|
You cannot talk about God and proof of existence in the same paragraph once you're past a certain age. This is coming from someone who, again, is not religious. Your, as you say, "feelings" or "spirituality" have nothing to do with proof. I don't understand why so many people ask for a physical proof of something that doesn't have anything to do with the palpable world.
Because believers in these proposed beings wish to have their faith taken into consideration when making decisions based in and affecting the palpable world, and we then expect them to play by the same rules as any other hypothesis. The message, in short form, would be something like; Back up your claims or keep them to yourself.
Religion has always sought temporal power because it is for some reason granted the luxury of an exemption from the standard burden of proof. This makes it eminently simple for utterly unqualified people to attain positions of immense power and influence. See creationism in school, religious education, opposition to contraceptives, abortion, homosexuality etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of religion, but it cannot, must not, under any circumstances, be given equal consideration compared that which is empirically and scientifically supported.
I am perfectly happy to let people have their toys. Do not bring the toys to my house. Do not try to make my children or anyone else's children play with the toys. Do not try to insinuate the toys into legislation and government. Keep the toys to yourself, and do not pester others with them.
|
My view on religion:
1. Organized religion is acceptable because it teaches good ethics & morals. Once the organized religion attempts to convert non-believers it has become obsolete.
2. There is a fine line between brainwashing young children into religion & teaching good ethics/morals. In my eyes, nobody under the age of 18-20 should be able to fully commit themselves to a single belief/view (quite frankly, they haven't lived enough yet).
3. People should look beyond the two extremes, the religion-hating atheists & the preaching extremists. There is much more in the middle. For example: There are many more atheists that coexist in a loving manner with very religious people than there are religion-hating atheists. There are also many more religious people that coexist in a loving manner with extreme atheists than there are preaching extremists. Life is about happiness, not hate!
4. Good ethics & morals can be taught with the complete absence of religion.
5. Nobody should be told what to believe. I am speaking to both sides of the spectrum. Non-believers should never tell those in question or those who believe, what to believe. Believers should never tell those in question or those who do not believe, what to believe. Discovering one's religion & spirituality is 100% personal.
6. Questioning everything around you is a dangerous road. While I do believe that it is good to question many things around you, too many questions will lead to unhappiness and anxiety. The life we live on this earth is short and sweet, but too many questions will lead to a life that is sweet and sorrowful.
7. The goal of any religion, spiritual decision, or non-belief should always be to strive for personal happiness, helping others, and self-fulfillment.
My personal religious views:
1. There is something greater than us and our reality here on earth. I am not referring to any Christian God, Allah, etc. There are too many conflicting religions on our planet to allow me to believe in a single entity. Therefore, I believe there is an infinite (like our universe) number of possible God(s), spirit entities, greater beings. But, I do believe there is something out there greater.
2. Life/lives is/are a combination of nirvana, reincarnation, and heaven. I believe there is potential for looping lives (reliving lives until bliss/happiness/nirvana is achieved). But, I also believe there is potential for reincarnation (live one life until you move on to the next, once again repeating this process until bliss/happiness/nirvana is achieved). Once this eternal bliss/happiness/nirvana is achieved, the "next level" of reality is presented. This higher level of reality consists of complete understanding of everything and infinity. Only at this point do we realize that complete understanding of everything and infinity isn't true bliss. The higher being(s) allows us to restart at the "bottom level" of reality. I believe that "true bliss" is the state of being ignorant and striving for the ability to be all-knowing, but once it is achieved, it is no longer true bliss. This is why I believe we are all truly blessed to be living this current life, because we are in this exact situation.
3. The main point of my life is 100% not guided by my spiritual beliefs. I want to live a happy life with a family and always strive to be the best possible person I can be. I want to be friendly and coexist with everyone, regardless of personal belief, orientation, race, and sex.
This is the end of my rant. I hope you enjoyed it 
PS: More important than everything I have written above: Love your friends and family. They will not be here with you forever, so enjoy your time with them.
|
On March 25 2013 01:51 S:klogW wrote:
Let's assume God in what I consider it's commonsense definition which cuts across many of the different major religions.
