Have you ever believed in god?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=104969
Printed Date: March 04 2025 at 16:09
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Have you ever believed in god?
Posted By: condor
Subject: Have you ever believed in god?
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 14:43
|
A god, that is, that answers prayers: a personal god And I mean a belief that is genuine, not one out of personal desperation but reasoned thought..?
|
Replies:
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 15:49
|
god or gods or force witch re diety like or imaginational beings for aesthetics purpose, Yes to the latter. -------------  
|
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 16:30
| No. Never. |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 16:40
|
A lot of attention to religion here lately! I'm raised as a christian and always stayed. It's a pity to see so few religious people here. ------------- |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 17:04
|
yes. ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: addictedtoprog
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 18:05
| Yes, always did...wud always do. |
Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 18:59
God is both personal and impersonal, manifest and unmanifest. Reasoned thought is good but it’s only theory. Theory alone will not get you there, you need practice. Practice what? Practice to still the mind and go beyond thought. I think therefore I am, says the little ego. You are neither the ego nor your
thoughts. You are the observer. You are Love and Joy; God is Love and Joy. The entrance is stillness of mind. “ Be still
and know that I am God.”
|
Posted By: GKR
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 19:09
|
Nope, never. Since child, I read about the egyptians and love the Asterix comics. And I always thought: If people in different times worshipped different gods, why this Jeovah is so especial? ------------- - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. |
Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 20:01
|
Did, then I grew up. I do believe that if god existed he'd be the most cruel, vile, evil, and loathsome being to ever exist and completely unworthy of worship. -------------  Time always wins. |
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 20:24
|
For a couple of weeks once ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: addictedtoprog
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 20:45
|
Posted By: Ozark Soundscape
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 20:47
|
I believed in Christianity until I was about eleven but I didn't really have a proper understanding of what it meant. |
Posted By: Polymorphia
Date Posted: November 26 2015 at 21:03
|
Yeah, still do. The Christian one specifically. ------------- https://dreamwindow.bandcamp.com/releases" rel="nofollow - My Music 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 00:26
|
I did believe in God when I was a child. My mother was a Catholic and I was christened, but I didn't have a strict religious upbringing. My mother gently encouraged belief. My father (not Catholic) never spoke of it at all. I stopped believing at around age 7, but I can't remember what triggered that. I've been atheist since. I don't really have any time for religion and fail to see its point, but I'm not a "militant atheist" seeking to actually shut it down. I just think it should be ignored, or humoured like some mad aging relative..  ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: emigre80
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 00:30
Why do you think it's a pity? do you think the site would be improved if more people were religious? It's not a hostile question, I'm just curious as to why you think having more religious people on PA would change anything.
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 03:25
|
I was fed the usual religious BS by my grand parents (my father being atheist, my mother mostly agnostic) and by my catholic primary school (though I remember it being fairly modern education for the times), but by the time I was six or seven or eight (after the "first communion" >> done mostly to receive gifts), I decided it was stupid... I refused to do the second communion/confirmation. Soooo, nope, never really believed once I started thinking for myself |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 03:33
|
I was raised in absolute freedom to choose my own faith and I am a Christian since my twenties. But I am not religious, and as far as I am, I hope to be delivered from that one day. ------------- 
|
Posted By: VOTOMS
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 04:46
| http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/free-bible-study/video-why-study-the-bible/" rel="nofollow - http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/free-bible-study/video-why-study-the-bible/ |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 06:00
Don't conclude too fast there mate! ;p In general there are fewer and fewer christians and you can probably imagine one rather has the same thoughts/beliefs with some people than being the only one. Also I am definitely not intending that christians are per se better people which would make the world better than non-christians. So I think it's a pity that most people on PA think different. (on a forum that's kind of what you're looking for, right?) And well it wouldn't change this place enormously but maybe you'd feel a bit more welcome here as a christian. (By no means any blame to anyone) ------------- |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 06:20
