Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 63

Thread: I Believe in God

  1. #16
    Sweet farewell, Good Nite
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,336
    god is founded on the relation of cause and effect, discoverable not by experience but imagination and abstract reason. Experience is the playground that allows people to discover it as a possibility. This is why Kant in his Pure Reason book singlehandedly refuses to go there altogether.

    This subject is a big snore, I'd much rather see a more relevant discussion on the nature of being.
    Last edited by jon1jt; 01-21-2009 at 07:24 PM.
    "He was nauseous with regret when he saw her face again, and when, as of yore, he pleaded and begged at her knees for the joy of her being. She understood Neal; she stroked his hair; she knew he was mad."
    ---Jack Kerouac, On The Road: The Original Scroll

  2. #17
    unidentified hit record blp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,436
    Blog Entries
    40
    Which religious text is this thread supposed to be about?

  3. #18
    Sweet farewell, Good Nite
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,336
    Quote Originally Posted by blp View Post
    Which religious text is this thread supposed to be about?
    Not sure it was even stated. Looks like Christianity since there are references to the Vatican City and Jesus. I'm still wondering why the Book of Thomas is irrelevant to Christians.
    "He was nauseous with regret when he saw her face again, and when, as of yore, he pleaded and begged at her knees for the joy of her being. She understood Neal; she stroked his hair; she knew he was mad."
    ---Jack Kerouac, On The Road: The Original Scroll

  4. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,564
    Quote Originally Posted by jon1jt View Post
    This subject is a big snore, I'd much rather see a more relevant discussion on the nature of being.
    Quote Originally Posted by blp
    Which religious text is this thread supposed to be about?
    I think someone has only tried to get a rise out of us.

    Quote Originally Posted by 0=2
    He, yes HE, for God is primarily a male entity, was birthed by Christians.
    Even not as a Christian, I know this as false. Christians gave birth to God? Christians may have reproduced the 'male entity' of God, as you say, but, in my opinion, an omnipotent, Infinite Being cannot gain 'His' original existence via birth from finite beings. By claiming that 'God is . . . birthed by Christians' presupposes that Christians existed before God.
    Quote Originally Posted by 0=2
    This does not mean he is imaginary. God is no more imaginary than the U.S., surely. There are temples to him, correct? Theres a city devoted to him and his son's name, correct? Surely there must be some existence in it, if there weren't it... wouldn't be. Simply put.
    With the millenia that have passed of believers in God, they have created many cities, churches, temples, mosques, etc., but that does not justify existence. In Ireland, I have seen buildings devoted to leprechauns and the loch ness, but that does not justify their existence, nor does the sustenance of the Black Forest of Germany prove that fairies, fauns, and other mythical creatures exist.
    Books? No, that does not make something exist either. Walk through the fantasy and science-fiction section of any bookstore or library, and convince me that dragons, dwarves, demons, and such nonsense exist.
    To place us back in the religious context, the Greeks and Romans built numerous temples that, in size, dwarf the average church in devotion to their polytheistic beliefs; most Christians deny polytheism, but many of the Greek and Roman temples exist. Because the temples exist, does that mean Zeus, Hera, Athena (who owns the city Athens), Aphrodite, Aries, and co. exist?
    Quote Originally Posted by 0=2
    Denying Him is the same as denying that wherever you reside is yours and yours alone, independent of country. Surely American exists, for it has fighters and flags, does it not?
    Again, material does not assume existence. Just because America has fighters and flags does not make it a country, nor does land, but a society. Denying the existence of a country that sits before us, because empirical evidence proves that America exists; where some doubt in the existence of God arises by some atheists and agnostics seems because no empirical evidence proves God's existence.
    Quote Originally Posted by 0=2
    So yes, I am a convert in one sense... However I want God, this word you've made yours, dead. I want Jesus to be reborn and slain. I kid you not. I will kill your savior if ever he rise again.
    Most Christians would celebrate the rearising of Jesus, so this statement confuses me. Personally, if I would bet money on Jesus versus you in a fight, I would bet on Jesus. Supposedly, according to Christian text, people have already slain him once, and he resurrected; I do not think you would win.

  5. #20
    unidentified hit record blp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,436
    Blog Entries
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by mono View Post
    Personally, if I would bet money on Jesus versus you in a fight, I would bet on Jesus. Supposedly, according to Christian text, people have already slain him once, and he resurrected; I do not think you would win.
    Dostoyevsky might disagree.

    http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist/dostgi.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor

  6. #21
    You and me skasian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by subterranean View Post
    I believe Jesus doesn't need anyone to defend Him . Suppose any comments thrown agaisnt Him, even the harshest ones, wouldn't change any fact about who He really is for those who believe in Him, don't you agree?
    Oh course!! But I am just sad for people that hates a being that did nothing wrong. As I love Jesus, I feel pain for the people who hates Him.

