Why do so many people believe in God? (Serious Question?)

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 4502 of total 4502 in this topic
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Original Post - Sep 30, 2006 - 09:31pm PT
Am I missing something. Is it logical to believe in something that cannot be proved?

Why do you believe in God?

JDF
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 30, 2006 - 09:51pm PT
But what is bleak.

So what if at death our whole existence ends.

Is that a big deal?

JDF
CorporateDog

climber
Middle California
Sep 30, 2006 - 09:51pm PT
The desperately sincere pyschological craving for a feeling that someone cares about them.

Or fear.

Speaks to the sad and pitiful void within humanity at large.

Personally, I lean towards the "opiate of the masses" opinion of religion as societal control.

Religion may well have sprung from a sincere proto-human desire for explanation of an amazing world - but a few thousand years of dubious human interference has given us a factuous, divisive, profiteering perversion that enslaves more than enlightens.
Mom

Social climber
So Cal
Sep 30, 2006 - 09:54pm PT
Who else to you ask for help when you have just pulled your three year old from the deep end of the pool and he's not breathing; or who else do you talk to when you have just been diagonsed with terminal cancer; who do you call out to as you are riding in the ambulance with the love of your life who has just suffered severe head trauma?

elcapfool --- you are NO fool!!
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:07pm PT
Because it makes so many other things fall into place.
CorporateDog

climber
Middle California
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:24pm PT
God?

I really like the idea of god as Alanis Morrisette in Dogma playing skeeball and turning cartwheels in the flowers. The Greeks probably had the best take on this idea.

More likely is that we are sentient probes emitted by a central conscious energy to "live" on Earth in order to absorb as many experiences and data inputs as possible. When you "die" - you report back and download.

I've been told that the central entity really gets pissed at couch potatoes and career Walmart employees.
John Barleycorn

climber
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:25pm PT
because it always gives you one last chance to be saved from whatever you're praying to be saved from. be that finishing the last three pitches in a lightning storm or getting through traffic to be on time for a meeting. People pray to god about everything they feel they don't have control over and hope god will save them. i think people should spend more time believing in themselves.

jb
Sioux Juan

Big Wall climber
Costa Mexico
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:39pm PT
I called his name the last time that red light showed up in my rear view mirror.....it was a miracle I blew a 0.00 when I should have broke a record. or maybe it turned over ?
andanother

climber
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:54pm PT
because people don't like to take responsibility for their own actions.
CorporateDog

climber
Middle California
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:56pm PT
Senor DeFuca - the question to ask is whether a god exists BECAUSE we are here in its grace, or, does a god exist BECAUSE the collective "we" believes in the concept.

To the ancients, their gods were as real to them as our dieties are today. Yet, when theose ancient cultures died - did not their gods die with them?

Given a few centuries - I would not be suprised to find the future humans worshipping some other form of supreme being with Jesus, Yahweh, Muhammed, etc only to be found in history books somewhere between Ashtar and Zeus.

Anything is real if enough people believe it to be so.
WBraun

climber
Sep 30, 2006 - 10:58pm PT
NOT TRUE Corpdog
pud

climber
Sportbikeville
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:02pm PT
"I called his name the last time that red light showed up in my rear view mirror.....it was a miracle I blew a 0.00 when I should have broke a record. or maybe it turned over ? "

Stevo,
after witnessing more than a couple of your insane runnouts in Toulomne I'd say you definitely have someone watching out for you brother!
--wayne
Tarbuster

climber
right here, right now
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:04pm PT
i don't believe in anything.
i find belief just gets in the way.
i just do stuff.

no offense intented towards god or true believers.
(mobius)
Mimi

climber
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:12pm PT
You gotta believe in that Rocky Mountain high, don't ya Roy?
CorporateDog

climber
Middle California
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:15pm PT
Werner - of COURSE everything I say is NOT TRUE...to someone.

Opinion creates bias which begats belief which converts to truth then finally to dogma. It is a closed loop.

Ideas, on the other hand, allow one to explore any number of possibilities.

Is not "inifinty" the root concept of divinity?

cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:19pm PT
People believe what they're taught when they're impressionable. Meaning when they're young or in crisis. Check out any of these:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Godless-books/lm/R3YAPEKBNTYDB/ref=cm_lm_detail_ctr_full_2/202-0366244-7644662
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 30, 2006 - 11:30pm PT
Some events can seem like Magic or a God stepped in and saved the day. But what about all the kids that drown in the pools.

The more I study Buddhism the more I like it.

The Buddha said we do not even have a soul. I really like the idea of not having a soul.

JDF
Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:35pm PT
I trust in God becasue I believe that there are good reasons for belief that God exists, and that he will hold me accountable for the life He gave me. One being that human beings have innate sense of right or wrong (that they ought to do something, or not something in a given situation). Call that your consciousness of your soul or whatever you like. I think God is the best, logical explanation for where that actually came from in human beings. If God doesn't exist, then where does this sense of morality come from. It might be the case we feel something we call guilt because we actually are guilty, guilty before God and his standards (example, eveyone has broken at least some, probably most are all of the 10 commandments-myself included).But I think we have all felt guilt and shame for one reason or another in our lives. Why do we have that? I believe that God gave us that for a reason. Anyways, all you CA guys and gals missed a beautiful 80 deg day in Eldo today after the 2 feet of snow in mountains from a few days back. Cheers, AK!
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Sep 30, 2006 - 11:37pm PT
You'd probably like what Dawkins has to say even more. Buddhism contains a lot of valid psychology but it still appeals to mystical mumbo-jumbo, largely because that's what uneducated people like. Rituals, smoke and mirrors, and subservience to the will of an all-knowing priesthood provide a lot of mental stability in a world that seems otherwise incomprehensible.
WBraun

climber
Oct 1, 2006 - 12:26am PT
hehehe

You guys spend all your time trying to get rid of God.
WoodySt

Trad climber
Riverside
Oct 1, 2006 - 12:27am PT
In God I do believe.
And, that might be a shocker.
But it gives me much relief,
Because I climb with Locker.
Bruce Morris

Social climber
Belmont, California
Oct 1, 2006 - 12:38am PT
Because they don't have anything better to do.
dirtbag

climber
Oct 1, 2006 - 01:08am PT
Good one Woody.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 1, 2006 - 02:03am PT
Here's something I wrote a while back. I think it applies

The question isn't so much "Is there a God?". Even according to physics, the world is all composed of the same energy. One thing comprises us all. You could call that God, if you can't stomach an old man in the sky. The question is the nature of that Reality. It is what it is, regardless of what we think about it. No matter how you slice it, the world is not as we see it.

and whatever we believe, we don't believe it very often. Most of the time we are living, eating, sleeping and otherwise separated from our concepts and ideas. It's who we are in our hearts that we carry around with us constantly.

My experience is that God is a supreme conscious intelligence and that our essential nature, our soul, is also consciousness. Thus we are created in the image of God.

No faith is required for this. Quiet your mind utterly and be deep inside yourself and you will see for yourself. Thus, if you seek (honestly and without prejudging the results) you will find. Beyond your changing mind, beliefs and concepts, you are a pure awareness that is inherently loving peaceful and fulfilled.

I've seen the light in folks from all religions, all countries, and those without religion as well. Dogma doesn't save anyone. God doesn't know what religion you are. God sees directly to the heart.

Peace

karl
jdub

Trad climber
Atascadero
Oct 1, 2006 - 02:39am PT
Sit in Yosemite, take a look around, I mean really look. Then tell me that pressure, heat, time, glaciers, and whatever else occurs naturally is the only explanation here. Whatever you believe in it sure seems as though there has to be some sort of help? Or does s%@* really just happen?
shmikee

Trad climber
Cheyenne,Wyoming
Oct 1, 2006 - 03:43am PT
Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God. Hebrews 3:4
http://www.watchtower.org/library/w/2000/6/15/article_01.htm
shmikee

Trad climber
Cheyenne,Wyoming
Oct 1, 2006 - 03:47am PT
Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God. Hebrews 3:4
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/article_02.htm
brett kassell

Trad climber
san jose, ca
Oct 1, 2006 - 03:48am PT
why do so many people believe in god?

take a climb up:

any climb in yosemite and you will know, my brohaminus

maybe not, but if you are ever very close to death, you will know. me, i see god in every locker hand jam i get in my life.
Wonder

climber
WA
Oct 1, 2006 - 04:52am PT
Buddhists believe in a mind stream that continues on for life after life. They do not believe in one creator god. We do believe in many higher powers. You can call them gods and you can ask them to help you but you never submit yourself to them. Take Tara for example, she is there to protect you from all your fears but she never asks you for anything. So you offer her praise. All buddhist higher powers will help you through your mind stream but wont demand anything from you. We all come into existence through interdependent causes and conditions.

rw-edit-karl baba is on to this
Jennie

Trad climber
Salt Lake
Oct 1, 2006 - 07:13am PT
" Is it logical to believe in something that cannot be proved?"

Can anything be proved using logic? Logic, a sequential evolution of human thought, is imperfect simply because it cannot prove all truths. Yet, mortals attempt logic, believing it their best tool in divining knowledge of the universe around them. Decide for yourself the value of human logic. But this is the "logical" (cosmological and ontological) argument for the existence of God:

The cosmological argument takes the existence of the universe to entail the existence of a being that created it. It does so based on the fact that the universe had a beginning. There must, the first cause argument says, be something that caused that beginning, a "first cause" of the universe.

The universe consists of a series of events stretched across time in a long causal chain. Each one of these events is the cause of the event that comes after it, and the effect of the event that comes before it. The world as it is came from the world as it was, which came from the world as it was before.
If we trace this series of events back in time, then what do we find? There seem, at first glance, to be two possibilities: either we eventually reach the first event in the series, the cause at the beginning of the universe that set everything going, or there is no first event in the series and the past stretches back into infinity.

The first cause argument tells us that the second of these is not possible, that the past cannot stretch back into infinity but rather must have a beginning. The argument then proceeds by suggesting that if the universe has a beginning then there must be something outside it that brought it into existence.

This being outside the universe, this Creator, the first cause argument tells us, is God.

If I told you that I had just counted down from infinity to zero, starting with “infinity minus zero” and carrying on until I reached “infinite minus infinity, i.e zero”, then you would know that this claim is false. Just as it is impossible to count up from zero to infinity, so it is impossible to count down from infinity to zero. If I had started counting down from infinity and kept going, then I would still be counting to this day; I would not have finished. My claim to have counted down from infinity to zero must be false. This is because it is impossible to traverse an infinite series.

The idea that the universe has an infinite past is just as problematic as the idea that I have just counted down from infinity. If the universe had an infinite past, then time would have had to count down from infinity to reach time zero, the present, and so would not have reached it. The fact that we have reached the present therefore shows that the past is not infinite but finite. The universe has a beginning. This claim, of course, has been confirmed by modern science, who trace the universe back to a point of origin in the ‘big bang’.

The past cannot go back forever, then; the universe must have a beginning. The next question is whether something caused this beginning, or whether the universe just popped into existence out of nothing. We all know, though, that nothing that begins to exist does so without a cause; nothing comes from nothing. For something to come into existence there must be something else that already exists that can bring it into existence. The fact that the universe began to exist therefore implies that something brought it into existence, that the universe has a Creator.

If this Creator were a being like the universe, a being that exists in time and so that came into existence, then it too would have to have been created by something. Nothing comes from nothing, not even God.

This tells us that the ultimate cause of the universe must never have come into existence; the ultimate Creator must be a being that exists outside of time, an eternal being with neither beginning nor end.

Assume that modern science is correct in saying that the universe began with a big bang, that the universe came into existence with an explosion that sent pieces of matter flying in all directions at an enormous rate. The big bang might have been other than it was; it might have involved more or less matter, or have involved a larger or a smaller explosion, for example.
That the big bang occurred as it did was crucial for the development of life, because the rate of expansion of the universe, i.e. the speed at which the pieces of matter flew apart, had to fall within certain limits if life was to develop.
Had the rate of expansion been too slow, then gravity would have pulled all of the matter back together again in a big crunch; there wouldn’t have been enough time for life to emerge.

Had the rate of expansion been too fast, then gravity wouldn’t have had a chance to pull any of the pieces of matter together, and planets, stars and even gases wouldn’t have been able to form; there wouldn’t have been anything for life to emerge on.
The rate of expansion following the big bang, of course, was just right to allow life to develop; if it weren’t then we wouldn’t be here now.

That this was the case, though, was either an extraordinary fluke, or was intended by the big bang’s Creator.
Had the rate of expansion been even fractionally slower then the big bang would have been followed by a big crunch before life could have developed.
Had the rate of expansion been even fractionally faster then stars and planets could not have formed.

It is highly unlikely that a random big bang would be such as to allow life to develop, and therefore highly unlikely, according to the argument from design, that the big bang from which our universe was formed happened at random.

The fact that the universe is fit for life requires explanation, and an appeal to chance is no explanation at all. It is far more likely that the universe was initiated by a being that intended to create a universe that could support life. The fine-tuning of the universe for life can only be explained with reference to a Creator, as the result of intelligent design.

The ontological argument is an argument for God’s existence based entirely on reason. According to this argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; we can work out that he exists just by thinking about it. Philosophers call such arguments a priori arguments.

There clearly are certain claims that we can tell are false without even having to look into them to find out. The claim to have made a four-sided triangle, and the claim to be over six feet tall but less than five, for example, are both claims that are obviously false. We know that triangles have three sides. We know that being over six feet tall means being over five feet tall too. No one that understands what the words in these claims mean would think that they might be true. There’s no need to spend time looking for four-sided triangles or tall short people in order to know that there aren’t any.

The ontological argument claims that the idea that God doesn’t exist is just as absurd as the idea that a four-sided triangle does. According to the ontological argument, we can tell that the claim that God doesn’t exist is false without having to look into it in any detail. Just as knowing what “triangle” means makes it obvious that a four-sided triangle is impossible, the argument suggests, knowing what “God” means makes it obvious that God’s non-existence is impossible. The claim that God does not exist is self-contradictory.

There are many things that something would have to be in order to be properly called “God”. For instance, it would have to be all-powerful, because a part of what “God” means is “all-powerful”. To call something that isn’t all-powerful God would be like calling a shape that doesn’t have three sides a triangle; to anyone who understands the words involved it just wouldn’t make sense. Another part of what “God” mean is “perfect”; something can’t properly be called God unless it is perfect. This is the key idea behind the ontological argument.
If something is perfect, then it couldn’t possibly be better than it is; there can’t be anything better than perfection. This means that if a thing is perfect then it is impossible to imagine it being better than it is; there is nothing better than it is to imagine.

If we think of God as being perfect—and perfection, remember, is part of the concept of God—then we must therefore think of God as a being that cannot be imagined to be better than he is. As St Anselm, the inventor of the ontological argument, put it, God is “that than which no greater can be conceived.”

It is therefore impossible to conceive either of there being anything greater than God or of it being possible to imagine God being better than he already is.

If we were to think of God as not existing, though, then we would be able to imagine him being better than he is; we would be able to imagine him existing, and a God that exists is clearly better than a God that doesn’t. To think of God as not existing, then, is to think of God as being imperfect, because a God that doesn’t exist could be better than he is.

The idea of an imperfect God, though, we have already said, is just as absurd as the idea of a four-sided triangle; “perfect” is part of what “God” means, just as “three-sided” is part of what “triangle” means. As the idea that God doesn’t exist implies his imperfection, therefore, the idea that God doesn’t exist is just as absurd, just as obviously false, as the idea that a four-sided triangle does. God’s non-existence is therefore impossible.

I, personally, do not believe the "logical argument" given here or other "logic based" arguments ABSOLUTELY PROVE the existence of God. Many if not most Christians believe proof comes only through communion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Some religions, outside Christianity have inspiration or revealation based precepts (that roughly parallel this Holy Spirit doctrine).

Some will see this as a sermon, I intended it to demonstrate that some find the existence of God entirely within the realm of logic.
Mountain Man

Trad climber
Outer space
Oct 1, 2006 - 08:40am PT
Divine Interventions by Dan Millman.

pg 132 Transformation at Lourdes

pg 155 Our Lady of Guadalupe
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 1, 2006 - 08:50am PT
You can look around the earth and see granger, Yosemite etc.

But for every example of granger you can find examples of human suffering that would sicken you.

Face it. Living in America you won the lottery. You have no idea of what it is to go Hungry or live in the constant fear of death. We hide in out material world and rarely think of the rest of the world unless it slows down our constant search for pleasure.

I for one think the whole belief in God is for the less enlightened.

What does it matter. The whole question is irrelevant.

I behave in a moral way not because I fear some type of punishment.

All Physics says is that matter and energy are equivalent. It says nothing about an intelligence behind the expanding bubble.


JDF

Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 1, 2006 - 10:02am PT
Wonder wrote
"Buddhists believe in a mind stream that continues on for life after life. They do not believe in one creator god."

I'm not a Buddhist but find many truths in Buddhist writings, just as I do in the writings of many religions. I do find that they all suffer from the corruption brought on my time, politics, and human nature.

Buddha didn't deny God, he refused to talk about a God and didn't consider God a factor in freeing oneself. It's my feeling that's because once you start applying human perspective and concepts to God, you inevitably miscontrue God. (some members of some religions have God degraded to the worst torturing, despotic, egoistic tyrant imaginable)

Buddha didn't mention those other Demigods either nor condone Buddha worship, those are examples of corruption that has creaped into Buddhism. That doesn't mean that demigods don't exist or that Buddha Worship doesn't work, just that they have nothing to do with origninal Buddhism.

I think intention is everything. We are like children who can't truly know the "name" or nature of our source. If we approach "God" with good intentions, we get inspiration. If you baby is screaming "Da.da" you still come.

But we also make assumptions about the meaning of life and deny or condemn God because of suffering. That's like waking up in jail after a bender where you forget what the outside world is like, and thinking life sucks and there aren't any pretty girls.

This life is more like an epic climb. You fear, you suffer, and you grow from the adventure.

Peace

Karl
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 1, 2006 - 10:42am PT


Spwllinf hAS has never been =MY STRONG POINT.


i LIKE NUMBERS.

jDF
TimM

Trad climber
somewhere on the Sierra Eastside
Oct 1, 2006 - 11:36am PT
Until 2 years ago I was an atheist. My new belief in God was, in part, inspired and summarized by the following verses:

16And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. 17In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him. 18There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. 19We love because he first loved us. 20If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. 21And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother. (1John 4:16-21, NIV)


Cheers,

Tim
ron gomez

Trad climber
fallbrook,ca
Oct 1, 2006 - 12:11pm PT
But Juan the questions IS...do you believe in god? Or...who(m) is God (god)? Im currently confused as to which one. Well gotta go...heading to Church (church)
Peace
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 1, 2006 - 12:57pm PT
DMT wrote
"Juan there is a god gene. You know this is true."

Yeah man, There is a certain kinda woman in a certain kind of jeans that always make me say "God!"
Mighty Hiker

Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Oct 1, 2006 - 01:24pm PT
Q: What do you call an agnostic, dyslexic, imsomniac?

A: Someone who stays up at night, wondering if there is a dog.
mdavid

Big Wall climber
CA, CO, TX
Oct 1, 2006 - 01:33pm PT
because we don't have any real idea what happens when we die.
And that scares most very deeply.
rockermike

Mountain climber
Berkeley
Oct 1, 2006 - 04:15pm PT
Why do people believe that reality has no source or purpose if there is no proof that it has no source or purpose?

"As an explanation of the
world, materialism has a
sort of insane simplicity. It
has just the quality of the
madman’s arguments; we
have at once the sense of it
covering everything and
the sense of it leaving
everything out."
G.K. Chesterton,
"Orthodoxy"
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 1, 2006 - 04:33pm PT
wow jody. i mean jenny. that was quite a lecture. in a god (i mean good) way.
Ouch!

climber
Oct 1, 2006 - 04:44pm PT
Hawkeye, can't be Jody unless it is just copied from someone else.

Can you imagine Jody using the word "ontological"

LOL!
pud

climber
Sportbikeville
Oct 1, 2006 - 04:58pm PT
I think believing in god is a positive thing for some and negative for others.
The man that does not litter because he thinks it a sin is doing me a favor.
The man that tries to kill me because I do not believe as he does is my enemy.
When one believes in a kind and generous god that does not condone senseless violence towards others, I have no problem sharing this world with them.
When a man invokes god's name in order to reason away his hateful acts, I refuse to accept his existence.
I believe in a higher power that has saved my life more than once and I believe I am responsible for my actions while I visit this planet.
I believe in a personal god that may be nothing more than a cool breeze or as much as a natural disaster.


Mighty Hiker

Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Oct 1, 2006 - 05:00pm PT
Fastest growing religious identification in the U.S.: Atheist and agnostic.

Anders

edit: damfino
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 1, 2006 - 05:15pm PT
Ouch!:
Hawkeye, can't be Jody unless it is just copied from someone else.

http://www.existence-of-god.com/first-cause-argument.html
Ouch!

climber
Oct 1, 2006 - 06:14pm PT
Chiloe...LOL!
Mountain Man

Trad climber
Outer space
Oct 1, 2006 - 06:56pm PT
I have to laugh, this is like a latenight college dorm, talking about the same subject.

Jennie

Trad climber
Salt Lake
Oct 2, 2006 - 12:11am PT
Hawkeye and Ouch:

Jody is a mainline conservative Protestant. Jennie is Mormon( a NON-protestant denomination) Mormon's do not subscribe to the concept of knowing the existence of God through logic (alone).

If you read the first and last paragraphs of my post I noted that the body of the discourse contained the mainline Christian's logicians attempt at justifying God's existence with LOGIC. (not my logic, but if logic is your way to God, then the logic I presnted as the quintessential Christain logicians view is a pretty sound argument)

Jody can speak for his own position--his views vary substancially from mine. I stated that I did not believe logic was hinge on which the door of God's existence swings. Since Juan question weighed in on the LOGIC angle, I posted the basic, mainline Christian logician position. This statement appears in many places,(books and internet) other than the link Chloe posted.

But please don't stop refering to me as Jody---it means instant notoriety and celebrity for an ST nobody.
Mungeclimber

Trad climber
one pass away from the big ditch
Oct 2, 2006 - 02:32am PT
"One being that human beings have innate sense of right or wrong"


"If God doesn't exist, this moral code doesn't exist and consciousness doesn't exist."

These two statements are contradictory. You probably meant something slightly different. However, the second statement is a false dichotomy. Either A or B. If not A, then therefore necessarily B. Which of course does not offer up explanation C at all.

Logic can be fun.

I am conscious.
I am a person with a moral code.
God does not exist.

Please reconcile these statements as made by a singular individual.

I wanted to get into that big long post about the cosmological argument for the existence of god. Also the ontological and de-ontological.

Quite simply our language is filled with metaphysical meaning. We can't get away from it. It is in metaphor. However, why? I'm not worried about people believing in a faith or god. I'm worried about people using that faith to rise to power as an elected official blowing sh#t loads of money and good soldiers dying for a country that instead of eliminating terrorism, now explicitly has created a cause celeb for it. Iraq as the poster child for terror recruitment. Further, the politicizing of 'the war on terror' and not helping the Afghani gov't recover is down right reprehensible.

oh crap, I'm sorry. this is not a climbing post. drawn into it again. damn.

late
Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 06:58am PT
Being an atheist is a lot like being single.

You spend an astonshing amount of time and effort telling everyone, over and over, that, really, you’re perfectly happy being single.

You keep telling everyone how great it is to be free to do whatever you want.

You say that it’s great not being answerable to anyone.

You say that you can just play the field, have a little of everything without all the burdens and responsibilities.

You say that it’s just terrific not to have to go to the parents’ house on Sunday.

You even take take the time and effort to laugh or sometimes tut and shake your head sadly, when you see folks who aren’t single arguing.

Some particularly bitter singletons even go out of their way to harangue and pressure people they know who are in relationships, telling them that the single lifestyle would be so much better and they should dump that baggage and be free.

But you know and everybody knows that if you’re single for life, you’re going to miss a whole world of fulfilment and reward which can only ever come from a long-term stable relationship based on a serious commitment.

Atheism can never, ever bring fulfilment or satisfaction, because atheism is just an empty space where part of life should be. It’s a vacuum. A void. It’s sitting still with an empty brain. Fulfilment doesn’t come from doing nothing at all. It can’t. Atheism is a belief system like not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Atheism creates nothing, does nothing and leads nowhere. It has no value, no reward and no benefit, because it is nothing.

TradIsGood

Fun-loving climber
the Gunks end of the country
Oct 2, 2006 - 07:19am PT
Because the ones they trusted only spilled the beans about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Oct 2, 2006 - 07:47am PT
"Atheism can never, ever bring fulfilment or satisfaction, because atheism is just an empty space where part of life should be. It’s a vacuum. A void. It’s sitting still with an empty brain. Fulfilment doesn’t come from doing nothing at all. It can’t. Atheism is a belief system like not collecting stamps is a hobby."

Or, it is the ultimatte path to fufillment, puts the onus on you, no lollygaging on the rules.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 07:58am PT
"Atheism can never, ever bring fulfilment or satisfaction, because atheism is just an empty space where part of life should be."

Can you explain how you know that I live a empty life without even knowing me?

"It’s a vacuum. A void. It’s sitting still with an empty brain."

Can you please explain what you mean with this? Are you saing that atheists dont use there brains? That philosophers like Bertrand Russel didn't think?

"Fulfilment doesn’t come from doing nothing at all"

Once again what is the connection with ateism and doing nothing? Here is a list of atheists,

http://www.wonderfulatheistsofcfl.org/Quotes.htm,

are the famous because the did nothing?

"It can’t."

I think this is kind of true. Doing nothing is not a good way for fullfilment. I dont see the connection to religion, atheism though.

"Atheism is a belief system like not collecting stamps is a hobby."

??

"Atheism creates nothing, does nothing and leads nowhere. It has no value, no reward and no benefit, because it is nothing."

What do you mean? Are you saing that atheism dont exist? In that case why?

Are you saing that atheists dont do anything good? I have to disagree with you in that case. I just think for example Einsteins has done quite a lot for the world.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:05am PT
here's some believers for ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_EKHK1C2IE

Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:08am PT
There's nothing complicated about this:

An atheist may have a fulfilling life, but the filfilment must come from something other than their atheism. Atheism provides nothing, because it is nothing: it is literally "a-theism", that is without a god". A space where God is in other's lives, a self-created gap which has no function of any kind.

By all means, go live without God if you can. But let's face it, you don't seem to be able to stop discussing him, arguing about him and telling others he doesn't exist, do you?

Atheism isn't closing your eyes and saying, "I can't see!". It's closing your eyes and saying, "there's no such thing as light!".
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:23am PT
Scary Sh1t, D-know.

"By all means, go live without God if you can. But let's face it, you don't seem to be able to stop discussing him, arguing about him and telling others he doesn't exist, do you?

Atheism isn't closing your eyes and saying, "I can't see!". It's closing your eyes and saying, "there's no such thing as light!"."

Wow an agenda! feeling a bit weak in your confidence, blight? Shout louder.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:33am PT
frightening indeed!

some more godliness.

http://www.alligator.org/pt2/061002eddy1.php
raymond phule

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:45am PT
"An atheist may have a fulfilling life, but the filfilment must come from something other than their atheism."

True and well put. But is it possibly to have a fullfilling life based on faith without doing something? Is the only advantage with faith that you can do nothing and still have a fullfilling life? If so is that a good thing?

"Atheism provides nothing, because it is nothing: it is literally "a-theism", that is without a god"."

It might not provide something but it also give you the opportunity to not live your life under a religion. I belive this is a god thing.

"A space where God is in other's lives, a self-created gap which has no function of any kind."

I am more a beliver in that some people has a gap that needs to be filled by a God and that atheist dont have and never had this gap that needs to be filled.



"By all means, go live without God if you can. But let's face it, you don't seem to be able to stop discussing him, arguing about him and telling others he doesn't exist, do you? "

A lot of assumptions. I dont care what people belive in if it doesn't affect other people. I have never tried to convience someone that God doesn't exist but I have tried to point out the errors in peoples arguments a couple of times.

Your post was negative against atheists and I belive that it is much more religous people trying to convience atheist that God exist compared to the other way around.

Atheism isn't closing your eyes and saying, "I can't see!". It's closing your eyes and saying, "there's no such thing as light!".

I dont think this metaphor says anything. A better metaphor is a blind man arguing that light doesn't exist because he cant see. He cant know if there are light or not, his only opinion is to belive. I haven't seen a single argument for the existens of a God that is even remotely conviencing according to me. The blind man hoppfully get some good arguments for the existens of light.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 09:22am PT
I dont think this metaphor says anything.

Well, of course you don't.

You say you don't see that God exists and see no good arguments. But almost everyone else on earth does. Over 90% of all human beings have some kind of religion, based on their own experience which is that God exists.

But just because you don't have that experience, you claim that no-one else can.

Which, of course, makes no sense at all.

I dont care what people belive in if it doesn't affect other people.

Well, you'd want to keep a close eye on yourself then. Four of the top five mass murderers of all time were atheists, responsible for over 100 million deaths. Atheism dwarfs religion in the sheer violence and brutality of its history.

Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 2, 2006 - 09:25am PT
interesting.

my GF's daughter is (was) atheist, she was raised that way. she is 20 and now has a christian BF.

she is a good person and a good girl. this christian kid did not get it. he asked her "why don't you sleep around, get drunk, etc." "I mean if you dont believe in god, why dont you just go do whatever you want?"

this kid could not believe that someone could have as high (or higher) moral values without god. it was hard for him to fathom that someone would be good because that was the right thing to do. seems like there are many believers out there who think the same way. astonishing.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 2, 2006 - 09:29am PT
yeah right sir blight.

the suffering inflicted on the people of the world by so called christians over the last thousand years makes me want to be part of the herd.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 10:01am PT

"Well, of course you don't."

I tried to give a better one.

"You say you don't see that God exists and see no good arguments."

Correct

"But almost everyone else on earth does."

God arguments or fear, social norms etc?

"Over 90% of all human beings have some kind of religion, based on their own experience which is that God exists."

Or because there parents and sociaty told them to. Many philosophers have tried to prove that God exist but I have to admitt that I dont by them.

Almost 100% of western children belive in Santa Claus. Does that prove that he exist?

"But just because you don't have that experience, you claim that no-one else can."

