Do you believe in God and why

[Peter Denis]

3 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

"I honestly feel sorry for everybody who chooses to mock God because there will be severe penalties for that person and God will make that person eat those words. All over the web you see people writing blasphemous things about Christ and when the time comes they’re going to wish they had a time machine."

I think you are not far from the next step, which would be helping realize Gods will by providing the fitting penalities to those that mock Him.

Those that tolerate other views and don't feel morally superior over the heathens that deviated from the Right Path (or want to eradicate them), are for sure closer to Gods Will than the preachers of hell and damnation.

[VincentRJ]

15 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

I honestly feel sorry for everybody who chooses to mock God because there will be severe penalties for that person and God will make that person eat those words. 

 

That's very Christian of you to feel so sorry for us. It's such a pity that your God is not so compassionate and Christian as to forgive the 'unbelievers' who were intelligent, skeptical and questioning during their life, and who were also well-behaved, refraining from lying, killing and hating their neighbours. ????

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

That's very Christian of you to feel so sorry for us. It's such a pity that your God is not so compassionate and Christian as to forgive the 'unbelievers' who were intelligent, skeptical and questioning during their life, and who were also well-behaved, refraining from lying, killing and hating their neighbours. ????

There are Christians and there are Christians, the same for every label you wish to apply ????

[VincentRJ]

4 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

There are Christians and there are Christians, the same for every label you wish to apply ????

And there are Gods and there are Gods, in the minds of all believers. When intelligent people 'mock' a particular God, they are actually mocking certain people's interpretations and descriptions of what is clearly an unknowable entity.

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

And there are Gods and there are Gods, in the minds of all believers. When intelligent people 'mock' a particular God, they are actually mocking certain people's interpretations and descriptions of what is clearly an unknowable entity.

Please define "intelligent" people, and why are you assuming that something "clearly unknowable" for you, should be unknowable for everyone ?

[CharlieH]

Troll post removed.

[VincentRJ]

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Please define "intelligent" people, and why are you assuming that something "clearly unknowable" for you, should be unknowable for everyone ?

I'm not assuming anything. My investigations into the issue during the past 70 years or so,  has not revealed or uncovered any sound evidence and knowledge of the existence of a Creator God.

 

A personal opinion, or belief, that a Creator God exists in reality, does not meet my standards of 'sound' evidence, which is based upon the methodology of science.

 

I consider myself very fortunate to be living in this modern scientific era of prosperity and security. We've never had it so good, except, of course, those regions in constant turmoil due to religious conflict.

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

I consider myself very fortunate to be living in this modern scientific era of prosperity and security. We've never had it so good, except, of course, those regions in constant turmoil due to religious conflict.

For the 1st part of your post, fair enough.

I used to consider my generation very fortunate too until a few weeks ago, let's see what the next months will bring.

I'm still of the opinion that religion is not the main cause of conflicts.

[VincentRJ]

8 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I'm still of the opinion that religion is not the main cause of conflicts.

Then please enlighten us, regarding the main cause of conflicts. ????

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Then please enlighten us, regarding the main cause of conflicts. ????

Power and greed, easy.

[VincentRJ]

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Power and greed, easy.

There's nothing more powerful than God. A belief that God is on one's side, creates the delusion that one is invincible, especially in conflict and warfare.

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

There's nothing more powerful than God. A belief that God is on one's side, creates the delusion that one is invincible, especially in conflict and warfare.

Nice deflection, we were talking about the cause of conflicts, and how comes that something which in your opinion doesn't exist, suddenly becomes the biggest power ?

[VincentRJ]

18 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Nice deflection, we were talking about the cause of conflicts, and how comes that something which in your opinion doesn't exist, suddenly becomes the biggest power ?

Doesn't exist in external reality. Got it? God exists in the mind of believers, and that belief has an effect on conflict; the belief that I am right and the major power in the world is on my side. I'll kill you if you don't agree; and if I don't kill you, then after you die naturally, God will punish you in the most horrible manner for your failure to believe.

