Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

More probably he would be questioning Him about His deeply flawed creation of life on Earth, as I would. Why does life for all creatures appear to have so much suffering

Somehow i think the most vocal critics of God's job look a lot like disappointed lovers.

It is what it is, get over it.

Without the suffering, one would not understand joy, and the opposite.

Being conscious is a precious gift, not every sentient being is given that consciousness.

[yodsak]

On 1/1/2020 at 10:48 AM, AsianAtHeart said:

By the way, have you heard about radiohalos?

 

 

[VincentRJ]

52 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Somehow i think the most vocal critics of God's job look a lot like disappointed lovers.

I imagine most people are disappointed lovers. The divorce rates, whether 50% or less, whether rising or falling, are not necessarily an accurate gauge for disappointment. One can be disappointed yet still married.

 

It is what it is, get over it.

 

Good point, and that's what I do. However, if you believe in God, it is what God created. See the difference?

 

Without the suffering, one would not understand joy, and the opposite.

 

I've never experienced extreme suffering. On the few occasions when I've had a minor accident and visited the hospital, I've been rather puzzled when asked how I would rate my pain on a scale of 1 to 10 because I've got no idea what the maximum level of pain would be. However, I would imagine it would be something like being burned alive at the stake for religious heresy. ????

 

Are you implying that a sexual orgasm will be more joyful if one has previously experienced extreme pain? ????

 

Being conscious is a precious gift, not every sentient being is given that consciousness.

 

It is what it is. Most creatures have some degree of consciousness, otherwise they wouldn't be able to locate food. The greater consciousness of humans probably contributes to a greater experience of pain, because of our greater capacity to exaggerate and fictionize our experiences.
 

[mauGR1]

7 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Good point, and that's what I do. However, if you believe in God, it is what God created. See the difference?

I don't see a lot of difference, to accept the part of the reality that we cannot change seems to me common sense, good for the believer and for the agnostic.

20 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

The greater consciousness of humans probably contributes to a greater experience of pain, because of our greater capacity to exaggerate and fictionize our experiences.
 

A bit pessimistic, greater experience of pain, but also greater experience of joy.

The ability to create is a sort of "Divine power" which even the most evolved animals don't have.

 

[Sunmaster]

36 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Good point, and that's what I do. However, if you believe in God, it is what God created. See the difference?

It is what God created whether you believe in him or not. ????

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

I don't see a lot of difference, to accept the part of the reality that we cannot change seems to me common sense, good for the believer and for the agnostic.

 

Fair enough. But how do you know what you cannot change. The nature of scientific progress involves a continuous striving to change and control things that were previously beyond our control.

 

A bit pessimistic, greater experience of pain, but also greater experience of joy.

 

Not according to Buddhism. The things which give us joy and pleasure are never permanent, and when we lose them we suffer. Detachment from all things and pursuits which give us pleasure, such as sex, wealth, possessions, fame, and so on, is the solution.

[Tagged]

23 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

I have become a pretty skeptical academic when it comes to published scientific research.  First of all, I have learned exactly how the peer-review system works, and it doesn't function as most people would expect.  Further, magazines do not wish to publish non-stories of "we tried to find a correlation between A and B,

 

I get more worried when people claim they are educated, and write pages and pages about scripts written thousands of years ago, and do not doubt one single word of it. Serving me blueprint of some of the version edited and changed for how many times, so it will fit the translations, and better fit the history. 

 

As well as others in this topic wingle and wiggle from one point to another and cherish each other the better the stories gets, and doesnt see how far out their opinions are compare to the real world right here and right here. Controversial is a mildly explanation. 

 

Must Adam, Eve, Noah and Abraham with his sons be with you guys, but I doubt that tribe is willing to include foreigners. 

[mauGR1]

36 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Fair enough. But how do you know what you cannot change. The nature of scientific progress involves a continuous striving to change and control things that were previously beyond our control.

 

 

 

 

Not according to Buddhism. The things which give us joy and pleasure are never permanent, and when we lose them we suffer. Detachment from all things and pursuits which give us pleasure, such as sex, wealth, possessions, fame, and so on, is the solution.

I cannot change the nature of humans for example.

Even if 'science' could do that, i would disagree with it.

Oh, please, don't need to remind me that detachment is the solution, i'm conscious of it all the time, and i've been repeating it since the beginning of the thread.

The reality of the conflict between attachment/detachment is much older than Buddhism, it's as old as the world, and everyone soon or later will have to deal with it.

[Skeptic7]

7 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Vegetarian since 42 years, for every good reason.. It would be funny to meet @Skeptic7 in Paradise...