A being that is:
- all knowing
- all present
- all powerful
- created the universe
I doubt there should still be confusion about this
Well, you see, this definition often leads to problems. Mainly because you first need to get rid of the idea of god as a puppet master that is pulling strings, that it is a single conscience, and also that it really cares what you are up to.
But ok, let's say we have a god that is all-know, all-present, all-powerful, and created the universe. Now what if I would add two extra properties that people often don't like added to their God because they want to personally feel special, like their Daddy God loves them:
I would like to add to that that this God does not consciously give a shit about us. The same way that most humans don't give a shit about the bug they squash under their feet. Or the cell in their body that has run its course, hell we are even smaller than that. We are a moldy small speck on a small speck in a maybe also small speck that is the universe. We are by no means significant to anything.
The second thing I would like to add is let's view this God as a programmer. He build the world like a coder builds a simulation. He adds all the parameters, even knows what it will all do and then let the thing run its course for his own amusement, although he might get bored of it and move on to other things pretty soon.
|
To TimeENT:
Do you believe it is good to teach morality based on faith? (i.e. Doubting Thomas etc..)
And related to that, how can one learn from faith-based teaching without the dogma attached to it? Aren't you sort of assuming that the person is right in telling you these things because it's faith-based?
Lastly, why do you believe in some kind of god, instead of just no god? (I'm reminded of Freud's friend who was describing the vast ocean of feelings in religious sentiments).
|
I have seen evidence in God in many different ways, experiences, situations, nature, "coincidences". I think it is wasted effort that we try to come up with some scientific formula for God, when there probably isn't. I believe in God because I've experienced him in my life, that is the evidence I have for his existence. Yes, I doubt sometimes, but I am able to work through it, and come out the other side.
I think Religion is a real problem. In biblical times, this would correlate to the pharisees and saducees (sp?) of the day, and Jesus was not a fan of those guys. Christianity is about a relationship with a God who loves us, and was willing to make a sacrifice to save us from our messed up ways. When you throw religion into the mix, you get hurt people, rules and laws that may or may not have a place in today's society. Religion (I'm talking about Christianity here) is generally unhealthy. We are supposed to have a relationship with Jesus, and show/do what he did for us to others, so that they may also be saved by him.
This doesn't mean we should go about it trying to force people to listen and convert. I try to live my life to honor and glorify him - and hopefully people see that difference in me. It's hard, but very worthwhile.
I don't see very many, if any, people express this view of Christianity/God debates, and I just wanted to let you guys know, that there are a lot of us out there who don't want to ram anything down your throats. I would like to apologize to anyone who has been hurt be religion, christians, or myself, who may have caused pain, annoyance, or trouble.
tl; dr: Religion is the problem. Christianity should/is a relationship with God, rather than just following a set of rules. My views are constantly changing as I work through important issues, and hope you can do the same with an open mind.
Thanks for reading this
Edit: first sentence had spelling mistakes
|
On March 25 2013 01:57 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2013 01:51 Carving wrote:
In advance, im very sorry for my poor english, this also might cause me to sound pretty chaotic :D
I am not entirely sure yet after reading most of the posts what drives you to prove a God exists or doesnt exist.
In my oppinion the drive people have to explain things they don't understand, from human behaviour to the development of the universe and our planet, is one of the most important aspects of being human and improving as humanity.
But
Why is there such a need for proving or disproving a God? I suppose you could take up different perspectives.
If there is a God like the Christian God for example, you could say this God wants humanity to believe in him without having proof. So this almighty God would make sure it isn't possible to prove his existence.
In this case it would be pretty useless to try to prove this God right?
Or
You could try to prove there is a God by for example looking at miracles. As for myself i have seen quite some stuff which could be called miracles, which cannot (yet) be explained by science. Yet personally i do not automaticly link those miracles to a God NOR to science. But if you would, you would have to somehow 'force' situations to get miracles right? but then again when you would 'force' it, it could be 'controlled' meaning it isn't a miracle anymore, so id say, if miracles exist they will stay miracles because for it to be a miracle, science should fail to explain.
