Page 5 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Orvaskesi
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

20 Aug 2006, 7:50 pm

I am, by and large, with Romana in that I regard Process Theology as a pretty neat framework for my own speculations.

I would regard myself a theist, rather than as religious - to denote that I am (at this point) more concerned whether S/He exists or not rather than with worshipping Him/Her. "Panentheism" - the idea that we, and the Universe, are part of God but God is a bit more than that, fits me nicely. I am furthermore convinced of the validity of scientific method, including evolutionary theory. I would regard God as someone immanent in the regularities of nature (i.e. fundamental constants and natural laws as "God's mind"), rather than as a cosmic trickster who can break them at will.

I have nothing nice to say about silly arguments such as that Aspies cannot be religious because to be religious is to be irrational and Aspies are rational. I mean, come on - what kind of playground logic is that?

I have nothing but respect for thoughtful atheists, but there is a kind of atheist who will gladly use scientific fact to bombard religious people with, but not go near a theology textbook himself. And a lot of work written within theology, philosophy of religion and all (the already mentioned Whitehead, but also say Arthur Peacocke) is extremely well-thought, and utterly rationalistic stuff. Religious thought is quite a bit more than the cliche-picture of a bearded guy sitting on a cloud doing miracles. This why I find the whole Flying Spaghetti Monster spoof funny on the one hand, but a bit childish on the other: it parodies a kind of religious worldview which is in no way representative of the whole.


_________________
Merlijn
Male, self-diagnosed - so perhaps I really am a mutant.


Orvaskesi
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

20 Aug 2006, 8:00 pm

sigholdaccountlost wrote:
Right.

Now, Jesus/God/Whoever is supposed to love you, right?

If that's the case then how come lots of us have been bullied.

Well, there's a few possible reasons
1)He cares about everyone as long as they're NT
2) Satan/the devil/evil spirits. ((Which I find to be a very convient excuse.
3)He doesn't know
4) He can't do anything about it.

Once I had to draw Him for an R.E. exercise. Now, how on earth I'm supposed to draw what I am convinced is a fairytale was beyond me until I realized that I could just draw him in a book and I labelled it 'doesn't exist'. When me and another class-mate broached the issue of natrual disasters, all our R.E. teacher could come up with was 'Um...err...erm..erh..that's a good point actually.' and didn't mange to answer the question.


4) is correct, in my opinion. God is not omniscient and omnipotent in that She cannot peer into the future (though She probably has a good grasp of probabilities :-)) and She cannot overrule the free will of sentient creatures. This is actually pretty consonant with the picture of the Old Testament, where God constantly tries to negotiate with people or cajole them into doing things. There is a dialogue between God and men. If we were mindless automata, obeying God's will without any free will of our own, there would have been no need for the Prophets to try and turn people back towards God, there would have been no need for Jesus to die for our sins, because we wouldn't be able to committ any sins.

I like to think that God rather deals with free creatures, whom She may try to persuade but who nonetheless will not automatically bend to Her will, than with robots. Free will, and an undeterministic universe, are perhaps a greater "good" even though they bear within themselves the possibility for evil to occur.

Your R.E. teacher doesn't seem to be much good :-) On questions like these, Rabbi Harold Kushner's book "When bad things happen to good people" (which itself departs from the book of Job) is an excellent read. Issues like these have been on religious people's minds, as well as non-religious people's, ever since the anonymous writer of Job.



sigholdaccountlost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

24 Aug 2006, 2:18 pm

Orvaskesi wrote:
sigholdaccountlost wrote:
Right.

Now, Jesus/God/Whoever is supposed to love you, right?

If that's the case then how come lots of us have been bullied.

Well, there's a few possible reasons
1)He cares about everyone as long as they're NT
2) Satan/the devil/evil spirits. ((Which I find to be a very convient excuse.
3)He doesn't know
4) He can't do anything about it.

