Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 210 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
paul 1
Page 36 of 120 < 1 2 ... 34 35 36 37 38 ... 119 120 >
Topic Options
#26726 - 06/19/08 07:12 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Originally Posted By: the cloudten link
What we will attempt to do in the first part of this book, in down-to-earth language, is demonstrate that the theory of creationism, contrary to popular belief, does not lineup with scientific discoveries today.
Really?
Does that mean:
The populace believes creationism does "lineup with scientific discoveries today?"

~K

Top
.
#26731 - 06/19/08 11:36 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
What I intended to imply was that the origin of universe is just as easily explained as the result of a random event, action or chaos, as the possibility that it was planned by a divine planner of some sort, or indeed by the unlikely planned behaviour of otherwise chaotic events. I am, as I have often stated, not a scientist, but I see no more reason for believing the whole greater universe of which our world is a tiny portion, was 'made' to a plan rather than that it appeared as a result of blind chance.

Are not scientists among the most sceptical of we humans? They constantly test their hypotheses and are usually eager to research for the foundation of beliefs and conclusions, something not always so in the case of people with a religious background.

Top
#26735 - 06/20/08 12:45 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TT, and others: Keep in mind, IMO, this is not a debate; it is a dialogue--the sharing of ideas. Don't be shy. Share your thoughts about your religion, or lack of it, with us. Then we can take it for there. I want to understand you, not judge you.

I would like to explore the question: How inclusive is it possible for us to be, okay?


Edited by Revlgking (06/20/08 12:51 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#26736 - 06/20/08 01:06 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
Are not scientists among the most skeptical of we humans? They constantly test their hypotheses and are usually eager to research for the foundation of beliefs and conclusions, something not always so in the case of people with a religious background.
Ellis, I am sure you are aware that some of the great scientists and philosophers of history--Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Chardin, Whitehead, Tesla, Planck, Priestly, Kant, Hegel ...even Einstein, were open to the idea of spirituality.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#26737 - 06/20/08 02:16 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Yes, I know that some scientists are believers in the divine. I do not subscribe to the theory that being a scientist precludes the acceptance of god/spirituality. Faith/belief in that area is a personal choice, one which, as you know I do not have. Thus my statement that I think the universe may be the result of blind chance seems reasonable to me.

However I will acknowledge that the scope and range of the known universe (and the possibilities of the unknown) are awe-inspiring!

Top
#26739 - 06/20/08 02:43 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
I liked the idea of blind chance or chaos theory of the big bang compared to taking the materials for a building and blowing them up with dynamite and ending up with a completed building.

Quote:
Really?
Does that mean:
The populace believes creationism does "lineup with scientific discoveries today?"

Do you normally think this way or are just sarcastic because your bored?

Scientists can be skeptical but then the majority of the population aren't skeptical enough to closely examine the things that are labeled as scientific, and often act like lemmings, following a lead even if it ends up at the bottom of a ravine after a long fall over a cliff.

Quote:
TT, and others: Keep in mind, IMO, this is not a debate; it is a dialogue--the sharing of ideas

Which part of expressing feelings or opinions falls outside of the definition of dialogue? If you don't want to judge others then just don't. That'd be a choice.

Quote:
Thus my statement that I think the universe may be the result of blind chance seems reasonable to me.

Seems totally idiotic to me
crazy
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#26740 - 06/20/08 03:15 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis, you say
Quote:
However I will acknowledge that the scope and range of the known universe (and the possibilities of the unknown) are awe-inspiring!
If you add the readiness to be a humane--loving, moral, and ethical--being to this. Now,tell me: What is the difference between this and being a spiritual one?


Edited by Revlgking (06/20/08 03:17 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#26744 - 06/20/08 04:52 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Originally Posted By: anon~K
Really?
Does that mean:
The populace believes creationism does "lineup with scientific discoveries today?"

Do you normally think this way or are just sarcastic because your bored?

