Do you believe in God and why

[save the frogs]

2 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

That's amazing !

I guess one can say that life is bad, all the people end up dead

I'm not sure what you mean.

A pastor is saying he's observed the Bible messing people up.

If anyone else (besides YOU) is reading this, maybe they can be cautious with this book.

 

[Sunmaster]

2 hours ago, save the frogs said:

This guy is a pastor ... and admits that the Bible can be bad for you.

 

https://brianzahnd.com/2016/06/when-the-bible-is-bad-for-you/

As a pastor I’ve seen people do real harm to themselves and others with the Bible. This is why I have on occasion counseled a troubled soul to either restrict their Bible reading to the Gospels or even stop reading the Bible all-together for a season. There have also been times when I have instructed people to stay away from the Book of Revelation until they were in a healthier mental state and had received some instruction on how to properly interpret it. (An ignorant and irresponsible reading of Revelation can really mess people up!) 

The Bible is a repository of knowledge at its basic function. Interpretations vary and depend on the personal development of the reader in my opinion. 

The pastor simply warns that people without sufficient development and faculty of understanding more complex knowledge can misinterpret it and should limit themselves to read those parts of the Bible that are appropriate to their mental faculties. 

 

A practical example, a person who interprets it literally will extract a very superficial, shallow knowledge. This person will believe all sorts of things that are meant to be allegories and metaphors. 

 

On the other hand, a person who is able to grasp deeper truths and see wider connections will interpret it very differently and I think more in line with the core truths in the Bible. 

 

I think it's fair to criticise the Bible as a source of spiritual information. There are much clearer and more precise sources out there that don't cover the truths in heavy coats of stories and are much better suited to the modern man. So, while there is and there should be a place for the Bible and religion in modern society, the main focus should be on the core teachings that unite all religions. Universal values that unite all people, religious and atheist alike, should be taught at schools and observed by all. 

 

What would such universal values be in your opinion? 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Sunmaster

[save the frogs]

6 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

What would such universal values be in your opinion? 

I don't know.

Haven't put much thought into it.

Do not kill, do not lie, do not steal is a good place to start.

Maybe modernize it for robots - Do not harm androids.

Basic values that should apply to religious folks and atheists alike. 

[Sunmaster]

6 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I don't know.

Haven't put much thought into it.

Do not kill, do not lie, do not steal is a good place to start.

Maybe modernize it for robots - Do not harm androids.

Basic values that should apply to religious folks and atheists alike. 

That's a good start.

 

So, integrity, honesty, kindness, respect, compassion, but also a sense of justice, altruism, humility and forgiveness. And above all that, love.

 

What would the world look like if we could make these values the foundations of our society, free from religious dogma, cultural straight jackets and political ideologies. 

And more importantly, what can we personally do to make such a world possible? 

[save the frogs]

4 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

So, while there is and there should be a place for the Bible and religion in modern society, the main focus should be on the core teachings that unite all religions.

The Bible defines what God is all about ... and many posters in this thread have expressed that they don't like it. 

And I agree with them.

So basically I have decided that there is no getting away from the Bible, since it is after all the most popular piece of literature in human history.

So basically I have also decided that since we cannot get rid of the Bible, it's best to remain an atheist.

 

So here's my advice to everyone after 583 pages:

1 - Remain an atheist. Forget about God.

2 - Avoid the Bible 

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by save the frogs

[Sunmaster]

5 hours ago, save the frogs said:

The Bible defines what God is all about ... and many posters in this thread have expressed that they don't like it. 

And I agree with them.

So basically I have decided that there is no getting away from the Bible, since it is after all the most popular piece of literature in human history.

So basically I have also decided that since we cannot get rid of the Bible, it's best to remain an atheist.

 

So here's my advice to everyone after 583 pages:

1 - Remain an atheist. Forget about God.

2 - Avoid the Bible 

 

Damn....just when I thought you found your way back to rationality...

[save the frogs]

I looked up the "god is dead" quote. First time I read the entire quote. Not even sure what it means ... it's over my head. 

 

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/22827-god-is-dead-god-remains-dead-and-we-have-killed

 

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

 

Edited May 7, 2023 by save the frogs

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I looked up the "god is dead" quote. First time I read the entire quote. Not even sure what it means ... it's over my head. 

 

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/22827-god-is-dead-god-remains-dead-and-we-have-killed

 

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

 

Sometimes i find him difficult to understand too ????

[Sunmaster]

I think he's referring to the fact that we dissected nature in search for God and when we couldn't find him, we simply declared "him" dead...with nothing to replace him.

Like trying to dissect a body hoping to find the soul.

[save the frogs]

ok. good comment, sunmaster.

[Sunmaster]

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

In other words, God is a creation of the human imagination. ????

