8
   

believe in god!

 
 
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 06:56 am
@roammer,
Why don't you start with your definition. Or did you post it and I missed it?
roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 07:06 am
@djjd62,
Quote:
but why does there have to be a god for this, why can't it just be

believe in science if you want to know the nuts and bolts of life, believe in god if you need comfort that your life has meaning, it is what it is, your life, live it how you will, why care what anyone believes, thinks or cares about


Do you believe Individualism?
for example when i believe something about my life i accept on myself that it is true and no need for searching for better believe, you know... I lost my believe in yesterday's god -the god that cruel to people and has no understanding and no any reason - but now i'm here and try to know what u know, believe what u believe, this is my way for improve my believes.... Although i know this is just my believe.
0 Replies
 
roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 07:27 am
@JPB,
I can't say Strictly but i think i believe ...

- The single, proper name for God in Islam
- The Compassionate, The Beneficent
- The Merciful
- The King, The Sovereign Lord
- The Holy
- The Source of Peace
- The Guardian of Faith
- The Protector
- The Mighty, The Strong
- The Compeller
- The Majestic
- The Creator
- The Evolver, The Maker
- The Fashioner
- The Great Forgiver
- The Subduer, The Dominant
- The Bestower
- The Sustainer, The Provider
- The Opener, The Reliever
- The All-Knowing
- The Retainer
- The Expander
- The Abaser
- The Exalter
- The Honorer
- The Humiliator
- The All-Hearing
- The All-Seeing
- The Judge
- The Just-( important really important)
- The Subtle One
- The Aware
- The Forebearing
- The Great One
- The All-Forgiving
- The Grateful
- The Most High
- The Great
- The Preserver
- The Maintainer
- The Truth
- The Trustee
- The Strong
- The Firm One
- The Supporter
- The Praiseworthy
- The Counter
- The Reckoner
- The Sublime One
- The Generous
- The Watcher
- The Responsive
- The Vast
- The Wise
- The Loving
- The Glorious
- The Resurrector
- The Witness
- The Originator
- The Reproducer
- The Restorer
- The Destroyer
- The Alive
- The Self-Subsisting
- The Perceiver
- The Unique
- The One
- The Eternal
- The Able
- The Powerful
- The Expediter
- The Delayer
- The First
- The Last
- The Manifest
- The Hidden
- The Governor
- The Most Exalted
- The Source of All Goodness
- The Acceptor of Repentance
- The Avenger
- The Pardoner
- The Compassionate
- The King of Kings
- The Lord of Majesty and Bounty
- The Equitable
- The Gatherer
- The Self-Sufficient
- The Enricher
- The Preventer
- The Distresser
- The Propitious
- The Light
- The Guide
- The Incomparable
- The Everlasting
- The Inheritor
- The Guide to the Right Path
- The Patient

----
and on just one word god is "exist".
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 07:30 am
ok, forgetting the long list and focusing on "exist". Do you believe that we exist because of god or that god exists because of us? I don't mean that as a figment of the imagination. I mean, do you believe in a creator god or in a creation of god from the human spirit?
roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 07:54 am
@JPB,
Quote:
ok, forgetting the long list and focusing on "exist". Do you believe that we exist because of god or that god exists because of us? I don't mean that as a figment of the imagination. I mean, do you believe in a creator god or in a creation of god from the human spirit?


I believe the spirit which god created, is not something apart from the nature, I think god created something that i call it :"self".
Self it is that make human different from other "living things", self is for Tiki paranormal and Metaphysics, not spirit .
And there is a reason for being self,for example: I wanna ask u why we can Judge some-one? If u tell me because of his (or her) doing! i will tel u which part of him(or her) does doing ? Anyone has some fixed part... i think ...
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 08:19 am
@roammer,
Are you familiar with panentheisum (different from panthesism)?

roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 08:36 am
@JPB,
Quote:
Are you familiar with panentheisum (different from panthesism)?

no, ... can u explain this,pls?
Do u know Molana? Are u mean Molana and Khayam belief ? persian Mysticism؟
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 08:46 am
@roammer,
I think some other folks have done a better job of it than I could. Here's an example...

Quote:
The definition for "Pantheism" given in the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy is: "The belief that God, or a group of gods, is identical with the whole natural world; pantheism comes from Greek roots meaning "belief that everything is a god."

By contrast, "panentheism" is the doctrine that God includes the world as a part, though not the whole, of "his" being.