not sure why... but that rubs me the wrong way. Sounds like you are another member of the mom and dads basement brigade Get out and live. Have your savings wiped out by medical emergencies, lose a child, experience what life really is about. Personal desperation and how you as a person deal with it. There is no better salve for the soul when life has stuck a 2x4 up your ass than faith. It keeps one going and helps provide comfort through the worst of times. It isn't a sign of mental midgity or weakness. I do damn sure believe in God, with everything I've seen and experienced. How could I not  ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 07:01
|
Though I grew up as a Catholic (in Rome, as many of you know), I lost my faith quite early, in my mid-teens. Due to various circumstances, it took me quite a long time to recognize it, but by the time I had turned 22 or so, I stopped attending church and calling myself religious. Now I consider myself agnostic, though leaning more and more towards atheism. However, I don't feel the need to belittle anyone who has faith, or loudly state that religion is the root is all evil. I have a lot of respect for personal faith (as opposed to organized religion rammed down people's throats, and/or encroaching on public life), and if that means it's a crutch, so be it. After all, people use all sorts of crutches to go through life, and I don't see how faith is any worse than alcohol, drugs, gambling and their ilk. As to the world being a better place if religion was abolished, I think it's as much of an illusion as believing the world would be better if women were in charge (and I say that as a woman). Personally, I find the worship of money, power and "success" worse than the worship of an "imaginary" being, but that's just me. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 07:05
|
damn right darling... well said. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 08:44
|
No, I have never believed in God. I have always been an agnostic. But I am very tolerant of other people's religious beliefs-some of my best friends are devout Christians. I tend to not like to argue about religion; my late father was an atheist, and when he was on his deathbed, my stepmother grinned and said to me, "Well, you know, your father isn't going to heaven, he is an atheist." What a thing to say at such a time! I would never try to belittle a person's faith, even if I don't have a personal faith in god. Nor would I condemn an atheist or agnostic for his or her lack of such. And I would never try to push or impose my beliefs on others; to differ is human, after all. |
Posted By: emigre80
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 08:56
I didn't know Christians felt less welcome here. I don't believe in god myself but I have no objection to anyone else believing in him/her. Have you encountered any hostility?
|
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 09:09
|
Not really hostility per se, and maybe less welcome is a big word, it's in little things. Topics like songs for theists not taken seriously, that sort of things. ------------- |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 09:14
|
there is a substantial anti-faith quotient here... and yeah.. you get those like the OP that blatantly imply that faith is for the weak minded. Not that it is hostility but still.. always nice to think that others here might see you as some kind of deluded fool for having personal beliefs. Personally I keep my faith to myself and wish others would keep their lack of it, or disdain for it, to themselves. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 09:42
I really don't think so...  First, we're here for music  , not for proselyte reasons ... so this subject is hardly a focus of the site... Except in one or two sub-forum (like this one of recently the general polls), religion is a minor issue... And even then, set aside the recent (last two or three months) flurry of such threads, I would say it's a fairly very very very minor subject on PA in general  - if you'll except the long running threads in the GD forum. If religious people would not bring up the subject, my guess is that this would rarely be a topic of choice for many (if not any) of us....  But some (often the same dudes/members) keep bringing it up  ... So it's no surprise that some of these opened threads become target for ridicule or frustrations or even irritation... Should zealots not bring it up, they wouldn't feel "less welcomed". It is the very  persistence of that topic's constant bringing to attention that gets (maybe) its unwelcomed attention A few solutions: 1. you either don't bring the subject up by opening the umpteenth thread about it (and everything is cool and calm)  or 2. bring those stupid (IMHO) short subjects/questions confined to the long-standing thread in the GD subforum (and everything is cool and calm) 3. you avoid claiming that it's your right to open up as many threads on the subject and then claim to be a victim because you get un-serious responses. 4. in many forums, politics and religion subjects are often banned, because those two subjects always bring big fights between members who take quick offence at the other's views, because it conflicts with your own views... That's because religion doesn't like contradictions and other different opinions (whereas politics is about contradictions and different PoV) Generally when religion arises in a subject (generally in a thread title), then I will check it out (and often, but not always, answer), but I certainly won't go out of my way to bring the religion or esoteric dimension in any other musical or non-musical topics. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 10:43
|
I have believed in God in the past. Now I just don´t know. I don´t believe God exists, but I don´t pretend to be able to affirm it with 100% certainty. I leave that to the geniuses who have all the answers already, some really young but who have already figured the entire universe out. ------------- 
|
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 16:59
Well said. I'm agnostic for a long time now , but there were times in the past where I used Eastern spiritual ideologies and was raised to believe in God (Presbyterian) , so I keep the options open as I go through life. I simply don't know . ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 20:01
