0
   

My difficulty with karma and reincarnation

 
 
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 02:01 am
@Alan McDougall,
God is the best security blanket, you hold onto your atheism and I will retain my belief in a Divine Creator who is both concerned and interested in his/her/its creation
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 04:42 am
@Alan McDougall,
The doctrine of karma is not, or need not be, theistic. If there is a God who judges sinners then the doctrine would be redundant. Nor does it rely on a 'soul'. Rather, it depends on no God and no soul. The laws of Karma would be a subset of the laws of nature. It gives existence meaning without any need for an old man in a white beard playing God.

The doctrine may be believed on faith, but it is said to originate in first-person experience, i.e. empiricism. There is no overwhelming scientific argument against it, and certainly population increase is not one, as someone suggested. Population decrease would support a better argument.
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 06:57 am
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;101400 wrote:
God is the best security blanket, you hold onto your atheism and I will retain my belief in a Divine Creator who is both concerned and interested in his/her/its creation


Atheism isn't a belief. So what exactly is being held onto if the stand point is a lack of evidence? So if you don't believe in the existence of gremlins you are holding onto it as well? If it truly is holding on then there are billions of things that are non existent that are being held onto.

The god concept is so convoluted. No one can agree on any of the characteristics. They say god has a plan, but if there were a plan then punishment would add insult to injury. If god made me a rebel and at the end of my life punished me for being a rebel then it is not my fault I am a rebel so why punish me for it?

If there is no plan and there is no intervention into any affairs of our lives. Then praying does absolutely nothing. If there is a plan then wouldn't praying for a change effect that plan? So it wouldn't really be a plan then if he can be petitioned. I find it insulting when I hear someone say they prayed for some money and got in the mail the next day. When there are thousands of starving children in the world. So if god really listened to you but ignored them, I wouldn't want anything to do with such a being.

A simple question that no one has ever answered but not because it is difficult to, instead because the question provokes a thought people who believe ignore. What was god doing before he created the universe? For all those eons of time, what was he doing? Nothing? Playing with himself? Or did he pop into existence a split second before he made the universe?

Just this question alone points out that humans created god and not the other way around. Why? Because a god needed humans? He was bored with his existence he wanted to create something he could lord over? Watch suffer? Place impossible expectations onto? Play mind games?

It is quite obvious that we invented god, not the other way around.
0 Replies
 
William
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 07:23 am
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;101207 wrote:
Hi I dont need to go to any human source to find out if reincarnation is true or not. The Divine Christ Jesus said it was not true and that is good enough for me


If you don't mind Alan, what did he say concerning being reborn, or born again? Thanks.

William
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 01:04 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Krumple wrote:

Atheism isn't a belief. So what exactly is being held onto if the stand point is a lack of evidence? So if you don't believe in the existence of gremlins you are holding onto it as well? Silly Alan, even for you. If it truly is holding on then there are billions of things that are non existent that are being held onto.


Atheism can be a belief: weak atheists don't believe there is a god, strong atheists believe there is no god. In other words, weak atheists just don't believe there is a god - they are not denouncing the possibility that god exists. However, strong atheists do hold the belief that god does not exist - they are denouncing the possibility that god exists.

Some things we just don't believe, and some things we believe do not exist. There's a difference. For instance, I don't believe my mother is in the kitchen, but I admit she very well may be. However, I believe unicorns don't exist, and neither do gremlins.
0 Replies
 
William
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 04:14 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Krumple;101421 wrote:
Atheism isn't a belief.


Okay, I'll concede for the time being. If you don't mind, if it is not a belief, then just what is it?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
So what exactly is being held onto if the standpoint is a lack of evidence?


What evidence do you need? Do you assume that you know it all? Can you do that?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
So if you don't believe in the existence of gremlins you are holding onto it as well? Silly Alan, even for you.


For one thing, he didn't say that, you did! To assume Alan silly for something you added is insulting and rude. You have no idea of all that Alan is holding on to, and to assume you do is also rude. Alan thinks the way Alan thinks and it is not for us to condemn anything he thinks as you assume to know all the evidence there is to know. So, as politely as I know how, cool it!