It is sad you guys don't master Dutch because there is a very interesting discussion going on in our country right now. There is this scientist in astronomy i think, who has received various prizes, and such. During a lecture he gave, he said he believed in miracles and saw them himself. Some guy from a newspaper wrote an article about this scientist that he shouldnt be a scientist anymore and that christians can't be true scientists because they believe in a God and such, alot of drama started and this scientist said, alright i will drop out of my position at the university etc and continue researching individually. This raised even more drama because many other scientist of whom most are christian got angry because this is one of the most accomplished scientist in his working field (in the netherlands). After reading most of all the articles of both sides i have the strong feeling you shouldn't mix up religion with science.
Not because science proves religion to be false or because religion proves science to be false. I actually think they even make each other stronger when mixed BUT somehow many atheists want to use science to prove religion wrong, creating emotional discussion just as many religious people try to prove science wrong.
The thing that strucks me the most when i see religious vs science discussions, you see atheists saying religious people are ignorant stupid crazy and such, while stating atheists and scientists are developed people with knowledge. YET the exact thing those atheists hate about how for example christians behave is EXACTLY what they do themselves in such a discussion they just have a different perspective on the world. The christians in this case want to prove science wrong and do the exact thing they think is stupid about what atheists do in such discussions. There is atheists using facts that prove being a christian is the most stupid thing on the world while the guy who came up with these facts is a christian. Then there is christians using theological reasoning and 'facts' that prove science wrong while their source for this reasoning many times comes from scientists who also work on for example the evolution theory.
The thing is, people who dislike religion pick up science, and people who dislike science pick up religion to prove each other wrong. And by doing this both are wrong. Atleast this is my oppinion. Then there is a small amount of both religious and atheist people who actually manage to talk about each others believes (yes i just called facts and science a belief aswell) without inmidiate judging and dirt throwing.
When people stop to be afraid and scared of everything they can and cannot explain they might be able to not take the bible as the absolute answer to everything and maybe atheists can accept that there are many things that happen which cannot be explained (some will be explained). So if we stop wasting our time to research the existence of a God or the nonexistence of science but just do research for things we do not understand without putting stamps on it like : Science is bullshit, Religion is bullshit. We might even understand things faster and more easy, i truly believe open minded people who see religion for what it could be and combine it with science will upgrade us as humanity faster and more effectively then when there is constant battle between religion and science.
Because lets get this clear, religion does not deny science, religion does not dissaprove aborting childs or the use of condoms. People who are scared of developments and such and who cannot deal with them USE religion as some kind of truth to forbid those things and to create chaos.
So after this long incoherent story id say, Stop discussing the existence of god and science and start asking how to combine those.
This is a good post if it were not off topic. From what I understand, we want to limit the discussion to a scientific or empirical understanding of religion. Anything outside that is not part of this thread. To answer your point, science and religion does not have to mix. In fact, science is better off without religion. Science deals with truth, observable, verifiable, significant truth. Religion deals with feelings and effects.
Well i don't think its that offtopic actually, because what im trying to say is, the discussion might ask the wrong questions
I think science isnt better off without religion, i think both can improve each other, the reason i say this doesnt mean i want science to stop looking at truth or observe etc but ideas create opportunities. When you accept the fact there might be more then just science and religion accepts science you get a broader and wider perspective, the more open minded we think the better we can come to solutions, also solutions based on truth and empirical data etc. Atleast thats my oppinion.
|
If god is all powerful then can he make a pizza large enough that even he cannot finish it?
If he can, he is not all powerful because he cannot finish the pizza.
If he cannot, then he is not all powerful because he cannot make a pizza large enough for him to not be able to finish it.
