PDA

View Full Version : God or Religion



Rick Hendricks
05-03-2007, 08:42 AM
I have followed an interesting discussion concerning the existence of God, and find that most people tend to lump belief in God and belief in religion together. This is somewhat like asking which football team God will choose to win the game today: the team that prays to the correct football God, the correct winning God, or the team that prays best to any correct God that might care about the outcome of the particular sporting event.

Is there a connection between God and religion or is that belief a man-made construct used to control the masses or explain things we, as finite creatures, cannot comprehend at this juncture? I suggest: the two issues are separate and apart from one another, and two distinct and separate discussions.

Religions describe God as a perfect being, beyond human comprehension that has the attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence et al. Moreover, they proclaim all of these qualities, which we as humans cannot understand are understood by religions, which interestingly are comprised of human beings. Additionally, they (religions) advise us what God wants, who God is, what God looks like, what God does, and that only their religion knows how to make this incomprehensible God happy.

Furthermore, according to religion(s) it appears that God, a perfect being, has acquired a great many human attributes, and most fascinatingly in the form of what religions refer to as the seven deadly sins: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, anger, envy, and pride (which a perfect being wouldn’t possess). This we can determine from reading sacred texts, which religions provide, and listening to those people (prophets, clergy et al) claiming to represent God here on our lowly, un-Godlike planet.

It is possible we might have a more fruitful discussion concerning the existence of God if we focused on God and left religion(s) out of it entirely. Religious beliefs tend to obfuscate the rational, replacing it with faith, which is not necessarily negative, and also not germane to the existence of God dialogue.

There is one critical issue, at least from my perspective, which I think cannot be resolved adequately, regarding God’s existence or non-existence: was there always something that was the force behind what we know as life in the context of our understanding, or, were we created from nothing? If there was always something, what was it and where did it come from? If there was nothing, how was something created from nothing?

Lote-Tree
05-03-2007, 08:46 AM
There is one critical issue, at least from my perspective, which I think cannot be resolved adequately, regarding God’s existence or non-existence: was there always something that was the force behind what we know as life in the context of our understanding, or, were we created from nothing? If there was always something, what was it and where did it come from? If there was nothing, how was something created from nothing?

All religions are man-made and is nothing to do with the ineffable Reality that many have called "God", "Allah", "Nirvana", "Tao" etc...

Rick Hendricks
05-03-2007, 09:17 AM
All religions are man-made and is nothing to do with the ineffable Reality that many have called "God", "Allah", "Nirvana", "Tao" etc...

What does religion have to do with the question I asked?

Lote-Tree
05-03-2007, 10:03 AM
What does religion have to do with the question I asked?

Your thread - God or religion.

Rick Hendricks
05-03-2007, 10:06 AM
There is one critical issue, at least from my perspective, which I think cannot be resolved adequately, regarding God’s existence or non-existence: was there always something that was the force behind what we know as life in the context of our understanding, or, were we created from nothing? If there was always something, what was it and where did it come from? If there was nothing, how was something created from nothing?
....they are separate issues, not one and the same.

Lote-Tree
05-03-2007, 10:16 AM
Is there a connection between God and religion or is that belief a man-made construct used to control the masses or explain things we, as finite creatures, cannot comprehend at this juncture? I suggest: the two issues are separate and apart from one another, and two distinct and separate discussions.


I was replying to this. I agree with you. That is why my reply - religions are man-made and God is an ineffable reality. Two separate thing.



There is one critical issue, at least from my perspective, which I think cannot be resolved adequately, regarding God’s existence or non-existence: was there always something that was the force behind what we know as life in the context of our understanding, or, were we created from nothing? If there was always something, what was it and where did it come from? If there was nothing, how was something created from nothing?


To answer this question - There is no such thing as nothingness.


