RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang

RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 9:58:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl But you do follow religious arguments enough to speak with substance about those. Interesting for someone to claim to know so much, yet later admit to limited knowledge. So are you saying if I can't speak with substance on everything then what I can speak about is questionable? I have never claimed to know so much as you say...that is your impression of me based on what you have read here. But it's true, I don't follow the atheist arguments. I'm not interested in atheism...mainly because it's another "camp" so to speak. I think we have enough already. Basically I'm doing what I've always done...following my intellectual curiosity.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 10:14:19 PM)
quote: Regarding religion, I personally feel there are certain aspects of it that act as a sort of heavy ball and chain that cultures are shackled with and it needs to be cut free while keeping what is still applicable. But (speaking generally) the institution of religion is fighting this out of fear of losing authority and credibility. And here is where my intellectual curiosity has lead me. I dont believe in an all powerful god, not in the sense that you seem to believe christians should. I do believe in a guiding force, and i do believe we all follow the same force, that force taking different forms for us all. I believe the bible is as historical as it could be, for th time it was written. I do believe science has made great discoveries. I do not believe the earth is only 6000 years old, and many that i know do not believe it is either. I do believe our universe was created, but not in the sense by a creator. However, i do not believe it was an accident either. I do believe in evolution, and i also believe the Bible points to that very fact. I do believe many who are agnostic and atheists believe the Bible to be more true than those who follow its messages. I do not argue against atheism, or agnosticism, simply because I am not in possession of absolute information to make any assertations as to the truth or lies about any of those positions. I do embrace anyone's right to believe as they wish, and deny no one that right.... I also believe those who wish to believe may do so... those who do not, may believe as they wish as well. I try very hard not to pidgeon hole anyone into any certain group, because, honestly, I do not belong in any group myself. Yet, I will speak up when I see others attempt to do that to others. The basics of my belief is that... believe whatever you desire. But, when you call into question the intelligence or morality of any group that has a differing belief than yourself, you are merely pointing out how narrow minded you are. ("you" not meaning you, personally). If you will notice, many of the threads started about religion on these boards are started by those who criticize those who hold such beliefs. My question to you, anthrosub, would be this... is that the basis for your intellectual curiosity? To immediately put those who may hold the answers to your questions on the defensive?

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 10:20:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub "You see what your knowledge tells you you are seeing." Quite so. Also, what you can know is determined by the questions you can ask. And the questions you can ask are determined by the metaphors you have available. Yes...and this is also the basis for having an epiphany or "Eureka!" moment. I don't know how many times I've been stuck on a thought based problem and after giving up and walking away from it, suddenly the answer pops into my head. Usually it's because I'm so focused on what I do know that my thinking gets in the way of letting anything new into my mind. So it's often a good thing to "lose your mind and come to your senses" once in a while.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 10:34:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Regarding religion, I personally feel there are certain aspects of it that act as a sort of heavy ball and chain that cultures are shackled with and it needs to be cut free while keeping what is still applicable. But (speaking generally) the institution of religion is fighting this out of fear of losing authority and credibility. And here is where my intellectual curiosity has lead me. I dont believe in an all powerful god, not in the sense that you seem to believe christians should. I do believe in a guiding force, and i do believe we all follow the same force, that force taking different forms for us all. I believe the bible is as historical as it could be, for th time it was written. I do believe science has made great discoveries. I do not believe the earth is only 6000 years old, and many that i know do not believe it is either. I do believe our universe was created, but not in the sense by a creator. However, i do not believe it was an accident either. I do believe in evolution, and i also believe the Bible points to that very fact. I do believe many who are agnostic and atheists believe the Bible to be more true than those who follow its messages. I do not argue against atheism, or agnosticism, simply because I am not in possession of absolute information to make any assertations as to the truth or lies about any of those positions. I do embrace anyone's right to believe as they wish, and deny no one that right.... I also believe those who wish to believe may do so... those who do not, may believe as they wish as well. I try very hard not to pidgeon hole anyone into any certain group, because, honestly, I do not belong in any group myself. Yet, I will speak up when I see others attempt to do that to others. The basics of my belief is that... believe whatever you desire. But, when you call into question the intelligence or morality of any group that has a differing belief than yourself, you are merely pointing out how narrow minded you are. ("you" not meaning you, personally). If you will notice, many of the threads started about religion on these boards are started by those who criticize those who hold such beliefs. My question to you, anthrosub, would be this... is that the basis for your intellectual curiosity? To immediately put those who may hold the answers to your questions on the defensive? To everything you said above except your final question...I think that's representative of a large portion of society (not verbatim obviously) to some extent or another. In your final question, I'm not exactly sure what you're asking due to the words "basis for" in the first question combined with the second question. Are you asking if it is my point to put people who may hold answers to my questions on the defensive?

