Do you believe in God and why

[luckyluke]

2 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

If that makes you happy, I'm happy to oblige. 

Thanks, but no particularly feeling about it.

So up to you. 

[luckyluke]

23 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

God doesn't need (a) religion to exist, nor does he need the belief of anyone.
 

If one believe in God, that's the right thing to think and say.

 

However, in my opinion, this quote is not limited to God alone, but can be used by every believer of any belief.

[mauGR1]

30 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

And that's what differential us.

I can understand that you have your own opinion and " fight " for it.

I hope you will understand that I act identically.

As i told you previously, I understand that, and on a purely philosophical level, I fully agree with you.

Also i consider ". fighting " not necessarily in a bad way, but rather a part of being human.

In this case, we are fighting with words, so, on my side is a mostly positive fight.

On the other hand, i strongly suspect that we have a reason to exist, and to say it in a very broad way, is to grow into better beings.

If one doesn't believe in some sort of afterlife, there could be a serious lack of motivation in trying to improve oneself.

So, even if God shouldn't exist at all, I would consider the strive to improve oneself as useful, rather than useless.

Hope it's not too complicated, but if you say that it's just an opinion, I'll accept that.

[luckyluke]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

Hope it's not too complicated

Alas it is.

I don't understand what concrete point you want to make, sorry.

[CraigInBangkok]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If one looks only at the life of the Christ as related in the 4 gospels, he laid out the path to being a better person. He was also a Jew and did not seek to replace Judaism. It was not he who started the Christian Church.

The criticism on this thread is always to the Christian Church, but billions of very good and caring people have been Christians over the past 2,000 years. Only a few bad characters have exploited others and given the Church a bad reputation.

To criticize religion is to criticize ALL religions, including Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, etc etc etc.

If you feel the need to follow a particular religion, I don't have a problem with you, that is your choice. I would criticize all religions, not in principle, but how they are interpreted by man. I am not saying there are not caring decent people involved in all religions but I follow no one and choose take my own path and believe I am decent human being. 

[Rimmer]

Some baiting and bickering posts have been removed also replies, please see the following rules that you agreed to when you signed up to Thai Visa:

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

 

25) No public discussion is allowed with regard to other forum members

[mauGR1]

24 minutes ago, Tagged said:

It is our willingness to turn the blind eye and the death ear to what religion represent, and also the fantastic respect we learn or are brainwashed to Respect and believe in fairytales. And most recently modern phenomen (Not really, been tried out a nummerious times during the history) Religious freedom and right to believe in what you want, and also teach. We will see the crackdown again, and we will see the rise of importance monoistic Religions dominance once again. 
 

And again, you can dismiss religion as a concept now, but as much you guys are influenced of it as I am, even Luckyluck, we are connected somehow to the christian belief system, and under bigger crises, most people who have dismissed religion, have an tendency to turn back to it, or let themselves lead to it. 

I'm not dismissing anything.

I have the clear impression that you don't understand what you read, and you don't know what you write.

I hope you ll not be offended if I humbly suggest you to take more time to read and understand, not just mine, but other posts as well, before replying just for the sake of replying.

Again, my point about religion, and i think most posters here agree with that, is that religion has positives and negatives, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Tagged]

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I'm not dismissing anything.

I have the clear impression that you don't understand what you read, and you don't know what you write.

I hope you ll not be offended if I humbly suggest you to take more time to read and understand, not just mine, but other posts as well, before replying just for the sake of replying.

Again, my point about religion, and i think most posters here agree with that, is that religion has positives and negatives, nothing more and nothing less.

 

So, I do not understand what I write? Are you for real? 

[mauGR1]

15 minutes ago, Tagged said:

So, I do not understand what I write? Are you for real? 

Yes, and to be blunt, I'm afraid that your command of English language is weaker than you think.

It's not my aim to criticize you personally, but I take religion and philosophy quite seriously, and a proper command of the language is essential.

If you don't like what i say it's not my problem.

[Tagged]

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yes, and to be blunt, I'm afraid that your command of English language is weaker than you think.

It's not my aim to criticize you personally, but I take religion and philosophy quite seriously, and a proper command of the language is essential.

If you don't like what i say it's not my problem.

