Well, let’s just say that I’m probably closer to grasping what I believe others can and cannot do to help me than you are. Having, for example, actually lived my own life.
Then all I can do in regard to my own interest in God and religion is to note what that is and to ask others to react to it in terms of what their interest is.
Given that they have probably lived lives very different from mine.
Right?
I don’t think that’s necessarily true.
One needs only look at teachers and students, or coaches and athletes. A teacher/coach probably knows what the student needs to do better than the student/athlete.
So it makes sense to consider that you may not know how you would be helped.
That’s not really an obstacle.
Someone who has lived a different life can have a point of view which is useful to you.
If I only look at people who have lived a life similar to my own, then I am limiting what I can learn.
Okay, but let those teachers and coaches bring their own arguments embedded in their own lives to bear on the points I make above about God and religion. What can they teach me or coach me in regard to “morality here and now and immortality there and then”? And how might the fact that we have not lived each other’s lives be an important consideration?
In regard to any possible “failure to communicate”?
Besides: Doesn’t it all still come down in the end to exploring the particular behaviors that we choose on this side of the grave given our beliefs about God and religion…as we connect this “in our head” to that which we imagine the fate of “I” to be on the other side of the grave?
Doesn’t it come down to learning as much as we possibly can about each other’s lives in order to react more fully to that which we attempt to accumulate as actual evidence able to demonstrate that what we believe about God and religion is in fact actually true?
Does that part ever really go away if, given what is at stake here, our own assessments are to be taken seriously?
In other words, brought down out of the “general description spiritual contraption” clouds.
Sure, someone who has lived a life very different from mine can help me. And, yes, precisely because of that. But that’s the point that I keep raising myself. I merely feel it is also important to note the limitations of those who speak of God and religion as though their own life is all that is necessary as a font to make their own faith true.
Thus, when push comes to shove, given the subjective and subjunctive elements involved here, what must ultimately count is that which can be demonstrate as true for all of us.
Given the contexts [and many, many more like them] that I noted for Bob above.
You got a life. You didn’t get a guarantee that you would not suffer and die.
You’re arguing based on a very narrow idea : God ought not to allow any suffering. If there is suffering, then God does not exist.
Consider this:
God is=> Man intuits God => Man defines God=> God doesn’t fit Man’s definition=> Man concludes God doesn’t exist.
In the Hebrew Bible it states that God created evil. [“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” Isaiah 45:7] Following Plato, Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism identified God with the Good ergo the problem of evil [POE]. Such is life in its divine-demonic ambiguity.
I’m not sure that you know any more than me why natural disasters happen and why mankind is so unkind to his brothers and sisters, but I do know where I find the way out of such horrors. If we didn’t have faith, where would we be? Would it be better? Would the world be better without carers who do their job out of a conviction that there is a right thing to do expressed in “Love your neighbour”? Your ranting is really just because you lack that moral strength and someone else must be to blame for it. But if God doesn’t exist, where will you aim your accusations? Of course, against those who believe that God is real. But your real enemy is within yourself.
Oh yes, Marx, who devised a system that ended up causing more terror and horror than even the Nazis were able to do. I’m sure that there were millions of oppressed creatures who sighed under the conditions described in the Archipelago Gulag.
Iambiguous has some kind of war going with transcendent reality. He likes to challenge people to explain transcendent reality to him. And of course they can’t. Everything that we can explain is embedded in what we can’t. Some people call that fact God. Now reality as we know it is neither completely chaotic nor completely ordered. Religions observe this and represent it artistically, mythologically and ritually. They make a sacred space for the transcendent inexplicable in their communal life. In iambiguous’ modern “God is dead” world there’s no place for the sacred. So his pastime is railing against those who have such. Or at least that’s how it seems to me.
I’ve tried to make this clear but failed (of course) and still he comes back …
Well…
Everyone in all of existence is having their consent violated. If god is anything, it’s “the supreme consent violator”
Harming something is the easiest thing to do in existence.
Think very deeply about all that I just wrote.
Haha, consent …
Means: to give assent or approval, so my wish to give approval is being violated?
You’re obviously not an empath. As we sit here and speak, someone has been bought, drugged and kidnapped to wake up in a torture room, where they are tortured for 20 years straight by a sadist.
Now here’s the deal. I know you don’t give a shit. But I do. So fuck you.
You’ll care when it’s you.
And yes, all that shit violates MY consent.
Again bob, fuck you. You glib ass piece of shit of a human.
Did this message enter your skull? I hope so
Whilst we need more empathy in the world, too much can drag anyone down. I know because I experienced it. The way out was to accept that I don’t have to feel everything in the world that is wrong. It is a case of step by step, case by case, and we’ll have to approach one problem at a time - because, after all, what else can you do?
I’m quite sure that there are too numerous things happening to which I don’t give my consent, but does anybody care about what you or I think? So you shift it up to the metaphysical level and blame some entity you don’t believe in. What is that going to achieve? So then you attack people who believe that God is real. What does that achieve? It is a rant, nothing more, and a potential increase in the behaviour you don’t consent to.
The hate or disgust that you expressed is precisely what is driving people to drug, kidnap or torture people. It isn’t a way out. It isn’t empathy. You’re fooling yourself to think that way.
Actually,
I take the mantle of god upon myself. It’s a heavier mantle than you’ve taken in life.
If you’re not angry at a zero sum reality, you don’t deserve a seat at the creator table.
Am I walking around raging at people…?
No I’m calm. I’m just using language to try to wake you up… maybe that’s too much for you. So I tow the line. Ok.
Ultimately, this reality is up to all of us.
My swearing at you compared to what can happen to you is a joke. Be thankful for what you have and work to earn it every moment. I’ll pull up the slack if you get into shit you can’t handle.
