Do you believe in God and why

[UbonThani]

3 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Hinduism and Buddhism are hardly random made up theories.

Still just theories

 

[Sunmaster]

18 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

Still just theories

 

Whatever makes you happy.

But I suggest spending a bit of time looking into these "just theories", because you'll find that the main body of teachings is based on practice and very practical advice, without which the rest would be worthless. So, in fact, much more than "just theories".

Edited February 29, 2020 by Sunmaster

[UbonThani]

20 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Whatever makes you happy.

But I suggest spending a bit of time looking into these "just theories", because you'll find that the main body of teachings is based on practice and very practical advice, without which the rest would be worthless. So, in fact, much more than "just theories".

Called common sense.

[Sunmaster]

1 minute ago, UbonThani said:

Called common sense.

It should be, but if it were, then the world would be a much better place, wouldn't it?

[mauGR1]

7 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I can't blame you for your view, mauGR1.  The pain and suffering available in this world is perhaps the number one perplexing aspect of this reality for people as they try to make sense of this reality.  Why, in heaven's name, does it exist? 

I am not perplexed, the fact is that we are all connected and we are all in part responsible for the good and the evil which is the physical reality.

One just has to look at the example of Jesus Christ, would you sacrifice yourself for a better world ?

To make the concept clear, here's  the lyrics of a song you may know:

 

Sympathy for the Devil

 

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game

I stuck around St. Petersberg
When I saw it was a time for a change
I killed the Czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain

I rode a tank
Held a general's rank
When the Blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
What's puzzling you is the nature of my game, oh yeah

I watched with glee as your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the Gods they made

I shouted out
"Who killed the Kennedy?"
When after all
It was you and me

So let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you is the nature of my game, oh yeah

[mauGR1]

2 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Hinduism and Buddhism are hardly random made up theories.

Esoteric Christians hold the same view, even if using different words.

[UbonThani]

4 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

It should be, but if it were, then the world would be a much better place, wouldn't it?

Uncommon

[Sunmaster]

55 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

Uncommon

The wisdom in your replies is staggering to say the least. 

[Tippaporn]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I am not perplexed, the fact is that we are all connected and we are all in part responsible for the good and the evil which is the physical reality.

One just has to look at the example of Jesus Christ, would you sacrifice yourself for a better world ?

To make the concept clear, here's  the lyrics of a song you may know:

 

Sympathy for the Devil

 

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game

I stuck around St. Petersberg
When I saw it was a time for a change
I killed the Czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain

I rode a tank
Held a general's rank
When the Blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
What's puzzling you is the nature of my game, oh yeah

I watched with glee as your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the Gods they made

I shouted out
"Who killed the Kennedy?"
When after all
It was you and me

So let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you is the nature of my game, oh yeah

Awesome song and fantastic lyrics.  I've posted this classic myself on the music thread.

 

To be honest, when it comes to expressing my views on the nature of reality and who and what we are I would rather find myself in a hornet's nest of skeptics than in the midst of a circle of devout men of faith.  If one is not allowed to even question religious belief then the attempt of arguing against even certain aspects of it becomes the epitome of futility.  I've stated before that beliefs are one thing but conviction is a completely different animal.

 

Men of science believe what they will but at least their beliefs are grounded in reason and logic, however flawed.  Men of faith believe in The Word (the plural form would be more apt as there are different versions of The Word along with multiple interpretations of any given version of The Word) which may at times defy reason and logic.  Reason and logic therefore are rendered moot.  I will say that common ground can be found, though.  These are my opinions based on my own experiences with both groups.

 

I am in complete agreement that we are all connected.  I might go further and say that every last stitch of creation is connected.  You might agree as well.  I am also compatible with the idea that we all have our hand in the creation of reality.  It is above all else a cooperative venture.

