Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by Nu'maaN, Jul 5, 2011.
This is a brilliant response,to which I will add a few things in a lil while...
Like I said, I was merely looking to be sarcastic. I've no interest in coincidences between religious scripture and scientific theory. It's not that I don't find it interesting that people like the Hindi's way back when managed to work out interesting facts about the solar system, it's how religion tries to attribute something supernatural to them.
Are you pulling my leg? Seriously, I don't know how I can spell it out for you - God isn't a factor. No God, some God, religious God, lost God, found God etc - DOESN'T OCCUR TO ME.
I never gave the idea of God a second thought when growing up. God to me is like cricket. I see some people are interested in it, I personally think it's shit and mock them for liking it.
Suggesting that I need to disprove something (that can't be proved, thus fucking stupid) in order to justify my life is paramount to me having to go round and prove to people that cricket is shit.
The possibility, the idea of a God in it's entirety is of no consequence to me. I've never struggled, lost nor found him. I took a glance, realised it was stupid and left people to play cricket - or talk to their imaginary friend.
Definitive proof is irrelevant one way or the other because it's cricket being perceived as a good sport has no baring on how I lead my life.
The only reason I get involved in this crap is because I hate the knock on effect that religion has on wider society. Plus I like arguing.
I really can't spell it out any plainer. But like I said before, you'll gloss right over this.
i did, lol.
but you're ignoring the fact that the universe is constantly expanding.
this was roughly 1400 years ago, didn't scientists only find this out 80 years ago?
i can't really answer that, as i've always believed in a god.
not necessarily a spaghetti monster in the sky though.
so do i.
what brings you comfort?
i don't take that kid's posts/threads seriously.
with or without it, i would still be content as i know there is a god.
as for him judging me according to how/how i didn't implement the guidelines/teachings from the qur'an, that's another story because i personally am not a good muslim at all.
My post reads back rather strongly and dimissively. It's partly me still impatiently trying to work out just where you stand, what you're open to before I spend time replying in full - part me being strung out.
i know where you're coming from, and i have no problem with it.
having said that, pretty sure you went over the top with the cricket analogy lol.
but that's just it, just as you didn't give god a second thought while you were growing up (credit to you for thinking for yourself), i never gave the "no god" theory a chance to breathe, in the slightest.
that was because of my upbringing, as sheltered as it was, i still got to learn shit on my own though. and me believing god is in nature has nothing to do with the qur'an, the prophet, my parents. i just think it all can't be just happening randomly, all these precise patterns in the universe, there is something in control.
but what i'm open to? anything really.
i just want to read what intrigues you, what opens your eyes, etc.
and i'm not saying that so i can read on it and disprove the shit, fuck that.
also, if you ever decide to try and read the qur'an, i hope you have the same outlook.
Not really. The problem is that its a philosophical talk, straining 1400 years ago to explain what we arent quite sure. Its like the Nastradamus predictions. Yes you can draw parallels with past or current occurences, buts its all just one big fat guess.
Sounds like a contradiction to me. How could you always believe in God. That doesnt make any sense. I didnt always believe in Santa or Dignity or Math. It was something my parents had to tell me about. Same goes for basically ANY concept you could think off.
To be honest, not much lately. Sleep would probably be #1 (so I can escape this world for a little white, and hopefully get my nightly DMT fix) and music #2 (to hear the trials and tribulations of hundreds of artists)
...So... You don't even follow by God's teachings... That's just stupid x 10.
I mean, in my opinion, its stupid to believe in them at all but that's really moot. But here you are defending God, and by association his teachings, yet you yourself dont even follow them. Personally IF I was a believer, a true believer 100%, then I wouldnt be able to think of any reason not to follow his teachings. They're either words from THE ONE TRUE GOD or not. Not following it would be the definition of stupid unless on some level you too think its all just a book. While possessing history lessons and other mundane things, at its core it too is just a man made construct, nothing Divine here, no reason to adhere to these teachings..
Sounds like you're only a Muslim in name, probably to keep your parents off your back. I ask whats the point?
To me thats the basis of a religious person realizing that their religion is bullshit.
My problem is that I can look at the exact same Universe and see nothing but Chaos (pure randomness). If my conclusion was only slightly off yours using the same input then we could come to an agreement that we're in the right ballpark. But the idea is diametrically opposed to the other. Using the patterns of nature to claim anything is nothing but an assumption on our parts though. And basing something as drastic as the existence of a God on an assumption is just too big of a leap for me to make.
This is a better position than Nu'maan's position,if I understand his posts aright. However...supposing that because evolution seems to be perpetual that it's flawed could be very flawed thinking in and of itself. This idea seems to imply that there is only ONE expression of "perfection" and that "perfection itself" is a static unchanging state of being/existence/whatever. Consider also the possibility that there are infinite multiverses and infinite dimensions and infinite multiversal dimensions all of which are continuing to evolve interact and interplay with one another...yet also wholly separate from one another. Consider also that God transcends any concept that we may conceive of...exactly as you stated earlier. By naming The Creator and attempting to define specific characteristics of It in the religious sense,we as humans have also attempted to downscale this entity so we can have the illusory satisfaction of wrapping our puny little minds to some incremental degree around its existence,our existence,and Existence itself. How can we in all honestly have finite minds and in any way accurately engage an entity that created Infinity,Eternity,and allat other stuff we have no idea exists? Extra stiff order. Basically we assign meanings to this shadow of a shadowy concept that we have no hope of actually grasping in a functional way,and the meanings that we assign give us comfort. Those meanings change as we walk the path that The Creator wanted us to walk.