Krumple;101421 wrote:
If it truly is holding on then there are billions of things that are non existent that are being held onto.


Name some..............for example, please? How do you know what is existent and that which is not. Here, again, you seem to think you know all there is to know. Perhaps you do know all you are meant to know. That's ok. Stay there, if you wish. Just don't assume all others to be the same as you.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
The god concept is so convoluted.


Sure it is. Do you know why? I would like to here what you think, please.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
No one can agree on any of the characteristics.


Again, why do you think that is? You make a statement and you assume it to be fact, please give "your" reasoning?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
They say god has a plan,......


You say "they". They is a broad subject and is no way specific. Please, just who is "they"? Those you don't agree with? Or what? What about those you do, do they know it all? And who are they........exactly?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
.....but if there were a plan then punishment would add insult to injury.


That depends on how you define punishment. Yes, we do punish others, what is it that makes you believe your definition is the same as god's?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
If god made me a rebel and at the end of my life punished me for being a rebel then it is not my fault I am a rebel so why punish me for it?


Are you so sure it was god, who made you that? God, didn't make you a rebel, you did. It is comfortable to lay the blame else where, is it not?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
If there is no plan and there is no intervention into any affairs of our lives.


You say that. How do you know what that intervention might be for you to assume such a thing?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
Then praying does absolutely nothing.


You say that. How do you know that, if you don't mind? It's perhaps only you or anyone else who thinks that because you have, perhaps, in the past, prayed and did not get what you prayed for. That does not mean all can say that. Take me for instance, My only prayer has been for god not to abandon me and you know what...........................he hasn't! And I am the better for it, thank god. A just thanks, indeed.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
If there is a plan then wouldn't praying for a change effect that plan?


Depends? We have no idea of what that "plan" is, now, do we? I can be concluded if one is lacking because of what others have taken from them, it, more than likely, will be restored to them if it was truly theirs in the first place. I don't claim to know that is true; it just makes sense, speaking of judgement and all, by our standards.


Krumple;101421 wrote:
So it wouldn't really be a plan then if he can be petitioned.


It is not a petition to ask for that you truly need. Unfortunately many don't appreciate what they do have as they are convinced by others, more is better. Many, who live in peace, are not so disjoined as to want what they do not have for they find a solace in that they do.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
I find it insulting when I hear someone say they prayed for some money and got in the mail the next day.


Considering what has befallen so many people who have suddenly been endowed with new found "money", it is definitely "not" an answered prayer, regardless of what "they" say.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
When there are thousands of starving children in the world. So if god really listened to you but ignored them, I wouldn't want anything to do with such a being.


People are starving in many ways; though money and the amassing of it does play a part, it is not the only thing. Greed and power have a lot to do with it and money definitely is a part of that which supports it. You can't blame that on god, that is all of man's doing, apart from that god.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
A simple question that no one has ever answered but not because it is difficult to, instead because the question provokes a thought people who believe ignore. What was god doing before he created the universe? For all those eons of time, what was he doing? Nothing? Playing with himself? Or did he pop into existence a split second before he made the universe?


Please, Krumple, what difference would it make if we did know that? That's why, specifically, we are not allow to remember our past. There is no future in it. All it does is allow us to bide our time because we have nothing else to do. How sad that is, don't you think? It does give us something to argue about though, doesn't it?

Krumple;101421 wrote:
Just this question alone points out that humans created god and not the other way around. Why? Because a god needed humans? He was bored with his existence he wanted to create something he could lord over? Watch suffer? Place impossible expectations onto? Play mind games?


No, I think not, yet you are right to an extent. It's not that we created god, it is our perception of god that is skewed. We assumed god created us in "his image", that is the matter. It is impossible to know all that god is. Yes, as far as we are concerned, now, we are a new creation; that doesn't mean we ever were "not" a part of that. Like I said, that is why we are not allowed to remember our past. We couldn't deal with all that we once were. What ever that was, it is not in our best interest now.

Krumple;101421 wrote:
It is quite obvious that we invented god, not the other way around.


Hopefully from what I have offered, you might think differently.

