Do you believe in God and why

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

What imho you fail to understand is that the experience of oneness is beyond logic,  that's why it's so amazing and so difficult to describe. 

Yet, i can easily predict that, if you are so lucky to experience it, you'll also try to explain it, to yourself and others,  in logical terms. 

Not true.. There are many concepts that are beyond logic which I understand and accept are illogical and irrational. Poetry is often beyond logic, for example, but one can still appreciate the nice feeling it produces, and perhaps the imaginative stimulation, as one can when watching an entertaining movie.

 

I can also imagine how puzzling our environment, such as the night sky, and the rising and setting of the sun, must have been to our ancient ancestors, say 50,000 to 5,000 years ago, not to mention volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, thunder and lightning, and devastating winds and rain.
The history of mankind has been an attempt to understand the causes of such events, which used to have a severe impact on their survival, and still does, because we are entrenched in fixed locations like cities, and are economically restricted in freely changing our locations, as many animals do to avoid harmful, temporary conditions. 

 

All the explanations of our ancient ancestors, which usually included various types of Gods, have been proved by modern science to be either wrong and fanciful, or not yet substantiated.

 

We all have personal experiences which might be difficult to describe, hence the great number of novels, poetry and movies. However, being unable to distinguish between fact and fiction can have disastrous results. ????
 

[mauGR1]

24 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Not true.. There are many concepts that are beyond logic which I understand and accept are illogical and irrational. Poetry is often beyond logic, for example, but one can still appreciate the nice feeling it produces, and perhaps the imaginative stimulation, as one can when watching an entertaining movie.

 

I can also imagine how puzzling our environment, such as the night sky, and the rising and setting of the sun, must have been to our ancient ancestors, say 50,000 to 5,000 years ago, not to mention volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, thunder and lightning, and devastating winds and rain.
The history of mankind has been an attempt to understand the causes of such events, which used to have a severe impact on their survival, and still does, because we are entrenched in fixed locations like cities, and are economically restricted in freely changing our locations, as many animals do to avoid harmful, temporary conditions. 

 

All the explanations of our ancient ancestors, which usually included various types of Gods, have been proved by modern science to be either wrong and fanciful, or not yet substantiated.

 

We all have personal experiences which might be difficult to describe, hence the great number of novels, poetry and movies. However, being unable to distinguish between fact and fiction can have disastrous results. ????
 

Nice try,  but if it's beyond logic, you can't explain with logic ????

[Sunmaster]

2 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

I already have an explanation of what reality is. It's combination of human characteristics, (that is, our qualities of perception and thought as a species), and our environment (inner and outer) which we observe and perceive using those qualities of perception.

 

As I've mentioned before, if one separates the observed from the observer, there's nothing to be observed. One cannot observe consciousness as a separate entity, because consciousness is always required to observe, experience, and think about anything and everything.
What we can observe, using modern technology, are certain activities in parts of the brain that are always associated with consciousness, and the inactivity in those same areas of the brain when we observe that a person is unconscious.

 

Whilst an individual, during introspective meditation, might achieve a state of awareness without any thoughts arising, that is not a state of 'understanding the nature of consciousness'. It's just a state of awareness with no thoughts. Such awareness with no thoughts might result in an extraordinary sense of peace and calm. However, to then describe that experience as a 'oneness with God' is not only pure speculation and hypothesis, from a scientific perspective, but terribly imprecise without a clear definition of God.

 

If you describe God as 'everything that exists', then an experience of a 'oneness with everything' is just an illusory experience which you find impossible to describe meaningfully and rationally. Do you feel a oneness with a Black Hole, an exploding star, the scientifically hypothesized Dark Matter and Dark Energy, and a oneness with the billions of different species of insects and microbes in the soil? ????

 

A mere handful of soil can contain a greater number of microbes than the entire human population on our planet. Do you feel a oneness with all those microbes that you can't possible be aware of personally, unless you are a microbiologist with sophisticated instruments? ????

Warning: This is an analogy and not to be taken literally. ????

You know the story of the monkey who tries to get nuts out of a jar? He reaches inside the bottle and grabs a handful of nuts and then tries to get the hand out, but the fist gets stuck. As much as he tries he can not get the hand out holding the nuts. Only when he releases the nuts he can take it out.
In the same way we have to let go of what we think we know in order to open ourselves to new possibilities. "I already have an explanation of what reality is" is being stuck with the hand inside a bottle. I too have an idea of what reality is, but it's a work in progress. It takes into account the new scientific discoveries as well as my own personal discoveries, and I know that in both fields there is so much more to discover.
 

