudent


One of the seven axioms of mathematics.

How do you know there are seven?

Is 1+6 =7 more reliable than 1+1=2 ?

[MATT_LIQUID]

Guys do you think all soldiers go to hell?

[JediMasterChris]

I would hope not, my dad and brother are soldiers. Do YOU think they do?

[Cain]

You physicists need a vacation!

;)

|Cain|

[LilBunnyRabbit]

How do you know there are seven?

They're just called the seven axioms, whether there are seven or not is irrelevant. Kinda like a trilogy in five parts.


Guys do you think all soldiers go to hell?

If you're taking Christianity as your basis then no. All that access to heaven is supposed to require is faith in the Holy Trinity, and acceptance of forgiveness.

[YODA]

Kinda like a trilogy in five parts.

Here I am - brain the size of a planet - and he expects me to believe a trilogy can have 5 parts.

:D

[Marku]

Soldiers fight for there people, to protect them. so i doubt they goto hell........unless they really enjoy killing people

[pgm316]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
Simple, proof is proving beyond all doubt. Backing something up is no more than saying 'well this suggests that this theory is reasonably accurate'. Proof is impossible.


A belief system. It requires no evidence, it simply requires belief.


No they don't. Evidence is not proof. A belief system is not a theory. Lets take an example. You believe that one plus one equals two, but there is actually no way to prove this at all. Ask any high level mathematician. Its called an axiom, and is accepted as being true, i.e. believed, in order that mathematics works, but it cannot be proved using maths.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/brennan.robinson/bitching/huh.jpg

[Marku]

nice response pgm ^_^

[Cain]

Hehehe;)

|Cain|