An example of "Panentheism" is given by Fr. Charles Cummings, a Trappist-Cistercian monk, author of Eco-Spirituality: toward a reverent life. In Cummings approach, "Pantheism exaggerates divine immanence to the point of identifying God and the universe. The Judeo-Christian tradition maintains both that God is immanently in all things (or all things are in God) and the God is transcendentally beyond all things. "

For Fr. Cummings, "Reverence for nature is not irreverence for God; reverence for nature does not diminish our reverence toward God. God need not compete with nature for our reverence. Rather, we can reverence God by reverencing nature, because all creation is permeated with God's presence."

Similarly, Michael Fox has found value in a panentheistic approach. He writes: "The pantheism that regards the totality of Nature as being God (i.e.., that God is swallowed up in the unity of all) rather than an aspect of divinity is quite distinct from monotheistic pantheism. This monotheistic pantheism conceptualizes God as the all-inclusive essence or substance, the first cause of the universe, with many attributes, including intelligence, which we can perceive in Nature's lawful harmony. This form of pantheism would be better termed panentheism."

In short, the philosophy of "panentheism", as distinct from strict "Pantheism", believes in the immanence of God, but also in its Transcendence. By contrast, for strict Pantheists, like Ernst Haeckel, John Burroughs, and Joseph Wood Krutch, God and the Universe are one and the same, and the concept of a transcendent deity is abandoned. More at this link
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 08:57 am
@roammer,
I don't know Molana but I am familiar with (and have read) Khayam. I've read multiple translations of the quatrains in the Rubaiyat. I struggle with poetry but, yes, I would say that Khayam espouses a type of panentheism.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 09:01 am
@roammer,
roammer wrote:
persian Mysticism؟


It is my belief that the mystics from many traditions have a sense of "something" that we as humans do not have the language to put into simple words. Some mystics use poetry, some use art, some use parables or stories to try to explain what it is that they "know" as truth. I believe they are trying to explain the same thing, but they (and we) lack the language to state it clearly.
fresco
 
  3  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 10:17 am
@roammer,
You asked me "what is my sect", to which the only answer I can give is "British intelligent adult". Like countless others, I am an atheist who occasionally attends religious ceremonies out of respect/obligation for friends and family who are believers, but not their beliefs.

IMO (and I am one of many), the word/concept "God" was developed as a psychological insurance against "the void". It is part of the price paid by humans for their pre-occupation with their cognitive ability to anticipate the future, especially their own death. Our ultimate incomplete control over our "destiny" and lack of perception of it gives rise the psychological need for a "big controller in the sky"...an omniscient and omnipotent "parent" in whom we will ultimately find "comfort". Tribal power structures were reified by their idiosyncratic versions of such a fairy tale, to the extent that rival tribes have murdered, and continue to murder each other over their particular versions.

In short "God" is a psychological opiate and palliative, with occasionally pernicious sociological consequences.



0 Replies
 
roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 12:39 pm
@JPB,
Quote:
I don't know Molana but I am familiar with (and have read) Khayam. I've read multiple translations of the quatrains in the Rubaiyat. I struggle with poetry but, yes, I would say that Khayam espouses a type of panentheism.

I get it... I can't believe that i didn't know what panentheism is, yes sure I know it,
In eastern mysticism and especially islamic mysticism created two progress,
"unification of exist"(panentheism) and "unification of intuition".
Panentheism made by "Mohieddin" and khayam and molana (rumi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumi) as u said espouse the panentheism. and i'm wondering that the text you quote was translated letter from persian site! anyway thank u.
Rumi or Mawlana Rumi or Mewlewī was an evolutionary thinker in the sense that he believed that the spirit after devolution from the divine Ego undergoes an evolutionary process by which it comes nearer and nearer to the same divine Ego.

I died as a mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was Man.
Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar
With angels bless'd; but even from angelhood
I must pass on: all except God doth perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,
I shall become what no mind e'er conceived.
Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence
Proclaims in organ tones,
To Him we shall return.

---
Khayam said:
yesterday this day's madness did prepare to-morrow's silence, triumph, or despire: drink! for you not know whence you came, nor why;Drink! for for you know not why you go, nor where...

http://www.up.nicepatogh.com/images/c9c7honb8n7drjhjuxjb.jpg
0 Replies
 
roammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 12:41 pm
@JPB,
Quote:
It is my belief that the mystics from many traditions have a sense of "something" that we as humans do not have the language to put into simple words. Some mystics use poetry, some use art, some use parables or stories to try to explain what it is that they "know" as truth. I believe they are trying to explain the same thing, but they (and we) lack the language to state it clearly.

