Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

11 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

In my personal case it does, but it isn't the major reason.

Doing good is obvious/standard;

doing bad, intentionally, isn't,

in my opinion.

I tend to agree with you.

Obviously there are infinite degrees of good and bad, but i'd guess that more than 90% of the people are good.

[canuckamuck]

42 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Right. I agree with that.

By continuation, doing something good for the sake of doing something good, is the best, because the pure intention behind it amplifies the action.

Maybe ????

Doing something good with no desire to see good is just random and meaningless. One seeks to cause good because one knows what good is, and wants to see good increased. The purest expression of knowing good is to cause good to occur regardless of the benefactor. It is only selfish if the good is done at a known cost for others. Good benefits you just by seeing good increased.

Good eh?

[canuckamuck]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

I think your questions only make sense if you accept the concept of "God" of the Abrahamic religions. A grumpy old fart in the sky who will give you a ticket to heaven if you're a good boy or punish you with eternal damnation if you don't behave. 
This, of course, is a very distorted interpretation and I venture to say that most of us can agree on that.

 

The way I see it, the Source is not going to interfere with your free will, otherwise it would have stopped Hitler, Stalin or Mao from slaughtering millions.  The Source is benevolent, the ultimate expression of love, wisdom, truth and compassion. How then, could it ever be so petty to punish you for not believing in it? In my mind this is just a ridiculous notion.
Actions do have consequences though, but they have more to do with your own Self and your own spiritual progress rather than heaven or hell. There's no judgment whatsoever from the source. You'll be your own judge.

I think the most important aspect of every action is the intention behind it.
Do you help that person out of kindness or because you expect a reward in the afterlife?

Do you donate money to that temple to help others or because you expect your next incarnation to be better?
These things matter.
 

 

 

Logically though, if an Abrahamic God exists but He fails to fit your model of Him, Then it is your model which is wrong.

 

 

 

 

[Sunmaster]

6 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Logically though, if an Abrahamic God exists but He fails to fit your model of Him, Then it is your model which is wrong.

 

 

 

 

This is going to take me a while to wrap my head around ????

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

There's no judgment whatsoever from the source. You'll be your own judge.

This is what the esoteric Christians say, and it makes perfect sense to me too.

[Skeptic7]

9 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

So we have 2 persons doing something for their own benefit, yet one is working for a better world, and the other one is creating disasters.

RIDICULOUS (as usual). How did you come to that conclusion? I'm sure Sunmaster is working for a better world too! 

 

Arrogant and judgmental much??? And Sunmaster thinks I claim the superior high ground!!!

 

FYI...My entire life has been based around 'harmlessness". Vegan as soon as I was aware that it was a viable and healthy diet style, which was 30 years ago. Animal rescue and rehab volunteer. "Recycler" before recycling was even a mainstream thing. Naturalist and conservationist. Tiny eco-footprint. 35 year career AND proud lifelong freethinker and atheist. It's that last part on which your base your preconceived notions and ire. Just because I don't agree with you. Typical.   

[Sunmaster]

Guess I touched a nerve there....ouch.????

[mauGR1]

22 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

RIDICULOUS (as usual). How did you come to that conclusion? I'm sure Sunmaster is working for a better world too! 

 

Arrogant and judgmental much??? And Sunmaster thinks I claim the superior high ground!!!

 

FYI...My entire life has been based around 'harmlessness". Vegan as soon as I was aware that it was a viable and healthy diet style, which was 30 years ago. Animal rescue and rehab volunteer. "Recycler" before recycling was even a mainstream thing. Naturalist and conservationist. Tiny eco-footprint. 35 year career AND proud lifelong freethinker and atheist. It's that last part on which your base your preconceived notions and ire. Just because I don't agree with you. Typical.   

LOL  No need to get defensive, i was not talking about you or Sunmaster, it was just a random example.

Thanks for the insults, but i can assure that in this case are totally undeserved.

My lifestyle has lots in common with yours btw, pls relax and accept my apologies if my post let you think that i was attacking you ????

[canuckamuck]

11 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

This is going to take me a while to wrap my head around ????

Let me know when you get there

[mauGR1]

13 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Logically though, if an Abrahamic God exists but He fails to fit your model of Him, Then it is your model which is wrong.

 

 

 

 

I am quite sure he exists/existed, and so the Greek gods, the Indian gods and the Egyptian (many or all of them could be the same gods, just with different names)

If the real God is one, He/She should be one and the same for all human beings, as the gods we hear about in the old texts, i would call them "manifestations of God" having supernatural powers on one hand, and a human shape, and human defects like anger, jealousy, or qualities like love, forgiveness etc.

Of course it's always hazardous to try to describe with words something we can only perceive by intuition, but if we have to give some credit to the old legends, and i regard some stories of the Bible as such, there have been many manifestations of the Supreme Being, in different times and shapes, with different names, and none of them IS the Supreme Being, but "just" a manifestation.

