0
   

Belief in God......

 
 
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 08:49 am
@Ding an Sich,
Hi Ittekimasu,

you asked me for proof of God and I suggested that you look up in the sky after it has rained and look for his promise (proof) in the rainbow. Infact probably the since best evidence for His existence as Christ, is in the Bible. I'm not going to quote large swathes of it to you now here. Just read 1 corinthians 13 of the new testament, if you want to read a nice bit to yourself. Of course if you need proof of the Hindu deity please read the epic Bhagavada Gita where Krishna tries to persuade his nephew Arjuna of the arguments for going to war (against his kinsmen). Equally if you want persuasion of Buddha check out Buddhist scriptures by Edward Conze (Penguin Classics). More then that I cannot give you. God is a manmade image, of colours and details filled by stories. but just because he is manmade doesn't mean to say that he doesn't exist. Far from it. His is the greatest power ever imagined and the greatest love surely. His is the answer to our problems, and his faith is the greatest love imaginable. The best place to study him is infact not in some scholarly classroom or lecture theatre, but infact his temples, be it mosques/churches or whatever. There you can find the genuine convictions of true believers, which is sadly lacking by the scholarly inbred ignorance of Dawkins and his ilk. That is my take on it anyway. Thanks, John.
fresco
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 09:23 am
@john2054,
The real question is what does "a believer" hope to achieve on a forum populated by a large number of atheists ? You have no chance of converting anybody because ultimately "belief" is based on "faith", not on what are normally understood as "facts". So the pay-off is what ?....celestial reward points?.....conversation to persuade yourself ?.......giving the heathen a "warning" thereby "doing God's work"?

And how do you feel when philosophers like Richard Harris accuse even moderate religionists of complicity in atrocities like 9/11 by supporting the the same irrationalities as employed by fanatics. i.e. Have you legalized a potentially dangerous drug ?
0 Replies
 
Ding an Sich
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 03:18 pm
@john2054,
john2054 wrote:

Hi Ittekimasu,

you asked me for proof of God and I suggested that you look up in the sky after it has rained and look for his promise (proof) in the rainbow. Infact probably the since best evidence for His existence as Christ, is in the Bible. I'm not going to quote large swathes of it to you now here. Just read 1 corinthians 13 of the new testament, if you want to read a nice bit to yourself. Of course if you need proof of the Hindu deity please read the epic Bhagavada Gita where Krishna tries to persuade his nephew Arjuna of the arguments for going to war (against his kinsmen). Equally if you want persuasion of Buddha check out Buddhist scriptures by Edward Conze (Penguin Classics). More then that I cannot give you. God is a manmade image, of colours and details filled by stories. but just because he is manmade doesn't mean to say that he doesn't exist. Far from it. His is the greatest power ever imagined and the greatest love surely. His is the answer to our problems, and his faith is the greatest love imaginable. The best place to study him is infact not in some scholarly classroom or lecture theatre, but infact his temples, be it mosques/churches or whatever. There you can find the genuine convictions of true believers, which is sadly lacking by the scholarly inbred ignorance of Dawkins and his ilk. That is my take on it anyway. Thanks, John.


1. My name is not "ittekimasu". That is what the Japanese say when they wish to say "Goodbye" (literal tran. "I will go and come back"). My name, for all intents and purposes on this forum, is ding_and_sich.

2. Ok so God is a manmade image, but that does not tell me that he "exists". There is a difference mind you. You can add as many predicates as you like, but that does not mean that God exists. "Being" is what I am concerned with here. Once again we are going back to feeling. Say I walk into a church (RPC for preference) and partake in a service. This only adds to the feeling of God. I can tell you, if I am caught in the moment that "I feel God." But this does not prove anything. It only confirms my "feeling" of something. It is much like saying, "I feel pain." (but perhaps there is a greater ambiguity with saying that "I feel God." because most would not be able to understand you; unless of course we understand what you mean "God".)

3. Finis
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 03:40 pm
@john2054,
you asked me for proof of God and I suggested that you look up in the sky after it has rained and look for his promise (proof) in the rainbow. Infact probably the since best evidence for His existence as Christ, is in the Bible. I'm not going to quote large swathes of it to you now here. Just read 1 corinthians 13 of the new testament, if you want to read a nice bit to yourself. Of course if you need proof of the Hindu deity please read the epic Bhagavada Gita where Krishna tries to persuade his nephew Arjuna of the arguments for going to war (against his kinsmen). Equally if you want persuasion of Buddha check out Buddhist scriptures by Edward Conze (Penguin Classics). More then that I cannot give you. God is a manmade image, of colours and details filled by stories. but just because he is manmade doesn't mean to say that he doesn't exist. Far from it. His is the greatest power ever imagined and the greatest love surely. His is the answer to our problems, and his faith is the greatest love imaginable. The best place to study him is infact not in some scholarly classroom or lecture theatre, but infact his temples, be it mosques/churches or whatever. There you can find the genuine convictions of true believers, which is sadly lacking by the scholarly inbred ignorance of Dawkins and his ilk. That is my take on it anyway. Thanks, John.




I liked your definition of god but I do have to say that you are speaking in absolutes about something we do not absolutely know.

