quote:The simple opinion that there is only one god.
Many gods are worshipped throughout the world, and each worshipper believes as strongly and with as much reason to believe in theirs as you have in yours...
I would venture to say its the same God we all worship but we all give the diety different names and ways of worship. Like Allah is another name for God, Buddah, or a higher spiritual conscience, etc. All practicing believers or believers but not practicing place their faith in a higher being. Allah is my God too. When we look to find a spiritual inner self we all connect with the same higher being. This is my belief.
When we look to find a spiritual inner self we all connect with the same higher being. This is my belief.
This is not a new argument, but it has not improved much with age. Allow me to play a little devil's advocate with the following question:
Do you believe that those who do not share your beliefs are spiritually doomed (i.e., destined to suffer for eternity)?
If your answer is yes, then obviously not everyone who believes in a god connects with "the same higher being." In other words, if it is really true that every religious person worships the same god, then there are no true religions and no false religions, and the only people doomed are atheists. After all, if everyone is worshiping the "right" god, then no one should be doomed.
If your answer is no, then you've abandoned the official stance of Catholicism, which is that salvation is only to be found through the Catholic Church and its teachings. You believe that there are many ways to salvation, all equally viable. I'm not making a value judgment on either answer, I'm just saying that you can't have it both ways.
Whatever the case, your qualification differs little from your original claim that there is only one god. It is still your opinion that there is only one god and all religious people seek him. I think you will find that many adherents of other religions (not to mention many adherents of your own religion) will disagree with you rather heartily. Try telling a Muslim that Allah is the same god as Jehovah and see what he says. Or how about a religion originating in my country of residence--the Unification Church (commonly known in the States as "the Moonies"). Rev. Moon and his followers believe that he is the reincarnation of Christ (the returned Messiah). Rastafarians believe the same of Haile Selassie. What are we to make of this?
If your personal beliefs reflect traditional Catholic beliefs, then what you are trying to say is probably that every religious individual is seeking Jehovah, but only Catholics know the true way to him. Everyone else is basically misguided. This is a more consistent position, and I suspect that this may be what you are trying to say.
I'm not trying to be difficult here, I'm just trying to clarify some things. I remained silent for the past few posts to respect your declaration of gracefully bowing out of the thread. But since you're still around, I figured I'd hop back in.
Jade - there are really many problems with your statements. Suho has done a great job of talking about some of them.
The fundamental flaw with that type of reasoning is very simple: it assumes that your particular view of god is the right one, and that every other view is trying to attain the truth that is yours.
Since there are so many views of what god is, and since there are so many examples of polytheistic beliefs, with so many different gods for different reasons, it just doesn't add up. It brings us right back to what I said - gods in opposition of each other.
To say that different religions, often with some drastically different requirements and beliefs, are just different ways of reaching the same thing is a view that ignores the great chasms between different faiths.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-22-2007 21:32
quote:Do you believe all persons evolve in their "state of being" with age? What you thought rearding your beliefs about God, were they the same 10 yrs ago. With age you are growing in the wisdom of things by life. Right? I believe 10 yrs from now you may have had a change in your ideals..Not that you may become a member of any sect in religion but circumstances, episodes or other reflections or a person may shape your belief in another direction.
My freedom came in the middle of a battle in a war.
You have no idea what sort of bizarre things runs through a persons mind as bullets are flying through the air, and your buddies, your comrades, your friends are dying around you, others are fighting, like you, and a detacted part of your mind is mechanically, coldly analysing all this.
It came to me clearly - there IS no God. I saw as those who believed as firmly in a Supreme Being bleed out their last dying breathes - and there was no God there, to save them. In fact, I saw those who did not believe survive. I heard alot calling out to a Supreme Being. I also saw those who thought that a Supreme Being would protect them die in a hail of bullets.
It dawned on me that my faith was just belief, and I realized just how shallow and hollow it truly was in the face of reality. I mean brutal reality, the kind that not many get to face anymore. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN REALITY WHAT ONE BELIEVES! A bullet does not care.
That was the beginning. I later, after the war was over, had more time to sit down with myself and sort things out. I basically had to rebuild my whole belief foundation.
My reality check had nothing to do with age, or with wisdom. It had to do with finally accepting REALITY.
As DL has pointed out here
quote:
quote:
jade said:
I don't believe Gods oppose each other for the simple truth is that there is only one God.
The simple opinion that there is only one god.
Many gods are worshipped throughout the world, and each worshipper believes as strongly and with as much reason to believe in theirs as you have in yours...
Belief is just that - an opinion, a faith in something that one cannot prove, because there is no evidence to support it.
And it will not stop a bullet.
I know. I have seen that reality.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
quote:Allow me to play a little devil's advocate with the following question:
Do you believe that those who do not share your beliefs are spiritually
doomed (i.e., destined to suffer for eternity)?
I am going to explain myself but feel free to direct me in a better
mode to explain if I do a poor job. As I admire and welcome your thoughts
on your way of zoning in and giving us your feedback. I speak for my personal beliefs and hope to give the impression I am not speaking in defense of my belief.. Just realting what believe in along with the magisetirum.