No, I haven't claimed that. I belive faith can be good for people. I dont belive that it is necessary for me though.

You on the other hand claimed that I miss something because I dont have faith in God.


"Which, of course, makes no sense at all."

Making a straw man and destroing it dont prove that you are correct.


"Well, you'd want to keep a close eye on yourself then. Four of the top five mass murderers of all time were atheists, responsible for over 100 million deaths. Atheism dwarfs religion in the sheer violence and brutality of its history."

You might be right about the massmurders. Who are you talking about? Hitler, Stalin, Mao? Pol pot?
Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler Doesn't seem that Hitler was an atheist.


I dont like these kind of generalisations. I have problem to fel responsibly for some nutcases that died many years before I got born. I doubt that you like to be resposibly for which burning for example.

A lot of bad things have been done in the name of religion over the years. Bad things have probably been done in the name of atheism also. I cant blame Hitler and the second world war on atheism. Do you blame ateism when a crazy atheist takes over a country and start a war?

You want to make the point that atheism is more dangerous compared to religion. You try to do that by taking into account the largest massmurders. You avoid many bads things by only considering the worst cases. The cumulative bad things from religion might be larger. I dont know and it is very difficullt to measure.

I have problem to see religion as peacemaking when I look at the world and see all conficts that exist because of religion.

Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 10:28am PT
God arguments or fear, social norms etc? Or because there parents and sociaty told them to.

Well, thanks for speaking for all of us. I like the imaginary indoctrination bit.

Because of course if they were religious of their own free will, because of their own personal experiences of God, that would shoot the sh#t out of your argument, wouldn't it?

Because then, almost everyone would know that God existed except you, and you'd STILL be claiming that almost everyone in the world was wrong except you.

You on the other hand claimed that I miss something because I dont have faith in God.

Yes, you are!

You literally have less to your life than someone who has faith, because they have everything you do PLUS faith, and all that comes with it. In your life you have the same as them, MINUS faith.

Well I bet that stings. Oh well, tough sh#t.

I dont like these kind of generalisations.

Whoops, shoulda thought of that BEFORE you started claiming that all religious people are wrong, brainwashed and gullible.

Oh yeah, and:

I have problem to see religion as peacemaking when I look at the world and see all conficts that exist because of religion

You keep on coming out with crude generalisations like that one, and I'll keep pointing out that 100 million people have been murdered by only 5 atheists: if you want to play the "religion is responsible for so much suffering" card, you're going to have to swallow this: atheism is responsible for far, far worse things than religion could ever dream of.
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 10:37am PT
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 2, 2006 - 10:59am PT
blight,
"You literally have less to your life than someone who has faith, because they have everything you do PLUS faith, and all that comes with it. In your life you have the same as them, MINUS faith."

Life + Faith is still equal to Life.

therefore,

faith = ZERO.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 11:06am PT
Yup, I thought that would hurt, hawkeye.

Still, life's tough sometimes. Oh and you can probably kid yourself that a life with no faith, no hope, no peace, no God and no purpose to it has just as much in it as with with all those things, but that's the only person you're kidding.

After all, if there's no truth to it then why were you butt hurt enough to make a snippy reply?
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 2, 2006 - 11:07am PT
Whether you are a theist, atheist or agnostic is just a blip in the conceptual area of your mind that may or may not make a difference in how you live. If you ask me God doesn't give a damn what you believe. God's grace is conducted by the intention of the heart.

Some Atheists or Agnostics are simply being honest about not having enough information or experience to acknowledge a reality that is hard to fathom and whose existence is cloaked with myth, superstition and political corruption.

Real connection with Spirit can exist without conscious conception of God and Religion. Real spirituality is marked by a capacity for love and peace of mind, whoever, whereever, and however it arises.

Belief in God goes away when you are sleeping, eating or doing anything else. Spiritual connection is who you are all the time

Peace

Karl
Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 11:08am PT
Wow, I can't believe raymond phule's actually defending hitler.

Wow.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 11:31am PT
"Well, thanks for speaking for all of us. I like the imaginary indoctrination bit."

Ok, I am going to try to explain what I meant. A lot of personal beliefs and such come from the enviroment. Children belive in Santa becuase their parents and society tell them that he exist. It is likely that your political views are similar to the people around you. It is much more likely that your religious beliefs is cristian if you live in the US with christian parents compared to if you live in india with hindu parents. This is how it works and I wouldn't call it indoctrination. Can you explain in some other way that the religous beliefs is different in different parts of the world?


"Because of course if they were religious of their own free will, because of their own personal experiences of God, that would shoot the sh#t out of your argument, wouldn't it?"

As above, I dont belive that everybody choices religion or atheism by there own by taken a reasoned choice. How do you explain hindu in India, christian in the US and many secular in northern europe and at the same time complete freedom of choice?

"Because then, almost everyone would know that God existed except you, and you'd STILL be claiming that almost everyone in the world was wrong except you."

Proff by concensious is not a valid argument. Most people belived that the relativity theory was incorrect but it turned out to be correct. Everybody know that the earth was flat.

I dont claim that God doesn't exist. I dont belive that he doesn't exist but cant prove it.

"You literally have less to your life than someone who has faith, because they have everything you do PLUS faith, and all that comes with it. In your life you have the same as them, MINUS faith."

I cant see why faith should be that important compared to other stuff. I have a lot of things both spiritual and material. I am sure that I have a better life compared to many religous people with faith. Or are you again suggesting that I am unlucky because I have no faith? You said before that a fullfilling life was possibly for an atheist.


"Well I bet that stings. Oh well, tough sh#t."

No it didn't sting actually.

"Whoops, shoulda thought of that BEFORE you started claiming that all religious people are wrong, brainwashed and gullible."

I have tried to explained above what I belive about brainwashed and gullible. I belive that it is mostly a cultural thing.

I must be allowed to belive that most people are wrong in a matter where there are no proofs?


"You keep on coming out with crude generalisations like that one, and I'll keep pointing out that 100 million people have been murdered by only 5 atheists: if you want to play the "religion is responsible for so much suffering" card, you're going to have to swallow this: atheism is responsible for far, far worse things than religion could ever dream of. "

First, can you tell me which crual acts you are talking about?

Second, I dont think atheism is responsible for an action just because the person is atheist in the same way that I dont blame the religion if a religous person make an action. I belive that most of your examples have nothing to do with religion and I have thus a problem to blame religion.

A lot of bad things have been done in the name of the religion (or atleast people claiming that it is for the religion). Some examples Irland, Yugoslavia, which burning, the crusades, 9/11 etc. This doesn't show that religions is bad but that bad things have been done.

My point is that bad things happen and have happened in the world both by atheist and religous people and that the problem is the people not if they have faith or not.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 11:34am PT
"Wow, I can't believe raymond phule's actually defending hitler.

Wow."

Sorry, did I defend Hitler? Must go back and read my post once again. Back soon.

I am back. So I wrote

" I cant blame Hitler and the second world war on atheism. Do you blame ateism when a crazy atheist takes over a country and start a war?"

Ok, not the best sentence but I am supprised that some one could belive that I defended Hitler by that sentence...

Ok, for Blight. I thought Hitler was one of the massmurders you refered to. Then I wanted to make the point that the reason for Hitlers crimes wasn't because he was an atheist but becuase he was a cracy lunatic. I found out later that Hitler wasn't an atheist and made an edit. But didn't edit the rest of the post. So I dont defend Hitler.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 12:02pm PT
Can you explain in some other way that the religous beliefs is different in different parts of the world?

No, and I'm not going to either because it's a completely irrelevant distinction.

There are thousands of different languages in the world, with regional variations. Does that mean that all languages are wrong? Or do they all serve the same purpose almost equally well?

First, can you tell me which crual acts you are talking about?

Nope. You say that religion is responsible for non-specific "conflicts", I'll keep hitting you with non-specific murders by atheists until you stop it. Don't like the taste of your own medicine? Quit dishing it out then.

Proof by concensious is not a valid argument.

Of course it is. I've never been to Hong Kong, but a hell of a lot of people tell me it exists. Would it make any sense at all for me to say Hong Kong definitely doesn't exist because I haven't seen it?

Cos that's the argument you're using.
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 02:28pm PT
Lots of people are schizophrenic too, but that doesn't mean the voices in their heads are real. But feel free to maintain whatever relationship with whatever imaginary friend you need to keep you from committing mass genocide. Probably for the best.

WBraun

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 02:38pm PT
Why do so many people believe in God?

It's so simple, all the speculation and foolish nonsense in these threads is a mind blower.

It's because we are part parcel of the supreme lord. We have all the qualities but not the quantities. There never exists any separation from him, only forgetfulness due to our rebellious nature and independent free will.
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 02:43pm PT
And that's our fault but not "His"? What a strange little game he plays. On the one hand taking credit for all that is, but on the other disavowing responsibility for his own creation's "rebelliousness." Sounds bipolar to me.
WBraun

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 02:46pm PT
cintune

You are just a foolish mental speculator.
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2006 - 02:55pm PT
How does God keep track of all of us?

Why does he do such a bad job?

Juan
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2006 - 02:57pm PT

phoolish

Boulder climber
Athens, Ga.
Oct 2, 2006 - 03:00pm PT
Blight:

some data for you:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited."

-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922

"We are determined, as leaders of the nation, to fulfill as a national government the task which has been given to us, swearing fidelity only to God, our conscience, and our Volk.... This the national government will regard its first and foremost duty to restore the unity of spirit and purpose of our Volk. It will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests. It will take Christianity, as the basis of our collective morality, and the family as the nucleus of our Volk and state, under its firm protection....May God Almighty take our work into his grace, give true form to our will, bless our insight, and endow us with the trust of our Volk."

-Adolf Hitler, on 1 Feb. 1933, addressing the German nation as Chancellor for the first time, Volkischer Beobachter, 5 Aug. 1935

"We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls.... We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people."

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Zehlendorf,



You'll probably really like this one:

"We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933
Manjusri

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 03:12pm PT
Man is not omniscient, therefore there exists that which is unknown and transcendent. There are as many different ways of conceptualizing this as there are people, and the name it goes by for most is "god". To paraphrase Roger Zelazny: Some people bow before the unknown and avert their eyes, and others advance upon it with the tools available to the mind to make it known.




JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2006 - 03:14pm PT
I just wish God got the Human Spine Design Correct.

Or maybe made gravity a little less strong.

JDF
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 03:28pm PT
A foolish mental speculator? Gee, thanks Werner! I suppose I could call you a foolish fairy-tale believer, but that wouldn't be very civil, especially considering the high regard you deservedly enjoy around here. Actions speak louder than words, after all. People believe what they want to believe for deeply personal reasons, which is why religion is typically off-limits in polite conversation. But I agree with whomever posted here above saying that if there is a god, it really shouldn't care what people think of it. Behaving compassionately toward our fellows does not require the dictate of a supreme being, however. It's just been too often the case that people have used their God as an excuse to behave like absolute shits to each other.
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 2, 2006 - 03:47pm PT
blight
"Yup, I thought that would hurt, hawkeye.

Still, life's tough sometimes. Oh and you can probably kid yourself that a life with no faith, no hope, no peace, no God and no purpose to it has just as much in it as with with all those things, but that's the only person you're kidding.

After all, if there's no truth to it then why were you butt hurt enough to make a snippy reply? "

poor blight. i apologize if i hurt your feelings. i am not butt hurt. i almost added something to that post. something like this...

i believe in god. it took me a while to get there, but i do. i admire those that are fulfilled in their lives whether they have god or not. machs nicht as hitler would have said.

the difference i see in you and i is that i do not need to make my beliefs known, nor do i need to argue so strongly one way or the other as you are here.

why do i believe in god? because of what has happened in my life.

my god may not be your god. i disagree with worshipping a stuck jesus on a cross. i disagree with arguing so vehemently that i am right and you are wrong. i have never travelled your road and you have not travelled mine. i can be a brother to other people who believe differently than i. my relationship with god is not something that i have to share with others, nor is it something that i need to go to church.

i am not certain that the bible we have today is the truth. man has been involved in translating and recording the bible and man is not always righteous or correct. he f*#ks up sometimes.

in short, my faith that i have is good, but i do not presume to know that my life is richer than others who do not share that.

i do not vote republican.

i dont give to churches ever since i built houses 30 yrs ago. i built a house for a guy who handled the LDS chruch money. it was disgusting how much money the guy had.

sorry for the blather, blight.

if you cannot lighten up, then your life is dark dark dark....
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2006 - 03:50pm PT
Werner has the SAR stuff down. But aside from that he is nuttier than a fruitcake.

JDF
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 2, 2006 - 03:52pm PT
fits in great here then. hehe
WBraun

climber
Oct 2, 2006 - 04:44pm PT
cintune

I could call you a foolish fairy-tale believer .....

You already have in many posts previous indirectly, not that I give a sh#t.

Those who are mental speculators, those who are fruitive workers, those who are mediators or mystic yogis, cannot explain the science of God.

Do you really want me to go into it ( about your questions )? Do you really want to hear it Juan? I don't think so Juan. I don't believe you really are sincere enough.

You are always trolling, and thus have fallen under the example of the boy who cried wolf to many times.
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 2, 2006 - 05:17pm PT
Its not a troll Werner,

I think many people blindly believe in God out of Fear.

People should question their beliefs.

We cannot all be right. Either I am wrong or you are wrong.

Juan
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 05:37pm PT
WB: Do you really want me to go into it ( about your questions )?

 If you've got the time, sure. To be clear, however, I have already spent a good bit of time reading the Vedas, likewise the major Kundalini and Mahayana texts. I think they all display a great depth of psychological insight and share a vision of human potential that is inspirational in ways that go far beyond anything found in contemporary Western religion. But I remain atheistic, because I was raised on science instead of mysticism.
What interests me the most, really, is your apparent willingness to lump these traditions together under the generic heading of "God," when you clearly view godhead as Krishna, not Yahweh and/or Christ, which is what most of the other "religious" posters here mean in their devotions. Although there are similarities, such as the Diamond Sutra/Sermon on the Mount, there are also some serious differences that I find very difficult to reconcile. The god of the Old Testament, in particular, seems to be more of a demon than a god, in Vedic terms anyway. But that's what the Gnostics thought, so I suppose there may be a way to bridge over the confusions in those traditions. I'm not saying that fairy-tales can't have significant symbolic meaning.
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 2, 2006 - 08:18pm PT
Far Eastern religions in general are far more compatible with a modern scientific worldview than any of the monotheistic faiths, Gnosticism excluded.
Anastasia

Trad climber
Near a mountain, CA
Oct 3, 2006 - 12:25am PT
My father taught me to fear the unknown, especially when it came to what consequences he would implement when I went against him.
I call it the God complex.
I don't know, but I also don't want to find out by crossing the line.
Ouch!

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 02:12am PT
"That God has managed to survive the inanities of the religions that do him homage is truly a miraculous proof of his existence." --Ben Hecht ...

raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 03:51am PT
""Can you explain in some other way that the religous beliefs is different in different parts of the world?""

"No, and I'm not going to either because it's a completely irrelevant distinction."

No, it isn't. I live in a secular country and most people around me doesn't belive in God. This is very similar to the faith of people in india and the US.

"There are thousands of different languages in the world, with regional variations. Does that mean that all languages are wrong? Or do they all serve the same purpose almost equally well?"

What are the connection with God?

"First, can you tell me which crual acts you are talking about?"

""Nope. You say that religion is responsible for non-specific "conflicts", I'll keep hitting you with non-specific murders by atheists until you stop it. Don't like the taste of your own medicine? Quit dishing it out then.""

Sorry Blight but I actually mentioned conflicts and bad things that have happened in the name of religion. Once again Irland, Yugoslavia, 9/11, witch burning, the crusades and the aquisition. These are obvious examples and there definitely exist more.

""Proof by concensious is not a valid argument.""

"Of course it is. I've never been to Hong Kong, but a hell of a lot of people tell me it exists. Would it make any sense at all for me to say Hong Kong definitely doesn't exist because I haven't seen it?"

Ok, you have difficulties with logic. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/bandwagn.html

Everybody thought the world was flat. Could people prove that it was flat because of the concensous that it was flat?

Most knoweledge about the world have come because people questioned the world view that was dominant at the time. Flat world, earth in the center of the universe, the sun made of iron to name a few scientific. All people that first postulated what turned out to be the correct knoweledge in these cases was very badly handled by the people with the old view.

It's folish to deny the existens of Hong Kong because there exist a lot of evidense that it exist. Movies, pictures, people living there etc. Not because most people belive it exist.

"Cos that's the argument you're using."

One thing here is that I haven't claimed that God doesn't exist. I dont know if he exists or not. I dont belive he exist and I dont belive that it is possibly to prove that he exists or not.

You seems to suggest that he must exist because a lot of people belive he exist. This is not a valid argument.

You suggest that I am missing something in my life because I dont have faith. I disagree with you but I might be wrong.

I belive that you can have a fullfilling happy life without God.

I belive that it is more important what you do in life compared to if you belive in God or not.
shmikee

Trad climber
Cheyenne,Wyoming
Oct 3, 2006 - 04:50am PT
What Is God's Purpose?
MANY people who doubt the existence of an all-powerful, loving God ask: If God does exist, why has he allowed so much suffering and wickedness throughout history? Why does he allow the sorry state of things we see around us today? Why does he not do something to bring an end to war, crime, injustice, poverty, and other miseries that are escalating at an alarming rate in so many countries of the earth?
http://www.watchtower.org/e/19990208/article_02.htm
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 05:02am PT
At one point in time all the universe would fit in the tip of a pin.

So did God say BANG!

Did God know how it would turn out.

14 Billion years ago did God know what he would create?

If a God existed would he let his children suffer so?

Opps. We need a new explination for that.

JDF
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:15am PT
It's folish to deny the existens of Hong Kong because there exist a lot of evidense that it exist.

Then by that token it would be equally foolish to deny that God exists: there are literally tens of thousands of volumes of theoretical, eye-witness, philosophical, historical and written evidence for God's existence. In fact there are whole bookshops in every city dedicated to almost nothing else.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:17am PT
If a God existed would he let his children suffer so?

That's a good point.

But does God create our suffering? Or do we and our fellow men create it?

We have free will; why blame God for wars, famines and suffering which human beings create?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:27am PT
""It's folish to deny the existens of Hong Kong because there exist a lot of evidense that it exist. ""

"Then by that token it would be equally foolish to deny that God exists: there are literally tens of thousands of volumes of theoretical, eye-witness, philosophical, historical and written evidence for God's existence. In fact there are whole bookshops in every city dedicated to almost nothing else."

Sorry Blight but I haven't seen a single evidence that God exists. Cant you give me a reference to atleast a single one?
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 05:42am PT
If a God would stand by and let little girls be executed I have no need or time for that God.

Pathetic.

JDF
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 05:54am PT
I think I have figured it out.

We are in Hell.

The question is can we get out?

JDF
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 06:04am PT
"Sorry Blight but I haven't seen a single evidence that God exists. Cant you give me a reference to atleast a single one?"

We've already established that you can't see evidence because you're not looking.

So you want me to show you the book? Then you'll demand that I pick it up, find the page, read it out to you then explain it, right?

No dice. If you really want to know, you'll go look it up for yourself. Don't ask me to do your learning for you.

But since you won't bother, read this instead - Luke 16 verses 19-31. It's a story jesus told which describes people like you. See if you can understand it.

http://bibledev.azaz.com/bibleresources/passagesearchresults2.php?passage1=Luke+16&book_id=49&version1=31&tp=24&c=16

Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 06:06am PT
If a God would stand by and let little girls be executed I have no need or time for that God.

Oh, so it's God's fault because he didn't stop it?

Well, you didn't stop it either.

Does that make it your fault?

What makes more sense, to demand that God stop people from killing each other, or to look at why they're doing it and stop it ourselves?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 06:55am PT
"We've already established that you can't see evidence because you're not looking. So you want me to show you the book? Then you'll demand that I pick it up, find the page, read it out to you then explain it, right?"

Of course, you are the person that want to prove something and you should provide the evidence. It is that way in court and science for example. Isn't this obvious?

"No dice. If you really want to know, you'll go look it up for yourself. Don't ask me to do your learning for you."

This is also a comment that is so obvious faulty in all other cases than religion. A professor write paper about a theory without given any evidence for the theory just saing "If you really want to know, you'll go look it up for yourself. Don't ask me to do your learning for you." I can assure you that the paper is not going to be published.

"But since you won't bother, read this instead - Luke 16 verses 19-31. It's a story jesus told which describes people like you. See if you can understand it.

http://bibledev.azaz.com/bibleresources/passagesearchresults2.php?passage1=Luke+16&book_id=49&version1=31&tp=24&c=16"

Why should I belive anything in the bible as more than storys writting down several years after the actual happening? Why should I see Jesus in a another why than other philosopher like Platon, Kant, Nitche? Why should I belive that the bible is God words more than I belive in the Koran or the scientolog bible? Do you belive that both the Koran and the scientolog bible is true?

Think about why you dont belive these religions and books and you should be able to understand why I dont belive your holy book.


From the link.

"Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much."

I interpret this like I cant trust you with anything at all because you cant even backup your claim that 4 of the 5 worst massmurders where atheists. You might be right but you need to backup your claim to get any crediability.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:17am PT
Of course, you are the person that want to prove something and you should provide the evidence.

*sigh*

I'm not the one asking for evidence. You are. Read your own posts, man.

"Why should I belive anything in the bible as more than storys writting down blah blah blah bullshit bullshit bullshit blah blah"

The story says that if you're not going to bother looking at the evidence right in front of you, you're not going to believe anything I give you either.

Yes, there were idiots like you 2000 years ago too, and Jesus knew all about your bullshit and had it covered too.

Either do the research yourself or stop talking rubbish, shut up and go away. Either way works well for me (and for God, by the way).
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:26am PT
Oh and here's what Hitler had to say about christianity:

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941

"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....
"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....
"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things." (p 6 & 7)

10th October, 1941, midday

"Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure." (p 43)

14th October, 1941, midday

"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity....
"Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse....
"...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little....
"Christianity the liar....
"We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State." (p 49-52)

19th October, 1941, night

"The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity."

21st October, 1941, midday

"Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer....
"The decisive falsification of Jesus' doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work... for the purposes of personal exploitation....
"Didn't the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it's in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the
instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea." (p 63-65)

13th December, 1941, midnight

"Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.... ....
"When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease." (p 118-119)

14th December, 1941, midday

"Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself....
"Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism,
under a tinsel of metaphysics." (p 119 & 120)

9th April, 1942, dinner

"There is something very unhealthy about Christianity." (p 339)

27th February, 1942, midday

"It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie."
"Our epoch in the next 200 years will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold ." (p 278)

These are just a small sample.

Hitler knew that religion was a good way to manipulate people, but he wasn't religious himself. Read the quotes and look at his actions, for God's sake!

Oh, and if Hitler was an atheist, that would mean that 5 out of the top 5 were probably atheists. Thanks for bringing it up (although you;re not doing your side any favours).
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:42am PT
""Of course, you are the person that want to prove something and you should provide the evidence."

*sigh*

I'm not the one asking for evidence. You are. Read your own posts, man."

Blight. You say that good exists. I say that I dont know if God exist but I doubt it. This is similar to a prosecutor saying that person A killed someone. You are the prosecutor and I am the judge. It should be very clear for everyone that it is the prosecutors job to convience the judge that person A is a murder and that he should do it by given evidence. The judge is the person asking for evidence. Is this so difficult to understand?



""Why should I belive anything in the bible as more than storys writting down blah blah blah bullshit bullshit bullshit blah blah"

The story says that if you're not going to bother looking at the evidence right in front of you, you're not going to believe anything I give you either."

I am looking for evidence and you are correct that I am not going to belive you if you dont give me any evidence.

"Yes, there were idiots like you 2000 years ago too, and Jesus knew all about your bullshit and had it covered too."

Nice, some ad hominum. You call me and what is it 5 billion people in the world idiots. Thats a very good argument... or maybe not.

"Either do the research yourself or stop talking rubbish, shut up and go away. Either way works well for me (and for God, by the way)."

I am sure that your work as a prosecutor would end pretty soon.

Judge, do the investigation for yourself and send the prosecuted to death. You are a complete idiot if you cant see that he is quilty without getting any evidence. Your f*#king idiot.

Still waiting for the name of the 5 worst massmurders.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:49am PT
"Read the quotes and look at his actions, for God's sake!"

I have read the quotes and looked at the actions from George W Bush. The logical conclusion is that he cant be a christian either according to you. Or is it good christian values to lie, torture, manipulate and start offensive wars?



"Oh, and if Hitler was an atheist, that would mean that 5 out of the top 5 were probably atheists."

Cant you for the third or forth time give the name of the massmurders. Or is it good christian values to not back up claims and answering questions?

"Thanks for bringing it up (although you;re not doing your side any favours)."

Once again I have difficulties seeing this as two sides fighting each other. I see it as crazy people with or without fath do bad things.
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:49am PT
blight,

i checked out that link you provided to Luke 16. i was curious.

The Rich Man and Lazarus
19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[c] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

25"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

27"He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29"Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'

30" 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'

31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "


while i think helping others is great and everything, and perhaps the rich guy could have done so, arent we supposed to help ourselves? should america become more socialist?

and who do we listen to here on earth now? who are our prophets that will save us? if there is really some human on our earth now that can shed some light,well, inquiring minds want to know...

Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:51am PT
I am looking for evidence and you are correct that I am not going to belive you if you dont give me any evidence.

Raymond, this isn't a courtroom. It's a discussion forum. You want evidence? There are loads of places you can get it - if you're actually looking, which you're not, or you would've found plenty already.

I'm not looking for evidence, you are. So go find it if you really want it.

You call me and what is it 5 billion people in the world idiots.

No, just you, the guy who says he's looking for evidence but hasn't even bothered to go to a library or a bookshop, or even just to google for it.

Still waiting for the name of the 5 worst massmurders.

Google it you thick f*#k.
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:55am PT
Google it you thick f*#k.

lol, thanks for the help in finding god. a true missionary of the teachings of god.
lol
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:59am PT
while i think helping others is grat and everything, and perhaps the rich guy could have done so, arent we supposed to help ourselves?

Yes, of course you're right, we should help ourselves when we can. But sometimes we genuinely need help too.

That's what the parable is about.

We need to learn to recognise when people really can't do things on their own, and to help those people. But we also need to learn to not help them when they should be doing it for themselves.

Raymond is perfectly capable of looking for evidence of God himself. But he demands, like the rich man in the story, that I do everything for him. But just as in the parable, in real life we know that the sad fact is that if somebody, like Raymond, will not help himself when he could, then our help will not accomplish anything more than making him more dependent on us.

Utlimately, if he's capable of doing it himself then he should. His shrill claims that I have to support him are just an excuse not to start.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:00am PT
lol, thanks for the help in finding god. a true missionary of the teachings of god.

You don't have to find him, he's there all the time. But you have to open your own eyes.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:09am PT
hey plight, how do you know "god" is a he?
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:11am PT
and who do we listen to here on earth now?

There are churches on every corner of every city. All you have to do is walk in and ask.
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:11am PT
Blight...unfortunately you are using a single source called "Hitler's Table Talk"...it has been disputed widely whether this is even an accurate source...

Got any of his speeches that say what you are claiming? I think not. But you know, interestingly, even in "all" your quotes, Hitler never condemns Jeeeeeesus.....

Why don't we just start with what Hitler "wrote"...


I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 46]

What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the Creator. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 125]

The anti-Semitism of the new movement [Christian Social movement] was based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge. [Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter 3]

The fight against syphilis demands a fight against prostitution, against prejudices, old habits, against previous conceptions, general views among them not least the false prudery of certain circles. The first prerequisite for even the moral right to combat these things is the facilitation of earlier marriage for the coming generation. In late marriage alone lies the compulsion to retain an institution which, twist and turn as you like, is and remains a disgrace to humanity, an institution which is damned ill-suited to a being who with his usual modesty likes to regard himself as the 'image' of God. [Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter 10]

This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.152]


And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.174]


Catholics and Protestants are fighting with one another... while the enemy of Aryan humanity and all Christendom is laughing up his sleeve. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.309]


I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so [Adolph Hitler, to Gen. Gerhard Engel, 1941]


Any violence which does not spring from a spiritual base, will be wavering and uncertain. It lacks the stability which can only rest in a fanatical outlook. [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 171]


I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal. [Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter 1]


I was not in agreement with the sharp anti-Semitic tone, but from time to time I read arguments which gave me some food for thought. At all events, these occasions slowly made me acquainted with the man and the movement, which in those days guided Vienna's destinies: Dr. Karl Lueger and the Christian Social Party. [Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter 2]


...the unprecedented rise of the Christian Social Party... was to assume the deepest significance for me as a classical object of study. [Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter 3]



I've said this to you before and will say it again...just how do you think you can bring a "Nation to War" with the an atheistic statement like, "hey guys, guess what, there is no Gott, you are just a meatbag. When you die you rot, and that's it..."

Pix worth 1000 tho...

...

Let me know if you need a translation of this Nazi soldier belt buckle...Hint: it's kind of along the lines of "God Bless America"...
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:12am PT
hey plight, how do you know "god" is a he?

He's not, God doesn't have a gender.

It's arbitrary. You can called him her if you like, I'm sure she won't mind.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:15am PT
i believe she's a BITCH.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:16am PT
Why don't we just start with what Hitler "wrote"...

Like I said, Hitler knew that religion was a good way to motivate people. But he wasn't a christian.

If you can dispute that he said what I quoted, go ahead. Otherwise it stands.

Oh, and nice to see that you've stopped pretending to be looking for evidence of God. Obsessing over this one tiny detail in all that I've said is comcial. Why not just accept that 99% of what you've written so far has been shown to be bullshit instead of deperately trying to salvage this one last point by defending Hitler (of all people)?
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:19am PT
So it W a CINO or a real one?

Why would anyone care what I think about "God"...I'm ignostic at best.

However, the boomerian notion that AH was "atheist" or at least "paganist" is a misnomer that needs to be put to rest....take for instance, "Mama's Cross"...


Got any other sources than "Table Talk"? Of course if you know history, you'll know that Hitler was just cribbing off of Martin Luther's "The Jews and Their Lies" (1543).

"Heaven will smile on us again."-AH (MK
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:23am PT
"Raymond, this isn't a courtroom."