Nothingness = Absence of all property.
Existence = a propterty

Therefore nothingess cannot and does not exist.

soumyakans
05-03-2007, 10:22 AM
Hello Rick,
You have posted a very profound and interesting question. Left to deep and sincere retrospection, every human being will be intrigued by this question. Having been brought up in a religious environment, it is very difficult for me to think of God without religion. However, let me try to answer your question with a neutral outlook permitted by the best of my abilities.
As you rightly said, we must be able to think/attain/comprehend God without being bound by the shackles of religion. However, as civilization evolved, religion sprouted as a means to understand the supreme Force that rules us and also served as an explanation for things that happen beyond our control. Over the years, religion became a thorn as religious heads became political and drifted from their path of righteousness and truth as they were gripped by hunger for power.
However, from what i have seen and read of the life of true saints (i talk about genuine saints who sincerely sacrificed their material needs and concentrated on solely understanding the universal truth), all religions lead to the same goal - and if every religion is followed to its strictest rule, it would eventually lead you to the basic understanding of the origin of this universe and our place there. This realization is something that is beyond the power of human explanation and must be experienced by every individual.
Infact, the Bhagwad Gita - holy book of the Hindus lays down several ways to attain salvation or the realization of this supreme truth - Religion is only one of the means. The other ways of attaining this objective are (1) Be devoted to your profession and be incredibly sincere to it (2) Resort to pure devotion to God and turn your time and attention on him (3) Take the path of saintliness - as in become a disciple of a suprme "Guru" or teacher who will in turn lead you to this truth.
So there are several avenues to understanding this. Infact, several Scientists (Physicists, notably) have tried to understand the origin and evolution of this universe and life by applying the concepts of Quantum theory.
One more thing - Hindu philosophy says that , if an individual is gripped by a genuine desire to understand the base of this world and his existence, he will be guided to the answer by the Supreme power itself.
So, all the best for you to find the answer!

hyperborean
05-03-2007, 10:38 PM
Nothingness = Absence of all property.
Existence = a propterty

Therefore nothingess cannot and does not exist.

Nothingness is a state of non-being. Nothingness does not itself have Being, but is sustained by Being.

Rick Hendricks
05-04-2007, 07:18 AM
I was replying to this. I agree with you. That is why my reply - religions are man-made and God is an ineffable reality. Two separate thing.



To answer this question - There is no such thing as nothingness.


Nothingness = Absence of all property.
Existence = a propterty

Therefore nothingess cannot and does not exist.

So you are saying that there was always something, and that there was never nothingness, and that there was always something. That resembles very much a definition of God, which sounds like: always was and always will be, no beginning and no end, and we are just temporal beings dependent on God.
If nothingness never existed, and it were a time before man was here, and you somehow were observing the universe, and you were not actually something, how would you explain where all this originated? How could this always have been?

All the best,
Rick

Rick Hendricks
05-04-2007, 07:30 AM
I am not so sure that every human being will be intrigued by this question when they have American Idol or realty shows to watch.
I too was reared in a religious environment and at one time in my youth considered devoting my life to God. However, by the time I was eleven years old, I came to the conclusion: religion would be an insult to God if in fact God were a loving God as the teachers claimed. It also naturally followed that religions acted conversely to what they claimed God wanted for us temporal beings. And yes, the drive for power among those who swore allegiance to God were a great influence on concluding that there may be a “God,” however, religions didn’t “walk the walk” they spoke of, and were probably unnecessary, and most likely detrimental, as true methods for understanding and relating to God.

All the best,
Rick

ennison
05-04-2007, 08:49 AM
God of course is more important than religion but humans are social beings and therefore tend to want to be with those sharing the same beliefs.

Lote-Tree
05-04-2007, 10:14 AM
So you are saying that there was always something, and that there was never nothingness, and that there was always something.


Yes.



which sounds like: always was and always will be, no beginning and no end, and we are just temporal beings dependent on God.


1. If there is always "something" then we are not dependent on God as such but we are part of God. Just like your eyes and ears are part of you and not separate from you - Therefore we are all an expression of that one reality - this is the Mystical and Philosophical View.

2. Reality at fundamental level is just "Energy" which is neither can be created or destroyed. Therefore all reality is just a manifestation of "energy" - This is the scientfic view.



If nothingness never existed, and it were a time before man was here, and you somehow were observing the universe, and you were not actually something, how would you explain where all this originated? How could this always have been?


We are all something and that "something" at fundamental level is "energy" which is neither created or destroyed. Hence it is eternal. But this "energy" is in a constant state of transformation. We can see this happening all around us.

laters...

hyperborean
05-04-2007, 05:47 PM
The term nothingness is used by Sartre. people who have read his works will understand what the term "nothingness" means.

joan carles
05-05-2007, 05:28 PM
Rick, when you are speaking about a "time before man was here", I supose that you are speaking about the time before our Universe was created (because Earth was created a lot of thousands of years before the aparition of man on Earth and I don't think that the existence of God depends of the existence of man on Earth... or maybe yes?). But according to the science point of view, this is an absurd. Time was created with the creation of the Universe itself. Time beguins its course from the Big Bang, the very initial moment of our Universe, to nowadays. After the Big Bang there was nothing. There was nothing at all! No matter, no energy, no time.. nothing. Or, at least, nothing which could be measured with physical parameters. Maybe that moment, the moment of the creation of our Universe, was the moment which God gave up his interest in what he had created. Maybe since then there is no God at all. He was the spark that caused the Big Bang and, after that moment, he said: "bye, bye, Universe, see you!". Because, where is God if exists the religions? Where is God if exists pain?