"Oneness with everything there is" is not just an empty, airy concept. Unlike the analogy above, this can be taken literally. You might find it speculation and I understand that from the outside it is difficult to grasp, but it's exactly like that: being one with black holes and microbes and everything in between. You can believe it or not, it doesn't matter, and it doesn't change the fact that great men and women have experienced this state throughout history in all parts of the world.

But that's where Buddha's quote comes so perfectly into play. You accept what only one side tells you reality is, the materialistic view, and think that's all there is. The mystical parts seem suspect and ridiculous to you because you've never experienced something that would indicate the truthfulness in those teachings. When Buddha says "Find out by yourself", he doesn't mean to read a couple of scientific research papers on consciousness on the internet and be done with it.

He means that in order to understand the outside, you must first understand the inside. This takes practice. 

If you doubt that it is possible to be one with everything, sit down, look inside and find out by yourself if it's true or not.
Saying it's not possible without even trying, is completely worthless.

[VincentRJ]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

 

If you doubt that it is possible to be one with everything, sit down, look inside and find out by yourself if it's true or not.
Saying it's not possible without even trying, is completely worthless.

Oh! I see! You mean 'one with everything inside yourself'? I thought you meant 'one with everything in the universe', which you obviously can't possibly know about. I hope you are not implying that spirituality travels much faster than the speed of light and that you are able to feel at one with a galaxy that is 13 billion light years away from Earth. ????

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

I suspect this is an interpretation of the ideas expressed in the Kalama Sutta which addresses the doubts that a group of villagers had about the various religious ideas which were prevalent in those times.

 

The Kalamas were inhabitants of the town of Kessaputa. They had experienced, before the Buddha arrived, numerous monks, brahmans, and ascetic wanderers, passing through their village and teaching their own doctrine whilst reviling and despising the doctrines of others.
As a result, the villagers were confused and uncertain about which 'teaching' they should follow, or accept as true. When the Buddha arrived at their village, the Kalamas explained their situation and their doubts.

 

The Buddha's response, known as the Kalama Sutta, is found in the Pali Canon. The following article goes into detail.

 

"The instruction of the Kalamas (Kalama Sutta) is justly famous for its encouragement of free inquiry; the spirit of the sutta signifies a teaching that is exempt from fanaticism, bigotry, dogmatism, and intolerance."
 

The criterion for acceptance
10. "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.'

 

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wheel008.html

 

Everything that we experience, talk about, or think about has to be first interpreted during the process of 'awareness' or 'consciousness', although often very basic interpretations appears to be instantaneous because they are embedded in our subconscious. An example would be 'seeing a very small house in the landscape'. We don't have to ponder and wonder whether or not the house is a 'Doll's House' because it is so small. We automatically understand that it appears very small because of it's distance from us, which is something all children learn at an early age.

 

Even if writing had existed during the times of the Buddha, and his teachings had been written down, there would still be problems of modern interpretation, especially considering the abstract nature of the subject.
The Kalama Sutta has different, modern interpretations. It doesn't seem to be a popular sutta within the traditional Buddhist religion, which is understandable because the sutta is advising those who have doubts, not to automatically accept what is written in the scriptures, nor accept what a particular, so-called 'authority' claims to be true.

 

It's the type of sutta that mostly appeals to atheists, skeptics, and those who attach great importance to the rigorous process of the 'Methodology of Science'. Those who criticize the sutta claim that it encourages people to believe whatever they like, which I think is a wrong interpretation. In my view, the Kalama Sutta encourages people to 'think for themselves', to question 'so-called authorities', and to also consider their own biases which have influenced their current views.

 

I consider the Kalama Sutta, as interpreted in modern English, to be one of the wisest of the Buddha's teachings, regardless of whether or not the Buddha actually taught that precise message as translated.

If I took what the Buddha said seriously I could be accused of being religious. That doesn't mean I can't read about him as an interesting person.

We should all read as much as possible about things philosophical, as they can help us lead better lives, but unless one is religious, one is not required to follow any of the teachings, but can cherry pick bits that appeal to us from different sources. My criteria for acceptance is whether it makes sense, and whether it is seeking to exploit rather than help.