Isn't the bible full of methaphors? Do you understand them or is it just methaphors outside the bible that you cant understand?

"It's a discussion forum. You want evidence? There are loads of places you can get it - if you're actually looking, which you're not, or you would've found plenty already."

You told me that there where thousands of evidence but you cant even show me a single one. Why should I belive you? You have no idea whatsover have much I have looked. Just assumptions and prejudice. Is prejudice also a cristian virtue?

"I'm not looking for evidence, you are. So go find it if you really want it."

Taka a look at the courtroom example and you might be able to understand that it is you that should provide evidence.

"No, just you, the guy who says he's looking for evidence but hasn't even bothered to go to a library or a bookshop, or even just to google for it."

You have no idea whatsover what I have done. Just assumptions. Is this really christian values?

"Google it you thick f*#k."

Very good argument. I am starting to be convienced that christianity is a very good religion for me when I see how nice you answer me... or was it the flying spaggeti monster religion that seemed like a nice choice?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:30am PT
"Raymond is perfectly capable of looking for evidence of God himself."

And I have done so. Before this thread I thought that I didn't
need a religion but now I realise that the flying spagetti monster is the religion for me. I see God in it.

"But he demands, like the rich man in the story, that I do everything for him."

No, I demand that you should backup your claims. I mean is it difficult to mention a single one of the thousands of evidence for God that you claim? Is it difficult to actually say who is the 5 worst massmurders?

I also think that you should stop talking about stuff that you dont know anyting about. Like saying that an atheist cant have a fullfilling life.




Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:32am PT
I am starting to be convienced that christianity is a very good religion for me when I see how nice you answer me

Good! I don't think you'd do very well as a christian - christianity requires a lot of thinking, questioning and learning. It's really not suited to people like you who want everything hand delivered on a sliver plate in a nice simple format.

You have no idea whatsover what I have done.

Ha! Ha! Ha!

If you'd looked, you would have found evidence. The fact that you pretend not to know where to look and to have found none proves that you didn't bother looking.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:33am PT
I also think that you should stop talking about stuff that you dont know anyting about. Like saying that an atheist cant have a fullfilling life.

Really?

I used to be an atheist.
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:35am PT
i'm pagan agnostic.

i deny the existence of many gods.
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:37am PT
Was it Bush (Sr.) who convinced you to switch?

I don't know that atheists should be regarded as citizens, nor should they be regarded as patriotic.

Seriously...is W. a CINO or a "real one"?
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:38am PT
Got any other sources than "Table Talk"?

Got any proof that what I quoted was not said by AH?

Even Marx, Stalin and Lenin knew that religion was a useful tool to control the masses - just as hitler did. I doubt anyone would seriously say they were religious though, and neither was hitler.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:39am PT
deny the existence of many gods.

Ha! Ha! Ha!
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:42am PT
Yeah, most historians find your singular source to be erroneous. Do you have any "file footage" of him saying that...cause many of the quotes above "Lord and Savior" are actually recorded.

I'm going off of "what he said"...you are not. Your source is hearsay at best.

Take a stab at my question there, I'm curious about your answer...

I'll concur that religion is used to bring the masses to war though...


Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:49am PT
Ah yes, discounting the evidence on the basis that you've not seen it first hand. Desperate but amusing... I guess that you think the world's flat, not having seen its cruve from space yourself!

AHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:50am PT
Nice try.

One disputable source does not an "argument" make. You are begging "the question"..

Looks like your "source" says "Hitler was a Vegetarian"

http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/

The heresy!

Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:52am PT
Okay, I can live with that.

I think that a single source - the person who said it - is pretty good for spoken words.

I guess that's not good enough for you? Fine!
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:56am PT
Just like I don't count on the "NYT" as a "be all end all"...

Not gonna stab at my question? Disappointing....

...here is one problem of your singular source...TT...

Thus, there are three sources in German for the Table-Talk: the Bormann Notes copy of Genoud, which contains the full brunt of Bormann's editings; the fragment of the Bormann Notes in the Library of Congress; and the limited German text of Picker.

Today, according to Richard Carrier and other sources, there are four main published versions of the Table-Talk. The first published was the German manuscript of Picker, which contains no entries subsequent to August 1942, and has only five months of entries which Picker attests are free of Bormann alterations. The second to be published was a French translation by Genoud of his copy of the Bormann Notes. The third was the English translation of Stevensand Cameron, edited by Trevor-Roper. This was a translation of the Genoud's French translation, and was not based upon the German. The fourth and last edition was a printing of Genoud's German original, prepared by Werner Jochmann.

Before we can begin to sort through whatever alterations Bormann himself may have made to the text, it first should be pointed out how faulty the Trevor-Roper edition is, and the Genoud French translation upon which it is based. Carrier has described the Trevor-Roper edition as "worthless," and in fact, he has shown that all of the major anti-Christian passages commonly cited by historians,including the three at the beginning of this chapter, are frauds and are not contained in the original German, in his article "Hitler's Table-Talk: Troubling Finds."


Much more...

http://www.liesexposed.net/nfp/tabletalk/tabletalk.html
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:58am PT
Looks like your "source" says "Hitler was a Vegetarian"

And?
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:01am PT
and it looks like your quotes are faulty...

Now W, you figure he's a CINO or the real deal?
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:02am PT
Wow, a pro-atheist web site selling a book saying that hitler wasn't an atheist! How convincing!

Good job there's no bias there or I'd be skeptical!

Oh, and you might want to have a look at what else your source publishes. I like this excerpt from their coverage of the earthquake in seattle:

"Gangs of ferocious blacks roamed the streets attacking white people, beating them unmercifully and robbing them...A perfect example of how the Jews attempted to manipulate the facts was the announcement that three-fourths of the Mardi Gras crime suspects identified were black. To get this lower figure, all those arrested for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct, etc., and classified as white or non-negroid mongrel".

That article gets worse (a lot worse actually). And you questioned my source?

Wow.
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:04am PT
This should sound familiar...

Ah yes, discounting the evidence on the basis that you've not seen it first hand. (the original German document) Desperate but amusing... I guess that you think the world's flat, not having seen its cruve from space yourself!

AHAHAHAHAHAAAA!



...mysteriously enough, no original documents or recordings of Table Talk can be found......
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:08am PT
426, you're way out of your depth here mate. Give it up already.
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:09am PT
Burden of proof's on you now...I got Mein Kampf, recorded speeches and even some old file footage. You got a source with "no source"...

But I give up, as the Di'Neh say, you can't awaken a man who pretends to sleep...



Take a stab at my question (W a CINO or a real one?), really curious about your answer...
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:15am PT
W a CINO or a real one?

I have no idea what this means. Could you write it in english please? What is "W", a "CINO" and a real what?
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:19am PT
Is Bush a "Christian in Name Only" or a real one?


D'ya figure the Pope had one of these...
d-know

Trad climber
electric lady land
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:20am PT
.

i believe w is in bed w/satan.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:24am PT
"Good! I don't think you'd do very well as a christian - christianity requires a lot of thinking, questioning and learning. It's really not suited to people like you who want everything hand delivered on a sliver plate in a nice simple format."

Strange i thought the complete opposite in this matter.
I belive that christianity is good for people that want something to belive without having to think.

You are kind of typical for a christian when you dont answer any serious questions. The faith cant be questioned.

I works as a researcher and it is necessary that I question things in everyday life. This is in bad agreement with the faith not questioning religion you praise.

"You have no idea whatsover what I have done.

Ha! Ha! Ha!

If you'd looked, you would have found evidence. The fact that you pretend not to know where to look and to have found none proves that you didn't bother looking."

Blight is it difficult to understand that people dont belive that the bible is evidence for God? I have read articles for the bible and I have read articles against the bible.

"I also think that you should stop talking about stuff that you dont know anyting about. Like saying that an atheist cant have a fullfilling life."

Really?

I used to be an atheist. "

Ok, you had a bad life as an atheist but you still have no clue about other peoples life.



"Even Marx, Stalin and Lenin knew that religion was a useful tool to control the masses - just as hitler did."

Yes, because many religous people base their opinions on faith instead of reason. It is very easy to contol people like blight.

The authors of the bible might have realised that religion was a good way to control the masses.

Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:24am PT
Is Bush a "Christian in Name Only" or a real one?

I don't know and I don't care.

It's not up to me to judge President Bush's relationship with God. I have compassion for him just as I have for everyone; whether he's a "real" christian has no bearing at all on that.

Why do you care?
426

Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:28am PT
You say Hitler used religion to do his bidding, correct?

I can even abide by the fact that whether Hitler was Xian is not particularly relevant, but how he used Xianity to "rid liberal excess" (verbatim) is...

I should've guessed you wouldn't know or care.

My apologies...just don't count me in on the "Crusade"...to me, a Christian (PBUH) turns the other cheek...and that's why "I care"...

But I bet someone can pull a quote from the bible that refutes that whole "turn the cheek" notion....
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:36am PT
I belive that christianity is good for people that want something to belive without having to think.

Ha! Ha! Ha!

You haven't even stirred yourself to search the web. Christians go to church, attend study groups, read their bible and concordance and organise discussions, research courses and guest speakers.

You're really not suited for christianity; learning is an integral part of it. All you're doing is spouting your pathetic prejudices without bothering to check whether they're right.

Blight is it difficult to understand that people dont belive that the bible is evidence for God?

Again, you only show your ignorance. If you try looking for evidence you'll find that the bible is only one small part of it - there are entire libraries full of other evidence which has nothing to do with the bible.

Ok, you had a bad life as an atheist but you still have no clue about other peoples life.

I had an excellent life as an atheist, actually, and I enjoyed it a great deal. But it never came close to my quality of life as a christian.

The authors of the bible might have realised that religion was a good way to control the masses.

No, as I said, christians learn, discuss and debate all the time. Look at almost any church's schedule and you'll find dozens of studies, sermons, lectures, forums, groups and newsletters which they use in addition to their own private learning.

But as I also said, I don't think you're cut out for that. You should really just forget about it - go back to trying to convince yourself that you're doing okay and your incessant questioning about God doesn't mean you're at all interested.
Crag

Trad climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:51am PT
Why?

Becasue when evil stands before a group of children bound at the feet with a gun pointed directly at the backs of their head.....
raymond phule

climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 10:28am PT
"You haven't even stirred yourself to search the web. Christians go to church, attend study groups, read their bible and concordance and organise discussions, research courses and guest speakers."

Yes and so what? You haven't answered my questions. You haven't showed we to a single proff of God. You haven't answered me why religion seems to be very dependent on where (and when) you live. You might be interested in talking and discusing details in the bible and equal things. But I still have the feeling that the main questions is not open for questions. My girl friend attended a christian school and sayes the same thing.

Talking about for example moral issues is not only for christians. A lot of philosophers have thought about this outside religion. Jesus definitely has some good points and it is a pity that bad things happens in his name.

"You're really not suited for christianity; learning is an integral part of it."

I have read more books than most people an a lot of different subjects. You just assume that I dont care (as usual).

"All you're doing is spouting your pathetic prejudices without bothering to check whether they're right."

You are the one with most prejudice in this case.


"Again, you only show your ignorance. If you try looking for evidence you'll find that the bible is only one small part of it - there are entire libraries full of other evidence which has nothing to do with the bible."

For the probably 198328943 time. Cant you show me a single one of these?


""The authors of the bible might have realised that religion was a good way to control the masses."

No, as I said, christians learn, discuss and debate all the time. Look at almost any church's schedule and you'll find dozens of studies, sermons, lectures, forums, groups and newsletters which they use in addition to their own private learning."

Your comment doesn't have anything to do with my question.

I know about religous dogma. How people discuss and try to make everything add toghether. That parts of the bible have dissapeared. I consider this as a philosopical system with some underliying dogmas that cant be questioned. The importance of different parts change with time. How many different version of the christian faith do it exist now? 1478783 maybe? Which one is correct?

Just becuase people discuss some parts doesn't prove the underlying dogmas.

"But as I also said, I don't think you're cut out for that."

No, I cant by the underlying dogmas without any evidence. I see no reason to belive in them. I am much more interested in learning about more open minded peoples theories.

Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 11:33am PT
You haven't showed we to a single proff of God.

If you really want it, you'd go get it yourself. But you don't go get it, do you? No, you sit and demand that I spoon feed you like a fat, spolied child,and you sulk when I don't.

I have read more books than most people an a lot of different subjects.

And yet mysteriously you refuse to read books about God. In fact you refuse point blank to learn for yourself; you demand that I provide you with what you want. Some intellectual you are!

For the probably 198328943 time. Cant you show me a single one of these?

And for the 198328943 time: go find it yourself if you're really interested. If you're not interested in genuine learning, quit asking.

I consider this as a philosopical system with some underliying dogmas that cant be questioned. The importance of different parts change with time. How many different version of the christian faith do it exist now? 1478783 maybe? Which one is correct?

Uh, if we weren't allowed to question doctrine, there would only be one version of christianity. There are many versions precisely because we're allowed to question anything about it and come to our own conclusions.
Jennie

Trad climber
Salt Lake
Oct 3, 2006 - 12:17pm PT
Dear Gentlemen, Thank you for a stimulating and enlightening night in Friendship Land. (Lurkergirl needs to sleep now) Wish you all a deep sleep and a sweet dream when the long party's over.

Godspeed! (Yes, I'm still a believer)
Blight

Social climber
Oct 3, 2006 - 12:20pm PT
:)

Heh.

And sweet dreams to you too.
phoolish

Boulder climber
Athens, Ga.
Oct 3, 2006 - 01:29pm PT
Blight:

A lot of the trouble is that things you take as evidence, lots of other people just take as mythology, same as you do with the Vedas or the Edda, for instance.

Generally, when you start thinking you've found the one true way, thinking you're special, you're probably wrong. That goes for just about everybody, regardless of belief system.
ewto

Mountain climber
My mommy's tummy
Oct 3, 2006 - 02:41pm PT
Holy cow... this got nasty, didn't it?

My simplistic position on it is this:

"Why do so many people believe in God?

Because He's THERE.
Every time I sit on top of a peak and look around me, I can see Him. Every time I look at something as "simple" as a tree growing in my front yard, I see Him. When I watch my children grow or my parents age, I see Him.

When I fell thirty feet and hit the deck, I damn near got to meet Him...
Anastasia

Trad climber
Near a mountain, CA
Oct 3, 2006 - 04:25pm PT
Would I cross the line if thought God didn't exist?
I probably would have a different definition of the "line" without my parents' religious teachings. Yet, there still will be a "line" I would not cross.
I wouldn't cross it for my own sanity. Having a line between what I think is bad and good is just a way of making life simpler. I need to feel comfortable with what I am doing and know that it causes no one else pain. I have a sense of empathy and fairness that has always guided me. It is something I've created out of dialogue and logic which is also one of my culture's traditions.
The line I live by is enforced by my own sense of responsibility towards doing what is right. When I am in the wrong, it is not the people that I hurt that injures me. It is the idea that I hurt people that trusted me to be better then that which makes me feel horrible.
I've been there, didn't like it, don't want to visit.
Plus, I do hear echoes of my father's teachings during such times and I am afraid of finding out what the road leads to if I stay on such a path. I won't need God's wrath to give myself a bad life. I can do that myself and that keeps me from crossing the line.
Now just add that with the idea of God also giving me a share of my own mistakes in my afterlife...
Yeah... It has me thinking... Who doesn't wonder about what happens after this existence?


madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 3, 2006 - 04:28pm PT
I can't believe that some people have actually posted lengthy tomes like I would normally write. I'm so pleased to see it.

BTW, I have read all the posts so far, so I'm up to speed on this NON-climbing thread.

Everything so far in this discussion is quite standard; same old arguments and presuppositions from both sides. Nothing particularly wrong with that, as far as it goes.

Rather than to wax "philosophical," I'll contribute just my own experience.

Studying philosophy, I found ample reason to doubt my earlier theism. I went through a period of many years as an agnostic. Intellectual honesty mattered (and matters) most to me, and I tried to adopt views according to the weight of evidence.

One of the main things of interest to philosophers is the nature of evidence itself. "Weight of evidence" is a pretty empty phrase without getting clear on what counts as evidence in different contexts. There is an amazing amount of presumption in the actual disciplines that employ "evidence" (religions are not alone in this morass).

Asking for "proof" in a discussion like this is even nuttier than looking for "weight of evidence." PROVE to me that the floor is going to be there when you next go to step forward. PROVE to me that you have hands! One of the biggest confusions in a discussion like this is not getting clear about what SORT of evidence even counts, and how weighty that sort of evidence can even be.

Learning about what is "evidence" and what is "proof" is fundamental to thinking philosophically, and it was my early learning on this subject that led me to be an agnostic.

Entering grad school, the deep study of ethics was very revealing. Ethical anti-realism/subjectivism has fallen out of favor among philosophers for very good reasons. Most of us are after realistic/objective accounts now. I quickly found that authority-based accounts, and among them "divine command" theories, provide a host of advantages not enjoyed by secular theories. The "best explanation" in ethics seemed to me to favor theism (although not for the reasons I've heard so far in this thread).

Perhaps theoretical beauty isn't sufficient grounds for most, but many people, scientists included, rely upon this aspect of theories all the time (read Steven Wienberg, for example). For my part, I was suspicious of "running home to mama" by returning to theistic thinking without a fight. But on many fronts I found that, as Philip Quinn (past APA President) has said, "Theists have gotten the better of the argument."

In short, there are a host of phenomena ranging from consciousness to abstract objects for which a theistic account seems to provide the best range of approaches and answers. I've read Dawkins and Dennett (among many others) carefully and thoroughly, and I along with top philosophers (such as Saul Kripke) simply don't find their approach worse than a punt. About mind, for example, simply denying the phenomenon isn't on the same level of an "account" as acknowledging and explaining the phenomenon.

I could ramble on and on, but for now, I can say that intellectual honesty, employed in the setting of one of the top philosophy grad programs in the country, has brought me back to theism (with significant caution and resistence, btw). I don't think I'm being arrogant to say that my Ph.D. gives me some credence to assert that I've done a lot of looking around on the subject. I'm a philosopher first, a theist second, a Christian third, and a Seventh-day Adventist fourth. (Oh, btw, on the little survey linked to earlier, I scored 100% as a Seventh-day Adventist, so at least I answered as the site expected SDAs to answer, for whatever that's worth.)

I'll end with this thought. I hear a lot of the same sort of fallacy in this thread so far. It takes a form like this: "There is lots of disagreement about x. So, if you think you're right about x, then you are probably wrong." Another iteration of it is this: "There is lots of disagreement about x. So, there is probably no genuinely right answer about x."

Both iterations are appeals to ignorance. Nuff said.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 3, 2006 - 04:39pm PT
To address the thread-opening question: "Is it logical to believe in something that cannot be proved?" As I noted briefly earlier, this question is ABOUT the nature of evidence and proof. You "logically" (which in this context must mean "reasonably") believe in lots of things you can't "prove."

In fact, the vast majority of "knowledge" you have concerns things you can't prove. Do you have parents? Do you have a past? Do you have hands? Is water wet? Is grass green? Will your car turn left the next time you turn the wheel left? You have "knowledge" about the answers to all these questions, and you live and act as though that knowledge is reasonable and secure. But you can't PROVE that your ideas are correct on any of these subjects.

Believing in God is no more and no less an exercise in examining "weight of evidence" than any of the above questions. And in almost all cases, the weight of evidence could go numerous ways, depending upon what you emphasize as "weighty."

One thing I will vehemently resist, as a trained philosopher, is the hyperbolic sort of claim made by the likes of Dawkins to the effect that theists/Christians are simply ignorant or nutty. I am neither, I am both a theist and a Christian, and I have GOOD reason for my beliefs.

Of course, explaining those reasons is a multi-book-length project. So, tempted as I am to break my post-length record (which is already prodigious), I'll let that go.
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:10pm PT
Whatever works for you.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:52pm PT
Just a little food for thought:

Lets say you took a sample (assuming this was possible) of the most charismatic and special 4 year old kids from 1000 years ago and asked them if Romantic Love existed and what sex had to do with it.

What could they say? Would they really understand?

In a similar way, us humans are stuck here the darkness, living in piles of meat.

The existance of God and God's nature is not dependent on the opinion of purity or corruption of great men or the world religions or the fact that we can't see beyond our material world

Peace

Karl
Ed Bannister

Mountain climber
Victorville, CA
Oct 3, 2006 - 05:59pm PT
If you deny the reality of what you cannot perceive:

Does atomic structure exist?

Love?

we really do choose to believe, or not to, and persue info along our chosen course.

I remember a guy who worked for me, Brandon, we walked through the alter room under the huge boulder on the short hike to human sacrifice (the route) The feeling of darkness was so prevalent, he remarked, now I know there is a God, because now I know there is a Devil.
Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Oct 3, 2006 - 06:28pm PT
Mungeclimber, you were right about faulty line of reasoning. I rechecked and modified my earlier post a bit as it related to consciousness.

After inspirtation from madbolter1 I remembered an argument I had with a friend that claimed "we can olny know things through science, and religion is about faith." By faith, he went wishing and hoping. I would say my faith is about "reasonable belief" and not wishing and hoping. If we only could know things through science, then we couldn't know or even make a claim about science unless we were using science-meaning philosophical statements about science are not science itself, so his claim is self-refuting.

Personally, I would much rather be a pantheist or believe that I am God or a god, so I can do whatever I want without guilt or shame. The problem is, I don't actually think pantheism is true. I am a Christian, not because I like it, it doesn't always resonate with me, it doesn't always make feel good, or give me a particular sense of comfort in fearing death. I am a Christian because I believe it is true. It might seem irrational that I put my trust in a man who claimed to be the Messiah and was slaughtered on a cross. But I believe he spoke to the human condition (suffering, sin, etc.) better then any other figure in history and offered the greatest love ever evidenced by anyone by living as a human being to pay the penalty we owed to God for us and offering us a rescue to our human plight. If you think Buddha, Mohammed, Vishnu, Krishna, or Richard Dawkins know and speak better to this issue and have evidence and good reasons to support what they calim is true, I would suggest you follow them as I would myself.

Jesus proved that what he said was true by raising himself from the dead. As far as I know, no other person has done that. I think it might be worthwhile to hear what he had to say about life and the kingdom of Heaven for that reason alone. Jesus asked his disciples once "who do say that I am?" I think that is the most important question you could ever ask and at the end of life if you miss Christ, you've missed the very source of life itself, and when you die you missed everything. There is lots of truth in other religions (golden rule, etc.) but only Christ offers a truth that will save us from death. He even showed that it possibble by raising Himself from the dead. Jesus, said "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me" (John 14:6).

If He is wrong, eat, drink, be merry, beleive in whatever resonates with you or makes you feel good and then you die.

If He is right then what he said to Martha in John 11:25 is true.
"I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

Well, off to Eldo before the rain hits this afternoon, Cheers, AK
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 07:03pm PT
None of you have presented any evidence that God exists.

I have to start to think you are just wasting my time.

Juan
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 3, 2006 - 07:26pm PT
Nor have you presented any that He does not. Surely you are not popping off with a negative existential claim. So, what is the nature of the evidence you want to see? What I mean is: of what SORT is the evidence you will admit?
Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:13pm PT
Juan,

If you have a Bible (whether you trust it is God's word or not, Romans 1 and 2 give a good explation that creation itsef is evidence of God's existence and power). Here is one of the more meaty passages, Romans 1:18-20.

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood by what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

I don't know you or moral character, so I don't know if you are suppressing or just questioning the truth, trolling, or honestly interested in the question.

I think a good question to ask, however, similar to madbolter1's, is what evidence would it take to prove to you that God exists. If it is miracles or rising from the dead, look at Jesus. From a Christian perspective you can check out www.str.org (Stand to Reason) and type in a questioon/topic in the search and ususally find a well written/researched article on a variety of religious questions which good reasons to believe in God.

However, if everyone could answer all your questions to your satisfaction, would you believe in God (become a theist) and/or follow Christ? If the answer is no, all the evidence "in the world" wouldn't matter. Let me know what you think.
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 08:41pm PT
If you have no evidence why do you believe?

What purpose does it serve?

Is God some type of Psychological crutch when you suffer?

Do you really think an all loving all powerful God could sit by and let such evil roam the World?

If God is just sitting back and observing the carnage He is one twisted sick f*#k.

Juan
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 08:45pm PT
I just proved God does not exist.

Wow.

JDF
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 3, 2006 - 08:48pm PT
To sharpen my question a bit: are you after scientific (i.e.: empirical) evidence? Are you after a deductive proof (for such are really the only "proofs")?

Could you prioritize your particular weighting of evidence? For example, would you prioritize this way: 1)deductive proofs; 2) experimentally verified, empirical statements; 3) cumulative case empirical arguments; 4) first-person observations; 5) anecdotal statements from third parties? Or something like that?

JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 08:55pm PT
I do not think you can provide any evidence, but what ever you have will do.

Juan
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:01pm PT
Uhhh... ok, Juan. Now I realize that this is a waste of my time. If your last two posts are to be believed, you really have no desire to think about this subject carefully.

There is a wealth of literature addressing the "problem of evil" (a trite rendition of which you mentioned). The problem of evil has been demonstrated (to educated, non-ignorant people) to have zero intellectual threat against theism. (The average person on the street, however, still finds it troubling.) The most famous and careful casting of the problem of evil was by Rachels, and that has been thoroughly decimated by Quinn (if you care to actually educate yourself on such matters).

It's easy to pop off with supposed theistic problems that are straw men or no longer seen as problems by people who think about such things for a living. It's as ridiculous as me saying something like, "Those stupid scientists. Anybody can see that fruit flys don't turn into whales!"

But... it's pretty clear at this point that you're not serious about this topic, so, I bid you good bye.
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 09:15pm PT
I am not interested in Philoshophical Mumbo Jumbo.

It would have to be physical proof of a creater.

If I was God I would have encoded it in the Big Bang Background.

I guess it comes down to

1. Did a creater create.

2. Does he take an active role in our lives.

3. Does he just like to watch.

Juan

cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:44pm PT
Hey Juan it's good that you are actually getting into this mano a mano with these theists, but if you keep it up they're eventually all going to tell you that you're just "not serious" and withdraw from the conversation, because, really, what else can they do? They Want To Believe. You want to know, and they can't give you that knowledge, because they don't have it themselves. They just have their will to believe, for various reasons, but it mostly boils down to denial of individual mortality. There is an entire industry of apologists who spin out endless reams of argument from authority on this unsubstantiated assertion that we can live forever, and that if we're good, we go to the big rock candy mountain in the sky. It helps to keep people in line, I'll give it that much. Some people like to read their horoscope for guidance every day, too. Whatever gets you through the dark night of the soul, I say. We'll all find out in the end. Treating one another decently while we're alive is just common sense because most of us prefer happiness to suffering. It's a no-brainer, and there's no need to dress it up in the form of divine commandments or anything else. Evil exists because some people are selfish stupid f*#ks. Simple as that.
Mountain Man

Trad climber
Outer space
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:45pm PT
So many assume God's mind is no different from theirs, so they judge Him according to their own minds.

I would advise them to love themselves beyond all limits, forgive everybody for everything, and behold the beauty of this earth that God has given us.

At the least, it will bring great joy.
Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Oct 3, 2006 - 09:58pm PT
JDF,

Actually, your proof that God doesn't exist because of all the evil in the world and the fact that he could stop it, I agree, is a good argument against the beleif in God. Roughly it is:

1) God is omnipotent (all-powerful)
2) God is wholly good
3) God is omniscient (all-knowing)
4) Evil exists
5) An omnipotent and omniscient good being eliminates every evil
that it can properly eliminate
6) Therefore, God is either not omipotent, wholly good, or all
knowing because he allows evil to exist
7) Therefore God does not exist

Alvin Platingna a philosophy profesor at Notre Dame addressed this issue and is known in the philosophy world for solving this argument from evil in his book, "God, Freedom, and Evil" (about 100 pages long) in what philosphers know as the Free Will Defense, which shows that the existence of God is compatible both logically and probabilistically, with the existence of evil.
Roughly speaking the argument is:

God is omniscient, omnipotent, and morally perfect; God has created the world; all the evil in the world is broadly moral evil (brought about by free agents-namely mankind); and there is no possible world God could have created that contains a better balance of broadly moral good with respect to broadly moral evil.

If we our to love God, it has to be a freely given and not coerced or forced. To allow this freedom, one has to be free to do good and free to do evil. If God values this freedom of choice that could be at least one explanation why he allows evil to happen without interfering.

There is also a chapter dealing with natural evils (floods, hurricanes, etc. that is good)

Juan, I am still curious to know one way or the other, if you had all your questions and evidences for God and Christianity answered to your satisfaciton would you become a theist and follow Christ?

JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 3, 2006 - 10:10pm PT
I learned much from Jesus when I read the book a Course in Miracles. You should really check it out if you have a real interest in Christ.

Now I seek a different path to the East.

Juan
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 3, 2006 - 10:28pm PT
Fear.

And I find the "you can't prove anything, so theism is as likely as anything" basis for belief not only highly dissatisfying, but - and I hate to join the other camp - nutty.

And Madbolter1, I have to express surprise at the description of your journey to the extent it seems inconceivable that anyone would have made it out to agnostic would then travel all the way back to Adventist. That smacks way more of inculturation and less of reason and logic. Now I can imagine logic and philosophy leaving one with a bent for theism, but to make it from a that general concept back to a specific implementation, particularly the one you started with? Well, that clearly had to have been objective voyage by any definition to have returned you back to your starting point.

And your background in philosophy no doubt lends itself to the intellectual hocus-pocus of skipping far simpler common sense levels of shared understanding that would, for most of us suffice for "proof" relative to there being any "real world" implementation of [anthropomorphic] theism. I personally find the idea beyond nutty - I find it a fear-based response to the the unknown and unknowable. It opens the door to the societal manipulations that separate peoples one from the other and acts as the root foundation of war and genocide.
Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Oct 3, 2006 - 10:29pm PT
Juan, me too. I sought that different path out east as well! I moved out east to Colorado and am no longer in Cali. Ice season has already begun in RMNP, and there is still 80 deg days in Eldo as well!!
(no pun intended)
mike

climber
tahoe city, ca.
Oct 3, 2006 - 11:18pm PT
Cause and effects my friends.

