Research on Belief in God

[Echoes]

Delicate isn't he? Not a very sturdy or tolerant god backing that faith.

Why should I be delicate? Why should I be tolerant?

People saying I'm constantly fearing death, do not deserve my tolerance. People accusing me of trolling do not deserve my tolerance, right.

Some people's opinion are NOT respectable.

 

[rhubroma]

Why should I be delicate? Why should I be tolerant?

People saying I'm constantly fearing death, do not deserve my tolerance. People accusing me of trolling do not deserve my tolerance, right.

Some people's opinion are NOT respectable.

So you say why be tolerant? Par for the course. Anathema.

 

[RetroActive]

This is why Enrico Fermi was the Pope, while Ettore Majorana the Grand Inquisitor, other than war drums.

It's all just Greek to me.

...and Greek was Egyptian, was Persian, was Babylonian, was Sumerian, was Indian, was Gobekli Tepe???

 

[aphronesis]

Why should I be delicate? Why should I be tolerant?

People saying I'm constantly fearing death, do not deserve my tolerance. People accusing me of trolling do not deserve my tolerance, right.

Some people's opinion are NOT respectable.

I can't comment on the trolling issue other than to suggest there was a rather potted version of history offered. Many might take offense at your own rather absolute claims.

Suggesting that certain (many) strains and articulations of Christianity are predicated on a fear of death is not unreasonable. There are more contemporary ways of phrasing it, but maybe that's not what's needed. Why not refute it if that's not the case. At the worst it puts definitions of "death" back on the table as was done a few days ago.

 

[RetroActive]

I can't comment on the trolling issue other than to suggest there was a rather potted version of history offered. Many might take offense at your own rather absolute claims.

Suggesting that certain (many) strains and articulations of Christianity are predicated on a fear of death is not unreasonable. There are more contemporary ways of phrasing it, but maybe that's not what's needed. Why not refute it if that's not the case. At the worst it puts definitions of "death" back on the table as was done a few days ago.

Death, the ultimate mystery, the final frontier...

 

[rhubroma]

I can't comment on the trolling issue other than to suggest there was a rather potted version of history offered. Many might take offense at your own rather absolute claims.

Suggesting that certain (many) strains and articulations of Christianity are predicated on a fear of death is not unreasonable. There are more contemporary ways of phrasing it, but maybe that's not what's needed. Why not refute it if that's not the case. At the worst it puts definitions of "death" back on the table as was done a few days ago.

What's needed is for man to stop being a coward and accept his own mortality.

 

[aphronesis]

Death, the ultimate mystery, the final frontier...

For some. I had more in mind the contemporary and poststructuralist laments that it's no longer sacred in Western culture, hence not much represented in overt and circumscribed terms, so that much more debilitating, omnipresent and banal in its infection of all other aspects of life: from speech, to habits, time spent, values, etc.

Or trivialized through being denied as Rhubroma has it.

 

[rhubroma]

...and Greek was Egyptian, was Persian, was Babylonian, was Sumerian, was Indian, was Gobekli Tepe???

I see you've gotten off the coffee break and moved to wine...

 

[rhubroma]

For some. I had more in mind the contemporary and poststructuralist laments that it's no longer sacred in Western culture, hence not much represented in overt and circumscribed terms so that much more debilitating, omnipresent and banal in its infection of all other aspects of life: from speech, to habits, time spent, values, etc.

Or trivialized through being denied as Rhubroma has it.

Right because death has become taboo in our affluent society, which has desacralized and at once dehumanized the inevitable outcome; or its total removal has been falsely bound to illusions of a certain eternal Boccaccian Bengodi under liberalism. The Kingdom of Heaven is indeed at hand. Such that today they even applaud at funerals!

 

[RetroActive]

For some. I had more in mind the contemporary and poststructuralist laments that it's no longer sacred in Western culture, hence not much represented in overt and circumscribed terms so that much more debilitating, omnipresent and banal in its infection of all other aspects of life: from speech, to habits, time spent, values, etc.

Or trivialized through being denied as Rhubroma has it.

I caught the gist of what you were saying but the edit is more my speed. Yes, I agree.

 

[RetroActive]

I see you've gotten off the coffee break and moved to wine...