[canuckamuck]

12 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I am quite sure he exists/existed, and so the Greek gods, the Indian gods and the Egyptian (many or all of them could be the same gods, just with different names)

If the real God is one, He/She should be one and the same for all human beings, as the gods we hear about in the old texts, i would call them "manifestations of God" having supernatural powers on one hand, and a human shape, and human defects like anger, jealousy, or qualities like love, forgiveness etc.

Of course it's always hazardous to try to describe with words something we can only perceive by intuition, but if we have to give some credit to the old legends, and i regard some stories of the Bible as such, there have been many manifestations of the Supreme Being, in different times and shapes, with different names, and none of them IS the Supreme Being, but "just" a manifestation.

 OK, but if the manifestations are contradictory, then some of those are misrepresentations.

[mauGR1]

13 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

 OK, but if the manifestations are contradictory, then some of those are misrepresentations.

Perhaps you should define "contradictory"

..But, talking in general, i would guess that the contradiction is likely to be with humans, not with the superior beings.

To an extent, we could compare "water" to a superior being, yet the same "water" is necessary  for life, and in certain forms can kill millions.

So, is water good or bad ? I would say it's both, but there is no contradiction in the existence of water, or fire or nature, contradiction is a human experience.

Edited November 14, 2019 by mauGR1

[canuckamuck]

Well contradictory in nature is a start. Something cannot be a trickster and also the embodiment of truth. Or a warrior god like Odin and at the same time say turn the other cheek. And polytheism cannot be expected from an entity that declares to be one and only.

 

 

[mauGR1]

42 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Well contradictory in nature is a start. Something cannot be a trickster and also the embodiment of truth. Or a warrior god like Odin and at the same time say turn the other cheek. And polytheism cannot be expected from an entity that declares to be one and only.

 

 

Well, now you are setting limitations to the Supreme Being, i am not sure this is the way to go.

I think we should accept and respect contradiction as a part of the human experience.

Like when we see 2 men, or 2 countries fighting each other, they could be both in the right in their imagination, still, they are fighting.

[mauGR1]

On a less serious note, i always found the B.Dylan lyrics on the famous Abraham's son tale quite funny.

 

" Oh God said to Abraham, “Kill me a son”
Abe said, “Man, you must be puttin' me on”
God say, “No.”
Abe say, “What?”
God say, “You can do what you want, Abe, but
The next time you see me comin' you better run”
Well Abe says, “Where you want this killin' done?”
God says, “Out on Highway 61”

[canuckamuck]

17 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, now you are setting limitations to the Supreme Being, i am not sure this is the way to go.

I think we should accept and respect contradiction as a part of the human experience.

Like when we see 2 men, or 2 countries fighting each other, they could be both in the right in their imagination, still, they are fighting.

 I am not sure but it seems you are suggestion that because man is dualistic that the supreme being must also be?

[mauGR1]

Just now, canuckamuck said:

 I am not sure but it seems you are suggestion that because man is dualistic that the supreme being must also be?

My bad, actually i meant to say the opposite.

Yet, any kind of limitation we can imagine, it doesn't apply to God.

 

[Sunmaster]

To be pedantic, the Supreme Being is both duality and unity.

[mauGR1]

7 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

To be pedantic, the Supreme Being is both duality and unity.

Yes, but not only, i would regard the number 3 as really divine.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

n different times and shapes, with different names, and none of them IS the Supreme Being, but "just" a manifestation.

Exactly. That's what the atheists don't get. They, apparently, think "God" is definable as a "man" with human characteristics, when logically a being capable of creating life the universe and everything can appear as anything he/she/it wants and is capable of anything within or without the boundaries of human primitive science.

[canuckamuck]

 

11 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

To be pedantic, the Supreme Being is both duality and unity.

And here is where we go our separate ways. In my estimation the only thing which can be preexisting and eternal is a singularity

Edited November 14, 2019 by canuckamuck

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Well contradictory in nature is a start. Something cannot be a trickster and also the embodiment of truth. Or a warrior god like Odin and at the same time say turn the other cheek. And polytheism cannot be expected from an entity that declares to be one and only.

 

 

Well, Odin didn't actually exist outside of men's imagination.  Makes nice fairy stories though.

As for polytheism, God can appear in many forms, according to what may be appropriate at the time.

Many paths, one destination.

To determine if genuine one must understand the basics of the religion. If it's just kill people one doesn't like, it's pretty clear it's not the real deal. The real thing has an objective of nirvana, paradise, heaven, etc which is reached by becoming a better person ie turning the other cheek.

[canuckamuck]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, Odin didn't actually exist outside of men's imagination.  Makes nice fairy stories though.

As for polytheism, God can appear in many forms, according to what may be appropriate at the time.

Many paths, one destination.

To determine if genuine one must understand the basics of the religion. If it's just kill people one doesn't like, it's pretty clear it's not the real deal. The real thing has an objective of nirvana, paradise, heaven, etc which is reached by becoming a better person ie turning the other cheek.