Do humans need a greater purpose behind their existence and why is it not acceptable if they don't?
|
On March 25 2013 01:57 McBengt wrote:Show nested quote +You cannot talk about God and proof of existence in the same paragraph once you're past a certain age. This is coming from someone who, again, is not religious. Your, as you say, "feelings" or "spirituality" have nothing to do with proof. I don't understand why so many people ask for a physical proof of something that doesn't have anything to do with the palpable world. Because believers in these proposed beings wish to have their faith taken into consideration when making decisions based in and affecting the palpable world, and we then expect them to play by the same rules as any other hypothesis. The message, in short form, would be something like; Back up your claims or keep them to yourself. Religion has always sought temporal power because it is for some reason granted the luxury of an exemption from the standard burden of proof. This makes it eminently simple for utterly unqualified people to attain positions of immense power and influence. See creationism in school, religious education, opposition to contraceptives, abortion, homosexuality etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of religion, but it cannot, must not, under any circumstances, be given equal consideration compared that which is empirically and scientifically supported. I am perfectly happy to let people have their toys. Do not bring the toys to my house. Do not try to make my children or anyone else's children play with the toys. Do not try to insinuate the toys into legislation and government. Keep the toys to yourself, and do not pester others with them.
Definitely should be added in the HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DISCUSSION in the OP.
Thank you very much for this post.
|
On March 25 2013 02:05 WoolySheep wrote:I have seen evidence in God in many different ways, experiences, situations, nature, "coincidences". I think it is wasted effort that we try to come up with some scientific formula for God, when there probably isn't. I believe in God because I've experienced him in my life, that is the evidence I have for his existence. Yes, I doubt sometimes, but I am able to work through it, and come out the other side. I think Religion is a real problem. In biblical times, this would correlate to the pharisees and saducees (sp?) of the day, and Jesus was not a fan of those guys. Christianity is about a relationship with a God who loves us, and was willing to make a sacrifice to save us from our messed up ways. When you throw religion into the mix, you get hurt people, rules and laws that may or may not have a place in today's society. Religion (I'm talking about Christianity here) is generally unhealthy. We are supposed to have a relationship with Jesus, and show/do what he did for us to others, so that they may also be saved by him. This doesn't mean we should go about it trying to force people to listen and convert. I try to live my life to honor and glorify him - and hopefully people see that difference in me. It's hard, but very worthwhile. I don't see very many, if any, people express this view of Christianity/God debates, and I just wanted to let you guys know, that there are a lot of us out there who don't want to ram anything down your throats. I would like to apologize to anyone who has been hurt be religion, christians, or myself, who may have caused pain, annoyance, or trouble. tl; dr: Religion is the problem. Christianity should/is a relationship with God, rather than just following a set of rules. My views are constantly changing as I work through important issues, and hope you can do the same with an open mind. Thanks for reading this Edit: first sentence had spelling mistakes
Thanks for posting this i feel the exact same way, so many christians give other christians a bad name like every christian wants to force others to think, act and behave like they do
|
On March 25 2013 01:51 S:klogW wrote:
Let's assume God in what I consider it's commonsense definition which cuts across many of the different major religions.
A being that is:
- all knowing
- all present
- all powerful
- created the universe
I doubt there should still be confusion about this
All benevolent?
|
On March 25 2013 02:06 Carving wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2013 01:57 S:klogW wrote:On March 25 2013 01:51 Carving wrote:
In advance, im very sorry for my poor english, this also might cause me to sound pretty chaotic :D
I am not entirely sure yet after reading most of the posts what drives you to prove a God exists or doesnt exist.
In my oppinion the drive people have to explain things they don't understand, from human behaviour to the development of the universe and our planet, is one of the most important aspects of being human and improving as humanity.
But
Why is there such a need for proving or disproving a God? I suppose you could take up different perspectives.
If there is a God like the Christian God for example, you could say this God wants humanity to believe in him without having proof. So this almighty God would make sure it isn't possible to prove his existence.
In this case it would be pretty useless to try to prove this God right?
Or
You could try to prove there is a God by for example looking at miracles. As for myself i have seen quite some stuff which could be called miracles, which cannot (yet) be explained by science. Yet personally i do not automaticly link those miracles to a God NOR to science. But if you would, you would have to somehow 'force' situations to get miracles right? but then again when you would 'force' it, it could be 'controlled' meaning it isn't a miracle anymore, so id say, if miracles exist they will stay miracles because for it to be a miracle, science should fail to explain.