  7. #22
    unidentified hit record blp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,436
    Blog Entries
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by billyjack View Post
    checked them out. youtubed em too. like the quote, very gangstaish--probably true too

    not sure "the the" made it across the pond though, at least not my local radio scene in the frozen tundra
    Did you find this? One of my favourite songs. Great video too.

  8. #23
    ID ?? Hobbes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    40
    Blog Entries
    1
    I think there are too many ideas that get pasted onto religion to make it a reliable referance to much.
    Like the idea of an antichrist-
    Religion states that the person should be:
    attractive,
    eloquent,
    and rise to power quickly.
    But this was a reflection of the book Paradise Lost and Milton's creation of a Byronic hero rather than a devil based on religious belief.
    I think many a times, a good story gets pulled into the web of religion and accepted. And that is the base of religion.
    And no, I don't think that on the base of great stories lies a granule of truth. that logic is flawed beyond imagination.
    I think we dream so we don't have to be apart so long. Hobbes (Bill Watterson)

    The problem is that you try to play the game as a man. If you hinder all your gifts trying to play like the rest of them, then you'll never achieve your potential.Mona- Half and Half

  9. #24
    Registered User Judas130's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by skasian View Post
    Oh course!! But I am just sad for people that hates a being that did nothing wrong. As I love Jesus, I feel pain for the people who hates Him.
    most, friend, do not hate poor jesus, but the establishments which pollute and contort his words. Jesus was a thinker, he essentially provided his ideals in simplistic terms for many to understand and feel interactive with, to feel represented by, 'the meek shall inherit the earth'. His parables are given so that we better understand his arguments. He is a very important thinker.
    Many would hate the establishments that slaughtered thousands of muslim children and women and civilians in Jesus' name during the crusades, do you think they are justified? Seeing as how a war 900 years ago still effects their society I think yes.

    There is nothing wrong with Jesus, but there's something wrong with the hypocritical agents that put him to work. - you install a water fountain in a poor village - suddenly, Jesus did this for you? you must worship him for this?

    Jesus, a strict Galilean Jew, would not have had anyone worship him as a God, he would have been disgusted. Galilean Judaism was barely different to that practised in Jerusalem. Jesus was a prophet, a man spreading God's word. Yet He is no more 'son of God' than you or me. He is 'son of man', SERVANT of man, suggesting beneath us. He is not the messiah, as the messiah was a Jewish concept of geographical and political liberty. Jesus died upon a cross, he was not the messiah. The establishments that promote Jesus as God had to find some abstract method of showing that Jesus was Lord.

    Furthermore, Jesus knew that his reformed ideology would cause trouble. He knew the dangers he put himself in. He upset a lot of people of a traditional mindframe at a time when doing so would have grave consequences, essentially, he did 'something wrong'.
    Last edited by Judas130; 02-09-2009 at 07:38 PM.

  10. #25
    Cur etiam hic es? Redzeppelin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Infinity and Beyond
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Judas130 View Post
    most, friend, do not hate poor jesus, but the establishments which pollute and contort his words. Jesus was a thinker, he essentially provided his ideals in simplistic terms for many to understand and feel interactive with, to feel represented by, 'the meek shall inherit the earth'. His parables are given so that we better understand his arguments. He is a very important thinker.
    Christ's ability as thinker comes second to his job as redeemer. He didn't come to establish a moral code - he came to save souls.

    Quote Originally Posted by Judas130 View Post
    Many would hate the establishments that slaughtered thousands of muslim children and women and civilians in Jesus' name during the crusades, do you think they are justified? Seeing as how a war 900 years ago still effects their society I think yes.
    No - the atrocities of the Crusades are not justifiable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Judas130 View Post
    There is nothing wrong with Jesus, but there's something wrong with the hypocritical agents that put him to work. - you install a water fountain in a poor village - suddenly, Jesus did this for you? you must worship him for this?
    Who is to say that the water fountain didn't arrive in the village due to God's prompting? The Bible tells us that all good (including our good actions) comes from God. Without God working within our hearts, we can produce no good thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Judas130 View Post
    Jesus, a strict Galilean Jew, would not have had anyone worship him as a God, he would have been disgusted. Galilean Judaism was barely different to that practised in Jerusalem. Jesus was a prophet, a man spreading God's word. Yet He is no more 'son of God' than you or me. He is 'son of man', SERVANT of man, suggesting beneath us. He is not the messiah, as the messiah was a Jewish concept of geographical and political liberty. Jesus died upon a cross, he was not the messiah. The establishments that promote Jesus as God had to find some abstract method of showing that Jesus was Lord.
    Did you read the same gospels I did? In them, Jesus
    a) accepted worship
    b) claimed equality with God
    c) performed miracles
    d) rose from the dead

    If you're not basing your argument on the gospels - the only authoritative record of Jesus' life here on earth - what are you basing it on?

