Do you believe in God and why

[Sunmaster]

Sorry Skeptic7, I meant to quote this comment of yours:

 

Preachin' to the choir bro! 

 

I obviously agree with you since you've just repeated exactly back what I've said throughout this thread (and others) and as recently as post #979 above...and from which you quoted me. Seems you'd be better served if you directed it towards those who aren't on the same page. 

[Isaanbiker]

 

   Doesn't ALL life come from the oceans? Isn't that something where no god was needed? Most people, including atheists, start praying when they are in deep troubles.

 

    But that's more something they had learned at school, going to church, etc...

 

    If a child wouldn't be introduced to all these lies, would it later start to pray to an imaginary god? 

   

Edited May 7, 2019 by Isaanbiker

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Sorry Skeptic7, I meant to quote this comment of yours:

 

Preachin' to the choir bro! 

 

I obviously agree with you since you've just repeated exactly back what I've said throughout this thread (and others) and as recently as post #979 above...and from which you quoted me. Seems you'd be better served if you directed it towards those who aren't on the same page. 

Not sure why you would have quoted either one of those, as they were each a direct reply to OTHER posters quoting me. One about a like-minded poster parroting my exact words back to me. 

 

The other about the magazine article, which I referred as a 'decent article'...and nothing about it being conclusive. 

 

Not sure how either reply could have been more clear, nor how either possibly treaded on your fragile sensitivities? 

[Sunmaster]

Ok, to make it clear...

 

You replied to this:

I don't care if someone believes themselves to be a chicken sandwich. Well, it might make me sad but ultimately it's none of my business and nor should it be. The problem only starts when that person/s demands respect for that belief and/or tries to legislate so as that belief affects others. 

 

with this:

 

Preachin' to the choir bro! 

 

I obviously agree with you since you've just repeated exactly back what I've said throughout this thread (and others) and as recently as post #979 above...and from which you quoted me. Seems you'd be better served if you directed it towards those who aren't on the same page.

 

and I basically said:

I wonder where you showed respect for other's beliefs in your previous comments? Nobody here tried to impose their beliefs onto you, yet your attitude was quite different from the liberal "live and let live" stance you're taking now.

I just wonder why. 

 

Hope that clears it up for you.

Anyway, I regret starting this now, because I would rather discuss the main topic and therefore I apologise. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 12:45 AM, Skeptic7 said:

Yes...the Universe is vast. Any 12 year old knows that. WOW that's alot of parsecs and stars! Yes it is. We all understand awe. 

 

However your reasoning is flawed. In your example above, you assume that if there is no god, then the universe is not possible. I think we all agree the universe exists...though that is probably a stretch...but let's go with it. For a god to be given credit for creating the universe...one first has to prove said god exists. Just crowbarring god into the equation is a disingenuous attempt at inserting a non answer when actually it's not an answer at all. 

 

Solving an unknown by inserting an even bigger unknown is not an answer. Nor is it a pathway to finding what is true and correct. 

You missed my point by miles.

NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING to do with life the universe and everything, even if they think they do. Does "God" exist in a form that humans can even  begin to understand? NO ONE KNOWS if God DOES exist or DOESN'T exist. To claim that one KNOWS, is ARROGANCE personified.

 

Nor is it a pathway to finding what is true and correct. 

NO LIVING HUMAN BEING will ever know the answer to that.

 

What I do know is that humans have a need to believe in something. Even believing in a negative is believing in something.

Atheists are believers in their point of view just as much as god believers are in theirs.

Every human has "faith" wired into their genes. However, faith can take many forms, even the arrogance to believe that mankind controls itself. Nature controls mankind, and any time Gaia wants to rid the planet of us, we are as extinct as the dinosaurs. So, is Gaia "God"?

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, Isaanbiker said:

 

   Doesn't ALL life come from the oceans? Isn't that something where no god was needed? Most people, including atheists, start praying when they are in deep troubles.

 

    But that's more something they had learned at school, going to church, etc...

 

    If a child wouldn't be introduced to all these lies, would it later start to pray to an imaginary god? 

   

Life as we know it started in the oceans, but what provided "life force" Any biology scientist can probably grow a biological machine, but can they make it "live"?

