No, empirical science doesn't allow for it because the principles it's founded on are exactly the opposite of science. Science deals with evidence and observations, religion deals with faith and feelings. You make it seem as if it's some big consipiracy, when in actuality it's nothing more than a conflict of concepts.
Just a question about god
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
No, empirical science doesn't allow for it because the principles it's founded on are exactly the opposite of science. Science deals with evidence and observations, religion deals with faith and feelings. You make it seem as if it's some big consipiracy, when in actuality it's nothing more than a conflict of concepts.
I didn't read this before I posted, but yeah. Excellent point. I would further state though, that the following must be considered: Say you have an amazing spiritual experience today... one from which you walk away thinking "god IS real, that is amazing and has changed my life forever" or "that validates my suspicion, god IS real" or something to that effect. Tomorrow I had the EXACT same "spiritual' experience but my reaction is "wow, I didn't think phsyics would allow something like that, I need to talk with my big brained friends and try to convince them we need to open up this area of research. The subjective experience has possibilities I have previously thought possible."
Who had the correct reaction? Should your belief in a concrete result be more correct than a belief that more data must be sought? Sure there may be no real way to research spirituality as of yet, but does that mean that it's fine just to jump to a conclusion?
Eh, I don't mean to be insulting, but to me it seems weak to jump to a conclusion even if the answer may never be known in your lifetime. Why? Because in order for the human race to advance, answers to said type of question must inevitably be sought. Coming to a conclusion is detrimental to searching wouldn't you agree? If I just make a conclusion and try to convince you based on the weight of my spiritual experience well, I haven't got much of a basis to sway you.
That's just my opinion of course and it's jamming up my cranium damnit.
and FURTHER, it just occurred to me that the subjective experience will almost surely eventually be experiencable (?) by another consciousness via technology. That will likely be the starting point of actual objective progress regarding these issues... therefore, isn't it imperative to reserve judgment? I mean I can totally see being all "I KNEW IT" when 300 years from now it is announced "god is a big dude who kicks ass in the sky", I think it is reasonable (though not my opinion) to think "I'm pretty damned sure there is a christian god" or whatever... and search for evidence and think all of your evidence backs you up.. but to say "I KNOW IT" that god or whatever really exists is well, pretty presumptuous I think. The only prudent perpective is to wait and maybe die never knowing. Welcome to reality.
Of course I guess reality is that a bunch of people have to be so presumptuous as to think they know, and then go kill each other over it so they can find out for sure. Likely they'd even want to kill me, who would deny them their righteous indignation. Assholes. Hehe, sorry, my attitude might benefit from some improvement regarding this issue.
Of course I guess reality is that a bunch of people have to be so presumptuous as to think they know, and then go kill each other over it so they can find out for sure. Likely they'd even want to kill me, who would deny them their righteous indignation. Assholes. Hehe, sorry, my attitude might benefit from some improvement regarding this issue.
i dunno if anyones said this already coz there were too many post for my little mind to handle but if God does exist, then we have absolutely EVERYTHING to blame on him.
Why should we have to suffer just coz he/she/it wants to create a universe? I cant see a justification coming anywhere.
Why should we have to suffer just coz he/she/it wants to create a universe? I cant see a justification coming anywhere.
Originally posted by Dudeyhed
i dunno if anyones said this already coz there were too many post for my little mind to handle but if God does exist, then we have absolutely EVERYTHING to blame on him.
Why should we have to suffer just coz he/she/it wants to create a universe? I cant see a justification coming anywhere.
On that line of reasoning, god also gave you the power to kill yourself (or you can die blowing up an abortion clinic or something), so there's really no room to gripe.
God created us in a certain way, He created us to be with Him forever, kinda like making your own family (wouldnt that be great!) but then we screwed it up and we keep screwing it up everytime we sin. Jesus came to forgive us for screwing up. You cannot blame him for our screw ups, he made us yes, but we made ourselves into what we are today.
the purpose of a spiritual insight or understanding is not to "convince" people. the purpose is to utilize it in your own life. you don't have to label, classify, or observe every aspect of it to see, once you've experienced it, how it can benefit you.
i can tell you about my own experiences but that is not the same as you experiencing it for yourself. there are no "conclusions" to jump to, other than the realization from the experience that there is a spiritual dimension (or whatever you'd prefer to label it). i won't go further in explaining it because it is not something i can "convince" you to believe. i can only say that i'm tremendously happier since discovering this in my own life. and that it's not at all hard to believe once you've experienced it.