I am not saying that God cannot be referred to by different groups in different ways. However if two groups contradict each other in foundational ways. Then it must be that one or both groups are wrong.

A God that is fine with promiscuity is not going to be the same as one instituting marriage and fidelity.

[mauGR1]

21 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

 

And here is where we go our separate ways. In my estimation the only thing which can be preexisting and eternal is a singularity

The Tao is a good visualisation of what i was trying to express with words.

The Tao is one.

The 2 colours are the duality.

The 3 circles are the trinity.

The 5 areas are the physical elements.

All in one.

[Sunmaster]

26 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

 

And here is where we go our separate ways. In my estimation the only thing which can be preexisting and eternal is a singularity

If duality comes from the singularity, where/when can you draw a line between the 2 and the 1? I find it impossible to separate them, so for me if 1 is eternal, 2 is too by association.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

I am not saying that God cannot be referred to by different groups in different ways. However if two groups contradict each other in foundational ways. Then it must be that one or both groups are wrong.

A God that is fine with promiscuity is not going to be the same as one instituting marriage and fidelity.

Actually "God" probably doesn't care about marriage, fidelity etc. How could he/she/it when the urge to procreate with as many different woman as possible is a genetic program? 

The concept of one partner for life is a nonsense dreamed up by humans for cultural reasons. Nothing to do with God.

Personally I can't even imagine the creator making us with the procreation program and then thinking that it would be a good idea to make people only live with one woman their entire adult life. Penguins do, but that's their genetic program, and they don't live that long anyway.

 

IMO people get culture mixed up with religion far too often. Eg, ignorant people think that wearing a headscarf is an Islamic requirement handed down by God, when it's cultural and not religious at all. God, who can see what is in human's minds, doesn't care if people wear something on their head, or not. Only humans would think the creator of all gives a monkey's about what they wear.

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Exactly. That's what the atheists don't get. They, apparently, think "God" is definable as a "man" with human characteristics, when logically a being capable of creating life the universe and everything can appear as anything he/she/it wants and is capable of anything within or without the boundaries of human primitive science.

My impression is just the opposite. It's the 'religious' people who apparently think that God is definable as a man with human characteristics. On the other hand, an atheist can accept that it's hypothetically possible there might be some sort of 'Almighty Creative Intelligence' pervading the universe, that has influenced the creation of life on planet Earth, but if there is such an entity, the atheist probably thinks it would be silly for anyone to claim that they have even the remotest knowledge, or even remotely accurate description, of such an entity.

 

From Genesis 1:26:  
"On the sixth day God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

 

From Exodus 20:3-5 King James Version:
"3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me."

Edited November 14, 2019 by VincentRJ

[thaibeachlovers]

42 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

My impression is just the opposite. It's the 'religious' people who apparently think that God is definable as a man with human characteristics. On the other hand, an atheist can accept that it's hypothetically possible there might be some sort of 'Almighty Creative Intelligence' pervading the universe, that has influenced the creation of life on planet Earth, but if there is such an entity, the atheist probably thinks it would be silly for anyone to claim that they have even the remotest knowledge, or even remotely accurate description, of such an entity.

 

From Genesis 1:26:  
"On the sixth day God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

 

From Exodus 20:3-5 King James Version:
"3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me."

Personally I don't put much stock in a history book written thousands of years ago by a bunch of people that knew very little about anything.

Feel free to do so if you wish though. We all have the right to believe in whatever we want.

[Skeptic7]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Exactly. That's what the atheists don't get. They, apparently, think "God" is definable as a "man" with human characteristics, when logically a being capable of creating life the universe and everything can appear as anything he/she/it wants and is capable of anything within or without the boundaries of human primitive science.

Oh we get it, but just don't accept such a thing exists. 

 

Before you can start listing the attributes and capabilities of a supposed Super Thing...first have to show such thing actually exists, otherwise it's just an idea (or superstitious belief). Already know u will now cry "faith", but then just because others don't share your blind faith doesn't mean they don't get it. Just means we ain't buyin' what you're sellin'. 

 

Can your omnipotent thingy create a rock so heavy that IT can't lift it? 

[canuckamuck]

3 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

My impression is just the opposite. It's the 'religious' people who apparently think that God is definable as a man with human characteristics. On the other hand, an atheist can accept that it's hypothetically possible there might be some sort of 'Almighty Creative Intelligence' pervading the universe, that has influenced the creation of life on planet Earth, but if there is such an entity, the atheist probably thinks it would be silly for anyone to claim that they have even the remotest knowledge, or even remotely accurate description, of such an entity.

 

From Genesis 1:26:  
"On the sixth day God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

 

From Exodus 20:3-5 King James Version:
"3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me."

I hear what you are saying, but I don't get how you are connecting the verses you quoted to your statement.

It is possible for there to be a God that does not reveal Himself just as it is possible that God has revealed Himself, and has created ways to make Himself known.

The verses you chose are taken to be God's revelation of himself through inspired writing.