[mauGR1]

8 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Doesn't exist in external reality. Got it? God exists in the mind of believers, and that belief has an effect on conflict; the belief that I am right and the major power in the world is on my side. I'll kill you if you don't agree; and if I don't kill you, then after you die naturally, God will punish you in the most horrible manner for your failure to believe.

Sorry, i am a believer, and i don't believe any of the rubbish you are saying a believer does believe.

..And guess what, there are many others like me who don't believe that rubbish.

[VincentRJ]

35 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Sorry, i am a believer, and i don't believe any of the rubbish you are saying a believer does believe.

..And guess what, there are many others like me who don't believe that rubbish.

You are a believer in 'what' precisely? Heaven or Hell after death? Describing a view as 'rubbish' is probably a projection (onto others) to protect your own semi-conscious, or unconscious flawed views which you can't confront, or become aware of, because they are too disturbing. (refer Carl Jung).

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

You are a believer in 'what' precisely? Heaven or Hell after death? Describing a view as 'rubbish' is probably a projection (onto others) to protect your own semi-conscious, or unconscious flawed views which you can't confront, or become aware of, because they are too disturbing. (refer Carl Jung).

Well, i am surprised, it seems that for almost a year various opinions expressed on this thread have flown over your head.

Telling me that my "conscious or semi-conscious views are flawed" is also a projection, isn't it.

Actually i am confronting any views, including mine, that's why i am here.

If you are interested (let me doubt it) in what i believe, you can read my posts in this thread.

[VincentRJ]

11 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i am surprised, it seems that for almost a year various opinions expressed on this thread have flown over your head.

No they haven't flown over my head. I examine all opinions I'm interested in, to see if they meet the basic requirement of the methodology of science.

 

Telling me that my "conscious or semi-conscious views are flawed" is also a projection, isn't it.

 

No. I wrote, 'probably flawed', according to the science of Psychology. To be more certain, I would need more details about your background, but I'm not here to play the role of a personal Psychologist.
 

[Skeptic7]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i am surprised, it seems that for almost a year various opinions expressed on this thread have flown over your head.

Telling me that my "conscious or semi-conscious views are flawed" is also a projection, isn't it.

Actually i am confronting any views, including mine, that's why i am here.

If you are interested (let me doubt it) in what i believe, you can read my posts in this thread.

I certainly can't answer for Vincent, but I've read nearly all of your posts over the past year and seriously haven't a clue what your beliefs are. Sorry but clear as the proverbial "mud" comes to mind.  A mish-mash of this one and a sprinkle of that one with some nice freshly hand-picked cherries of others on top...then some random ingredients of your own stirred in. 

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

No they haven't flown over my head. I examine all opinions I'm interested in, to see if they meet the basic requirement of the methodology of science.

 

 

 

 

No. I wrote, 'probably flawed', according to the science of Psychology. To be more certain, I would need more details about your background, but I'm not here to play the role of a personal Psychologist.
 

Well, a few moons ago i suggested you some reading, there are spiritual scientists who investigate the spiritual realms using the methodology of science.

Warning. It requires some effort, and if you believe only in what is accessible to your physical senses, it's going to be really hard for you to even try.

As for your last remark... You are projecting again LOL

[talahtnut]

On 3/25/2020 at 8:56 PM, Sunmaster said:

Yet, to make such a sweeping statement (without any logical arguments to back it up) is super humble, right? 

PS: Sorry, was that thing about the Sumerians the reason you came to that conclusion?

To simplify, the ancients explained natural

phenomena as being the work of gods.

Everything in the universe was created by

the amazing process of nature.

'God' was another word for 'nature'.

The 10 commandments predate Christianity

by millenia. They are independant of any

religion, and are a super code by which

everyone should strive to live by.

Real Buddhism has got it right.

 

 

 

 

[Sunmaster]

3 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

To simplify, the ancients explained natural

phenomena as being the work of gods.

Everything in the universe was created by

the amazing process of nature.

'God' was another word for 'nature'.

The 10 commandments predate Christianity

by millenia. They are independant of any

religion, and are a super code by which

everyone should strive to live by.

Real Buddhism has got it right.