[Sunmaster]

19 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

In other words, God is a creation of the human imagination. ????

Yes and no.

"God" as a concept is a mere approximation of the ultimate consciousness, that which can not be put into words nor concepts. In that sense it is a creation of our imagination. 

But that's just our way to reduce the unreduceable in terms that are easier to grasp. It says nothing about the actual ultimate consciousness, which is not a product of our imagination, but is the source of all, including our consciousness and imagination. 

Edited May 8, 2023 by Sunmaster

[Red Phoenix]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Yes and no.

"God" as a concept is a mere approximation of the ultimate consciousness, that which can not be put into words nor concepts. In that sense it is a creation of our imagination. 

But that's just our way to reduce the unreduceable in terms that are easier to grasp. It says nothing about the actual ultimate consciousness, which is not a product of our imagination, but is the source of all, including our consciousness and imagination. 

Thanks Sunmaster for this Perfect response! ????

[VincentRJ]

10 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Yes and no.

"God" as a concept is a mere approximation of the ultimate consciousness, that which can not be put into words nor concepts. In that sense it is a creation of our imagination. 

But that's just our way to reduce the unreduceable in terms that are easier to grasp. It says nothing about the actual ultimate consciousness, which is not a product of our imagination, but is the source of all, including our consciousness and imagination. 

The above statement is also a product of the human imagination. All opinions and perceptions, including scientific theories, are products of the human imagination. We tend to use phrases like 'the Laws of Physics', as though these are facts of reality that can never be broken, yet the history of science is rife with laws that have been broken and replaced with new laws that will no doubt be broken, or at least modified, at some point in the future.

 

The issue to contemplate and address is 'what laws, opinions, views, and interpretations actually work, and/or are beneficial to our survival and well-being'?

 

When individuals and/or communities suffer, starve, get killed, and so on, it's usually because of wrong views. Exceptions would be certain natural disasters which are beyond anyone's capability to accurately predict.

 

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

The issue to contemplate and address is 'what laws, opinions, views, and interpretations actually work, and/or are beneficial to our survival and well-being'?

 

When individuals and/or communities suffer, starve, get killed, and so on, it's usually because of wrong views. Exceptions would be certain natural disasters which are beyond anyone's capability to accurately predict.

Maybe we differ on the nuances of "what works", but I completely agree. 

A society that is focused only on the material aspect of reality and refuses any deeper understanding of our place in the universe, is a society that doesn't work. Nor is a society that blindly follows a dogmatic religion without direct personal experience.

Which reconnects me to a previous post, where I tried to identify a universal belief system for the 21st century that would make sense (and would work) for all individuals. A truly inclusive framework that recognizes the accomplishments of science and spirituality alike and one that isn't a closed system, but rather an open-ended system that allows for change and growth.
 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Sunmaster

[KannikaP]

On 5/5/2023 at 10:09 PM, Sunmaster said:

and should limit themselves to read those parts of the Bible that are appropriate to their mental faculties. 

How would one know what is appropriate to their mental facilities until they have actually read it?

I personally much prefer the story of King Arthur to that of the Bible, and their accompanying musicals Spamalot & J C Superstar. 555

Edited May 9, 2023 by KannikaP

[Sunmaster]

2 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

How would one know what is appropriate to their mental facilities until they have actually read it?

I personally much prefer the story of King Arthur to that of the Bible, and their accompanying musicals Spamalot & J C Superstar. 555

I'm not sure.
I'm thinking about math as an example. While all of the math theorems are available to all at all times, it is quite obvious that a school kid is likely not to understand more complex theories. They have to be taught the basics first and as they progress, more and more complicated systems are introduced to them. 
Maybe the Bible should be taught in a similar way. In simple terms for young minds and more in depth for adult minds?
The more important point though is the mental maturity of those that teach it. Without that, all other efforts will be for nothing.

[KannikaP]

11 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I'm not sure.
I'm thinking about math as an example. While all of the math theorems are available to all at all times, it is quite obvious that a school kid is likely not to understand more complex theories. They have to be taught the basics first and as they progress, more and more complicated systems are introduced to them. 
Maybe the Bible should be taught in a similar way. In simple terms for young minds and more in depth for adult minds?
The more important point though is the mental maturity of those that teach it. Without that, all other efforts will be for nothing.

Yes. I think that the Bible IS taught in very simple terms to young people, starting obviously with Christmas (presents) & Easter (chocolate), and then progressing to the Immaculate Conception, the Circumcision of Jesus, and then the Resurrection. Eventually the Creation and the entire history of the Israelite nation will poke it's nose in there.

By the way, what is MATH an abbreviation of please?