 

What I am not in agreement with is the existence of evil, the existence of heaven and h3ll, the idea that we are mere mortals, the idea that our current form is unchanging throughout all of our existences, the idea that all realities are physical in nature (where even "spiritual" realities are form based reflective of the physical world), the idea that this world, this reality is somehow less than or inherently tainted, the idea that we experience only two existences - the here and now and the afterlife, the ideas of one world and one God . . . among other ideas commonly held by religions.  This is a short list.

 

 

[Tippaporn]

Freedom allows science to make it's discoveries.  Science then denies that freedom with their trite theories of existence as little more than a game of Wheel Of Fortune and mankind as an unfortunate player who has little control over his experience and who himself is little more than a self within a mechanized body, with no purpose, with no meaning, with no direction, and whose very actions and emotions are merely the result of the swirl of chemicals inside his brain.

 

In that sense science does one of the greatest disservices to mankind by robbing him of his freedom, his will, his desires, his meaning, his purpose, and his power.  And for this reason science will never uncover the answers to life.  With that attitude it's entirely impossible.

 

Other than that, science does have it's benefits.

 

Religion fares no better in it's own way with it's ideas of original sin, it's ideas of good and evil, heaven and h3ll, and robs mankind of his freedom and his power as well when it proclaims, "It is for God to know," or any other proclamations which suggest mankind is at the mercy of God.

 

Other than that, religion does have it's benefits.

 

Oh, sh!t.  I've probably just put myself on the bad side of everyone here.  No offense to any other for what they choose to believe or where they happen to worship . . . be it a Church of God or the Laboratory of Science.  Sometimes things just need to be said, though . . . 

 

All in good fun.

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Tippaporn

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

What I am not in agreement with is the existence of evil,

I think we agree on lots of things, but i'd like to discuss this sentence.

We can agree that on higher realms of consciousness evil doesn't exist, at least as we know it.

Nonetheless, we are in a human physical shape, living in a physical world, and evil exists in the physical world.

Now i am not saying that you or me are evil-doers, i am just saying that when our physical life is over, we still exist as conscious beings, and we go to a process of getting rid of the useless baggage, or as i said in a previous post, the influences of the physical world.

I went further, in saying that none of us is completely innocent for the evil in the physical world, and i'm fairly confident that you understand what i mean.

[mauGR1]

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Oh, sh!t.  I've probably just put myself on the bad side of everyone here.  No offense to any other for what they choose to believe or where they happen to worship .

Well, as they say.. "to please everyone is nearly impossible, but to pi** off everyone is the easiest thing in the world".

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

I think we agree on lots of things, but i'd like to discuss this sentence.

We can agree that on higher realms of consciousness evil doesn't exist, at least as we know it.

Nonetheless, we are in a human physical shape, living in a physical world, and evil exists in the physical world.

Now i am not saying that you or me are evil-doers, i am just saying that when our physical life is over, we still exist as conscious beings, and we go to a process of getting rid of the useless baggage, or as i said in a previous post, the influences of the physical world.

I went further, in saying that none of us is completely innocent for the evil in the physical world, and i'm fairly confident that you understand what i mean.

True, we do agree on many points.  I recognize that no two individuals are alike in all respects and therefore no two individuals will ever be harmonious in all of their thoughts and ideas.  All is well with that.

 

I'm a bit occupied at the moment so I must keep this reply brief.  In short, evil is a man-made concept.  In other words, evil has no basis in terms of a greater reality.  As we have created the concept so too do we attach our own personal interpretations to it.  And those interpretations do vary from individual to individual.  As you say, in "higher realms of consciousness evil doesn't exist."  I'll mention again that you will never hear me refer to "higher" realms of consciousness simply because it is a highly loaded term and therefore easily misleading.  I'll repeat myself and say that there is no basis for evil in terms of a greater reality.  Not a "higher" reality but a greater one.  There is an important distinction.