 

 

 

 

God was not just another word for nature, but nature, or the physical reality, was just one tiny aspect of God. This is clearly described in the Indian Vedas, which were written down almost 4.000 years ago, but are likely to be much older. Are you talking about more ancient ancients? Cavemen?
I don't know where you got that info about the 10 commandments, first time I hear that. Got any sources?

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

To simplify, the ancients explained natural

phenomena as being the work of gods.

Everything in the universe was created by

the amazing process of nature.

'God' was another word for 'nature'.

The 10 commandments predate Christianity

by millenia. They are independant of any

religion, and are a super code by which

everyone should strive to live by.

Real Buddhism has got it right.

 

 

 

 

Actually i very much agree with you, with perhaps the exception that the modern are not necessarily better than the ancient.

One could say: "The modern explain the work of gods as natural phenomena" or "Nature is another word for God".

I also agree on the commandments, just a code without which a human society could not exist.

The Sumerian were the first known civilisation to develop the script after the planetary catastrophe of about 12.000 years ago. Legends of the flood can be found in all cultures of the world.

The revolution of the Buddha's and the Christ's teachings, mostly consist in telling humans that we can evolve spiritually without the need of an organised religion.

[CMNightRider]

Over the ages, scoffers have called the Bible a myth, but archeological records have proved its historicity. Others have denounced its teachings as outdated and useless, but its positive impact on the moral and legal systems of cultures around the world is undeniable. Scientists, psychologists and politicians continue to attack the Bible, but its truth has never been disproven and its light has never been snuffed out. It continues to change lives and cultures just as it did 2,000 years ago. God supernaturally protects the Bible, proving that it is indeed His Word, just as it claims to be. Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away" (Mark 13:31). When all the evidence is before us, there is no doubt that the Bible is truly the Word of God.

 

The fulfilled prophecies in the Bible also indicate that it is God's Word. Hundreds of prophecies about future kingdoms and nations, and most importantly, the Messiah, were spoken forth and then fulfilled, sometimes hundreds of years later. This is all recorded within the Bible itself. Unlike many modern prophecies, the prophecies in Scripture are very detailed and are fulfilled exactly. There is no way this happened by chance. The only answer is that the Bible is of divine origin.

[mauGR1]

29 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

The fulfilled prophecies in the Bible also indicate that it is God's Word. Hundreds of prophecies about future kingdoms and nations, and most importantly, the Messiah, were spoken forth and then fulfilled, sometimes hundreds of years later.

This aspect i find most interesting.

Did you find something about the current state of affairs ?

[VincentRJ]

15 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, a few moons ago i suggested you some reading, there are spiritual scientists who investigate the spiritual realms using the methodology of science.

It would be helpful if you could provide a summary of the particular 'methodology of science' that was used, and whether or not the investigations were peer reviewed. I'm not the sort of person who automatically accepts a view because it comes from a so-called authority, especially when the issue is related to great complexity with so many influencing factors that make the application of the full rigor of the 'methodology of science' too difficult, or too expensive, and even impossible.

 

The investigation into Reincarnation, by psychiatrist Ian Pretyman Stevenson, is a good example of the difficulty, if not impossibility, of applying the full rigor of the methodology of science when examining the stories of young children claiming to know details of recently deceased, distant neighbours, whom they 'apparently' couldn't possibly have known about if they had not been that person in a previous life.

 

Wikipedia covers the issue quite well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson#Criticism

 

"Champe Ransom, whom Stevenson hired as an assistant in the 1970s, wrote an unpublished report about Stevenson's work..... According to Ransom, Stevenson asked the children leading questions, filled in gaps in the narrative, did not spend enough time interviewing them, and left too long a period between the claimed recall and the interview; it was often years after the first mention of a recall that Stevenson learned about it. 
In only eleven (perhaps 23) of the 1,111 cases Ransom looked at had there been no contact between the families of the deceased and of the child before the interview; in addition, according to Ransom, seven of those eleven cases were seriously flawed. 