I'm with you bro ------------- 
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 20:03
That's exactly my case I was raised as catholic, became an agnostic around 16 and onñly returned to Catholicism after studying theology in the university. But I have absolute respect for every belief or disbelief, as long as they are respectful. -------------
|
Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 20:48
|
I'm cool with anyone having whatever faith gets them through the day, I'm strongly opposed to the institutes of religion which have proved themselves primarily interested in the instruments of power through the centuries. ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: Follix
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 22:27
|
Ever? Yes when I was like 10 yo... |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 22:30
|
When I was younger sure. I believed in the standard god that most of us have if raised Christian. Around 13 I stopped believing that type stuff but got into Deism and carried that for a few years, though by the end of High School honestly I didn't really believe in that anymore. |
Posted By: *frinspar*
Date Posted: November 27 2015 at 22:34
|
Hey, OP. Do you actually read these threads after you drop them like the grenades you believe them to be? Do you even care what people respond with? Could I type "gablarbingterlude" as an answer and that would satisfy you? You just don't seem very much engaged in follow up on these things. What's your purpose behind demanding I share something personal and/or meaningful with you? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 06:39
 ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 06:50
interesting point. who gives a f**k about the OP man. I don't like what he implies but f**k him . However what counts are the functioning forumites here. The community itself. Most of the people that post here have the personalities of a rock. Some have been here for years and I couldn't tell you a single thing about them based on what they share. Do they have too? Of course not. However many real life friendships have blossumed here and first step is finding those that interest you, and those interested in you and it goes from there. Not only did I find the love of my life here by putting myself out there, the good and the bad, but a great number of very real friends. Some I've got to meet and continue to see in real life, and some I'd give my left arm to meet in person and spend some time with.Why should you share, not because the OP, but for the rest of us and perhaps for yourself. One of the numerous reasons why this site was so great all those years ago. We not only worked together but we came to know each other, and came to care for each other. The site, and those that posted here had personality and expressed it. Now adays.. very much less so. Perhaps it is just me but I see people new to this site since I left it and returned and I don't think I could tell you a single thing about them based on their posts. Definitely not necessary, no one is forced to have or express a personality online haha.. but it is one of the main reasons this site is not what it once was. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 06:51
|
When I was back there in seminary school, there was a person there who put forth the proposition that you can petition the Lord with prayer. Petition the Lord with prayer. Petition the Lord with prayer. You cannot petition the Lord with Prayer! Ummm....sorry, Jim Morrison moment. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 07:06
|
I've found that prayer is a funny thing. Praying for myself never worked.... otherwise I'd be hung like John Holmes and look like Brad Pitt and be rich like Bill Gates and would have never said yes when my ex asked me to marry her. praying for others though. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Then again I'm not asking for them to get what I wanted I always thought God filed personal requests in the sh*t can, but was more open to ... well.. what prayer should be about.. what God wants us to do. Thinking of others not ourselves. Selfishness is one of the roots of all evil.------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: emigre80
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 08:53
|
I don't care for fundamentalism of any kind, whether religious or political. As soon as someone starts telling me what their god wants me to do (or rather insists on what I should do), I turn off, particularly when I perceive that what they are asserting has nothing to do with the basic tenets of their purported beliefs. I have no issue otherwise with other people believing what they believe. People start blowing other people up in the name of their religious or political beliefs, then I have issues.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 09:49
amen to that sista.. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 13:43
|
When I was a young'un, I believed in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy, so yeah, once upon a time........... The way sh*t is in the World these days makes me wonder if this God entity isn't pure evil............. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 13:50
|
nah.. the fallacy IMO that those of faith have is that God could or should prevent such things. Pffff... yin and yang man.. there is no renewal and rebirth without death and destruction. It is the cycle of life. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 13:53
| H to He, Who Am The Only One............ |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 28 2015 at 13:58
|
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: November 29 2015 at 05:03
I met a Goddess yesterday, in the form of Barbara Eden  True, at the Super Nova convention. She is still a Jeannie to me...........