William
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2009 03:58 am
@Alan McDougall,
Krumple - I agree that God is often an incoherent concept, and all concepts are invented. The question remains, however, of whether there something which roughly corresponds to this concept. The Roman Church adopted a concept of the solar system that was wildly at odds with the facts, but it does not follow that the solar system does not exist.
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2009 04:47 am
@William,
William;101607 wrote:
Okay, I'll concede for the time being. If you don't mind, if it is not a belief, then just what is it?


A lack of belief in god. Absence of belief.

William;101607 wrote:

What evidence do you need? Do you assume that you know it all? Can you do that?


How about I put it like this. You carry with you a box, which has no lid and you have never seen inside it. Every where you go, people ask you, "What's in the box?" Your reply is, "The best thing in the universe, is in this box..." But that isn't good enough and besides, why are you saying it's the best thing in the universe yet you have never seen it? That's like someone saying they love spinach but have never eaten it.

William;101607 wrote:

For one thing, he didn't say that, you did! To assume Alan silly for something you added is insulting and rude.


Actually my comment was a compliment. I consider Alan to be very intelligent and asks some good questions. My point was not to insult him in any way, simply saying I'm surprised that he asked the question but ignored his own logic I have seen him express. That to me is silly.

William;101607 wrote:

You have no idea of all that Alan is holding on to, and to assume you do is also rude.


I was not talking about what he actually holds onto. My questions are ways of reasoning out the logic. I wasn't assuming anything.

William;101607 wrote:

Alan thinks the way Alan thinks and it is not for us to condemn anything he thinks as you assume to know all the evidence there is to know. So, as politely as I know how, cool it!


Oh so I can't make a statement but you can? Isn't this that you say here the same that I made? By the way, I never said I had any evidence, instead I am requesting evidence.

William;101607 wrote:

Name some..............for example, please? How do you know what is existent and that which is not.


Once again, It is not me making the statement, I am inserting the doctrine. Did you miss that part?

William;101607 wrote:

Here, again, you seem to think you know all there is to know. Perhaps you do know all you are meant to know. That's ok. Stay there, if you wish. Just don't assume all others to be the same as you.


Funny how I mentioned it was the teachings and not my held thoughts. But you still want to consider them mine? That leads me to think you didn't actually read what I had wrote.

William;101607 wrote:

Sure it is. Do you know why? I would like to here what you think, please.


It has already been stated.

William;101607 wrote:

Again, why do you think that is? You make a statement and you assume it to be fact, please give "your" reasoning?


My reasoning?

William;101607 wrote:

You say "they". They is a broad subject and is no way specific. Please, just who is "they"? Those you don't agree with? Or what? What about those you do, do they know it all? And who are they........exactly?


Oh getting into semantics because you don't like the question? Attack the question because it's the threat?

William;101607 wrote:

That depends on how you define punishment. Yes, we do punish others, what is it that makes you believe your definition is the same as god's?


Well first I would have to assume god existed. Since I don't make that assumption, I wouldn't.

William;101607 wrote:

Are you so sure it was god, who made you that? God, didn't make you a rebel, you did. It is comfortable to lay the blame else where, is it not?


Thank you for stating my point. This is exactly what I wanted you to realize. I fashion the statement that way to point out the contradiction in plan and non-plan.

William;101607 wrote:

You say that. How do you know what that intervention might be for you to assume such a thing?


Because the whole idea is polluted and convoluted. It seems nothing more than an invisible friend for adults.

William;101607 wrote:

You say that. How do you know that, if you don't mind? It's perhaps only you or anyone else who thinks that because you have, perhaps, in the past, prayed and did not get what you prayed for. That does not mean all can say that. Take me for instance, My only prayer has been for god not to abandon me and you know what...........................he hasn't! And I am the better for it, thank god. A just thanks, indeed.


So why is that the only thing you pray for if he always answers you? Why even pray then? Seems a little lopsided. Yet you also are making an assumption. What are you using as evidence that god hasn't abandoned you?

William;101607 wrote:

Depends? We have no idea of what that "plan" is, now, do we? I can be concluded if one is lacking because of what others have taken from them, it, more than likely, will be restored to them if it was truly theirs in the first place. I don't claim to know that is true; it just makes sense, speaking of judgement and all, by our standards.