Well, then I have to take you and your religion seriously and leave you alone. Hopefully, Im not the only one

[mauGR1]

12 minutes ago, Tagged said:

Well, then I have to take you and your religion seriously and leave you alone. Hopefully, Im not the only one

As O.Wilde used to say, "paradise is better for the climate, hell is better for the company ".

So I have no doubt that you ll be in good company while I search for a better climate.☺

[2 is 1]

I believe there is some higher "power", but i don't believe any "human made" religion! Like Bible , first txt write 2700 year ago and Koran 1400 years ago! Before that "story" move mouth to mouth! It's nice if that time mouth to mouth story never chance! Normaly if you even tell somebody story and story goes mouth to mouth, it's all different story when number 10 people tell that! But we have to believe that these 2 books story never chance even there was 1000 yers time difference! When story start!

Edited October 5, 2020 by 2 is 1

[Tagged]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

As O.Wilde used to say, "paradise is better for the climate, hell is better for the company ".

So I have no doubt that you ll be in good company while I search for a better climate.☺

You really topped it now! 

 

Im not sure I am going to laugh of the humor, be annoyed, ashamed, or angry. I have to think about it. And still to early to ask if you have been drinking, or forgot to take your medication, since you seems a bit to organized to forget that. 

 

God works in mysterious ways, indeed. 

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, 2 is 1 said:

I believe there is some higher "power", but i don't believe any "human made" religion! Like Bible , first txt write 2700 year ago and Koran 1400 years ago! Before that "story" move mouth to mouth! It's nice if that time mouth to mouth story never chance! Normaly if you even tell somebody story and story goes mouth to mouth, it's all different story when number 10 people tell that! But we have to believe that these 2 books story never chance even there was 1000 yers time difference! When story start!

Agree that there's much to be questioned about religion and holy books, but to dismiss ancient knowledge without questioning, would be akin to throw away the baby with the dirty water.

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, Tagged said:

You really topped it now! 

 

Im not sure I am going to laugh of the humor, be annoyed, ashamed, or angry. I have to think about it. And still to early to ask if you have been drinking, or forgot to take your medication, since you seems a bit to organized to forget that. 

 

God works in mysterious ways, indeed. 

Whatever makes you happy it's fine for me, I can laugh at myself, and I wish you can do it as well ☺

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

God doesn't need (a) religion to exist, nor does he need the belief of anyone.
 

Really! That doesn't appear to be the case for the God, Yahweh. He appears to be a jealous God. Why would he be jealous if he doesn't need the belief of anyone?

 

From Exodus 20:2-6

 

"I am Yahweh your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."

[JensenZ]

On 6/12/2020 at 2:33 PM, fredwiggy said:

On 6/12/2020 at 2:20 PM, giddyup said:

How do you know which part is true, and which part isn't?

Some has been proven wrong. Some hasn't.

Sorry, a bit late here. You either take all of the Bible or none of it. In fact there is a warning in the Bible not to add or subtract from the scripture. It was penned by men, yes, but inspired by God. Think of God writing it through the pens of men. The biggest problem, which still persists, is that it was written in Hebrew and Greek, and translating thoughts into other languages is problematic and doesn't always get the context correct. It doesn't help that most modern translations were based on the King James version (1604 - 1611), the English of which is no longer spoken.

[Peter Denis]

45 minutes ago, Tagged said:

So, I do not understand what I write? Are you for real? 

@mauGR1 was only referring to your command of the english language.  I am not a native english speaker myself but have to admit that I also often have some problems trying to figure out the meaning of some of the things that you wrote. 

Maybe try writing your response first in your native language and then do a google translate.  Yes, that will obviously result in a garbled version of what you meant but you can use that as starting point to amend/clarify the english text.

 

Your posts - when decyphered - often provide some food for thought, so it's no critique but rather praise that readers of those posts, suggest you to make an effort to clarify the message you want to convey with your posts.

 

It's of course possible that when your posts are more clear that @mauGR1 will then do a 'Gurdjieff' on you. 

In the book in which the great Russian philosopher P.D. OUspensky describes his encounters with Gurdjieff, there is the following excerpt which popped up in my mind when reading your dialogue.