Then u think they have same idea about exist and the world?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 12:50 pm
@roammer,
I do, yes.
roammer
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2012 01:00 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

I do, yes.


Thank you for answering but i don't think so, I can rhyme as u can but now, we know we have difference epistemology(Philosophy).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Nov, 2012 05:55 am
Roammer wrote:
Setanta wrote:
Come back to talk to us when you've learned to speak English.


Thank u for this welcome and your offer...


There was no welcome in that post, nor is there any offer. If you ever succeed in learning enough English to express your ideas coherently, i can neither stop you from coming here to post them, nor can i cause you to do so. The point, which you are evading, is that you are not now expressing any ideas coherently in English. It appears that you think you are wise or clever, but the evidence of that simply does not appear in this thread. It is charity on my part to assume that that is because of your lack of language skills. In fact, i suspect that it is because you are not clever and you have no wisdom to offer. You throw out words and phrases as though they will be evidence of your wisdom and cleverness. They are not. So, for example:

roammer wrote:
djjd62 wrote:
how about the law of casualty, dead is dead

i know that one



incoherent reply, because u have not any reply this is
"Argumentum ad hominem" fallacy!


This is a perfect example of your incoherence, and i begin to suspect it's not just because you lack the ability to clearly express yourself in English. For whatever Djjd may have been doing in that post, argumentum ad hominem is not a part of it. Do you actually know what that means, or do you just like to throw terms around to make yourelf look wise? Argumentum ad hominem means to attack the man and not the idea. Djjd did not make a personal attack on you, so you are just as wrong as wrong can be.

roammer wrote:
JPB wrote:
I do, yes. [I.e., she believes that mystics from many different traditions have the same idea about "exist" (the word you wanted was existence) and the world.]



Thank you for answering but i don't think so, I can rhyme as u can but now, we know we have difference epistemology(Philosophy).


This is another wonderful example of how you just throw something out which you apparently think makes you look wise. Epistemology is the study of knowledge--how we can know that we know something. It is completely irrelevant as a response to what she has written in her several preceding posts.

When JPB asked you for a definition of god, you dodged that by providing a laundry list of mindless panegyrics which Muslims recite about their god. What you did not do was provide a definition of god, you did not answer her question. The member who earlier suggested that this may be an extended joke may be right. You may just be playing a game. Whatever it is that you think you are accomplishing, what you are certainly not doing is communicating. You are not engaged in an exchange of ideas. You are just telling people what the truth is, as though we have any good reason to assume that you know the truth. We don't. Perhaps if you ever did get an adequate command of the English language to have a coherent conversation here, you would engage in a free exchange of ideas. Personally, i suspect that that won't happen. Not because you cannot learn English well enough for the exercise, but because a free exchange of ideas was never your goal. You just want to tell us how things are, and tell us we are foolish or intellectually deficient if we don't agree.


In short, you didn't come here to discuss or debate a topic, you just came here to preach. How convenient the internet is for Muslims who want to fulfill their obligation to preach to the infidel.
roammer
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Nov, 2012 07:06 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Roammer wrote:
Setanta wrote:
Come back to talk to us when you've learned to speak English.


Thank u for this welcome and your offer...


There was no welcome in that post, nor is there any offer. If you ever succeed in learning enough English to express your ideas coherently, i can neither stop you from coming here to post them, nor can i cause you to do so. The point, which you are evading, is that you are not now expressing any ideas coherently in English. It appears that you think you are wise or clever, but the evidence of that simply does not appear in this thread. It is charity on my part to assume that that is because of your lack of language skills. In fact, i suspect that it is because you are not clever and you have no wisdom to offer. You throw out words and phrases as though they will be evidence of your wisdom and cleverness. They are not. So, for example:

roammer wrote:
djjd62 wrote:
how about the law of casualty, dead is dead

i know that one



incoherent reply, because u have not any reply this is
"Argumentum ad hominem" fallacy!


This is a perfect example of your incoherence, and i begin to suspect it's not just because you lack the ability to clearly express yourself in English. For whatever Djjd may have been doing in that post, argumentum ad hominem is not a part of it. Do you actually know what that means, or do you just like to throw terms around to make yourelf look wise? Argumentum ad hominem means to attack the man and not the idea. Djjd did not make a personal attack on you, so you are just as wrong as wrong can be.

roammer wrote:
JPB wrote:
I do, yes. [I.e., she believes that mystics from many different traditions have the same idea about "exist" (the word you wanted was existence) and the world.]