In Ghasso
Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Oct 3, 2006 - 11:31pm PT
The curious thing about all this talk about God is that so few ever consider or can imagine that "God" can be encountered in other ways but through doctrine and beliefs. Most so-called spiritual paths are not built on beliefs or arguments or thoughts at all, but on practices that quiet your evaluating mind (i.e., the mind that evaluates what you already know). I suspect that most of those who demand proof would not bother to put in the difficult work to ever find out for themselves, hence their interest is by and large not so much an inquiry as an exercise to verify what they already believe: there is no "God." This natually leads to circular shuck-and-jive landing them exactly where they've been sitting all long.

I remember being at the LA Zen center years ago engaged in a discussion with an old Sensai and one student said, "I'm an athiest." The Sensai said, "Congratulations. Who are you and what is your life?"

JL
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 4, 2006 - 12:46am PT
The problem to me is the Damm Paradox, How can anything be real or exist? How is it possible to have a creation. How is it possible to have a beginning.


The law of cause and effect requires a cause.

I cannot understand the nothingness that would precede a creation.

My mind can not comprehend it.

We must exist in some temporal loop of space time, no beginning, no end.

If I had a Bong this could get really good.

JDF


JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 4, 2006 - 01:08am PT
In our Universe particles suddenly appear out of nothingness.

How is that possible?

JDF

healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 4, 2006 - 01:30am PT
The discussions of "deep" comsological and philosophical conundrums are a purposeful distraction in this discusion. I think Juan (and I'm almost frightened to say it) - and I - aren't looking for exotic proofs of logic; we're looking more for pedestrian and mundane "proofs" that clearly display the existence of an [anthropomorphic] diety.

Simple things - the modern day equivalent of a burning bush. Float the Washington Monument 100 meters in the air for a couple of days; rain loaves and fishes down on every Walmart parking lot in America at noon tomorrow; a day without deaths, births, or spam; write a message in the sky seen by all people and understood in all languages; resurrect JFK; etc., etc. Hell, turn my cat purple; my couch blue, or my Camry peach; bring home the troops; or, given I'm a pretty easy sell on the whole, having me climbing 5.14 without breaking a sweat for a day would suffice.

Again, I'm a simple guy with simple needs - no need for all these highly esoteric and complex explainations for why there are no simple concrete "proofs" that would be an undeniable shared experience among a number of people, recordable on video, and simple to understand.

Hurricane

Trad climber
Eldorado Springs
Oct 4, 2006 - 03:37am PT
stzzo wrote:
I've heard Christians use this argument a lot. It doesn't prove that god exists - more like it attempts to prove that the "because there's evil" argument doesn't disprove god's existence.

Your exactly right and I agree with you 100%. Plantingna's argument doesn't prove that God exists but rather it shows that it is possible that the existence of evil doesn't disprove God's existence. That was the main point I was trying to make. Cheers!
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 04:29am PT
"Float the Washington Monument 100 meters in the air for a couple of days; rain loaves and fishes down on every Walmart parking lot in America at noon tomorrow; a day without deaths, births, or spam; write a message in the sky seen by all people and understood in all languages; resurrect JFK; etc., etc. Hell, turn my cat purple; my couch blue, or my Camry peach; bring home the troops; or, given I'm a pretty easy sell on the whole, having me climbing 5.14 without breaking a sweat for a day would suffice."

Demanding proof which you know doesn't exist (and you know because, well, you just made it up) is just an easy way out of looking at the evidence which is there.

After all, what better way to avoid getting answers you don't like than to say that you'll only accept specific imaginary ones which you do?
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 04:37am PT
In our Universe particles suddenly appear out of nothingness.

How is that possible?


Many things both in science and religion seem contradictory or impossible if you don't understand them.

But with a little effort and learning, you'll usually find that they're not really that difficult after all.

The mechanism whereby virtual (and real) particles "appear" out of disturbances in underlying quantum fields isn't really difficult or even very complicated. But you'd have to read, study and learn before you understood it.

You say you don't understand this principle, or how God could exist?

Well of course you don't. You won't listen, won't study and won't learn. Obviously unless you change that, you never will.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 05:01am PT
Blight, whatever you say. It is impossibly to arguee anyting with you because you dont understand logic and becuase you think it is the other people fault when they dont understand something or is sceptical. It is like you are saying 2+2=5 and people dont belive you. They read and look and all their sourses claim that you are incorrect but you still claim that you are correct and that they just dont look hard enough. It is their fault that they cant understand that 2+2=5. You cant understand that people can get to a other result than you given the same sourses and that you might be wrong.

I might have wrong when I thought that christians dont questions though. I take that back.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 05:18am PT
It is impossibly to arguee anyting with you because you dont understand logic and becuase you think it is the other people fault when they dont understand something or is sceptical.

So you think that I don't understand logic, and that must be my fault? But when you don't understand it, that's my fault too?

From that alone, it would seem that it's not me who has problems with logic and understanding.

You have the same simple problem as Juan. Of course you don't understand religion or God. You've refused point blank for the whole thread to go and learn about them for yourself. If a child refuses to go to school, is it the school's fault that he can't read or write?

To put it bluntly, if you refuse to study, you will remain ignorant. It's that simple.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 07:43am PT
"So you think that I don't understand logic, and that must be my fault?"

You said that argument of concensous was a valid argument for example. I also gave a link and tried to explained it. What more can I do? You also doesn't seem to have a clue about who that is responsible to prove a claim. You never provide any evidence.

"But when you don't understand it, that's my fault too?"

A person claiming that it exist thousands of proofs is the person that should provide the proofs. A scientist that claim something should provide proof for the claim. This should also be obvious.

"From that alone, it would seem that it's not me who has problems with logic and understanding."

You clearly show once again that you doesn't understand logic and understanding.

"You have the same simple problem as Juan. Of course you don't understand religion or God. You've refused point blank for the whole thread to go and learn about them for yourself. If a child refuses to go to school, is it the school's fault that he can't read or write?"

Whos fault is it if the school just tell the children: Your homework is to learn to read and write. The students ask how I am I going to learn? It is up to you. It is not my job to teach you or explain how you are going to learn to read and write.

Ok, I do some research.
did a search for proof of god.

http://www.doesgodexist.org/Phamplets/Mansproof.html

"The atheist has always maintained that there was no beginning."

This is a strawman and is not true for all atheist. Thus all arguments follows doesn't prove that atheists are wrong.

"The atheist's assertion that the universe is uncaused and selfexisting is also incorrect The Bible's assertion that there was a beginning which was caused is supported strongly by the available scientific evidence."

That science cant prove something doesn't prove that God exist.

I simple not by this kind of proof. I dont by all proof or evidence given by christians. Is that so difficult to understand?

"To put it bluntly, if you refuse to study, you will remain ignorant. It's that simple."

I have studied I just simply didn't get to the same conclusion as you.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 07:57am PT
Whos fault is it if the school just tell the children: Your homework is to learn to read and write. The students ask how I am I going to learn? It is up to you. It is not my job to teach you or explain how you are going to learn to read and write.

I've told you where the school is. Get this through your thick head: I AM NOT YOUR TEACHER. THIS IS NOT A SCHOOL. I'm not teaching you because I don't want to, not because I can't.

If you want to learn, go to a place of learning. This is not it. Quit pretending that it must be impossible for you to learn because you spend your time bugging someone who's not a teacher in a place which isn't a school.

I have studied I just simply didn't get to the same conclusion as you.

That's not study. That's just petty nitpicking. Now if you were to take that article to a teacher, disuss it and learn from it, that would be study.

Oh and the idea that atheists believe there was no beginning is not a strawman, it's a inductive fallacy of generalisation. And Although that's a mistake, that doesn't make it completely wrong, let alone everything that follows it.

That science cant prove something doesn't prove that God exist.

Yes; thinking that's the case is called the "God of the gaps fallacy". However, if science didn't have such huge gaps, that fallacy wouldn't exist, would it?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:00am PT
Richard, I definitely belive that you have done a lot of thinking :-) What are your area of philosophy by the way?

My view:

The first problem is the question of what can we actually know about the world. This is a very old philosphical question and my opinion is that we cant know anything at all. It is possibly that we live in a dream or in a computer program (like in the matrix movie). A pretty bad start for a researcher... but I dont belive that it is possibly to prove that we cant be fooled by are senses.

On the positive side is that the world seems to pretty consistent and seems to be governed by rules. The sun rise every day for example.

Thus we have problem with truth. Lets assume that we can trust our senses. Nothing really make sense if we cant.

When I look at the world I see no reason to belive that it exists a God. Not everyting is explained but most things are. Things that dont follows the rule of physics don't seems to happen (or atleast most of them dont seem to survive a scrutiny).

I see no reason to include a God in my view of the world. You and other say that you get a more consistent world if God exist. I belive that the difference in opinion might be because we have postulated different truths and that we want different results. For example you probably belive in some kind of soul, I dont.

Thus some people need an answer (often a nice answer) to questions like, what is the soul, what happens after death and is it a higher meaning of life. These questions might be easier to answer with a God if you want a "nice" answer but a God is not necessary if you dont care about those questions.

I have also read a couple of Dawkings books. The difference between how we read him seems to be that you belive that it exist something methaphysical about brain/consious. Dawking doesn't belive this and thus doesn't answer your questions about how the consious evolved. You doesn't seem to by his arguments because you want him to give an explaination of phenomena that not necessary exist.

I have a hard time to understand how questions on the foundations of knoweledge could be better explained by invoking a religion with metaphysical concepts like life after death.

A theory is not more true because the result is easier to take. It would be better if we would have a life after death but this cant be a argument for that it actually exist.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:20am PT
Healyje, I'm sympathetic to what you (and, I guess, Juan) are looking for in the way of evidence. I'll get to that in just a minute.

First, though, I'm disturbed by your idea that thinking carefully about a subject is "philosophical hocus-pocus." You cast the alternative as "common sense." But "common sense" tells us that the sun revolves around the Earth. "Common sense" tells us that when you put a pencil in a glass of water, it bends. And so on.

Your likely reply is that "common sense" in my two examples must include what we know about how the universe works. But wait! That sort of thinking is already way past "common sense." At that point, you're into theorizing about astronomy and refractive properties of light. While such "facts" have become "common knowledge," coming to believe in such "facts" are NOT "common sense," and they require significant education (indoctrination) to believe.

So, I submit that we all do a lot of "philosophical hocus-pocus" at all times as we try to decide how to interact with the world and what we shall believe about the phenomena that present themselves. The only question is how "deep" of "hocus-pocus" is needed to provide a sufficient explanation of observed phenomena.

You SAY that faith would have to rest upon evidences that are quite simple. But, you also sweepingly dismiss my lengthy and very careful intellectual journey, which dismissal can only serve to call into question my intellectual honesty. Perhaps I ended back up as a SDA because that belief system makes the most sense when you consider enough facets of enough world views. It is actually pretty amazing that I'm an SDA now, given how hard I resisted going back there, because I had the same suspicions of myself that you now have of me. But, honestly, the weight of evidence was convincing to me, and I did look at a lot of it.

However, I don't expect my journey to be compelling to you; I only shared it to dismiss this ongoing notion that one has to be simple-minded or have blind faith to be a Christian or theist. I am far from alone in my philosophical theism, and in fact many of the top philosophers on this planet are theists for similar reasons that I am: the cumulative case arguments in favor of it overwhelm the alternatives.

But, you don't want to hear about all that "hocus-pocus," so here's a "simple" evidence. I predict, however, that despite its simple force, you will find many reasons to dismiss it as well, which goes to make my point that "simple" evidences are not actually so simple after all. Well, here goes....

When I was ten or eleven, my family went to visit my Grandma. The cousins, my two sisters, and I were playing tag in the front yard. My youngest sister, who was about six or seven, was running away from "it." She was running with her mouth open, laughing, looking back over her shoulder, and she turned to look where she was running just as she ran straight into a large yucca plant.

One of the stiff spines drove entirely through her tongue and pierced the back of her throat. She stood there screaming, and then started gasping for air. My cousin and I pulled her back off the spine, as the others ran to report the accident.

We bent my sister forward to keep the blood from pouring down her throat, and stumbled to the house.

The entire family gathered around, and my mom ran to my sister. My mom, I, and my sister made it into the bathroom, leaving pools of blood as we went. In the bathroom, my mom got a washcloth wet with cold water and pressed it hard against my sister's tongue, trying to slow the bleeding before we drove to the hospital.

The extended family crowded around in the hallway talking in horrified whispers, and most of them could see into the bathroom to watch what was happening. Most of them had seen the fact that my sister's tongue was virtually cleaved in two.

Mom began to pray out loud that God would help my sister to be strong and that He would make the upcoming hospital (stiching)experience as little traumatic as possible. Then she pulled the washcloth away from my sister's tongue to check the bleeding.

The wound was completely gone. My sister brightened and said, "It doesn't hurt any more."

The extended family was amazed. I was amazed. I mean, I was standing right next to her, and I was looking right into her mouth when my mom pulled the washcloth away.

Mom decided to take her to the hospital anyway, fearing how much blood she had swallowed and wanting her to be checked out.

I was there during the examination, and the doctor reported that he could find no evidence of the wound we described, except for a small, round scar in the back of my sister's throat. She had that scar into adulthood, and she might still have it today. I don't know.

Now, hearing this story you have lots of alternatives. You might say that my memory isn't serving me well, since I was just a kid when I saw all this. Maybe I'm embellishing, you might say. Ok, well, there's "embellishing" and then there's outright lying. Even if you conclude that I might not have every detail right, you should use some "common sense" to decide a few things: 1) I'm not just outright lying, because, given my belief system, I wouldn't risk my eternal life over such a lie; 2) it would be insane for me to lie in an effort to convince you of the truth of a belief system that I knew was based upon a lie; 3) I did witness a horrible injury, and that injury was enough like I remember it that it left a scar in the back of my sister's throat; 3) I did witness my mom pray, and I did witness that the horrible wound was healed immediately after that prayer; 4) I did witness the doctor state that he could find no damage to my sister's tongue when he examined her.

Other alternatives. You can say, "Well, ok, I'll grant that something unusual happened, but surely there's a scientific explanation for it." Fine, but now you are NOT after "simple" evidence after all. If you take this tack, you have officially abandoned "common sense" and are already deep in the realm of "philosophical hocus-pocus." In such a case, I could give you tons of reasons (a lengthy project) why a purely naturalistic paradigm fails, but, again, this begs the question against "common sense." And such investigation, if you are honestly interested in the truth, is easy to conduct on your own; there are carefully written volumes by extremely credible thinkers against a purely naturalistic paradigm.

You might say, "Fine, some sort of apparently supernatural 'god' or 'power' helped your sister, but why think that 'god' is anything like the Judeo-Christian God?" Ahh, yes, and here we note again how impossible it is for ANY "simple" evidence to get the job done. The more "simple" an evidence is, the more questions it leaves unanswered! Of course, "common sense" would say, "Well, duh! His mom prayed to the Judeo-Christian God, by name, and He answered. How much more 'simple' does it need to get?" But, I suspect that at this point you will reinterpret what counts as "common sense."

You might say, "Ok, if the Judeo-Christian God healed your sister, then why does He allow so MANY other horrors to take place? It makes no sense and isn't fair that He would answer your mom's prayer and not the prayers of so many others!" Again, though, such a statement is WAY outside the realm of the "simple" or the "common sense." Answering such an objection just IS the realm of "philosophical hocus-pocus." Yet, in your sweepingly dismissive way, you have disallowed the very sorts of arguments that could provide the account your objection begs for. How convenient! By your definition of the rules of the game, you have ruled out the very sort of discussion that could address this issue. And, again, the point is clear that even an event as startling as the story I have told isn't sufficient to provide "simple" evidence.

You might say, "Now I see why YOU have some good reason to believe, but the event happened to YOU. I'm waiting for something like that sort of evidence to happen to ME! If I saw something like that first-hand, then I would believe too!"

Probably not. I say that because of observing how my extended family reacted over time. A few of them became believers for a short while and even attended church weekly. But the old lifestyle of smoking, drinking, gambling, etc. quickly pulled them back in, and the effect of the event was swallowed up in the old lifestyle. Just before my Grandma died, I asked her if she remembered the event. She said that she did, but it seemed distant, like a story she had heard, like it was almost a family myth; and the myth had lost its force.

I can't avoid spewing a bit of "philosophical hocus-pocus" here, because the fact that so many witnesses to the event came to ignore it reveals a few things about how faith works.

God does not reveal Himself more startlingly to most people because He values free will above all things in the universe. Let's say that He came down in glory and power, stood right before you, performed astounding miracles, and proclaimed, "I am God, the Creator, the God of the Bible." Would THAT be sufficient evidence to convince you? Would THAT be simple enough?

Well, it shouldn't be! How do you know that this being is really God rather than just some very powerful alien? There is nothing about such a display that can (or should) convince you of the truth of the propositional content of His claim. Instead, such a display would be a blatant attempt to manipulate you, to cow you into submission, to COMPEL you to believe. And yet, even such a forceful display, as manipulative as it would be, SHOULD not convince you because there are so many other alternatives.

God is a gentleman when it comes to approaching His free-thinking creatures. He DOES provide ample evidence to those who are honestly seeking Him, although He is careful to not compel on any level. He says, "You will find me when you seek for me with your whole heart," and that is because He will not stoop to manipulative tactics, nor will He stoop to begging you with demonstrations.

So, why did He answer my mom's prayer, when He could answer so many other prayers and thereby "prove" Himself? First, He doesn't usually answer prayers to "prove" anything. We already believed, and He simply honored that belief with His answer. My extended family were disinclined to believe, and they soon found ways to distance themselves from the event so that it lost its impact on their lives. We didn't view the event as a reason TO believe, and my extended family didn't find the event sufficient to produce faith.

In the vast majority of cases, even first-hand witnessing of a miracle isn't sufficient to arouse genuine faith! Instead, praying for that sort of "proof" merely attempts to get God to come to you, hat in hand, and beg you with more and more impressible displays: "Is THIS enough? No? Ok, how about THIS?"

The evidence is there, although it is neither "simple" nor "common sense" to recognize it. Faith requires searching with an entire and honest heart. If you do engage in such a search, I am confident that God will hear and answer THOSE prayers.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:24am PT
"I don't want to, not because I can't."

Sure... that argument works well in the real world.

"If you want to learn, go to a place of learning. This is not it. Quit pretending that it must be impossible for you to learn because you spend your time bugging someone who's not a teacher in a place which isn't a school."

Everything you say assume that you and your faith is true. I cant do something or learn something until I get to the same conclusion as you. It doesn't matter how god my arguments are and how many references to people that agree with me that I show. I am still dont get it before I agree with you.

""I have studied I just simply didn't get to the same conclusion as you."

That's not study. That's just petty nitpicking. Now if you were to take that article to a teacher, disuss it and learn from it, that would be study."

Se above.

"Oh and the idea that atheists believe there was no beginning is not a strawman, it's a inductive fallacy of generalisation."

The article made and killed a strawman. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html

"And Although that's a mistake, that doesn't make it completely wrong, let alone everything that follows it. "

They killed a strawman. Not everything is wrong but most conclusions are. The also dont understand evolution.

"However, if science didn't have such huge gaps, that fallacy wouldn't exist, would it?"

yes, why not? It is enough that people belive that it is gaps in science to invoke it. Most people arguing that evolution didn't happen have no clue about evolution theory.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:34am PT
Raymond, thank you for your post. I appreciated it.

I should set the record straight, though. I don't have faith because I need answers to issues like souls, eternal life, and other religious trappings like that.

The things that I think need accounts are things like abstract objects, self-consciousness (which is not a phenomenon that cannot be "explained" by in effect denying it, as Dennett does; and reductive/eliminative materialism is a dismal failure), objective moral facts, the existence of natural languages, and so on. Unlike "souls" or "eternal life" or such things, the things that I'm interested in are common currency. We encounter these things every day, and they are part of our shared world view. It's our ACCOUNTS of them that differ.

You are right to note the skeptical problem introduced by matrix-like scenarios. But I believe that the response to such scenarios is not properly an appeal to God, who makes everything turn out ok for us so we don't get too deceived. Instead, I am very Kantian in my response to skepticism (but that's too vast a topic to discuss in this venue); I only mention Kant to point people to a line of fruitful research. One of my undergraduate professors was/is an internationally known scholar (and an atheist), and she said, "Much of the thrutching around in philosophy today results from people not understanding Kant. So they keep attempting to address issues that he laid to rest already." I think she was largely right about that.

Anyway, it seems that you're still looking at all the evidence, and that's all any philosopher could hope for. I hope for it for myself on an ongoing basis too. May we someday meet somewhere close to the truth!

edit: and you are certainly correct about most people not actually understanding evolutionary theory!
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:56am PT
Sure... that argument works well in the real world.

This IS the real world you twit.

Everything you say assume that you and your faith is true.

Uh, no Raymond, I believe that my faith is true because I've been and am going through the learning process. You need to make your own decision by learning too. But you haven't and won't go through it, instead substituting shouting at a passer-by - me - that they are WRONG WRONG WRONG because they won't give you knowledge on a plate.

The article made and killed a strawman.

*sigh*

No it didn't. The article said, "The atheist has always maintained that there was no beginning". Some atheists have always maintained that. Therefore it is not a straw man, which sets up an argument your opponent has never used then attacks it. It's just a generalisation which is largely but not completely incorrect.

The also dont understand evolution.

The article doesn't mention evolution. Not once. So your attack on the author's understanding of it really is a strawman.
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 4, 2006 - 09:41am PT
Blight,

Why? Still no good evidence?

JDF
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 09:57am PT
Juan, why what?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 09:57am PT

""The also dont understand evolution."

"The article doesn't mention evolution. Not once. So your attack on the author's understanding of it really is a strawman."

The section named design is clearly about evolution.

Whatever, I think that the article is crap due to many logical errors. You probably think it is a good article and you are going to call me a twit until I think it is a good article.
Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 10:03am PT
The section named design is clearly about evolution.

Uh no, the setion named "design" is clearly about design.

And no, I don't particularly rate the article. But then again I didn't bring it up. If I had, I'd have taken a little time to attack the eproblems that are in it instead of making up new ones.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 10:27am PT
""The section named design is clearly about evolution."

Uh no, the setion named "design" is clearly about design."


Whatever you say. The word evolution didn't exist in the article, not the word inteligent design either. So it cant be pro ID and against evolution. No, it cant. That would assume that the reader had some reading comprehension.

"The atheist, on the other hand, will try to convince us that we are the product of chance"

Cant have something to do with evolution... No it cant be a statement based on a missunderstanding of evolution that ID people use all the time because the word evolution is not in the sentence.

Blight

Social climber
Oct 4, 2006 - 11:53am PT
Cant have something to do with evolution... No it cant be a statement based on a missunderstanding of evolution that ID people use all the time because the word evolution is not in the sentence.

Looks like you're reading your own prejudices into it. It doesn't say ID and it doesn't say evolution. You might see similar content, but anything else is just a straw man.
Clarke Brogger

Mountain climber
Laguna Beach, Ca
Oct 4, 2006 - 12:50pm PT
oooohhh Corpdog, so profound.
Tao Climber

climber
Milky Way
Oct 4, 2006 - 01:08pm PT
OK ENOUGH IS ENOUGH......THIS IS A FRIGGING CLIMBING FORUM NOT A METAPHYSICAL, SPIRITUAL OR PHILOSOPHICAL ONE....UNLESS OF COURSE WERE TALKING ABOUT CLIMBING ETHICS, STYLES ETC. ALSO....THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL FORUM. I AM SO SICK OF SIFTING THROUGH FIVE FORUMS TO FIND ONE THAT HAS ANYTHING REMOTELY TO DO WITH CLIMBING.......I KNOW THIS FALLS ON DEAF EARS, BUT FOR GOD SAKES SPARE ME ALL THIS GOD TALK ON A CLIMBING FORUM.....................AAAARRRRRGGGHHHHH.
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 4, 2006 - 05:11pm PT
Madbolter1,

I don't dismiss exercises in logic or the result of philisophical explorations. I simply find them unsatisfactory in that they [typically] bypass the simple and the obvious with deliberate intent. If they did not do so I would be far more inclined to accept them at face value. Where you and others so inclined paint all such "simple" and "obvious" answers no differently than the perceptions of a mob attempting to fish the moon out of a pond with pitchforks is where we part company.

Now that you claim [anecdotably] to have experienced the full measure of a road from "simple" and "obvious" to intellectual rigor is to your credit. But your story is still anecdotal, personal, and unverifiable in a way that a layer of rotting loaves and fishes fifty feet deep in every Walmart parking lot in America would not be. And why wouldn't we still be able to exercise free will in the presence of clear, simple, and obvious "proof" that an anthropomorphic theistic diety existed? Religious fundamentalists are claiming one does and we still manage to operate with free wills - I don't get what's the inherent problem with a simple verification on a generationally periodic basis?
pyro

Social climber
I'm not telling,
Oct 4, 2006 - 05:52pm PT
more like lets work on good manners. this poetry is B.S. people become the best, "Tape recorders" when they want attention, soo stupid are your ethics.
keep it real+ don't steal, don't lie, don't hit, don't hate, etc. were all working toward an excellent society. Instead we act like a cast away on some dried up island.
faith will make you the beliver in any God, but mind who watches you. Keep the poetry authentic.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 4, 2006 - 06:52pm PT
Healyje, the observation of some buried leaves or fishes is exactly the same sort of observation as the observation of the event of my sister's tongue being healed: empirical. The issue at hand is interpretation.

You seem to want to distinguish between "facts" (like a fish being buried in a certain layer of sediment) and "events" (like my sister's tongue being healed, or my personal intellectual journey). If I understand you correctly, on your model the former are "verifiable," while the latter are "personal... unverifiable."

I do want to clarify that I never intended my intellectual journey to be "verifiable" or to act as evidence. My only point in mentioning it was to respond to the notion that all Christians are ignorant, stupid, or blind in their faith. So, I would prefer to address your distinction in terms of the contrast between buried fishes and miracles.

For our purposes, though, this is a distinction without a difference. In the exact same way that everybody who OBSERVES a buried fish can say, "There's a buried fish," everybody who OBSERVES a healing can say, "There's no wound where a second ago there was one." BOTH are "facts" in that both are features of reality that can be observed. Again, the issue is in how these observed facts are interpreted.

Earlier, you or Juan (I don't remember which) asked for something simple and obvious, like a burning bush. My point is that what we MAKE of buried fishes, burning bushes, or healing events is where the rubber meets the road. There are no "facts" in a vacuum. All observation is loaded with the baggage of theory and interpretation. So, I'm honestly baffled about what sort of "simple" or "obvious" evidence you expect.

For more fruitful future discussion, I need to get clear on two points: 1) What do you make of a miracle story like I told? 2) Can you give a particular simple or obvious evidence that would be sufficient to indicate God's existence?

Thank you in advance.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 4, 2006 - 07:35pm PT
Dingus, I appreciate your candor, and there is no offense taken. Of course, if I have to doubt my senses at that level, then, well... let's just say I shouldn't be driving (or climbing, for that matter)!
cintune

climber
Penn's Woods
Oct 4, 2006 - 08:13pm PT
"I got a feeling and it wont go away, oh no,
Just one thing and then I'll be okay:
I need a miracle every day."
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 4, 2006 - 11:43pm PT
Madbolter1: "For more fruitful future discussion, I need to get clear on two points: 1) What do you make of a miracle story like I told? 2) Can you give a particular simple or obvious evidence that would be sufficient to indicate God's existence?"

1) I have no way of verifying your miracle nor does anyone I know. That's the problem with all such stories. Typically in all such anecdotal incidents there is a lack of a "threshold of witness" to the miracle. By "threshold of witness" I mean not enough people saw or experienced it for it to be universally accepted as "truth" or a "proof".

2) Now I agree that intepretation is a significant hurdle and hence the desire for simplicity and scale. Simplicity for easy and common understanding; scale to overcome deniability. So my example: God completely filling every Walmart parking lot in America to a depth of fifty or one hundred feet with loaves and fishes at 6pm tomorrow night would accomplish both. Loaves and fishes would leave no doubt as to who sent the message; instantly filling every Walmart parking lot in America with identical fishes and loaves would represent a highly public and logistically impossible feat that overcomes deniability.

[ Note: Now neither #1 or #2 above addresses the possibility you raised that aliens, rather than God, might be responsible for such an act. But I suspect, logically and philosophically, that anyone / anything capable of such an act - regardless of any extra-terrestrial origin - would be (nominally) indistinguishable from a theistic diety as far as the general public is concerned. ]
Minerals

Social climber
The Deli
Oct 4, 2006 - 11:54pm PT
No, I didn’t read any of it… except for the fact that Joseph got post #223…



What God…?

healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Oct 5, 2006 - 01:54am PT
Ha, if I ever saw proof there is no god that's it...
Blight

Social climber
Oct 5, 2006 - 04:39am PT
But you have faith so my disbelief is irrelevant.

No, your disbelief is irrelevant because he saw it happen for himself.

You insistence that it didn't happen and couldn't have happened, because you say so, when you weren't there and have no evidence to the contrary, is remarkably reminiscent of a small, spoilt child putting his fingers in his ears and shouting, "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!".

As I said before, there's a big difference between having your eyes shut and saying, "I can't see", and having your eyes shut and saying, "there's no such thing as light".

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
Oct 5, 2006 - 03:04pm PT
Healyje, thank you for your reply, and I laughed out loud at your (excellent) Walmart idea.

I'm on the same page with you about threshold of witness. I want to discuss an implication of that in a moment. But first, let's talk about your Walmart idea.

You say, "Now neither #1 or #2 above addresses the possibility you raised that aliens, rather than God, might be responsible for such an act. But I suspect, logically and philosophically, that anyone / anything capable of such an act - regardless of any extra-terrestrial origin - would be (nominally) indistinguishable from a theistic diety as far as the general public is concerned."

You here suggest that a sufficient demonstration of power is tantamount to justification for employment of the title "God." But, it really isn't, is it?

Arther C. Clark famously said, "Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic." Your idea is really a paraphrase of that: "Any sufficienctly impressive demonstration of power is indistiguishable from divinity."

I agree with you that if your Walmart idea became reality, that would be a pretty impressive demonstration of something. The question would be: What?