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: November 29 2015 at 05:44
|
I used to, but weren't religious enough to go to church. I'm in a strange situation regarding my upbringing in that my father is actively anti-religious, but my mom is a (very heterodox) Lutheran. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: AreYouHuman
Date Posted: December 03 2015 at 19:42
 micky wrote:Why should you share, not because the OP, but for the rest of us and perhaps for yourself. One of the numerous reasons why this site was so great all those years ago. We not only worked together but we came to know each other, and came to care for each other. The site, and those that posted here had personality and expressed it. Nowadays…very much less so. Perhaps it is just me but I see people new to this site since I left it and returned and I don't think I could tell you a single thing about them based on their posts. Definitely not necessary, no one is forced to have or express a personality online haha.. but it is one of the main reasons this site is not what it once was. I’m still relatively new to this site, and anyone who’s seen my posts knows that I’m not too forthcoming about personal details. That’s entirely my choice, as I’m sure it is for many others, and (for the time being at least) I’m comfortable with that. It seems to me everyone’s expected to share and overshare with the entire web, but everyone’s going to seek his or her own comfort level.As to the original question: I’ve never completely disbelieved, so if you absolutely positively had to pin a label on me, it’d be agnostic.------------- Caption: We tend to take ourselves a little too seriously. Silly human race! Yes is for everybody! |
Posted By: proglover123
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 11:35
| I only believe in 1 god.... DAVID GILMOUR!!!!!!! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 11:57
Well, I have to say you've set your expectations rather low. Although I can see you at the final judgement getting your sentence from a giant buttocks in a white wig:  ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 12:15
| Quit paddling the boat |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 12:18
amen brother ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 13:05
| I have almost always called myself an agnostic, since I don't think that I can really know. That said, I relate much more to atheism than theism. I've been studying the Koran a lot of late.... |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 13:07
|
now that is a fascinating avenue of study Greg. I took a college class about Islam many many (but not Terri levels of many) years ago. Fascinating religion. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 13:10
|
i'm a gnostic agnostic. |
Posted By: Nightfly
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 13:14
|
Posted By: Ozark Soundscape
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 13:42
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 14:01
The closest I came to religious formal studies would be in my Philosophy classes, and Sociology and Anthropology to an extent. It is fascinating, but the more I have self-studied religion, the more concerned I have become. If I were to give a discourse about religion, it would not be deemed politically correct, and as much as I despise political correctness, I would be loathe to share my views here. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 14:08
|
my problem is not with religion..but those who claim to practice it. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 14:55
I have a problem with those who claim to practice it as well as those who created it. |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 15:51
One can't, but you shouldn't have to. Though pure faith (no facts, no proof) is fairly impossible. I've always been a christian btw. ------------- |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 16:08
|
The problem with religion is not God, per se, but rather the people who follow it. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 16:53
One can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. Using the principle of Occam's Razor, which requires less assumptions, that there is a God or that there is not one? Some would say that the simplest solution is that we were created by a God, but for me to take such a leap of faith would require some evidence, and would require many assumptions. And what is evident to you may not be evident to me. And of course there's always the problem of first cause: if we needed a God to create us, what was needed to create God? Always was and always will be some would say, or exists in another dimension where time and space and our laws of physics do not apply? Anyway, I'm being silly. What kind of a Christian are you? I'm more comfortable in an Anglican church than say a Pentecostal one, and have found Anglicans less dogmatic than most born again Chrisians I know (most of which seem uncomfortable when one one even questions the faith -- my wife was a Roman Catholic turned born again). Are you a literalist? Much of the Christian philosophy does appeal to me. I find the teachings attributed to, and the way of, Jesus in the New Testament much more palatable than those related to Mohammed, for instance. Very different characters -- the Koran sees Jesus differently than in Christianity, incidentally. You have always been a Christian, born elsewhere you might have always been a Hindu... Maybe then you'd believe in gods....