Once I had to draw Him for an R.E. exercise. Now, how on earth I'm supposed to draw what I am convinced is a fairytale was beyond me until I realized that I could just draw him in a book and I labelled it 'doesn't exist'. When me and another class-mate broached the issue of natrual disasters, all our R.E. teacher could come up with was 'Um...err...erm..erh..that's a good point actually.' and didn't mange to answer the question.


4) is correct, in my opinion. God is not omniscient and omnipotent in that She cannot peer into the future (though She probably has a good grasp of probabilities :-)) and She cannot overrule the free will of sentient creatures. This is actually pretty consonant with the picture of the Old Testament, where God constantly tries to negotiate with people or cajole them into doing things. There is a dialogue between God and men. If we were mindless automata, obeying God's will without any free will of our own, there would have been no need for the Prophets to try and turn people back towards God, there would have been no need for Jesus to die for our sins, because we wouldn't be able to committ any sins.

I like to think that God rather deals with free creatures, whom She may try to persuade but who nonetheless will not automatically bend to Her will, than with robots. Free will, and an undeterministic universe, are perhaps a greater "good" even though they bear within themselves the possibility for evil to occur.

Your R.E. teacher doesn't seem to be much good :-) On questions like these, Rabbi Harold Kushner's book "When bad things happen to good people" (which itself departs from the book of Job) is an excellent read. Issues like these have been on religious people's minds, as well as non-religious people's, ever since the anonymous writer of Job.


No disrespect inteded but makes them sound like a parent trying to discilpline their naughty children.



lawpoop
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 25

25 Aug 2006, 12:53 pm

eipsa wrote:
aspiegirl2 wrote:
But the difference is that God is spiritual, not physical. Anyways, yes, I believe in God.


Yes, but he can't influence your life whatsoever if he's on the outside, because even *information* can't enter the universe from outside. Call it spiritual or whatever, but if he is to interract with your life it will have to go to the *physical* plane sooner or later since this is where you are..... and that's not possible...so god is irrelevant.


Even *information* ?! According to information theory, information is physical. You have a metaphysical disagreement with Aspiegirl2. You are claiming that there exists only physical, measurable forces. Aspiegirl2's metaphysical stance is that there are other 'forces' that can influence the physical world, which she is calling spiritual. You are missing her point.

Also, your arguments are sloppy. There is no *outside* of the universe. The phrase 'outside the universe' is as non-sensical 'before time'. The universe is space itself and there is no outside that is not the universe itself. In other words, there is no space outside of space. There is only space.

Anyways, if the God we are talking about is omnipotent, we necessarily expect him to transcend the laws of physics and logic -- after all, a God who has to obey logic isn't all that omnipotent, is he?



waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

25 Aug 2006, 1:06 pm

There's two possibilites for me anyways.

He's a space alien, (you heard right) that genetically engineerd us out of himself and monkeys, and if you think this is crazy talk whats even crazier to me is god speaking to dirt and making a man out of it.

i always go back to when civilizations first started, to see what they have to say about it. because more than likely everyone who comes after them will rip off there ideas and put there own twists on the origional idea.

the sumerians thought a space alien made them, so im leaning more twords what they believe.

the other possibility is we just evolved over many years after protien was introduced into our diets, and we made god in our heads.



miku
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 5 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 109
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

30 Aug 2006, 3:01 pm

Rationality is a means of deriving value from truth. Faith is a means of deriving value from unlikely possibilities.

Rationality is doing the right thing for the right reason. Faith is doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

Rationality is taking responsibility for your actions and doing the best you can to improve things. Faith is a child's dependency on his mother.

Without God, and with the tendency to care about other human life (which is common in most humans), we have the incentive to progress as much as we can in our lifetimes for the sake of future generations. With God, we have no reasons to progress, in fact, with God, regression towards "the old ways" is what is valued.
Tradition is a euphemism for the preservation of the obsolete, and the overestimation of humans from previous generations and even millennia.

In a nutshell, religion is an evolutionary tool which is useful for the first chunk of a civilization's history. Survival is a little tricky nowadays, but it was a real challenge before. Religion has the potential to make an overall improvement to society at first by keeping people plugging away at their lives without losing motivation, but at a point, and I think that point is now, its detrimental side effects gradually outweigh the pros.

