By the way, Stoid, your long paragraph didn’t even answer the question that I asked. It only condemned me for asking it.
I’m impressed, good thinking. Life is for fun also. But don’t forget the Love part, most important, that will open the door to spirit.
Unfortunately most people are like standing in a brilliantly lit room with their eyes tightly shut yelling for someone to turn on the lights. Don’t spend too much time on them. They will “see” at their own pace, teach those whose eyes are open and asking “what is going on here.” – Emanuel
If you are standing in a room full of people and you are the only one who sees a bright light, I suggest you call 911.
Again I ask, is there an organization I can contact or a book to read to get details on these ideas, or are you the only source? You keep claiming that you are not religious, but it seems as if you are actually trying to start a religion.
Wow, Czar, defensive much?? All I was doing was sharing what I’ve been exposed to over the years that dovetails with what I felt Lekatt was referring to. There was ZERO attempt to get you to believe a damn thing, and ZERO condemnation! Your remark led me to believe that you probably had no familiarity whatsoever with these ideas, so expected that you would react the way people usually do when exposed to them, and I was suggesting you withdraw from that reaction just for the intellectual exercise, if nothing else.
Jeez.
Where did you get the idea that have no familiarity with these ideas? Was it because I didn’t swallow them whole? These ideas have been put forth over and over again, but because there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on the details, just the overall “feelgood” factor, and since these ideas usually(but not always) originate with the person posting them, we have no common source to study. We only have the unsupported words of the poster, making said poster the head of a religion. If you post “facts” about the afterlife, God and the like, and you are the only source, not only do you belong to a religion, you are the religion.
I reacted to these ideas the same way I would react to any idea unsupported by evidence or science. This is why I am proud to be a skeptic.
Oh, I dunno, Czar, would you say this: “Did you read all this in a book, did you dream it, or are you making it up as you go along?” about the basics of Christianity? That says to me that the ideas were new to you, but hey, evidently not. Whatever.
Nope. Obviously, there is a reference book involved in this case(it’s called the Bible). Even with this reference book, there are hundreds, if not thousands of splinter groups that just can’t agree on the details. Now, you may say that the details aren’t what’s important, its the general idea of Christianity itself. I have strong doubts though, because if the details weren’t important, there wouldn’t be all of these splinter groups, would there? If the details didn’t matter to people, they would all meet together under one banner, agree on the overall message, and agree to disagree on those pesky little details.
Again I ask, as I have asked before and will continue to ask in the future-What is your source for the details? Details matter. Details are the foundation.
And there’s lots of books that talk about these ideas. So? That doesn’t make any of them (including Christianity) right or true or legitimate. Books don’t confer legitimacy or truth or even popularity. (And I think you have a rather broad view of “reference”, unless you simply mean “a book to which one may refer to find out what people who believe in this book believe”, in which case, all books discussing ideas are reference books, which is certainly a true definition, if not a common one.)
I disagree. Just because people obsess over details, it doesn’t mean that they are genuinely meaningful or important. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t, people’s obsessions don’t decide the matter in either direction. (Of course, the idea of “importance” is rather unclear to begin with. Since you are the one making it an issue, what do YOU mean by “important”?)
I guess that answers my question, then. Because it matters to people, that makes it important.
Of course, if that’s true then a whole bunch of stupid shit is evidently important, but it’s your issue so you get to say. Again: whatever.
Please explain why you are making such an issue of this? I don’t know about Lekatt, but I have no axe to grind, Czar. Just sharing things I’ve learned about over the years, from multiple sources. (Unlike Christians, I haven’t fixated on any particular tome as The One True Book That Must Be Believed In Every Particular. I’ve taken in lots of books, lots of sources. And in my own view, that’s a better plan because it is more legitimate TO ME to see what similar ideas coem out of all of them. IN MY OPINION, it is precisely the large similarities that have weight and the little differing details which are unimportant.