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 10:36:33 PM)
Yes, as individuals and as a group. If one has an intellectual curiosity, then one goes to those that may hold the answers. Correct?

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 10:45:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz In the indeterminate behavior of the constituents. Non-linear dynamics (aka chaos theory) cites many examples. Quantum mechanics also posits non-deterministic behaviors. That's the answer I was expecting, but I don't find it entirely satisfying because, as I understand it, indeterminacy is a given at the quantum level, whether the system is chaotic or ordered. K.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 11:03:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Yes, as individuals and as a group. If one has an intellectual curiosity, then one goes to those that may hold the answers. Correct? The answer is no to your question in the earlier post (putting people on the defensive). It's a consequence of challenging commonly held beliefs which is somewhat unavoidable if a dialog is to be had regarding them. Some people take offense no matter how you phrase what you're trying to say. I can't please everyone. I'm also not perfect. I screwed up royally with Kirata a few days back and apologized immediately. I still don't know why I reacted the way I did to his post. I'm still smarting from it. As far as going to others for possible answers is concerned...what I'm doing here is putting out ideas to see what others think of them and also to see if others have had the same ideas as I mine. I speak on things I have had some exposure to either formally or through my own personal explorations and hope others will do the same but do not expect it. Given the sensitive nature of the subject, I do expect some ruffled feathers. A few years ago I was involved in a similar discussion and at one point there was a female poster telling me I had her in tears because I pulled the rug out from under her. I felt bad but what am I supposed to do...stop talking? Let me ask you a question. Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? And I mean that literally...obviously people have their opinions but that is not what I'm asking. The explanation(s) I'm speaking of may or may not be known but would be valid (as in true). It's late and I'm signing off for now just so you know.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/21/2011 11:08:45 PM)
quote: As far as going to others for possible answers is concerned...what I'm doing here is putting out ideas to see what others think of them and also to see if others have had the same ideas as I mine. I speak on things I have had some exposure to either formally or through my own personal explorations and hope others will do the same but do not expect it. Given the sensitive nature of the subject, I do expect some ruffled feathers. But when you call the intelligence of a person into question, you may as well expect a few ruffled feathers... or possibly a whole pillowcase of them exploding. Why is it that religion cannot be a topic of discussion without berating or belittling? Do you honestly believe those who disagree with you are intellectually inferior? Or is it just that the examples/questions you pose seem to assert that opinion for you? quote: Let me ask you a question. Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? And I mean that literally...obviously people have their opinions but that is not what I'm asking. The explanation(s) I'm speaking of may or may not be known but would be valid (as in true). I believe two people can witness the same exact event and come up with two differing retellings. Which one is valid? One? Neither? Both? Do we have to have only one valid explanation? Would that make you feel more secure?

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 1:29:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? If we are willing to consider that the ultimate nature of reality may not be susceptible to concise expression in words, then we are dealing with a reality the nature of which can only be conveyed metaphorically and symbolically. But, of course, the validity of such a metaphoric and symbolic representation cannot be assessed unless you know what it seeks to reflect. What differentiates a religion from a collection of tall tales and tribal legends is a method, a discipline, a practice by which one may come to grasp the reality behind its metaphors and symbols. K.