Don't be too quickly dismissive of my "aliens" idea, because I submit that a significant percentage of the people on Earth would NOT surmise divinity from such a demonstration of power (the vast majority of the world's population is not Judeo/Christian). While you or I might say, "Nice. Loaves and fishes. Yeah, I get the point," most of the world's population would draw completely different messages. And our attempt to "educate" them about the "real" message conveyed by the demonstration would introduce the very obliqueness that your "clear" and "obvious" demonstration was supposed to avoid. The fact is that no matter how "clear" and "obvious" the message is, the more people you have to get that message TO, the higher the odds are that it will be misunderstood by more and more of them!

Now, in that context, let's turn back to the threshold of witness idea. The tension with any "message" is that if you give the same message to too many people, a lot of them aren't going to "get it." But, on the other hand, if you give the message to a small enough group of people, in an intimate setting, crafting the message to reach JUST them very effectively, then the message fails the threshold of witness test. So, if you're God, how do you approach things?

Well, on the one hand, you DO give some messages that reach everybody--knowing that many if not most aren't going to "get it" for many reasons. Examples are the Bible and creation itself. Now, I know you are howling, and THAT is my point. Many people see in the Bible and in creation messages that clearly and obviously tell them of a Creator God. Others, like yourself, interpret these messages differently, even coming to the opposite conclusion from those who see God in them.

At this juncture you might say, "But neither the Bible nor creation are undeniably non-naturalistic, while my Walmart example clearly and obviously would be!"

But, no, it wouldn't be. Most people on Earth might well say that your example event would be clear and obvious evidence that aliens visited the Earth--AND, it could be further conjectured that the loaves and fishes themselves were evidence that these very aliens must have been responsible for a host of other "miracles" that are now such an entrenched part of Christian mythology!

Surely you are not placing yourself in the camp of the "general public" who you think would likely be convinced by the demonstration. Instead, you would be one of the ones saying, "Wow! Impressive! Ok, now, what caused this? (BTW, you general public people, shut yer yappin' so we can figure this out.) Ok, so whatever did this had to have access to basically the whole country in one night...." And you would then begin to catalog the alternatives, and, trust me, aliens WOULD be on that list. YOU would not, along with the "general public," immediately think "God!" And, I believe, you would be RIGHT to reserve judgment in that very way.

You should not be immediately convinced by anecdotal evidence, no matter how "clear and obvious" it was to the small group present to observe it. AND you should not be convinced by even something as impressive as your Walmart example.

To illustrate my upcoming point, bad hermenutics uses the "proof text" method of Biblical interpretation. One or two verses are used (usually out of context) to make some doctrinal claim, despite the fact that many other places, and indeed entire themes of the Bible, make the opposite point. Such "proofs" are the basis of many of the allegations of "inconsistency" critics level at the Bible (and such methods account for much of the divergency in Christianity).

One good example is the way Luke 23:43 is read: "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." It clearly reads that the thief on the cross would be with Christ that very day in paradise. There is simply no misunderstanding what that verse "clearly and simply" says!

Because it is so "clear and simple," this verse has be widely used as "proof" of people going straight to Heaven (or Hell) when they die. The Bible is crystal clear in many places that "the dead know not anything," and that they do NOT go straight to Heaven or Hell when they die, but the doctrine of the immortal soul and immediate punishment or reward is mainstream.

All hinges on the employment of that one little comma! Because the translators placed it before instead of after the "To day," it reads totally differently from the original Greek (which, BTW, had no punctuation). Put the comma AFTER the "To day," and you have an entirely different reading of the text.

The same problem applies to ALL levels of interpretation in ALL contexts! You acknowledge that interpretation of evidence is "a significant hurdle," but you are mistaken that "simplicity and scale" are the solutions to it. EVERYBODY has access to the same Bible, which satisfies the scale requirement. AND it is quite common knowledge among those who read their Bibles that the Greek has no punctuation, which you would think would make it astoundingly simple for them to recognize that the offending comma was SUPPLIED by translators. How much more simple can the understanding of this text be??? "Duh, supplied comma... ok, we can't base anything on where the comma is... ok, then at best this verse is ambiguous."

But, it's even simpler than that! The Bible itself clearly explains that Christ didn't ascend to Heaven that day, and the thief didn't die that day either. So, with the TINIEST bit of looking at the context, it is trivial to not misunderstand that verse. Nevertheless, the misunderstanding to which I point is mainstream!

If SO many people, over so many centuries, could be SO taken in by what is an OBVIOUS misunderstanding (scale and simplicity), how much hope can you really put in either scale or simplicity? As the line from Men in Black goes, "A person is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it."

If something like your Walmart example ever became reality, you would get WILDLY divergent interpretations, even among the educated and intelligent, and the demonstration would NOT convince many (if not most) that GOD had been responsible, nor should it!

No one of us (and the prospects are even more dismal in groups) enjoys an epistemically privileged position, such that we can have confidence in our interpretations of any particular "facts" or events. THIS is why there IS no "clear" and "simple" path to (or away from) faith. We are ALL just thrutching around, picking things up, examining them, trying to fit them in, discarding those that don't seem to fit anywhere, perhaps revisiting them later--and all the while we are trying to assemble for ourselves coherent world views.

We oversimplify that process only at our peril: doing do makes us closed-minded, narrow, and exactly the sort of people Tommy Lee Jones said we are. I remember a Calvin and Hobbs cartoon. I can't find it, though, but here goes. Calvin is bemoaning education: "It just introduces shades of grey. It makes things that seemed clear, fuzzy," and so on. HE is a "man of action," so he says, and such fuzziness causes one to pause, causes one to contemplate before acting, which restricts a "man of action." Thus, Calvin will resist education! Hobbes replies, "You're ignorant, but at least you act on it."

As you know, the world is chock full of people who are ignorant, but at least they act on it! The reason Arther C. Clark is correct in his statement is exactly because we ALL want to jump to conclusions, and we ALL oversimplify the issues that face us. But oversimplification is the root of all evil.

Anti-abortionists kill abortion doctors because they have oversimplified the issues. Hitler kills millions because he has oversimplified the issues. People elect idiots as presidents because they have oversimplified the issues (and because we have trained our politicians to do so as well, so that the only pool we have left to choose from consists of idiots). I could go on and on, and you yourself could come up with millions of examples. "Knowledge is power," and we believe that adage, so we oversimplify the issues enough that we can feel that we have knowledge about various subjects that matter to us!

So, yes healyje, we part company on whether or not philosophical methods are valuable in the context of such questions. I deny that there is any such thing as a "clear and simple" demonstration of anything, and I advocate careful and non-dogmatic thinking about all subjects, despite the fact that careful thinking is time-consuming and strips one of the precious sense of having "knowledge." Initially you thought that your Walmart example could act as a sufficient demonstration of divine power. I hope you think differently about that now.
gonzo chemist

climber
Crane Jackson's Fountain St. Theater
May 7, 2010 - 05:14pm PT


Anybody here ever read "Waiting for the Galactic Bus"?

ec

climber
ca
May 7, 2010 - 05:25pm PT
scene: hot & dusty, sort of like in the gas station scene of No Country for Old Men...in the mid-70's at a junk yard in the S. San Joaquin Valley, outside of Bakersfield, CA.

The guy at the counter is wearing on separate chains a cross, an ankh, a star of david and a crystal.

When asked about the variety of religious jewelry the guy replies, " 'Never know man, I figured that need to have it all covered."

true story...

 ec
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 7, 2010 - 05:35pm PT
Craig said: "The whole bible is made up, that is a fact."

How about the Song of Songs, or the parables, the Beatitudes, and what not. There are no facts even mentioned in these passages, but there is wisdom. Is wisdom made up or universal?

Problem is that people continue to look for God at the level of their discursive mind, so if "God" does not appear according to discursive criteria (God = some entity), God is, ergo, "made up."

There's an old saw: You cannot solve a problem at the level of the problem. Put differently, you cannot "solve" the God problem at the level of the discursive mind, not without introducing God forms that are, as Craig said, "made up," unsubstantiated, illogical, and so forth.

And so we have people saying, "God doesn't make any sense to me. I can't prove Him, or it, or her." So God gets cast in the image of our needs, real or imagined, or to "explain" what science has yet to nail down, or as thoughts or imaginings, or as the product of states, or as a feeling or sensation or vision - but always as a "thing," and substance, an "it," a form. Few see this as simply the analytical mind grasping for something to squeeze and contrast.

But why stop there? That's just the first belay, and the wall rises out of sight.

JL

JL
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
May 7, 2010 - 05:36pm PT
People believe because they are taught it by their parents and by the people around them.

At some point, someone tells you that there is no Santa Claus. Until then, you believe it because they tell you to believe it. They also give you a reward for believing it and punishment for not believing it (naughty and nice list). It's just like most religions except instead of presents, there is heaven and hell.

It also allows people to blame someone else for their problems so they don't give it up easily.

The Egyptians believed it because they were taught by their parents to believe it and it was better to believe than to not believe. The same goes for the Mayan, Aztec, Greek, Roman, Jew, Muslim, Christian, Wiccan, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

Dave
brotherbbock

Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
May 7, 2010 - 05:38pm PT
nicely put JL
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
May 7, 2010 - 05:43pm PT
nicely put JL

Or to state it more clearly without the JL poetry:

We are too stupid to figure out anything having to do with God. Bummer.

Dave
ec

climber
ca
May 7, 2010 - 05:45pm PT
'Never know man, I figured that need to have it all covered.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 8, 2010 - 01:19am PT
Craig said, "Why cant' you extend beyond your beliefs to see that all religions are just that, people duped with a false belief."

What are you saying that I "believe," and where did you get that idea?

What I'm actually saying is that you are arguing yourself into a circular argument at the level of the mind, and from that level, only mind, and thing or form of mind, are "real." It never occurs to "mind" that there are limitations to it's capacities.

JL
pa

climber
May 8, 2010 - 01:42am PT
"The intuitive mind is a precious gift. The rational mind is its faithful servant.
We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

Albert Einstein
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 04:41am PT
Bible Prophecy and Probability
The record of Bible prophecy and the corresponding historical fulfillment.




PROPHECY/ PROBABILITY
1. His birth in Bethlehem from the tribe of Judah. - Michah 5:2/Matt 2:1
/1:2400
2. He would be preceded by a messenger. - Isaiah 40:3/Matt 3:1-2
/1:20
3. He would enter Jerusalem on a colt. - Zech 9:9/Luke 19:35
/1:50
4. He would be betrayed by a friend. - Psalm 41:9/Matt 26:47-48
/1:10
5. His hands and feet would be pierced. - Psalm 22:16/Luke 23:33
/1:100
6. He would be scourged by His enemies. - Isaiah 53:5/Matt 27:26
/1:10
7. His betrayal for 30 pieces of silver. - Zech 11:12/Matt 26:15
/1:50
8. He will be spit upon and beaten. - Isaiah 5:6/Matt 26:27
/1:10
9. His betrayal money would be thrown into the temple. Zech11:13/Mat 27:5-7
/1:200
10. He would be silent before His accusers. - Isaiah 53:7/Mat 27:12-14
/1:100
11. He would be crucified with thieves. - Isaiah 53:12/Mat 27:38
/1:100
12. People would gamble for His garments. - Psalm 22:18/John 19:23-24
/1:100
13. His side would be pierced. - Zech 12:10/John 19:34
/1:100
14. None of His bones would be broken. - Psalm 34:20/John 19:34
/1:20
15. His body would not decay. - Psalm 16:10/Acts 2:31
/1:10000
16. His burial in a rich an's tomb. Isaiah 53:9/Mat 27:57-60
/1:100
17. The darkness covering the earth at midday. - Amos 8:9/Mat 27:45
/1:1000

Total odds against the above prophesied events occuring by chance are:
4.8E+33
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 05:30am PT
Dr. F.,

So, were all of the apostles just imaginary characters? Did they not exist?
Was Saul/Paul really the persecuter of Christians that history says he was? Are the fourteen attributed Epistles of Paul fabricated?

Did this paint rendering of "The Apostle Paul" come from someone's imagination?



http://biblestudies.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_apostle_paul_a_biography



I ask about the Apostle Paul because in 1 Corinthians 15:17 Paul declares and defends, to the those of the church of Corinth, his own and those, greater than (500), that witnessed Christ's resurrection! Even after this the majority still didn't believe.



Listen to how Paul ends chapter 15:

"50Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

51Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

55O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

56The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

57But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord."



Spending eternity in hell is not a long time, it isn't a very long time....it's forever! I'm 100% sure I'm going to heaven, are you? I can show you how!
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 8, 2010 - 06:11am PT
Madbolter and Illusiondweller,

Most excellent brothers. Thank you.


There are physical evidences that GOD is, and Jesus is who he says he is. Illusiondweller, prophecy fortold and then coming to pass just as the Good Book said it would, is most powerful and faith edifiying. There is soooo much. And it continues in our day.

GOD doesn't expect us to throw our heads away.

Some will believe with little evidence, they are surely blessed. Some will believe after an overwhelming amount of evidence. I first came to faith with some evidence and personal experience. When I fell away from GOD, and finally came back for good, I had an enormous amount of evidence to rest upon. And today the evidence just keeps pilling up. For me not to believe would be impossible.

I would like to contribute to this thread and look up and post evidences that GOD tells the truth and reveals himself as we go, but for now I just want to post this children's story of Doubting Thomas . . .


http://www.kirkofkildaire.org/quest/FQlessons/DoubtingThomasGoodNews.htm


Paraphrased from the Children’s Illustrated Bible – Doubting Thomas



Jesus’ followers were excited and everyone in the room wanted to talk to Peter and his friend at once. The disciples crowded around them, firing questions and praising God, begging to hear them tell again and again exactly what Jesus looked like and each word of what he said. Had Peter seen the wounds in his hands?



All at once the hubbub died away into silence. Everyone stood perfectly still, staring open-mouthed at the newcomer in the room. No one heard anyone knock or open the door. No one had seen anyone enter. Yet there He was! It was Jesus!



“Peace be with you, “Jesus said softly, greeting His friends and disciples with a familiar hand shake and smile.

“Be careful, it’s a spirit!” came murmurs from the back of the room.



A frown creased Jesus’ brow. Why are you frightened of me? I am not a ghost. Look here, see the wounds on my hands, feet and side. It is me, Jesus.

A few of the disciples began to creep closer to Jesus – but very cautiously.

“Yes, come closer. Do not be afraid.”



As they began to touch his warm skin, they cried out – it is you, Jesus and their faces were bright with peace and delight.



There was one disciple who was not present at this special meeting and when he heard what had happened, he did not believe them. He said, “Unless I can touch the marks of the nails in His hands and the wound in His side, I can’t believe what you tell me.” It cannot be Jesus.

No matter what his friends said, no matter how hard he tried, Thomas could not get the doubt out of his mind.



Eight days later, Jesus followers were again together in a private place with the doors locked. The disciples were afraid of the Jewish council and other political figures who might know that they had seen Jesus and what might happen to them.



During the middle of their meeting/meal, just as before Jesus appeared among them – the door did not open, no one heard a knock. “Peace be with you!”

He greeted his disciples and friends and turned toward Thomas.



Thomas, shrank away from the group. Jesus went toward him.

Jesus reached out His hand and took the terrified disciple’s hands.

“Here,” Jesus said, holding Thomas’s fingers against the nail wounds in His hands. “Feel the wound in my side. Don’t doubt any longer. Have faith in me, it is true.”



As Thomas fingers touched Jesus where he was wounded, his hands, his feet and his side, Thomas broke down and cried.

“My Lord and my God!” Thomas cried.

You believe me now because you have seen me for yourself. Even more blessed are those who don’t see me and yet still believe.


See John 20:24-29
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/John#20:24



illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 06:20am PT
Do you really think that if more direct archaelogical evidence was found of Jesus Christ's existence, that people would believe in God? Phillip spent personal time with Jesus and still didn't believe in God. Listen to the exchange between them:

John 14:
1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

8Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

13And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 8, 2010 - 06:36am PT
Yes, I agree.

Some need no evidence, and some need a great deal, even after spending personal time with Christ. Personally, I can't imagine. But Jesus worked with even those.

We are blessed. We believe but have never seen Jesus. (But I have other physical evidences that what he says is true, that they didn't have in the time of Christ).

Some will come to GOD and believe with little evidence, or no evidence. They hear the Good News, they have faith, believe, they ask Jesus to come into their hearts and forgive them, and Jesus comes into their heart and changes their life.

Others hear the Good News, but then they want proof that it is real and true. Then they believe, they have faith, ask Jesus to come into their hearts and forgive them, and he does and he changes their life.


We all have different amounts of faith who have come to Jesus. The Good News is he will work with what you have and what you need to believe. Faith will grow as we go.

But we all have to take that leap of faith at some point. It will always require faith. Always.

illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 06:37am PT
Klimmer,

That "Bible Prophecy and Probability" was part of a presentation that a brother in Christ, David Hall (http://quiettimepoems.blogspot.com/); put together for a statistics class back when he was in college. He told me that his instructor never said a word nor asked a question after he finished! Read his testimony and peruse his poems. It is humbling how he has committed his life to the Lord. Edit: see below
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 06:55am PT
"About Me
Name: David Hall Location: San Diego, California, United States
I retired from the U.S. Navy in 1997. More importantly, I trusted Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior in 1973 and will tell anyone about Him who will listen to the evidence that He is the Savior of the world! I have been employed as an English teacher, but am now retired and serving the Lord full time. I am especially eager to present the evidence that PROVES the Bible to be true, by examining the accuracy of fulfilled prophecy (God has NEVER been wrong), the historical reality of the resurrection of Christ, the intelligent design evident in nature by which God has clearly illustrated His attributes, and an objective examination of the scientific validity of the Bible, whenever it speaks to issues of science (e.g., the Bible's claim that the stars were innumerable (Jeremiah 33:22) while astronomers in 150 A.D. said there were at most 3,000). A lot is riding on this, friends. God's promises of salvation are as valid as His promises of judgment. And you must decide which one you want to experience for all of your eternity... a long time to regret the wrong choice. Come to Christ today, while you may. -Matthew 11:28."

illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:01am PT
From David Hall's blog:

"What reason do you have to believe the earth is flat?"
"No reason at all! The Bible affirmed that the earth was round long before science discovered it (Isaiah 40:22)."
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:07am PT
Dr. F,

You want archaelogical evidence? Just look at present day evidence!:

http://mazzarothgospel.blogspot.com/
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:08am PT
...http://mazzarothsong.blogspot.com/
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:20am PT
Outstanding!



"How the Heavens Declare the Glory of God

"Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said.... Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth MAZZAROTH (i.e., the twelve constellations of the zodiac) in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” (Job 38:1,32).

1. WHO named the stars?

Answer: Scripture is clear: God Himself named the stars.

“He telleth the number of the stars; He calleth them all by their names” (Psalm 147:4).

“Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: He calleth them all by names by the greatness of His might, for that He is strong in power; not one faileth” (Isaiah 40:26). See Job 38:32, where God recites star names."

illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:21am PT
"2. WHY did God name the stars?

Answer: To provide prophetic signs ordered according to their appointed times (i.e., “seasons”) of fulfillment.

“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs (othoth, signifying something to come), and for seasons (moed, a fixed or an appointed time), and for days, and years” (Genesis 1:14). See Romans 10:18."
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:22am PT
"3. WHAT is the message declared by the stars?

Answer: The glory of God that is “above the heavens” (Psalm 8:1), as seen in the Person and work of God the Son, Jesus Christ, the promised Seed of a woman, as foretold in the first Messianic prophecy (Genesis 3:15), declaring that our Savior would eventually defeat Satan (i.e., bruise the serpent’s head), though He would suffer (bruising His own heal) to redeem His people from their sins and take them safely home to heaven.

“O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! Who hast set thy glory above the heavens... The heavens declare the glory of God” (Psalm 8:1, 19:1).

“For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). See also Hebrews 1:3.

“And I will put enmity between thee [Satan, embodied in the serpent] and the woman, and between thy seed and her Seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15). This is the central theme.

Example: God called Abram out of Ur of the Chaldees where astrology, abhorrent to God (Deut. 18:10-12, Isaiah 47:13,14), had flourished. God commanded Abram: “Look toward heaven, and tell (narrate) the stars, if thou be able to number (name them one by one) them. And He said, So shall thy Seed be (singular, referring to Christ; see Galatians 3:16). And he believed in the Lord; and He counted it to him for righteousness” (Genesis 15:5).

Abram knew the star names and where to begin naming them. Beginning at Virgo he would have recited words such as: “VIRGO, SUBILAH, ZAVIJAVA, SPICA/TSEMECH¹, VINDEMIATRIX, COMA, IHESU², BOOTES, ARCTURUS, NEKKAR, AGENA, TOLIMAN,” which translates: “The virgin who carries the gloriously beautiful Seed, the Branch (Messiah), the Son who comes down to rule, the desired Son, the Christ, the coming Shepherd, the Pierced, the despised Sin Offering, the Beginning and the End.”
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:23am PT
"4. WHERE do we find specific star names in Scripture?

Answer: Primarily in the Book of Job, acknowledged by God Himself in the series of questions that He posed to Job, showing also the common knowledge of the star names among the ancient patriarchs of that dispensation.

“Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth (the constellations) in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” (Job 38:32).

“[God] alone spreadeth out the heavens...which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers (constellations) of the south” (Job 9:9).

“By His spirit He hath garnished the heavens; His hand hath formed the crooked serpent” (Job 26:13).
-Note: SERPENS and HYDRA are two examples of this.

The prophet Amos also advised, “Seek him that maketh the seven stars (literally, Pleiades) and Orion” (Amos 5:8)."
illusiondweller

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
May 8, 2010 - 07:24am PT
"5. WHEN were the star names first given in human history?

Answer: Most likely incident to the fall of man, providing and preserving an exposition on the first Messianic promise given to humanity in Genesis 3:15.

The obvious familiarity of the star names in the book of Job (accepted as the oldest book in the Bible) testifies to the antiquity handed down by Adam to his descendants. Ancient planispheres and star charts in virtually every civilization bear witness to a single, Divine origin by their phenomenal unity, as observed in China, India, Babylonia, Persia, Egypt, Israel, Greece, Rome, Scandinavia, and in Central America.

Bibliography:

Bullinger, E.W. The Witness of the Stars, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel, 1893, 1967.

Fleming, K. C. God's Voice in the Stars, Loizeaux Brothers, Neptune, New Jersey, 1981.

Seiss, Joseph A. The Gospel in the Stars, Castle Press, 1884; Grand rapids, Michigan: Kregel, 1979.

posted by Brother David Hall"
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 8, 2010 - 10:03am PT
Wow Illusiondweller,

You a have given me a bunch more to read! Very good stuff. :-))

My Amazon.com Wish list is breaking at the seams . . .


Klimmer
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 8, 2010 - 02:47pm PT
Craig said: "You have not answered any of my questions, and just go tangential from anything I say."

The problem is that you're not really asking any questions, Craig. I sense of this is that your mind is made up and you're daring anyone to provide "evidence" that will refute your conclusion. Funny thing is that I'm not refuting your conclusion at the level of your arguments. If a person demands that "God" be material with qualities that can be quantified with scientific instrument, then I totally agree that "God" does not "exist." I also agree that at the level of symbolic materialism (language refers to "real" things), discussions of "God," at least in literal terms, are meaningless, since there's no material to haggle over so what the hell are we talking about if not a whole lot of "nothing?" Right?

But moving on - A true question is the inquiry about information to which you have to clue whatsoever, and no opinion either. It's an open minded exploration. As is, you've determined that "God" meet your own personal, and in my opinion, very limited, materialistic/reductionistic criteria.

I'm merely suggesting that perhaps your problem lies more with your criteria, than with "God."

JL
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 8, 2010 - 10:22pm PT
Dr. F. wrote: "No one here on ST, or in any other book, or after 10000 of years, has experienced God in some way that could called more than a warm fuzzing feeling inside."

Well, nobody can accuse of not making bold and fantastic assertions there Doctor. In the previous statement, you're purporting to know, with certainty, the inner experiences of every human being who has ever lived in the history of the world. In fact this is more fantastic a claim than insisting Jonah spent time in the whale's tripe. That means you're nothing short of omniscient = God. Who would'a thunk it?

Moving on: "And Largo, why are you taking this so personnal."

I don't personalize any of this. Not remotely. I laugh a lot, at myself for fiddling with such folly, but I still do it for the hell of it.

JL
pa

climber
May 8, 2010 - 11:40pm PT
Dr.F, there is truth in what Mr. Largo says...you sound like a man who is trying to put out a fire with a wooden stick.


Binks

climber
Uranus
May 8, 2010 - 11:56pm PT
A better question is what do people mean when they say God?

To me God is the intelligence that permeates and creates the Universe. He created me with a unique configuration and wants me to live it to the fullest.

Honestly, I can't even imagine not believing in God. It would be trying to deny my own existence. One thing I can't believe in is religion. All these idiots with their "holy books" proclaiming this and that about God. They don't know sh#t. Religion seems to me for people who are unaware that God speaks directly to anyone who asks. Religious people are idolaters. They listen to men, not God and claim it's God they listen to. Religion is a scourge.

I am a part of the intelligence of this universe. I perceive that it is vast, and that I have frequent access to it, and that it is infinitely greater than I can comprehend using normal human consciousness.

I ask it to speak to me in a language I can understand and it does. God breaks it down for me. Every time I ask. If you don't experience a connection of God it's your free will not to do so. You've chosen it, or chosen to believe something else.

Here's the rub. Ask God to send you a sign that you will be unable to deny. He'll do it.






luggi

Trad climber
from the backseat of Jake& Elwood Blues car
May 9, 2010 - 12:00am PT
More than 1 billion copies
Book Author(s) Original language First published Approximate sales
Bible[1] (Koine Greek τὰ Βιβλία -hebrew " התנ"ך " ) Authors of the Bible Hebrew, Koine Greek, Aramaic, Latin 300 BC- 95 AD,
Further information: dating of the Bible
2.5 billion[2] to more than 6 billion[3]

for something that some say cannot possible hold truth...why would it be passed down via language for generations and printed so many times?.....what other book has sold more copies...or for that matter how far back....
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 12:02am PT
Pa, there is truth in what Dr. F says. You sound like a truckler.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 12:05am PT
The Bible is like a virus. God does not give a crap or not about it. Ask him.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 12:10am PT
Binks- In a way, you just contradicted your own aforementioned principle. Which God? When you say God, what do you mean? Do you mean God Jehovah, that is, God of Moses? If not, which God? God Diacrates? God Hypercrates? Which, man, tell us which one you mean.

God Diacrates: The intelligent higher power behind all things.
God Jehovah: The god (deity) of Jews, Christians, Muslims.
God Hypercrates: personification, symbol, of fate (cf: Grim Reaper, symbol of death)
God Zeus: the God of the ancient Greeks


Stop dangling deities. (Your own aforementioned principle.) Break this bad habit. -Which is what it is. A bad habit.

You don't "dangle participles" in English class. Similarly, you don't "dangle deities" in any 21st century intelligent discourse on gods or theologies. (Yes, it's a new standard of awareness.) Try it.
mrtropy

Trad climber
Nor Cal
May 9, 2010 - 12:10am PT
Too lazy to read all the post but the only reason is brainwashing.
luggi

Trad climber
from the backseat of Jake& Elwood Blues car
May 9, 2010 - 12:15am PT
Challenge...why are the players in this case ask for others to always prove there is a God...how about those that insist there is no God provide evidence of their case.....instead of babble....

Do people believe in worm holes and time travel even if we cannot see them but Hawkins says they exist...does everything have to be proved before it is accepted?
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 12:21am PT
HFCS you're talking about avatars. God can appear in whatever mask you like.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 12:22am PT
There is no God Zeus. There is no God Jehovah. There is no God Poseidon. There is no God Amon-Re.

Do I really need to prove to you there is no God Poseidon? Do I really need to prove to you that Aphrodite wasn't born of sea foam off a Greek isle?

If no, no... then similarly I shouldn't have to prove to you Jehovah (aka Yahweh) of the ancient Hebrews didn't exist for Adam to Abraham to Moses either.

Let go of this ancient theology. The sky won't fall. Life will still be the adventure it is and it will still go on. Just try it.


Binks- Okay, agree to a point, so simply distinguish your God from God Jehovah in your conversations and this will cut a great deal of the needless arguing in half. Try it.

But God Jehovah for millions (including my grandmother) was hardly conceived as just an avatar or symbol of fate, even intelligent fate. They believe he's as real as you or me and carried out all the specifics of the Bible stories literally. -Including mating with a young human female to produce an offspring: God Jesus. (Quite a stretch from Diacrates or Hypercrates.)
pa

climber
May 9, 2010 - 12:29am PT
"Pa there is truth in what Dr. F says. You sound like a truckler".

"Truckler" : A servile, self seeking flatterer. (Webster)

Mr. HFCS,
I am humble
I seek the self
I have found flattery expedient at times...but I wouldn't know who to address it to, in this case...or why.
Brian More

climber
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
May 9, 2010 - 12:38am PT
Read Eric Hoffer, " The True Believer" .

Personal experience with a higher power: Snorkeling solo off a sandy beach in the Galapagos islands in November 2008 (can't remember which island or beach) I floated above the reef about a hundred yards offshore. From the depths, in the distance, a shape appeared. Adrenaline flowed as I waited for it's arrival. Closing fast, a large black mass. I held my position and was visited by a giant Galapagos sea turtle, looking for a snack. I treaded water (mesmerized), as my new friend munched on the reef... but wait! Again, in the distance, a dark shape moved closer... It was, to my amazement, another giant sea turtle! (were they a couple?-did they seek out my company for some reason?-were they drawn to me?) Many minutes later, and after much floating/observation and reef munching I knew I had been witness to a higher power, God/nature spoke to me, and I will never ever forget it.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
May 9, 2010 - 12:38am PT
Beat her with a rake...make her pay for her mistake....choke her , choker her till she sees god....the weasles...need more proof..?
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 12:40am PT
Seventeen.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 12:41am PT
Here's the thing about you folks that keep denying God or gods exist. You seem so confident that what YOU believe is real. I bet almost none of what you believe is real is very accurate. If you go back a thousand years, you'd agree that people then didn't know jack squat. I'm sure though they sure thought they really had a handle on things. In another thousand years everything you think you know will probably be understood as a primitive fantasy. Don't be so sure of yourselves. God is God. He was there then and he's there now. Attempts to pin him down by using different avatars (Zeus or whatever) are a misunderstanding of divine intelligence. I don't need to 'believe' God exists. I experience it all the time. He's the guide and creator of my mission here on Earth. He speaks to me directly in a language I'm capable of understanding whenever I ask a question. It never fails.