Scientists can be skeptical but then the majority of the population aren't skeptical enough to closely examine the things that are labeled as scientific, and often act like lemmings, following a lead even if it ends up at the bottom of a ravine after a long fall over a cliff.


Hiya TT,
It's a sad comment I suppose, but I do normally think this way.
blush
I wrote that above, fully in the "spirit of dialogue;" but it's nice to know a hint of sarcasm can come across. smile
I like to think that I make people think.

I'd wondered if the 'cloudten' text had yet to be edited; it so surprised me by saying the opposite of what I'd expected.

Was it ~300 points to prove... ...and this is about ID, correct?
Is there a particular point, or family of points that you feel are especially strong and compelling?
I'd be happy to share a scientific wonk-type perspective, or give a critique, if you'd be interested.

~K

Top
#26745 - 06/20/08 05:16 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Quote:

Was it ~300 points to prove... ...and this is about ID, correct?
Is there a particular point, or family of points that you feel are especially strong and compelling?

I thought all of them were good points.

Basically I think that people have a tendency to think within boundaries, and without being aware of it never challenge themselves to see beyond their own beliefs. Most would rather spend time defending their beliefs because of the devastating affects it would have on the personality to accept that maybe everything one thinks they know may be false.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#26750 - 06/20/08 06:00 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Didn't I post something from "cloudten" about Blackwater here?
Was it censored?
It was subversive, I suppose.
~K
p.s. Should I try again?
confused

Top
#26796 - 06/21/08 07:56 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hmmm...
Haven't gotten around to registering, as I was sent a link from someone. Just so that I'm not really "anon," this is Cassox.

Yes, I spent the time to go through all of the posts. Quite long.
The problem as I see it, is that each person is using a subjective
definition for ideas. Going back to the first page, we have someone
saying that a omniscient computer would be God. Yes, the statement was retracted to an extent, but its a good launching point.

What are the qualities of God? Basic Abrahamic approach is that he's Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Benevolent. This is the first problem I have. Most people here are familiar with "the problem
of evil," so I won't even bother to explain it. My point is that if God has these three attributes, then his existence is not logical. Yes, according to human logic I mean. So if God can't be
comprehended by humans, how can one even attempt to discuss his attributes? Unless we make certain assumptions, how can we possibly identify any form of truth?

These are my assumptions:
1. God, if greater than human, would exhibit greater maturity and tolerance than any human.

Do we see this? No, of course not. First of, if omniscient, god
knew each soul that would be condemned. He set up the environmental influences that caused their "fall." Thus he is directly responsible. Problem, is he still punishes. Wouldn't god be above entrapment?

Also, why the secrecy? If the point of god creating the world was to be glorified, why does he need to hide away? It's a weak arguement to say," God is all around you, but you refuse to see."
An omnipotent god would have the power to make it damn clear to everyone. Where a person to choose sin then, its really sin. For a person, who reasons it out differently, to make a decision such as "not stoning their children" or "to eat shellfish" against old testament proclemations, really shouldn't be punished. People in general really do want to do whats right. The problem is, god has
not made that clear at all. Those who follow the "good book" are often the most hateful, and the most loving and supporting often
lack religious affiliation.

I think its fair to say, that if a child experiances and associateds a christian as mean hearted, and then is punished with eternal damnation for not being christian, then "god" is not
just.

Finally, creation itself is the biggest arrogance I can imagine! Billions of souls created to burn for all eternity, and why? For glory? Glory!?! That is sickness. Worse than any Hitler...

Top
#26797 - 06/21/08 08:01 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Sorry so long! I can definitely provide other assumption arguments, but don't want to just rant endlessly. My question, for Christians, is why do you feel your god is worthy of worship?

If great men, such as Buddha, Gandhi, Bucky Fuller, etc. are capable of tolerance and compassion, then shouldn't god be?



Now this line of argument can't really be applied to non-literalists. If one doesn't believe that the bible is the 100% accurate word of God, then its easy to banter away such questions. If someone says, "I don't beleive in hell," then hey, problem solved.