Cures to illnesses are being held back from being discovered by those who feel it's wrong to study stem cells. Understanding and acceptance of what is perhaps nature's ingenious population control response known as homosexuality is taking far too long because people were pressured long ago to make kids before they themselves died from the harsh environment of the time, and that mindset was preserved by religion even though the relevant factors have long since changed.

I can't say that God definitely doesn't exist, but I can say that if there is a god, it's very unlikely that he happens to be any one of the ones we came up with.

I'm glad that I have AS, because as a result I seem to be free of one of the biggest cognitive curses that typical humans have. How to put it... maybe something like.. "binary assumption haste." People come across some sort of question, before they even apply any real logic to it, their mind presents them with two options. It's always two for some reason. And that's bad enough as it is, but then most people have to go a step further and choose one of those two options right off the bat, even if they have no criteria with which to narrow it down.
We as humans sort of just found ourselves existing here, and have been studying to try to find out more about this plain of existence and ourselves. Naturally, at least some people will consider the possibility of us having been created by a god. At that point, it's practically a coin flip that makes a bunch of us religious, and a bunch decidedly non-religious.

Perhaps people feel defective in some way if they aren't able to firmly decide on an answer to every question. And that's what religion is all about; Encouraging the right brain's emotional need to jump to conclusions and defend them to the bitter end.
Science / rationality / etc, are all about the opposite. Decide on something that seems most likely if given enough information, and update as necessary.



Litigious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,505
Location: Nearest Wells Fargo trade

31 Aug 2006, 4:53 am

klassobanieras wrote:
'God' is a word that intelligent people use to explain things beyond human understanding, and less intelligent people use to explain things beyond their personal understanding.


:mrgreen:



waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

31 Aug 2006, 12:23 pm

miku wrote:
Rationality is a means of deriving value from truth. Faith is a means of deriving value from unlikely possibilities.

Rationality is doing the right thing for the right reason. Faith is doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

Rationality is taking responsibility for your actions and doing the best you can to improve things. Faith is a child's dependency on his mother.

Without God, and with the tendency to care about other human life (which is common in most humans), we have the incentive to progress as much as we can in our lifetimes for the sake of future generations. With God, we have no reasons to progress, in fact, with God, regression towards "the old ways" is what is valued.
Tradition is a euphemism for the preservation of the obsolete, and the overestimation of humans from previous generations and even millennia.

In a nutshell, religion is an evolutionary tool which is useful for the first chunk of a civilization's history. Survival is a little tricky nowadays, but it was a real challenge before. Religion has the potential to make an overall improvement to society at first by keeping people plugging away at their lives without losing motivation, but at a point, and I think that point is now, its detrimental side effects gradually outweigh the pros.

Cures to illnesses are being held back from being discovered by those who feel it's wrong to study stem cells. Understanding and acceptance of what is perhaps nature's ingenious population control response known as homosexuality is taking far too long because people were pressured long ago to make kids before they themselves died from the harsh environment of the time, and that mindset was preserved by religion even though the relevant factors have long since changed.

I can't say that God definitely doesn't exist, but I can say that if there is a god, it's very unlikely that he happens to be any one of the ones we came up with.

I'm glad that I have AS, because as a result I seem to be free of one of the biggest cognitive curses that typical humans have. How to put it... maybe something like.. "binary assumption haste." People come across some sort of question, before they even apply any real logic to it, their mind presents them with two options. It's always two for some reason. And that's bad enough as it is, but then most people have to go a step further and choose one of those two options right off the bat, even if they have no criteria with which to narrow it down.
We as humans sort of just found ourselves existing here, and have been studying to try to find out more about this plain of existence and ourselves. Naturally, at least some people will consider the possibility of us having been created by a god. At that point, it's practically a coin flip that makes a bunch of us religious, and a bunch decidedly non-religious.

Perhaps people feel defective in some way if they aren't able to firmly decide on an answer to every question. And that's what religion is all about; Encouraging the right brain's emotional need to jump to conclusions and defend them to the bitter end.
Science / rationality / etc, are all about the opposite. Decide on something that seems most likely if given enough information, and update as necessary.
i agree with this post somewhat.



Orvaskesi
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

31 Aug 2006, 1:15 pm

miku wrote:
Rationality is a means of deriving value from truth. Faith is a means of deriving value from unlikely possibilities.

Rationality is doing the right thing for the right reason. Faith is doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

Rationality is taking responsibility for your actions and doing the best you can to improve things. Faith is a child's dependency on his mother.

(...)

I'm glad that I have AS, because as a result I seem to be free of one of the biggest cognitive curses that typical humans have. How to put it... maybe something like.. "binary assumption haste." People come across some sort of question, before they even apply any real logic to it, their mind presents them with two options. It's always two for some reason. And that's bad enough as it is, but then most people have to go a step further and choose one of those two options right off the bat, even if they have no criteria with which to narrow it down.
We as humans sort of just found ourselves existing here, and have been studying to try to find out more about this plain of existence and ourselves. Naturally, at least some people will consider the possibility of us having been created by a god. At that point, it's practically a coin flip that makes a bunch of us religious, and a bunch decidedly non-religious.

Perhaps people feel defective in some way if they aren't able to firmly decide on an answer to every question. And that's what religion is all about; Encouraging the right brain's emotional need to jump to conclusions and defend them to the bitter end.
Science / rationality / etc, are all about the opposite. Decide on something that seems most likely if given enough information, and update as necessary.


One of my favourite targets (but surely unrelated to my possible AS) is what I call "dichotomical thinking": the tendency of the human mind to think in terms of incompatible opposites. Either white or black, either is or is not. But I believe the distinction between "faith" and "reason" that some people make, and particularly the tendency for people to ascribe all kinds of good and desirable qualities to "reason" and all kinds of undesirable qualities to "faith", is an instance of this kind of thinking in dichotomies.

Because faith and reason, as well as "science" and "religion" need not at all to be opposed. It is for example quite "reasonable" to examine our basic assumptions about the universe and find that they are based on "faith".

Science uses the same tendency for dichotomical thinking that we find in commonsense reasoning. And to a big extent, it works well. In the classical natural sciences and in formal logic, something either is a causal factor or is not a causal factor. Natural laws either work everywhere and always, or they're not laws at all. Quantum mechanics is a different story.

But this kind of dichotomical thinking can wreak all kinds of havoc when transferred to the human sciences, or philosophy.

I think the whole black-and-white picture of science/rationality vs. religion/faith that some people have is a result from the pretty much unique situation in the United States, with a very powerful and quite anti-scientific religious lobby at work. In Europe, however, there is nothing like it.


_________________
Merlijn
Male, self-diagnosed - so perhaps I really am a mutant.


waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

31 Aug 2006, 3:34 pm

i need to get out of the united states, the problem is the majority rule here and unfortunatly is christian. i've thought about moving to canada, but i need more inner/self motivation to do it.



starchild
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 73

03 Oct 2006, 2:16 pm

DOULOS-XPISTOU wrote:
Barracuda wrote:
starchild wrote:
I believe God is everything. He/she is everywhere. We are all little parts og God.

A pantheist. I love you guys. Just out of curiousity, what do you believe happens at death?


Hello,

Technically, Starchild is describing a philosophy known as "Panenthiesm" which is very different from Panthiesm. The latter is the belief that objects - living or inanimate - can themselves be gods. Panenthiesm suggests that the Divine is located in all of its creation - in each of us and everything around us. Specifically, neither of these are intrinsically religions - they are world views - paradigms of existence. This particular view is very compatible with Christian philosophy & doctrine and is exclusive to monothiestic religions like Christianity and Judiasm. It is most recently advocated by philosophers such as Whitehead and Hartshorne. Whitehead actually uses Quantum Mechanics to explain this concept - Whitehead, although not a household name, is the philosopher who first described quantum physics from a philosophical point of view and explained it to Einstien BEFORE he did the math that proved it. Not a lightweight by any means...