Juan Carlos

Rick Hendricks
05-07-2007, 09:14 AM
Yes.



1. If there is always "something" then we are not dependent on God as such but we are part of God. Just like your eyes and ears are part of you and not separate from you - Therefore we are all an expression of that one reality - this is the Mystical and Philosophical View.

2. Reality at fundamental level is just "Energy" which is neither can be created or destroyed. Therefore all reality is just a manifestation of "energy" - This is the scientfic view.



We are all something and that "something" at fundamental level is "energy" which is neither created or destroyed. Hence it is eternal. But this "energy" is in a constant state of transformation. We can see this happening all around us.

laters...

If there was always something, what was it, and where did it come from? Now, as you claim “we are part of God”: we, at least I, may be a part of God. For all I know “you” are a computer program created by an evil computer programmer (maybe Bill Gates). :) However, I am not perfect, and isn’t that one of the criteria to be God?

Energy may just be one type of matter. I believe in science, and note that science is always testing theories in an attempt to disprove them if new facts arise, and new facts arise fairly frequently, i.e. relativity replaced laws of motion.

All the best,
Rick

Rick Hendricks
05-07-2007, 09:35 AM
Rick, when you are speaking about a "time before man was here", I supose that you are speaking about the time before our Universe was created (because Earth was created a lot of thousands of years before the aparition of man on Earth and I don't think that the existence of God depends of the existence of man on Earth... or maybe yes?). But according to the science point of view, this is an absurd. Time was created with the creation of the Universe itself. Time beguins its course from the Big Bang, the very initial moment of our Universe, to nowadays. After the Big Bang there was nothing. There was nothing at all! No matter, no energy, no time.. nothing. Or, at least, nothing which could be measured with physical parameters. Maybe that moment, the moment of the creation of our Universe, was the moment which God gave up his interest in what he had created. Maybe since then there is no God at all. He was the spark that caused the Big Bang and, after that moment, he said: "bye, bye, Universe, see you!". Because, where is God if exists the religions? Where is God if exists pain?

Juan Carlos

I'm really trying to determine, or at least discuss our origins before man created belief systems.

I’m not really sure what caused the Big Bang or if there was a Big Bang, although it seems there was, so I lean towards that belief. After the Big Bang I believe there was something, dense matter, and not "nothing at all."

It may be true that what we call God gave up on the universe, if in fact it was God's creation, and I don't believe the existence of God depends on "man." I have no idea where God is; in fact I've been told I may a part of God.

As for time, it may not exist except in our minds, and I'm not sure time began with the creation (or appearance) of the universe, or if there was anything or nothing when it was there. It may have come as a man-made construct.

All the best,
Rick

joan carles
05-07-2007, 12:15 PM
Hello, Rick.

And I'm very, very sorry! In my previous post I did not want to say that there was nothing at all after the Big Bang (what is, of course, a nonsense because after the Big Bang there was something: the dense matter which gave origin to everything, including us). I don't know what I was thinking about! What I wanted to say is that BEFORE the Big Bang was when there was not anything at all. There was no matter and no time and no energy and no particles and anything. Because there was not any space or universe or anything similar which could contain something. All the things and beings that we know were created after the Big Bang, including time...

When I'm speaking about time, I'm speaking about the time which plays in physics. The time which serves to measure scientific concepts. The, in principle, subjective time (I say "in principle" because, in fact, the time in physics is really not an easy subject. For example, there are problems with the behaviour of time in the Einstein equations when we try to approach to a black hole). In my opinion, this concept of time is not a man-made construct. It only depends of the entropy (all the things into the Universe tends to increase their disorder, and this increasing disorder is an obejective measure of time) of the Universe itself. The Universe works itself and all the things would happen in the same way although the mankind was not here in order to observe them. Another thing is the concept of time in anthropology, psychology or philosophy. From Anaxagoras to Hegel, Kant or Freud, time has been, from the very beginning of the human thought, a very important subject of study. As Saint Augustine said: "What then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know."