 

If a child wouldn't be introduced to all these lies, would it later start to pray to an imaginary god? 

Yes, because it's wired into our genes.

As you point out so rightly, there are no atheists in a crisis.

[mauGR1]

15 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

A healthy dose of skepticism is a very good thing, even for spiritual seekers, but don't let that skepticism become too rigid, because it will prevent you from learning and growing beyond your limitations. 

Yep, completely agree.

A wall (of skepticism) can protect one from enemies, but it kind of separates one from the rest of the world.

Skepticism in healthy doses is nonetheless an absolutely necessary tool in the searching of any knowledge.

[Skeptic7]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You missed my point by miles.

NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING to do with life the universe and everything, even if they think they do. Does "God" exist in a form that humans can even  begin to understand? NO ONE KNOWS if God DOES exist or DOESN'T exist. To claim that one KNOWS, is ARROGANCE personified.

 

Nor is it a pathway to finding what is true and correct. 

NO LIVING HUMAN BEING will ever know the answer to that.

 

What I do know is that humans have a need to believe in something. Even believing in a negative is believing in something.

Atheists are believers in their point of view just as much as god believers are in theirs.

Every human has "faith" wired into their genes. However, faith can take many forms, even the arrogance to believe that mankind controls itself. Nature controls mankind, and any time Gaia wants to rid the planet of us, we are as extinct as the dinosaurs. So, is Gaia "God"?

You make no point, so it wasn't missed. Inaccurate statements like "atheists and god believers blah blah blah'. Believers make a claim their god is real or some 'supernatural thingy-out-there-somewhere' is real. Atheists simply don't except said claim. Those making the positive claim bear the burden of proof. 

 

Also...'no living human being will ever know'. Then why bother with it? It's meaningless. Do you know any dead human beings that do know? Are you saying you have proof of an afterlife? No, your're just tossing word salad again. Words without a point. If we can't possibly know something, then by default it should be disregarded. 

 

"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike" 

~ Delos McKown

 

Also, 'every human has faith...' Add the word gullible after every and then we can agree.

 

I certainly don't have faith in my genes. Confidence in my brother or flying in a jet is not the same as faith. Brothers and jets are real. My bro, up until this very moment anyway, has never let me down. His trustworthiness and reliability are based on real life experience. Jet airplanes are quite safe and reliable. Sure one crashes and burns on occasion, but overall I'm confident in the trained pilots abilities and the craft's airworthiness, based on historical safety records...not faith. Also being employed in the aviation industry for 35 years. 

 

On the opposite side, faith is believing in something without evidence or proof. BIG difference. 

 

“Faith is believing what you know ain't so.”

~ Mark Twain

Edited May 8, 2019 by Skeptic7

[mauGR1]

45 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

If we can't possibly know something, then by default it should be disregarded. 

That is one point where i completely disagree with you.

Apparently you have faith in your 5 senses, that's fine, but there are also other ways to perceive reality.

..But, if you are happy with yourself and your knowledge, that's fair enough.

[Skeptic7]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Life as we know it started in the oceans, but what provided "life force" Any biology scientist can probably grow a biological machine, but can they make it "live"?

 

If a child wouldn't be introduced to all these lies, would it later start to pray to an imaginary god? 

Yes, because it's wired into our genes.

As you point out so rightly, there are no atheists in a crisis.

A very broad stroke BS claim. In a crisis I would want a rational thinking atheist who will take action, over someone who's just clasps their hands and cowers in prayer. A single pair of hands DOING are worth infinitely more than a billion pair of hands praying. Plenty of atheists in foxholes. Notable well known examples are Pat Tillman, Ted Williams. See sites below for many more.

 

http://militaryatheists.org/

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20131212104137/http://armedforceshumanists.org.uk/about/

 

http://www.mrff.org/

 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Skeptic7

[Sunmaster]

1 minute ago, Skeptic7 said:

A very broad stroke BS claim. In a crisis I would want a rational thinking atheist who will take action, over someone who's just clasps their hands and cower in prayer. A single pair of hands DOING are worth infinitely more than a billion pair of hands praying. Plenty of atheists in foxholes. Notable well known examples are Pat Tillman, Ted Williams. See sites below for many more.