 

And yes, I do understand what you mean regarding our role as co-creators.  While we have a hand in it I would not interpret that in too literal a sense so as to mean that if someone kills another I am also complicit in that violation.  We rather support "evil" by holding a belief in it.  This world has it's own dual nature in terms of opposites.  For every transgressor there must be a victim.  We choose for ourselves which role we play within that co-creative drama.

 

To state that in another way is to say that the conglomeration or mix of beliefs which cause a murderer, for instance, to act out his beliefs so too does the "victim" share a similar conglomeration of beliefs.  I use the word conglomeration to imply that we are not dealing with singular beliefs in the creation of events but with multiple beliefs which are alike.  The perpetrator and victim obviously do not share identical sets of beliefs since they play opposing roles but they are similar enough to attract the victim to the perpetrator and the perpetrator to the victim.  It is attraction which is at work in bringing the two together.  Like attracts like.  Magnetism is at play, and not merely in a figurative sense.

 

Since the above alludes to it I may as well state it flat out.  In the truest sense there is no such thing as a victim.  Again, in terms of a greater reality just as evil does not exist neither does victimhood.  I understand full well that that might be too shocking for people to hear.

 

You create your own reality.  There is no other rule.

 

Gotta go for now.

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Tippaporn

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

I'm a bit occupied at the moment so I must keep this reply brief. 

Jeez, thanks God for it's brief.

 

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

In short, evil is a man-made concept.  In other words, evil has no basis in terms of a greater reality.  As we have created the concept so too do we attach our own personal interpretations to it. 

Agree to a certain point, but depends how you define "evil". Violence appears to be a part of the physical world, it exists even without humans involved.

 

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

As you say, in "higher realms of consciousness evil doesn't exist."  I'll mention again that you will never hear me refer to "higher" realms of consciousness simply because it is a highly loaded term and therefore easily misleading.  I'll repeat myself and say that there is no basis for evil in terms of a greater reality.  Not a "higher" reality but a greater one.  There is an important distinction.

 

"Greater reality" can be as misleading as "higher realms", but i can understand where are you going, and we can probably agree that words can be misleading when talking about higher or greater realities and realms. "Reality" and "realm" can also be misleading for someone, yet i think i understand the meaning you are trying to convey, and i hope you are not offended if i think that your level of consciousness is "higher" than average.

All the rest of your post is food for thought, and cannot be discussed "in brief" so for the moment i will leave it there.

[Tippaporn]

16 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Jeez, thanks God for it's brief.

LOL.  I do have a tendency to be verbose.

 

16 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree to a certain point, but depends how you define "evil". Violence appears to be a part of the physical world, it exists even without humans involved.

For some evil does not exist in the world.  And it's not due to denial.  I've said before that truth is a funny thing.  There may be more than one.  What is true for me may not be for you and what is true for you may not be for me.  Is there a single truth?

 

Violence can be confused with aggression.  They are both often used synonymously as if their meaning is identical.  Aggression is not the same thing.  Aggression is the birth of a child, or the bursting of a blossom.  Not doubt both are forceful but certainly not violent.

 

16 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

"Greater reality" can be as misleading as "higher realms", but i can understand where are you going, and we can probably agree that words can be misleading when talking about higher or greater realities and realms. "Reality" and "realm" can also be misleading for someone, yet i think i understand the meaning you are trying to convey, . . . 

Some words are most definitely more loaded than others.  In other words, they can hold many different meanings for different people.  Language has it's limitations but I do try and choose words whose meaning cannot be so easily misinterpreted.  Greater, as I use it, refers to more encompassing.  We can talk in terms of our greater self.  It is not meant to imply that there is a part of us that is in some way better.  It means simply that there is more to us than the reflection we see in the mirror.  We are much more expansive than we realize.  A greater reality is one which includes more than the physical reality which appears to be the only reality we are aware of.  As reality is greater, or more, than what we currently perceive, so too are we greater, or more, than we currently perceive of ourselves.

