Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
True, I spent the next several decades trying to explain to my intellect how I could have been so wrong after my encounter in deep meditation.
So your belief in a god came later in life? That’s intriguing - I usually hear the reverse. I’d be interested to hear how that came about. I do know I enjoy reading (and respect the way you articulate) your views, even though we don’t often agree.
yeah, but look under the curve. people feeling that they can over come many of the evils they (we) do is a good thing.
the extremes are not really what the teaching addresses. and even that, taken in the light, a man in his forties can atone for some of the things he did in his twenties is good, even for the worst of us. If they are making good on that atonement.for example, give the O.G. a chance to teach the young G. With hope he can atone for some of the things he has done.
I get what you are saying about not addressing the ‘extremes’ - lol but, doesn’t that seem kind of relevant to the whole basis of the belief? ‘Oh, we’ll just skip right on over that part.’
I understand about the ‘good’ it can do for some people, but overcoming evil is an earthly fight. It’s the here and now - and what we do in our lives which matters (not the reasons we are doing them). In this example (and I know it’s an extreme one) - it’s the reverse. It basically states what we do does not matter, as long as we accept Jesus in the end. So what should be more relevant? Accepting Jesus - or not committing murder?
I get what you are saying about not addressing the ‘extremes’ - lol but, doesn’t that seem kind of relevant to the whole basis of the belief? ‘Oh, we’ll just skip right on over that part.’
I understand about the ‘good’ it can do for some people, but overcoming evil is an earthly fight. It’s the here and now - and what we do in our lives which matters (not the reasons we are doing them). In this example (and I know it’s an extreme one) - it’s the reverse. It basically states what we do does not matter, as long as we accept Jesus in the end. So what should be more relevant? Accepting Jesus - or not committing murder?
your definitely right.
"Hope" is a notion i struggle with. and basically religion is about hope really. What do we give the more emotional people? The emotional trans locked onto anti-religion and others, like Clara lock onto this sweet whatever thing they got going on. how do we package a more healthy "hope"?
i guess just keep pounding claims that offer an explanation, mechanism, correct predictions, and repeat are more valid than those that don't. so whatever the the emotion locks onto it has a chance to self correct itself.
I get what you are saying about not addressing the ‘extremes’ - lol but, doesn’t that seem kind of relevant to the whole basis of the belief? ‘Oh, we’ll just skip right on over that part.’
I understand about the ‘good’ it can do for some people, but overcoming evil is an earthly fight. It’s the here and now - and what we do in our lives which matters (not the reasons we are doing them). In this example (and I know it’s an extreme one) - it’s the reverse. It basically states what we do does not matter, as long as we accept Jesus in the end. So what should be more relevant? Accepting Jesus - or not committing murder?
Perhaps a more interesting thought is, what’s the difference between accepting Jesus and then committing murder, OR committing murder and then accepting Jesus?
Since Ozzy has such disdain for science, I suggest he stop using everything in life based on science. For example -- he shouldn't use any medicines. Or a refrigerator. Or air conditioning. Or a heating source. Or, the computer (that would be a blessing). Or, in fact, electricity.
I have been seeing this bogus argument here for years:
If someone doesn't 100% agree with every aspect of some concept, field, vocation, etc...they should be expected to forsake EVERYTHING associated with that concept, field, or vocation, lest they be labeled a hypocrite.
I'm sure that even though Atheists don't believe at all in any God or religious dogma...they still think the charity work done through religion is cool.
Should an Atheist be thought a hypocrite if they buy their kid a Christmas present...or go to a soup kitchen/food pantry run by a church if they are hungry and have no food? Of course not.
The same with people that have doubts about some aspects of scientific research...they still think jet propulsion and HVAC systems are cool.
Should someone that touts global warming be told they are a hypocrite if they have a car, or an air conditioner?
Hey...I remember when I was young my mother telling me to "drink my milk" (whole milk @ 4% milk fat, of course), and her serving some kind of beef, pork, or other meat, a couple times a day...because "science" had "figured out" that is what was "good for you". MOF, this was "the theory" (a lot of milk and meat were good for you) for most of human history and viewed as "proven science", "a given" without question. Everyone was taught the "Food Pyramid"...it was even on the wall in the doctors office waiting room.
I had to take drugs for a time to lower the high cholesterol it caused, while I modified my diet. Some "given"! Yet, in the face of things like this, "science" still holds up things as "a given".
Now...even though the bad data "science" put out almost killed my Father and made me sick too (along with millions of others dead and sick)...and I am critical of "science" for that...I still acknowledge there are good things that come from science and technology, even if I don't give it 100% credence.
Should I give up, or be told to give up, all the technology I use in my life just because I note that science has been known to be very wrong about some things? Of course not.
