RE: Can You Believe It?

RE: Can You Believe It? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

subtee -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 12:31:00 PM)
Um...can we have a little reverence for the ..ah..ah...awh haiku!

sappatoti -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 12:56:34 PM)
... and a lovely one it is.

NorthernGent -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 1:07:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist" Dr. Norm GeislerDetails: In his presentation, Geisler will examine what the universe shows us about God, why the New Testament is extremely accurate, and why it takes more faith to believe that God doesn't exist. It takes merely a logical mind; a mind more concerned with empiricism than abstract notions and metaphysics. quote: ORIGINAL: subtee The way one answers the question, "Is there a God?" defines a life. No more than a response to any other idea.

NorthernGent -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 1:13:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You do know that without God there is nothing but oblivion don't you Perhaps in your mind, Butch. You can marvel at the world around you, irrespective of a religious disposition. You can craft a purpose for yourself, irrespective of a religious disposition. I'd argue that a belief in god is more conducive to 'oblivion' by virtue of thought control.......

kdsub -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 2:14:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You do know that without God there is nothing but oblivion don't you Perhaps in your mind, Butch. You can marvel at the world around you, irrespective of a religious disposition. You can craft a purpose for yourself, irrespective of a religious disposition. I'd argue that a belief in god is more conducive to 'oblivion' by virtue of thought control....... Of course you can...there are good and bad people religious or not...We can all enjoy or fear the world around us. We can all appreciate a beautiful woman or a gorgeous sunset. We can all feel satisfaction in our work and relationships. I am talking after death… and even then I was not condemning those without faith to my view of oblivion… who am I to know. I was explaining my fear of my view of oblivion was greater than my fear of death and hell. All this was in answer to Stella contention that religion exploits fear of death. In my case and many religious people religion is a comfort at death. But as often happens anytime someone expresses a religious thought on these boards you are automatically considered radical. Associated with all the evil done in Gods or any Gods name. As if atheists have never perpetrated evil. Your very basic beliefs are attacked for no reason. You have never heard me talk down to someone who does not believe...hell there are times in my life when I have doubt.. Yet let someone post a view defending religion or even explaining it and they are attacked out of proportion to the comment. I have a personal religion and I don’t preach to or try to convert anyone. Faith or lack of it is a personal choice Butch

subtee -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 2:23:13 PM)
~FR It seems to me, quite ironically, that we are all of us "righteous," either in our belief or non-belief. What say you?

sappatoti -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 2:24:24 PM)
I don't know if I'm righteous, but I will say with certainty that I'm often wrongeous.

NorthernGent -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 2:35:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub In my case and many religious people religion is a comfort at death. Butch Well, yeah, fair enough. It's your call on what you want to take from an idea. I think the problem comes when the idea is fixed and there's no possible alternative, which I suppose explains religious fundamentalism. Generally speaking, nations that are so fixed on an idea tend to stagnate; it happened in Europe during the Middle Ages.

subtee -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 2:41:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sappatoti I don't know if I'm righteous, but I will say with certainty that I'm often wrongeous. Hahahaha, that's awesome. Me too! The only thing I know for sure is that I don't know what I will know.

kidwithknife -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 4:36:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Hello Kidwithknife, are you are well? Hey thedark. I'm pretty good. Hope you're doing ok. quote: For the first, total agreement with you. I should have added that caveat. I think we're reading from the same page then. I don't think we can probably understand Western civilisation without having at least a basic grounding in Christianity. Personally I'm in favour of teaching philosophy in secondary school and I see theology as a branch of that. quote: For the second. Both. And you are correct, the bible never made that claim. Interesting. I have the following problems with literal innerancy. For it to stand, it needs to be falsifable in all areas, not just the spiritual. And I can't see how it is, particuarly on scientific matters. If we take the Genesis creation accounts as an example, they very much reflect the Greek concept of the universe, which we now know to be incorrect. There's also the problem of inclusion and exclusion. Which, if any, of the apocrypha do we include? While some of them are of dubious authenticity, I don't think that's universally the case. The final issue I have is more abstract. I actually think that to take all parts of the Bible literally, including the more poetic parts, is to miss out. There are parts of the Bible I actually think are stronger for being myths. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It takes merely a logical mind; a mind more concerned with empiricism than abstract notions and metaphysics. On the other hand, the view that empiricism is the best way of understanding the world is not provable using purely empirical methods.

kdsub -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 6:03:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub In my case and many religious people religion is a comfort at death. Butch Well, yeah, fair enough. It's your call on what you want to take from an idea. I think the problem comes when the idea is fixed and there's no possible alternative, which I suppose explains religious fundamentalism. Generally speaking, nations that are so fixed on an idea tend to stagnate; it happened in Europe during the Middle Ages. I'd say the possibility of some sort of awareness after physical death is contemplated by most everyone be they religious or not. So I would say that thought is not fundamental to religion exclusively but fundamental to mankind as a whole. Butch

cpK69 -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/1/2009 7:02:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee ~FR It seems to me, quite ironically, that we are all of us "righteous," either in our belief or non-belief. What say you? Sort of, but I also think doing so is accurate. (I think Stella already said it, or something like it.) Somewhere between perception and reality, is truth; truth, for the individual, is unique. Kim

RCdc -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/2/2009 3:47:06 AM)
Hello Kidwithknife Yes I am well. Busy and productive which is always good. I am an apocrypha kind of girl. And any and all books excluded also. I would avoid placing religion with science and put it more with history if we really got down to it. There are other historical texts out there, roman diaries for example that both verify and conteract the bible, just like there are those, as you say, dubious books of the apocrypha. My daughter is considered to be in the top percent of her year. This means she gains far more advantages (streaming sucks IMO but it's her decision and I am not letting her lose out because of my principles) and gets to take extra GCSEs and psychology was one of them. Philosophy is included in her PSHE, and also in her RE which is another of her chosen options, but as I understand it, that depends on the school and which examination board they use. I believe that shows the massive gap between, not only schools within the same area, but how it is taught in the states. Actually, it also shows just how hit and miss it is between years. My son is only two years older and his options were far different because of the exams chosen, even to the extent that for example took media which was a double and in my daughters choice, is now compacted into a single option, so in a sense he loses out because he leaves with less GCSEs than those that did not take double options. But I am digressing. the.dark.