Eg saying that I have to pray a specified number of times a day, or that I have to behave differently on a particular day, or eat a bit of bread and think it is actually part of a body does not pass my common sense test. God knows what is in my heart and mind, and why would the creator of life the universe and everything require me to eat bread and think it is God's body to achieve salvation?

To me, God is beyond anything written, as writing applies to living humans and God is obviously not human.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Oh! I see! You mean 'one with everything inside yourself'? I thought you meant 'one with everything in the universe', which you obviously can't possibly know about. I hope you are not implying that spirituality travels much faster than the speed of light and that you are able to feel at one with a galaxy that is 13 billion light years away from Earth. ????

Why would spirituality need to travel faster than the speed of light, when God may exist in another dimension? Perhaps you don't believe that there are other dimensions, but IMO God is outside our time and space, ergo in another dimension. After all, if a being can create life the universe and everything, creating multiple dimensions would be a doddle.

 

Also, as God created this universe and everything in it is part of God ( as discussed many times previously ) everything is connected, no matter how far apart on a physical plane.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Poetry is often beyond logic, for example, but one can still appreciate the nice feeling it produces, and perhaps the imaginative stimulation, as one can when watching an entertaining movie.

Have you never considered that God is poetry and imagination? God made everything, ergo everything is part of God.

 

Simple example- if I write ( create ) a poem, that poem is part of me, in my mind.

 

So, God created life the universe and everything, so if God has a "mind" we and everything in the universe is part of God, in God's mind.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

All the explanations of our ancient ancestors, which usually included various types of Gods, have been proved by modern science to be either wrong and fanciful, or not yet substantiated.

Correct, but nothing you said proves that God doesn't exist.

God is spirit, so can't be proven/ dis proven, IMO, by human science, which deals with the physical.

I suppose it's hard to believe in God without a spiritual experience, but that just means one has not yet been blessed by such. If one has such, one has no choice other than to believe.

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

If you describe God as 'everything that exists', then an experience of a 'oneness with everything' is just an illusory experience which you find impossible to describe meaningfully and rationally. Do you feel a oneness with a Black Hole, an exploding star, the scientifically hypothesized Dark Matter and Dark Energy, and a oneness with the billions of different species of insects and microbes in the soil? 

I think you are stretching too far by trying to say that a oneness with a Black Hole, an exploding star, the scientifically hypothesized Dark Matter and Dark Energy, and a oneness with the billions of different species of insects and microbes in the soil is necessary to believe in the creator.

When I came to believe, I didn't fall into a black hole, and it wasn't necessary for me to do so to believe.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

However, being unable to distinguish between fact and fiction can have disastrous results.

Only if one acts on an erroneous belief. Just believing in God does not make me think I can safely leap off high buildings.

The terrorists that claim to be killing in the name of God are wrong, because God has never said that people should kill for God. That's a religious thing.

[canthai55]

Buddhism is not a religion

It is a Philosophy

 

[Sunmaster]

9 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Oh! I see! You mean 'one with everything inside yourself'? I thought you meant 'one with everything in the universe', which you obviously can't possibly know about. I hope you are not implying that spirituality travels much faster than the speed of light and that you are able to feel at one with a galaxy that is 13 billion light years away from Earth. ????

There is no difference between "one with everything inside" and "one with everything outside". That's a logical fallacy. If you are one with everything, then that's EVERYTHING, inside and outside. 

 

The speed of light which depends on mass and energy, only works in relation to the material plane. These parameters don't apply to the cosmic consciousness. 

 

"Spirituality" is a broad concept and doesn't "travel" at all. Perhaps you mean consciousness. 

If your consciousness melts with the cosmic consciousness, effectively becoming one with it, then space and time cease to exist. It's like asking if the thought of a black hole is further away from you than the thought of your finger.

What's the distance between the 2? Can it be quantified? Of course not. 

 

The problem is that you're trying to apply 3D concepts to something that is way beyond 3D. It simply won't work. 

 

Science won't help you to overcome your 3D-ness, meditation will. Science won't help you to understand your true identity, meditation will. Science, as a 3D tool, won't help you make sense of the absolute reality, meditation will.

 

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by Sunmaster

[mauGR1]

Buddhism was a philosophy, and it has become a religion ????

I'm talking obviously about the masses,  and not about the individual. 