He would be probably be seen cursing God and denying its existence in the same time.

So in your hypothetical, surely would not deny it's existence since I'd have empirical evidence, but almost certainly would be cursing it for myriad valid reasons. ????

[Sunmaster]

Just binge watched 2 shows on Netflix: The 2 Popes and Messiah. Both very good and interesting  

The first focuses on the necessary change the catholic church has to undertake if it wants to stay relevant in this century.

 

The second is more fiction, but raises some interesting questions. Assuming that he could really perform miracles (let's just say science would confirm them), how would the world react to the presence of a new Messiah? How would we personally react? How would it change our lives?

[AsianAtHeart]

14 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Just binge watched 2 shows on Netflix: The 2 Popes and Messiah. Both very good and interesting  

The first focuses on the necessary change the catholic church has to undertake if it wants to stay relevant in this century.

 

The second is more fiction, but raises some interesting questions. Assuming that he could really perform miracles (let's just say science would confirm them), how would the world react to the presence of a new Messiah? How would we personally react? How would it change our lives?

The truth is that a Messiah/Christ look-alike is going to come.  He will look exactly like Christ, will work miracles, and perhaps even bring fire down upon the earth in the sight of men.  He will look so beautiful, and talk so sweetly, that huge numbers, even of Christians, will be deceived. 

 

When Jesus comes again, He will come in the clouds.  He will not walk around on earth to talk to us.  This is one way in which we will know who the true Jesus is and who the false one is.  Jesus told us not to go out to see if people have claimed that Christ is here or there, for there will be false Christs.  When Jesus comes again, it is as King.  He will come to judge the earth, not to bring in a millennium of grace and earthly peace for all.  When He leaves the earth, it will be desolate--His children will be traveling to Heaven with Him.

 

But before Jesus comes, Satan himself will impersonate Christ.  He knows exactly what Jesus looks like, and he will imitate Christ as perfectly as he can (quite very well).  He will speak with a melodious voice (remember, he was once the choir director for all the angels in heaven).  Let us be careful that we are not taken in.

[Sunmaster]

21 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

The truth is that a Messiah/Christ look-alike is going to come.  He will look exactly like Christ, will work miracles, and perhaps even bring fire down upon the earth in the sight of men.  He will look so beautiful, and talk so sweetly, that huge numbers, even of Christians, will be deceived. 

 

When Jesus comes again, He will come in the clouds.  He will not walk around on earth to talk to us.  This is one way in which we will know who the true Jesus is and who the false one is.  Jesus told us not to go out to see if people have claimed that Christ is here or there, for there will be false Christs.  When Jesus comes again, it is as King.  He will come to judge the earth, not to bring in a millennium of grace and earthly peace for all.  When He leaves the earth, it will be desolate--His children will be traveling to Heaven with Him.

 

But before Jesus comes, Satan himself will impersonate Christ.  He knows exactly what Jesus looks like, and he will imitate Christ as perfectly as he can (quite very well).  He will speak with a melodious voice (remember, he was once the choir director for all the angels in heaven).  Let us be careful that we are not taken in.

Sorry to say this, but you make far more sense when you talk about science.

 

Who are his children? Only Christians I suppose. Sorry, not good enough. 

 

Satan was once the choir director for all the angels in heaven?!? Good lord....

 

Whatever....my question was not about what the bible says, but how you personally would react. 

So, any saintly person living right now....let's take the Dalai Lama as an example, is probably Satan disguised, right? 

[mauGR1]

11 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

It is what it is. Most creatures have some degree of consciousness, otherwise they wouldn't be able to locate food. The greater consciousness of humans probably contributes to a greater experience of pain, because of our greater capacity to exaggerate and fictionize our experiences.
 

I have a question for you.

Let's say that we look at faith, spiritualism, and any kind of doctrines and various superstitious beliefs as completely separated from the ordinary reality of locating food, prosper, reproduce etc

Do you think that humans would be any different without "wasting time" for something that may not even exist ?

How would they be different ?

I mean, from an extremely practical point, is it convenient to believe in something ?

[Tagged]

6 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Just binge watched 2 shows on Netflix: The 2 Popes and Messiah. Both very good and interesting  

The first focuses on the necessary change the catholic church has to undertake if it wants to stay relevant in this century.

 

The second is more fiction, but raises some interesting questions. Assuming that he could really perform miracles (let's just say science would confirm them), how would the world react to the presence of a new Messiah? How would we personally react? How would it change our lives?

I just started to watch the two popes, had it downloaded before went of for holiday now. Thanks for the tips on Messiah, will watch that one to. 