 

Some here I believe are involved in increasing their awareness to include more.  More reality and more of themselves.  Unfortunately, some have been led to believe that the portions of reality, or the portions of ourselves, which we do not perceive are therefore "better" or "higher" than the portions we are aware of.  It is, I consider, to be drawing a false conclusion.  I have no desire to reach "higher" consciousness, and certainly not with the intention of abandoning this "lesser" version.  I have a desire to expand my awareness of myself and of what IS.  (I don't know why I put that in all caps.)

 

37 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

. . .  and i hope you are not offended if i think that your level of consciousness is "higher" than average.

No offense.  Although I would never want to be seen that way.  Read Richard Bach's "Illusions."  The life of a messiah doesn't always end well.  I am by no means a messiah, nor would I ever desire to be.  I'm just an average Joe like anyone else here.  To be truthful, my sh!t stinks more than most.  I've always had a burning desire to pull the veils away from reality and glimpse as much as I can as it exists beyond our beliefs about it.  And all for the sole purpose of enhancing my current experience.  I had desire, I allowed myself to suspend my current beliefs, and was willing to put in the effort.  Anyone can do what I can.  Although, it's not a road for everyone, just as Thailand isn't a paradise for all farang.  (It is for me. )

 

38 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

All the rest of your post is food for thought, and cannot be discussed "in brief" so for the moment i will leave it there.

It's why I post.  Food for thought.  What anyone chooses to do with the information is up to them.  Not my concern.  I'm merely offering . . . because it's fun.

[Tippaporn]

Someone once told me that Microsoft Windows runs better as an application inside Linux.  Perhaps physical reality works better when run as an application inside a greater reality.  555555555

 

Probably not a good analogy but the thought came to mind and as it was humourous to think of it that way so I thought I'd share.

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Tippaporn

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Violence can be confused with aggression.  They are both often used synonymously as if their meaning is identical.  Aggression is not the same thing.  Aggression is the birth of a child, or the bursting of a blossom.  Not doubt both are forceful but certainly not violent.

Strange...I would think it's the exact opposite actually. 

A volcanic eruption may be violent, but there's no aggression. Aggression needs an intent behind the action and a recipient/target.

 

 

[UbonThani]

452 pages of gibberish. Adults talking about a made up sky fairy.

[Sunmaster]

11 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

452 pages of gibberish. Adults talking about a made up sky fairy.

Your brilliant and insightful contributions are not out of place then. ????????????

[Tippaporn]

5 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

452 pages of gibberish. Adults talking about a made up sky fairy.

By all means explain to us it all works.  Forget about the question of whether God exists or not.  Not important.  Go ahead and tell us how this world works.

 

I'll be here to reply to anything you have to offer and agree or disagree.  Either way I'll give you reasons why you would be correct or incorrect.  I'll even treat you with kid's gloves.  Sound fair?

[Sunmaster]

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

By all means explain to us it all works.  Forget about the question of whether God exists or not.  Not important.  Go ahead and tell us how this world works.

 

I'll be here to reply to anything you have to offer and agree or disagree.  Either way I'll give you reasons why you would be correct or incorrect.  I'll even treat you with kid's gloves.  Sound fair?

If he had read all 452 pages, he would know that we stopped talking about a Christian personal God a few 100 pages ago. 

Don't hold your breath waiting for a rational reply.

[sirineou]

22 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

By all means explain to us it all works.  Forget about the question of whether God exists or not.  Not important.  Go ahead and tell us how this world works.

 

I'll be here to reply to anything you have to offer and agree or disagree.  Either way I'll give you reasons why you would be correct or incorrect.  I'll even treat you with kid's gloves.  Sound fair?

In the morning when Mr Sun wakes up, Mr World puts on his/her makeup ,and  rides his/hers (Mr world is ladyboy) motocy to the Seven11 where he/she spend most of her day receiving payment for all her establishment has to offer,

then for an  inexplicable reason  Mr Sun disappears, (probably out drinking with the boys) and Mr World goes home, hoping Mr Sun's wife (Ms Moon) will find him  soon so so Mr World  can go to work again soon.