Understand this:
If anyone loses, the reality doesn’t work.
Think about all the people who lost because of who your friends, partners and living situation is.
What do you do for those people?
Even more. How much cognitive dissonance do you truly have? I know it’s a lot.
It’s fine, we’re all learning here.
Okay, I’ll play your game: What are you trying to wake me up to?
Are you so full of yourself that you think that you are the only one on the planet who notices these things? Are you so convince that you know what anonym people on discussion forums think, or don’t think? What makes you so damned cocksure of yourself? You’re just a Joe waiting for old age and death like us all.
Bob,
I’ve already been resurrected multiple times in this life.
I’ve spent most of it in hell.
Suffice it to say, I know a lot more than you in my conscious mind about existence as a whole.
Let me explain to you what’s different about me:
I have a patch/upgrade plan to add to our current existence that lives in my spirit and mind which is greater than anything you’ve ever considered.
The whole fucking thing is there.
And if you had any sense whatsoever about dying, you’d know that we never do.
Ask shamans, shintoists, mediums, or just your average person who feels a deceased loved one with them in spirit.
Life is not about learning to die, it’s even scarier than that, it’s about figuring out how to live forever. It’s about forming a perfect retirement plan for all beings… because anybody with half a brain cell knows that they’re not in heaven until all beings are in their private heaven forever and ever.
You know what scares people about forever?
Imagine a googleplex number of years raised to the googleplex power… that’s a lot of fucking years! Compared to infinity, any finite number of years that you can conceive of is so small that to measure it is to actually touch your forefinger to your thumb to measure it.
Yeah, I’m a little different than the other ones man.
In each being, their subconscious is the whole cosmos… most of that is in my conscious mind, unlike a person like you who still sublimates it.
Okay, but what does this have to do with the points I make above? We’ve all got lives that can be bursting at the seams with pain and suffering. And, sure, when that revolves around things that “mankind” brings about, that has to owned up to. But it doesn’t make the terrible pain and suffering of those who didn’t cause it go away. Or the terrible suffering that the entirely innocent children endure.
Nor does it seem to explain why a “loving, just and merciful” God would bring into existence natural disasters, or extinction events, or all of the terrible diseases that plague us. Nature itself is nothing less than a ghastly, horrific slaughterhouse of predator and prey.
And the religionists here ague from the broadest possible explanation: A God that they are not able to demonstrate does in fact exist bringing all of these terrible things to His creation for reasons – mysterious ways – we simply cannot fathom.
And my point of course is that with so much at stake on both sides of the grave why does this alleged God just sit back while hundreds of religious denominations down through the ages have insisted that only their path actually guarantees immortality and salvation.
Do you even still have a path yourself?
And, if so, does it make any difference to God that it might be a very, very different one from those that others here are on? How “for all practical purposes” can that even be broached and discussed?
Okay, but what does any of this have to do with the points that I made to Phyllo above? Or is your point instead to simply avoid addressing them as, in my view, you have done in the past.
Let’s note a set of circumstances involving intuitions and definitions about a God, the God and discuss the Hebrew Bible more…existentially?
How on earth can I, no less a mere mortal than you, be privy to why a God/the God said to be omniscient/omnipotent and loving, just and merciful by millions and millions of the faithful allow the things I note above?
How could it not be incumbent on those who believe in Him to explain this instead? And what of the historical fact that hundreds of very much conflicting denominations are telling us that it is their own path – and only their own path – that allows the faithful to actually be saved?
Instead, all you are pointing out is that what you have thought yourself into believing about God and religion [re dasein in my view] comforts and consoles you. While those like me who see no definitive evidence for the existence of either your God or of all the other ones that are claimed to exist here and everywhere else around the globe, don’t get to be comforted and consoled?
And, sure, you continue to insist that “without carers who do their job out of a conviction that there is a right thing to do” the world would be worse off.
But the “right thing to do” is never addressed in the manner in which I suggest that we explore it. Instead it stays up in the clouds of “general description spirituality”. You don’t bring it down to earth because down here there are any number of religious denominations/faiths/paths that insist the “right thing to do” is only as they insist it is.
And why wouldn’t they with so much at stake for the soul.
Some of them don’t even have a God or a Judgment Day! It’s all tied up instead in how the universe itself sorts these things out.
Well, if you believe that I am ranting here, that’s your prerogative. But what does the moral strength of any of us have to do with the points I raise above about God and natural disasters…and all of the terrible diseases that plague us? Or the hundreds of denominations all claiming that their path to God is the only true path?
An omniscient, omnipotent, loving, just and merciful God and…the Nazis?!
And, yes, atheism attached either to those who embrace a political ideology like Communism or to those who construe the world around them from the perspective of the sociopaths, have caused and will continue to cause human pain and suffering.
But Marx was intent on ridding the world of it by pointing out all of the terrible things that the rich and the powerful sustain by way of a political economy that owns and operates a global economy in which the religious credo of choice revolved basically around “show me the money”.
And any number of religious folks got in on that path: etinside.com/top-15-richest … ill-shock/
Only they don’t get the truly “right thing to do”, do they?
God created diseases, death, natural disasters, extinctions events. Who here is arguing that He didn’t?
Theists/religious people don’t know the reasons for these things which they express as “God’s mysterious ways”. Who here is saying otherwise?
Theists/religious people either think that He has provided sufficient clarity or don’t know why He doesn’t reveal Himself more clearly. Anybody disagree here?
I have already told you about “my path”. Not going to do it again.
There is “terrible pain and suffering” coming from the capitalism, communism, socialism, national socialism.
If you could demonstrate for all rational men and women that Marxism would give them better lives, then you might get them to convert. Why don’t you work on that.
Have I answered all your points?
Phyllo got the connection. "Listen’’ to him.