Rick Hendricks
05-07-2007, 12:30 PM
Hello, Rick.

There was no matter and no time and no energy and no particles and anything. Because there was not any space or universe or anything similar which could contain something. All the things and beings that we know were created after the Big Bang, including time...


I'm glad you said this because this is where I think the puzzle begins.

If there was nothing: no particles, no matter, no energy, what was the stimulus that caused this to happen? How do we know there was nothing?

All the best,
Rick

Lote-Tree
05-08-2007, 04:42 AM
If there was always something, what was it, and where did it come from?


I have given you two alternatives. One of the Philosophical and Mystical View that something cannot come out of nothing and the other scientific view.

So when you say what is that something? In Mystical and Philosophical View that something is called God, Nirvana, Tao, Brahman-Atman etc..and this something has always existed - it has no begining and end.



Now, as you claim “we are part of God”: we, at least I, may be a part of God. For all I know “you” are a computer program created by an evil computer programmer (maybe Bill Gates). :) However, I am not perfect, and isn’t that one of the criteria to be God?


If you accept the view that something cannot come out of nothing then we are all part of everything. And in Mystical and Philosophical view that is we are part of God. So we are everything including evil computer programs. The Good, Bad, The Ugly - all are expressions of that one reality that many have called God, Nirvana, Brahman-Atman, Tao etc...in scientific view we are made of "energy", the energy that is netiher created or destroyed.



Energy may just be one type of matter. I believe in science, and note that science is always testing theories in an attempt to disprove them if new facts arise, and new facts arise fairly frequently, i.e. relativity replaced laws of motion.
All the best,
Rick

Energy and Matter are interchangeable. And yes Science is very humble in that it does not say it has the absolute truth. But whatever "truth" it has, it has built computers and allows us to communicate through the vastness of cyberspace.

Lote-Tree
05-08-2007, 04:44 AM
I'm glad you said this because this is where I think the puzzle begins.

If there was nothing: no particles, no matter, no energy, what was the stimulus that caused this to happen? How do we know there was nothing?

All the best,
Rick

Big Bang Theory says nothing about the cosmic origins. It just says it starts from something so small and dense.

Big Bang itself did not come out of nothing. It came out of something...

kari
05-09-2007, 08:12 PM
I agree with one post...God is seperate pretty much. Anyone can believe and follow/worship God. Religion is a group of people that prefer to worship God in the same manner...and believe or interpret things like the Bible in the same manner. It is always easier to stay on the straight and narrow when you have others around for support! As for all the talk about if we came out of nothing...and all of that such. Does anyone believe we existed on some level, in some form....prior to being born on earth? Have any of you ever felt you were before you came to earth? (Not talking about reincarnation though). With all the talk of nothingness...and coming from nothing, or something...I would think you have to ask where you were before...
Kari

Brady10
06-02-2007, 04:13 AM
Religion is based on personal philosophy, because until we die, we will never know which one, if any, is the truth. Although we may have our strong beliefs, there will always be a little doubt in the back of our minds.

blazeofglory
05-12-2008, 11:35 AM
God and religions both are man's invention and it is our ideas only and nothing else. All found there origins in our imaginations and nowhere else.

God and religions do not help human beings and in point of fact history approves of it. It has stirred more wars. Jews and Christians, Hindus and Muslims. Even within Muslims and Christians there are other sections or sectarians.

Rakthor
05-12-2008, 09:31 PM
God and religions both are man's invention and it is our ideas only and nothing else. All found there origins in our imaginations and nowhere else.

God and religions do not help human beings and in point of fact history approves of it. It has stirred more wars. Jews and Christians, Hindus and Muslims. Even within Muslims and Christians there are other sections or sectarians.

I'd love to agree with you, as I am an agnostic, but there is a part of me that says that you're just a little bit wrong. True, religion has caused a lot of conflict, death, and other unpleasant things. But isn't it also true that religion gives hope to some people? Isn't it true that many religions helped increase literacy throughout the common people? I think that religion was essential to humanity's development. But I also think that as time passes, the necessity of religion will begin to dwindle, and eventually the concept of an over-being or a religion of any sort will become obsolete.

jgweed
05-13-2008, 08:36 PM
One might say that the concept of God is so burdened by the history of religious dogma, that to discuss the properties of God without reference to the definitions that this history has imposed and sedimented into thinking and language, is very difficult.

blazeofglory
06-09-2008, 09:54 PM
God is something we invent out of the fear of the unknown.