I'm agnostic. I don't believe that any of the socio-historical-political books masking as the one true divine scriptures are at all what they claim they are. I do,however,find it equally impossible to suppose of Existence without some form of cognizant,directing Creator. It's THE DETAILS that these alleged Scriptural Books assign to this Creator and the Created which I for the most part roundly reject,and it's THE DETAILS that science provides which trumps most of the positions that any Believer has to offer.
On one matter and one alone does Science and Religion (which is different than Faith) agree wholeheartedly: there was and is a Creator that is beyond anything we have any hope of conceiving. The meaning of Existence is interpreted by those that Exist...and not just in the physical realm. All of us right now are affected by Gravity,which is a nonphysical force...for example. All of us right now are empowered by what our African ancestors called "ka",which is the single concept which spawned the Hindu "prahna" the Chinese "chi" the Japanese "ki",etc. etc. It is the Force that all beings existing or not and all things existing physically or not are linked to.We need to learn more about this...and here Science has a gargantuan advantage over Religion. Scientists off top acknowledge that they're not sure but they're going to find out,and as they investigate and uncover data? Their prior beliefs will be changed accordingly. The inflexible irrational Religious mindset seeks to zealously cling to its outdated prior models,no matter how badly they get slaughtered by modern discoveries.
There is a more rational approach which welds the best of both worlds into a single whole that our African ancestors grasped: Science and the Logic of Existence indicates that there must be a Creator. Praise this Creatory by living well in every way that is revealed to us as we continue to live our lives. And use the Scientific Method for inquiries great and small.There ya go.
I don't 'believe' in science, I fucking experience science daily.
When you can prove your Gods existence as fast as I can prove gravity, we'll talk.
Probably. It's just I'd mentioned this a few times before and you keep treating our discussion like I'm on the other side of the coin. I'm note. Get it?
I wouldn't say I was open minded. I was an emotionally driven retard just like everyone else as a kid. Told to challenge the world, but not my parents who are/were intellectually inferior.
BUT, since I wasn't 'raised to believe in the unseen' I guess I've had it easier than you.
I'm interested in social psychology and the psychology of religion. Critical thinking and science.
I was going to suggest you read 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins. I'd listen to it if you can. It's largely about Christianity, but the most interesting parts are about the psychology and human biology involved in how we react to religion and the idea of a God. Not the 'comfort blanket' stuff, but exploring the cognitive side of simple, every day events that amass to, or religion takes credit for. etc.
If you do read it, make note that it's not a gospel and there's little wrong with Dawkins other than he is an opinionated human being. It's the people that act as if this book is a gospel and the reactionaries that give Dawkins a bad name. Hence why I think you should listen to him read it.
Anyway, instead I'd recommend you start with 'Citizen Radio'. Two 'zaney, progressive liberals' but they aren't that bad and it's largely about American politics, but it does address a lot of the social psychology and critical thinking I'm interested in. It also acts as a decent hub to all the other people that interest me like the Novellas, Sagen, Myers, Hitchens, Neil - that nigga - Digrassi Tyson.
Actually thinking about it, you might like neil degrasse tyson as a better starting point. He doesn't care about 'battling' religion, just the public perception of science and critical thinking in every day life.
Home - The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe is also a good podcast.
This is all good background noise. An alternative to music. I blank out a lot of it (especially Skepticsguide, too American nerd) but there will be the odd thing that sticks out that interests you. Thats what you need. Something that interests you. It'll eventually lead to the thread that ruins your trousers.
lol, so you're just going to dismiss that fact as a big fat guess? ok.
lol @ dignity.
believing in santa is different to believing in a god, man.
just as you sleep to escape this mundane world, i pray to escape.
no, your stance on this matter is pretty silly.
not every person who believes in their religion are 100% religious.
we are humans, not fucking angels. it's in our nature to commit faults/sins.
my parents gave up on me at the age of 9 years old.
my faith has nothing to do with my parents, they knew i wasn't following 100%.
no it's not, faith is not always 100% - it varies.
for instance, my faith is like the stock markets, ups and downs all the way.
will give it a shot.
i will go in this order.
- neil degrasse tyson.
- citizen radio.
- dawkins reading his god delusion.
i'll pm the fuck out of you if i have any questions, or can't keep up with the logic.
cheers from the big ears.
Ok so its expanding.. But if we created the Universe what was your Creator doing?
To you of course its different... To me... A man sitting up there somewhere. Checking his list to discern who is nice or not. The nice people get rewarded the naughty get punished. Using supernatural stuff like flying reindeer, elves, etc. All things No one has ever proved to be real. Im sure i could think of others...
Then again. I ask. What is the Point? Why not just be agnostic? What stopped you from believing in the Christian God, or Hindu Gods? Or more importantly what about the Qu'ran makes you stick with it?
i don't think you're getting it.
the qur'an is the word of god himself, so when it says we, he means himself.
the christian god became human over the years, why would i take a human as god?
the hindu god is not one god, they've got a god for pretty much everything.
fuck an idol, how is an idol going to help me when it can't help itself.
i like the idea of the sovereign, one true god.
and i stick with the qur'an, because i believe it's the divine word of god.
full stop, i don't think anybody could change that.
So you believe in it cause you believe in it... That clears that up...
But as you kind of already said. You don't believe it 100%, atleast on your Faith Stock Market. Its Divine, just not enough to adhere to it 100%...
Separate names with a comma.