Why are you taking such a pissy position about it, anyway? It isn’t as though I (or Lekatt, to my eye) declared: “These things are true! Believe them or perish! All other thoughts are garbage!” So why are you acting like I did? It’s just some other ideas to ponder Czar, ponder them yourself or don’t, because I really don’t give a shit one way or another, ya know?
Some people give a shit about the ideas they follow, some don’t.
I do.
Certainly you are correct; at the core, it is a belief system. But it is a belief system in the way that all things are a belief system; we have to have belief that the world actually works by logic, and that we aren’t wrong, for example. I think, however, that religious belief differs from irreligious belief on one point; faith is present. As I see it (and not having been religious at any point, i’d appreciate the words of experience on this) religious people often value faith as a sort of stepping stone between what they see of the universe and sincere belief. It’s a leap of faith in the very meaning of the term. Irreligious people OTOH don’t tend to value faith in this way; they certainly have a belief system, just as I have a belief system that cars will start, cows moo, and mice don’t suddenly start flying about the room. But there’s no leap of faith from how they see the world to a “certainty”, for lack of a better word. Clearly this doesn’t apply to strong atheists (who would say “no gods exist, I am certain, none, nada, zero”) who I would agree have faith comparable to most religious people.
Yep, but I do think science can come in handy. Can’t prove that a god doesn’t have a hand in something, of course, but it can show that there are possible alternate ways things could work. IOW, that god may exist, but is not necessarily needed.
If science and maths are objective, we surely have no way of knowing, being subjective beings. And I haven’t denied that some of those theists have compelling logic - at the same time i’m disagreeing with you i’m disagreeing with **ForumBot ** on this very argument.
I’ve never liked this argument. Theist reasons for disbelieving in Zeus when they believe in God aren’t all the same as atheist ones; their biggest reason for not believing tends to be that they already have a belief in god/gods who are incompatible with others. If they end up dismissing that god, they may still see the signs of what they believe is the work of a god in the world, and so find a new belief system.
:eek:
Wow. I think you are the single craziest person on this message board. I thought that I was a contender with my “opt-in government”, but you have me beat by a mile. You win. That is a significant accomplishment.
Yes, it is your belief,that is your right, but it doesn’t make it a fact.
The Bible is a human’s thought about what or who God is but that does not prove it is true. One’s belief in God is based on human teaching, writing or self.
A plant or animal can go to the same place as a human they become part of the whole of existence Nothing truly dies it just changes like burning a paper the atoms are still part of existence just not in the form of paper.
Monavis
I’d call that Czarcasm Sarcasm. YMMV.
If you want to read books of this sort to learn what other people are thinking, that’s fine. But if you are reading them as a source to the Big Secret, one would hope there would be one shred of reality at the start. There never is. It’s always just what some person is thinking. Interesting fiction, but hardly a guide to life or a worthwhile subject for further investigation. Gimme something I can work with.
There are groups of people and there are books, thousands of them. Spirituality has been around as long as man. Probably the first large writing is the “Egyptian Book of the Dead.” Yes, there is diversion of thought just as there is diversion of clothes for people to wear. The main principles are the same. Unconditional love the main goal. Much of what I know I learned from my near death experience, and later from the hundreds of books I read on the subject, and further contact with the spirit realm. I have to go now, be back late today. If any are interested someone should start a thread on the subject of spiritual principles. I can then point out some of my favorite writings.
I’ve never seen the term “unconditional love” used as a universal in religion. Why do you say that? It’s not even an uncontested theme in christianity!
Are you serious? Why, Odin was just a big old teddy bear.
And Huitzilopochtli? Just a bundle of love. As long as you weren’t related to him.
Bollocks. There are plenty of cases of religions where not only is unconditional love not a main goal, the gods themselves pretty actively enjoy annoying all the others. But hey, you’ve done research. Cites, please. Let’s have unconditional love as a main goal from… the Norse pantheon, if you will.
Hey, don’t malign those SA guys. They were really into love and giving - why, I’ve heard that sacrifices from the heart were very popular!
Something like that, anyway…