Ryanfire

Hi David,

How is faith going to solve the unknown?

What do you expect to happen in the afterlife David? Do you expect god to show you the unknown?
To explain the unknown and known? You don't know god, so how do you know he will be your explanation? You just assumed god will be.

You treat your human existence as meaningless, expecting all answers to be bestowed to you on such an insignificant emotion such as faith, and also coming from such an insignificant being as yourself. You infact said all humans are insignificant in the scheme of things. Why do you pressume god can be used as an explanation for anything, did god agree to do this for you? You don't even *trust* reality, so how can you trust *beyond reality* as well? Is that righteous to you David?

You and theists alike will ultimately destroy what it means to be human. There is no good in your philosophies David. You have nothing to offer the people, nothing to offer to the world, nothing to offer yourself, nothing to offer humanity other than a "belief". And your beliefs contradict everything you say. Therefore it'd be best for you to just stop talking. Words are meaningless in your world as well. Beliefs are all that you have, but they in essence will be the downfall of humanity if it cannot search for truth, or obtain true beliefs. Beliefs could be lies in your reality David, as you say we can't percieve the unpercievable. So maybe you just don't percieve your beliefs are based on deception and lies, and that your mind has accepted those deceptions and lies as truth.

If you wish to play the reality and perception game, lets do it! This will be fun.

I'll start ok? Here's my first move:

You exist in a universe.
The universe is based in reality.
Perception can only be obtained from observing reality, as non-reality would mean non-perception.

Perception:
The act of perceiving; cognizance by the senses or intellect; apperhension by the bodily organs, or by the mind, of what is presented to them; discernment; apperhension; cognition

You are human, and therefore have the perception of one.

Now how can non-reality exist?
How does one make up non-reality?
I can answer that one for you... Imagination.
Imagination can break all bounderies of reality. Hence why god is outside reality for you David.

Now would you consider imagination to be the percievable truth?? Thoughts are obtained from memory and observation. The brain uses sensory impulses from all of our senses that percieve reality(where we exist David). Them being touch, smell, sight, taste, and sound. David, you have all of these senses correct?

Can you touch reality? Yes, various forms of it.
Can you touch non-reality? No, we exist in a universe based in reality.
Can you smell reality? Yes, various forms such as the smell of a flower, or gas.
Can you smell non-reality? No, we exist in a universe based in reality.
Can you see reality? Yes, our eyes can see gas, solids, liquids, and colors.
Can you see non-reality? No, we exist in a universe based in reality.
Can you taste reality? Yes, we can taste food, taste dirt, earth, liquid, gas, solids.
Can you taste non-reality? No, we exist in a universe based in reality.
Can you hear reality? Yes, the keyboard you're typing on is making noise.
Can you hear non-reality? No, we exist in a universe based in reality.

So if we cannot percieve (with our senses) non-reality, where does the concept/idea of non-reality come from?

You forever place god in the places we can never get to David. That's why you don't believe in humanity to solve the mystery of existence.

..............................

Interpret and contemplate the question below in every way possible, and answer it in the same manner.

Why existence David?

You will probably answer, god created existence
out of love. Why does god have love?
God created existence because he felt like it? Why did he feel like it? God created existence because it's in his nature. Why is that his nature? God is everything. Why is god everything?
God is the universe. Why? How does god exist?

once again David,

WHY EXISTENCE?

[ July 13, 2002: Message edited by: Ryanfire ]</p>

Answerer

Thanks for telling us one more good reason, why your 'God' is not worthy of our faith.

Jobar

Hello David- I would be pleased to discuss my own concepts of the nature of reality with you, but I think this thread is not the appropriate place to get deeply into that. This thread is about your beliefs- the only reason I have spoken about mine so much, is to see if yours might possibly be identical to mine, but stated in different terms. At this point I am sure that they are not.

David, you use certain arguments which, if you were a mystic and a pantheist, I would consider valid. These are based, in the main, on the ultimately inexpressible and transcendent nature of reality. BUT- when you attempt to apply these arguments to the reality of a God which is *outside of* or *separate from* nature/reality/the universe, they fail. You can say that reality is ultimately inexpressible and mystical, with some considerable support from physics and information science. But if you deny the identity of God with reality, none of this supports belief in your God.