tweakabelle -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 5:13:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If we are willing to consider that the ultimate nature of reality may not be susceptible to concise expression in words, then we are dealing with a reality the nature of which can only be conveyed metaphorically and symbolically. But, of course, the validity of such a metaphoric and symbolic representation cannot be assessed unless you know what it seeks to reflect. What differentiates a religion from a collection of tall tales and tribal legends is a method, a discipline, a practice by which one may come to grasp the reality behind its metaphors and symbols. K. Whenever I finish a good yoga session, I can sense a shift in the way I relate to the world. So I feel I have a glimmer of insight into what you are suggesting. However I would be very reluctant to interpret that as an insight into a hidden reality or union with some mystical entity. Just about every human society or culture of note will have some "method, discipline or practice" that seems to meet the criterion set here. For example, most human cultures have rituals (eg. around food, death, fertility etc) or objects that have some special status attached to them (eg crosses, icons, amulets or relics etc) that seem to me to qualify. These occur across a wide spectrum of complexity or sophistication. They exhibit a wide range of diversity. How then do we distinguish those that are useful for our purposes? And is the reality or realities that are to be found universal or culturally specific? And, if there is, as is perhaps implied, potentially universal access to this reality or realities, why does it prove so elusive to render into language and the everyday, why is it so obscure?

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 8:38:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: As far as going to others for possible answers is concerned...what I'm doing here is putting out ideas to see what others think of them and also to see if others have had the same ideas as I mine. I speak on things I have had some exposure to either formally or through my own personal explorations and hope others will do the same but do not expect it. Given the sensitive nature of the subject, I do expect some ruffled feathers. But when you call the intelligence of a person into question, you may as well expect a few ruffled feathers... or possibly a whole pillowcase of them exploding. Why is it that religion cannot be a topic of discussion without berating or belittling? Do you honestly believe those who disagree with you are intellectually inferior? Or is it just that the examples/questions you pose seem to assert that opinion for you? quote: Let me ask you a question. Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? And I mean that literally...obviously people have their opinions but that is not what I'm asking. The explanation(s) I'm speaking of may or may not be known but would be valid (as in true). I believe two people can witness the same exact event and come up with two differing retellings. Which one is valid? One? Neither? Both? Do we have to have only one valid explanation? Would that make you feel more secure? I'm sorry but I cannot address every single connotation you get from what I write. The task would just continue to grow in volume. Who's intelligence have I called into question? Yours? Religion unquestionably has problems. I think I have explained what I mean by that and given some examples. Taking the criticisms I write as berating or belittling religion by you or anyone else is something I cannot control. I'll offer another example to demonstrate what I mean by problems. When a scientific theory is shown to be open to interpretation...it is revised or discarded (let's not go into crackpot theories for they are the exception). When it is shown that Christianity is open to misinterpretation...nothing happens to the text of the bible. Down the road, any newcomer reads the same text and is susceptible to the same problem. So far as I know, the church has no plans to change the bible's text. The difference between the two is explicit communication versus implicit communication. Commenting on your reply about a single explanation.... You just described opinions (which I specifically stated I was not talking about). The rest is conjecture on your part.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 9:08:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? If we are willing to consider that the ultimate nature of reality may not be susceptible to concise expression in words, then we are dealing with a reality the nature of which can only be conveyed metaphorically and symbolically. But, of course, the validity of such a metaphoric and symbolic representation cannot be assessed unless you know what it seeks to reflect. What differentiates a religion from a collection of tall tales and tribal legends is a method, a discipline, a practice by which one may come to grasp the reality behind its metaphors and symbols. K. When I was in my teens it came to me that if we could build an exact model of the universe...we would have a copy. In essence, a second universe. From this I concluded that any attempt to explain the universe is asymtotic. Later, I had this idea about engineers building a high performance jet aircraft. If you gave a set of parameters to several engineers and told them to independently develop a jet aircraft that could achieve those parameters, they would have to ultimately come up with the exact same design if the parameters were extreme enough. To say it differently, the more extreme the parameters are, the less room for variation. In principle, this is what I'm talking about regarding a single explanation for the universe. As we approach a more accurate explanation, the variations reduce in number. But as you said previously, at some point it must be accepted that the finger is not the moon which is alluded to in your description of the practice of religion and I dare say at that point, even the religion being practiced must by definition be dropped. I agree with what you say about religion and achieving the experience of transcendence through discipline and method. If you look at it that way, there is really no difference between any of them...even eastern practices. Western religions for some reason have a propensity for being taken as some sort of historical document rather than a spiritual guide (not by everyone of course). Many eastern religions contain stories about how everything began but they are understood to be metaphors more often than not. I say this on the grounds that we do not hear much of any controversies between science and eastern religions. But it's also interesting to note that historically, eastern cultures are not as progress oriented as western cultures. I think there's a correlation there.

