how bout dianetics by L Ron hubbard?
What is your belief regarding the existence of "God"?
- Thread starter SolusCado
- Start date
how bout dianetics by L Ron hubbard?
I could pull the no true Scotsman fallacy by referencing the "seemingly rational" line.
Instead I'll just ask if you really want to lump the bible in with Dianetics?
If there is no God, it makes no sense to ask "why?".
kutthanand
Registered Senior Member
just passing thru...
Roaming around, I found these discussions. I'am somewhat amazed and was thinking that not only have we everything else, but we have you all discussing these subjects, too. How phenomenal this universe! Not only making stars and galaxies and planets and moons and all this stuff, but everyone here discussing whatever; the important stuff, most would say. Isn't it a fantastic thing that is happening?
I can't tell if the ideas are a natural, human way of searching for something-some answer or formulation which would make perfect sense and bring some kind of finality, or a way of making a grander point than anyone else; with each possessing a vast amount of mental capacity, obviously, and each with fingers of steel from typing out volumes.
Each individual becomes an author and an authority. Who has the stones to admit... I Don't Know. That's a tough one, isn't it? Supposedly, there is so much riding on one being able to get the whole god-thing right whether existing or not, what happens after, what happened thousands of years ago, etc etc. who has read more and memorized more, etc.
Who is real enough to admit that they just don't know a damn thing about it?
Roaming around, I found these discussions. I'am somewhat amazed and was thinking that not only have we everything else, but we have you all discussing these subjects, too. How phenomenal this universe! Not only making stars and galaxies and planets and moons and all this stuff, but everyone here discussing whatever; the important stuff, most would say. Isn't it a fantastic thing that is happening?
I can't tell if the ideas are a natural, human way of searching for something-some answer or formulation which would make perfect sense and bring some kind of finality, or a way of making a grander point than anyone else; with each possessing a vast amount of mental capacity, obviously, and each with fingers of steel from typing out volumes.
Each individual becomes an author and an authority. Who has the stones to admit... I Don't Know. That's a tough one, isn't it? Supposedly, there is so much riding on one being able to get the whole god-thing right whether existing or not, what happens after, what happened thousands of years ago, etc etc. who has read more and memorized more, etc.
Who is real enough to admit that they just don't know a damn thing about it?
Last edited:
yes, that's true.
SolusCado,
The difference is that the bible is already written. It is the word of god or inspired by the word of god.
There are no additonal chapters to be written. So unlike an archeaologist who may write a book on his findings which can later be added to or changed with new and better information all you have is the already completed texts.
So you can't go back and change them to fit the better information, you can only re-interpret that which has been written. You are limited and when the information doesn't fit, what are you going to do.
Make up something in some way so that it fits, but it only fits in your mind.
Which is why I said, you might as well re-write the bible every 20 years of so to keep up with the changes.
They believe in one way. Fair enough.
See my above comments. I don't have an issue with you wanting to re-interpret it. The problem in doing so however is the limitation of the date available to mesh with our modern understandings.
I think there would have to be so much interpretations of the interpretations that it would not even come close to being considered valid. So again, only in your mind can it work, and in the end you only have to satisfy yourself.
See below
Are you sure ?
see below
For the above three posts connected.
God is now meaningless per you. There is no reason for god. What you are suggesting is that god set everything in motion. We have no freewill, only the perception of it and god makes no mistakes.
So
No need for god to interact with us ever, never, ever, it makes no mistakes so no need to ever come back and adjust or correct anything.
No need for god to interact because all decisions have been made for us.
There is no need to seek god.
Anything short of no need for god based on your position is contradiction.
Plain and simple.
However, maybe you can take another look at this question and re-think it.
Our future cannot be changed or we can not change the future ?
The future cannot be changed. However, that future is being altered in the present.
The choices we make today do affect our future. If we could go in the future, the future would be what it is, but our choices today affected that outcome.
If we do not have freewill there is no need for god.
The only way we can have freewill is if our choices affect the future.
The only reason for god to interact with us is if:
We have freewill and/or
God makes mistakes
The difference is that the bible is already written. It is the word of god or inspired by the word of god.
There are no additonal chapters to be written. So unlike an archeaologist who may write a book on his findings which can later be added to or changed with new and better information all you have is the already completed texts.
So you can't go back and change them to fit the better information, you can only re-interpret that which has been written. You are limited and when the information doesn't fit, what are you going to do.
Make up something in some way so that it fits, but it only fits in your mind.
