What do atheists think that "to know God" means?
- Thread starter wynn
- Start date
not really on topic - atm we are just trying to get grumpy to concede that there are inherent problems of the material world - starts about post 547 on this thread
then you have seemingly come to terms with questions you posed earlierlightgigantic
My point, exactly. The problems you see are problems of living that are just things you have to deal with to continue living. And there is nothing you can do about it, so you deal. And there is no evidence that religious people deal any better than the non-religious or get exempted from any of it.
Grumpy
Me : IOW it doesn't really identify the inherent problems of material existence.
”
You : What inherent problems? I think you are seeing problems that just do not exist.
One ought to count oneself lucky than one has come in contact with the Dharma and that one can practice in line with the Dharma.
There are people who either suffer so much, or who are so overwhelmed with pleasure that they can't practice the Dharma nor have any Dharmic desires.
lightgigantic
What's your point? You've gone on and on about this question. Of course there are problems in life, but you have nothing that can do a thing about them. And you were born, you will get old, you probably will get sick and then you will die, forever. Then they will bury you and you will rot. It will be as if you never existed in a few decades.
Grumpy
What's your point? You've gone on and on about this question. Of course there are problems in life, but you have nothing that can do a thing about them. And you were born, you will get old, you probably will get sick and then you will die, forever. Then they will bury you and you will rot. It will be as if you never existed in a few decades.
Grumpy
So in other words you can't support your assertion?
Figures.
Oh, and you'll never get Grumpy to concede anything. You'll see LG concede a point before you see Grumpy...wait a second...
How do you know that?
Wow - this ol' chestnut.
If your argument is that there are problems inherent in the interaction between "life" and the (rest of the) material world then you may be correct.
But again I will chip in: the material world itself has no inherent problems: problems are a subjective interpretation of a situation, and are from the perspective of an aware life-form (i.e. require material to interact with "life") and not the material world per se.
So please be more precise in your wording, as the implication of your current wording suggests you hold material itself to have inherent problems.
Unless, of course, this is what you meant - in which case please describe the problem inherent in a universe that is devoid of life?
And if it becomes evident that it is not material per se that has problems, one is left to conclude that it is either life that has inherent problems (is there a place devoid of matter but with life with which to test this scenario?) or it is the interactions between life and (the rest of) matter that have inherent problems.
I think you knew precisely what I was talking about the first time you brought this up
Actually the case is that I never made that assertion (at least in this thread) - its more of something Grumpy decided to move the subject to since he ended up conceding that material existence does have inherent problems
:shrug:
Arioch :However a better question would be this, what marked differences are there between scientology and christianity? How do they differ in the fundamentals?
”
Me :Not too expert in scientology but I would say off the cuff that scientology doesn't really have anything to say about the ultimate nature of existence ( the role of the living entity, the role of the phenomenal world, the role of god .... and the interaction of all these three.) It seems that scientology is mostly about psychic phenomena ... kind of like "how to win friends and influence people" mixed in with reincarnation.
IOW it doesn't really identify the inherent problems of material existence.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2922128&postcount=546
And you thought wrong - which is why I asked... and am also asking here.
Please can you now respond to my post (#588)?
Who said anything about Christianity?
Go back to where you brought it up last time if your really want a refresher on your topic
regardless of what you think, I was talking about the distinction between scientology and conventional religion/christianitylightgigantic
Since we can only evidence two of these and science has much to say about them it is left to you to evidence god. We'll be waiting(probably forever).
Grumpy
meanwhile your molars rot .....
:shrug:
This is where we had that discusison last time: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=112145&highlight=problems+material
The last time, the issue was not resolved.