You deny that your theology encompasses the identity of I/Thou and God. So I repeat my question a third time, David- why do you believe in a God separate from its creation? (I note that neither I nor anyone else here will accept 'faith' as an answer- to us 'faith' translates to 'I was told this by mommy when I was very small.')

wordsmyth

Fair enough. First, lets define faith. According to… dictionary" target="_blank">http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=faith]dictionary[/url]</a>

Faith n.

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.


Ok, now that we know what exactly faith is, lets see if you can help me to understand what initially prompted your “belief without logical proof or evidence” in xianity. Additionally, what prompted your “belief without logical proof or evidence” in the xian texts as being the most valid?

It probably comes as no surprise that I profoundly disagree with this assertion. In fact I would say that unbelievers are better equipped to assess the validity of religious texts due to their objectivity. A xian for example, begins his/her assessment with the preconception that the xian texts are true a priori and thus lack the objectivity to accurately assess their validity or non-validity.

</strong>

I both agree and disagree with your second statement above. I agree that as an American my personal rights to freedom of religion (or freedom from religion as I would prefer it) are protected and allow me the opportunity to seek the truth without fear of persecution; even if this freedom is only vestigial. However, The United States is a predominantly xian country where my beliefs (or non-beliefs as it were) are among a small minority and as such it is a daily struggle against the unreasoning xian dogma that permeates every area of our nation/culture.

China is a predominantly atheist country and so if I were Chinese I would say that your second statement would be accurate.

</strong>

You seem unfamiliar with the rules of formal logic, so allow me to elucidate. He who asserts bears the burden of proof. You have asserted that the attributes of the xian God are common among the God(s) of all religions. I called you on your assertion and so now you bear the burden of proving that it is valid.

This is where most xians fail to be convincing, as they seem to have an abundance of wild assertions, but lack any substantial evidence to support them or, as you have stated previously on this board, they do not feel they need to justify their beliefs and so refuse to produce any supporting evidence. The latter tends to lead one to believe the former.

It was not my intention to prove God’s non-existence and I certainly would not be so presumptuous as to try and dissuade you from your beliefs. I was simply refuting your claim that similarities among religions were an argument in favor of theism by expounding the fact that there are many more dissimilarities than there are similarities. Thus I have demonstrated why your reasoning is flawed.

The best evidence is in fact the lack there of.

The lack of any and all verifiable evidence that demonstrates the existence of God(s) is itself evidence against the existence of God(s).

History is filled with accounts of supernatural beings and events interacting with humans and yet not a single piece of substantial evidence for these beings or events exists anywhere. It seems quite odd that supernatural events began to die out as our ability to explain them through naturalistic causes advanced. Supernatural explanations for natural events due to ignorance of the actual cause of those events is evidence in favor of humankind’s imagination toward inventing an explanation.

Here we are in the 21st century and there are still a few people who cling to an unreasoning belief in the supernatural even when they are given reasonable naturalistic explanations. People continue to believe in the existence of ghosts and the power of ESP even when presented with logical explanations and refutations they refuse to accept them over their belief in the supernatural. Even after the two men behind the crop circles in Europe came forward and admitted they were behind it, many people continued to insist it was the work of UFOs. This is evidence that humans in general have an unreasoning desire to believe in the supernatural.

We have also found that many beliefs of the past are fallacious, such as the earth being flat and the sun revolving around it. The xian bible is literally filled with allegorical stories that are a “testament” to the imagination of humankind rather than scientific fact. You have already admitted that you believe at least some parts of the bible are allegorical stories and not literal truth. Therefore you must also admit that it is evidence of human imagination throughout the bible. There is no physical evidence for any supernatural event described in the bible and in several instances supernatural events are only recorded by a single author (Matthew comes to mind) which further shows that the stories were clouded by the imagination of an individual rather than based strictly on actual events. After all, it’s a religious text and not a history or science book and so we should not expect it to be filled with verifiable facts. However, as I stated before, without verifiable evidence we are forced to believe every wild assertion and supernatural claim a priori.

The same can be said for the texts of any of the world’s religions, which also lack any substantial evidence to support their claims of supernatural beings or events.