To me, it doesn't make any sense.

William;101607 wrote:

It is not a petition to ask for that you truly need. Unfortunately many don't appreciate what they do have as they are convinced by others, more is better. Many, who live in peace, are not so disjoined as to want what they do not have for they find a solace in that they do.


Tell that to the starving children.

William;101607 wrote:

Considering what has befallen so many people who have suddenly been endowed with new found "money", it is definitely "not" an answered prayer, regardless of what "they" say.


I agree, but so are all other prayers.

William;101607 wrote:

People are starving in many ways; though money and the amassing of it does play a part, it is not the only thing. Greed and power have a lot to do with it and money definitely is a part of that which supports it. You can't blame that on god, that is all of man's doing, apart from that god.


It's also mans fault that it created god too, so yeah it's good that we finally find the correct place for blame.

William;101607 wrote:

Please, Krumple, what difference would it make if we did know that? That's why, specifically, we are not allow to remember our past. There is no future in it. All it does is allow us to bide our time because we have nothing else to do. How sad that is, don't you think? It does give us something to argue about though, doesn't it?


Forgetting your past mistakes will probably end up with you repeating the same mistake.

William;101607 wrote:

No, I think not, yet you are right to an extent. It's not that we created god, it is our perception of god that is skewed. We assumed god created us in "his image", that is the matter. It is impossible to know all that god is. Yes, as far as we are concerned, now, we are a new creation; that doesn't mean we ever were "not" a part of that. Like I said, that is why we are not allowed to remember our past. We couldn't deal with all that we once were. What ever that was, it is not in our best interest now.


Sounds like guess work to me. You are starting from a basis of weak premise and build off it as if I accept the premise. You haven't convinced me that the premise is true so all other characteristics are "invented" attributes.

William;101607 wrote:

Hopefully from what I have offered, you might think differently.


Think differently? Or do you mean think more like you? Because I already think differently.
0 Replies
 
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2009 05:32 am
@Alan McDougall,
One little niggle. The absence of a belief is a belief that it should be absent. Atheism is a faith unless you know that theism is false. Of course, some versions of theism and atheism are absurd and can be discounted, but not all.
0 Replies
 
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 09:29 am
@Alan McDougall,
Krumple,

I am not sure about reincarnation!! that is why I started this thread. I used the biblical quote that "a man lives once and then the judgement", just to bounce off the topic and get it going.
prothero
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 12:36 pm
@Whoever,
Whoever;101965 wrote:
Krumple - I agree that God is often an incoherent concept, and all concepts are invented. The question remains, however, of whether there something which roughly corresponds to this concept. The Roman Church adopted a concept of the solar system that was wildly at odds with the facts, but it does not follow that the solar system does not exist.


I do not think there is a single conception of God. It is more like Thomas Jeffersons notion that everyman has his own religion.

The conception of God as all powerful, all knowing and as some sort of divine tyrant or ruler is not one that I have found many people actually believe in.
That is the conception that is most frequently attacked (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, etc) usually on the basis of the obvious suffering in our world and the catastrophic nature of the universe and history but it is not a conception of God that is widely held to begin with.

That the universe does have a purpose and that life, mind and experience are not meaningless accident are widely held conceptions. Some conception of the divine is almost a universal feature of humanity, society, history and culture. Even the pragmatists think the concept of the divine is useful. One should consider there might be something to the concept of the divine more than self delusion, infantile wishing, and fuzzy thinking.

As for reincarnation we are all "recycled star stuff".
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 05:37 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;102323 wrote:
Krumple,

I am not sure about reincarnation!! that is why I started this thread. I used the biblical quote that "a man lives once and then the judgement", just to bounce off the topic and get it going.


Sometimes what you want to be true will get in the way of examining any alternative. The only reason you can not see reincarnation as possible is because you insist that there is a single life followed by a judgment. So of course the concept wouldn't make any sense to you.

Atheism is not a faith. Creationists love to make that statement because they think if they were to put atheism into the same category as requiring blind choice making then their standpoint doesn't seem so illogical. But there is no faith required at all to have a non belief.