I want to note, for me, salvation is more than avoiding doom and
getting into a heaven. It is sharing the power of a divine love with God. I do
not believe those who do not share my beliefs are spiritually doomed... I
make no judgements on the souls of anyone. To evangelize with the good news that Christ comes to us is good and to say they are doomed if they reject my way of worshipping God is wrong. I believe for one to be without the spirit of good could doom them for eternity. So they could spritually doom
themselves. Its in their court, not Gods.... in like you reap what you sow...Because its to ones will..not God's that man separates himself.
For me there are different plateaus of the spirit, cold, warm, lukewarm and on hot fire with the love of God. If God in all his mercy allows this one person who denied good for evil, does not abandon and spares a soul, its divine will.
quote:If your answer is no, then you've abandoned the official stance of
Catholicism, which is that salvation is only to be found through the
Catholic Church and its teachings.
I think for you to better understand where I am coming from bear my explanation please.
The realm of the salvation issue according our faith is not complicated. I will try to explain why I have this view. The Church with the unending succession of its preachers is a constant spirit living & breathing revelation for us. Not just printed words from a holybook. What we call the magisterium of the church carries on the task of the apostles in (you share, you anoint, you forgive, you heal, you drive out demons) with the same divine power they possessed. The holy see and his bishops are not a sentencing judges, umpires, or traffic cops. That is Gods business. Instead they are involed in the unending 24/7 task to proclaim the news of salvation. Faith & bible scripture means all men are called to be universal in faith & in unity. And in different ways, belong or are ordered to be a universal faithful. This is for other sects who believe in Christ. And all mankind are called by God's grace to salvation. We accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who with the bonds of the profession of faith come together in the visible/invisible structure. Though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity (love) could not be saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but in body not its heart. We believe we are joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of the apostle Peter. This is why those who are baptized ouside the Church in the name of father, son and holy spirit we have a common bond in Christian Unity. How can we not love and share in the name of Christ. This is contrary to the will of God.
Those who have not yet received the gospel are related to the Christians in various ways. Jews, Muslims, Jehovas, and other organized sects that adhere to loving principles though no fault of their own do not profess fellowiship. Jews are the first people of God in the new covenant. We are linked to them in they are the first to hear the word of God. Unlike other non-Christian religions, its already a response to God's revelation in the OT . They belong to the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises too. And when one considers the future, God's people of the OT and the NT people of God tend towards similar goals: awaiting of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus. The Church's relationship with the Muslims is in the plan of salvation also. They profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful Allah,mankind's judge on the last day. They believe Jesus a great prophet and Mary his mother they venerate and revere as the mother of a great messenger more than some Christian protestants do. When Jews, Muslims look up to the skies to call upon their God. Does only their God answer them or does mine answer them too. Yes. because I believe its the one true God of us all. My God is their God. The son Christ who extends himself as God man is the God of Abraham too. The God of Muhammud and the God of the Chrisitans are all one in the same God I believe hears us all.
We believe the church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the
first place the common origin and end of the human race. We believe all
nations of the world form but one community. Humanity is this community. This is so because we believe we all stem and migrate from the one stock which God created to peoples the entire earth, and also because we all share a common destiny, namely God. For us, his providence, beauty, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all to the day when the elect are gathered together in a heavely city of where we do not know till our fulfillment comes. We believe that there is goodness in many creeds. God wants all men to be saved. How could she consider to just forsake those who are not in a communion. The church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions of good as a preparation for the gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life eternal.
quote:Try telling a Muslim
that Allah is the same god as Jehovah and see what he says. Or how about a
religion originating in my country of residence--the Unification Church
(commonly known in the States as "the Moonies"). Rev. Moon and his
followers
believe that he is the reincarnation of Christ (the returned Messiah).
Rastafarians believe the same of Haile Selassie. What are we to make of
this?
Your right.. Other sects may have the view that they worship a different God, but many do no. They believe in a brotherhood of all faiths
In some religious behavior, however, some men also display the
limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them: Like Moonies and rastaferans, etc... Very often, deceived by service to themselves instead of leading persons to service to the true God they have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served a creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed & expose others
to the ultimate despair. To reunite all scattered and led astray, God wills to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is "the world reconciled." She is that bark which "in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world." And this is according to our Catholic belief.
quote:If your personal beliefs reflect traditional Catholic beliefs, then
what you are trying to say is probably that every religious individual is
seeking Jehovah, but only Catholics know the true way to him. Everyone else is basically misguided. This is a more consistent position, and I suspect
that this may be what you are trying to say.
I would say we all are trying to seek the ultimate truth and its a journey. Not all are given the same vision. Its according to the sincere heart. One who does find the hidden treasues will continually look for more of them. I would not say eveyone outside the my faith is misguided becasue that reflects that only I know the way. I believe I am in the right boat going on a journey. And if one prays for guidance he will find what he is seeking. And that would be truth in its fullness.
Remember.. I am not trying to preach. Just explaining the way of my church's belief.
quote:That was the beginning. I later, after the war was over, had more time to sit down with myself and sort things out. I basically had to rebuild my whole belief foundation.