Top
#26801 - 06/22/08 01:04 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Anon wrote:
If great men, such as Buddha, Gandhi, Bucky Fuller, etc. are capable of tolerance and compassion, then shouldn't god be.

If you decide that the god you believe in has these characteristics then he/she/it will have.

However could you not make a similar argument that powerful people like Hitler, Genghis Khan,etc. are capable of terror and tyranny, therefore god, who is also powerful, would be too.

Also can we indeed endow god with human characteristics? Surely god must be divine and his/her/its actions will be beyond our limited human understanding. Isn't that the usual get-out clause?



To Rev:
I wrote:
However I will acknowledge that the scope and range of the known universe (and the possibilities of the unknown) are awe-inspiring!

Rev replied:
If you add the readiness to be a humane--loving, moral, and ethical--being to this. Now,tell me: What is the difference between this and being a spiritual one?

The difference is that I do not believe in god. I think that the awe, and being a moral, loving and ethical person (I hope!) are because I am human, not because I believe in God. Every human is born with the possibility for good.

Top
#26802 - 06/22/08 02:50 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Ellis]
Anonymous
Unregistered


(Cassox)
That's exactly my point. If I give "god" such a loose definition that it absolutely any anthropomorphism, then of course he/it exists. I guess my question, is whats the argument then?

This is only wordy bantering. What are you saying exists? Is it the
Christian ver. of god or what?

Are we talking about just the concept of a god, or God?

Top
#26806 - 06/22/08 05:57 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Quote:

What are the qualities of God? Basic Abrahamic approach is that he's Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Benevolent. This is the first problem I have. Most people here are familiar with "the problem
of evil," so I won't even bother to explain it. My point is that if God has these three attributes, then his existence is not logical. Yes, according to human logic I mean. So if God can't be
comprehended by humans, how can one even attempt to discuss his attributes? Unless we make certain assumptions, how can we possibly identify any form of truth?

God has no qualities other than those we give to God. Since God is not contained in an individual but the individual is made in the image of God we become tantamount to the reflection of God.
We evolve and as we haven't reached an end to evolution then either has our ability to reflect God.
God is Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipotent. Benevolent enough to allow anyone to choose their reflection of God and as one evolves the intellect begins to sharpen the image to greater possibilities.
The experiential world is the world of duality, it exists to placate the development of choice based on sensory appreciation.
Obviously an adult has the ability to appreciate things on a larger or more expanded scale than a two year old. But then after puberty the ego begins to take a foothold in the personality and lock potential into form and function based on past experience and begins to project itself into probable futures by relegating all thought to the past.
If certain influences created by stress infect thought, then the projected futures contain the stresses that remain due to the attachment ego has to identification with memories that hinder innocence and potential.
Some would like to blame this on God but the reality is God is the creation of an absolute that has no attachment to what choice is made. The absolute simply supports all thought.
Ego has a tendency to limit itself to the tiny universe of personal opinion and belief. If one could tear down ego and put it in its proper perspective as the servant to consciousness rather than the master of it in lower states of intellectual evolutionary development, a greater world would exist.
On a positive note. God loves stupid people and gives them enough chances or lifetimes to grow up before removing the rug beneath creativity and starting all over.

Raising conscious awareness so that one does not live superstitiously requires a certain level of spiritual evolution to take place at a soul level.
Just like most people don't give their 3 year old the keys to the car, neither do certain universal laws provide energies to allow ignorant people to raise the dead or heal the sick.
Without knowing the consequences of interfering with the development of spiritual evolution every one with good intentions would be trying to create the perfect world without knowing what someone actually needs to learn about themselves and how to refine the awareness in sense of self and intellectual choice.

Quote:
These are my assumptions:
1. God, if greater than human, would exhibit greater maturity and tolerance than any human.

Do we see this? No, of course not. First of, if omniscient, god
knew each soul that would be condemned. He set up the environmental influences that caused their "fall." Thus he is directly responsible. Problem, is he still punishes. Wouldn't god be above entrapment?