Enigma108 -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 9:51:00 AM)
Kirata wrote: What differentiates a religion from a collection of tall tales and tribal legends is a method, a discipline, a practice by which one may come to grasp the reality behind its metaphors and symbols. I think what you say is profound and succinct. For anyone who is interested in understanding the methods and disciplines and practices, good books that discuss religions from multiple points of view are Karen Armstrong's A CASE FOR GOD, and THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION. I didn't think she did full justice to the Vedic traditions because she apparently lacks the direct experience of Transcendence (which is the central point and basis of all religions, which I believe you are referring to when you say "the reality behind it's metaphors and symbols") but overall she has an astounding intellectual grasp of how religions came into being, and I don't think her books can be read without having a deeper sense of what religion is. Because I think there is usefulness even in the descriptions of her books, I've included them here: A CASE FOR GOD: Moving from the Paleolithic age to the present, Karen Armstrong details the great lengths to which humankind has gone in order to experience a sacred reality that it called by many names, such as God, Brahman, Nirvana, Allah, or Dao. Focusing especially on Christianity but including Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Chinese spiritualities, Armstrong examines the diminished impulse toward religion in our own time, when a significant number of people either want nothing to do with God or question the efficacy of faith. Why has God become unbelievable? Why is it that atheists and theists alike now think and speak about God in a way that veers so profoundly from the thinking of our ancestors? Answering these questions with the same depth of knowledge and profound insight that have marked all her acclaimed books, Armstrong makes clear how the changing face of the world has necessarily changed the importance of religion at both the societal and the individual level. She makes a powerful, convincing argument for drawing on the insights of the past in order to build a faith that speaks to the needs of our dangerously polarized age. Yet she cautions us that religion was never supposed to provide answers that lie within the competence of human reason; that, she says, is the role of logos. The task of religion is to help us live creatively, peacefully, and even joyously with realities for which there are no easy explanations. She emphasizes, too, that religion will not work automatically. It is, she says, a practical discipline: its insights are derived not from abstract speculation but from "dedicated intellectual endeavor" and a"compassionate lifestyle" that enables us to break out of the prison of selfhood. ©2009 Karen Armstrong; (P)2009 Random House THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION: In one astonishing, short period, the ninth century BCE, the peoples of four distinct regions of the civilized world created the religious and philosophical traditions that have continued to nourish humanity into the present day: Confucianism and Daoism in China; Hinduism and Buddhism in India; monotheism in Israel; and philosophical rationalism in Greece. Historians call this the Axial Age because of its central importance to humanity's spiritual development. Now, Karen Armstrong traces the rise and development of this transformative moment in history, examining the brilliant contributions to these traditions made by such figures as the Buddha, Socrates, Confucius, and Ezekiel. Armstrong makes clear that despite some differences of emphasis, there was remarkable consensus among these religions and philosophies: each insisted on the primacy of compassion over hatred and violence. She illuminates what this "family" resemblance reveals about the religious impulse and quest of humankind. And she goes beyond spiritual archaeology, delving into the ways in which these Axial Age beliefs can present an instructive and thought-provoking challenge to the ways we think about and practice religion today. Satara