Religions are full of moral and ethical things man knows already before becoming religious.

But religions create divisiveness more often than not.

Hypercrit Htd
06-09-2008, 11:18 PM
People believe what they have knowledge of not what they don't have knowledge of. Religious knowledge is a PERSONAL thing. It is individualized, not dependent on group concensus-a man find Jesus-how-he went into his
closet to pray and got an answer! Science is more abstract knowledge more dependent on what other people say and think mainly on academic approval
so religious knowledge come from EXPERIENCE while scientific knowledge is derived from acquiring other peoples knowledge secondhand.

JBI
06-10-2008, 12:44 AM
People believe what they have knowledge of not what they don't have knowledge of. Religious knowledge is a PERSONAL thing. It is individualized, not dependent on group concensus-a man find Jesus-how-he went into his
closet to pray and got an answer! Science is more abstract knowledge more dependent on what other people say and think mainly on academic approval
so religious knowledge come from EXPERIENCE while scientific knowledge is derived from acquiring other peoples knowledge secondhand.

Funny, Moses' wisdom is coming second hand, it having been passed down by the oral tradition before the Book of J. His teachings are second hand, in the sense that they required a medium, in this case a bible, or more appropriately, a scroll. Jesus in that sense comes second hand, if you believe in the religion, from his apostles, or if not, from other people (assuming he existed). The fact remains that the answers are still rooted in tradition. Science and religion are still reliant on belief. If I do not believe in other planets, then to me, they do not exist. The only difference is, that gravity works whether your like it or not, meanwhile god's wrath is yet to descend on me for eating pork.

NikolaiI
06-10-2008, 05:42 PM
But religions create divisiveness more often than not.

What is this, more than a mantra? The power of suggestion is very great. Is the positive more powerful than the negative? God is real, He is the creator and master of the universe. All of creation is of God and returns to God. Human life is meant for learning about God, and living to spread God-consciousness.

Blaze you always talk about how you permeate everything. This is the same as that in the sense that at all times man could possibly die, and when he dies, he goes back to God. And the possibility of this is with every moment. So living or dying we are with God. Then we can have peace in this life because we aren't struggling anymore.

blazeofglory
06-20-2008, 10:10 PM
What is this, more than a mantra? The power of suggestion is very great. Is the positive more powerful than the negative? God is real, He is the creator and master of the universe. All of creation is of God and returns to God. Human life is meant for learning about God, and living to spread God-consciousness.

Blaze you always talk about how you permeate everything. This is the same as that in the sense that at all times man could possibly die, and when he dies, he goes back to God. And the possibility of this is with every moment. So living or dying we are with God. Then we can have peace in this life because we aren't struggling anymore.

You seem to be very comfortable with ideas, oftentimes, very ancient ideas of God. You are indoctrinated. I apologize if I am a bit blunt. I do not think God is the master of the universe.

Sometime back we have agreed to a point whereat we shared ideas that we all are parts of the universe, an integral and organic whole. Or we are the cosmos. When we have mounted so high in our lofty ideas wherein there is no division between god and man, all are one and the same.

Nikolai, I feel is what we call sins, gods, demons, sacredness and profanities, righteousness, transgression are simply mundane realities and if we are highly spiritually elevated these things lose ground and these attributes become insignificant.

I do not subscribe to master and servant notions.

Nikolai, I do not mean to oppose you on purpose as a matter of fact. I respect you and I reckon your lofty ideas.

But I am honest and express what I feel at the moment. At this moment I feel like this and pour such ideas and Maybe afterward I may come with different ideas.

Maybe I am indoctrinated. I have yet to find out.

Hypercrit Htd
06-23-2008, 03:02 AM
All religions are man-made and is nothing to do with the ineffable Reality that many have called "God", "Allah", "Nirvana", "Tao" etc...


The ineffable Reality live inside human being. That what religion teach. Want to get to your destination? Use map. Having religious text is like having map.