    Quote Originally Posted by Judas130 View Post
    Furthermore, Jesus knew that his reformed ideology would cause trouble. He knew the dangers he put himself in. He upset a lot of people of a traditional mindframe at a time when doing so would have grave consequences, essentially, he did 'something wrong'.
    Jesus cannot be seen as nothing more than a moral teacher or prophet - none of the other moral teachers/prophets of history or the Bible claimed what Christ claimed. As CS Lewis puts it (from Mere Christianity):

    "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
    "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." - C.S. Lewis

  11. #26
    Cunning linguist Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    232
    Anybody who preaches good moral values can be considered a teacher of morals. Even a lunatic -- on the level of a man who says that he is a poached egg -- could theoretically be considered a good moral teacher.
    Hell is other people.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre, "No Exit"

  12. #27
    Cur etiam hic es? Redzeppelin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Infinity and Beyond
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Al View Post
    Anybody who preaches good moral values can be considered a teacher of morals. Even a lunatic -- on the level of a man who says that he is a poached egg -- could theoretically be considered a good moral teacher.
    Perhaps - though how a lunatic comes up with moral lessons is quite beyond me, because by definition the lunatic is not connected with reality, and morality is definitely connected with reality.

    The Lewis quote suggests that it is an error to see Jesus ONLY as a moral teacher - his statements were unequivocal in their claiming of equality with God. It's not that Jesus wasn't a moral teacher - it's that he was that AND more importantly, he was (and is) the Son of God.
    "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." - C.S. Lewis

  13. #28
    Cunning linguist Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    232
    There are different types and varying degrees of psychosis. Because a man has a type of insanity does not necessarily mean that he is competely disassociated with reality, or that he has no conception of right and wrong. A perfect example is a schizophrenic pastor I once met who, when not on his medication, saw people that were not really there. In every other respect he was a perfectly lucid and very pleasant man, and certainly a moral teacher as well.

    My argument to your second point is that atheists and non-Christians would not believe that Jesus was the son of God, so how else would they view him except as a moral teacher?

  14. #29
    Cur etiam hic es? Redzeppelin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Infinity and Beyond
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Al View Post
    There are different types and varying degrees of psychosis. Because a man has a type of insanity does not necessarily mean that he is competely disassociated with reality, or that he has no conception of right and wrong. A perfect example is a schizophrenic pastor I once met who, when not on his medication, saw people that were not really there. In every other respect he was a perfectly lucid and very pleasant man, and certainly a moral teacher as well.
    I understand your point; however, I think most people would question the moral teaching of someone who was - to use your term - a "lunatic."

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Al View Post
    My argument to your second point is that atheists and non-Christians would not believe that Jesus was the son of God, so how else would they view him except as a moral teacher?
    But the problem is with what Jesus said: anybody who said great moral things and then said "I'm the Son of God" would be immediately dismissed, regardless of the validity of his teaching. Atheists and non-Christians can view Christ how they like - but they must somehow get around the fact that he claimed to be God. Most people would discount just about anything coming out of the mouth of someone who claimed likewise. How seriously would you take my discussion if I finished by saying that I am the Son of God?

    Really?
    "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." - C.S. Lewis

  15. #30
    Cunning linguist Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    232
    "Lunatic" was Lewis' word, not mine.

    I have no interest in a drawn-out argument, so I'll state this as simply as I can. Jesus' moral teachings have as much to do with his claims to be the son of God as Martin Heidegger's philosophical theories have to do with his Nazi sympathizing, which is to say, nothing. Do Heidegger's questionable politics detract anything from the brilliance of his ideas on unrelated subjects? I would contend that no, they do not. It is the same with Jesus; I do not believe that either his assertions that he is God or his apparent condonement of slavery takes away at all from the goodness of his moral teachings. Ideas are something separate -- they stand apart from us as individuals, and become a kind of thing unto themselves. This is how I see this subject.

    Really.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •