Conceptualizing "God"

[W.G.Ewald]

Re: God is a Lie!

I still don't believe it's a strong argument. If they don't believe in God, than why would they believe in Satan?

They can be ignorant of Satan and be misled by him at the same time.

 

[Known_Unknown]

@civfanatic @The Messiah @pmaitra @Rage @Daredevil @Singh @LurkerBaba

Would love to hear your views on the matter.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Re: God is a Lie!

Did you ever stop to think why only cloning and stem cell research has suffered so much backlash whereas the development of the A-bomb or all kinds of advanced weapons research never gets the same kind of attention? I can't for the life of me see how one can oppose research that will save the lives of millions in need while condoning research that will kill millions.

Maybe it has to do with the fact that the dominant religions of the world never prohibited killing other tribes of human beings, but issued clear judgements for how their followers should lead their own lives?

Just to correct you:

I think its because no one knew about "Manhattan Project" and then once US developed A-bomb every other nation in the world had no option but to get it.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Re: God is a Lie!

Just to correct you:

I think its because no one knew about "Manhattan Project" and then once US developed A-bomb every other nation in the world had no option but to get it.

The last US nuclear test took place in 1992. Between 1945 and 1992, the "theists" fought long drawn battles to prevent all social progress from the Civil Rights legislation to laws preventing discrimination against LGBT individuals while doing nothing to protest continuing nuclear testing. The only time a moratorium was placed on testing was in 1958, after years of pressure from the Soviet Union (the evil atheists) to halt nuclear testing and after the Soviets announced that they would unilaterally stop nuke tests.

Another example of how theists want society to suffer for the sake of their beliefs while being oblivious to the larger, universal values of humanism which need to be adhered to.

 

[pmaitra]

@civfanatic @The Messiah @pmaitra @Rage @Daredevil @Singh @LurkerBaba

Would love to hear your views on the matter.

I do believe in the unexplained, the behaviour of nature, and things that could be attributed to the exceptional occurences, which being rare, can be categorized as supernatural. Hence, I do believe in God (only one; hence proper noun) or gods (many; hence common noun), which in a way is pantheistic; but I also believe religion is man made.

Regarding cloning of humans, I would stop short of endorsing it, because I am not sure what the implications would be. Also, regarding crossing humans with animals, I would refrain from it, simply because I am ethically against it, although technically, I see no reason why it couldn't be possible. I do believe in evolution.

Moreover, the "Adam and Eve" theory (I bet you were dying to hear about that part ) does not resonate with me.

Other than the scientific evidences to the contrary, I do not like to mix religious beliefs with logical reasoning. Even if one were to ignore Darwinian theory, the very assumption that all humans originated from Adam and Eve would imply at the top of the human reproductive pyramids, brothers were fornicating with sisters and producing babies, and then near cousins with near cousins . . . , which simply leaves a bad taste in my mind. I find this concept very disturbing and offensive, and I am equally offended by people who preach this "Adam and Eve" story.

Moreover, I do not buy the theory that the Bible equates with Christianity. Especially the Genesis chapter is pre-Christ, and is full of assumptions and legends, most of which are fictional, among the peoples of what today would be Palestine, and the periphery thereof. These stories are best described as folklore born out of ignorance. I have no disregard for the people who gave birth to these theories, because for their age, anything better couldn't have been expected. However, today, I have better expectations.

I also stand categorically against people who cite Genesis as a part of Christianity. It is not. Christianity begins with Christ, and end with Christ.

I went to a Roman Catholic Christian school, and we were taught evolution there. So there again, Christianity and Bible are not part of the same thing. While I hold the life and teachings of Christ in very high respect, and often cite them in today's scenarios, I will have no qualms in declaring the chapter Genesis as a total farce, and should be discouraged in any civilized belief system. Let the Bible not smear the sacred life and actions of Jesus Christ.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Re: God is a Lie!

The last US nuclear test took place in 1992. Between 1945 and 1992, the "theists" fought long drawn battles to prevent all social progress from the Civil Rights legislation to laws preventing discrimination against LGBT individuals while doing nothing to protest continuing nuclear testing. The only time a moratorium was placed on testing was in 1958, after years of pressure from the Soviet Union (the evil atheists) to halt nuclear testing and after the Soviets announced that they would unilaterally stop nuke tests.

Another example of how theists want society to suffer for the sake of their beliefs while being oblivious to the larger, universal values of humanism which need to be adhered to.

The cat was already belled in 1945 and continued testing did not change much.

Social changes involve a step function. I myself do not agree with most theistic arguments on deciding research agenda. But in A-bomb case, they were already accomplished and nationalism, another jingoistic thought, superseded theism on this matter. And anyway, there is no way to revert back to zero in such cases.

Some examples of Catholic debates about A-bomb could be found here: Nuclear Weapons

 

[civfanatic]

@civfanatic @The Messiah @pmaitra @Rage @Daredevil @Singh @LurkerBaba

Would love to hear your views on the matter.

My views? I am a strict materialist. I believe that all phenomena - without exception - are the result of physical interactions between matter. I have nothing but disdain for the concept of "immaterial" entities, whether they be God(s), spirits, ghosts, etc. The only reality is that which can be quantified as matter and/or energy.

Naturally, I also believe that there is a rational, scientific explanation for everything, without exception. Just because something at first seems inexplicable or supernatural doesn't mean that it is; it simply means that there is more for us to learn and discover.