Hypercrit Htd
06-23-2008, 03:10 AM
Funny, Moses' wisdom is coming second hand, it having been passed down by the oral tradition before the Book of J. His teachings are second hand, in the sense that they required a medium, in this case a bible, or more appropriately, a scroll. Jesus in that sense comes second hand, if you believe in the religion, from his apostles, or if not, from other people (assuming he existed). The fact remains that the answers are still rooted in tradition. Science and religion are still reliant on belief. If I do not believe in other planets, then to me, they do not exist. The only difference is, that gravity works whether your like it or not, meanwhile god's wrath is yet to descend on me for eating pork.

If it all belief how do you explain the miracle done by saints? People witness these thing, there historical documentation of laying on of hands healing disease, people levitating, people foretell future, people causing object to appear out of nowhere, people seeing vision of what you say not exist like Lourdes-how do you explain all the people see the same thing? Did little children tell lie? Or what they saw not exist because not everyone believe?

Trystan
06-23-2008, 03:49 AM
If it all belief how do you explain the miracle done by saints? People witness these thing, there historical documentation of laying on of hands healing disease, people levitating, people foretell future, people causing object to appear out of nowhere, people seeing vision of what you say not exist like Lourdes-how do you explain all the people see the same thing? Did little children tell lie? Or what they saw not exist because not everyone believe?

There is "historical documentation" (plenty of witnesses) of satanic men turning into mice during the medieval period. Please . . .

Hypercrit Htd
06-23-2008, 11:02 PM
There is "historical documentation" (plenty of witnesses) of satanic men turning into mice during the medieval period. Please . . .


Vision at Lourdes was nineteenth century C.E. Beside..you should not believe everything you read. However when thousand of people see same thing your saying it not exist seem to say thousand of people crazy-how you explain that?

Smoogles
06-24-2008, 12:00 AM
Wait so Trystan did you ever see any of these miracles? Please do tell.

NikolaiI
06-24-2008, 09:46 PM
You seem to be very comfortable with ideas, oftentimes, very ancient ideas of God. You are indoctrinated. I apologize if I am a bit blunt. I do not think God is the master of the universe.

Sometime back we have agreed to a point whereat we shared ideas that we all are parts of the universe, an integral and organic whole. Or we are the cosmos. When we have mounted so high in our lofty ideas wherein there is no division between god and man, all are one and the same.

Nikolai, I feel is what we call sins, gods, demons, sacredness and profanities, righteousness, transgression are simply mundane realities and if we are highly spiritually elevated these things lose ground and these attributes become insignificant.

I do not subscribe to master and servant notions.

Nikolai, I do not mean to oppose you on purpose as a matter of fact. I respect you and I reckon your lofty ideas.

But I am honest and express what I feel at the moment. At this moment I feel like this and pour such ideas and Maybe afterward I may come with different ideas.

Maybe I am indoctrinated. I have yet to find out.

All are not exactly one and the same. We are all parts of God, and if we all realized this, there would be perfect peace. Sometimes I am struck by the absolute importance of the truth, and yet I have never received much response for this. We are all parts of God, and this means that we are so much smaller than God-- so much less significant. Yet like a drop of salt water in the ocean is salty, so are we spiritual sparks, of the same quality as God. We are of a different quantity, but the same essential quality.

You do not believe in God, this is fine; but do not say I am indoctrinated-- this is vague and it breaks down communication. Even on the word of someone such as George Harrison, I would place so much importance-- not that I would believe against my heart's discrimination, but you can understand how it is a strong, spiritual effect of such a person-- this is Harrison, not even the Gaudiya-sampradaya line, Srila Bhatkisiddanta, Swami Bhaktivedanta, so many others, all of these affirm that Krisna is God.

You say how much religion causes division-- but you are saying that we should not be reilgious because religion is bad, all the division it caused, and the opposite also exists, religionists saying how good religion is on the basis of how much love has been generated. Are you still open at all, or are you closed in this matter? I urge you to seek God in your heart-- God exists not only as impersonal brahman, but also paramatma-- Supersoul-- and Bhagavan. Please reply to these points.

blazeofglory
07-27-2008, 09:07 PM
If I really have inclinations towards God or something that is not the one we generally take extracting ideas of God from mythologies. God is not besmeared, something not attributable, far from natural courses. Sometimes the Upanishads, the scriptures evidently far more advanced than any other available to us, or bequeathed to us by our ancestors speak something of God or maker of this cosmos. There is a word Nirguna, I think you maybe familiar with. I believe in that form, which in substance formless. Then since it is formless our endeavors to give it shapes and forms are fruitless.

Nikolai, you are a close friend of mine despite so many arguments and often drifting in reverse directions while sharing ideas. I am not an atheist or nor a die hard theist. I am not a skeptic.