 

He also wrote that there were problems with the way Stevenson presented the cases, in that he would report his witnesses' conclusions, rather than the data upon which the conclusions rested. Ransom concluded that it all amounted to anecdotal evidence of the weakest kind."

 

Edited March 28, 2020 by VincentRJ

[mauGR1]

13 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

It would be helpful if you could provide a summary of the particular 'methodology of science' that was used, and whether or not the investigations were peer reviewed. I'm not the sort of person who automatically accepts a view because it comes from a so-called authority, especially when the issue is related to great complexity with so many influencing factors that make the application of the full rigor of the 'methodology of science' too difficult, or too expensive, and even impossible.

 

That's a very reasonable post, but as discussed since aeons, it appears obvious to the spiritual researchers, that "science methodology" relies only on the physical phenomena which can be detected by the physical senses.

This attitude makes you impervious to the great power which is intuition.

My suggestion is, start to accept the power of thought, everything which crosses your mind "exists", one way or another, even the most absurd fantasy.

That, imho, is a good starting point to start an investigation of the spiritual worlds.

[CMNightRider]

7 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

This aspect i find most interesting.

Did you find something about the current state of affairs ?

I don't think the coronavirus is mentioned by name in the Bible.  What you may find interesting is going to YouTube and type in Prophecy Update with Pastor Mark Correll.  This pastor follows what the Bible says about the times we are living in and how it relates to current events.  

[Skeptic7]

8 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

Over the ages, scoffers have called the Bible a myth, but archeological records have proved its historicity. Others have denounced its teachings as outdated and useless, but its positive impact on the moral and legal systems of cultures around the world is undeniable. Scientists, psychologists and politicians continue to attack the Bible, but its truth has never been disproven and its light has never been snuffed out. It continues to change lives and cultures just as it did 2,000 years ago. God supernaturally protects the Bible, proving that it is indeed His Word, just as it claims to be. Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away" (Mark 13:31). When all the evidence is before us, there is no doubt that the Bible is truly the Word of God.

 

The fulfilled prophecies in the Bible also indicate that it is God's Word. Hundreds of prophecies about future kingdoms and nations, and most importantly, the Messiah, were spoken forth and then fulfilled, sometimes hundreds of years later. This is all recorded within the Bible itself. Unlike many modern prophecies, the prophecies in Scripture are very detailed and are fulfilled exactly. There is no way this happened by chance. The only answer is that the Bible is of divine origin.

Scoff ????

[Sunmaster]

On 3/25/2020 at 8:18 AM, CMNightRider said:

 (John 3:16???? “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”

 

Why would anyone reject such a wonderful offer? Why would anyone want to keep heading for eternal destruction? 

 

People reject Christ because they love their sin and they hate having it exposed by God’s light.

The majority of people can distinguish right from wrong. Killing someone = wrong. Helping old woman crossing the road = right. Even atheists and agnostics have a moral code, ...imagine that. They don't go out and behave like godless cavemen. They love their children just they way any pious Christian would.

What they, and I would wager all of the believers here reject, is your interpretation of God, because it's incredibly intolerant.

"People reject Christ because they love their sin and they hate having it exposed by God’s light."

Maybe so. Or maybe they don't care about Jesus or don't believe he ever existed. Who cares? Can you imagine Jesus pointing his finger at Thomas and telling him "You better believe I'm God's son, or I will condemn you to eternal damnation, you motherxxxxxx!" Where's the love, where's the compassion, where are all the attributes that make him truly stand out as an exalted, divine being? 
Being judgmental, I would like to remind you, is a very low energy character trait, that is diametrically opposed to compassion. As far as I know, Jesus has never been judgmental, God certainly isn't....and neither should you.

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

Being judgmental, I would like to remind you, is a very low energy character trait, that is diametrically opposed to compassion. As far as I know, Jesus has never been judgmental, God certainly isn't....and neither should you.

To avoid being judgemental is not always easy, in a way we are wired to judge, it's part of the survival instinct imho.

That said, when one is on a spiritual path, learning to leave judgement aside, even for a short time, opens the door to infinite worlds of wisdom.

Pure ecstasy if you ask me ????