 

 

[AsianAtHeart]

6 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Sorry to say this, but you make far more sense when you talk about science.

 

Who are his children? Only Christians I suppose. Sorry, not good enough. 

 

Satan was once the choir director for all the angels in heaven?!? Good lord....

 

Whatever....my question was not about what the bible says, but how you personally would react. 

So, any saintly person living right now....let's take the Dalai Lama as an example, is probably Satan disguised, right? 

I have degrees in both biology and religion.  While biology may appeal to you more, and perhaps you understand it better, to be honest, I am at present more confident in my understanding of religion than in that of biology.  Of the two sciences, the science of salvation is the one with eternal consequences, and is the one of far greater importance.  But I think your issue with understanding what I posted above is not even so much with what I said, or how I said it, as it is with your prejudice against believing that Satan exists.  I know you objected to reading that really long post (and it _was_ really long) of mine a few pages back, but that post would really help explain things, and if you read it, you will know exactly who Satan is and why he exists.  You will also learn why he can appear as an angel of light--look just like one of God's heavenly angels.  If Satan could temp Christ by appearing as one of those angels of light, and if Christ was unable to see through the disguise (in His humanity), we will not be able to perceive otherwise either.  We must not trust our senses, but must know the truth of what is coming.

 

It used to be said that seeing is believing.  Nowadays we cannot always believe what we see.

[canuckamuck]

I missed the part where we all shared our dietary habits. I think I am the black sheep of the thread.

I am a full on carnivore. However I have a normal BMI, have no health issues, and I am physically active most of the year. I can't remember the last time I got a cold. I don't think vegetarianism has anything to do with morality of spiritualism. That being said, I admire people who can go vegetarian, There are obvious health benefits from eating more vegetables. But the exclusion of meat is not for me thanks.

[jimmybcool]

40 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

I missed the part where we all shared our dietary habits. I think I am the black sheep of the thread.

I am a full on carnivore. However I have a normal BMI, have no health issues, and I am physically active most of the year. I can't remember the last time I got a cold. I don't think vegetarianism has anything to do with morality of spiritualism. That being said, I admire people who can go vegetarian, There are obvious health benefits from eating more vegetables. But the exclusion of meat is not for me thanks.

Off topic a bit but I don't think going strict vegetarian is actually the healthiest diet.  I believe our bodies have evolved to need some of the nutrients in meats.  Especially the denser proteins.  Now I respect anyone that chooses to not eat meat based on ethical reasons.  No problem with it at all.  And most of us eat too much and that is unhealthy.  Just saying some is probably good for us.  Opinions may vary.

 

[Neeranam]

God is great!

 

 

[Sunmaster]

4 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

I have degrees in both biology and religion.  While biology may appeal to you more, and perhaps you understand it better, to be honest, I am at present more confident in my understanding of religion than in that of biology.

I'm curious....a degree in religion or religions? Understanding of one religion or all religions?

Biology appeals to me even though I have a limited knowledge of it. Like you, I'm more confident in my understanding of religions and the thing they all have in common. I admit my ignorance when it comes to the bible though.

 

4 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

But I think your issue with understanding what I posted above is not even so much with what I said, or how I said it, as it is with your prejudice against believing that Satan exists.

No, I have an issue with your interpretation of a book. A book that you obviously take literally, a book that has seen so many modifications and self serving additions that sieving out the original message has become a life long endeavor with an evidently dubious outcome. A book that promotes the notion of salvation, but only for a few selected. A book that promotes divisions among humans: Christians get to pass, but gays and divorcees don't make the cut apparently. Nor do unbaptized children, and anyone that is not Christian, including saints from other religions. And this is just from the top of my head.

If one can find personal direction and support in the words of the bible, no problem at all. It's when this book gets elevated to the status of absolute truth and taken word by word without the maturity of interpretation that comes from self inquiry, THEN I have a problem with it. Not because you believe in it, but because you propagate corrupted data that is the opposite of God's message. God IS and calls for unity, he loves ALL of his children equally: gays, Muslims, Jews, sinners and saints.

To claim otherwise is the true sin!

I really think the church should write a new New Testament, because the old New Testament is clearly well behind the times. It's no surprise nobody goes to church anymore and many parishes can't find priests anymore. Not because people are now all atheists, but because they feel disconnected on a spiritual level. They instinctively feel that the stuff taught by the church is not true to its source. The church has to either evolve fast, or die out. As simple as that.