ThoughtfulSwitch -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/2/2009 5:05:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee It seems to me, quite ironically, that we are all of us "righteous," either in our belief or non-belief. What say you? I say that this nicely shows how strong we've been formed by authority and or milieu later. We've learned what is definitely right or wrong so that we can say for sure if there is some almighty energy or not. Personally I need to agree that there is a god. I don't drain my knowledge from the bible, which is 'just'an edited and re-written book. It is worth to read, but still a book. As Koran an Talmud are to me. (I guess, some people will hate me now.^^) They tell us what we should believe in. Partially true, partially literally decorated, partially dogma. My belief comes from a near-death-experience 17 years ago. And as it is my belief I do not force people to share it. Life would be much more relaxed, if more people would not be so righteous to try convincing the whole world. If anybody tries to harvest my soul he needs to beat the "proof", which I've seen personally. And that's quite though.^^ But what would a skeptic or atheist person say about that experience? Some overreaction of my mind, some memory hallucination perhaps. Maybe he's right, maybe not. There's no proof able. This is why discussion endures for ages. Anyway what do I lose by believing in what I believe? It cannot be false to live the grace of charity. And this is my personal essence of Christianity. - I don't like the pope and don't overplay the bible's metaphors. Guess I'm not too "righteous" then, and I believe that's sane. [:D]

kidwithknife -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/2/2009 4:54:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThoughtfulSwitch But what would a skeptic or atheist person say about that experience? Some overreaction of my mind, some memory hallucination perhaps. Maybe he's right, maybe not. There's no proof able. This is why discussion endures for ages. Anyway what do I lose by believing in what I believe? It cannot be false to live the grace of charity. A term I've heard for the kind of experience you describe (true from an individual perspetive but unprovable) is "unverifiable personal gnosis". I really like that as a concept.

CruelNUnsual -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/2/2009 9:21:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThoughtfulSwitch quote: ORIGINAL: subtee It seems to me, quite ironically, that we are all of us "righteous," either in our belief or non-belief. What say you? I say that this nicely shows how strong we've been formed by authority and or milieu later. We've learned what is definitely right or wrong so that we can say for sure if there is some almighty energy or not. Personally I need to agree that there is a god. I don't drain my knowledge from the bible, which is 'just'an edited and re-written book. It is worth to read, but still a book. As Koran an Talmud are to me. (I guess, some people will hate me now.^^) They tell us what we should believe in. Partially true, partially literally decorated, partially dogma. My belief comes from a near-death-experience 17 years ago. And as it is my belief I do not force people to share it. Life would be much more relaxed, if more people would not be so righteous to try convincing the whole world. If anybody tries to harvest my soul he needs to beat the "proof", which I've seen personally. And that's quite though.^^ But what would a skeptic or atheist person say about that experience? Some overreaction of my mind, some memory hallucination perhaps. Maybe he's right, maybe not. There's no proof able. This is why discussion endures for ages. Anyway what do I lose by believing in what I believe? It cannot be false to live the grace of charity. And this is my personal essence of Christianity. - I don't like the pope and don't overplay the bible's metaphors. Guess I'm not too "righteous" then, and I believe that's sane. [:D] Like other investigations into "psychic phenomena", as soon as scientific principles are applied the phenomena doesnt happen. There are ongoing experiments of "near death experiences" where the "rising to the ceiling and observing what was happening from outside my body" has been tested by placing objects/messages in the operating room that cant be seen from the operating table but are obvious from the ceiling. No surprise that there hasnt been a single near death experience that could identify the object. Lucid dreams are very convincing, but dreams nonetheless.

Raiikun -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/3/2009 6:26:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Jesus simply fulfilled the prophecies of that time... That is why he was not accepted by the Jews who found him and his group to be horribly rebelious as well as heretics. The Jews expected the Savior to come in some kind of glorious arrival, not as a son of a carpenter. quote: If we want to adopt the notion that worshipping false idols is a sin, then who is the dude hangin around most churches supposed to be? He bears no likeness whatsoever to that of The "J" dude whatsoever. Never been to a church that worshipped any figures of crosses. If there are any churches that do though, they need to be corrected. quote: How is it remotely possible that Jesus was surprised by being betrayed by Judas? Was his omnipotence on the blink? Jesus wasn't omnipotent per se when he was on the earth. He was sent as one of us, part of the point being as an example to live by. That's a concept that's kind of mindblowing to most people. quote: There are many bibles. We happen to be privvy to the St constatine version. Books were discarded based upon the time frame written as well as content. The Bible as it stands did exist many many years before Constantine, for what it's worth. Not as one volume necessarily, but IIRC, the writings that made up what became the present day Bible was accepted as such centuries before Constantine/Nicea/etc.

Raiikun -> RE: Can You Believe It? (4/3/2009 6:29:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I would avoid placing religion with science and put it more with history if we really got down to it. Just kind of an interesting point...I've never seen my faith as incompatible with science and have never tried to seperate them. My thought is, if God exists he'd know more about science than any of us, so why seperate it? I've learned a lot about my faith and God thanks to science, and vice versa.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875