My reality check had nothing to do with age, or with wisdom. It had to do with finally accepting REALITY.
What about people who have been in war and sufferd more than you had. What if they lost limbs or lost their children or whole families? If they are still a people of faith why do you think they still believe in God? They were not disillusioned. Some say their strength was their faith. Or their faith guided them. Maybe you feel their faith was a coping mechanism to get thru the terrible reality of war. My father was at war and lost lots of his friends. He tries not to talk of it. But deep down he has never forgot the pain of war. But wars have been with us since the beginning of time in the name of survival and preservance. All kinds of wars are referenced in scripture and the history of the world. I think for you, in your uniqueness a part of you suffered a great deal. And has left you scarred. Just like my father.
jade: Thanks for that detailed explanation. It gives me a better idea of what exactly you believe. I will readily admit that my knowledge of Catholicism is fairly superficial these days. A few points/questions:
quote: jade said:
The holy see and his bishops are not a sentencing judges, umpires, or traffic cops.
I have gotten the impression that the Pope does indeed see himself as a sentencing judge, based on some of his recent statements and Dominus Iesus, which he authored (or at least signed) before he became pope. I find this passage from Dominus Iesus to be key:
quote:22. With the coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30-31). This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism ?characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that ?one religion is as good as another'?. If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.
Granted, it's not Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (Outside Church No Salvation), but "gravely deficient situation" sounds very serious. For their part, leaders of other world religions have reacted very poorly at the Catholic Church's attempts to engage in what it considers "interreligious dialogue." Attempting to subsume all of the world religions under Catholicism's idea of faith and salvation is not interreligious dialogue, it is simply inclusivism. Again, no value judgments, I just think we should recognize it for what it is.
I noticed a particular phrase that you used in your reply: "through no fault of their own." I have heard this before in explanations of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, and I take it to mean that someone who is not aware of the salvific power of the Church and their own gravely deficient position cannot be held responsible for not being part of the Church (for the record, this argument is used by many Protestants as well). I understand that arguments like these are attempts to reach out to the worldwide religious community, but I don't see how true interreligious dialogue will be possible as long as the Church insists that everyone plays by their rules. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that's the way it looks to me at the moment.
quote:How could she consider to just forsake those who are not in a communion.
(emphasis mine) Nice. Is this an official position?
Oh, one more question: what is the current thinking on the infallibility of the pope?
And a quick note to WS: while I respect your right to believe what you choose, I hope that you realize your belief that God does not exist is just that--a belief. Just as the existence of God cannot be proven, neither can the non-existence of God be proven. You may feel that one side of the argument is better supported by the evidence, but unless you are omniscient you can not say that either the existence or non-existence of God is "reality." You cannot slam jade for mistaking belief for reality and then do the same yourself. Well, I guess you could, but it would be intellectually dishonest. If you're going to posit that your beliefs are reality, then jade has every right to do the same.
(Please don't bring up the Flying Spaghetti Monster argument or things of that nature. I'm not trying to be solipsistic here, I'm just saying that, logically speaking, there are certain things that we cannot know for sure. The knife cuts both ways.)
(Please don't bring up the Flying Spaghetti Monster argument or things of that nature. I'm not trying to be solipsistic here, I'm just saying that, logically speaking, there are certain things that we cannot know for sure. The knife cuts both ways.)
Well, if we're going to be looking logically, then it must also be said that such things as gods can be assumed not to exist, based on evidence and logic. We cannot know for sure, of course, but how sad an argument for the existence of something is that? Logically speaking...?
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-25-2007 03:14
While I understand and respect your stance, Master Suho, you have to recognize that belief does not stop a bullet.
That is the cold, hard fact of the matter. If you can prove otherwise, please do so.
That in and of itself is not an irrevocable fact that a god cannot exist. This is also not what I am saying. I am saying that no amount of Faith or Belief is going to cause that bullet that is going to hit you not to.
In fact, no amount of belief or faith will change any of the natural laws.
This is what I meant when I said that I had to accept reality, as it is.
In light of that realization, it leaves very little room for a god, especially the god that is mentioned in the Bible, or for that matter, other holy books (where it IS suggested that such a god can bend the natural laws, and in some cases, actually does so).
Now, if we want to talk about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, sure. We can do that. After all, it is not going to try to bend any of the natural laws for you (or me, or anyone else, for that matter), regardless of how one pleads, begs, prays, or asks.
That neither proves, nor disproves, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists.
@ Jade - I cannot (and will not) answer for those who have been through battle and war. I can only answer for myself. I do know some that became religious after their experiences in war (and equally, others who disposed of their belief). I can offer explanations for such behavior, but truly, they (and probably only they) know the true answers. I can only speak for myself (which I have).
I do have a question for you, Jade - what about those who believe in multiple gods? How do they fit into your "universal god" belief? What about those who believe not in gods, but in animal totems, spirits, etc?
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
WS: I see what you're saying, but that was not the issue in question, and it was not what you implied with your original post. You said that you came to the conclusion there was no god because of what you saw, that you came to grips with reality.