Perhaps the same happened with Christianity,  as i never heard of Jesus building churches. 

[atpeace]

Over the years my atheist stance has transformed. Now i simply do not know and open to new ideas.  All the current popular religions, Buddhism included, are hard to take seriously unless altered to a point  that no longer resembles the original beliefs. 

 

Have no idea about the origin of our existence and those that think they do are just full of cra@#!p.  The nearest a person can come to the true spiritual nature of our existence is a hunch at best.  An open minded evolving spiritual journey  is grounding and simply "fun".  Why not enjoy the journey with no definitive answers while many pontificate spiritual reality as if they have any idea.

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, atpeace said:

An open minded evolving spiritual journey  is grounding and simply "fun".  Why not enjoy the journey with no definitive answers while many pontificate spiritual reality as if they have any idea.

I hope that you'll consider that minds can be open in different ways.

[bendejo]

Whether or not God exists is one thing, but he certainly has a twitter account.

Afghanistan Takeover By the Taliban Has Led to a Cryptic Tweet From 'God'

 

 

[atpeace]

29 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I hope that you'll consider that minds can be open in different ways.

Think that is what I stated. 

[mauGR1]

42 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Think that is what I stated. 

So, when you say 'many people pontificate about spiritual reality as if they have any idea'.. you are referring to ..?

[atpeace]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

So, when you say 'many people pontificate about spiritual reality as if they have any idea'.. you are referring to ..?

Sorry, think I'm not clearly expressing myself????.

 

There are many but definitely the minority that have religious believes but are open to other possibilities. Few have a religious believe and are not compelled to defend it.  

 

The OP oddly finds it hard to understand why others don't think like him.  There are many well rounded and  intelligent people that do believe in a God.  I'm OK with their believes even though I haven't found "a" God myself.

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Sorry, think I'm not clearly expressing myself????.

 

There are many but definitely the minority that have religious believes but are open to other possibilities. Few have a religious believe and are not compelled to defend it.  

 

The OP oddly finds it hard to understand why others don't think like him.  There are many well rounded and  intelligent people that do believe in a God.  I'm OK with their believes even though I haven't found "a" God myself.

Thanks, that's rather clear.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Buddhism was a philosophy, and it has become a religion ????

I'm talking obviously about the masses,  and not about the individual. 

Perhaps the same happened with Christianity,  as i never heard of Jesus building churches. 

Jesus was a Jew, so he would have built synagogues.

[mauGR1]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Jesus was a Jew, so he would have built synagogues.

Ok, but he didn't. 

Actually he went to the temple and scolded the priests for making religion a business. 

He was crucified not long after doing that. 

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Ok, but he didn't. 

Actually he went to the temple and scolded the priests for making religion a business. 

He was crucified not long after doing that. 

Indeed he did.

 

A brave man that knew what would happen to him and carried on anyway. Even soldiers at war have hope they won't die, but he knew he would die horribly.

[mauGR1]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Indeed he did.

 

A brave man that knew what would happen to him and carried on anyway. Even soldiers at war have hope they won't die, but he knew he would die horribly.

Agree, he knew very well what was going to happen, and he was scared, but carried on nonetheless. 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree, he knew very well what was going to happen, and he was scared, but carried on nonetheless. 

The best representation of The Christ's scourging and crucifixion was in the movie Mel Gibson made. Utterly horrible.

Edited August 18, 2021 by thaibeachlovers

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The best representation of The Christ's scourging and crucifixion was in the movie Mel Gibson made. Utterly horrible.

Thanks God i didn't watch it, but Jesus Christ superstar was not bad.

The actress who played Magdalene sang a beautiful song, "everything's alright ".

[Sparktrader]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

Ok, but he didn't. 

Actually he went to the temple and scolded the priests for making religion a business. 

He was crucified not long after doing that. 

He was an ordinary man. 

[Sunmaster]

35 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

He was an ordinary man. 

How would you know what he was or wasn't?
 

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by Sunmaster

[Sparktrader]

6 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

How would you know what he was or wasn't?
 

 

Because I dont believe in sky fairies.  There is no credible proof he was the son of "god". Just a few bs stories.

 

Common sense really.

[Sunmaster]

Just now, Sparktrader said:

Because I dont believe in sky fairies.  There is no credible proof he was the son of "god". Just a few bs stories.

 

Common sense really.

We're all the sons of God, whether you believe it or not.