Yes, and how people perceive God can be a problem. One can believe in God while eschewing religion. "Are you religious, and if so what does it mean to you?" would be another interesting thread. Religion is created, developed and fostered by people. I see a problem with not only certain people who follow it, but also with people who developed religions. I have a problem with people who claim to know God's will, and especially when they inculcate people with these beliefs and try to force their world view on others (sometimes in violent ways). I have a problem with those who claim to be God's chosen people, and the unbelievers, as with some, are less than human and/or are enemies. Of course some religions or sects of religions espouse values that are much more in keeping with my values, and I don't claim that my sectarian values must be universal. It's one thing to believe in God, it's another to feel that you and your ilk are the only ones to hold the truth and know his will, and all others be damned. When religion gets in the way of rationality, yes, I can have a problem. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 17:14
Haven't read the whole thread, but there is a Christian thread you might want to check out if you haven't seen it already. I posted there a few times as I am an occasional church goer. http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485 There are actually quite a few threads related to Christians: Christian music, Christian Vander music ;) etc. |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 17:22
|
@Logan: Well it's something like protest reformd, if that says anything to you (I don't really know the currents). A bit of an old church (and people), but I personally prefer it to a church where everyone throw their hands in the air and scream hallelujah- just to illustrate. I try to be very open minded but I need some kind of proof for myself and do not like too strict rules. Fortunately my parents raised me with faith and at a certain age you become curious and critical and want to know if it's real. With such an attitude I tried to behave like I thought a christian should and felt that it couldn't be different. I just knew that God existed. I can't explain you how and shouldn't because it's all personal, you have to experience itself. I'm quite interested in philosophy and some now and then read a little about it but I can't call myself a literalist. My view is that you don't need knowledge about the bible or philosophy. Sometimes you want a question to be answered, but you must form your own answers to questions of life IMO; literature is then helpful and can be very interesting. ------------- |
Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 17:25
|
^And thanks, hadn't seen the thread before. ------------- |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: April 17 2016 at 17:33
Yes, I agree with you in large part, Greg #1. As far as religion beings created, developed and fostered by people, I would suggest that nearly all religious mandates throughout history were due to forced hierarchical and patriarchal control and coercion. Review the Ten Commandments, for instance. All ten deal with 1. property ownership (numbers 7 through 10), 2. control of family issue and wealth (numbers 5,8 and 10), 3. assuring no violence or crime occurs against the propertied class (numbers 6 through 10), and 4. keeping the clerical class perpetually in business (numbers 1 though 4, all prominent and first on the list). So, it's basically don't steal my stuff, don't kill me for my stuff, don't even look at my stuff (including the wife, who was property back then), and also don't kill me for your inheritance because I'm Dad, and I'm giving it all to your worthless brother. Oh yes, and keep the donations to the temple flowing, because the priests are the ones keeping up the whole facade. The same idea was perpetuated throughout the Middle Ages, with the 3 orders: the nobility, the clerical caste, and the last, the serfs, merchants and villeins - literally everyone else - who must pay for the first two. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 06 2016 at 12:46
|
Wasn't sure if this deserved a new thread so I posted it here..... http://ageac.org/en/multimedia/scientist-says-he-found-definitive-proof-that-god-exists-2/ "The theoretical physicist Michio Kaku claims to have developed a theory that might point to the existence of God. The information has created a great stir in the scientific community because Kaku is considered one of the most important scientists of our times, one of the creators and developers of the revolutionary String Theory which is highly respected throughout the world." ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: Son.of.Tiresias
Date Posted: June 06 2016 at 13:15
|
"Jesus Is Alright" by The Doobie Brothers, 1972 ------------- You may see a smile on Tony Banks´ face but that´s unlikely. |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: June 06 2016 at 13:35
|
before one can state belief or disbelief in God one first has to define God. it is by no means certain that two people mean the same thing when referring to God. to make my point clear: to believe in tigers one first has to define what a tiger is (a large animal of the cat family with black and yellow stripes), else the statements "I believe in tigers" or "I don't believe in tigers" are totally meaningless -------------  A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 09:25
Well.....you can e-mail Dr Kaku, I'm sure he would love to discuss semantics with you. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:02
Do you mean that God may be... a tiger? It would explain a lot of things, for sure. ... Er, no, it wouldn't explain anything. But let's discuss this idea anyway. |
Posted By: ALotOfBottle
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:11
|
