God of philosophy and God of religion

[XenoFish]

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

You can never assume anything about me.  I am not what someone called me once "a believer" I am "a thinker" so there will always be something we disagree about and something we agree about.  You don't need to be surprised.

A lot of the time it's hard to tell.

[+Desertrat56]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

A lot of the time it's hard to tell.

Yeah likewise.

[GoldenWolf]

Nevermind

Edited April 30, 2019 by GoldenWolf

[Wes83]

2 hours ago, oslove said:

"one would not develop a concept of that they do not believe in.... "

Let you and me just bring up one thing that you don't believe in, and then we will examine why we don't believe in it or about it.

I ask you, are you not into senseless-ness or pure irrationality declaring that you don't have to develop a concept on what you don't believe in?

Say, you don't believe in circumcision, and people ask you what you know to be circumcision, but instead of telling them what you know to be circumcision which you don't believe in or about, you just declare:

"I would not develop a concept of that I do not believe in."

Then in a shipwreck you find yourself washed up on a strange island where the natives practice circumcision, and they do that to any man who just happens to chance upon their island from a shipwreck.

They tell you, "It is our rule with men washed up on our island, that they must choose between circumcision or glansectomy."*

Now you are in a most dire situation, as you don't know what is circumcision and what is glansectomy, just the same you seek safety with declaring that you don't believe in circumcision; so they put you to sleep with some unconsciousness inducing drink made from their own medicinal herbs.

When you wake up you scream with horror, your glans penis (the ram head part of the penis**) is gone.

 

*Google the word "glansectomy."

**Google image: "ram head part of the penis."

Not into porn first off, secondly your logic is lacking in my opinion. 

I am claiming no safety, couldn’t care less about what anyone believes as far as changing or forming my own beliefs-nor am I interested in changing others beliefs.

how about lack of necessity for believing in a god? One could say that one had no requirement to believe in a god and that should suffice. 

I feel you are fishing for a debate in which you can show off your wittiness and try to trap someone in a corner of twisted logic. 

Finally, I haven’t confirmed a belief or disbelief on my own part in a god. Regardless my beliefs are just that, mine, and I can’t buy into most people’s definitions or descriptions of a god. 

Your very own definition is extremely lacking in my own opinion. 

Ever studied Buddhism? Perhaps “the god that can be described is not the true god” is a good paraphrased bastardized quote to throw in here. 

So what is your aim here compadre? What are you searching for in this thread? Be specific. It sounds like you want atheist to describe a god thereby coercing them into admitting there must be a god giving there own words against them? That will only work on the shallow minded and no good conversation can come from that.

 

[oslove]

3 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Religion is a structured approach to someone else's spirituality. Typically a cult with made up rules, regulations and spiritual woo. The biggest issue with religion is that it is a cult of ego. Not all religious are white light, rainbows, and happy kitty cat farts.

Please dear Xeno, talk in brief plain simple clear words instead of mesmerizing your own confusion.

I see clearly that you are accustomed to self-confusion, instead of mastering plain speech for your possession of a clean mind and a pure heart.

Again, observe what peoples with a religion do that is the common denominator of every human being with a religion and he is practicing it.

But you are not in the intellectual habit of observation, but in the vagary of verbose self-obfuscation.

Okay, let you and me observe what religious peoples in our respective neighborhood do on a Sunday for Christians, and on a Friday for Muslims, and on a Sabbath day with orthodox Jews.

[oslove]

3 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

You are using semantics to confuse the issue.  I hate religion because it is used to manipulate large groups of people, not because it teaches anything about god.  If any religion were the TRUE religion and god cared there would only be one religion allowed.  By definition, religion is rules that a set of people are expected to live by and the lie is that those rules came from god.  If they did why do so many religions disagree about god's rules?  because they are not god's rules they are human's rules.

You should instead of hating religion, righteously hate people who manipulate religion to sow like terrorism for whatever they are into, from their fanaticism agenda.

Your mind is into semanticism of the wrong kind, I am inviting your to observe what religious peoples do on their holy day of the week, instead of tunnel sighting the fanatics who are blowing up people.

[+Desertrat56]

5 minutes ago, oslove said:

You should instead of hating religion, righteously hate people who manipulate religion to sow like terrorism for whatever they are into, from their fanaticism agenda.

Your mind is into semanticism of the wrong kind, I am inviting your to observe what religious peoples do on their holy day of the week, instead of tunnel sighting the fanatics who are blowing up people.

It doesn't matter what they do on their holy day.  You keep bringing that up though.  What is it you want people to say about what religious people do on their holy day (by the way Friday is the sabath for orthodox jews, as you call them)  I would like to know why you think Muslims, Christians and any other sect of the Judaic religion are different religions.  They all worship the same god, they all have the same roots, they all have been changed to control more people.  The difference is who the controller is.  And why do you not mention different Buddhist sects as well?