Do you think that the pilots of the planes that flew into the twin towers had any doubts in their minds about god?
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 04:38 pm
@Ding an Sich,
Hi Ding, your refutation is too complex for me to even remember, but for the sake of good arguments i will try... OK God is something that I just feel. I am a Buddhist too note. The Buddhist persuasion combined with the Christian one is an interesting one admitedly. But then let's also try and remember that I have nothing to prove to anyone. Please don't forget that I spent years as an Atheist arguing from that perspective. But when you have someone, or sometwo to love. You don't need to bother about such frivolous worries. You see that's just it isn't it. People think that things such as God, or his big brother love can be argued into existence? They can't. Nor can't they be felt using the rationalistic and objective mind. They can only be realised, or heard using the inner ear if you will. I welcome you reply to this thanks. Salute'.
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 04:46 pm
@reasoning logic,
Hi reasoning don't even get me started on the war. To take out a million or two innocent lives for the sake of a couple of thousand seems a little bit like overkill if you ask me. And so what if you got the little hitler (Saddam) in the process? Surely if your, or should that be OUR, special forces are half as good as they make out, they could have taken him out in a one on one at the beginning of the invasion and saved have of the bloodshed. But that's just it isn't it? It wasn't just about taking out the man and his fictional weapons of md, but teaching those bloody muslims a lesson they wouldn't forget. Blair wanted his war and he damn well got it! Back to the question of 9'11, I agree it was terrible. However did you know that one of the planes was a military plane as discernable by the markings and engines, and not civilian as is widely believed. That's to say nothing of the third building of the trade towers which was announced on the tv news as having collapsed, some half an hour before it even fell. And it wasn't even hit. How do you explain these facts then. I know what i think. Bye.
Ding an Sich
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 05:45 pm
@john2054,
john2054 wrote:

Hi Ding, your refutation is too complex for me to even remember, but for the sake of good arguments i will try... OK God is something that I just feel. I am a Buddhist too note. The Buddhist persuasion combined with the Christian one is an interesting one admitedly. But then let's also try and remember that I have nothing to prove to anyone. Please don't forget that I spent years as an Atheist arguing from that perspective. But when you have someone, or sometwo to love. You don't need to bother about such frivolous worries. You see that's just it isn't it. People think that things such as God, or his big brother love can be argued into existence? They can't. Nor can't they be felt using the rationalistic and objective mind. They can only be realised, or heard using the inner ear if you will. I welcome you reply to this thanks. Salute'.


So you are saying that "I feel God." I feel p, therefore p exists. You do realize that this argument is blatantly fallacious? Well, I am done here. Thank you for a time well wasted.
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 06:03 pm
@john2054,
I do have an open mind! could you please show me this news cast of the third building collapsing before it collapsed. Thanks
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Sep, 2010 03:37 pm
@reasoning logic,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_UKdqoa_o

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98g63YSYxLo&feature=fvst

check these pages out for interesting conspiracy vids, thanks! John.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Sep, 2010 04:16 pm
@fresco,
fresco, Well stated. I like what you said,
Quote:
"the defense mechanisms operating to preserve self integrity."
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 12:00 am
@cicerone imposter,
Thanks !
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 12:07 am
"Flood the earth to distinction?" Well, we've got the ridiculous . . . where's the sublime?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 12:37 am
@Setanta,
I think we all know he meant extinction, but being mindful of our own typos we courteously let it pass.
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 11:36 am
@Setanta,
Well done Setanta, that's five points you get for astute paying attention. Now for a bonus five answer the next question. What are we going to talk about next???
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 11:38 am
@fresco,
I was just havin' a little harmless fun there, Boss . . .
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Sep, 2010 01:40 pm
@john2054,
john,

I note you have not answered either my question about motivation, or Harris's accusation. Do you find them problematic ?
john2054
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Sep, 2010 12:00 pm
@fresco,
Hii Fresco, thanks for your intelligent and reasonable reply/query. Well in reply to your question of motivation, i come on these sites 'cos it amuses me. To see the frivolous and futile responses you heathen can provide to my absolute theorums. But seriously I used to be an atheist too, so I know all about the absolute and the problematic. I also am a Buddhist which gives me a fairly good insight into fundamental relativity of all and sundry (they call it the conditioned behaviour of all things). And I have studied philosophy at college level, under a good friend, which has given me a taste of the 'proper' way of doing things. Now I also have had more then a fair share taste of madness, even being in hospital right now as we speak, and so I really have been right round the block now a couple of times in fact. Harris, what I heard of him, is a very intelligent young man whose heart is clearly in the right place, being inquisitive and rational. However I disagree with his assertions that faith is flawed in as much as it is probably written by a man who has never been to church, or at least certainly not in an hour of need. Not when he had nothing else left, and then closed his eyes and quietly said a prayer. That is what Christianity is about, and no matter how many thousands of atheists convictions will ever make it different. Peace.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Sep, 2010 12:36 pm
@john2054,
I did watch the videos and they do get you to think.
I thought that maybe the building partially collapsed and then maybe 20 minutes later the whole building feel in on itself.
The truth is that I do not have the experience to speak on such matters of how buildings should come down under certain situations. Maybe we should have a public independent review of situations that are as extreme as this to make sure there is no corruption involved
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Sep, 2010 01:14 pm
@reasoning logic,
You have it right; the buildings collapsed, because the floors above fell down and increased the weight as each floor collapsed underneath each one. They were not built to withstand that much weight.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Sep, 2010 01:32 pm
@john2054,
Thanks for that.

Harris specifically argues that any belief in "an afterlife" is the irrationality which devalues "this life". Secondly he says that moderates have no moral sway over their fanatics who take such irrationality to its limit. They merely give them intellectual succour. Interestingly, Harris, unlike Dawkins, is not averse to "spirituality" insofar that it might be devoid of tribalism and theism.
 

Related Topics

What is the most valuable thing you own? - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Has there been a roll call? - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
Here's another Trump thread... - Discussion by tsarstepan
Should I be offended? - Question by the prince
How desperate can a christian get? - Discussion by reasoning logic
Is A2K A Religion? - Question by mark noble
Top o' the Mornin' to Ya! - Question by Transcend
8/31/05 : Gas Prices - Discussion by Ken cv
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/11/2020 at 05:08:10