Humans wouldn't be free to evolve or to choose if God intervened in every thing humans did.
Ever tried to teach a child how to live by making all of the choices so he wouldn't make mistakes? Treating someone like they are stupid and can't learn anything doesn't inspire maturity. It breeds insecurity and low self esteem.
Besides we don't approve of slavery anymore than God does.

The soul itself never suffers. There is no condemnation that takes place at the soul level only at the level of the ego and belief that is manifest due to cause and effect.
What we believe and initiate through our beliefs creates the foundation for our lives. Where we leave off at death with the momentum of thoughts and energies of actions paves the portals for future lives.
Basically we become addicted to habits that drive us outward in sensory experience rather than inward toward the soul and conscious awareness of the soul.
It's a matter of simple mechanics. What you focus on grows. The ego is addicted to sensory addictions and instant gratification.
It tries to manipulate the outside world to achieve what it desires and push away what it doesn't like. The universe is an energy web that doesn't hear negatives. It takes thought and translates it into experience. We create experience either consciously or unconsciously.
For those who think God is some guy or being, and heaven is some location that exists on an ethereal plane that can only be reached after good living and a following death, God is a belief.
For those who transcend the ego, God is as if a void of infinite potential and energy and it lives in every experience as a silent still absolute presence that is very tangible to all the senses.
Superstitious beliefs of separation from God and the resultant experience sees the universe as something foreign that happens to the individual.
In Unity of body mind and spirit, God is experienced within ones self and creation moving outward from consciousness that is inside rather than outside of ones self.
The Eastern spiritual Teachings of Yoga or Union are all about the universal laws of God and the absolute.
The Christian roots that are the Teachings of Jesus are based on these same universal laws.
It is man who has translated the teachings into dogma, superstition and Churchianity.
In every age there have always been great sages or seers of truth who have shared the greater truths of God that are not the superstitious beliefs of religious ignorance, but for the most part man has already made up his mind about God and expects this God to counter his thoughts and feelings with something more powerful so that he may be removed from everything that he sees as evil.
God will do no such thing for it is man who is responsible for all of his evils and sufferings, and by mans own defiance toward good and the change required to quit masturbating both physically and mentally, he resists God in favor of his ego.

Quote:

Also, why the secrecy? If the point of god creating the world was to be glorified, why does he need to hide away? It's a weak arguement to say," God is all around you, but you refuse to see."

It is a weak argument if you don't know God, but the fact is, if you are blinded by your own ignorance and can't see the greater part of yourself and it is not the fault of your senses, it has to be the way you use your senses.
Anybody can learn to play a piano but not everyone does. The reason being is that not everyone wants to learn nor wants to invest themselves in the discipline it takes to learn to play.
Seeing God is the same. Not everyone is really wanting to see God and the God they want to see is what they imagine God is rather than the real God.
Ever hear the song, "Lookin for love in all the wrong places"?
Well if you're looking south when you should be looking north you're not going to see what is happening north are you?
Very few want to give up their precious attachments to their suffering to really know God. And suffering is the attachment to lifestyle and living in belief. Anytime that lifestyle is disturbed and the belief threatened, suffering occurs.
People deluded by ego hate change, and as such are resistant to opening themselves to God.
People will bargain with God.. Give me this and I'll do that...etc. etc. But will they put down everything to experience a life that is different? Not unless it is ripped from their hands, and then they will resent losing what they had. There is no room in most peoples lives because they are too preoccupied with their thoughts and feelings to notice God.
60,000 thoughts per day according to a Stanford research study. That's how many thoughts a normal person thinks per day.
The mind is too caught up in the drama of personal chaos to be cognizant of anything other than egoic personal drama.

Quote:
An omnipotent god would have the power to make it damn clear to everyone. Where a person to choose sin then, its really sin. For a person, who reasons it out differently, to make a decision such as "not stoning their children" or "to eat shellfish" against old testament proclemations, really shouldn't be punished. People in general really do want to do whats right. The problem is, god has
not made that clear at all. Those who follow the "good book" are often the most hateful, and the most loving and supporting often
lack religious affiliation.