BTW, there is a God Zeus, Poseidon etc. They are part of divine intelligence. I could call on any of those Gods if I need to.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 12:50am PT
Binks wrote-
Attempts to pin him down by using different avatars (Zeus or whatever) are a misunderstanding of divine intelligence.

(a) Attempts to pin ideas down by using different words are a misunderstanding of ideation.

(b) Attempts to pin entities down by using diffent names are a misunderstanding of things.

(c) Attempts to pin people down by using different names for them (Mike, John, Bill, Sue, Mary, whatever) are a misunderstanding of humanity, the oneness of humanity.

(d) Attempts to pin rockclimbing gear down by using different names for them (cams, nuts, slings, hexes, Aliens, Metolius, BD, etc.) are a misunderstanding of basic protection.


You don't see the analogies. If not, pretty lame.

The use of words, terms, labels in whatever field is a basic role of language amongst humans to improve understanding.

Good luck and good night.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 12:57am PT
Unfortunately, it is YOU, HFCS who do not see. I really have no need to convince you or anyone else of anything of this nature!

You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear. Simple as that.

For me God exists and so do all the "gods" of human history. They are all entities that have intelligence that I can call on. I have had some of them appear to me in visions of such dazzling complexity that no artist on earth has ever rendered. Things I couldn't have imagined in a million years. The are real and they are all warp and weft of the divine.

It's pretty funny that "modern" man, who has largely completely blinded himself to the existence of God thinks this is a superior state of intelligence. It's like putting out your own eyes and then claiming anyone who believes in vision is a crank. Now, I understand why you'd want to deny God and it's not about God at all. It's about the power people abuse who claim they or their sect\church\cult speaks for God. That's pretty much always a lie and personally I'm praying that the liars continue to be exposed. If you haven't noticed, the Catholic church has been getting what they deserve lately. Thank God.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 01:11am PT
Binks wrote-
"it is YOU, HFCS who do not see..."

Well, perhaps you misunderstand. I believe. I am a believer. I believe in Hypercrates. Moreover, like Einstein, I believe in Diacrates as a possibility.

But I don't believe in Jehovah or Marduk- just too ancient Mesopotamian to me. For my taste.

And thank goodness, too, because if I did believe in Jevovah, for instance, I'd be inclined to help pass edicts against Sabbath breakers (Num 15) and I'd be inclined to help stone them to death in obedience to Him.

"You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear. Simple as that."

Not quite. I've spent a lifetime studying the world's god concepts and theologies. Far more than just those of the Abrahamic religion. For me, it is (1) education and (2) trying hard to "live up to" that education. -That is what I am expressing here. Sorry if that goes against your perspective.
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 9, 2010 - 09:54am PT
Remember, when the proverbial doo-doo hits the fan, there is only one to turn to: Jesus the Christ, our Lord and Savior.

Turning now to GOD and to Jesus and getting right with him before this happens, is much more advised. I wouldn't put it off for another day.

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4380943

Matt.24 (KJV)
[1] And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
[2] And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
[3] And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
[4] And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
[5] For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
[6] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
[7] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
[8] All these are the beginning of sorrows.
[9] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
[10] And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
[11] And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
[12] And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
[13] But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
[14] And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
[15] When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
[16] Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
[17] Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
[18] Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
[19] And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
[20] But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
[21] For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
[22] And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
[23] Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
[24] For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
[25] Behold, I have told you before.
[26] Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
[27] For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
[28] For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
[29] Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
[30] And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
[31] And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
[32] Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
[33] So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
[34] Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
[35] Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
[36] But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
[37] But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
[38] For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
[39] And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
[40] Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
[41] Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
[42] Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
[43] But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
[44] Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
[45] Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
[46] Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
[47] Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
[48] But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
[49] And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
[50] The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
[51] And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 11:19am PT
Weschrist- I wish Earth had a planetary twin also in orbit around the sun. So we of like mind could set sail for this new world, leave behind these supernaturalists and contribute to a new speciation: Homo superbus.

I wonder if any evolved intelligence in the entire Milky Way could be so lucky as to have multiple planetary systems (chockfull of abundant fossil fuel of course). To enable dispersal. To enable speciation. To enable getting away from the Klimmers and Rokjoks.

But alas, not we, we're stuck. Having to get along. Having to compromise, negotiate, with these nonadaptive supernaturalists.

"If it weren't for God, we would have nothing going for us at all."

Yeah, ain't that crazy. I missed that one. I missed it because I take Pate's advice and skip all the nonsense of this poster.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 03:03pm PT
You aren't any different than the people who believe in God or other gods and thinking you could isolate yourself is funny. You'd have an outbreak of God believers before long if you did so. You've just made your own philosophies and beliefs gods instead. What you attack you just strengthen. Any god you contemplate long enough will eventually appear before you thru archetypal consciousness. The reason we can't reach agreement isn't the reason you think it is. In my opinion you have decided in your mind what God and gods must be, excluded everything else, and then concluded from that faulty construction that God does not exist simply because he does not exist within the criteria you have selected. God allows you to play this game and isn't miffed at your stance. It's called Free Will.

You probably think believing in God would somehow imprison or limit you. This is totally an error. It's the opposite. You don't gain anything by excluding God. You just lose guidance, vision, protection, and connection by that exclusion.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 03:08pm PT
Binks wrote-
"You've just made your own philosophies and beliefs gods instead."

Yeah, but the difference is it is based on a modern understanding of things. Esp in regard to how the world works and how life works. As opposed to quite literally a bronze age understanding of things. Makes for a big difference. Big.

You think it's right not to distinguish between the god concept Einstein speculated about and the god concept fundamentalist Christians and Muslims believe in? You think the two are one and the same?

"The reason we can't reach agreement..."


Give it time. We've just entered a powerful info age. Internet-driven now. Give it time. 2-3 generations. Big changes are underway. The "practice" of living 100 years from now won't be domininated by ancient theologies or ancient theisms. People will trust them, they will have faith in them. These "practices" will be based not only on a modern understanding of how the world works but on new narratives and the world and its human cultures will be better for it. That is my hope and faith/trust.

Right now, we are experiencing growing pains.

"A watched pot never boils."
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 03:10pm PT
Yeah, but the difference is it is based on a modern understanding of things. Esp in regard to how the world works and how life works. As opposed to quite literally a bronze age understanding of things. Makes for a big difference. Big.

This is incorrect. God is eternal. Modern understanding is modern understanding. In a little while it won't be modern. You can understand anything you like but God isn't tied to an understanding bound by time. When you experience God it is timeless. Concepts and understanding are fragments of consciousness. God is within total consciousness.

You think it's right not to distinguish between the god concept Einstein speculated about and the god concept fundamentalist Christians and Muslims believe in? You think the two are one and the same?

Religious people in my opinion are basically some of the most un-Godly people on earth. John Lennon said "Imagine no religion". Amen. He didn't say "Imagine there's no God". Religious people mostly haven't had an experience and substitute "holy" books, crooked leaders, and arrogant pronouncements from fools for God's truth.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
May 9, 2010 - 03:16pm PT
Why not?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 9, 2010 - 03:34pm PT
Why?
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
May 9, 2010 - 04:27pm PT
You're correct Juan, it isn't logical. I do not believe.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 9, 2010 - 04:41pm PT
Dr. F. said: My criteria is that God has to be "something."

This insistence is the result of being entirely trapped in the discursive mind, which can only work with "things" that have qualities we can measure and contrast and so forth. It is simply the discursive/evaluating mind interpreting and objectifying "reality" on it's own terms - and be glad the mind does this or we'd never get things done. But the evaluating mind's limitations are strongly felt and known when it runs up against "spirit," or the indivisible "all."

Spirituality is not beholden to "things," hence the circular argument if you require "God" to be the way your mind has decided "he" must be (material - "something" we can wrangle with instruments) lest "He" is not real.

What, then, is "spirit?" (Hint - not an idea, a feeling, a thought, a sensation, a memory, an imagined image, a sound, etc., all of which are "things." Nor yet is Spirit a "fiction," a "belief," etc., which are merely appraisals and evaluations of some thing, or the lack of thingness.)

See how the evaluating mind grasps after things? That's a good starting point.

JL
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 9, 2010 - 04:41pm PT
HFCS,

After reading your posts for sometime now, and I do. I get the distinct feeling you are OK with a GOD or GODs and faith, just not Judaism/Christian faith and belief.

I get the feeling you would be OK with rounding up those of the Jewish and Christian faiths, putting us all in prison, and then bring back the persecution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_sentiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_early_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians


Why do you hate GOD? Why do you hate Jesus Christ so?


Those of true faith from both Judaism and Christainity do not condone violence. Do not condone killing. Only those who distort GOD's word do that. True faith in GOD and his word promotes love and peace only.

Why are you threatened by it so?
go-B

climber
May 9, 2010 - 04:56pm PT
Because there IS God, His Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit!
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 9, 2010 - 05:25pm PT
Thank God for Soundgarden...

Take, if you want a slice
If you want a piece
If it feels alright

Break, if you like the sound
If it gets you up
If it brings you down

Share, if it makes you sleep
If it sets you free
If it helps you breathe

Don't come over here
And piss on my gate
Save it just keep it
Off my wave

Cry, if you want to cry
If it helps you see
If it clears your eyes

Hate, if you want to hate
If it keeps you safe
If it makes you brave

Pray, if you want to pray
If you like to kneel
If you like to lay

Don't come over here
And piss on my gate
Save it just keep it
Off my wave

Keep it off my wave
Keep it off my wave
Keep it off my wave

My wave

Cry, if you want to cry
If it helps you see
If it clears your eyes

Hate, if you want to hate
If it keeps you safe
If it makes you brave

Take, if you want a slice
If you want a piece
If it feels alright

Don't come over here
And piss on my gate
Save it just keep it
Off my wave

Keep it off my wave
Keep it off my wave

My wave
go-B

climber
May 9, 2010 - 05:35pm PT
Psalm 93:4, Mightier than the thunders of many waters, mightier than the waves of the sea, the Lord on high is mighty!

Isaiah 51:15, I am the Lord your God, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar— the Lord of hosts is his name.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 9, 2010 - 06:16pm PT
because random doesn't explain this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkGeOWYOFoA
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 06:25pm PT
Now that is a beautiful video! Reaffirms the exquisite relations between physical laws, energy and motion, mathematics, living things and human perception. Thanks for posting it.

Mathematics is a reflection of causality. Applied to biology, it may be used to expose and express the mechanistic nature inherent in all living things.

Hurray for mathematics. The language of mathematics. The tool of mathematics. The beauty of mathematics.

Make Astrophes proud. Embrace causality.
Jingy

Social climber
Nowhere
May 9, 2010 - 06:26pm PT
the god delusion runs deep.

it goes back a long time.

But few can see that there is no god.
go-B

climber
May 9, 2010 - 06:36pm PT
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 06:42pm PT
What makes chimpanzees go?

Is there a ghost (or ghostly spirit) in the body machine that pulls levers?
that leads to chimpanzee behavior, that makes the chimpanzee go.

On the other hand...

If there is no ghostly spirit driving the flesh, then the conclusion is inescapable: it means flesh and blood working through cells and tissues, brought forth by evolution and natural selection, is capable of mighty exquisite powers.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 07:03pm PT
Whew, talk about paradigm shifts in attitudes and thinking:

Modern: Flesh and blood drives the flesh and blood, so it's time we respected it for the marvel it is. (HFCS)

Ancient: A ghost or ghostly spirit drives the flesh and blood, so there is good reason to "pass over" flesh and blood, to discount it, for it is only of secondary importance if that relative to the ghost. (Go-be, Klimmer, Rocjok, Trip7)
go-B

climber
May 9, 2010 - 07:03pm PT
Psalm 32, Blessed Are the Forgiven
A Maskil of David.
1 Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven,
whose sin is covered.
2 Blessed is the man against whom the Lord counts no iniquity,
and in whose spirit m there is no deceit.

3 For when I kept silent, my bones wasted away
through my groaning all day long.
4 For day and night your hand was heavy upon me;
my strength was dried up as by the heat of summer. Selah

5 I acknowledged my sin to you,
and I did not cover my iniquity;
I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord,”
and you forgave the iniquity of my sin. Selah

6 Therefore let everyone who is s godly
offer prayer to you at a time when you may be found;
surely in the rush of great waters,
they shall not reach him.
7 You are a hiding place for me;
you preserve me from trouble;
you surround me with shouts of deliverance. Selah

8 I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go;
I will counsel you with my eye upon you.
9 Be not like a horse or a mule, without understanding,
which must be curbed with bit and bridle,
or it will not stay near you.

10 Many are the sorrows of the wicked,
but steadfast love surrounds the one who trusts in the Lord.
11 Be glad in the Lord, and rejoice, O righteous,
and shout for joy, all you upright in heart!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 9, 2010 - 07:13pm PT
But back to the original question: Why do so many believe in god?



Short answer: an Afterlife

Longer answer: Modern higher consciousness primates, humans, want very very
badly to believe that physical death is not the end of their existence.

Evidence of this is found as far back as 15-20,000 years ago when burial
grounds are unearthed that show people laid to rest along with some of
their favorite artifacts, weapons, adornments, to use in case they would be
reborn in some kind of conscious afterlife.

In seems we are hard wired to want to believe that somehow we go on and on.

Almost every religion has as it's core this belief in an afterlife.

The very structure of religion is to promote and legitimatize through ritual
preparation for an afterlife that both rewards and punishes earthly behavior.

The concept of a deity goes nicely along with the strong desire for leadership in the hereafter.

If blind salamanders had our consciousness, they would want the same.

Sadly, wanting something is only a concept, and contributes nothing to
the concept being true, or untrue. It is just a desire, like wanting to eat.



High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 9, 2010 - 07:44pm PT
I'd like to take this opportunity to be more clear about something.

I "believe in" Hypercrates. Hypercrates is either (a) the personification of fate or (b) the personification of higher powers (of fate). Just as the Grim Reaper is the personification of death. That's it.

It's only by extension and it's only because it's handy... that I sometimes call Hypercrates "God Hypercrates" or simply "God." (Similar to Plumber Joe.)

Humans like to personify. Over the years, it's been clarifying and helpful for me to have Hypercrates (hii puhr' kruh tees) as a personification.

Again, I don't first and foremost think of Hypercrates as a God any more than I think of Mother Nature as a God or the Grim Reaper as a God.

But it sure is handy sometimes to have Hypercrates to contrast with Jehovah. As needed.
Oxymoron

Big Wall climber
total Disarray
May 9, 2010 - 07:57pm PT
Make Death your bitch.
go-B

climber
May 9, 2010 - 08:37pm PT
Proverbs 9:10, The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.
eeyonkee

Trad climber
Golden, CO
May 9, 2010 - 11:44pm PT
Because they are afraid of death.
krutley

climber
here, now
May 10, 2010 - 12:05am PT
Cause we all have the right to choose of our own free will. Just don't choose for anyone outside yourself.
mushroom

Trad climber
USA
May 10, 2010 - 12:07am PT
"Belief in God" is an oversimplification of a very complex topic. Lets take a look at how many different faucets God can encompass:

1. Did the universe come to be or was there a creator behind it?

2. Are there recognized universal laws? Gravity? Karma? Cause and effect?

3. Is there a judge who decides whether our actions are ethical, providing, or limiting from us, access to some reward-land at the end?

4. Is there a all-powerful entity that can even break said laws of #2 (aka miracles)?

5. Is there knowledge or do we really not know anything for certain at all?

This is just the beginning of the faucets that God can encompass.

Next comes the argument of the logical positivists: does your statement about belief in the supernatural really mean anything at all? Sure, one person can say, "I believe in God" and another, "I don't believe in God", but perhaps these are both ridiculous statements that don't have any meaning whatsoever. It is, indeed, possible for us to just piece words together by the laws of grammar and come up with meaningless statements: "I believe clouds give great hugs". What?

The problem with the American perspective on the super natural is this: people are criticized for their lack of faith in God. Perhaps, rather, our tribulations with faith are all part of our path through life. Periods of believing and not believing are both totally natural processes.

I prescribe to the latter. How you feel at any given time is part of the natural course of things. Your delving into and out of faith is all part of the path. I avoid the use of the world God and prefer terms like "the central order of things" and "infinite intelligence" because these are the specific answers to my aforementioned questions which I attest to. The word "god" is just too easily misconstrued and I wouldn't want to be confused with one of Them. Knaw mean?

To answer your question, it's a mixture of society and lack of thought. People don't spend the time to do the thinking to figure out what they make of the world, but society has a nice corner it'd love to push you into.
krutley

climber
here, now
May 10, 2010 - 12:10am PT
wc - dont know where you got the pie chart, but sitting here in the middle of Hindu belt, N India, I'm looking at >50% disordered. I may be ugly, and murkan, but i aint ugly murkan.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 10, 2010 - 12:16am PT
mushroom- nicely put.
eeyonkee

Trad climber
Golden, CO
May 10, 2010 - 12:54am PT
I like what mushroom said...and I want to change what I said. In my opinion, the number ONE answer is "Their parents taught them to."
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 10, 2010 - 09:37am PT
Greg,

You are right. We are given a responsibility and will be held to account for it.

Is everything my parents taught me correct? No. But they did instill in me a love and respect for GOD, and others. I in turn will instill that in my children.

Proverbs 22:6 (KJV)
"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."

Glenn
eeyonkee

Trad climber
Golden, CO
May 10, 2010 - 09:51am PT
I was just stating a point in fact. Clearly, the main reason most (obviously, not all) people believe what they do with respect to God and religion is the result of direct cultural transmission - mainly from parents to children. That's the primary reason that Muslim's hold their views and Christians hold theirs.
Studly

Trad climber
WA
May 10, 2010 - 09:52am PT
Do the math boys. Bookworm, right on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVpqtH-g-ok&feature=related

TYeary

Social climber
State of decay
May 10, 2010 - 12:01pm PT
The more pain you have , the more God you need.
Not my words, but it does seem to make sence.
drljefe

climber
Old Pueblo, AZ
May 10, 2010 - 12:05pm PT
cheaper than therapy.
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
May 10, 2010 - 12:09pm PT
I did some of my own thinking and instead of just taking what my parents told me as the truth, I formed my own opinions and taught my child something different. This change is the only way for the human race to advance to a high level of anything. If we took our parents word for things outright, we would still be blood-letting for its health benefits.

Dave
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 10, 2010 - 12:15pm PT
because accepting that there is no afterlife is just too damn hard to do
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 10, 2010 - 12:33pm PT
Any of you ir-religious or post-religious people...

... ever notice the term "afterlife" plays right into the hands of the religious supernaturalists? (Just like "atheism.") Just for the heck of it, try the word... lifeafter... might serve better.

Here's a usage example with both terms in the same sentence.

Example: "Of course there's an afterlife (state), I "believe in" an afterlife (state), just not a lifeafter."

Sometimes "rebel freeskites" (e.g., irreligious people) trying to break out of antiquated habits, antiquated traditions, can be their own worst enemy. -When they continue to use the language and framing of the system from which they are trying to get away or leave behind.

Words matter. Language matters.

But like rockclimbing, takes practice.

Another Example:

"This life is not a rehearsal. There is no lifeafter. We are evolved beings. Comprised of 100 trillion cells. Constituted like that, how could we live forever? Lifeafter- an ancient bronze age misconception institutionalized by religions down through the centuries-- is as bogus as astrology.

Just try it. It's way more specific than afterlife and doesn't play into the hands of religious supernaturalists.
Robb

Social climber
The other "Magic City on the Plains"
May 11, 2010 - 12:54am PT
What I haven't seen posted in this thread is why all of you who don't believe in God get so worked up about those who do believe in God. If it/He isn't real, then so what? Why does it make a hill of beans?
WBraun

climber
May 11, 2010 - 01:01am PT
Corn nut

Being being falsely proud of your word jugglery is one thing.

But actually believing in your own bullsh'it is even worse.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 11, 2010 - 02:18am PT
Robb wrote-
"What I haven't seen posted in this thread is why all of you who don't believe in God get so worked up about those who do believe in God. If it/He isn't real, then so what? Why does it make a hill of beans?"

Well, that's certainly a platitude I've heard 100 times since the 1980s. But I would've hoped, since 9/11 esp, the reasons would be evident.

1. We live in a democracy. Votes matter. Science education, science literacy, matters. An accurate understanding of how the world works matters. An accurate understanding of how life works matters.

2. Today's Abrahamic religions all operate off of an ancient theology that's chock full of bronze age misconceptions, no, better, bronze age stupidities. Because they do they are an obstacle. An obstacle to higher education (both science education and general life education. An obstacle to less contentious more informed democracies. An obstacle to better practices in the "practice" of living.

More interesting: Why does this need to be spelled out? Surely you've been paying attention to what's been going on the world: How much money have our democracies had to spend fighting against ol' time religious ideologies? Ol time religious ideologies too numerous to count out here.

By the way: Which God? Most post-religious in American culture (like Sam Harris or me or Richard Dawkins) don't get "worked up" at all over Poseidon, for example, or Diacrates (the hypothetical Intelligence millions including Einstein speculated about).

Most get "worked up" only over Jehovah (aka Allah) the warrior god of the Abrahamic religions. And then only because of the theologies developed based on Him and the crazy ideas and behaviors of religious institutions founded on these.

But it won't always be so. Times are changing.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 11, 2010 - 02:20am PT
Braun-

Give it a rest.

Your belief that... Life works through matter but is independent of it... is incorrect. Stop beating this dead horse.

Adapt. Upgrade your software. Take some life science courses. Spend your time and energy adapting to the Scientific Story (aka Epic of Evolution), not fighting it.

It's about raising awareness, Brawny, on the path to changing attitudes and behavior. But it does seem that you are set on fighting it at every turn- insofar as it conflicts with your own brand of ancient Hinduism.

Lean into the "growing pains" of change. It's how we advance, it's how we've always advanced.

Till you do, you'll always be at odds with science, science education. And with me. Good luck and good night.

"...proud of your word jugglery..."

...you only focus on the words because they're unfamiliar... if you ever went to school on the subjects behind them, they would be second nature. -Which is just the way it is with any technical discipline. Or trade or activity. Even rockclimbing.

It's late. Time to recharge the mitochondria. (Whoops, more "word jugglery," sorry...)
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
May 11, 2010 - 06:19am PT
Don't underestimate Werner! He carved that last post in a stone tablet and WAM! it appear on ST with a last gesture of his chisel. No stinking iPad for him.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 11, 2010 - 10:25am PT
"Most get "worked up" only over Jehovah (aka Allah) the warrior god of the Abrahamic religions. And then only because of the theologies developed based on Him and the crazy ideas and behaviors of religious institutions founded on these."


i find it interesting that so few atheists "get worked up" about god but have little or nothing to say about godless societies (except hitchens) like stalinist ussr, red china, noko, etc.; stalin and mao EACH were responsible for the greatest destruction of human life ever recorded, and combined they stagger the imagination...conservative estimates credit stalin with 20 MILLION deaths and mao with 30 MILLION...and i'm talking about their own people, not the wars they participated in...take ALL the religiously motivated killings in history and you won't come near 50 million

and let's not forget the 50 MILLION babies killed in the womb just since roe

finally, to claim that there is no good to come out of religion would be equally idiotic to the claim that no good ever came from science...to condemn all religion or all religious people just because a few aholes blow themselves up in the name of allah would be equally idiotic to condemn einstein for inspiring hiroshima and nagasaki, which, i'm pretty sure outnumber in deaths the best efforts of the aforementioned aholes
Jingy

Social climber
Nowhere
May 11, 2010 - 10:51am PT
"Why do so many people believe in God? (Serious Question?)"

because they can't imagine a world without a god?

because they need someone to blame?

Becuase they would not be moral if they didn't have the imaginary big brother type looking over their shoulder?

because they are weak?


the list goes on...
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
May 11, 2010 - 11:13am PT
What I haven't seen posted in this thread is why all of you who don't believe in God get so worked up about those who do believe in God. If it/He isn't real, then so what? Why does it make a hill of beans?

Because the believers try to f*** up my life all too often. How about stop trying to convince my kid that there is a God by making her pray in school (...one nation UNDER GOD!!!).

And yes, big communist type civilizations that promoted atheism also did evil things. They wanted people to worship their commune and were pretty much like any set of deep believers in a higher power.

Theism and Atheism are like guns, they don't kill people, people kill people.

Dave
Branscomb

Trad climber
Lander, WY
May 11, 2010 - 11:30am PT
I read an interesting book recently call Descartes' Bones, forget who the author is.

Goes into the struggle between rational thinking and religion. Really sets the present argumentation between fundamentalism and rational thought in a good historical perspective.

It made me start thinking that maybe we're in one of those times, due to a lot of uncertainities in present human existence, that a lot of people have been thrown back onto more primitive modes of thinking about the world, for whatever personal reasons.

Maybe we're in a time when we'll finally hash out all that bullshit and start thinking about things in more rational manner. I hope so because the present intensity of fundamentalism is so destructive. Hey, more people have been killed in the name of Christianity than all the world wars put together.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
May 11, 2010 - 11:48am PT
Maybe we're in a time when we'll finally hash out all that bullshit and start thinking about things in more rational manner

I am currently reading William Manchester's book: A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance — Portrait of an Age
A lot of it deals with the Reformation and times that were very much like these.
As Manchester notes "intelligent people do not necessarily act logically."
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 11, 2010 - 12:15pm PT
Nothing is unreal. If you can imagine it, it is real in some sense. Just because some people give higher weight to some kinds of reality than others does not make that a correct judgment. Any God I imagine is real, the imagination is a discovery process, not just a fabrication, and the entity eventually even take on a life if it's own without me even if I'm its sole creator. That does not necessarily mean it's a very strong God but the more I invest of my energy in it, the more energy and power it gains. Many of the Old gods are very strong. This is the same way God (meaning the God comprising all the information of the universe) creates the known universe, which is really just information-energy. It is created by the focusing of consciousness to create. We are all just part of God's dream. God created us to believe we have individual consciousness as a necessity in order to avoid some problems caused by recursive looping of semi-independent conscious substructures. We have real creative power and are part of the larger God-consciousness. God co-creates reality thru us. How do I know this is true? I have experienced it. If you think "belief" is necessary because you can't experience or communicate with God, then you haven't even got to first base yet.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 11, 2010 - 12:24pm PT
Wes, you're trapped within semantics and can't see the forest for the trees. It's the position of someone who habitually accepts definitions instead of one who has experience creating them.

Science and reason are far less real than God, who can change the rules any time he wants to. Science and reason and even "laws of the universe" are only well ingrained habits.

Antonyms imply polarity. A polarity is actually a unity anyway. Take a magnet with two poles. Say One pole is Republican and the other Democrat. One pole hates the other and cuts it off. What happens? It just brings it closer to it. If you cut a magnet in half, the two poles are now just closer together. The polar enemy is an intrinsic unity.

We should learn to respect, love, and enjoy the distance from those adopting stances polarized to our own. Only a fool wants to cut that down and bring it right into his own face. Only a fool believes his polar opposite isn't actually unified with himself...
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 11, 2010 - 12:29pm PT
Poor Binks- it pains me to say you've now forced me to include you in the same penalty box as Klimmer and Rokjox.

(Wait, there's poetry in there some where...)
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 11, 2010 - 12:35pm PT
I'm perfectly capable of practicing science and reason, realizing full well they are a merely an approximate toolbox. It's why I've worked for many years as a senior engineer at a technology company. The best engineers are wizards. They understand how the wiring works and will create an entirely new lexicon or language if necessary. Creators. If you're one of my reports, I'll tell you the "rules and laws" which you will take as absolute. But meanwhile I know there is an awful lot of "space" around them. So much so that mostly what we are dealing with is thin air.

But don't let my appeal to my spurious "real world authority" move you. That's just "the man". Maybe I only achieved this position in order to fully hide my foolish nature.
WBraun

climber
May 11, 2010 - 12:41pm PT
Corn nut ...

I told you already that you're stupid dumb sh'it leg humper.

Now you're trying to do it with Binks.

Why not STFU for a change and learn something instead of lumping people here always into your narrow mental speculative idea of what they are.

You really are an idiot .....
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 11, 2010 - 12:45pm PT
I'm violating one of my personal rules by posting on a thread where I only skimmed the posts, rather than reading them carefully. If I've re-plowed a row, please forgive me.

I think applying Pascal's wager to Biblical Christianity is making an insane bet. As Paul wrote, if the dead do not rise, then we, of all people, are most to be pitied. Jesus said that one who, having put his hand to the plow, looks back is not fit for the kingdom of heaven, and He told His followers they must take up their cross daily.

The cross was simultaneously an instrument of torture, humiliation, and death, as His listeners knew all too well. Jesus was saying that being His follower is neither costless nor easy, as skimming the posts on this thread demonstrates.

I nonetheless believe in Jesus in the same way I believe in gravity, because of personal experience. I came to my faith as an adult and, like Lynnie, know Jesus as both my friend and my savior and God. In the absence of a mind meld, I can't transfer my experience to any of you, but neither can I deny it, even if admitting my belief exposes me to ridicule as a simple fool. So be it. I know what I've experienced, and my God is real.

John
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 11, 2010 - 12:49pm PT
Amen.

Jesus said, "They will hate you because they first hate me." (Paraphased)
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 11, 2010 - 12:58pm PT
Brawny- what, you don't think I could give as good as I get?

You don't think I could stoop to the "leg-humping" level, too. If I wanted? C'mon, raise the discourse. Show the class you show out in the field. What are you schizo, a duel personality, on the internet? or are you just jacking around with another "social experiment"?

Take up Pate's challenge. Post up something relating to belief that's insightful, thought-provoking, a sign of deeper understanding, something more than a two-sentence punchline.



Of absurdities, shadow governments and woowoo
angels and demons, conspiracies and biblical huey poo;

Into the penalty box, oughta be a lock box,
for Binks, Go-be, Brawny, Klimmer and Rokjox.


