God?

[klugiglugus]

Who is he? What is he? Is he a she???

[Celebthôl]

God just is, neither a he or a she. God is everything. God is he's and she's. However, im not sure that we are allowed to talk on such things on the forum. . . you may find this thread closed soon :(

[celebdraug]

But is a good thread!
Prrsonally i think he is neither! God id just God! he doesnt have a shape!

[Eriol]

For those who like this sort of thing, I give a link:

http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm

It's interesting :).

[Gandalf White]

Why wouldn't we be allowed to talk of such things?

I remember a thread much like this a while back...very interesting. Anyway, I think God is neither male nor female, although I always refer to 'him' as a 'he.'

[Theoden_king]

It would depend on each persons individual belief. For myself there is no God so gender is no matter

[celebdraug]

So T_K, what is your beliefs on creation then?

[Lantarion]

I'm an agnostic/atheist so I don't really believe in God.
But I would assume that, in a way like Brahman in Buddhism (to which I adhere more than to Christianity), God is not a being but a notion and an all-surrounding energy.

[Niniel]

I don't believe in God either. If there would be one, he would have to be almighty, all-knowing and merciful. But that's just my idea, I have never really thought about it cause I don't believe in God and I never had a reason to think about it in detail.

[klugiglugus]

There is a god but it is every thing, creation is every thing, god=creation=every thing, there is a god but not in the religous sense more in the physical sense, there in only one moral for this physical god 'might is right' if you have the ability to do some thing then you can do it, this god won't make you feel guilty but it will make you feel depressed.

[Turin]

Originally posted by celebdraug
But is a good thread!
Prrsonally i think he is neither! God id just God! he doesnt have a shape!

If we are made in the image of God, then how can He not have a shape?:p

[Celebthôl]

Because we arent made in the image of God ;)

[Lantarion]

*gasp* Celeb! You're blaspheming! :eek:
Should I give you Warning Points, or what..? ;) :D

[Thorin]

Discussing this is pretty much futile as there is no proof (other than a changed heart and life) of anyone's views....Plus the 'religion police' may come and whine to the higher authority that this thread is forcing religion down their throats. :rolleyes:

My belief is that if God is not personal, righteous and intervening in our lives, He is no God at all. He is a waste of space, time and energy if He is not useful at all in pertaining to His creation. If He is not omniscient, omnipotent, or omnipresent He is not worthy to be worshipped. If He just IS, you might as well be worshipping a stone or a chunk of wood.

This is why I believe in the personal Creator of the Hebrew/Christian scriptures. To believe God as anything else makes it hard to derive any true meaning or purpose in one's life.

Of course that's just my opinion.

[Lantarion]

Sounds right IMHO, at least pertaining to the general Western view of 'God'.

[Tinuvien21]

We are made in the image of God, but He is all powerful. In the Bible, it says when a Christian goes to heaven, then he will be a little lower than the angels. And when people say that God is a "he", that probably means Jesus in His human form on earth.

[Gandalf White]

Originally posted by Tinuvien21
In the Bible, it says when a Christian goes to heaven, then he will be a little lower than the angels. And when people say that God is a "he", that probably means Jesus in His human form on earth.

Whooaaa, back that angel thing up with a quote! I think you've got something confused there.

"He" probably comes from the term 'God the Father,' as in father of life, etc. Jesus, of course, was male.

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by Lantarion
*gasp* Celeb! You're blaspheming! :eek:
Should I give you Warning Points, or what..? ;) :D

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Oh forgive me mighty and vengeful Lanty! :p

[Bethelarien]

Being LDS, I have a very strong viewpoint on the nature of God. We believe that he is a male, and that he has a definite shape--not this non-gender, no form thingy that some Christians believe in.

If you'd like me to go on, by all means, I will. :D

[Elessar II]

_______________________________________________
I don't believe in God either. If there would be one, he would have to be
almighty, all-knowing and merciful.
_______________________________________________

He is all these things. He knows every hair on our heads, he created the earth down to the last tiny atom, and as for his mercy, if it wasn't for his mercy he would have destroyed the planet long ago instead of sending his only Son in the form of a man to die on a cross for our sins. :)

[Gandalf White]

Originally posted by Bethelarien
Being LDS, I have a very strong viewpoint on the nature of God. We believe that he is a male, and that he has a definite shape--not this non-gender, no form thingy that some Christians believe in.

If you'd like me to go on, by all means, I will. :D What is LDS? And by all mean, go on and describe your view!

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Tinuvien21
In the Bible, it says when a Christian goes to heaven, then he will be a little lower than the angels.Actually the Psalms say that man was made a little lower than the angels, not that that is what we would be in heaven. Just a little theological correction. :)

LDS stands for Latter Day Saints which is Mormon....Sorry Bethelarian for stealing your thunder. :D

These little acronyms can be confusing for some non-Christians. Another acronym is my own faith: SDA which is Seventh Day Adventist.