 

"Yes," said G. "A great deal can be found by reading. For instance, take yourself: you might already know a great deal if you knew how to read. I mean that, if you understood everything you have read in your life, you would already know what you are looking for now. If you understood everything you have written in your own book, what is it called?"—he made something altogether impossible out of the words "Tertium Organum"—"I should come and bow down to you and beg you to teach me. But you do not understand either what you read or what you write. You do not even understand what the word 'understand' means. Yet understanding is essential, and reading can be useful only if you understand what you read. But, of course, no book can give real preparation. So it is impossible to say which is better. What a man knows well" (he emphasized the word "well")—"that is his preparation. If a man knows how to make coffee well or how to make boots well, then it is already possible to talk to him. The trouble is that nobody knows anything well. Everything is known just anyhow, superficially."
~ P.D. Ouspensky - 'In Search of the Miraculous - Fragments of an Unknown Teaching'

[Sunmaster]

Just now, VincentRJ said:

Really! That doesn't appear to be the case for the God, Yahweh. He appears to be a jealous God. Why would he be jealous if he doesn't need the belief of anyone?

 

From Exodus 20:2-6

 

"I am Yahweh your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."

This is the interpretation of the tribespeople who lived a few thousand years ago. 

I believe that yes, we are made in the image of God, in the sense that we all carry that divine spark within us. But when it comes to religions, it is us who make God in our image. 
The God you see described in the bible, in the koran in the torah etc is an approximate description (of something indescribable) that reflects the understanding of the people of that time. 
Nothing more, nothing less.

[thaibeachlovers]

26 minutes ago, 2 is 1 said:

I believe there is some higher "power", but i don't believe any "human made" religion! Like Bible , first txt write 2700 year ago and Koran 1400 years ago! Before that "story" move mouth to mouth! It's nice if that time mouth to mouth story never chance! Normaly if you even tell somebody story and story goes mouth to mouth, it's all different story when number 10 people tell that! But we have to believe that these 2 books story never chance even there was 1000 yers time difference! When story start!

Koran and Bible are completely different. Same God, different path.

Old testament is for the Jews- I have no idea why it's included for Christians. Only first 4 books of New Testament are about the Christ, the rest are about the Christian Church.

Anyone living by the words of the Christ would be a good person indeed.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

@mauGR1 was only referring to your command of the english language.  I am not a native english speaker myself but have to admit that I also often have some problems trying to figure out the meaning of some of the things that you wrote. 

Maybe try writing your response first in your native language and then do a google translate.  Yes, that will obviously result in a garbled version of what you meant but you can use that as starting point to amend/clarify the english text.

 

Your posts - when decyphered - often provide some food for thought, so it's no critique but rather praise that readers of those posts, suggest you to make an effort to clarify the message you want to convey with your posts.

 

It's of course possible that when your posts are more clear that @mauGR1 will then do a 'Gurdjieff' on you. 

In the book in which the great Russian philosopher P.D. OUspensky describes his encounters with Gurdjieff, there is the following excerpt which popped up in my mind when reading your dialogue.

 

"Yes," said G. "A great deal can be found by reading. For instance, take yourself: you might already know a great deal if you knew how to read. I mean that, if you understood everything you have read in your life, you would already know what you are looking for now. If you understood everything you have written in your own book, what is it called?"—he made something altogether impossible out of the words "Tertium Organum"—"I should come and bow down to you and beg you to teach me. But you do not understand either what you read or what you write. You do not even understand what the word 'understand' means. Yet understanding is essential, and reading can be useful only if you understand what you read. But, of course, no book can give real preparation. So it is impossible to say which is better. What a man knows well" (he emphasized the word "well")—"that is his preparation. If a man knows how to make coffee well or how to make boots well, then it is already possible to talk to him. The trouble is that nobody knows anything well. Everything is known just anyhow, superficially."
~ P.D. Ouspensky - 'In Search of the Miraculous - Fragments of an Unknown Teaching'

I think we are talking about comprehension. When the meaning of a post is not clear, it is difficult to comprehend what the poster meant to say.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

Sorry, a bit late here. You either take all of the Bible or none of it. In fact there is a warning in the Bible not to add or subtract from the scripture. It was penned by men, yes, but inspired by God. Think of God writing it through the pens of men. The biggest problem, which still persists, is that it was written in Hebrew and Greek, and translating thoughts into other languages is problematic and doesn't always get the context correct. It doesn't help that most modern translations were based on the King James version (1604 - 1611), the English of which is no longer spoken.