I haven't seen any post on this thread saying anything about fanatics.  Religion as whole has been mentioned, but not specific fanatics.  Maybe I skipped that post.

Edited April 30, 2019 by Desertrat56

[MWoo7]

       What the ? how did I miss this part ? ...you gotta love this no matter who you are " cult of ego "   some have like 50 different leaders all with SEE ME LOOK AT ME titles in one area or Region of preaching.  Smiling jacks with yellow suits 2 pounds of bling fake teeth and all fighting for stage time , true, no I'm not making this up although it would make a good NETFLIX series.

oh Xeno cred

here:

4 hours ago, XenoFish said:

biggest issue with religion is that it is a cult of ego.

Edited May 1, 2019 by MWoo7

[oslove]

Dear colleagues here, time to return to the OP.

On 4/30/2019 at 5:17 AM, oslove said:

After having talked with atheists for years and years, I have come to the conclusion that atheists don't think at all when the question is God exists or not, they just evade the question altogether and rave against religion.

[...]

 

So, as I have known already, some people here are into religion, and that with hostility.

And I am trying to see whether they can examine religion without bringing to it their hatred, which hatred of course should also be their concern, that they examine why they are so hatefully hostile to religion - the unexamined life is not worthy living.

Perhaps some bad trips with family members or friends or church workers, that is where psychology should be useful, for self-examination.

But for the purpose of this thread, namely, on the God of philosophy and the God of religion, let us academically work together to concur on the core common denominator of the religions of mankind.

[+Desertrat56]

28 minutes ago, oslove said:

Dear colleagues here, time to return to the OP.

 

So, as I have known already, some people here are into religion, and that with hostility.

And I am trying to see whether they can examine religion without bringing to it their hatred, which hatred of course should also be their concern, that they examine why they are so hatefully hostile to religion - the unexamined life is not worthy living.

Perhaps some bad trips with family members or friends or church workers, that is where psychology should be useful, for self-examination.

But for the purpose of this thread, namely, on the God of philosophy and the God of religion, let us academically work together to concur on the core common denominator of the religions of mankind.

So, you start.  What do you think is the core common denominator of the religions of mankind?  It is hard to understand what you want to discuss.

 

[Piney]

4 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

You can never assume anything about me.  I am not what someone called me once "a believer" I am "a thinker" so there will always be something we disagree about and something we agree about.  You don't need to be surprised.

During my early training my grandfather and uncle taught me there are "workers" and there are "believers". Never fall into a believers trap of blind spirituality. 

[freetoroam]

8 hours ago, oslove said:

I must commend you for not hating religion, still I request that as a member of this unexplained mysteries website, folks here are into explaining things which have not been explained.

So, what do you say, will you seek to explain what if you have any, your concept of a god?

You see, in addition to stating your position that you don't believe in a god, it behooves you to also inform readers what is your concept of a god.

I do not believe in any god so nothing to explain on my part. It really is simply - no god.

As to believers, they will have their reasons why they believe and what their concept of a god is.

It is not my position to comment on any concept as i do not believe or worship any god.

Why people believe in a God has been explained, but a god has never been proven.

I say that is because there is no god. The religious will not agree with that, but they still can not prove a god exists outside of their feelings, emotions and belief.

I understand why many centuries ago man would create the idea of gods at a time when he was learning about nature,  the world around him and the Universe he saw, and his own origins, hence creating  a "creator".

Man himself is a creator, so it would  make sense to question who created the world we live on and where we came from. We still do today, but we have lot more knowledge and understanding.

I have no reason to hate religion,  but i do not like those who use it to gain power over others and to kill others. 

Some religions say god created man in his image, i say man created a god in his.

Edited May 1, 2019 by freetoroam

[Duke Wellington]

On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 10:17 PM, oslove said:

After having talked with atheists for years and years, I have come to the conclusion that atheists don't think at all when the question is God exists or not, they just evade the question altogether and rave against religion.

So I say to myself perhaps atheists can talk with me about God from the standpoint of philosophy and psychology, that is why I put the present thread in the board here which is about philosophy and psychology.

Now, the way I see it, philosophy is all about man seeking the programming that exists or might exist or should exist in everything that man is exposed to by his conscious experience, and with thinking about his experiences, thereby coming to an idea on what is the programming that exists or might exist or should exist in any realm of experience he is exposed to.

For example, there is a philosophy of artificial intelligence, which has to do with intelligent folks figuring out what the programming that exists or might exist or should exist with artificial intelligence, i.e. intelligence of robots.

What about religion, it is a realm of human experience, can we have a philosophy of religion, and also a psychology of religion?

Let me read the reactions of colleagues here in this website on unexplained mysteries, at this point on the launching pad of this thread.

