Ion

How do you know this outside religions?

Gemma Therese

Ion --

you said: How do you know this outside religions?

I have come to an understanding that God exists. He manifests Himself through religion.

Ion, I have had periods in my life when I did not believe in God, make no doubt. But I always seem to come back to Him.

In God's Love,

Gemma Therese

Ion

Religion is not science.
Religion and science are in conflict about material truths.

Religion holds some value as a philosophy of life. However it is a philosophy which is hampered, when compared with coherent philosophies, by inconsistencies within the itself.

As a philosophy of life, whatever makes you happy Gemma, whatever works for you, as long as you don't harm anyone in the name of religion:
religions are notorious for disrespecting human life in the name of a supreme being who is unhappy with humans.

I know it doeasn't make me happy as a philosopy of life.
I know pilosopies of life, that to me are better than that.

Mageth

You sure claim to know a lot about god for someone who claims that god can't be understood.

Plain and simple, if god cannot be understood by humans, then anything we claim to "know" about god is suspect. For example, you made the statement "He manifests Himself through religion." If you cannot understand god, then the most you can say is "I believe He manifests Himself through religion." As another example, you made the statement "God is present on Earth." Again, the most you can say is "I believe God is present on Earth."

Typhon

Hello Gemma,

I hope you'll not mind over much, if I jump in here. I have a few questions about some of your most recent remarks.

Love is never a substitute for understanding. Understanding, never diminishes a true, and valid love.

I could declare my love for dirty, multi-yield, long-range, thermonuclear weapons, without understanding what they are or the ability to thus explain them to others. I could love them so very much. However, for someone who understood what it was that I REALLY was embracing with my love, one might understand a degree of skepticism and repulsion. That is I'm afraid, much why we atheists react with skepticism and repulsion, to your blind love of the (I assume) Catholic god.

I KNOW what the Catholic god is, and frankly, this historical, created-by-man, imaginary myth concept is close to being right up there, unfortunately, with dirty, multi-yield, long-range, thermonuclear weapons. Hence, I am skeptical and somewhat appalled by those who profess love in the Catholic mythos.

"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, 1782)

Well for starters, god does not exist, and all religions appear to clearly be the sole brain-child of man, so right of the bat you have issues understanding god and religion.

If you do not understand nuclear physics, why do you believe it exists? I know that "nuclear physics" exists, because I understand it and have taken time, pains, and study, to weigh the output of those scientists who have formed and are active, in defining the field.

Nuclear physics is not static. What we know, and what we think, has changed over time. New ideas have replaced older, more outdated and less correct ones. Nuclear physics is a testable, observable, repeatable, field. Do we know everything there is to know, not by a long shot. Do we strive towards a more true and factual understanding of the field, yes. The same can not be said for the Catholic faith, no matter what it's long tradition of founders and theologians who sought to define and prop-up the very ancient deficiencies and contradictions of its wobbly faith.

Personally I couldn't care if you said in Beelzebub's Love, or in BlueCodSherry's Love or in JackTheRipper's Love. It's your delusion, not mine.

However, in a room full of theists, it is somewhat a kin to shouting out at the end of every sentence "INCOMING" in a room full of shell-shocked veterans. Or on the sweeter side, shouting "TOOTH FAIRY" every five minutes in a room full of dentists.

In nobody's love but my own,

.T.

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

[ May 29, 2002: Message edited by: Typhon ]</p>

DRFseven

Gemma, I repeat, please answer the question instead of evading. Tell me how I can DECIDE to believe. Are you going to answer or not?

Gemma Therese

DRFseven:

You wrote: Gemma, I repeat, please answer the question instead of evading. Tell me how I can DECIDE to believe. Are you going to answer or not?

Possess your soul in patience!

Sometimes, you have to make a "leap of faith" and just believe.

You can pray, "God, I believe in you. Now help my unbelief!"

In God's Love,

Gemma Therese

Ion

Easy Gemma: this thread and "Does God exist?" have the beginnings of openinig your eyes from a third-world country superstitious into a developed country enlightened mind.
For more than beginnings, we can dig into details of particular subjects already mentioned.

Gemma Therese

Typhon,

Due to lack of time, I cannot address all your questions, but some things stood out.

You said: I am skeptical of those whose profess love in the Catholic mythos.

Mythos? Please elabarote.

You said, "Well, for starters, god [sic] does not exist."

Could you please capitalize God? You do not believe in Santa Claus, but I'm sure you capitalize it.

You said: I know that nuclear physics exists, because I have taken the time, pains, and study ... blah, blah, blah.

Kudos to you.

You said (in effect) : The Catholic Church is static, and has always been this way.

Well, ya may be well-versed in physics, but ya ain't in Church history.

You said: It's your delusion, not mine.

Wow! You're well read in psychiatry, too? You're so wonderful, Typhon, whatdon't you know?!

In God's Love,

Gemma Therese

[ May 29, 2002: Message edited by: Gemma Therese ]</p>

Samhain

Gemma Therese:

I applaud your sincerety and your cooperation, but frown upon your naivety.

The quote you used in order to try and debunk my statement proved nothing at all, actually it contradicts the rest of the points you have made. Besides, by what measurement is he considered to be a "brilliant spiritual figure"? Some, such as yourself will say such, others will call him a charlatan. Your use of his arguments and that particular quote lacks substance.

Whoa. Wait a second. You love something which you do not, and cannot possibly have any conception of. You said it yourself that one cannot understand God, how do you know that he is not a maniac tyrant, or a demented joker? There is no purpose to following or loving something which you cannot possibly have any understanding of. The two possibilities above are just as valid, and IMO more possible than your perception of an omnibenevolent creator. I can say I worship a wabbajack, but what does that statement mean? What is a wabbajack? I cannot tell you what it is, and I cannot possibly know anything about a wabbajack, so what do I really worship? A word, that's all. A word which I have made up in my own head in order to turn self-righteousness into righteousness.

Of course that is all just unsupported assumption. Proclaiming the "glory of god" by saying that we can witness his creation in the world around us does not prove the existence of god, and is a common logical fallacy which theists frequently fall into.

Well, knowledge defeats the purpose of faith. Second, physics can be understood by humans, and there is no human limitation restricting our understanding of physics. Next physics is a scientific tool which falls under all other human concepts of what we understand as truth, and thus we can witness the existence of physics in totallity and with understanding because it coincides with everything else that is logical and scientific in the world and what humans know to be true. God, however, does not fall under any of these. We have no evidence of the existence of any god(s), common concepts of god are not logically possible and create a paradox (such as the paradox your god creates). Thus, you are saying that we should live our lives searching for "truth" but when it comes to god we should throw all that we know away on a whim and worship regardless of lack of evidence for the existence of god or compelling evidence against the existence of god?

This statement is offensive to me because it portrays a bigotry and a self-righteousness which I loathe. It is a disrespectful statement for you do not consider how I feel on the matter but instead launch your little ridiculous remark for no purpose at all other than to portray your own self-righteousness. I would not walk into the home of a christian and say "I love satan". I would not walk into the home of a muslim and profess the teachings of Christ. Now, you've walked into our house, maybe you should try and show a little respect before launching your self-righteous evangelistic theories upon the masses. Understand that I respect your ideas if they work for you, but do not come here to question my lack of belief in your god unless you want your shit to be handed back to you in toto.

[ May 29, 2002: Message edited by: Samhain ]</p>