Which is why I said, you might as well re-write the bible every 20 years of so to keep up with the changes.
They believe in one way. Fair enough.
See my above comments. I don't have an issue with you wanting to re-interpret it. The problem in doing so however is the limitation of the date available to mesh with our modern understandings.
I think there would have to be so much interpretations of the interpretations that it would not even come close to being considered valid. So again, only in your mind can it work, and in the end you only have to satisfy yourself.
See below
Are you sure ?
see below
For the above three posts connected.
God is now meaningless per you. There is no reason for god. What you are suggesting is that god set everything in motion. We have no freewill, only the perception of it and god makes no mistakes.
So
No need for god to interact with us ever, never, ever, it makes no mistakes so no need to ever come back and adjust or correct anything.
No need for god to interact because all decisions have been made for us.
There is no need to seek god.
Anything short of no need for god based on your position is contradiction.
Plain and simple.
However, maybe you can take another look at this question and re-think it.
Our future cannot be changed or we can not change the future ?
The future cannot be changed. However, that future is being altered in the present.
The choices we make today do affect our future. If we could go in the future, the future would be what it is, but our choices today affected that outcome.
If we do not have freewill there is no need for god.
The only way we can have freewill is if our choices affect the future.
The only reason for god to interact with us is if:
We have freewill and/or
God makes mistakes
Just because there are no additional chapters to be written doesn't mean we should all just stick our heads in the sand and assume some priest fifteen hundred years ago had a better handle on what it all meant than anyone else who will ever follow. Frankly, I can't believe I am even having this conversation with you. I could see a religious fundamentalist having this argument, but you?
Continue trying to figure it out. Just like everyone else on the planet.
If the things I've suggested only fit in my mind, then please explain to me where and how they don't fit.
Fair enough, and true enough.
Unless there is some fundamental aspect of reality that renders every modern physicists work wrong, yes.
God either exists or doesn't exist regardless of whether there "is reason" for him to exist (or not exist). I have no reason for sea turtles, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.
As for meaningless, that is far from the case. I do believe my soul has plenty of room to mature (or not), and God most definitely plays a role in that.
For you to say that you are COMPLETELY IGNORING everything I've said about a soul.
In any case, you haven't pointed out any contradictions. Even if I agreed with you that there is no need for God (which I don't, see above), how would that somehow yield a contradiction?
From our perspective, yes. Dude, I'm not invoking religion for this aspect. Physics tells us these things.
OK; at this point we are most definitely going in circles. I say we have free will because we don't know what choices we make. God has created everything in a very specific way, so our choices will be "x". God knows "x". God created "x". But that doesn't mean we don't have free will, since choice is a function of our perception of time. There is no contradiction.
And yet, when it comes to religion, it is always the atheist that dwells on the "how we got here" part, when those who live with God in their hearts on a day to day basis are FAR MORE concerned with where the hell they are going.
Does god speak to you? what makes you think he spoke to the individuals who wrote these books however great their morals may be.
"Value of honest books.- Honest books make the reader more honest, at least by luring into the open his hatred and aversion which his sly prudence otherwise knows how to conceal best. But against a book one lets oneself go, even if one is very reserved toward people."Neitzsche
Last edited:
Context my friend.
It was only stated for SolusCado to clarify that the bible is not a book that is to be improved upon. It is supposedy the word of god or inspired by the word of god.
Re-interpret all you want but we can't add new text.
LOL. I'm not.
You might want to check the forum rules before you complain about others not following them. The reason you get trite insults is because you are not original. How many do you think, pick and chose little portions from the bible, and try to create a new religious movement?
Atheists reject the idea of God, seek self-consistency, and respect the truth, not religion, the truth! Theists believe in God, but have many different and evolving weirdo concepts. What would you say best describes your belief, Pantheism, Social Darwinism, Baha'i, or something else?
"You said, "A wise one created us ";
That may be true, we would agree.
"Outside of time and space," you postulated.
Then why not say at once that you
Propound a mystery immense
Which tells us of our lack of sense?"
Al-Ma'arri
"So, too, the creeds of man: the one prevails
Until the other comes; and this one fails
When that one triumphs; ay, the lonesome world
Will always want the latest fairy tales.
Al-Ma'arri"
Atheists reject the idea of God, seek self-consistency, and respect the truth, not religion, the truth! Theists believe in God, but have many different and evolving weirdo concepts. What would you say best describes your belief, Pantheism, Social Darwinism, Baha'i, or something else?