people seem to get bogged down with semantics and old ways of religiously labeling spirituality. to understand spirit, most of us need to transcend these old lines of thinking. that is not to say that one can't continue to practice a religion, but that the two (spirit and religion) are not the same thing.
this holds true for science as well. we don't have to empirically prove something in order to know it and to utilize it in our lives. a scientific measurement of spirit is not required for either an individual or all of "humanity" to transcend (evolve). understanding it on an individual level is enough to make a difference in the collective. if each individual is, for example, non-violent, then the collective will be non-violent as well, won't it?
i can tell you about my own experiences but that is not the same as you experiencing it for yourself. there are no "conclusions" to jump to, other than the realization from the experience that there is a spiritual dimension (or whatever you'd prefer to label it). i won't go further in explaining it because it is not something i can "convince" you to believe. i can only say that i'm tremendously happier since discovering this in my own life. and that it's not at all hard to believe once you've experienced it.
people seem to get bogged down with semantics and old ways of religiously labeling spirituality. to understand spirit, most of us need to transcend these old lines of thinking. that is not to say that one can't continue to practice a religion, but that the two (spirit and religion) are not the same thing.
this holds true for science as well. we don't have to empirically prove something in order to know it and to utilize it in our lives. a scientific measurement of spirit is not required for either an individual or all of "humanity" to transcend (evolve). understanding it on an individual level is enough to make a difference in the collective. if each individual is, for example, non-violent, then the collective will be non-violent as well, won't it?
Well, thats not quite it, it's more like this. God created Adam, and took the woman that would be called Eve out of adam. Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which caused the whole of Adam, (which means both Adam, Eve, and all their offspring) to be subject to death. By Jesus not being the offspring of Adam, but instead coming directly from god, it allows us to escape the sentence of death, through adoption unto Jesus Christ.
I'm not so sure about yours Binary. Jesus worried in the Garden, just before he was crucified, which is a separation from God. He also said that he doesn't know when the kingdom of heaven will come, since he said that only the Father in heavens knows it.
If Jesus was perfect, how could he die for us? He needed to pass throguh the same things we do. Wasn't he tempted in the desert? Why would Satan bother to temp him if he was perfect? Simple: he wouldn't. Jesus also had the choice. He could have done nothing. But he loved us, and it was his Love that made the biggest difference. His Love is the source of his power and the reason why we saved us.
What Jesus basically did, is that his Love for us purifies our sins. Jesus covenant with God was: I die for them, I die in their place. God accepted that. God recognized Jesus' Love for us and if Jesus can Love us, why can't God? So God did send Jesus to save us, but the mechanics of how this works is often misunderstood. The whole Law is based on the principle "love one another" and Jesus is the one who practiced it in the highest way.
If Jesus was perfect, how could he die for us? He needed to pass throguh the same things we do. Wasn't he tempted in the desert? Why would Satan bother to temp him if he was perfect? Simple: he wouldn't. Jesus also had the choice. He could have done nothing. But he loved us, and it was his Love that made the biggest difference. His Love is the source of his power and the reason why we saved us.
What Jesus basically did, is that his Love for us purifies our sins. Jesus covenant with God was: I die for them, I die in their place. God accepted that. God recognized Jesus' Love for us and if Jesus can Love us, why can't God? So God did send Jesus to save us, but the mechanics of how this works is often misunderstood. The whole Law is based on the principle "love one another" and Jesus is the one who practiced it in the highest way.
Wes, your question, "Who had the correct reaction?" assumes that there actually is a correct action. I don't buy that assumption. There is simply a choice among actions. Your inclination not to jump to a conclusion indicates a strong desire to be correct rather than wrong. Does the desire to be correct indicate a discomfort with being wrong? If so, discomfort with being wrong is irrational, because who among us has perfect knowledge? Now, if discomfort with being wrong causes you to dismiss things simply because they cannot be proven, then your life experience will, of necessity, be diminished. What about choosing to risk being wrong for the possibility of gaining wisdom as opposed to only knowledge and a fuller experience of life as opposed to only certainty. You have nothing to lose, because we both know that nothing is certain, and on some level, we're both wrong
Last edited:
But God supposedly created us and the world. Who should take the blame?
