EPTWOOOOOAOOAAAAHHHHOWWWOOOOAAHHHOOOOAAAAAHH
How I Believe in God - Page 10
| Blogs > GrayArea |
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
WOOOOOAOOAAAAHHHHOWWWOOOOAAHHHOOOOAAAAAHH | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24701 Posts
On March 30 2009 01:28 MoltkeWarding wrote: This question can only be of interest to a pedant. When you said pedant did you mean "a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning." or "a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details." or "a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to common sense." Maybe you can explain what you meant because I don't really get it. Love requires impulsive trust and confidence in the object of your feelings. In a relationship between two people, one intuitively knows that the other loves them, but their knowledge is founded completely on faith. Skepticism destroys love between two people just as it destroys communal confidence. I'm still waiting to know if you mean love in general (like you could love your mom or your wife), or if you differentiate between love that results from different relationships (mom vs gf). I'm not sure if I agree with what you said about love, but I think I'd rather you clear up what you mean by 'love' as I originally requested. chef: he opened it because I asked him to; the justification was that the idiots seem to have gone and we are just having a flame-less discussion at the moment... and it would be better to close all of the follow up blogs that copied the thread title instead... | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
On March 30 2009 01:28 MoltkeWarding wrote: This question can only be of interest to a pedant. Love requires impulsive trust and confidence in the object of your feelings. In a relationship between two people, one intuitively knows that the other loves them, but their knowledge is founded completely on faith. Skepticism destroys love between two people just as it destroys communal confidence. I don't think that impulsive trust is necessary... In fact, I think many times people require proof to feel comfortable in a relationship. There are things people wouldn't normally do that they do for people they love, that prove to one the person loves them. Usually involving going out of ones way to ensure another's happiness, or many hours spent on an artistic rendition of one's lover... For fucks sake, wedding rings are expensive as hell for the people that judge commitment on them. It's not a leap into the dark like religion can be. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
EDIT: And I don't mean infatuated with a girl/guy. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24701 Posts
On March 30 2009 01:50 BottleAbuser wrote: I once got a straight flush. God does exist; the probabilities against my hand were astronomical! This kind of post is what got the thread closed. If it gets closed again I won't be able to get it open ;( | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
On March 30 2009 01:50 BottleAbuser wrote: I once got a straight flush. God does exist; the probabilities against my hand were astronomical! How much did you rake in with that? ^^ BottleAbuser: raises $0.03 to $0.10 and is all-in progre$$or: folds Uncalled bet ($0.03) returned to BottleAbuser BottleAbuser collected $0.07 from pot BottleAbuser: doesnt show hand | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 30 2009 01:02 Chef wrote: Couldn't that be achieved with basic optimism in the absence of spiritual faith? I also dislike when people compare religion to a moral compass. Religion is more like a moral old map. Sometimes you're trying to follow that map and you come to a place that doesn't even exist on the map cause it was built after the map was drawn. A moral compass is something within every non-sociopathic human being that allows him or her to feel empathy and consideration, and it works with or without the dirty map. Only if your faith allows you to update that map constantly can it ever be remotely useful. Most of the faiths I've seen change very, very slowly. Not quite what I was getting at. Religion shouldn't act like a moral compass. Its fairly poor for assessing common issues of morality that more basic moral thought comes across. It comes into play in situations that are morally intractable (e.g. your everyday moral reasoning is not adequate in resolving the issue). To better understand my meaning, consider the scientific analogue. Religion is fairly poor at answering questions that empirical science can (in fact, an overly religious view can lead to answers scientifically proven to be incorrect). Science, however, can't answer everything. There are questions of a scientific nature that are simply beyond human ability to comprehend. Like it or not, there will simply be things unknowable to humankind. This is where religion comes in. It helps bring peace of mind not by answering the unknowable questions, but by establishing faith that there IS an answer (e.g. God knows the things that humans cannot know). | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