I take only the first 4 books of the New Testament, and as I subscribe to no religion that is OK.

The Bible is so full of contradictions that one like me can't take it seriously.

[2 is 1]

11 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree that there's much to be questioned about religion and holy books, but to dismiss ancient knowledge without questioning, would be akin to throw away the baby with the dirty water.

I dont mean to dismiss ancient knowledge. But holy book's not hold any! They are fiction! In my coudry you normaly get your mother religion and i get Lutheran. Its "coverment religion" in Finland and if you are member you need pay more tax!

Lutheran priest can drink, get merried etc.  I separate from church many years ago! Why i pay more tax to see priest drive nice Mercedes! 

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyone living by the words of the Christ would be a good person indeed.

Absolutely !

A simple phrase like :

"Love your enemy", although extremely difficult to put in practice, represents the gate to a higher realm.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, 2 is 1 said:

I dont mean to dismiss ancient knowledge. But holy book's not hold any! They are fiction! In my coudry you normaly get your mother religion and i get Lutheran. Its "coverment religion" in Finland and if you are member you need pay more tax!

Lutheran priest can drink, get merried etc.  I separate from church many years ago! Why i pay more tax to see priest drive nice Mercedes! 

Aren't you happy you don't live in the Middle Ages! They'd probably kill you for saying the Bible is fiction. Apostasy doesn't go down well even today in countries like Saudi and Pakistan.

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, 2 is 1 said:

I dont mean to dismiss ancient knowledge. But holy book's not hold any! They are fiction! In my coudry you normaly get your mother religion and i get Lutheran. Its "coverment religion" in Finland and if you are member you need pay more tax!

Lutheran priest can drink, get merried etc.  I separate from church many years ago! Why i pay more tax to see priest drive nice Mercedes! 

Easy then, become a priest so that you can marry, drink and drive a Mercedes ????

[mauGR1]

49 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

This is the interpretation of the tribespeople who lived a few thousand years ago. 

I believe that yes, we are made in the image of God, in the sense that we all carry that divine spark within us. But when it comes to religions, it is us who make God in our image. 
The God you see described in the bible, in the koran in the torah etc is an approximate description (of something indescribable) that reflects the understanding of the people of that time. 
Nothing more, nothing less.

Although i completely agree with your post, I would point out that modern science followers tend to dismiss ( I know you don't ) ancient people as primitive, uncultured, ignorant or even stupid, but that's completely wrong imho.

While it's true that technological and scientific developments have made our life more comfortable in a way, we are paying a high price for that in another way.

In the same way, the invention of the script, which has been a necessary tool for the technological leap , has probably weakened, is not killed, other tools, like instinct, memory, intuition, and a once deeper connection with the nature and its treasures.

[JensenZ]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I take only the first 4 books of the New Testament, and as I subscribe to no religion that is OK.

The Bible is so full of contradictions that one like me can't take it seriously.

I bet you just picked up that phrase somewhere and decided to run with it, without giving it any thought. It's hard to believe a non-religious person (atheist or agnostic) would read enough of the Bible to even give an opinion on it.

 

People can twist the meaning of the Bible a thousand different ways, but I'm pretty sure any of these so called contradictions you speak of can be well explained too, not that you would be interested in hearing the explanations. How about naming one of these contradictions so we can explore it.

 

 

[Peter Denis]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think we are talking about comprehension. When the meaning of a post is not clear, it is difficult to comprehend what the poster meant to say.

Except when the poster is of the Damien Hurst school of communication:

I sometimes feel that I have nothing to say and I want to communicate this.

But in that case not posting or Sacred Silence is for sure the better option. ????

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

I bet you just picked up that phrase somewhere and decided to run with it, without giving it any thought. It's hard to believe a non-religious person (atheist or agnostic) would read enough of the Bible to even give an opinion on it.

 

People can twist the meaning of the Bible a thousand different ways, but I'm pretty sure any of these so called contradictions you speak of can be well explained too, not that you would be interested in hearing the explanations. How about naming one of these contradictions so we can explore it.

 

 

Interesting post, so i will answer for myself.

God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, for example; i am not sure if we can call it a contradiction, but it's something which deserves a proper investigation.

Another one, the notion of eternal damnation for the evil doers, while in the new testament, the prodigal son is forgiven and his return celebrated.