Belief does not stop a bullet. OK, I can buy that. If this is the reality that you accepted, fine. But when you go from that to concluding that god does not exist, you have still made the jump from fact to belief. You get what I'm saying, right? There are facts, and then there are interpretations of those facts.
Let me give an example. Let's say a man is threatened by someone with a gun. To be more specific, let us say that this is happening in a country with no religious tolerance, and the man being threatened is a religious individual. He is told that he must give up his faith or die. He chooses death. But when his assailant pulls the trigger, nothing happens. Now this man believes that God spares his life by causing the gun to jam. His belief is based on a fact--that the gun jammed and he was not killed. He chooses to interpret this fact in such a way that it strengthens his faith. But this is just a belief. The only fact is that the gun jammed.
In your case, it is a fact that people died regardless of their beliefs. But once you begin interpreting those facts to come to a conclusion about the existence of god, you enter into the realm of belief.
I do understand what you are saying about natural laws, though. I think we are on the same page now.
DL: The logic I was referring to was the logic of the argument, although it would appear that I had misinterpreted what WS was saying.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-25-2007 11:36
quote:But when you go from that to concluding that god does not exist, you have still made the jump from fact to belief. You get what I'm saying, right? There are facts, and then there are interpretations of those facts.
If you have ANY evidence of the existence of a god, please present them. I mean factual evidence according to the natural laws and the scientific method.
It is not a belief to hold that something does not exist, if there is absolutely no evidence for it, and in fact all evidence points to the contrary. That goes a bit further than just belief here, Master Suho. What I witnessed does disprove the existence of a god that can bend natural laws. Remember, the Bible and other Holy Books are making the claim - not me. When one makes a claim, one has to provide the evidence and facts to back it up, or the claim is discredited. This is why it falls under the catagory of Belief in the first place!
Now, as I said, on the metaphysical level (where we can argue Do we truly exist? - and not come to a definitive conclusion, etc) - yes, you are correct. This is why I concur with DL about the Flying Spaghetti Monster. If one chooses to move god to this level, then yes, your postulation is correct - one cannot prove or disprove that it truly exists. However, this goes for all things reduced to this level, to be honest.
But you know this.
quote:Let me give an example. Let's say a man is threatened by someone with a gun. To be more specific, let us say that this is happening in a country with no religious tolerance, and the man being threatened is a religious individual. He is told that he must give up his faith or die. He chooses death. But when his assailant pulls the trigger, nothing happens. Now this man believes that God spares his life by causing the gun to jam. His belief is based on a fact--that the gun jammed and he was not killed. He chooses to interpret this fact in such a way that it strengthens his faith. But this is just a belief. The only fact is that the gun jammed.
As for the gentleman who thinks that his belief saved him from being killed by the gun - it is quite the opposite. The natural laws saved him. We can repeat the experiment, and it is not reliably repeatable in his case (with different guns, different ammunition from a different manufacturer, etc) and I guarantee you he will be killed. If, however, we reproduce the exact conditions that happened before (same gun, exact same ammunition, conditions, etc) then I guarantee you that he will not be killed, belief or no belief.
But you know this, as well.
What my realization was, is that reality (the natural laws around us) preclude the existance of a god (or gods) that can change and bend the natural laws as they will in favor of those who believe in them.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
What I witnessed does disprove the existence of a god that can bend natural laws.
You know that I agree with you on most counts, but this statement is incorrect.
While it shows that people die regardless of faith or the lack of it, it does not prove or disprove anything about the existence of any gods. It could too easily be argued that 1) god simply did not intervene or that 2) god intervened and the outcome was one that he desired.
But I will reinforce that it is quite 'intellectually defensible' to assert that there is no god, for reasons that have been put forth repeatedly here...
quote:(Please don't bring up the Flying Spaghetti Monster argument or things of that nature. I'm not trying to be solipsistic here, I'm just saying that, logically speaking, there are certain things that we cannot know for sure. The knife cuts both ways.)
However not knowing, or understanding, things for sure is not a reason for giving up and invoking supernatural. Which is exactly what ID does, in addition to try as hard as they can to fit selected facts into the picture of their favorites tales.
WS: I don't know how else I can explain it. DL put it in far fewer words, so maybe that will help. That's all I'm saying.
I also cannot disagree with DL that it is intellectually defensible to assert there is no God. I never said it wasn't. On the other hand, I also believe that one can believe in God and not be stupid. I hope you'll agree with me there. If not, well, I suppose that's your right.
poi: I'm not going to argue the ins and out of ID, mainly because I do not know them. I do agree with evolution as a scientific theory (in the scientific sense of that term), but I do not believe that this precludes the existence of a God. Speaking on a personal level, I do not feel that my belief in the existence of God is "giving up and invoking the supernatural."
I kind of feel like I'm spinning my wheels here a bit. I respect everyone involved in this thread, and I hope the feeling is mutual. I try not to pass judgment on anyone, and I try to maintain intellectual integrity. I'm sure some of you think I am fighting a losing battle on the latter count, but at the end of the day, I need to come to grips with my own experiences of and views on the cosmos. I try not to accept things at face value, and I ask questions without the guarantee of finding an answer. Every day I spend on this earth will be one more day spent searching for the Truth. Will I ever find it? Probably not, at least not in full. But that will not stop me from searching.