I was born and raised atheist, which is a rarity around the central woods of Europe (well, only in Poland it's a rarity). About 90% of citizens are baptised - I am not. And I never plan to! ------------- Categories strain, crack and sometimes break, under their burden - step out of the space provided. |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:21
And most who are theists were born and raised that way....it's a family thing until one gets older and makes a choice. Have you investigated why you believe that atheism is right for you? I'm agnostic because imho it's the only tenable position to have. ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:31
| I do not need to define God to believe |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:32
my position is complicated, but I am not agnostic. I do however not believe in God as he (if I may use this questionable pronoun) is depicted by the major religions. but I do believe there is some kind of supreme consciousness. what's more, I believe that the existence of such a supreme consciousness follows from the existence of human consciousness ------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: ALotOfBottle
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 10:48
Yes, my parents' point was to make me investigate and make my own choice. And so I have. I firmly believe that all answers one should ever need are within the human mind. I find atheism the most logical of all. I'd rather not get into detailed discussion, not because I don't want to or feel like I don't have arguments, but rather because I feel a discussion about such things through the internet (and especially a forum) is well... aimless. Everybody has their own beliefs and as long as you are a positive and kind human being, I don't care what or who you believe in. ------------- Categories strain, crack and sometimes break, under their burden - step out of the space provided. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 11:11
 I'm trying to think of a world religion that does actually define what god is and currently drawing a blank. Everyone is presumed to just "know" what it is they are expected to worship and why. That's the great confidence trick of religion - if you don't know then you're not part of the gang so those who don't know pretend to know on the understanding that enlightenment will come to those with sufficient faith. Failure to be "in the know" is a failure in the personal faith, not in the religion itself or its god. So within a single religion there are multiple definitions of godhead that are not universally shared by every member of that religion. I suppose if you had a religion with a 'congregation' of one then you could arrive a definition that each member would agree on but as the numbers increase with each addition adding its own interpretation of that definition then it becomes harder to actually say there is a mutually agreed definition that all would adhere to. I suspect that a religion with a world population of two could feasibly have a definition of god that was mutually acceptable (though maybe wholly acceptable) to both of them, but it would be highly unlikely that anyone outside that religion would agree with them.Religions define their deities by their past deeds, by their expectations of their followers and by some non-guaranteed promises of a reward that can be achieved by worshipping them - not (necessarily or solely) by what they are or what they look like. Therefore in your analogy a tiger would not be defined by its physical appearance but by its status as a predatory carnivore of the genus panthera that can roar - which would make it indistinguishable from a lion, leopard, jaguar or panther (but not a puma or cougar, which is taxonomically a different genus) - No one needs to recognise that definition as fitting any of those creatures to "believe" your definition of a tiger. In fact you don't need to define a tiger at all for anyone to believe (or not) that such a creature exists (or not). All you need to say is there is a large predatory cat in Asia called a tiger and you will either be believed or you won't - of course some may be sceptical without physical proof, but that's an altogether a different philosophical argument. If on the other hand you said a tiger has six limbs, two of which were wings so it could fly, that it could breath fire and dined exclusively on virgin maidens then the number of people who would choose to believe you would be significantly less... perhaps. Therefore you don't have to define what a god is in order to believe or not believe, however it should be a prerequisite to have some understanding of (more or less) what it is you are worshipping in order to believe. ------------- What? |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 11:11
see, this is why I insist you should define God first before saying you believe or don't believe. my belief has nothing whatever to do with the answers one needs being in God, so I agree with you they should be in the human mind. my position is this: everything in the world is a process, an elemental particle as well as the human consciousness. speaking of the latter: no-one has any idea where it comes from. I do, however, observe that the more complicated and self-reflective a process is the more consciousness it has. now the most complex process in the world is the universe itself, and thus I believe it does have a consciousness. does this consciousness care for us humans? doubtful; it is even possible it does not know of our existence at all or if it does it is not directly aware of us (just like a human being is not directly aware of for example his or her blood cells). does it have any of the moral qualities that are usually ascribed to God, like just and forgiving? again most probably not ------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: ALotOfBottle
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 12:51