"Nothing is unreal. If you can imagine it, it is real in some sense. Just because some people give higher weight to some kinds of reality than others does not make that a correct judgment."

yeah, right, and the moon is made out of blue cheese. And this blue cheese will someday substitute for fossil fuels and power our cars and economies. Just believe and it is so.


And when the carrying capacity of the Earth collapses from 8 billion to 2 billion, do not fear this day for God Jehovah or God Marduk or God Ashtar (but not God Quetzalcoatl or the Flying Spighetti Monster) will save the difference in a super-sized chariot of fire on a whirlwind. And all will be fine. His Will be done.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 11, 2010 - 01:09pm PT
yeah, right, and the moon is made out of blue cheese. And this blue cheese will someday substitute for fossil fuels and power our cars and economies. Just believe and it is so.

The problem is you fail to understand context. Nothing is absolutely true in every context. Often, things only true in extremely narrow contexts have incredible power (like many applications of Science, or the impact of events in fictional movies). Everything is true in some context. You folks who want to deny the existence of God have narrowed down your context so far that you have made yourselves blind.

Even worse, you want to extend your minuscule and overextended context to include things that dwarf it, like God.

I say "even worse" with the greatest of respect. I'm OK with you believing whatever you want.

If you were truly able to believe that in some contexts the moon IS made of blue cheese then you would have made a true leap of consciousness that might actually enable a revolution in energy prodution, who knows? Instead, your brain is crippled because you insist on applying things of limited context outside of their domain.
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
May 11, 2010 - 01:15pm PT
nonetheless believe in Jesus in the same way I believe in gravity, because of personal experience. I came to my faith as an adult and, like Lynnie, know Jesus as both my friend and my savior and God. In the absence of a mind meld, I can't transfer my experience to any of you, but neither can I deny it, even if admitting my belief exposes me to ridicule as a simple fool. So be it. I know what I've experienced, and my God is real.

But you could show us your experience with gravity.

That is why atheists think that non-atheists are nuts. It's because they (the believers) seem to consider a repeatable and demonstratable experience (such as gravity) as being of the same meaning and quality as hearing voices in their heads; something that cannot be confirmed, demonstrated, or even verified to not be schizophrenia.

You say you know jesus but then I'm stuck having to take your word for it. On the other hand, I say that I know gravity and when you ask, I show you who, what, how, when, and why I know gravity. I hide nothing and I tell you that you do not need to simply believe it because your I told you so.

And yet the believers still act like the non-believers are somehow idiots for not seeing "it" even though it is invisible, unhearable, unmeasurable, and looks like a psychosis to us.

even if admitting my belief exposes me to ridicule as a simple fool

Maybe all of mankind are fools, even the atheists. Unfortunately, my beliefs make me thing that I'll never find out the answer. If the believers turn out right, I'll apologize on my way past heaven to wherever your various religions say I'll go.

Dave
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 11, 2010 - 01:29pm PT
Dave,

I recognize that I can't demonstrate what I've seen, heard, or sensed. I can only tell you about it. That's why I call it my faith, not my science or objective logic.

By saying I believe in Christ in the same way I believe in gravity, I don't mean that I can demonstrate them comparably. Rather, I meant that both guide my actions in the same way. I rope up because I know what gravity does. I pray, study, worship and share because I know who God is and what He does.

Christian faith is not science. If it were, we'd go about spreading the news differently. All I can do is share my experience. I cannot make you believe, nor can I make you disbelieve. That's your choice and the work of the Spirit. I have, however, been commanded to tell the story, and I try to follow His commands with the same care I take when I climb.

John
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 11, 2010 - 01:32pm PT
Dave wrote-
Unfortunately, my beliefs make me thing that I'll never find out the answer.

You could embrace the mystery, lean into it, take it on. (But perhaps you already do.) I do. That, too, is a life strategy that I think is gaining favor and coming more into being. In this evolving post-religious age.

Of this I trust, I have faith: There's no Intelligence (e.g., Diacrates) behind the Cosmos whose criteria of anything, e.g., morality, good v. evil, entry or not into a lifeafter, reward or punishment, turns on our believing in him or not. How childish is that? That's absurd. It's got human ideology written all over it. Made up a long time ago for ideological reasons and institutionalized down through the centuries.

What's most bewildering is how few- per cent wise in the population-- take the time to even think that through. And then again, how many others know full well what's up but play along anyway.
bestill

Trad climber
s. ca.
May 11, 2010 - 01:46pm PT
if the buddha figure in the post from juan de fuca held a mirror in front of it,it would realize it was a nazi.
go-B

climber
May 11, 2010 - 08:40pm PT
God's blessing is the only vote that matters! It's an open book test, Jesus is the answer!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 11, 2010 - 08:53pm PT
Still believe in Santa and the easter bunny, Gobee?

luggi

Trad climber
from the backseat of Jake& Elwood Blues car
May 11, 2010 - 08:56pm PT
John..well put!
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
May 13, 2010 - 12:00am PT
Norton....That's the xmas bunny...rj
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 13, 2010 - 12:34am PT
"The problem is you fail to understand context. Nothing is absolutely true in every context. Often, things only true in extremely narrow contexts have incredible power (like many applications of Science, or the impact of events in fictional movies). Everything is true in some context. You folks who want to deny the existence of God have narrowed down your context so far that you have made yourselves blind."

The problem here is that when people narrow their context, they don't realize it, or they'll consider all that might be out side that context as illusionary. This is what fundamentalist materialists believe - that to be real, we must refer to some thing with measurable matter, even though QM tells us there is no such thing as matter in an absolute sense.

People believing absolutely in matter are engaged in the same thinking process as those believing absolutely in biblical scripture.

JL
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 13, 2010 - 01:11am PT
This is huey.

re: Gods and "higher powers of fate" and theologies

We're not talking here about God in some abstract sense. We're talking about God Jehovah. Till you and the bulk of the multitudes get around to distinguishing the many and various God concepts, H. sapiens won't get any traction in this area.

But thank goodness a subculture (or two) is getting around to it. And making progress.

God Jehovah (the God underlying all three Abrahamic religions) was an ancient Mesopotamian God, akin to Marduk and Ashtar and just as fictional as the personal Gods of other cultures just 1,000 miles away in ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt.

Not a few on this site know well the concepts of "perspective" and "context" and the skill and power of applying them.

Here's a 21st century concept: dangling deities. In today's "post-religious" schools of thought, it's a faux pas to "dangle deities" just as in high school English class it is a faux pas to "dangle participles" or in high school math courses to "dangle numbers" without units.

"This is what fundamentalist materialists believe - that to be real, we must refer to some thing with measurable matter, even though QM tells us there is no such thing as matter in an absolute sense."

This is incorrect. EDIT: On several levels, too.

re: mechanistic nature of living things and mind-brain relationship

"Materialists" in regard to biology and living things believe (that is, mentally hold) that flesh and blood drives flesh and blood. What's more they believe molecular biology and biochemistry drive flesh and blood. From a different perspective, they believe there is no ghost in the body machine (as centuries of religious leaders believed and taught their congregations). From a different perspective, "materialists" believe mind (mental function incl consciousness) is what the brain does.

Here it is from a different perspective still: spiritual discarnationists believe "life works through matter but is independent of it." Wbraun comes to mind here. This belief is in direct opposition to what the materialist believes.

There is no such thing as "fundamentalist materialist." That is bogus language, a play on words. At least so it would be from many emerging perspectives, models and contexts. Mine, too.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
May 13, 2010 - 01:16am PT
John...do you , personally , believe in a supreme being. rj
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 13, 2010 - 04:42am PT
"This is what fundamentalist materialists believe - that to be real, we must refer to some thing with measurable matter, even though QM tells us there is no such thing as matter in an absolute sense."

This is incorrect. EDIT: On several levels, too.

re: mechanistic nature of living things and mind-brain relationship

"Materialists" in regard to biology and living things believe (that is, mentally hold) that flesh and blood drives flesh and blood. What's more they believe molecular biology and biochemistry drive flesh and blood. From a different perspective, they believe there is no ghost in the body machine (as centuries of religious leaders believed and taught their congregations). From a different perspective, "materialists" believe mind (mental function incl consciousness) is what the brain does.

Here it is from a different perspective still: spiritual discarnationists believe "life works through matter but is independent of it." Wbraun comes to mind here. This belief is in direct opposition to what the materialist believes.

There is no such thing as "fundamentalist materialist." That is bogus language, a play on words. At least so it would be from many emerging perspectives, models and contexts. Mine, too.
----


This is all faux scholastic hot air and is very much behind the curve per consciousness models and how consciousness "works." If you're going to jump into a conversation about "God" and consciousness you need to bring your A-game lest you'll have to sit in the corner with the pointy hat on.

The model provided above, as bore out through the history of philosophy, is actually reductionism, more specifically, material reductionism (or a sub set of "physicalism"), where consciousness can be "reduced" to atomic or chemical processes which "produce" said consciousness. That is, consciousness is a "product" or function of atomic and chemical processes, ergo, consciousness is what the brain "does."

People argue that the above, in considering consciousness as a meta-function of lower, and more fundamental chemical/atomic activities, you've introduced a kind of "ghost in the machine" that most of us laugh at as a viable concept. You can't have it both ways, runs the argument. You can't be a material reductionist, who believes that everything is no more than a sum of it's measurable parts, and at the same time say this or that (consciousness) is a function or by-product that is different than, more than, or above and beyond the basic chemical/atomic "parts" themeselves.
In other words, the only way material reductionism can stay logically viable is for everything to be the same thing. Ergo, a Fender Stratocaster is the very same thing as Jimi Hendrix's "Cry of Love," and that the Strat "created" the tune. I trust you see the problem with this.

Put in jug head terms, conscious is not something the brain does, consciousness is what the brain is. The brain doesn't produce consciousness in the old style, linear causal model. That's a cognitive style transposed or projected onto the question of God and consciousness.

"Fundamentalist Materialist" simply means that a fundamentalist cognitive mode (rigid adherence to a set of principals believed to be absolutely "correct") is applied to matter as the end-all, be all.

The subtle thing to realize here is not all the fancy justifications, but that material reductionism, which doesn't rule out emergent phenomena, nevertheless holds to an archaic form of linear causality that has much more to do with a certain cognitive style (the way a person feels comfortable thinking), and has almost nothing to do with how consciousness "is."

Bottom line: The fly in the ointment is a linear concept causality, which is really just a reflection of left brain, evaluating mind mode. Move into right brain mode and time vanishes, a phenomenon most evident in trauma research - but that's another story.

More later.

JL
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 13, 2010 - 10:24am PT
What would Lois say?
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
May 13, 2010 - 10:29am PT
Beats taking responsibiilty- "I could have avoided getting behind on my mortgage, but it was god's plan."
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 13, 2010 - 12:11pm PT
Pate- Covering at least four so-called "deep" subjects in as many sentences, short ones, how's this...

(1) Jehovah is a deification. (2) Nature is physics and chemistry (3) Meat is sentient. (4) Stop whining, suck it up and deal with it.


P.S.

Pate, btw, I do expect double duty from you in the good fight ala parody against ol time supernaturalist nonsense now that Weschrist is on sabbatical.

And Norton, knock it off with the little one-liners, give us some essays to sink our teeth into.

Jaybro- if we're being religious and balanced sounds like a perfectly reasonable explanation to me.

JL- I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the more profound subjects. But I dig your climbing books.

Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 13, 2010 - 12:22pm PT
(3) Meat is sentient.



There you have it IMO. Or half of it. Because the opposite is true as well.
Consciousness is meat.

This harks back to the old Zen maxim that "form is emptiness and emptiness is form, exactly." Put still differently, matter is energy and energy is matter, exactly.

Oddly, it looks as though everything is everything else. Remember David Boehm and all that hologram shite he was running in the 70s?

Pate - It's only complicated on the level of forms and matter, as any Quantum Mechanic or psychologist or poet can tell you. At the deeper level of being or emptiness, life just flows...

Gotta rock the matter and the spirit, and anytime you go cragging, you are, you just can't "prove" it, a process that lies strictly in the material, form, matter realm.

JL
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 13, 2010 - 01:06pm PT
HFCS and Largo -- for me it was an epic realization that material reductionism was being misapplied outside it's proper context. You need believe nothing "supernatural", quite the contrary. It started for me with ecology. I was studying ecosystems. Within them you see all kinds of "emergent phenomena". Stuff that performs with what seems like intelligence thru feedback loops. I studied things like the "faint young sun paradox", the carbon cycle and composition of the earth's atmosphere as regulated by the biosphere.

The whole thing can be turned on it's head you see. And once you turn it on it's head you will realize that in being indoctrinated to disbelieve anything but scientific materialism we have been blinded. Coordinating intelligence (i.e. teleological processes) exist as "epiphenomena" and in these contexts material reductionism is simply false. This realization is of course heretical to material reductionism, yet it's clear in these large scale ecosystem contexts that reductionism is absurd. All kinds of coordination is happening that has to be generated by random chance if you're going to hold to the reductive model. We westerners have been trained in a way that we "can't see the forest for the trees" and have grossly misapplied material reductionism so far out of context that we have created a kind of insanity on this planet.

If you're interested in this stuff, I recommend Lewis Thomas "The lives of a cell".

Of course once you take this realization out of the context of ecology, the entire thing just keeps opening up. This stuff has been misapplied all over and the limitation to our thinking and modeling has suffered greatly. We now need to grow beyond these limitations. Probably our survival depends on it too.

I leave you with a quote from Dune:
"Any path that narrows future possibilities may become a lethal trap. Humans are not threading their way through a maze; they scan a vast horizon filled with unique opportunities. The narrowing viewpoint of the maze should appeal only to creatures with their noses buried in the sand."

Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 13, 2010 - 03:08pm PT
As the The Police song goes . . .


We are Spirits . . .

in the Material World.

Are Spirits . . .

in the Material World.

. . .


When we die our souls return to our Creator. The Bible says this, and I firmly believe this. What we do, or do not do on this Earth matters.

Some say that our Soul has the mass of approximately 21.0g.

Could be true. More research needs to be done in this area.

Dr. Duncan MacDougall, the human soul has a mass of 21.0g:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_MacDougall_(doctor)
Anastasia

climber
hanging from a crimp and crying for my mama.
May 13, 2010 - 03:11pm PT
Just because I can't see gravity doesn't mean I am not influenced by it. To me God is something similar.
AFS
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 14, 2010 - 12:19am PT
my problem is not with god so much as belief, which seems to be a very compulsive thing in western tradition. you HAVE to believe. if i believe, i HAVE to testify about it. all you have to do is believe, and you will be saved. (lots of believers with other weaknesses in dante's inferno.)

i think we all have to agree that it's pretty hard to prove whether there's a god or not. might be one. might not. even if you believe, i think you have to admit this is the common state of knowledge on the subject. people claim to have special insights, but i never find them very convincing. their insights, to me, seem to be the product of their desire.

so why not leave god an open question? who knows, maybe we'll learn more about it all in a few years. maybe someone remarkable will come along--seems kinda foolish to think it all went down thousands of years ago and we're just here making time until god tells us, "that's all, folks."

if there is a divinity, i think our cues about it come from this wonderful universe. we know so much more about it today than did the writers of bibles, korans and sutras. there's more to be learned from the present than in these frozen concepts of the past.

on the other hand, the desire for a god, and life after death, which is a close companion to it, seems to be intrinsic in the human adventure. it has had many expressions. we can learn from them too--they're part of the biology and the universe as well.
Robb

Social climber
The other "Magic City on the Plains"
May 14, 2010 - 10:54am PT
HFCS
Thank you for your concise answer. From a given perspective it makes perfect sense. My question wasn't meant to be a platitude. Nearly all of the times I have asked this over the years I've only received rants for answers. Refreshing to hear a well constructed arguement.
Thanks again,
Robb
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 14, 2010 - 01:10pm PT
Dr. F wrote:

"Its so much bigger than our mind can understand, to make it all about God is just demonstrating how small you think the universe is:

Another word/concept for "God," reaching back to early history, is "The All," which, quite naturally, includes the Universe and everything in it - and nothing at all.

That has led some people to tell us that both the universe and God are infinitely larger than the content and evaluating capacities of our minds; and more importantly, that our minds themselves (not the content or processing aperati) are not only "no-thing," they are infinite.

So the question becomes: Is it possible for you to imagine that both mind and God are not "things," or "something?"

Again, at this point we're simply engaging in a thought experiment. We're checking our willingness to imagine God and Mind as "no thing," we're not asking you to believe something, to stop analyzing or provide a construct or definition of anything.

The next step is easy.

JL
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
May 14, 2010 - 01:57pm PT
The problem here seems to be the definition of god. What is it?

The difficulty,logically, is the notion of an individulaized, eternal consciousness that has the ability to empathize and interact directly and personally with our lives, I don't see the evidence for such a being.

On the other hand if you say god is simply a final term as in "energy is god as it is eternal and can neither be created nor destroyed" well, that I might buy.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 14, 2010 - 03:29pm PT
dr. f, there are a number of "proofs" of the existence of god--the cosmological argument, the ontological argument, and i'm sure others. "learned" some of it from the jebbies, but, in retrospect, it's sophistry.

my argument is that, believe it or not, everyone is pretty much in the same boat with the god business. there's only so much to be known, and we're not going to get satisfaction. when you get to that point, either you're going to say, "i'm an atheist" or "i believe". i add them together and divide by a common denominator.

i would like to inject an element of comparative religion into this. most of the people in this thread seem to have a rather christian take on the subject. from my point of view, y'all are in the tradition of mideastern monotheism. it begins with egyptian culture in what you might call the first "comfortable" civilization where life cut people enough slack to pursue these things. it's about mummies and their pantheon as much as it is about akhenaten and his "heresy," which sigmund freud so brilliantly suggested took the form of an egyptian moses leading "god's chosen people" to a promised land a generation later. not much of a god, really, when you compare the farming in egypt to that in palestine, but this is the burning preoccupation which infects the west, and i include islam in this because i think they actually have a much more realistic take on that theology, if you happen to like that theology, which i don't.

when people ask me my religion, i always tell them navajo. walk in beauty. with a coda from john keats's most famous line.
Binks

climber
Uranus
May 14, 2010 - 03:42pm PT
To call any blind man, closed minded, rigid in belief, fixed in thinkin what they want, not able to think beyond their experiences

Is the exact opposite of the truth for ANY blind man,

we have thought about reality, the evidence, our experiences,, other peoples experiences, read books, listened to authorities on both sides of the argument, and came up with a decision,
we do not believe that sight exists
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 14, 2010 - 03:54pm PT
Dr. F wrote:

What is God then??

You can chase words around if you want, and God can be nothing to you, or not

But In this universe

Nothing = No God


Dood, you dodged answering the thought experiment, so I will put it to you once more: Is it possible for you to imagine that "God" is not a thing?

Once more, I am not asking you for an "answer," a description, to believe anything, to think a certain thought or not think a thought. You don't have to provide anything. You merely have to show a willingness to imagine. Nothing more.

Paul said: "The problem here seems to be the definition of god. What is it?

I would add that the "problem" is our insistence that God "be" exactly what we want him to be - another article for our evaluating minds to judge and to "know" in the standard way. Dr. F mentioned "running around after words," when in fact his quest to find God is merely running around after things. Are we surprised that he doesn't find them?

JL
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 14, 2010 - 04:10pm PT
another aspect of the god question is this: is western theology barking up the wrong tree?

again, from my point of view, which began with a heavily catholic education, the standard western god flunks on two counts: human sexuality and war.

face it, sexuality is essential to more complex forms of life and it's tremendously powerful. i would conclude that it probably reflects whatever is at the heart of it all. so-called pagan theologies all recognized this, but christianity seems to dodge it and give us a lopsidedly male god, with the further obfuscation of trinitarianism, and a pretty much non-erotic mother goddess. seems pretty far afield from the lives we all live.

and then there's war, oh prince of peace. darwin explains that much, much better.

as i understand it, the latest cosmology, based on the recent discovery of planets in other solar systems, indicates that earth is a rare bird indeed. biochemists and biophysicists seem to feel that evolution here took place due to a very fortuitous and narrow set of circumstances--water ice from out mars way coming in to where it could melt, and the early earth getting punched by something which became our rather unusual moon. maybe one planet like this per galaxy. sorry, hollywood.

fred hoyle, the cambridge astrophysicist who coined "big bang", was an avowed atheist until he began to understand the triple alpha process of carbon fusion, a rather unusual thing in the thermonuclear realm, to the point where he declared, carbon being so essential to life, "the universe is a set-up job".

hey, all this is way over my head too, but i think the heart of the god question is closer to this than anything you'll ever hear in a church.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 14, 2010 - 04:31pm PT
to JL:

"truth is the highest god" -- gandhi
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 14, 2010 - 05:06pm PT
Another interesting thought experiment for materialists is this: Describe what you would like God to be in terms of capacities, attributes, and so on.

This is especially interesting because it commonly exposes a person's fixations, and the ego and rational mind's enormous resistance to the idea of "God." What the NLP folks used to call, "Stuck in a perspective."

JL
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 14, 2010 - 06:08pm PT
well, since no one asked:

"beauty is truth and truth beauty; that's all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know." -- keats, ode to a grecian urn (it's why we all have to study it in high school)

"how do i know, the bible tells me so." -- dale evans, whom i encountered at the lone pine film festival, a couple years before she passed away. she was a living example that it's possible to be an octogenarian and pretty. the truth was in her good looks.

binks, i've been looking for something to read. will order both "lives of a cell" and "dune". muchas gracias.

and my recc: simon conway-morris, several books on evolutionary biology. if you take sides in this debate, he's for you believers. he has a great debate going with the late stephen jay gould, who was for you atheists. add 'em up. divide by the common denominator.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
May 14, 2010 - 06:24pm PT
Largo wrote

I would add that the "problem" is our insistence that God "be" exactly what we want him to be - another article for our evaluating minds to judge and to "know" in the standard way. Dr. F mentioned "running around after words," when in fact his quest to find God is merely running around after things. Are we surprised that he doesn't find them?

Nice. This is the big problem with many of the well intentioned gurus of atheism and their arguments...They shoot down a image of God left over from old cultures and their projections.

Science claims everything is made of the same vibrating energy. All is ONE ENERGY in science ultimately. It is obviously capable of manifesting in intelligent ways. You can start with that, call it God and let the search refine itself from there.

Is there LOVE? How to prove it? God is similarly elusive even if there are symptoms. If you were lost in a dream some night, how would you prove to the other dream characters that they were in an unreal world and merely the creation of some middle-aged guy made of meat lying in a bed in California?

Every religion in the world can be full of crap and it would prove nothing of God or lack of God, much in the way that 100 5 year olds could meet and try to agree on what sex is, or what it is like to be an adult and never come close.

It's a mystery that can be explored within but proof without will evade us. The game doesn't work that way.

If you take the time, open your mind and heart, and seek the truth without preconception, some awakening will inform you and an inner evolution begins. You can't prove this to others but it serves your life every minute and disbelieving it becomes a joke.

Peace

Karl
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 15, 2010 - 01:26am PT
Craig said: "No, I cannot accept God to be: "not a thing", or "nothing"

Still no cigar. The thought experiment is: Is it possible for you to imagine - not, Can you accept.

But really this was a trick question all along because I knew you would never go there. What it shows is that you have a fixation about the way God HAS to be, to the extent that you won't even allow yourself to IMAGINE He might be otherwise. So like I was saying elsewhere, this discussion is merely masquerading as a conversation about God, when what is most being exposed are patterns of mental fixations, the subjects being interchangable - be they Republicans, God, matter, martians, yada yada.

Interesting inquiry.

JL
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
May 15, 2010 - 04:26am PT
We find ourselves alive in this strange existence confronted with love and hate, beauty and horror, sorrow and happiness, and always near to us the anxiety of anticipation and the dread of our own inevitable annihilation.

As well, we find ourselves compelled by curiosity as to what we are, how we got here and what our lives mean, if anything.

We are overwhelmed by the sublime nature of the “mysterium tremendum et fascinans” and so demand, through a host of anthropomorphic deities, a reconciliation to our existential dilemma.

The very structure of our minds both forms and reflects our understanding and curiosity with regard to the natural world.

Reason is a product of the construction of our minds; our minds like our senses are the products of natural forces and an evolution that favors us as the survivors of a long struggle for viability. How is it that evolution would favor sensory perception that deceives us? Survival itself dictates the accuracy of our senses! Can’t we say the same for reason?

Reason, not unlike our sensory perception, is a natural mechanism that favors our success as inhabitants of this world. Why would we abandon it except as a path to reconcile ourselves to what we think we simply cannot abide?

And more to the point, why would a god give us a “reason” that so favors our success and yet so often stands vehemently against the faith many say he demands?

Nobody can, and nobody wants to, argue against a god that can be anything; certainly all possibilities are possible. What god might be or when and how god might function beyond being is a fascinating question but perhaps that fascination may elicit too easily the abandonment of reason for the pleasure, fascination and reconciliation allowed by faith.

Unfortunately the sleep of reason too often produces monsters.


ruppell

climber
May 15, 2010 - 04:37am PT
god is a thing
stocks are a thing
god is a stock
the devil is the details
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 15, 2010 - 09:31am PT
sounds good, paul--if you wrote that yourself, i want to be your agent.

go-B: i never read bible quotes. it would work better if you pretended you wrote that yourself. kinda like slipping a mickey.

largo: someone told me you attended claremont school of theology. true? your point of view sounds a lot like professor griffin's process theology.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
May 15, 2010 - 10:18am PT
Try my thought experiment

If our culture was completley devoid of any thought about God, or religion

No one discovered it yet.

What modern day experience, or circumstances would make someone discover God, (or for a really long shot, Jesus)

People regularly experience synchronicities, unexplainable by science, that point to the interconnectedness of things and suggest an underlying intelligence in our world.

People regularly experience expanded states of consciousness that provide direct insight that a higher Being exists and is a part of us and our world. Often these states are triggered when our mentally created structure of the world is suspended by climbing fatigue, an accident or trauma, or meditative practice.

An awareness of a divine nature beyond ourselves is built into each of us. Not having religion would probably result in the rise of new and more clear religions as the old ones with their ancient cultural bias more appropriate to another time wouldn't hold sway. I thought religion was totally ridiculous playtime stories until I directly experienced something far beyond the fairy tales within myself. We tell fairy tales to our kids but that doesn't mean there's not some true reality that we don't know how to explain to them yet

Peace

Karl
FredC

Boulder climber
Santa Cruz, CA
May 15, 2010 - 12:29pm PT
I'm glad that Paul wrote about defining god. I think that if all the believers would just develop a consensus about what we are talking about it would help the discussion. It would be fun to watch that process anyway. The concept of god seems to be on a sliding scale from some vague kind of energy thing at one end to a very grumpy large sort of gaseous man floating up there somewhere on the other.

Quite a few "wise" people have suggested that the best way to actually answer the god question is to look really hard directly at the one who is asking it. Who is it that wants to know? I think you might have to do this for a long time. I hear caves might help too.

I think a topic like this burns so brightly here especially is because as outdoor people we are more exposed to the sharpness of our experiences of nature. It's like being a kid and looking at the night sky and thinking "holy cow, how big is this deal?". Then your mind sort of hits the wall for a moment.

Some threads really do feel like what might happen around a campfire.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
May 15, 2010 - 12:34pm PT
Fact is Dr. F. you don't know about what you haven't yourself experienced. Why not leave it at that if you want to be scientific? Your assumptions are rubbish to one who knows, just as a toddlers imagination of what orgasm might be would be off the mark.

As for Jesus, you don't have to know that name (a greek name that Yeshua of Nazereth wasn't even called during his life) to be transformed and touched by the Spirit of the "Son" of God. (the aspect of the divine that offers Grace and awakening) It's generally true that when people have spiritual experiences, no voice says, "this is Jesus working on ya" it's just that people pray to Jesus and get an answer and either feel or assume it's Jesus at work. God answers to any name called with the sincere intent just as a parent would answer a baby crying "do do, help!"

It's natural to resent and resist religion for many reason.. corruption, abuse and hypocrisy on one side, and our own resistance to fearing judgement and control on the other. It's sad because the real truth judges not but springs from pure love.

Of course, we are wounded and even fear pure love. That's one thing to look within and purge any fear of love and exposure from your system. Once you are open to love and your own self, spirituality comes naturally and without doubt

Peace

karl
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 15, 2010 - 02:07pm PT
Tony Bird. Holy cow, Tony! You get the award for being able to pick an arrowhead out of a haystack.

Tony wrote: "largo: someone told me you attended claremont school of theology. true? your point of view sounds a lot like professor griffin's process theology."

My adviser at Claremont was John Cobb, who I did all my grad Whitehead/ Process studies under (Oral exams on Process and Reality from Prof. Cobb were no cake walk), and many of the hardcore philosophy classes I took were from David Ray Griffin - a sharp dood, but he went south with all that 9/11 conspiracy jibberish.

It is true that much of what I write here can be framed in "Process" language, but the better part of it all came out of practicing Za Zen for many years.

I usually leave off mentioning sources or quoting this guy or that group, not wanting to frame my ramblings as some specie of faux scholarship, or to get all uppity and erudite in a campfire conversation.

But yeah, I did the book work and if you want to approach this from a standard, western philosophical or theological vector, I can surely go there with you.

BTW, the issue of matter and spirit is ancient, and got kindled in this last round, circa 1777, by a Brit named Joseph Priestley.

But I better stop here. Once again, great catch there, Tony.

JL

Postscript: Baba wrote: "Fact is Dr. F. you don't know about what you haven't yourself experienced."

I don't want to pile onto Craig, who is a friend who I grew up with, but another approach to this might be - instead of attacking or trying to catagorize the experiences that other people have had, as mentioned above by Baba, why not ask some questions? And I don't mean "set-ups," which are phrased as questions but for which you already have the "right" answer in your head. If there's something you don't know, why not ask, instead of writing the whole thing off as unknowable? Why bet against yourself like that?


Binks

climber
Uranus
May 15, 2010 - 02:16pm PT
But my bet is no one would discover God, or Jesus, they would live good lives without any Religion

I don't have any need for religion and I find I dislike most of them, but I experience God. So I think your theory is pretty much already shot down.