Anyway, while I enjoy challenging discussions, I'm not sure if I can contribute any more to this particular thread--especially if we're actually going to talk about ID. My stance has always been that ID is not science, and if anything it should be taught in philosophy class. There may be aspects of science in ID, but once you start bringing in questions of the existence of God, you have moved into the realm of philosophy. That's pretty much all I have to say.
If someone wants to address me on something specific, feel free. If not, it's been fun, but I think I'll take my leave now if you don't mind.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-26-2007 16:27
quote:On the other hand, I also believe that one can believe in God and not be stupid. I hope you'll agree with me there. If not, well, I suppose that's your right.
I have never asserted, nor will I, that someone who believes in god is somehow not intelligent, or is stupid.
That would be indefensible, and it would do grave injustice to those like yourself and Bugs, to name a few.
Back to this :
quote:You know that I agree with you on most counts, but this statement is incorrect.
While it shows that people die regardless of faith or the lack of it, it does not prove or disprove anything about the existence of any gods. It could too easily be argued that 1) god simply did not intervene or that 2) god intervened and the outcome was one that he desired.
I disagree with you here, DL. If a god can bend the natural laws, and actually does so, then it should be measurable. If it is measurable, then it can be proven.
If it can be proven, then it is no longer belief.
Please provide me with proof that a god has bent the natural laws, please.
And a god has never "interviened" in such a conflict - there are no measured examples of one doing so. One can suggest it, but one cannot provide evidence that one ever has, at least, not to my knowledge. I am, of course, open to any evidence to the contrary.
Now, as I stated before, one can reduce (or raise, whatever) the whole god concept to the metaphysical level, to that of the Flying Spaghetti Monster - and of course then your statement would be correct - in fact, just about any statement could be correct.
I suppose there could be some sort of Supreme Being that exists, and is totally impartial to the natural world, laws, etc, and could intervene but chooses not to.
But then, what value should such a Being have to us? For all intents and purposes, it does nothing for or against us. It has the same value as the Flying Speghetti Monster, to be honest. It remains in the realm of the "what if..." and there is no evidence supporting the existence of it, nor will there ever be such forthcoming, for it exists outside of the natural world and the natural laws of that world. One could say that it has its existence outside of existence, itself.
Thus it is unmeasurable, unprovable, and is in that sense equal to the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Let me put it to you this way :
Picture yourself on a battlefield. A real one. This is not a movie, this is not a game, this is not a drill.
It is the real thing.
You have your buddies, your equiptment, and the enemy. At some point in time, it starts. Sometimes it is sudden, and all hell breaks loose. Other times it is a slow, building sort of thing. But there you are, in the thick of it.
In all of this, with life and death hanging in the balance (very real, not some sort of imagined thing), what is the value of believing in a Being that will not help or hinder you? Keep in mind throughout the battle, and every other one that you participate in, there will be absolutely a totaly LACK of any evidence, whatsoever, that the Being that you believe in is influencing things for your benefit (or not, as the case may be).
So after the war is over, you have survived. You know that it is not because of the benevolent good graces of the Supreme Being that you believed in, because nowhere was there any shred of evidence that there was such at hand.
And that is the point here. Reality really does stick it's blunt nose into things. I found it very difficult to keep of the veil of illusion of belief any longer. It became more and more hollow, when compared to the reality of the situations that I had experienced, firsthand.
It is the total lack of evidence, not just during the war (although that is when my eyes were first pried open), but since then. I learned alot more about the natural world and the natural laws afterwards, about the scientific method, and about logic.
I am 42 years of age, now. And I have yet to witness, experience, or behold one shred of evidence that a god exists.
Perhaps you have something different that you can present?
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
I disagree with you here, DL. If a god can bend the natural laws, and actually does so, then it should be measurable. If it is measurable, then it can be proven.
If it can be proven, then it is no longer belief.
Please provide me with proof that a god has bent the natural laws, please.
You are missing the point. You said that the circumstances in your story *proved* that there is no god capable of bending the laws of nature. They don't. THe other aspect of what I was saying is that a god capable of manipulating the outcome of something would not necessarily need to break any laws. After all, if there were a god, it could be said that those laws are his laws, and surely he would know how to use them
But that's all off the topic really. The only real point I have in regard to this is that the outcome of the situation you related above does not prove anything whatsoever in regard to a god or gods.
quote: Suho1004 said:
On the other hand, I also believe that one can believe in God and not be stupid. I hope you'll agree with me there. If not, well, I suppose that's your right.
Surely a belief in god does not require a person to be stupid, and clearly many very intelligent and well reasoned people have such a belief. This is a bewildering to me, however (and certainly, the stupid ones tend to get the better press ). I have no quarrel with any person who simply professes a belief in god, and find no reason to dispute such beliefs in and of themselves. The application of such beliefs is where things get interesting...