 

Its quite easy to figure out that God exists although it isn't inline with what everybody expects a God to be.

Nothingness is the absence of everything and therefore it can never exist. It means that at the very minimum one thing has always existed and if we think about it then we can build up the universe from that. Its monism.

If we think about it then in order for something to exist it needs to exist somewhere, be made out of something, and exist at a point in time. So the very existence of the one thing brings into existence the space, time, and matter, needed for its existence. That is the creation of the universe.

To occupy a present moment in time means before and after that moment also exist. That is the creation of the past, present, and future. Continued existence also creates the flow of time in one direction.

To occupy a location means there is everywhere where the thing isn't. That is the creation of the whole of space with the things location being relative to all the other locations.

To be made out of something means that material also has to prop up its existence. With space and time existing this means space gets populated backwards and forwards in time, and across the present, to enable the matter to prop up its existence. From the big bang to the big crunch.

It has all come from the one thing.

[GoldenWolf]

On 4/30/2019 at 8:04 PM, freetoroam said:

Some religions say god created man in his image, i say man created a god in his.

Exactly.

[Truthseeker007]

If everyone is all God then that solves that problem then don't it? 

[freetoroam]

5 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

If everyone is all God then that solves that problem then don't it? 

No, if everyone was no god, that would solve that problem then don't it. 

[XenoFish]

5 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

If everyone is all God then that solves that problem then don't it? 

Yes, let's all have a god complex. 

[XenoFish]

On 4/30/2019 at 9:14 PM, Piney said:

During my early training my grandfather and uncle taught me there are "workers" and there are "believers". Never fall into a believers trap of blind spirituality. 

Believe it vs do it. 

[Piney]

9 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Believe it vs do it. 

But never fall into the trap of believing the psychological aspect is "Power". 

[XenoFish]

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

But never fall into the trap of believing the psychological aspect is "Power". 

Fire and forget in more magical terms.

[Duke Wellington]

On ‎01‎/‎05‎/‎2019 at 12:35 AM, oslove said:

You should instead of hating religion, righteously hate people who manipulate religion to sow like terrorism for whatever they are into, from their fanaticism agenda.

Your mind is into semanticism of the wrong kind, I am inviting your to observe what religious peoples do on their holy day of the week, instead of tunnel sighting the fanatics who are blowing up people.

He has a belief about religion.

He cherry picks to validate those beliefs while ignoring those showing inconsistencies with them. There is a difference between an atheist who cannot see a space for God to exist, and an atheist who ignores those spaces. The later doesnt want their to be a God.

[oslove]

Dear colleagues here, it is most satisfying that you take the time and work to contribute your thoughts to this thread.

Now, generally dear colleagues here, you seem to be concurring on your what I might uniformly consider to be hostility to religion, but I have not seen anyone with a rational i.e. in the present thread academic idea of what is religion at all.

What you do is to dwell on the unpleasant conducts of people who use religion to motivate themselves and others to undertake killing other peoples and grabbing their lands.

But there are conducts of peoples with a religion which do not consist in killing fellowmen and stealing their lands and/or natural wealth of lands.

I have been inviting you dear colleagues here, to observe what peoples with a religion, like Christians, Muslims, and orthodox Jews do on their respective one day a week holy day: Christians on Sunday, Muslims on Friday, and orthodox Jews on Saturday or as they call it, the Sabbath Day.

That is what I see and you should also were you accustomed to practice intellectual self-examination, namely, you eschew genuine use of your brain to learn what I call the common core of every religion of mankind.

So I will tell you what I see to be the common core of every religion of mankind, namely, prayer to an entity held by the adherents of a religion to be a god or God, for in particular Christians, Muslims, and orthodox Jews.

What do you say about my submission on the common core substance of religion, namely, prayer to a god or God?

 

 

[Truthseeker007]

18 hours ago, freetoroam said:

No, if everyone was no god, that would solve that problem then don't it. 

I do wonder why humans feel the need to worship something either outside of themselves or their selves.

[Truthseeker007]

18 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Yes, let's all have a god complex. 

Don't we already?

[freetoroam]

44 minutes ago, Truthseeker007 said:

I do wonder why humans feel the need to worship something either outside of themselves or their selves.

I can understand why they worshipped the sun, moon etc in the early days when they could see and feel the powers behind them, but a lack of understanding of how they worked, this led to the great move in science.

What i can never understand is how some then chose to believe in one god instead. What happened to all the gods of the past? What happened was man made up another one and some chose to believe in that one god instead. 

We have an understanding of how nature works and know more about the sun and moon and our solar system, but instead of attributing a god to each part of it, man decided to change it to one god who create it all, it does not even have a name, at least in the past man gave their gods names. 

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by freetoroam