Thank you for answering but i don't think so, I can rhyme as u can but now, we know we have difference epistemology(Philosophy).


This is another wonderful example of how you just throw something out which you apparently think makes you look wise. Epistemology is the study of knowledge--how we can know that we know something. It is completely irrelevant as a response to what she has written in her several preceding posts.

When JPB asked you for a definition of god, you dodged that by providing a laundry list of mindless panegyrics which Muslims recite about their god. What you did not do was provide a definition of god, you did not answer her question. The member who earlier suggested that this may be an extended joke may be right. You may just be playing a game. Whatever it is that you think you are accomplishing, what you are certainly not doing is communicating. You are not engaged in an exchange of ideas. You are just telling people what the truth is, as though we have any good reason to assume that you know the truth. We don't. Perhaps if you ever did get an adequate command of the English language to have a coherent conversation here, you would engage in a free exchange of ideas. Personally, i suspect that that won't happen. Not because you cannot learn English well enough for the exercise, but because a free exchange of ideas was never your goal. You just want to tell us how things are, and tell us we are foolish or intellectually deficient if we don't agree.


In short, you didn't come here to discuss or debate a topic, you just came here to preach. How convenient the internet is for Muslims who want to fulfill their obligation to preach to the infidel.


I said ..
Quote:
...now i'm here and try to know what u know, believe what u believe, this is my way for improve my believes.... Although i know this is just my believe.


I'm so sorry that u think like this about me, because i'd never ever can permit to myself to contumely anybody, really i don't know how can i say i'm sorry, I'm a girl from another country, and i'm here for know your idea, maybe as u said i can't speak English very well but it can't be a reason for stop me, I'm not here for play game and i'm not Muslim!But i read lot of book and it is just one reason why i'm here, i have no time for playing game and something like that, I'm here for new idea and new attitude or theory for life, for example when fresco told like this i stop talking about meaning of god because more than speaking (or writing) i like to reading and i'm really thank u for
consultation and sympathy.
Quote:
You asked me "what is my sect", to which the only answer I can give is "British intelligent adult". Like countless others, I am an atheist who occasionally attends religious ceremonies out of respect/obligation for friends and family who are believers, but not their beliefs.

IMO (and I am one of many), the word/concept "God" was developed as a psychological insurance against "the void". It is part of the price paid by humans for their pre-occupation with their cognitive ability to anticipate the future, especially their own death. Our ultimate incomplete control over our "destiny" and lack of perception of it gives rise the psychological need for a "big controller in the sky"...an omniscient and omnipotent "parent" in whom we will ultimately find "comfort". Tribal power structures were reified by their idiosyncratic versions of such a fairy tale, to the extent that rival tribes have murdered, and continue to murder each other over their particular versions.

In short "God" is a psychological opiate and palliative, with occasionally pernicious sociological consequences.


Thank u fresco

Maybe my low ability to speaking, made this misunderstanding ... i'm so sorry...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Nov, 2012 07:26 am
If you are not in fact a Muslim, you're doing a wonderful job making appear that you are. Your gender is meaningless here. Perhaps you could start over, and answer JPB's question. How do you define god?
roammer
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Nov, 2012 07:58 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

If you are not in fact a Muslim, you're doing a wonderful job making appear that you are. Your gender is meaningless here. Perhaps you could start over, and answer JPB's question. How do you define god?


Thank u for believing me, actually Allah is the Jewish's god and that Adjectives i wrote , are about Allah, but if anyone believes god by these signs is not Muslim no exactly, i believe in god but i can't believe prophets and prophecy.
I believe this god's definition because it's perfect.... I think.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Nov, 2012 08:24 am
First, Allah is the name Muslims give to god, not Jews. YHWH is a rough transliteration into Roman letters for the name Jews give to god, and it is sometimes pronounced Yahweh. But many Jews will not say god's name--Orthodox Jews and most conservative Jews will not say god's name.

That being dealt with--you still have not give a definition for god.
 

Related Topics

Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
Is "God" just our conscience? - Question by Groomers123
The existence of God - Question by jwagner
Are Gods Judgments righteous? - Discussion by Smileyrius
What did God do on Day 8? - Question by HesDeltanCaptain
What do you think about world? - Question by Joona
 
  1. Forums
  2. » believe in god!
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/30/2021 at 12:58:45