Good thinking. As to your example with blood cells, what I meant was that for example I am not directly aware of my blood cells, but no human being was guided by god to discover blood cells. It's all thanks to our minds, imperfect, yet beautifully twisted human minds. ------------- Categories strain, crack and sometimes break, under their burden - step out of the space provided. |
Posted By: DeadSouls
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 15:27
| Yes, i did (when i was a kid). I'm agnostic. |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 07 2016 at 16:26
You seem to have misread Jean's post, Dean. She is not saying that any world religion defines what God is. Which is exactly her point: Everyone has a different concept of God, even atheists. It does not make sense to say "I don't believe in God" if you don't have a concept what "God" is supposed to be, just as it makes no sense to say "I don't believe in tigers" if you don't have a concept what a tiger is supposed to be, which is why she made that example. -------------  BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 00:35
I read Jean's post just fine thanks, and I'll not counter-suggest that you've misread mine because I'm sure you understood it perfectly but chose to interject just because it contradicts what she (and now you) are saying. All the evidence¹ suggests that she (and now you) are wrong and you do not have to define what gods are in order to believe in them or not. The tiger example illustrates this because in Jean's definition a big cat with white and black stripes would not be recognised as a tiger whereas it would be if she had just said that there is an large predatory cat in Asia called a tiger without defining what it looked like. I suspect that religious leaders long ago realised that the more you define a god the less chance you have of being believed, after http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_religion" rel="nofollow - 300,000 years of "religion" there should be no ambiguity or doubt yet it has increased to the point were agnosticism is the preferred religion of many. However you have chosen to use the word "concept" rather than "definition" and they are not synonymous; and I note that Jean changed from saying "has to define" in the post I answered to saying "should define" in her post that followed mine, and again those two phrases don't mean the same thing. By saying that there is a large predatory cat in Asia I have a concept of what that is without having a definition of what it is. Similarly I don't have to define what that is, however because I have a concept of what a large predatory cat is then possibly I could define what that is but that does not mean that I should (or would) because it is likely that I do not have enough information to produce a meaningful definition. If you have a definition of what god is then no further explanation is required, however if you have a concept of god then you can explain further by defining what that concept is. Semantic pedantry perhaps but if you accuse me of misreading then you have to be aware of the precision with which words can be used. Now - an atheist does not need a definition of something they don't believe exists, and nor could they have just one - they can reject the basic notion or concept of gods or they can consider all the disparate concepts of gods and goddesses, and either reject each in turn or en masse (as opposed to a believer who could consider all the disparate concepts and rejects each of them except one, but is more likely to have believed the first one they heard and simply dismiss the rest). ¹ We need to be careful of the use of the word "evidence" here - the evidence is that none of the worlds religions have a definition of god yet three-quarters of the world population believes in some form of god, gods or goddesses. Of course this is not evidence that gods exist, just evidence that religion exists.
------------- What? |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 01:13
|
sigh. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/" rel="nofollow -
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/definition" rel="nofollow - See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
1.
the act of http://www.dictionary.com/browse/define" rel="nofollow - defining , or of making something definite, distinct, or clear:
We need a better definition of her responsibilities.
2.
the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, idiom, etc., as found in dictionaries. An online dictionary resource, such as http://www.dictionary.com/" rel="nofollow - Dictionary.com, can give users direct, immediate access to the definitions of a term, allowing them to compare definitions from various dictionaries and stay up to date with an ever-expanding vocabulary.
3.
the condition of being definite, distinct, or clearly outlined:
His biceps have great muscle definition.
4.
Optics. sharpness of the image formed by an optical system.
5.
Radio and Television. the accuracy of sound or picture reproduction.
source-luna" rel="nofollow - source-luna" rel="nofollow -
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 03:21
Really? Okay...*sigh*
<<insert equally pointless cut and paste here>>
You never spoke of "concept", Friede did, so only she can say she was referring to (1) when she spoke of the concept and not the actual meaning (2) because neither you nor I can draw that inference from the use of the word alone. As their completely different definitions show, the two words are not synonymous. Would you now like to quote the dictionary definitions for "have to" and "should" to show that the first is an imperative that one must follow while the second is merely an obligation that one can neglect? When I ride a motorcycle in the UK I have to wear a crash helmet because that is the law, I should also wear other protective clothing but I don't have to because there is no law that enforces me to do that. So yes, people should define what they mean by god but that does not follow that they have to or even need to.