This just goes to show that Fundies are all alike, no matter what side they are on.
This is a prime example.
WHAT!...you doubt what I believe?!--
FUNDIE RELIGIOUS: Then you will/should be in hell and suffer!!
FUNDIE ATHEIST: Then you will/should have to give up all your scientifically derived comforts and suffer!!
Fundies always want the people that don't fully believe as they do to SUFFER!...that's the Fundie "way".
I have been seeing this bogus argument here for years:
If someone doesn't 100% agree with every aspect of some concept, field, vocation, etc...they should be expected to forsake EVERYTHING associated with that concept, field, or vocation, lest they be labeled a hypocrite.
I'm sure that even though Atheists don't believe at all in any God or religious dogma...they still think the charity work done through religion is cool.
Should an Atheist be thought a hypocrite if they buy their kid a Christmas present...or go to a soup kitchen/food pantry run by a church if they are hungry and have no food? Of course not.
The same with people that have doubts about some aspects of scientific research...they still think jet propulsion and HVAC systems are cool.
Should someone that touts global warming be told they are a hypocrite if they have a car, or an air conditioner?
Hey...I remember when I was young my mother telling me to "drink my milk" (whole milk @ 4% milk fat, of course), and her serving some kind of beef, pork, or other meat, a couple times a day...because "science" had "figured out" that is what was "good for you". MOF, this was "the theory" (a lot of milk and meat were good for you) for most of human history and viewed as "proven science", "a given" without question. Everyone was taught the "Food Pyramid"...it was even on the wall in the doctors office waiting room.
I had to take drugs for a time to lower the high cholesterol it caused, while I modified my diet. Some "given"! Yet, in the face of things like this, "science" still holds up things as "a given".
Now...even though the bad data "science" put out almost killed my Father and made me sick too (along with millions of others dead and sick)...and I am critical of "science" for that...I still acknowledge there are good things that come from science and technology, even if I don't give it 100% credence.
Should I give up, or be told to give up, all the technology I use in my life just because I note that science has been known to be very wrong about some things? Of course not.
This just goes to show that Fundies are all alike, no matter what side they are on.
This is a prime example.
WHAT!...you doubt what I believe?!--
FUNDIE RELIGIOUS: Then you will/should be in hell and suffer!!
FUNDIE ATHEIST: Then you will/should have to give up all your scientifically derived comforts and suffer!!
Fundies always want the people that don't fully believe as they do to SUFFER!...that's the Fundie "way".
But Ozzy went far further than that. He condemned science. Period. "Science keeps changing, so you can never really trust it".
That's far different than me saying I disagree with ALL the dogma about religion, but I find positive things in the teaching of Christ, even if he wasn't magic. Most of us on the atheist side of things will admit that there are aspects of christianity that are admirable. For example, several people on the forum have pointed to half of the ten commandments and said they're great...but they don't require a backdrop of christianity to be worthwhile aspects of society. Several of us have pointed out the positive nature of at least some of the sermon on the mount, but again, those PRINCIPLES don't require believing in christianity. That's far different than saying "you can NEVER really trust" science. And the further problem is that Ozzy clearing doesn't understand the very concept of science. While many of us atheists were christians for much of our lives.
"Hope" is a notion i struggle with. and basically religion is about hope really. What do we give the more emotional people? The emotional trans locked onto anti-religion and others, like Clara lock onto this sweet whatever thing they got going on. how do we package a more healthy "hope"?
i guess just keep pounding claims that offer an explanation, mechanism, correct predictions, and repeat are more valid than those that don't. so whatever the the emotion locks onto it has a chance to self correct itself.
That’s why I say it is a built-in self help book for some, it offers ‘hope’ there is something more (the alternative is to have to accept ‘this is all there is’ and that can be a hard pill to swallow for those not equipped to do so). That’s why it’s not as simple as explaining the logic to people; their emotional guard is to instinctively reject it. I think packaging ‘hope’ is as simple as education and basic ‘self help’ skills, psychology, etc. As I’ve said before, it’s encouraging independent thinking. That’s what should be taught in schools - the skills needed to think independently!
Last edited by CorporateCowboy; 03-04-2019 at 08:01 PM..
Perhaps a more interesting thought is, what’s the difference between accepting Jesus and then committing murder, OR committing murder and then accepting Jesus?
You are saved either way, aren’t u?
That’s my point. Shouldn’t the focus on life be NOT to commit murder (and don’t spend life in jail). Why, instead, is it alright for someone to commit murder - and then accept Jesus at the end and everything is A-Ok?
The Christian angle is that not believing in Jesus is the worst ‘crime’. Say what?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As deep meditation also can.