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 11:05:57 AM)
quote: I'm sorry but I cannot address every single connotation you get from what I write. The task would just continue to grow in volume. Who's intelligence have I called into question? Yours? Religion unquestionably has problems. I think I have explained what I mean by that and given some examples. Taking the criticisms I write as berating or belittling religion by you or anyone else is something I cannot control. Was it not you who presented the words of Harris who does, indeed, call into question the intelligence of those who chose to believe? No one but you controls what you post. (Recall that you responded to my post which i stated "you" doesnt refer to you specifically.) I see it as no different than calling someone who has dark skin a derogatory term simply because it was historically used in the past towards all people of dark skin... again, you control what you post. When you post those thoughts, and then proceed to try and validate such thoughts, you are coming across as validating them... something else you can control. Hiding behind the... Oh those were not my words... doesnt cut it. quote: When it is shown that Christianity is open to misinterpretation...nothing happens to the text of the bible. Down the road, any newcomer reads the same text and is susceptible to the same problem. So far as I know, the church has no plans to change the bible's text. The difference between the two is explicit communication versus implicit communication. So your intentions are to have a piece of literature, written thousands of years ago, to be altered because you dont agree with it? There are many peices of literature i dont agree with... shall we change them all to suit each person's belief? (Belief here isnt a religious term, just a personal belief, as in the belief that the sky is orange instead of blue) quote: Commenting on your reply about a single explanation.... You just described opinions (which I specifically stated I was not talking about). The rest is conjecture on your part. Reading the written word is all about conjecture, on anyone's part. You asked... quote: Let me ask you a question. Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? And I mean that literally...obviously people have their opinions but that is not what I'm asking. The explanation(s) I'm speaking of may or may not be known but would be valid (as in true). I gave you an example associated with what you asked. And i will ask again... one event witnessed by many people will gain many different opinions.... Whose opinion is correct?

PeonForHer -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 12:43:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Enigma108 THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION An in-depth, and pretty scathing, critique of which can be found here: http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2009/review-of-karen-armstrongs-i-the-case-for-god-i/

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 1:35:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Whenever I finish a good yoga session, I can sense a shift in the way I relate to the world... However I would be very reluctant to interpret that as an insight into a hidden reality or union with some mystical entity. Perhaps that reality is simply not so lurid and "supernatural" as some are inclined to suppose, eh? quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle why does it prove so elusive to render into language... why is it so obscure? What would you expect? You can talk about love until you're blue in the face, or for that matter about the color blue itself, and you will still never be able to convey either of those experiences to someone who has never had them. They just won't really know what love is, or what blue is, until they experience them. K.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 1:51:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel But that's not what's happening here, that sort of intellectually honest critical discussion is fundamentally different from name calling and lying about it. In reference to the bolded part... that is your opinion. One i dont happen to agree with. And, for that, you called me a liar. Interesting. No, it's demonstrable that you engaged in name calling and then lied about it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 1:52:24 PM)
[8\|] Move on, life is way too short for this bs.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 2:14:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I'm sorry but I cannot address every single connotation you get from what I write. The task would just continue to grow in volume. Who's intelligence have I called into question? Yours? Religion unquestionably has problems. I think I have explained what I mean by that and given some examples. Taking the criticisms I write as berating or belittling religion by you or anyone else is something I cannot control. Was it not you who presented the words of Harris who does, indeed, call into question the intelligence of those who chose to believe? No one but you controls what you post. (Recall that you responded to my post which i stated "you" doesnt refer to you specifically.) I see it as no different than calling someone who has dark skin a derogatory term simply because it was historically used in the past towards all people of dark skin... again, you control what you post. When you post those thoughts, and then proceed to try and validate such thoughts, you are coming across as validating them... something else you can control. Hiding behind the... Oh those were not my words... doesnt cut it. quote: When it is shown that Christianity is open to misinterpretation...nothing happens to the text of the bible. Down the road, any newcomer reads the same text and is susceptible to the same problem. So far as I know, the church has no plans to change the bible's text. The difference between the two is explicit communication versus implicit communication. So your intentions are to have a piece of literature, written thousands of years ago, to be altered because you dont agree with it? There are many peices of literature i dont agree with... shall we change them all to suit each person's belief? (Belief here isnt a religious term, just a personal belief, as in the belief that the sky is orange instead of blue) quote: Commenting on your reply about a single explanation.... You just described opinions (which I specifically stated I was not talking about). The rest is conjecture on your part. Reading the written word is all about conjecture, on anyone's part. You asked... quote: Let me ask you a question. Do you think there is a single, valid explanation for reality or multiple, valid explanations? And I mean that literally...obviously people have their opinions but that is not what I'm asking. The explanation(s) I'm speaking of may or may not be known but would be valid (as in true). I gave you an example associated with what you asked. And i will ask again... one event witnessed by many people will gain many different opinions.... Whose opinion is correct? I think if we keep running around this tree much longer we're going to both turn into butter.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/22/2011 2:51:46 PM)
I answered your questions. Curious you are avoiding mine.

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625