David Mathews

Hello Ryanfire,

David: Faith is not meant to solve the unknown, merely to inform us of the existence of the unknown.

David: I don't have the least idea what will happen in the afterlife.

David: God has made no such promises. I suspect that the afterlife will present the known/unknown boundary from a much different perspective, perhaps dissolving the boundary.

David: I have faith in God. I suppose that after I die I will replace faith with knowledge.

David: God did not make any agreements with me. I approach theism from a more or less philosophical perspective in which God seems a sufficient cause for all that exist.

David: I don't trust perceptions, nor do I trust human intellect. I wonder what reality actually is, though I know that this question is essentially unanswerable.

Righteousness is defined as how I think, speak and act, and I would prefer to be more righteous than I am.

David: These are risks that I am willing to take on behalf of my own search for the ultimate cause and meaning of life, and also the search for the truth. I am not afraid of being wrong. People who are too careful acheive nothing.

David: I don't know what "The universe is based in reality" means as I am aware of a subjective element in human perceptions and also in the mind's interpretation of those perceptions.

I don't know what you mean by saying that "perception can only be obtained from observig reality, as non-reality would mean non-perception." For thousands of years humans were unable to perceive x-rays, gamma rays, radio waves and other forms of the electromagnetic spectrum. They did exist throughout this period in which humans could not perceive nor even imagine their existence. Secondly, some of the greatest advances in science came from mental experiments which were absolutely divorced and sometimes contrary to perceptions: For example, Albert Einstein's discovery of Relativity occurred internally.

David: I agree with the above.

David: Imagination has been a vital tool in the discovery of scientific, philosophical and political mysteries for thousands of years. Imagination breaks through the barriers and inhibitions which are self-imposed on the mind.

David: I have all of those senses.

David: All of the above is true in a trivial sense. What you are saying, essentially, is that we can perceive perceptible things.

David: The concept of non-reality comes purely from the intellect, just as the mathematical concepts of zero is a purely intellectual concept.

David: That is exactly what I am doing, with reason.

David: I have never asked God why He created and therefore do not have the answer to that question. Perhaps the answers which you mentioned are the actual answers, perhaps they are not. I don't know and can't find out.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews

Hello Jobar,

David: Christians, Jews and Muslims have traditionally considered God separate and apart from the Universe of His creation. The division between God and the Universe is by definition, not a conclusion based upon any sort of investigation.

The Hindu/Buddhist/Mystic concept of God differs dramatically from the Biblical concept of God. I believe that the difference is not a real contradiction, instead it is merely an expression of viewing this problem from a different perspective.

From the standpoint of God's omnipresence, it seems reasonable to believe that God is present everywhere at all times. That would mean that God is also present in our bodies and everywhere else in the Universe.

I don't know if this resolves the problem. I don't feel any special obligation to actually resolve the problem as I can and do appreciate the differing viewpoints of the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists and the mystics among all those religions.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

lpetrich

The appropriate question is: Which god? Carl Sagan had been known to respond that whether or not he believed in God depends on what one means by "God".

Although I think that mystical experiences are an interesting psychological quirk, I commend Jobar for stating what he means by "God".

DM's God is one that I would be unwilling to worship even if It existed. Because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Remember George Orwell's animal allegory about Communism, Animal Farm, and what happened to the pigs at the end.

I'm sure that advocates of rival creeds would claim that you'll be judged by their favorite deities or affted by your karma or whatever. Thus, if you have bad karma, you could get reincarnated as a cockroach or something. Imagine everybody trying to step on you and viewing you as an evil entity to be exterminated. And imagine that you escape from being stepped on, only for a spider to jump on your back and sink its fangs into you and ...

That might make a fun Pascalian argument for Hinduism
[/quote]

Good Grief!

DM ought to get a job at a movie theater; he's an expert projectionist

There are lots of religions that don't feature any entity with these attributes. Did Hellenic paganism? Did Norse paganism? Did Egyptian paganism? Does Buddhism?

Ryanfire

All humans are aware of the existence of the unknown since birth. The only way you discovered the unknown was with your perceptions. Faith causes perception to become blind.

What you don't percieve, you can only imagine.

Man could not percieve the reason for his existence, therefore needed the concept of god to create an answer for his existence.