I will ask you again. A person like the Dalai Lama, who spent his life teaching compassion, and brotherhood among all religions,....will he be allowed to enter your paradise or not? After all he's not baptized nor Christian. Will he burn in hell like the rest of us? Or maybe be suspended in limbo until he 'repents'?
 

4 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

If Satan could temp Christ by appearing as one of those angels of light, and if Christ was unable to see through the disguise (in His humanity), we will not be able to perceive otherwise either.  We must not trust our senses, but must know the truth of what is coming.

 

What you call Satan and Christ are aspects of our own nature. True, we must not trust only our physical senses, but we have to refine the ability to discern between what is true and what is illusion by going within and practice self inquiry. Books or degrees will not help you with that. 

 

Rant over.

 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Sunmaster

[Neeranam]

Hare Ram hare Krishna

 

 

[VincentRJ]

10 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I have a question for you.

Let's say that we look at faith, spiritualism, and any kind of doctrines and various superstitious beliefs as completely separated from the ordinary reality of locating food, prosper, reproduce etc

Good question, which raises a fundamental flaw. Whilst I'm not religious, I think I'm sufficiently rational and unbiased to recognize in some of the teachings of a religion those points which make rational sense and appear likely to benefit a society. I can accept the validity of such points without feeling the need to embrace the entire religion with all its 'fairy tales' and nonsense.

 

What attracts me about Buddhism, are some of the fundamental teachings which appear to be undeniably true, even in the context of modern scientific knowledge. I'm referring to such concepts as "Nothing is Permanent', and 'Everything is connected or related in some way'.
In other words, nothing arises by itself, independent of a causal effect or relationship. If one accepts this as true then it would seem to be impossible to consider or think about anything which is completely separated from the ordinary reality of locating food, the necessities of life, procreation, and economic development, because our very existence is dependent on such ordinary processes.

 

Do you think that humans would be any different without "wasting time" for something that may not even exist ?

How would they be different ?

I mean, from an extremely practical point, is it convenient to believe in something ?

 

It's both convenient and inconvenient, depending on the individual, the society and the circumstances. I think a criminal who steals and murders would find it very inconvenient to believe in eternal damnation in a fiery hell after he dies. On the other hand, those in positions of power and control in a society which does not have an adequate police force, which was the case in most societies until quite recently, would understand the practical benefits of promoting the belief in an afterlife in Hell or Heaven, which depended on one's behaviour in this life.

[mauGR1]

24 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

It's both convenient and inconvenient, depending on the individual, the society and the circumstances. I think a criminal who steals and murders would find it very inconvenient to believe in eternal damnation in a fiery hell after he dies. On the other hand, those in positions of power and control in a society which does not have an adequate police force, which was the case in most societies until quite recently, would understand the practical benefits of promoting the belief in an afterlife in Hell or Heaven, which depended on one's behaviour in this life.

Agree with the first part of the post.

on the second part, you are comparing to extremes cases as to avoid to answer yes or no, but i won't blame you for that.

So, for a human society as a whole, the belief in a divine justice and an afterlife would be convenient, right ?

 

Let's have a look of what the future may bring, will the collapse of organised religions be more beneficial or detrimental for the society as a whole ?

There is already a "common religion" for all the people in the world, it's money; but what will happen if money becomes the undisputed god, will the moral values collapse ?

Will the masses become even easier to deceive and manipulate ?

 

 

[VincentRJ]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

So, for a human society as a whole, the belief in a divine justice and an afterlife would be convenient, right ?

Your use of the word 'convenient' downgrades the significance of the issue. The meaning of 'convenient' is associated with personal comfort causing the least difficulty.

 

I would rephrase the question, "So, for a human society as a whole, would the belief in a divine justice and an afterlife, serve a useful and practical purpose which would add to the prosperity and happiness of the members of that society?"

 

My answer to this question, based upon my understanding of history and the current state of affairs in the world, is 'generally No'. Countries which have the highest percentage of religious believers tend to be the worst places in terms of conflict, corruption, poverty, lack of social services, and so on.

 

Countries which have the lowest percentage of religious believers, such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Japan, Finland, The Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, tend to have a better and more socially secure lifestyle, in my opinion. There are exceptions of course, which have more to do with politics than religion, which is why I use the word 'tend'.
 

http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/least-religious-countries/
 

[mauGR1]

8 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Countries which have the highest percentage of religious believers tend to be the worst places in terms of conflict, corruption, poverty, lack of social services, and so on.

 

 

8 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Countries which have the lowest percentage of religious believers, such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Japan, Finland, The Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, tend to have a better and more socially secure lifestyle, in my opinion. There are exceptions of course, which have more to do with politics than religion, which is why I use the word 'tend'.