FWIW
As for the start of the topic, ID itself...surely we've covered all that needs to be covered on that front in our previous discussions. I don't see anyone arguing that ID should be taught in science class, or that it is a valid scientific theory, so....I'd say we're done with that
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 08-27-2007 15:53
quote:The only real point I have in regard to this is that the outcome of the situation you related above does not prove anything whatsoever in regard to a god or gods.
Then we will have to agree to disagree.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
quote:I disagree with you here, DL. If a god can bend the natural laws, and actually does so, then it should be measurable. If it is measurable, then it can be proven.
If it can be proven, then it is no longer belief.
Please provide me with proof that a god has bent the natural laws, please.
I disagree. You're assuming several things, including:
- Although having the power, God actively bends the laws of nature. What if He doesn't feel like it today?
- We currently have the means to observe the laws of nature being bent. For most of history we didn't have the means to observe most of our galaxy, it doesn't mean it didn't exist.
quote:For most of history we didn't have the means to observe most of our galaxy, it doesn't mean it didn't exist.
Except that galaxies make sense if you consider, be it only for one second, gravity and electromagnetism, some laws of physic each and every one experience daily since dawn. On the contrary, gods, neither make sense nor are supported by anything tangible. You'd think that after all that time there would be the slightest shred of a proof to support their ( gods, fairies and other imaginary friends ) existence, but nope.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 09-01-2007 21:47
quote:quote:
WebShaman said:
I disagree with you here, DL. If a god can bend the natural laws, and actually does so, then it should be measurable. If it is measurable, then it can be proven.
If it can be proven, then it is no longer belief.
Please provide me with proof that a god has bent the natural laws, please.
You are missing the point. You said that the circumstances in your story *proved* that there is no god capable of bending the laws of nature. They don't. THe other aspect of what I was saying is that a god capable of manipulating the outcome of something would not necessarily need to break any laws. After all, if there were a god, it could be said that those laws are his laws, and surely he would know how to use them
But that's all off the topic really. The only real point I have in regard to this is that the outcome of the situation you related above does not prove anything whatsoever in regard to a god or gods.
I think either you are misunderstanding me, or you really disagree.
I will try to better explain my point here.
What I experienced proves that there is no god or gods ACTIVELY altering natural laws in a manner that we can measure.
Thus, that puts any god or group of gods into the mystical realm of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Remember, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could be manipulating the Laws of Nature as well - because they are ITS laws. Or perhaps the Flying Spaghetti Monster just was not interested in intervening and saving all those lives for that war. Just out of spite. Or whatever.
Same argument, same validity. Same total lack of evidence.
It does not disprove that a god or group of gods exist, in the same manner that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists or doesn't.
What it does disprove, is that there is an active god or group of gods that will intervene and alter natural laws, especially when the situation is most dire (I only consider two other cases to be more important than the lives of individuals - that being the eradication of an entire folk, ethnic group, etc, and the top one, the extinction of the entire species).
quote:quote:
quote:I disagree with you here, DL. If a god can bend the natural laws, and actually does so, then it should be measurable. If it is measurable, then it can be proven.
If it can be proven, then it is no longer belief.
Please provide me with proof that a god has bent the natural laws, please.
I disagree. You're assuming several things, including:
- Although having the power, God actively bends the laws of nature. What if He doesn't feel like it today?
- We currently have the means to observe the laws of nature being bent. For most of history we didn't have the means to observe most of our galaxy, it doesn't mean it didn't exist.
No, I am not assuming anything, here. A god that does not do anything is as tangible and as useful as the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is just as valid. See my comments above.
True, we currently have means to observe the laws of naure being bent, and for the most part of history we did not have the means to observe most of our galaxy - and true, it did not mean that it didn't exist.
But the lights in the skies from those galaxies could be seen, were cataloged, and named. We know that Mankind has always looked to the Heavens, probably since the first time he could stand and look up. We also know that the light from those galaxies has been shining for x amoung of time, and that it has been shining back then.
Thus, we can prove that those lights that we saw before, were actually stars and galaxies. Back then, Mankind did not know this, but COULD STILL SEE THE EVIDENCE OF SUCH with their own eyes, did so, and recorded this as they could.
This is a case where our science has advanced to a point that it allows us to also prove things that have happened before and predict what will happen in the future.
None of it has found one single SHRED of evidence supporting that a god or group of gods exist. In fact, in the light of the lack of evidence, it is prudent to conclude that there isn't any that are measureable by our science, and that do not alter the natural laws in a manner that we can detect or observe.
Keep in mind that a god or group of gods that can alter, bend, manipulate, etc the natural laws without leaving any evidence thereof is not measurable, observable, nor detectable. It thus becomes a thing that exists purely in the metaphysical realm that also houses things like the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
This means, for all intents and purposes, that a god or group of gods are moved into that Metaphysical realm that is also occupied by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Note that for the record, I am NOT SAYING that my experiences have disproved that a god or group of gods can actually exist - on the contrary, they can easily co-exist alongside the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the metaphysical realm quite happily.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 09-11-2007 04:51
About this "Flying Spaghetti Monster," did South Park first coin that term or did they just steal it from someone?