It is sad you guys don't master Dutch because there is a very interesting discussion going on in our country right now. There is this scientist in astronomy i think, who has received various prizes, and such. During a lecture he gave, he said he believed in miracles and saw them himself. Some guy from a newspaper wrote an article about this scientist that he shouldnt be a scientist anymore and that christians can't be true scientists because they believe in a God and such, alot of drama started and this scientist said, alright i will drop out of my position at the university etc and continue researching individually. This raised even more drama because many other scientist of whom most are christian got angry because this is one of the most accomplished scientist in his working field (in the netherlands). After reading most of all the articles of both sides i have the strong feeling you shouldn't mix up religion with science.
Not because science proves religion to be false or because religion proves science to be false. I actually think they even make each other stronger when mixed BUT somehow many atheists want to use science to prove religion wrong, creating emotional discussion just as many religious people try to prove science wrong.
The thing that strucks me the most when i see religious vs science discussions, you see atheists saying religious people are ignorant stupid crazy and such, while stating atheists and scientists are developed people with knowledge. YET the exact thing those atheists hate about how for example christians behave is EXACTLY what they do themselves in such a discussion they just have a different perspective on the world. The christians in this case want to prove science wrong and do the exact thing they think is stupid about what atheists do in such discussions. There is atheists using facts that prove being a christian is the most stupid thing on the world while the guy who came up with these facts is a christian. Then there is christians using theological reasoning and 'facts' that prove science wrong while their source for this reasoning many times comes from scientists who also work on for example the evolution theory.
The thing is, people who dislike religion pick up science, and people who dislike science pick up religion to prove each other wrong. And by doing this both are wrong. Atleast this is my oppinion. Then there is a small amount of both religious and atheist people who actually manage to talk about each others believes (yes i just called facts and science a belief aswell) without inmidiate judging and dirt throwing.
When people stop to be afraid and scared of everything they can and cannot explain they might be able to not take the bible as the absolute answer to everything and maybe atheists can accept that there are many things that happen which cannot be explained (some will be explained). So if we stop wasting our time to research the existence of a God or the nonexistence of science but just do research for things we do not understand without putting stamps on it like : Science is bullshit, Religion is bullshit. We might even understand things faster and more easy, i truly believe open minded people who see religion for what it could be and combine it with science will upgrade us as humanity faster and more effectively then when there is constant battle between religion and science.
Because lets get this clear, religion does not deny science, religion does not dissaprove aborting childs or the use of condoms. People who are scared of developments and such and who cannot deal with them USE religion as some kind of truth to forbid those things and to create chaos.
So after this long incoherent story id say, Stop discussing the existence of god and science and start asking how to combine those.
This is a good post if it were not off topic. From what I understand, we want to limit the discussion to a scientific or empirical understanding of religion. Anything outside that is not part of this thread. To answer your point, science and religion does not have to mix. In fact, science is better off without religion. Science deals with truth, observable, verifiable, significant truth. Religion deals with feelings and effects. Well i don't think its that offtopic actually, because what im trying to say is, the discussion might ask the wrong questions I think science isnt better off without religion, i think both can improve each other, the reason i say this doesnt mean i want science to stop looking at truth or observe etc but ideas create opportunities. When you accept the fact there might be more then just science and religion accepts science you get a broader and wider perspective, the more open minded we think the better we can come to solutions, also solutions based on truth and empirical data etc. Atleast thats my oppinion.
I respect your post and I even agree with it. But if you read the op, he wants to limit the discussion to this.
Its like saying, lets talk about America, but lets talk only about the history of Irish settlement in America. Now, given that limitation, would you still talk about Native Americans? Or the history of slavery? Or gun control in Kentucky? Obviously not. Like I said, they are very valid and in fact even correct at points, but this discussion has a different set of rules. Let us follow it.
|
On March 25 2013 02:08 Ettick wrote:
If god is all powerful then can he make a pizza large enough that even he cannot finish it?