There's a thread that runs throughout it seems. They seemed to identify the inherent limitations of the five senses and the intellect pretty early on. The game seems to have been to transcend these limitations. One earth, one moon, one sun, five wandering planets, pattern recognition, principles, functions and processes in nature. The forms they were expressed in varies in imagination but the intuitions and basic symbolic expressions appear similar enough.
Smack dab in the middle:http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Archaeology/Pre-History/jiroft.htm
Certainly the Egyptians were incorporating in their architecture ideas (maths, geometry) much earlier on, things that are attributed to the Greeks, for ex.

 

[ChrisE]

Why should I be delicate? Why should I be tolerant?

People saying I'm constantly fearing death, do not deserve my tolerance. People accusing me of trolling do not deserve my tolerance, right.

Some people's opinion are NOT respectable.

That's OK Echoes. Keep blocking people that offend you. I'm all for it.

Soon maybe there will be nobody you can converse with here because you will have everybody blocked, and then you can STFU.

 

[Hugh Januss]

As an atheist I believe that everyone gets one go around at life. This means not putting off doing the things that you want to do with your life and hoping that a better life comes around. As a good atheist this also means not robbing others of their chance at doing what they want with their lives by cheating, stealing, lying, or killing. This doesn't mean you let people walk over you, but it does mean that the old "do unto others" is a stronger tenant than it is in most organized Religions. But maybe I'm just weird.

 

[RetroActive]

Oh though art so passé, for we've already arrived at post-postmodernism in case you hadn't noticed.

Ok, had to look. There's been a new development! Metamodernism! We're back to Plato's Metaxy. The middle path of Buddha! An oscillation between two poles...hmmm...relationship...balance...transcendance...It's the fellow carved in the chlorite bowl (in the jiroft link) holding the two extremes of the exterior world in his hands (leopards, tiger by the tail?) and having the interior poles represented by burning red hot love, the other being the mind (unrepresented) and the heart in the middle (blue). Hey look, he's in the form of a cross too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-postmodernism

btw, as to posts like my previous to you I'm aware that I'm not saying anything that you don't know or couldn't say much more articulately. When you say "it's all Greek" in reference to the big bang (presumably) my mind turns to the breath of Shiva that breaths forth worlds and all the other variations of nothing creates everything.

I realize that Greek rational speculations are what we have in evidence but again there were those mystery schools that kept secrets. What other cultures were building suggests they weren't entirely irrational at all. Basically what I'm trying to say, not that it really matters.

 

[RetroActive]

I've been considering the law while watching George Gently. The adversarial system of justice, the prosecution and the defense; Ra and Set still engaged in the never ending struggle for truth. Meanwhile the judge sits on high watching the proceedings dressed in black (Saturn, the judge) with Thor's (the law) hammer ready to call order. At the same time watching from afar are the 12 jurors (zodiac) rendering the final verdict. The whole proceeding is very mercurial (the mind intellect/reason). Outside stands Justice, Libra, the seventh sign of the zodiac, the fall. She's blind to the outcome of the harvest as she weighs the efforts of the year, winter will come regardless.
Why do we put up with this archaic ****?

 

[stefank]

Somehow I get the feeling that the issue of whether or not God exists (not to mention who he/she might be) is not going to settled by a poll on a cyclingnews forum.

 

[horsinabout]

I think you misunderstood what I meant by ignorance. Why are we here? Who am I? We appear to have a choice, within limited parameters, to answer these things for ourselves. We need a good narrative, we really don't have one so it's a cluster****.

No It's fine! I know what you meant. I'm just trying to be clever. Last line of defence against an intellectual

Keep the head train rolling. Have fun

 

[horsinabout]

Somehow I get the feeling that the issue of whether or not God exists (not to mention who he/she might be) is not going to settled by a poll on a cyclingnews forum.

I agree, perhaps our intellectual friends could put forward a all encompassing definition of what god is? However, god is always referred to in the masculine. I think this might help in your definition formulaic

 

[ebandit]

oops!

Somehow I get the feeling that the issue of whether or not God exists (not to mention who he/she might be) is not going to settled by a poll on a cyclingnews forum.

oops! so I'm wasting my time reading................

actually I now realise that I was incorrect in my earlier post

we are all 'lambs to the slaughter' feeding the lifeforce of the creator

Mark L

 

[rhubroma]

Somehow I get the feeling that the issue of whether or not God exists (not to mention who he/she might be) is not going to settled by a poll on a cyclingnews forum.

