God is quite busy
- Started
- Last post
- 301 Responses
- ukit0
I'd say most rational, science-based people will admit we don't understand the true nature of the universe and how it was created etc. What we object to is people who assert that they DO understand it, when they clearly don't.
- yeah, what's wrong with simply admitting that we don't know everything...SigDesign
- We don't know everything by any stretch, but we do know enough to be able to claim certain absolute truths.gramme
- Not because of man's intellectual prowess, but because of what God has revealed.gramme
- ugh seriously gramme? could you be any more credulous?spifflink
- Could you be any more doubtful? ;)gramme
- I love it.spifflink
- SigDesign0
My world view is definitely not faith-based. My parents were raised Catholic, and like many, left the church. They told me when I was growing up, I could go to any church if I wanted to... of course, faced with the option, I never felt the need for organized religion.
My wife is Buddhist, but the differences in world view are mostly cultural. It's how we were raised...
The idea that a single being created everything... perhaps that's true, but if it is, then somebody had to create the being that created us, and so on and so forth.
Any way that I try to look at theism, I don't get it... the only way I could subscribe to the belief and acquire "faith" is to simply stop using my mind. This is what needs to happen to a certain extent in order to be a true believer, and it's very dangerous.
- Why did God need a predecessor, if he is eternal? Eternity goes both back into the past as well as into the future.gramme
- Khurram0
there's paradoxes on all sides of the arguments. I guess at best it is healthiest to maintain a level of agnosticisms and shrug your shoulders. Most of the time, i don't even give a shit if there is or isn't a god - would make no difference to me either way. I'm absorbed in the epic of my life, and thats all there is, HERE AND NOW.
But, there is nothing wrong on a philosophical level, speculating, , of trying to reach an understanding on why there is something and not nothing. A fundamental question.
I have my own beliefs. I am god. It's based on faith, my rationalisations, reading of Eastern philosophy, psychology/neuroscience, and hallucinogenic drugs. hehe.
But that's just how my conceptual framework is working right now. And that's cool, it's always shifting.... i might think totally different tomorrow.
- Khurram0
also, i saw on TV that the American Journal of Science classified craziness as someone who has a belief not shared by anyone else, But when a whole social group believes that thing, no matter how outlandish/cultish, you can no longer define the person as insane.
Interesting argument into the nature of belief system, truth, and human concocted rationality. In that we can't pin down what we mean by rational or irrational.
The greatest question for me, now, what the nature of objective "truth" actually is. Which exists, but what's it nature? that's wot i wanna know!!
- SigDesign0
See, there's a misunderstanding between evangelicals and scientists...
The former believe the latter "believe" that God doesn't exist, but that is not the case... scientists are always investigating everything, and any scientist who claims an idea is 100% infallible is not doing his job. Any scientist I've ever met simply is trying to better understand the world, and will not claim that God does or does not exist...we simply don't have proof either way...
- i think the misunderstanding is better defined as theists v atheists. Most accept science is neutral.Khurram
- and wholly inadequate in answering those questions.Khurram
- though it can DESTROY literal bible truth, which thank fuck it has done. Yay science!Khurram
- you're right... but, I think many religious individuals see scientists AS atheists... which is just wrong...SigDesign
- designbot0
I used to think Christianity was ridiculous. I also used to make fun of Christians all the time like so many in this thread. So it is really interesting to be on the other side for me. And helps me not take anything personally at all.
The only thing that I really like to encourage people to do is at least seek the truth as cliche' as that may sound. Don't assume you know everything...especially about Christianity just because you were brought up in the West or another predominantly Christian nation. It comes easy here, yes. It's become trite because you can't even flip on the television without seeing some "Christian" preacher. The message is everywhere. The problem is it's often times watered down, or completely destroyed by the people with the loudest voices. And the worst part is this is what becomes peoples view of Christianity. In the "information age" it seems we all go to resources about resources...and not the actual source itself. We assume that the biased information we are getting is actually accurate, when more often then not, it's actually a total distortion. That is to say, you might have animosity or biased towards something you don't truly know much about. And yes, I like to think I heed my own advice.
- Khurram0
Adam beget Jonah beget Julius beget Jupiter - what the fuck is this bullshit????
- designbot0
^That statement is self-defeating.
- True... but, if the universe is infinitely expanding, how could we ever obtain all truth?SigDesign
- I don't think the expanding universe makes truth any less knowable. Sure we cannot know all truth, as this would make us equal with God.designbot
- equal with God. But "the" truth, the most important truth, the reason we exist I think we can know.designbot
- If you can never equal God, you could never know the truth...SigDesign
- Khurram0
And lo! Thy god did make Eve out of Adams rib!
And did say to eve "thy punisment shall be the pain of child birth!"
it's pretty fucked up, Christianity, or any religion, when you think about it... *shiver*
- gramme0
Ukit—I'm not quite sure what you mean by "have you ever questioned your faith or are you a born again?". Being "born again" is something that happens to every Christian. When a person accepts Christ as their Lord and savior, the holy spirit actually inhabits a person, changing them from the inside through faith. The term "born again" gets routinely abused by people who really haven't a clue what it means.