If he can, he is not all powerful because he cannot finish the pizza.
If he cannot, then he is not all powerful because he cannot make a pizza large enough for him to not be able to finish it.
Do humans need a greater purpose behind their existence and why is it not acceptable if they don't?
Hehe i discussed this question sooooo many times, i think you could say:
God can make a pizza so big he cannot finish it, but at the same time because he is almighty he could overrule himself and eat it all up anyway.
|
Freud said religion is a collective neurosis.
If you ever had obsessive compulsive disorders in your life i think you can understand what he actually meant by saying this. "Faith" is like this little voice in your head that keep saying : "if you don't trust me, bad things will happen", just like when you have OCD. Once you're into it, it's really hard to convince yourself to stop it.
|
On March 25 2013 02:12 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2013 02:06 Carving wrote:On March 25 2013 01:57 S:klogW wrote:On March 25 2013 01:51 Carving wrote:
In advance, im very sorry for my poor english, this also might cause me to sound pretty chaotic :D
I am not entirely sure yet after reading most of the posts what drives you to prove a God exists or doesnt exist.
In my oppinion the drive people have to explain things they don't understand, from human behaviour to the development of the universe and our planet, is one of the most important aspects of being human and improving as humanity.
But
Why is there such a need for proving or disproving a God? I suppose you could take up different perspectives.
If there is a God like the Christian God for example, you could say this God wants humanity to believe in him without having proof. So this almighty God would make sure it isn't possible to prove his existence.
In this case it would be pretty useless to try to prove this God right?
Or
You could try to prove there is a God by for example looking at miracles. As for myself i have seen quite some stuff which could be called miracles, which cannot (yet) be explained by science. Yet personally i do not automaticly link those miracles to a God NOR to science. But if you would, you would have to somehow 'force' situations to get miracles right? but then again when you would 'force' it, it could be 'controlled' meaning it isn't a miracle anymore, so id say, if miracles exist they will stay miracles because for it to be a miracle, science should fail to explain.
It is sad you guys don't master Dutch because there is a very interesting discussion going on in our country right now. There is this scientist in astronomy i think, who has received various prizes, and such. During a lecture he gave, he said he believed in miracles and saw them himself. Some guy from a newspaper wrote an article about this scientist that he shouldnt be a scientist anymore and that christians can't be true scientists because they believe in a God and such, alot of drama started and this scientist said, alright i will drop out of my position at the university etc and continue researching individually. This raised even more drama because many other scientist of whom most are christian got angry because this is one of the most accomplished scientist in his working field (in the netherlands). After reading most of all the articles of both sides i have the strong feeling you shouldn't mix up religion with science.
Not because science proves religion to be false or because religion proves science to be false. I actually think they even make each other stronger when mixed BUT somehow many atheists want to use science to prove religion wrong, creating emotional discussion just as many religious people try to prove science wrong.
The thing that strucks me the most when i see religious vs science discussions, you see atheists saying religious people are ignorant stupid crazy and such, while stating atheists and scientists are developed people with knowledge. YET the exact thing those atheists hate about how for example christians behave is EXACTLY what they do themselves in such a discussion they just have a different perspective on the world. The christians in this case want to prove science wrong and do the exact thing they think is stupid about what atheists do in such discussions. There is atheists using facts that prove being a christian is the most stupid thing on the world while the guy who came up with these facts is a christian. Then there is christians using theological reasoning and 'facts' that prove science wrong while their source for this reasoning many times comes from scientists who also work on for example the evolution theory.
The thing is, people who dislike religion pick up science, and people who dislike science pick up religion to prove each other wrong. And by doing this both are wrong. Atleast this is my oppinion. Then there is a small amount of both religious and atheist people who actually manage to talk about each others believes (yes i just called facts and science a belief aswell) without inmidiate judging and dirt throwing.