I tend to adhere to this understanding of the Divine myself - when reading Christian and Jewish scripture (late Jewish scripture anyway - the earliest texts seem to assume polythiesm (multiple gods) and only later declare monothiesm - about the time Jeremiah was written) with this perception of panenthiesm in mind, it brings to light some very interesting solutions to otherwise unsolvable problems.

I cannot think of a paradigm (and that's all any of these ideas we suggest are - just models) that defines the reality I experience more adequately.

Now, Starchild's follow-up post is a bit different and doesn't seem to fall into what I'm describing - although this goal of ultimate union with the divine wouldn't necessarily negate what I've stated and still seems to rely upon a form of monothiesm (unite with "god" - whatever SC might say god is). But the quote I list above is classic Panenthiesm.

Thoughts, comments, suggestions?

Sincerely,

DOULOS-XPISTOU


Hey
It's a long time sice I've been here, but to ansver your question.
I see God as love/light, an all knowing concious beeing. We are all co-creators with God. God is the perfect balance of Female/masculine in itself. In spirit all beings are the same. Thus we're created in Gods image as such. God is the unierse, the everything, or I AM precence.
I don't cling to any one religion, but yes I see myself more of a spiritual truth seeker, rather than a blind follower of a limmited religious dogma, or authority. I like to find ansvers for myself, that make sense to me, rather than trusting an outside imposed religion. However I think every religion took different parts of the same truth, and made it individual. They're all bacically about the same thing.



hypermind
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 200
Location: haarlem, nederland

04 Oct 2006, 4:37 am

according to the bible, god is love. just an abstract concept, love. (also happening to be omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent (yet condemning all but a few select devout sheep to hell), and the origin and creater of "all")
according to the torah, god can be whatever you envision him as.
acording to druidists god is nature itself, represented by a few entities if im correct there.
according to pantheists god is every material thing in the universe.
according to hindus god embodies a multitudes of subgods which are all one and the same god. kinda funny if you ask me.
dont even ask about allah...

so where is this monotheistical bearded old man that everyone thinks of when the word god is mentioned? how did "He" get into existence?

beats me...



Last edited by hypermind on 04 Oct 2006, 4:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

hypermind
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 200
Location: haarlem, nederland

04 Oct 2006, 4:40 am

and at any rate: he who relates to ages old manuscripts written by several highly questionable individuals for his take on reality and morality is the biggest fool that walks the earth, along with all the others similar to him.



Scintillate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Oct 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,284
Location: Perth

10 Oct 2006, 4:57 am

Ok, I could say god is life, god is death, god is the universe, god is beyond comprehension...

But to me? All existence is in motion, and all motion is in existence, the space between, the gaps, or voids are always changing size and shape, I believe conciousness is a literal representation of this vibration in all things. Therefore when I die I believe I become part of everything that is, was, and shall be, according to how I live.

I do not need to believe in a concious creator judging me to be comfortable with death. I prefer to believe we're alive to live, to ponder the ever-expanding infinity of truths to be found in life, for to ponder death, as something separate and severed from life, is why we need to create such things as heaven and hell and the creator judging us from his/her seat up on high..

I think a certain naivety is required to make god out to have the same form of working conciousness itself, for what is beyond our comprehension? How everything works together! Its not the universe that is god, it is EXISTENCE..

But until I can write it in a definable essay format proved with axioms, lets leave it at that.

I'm still high from getting out of hospital for a little operation, I have a strange feeling I'm wandering today.



paulsinnerchild
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,111

17 Oct 2006, 1:00 am

IMO the only reason why God has survived is because so many people have re-invented him/her/it and the whole concept of god has become so ambigious it could mean anything from just and abstract principle to the bearded old man in the sky.



Scintillate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Oct 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,284
Location: Perth

17 Oct 2006, 8:28 am

Bingo it could be something very specific, or something very vague, the point being believe what you wanna believe, share what you wanna share, truth is self evident, what you don't wanna know, you can use faith to fill in the gaps..

We can all get along


_________________
All hail the new flesh, cause it suits me fine!