So does Zeus exist? If not, how do you know? I find it funny that christians can pick and choose what god is real where as the others are not. They completely ignore that. What you want to be true or real doesn't necessarily make it true nor real.

So how is it you know what gods are real and which are not?
Whoever
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 05:08 am
@Krumple,
Obviously atheism is a faith if you have faith in it. If you believe it might be true it's a theory. If you believe that it is true it's a faith. If you can show that it's true it's the truth. What's the problem?

PS. I won't be around to discuss this for a few days.
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 01:42 am
@prothero,
prothero;102349 wrote:
I do not think there is a single conception of God. It is more like Thomas Jeffersons notion that everyman has his own religion.

The conception of God as all powerful, all knowing and as some sort of divine tyrant or ruler is not one that I have found many people actually believe in.
That is the conception that is most frequently attacked (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, etc) usually on the basis of the obvious suffering in our world and the catastrophic nature of the universe and history but it is not a conception of God that is widely held to begin with.

That the universe does have a purpose and that life, mind and experience are not meaningless accident are widely held conceptions. Some conception of the divine is almost a universal feature of humanity, society, history and culture. Even the pragmatists think the concept of the divine is useful. One should consider there might be something to the concept of the divine more than self delusion, infantile wishing, and fuzzy thinking.

As for reincarnation we are all "recycled star stuff".


Very good post!!as far as reincarnation goes I most definitely do not want to return to this earth again as a baby, be spanked, go to school and die all over again and again and again because I simply cannot remember what I did wrong or right in my past lives and, thereby never able to clean up my bad karma

We are recycled supernova star stuff like you state, we are part and parcel of this unimaginably vast and beautiful universe
awareness
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Apr, 2010 06:16 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Is consciousness recycled mind stuff???
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Apr, 2010 11:26 pm
@awareness,
reincarnation

is the evolution of the brain

organic energy
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Apr, 2010 11:36 pm
@Whoever,
Whoever;102429 wrote:
Obviously atheism is a faith if you have faith in it. If you believe it might be true it's a theory. If you believe that it is true it's a faith. If you can show that it's true it's the truth. What's the problem?

PS. I won't be around to discuss this for a few days.


When are people going to realize that it is just a lack of a belief to begin with. I don't have to believe anything to be an atheist. I don't have to believe in the non existence of a god to be an atheist. The definition does not work like that, it is simply not having a belief in the existence of a god or gods. I don't think Zeus exists. Are you saying that I also have faith in the lack of Zeus? I would also have faith that gremlins don't exist? Maybe I also have faith that aliens are not abducting people. That is just absurd.

I don't have to put any trust into the thought. I don't require proof, because it is a neutral position. Just like the existence of gremlins, I don't hold onto the idea that they might exist because I have not seen any thing that would lead me to believe that they just might exist. The same goes for any gods existing, I haven't seen a single thing that would lead me to believe that gods exist.
Ali phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 03:04 am
@Alan McDougall,
In*
Sorry posted twice First time trying.
If it helps our soul isn't nessersaraly from earth, all souls come from the and return to the great 'void'
This void is not the absence of everything, but a positive void.
I am just a Youngster born in the age of televison sorry if spelling etc, is a bit off.
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 03:41 am
@Ali phil,
Ali;153476 wrote:
If it helps our soul isn't nessersaraly from earth, all souls come from the and return to the great 'void'
This void is not the absence of everything, but a positive void.


How is it you know this? Is it something you were told or have you experienced it first hand? If you have experienced it, how? If you have never experienced it then why are you talking about it as if you know first hand that it is true?

This is like a blind person from birth claiming to have seen a sunset. If you have never seen it, how can you make a statement as if you have?
Ali phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 04:22 am
@Krumple,
Ah you are indeed correct i have not experenced it but it is my belief i cannot claim it as truth but this is about buddhism and i was just stating the belief, so it would make it easyier to understand how 2 souls rencarnate them selfs to 6 billion. i used the word soul there is no soul in buddhism just beings very hard to explain, as we are supposidly all connected.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 12:57:23