On a merely materialistic view, you are right, yet the young generations in the Western countries don't seem to be as happy as a few decades ago.

 

Could it be that capitalism, like other ideologies and religions, is old and tired ?

I know that "Socialism" is a bad word for somebody, but if we really want a future for this planet, we should all try to be less selfish; capitalism is not a bad system at all, but it should be adapted to serve the planet and its population as a whole.

[sirineou]

7 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

 

On a merely materialistic view, you are right, yet the young generations in the Western countries don't seem to be as happy as a few decades ago.

 

Could it be that capitalism, like other ideologies and religions, is old and tired ?

I know that "Socialism" is a bad word for somebody, but if we really want a future for this planet, we should all try to be less selfish; capitalism is not a bad system at all, but it should be adapted to serve the planet and its population as a whole.

Socialism is certainly not a bad word, and is a necessary ingredient of any Society. and should be at the heart of the christian religion as prescribed in the teachings of Jesus. IMO Christianity and Capitalism are incompatible. Simply said " Jesus drove money changers out of the Temple, calling them “a den of thieves.”"

 

"Slavery has to be the ultimate example of unfettered, unregulated markets, laissez faire in its purest sense. The Church blessed slave ships and expeditions to rape and pillage indigenous peoples, and one slave ship was even named Jesus. "

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-capitalism-christianity_b_857425

 

   

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Socialism is certainly not a bad word, and is a necessary ingredient of any Society. and should be at the heart of the christian religion as prescribed in the teachings of Jesus. IMO Christianity and Capitalism are incompatible. Simply said " Jesus drove money changers out of the Temple, calling them “a den of thieves.”"

 

"Slavery has to be the ultimate example of unfettered, unregulated markets, laissez faire in its purest sense. The Church blessed slave ships and expeditions to rape and pillage indigenous peoples, and one slave ship was even named Jesus. "

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-capitalism-christianity_b_857425

 

   

Unfortunately slavery still exists in 2020, and what to say about mental slavery, of which millions of  people seem to be unaware ?

[White Christmas13]

[naboo]

33 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Socialism is certainly not a bad word, and is a necessary ingredient of any Society. and should be at the heart of the christian religion as prescribed in the teachings of Jesus. IMO Christianity and Capitalism are incompatible. Simply said " Jesus drove money changers out of the Temple, calling them “a den of thieves.”"

 

"Slavery has to be the ultimate example of unfettered, unregulated markets, laissez faire in its purest sense. The Church blessed slave ships and expeditions to rape and pillage indigenous peoples, and one slave ship was even named Jesus. "

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-capitalism-christianity_b_857425

 

   

This is something I don't get. The more Christian someone is, the less socialist they are. Totally hypocritical.

 

I'm waiting for the sequel to the bible, written by Satan. I need his side of the argumnt.

 

 

Edited January 4, 2020 by naboo

[sirineou]

8 minutes ago, naboo said:

This is something I don't get. The more Christian someone is, the less socialist they are. Totally hypocritical.

 

I'm waiting for the sequel to the bible, written by Satan. I need his side of the argumnt.

 

 

I love Jim Jefferies and consider the above   to not only be the funniest comedy skit but but profound, as indeed  God ruined the party by putting an end to the hellenistic times and plunging us into a millennium of darkness, and subject to his "unconditional love" .

About time we kick him out of the party. People can be better Christians without him.

Edited January 4, 2020 by sirineou

[canuckamuck]

8 hours ago, sirineou said:

Socialism is certainly not a bad word, and is a necessary ingredient of any Society. and should be at the heart of the christian religion as prescribed in the teachings of Jesus. IMO Christianity and Capitalism are incompatible. Simply said " Jesus drove money changers out of the Temple, calling them “a den of thieves.”"

 

"Slavery has to be the ultimate example of unfettered, unregulated markets, laissez faire in its purest sense. The Church blessed slave ships and expeditions to rape and pillage indigenous peoples, and one slave ship was even named Jesus. "

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/american-capitalism-christianity_b_857425

 

   

It is so unfair to blame slavery on Christianity. Slavery was a worldwide phenomenon, that still exists in some non Christian nations. But it was the Christians that moved to have the practice ended. It is much more accurate to say that Christians were instrumental in ending slavery. It exists now only under cover and in secret.

 

Socialism has earned it reputation. Give control of the means of production over to the socialists and watch the anarchy unfold. Every time it results in murder and poverty. European democratic socialism has its merits, but realize they are free market economies. Marx would disapprove. And Europe has lost its identity and will be a dystopian horror within two decades.