When people stop to be afraid and scared of everything they can and cannot explain they might be able to not take the bible as the absolute answer to everything and maybe atheists can accept that there are many things that happen which cannot be explained (some will be explained). So if we stop wasting our time to research the existence of a God or the nonexistence of science but just do research for things we do not understand without putting stamps on it like : Science is bullshit, Religion is bullshit. We might even understand things faster and more easy, i truly believe open minded people who see religion for what it could be and combine it with science will upgrade us as humanity faster and more effectively then when there is constant battle between religion and science.
Because lets get this clear, religion does not deny science, religion does not dissaprove aborting childs or the use of condoms. People who are scared of developments and such and who cannot deal with them USE religion as some kind of truth to forbid those things and to create chaos.
So after this long incoherent story id say, Stop discussing the existence of god and science and start asking how to combine those.
This is a good post if it were not off topic. From what I understand, we want to limit the discussion to a scientific or empirical understanding of religion. Anything outside that is not part of this thread. To answer your point, science and religion does not have to mix. In fact, science is better off without religion. Science deals with truth, observable, verifiable, significant truth. Religion deals with feelings and effects. Well i don't think its that offtopic actually, because what im trying to say is, the discussion might ask the wrong questions I think science isnt better off without religion, i think both can improve each other, the reason i say this doesnt mean i want science to stop looking at truth or observe etc but ideas create opportunities. When you accept the fact there might be more then just science and religion accepts science you get a broader and wider perspective, the more open minded we think the better we can come to solutions, also solutions based on truth and empirical data etc. Atleast thats my oppinion. I respect your post and I even agree with it. But if you read the op, he wants to limit the discussion to this. Its like saying, lets talk about America, but lets talk only about the history of Irish settlement in America. Now, given that limitation, would you still talk about Native Americans? Or the history of slavery? Or gun control in Kentucky? Obviously not. Like I said, they are very valid and in fact even correct at points, but this discussion has a different set of rules. Let us follow it.
Yeah you are probably right, ill exclude myself from this topic then^^
|
On March 25 2013 02:03 Roe wrote:
To TimeENT:
Do you believe it is good to teach morality based on faith? (i.e. Doubting Thomas etc..)
And related to that, how can one learn from faith-based teaching without the dogma attached to it? Aren't you sort of assuming that the person is right in telling you these things because it's faith-based?
Lastly, why do you believe in some kind of god, instead of just no god? (I'm reminded of Freud's friend who was describing the vast ocean of feelings in religious sentiments).
I have no answer for the first part because I have zero experience or understanding of teaching morality based on faith. I was raised in a household where there was a complete absence of religion.
For the second part: personally, it comes down to a very simple viewpoint of mine. Life is completely unbelievable, yet I am here. I am in fact here living this completely unbelievable life. This is why I choose to believe in some kind of higher being, rather than the absence of a higher being. However, I so understand why some people choose the opposite.
|
On March 25 2013 02:08 Ettick wrote:
If god is all powerful then can he make a pizza large enough that even he cannot finish it?
If he can, he is not all powerful because he cannot finish the pizza.
If he cannot, then he is not all powerful because he cannot make a pizza large enough for him to not be able to finish it.
god doesn't eat.
|
I stopped believing in god when I learned about the holocaust and numerous other events in which humans have caused utter misery for one another. If religion makes someones life better then who am I to critisise, but there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone, even if there was a god, why should he concentrate on us when the universe is so massive.
TL:DR - Religion is not for me, but im not gonna stop someone believing if it makes their life worth living
|
On March 25 2013 02:20 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2013 02:08 Ettick wrote:
If god is all powerful then can he make a pizza large enough that even he cannot finish it?
If he can, he is not all powerful because he cannot finish the pizza.
If he cannot, then he is not all powerful because he cannot make a pizza large enough for him to not be able to finish it. god doesn't eat.
It feeds intravenously?
|
Hee hee, I always enjoyed fashionable nonsense about the existence of God. If you want to wow people while they are drunk, tell them that dog is god spelled backwards.
|
On March 25 2013 02:24 Shiragaku wrote:
Hee hee, I always enjoyed fashionable nonsense about the existence of God. If you want to wow people while they are drunk, tell them that dog is god spelled backwards.
Id have to be more than drunk to be wow'd by that haha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