Well if nothing has resolved this issue since humans started believing in the supernatural to explain things they could not comprehend, which means at least for the last 40,000 years or so, then you're probably right.

On the other hand that's not the point, but rather a discussion where some choose to share their views in this regard.

 

[Echoes]

Soon maybe there will be nobody you can converse with here because you will have everybody blocked, and then you can STFU.

If everybody's digging in dishonesty, that's what I'll have to do. I have my honour.

Why should I discuss with dishonest people. Michel Clouscard said "against the sophists I'm disarmed." I might say the same thing. I can talk to a philosopher but not to a manipulator because he will always be able to talk louder than me.

What can I say when some trolls are saying Nazis were Christians? It just shows that such manipulators are prepared to anything, even the most disgusting lies to disqualify the opponent.

I should have the humility to realize that I will never be able to speak louder then such people. They are too powerful. I as a truth-teller am too weak.

 

[aphronesis]

If everybody's digging in dishonesty, that's what I'll have to do. I have my honour.

Why should I discuss with dishonest people. Michel Clouscard said "against the sophists I'm disarmed." I might say the same thing. I can talk to a philosopher but not to a manipulator because he will always be able to talk louder than me.

What can I say when some trolls are saying Nazis were Christians? It just shows that such manipulators are prepared to anything, even the most disgusting lies to disqualify the opponent.

I should have the humility to realize that I will never be able to speak louder then such people. They are too powerful. I as a truth-teller am too weak.

That's an interesting invocation of parrhesia--at least in terms of its minority function. But shouldn't the opposite be the case if that's the role you want to inhabit. Rather than consigned to martyrdom, shouldn't it be your duty to clarify the record and have it be a matter of civic responsibility rather than a vindication of your egoistic honor?

 

[horsinabout]

If everybody's digging in dishonesty, that's what I'll have to do. I have my honour.

Why should I discuss with dishonest people. Michel Clouscard said "against the sophists I'm disarmed." I might say the same thing. I can talk to a philosopher but not to a manipulator because he will always be able to talk louder than me.

What can I say when some trolls are saying Nazis were Christians? It just shows that such manipulators are prepared to anything, even the most disgusting lies to disqualify the opponent.

I should have the humility to realize that I will never be able to speak louder then such people. They are too powerful. I as a truth-teller am too weak.

In bold.....this is ace!

 

[RetroActive]

I agree, perhaps our intellectual friends could put forward a all encompassing definition of what god is? However, god is always referred to in the masculine. I think this might help in your definition formulaic

Pure potential? Creative intention? The formless that creates all forms and into which all forms recede? God is, by definition undefinable as it is (in all form) and isn't. This is what makes atheism so much fun too. There is no God! OK, what's new. God is beyond comprehension, unfathomable unity.

We ran into the same conundrum or paradox when we studied the sub-atomic photon as well. It's a particle and a wave depending on the observer. Back to the drawing board, subject-object non dualism.
"if you think you understand quantum mechanics you don't understand quantum mechanics". Richard Feynman

It exposes the limits of "think" and there's no objective "mechanism" to identify.

God is identified as male for the same reason the sun (of God) is identified as male. The sun fertilizes the earth with it's light bringing forth new growth, life. Male plants his seed in female and she grows new life. Father/Mother/Child, (2) in relationship(3) create child(3 and 1). Say what you will but the ancients were keen observers and certainly not dumb.

 

[rhubroma]

If everybody's digging in dishonesty, that's what I'll have to do. I have my honour.

Why should I discuss with dishonest people. Michel Clouscard said "against the sophists I'm disarmed." I might say the same thing. I can talk to a philosopher but not to a manipulator because he will always be able to talk louder than me.

What can I say when some trolls are saying Nazis were Christians? It just shows that such manipulators are prepared to anything, even the most disgusting lies to disqualify the opponent.

I should have the humility to realize that I will never be able to speak louder then such people. They are too powerful. I as a truth-teller am too weak.

This would be just so much simpler, if you just defined exactly what it is you actually believe and then we can go from there.