On another note, admitting that the universe is energy is admitting that it is just information. If the universe is just information, then it is in a sense virtual. If everything is energy\information, then virtual realities that we create are potentially the same as "real" reality. Once we create AI we will create virtual universes within our own that have any sort of laws or gods that we want them to have and they may evolve in ways we could never predict. To me this is part of how I understand that God is greater than any science. The laws of this virtual\energy\information universe we inhabit are mutable.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
May 15, 2010 - 02:32pm PT
But my bet is no one would discover God, or Jesus, they would live good lives without any Religion

This is probably true, but says little about God/Spirit, which exists and influences us tremendously whether we think about it or not. Religions are admittedly packed with culture and superstitions that pass for knowledge about God so it's debatable how much they add or detract from our relationship with Spirit.

We might compare organized religions to the state of science in the dark ages and say that people would have lived good lives without knowing the state of science in the year 1000. That would say nothing about the existence of natural laws and their potential benefits.

Peace

Karl
go-B

climber
May 15, 2010 - 07:01pm PT
Isaiah 55:9, For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
TripL7

Trad climber
san diego
May 15, 2010 - 07:27pm PT
If I may be so brash as to ask a question of you...

What is religion, is it not man working his way up to God i.e, through a good life, keeping certain rules etc.?

Dr.F, to answer your question, perhaps He would come down and introduce Himself...how novel!
jstan

climber
May 15, 2010 - 09:54pm PT
On the existence of (a) god.

It is most important that non-believers think clearly. There is no real world evidence either for or
against the existence of a god, any god. So we cannot say there is no god. But since there is no
evidence a god has ever affected anything in the real world, where both believers and non-believers
live,

the question whether any gods exist is patently unimportant. There is nothing practical to be gained
from having an answer.

There is a reason believers so frequently assert the "existence" of god(s). By raising that completely
moot point, we become occupied with non-sense. Be wary anytime you let an opponent frame the
discussion.
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 15, 2010 - 11:27pm PT
Tony Bird. Holy cow, Tony! You get the award for being able to pick an arrowhead out of a haystack.

Tony wrote: "largo: someone told me you attended claremont school of theology. true? your point of view sounds a lot like professor griffin's process theology."

My adviser at Claremont was John Cobb, who I did all my grad Whitehead/ Process studies under (Oral exams on Process and Reality from Prof. Cobb were no cake walk), and many of the hardcore philosophy classes I took were from David Ray Griffin - a sharp dood, but he went south with all that 9/11 conspiracy jibberish.

It is true that much of what I write here can be framed in "Process" language, but the better part of it all came out of practicing Za Zen for many years.

I usually leave off mentioning sources or quoting this guy or that group, not wanting to frame my ramblings as some specie of faux scholarship, or to get all uppity and erudite in a campfire conversation.

But yeah, I did the book work and if you want to approach this from a standard, western philosophical or theological vector, I can surely go there with you.

BTW, the issue of matter and spirit is ancient, and got kindled in this last round, circa 1777, by a Brit named Joseph Priestley.

But I better stop here. Once again, great catch there, Tony.

JL

Postscript: Baba wrote: "Fact is Dr. F. you don't know about what you haven't yourself experienced."

I don't want to pile onto Craig, who is a friend who I grew up with, but another approach to this might be - instead of attacking or trying to catagorize the experiences that other people have had, as mentioned above by Baba, why not ask some questions? And I don't mean "set-ups," which are phrased as questions but for which you already have the "right" answer in your head. If there's something you don't know, why not ask, instead of writing the whole thing off as unknowable? Why bet against yourself like that?



JL,

My good friend and my one time Methodist pastor John F., below in the picture also went to Claremont School of Theology, and had David Ray Griffin for a few classes. Brilliant man David Ray Griffin.

Griffin has an absolute sharp mind and ability for reason and logic. You should read some of his books on 9-11, and don't poo-poo them. Truth will set you free. Hard to stomach I know, but evil abounds in this World and some see through it crystal clear.

God's peace.



Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 15, 2010 - 11:32pm PT
the truth to tell, i'm probably a bit south of david ray, but i won't worry this thread with that.

i discovered recently that i had subscribed to a process theology, that of pierre teilhard de chardin, for quite a number of years without knowing it fell into that category. as i said, i think that science just broadens one's perspective of these things. the fact that teilhard has been so roundly ignored in the debate of belief and evolution indicates, i think, that the winning of argument, as embodied in some of the jousting on this thread, is more important to a lot of people than the seeking of truth.

i got a good definition of philosophy from my education, and i don't think it goes over anyone's head: philosophy is a discussion among friends about the way things are. discussion maintains friendship. when it becomes argument, you become adversaries. and maybe you stop getting anywhere.

for teihard, there was no conflict between his lifelong faith as a jesuit priest and his appreciation of evolution as a professional paleontologist. his scheme of things involved stages of creation: cosmogenesis, biogenesis, noogenesis or the rise of thought, and christogenesis, the injection of a divine element into humanity. he introduced two terms which have had widespread use: the noosphere, representing all the thoughts that go on in the world, and point omega, his conjecture that all is headed for a divine consciousness.

quite a trip, really, but i found it wearing thin in terms of my own life and milieu. as e.e. cummings put it, "there's a hell of a good universe next door--let's go!"
pa

climber
May 16, 2010 - 09:06pm PT
Dr.F,
you are right..."God" is hard to Google.
Must have something to do with "Free Will" and "Choices"...or some such static.
TripL7

Trad climber
san diego
May 16, 2010 - 09:12pm PT
Dr.F- "Maybe he should..."

"He" already has...
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 16, 2010 - 09:58pm PT
You can reframe it, too. It's not an issue of denial. It's not an issue of honesty. Not for many.

Indulgence. Nobody denies the power of the indulgence. But on many fronts, the indulgence interfers with better practices in the practice of living.

cf: (a) the softly spoken magic spells (b) opium
luggi

Trad climber
from the backseat of Jake& Elwood Blues car
May 16, 2010 - 11:16pm PT
I am reluctant to respond...but I am competitive and see what others have said...what I put forth in support of God is the Bible...what is the Bible...just a book..I think not...lets delve into that some more....

Since it is the written portion of what God and Jesus is all about it is a very important document...the only document left to us through out time. If you disagree....reference your point as I:

The bible contains 66 books, written by 40 authors, covering a period of approximately 1600 years. Kinda long for those that are conspiracy theorists.

The Old was written mostly in Hebrew ( a few short passages in Aramaic). About 100 years or more before the Christian Era the entire old testament was translated into the Greek language.

The word Bible comes from the Greek word biblos.

The word testament means "covenant" or agreement. The Old Testament is the covenant God made with man about the salvation before Christ came. The New Testament is the agreement God made with man about his salvation after Christ came.

In the old testament we find the covenant of law. In the new testament we find the covenant of grace which came through Jesus Christ.

The Old commences what the New completes
The Old gathers around Sinai
The New around Calvary'
The Old is associated with Moses
The New with Christ
The authors were kings and princes, poets and philosophers, prophets and statesmen. Some were learned in all the arts of the times and others were unschooled fishermen. Other books soon are out of date but this Book spans the centuries.

Most books are provincial and only interest the people whose language it was written, but not this book. No one ever stops to think it was written in what are now dead languages.

Believing takes faith....I put to those that argue..put forth another document that supports your evidence of another what ever...I have only began to scratch the surface. Why do I believe...I have seen the work He has done....Yes because I don't believe in a coincidence, Karma, or Luck...doctors believe in the unexplained, and yes prayer does work. That is all I am out........
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 17, 2010 - 02:20am PT
Acid, etc. (for the most part) wears off. Religion is a mind-altering drug where the users have an infusion pump permanently attached--and some of them are hitting the button a little too often.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 17, 2010 - 08:17am PT
on the other hand, what the hell.

"dare i disturb the universe?" -- j. alfred prufrock

"to be alive is to undo your belt and look for trouble." -- alexis zorba

klimmer: a welcome post up there. humanity currently has three divisions--predators, prey that doesn't know it's prey, and prey, like you and i, that does. that truth didn't make me free, but it sure organized a lot of chaos. i raised the subject with john in a gym conversation once, and he didn't want to go there then. he isn't the only smart guy like that. DRG is another story. he writes like an angel and speaks superbly to adoring audiences, but my experience of him in person is that there are places he doesn't like to go either.

HFCS: glad i'm not the only evolutionist in the playpen. that mystifies me too, this compulsion to have our sorry asses saved. where are they coming from with that? i guess their churches keep telling them what scum they are because adam ate an apple. i was tempted to strangle the priest at my mother's funeral who couldn't get off his sin kick and spend 15 seconds admitting what a great woman she was. i think the whole church would have cheered me on.

my cat doesn't need to be saved, and she's way further down on the evolutionary scale from me, but try to tell her that. she's an angel too, except when something smaller comes around to get its wings torn off. i think christianity is incapable of answering blake's query of the tiger: did he who made the lamb make thee?

largo: in my ongoing paranoia, i'm beginning to suspect that academia intentionally forces graduate students into narrow specialties so they don't start nibbling in the department next door or across campus and learn too much. i never made it to orals, and my name became mud for convincing one of their star students that it would be better to have babies with me than to continue jumping through all those hoops.

evolutionary science seems to be headed in the direction that, while the human race is quite special, there is really nothing essential about us that can't be found, at least in buds, among our fellow living entities. certain things evolve again and again in the history of life. predation showed up early and has created great diversity. one hates to look at it, but predators and prey need each other. in a way, that means we needed dick cheney and he needed us.

intelligence re-evolves again and again. octopuses are damn bright mollusks. chimpanzees, the DNA scholars tell us, are closer to humans than to gorillas, and gorillas can be taught vocabularies of up to about 500 words, close to the number of kanji characters the average japanese must learn in order to read a newspaper. other primates can't write symphonies, but lyrebirds and mockingbirds are respectable rhapsodists and jazz-like improvisers. and chimps, they tell us, make real war on each other in the wild.
TripL7

Trad climber
san diego
May 17, 2010 - 04:49pm PT
TB- "i guess their churches keep telling them what scum they are because adam ate an apple"

Never been called or considered "scum" in church, nor anyone else(including you).

Simply "loved"...

"God so loved the world..."

And it was some kind of "fruit" that Adam ate, doubt if it was an apple, most likely it was a fig...

Regardless, it was because he disobeyed/didn't trust God, and desired to "become like God". The same "sin" that Lucifer/Satan committed.

"I will be like the most High!" Isiah 14:14

"...and you will be like God." Genesis 3:5

Tony Bird- "did he who made the lamb make the".

Of course!

And the tiger and the lamb lived in peace in the Garden until the fall.

But of course Blakes Lamb is Jesus, and the "Tyger" could be perceived as evil or Lucifer perhaps...He also gave the angels "choice".

EDIT: "My cat doesn't need to be saved."

Your cat is not conscious(have the knowledge)of good and evil!

BTW, I enjoy reading your posts Tony...they're food for thought!!
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 17, 2010 - 10:09pm PT
thanks for the compliment, TripL7--it means all the more since we disagree.
paganmonkeyboy

climber
mars...it's near nevada...
May 17, 2010 - 10:50pm PT
ok. lemme esplain...

can we all agree it's a miracle that we are here ? can we just get that one down ?

ok...now...give it a name...

BANG ! FAIL... you've just lost it. now you've got My God is better than your God and it's all f*#ked up from here. As soon as you get any more than 'Hey, check it out. Here we are - we should appreciate this and treat each other accordingly...' YOU'VE LOST IT. COMPLETELY. Why do we fail here...why why why....

we fail at Step 1. We all know it's *something*, then we define it to the point where I have to kill you and you have to kill me and we're both going to hell forever because of what someone else believes anyway...

Why can't we just Get It ?

It's so damn sad it makes me cry.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 17, 2010 - 10:58pm PT
Paganmonkey- Keep the faith. Times are changing. Evolution of belief is underway. Despite its fits and starts, despite its inefficiencies.

The advice that works for me: Don't always focus on change year to year, let alone day to day.


Who said it first, was it Benjamin or Samuel J. or Samuel C. or... "A watched pot never boils."
paganmonkeyboy

climber
mars...it's near nevada...
May 17, 2010 - 10:58pm PT
;-)

kill infidel, repeat step 1...
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Boulder Creek CA
May 18, 2010 - 12:57am PT
People discussing the reality of the spirit-that-moves-in-all-things is like fish discussing the reality of water.

Most fish probably don't understand the basic chemistry of water, much less the physics, biochemistry and physiology of water-based systems. That doesn't seem to slow down their ability to live in the reality of water.

And then there is the question of fish discussing whether or not fishermen are real. Lots of fish have experienced contact with fisherman of the first, second, third and fourth kind.

Many fish have no direct experience with fishermen and might argue against the idea that fishermen really exist. And perhaps some fish would argue that you just need to accept on faith the existence of fisherman.

There are still enough fish that don't believe in fishermen; so that fishermen can continue to catch and eat fish.

The moment of truth is a term from bull fighting. It refers to the moment when the bull suddenly perceives the difference between the cape and the bull fighter. At that point the bull fighter has only one chance left to survive - by killing the bull on the next charge.

We have much to learn...

nscherneck

Trad climber
Redlands, CA
May 18, 2010 - 01:42am PT
I think Sam Harris does a great job arguing this topic (more specifically, responding to criticism of his first book, The End of Faith) in Letter to a Christian Nation...

http://www.amazon.com/Letter-Christian-Nation-Sam-Harris/dp/0307265773
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 18, 2010 - 02:05am PT
Well, it was always my understanding that the moment of truth refers to the "moment" a child raised in a traditional Christian family realizes at once (a) that the science model is spot on and (b) that the world isn't a god kingdom or a three-layer cake.
Mom

Social climber
So Cal
May 18, 2010 - 04:20am PT

Why do you believe in God? was Juan's original question....

and like I said 3 1/2 years ago in essence --- "Who are you gonna call?"

By the way, I am just blown away with the beyond wonderful, insightful, academically written posts submitted in this second go round of this ageless question, by those who know the true and living God; those who have flown the bombers, walked in mine fields, held their buddy as he bled out; who have watched the miracle of their child being born, who have asked that high power to heal one's own body and watched that miracle progress, who in burying their loved ones release that spirit to a safe and eternal place; who know that this life is but a blink in cosmic time; who know when they top out or finally reach the top of whatever they are challenged to climb - that the vista rewarded them was created for them for just this very moment by a power greater than themselves; who know that the lion and the lamb are but one gene apart and all of us are linked by virtue of our common ancestry of Adam and Eve. To believe in God is to possess that peace that passes understanding and we don't have to worry or question because we know that we know that we know that we know. One just has to live long enough in this world and with his fellow man to come to believe in God.
PaulC

Social climber
Traffic Jam Ledge
May 18, 2010 - 10:41am PT
Tony B & Largo,

Process theology.... Dang. Not exactly light reading. About the only accessible intro is Bob Mesle's book. Whitehead was incredibly brilliant in many diverse areas.

Paul
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 18, 2010 - 09:34pm PT
mom: sounds like you believe in the god of war, not the god of love. they say there are no atheists in foxholes. i wonder if your god could get on without it.

paul: i'm not into process like largo, and, as i said, i've gotten out of the part that i was in. i wish largo wouldn't talk down about it. if it were advanced physics it'd be a different story. he probably thinks i'm a flake anyway--like so many others, when the subject of 9/11 comes up, he's outa here. i think you only need the basic brains it takes to serve on a jury to see anomaly after anomaly and coverup after coverup, but, as with simpler things, you have to look, slightly before you can see.

griffin has already written three or four books on the subject, beginning with "new pearl harbor," which really put me onto it. he says he used to write books that put people to sleep. now he writes books that keep people awake at night.

BES1'st: parmenides is my favorite old greek. in a couple of rather short letters he made an important observation about truth: it seems to have an existence of its own, beyond what people to think it to be.

i'm no great genius at it, but i have studied a few languages, trying to do something with all the latin that was drummed into me in catholic high school. recently i took note of what appears to be a very interesting shift in meaning from ancient greek to modern greek in one of the words used by parmenides. "alitheia"--an absolutely beautiful word in itself--is the word, both ancient and modern, for truth. but "doxa", in ancient greek, meant opinion, at least as parmenides used it. he distinguished between alitheia, truth, with an existence of its own, and doxa, or what people think to be true, which may or may not correspond to truth. doxa is related to the word for teaching, and i'm not expert enough to trace its origin, but i was surprised to discover that in modern greek, "doxa" now means "glory". a rather common expression is "doxa to theo", or "glory to god". opinion--glory. and orthodoxy, of course, is "the right opinion". bears a bit on this discussion, don't you think?

buddhism seems a good foil to the religion of the west--very similar in so many ways, but they never deal with a "supreme being" and attendant mysticism. rather, they speak of enlightenment.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 19, 2010 - 09:01pm PT
i'm not a lawyer, BES, but i've had experience as a reporter covering courts. i fail to see a good reason for putting a lid on ANY matter before the courts. we used to be a much more open society, and we've become quite secretive and controlling, and the courts have become notorious for cooking up technical excuses to keep matters out of the public eye.

i don't know what you mean by laches. are you an attorney yourself? if you'd like to discuss this--it is off topic, but this thread seems to be winding down anyway--feel free to email me.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 19, 2010 - 09:38pm PT
i'd like to add a personal note here, and thanks for those who have been appreciative, and perhaps some apology to others.

i started life as a pretty good catholic little boy and pursued that course as far as i could. catholics are a little different from the mainstream of america, which i feel i'm dealing with here. fyi, my first wife was a lutheran, and i learned a lot from her about the independence and integrity of protestantism. catholics are pretty much led around by a ring through their noses, but i think they're closer to the heart of the christian tradition.

climbing has meant a lot to me--it helped me get over a divorce and gave me a lot of self-confidence, health, and appreciation of things i would never have known about otherwise. i'm not the sort of fellow who likes to get into people's faces, although my work as a newspaper reporter taught me a lot about the relativism of any given point of view.

anyway, what happens to us when we die?

i had some unexpected insight into that overtake me nel' mezzo di cammin di nostra vita--dante's words for the midlife crisis. this was not something i sought out, but i was privileged to become acquainted with a talented psychic and have some contact with three deceased relatives, people who had meant much to me and who seemed to have some unfinished business with me. i never would have sought such a thing out myself, but i came away with a sense that, yes, the heart does go on, as they say in the song from "the titanic", and it laid to rest the anxiety we all feel, believer or not, about our possible extinction at death. i would not be challenging things that are sacred to others if i had not gone through this. there are shyster psychics out there, but when you start hearing from a total stranger about things that happened 40 years previous a thousand miles away--well, it becomes pretty convincing.

i've tried to approach the issues of this very interesting discussion as they make sense to me. being mezzo italiano, i can be confrontational and emotional. italians seem to have a grace for doing that and remaining on speaking terms nonetheless. think of other italians you have known and try to take me with a grain of salt.

and sorry to have crossed swords with largo, whom i much admire and for whom we can all be thankful as an unusually approachable celebrity in our sport. i would not have done so were i not convinced of the importance of what is at stake.
go-B

climber
May 19, 2010 - 11:23pm PT
Matthew 1:23,“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and they shall call his name Immanuel”
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 19, 2010 - 11:46pm PT
Tony,


I enjoy reading your insight as a reporter.

When it comes down to it, all I can really say is that GOD is, and the Soul does go on. Hard to prove but by personal experience, and overwhelming evidence that most don't want to really check into.

George Harrison, before he passed away admonished people to seek after GOD. I agree. Keep seeking after GOD.

I don't know why, but my whole life I have always wanted to know the truth no matter what. Man it is painful sometimes. I run toward it, and many people run away from it.

he probably thinks i'm a flake anyway--like so many others, when the subject of 9/11 comes up, he's outa here. i think you only need the basic brains it takes to serve on a jury to see anomaly after anomaly and coverup after coverup, but, as with simpler things, you have to look, slightly before you can see.

griffin has already written three or four books on the subject, beginning with "new pearl harbor," which really put me onto it. he says he used to write books that put people to sleep. now he writes books that keep people awake at night.

I get it. I understand.

So true about Griffin. Lol. And I haven't been able to sleep since!

Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 07:59am PT
klimmer, the words for me are beauty and truth, not god. beauty and truth i've come to trust over what has been a difficult personal life. god is a word i distrust greatly, both personally and generally.

god people jump to conclusions easily and wind up doing quite ungodlike things--witness "mom" glorifying war earlier in this thread and not seeming to care a whit about the wholesale worldrape being committed by this so-called nation under god. god easily becomes people's license to destroy nature or each other. all the trouble in the world right now seems to be focused on the middle east, the cradle of this troubled western tradition. god never brings people together. the idea seems to splinter us, no matter how close we start out. look at all the denominations it has produced, each one beginning with a quarrel. russians have fought passionately over whether to make the sign of the cross with two fingers or three.

one thing which rockclimbing taught me is that there can be pleasure in difficulty. this has been a difficult discussion--kinda like a good climb.

beauty and truth have an interesting relationship. the poet john keats noted that about the time michael faraday began discovering a similar relationship between electricity and magnetism, which today are understood as the same force. physics is tricky, like the subject of this discussion. there can be universal consensus, with a few pesky anomalies, and then someone like einstein comes along and makes very different sense of everything. and then niels bohr comes along and does the same thing to einstein. the important thing is to keep an open mind.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 10:54pm PT
BES--

since you live in orange, you'll be able to check this out.

drive over to santa ana and park in front of the ronald reagan federal courthouse. there are lots of cheapie parking meters there, and if you drive in towards the end of the day, you shouldn't have a problem.

walk into the courthouse lobby and look at the fantastic mural on the wall. this mural will blow your mind.

at the lower left of the mural, you will see a fellow who looks a hell of a lot like a rather young barack obama. he's about to mount a skateboard and head into this phantasmagoria. if you have any doubt that it's obama, notice that he's wearing a CHICAGO WHITE SOX BASEBALL CAP. i'm not kidding about this.

this mural was painted in the late 1990s and installed shortly before the building was opened in 1999.

there is a much-muffled controversy about alleged president obama. many have reported evidence that he was born in kenya, africa, not hawaii, and would therefore not meet the requirement of being a natural-born american citizen, as required by law to become president. there were several lawsuits to produce his birth records from hawaii, but these were all, ah, stonewalled, and birth certificates were never produced.

greek gps? hey, we can talk about anything here.
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 20, 2010 - 10:55pm PT
I think it's so quiet because everyone's afraid BES1'st / navblk4 / midarockjock / 4damages will become their new friend.
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 20, 2010 - 11:04pm PT
Here's a 7000 year old religion!

. . . and the billion year old stars just laugh.



http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap100519.html
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:12pm PT
not photoshopped, fuca? heckuva bright milky way ...

doc F--

divinity is an old idea and part of human nature. gobs of gods for the longest time, then it all gets boiled down to one great god, with a variety of contradictory attributes. it was simpler, really, with polytheism--the contradictions could be embodied in different characters, and it didn't have to make a helluva lot of sense.

christians have devised a trinity god--one god in three divine persons. this is a mystery, i was told by the nuns, that we'll never be able to comprehend, but god seems to have clued us in on it anyway. big of the fellow(s). go shopping--we'll take care of the rest.

take a side trip into anthropology and mythology, doc. it will pacify your mind.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 20, 2010 - 11:16pm PT
Might I recommend: Book of Greek Myths, by Daulaires. It's A+.

None is better at dispelling God Jehovah for those raised to take the bible stories literally.


Good job, Wanda, at drawing virgin analogies, etc, with other Gods on the other thread. Yeah, times are changing. Finally at long last. The post-religious finally have a medium and a voice. Thanks internet. Thanks forums. Thanks blogs.
WBraun

climber
May 20, 2010 - 11:19pm PT
Book of Greek Myths, by Daulaires.

Another mental speculator who ultimately doesn't know either.

All your sources are mental speculators with no real disiplic succession going back billions of years to the original source.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:20pm PT
fuca--

"how the winds are laughing
"they laugh with all their might ...

"calves are easily bound and slaughted
"never knowing the reason why
"but whoever treasures freedom
"like the swallow, has learned to fly."

them stars older than a billion, sucka. planet earth is four, wiser prevailing heads tell me.
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 20, 2010 - 11:20pm PT
So are yours Werner, you just can't see it.



edit- thanks Tony, C&J's Donna, Donna
WBraun

climber
May 20, 2010 - 11:23pm PT
Another big guess by you Wanda ....

Your sources only go back temporarily and fleeting.

Nothing bonafide nor summon bonum.
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 20, 2010 - 11:25pm PT
Your assumptions about how far back your sources go are mental speculations.

Your sources themselves are riddled with mental speculations.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:29pm PT
post #413 on this thread shows a picture of alitheia. she is that universal. notice that there is nothing male about her. why is that?

if any of you is about to have a daughter, name her alitheia. you won't regret it.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 20, 2010 - 11:30pm PT
Jealous and angry, Athena turned Arachne into a spider.

So the question is: Is it reasonable to think of yourself as "agnostic" concerning this ancient Greek religious claim? Is it reasonable (as an individual of the premiere decision making species on the planet) to not make a decision based on a lifetime of experience and education (science education and general life education) and to not take a stand regarding this ol'time religious claim?

In contrast, in the view of many, it is "reasonable" (1) to make the decision and to take a stand regarding Athena and Arachne and (2) to extrapolate to Jehovah and Lot's wife (turned into a pillar of salt) and baby god Jesus and resurrection on the third day.

Because "you were not there" is no longer good enough reason to plead agnosticism and to not make a decision and take a stand. Get involved, exercise your decision-making power and take a stand. In the interest of better practices in the practice of living. Insofar as you haven't already, do it today.

And the naysayers will call your decision-making and expressions and declarations of it "arrogant" or "close-minded" or "preachy" or "elitist" or " exhibitions in "faux scholarship"-- let them. Get involved. Be the change you seek in the world.



Poor Brawny. Adapt, upgrade. Push the envelope like you did when you were a youngblood. Be not afraid, the sky won't fall.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:31pm PT
fuca! a fellow folkie!
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 20, 2010 - 11:31pm PT
Werner,

Just because the Bhagavad-gita doesn't say might, maybe, could, probably, seems, etc. doesn't mean it's "bonafide" and not just more made up speculations.

Summum Bonum is a mental speculation.







edit- Tony, not a big fan, I've heard them before (and like them), and I'm quick with google.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:35pm PT
gimme that ol' time religion, it's good enough for me!

it was good enough for silage, it was good enough for silage, it was good enough for silage, and it's good enough for me!

it was good for uncle anus, it was good for uncle anus, it was good for uncle anus, and it's good enough for me!

it was good for the profit motive, it was good for the profit motive, it was good for the profit motive, and it's good enough for me!


High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 20, 2010 - 11:37pm PT
That used to be my favorite mocking mantra. Revived when I watched Inherit the Wind. I made up my own "reframed" lyrics, too.
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 20, 2010 - 11:38pm PT
<--- drinking jepson syrah 2007 here (it helps me hit the RETURN button).
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 21, 2010 - 12:07am PT
sing it to us, huffcuss.
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 21, 2010 - 12:13am PT
GOD is Omnipresent.

GOD is Omniscient.

GOD is Omnipotent.

GOD IS.



GOD's knows all: past, present, and future.

You do not know the Power you are dealing with . . .

The following are not random made-up patterns. Learn about Equal Space Lettering (ESL) Bible Code, and meaningful words with context that fall in close proximity to one another. The statistical chance that this has happened by random is impossible. GOD's Word tells the past, the present, and the future.

Michael Drosnin's: Bible Code
http://www.muphin.net/biblecode/


Jesus's life and Suffering for the Sins of the World foretold.
And what our Savior's name would be . . .



Newton and Gravity
Einstein and a New Understanding



The Wright Brothers and Airplane
Edison and the Light Bulb



The Evil of Adolf Hitler



Man on the Moon
Spaceship




Shoemaker-Levy Impact with Jupiter





9-11-2001





I could post example after example. No other Book can do this to this accuracy and to this degree.




Wake-up before it is too late.


The Answer is in Front of Your Face. Read the Holy Bible. Believe.




Edit:


I've posted this before but worth posting again since someone out there might say, "Wow! I want to check it out!"

It is real and it is statistically, empirically measureable.


Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code:

Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 1 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blbLke9kLIk&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=0&playnext=1
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 2 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwMM3-UfuQo&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=1
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 3 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHuEG4nDR0Q&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=2
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 4 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIadU4uz7m8&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=3
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 5 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C53YCyAqGU&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=4
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 6 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coHmbONyiHU&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=5
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 7 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIWRjt23tI4&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=6
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 8 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km8y10KG-TQ&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=7
Encounters with the Unexplained - Secrets of the Bible Code 9 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RLPhL34RYs&feature=PlayList&p=2FD8CDED3E0DC0A0&index=8






WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 21, 2010 - 12:20am PT
Klimmer,

Where is the strength of your convictions?


If you truly believe this with all your heart you should preach it everyday, everywhere.


I suggest you start with parent night at the high school where you teach.


Why not send this important info home tomorrow with your students as a flyer?
Tony Bird

climber
Northridge, CA
May 21, 2010 - 12:23am PT
let's take a little turn here. let's talk about sickness. these last couple posts are about the sickness of compulsive belief.
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
May 21, 2010 - 12:24am PT
Bears repeating I think:

re: Jealous and angry, Athena turned Arachne into a spider.

Because "you were not there" is no longer good enough reason to plead agnosticism and to not make a decision and take a stand. Get involved, exercise your decision-making power and take a stand. In the interest of better practices in the practice of living. Insofar as you haven't already, do it today.

And the naysayers will call your decision-making and expressions or declarations of it "arrogant" or "close-minded" or "preachy" or "elitist" or " exhibitions in "faux scholarship"-- let them. Get involved. Be the change you seek in the world.
Klimmer

Mountain climber
San Diego
May 21, 2010 - 12:27am PT
Wanda,


Seperation of Church and State.

But I do teach everyday just by the way I live my life and treat others -- The Golden Rule. It is a powerful silent ministry.

We (those of faith) teach right here everyday.

Few sadly listen.
WandaFuca

Social climber
From the gettin place
May 21, 2010 - 12:30am PT
The great mystery in all the politics, religion, evolution, climate change, and other OT threads is how so many otherwise functional, rational people can believe such batshit craziness that is so illogical, insupportable, contrary to all evidence, against their best interests, etc., etc.
luggi

Trad climber
from the backseat of Jake& Elwood Blues car
May 21, 2010 - 12:31am PT

I disagree....as you can see