Never assume or presume anything. If you had read and remembered a fraction of what I have written on this forum on religious topics then you would not arrive at that conclusion. [I suspect that possibly you are Friede using Jean's account to answer this post as this has happened before but I don't actually know this is the case, it is just a possibility] Also, since I have ten years on either you or Friede it is entirely possible that I have been aware of such things as the concept of Gaia and the Gaia Hypothesis for more years than you have but I would never suspect that was actually true as it is perfectly possible for you to have known this in 1975 or maybe a little earlier as I'm not completely certain of when I first read of it. I am sufficiently comfortable with the science of a self-stabilising, self-regulating, seemingly self-sustaining, seemingly closed-loop ecosystem for me not to dismiss the basic premiss. I say seemingly here because it requires a constant external power source to function and when that power source is exhausted in ~5.4 billion years time it will destroy the ecosystem it currently feeds as this is a (reasonably) predictable "life-cycle" deduced from observation (each star does not have an unlimited supply of hydrogen) so extrapolating the hypothesis to encapsulate the entire Universe is not that much of a leap. However, there is nothing to say that any of this requires a supreme consciousness to instigate or maintain it, or that it is in some way forms part of a supreme [Universe] consciousness (for example, that it is self-aware) or that it maybe unaware of, or aware of but indifferent to, the human consciousnesses that live within it. We are not aware of our blood cells but we know what they are, that they are there and what they do - we know for example that humans cannot exist without blood cells, but it does not follow that the Universe does not exist without humans (though some idle philosophers would perhaps argue otherwise). However the concept that gods would not exist without humans to create them is something I can see the logic in.
Ah, no. I can easily reject It is far harder to accept something that has no definition which is why, as you said in your post that Friede accused me of misreading that "it is by no means certain that two people mean the same thing when referring to God" - each believer has their own personal definition of the concept of god they believe in, that they don't all mean the same thing is irrelevant, the definitions differ but there is a degree of commonality in basic concept (a supreme being/consciousness god/gods exists). What we are doing here is assessing probability that a concept is viable and thus believable within the personal definition that each person has. People are perfectly content with rejecting mythological supreme beings that do not fit within their own concept of what a supreme being is without requiring a definition of what those other supreme beings are. Everyone who believes in a concept will reject all other concepts, and the believers of each of those rejected concepts will reject every other concept except their own so it is conceivable that every concept has more people rejecting it than accepting it - all an non-believer does is assess the probability that all those rejected concepts are equally unviable and thus not believable. ------------- What? |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 12:20
|
Dean said: "I suspect that religious leaders long ago realised that the more you define a god the less chance you have of being believed, after http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_religion" rel="nofollow - there should be no ambiguity or doubt yet it has increased to the point were agnosticism is the preferred religion of many." How exactly is being agnostic a 'religion'......? (or atheism either, for that matter...?) ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 12:55
I suspect that most who refer to themselves as agnostic would be agnostic christians, agnostic jews, agnostic muslims, etc., rather than just simply 'agnostic' and when asked to state their religion on an offical form would most likely tick 'christian', 'judaism' or 'muslim' rather than 'none'. But other than that, yeah, I f**ked up - agnosticism that is not aligned to a specific religion is a doctrine not a religion (and atheism is neither). ------------- What? |
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 13:01
Thanks for the clarification.......btw I'm an agnostic (I was raised as Presbyterian) who always tick's none on the forms.  ------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: June 08 2016 at 13:48
|
Despite being raised Catholic I've come to realize I never had any real belief of my own. I remember getting my first reconciliation and going "so that's it?" As I got older I was less and less accepting and became more critical. I would consider myself an agnostic atheist now. Atheism may not be a religion but the new atheism movement might as well be the religion of the alt-right. |