I like this quote by C. S. Lewis. He is talking about Communion and Baptism, but I think it applies here, too: "God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature. That is why he uses material things like bread and wine to put the new life into us. We may think this rather crude and unspiritual. God does not: he invented eating. He likes matter. He invented it."
I like that last part, "He likes matter. He invented it." So if God likes the things he invented, then why should he use supernatural things all the time? Why should he work outside of the laws and nature he has already created? Do you think God is a romantic? I do. He created sunsets and waterfalls and music. He created aromas that make your head spin. He even created the way of smelling them. He made chocolate. How awesome is that?!
I think we sometimes overspiritualize God and ask for signs and wonders and lightening from above...why not just let what God has already made speak to you? Why not let that little whisper from God speak to your heart, instead of waiting around for some loud sign?
1 Kings 19:11-13
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
quote:So if God likes the things he invented, then why should he use supernatural things all the time?
To fix his broken creation, and the mess he and his minions has made. But I could be wrong, I don't know your imaginary friend very well: never saw him, never talked to him, never felt him, never heard or saw a single thing making me doubt that he is not made up.
quote:Do you think God is a romantic? He created sunsets and waterfalls and music. He created aromas that make your head spin. He even created the way of smelling them. He made chocolate. How awesome is that?!
Super awesome! And Al Gore created the informations super highways.
quote:I think we sometimes overspiritualize God and ask for signs and wonders and lightening from above...why not just let what God has already made speak to you? Why not let that little whisper from God speak to your heart, instead of waiting around for some loud sign?
1 Kings 19:11-13
I don't think it is overspiritualizing of asking for evidence. Rocks and sunset don't come with a "Made by God" tag.
Your contemplation is noble but IMHO your interpretation is mislead. You seek meaning and purpose where there is most likely none. Man seek meaning because he can, not because there is one.
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 09-12-2007 00:03
Thanks for the Wiki link. My roomate is on there all the time and I didn't even think to use it.
Wow, Poi, that last post looks like an "anti-theist" post. Seems chalked full of hatred towards God. Why do you hate the idea of God so much?
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
Gideon: My post was down to earth. Btw s/minions/creatures
Your quote about chocolate was too funny, I could not resist cracking a come back.
quote:Seems chalked full of hatred towards God.
I don't hate your god. How could I hate something that, to me, do not exist
quote:Why do you hate the idea of God so much?
Easy : I simply don't understand religions.
I understand spirituality : the wishful thinking in something greater or a deep humility towards nature at large ( as in the physical world and our understanding of it ).
On the other hand, to me religions are delusions. Delusions and endoctrination ( mostly due to cultural pressure ) based on made up and touched countless time stories.
The fact that some people are torn apart between their nature and their beliefs ( or those imposed to them ) is beyond me. Another thing I never understood about religions, even as a child, is the rituals : do deities ignore or punish their minions if they don't burn a candle, gather every X days/hours, blindly repeat X times a prayer, ... I thought deities were omniscient and compassionate therefore why do they need their minions to act like sheeps ?
[edit] Not being a native English speaker and not formalizing my view on the topic everyday, I hope I managed to get my point accross. [/edit]
poi, I understand your theological views however I think you should try to be more understanding and accepting of theists. The anger that you may feel comes from you not accepting that other people may perceive world differently. Of course to you it just looks stupid but thats because from the perspective of your perception of reality theirs is untrue. If a blind man wants to think that the sky is yellow trough no argument can you convince him otherwise. However you can accept his perception of it because maybe it's the yellow sky that keeps him happy. He can't see it anyway - whats the difference to you?
One's perception of reality do not change reality itself.
As for blind people and the color of the sky, they're not stupid they can understand wavelentghs and radiations. And eventually accept that the wavelengths of the visible spectrum not absorded by the sky correspond to what is called Blue. But I'm fine with them calling it yellow against all odds ... as long as they don't push their yellow sky agenda.
quote: DL-44 said:
When theists stop trying to dominate the world in the name of their specific deities, come back and we'll talk about it...
Yeah ... I felt like this too for a long time ... maybe I'm like this just because I'm not under pressure from any religious groups and I can live my life free of those troubles or maybe I have just given up. Anyway I have thought things through for myself, found confidence in myself and come to accept others along with all their differences. Or at least this is what I like to think. However I can't be truly successful in this until I accept those who haven't done the same.
I can accept people and their differences with no problems. Hell, some of my best friends are theists
But respecting people's differences, and respecting and accepting people who *refuse* to accept anyone's differences, and actively work to change your ability to "live my life free of those troubles" are two different things.
When I have to be worried that my daughter is going to come home with her new "Intelligent Design" science curriculum, and when the president of the United States can tell me I shouldn't be considered a citizen because I am an atheist, and when that president's son becomes president, and sends us off to war that he "knows god wants him fight", then it becomes a very real issue that is beyond my needing to just "accept people and their beliefs".
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 09-15-2007 04:34
Thank you for being so candid with me poi. I guess for the few years I was bickering back and forth about creation/ID/evolution I never really stopped to try and understand where you were coming from. Thank you for sharing with me.