Edited May 9, 2023 by KannikaP

[Sunmaster]

6 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

Yes. I think that the Bible IS taught in very simple terms to young people, starting obviously with Christmas (presents) & Easter (chocolate), and then progressing to the Immaculate Conception, the Circumcision of Jesus, and then the Resurrection. Eventually the Creation and the entire history of the Israelite nation will poke it's nose in there.

By the way, what is MATH an abbreviation of please?

 

[KannikaP]

Just now, Sunmaster said:

 

Yes I know. Just that in REAL English it is MATHS, short for MATHematicS. 555

When you study in USA is it PHYSIC?

[Sunmaster]

Just now, KannikaP said:

Yes I know. Just that in REAL English it is MATHS, short for MATHematicS. 555

When you study in USA is it PHYSIC?

Really....? That's what you want to discuss?
I'm not American nor is English my first language. It's my 3rd language. 

[mania]

On 5/5/2023 at 5:09 AM, Sunmaster said:

I think it's fair to criticize the Bible as a source of spiritual information.

That is for sure.

When one considers it was written by man (fallible)

It was translated by man (decided what words best fit in their minds translation)

Then men "later" decided some things should be removed & some things inserted

(The height of it)

 

Consider one simple example

Anyone who has looked at religious texts knows the value of "I Am"

The bible states Jesus said...""I am the way and the truth and the life"

 

Everyone assumed he meant himself....what if instead he meant "I Am"

That is something that could have been pooched in translation

 

I'm not daring to claim this is what it is I am just point out a single possible flaw

in thousands of translated possibly flawed parts

 

This is not helped by the fact the majority of bible readers read the story as literal text when it suits them

Edited May 9, 2023 by mania

[Tippaporn]

Chicken Shack with Christine Perfect (McVie) on vocals on When The Train Comes Back off of their '68 Forty Blue Fingers, Freshly Packed And Ready To Serve album.
 

 

[Tippaporn]

Wrong thread.  It's a great tune and there are no coincidences so I'll let it stand.  There must be a reason for this gaffe . . .

[save the frogs]

Mr Mick Jagger.

 

Do you fear the final hour?

Do you kneel before the cross?

Is Your Conscience Clear?

Are you caked in sweat?

Do you see the light?

See the face of Christ?

Enter paradise?

I doubt it.

 

 

[Hummin]

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

Mr Mick Jagger.

 

Do you fear the final hour?

Do you kneel before the cross?

Is Your Conscience Clear?

Are you caked in sweat?

Do you see the light?

See the face of Christ?

Enter paradise?

I doubt it.

 

 

[Mike Teavee]

9 hours ago, Hummin said:

What a wonderful quote... 

 

 

[Sunmaster]

A sub-topic worth exploring...

I was thinking about the increasing complexity of biological systems and how these systems are related to consciousness.
My primary assumption is that panpsychism is correct in saying that everything in the universe is conscious to some degree. Starting from the tiniest sub-atomic particles to the vastness of galaxies and beyond. This, coupled with the fact that conscious individual agents bond together in more complex systems, giving rise to a consciousness that is more than just the sum of its parts, brings us to a very interesting deductions.

In simple terms, take cells for example. Cells have their own individuality. They interact with their surroundings, they reproduce, they have their own goals and purpose. When they bond together to form an organ, they all work together to fill a higher purpose. The organ itself acquires new faculties and tools to interact with their surroundings. This new entity thus seems to be more than just a mere accumulation of cells. 

If we go one step further, we arrive at the human being, who is a collection of organs and parts. Yet, most will agree that we are more than that. There is a consciousness that oversees the function of all the different parts. Again, there is a new identity, there are new tools to interact with the world and new purposes.

But what if we take this a step further? What if we are all part of a bigger "organism", resulting in a higher order of complexity and consciousness? 
If this drive to unite individual agents into more and more complex systems can be seen throughout nature, does it make sense to you that it would stop at the human being, as if we were the glorious culmination of a very long evolutionary process?
Or would it make more sense to identify the human being as just another step of this process? 

In short....
Lower systems are transcended and included in higher systems, resulting in a consciousness that is more than the sum of its parts.

What about consciousness?
However you may define consciousness, I think we can agree that human beings are conscious. 
Who or what else is conscious in your opinion? Lots of people believe that mammals with big brains are also conscious (dolphins, primates), but also dogs, pigs, horses etc. 
Then it gets more difficult. Can we attribute consciousness to "lower" life forms, such as birds, bugs or worms? Why or why not? 
What about plants? Are they conscious?
How far down the scale are you willing to attribute consciousness? 
What about cells? Atoms? Subatomic particles?

[Hummin]

And still the answer is 42 ????

 

I believe your thoughts is right on, we are part of something bigger we can not comprehend.