///
Anything anyone can imagine to be god(s), I can imagine to have a long pointed horn therefore everything claimed to be god(s) is unicorn(s).
<>
Theists in severe decline.
- Thread starter Xelasnave.1947
- Start date
Anything anyone can imagine to be god(s), I can imagine to have a long pointed horn therefore everything claimed to be god(s) is unicorn(s).
<>
Thought bubble
We are fairly certain we are composed of atoms
Fairly certain that the ovum and spermatozoa are/were composed of atoms
Fairly certain the atoms making up the ovum and spermatozoa came from our parents bodies
Given that atoms are not alive but under life conditions do interact in the PROCESS of life
is it to much of a stretch for those believing in a afterlife to believe in a prelife life?
Shades of reincarnation and eternal souls????
///Thought bubble
We are fairly certain we are composed of atoms
Fairly certain that the ovum and spermatozoa are/were composed of atoms
Fairly certain the atoms making up the ovum and spermatozoa came from our parents bodies
Given that atoms are not alive but under life conditions do interact in the PROCESS of life
is it to much of a stretch for those believing in a afterlife to believe in a prelife life?
Shades of reincarnation and eternal souls????
It is too much for many theists tho some speak of eternal souls, apparently unaware eternal means no beginning as well as no end.
<>
They play qualitatively different roles.
And some of the examples handed to you - Taoist, Zen - do not necessarily recognize spiritual "beings".
I don't think very many people would agree with the claim that werewolves and vampires and pixies and kobolds and fairies are gods.
Are you claiming that ghosts are gods? That reincarnation is a god?
Only in the sense that a leprechaun is a god, or reincarnation, or the chindi of a bad man.
Musika:
In practice, these days, there aren't too many overtly theistic governments in action around the world. Most powerful leaders do not appear to me to be primarily motivated by their theism. There are exceptions, of course, and they tend to provide instructive examples of bad government.
You haven't actually made any connections between bad government and atheism yet.
In practice, these days, there aren't too many overtly theistic governments in action around the world. Most powerful leaders do not appear to me to be primarily motivated by their theism. There are exceptions, of course, and they tend to provide instructive examples of bad government.
I think you mean safer for theists, especially those in power.
Perhaps so, but is that to the ultimate benefit or detriment of the citizenry? Inquiring minds want to know.
Consider the United States as a practical example. There is a lot of talk about "one nation under God" and the like, but in practice the system is structured (deliberately) around separation of church and state. Is the result an absence of philosophy? Far from it. Western traditions of representative government, individualism, personal rights and the like are all built into the system at ground level. And all of those are fundamentally secular ideas.
In short, the philosophy of how the American nation is run is implicitly atheistic, already. Of course, there are endless arguments as the religious attempt to impinge on separation of church and state, but these are arguments that happen mostly at the fringes. The system weathers them, and life moves on. Religion isn't allowed to get in the way of the overall philosophy. And a good thing. We can compare and contrast other systems that are structured so as to put religion front and centre. They don't work so well - not for the people, anyway.
What scares me is the all-too-real attempt right now to remove the barriers between church and state - historically, a church could not direct its congregation to any specific action via the pulpit, much less through direct contribution and intervention... now, it seems, that there are plenty who want to tear those barriers down.
My opinion - fine, if that happens, then churches lose their tax exempt status.
My opinion - fine, if that happens, then churches lose their tax exempt status.
And for your further entertainment we bring to you Bishop "I believe the Book" Booker
Tune into his pod cast It's In The Book and find out how you can donate to his upcoming Presidential election campaign
Learn how he will use the power of his Crook to catch crooks
Better get in his good book now
They all represent supernatural characters to occupy a fantasized existence, how they’re ranked is of little importance. Unless of course you believe the fantasy.
Taoist theology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism#Theology
Buddhist deities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_deities
All traditionally supernatural products of an imagined divine order, and thus equivalent to lesser deities.
Like I said before, these manifestations are supernatural products of an imagined divine order.
If you believe in leprechauns, reincarnation, or chindi, you also believe in some associated divine order. So why would you make a distinction between belief in the products associated with deities and belief in the deities themselves? It’s like saying you believe in angels and heaven, but not in the associated gods.
Good question. I would say when it includes faith elements, like the notion of a tipping point when enough good deeds will lead to a cascade of righteousness and the redemption of mankind. And when this code can't be reformed or questioned.
Huh? How is that in any way a response to my message?
Well you fudged the dare and didn't surprise me.
You're going to have to be a lot more lucid than that. What the f**k are you talking about? What dare?
And that is the precise ingredient you are lacking ... hence the no-surprise factor. If you've forgotten what you are talking about, go back to your post.
Stop evading. What point are you trying to make?
We need that explicit: do you think gnomes, fairies, or leprechauns are gods, yes or no.
So? Neither Taoism or Buddhism necessarily involves any deity at all, and in both categories of religion sects and schools exist in which belief in gods is explicitly labeled illusion, delusion, error, obstacle, and so forth.
The Wiki authors's struggles with this are interesting ("Taoism can be defined as pantheistic, given its philosophical emphasis on the formlessness of the Tao and the primacy of the "Way" rather than anthropomorphic concepts of God. " - wtf? Is that guy really assuming the Way of the Tao Te Ching is a deity? Please: at least acknowledge that that sentence is not Taoist theology, no Taoist theologians are identified or quoted, and "philosophical emphasis" does not describe a deity.)
But there's no ordering god involved, in many cases (such as the chindi).
You have choices:
a godless "divine" order,
a menagerie of divinity that includes everything from Icelandic gnomes to the ghost of someone's evil to the concept of reincarnation,
or finding another adjective.
Have we reached a stage where I need to remind you of the point you were making?
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
allowing a church to become a political party means any religion can do so.
opening the doors for cults to ligitimise themselves into legal frameworks.