 

http://militaryatheists.org/

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20131212104137/http://armedforceshumanists.org.uk/about/

 

http://www.mrff.org/

 

 

The real test though is when there's nothing left to do with your hands and your faced with certain death. 
Will you be afraid in the knowledge that your ego is about to just disappear, your body rot and in a few years you'll be all but forgotten? 

[Skeptic7]

2 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The real test though is when there's nothing left to do with your hands and your faced with certain death. 
Will you be afraid in the knowledge that your ego is about to just disappear, your body rot and in a few years you'll be all but forgotten? 

Nope. Wasn't distressed in the least in the billions and trillions of years before my birth. Don't imagine it'll be any different after my demise. ☠️

[BritManToo]

10 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The real test though is when there's nothing left to do with your hands and your faced with certain death. 
Will you be afraid in the knowledge that your ego is about to just disappear, your body rot and in a few years you'll be all but forgotten? 

I will live on through the DNA of my children, that's enough for me.

No rotting, I live in Thailand, they burn dead people.

Edited May 8, 2019 by BritManToo

[Sunmaster]

I think it's pretty easy to say now that you're not bothered or afraid.

We imagine it as some far off event in the distant future, but I'll bet anything that when the time really comes, some metaphorical heads will roll. 
 

[BritManToo]

25 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I think it's pretty easy to say now that you're not bothered or afraid.

We imagine it as some far off event in the distant future,

i suspect I'll be dead within a year.

Not that bothered, I've had enough already.

[mauGR1]

15 hours ago, BritManToo said:

i suspect I'll be dead within a year.

Not that bothered, I've had enough already.

Hold on, some people surely would miss you, besides that, good things can happen unexpectedly.

[StreetCowboy]

On 5/8/2019 at 7:13 PM, BritManToo said:

i suspect I'll be dead within a year.

Not that bothered, I've had enough already.

My dear old late grandmother said that for 10 years.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 9:23 PM, Skeptic7 said:

You make no point, so it wasn't missed. Inaccurate statements like "atheists and god believers blah blah blah'. Believers make a claim their god is real or some 'supernatural thingy-out-there-somewhere' is real. Atheists simply don't except said claim. Those making the positive claim bear the burden of proof. 

 

Also...'no living human being will ever know'. Then why bother with it? It's meaningless. Do you know any dead human beings that do know? Are you saying you have proof of an afterlife? No, your're just tossing word salad again. Words without a point. If we can't possibly know something, then by default it should be disregarded. 

 

"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike" 

~ Delos McKown

 

Also, 'every human has faith...' Add the word gullible after every and then we can agree.

 

I certainly don't have faith in my genes. Confidence in my brother or flying in a jet is not the same as faith. Brothers and jets are real. My bro, up until this very moment anyway, has never let me down. His trustworthiness and reliability are based on real life experience. Jet airplanes are quite safe and reliable. Sure one crashes and burns on occasion, but overall I'm confident in the trained pilots abilities and the craft's airworthiness, based on historical safety records...not faith. Also being employed in the aviation industry for 35 years. 

 

On the opposite side, faith is believing in something without evidence or proof. BIG difference. 

 

“Faith is believing what you know ain't so.”

~ Mark Twain

I made a point, but there are none so blind as those that will not see.

Believe or don't, no one is forcing you to do either, but why do you insist on belittling those that don't agree with you?

I don't have to prove anything, and whether you believe me or not is irrelevant to whether or not I believe.

[soalbundy]

On 4/14/2019 at 9:31 PM, CharlieH said:

No offence to those that do,  but for me, its just  "an invisible friend for adults".

comfort food for the mind. Interesting on Youtube, an American cognitive scientist and physicist,Donald Hoffman, has been, and still is, writing mathematical formulas describing consciousness, they seem able to join up the laws of quantum physics with the standard model of physics. His take on life and our experiences in it can, he says, be likened to the symbol on your computer screen that denotes your emails, the symbol isn't the truth, you have to double click the symbol to see the truth, your emails, behind it. Life can't be double clicked so we live with the illusion of the symbol that represents the truth. Should we know the truth mankind wouldn't be able to survive, we can only realize enough for our survival. Some people, Jesus, Buddha, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj and the present day Tony Parsons or Jac O'Keefe as examples have had a glimpse of the truth without being able to fully understand it. Here an excerpt from Tony Parsons "The open secret"