1. Could this happen if God didn't exist? 2. No. 3. Therefore, God exists. Where is the problem with this? Hint: It's on line 2. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On March 29 2009 19:36 merach wrote: Until someone can prove or disprove the existence of a higher power to the point where even the most staunch atheist/fundie changes their views, I refuse to participate in these needless circlejerk discussions outside of pointing out that faith can empower a person to change their life, and make otherwise decent people slaughter each other in the names of their beliefs. How long before we have fundies killing atheists, or vice versa? How long before both sides learn to respect each other? lolwhat. Have you ever even taken a glimpse into history before? Oh, and Reason, the problems of the argument you posted a couple pages is that your entire argument revolved around an absolute claim you just made out of the blue, but the central idea wasn't really explained or supported by anything concretely. | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
Btw, I try my best to word my thought as precise as possible, but english is not my first language, so there will be some 'word mishits'. On March 29 2009 22:02 micronesia wrote: Actually it's a good idea for us to be clear in what we mean. It's so easy to you use words like 'believer' and not be clear if we mean someone who has some kind of spiritual beliefs, or someone who participates in a certain religion (such as Christianity). When I talk about my believing, I talk about my beliefs about how the world works, not about taking somebody's opinion for granted and stick to it because of some fear. I'm under the impression that even tho there are many atheist out there, many of them think or feel that there is some presence, a spiritual thing they belive exists, but no religion describes it well enough to become a follower. I'm not sure what your aim was there, so I don't know where exactly to go with my explanation. I don't like this statement. First of all pick a better word than smart... Also, what do you mean there is 'something' we haven't grasped about our minds? What kind of thing? A spiritual thing? Or just anything? Because we are still studying the mind constantly, if by mind you mean brain. Also, what do you mean by 'grasped'? Ok, I didn't formulate that well. There's this "life force", "aliveness" that is sometimes mentioned, something we can't track back or decode. There's something that breathes life into the form. I can't say it any better, if I knew how, and knew more about it, I'd be the author of a bestseller. The fact is that humans haven't been able to produce a single alive thing from non-alive components. You can only reproduce the already alive stuff. Interesting, reasonable topic. Not proof of anything, but worth investigating. What do you mean? I can't give any real reference here, mostly hear-say from this scientific show I watch. Forget this for now. There is something majorly wrong with this... "even the open-minded Christians will agree that there's only one God" wat? All religions are talking about the same thing? What point were you trying to make? Ok, even people as conservative as open-minded Christians(I use this term for people who take so much for granted, but aren't completely blind) will agree that the God being described in different religions is in fact the same being. Micronesia, I can see that you're very interested in debunking the religion/spirituality, which mean you care in some way. + Show Spoiler + I dare to say, you look for someone to convince you coz you don't wanna look stupid by believing something that isn't black on white. I would advise you to read some religious/spiritual books and see for yourself. Once you are completely sure within yourself, you'll have no reason to convince or prove anything to anyone else. If you do decide to read something, make sure to include some non-dualistic teaching in your repertoir. EDIT: typo | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 30 2009 02:30 Chef wrote: I'm fairly happy with not being omniscient. I don't need the answer to everything to be at peace with myself. You've never wondered what happens to your consciousness after death, or any of those other intractable questions that can't be empirically answered? It doesn't bother you that those are fundamentally unknowable? | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24701 Posts