"You said, "A wise one created us ";
That may be true, we would agree.
"Outside of time and space," you postulated.
Then why not say at once that you
Propound a mystery immense
Which tells us of our lack of sense?"
Al-Ma'arri
"So, too, the creeds of man: the one prevails
Until the other comes; and this one fails
When that one triumphs; ay, the lonesome world
Will always want the latest fairy tales.
Al-Ma'arri"
Last edited:
So you don't believe in the Bible?
Agreed, but re-evaluating interpretations, however long they may have been in use, is to question the interpreters, not God or his inspiration.
Are you talking to me? What forum rules am I not following? As for your second paragraph, I'm afraid I don't really understand your statement. Would you mind rephrasing?
SolusCado,
Actually, that is who you really would have an issue with, a religious fundamentalist.
I agree with you that you shouldn't just stick your head in the sand. Especially since you believe. You should question your belief, there is nothing wrong with that. It's wise.
Whether they fit or not is not the question, since you can make anything fit just by interpreting it differently.
I don't see any modern physicist saying that we don't have freewill and that our choices now don't affect our future.
True, but based on your position, there is no reason for it now, since everything is already in place.
To those who believe in a soul, not sure why it matters anyway though, remember that all is already in place. So if your going to heaven and I am going to hell, nothing I do today is going to change that according to your position.
You and I were not talking about this, got this confused with another poster. But no worries.
Based on your position of freewill and the future and that god has already put everything in place. Then yes unless you agree that there is no longer a need for god then it is a contradiction.
If you want to thrown in the soul then I ask, if everything is already in place then it's taken care of as well. So what is the point.
Physics doesn't tell us we don't have freewill, not at all.
You are confusing the end result with the way we got there.
Right your position is that god already knows and god makes no mistakes. So no need for god to ever interact with us including regarding ones soul. That is the condradiciton because even if we have a perceived notion of freewill and choice, your position is that we don't really make them, god makes them.
Do you see.
My position is that regardless of whether we were god created, we must have freewill for a god to be of any value to us.
My position is also that we do have freewill and we do affect the future. Our actions lead us in one direction or the other. In the end what is, is what is but our choices brought us to that place.
Actually, that is who you really would have an issue with, a religious fundamentalist.
I agree with you that you shouldn't just stick your head in the sand. Especially since you believe. You should question your belief, there is nothing wrong with that. It's wise.
Whether they fit or not is not the question, since you can make anything fit just by interpreting it differently.
I don't see any modern physicist saying that we don't have freewill and that our choices now don't affect our future.
True, but based on your position, there is no reason for it now, since everything is already in place.
To those who believe in a soul, not sure why it matters anyway though, remember that all is already in place. So if your going to heaven and I am going to hell, nothing I do today is going to change that according to your position.
You and I were not talking about this, got this confused with another poster. But no worries.
Based on your position of freewill and the future and that god has already put everything in place. Then yes unless you agree that there is no longer a need for god then it is a contradiction.
If you want to thrown in the soul then I ask, if everything is already in place then it's taken care of as well. So what is the point.
Physics doesn't tell us we don't have freewill, not at all.
You are confusing the end result with the way we got there.
Right your position is that god already knows and god makes no mistakes. So no need for god to ever interact with us including regarding ones soul. That is the condradiciton because even if we have a perceived notion of freewill and choice, your position is that we don't really make them, god makes them.
Do you see.
My position is that regardless of whether we were god created, we must have freewill for a god to be of any value to us.
My position is also that we do have freewill and we do affect the future. Our actions lead us in one direction or the other. In the end what is, is what is but our choices brought us to that place.
Damn its all setup. I just did the three thing again...
your two Trooper and this is one
" Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit."
But I believe we must delve deep into metaphysics just to understand the last term in the sentence. Maybe we even need a category for "it". But where to put it...
your two Trooper and this is one
" Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit."
But I believe we must delve deep into metaphysics just to understand the last term in the sentence. Maybe we even need a category for "it". But where to put it...
We have all these different approaches. Agnosticism, Apatheism, Atheism, Cosmicism, Deism, Henotheism, Ignosticism, Maltheism, Misotheism, Monism, Monolatrism, Monotheism, Nontheism, Pandeism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Polydeism, Polytheism, Post-theism, Theism, Theopanism, Transtheism, and Mythology.
What best describes your belief? You obviously don't believe in the bible. So, do you fall into another category?
What best describes your belief? You obviously don't believe in the bible. So, do you fall into another category?