 

"There is no me or you, no seeker, no enlightenment, no disciple and no guru. There is no better or worse, no path and nothing that has to be achieved. All appearance is source. All that apparently manifests - the world, the life story, the hypnotic dream of separation, the search for home, is the one appearing as two, the nothing appearing as everything, the absolute appearing as the particular.

There is no separate intelligence weaving a destiny, and no choice functioning at any level. Nothing is happening, but this, as it is, invites the apparent seeker to rediscover that which already is.....the abiding, uncaused, unchanging, impersonal silence from which unconditional love overflows and celebrates, it is the wonderful mystery....   

[Sunmaster]

10 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

comfort food for the mind. Interesting on Youtube, an American cognitive scientist and physicist,Donald Hoffman, has been, and still is, writing mathematical formulas describing consciousness, they seem able to join up the laws of quantum physics with the standard model of physics. His take on life and our experiences in it can, he says, be likened to the symbol on your computer screen that denotes your emails, the symbol isn't the truth, you have to double click the symbol to see the truth, your emails, behind it. Life can't be double clicked so we live with the illusion of the symbol that represents the truth. Should we know the truth mankind wouldn't be able to survive, we can only realize enough for our survival. Some people, Jesus, Buddha, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj and the present day Tony Parsons or Jac O'Keefe as examples have had a glimpse of the truth without being able to fully understand it. Here an excerpt from Tony Parsons "The open secret"

 

"There is no me or you, no seeker, no enlightenment, no disciple and no guru. There is no better or worse, no path and nothing that has to be achieved. All appearance is source. All that apparently manifests - the world, the life story, the hypnotic dream of separation, the search for home, is the one appearing as two, the nothing appearing as everything, the absolute appearing as the particular.

There is no separate intelligence weaving a destiny, and no choice functioning at any level. Nothing is happening, but this, as it is, invites the apparent seeker to rediscover that which already is.....the abiding, uncaused, unchanging, impersonal silence from which unconditional love overflows and celebrates, it is the wonderful mystery....   

Never heard of Tony Parsons, but what he says makes sense to me.

One thing I don't agree with though, is that you say in life you can't "double click" the symbol. I think there a lot of people, even today, that have the sort of glimpses of the Truth you describe. 
It's like holding your breath under water...some can do it for a few seconds, some a couple of minutes, then there are the "masters" who can hold it for a very long time, the truly enlightened ones have learnt how to breathe under water.

Like Parsons says in that paragraph, the Truth is already here, you don't need to go on a quest to find it. What you need to do it to take off the layers you've built around you, let go and allow that which is already here to become you.

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, Sunmaster said:

Never heard of Tony Parsons, but what he says makes sense to me.

One thing I don't agree with though, is that you say in life you can't "double click" the symbol. I think there a lot of people, even today, that have the sort of glimpses of the Truth you describe. 
It's like holding your breath under water...some can do it for a few seconds, some a couple of minutes, then there are the "masters" who can hold it for a very long time, the truly enlightened ones have learnt how to breathe under water.

Like Parsons says in that paragraph, the Truth is already here, you don't need to go on a quest to find it. What you need to do it to take off the layers you've built around you, let go and allow that which is already here to become you.

except that there is no you, that is the scary part of the message, it is, he says, a message that the mind will reject because it wants to go on for ever and ever. Tony Parsons can be found on youtube. His message is not dissimilar from that of Ramana Maharshi who when dying heard his disciples (he never accepted that he had any) crying said, you are crying because you think there is somebody in this body who is leaving, I am not going anywhere, where should I go.

[soalbundy]

12 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Never heard of Tony Parsons, but what he says makes sense to me.

One thing I don't agree with though, is that you say in life you can't "double click" the symbol. I think there a lot of people, even today, that have the sort of glimpses of the Truth you describe. 
It's like holding your breath under water...some can do it for a few seconds, some a couple of minutes, then there are the "masters" who can hold it for a very long time, the truly enlightened ones have learnt how to breathe under water.

