Aren't you contradicting yourself with that statement?i do choose to worship him, sometimes i have to question what he does, but i don't question god because i believe he gave me and everyone life,
Aren't you contradicting yourself with that statement?i do choose to worship him, sometimes i have to question what he does, but i don't question god because i believe he gave me and everyone life,
For those of you with a speck of curiosity about what God is really like as opposed to making false fillers see:
Spellbound possesses the divine secrets? (I thought that Jan Ardena was the annoited one.)
What are you worshiping if you reject religion? Is it your own concept?
Aren't you contradicting yourself with that statement?
Imperfection doesn't invalidate a deity as being worthy of worship. I mean, it might if you think a god has to be perfect. But that's an unreasonable expectation, to me.Either he's evil or he isn't worthy of worship due to imperfection or indifference.
Mind, religion is more than just venerating a thing (whether it's abstract or concrete). Religion contains a social element, and most importantly it prescribes a set of practices. Rituals, behaviours, and actions to go along with a suggested set of beliefs. What he's doing is pretty generic modern western spirituality; rejection of a specific set of religious practices, and in its place an eclectic and personalized belief system--generally influenced by Christian monotheism, even if it tries not to be.What are you worshiping if you reject religion? Is it your own concept?
Imperfection doesn't invalidate a deity as being worthy of worship. I mean, it might if you think a god has to be perfect. But that's an unreasonable expectation, to me.
Spellbound, your preaching is getting beyond a joke. And yes, it is preaching that you are doing. You are a one-trick pony, and have offered nothing to support any of your claims. You say you are a middle-man, but if you want to make such claims to knowledge as you continue to do then you have to support it - and support it with more than just "Langan says..." (i.e. more quotes from Langan).For those of you with a speck of curiosity about what God is really like as opposed to making false fillers see:
Don't forget Langan.
I'm merely the middle man of the divine secrets.
All you are describing is a placebo effect, or a different mindset that might aid someone's path. But that speaks nothing to the veracity of what it is that is believed in.
If belief in God is merely a mindset with no claim to the veracity of God's actual existence then that is one thing, but belief in God is generally accompanied by, if not logically necessitated by, belief in God's actual existence.
It varies. It's pretty apparent that most people believe in deity because they were taught to. But there are some, like me, who are theistic because of subjective experiences. I think that most of those in the latter category know that their experiences and personal evidence are subjective, unverifiable things. I believe that the gods are real, sure, but I explicitly do not claim that my beliefs are objectively true. What I personally believe and what I claim to others are different things.If belief in God is merely a mindset with no claim to the veracity of God's actual existence then that is one thing, but belief in God is generally accompanied by, if not logically necessitated by, belief in God's actual existence.
Forgive me if I struggle with the notion that you can believe something such as the existence of gods as true but not also claim those things as true, unless of course you are not certain that the gods are real? And that your "belief" is merely a matter of possibility, but one on which you side with "more likely than not"?I believe that the gods are real, sure, but I explicitly do not claim that my beliefs are objectively true. What I personally believe and what I claim to others are different things.
Forgive me if I struggle with the notion that you can believe something such as the existence of gods as true but not also claim those things as true, unless of course you are not certain that the gods are real? And that your "belief" is merely a matter of possibility, but one on which you side with "more likely than not"?
But to most theists, you ask if they are certain that God exists, and they are.
To me this is a claim that what they believe is objectively true. And such certainty of belief equates to a claim of truth.
So, are you certain that "the gods are real"?
In my opinion, if you believe something is real, and you claim to know it is real, then you are claiming it to be true, even if your justification is wholly subjective.I think what hapsburg means is that even though gods are real and he knows it, he won't claim that his beliefs are objectively true, but I don't know.
Why do you say "unquestionably"? Many would see "unquestionably" as a potential source of irrationality. Maybe it is because you don't question it that you do believe.as for me, I think what i believe is real, unquestionably,...
What does freewill have to do with it?...i also think that everyone would greatly benefit from my beliefs, because with freewill you get to choose, I hope everyone sees my way, but i can't force anyone.
I'm saying that "objectivity" and "truth", as traditionally understood, does not exist. Thus, belief is just a matter of opinion. Merely holding an opinion does not mean that I am telling other people that they should hold the same opinion.Forgive me if I struggle with the notion that you can believe something such as the existence of gods as true but not also claim those things as true, unless of course you are not certain that the gods are real?