If I put a 5 year old child in a room with a bucket of gasoline and a box of matches should I beat the child when he burns down the house? Should I keep beating him for all eternity?
~Raithere
"If I put a 5 year old child in a room with a bucket of gasoline and a box of matches should I beat the child when he burns down the house? Should I keep beating him for all eternity?"
we are not 5 year old children.
if you put a well educated 30 year old man in a room with a bucket of gasoline and a box of matches and a bunch of books and films and plays and photos that warned him about the consequences of playing with matches and gasoline and then he burns down the house, i'd say he probably deserves to live in the ashes for a while.
"no, wait, stop...." said wonka.
we are not 5 year old children.
if you put a well educated 30 year old man in a room with a bucket of gasoline and a box of matches and a bunch of books and films and plays and photos that warned him about the consequences of playing with matches and gasoline and then he burns down the house, i'd say he probably deserves to live in the ashes for a while.
"no, wait, stop...." said wonka.
As compared to God?
Actually, it's quite obvious that we are essentially 5 year olds in this context. The concept that no one is without sin and we can only be saved though faith in Jesus indicates that we are incapable of behaving properly on our own, does it not? If we could behave properly we wouldn't need Jesus, we could do it on our own.
If someone is incapable of handling a situation properly the correct or "moral" thing to do is to not put them into that situation. Thus we don't give 5 year olds gasoline and matches and we don't let blind people drive. Christianity tells us that God has seen fit not only to do this but to punish us for our mistakes.
~Raithere
I'll try to make my initial question clearer...
Assume for the sake of discussion that a single being created everything.
Now, here we are inthe universe, living, doing our thing. We want to believe we have free will, correct? (I hope we all do.)
Any interference in the universe whatsoever from that god would mean some factor or factors of this universe are out of our hands, or out of the hands of what we know as natural to the universe, and in the guidence of some being. That would be a limit on our freedom.
Likewise, if we knew without doubt that this god existed, if we had evidence, would that not give us the idea that there is some other who is responsible for things, perhaps for our thoughts, words, and actions? Would that not also be an infringement upon our free will?
My thought when I began this thread was "Only in a universe without a creator/controller can free will exist". Thus, if we accept that a creator/god exists, we can either: assume we do not have free will; or assume that we have free will, in which case this creator/god is 100% apart from and outside our universe and will never have anything at all to do with any of us.
Assume for the sake of discussion that a single being created everything.
Now, here we are inthe universe, living, doing our thing. We want to believe we have free will, correct? (I hope we all do.)
Any interference in the universe whatsoever from that god would mean some factor or factors of this universe are out of our hands, or out of the hands of what we know as natural to the universe, and in the guidence of some being. That would be a limit on our freedom.
Likewise, if we knew without doubt that this god existed, if we had evidence, would that not give us the idea that there is some other who is responsible for things, perhaps for our thoughts, words, and actions? Would that not also be an infringement upon our free will?
My thought when I began this thread was "Only in a universe without a creator/controller can free will exist". Thus, if we accept that a creator/god exists, we can either: assume we do not have free will; or assume that we have free will, in which case this creator/god is 100% apart from and outside our universe and will never have anything at all to do with any of us.
"Actually, it's quite obvious that we are essentially 5 year olds in this context. The concept that no one is without sin and we can only be saved though faith in Jesus indicates that we are incapable of behaving properly on our own, does it not? If we could behave properly we wouldn't need Jesus, we could do it on our own. "
i didn't realize you were simply arguing over christian dogma...
i'm not a christian. i believe we need jesus to show us what our greatest potential is, in the way that we need role models.
i do disagree about what you believe is "quite obvious." humanity is not a smallminded 5 year old child. we can behave properly. we are capable of modeling after jesus if we want to. we have everything we need to solve all of our problems. we certianly can handle these "gasoline and matches" situations properly. we know what the consequences are. we are capable of making wise choices. we just choose not to.
i didn't realize you were simply arguing over christian dogma...
i'm not a christian. i believe we need jesus to show us what our greatest potential is, in the way that we need role models.
i do disagree about what you believe is "quite obvious." humanity is not a smallminded 5 year old child. we can behave properly. we are capable of modeling after jesus if we want to. we have everything we need to solve all of our problems. we certianly can handle these "gasoline and matches" situations properly. we know what the consequences are. we are capable of making wise choices. we just choose not to.