On March 30 2009 02:51 niteReloaded wrote: Ok, I didn't formulate that well. There's this "life force", "aliveness" that is sometimes mentioned, something we can't track back or decode. There's something that breathes life into the form. I can't say it any better, if I knew how, and knew more about it, I'd be the author of a bestseller. The fact is that humans haven't been able to produce a single alive thing from non-alive components. You can only reproduce the already alive stuff. First of all you are assuming that everyone feels this indescribable thing you are trying to convey... and I don't share your feelings as far as I can tell, nor do I think it is agreed upon by most people. What reason do you have for saying that this is so? As for not being able to produce alive things... that's really a stretch of a related thing to talk about based on what you were saying immediately prior. However, it is important to note that the general inability of humans to create 'a single alive thing from non-alive components' doesn't prove either party right or wrong in any specific way since there are many very reasonable arguments for why that is so from both sides of the argument. Ok, even people as conservative as open-minded Christians(I use this term for people who take so much for granted, but aren't completely blind) will agree that the God being described in different religions is in fact the same being. Micronesia, I can see that you're very interested in debunking the religion/spirituality, which mean you care in some way. + Show Spoiler + I dare to say, you look for someone to convince you coz you don't wanna look stupid by believing something that isn't black on white. I would advise you to read some religious/spiritual books and see for yourself. Once you are completely sure within yourself, you'll have no reason to convince or prove anything to anyone else. If you do decide to read something, make sure to include some non-dualistic teaching in your repertoir. EDIT: typo Although I appreciate your reasonable offer, I can assure you that you have misjudged me. If you look through the thread closely you'll probably see that my involvement in this topic is usually not to change the religious beliefs of people, but rather to cut through the b.s. that often comes up from both sides and just stick to the heart of the matter. Basically, my goal would be for all the relevant and useful information to be on the table, and then the only thing that's left is for each reader to choose how to interpret it for themself. I'd prefer if more people agreed with me, and occasionally I make a few points to encourage this, but I'm far from searching for anything at this point. | ||
|
DeathByMonkeys
United States742 Posts
On March 29 2009 13:22 LuckyFool wrote: God exists. Nuff said. Nice story too. Welcome to why everyone believes there's some omnipotent deity out there, and that this "being" wasn't just created as a hoax to explain the currently unexplainable from about 4000 B.C. to about the 1900s. He's just there, I've been to church all my life because my parents started me going young and I've went ever since and my kids will go also... typical theist. I'm actually currently reading The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design. So you can probably guess my take on this and for now... /Gets popcorn and gets ready for typical God/Anti-God thread. | ||
|
Bac
United States53 Posts
| ||
|
404.Nintu
Canada1723 Posts
On March 29 2009 22:05 Samurai- wrote: Its really hard to listen of many different bullshit stories comming out of their mouth.. Are you kidding me? Because they say others are false.. And i ve heard that there are around 40 thousand different sects... And i think it was arround 0,02 % that you might have the right one, if you actually eat the "god exists bull".. 0,02% that you have the right religion ? lol This is such terrible logic. Most the denominations of Christianity don't think the others are damned to hell. The differences come with how you worship, and differences in varying belief policies, not simply 'saved or not'. A man who claims to be anti-religious goes on a killing spree. Does that make you, who is also against religion, accountable for this action? Of course not. Yet you seem to lack the intellect to realize that simply because someone who claims to be Christian, does something bad, that the rest of people who consider themselves Christian, are no accountable. Honestly. If there was a clone of you, except Christian, you'd hate him more than any other person in this thread. Self-righteous, offensive, obtrusive, belittling, hypocritical. Get some perspective dude. If a Christian REALLLLLY thinks he's right, does that give him the right to try and force others to believe him? Certainly you'd respond No. Then why is it that you, seemingly to be so sure of yourself, have the right to have all that you deny religious people? Oh, I forgot, because you're 'right' and 'logical' in your mind. So of course it's justified. You're a brainwashed, lifeless opinion. | ||
|
404.Nintu
Canada1723 Posts
Ok, even people as conservative as open-minded Christians(I use this term for people who take so much for granted, but aren't completely blind) will agree that the God being described in different religions is in fact the same being. Why do you think the God being described in different religions is in fact the same being? Which religions in particular? You mean the key 3? I believe he refers to the Abrahamic 3. Y'know, these guys: (Pink) ![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Abraham_Dharma.png) | ||
| ||