I'm not sure why you think being born again excludes the possibility of questioning one's faith. And yes, to answer your question, I have questioned everything I have ever been taught, and I continue to do so. I don't believe anything blindly without testing it, thinking through it, weighing the options and looking for loopholes. For many years I wandered from the faith of my parents, but God had different plans for me—little did I know, he had claimed me for himself and there was nothing I could do to resist him. As C. S. Lewis says, I was dragged kicking and screaming into the kingdom of heaven. It's the best thing that ever happened to me. I just came to a point several years ago where I could not intellectually or spiritually deny the gospel anymore. Becoming a Christian does not = intellectual suicide. Upon continued studying of Scripture, one finds that there are no loopholes. What at first seem like occasional contradictions turn out to be connected stories that complete each other and clarify each other, often separating the old from the new, or rather the new completes the old (i.e., the Old Testament law and the New Testament covenant).
Khurram, it's natural that the Bible would seem like vapid, unadulterated stupidity to you. Even though the Bible is not graduate-level reading material, its message will always seem unclear, cryptic, silly, and childish to those the Holy Spirit has not yet revealed himself. The Bible even says that the wisdom of God seems like foolishness to the world, because it all flies in the face of our inborn pride, self-delusion and self-centeredness. Even though God uses his people to spread the gospel, it is ultimately he that saves.
BTW have you ever read Kierkegaard? What did you think? The man can hardly be called a vapid idiot.
- ukit0
IMO, religion is a snapshot of the morality of the culture when it was created. That's why modern day Christians tend to emphasize the loving aspects of Christ, and ignore a lot of the anger of vengeance of the God in the Old Testament.
We even have 7th Day Adventists, who I think are trying to say that God doesn't banish unbelievers to hell eternally after all, he just kills them (lol). Or some churches moving towards admitting gays.
But even the most hardline conservatives Christians of today would be very uncomfortable with following the original Bible word by word, which included some pretty harsh, gruesome punishments for people, and called women subserviant to men, endorsed slavery, etc.
So how do you square the God of the Old Testament with the loving God of modern day Christianity? The answer is pretty simple IMO - the Old Testament was written in a primitive, brutal society by the people of that era. The rulers of that time needed to keep people in line - hence the idea of hell, sin etc., and the gruesome punishments. As society has evolved, we need less and less of that, hence the moderation of POV of the church.
- *it was actually Jesus who spoke about 'hell' for the 1st time in the bible, not the old testament-time rulers.mikotondria3
- Khurram0
gramme, you have descended into such idiocy, that you've made my ignore list.
I had a modicum of respect for you, but to say that i think the bible is stupid cos the Holy Spirit hasn't touched me...
...you've become such a fundamentalist crack pot, that...
shit wait! Home time!!!
LATERZ INTERNET GEEKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- gramme0
"Any way that I try to look at theism, I don't get it... the only way I could subscribe to the belief and acquire "faith" is to simply stop using my mind. This is what needs to happen to a certain extent in order to be a true believer, and it's very dangerous."
That is incorrect my friend. You might not come to the same conclusions as I do about God. I am no genius, but anyone who would say I have ceased to used my mind, that I no longer think rationally or critically, is deaf, dumb and blind. I think critically about everything that seems important to me. I think long and hard, and I am always looking to educate myself and expand my mind. I have a voracious appetite for knowledge of all sorts that was in no way dimmed when I became a believer.
- Okay critical thinker. Did cavemen run with the dinosaurs?metal_leg_will
- I'm not answering that question since you aren't interested in the answer.gramme
- You are correct. I'm only interested in revealing the self-serving delusions of the religious right.metal_leg_will
- that's just pathetic.gramme
- I serve God, not myself.gramme
- Perfect - thank you.metal_leg_will
- *at least that's the goal...gramme
- I mean, it's pathetic that you would waste your time trying to dismantle the "religious right".gramme
- Right. I'm pathetically wasting my time. What are you doing? Self-righteous asshole.metal_leg_will
- I like where this is going..Lillebo
- I guess I was being a bit of an asshole there metal_leg, I apologize.gramme
- I suppose I get a bit weary of the vehemence directed at people who are typically well-mannered.gramme
- Though I obviously pissed you off with good reason here... my bad.gramme
- Dude - no worries. Now I feel bad. We were both going for the jugular a bit. I respect your passion.metal_leg_will
- Cheers, same to you. *clinkgramme
- gramme0
Khurram, I've held the beliefs outlined above and elsewhere since before you knew me. Sadly, you really still do not know me, and it seems you've mischaracterized me as a fighting fundy, which is unfortunate but whatever.
A fundamentalist, by the by, would not be involved in culture at all. he'd be up on his holy hill hurling curses down at all the "heathens" you don't see me doing that. I have always tried to be level-headed, self-controlled and fair. I apologize if I have ever offended you. It seems perhaps you just don't like my ideas and will say anything to make a fool of me. You say you don't really care whether there's a God or not, and yet your constant presence in these sort of threads says otherwise.
- SigDesign0
gramme, I did not mean that a believer would completely shut off their mind to everything...
But, in order to become a believer, you need to suspend some thought processes... it's not logical to think a single being created everything, without being created...
- designbot0
^ Hey SigDesign,
I see what your saying "it's not logical to think a single being created everything, without being created..." but I think it is completely logical. After all if we assume God himself needs a creator, then his creator must also have a creator...the end result is off into infinity which simply can't be the case. Eventually you have to get to the point of the first being...the uncaused first cause..get my point?The idea that God himself is the "Alpha Omega" and has always existed, is really the only explanation that makes sense.
Sorry know that wasn't directed at me :)
- gramme0
An eternal being who always was—that makes a lot more sense to me than an infinite regression, or the notion of things appearing spontaneously without being acted upon. That seems more like intellectual suicide to me. I will say though that both positions require faith, since there are no living witnesses or any evidence that is conclusive beyond a shadow of doubt.