I also find it surprising that, even in the Modern Age, we (human beings in general) give so much importance to the ramblings of Iron Age barbarians, who composed the majority of religious and spiritual texts that are in vogue today.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

My views? I am a strict materialist. I believe that all phenomena - without exception - are the result of physical interactions between matter. I have nothing for disdain for the concept of "immaterial" entities, whether they be God(s), spirits, ghosts, etc. The only reality is that which can be quantified as matter and/or energy.

Naturally, I also believe that there is a rational explanation for everything, without exception. All because something seems inexplicable or supernatural doesn't mean that it is; it simply means that there is more for us to learn and discover.

I also find it surprising that, even in the Modern Age, we (human beings in general) give so much importance to the ramblings of Iron Age barbarians, who composed the majority of religious and spiritual texts that are in vogue today.

I do not hold so much contempt for all iron age barbarians. May be there are things we do not think about or take for granted or have forgotten along the way. And so I prefer to give benefit of doubt to some of them.

Although, this is out of context: Pāṇini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main argument is that Panini knew more than any linguist till the mid-20th century. Same might be true for many other concepts which we might think are outdated today.

So, the rationalist inside me do not want to write off everything spiritual that had been discovered in historic India just because I or other people of my generation do not understand it.

 

[civfanatic]

Although, this is out of context: Pāṇini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, it is totally out of context. All because Panini was a very well-accomplished and advanced linguist for his day (which he was, I myself have studied some Paninian linguistics), does not mean that ancient Indian religious texts have some great profound meaning that we in the modern day are unable to understand.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Yes, it is totally out of context. All because Panini was a very well-accomplished and advanced linguist for his day (which he was, I myself have studied some Paninian linguistics), does not mean that ancient Indian religious texts have some great profound meaning that we in the modern day are unable to understand.

What do you havee to say about Dhyan and yoga?

 

[civfanatic]

What do you havee to say about Dhyan and yoga?

They both have health benefits and are useful activities. What is your point?

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

They both have health benefits and are useful activities. What is your point?

Point is that these are not just for health benefits. If you believe the creators of these traditions, these practices open gates to deeper understanding of the world and not just provide some health benefits.
Since, we do not completely understand and have lost most of our knowledge about these traditions, we are probably not well equipped to give opinion on spiritual matters.

 

[panduranghari]

Please don't merge this, I hope to post more videos of Deepak Chopra.

DC is a uturner. He writes on Spirituality most sourced from Vedic sources but never acknowledges the sources. He needs to remember Hindu religion is not a buffet, you cannot pick and choose.

 

[panduranghari]

This thread is incomplete without these 3 videos

 

[HEILTAMIL]

Tamizh version

God Exists in the Form of Language,
Language acts as the vehicle towards realising God in the form of Language

kind of similar to yogic vehicle and attaining nirvana/moksha

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Tamizh version

God Exists in the Form of Language,
Language acts as the vehicle towards realising God in the form of Language

kind of similar to yogic vehicle and attaining nirvana/moksha

John 1:1

King James Bible

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

DC is a uturner. He writes on Spirituality most sourced from Vedic sources but never acknowledges the sources. He needs to remember Hindu religion is not a buffet, you cannot pick and choose.

Deepak Chopra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In August 2005, Chopra wrote a series of articles on the creation-evolution controversy and Intelligent design which were criticized by science writer Michael Shermer, founder of The Skeptics Society.[49][50][51]

Chopra has been criticized for his frequent references to the relationship of quantum mechanics to healing processes, a connection that has drawn skepticism from physicists who say it can be considered as contributing to the general confusion in the popular press regarding quantum measurement, decoherence and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.[52] In 1998, Chopra was awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize in physics for "his unique interpretation of quantum physics as it applies to life, liberty, and the pursuit of economic happiness".[53] According to the book Skeptics Dictionary, Chopra's "mind-body claims get even murkier as he tries to connect Ayurveda with quantum physics."[29] Chopra also participated in the Channel 4 (UK) documentary The Enemies of Reason, where, when interviewed by scientist Richard Dawkins, he admitted that the term "quantum theory" was being used as a metaphor and that it has little to do with the actual quantum theory in physics.[54]

In 2012, reviewing War of the Worldviews – a book co-authored by Deepak Chopra and Leonard Mlodinow – physics professor Mark Alford explains that the work is set out as a debate between the two authors, "[covering] all the big questions: cosmology, life and evolution, the mind and brain, and God." Alford considers the two sides of the debate a false opposition, and concludes that "the counterpoint to Chopra's speculations is not science, with its complicated structure of facts, theories, and hypotheses, but something much more basic. The antidote to Chopra is Occam."[55]

 

[HEILTAMIL]

John 1:1

King James Bible

thanks will use it in the future bro, by the way tamizh is the worlds oldest classical living language indigenous to India, if you dont know,
bloody wars have been fought to protect this language,

just making sure u are aware of it

 

[josan420]

Did rama ever said he is going to found Hinduism?
Did krishna ever said he is going to Found Hinduism?
Did buddha ever said he is Going to Found Buddism?
Did Guru nanak Ever said he is going to found Sikhism?
NO, What common between them is their message. they all said similar things, but used a diffrent method to explain them. Another diffrence between them was Time and culture in which they born.
God created us, God created Krishna, Budda, Guru Nanak to spread his message and We Human created religion.

 

[kseeker]

Humans will conceptualize GOD by fighting with each other.