It is blatantly clear. Sin is misdirected thought, belief in separation and attachment to physical appearances and mental imaginings that are belief. It results in a few years of experience and physical death. It doesn't get much clearer than that.

Quote:
I think its fair to say, that if a child experiances and associateds a christian as mean hearted, and then is punished with eternal damnation for not being christian, then "god" is not
just.

If a child experiences ignorance and by lack of better experience fails to become enlightened, it would be seen by the ego as circumstantial. But to the enlightened, the child who lives through the experience of ignorance expands his comprehension of life by learning and living first hand, ignorance. By this experience he/she will at some level comprehend a greater option and by his/her own judgments and retention of experience, set in motion the wheels of karma to create a more expanded experience of himself or herself.

Quote:

Finally, creation itself is the biggest arrogance I can imagine! Billions of souls created to burn for all eternity, and why? For glory? Glory!?! That is sickness. Worse than any Hitler...

For anyone who experiences a sewer there can be no words to express the filth and the smell, but above ground civilization would be swimming in its own filth if the sewers were not created to remove the waste that they create.
As such the universe is very accommodating when it comes to the greed and the lust humans focus on. We will kill for our right to lust.

Personally, I have experienced a much brighter side to humanity. Earth is one small planetary sphere in the universe of over 400 billion galaxies and for some planetary civilizations, in comparison, Earth is a toilet, and to others a paradise.
This is reflected in our own neighborhoods. There are people who have no homes and no income to buy food, and then there are those with food and shelter who could care less about the ones who are without food. We are a perfect example of choice and of the intelligence that exists within creation and choice. We reflect ourselves and our ability to evolve perfectly.

Quote:

If great men, such as Buddha, Gandhi, Bucky Fuller, etc. are capable of tolerance and compassion, then shouldn't god be?

It is because God is, that these men are what they are.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#26823 - 06/22/08 09:40 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Ok, my first post actually pointed out that this doesn't apply to interpretationalists. Basically, nothing said really makes any sense. Your operating on an entirely subjective set of points. Of course if I paint my own beleifs and decide to beleive them, I would think they make sense. Unfortunately, they really don't.

The fact that you think that you've answered the prob of evil, with a quick email reply, when its been a major philosophical quandry for generations says it all. The majority of people here really have no want to discuss, but rather to force feed their own little gods on others. You did'nt really answer even one of my questions.

""Humans wouldn't be free to evolve or to choose if God intervened in every thing humans did."" Obviously a very poor arguement. Its more difficult for people to evolve and choose, when they are burning in hell for all eternity. God isn't punishing to teach, but to cause suffering. This is directly biblical. You don't teach a dog not to pee on the carpet by beating them to death.



"" Anybody can learn to play a piano but not everyone does. The reason being is that not everyone wants to learn nor wants to invest themselves in the discipline it takes to learn to play.""

Also an incredibly egocentric statement. So, the reason I don't beleive in god is because I lack discipline, or don't want to? How about I've spent years in pursuit. I've praid, fasted, meditated, waited, chanted, and put myself through many painful ascetic practices in pursuit of god. I've tried harder than most christians ever do. I'm sure that I understand both the contents and the history of the Bible better than most here, with some exceptions. Still isn't a logically sound, nor moral way to live.
Your just repeating the same old, same olds, mixed up with a few new ager terms.
I have a new question. Why? Why do you beleive these things?

Top
#26824 - 06/22/08 10:10 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Anonymous:
Are you a moral, ethical and loving human being, like are all humane theists, and atheists?

If so, what is the problem?

BTW, Anon, I have little idea as to what you mean when you write:
Quote:
Still isn't a logically sound, nor moral way to live.
Your just repeating the same old, same olds, mixed up with a few new ager terms.

I have a new question. Why? Why do you believe these things?