She seem to find Mr Sun in less time in the summer because the weather is nicer. but sometimes in the rainy season Ms Moon don't find him for days. . 

Edited February 29, 2020 by sirineou

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

In the morning when Mr Sun wakes up, Mr World puts on his/her makeup ,and  rides his/hers (mr world is ladyboy) motocy to the Seven11 where he/she spend most of her day receiving payment for all her establishment has to offer,

then for an  inexplicable reason  Mr Sun disappears, (probably out drinking with the boys) and Mr world goes home, hoping Ms Suns wife (Ms Moon) will find him  soon so so Mr World  can go to work again soon.

She seem to find Mr Sun in less time in the summer because the weather is nicer. but sometimes in the rainy season Ms Moon don't find him for days. . 

Well, thanks God you are not in charge of the extremely complex orbits and rotations of the planets

[sirineou]

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Well, thanks God you are not in charge of the extremely complex orbits and rotations of the planets

They said I was not attractive enough. Instead they hired " Pretty face" Miss Gravity.  But they are going to regret it ,  someday she will mess everything up and the whole thing will explode again,

Mark my words!!

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, sirineou said:

They said I was not attractive enough. Instead they hired " Pretty face" Miss Gravity.  But they are going to regret it ,  someday she will mess everything up and the whole thing will explode again,

Mark my words!!

A little trouble must be taken into account when dealing with a pretty face and Miss Gravity is doing a great job so far.

[CharlieH]

Troll/off topic posts removed.

[sirineou]

I watched this interesting Ted talk a couple of days ago. 

When you have some time please watch it. from your posts I am sure you already know most of what the presenter said. but it helps to put things in perspective, 

 And always question what you know. but IMO not to the point of the "Paralysis of analysis" .

PS:I am not directing this talk towards anyone, It applies to me just as much as anyone else. 

If you watch it please tell me what you think.

 

[Elad]

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I've said before that truth is a funny thing.  There may be more than one.  What is true for me may not be for you and what is true for you may not be for me.  Is there a single truth?

I've said before that one of the following must be true:

 

1) A universe with intelligent design

2) A universe without intelligent design

 

Only one can be true, both cannot be true and none of them cannot be true.

Religion/believers/spiritualists have zero evidence for No 1, and science has zero evidence for No 2. That said, how do you prove the non existence of something when there's nothing to test or observe. ???? 

[mauGR1]

49 minutes ago, Elad said:

I've said before that one of the following must be true:

 

1) A universe with intelligent design

2) A universe without intelligent design

 

Only one can be true, both cannot be true and none of them cannot be true.

Religion/believers/spiritualists have zero evidence for No 1, and science has zero evidence for No 2. That said, how do you prove the non existence of something when there's nothing to test or observe. ???? 

Actually there's a lot to test and observe, there are a lot of things unknown.

You have to concede that science is limited to the physical world, and that's a bit of a hindrance if you want to investigate the supernatural.

To presume that life comes from "electrical impulses" sounds a bit parochial, don't you think ?

 

 

 

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, Elad said:

I've said before that one of the following must be true:

 

1) A universe with intelligent design

2) A universe without intelligent design

 

Only one can be true, both cannot be true and none of them cannot be true.

Religion/believers/spiritualists have zero evidence for No 1, and science has zero evidence for No 2. That said, how do you prove the non existence of something when there's nothing to test or observe. ???? 

I think that depends on the framework you want to use to find proof of the existence or non-existence of intelligent design. If you're framework is science, then you can only use evidence from the material world to find proof. That's not going to work.
If your framework is wider and can include subjective evidence, then there are scores of methods that will give you proof of a benevolent universe. Plenty of things you can test and observe.
The real question here is: Are you ready to ask the right questions?