I am a curious being, open to all of you, and if I argue and go adrift negatively, negating your ideas, it is out of curiosity of learning or knowing more. Or else ideas would not have streamed from you in the the degree and intensity I come across.

PierreGringoire
07-29-2008, 12:54 AM
I was going to make a new post that couldn't have been any more to the point than this one is.

I'm comforted by the fact that all of the posts I've read (didn't read all) are agreeable to me. It helps with the Nikolai charming theory that we are 'one.'

Any given Religion is very silly to me if it excludes open-mindedness. For example: Random Personality: Jesus is the Savior of us all.
Me: Why can't you call 'Jesus' God?
RP: Jesus is God's son
Me: Does God really need a son?
So on and so fourth, ending with me believing in a force that is Love, Truth, Honesty etc etc.

Here I simplify my Deity (designating him as Love, Truth, Honesty) because I realize that trying to wrap my head about what He is really about is impossible.

To comment on what someone posted about the Hindu's theories about attaining the Truth, I liked the one about taking your occupation seriously. For the simple fact, that its so foolproof if you think about it.

No theorizing, which risks you turning evil (or mad) for a brief duration, instead you keep your eyes on your tasks at hand and Feel your way towards a Power subtle but steady-- effectivly leaving yourself at peace with the least amount of spiritual scratches as possible.

Sticking with the Topic: I believe that nothingness is an impossible concept, which is enough to explain why God exists.

And if He doesn't, oh well, I feel stronger when I'm honest, loving, and truthful. At least I'm living life to its fullest.

PierreGringoire
07-29-2008, 01:17 AM
Sorry for the double post, but I think its a good thing we don't know if God exists or not. And we struggle with it daily, because it really shows us who we are. And if God does exist, we would be the better for it. If He doesn't we'd at least be closer to Peace if we search for it sincerly. Perhaps Honesty and Compassion are worthy to defend in either circumstances? "Which is exactly why God was cool with making himself known through such simple and subtle means" (The sentence in the quote is just being half serious)

aabbcc
07-29-2008, 11:17 AM
Religions describe God as a perfect being, beyond human comprehension that has the attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence et al. Moreover, they proclaim all of these qualities, which we as humans cannot understand are understood by religions, which interestingly are comprised of human beings. Additionally, they (religions) advise us what God wants, who God is, what God looks like, what God does, and that only their religion knows how to make this incomprehensible God happy.
It is more complex than that.

First, what does it mean that G-d is a perfect being comprised out of all attributes?
Second, which specific religion claims that it and its followers understand G-d in His essence as answered in the previous question?
Third, which specific religion claims that they are so familiar with G-d to explicitly know what G-d wants, who G-d is and what He does?

I realise that you are generalizing for the purpose of this thread - but this is banalization of religion and idea of G-d, and if you banalize things to certain extent, they become incorrect.
If we are to speak seriously, there is no serious theist whose image of G-d is reduced to human attributes andwho believes they have monopoly over the truth in sense of understanding G-d's essence and will.
The fact that approximately 99,99% of self-proclaimed theists are not serious is another matter, you cannot attack an idea based on its "common" treatment. ;)
So answer the first of the questions above, and then we will see if:
a) we have the same concept of G-d or no;
b) your concept is based on common treatment of idea or actual background in something other than that;
c) there is something to discuss at all (perhaps we are all saying the same thing using different formulations).


There is one critical issue, at least from my perspective, which I think cannot be resolved adequately, regarding God’s existence or non-existence: was there always something that was the force behind what we know as life in the context of our understanding, or, were we created from nothing? If there was always something, what was it and where did it come from? If there was nothing, how was something created from nothing?
You realize that, scientifically, you cannot treat those questions without stepping into the realm of speculations which you will not be able to prove empirically. What precisely are you looking for - a theist argumentation without citing its "holy resources" but based on theist 'logic', or something else?

DooRag
07-31-2008, 12:53 PM
Religion is a political tool, an invention to control large masses of people, thousands of years ago. God was the vengeful figure put into place to scare these large masses of people into conformity.

Everything said about the topic between then and now is just us thinking we are smarter than we actually are.

blazeofglory
09-01-2008, 09:05 PM
we are smarter than we actually are.

Yes, you are right in saying that we are smarter than we actually are, and in fact we do not know things and yet we claim we know. God, religions all are the products of minds.