Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

A confession....


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#16    IamsSon

IamsSon

    Unobservable Matter

  • Member
  • 11,937 posts
  • Joined:01 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 29 January 2013 - 07:51 PM

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 29 January 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

True, but 'equal' is not equivalent to 'the same'.  The idea that the earth is the center of the universe is 'equal' to the idea that the moon is as far as being able to explain the movement of celestial bodies, which is that they are both pretty much equally bad as explanations for this.  So somewhere in 'human experience', it appears that two different explanations are 'as good as any other', or more relevantly put, as 'bad' as any other (for particular people's definition of 'as good' and 'as bad' of course).  This example also has the advantage of actually dealing with something that we have pretty good reason to think exists, celestial bodies, as opposed to 'spirituality' which presumably is referring to a spirit that no one has yet shown to exist at all.
And if all religions concerned themselves with just explaining the origin of the universe, or with just ritualizing, or with just moralizing the argument of equality would certainly be feasible.  But to lump all religions together because they all fail to address something or because the scientific process is unusable in addressing the assertions made by religion is ridiculous.

View PostRlyeh, on 29 January 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

Depends want you are measuring. Obviously they aren't the same religion, however their validity are equal.
One would have to prove all religions are false, and in order to do that would have to develop a viable process since the scientific process is not usable for this task.

"But then with me that horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" - Charles Darwin, in a letter to William Graham on July 3, 1881

#17    ranrod

ranrod

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 726 posts
  • Joined:29 Aug 2009

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:02 PM

View PostIamsSon, on 29 January 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

One would have to prove all religions are false, and in order to do that would have to develop a viable process since the scientific process is not usable for this task.
So many people have this misunderstanding!  We can only prove assertions.  Trying to prove negations is silly thinking.  However, the reasoning behind proving negations illustrates the point of all supernatural beliefs falling in the same category: prove that gravity isn't caused by invisible purple dragons that push us down, prove that the giant spaghetti monster didn't come to us through divine intervention, prove that the universe is not an atom in a giant's fingernail, prove our universe is not a simulation in a computer, etc, etc, etc.  There are an infinite amount of these, each as likely and/or valid as the other (from the point of view of reason).


#18    IamsSon

IamsSon

    Unobservable Matter

  • Member
  • 11,937 posts
  • Joined:01 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:57 PM

View Postranrod, on 29 January 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

So many people have this misunderstanding!  We can only prove assertions.  Trying to prove negations is silly thinking.  However, the reasoning behind proving negations illustrates the point of all supernatural beliefs falling in the same category: prove that gravity isn't caused by invisible purple dragons that push us down, prove that the giant spaghetti monster didn't come to us through divine intervention, prove that the universe is not an atom in a giant's fingernail, prove our universe is not a simulation in a computer, etc, etc, etc.  There are an infinite amount of these, each as likely and/or valid as the other (from the point of view of reason).
Exactly, so a statement declaring all religions as equal because of their validity is nonsensical.

"But then with me that horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" - Charles Darwin, in a letter to William Graham on July 3, 1881

#19    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 24,789 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • "If one is to be thought acceptable and agreeable in society, one must submit to being taught the same lessons over and over again." --Hammer

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:02 PM

View PostRon Jeremy, on 28 January 2013 - 09:37 PM, said:

I am not an atheist.

But that doesn't mean that I am automatically a lover of God either. I've gone through a lot of phases and now the only emotion I want to convey toward God is indifference. I gotta be honest, the main reason why I still cling to the idea of God is hardship. Yeah, I am going through a tough phase of my life (not as devastating as back in 2005 to 2007) and I feel crappy about my life in general.

I believe in God, or many gods. The sheer size of the universe makes me believe that there can't be just one deity managing everything. So,I am a bit of a polytheist. Not quite a neo-pagan, but just a bit of a polytheist. Now I am attending a Unitarian church every now and then and consider myself a Unitarian-leaning person. But I do have my criticism on my newfound religion. I believe that most people need some kind of spiritual rituals and I came to believe that Unitarianism is the least insane kind of all. (and yes, I am also interested in the teachings of Buddha.) To some of you guys, I am definitely on my highway to eternal damnation, since I chose to reject Jesus as my lord and savior.

See, I believe in God or gods. But I simply can't believe that God is wholly good. I just can't anymore. That's a part of reasons why I won't go back to Christianity. I gotta confess, I believe that Bible is just a marketing and advertisement for God. And it's a very exaggerated one. When I came to believe that, I just felt empty and hopeless because the promises and covenants of the Bible were what I wholeheartedly relid on for most of my life...

I think you have a wonderful opportunity before you to find a path that suits you, to decide based on your own questioning and experience about  who you are and to explore if and how a traditional approach to religion is or isn't for you.


#20    rimbaudelaire

rimbaudelaire

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 110 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:City of Brotherly Love

Posted 31 January 2013 - 09:38 PM

View PostIamsSon, on 28 January 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

Ron,

I can understand why you would have a hard time with Christianity, but I disagree with your view of the Bible.  If you read the Bible and walk away with this idea that God is a kindly, spoil-the-heck-out-of-the-grandkids, type old man, you are definitely not reading it properly.  God is an AWESOME (as in: Extremely impressive or daunting; inspiring great admiration, apprehension, or fear.) being who has a specific purpose and plan for His creation, and who offers one way, HIS way, to avoid the full impact of his justice.  Christians who do not see this, are fooling themselves and, unfortunately fooling others as well.  Preachers who avoid talking about how awesome this being is, are doing everyone a terrible disservice.

I think one of the things one has to keep in mind when considering God's truly amazing goodness is that this life we cling to so tenaciously is meant to be less than a drop in the ocean when taken in the context of the eternal experience He wants us to have.  That perspective is incredibly difficult to maintain when you're in the middle of hardship and trouble (believe me I know, I've been dealing with a CRAPPY situation for several years now), but it's difficult to truly understand Scripture, much less have any kind of a real insight into God's love without that perspective.

Please reconcile your claims with Spinoza's idea of G-d. You use an Einstein quote as a personal insight into something you believe, see what Einstein thinks of Spinoza's G-d.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users