[side note]
quote: poi said:
One's perception of reality do not change reality itself.
AMEN! I know that you may consider me as some psycho for going to religion and God for truth, but I'm after the same thing you are: truth. I want to know what reality is about and what it means. Not what someone tells me it is. That's why I'm starting to question some things I once took for granted: in science, my religion, and my relationships. Just thought you'd like to know that some of us "theists" aren't completely blind sheep either. ;-)
[/side note]
You brought up a ton of really good questions about religion. I don't think I have many, if any, of the answers. But I did like the question about rituals. My church didn't really have any rituals except communion and baptism, but they did have traditions. TONS of them. I grew up Baptist, so there were tons of things that I wasn't allowed to do, or I was at least frowned down upon for doing: dancing, not dressing up for church, gambling, drinking, etc. Just to name a few. I decided to look into them myself to see why they didn't want me doing these things. I found out that most of them were rooted in really good reasons. The only problem was that they blew the good reasons out of proportion. The traditions were meant for a few people to help them...it ended up hurting the crowd when it was applied to everyone.
Just for curiosity's sake, do you have a church background or did you get these ideas from watching other people?
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
Well I had never heard about the FSM, so I did - LOL - and great photoshop take on the Sistine Chapel's masterpiece.
The same article, references the origin of the FSM -Russel's Teapot, this I was very familiar with having been a student of evolutionary biology.
So here's the quote by the brilliant Bertrand Russel followed by a quote from the much less brilliant Kathy Griffin when she won her emmy.
quote:"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
- Bertrand Russell
quote:"A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus...Suck it, Jesus. This award is my God now."
Following the remark, Catholic League President Bill Donohue called on the TV academy to "denounce Griffin's obscene and blasphemous comment" which he then thanked them for doing.
quote:"A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus...Suck it, Jesus. This award is my God now."
Personally, I think that's hilarious. As God ever has anything to do with winning a meaningless award.
Reminds me of a routine some comedian used to do about pro sports players always thanking God for a win. You never hear a reporter interview someone on the losing side, asking, "So what happened out there?" and get the response "... Jesus made me fumble!"
quote:AMEN! I know that you may consider me as some psycho for going to religion and God for truth, but I'm after the same thing you are: truth. I want to know what reality is about and what it means. Not what someone tells me it is. That's why I'm starting to question some things I once took for granted: in science, my religion, and my relationships. Just thought you'd like to know that some of us "theists" aren't completely blind sheep either. ;-)
You're not a psycho, just delusioned ( notice I see no reason beside political correctness my a** for this definition to put religions aside ). Glad to see you stop acting like a sheep/slave.
quote:My church didn't really have any rituals except communion and baptism, but they did have traditions. (...) Just for curiosity's sake, do you have a church background or did you get these ideas from watching other people?
I grew up in a small village in France, a traditionnaly catholic country. Baptism, the ritual, is the archetype of traditio^Wendoctrination. Although a thin minority of the people I know actually believe, virtually all of them got baptized by their parents when they were ~3 months old. So long for the respect and acceptance of other's, escpecially people's own children, difference and beliefs or lack thereof.
I've been baptized, needless to say I was not consulted in the process. I attended catechism for a year ( the good thing about it was having to make drawings, the rest was a mix of comon sense and nonsense ), again without being asked if I wanted to. I did my comunion, why I don't know. Tradition and cultural pressure I guess.
End of the story.
AFAIR my parents were not religious. My mum is agnostic or atheist. During his last year(s) my dad hooked up with some protestants. I don't know the details. I think he was dating a protestant woman. Next thing I know he had an ichthys sticker on his car. Note that the little guy didn't save him from a lethal car accident.
I never bought those religions, beliefs, holy books thing. It just doesn't fly for me. It never did, even when I was a kid. My questions were answered with circular reasoning. Not the most convincing way of selling one's view of the world.
I seriously consider doing my apostasy and have my batpism cancelled, but couldn't be bothered so far to write to the diocese where I got baptized.
Oh I agree Wes, just was alluding to the fact that Russell was brilliant, while Griffin is just funny.
Poi: very nice teapot, now we have proof it does exist. - took me a few seconds to realize if my FF was rendering it properly as well - since it didn't appear to be animated, it wasn't obviously.
quote: WebShaman said:
However, if we really wanted to prove it's existence or not, we could build a spacecraft to go out there and find it.WebShaman
Sorry, but it does exist - because I already flew there myself in a spacecraft - this craft had ultra-stealth technology so that even the highest resolution telescopes could not detect it....but I did go there, and I will soon document my voyage so that it can become part of the history program in schools around the world.
quote:Who cares if the teapot exists or not? Obviously, it has no effect whatsoever on things.
Gravity pull.
One day baby celestial teapot will become a full blown teapot shaped asteroid/planetoid that might harbor life. Mmmh I wonder what it's like to live on a teapot planetoid. Is it tea and cookie for every meal ?
posted 08-21-2007 15:02
Is this an official position? 
If you wish.
oh let's not do this again....
Celestial Teapot