Like Parsons says in that paragraph, the Truth is already here, you don't need to go on a quest to find it. What you need to do it to take off the layers you've built around you, let go and allow that which is already here to become you.

Interestingly, Parsons and Jac o'Keef both say an enlightened person doesn't exist, once 'enlightenment' occurs they cease to exist, ie. the ego, the 'me' dies, there is no egoic history of 'before', being me. Tony Parsons,a businessman, had a revelation while walking through a park in Balham, London of all places. He describes it as, not only had Tony Parsons died but the realization that there never had been a Tony Parsons, I was one with everything and everything was me, it was all there was, there was just energy and overpowering feelings of love.

[Sunmaster]

15 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

except that there is no you, that is the scary part of the message, it is, he says, a message that the mind will reject because it wants to go on for ever and ever. Tony Parsons can be found on youtube. His message is not dissimilar from that of Ramana Maharshi who when dying heard his disciples (he never accepted that he had any) crying said, you are crying because you think there is somebody in this body who is leaving, I am not going anywhere, where should I go.

That's right, once "you" melt with all there is and become one with it, there's no ego, no "you" to witness it all.

[soalbundy]

17 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

That's right, once "you" melt with all there is and become one with it, there's no ego, no "you" to witness it all.

Apparently, although I can cease thoughts for some time, can concentrate on Maharshi's 'who am I' and seek the source of the thought, I am still here as 'me'. It isn't necessary apparently to realize anything while alive, when dying it will become apparent.

I can't remember who it was but I was reading about a distinguished man who was dying, going in and out of consciousness with his wife by his side, at his last 'coming back' he said to his wife, without any other explanation, "this is all a fraud" and died.

[Sunmaster]

5 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

Apparently, although I can cease thoughts for some time, can concentrate on Maharshi's 'who am I' and seek the source of the thought, I am still here as 'me'. It isn't necessary apparently to realize anything while alive, when dying it will become apparent.

I can't remember who it was but I was reading about a distinguished man who was dying, going in and out of consciousness with his wife by his side, at his last 'coming back' he said to his wife, without any other explanation, "this is all a fraud" and died.

Could it have been Aldous Huxley? I remember reading something similar.

[ivor bigun]

My dear old late grandmother said that for 10 years.

My dad was very ill when i was young he was told he may die in his 30s,managed to hold on till he was 85 in the end..

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[notmyself]

I think what gets me most is the shear number of people who consider their argument to be somehow reasonable and go to unimaginable lengths in an effort to show it as potentially being so. This knotting of the mind results in some interesting views, psychologically,  where a method is used to prove that the very same method should not be used, 

[Odysseus123]

3 hours ago, notmyself said:

I think what gets me most is the shear number of people who consider their argument to be somehow reasonable and go to unimaginable lengths in an effort to show it as potentially being so. This knotting of the mind results in some interesting views, psychologically,  where a method is used to prove that the very same method should not be used, 

Perhaps it is has more to do with the limitations of the internet?I am sure that in private conversations we would be far more nuanced in our approach,if only for a desire to not offend.

The internet-and social media in general-encourages the short,sharp thrust rather than a leisurely conversation.

How God perceives all of this is beyond me..????

[mauGR1]

53 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said:

Perhaps it is has more to do with the limitations of the internet?I am sure that in private conversations we would be far more nuanced in our approach,if only for a desire to not offend.

The internet-and social media in general-encourages the short,sharp thrust rather than a leisurely conversation.

How God perceives all of this is beyond me..????

That's reasonable, being virtually crucified is not as bad as being crucified for real.

[Odysseus123]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

That's reasonable, being virtually crucified is not as bad as being crucified for real.

Well..personally I would rather be conversationally crucified whilst sipping on a fine port,eating a decent cheese and not responding to B F Skinner's theories about operant conditioning...at least then I can pretend that I am not a Skinner box rat.

Self deluded as I might well be.

Be that as it may...Here is a scientist who discovered the awful chasm at his feet..

 

Edited May 12, 2019 by Odysseus123