What are heaven and hell? Describe what happens in both scenarios.

So in death you expect to find knowledge? Knowledge of known and unknown boundaries? What perspective could desolve the boundary of reality and non-reality? Does the word "imagination" come to mind?

Or replace faith with non-existence. There is no way for you to obtain knowledge between reality and non-reality, as the inbetween barrier can only be void.

You approach the concept of theism because you have no idea as to why we exist. A god only seems fitting because you don't believe man can solve the mystery.

"I guess I better believe in god because I have no idea what the purpose of my existence is, and with death knocking at my door, I don't have enough time to decide what is the the true reason for existence."

Even if you were given the answer, you could not trust it because you do not trust yourself.
All knowledge, wisdom, and intellect are not to be trusted. The concept of god cannot be trusted either as it only exists within our knowledge, wisdom, and intellect, moreso... our imagination.

Then you cannot be too careful of your belief in god. You don't have to be afraid of being wrong. I would not hate you for being wrong. You are only trying to find your place here David. That is never wrong. Don't claim god as the only answer. It is one of many possible answers. Perhaps if you, I, and many others stuck around for a while, we could go on a journey to find the reason(s) for our existence.
Death need not be our only solution to ease the pain or suffering of our fears, or quest for the unknown.

Ironically David, we did not percieve them sure, but they do exist in reality Nice try.

Imagination can break through the barriers, but can also lock the barriers as well. Sure it's a vital tool, but imagination is not truth, only theories, concepts, or ideas based on perception and intellect. But you don't trust those, so I don't know how imagination works in your world,
or how you can assert that imagination is a vital tool for the human mind.

That's good to know, but you don't trust them, so what good are they to you? You should trade them in for a new set of senses.

Not what I was saying, but what the hey.. I will apply your rehash of my statement(s):

If God is not perceptible, then one cannot percieve god to exist. Therefore the word, idea, theory, and concept of "god" do not exist.

But also from the intellect comes imagination

Mathematical concepts of zero exist in our reality David.

I know in my reality 1 - 1 = 0

What sort of math can you do in non-reality?
Give me one mathematical concept within non-reality and I will shut my mouth.

Hmm.. perhaps you should rephrase this.
"This is exactly what I am doing, for a reason."
Anything to fit your god concept into reality.

Therefore you are in the same boat as an atheist. You have no idea about the creation process and why it happened. You can only account "goddidit" because you can't afford to be wrong, I know you wouldn't want to burn in hell David. This is the fear deep inside all humans, and we must replace this fear with love. To disallow imperfection and wrongness is to deny humanities balance within reality, nature, and its purpose for existence.

You CAN find the answers! Are you willing to open your mind and heart to believe in humanity and all it has to offer?

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Ryanfire ]</p>

HelenM

Originally posted by rainbow walking:

David: No, you will most certainly meet God, even as an atheist you will meet God. You can do so either gently or harshly, that is your own choice to make.

Isn't it also God's choice?

If we can forgive, so can He...or can't He? We are supposed to forgive unconditionally, and yet Him, only those who 'believed'? So...He holds us to a higher standard than Himself?

How odd

David: You have a superficial atheism, a conscious atheism, built around the core of your personality which is still inclined to theism and perhaps is still theistic in its approach to reality.

So, David, you have insight into rw's inner thoughts that he doesn't have, since he disagrees with you? How do you know what he thinks, more accurately than he does? Did you have a revelation from God? Are you simply much more insighful than him, so much so that even though he has the natural advantage of access to his thoughts and you can only guess at them, your insight overrides his greater knowledge of his thoughts and motivations?

Do you think it might be come across as a little presumptuous of you, to think you know so much about him?

David: God's fundamental law is expressed: Love God, Love your fellow humans. All sins are a violation of these two laws.

Rw: Then your god is a sinner.

I'm guessing that David is not going to agree with something about your reasoning here, rw

love
Helen

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: HelenSL ]</p>

Answerer

I don't know where had you come across a buddhist text which mentions things about God, but I can tell you for sure, Buddhist texts mentions about God and even, buddhists, themselves, don't bother themselves with the question of whether God exists or not. The same thing goes for the hindi, taoists, etc.
Please don't make any more assumptions that are based on your wrong understanding of their religions.