Edited by Revlgking (06/22/08 10:14 PM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#26825 - 06/22/08 10:14 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TT:
Please, summarize your last post. Or is it possible?
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#26827 - 06/23/08 01:40 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Anonymous]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Quote:
Ok, my first post actually pointed out that this doesn't apply to interpretationalists.

My answer isn't supposed to appeal to fantasy, nor is God realized in the same way as word association or a Rorschach excercise.
Quote:
Basically, nothing said really makes any sense.

Not my fault, maybe you aren't really listening.
Quote:
Your operating on an entirely subjective set of points.
No I'm not, tho I can use subjective analogies to point in a direction.
Quote:
Of course if I paint my own beleifs and decide to beleive them, I would think they make sense. Unfortunately, they really don't.

Then obviously your beliefs need to change.
Quote:
The fact that you think that you've answered the prob of evil, with a quick email reply, when its been a major philosophical quandry for generations says it all. The majority of people here really have no want to discuss, but rather to force feed their own little gods on others. You did'nt really answer even one of my questions.

I probably didn't meet your expectations which is not a priority for me. But I did comment to the subjects and even the questions.
Evil is an illusion.
Quote:

""Humans wouldn't be free to evolve or to choose if God intervened in every thing humans did."" Obviously a very poor arguement. Its more difficult for people to evolve and choose, when they are burning in hell for all eternity.

There are no humans burning in hell for eternity. You are being dramatic. And I'm not trying to make an argument for the truth, but if you want to argue against my points then it will be wasted energy.
Quote:
God isn't punishing to teach, but to cause suffering. This is directly biblical. You don't teach a dog not to pee on the carpet by beating them to death.
If that, is Biblical, it is misinterpreted and mistranslated from its original meaning.

Quote:

"" Anybody can learn to play a piano but not everyone does. The reason being is that not everyone wants to learn nor wants to invest themselves in the discipline it takes to learn to play.""

Also an incredibly egocentric statement. So, the reason I don't beleive in god is because I lack discipline, or don't want to?

Yes and no. If you want to know God, you have placed something in front of you first to learn about, before you can appreciate the fullness of God. If I was to make a guess I would say it was arrogance.
Quote:
How about I've spent years in pursuit. I've praid, fasted, meditated, waited, chanted, and put myself through many painful ascetic practices in pursuit of god.

So self flagellation is a reason you should experience God?
Quote:
I've tried harder than most christians ever do. I'm sure that I understand both the contents and the history of the Bible better than most here, with some exceptions. Still isn't a logically sound, nor moral way to live.

If you haven't gained the experience of God you haven't understood the Bible. You understand it in terms of your beliefs maybe, but not in the way it was taught by the person who was quoted in the scripture.
Quote:
Your just repeating the same old, same olds, mixed up with a few new ager terms.

Isn't it amazing how truth can be spoken without understanding? The New Agers, not unlike the dogmatists who spout scripture have words at their disposal but their level of conscious awareness does not change by chanting scripture of mantras without an experience of God. The only thing they have to surrender to is their imagination which is locked in illusions of the ego.
Quote:

I have a new question. Why? Why do you beleive these things?

Beliefs change. What I experience (as experience) also changes. What it is that inspires me and supports me doesn't.
There is a constant behind the experiences and the beliefs.
One can easily recognize the difference between heaven and hell from the realization of Truth which is not relative but a constant.

Oh and Reverend. What specifically did you want summarized?


Edited by Tutor Turtle (06/23/08 04:02 AM)
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#26833 - 06/23/08 03:41 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, includ [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis writes:
Quote:
The difference is that I do not believe in god. I think that the awe, and being a moral, loving and ethical person (I hope!) are because I am human, not because I believe in God. Every human is born with the possibility for good.
Ellis, I think I have said this before: I do not believe in a god out there, either. However, I know GOD as being in and through the here-and-now I know. Perhaps we are saying the same thing. The important point is for us to: Be and live as humane being, not just animal-like humans.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
Page 36 of 120 < 1 2 ... 34 35 36 37 38 ... 119 120 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.