[Rangerdave]

To quote my favorite modern philosopher...

If man is made in God's image, then God must be ugly and a little stupid on the side
F. Zappa



:D :D :D :D
remember, God has a sense of humor too.
how else can you explain the platypus


RD

[klugiglugus]

God and religion are two separate things, one is worship of the self as is homosexuality and racism and the other is an understanding of reality, savvy?

[Lantarion]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
God and religion are two separate things, one is worship of the self as is homosexuality and racism and the other is an understanding of reality, savvy?

Sorry I have no idea what that is supposed to mean! :p

[klugiglugus]

god is physical, mankind is physical, real, religion is mythology, guilt and sex.

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
god is physical, mankind is physical, real, religion is mythology, guilt and sex.

Explain it more basically. . .

[klugiglugus]

god=real religion=non-real

[Celebthôl]

non-real meaning false?

real meaning true?

[e.Blackstar]

I generally think of God as, if required to define 'him' by terms of gender, as a 'he', if only because of the reference to all of humanity as mankind and 'he'.

However, I generally just say It. (with a capital I)

[Celebthôl]

Eru then ;) ill call God Eru from now on! :D

[Narya]

Why would you associate Eru with the christian or modern world concept of a Divine Sovereign?

Eru was never made to be like what the modern-world concept of a creator is. Actually Tolkien was trying hard to stay away from that topic. Maybe we should also.

[Eriol]

Originally posted by Narya
Why would you associate Eru with the christian or modern world concept of a Divine Sovereign?

Eru was never made to be like what the modern-world concept of a creator is. Actually Tolkien was trying hard to stay away from that topic. Maybe we should also.

Well, there are many, many instances in which Tolkien calls Eru "God" in his Letters; letters who were written to other Catholics. So, Eru is the Christian God. I don't have all quotes here, including what is probably the strongest, the one in which he claims that "his myth is supposed to be believable by a mind which believes in the Blessed Trinity".

We can stay away from that topic... but we can't really say that Tolkien did the same ;).

[Theoden_king]

Originally posted by celebdraug
So T_K, what is your beliefs on creation then?

Creation? Well if you are talking about human beings then the theory of evolution sounds pretty good to me.

However if you are talking about Earth, the Sun, the Galaxy etc. Then I believe that there was no beggining, it's quite a hard concept to believe for us because we are finite beings, but I think that there was never any start to creation.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Theoden_king
Creation? Well if you are talking about human beings then the theory of evolution sounds pretty good to me.

However if you are talking about Earth, the Sun, the Galaxy etc. Then I believe that there was no beggining, it's quite a hard concept to believe for us because we are finite beings, but I think that there was never any start to creation.

At age 67, I've come to believe that we are simply incapable of knowing whether or not a God exists, for the same reason that a cat will never learn to read the sports page: it just doesn't have what it takes. What is all-important to me is how we treat ourselves and each other. I think we will thrive or go extinct on the application (or lack thereof) of two principles: loving cooperation, and appreciation of differences.

—Lotho

[Ciryaher]

Originally posted by Theoden_king
Creation? Well if you are talking about human beings then the theory of evolution sounds pretty good to me.

However if you are talking about Earth, the Sun, the Galaxy etc. Then I believe that there was no beggining, it's quite a hard concept to believe for us because we are finite beings, but I think that there was never any start to creation.

That's a rather tricky rope-bridge to tread. An infinite universe is scientifically improbable, because current studies indicate that our universe is indeed finite in mass. A finite mass means that there is a finite amount of energy (Einstein's Law of the Conservation of Mass and Energy, mass and energy are interchangable, but still cannot be created or destroyed) and a finite amount of energy means there is a beginning, and an end. The universe simply doesn't have the energy to run forever, and nothing that comes into existence (i.e. the Universe via the Big Bang) can logically exist forever, since there isn't enough energy in a finite amount to keep something going infinitely...

An "infinite Universe" also makes Evolution rather tricky, being as there has been an infinite amount of time (time, in an Infinite Universe, wouldn't have much meaning or significance) for creatures to evolve enough on other worlds to come to ours many many times.

Now before I go *completely* on a tangent, I think I'll just stop there :)

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Ciryaher
A finite mass means that there is a finite amount of energy (Einstein's Law of the Conservation of Mass and Energy, mass and energy are interchangable, but still cannot be created or destroyed) and a finite amount of energy means there is a beginning, and an end. The universe simply doesn't have the energy to run forever, and nothing that comes into existence (i.e. the Universe via the Big Bang) can logically exist forever, since there isn't enough energy in a finite amount to keep something going infinitely...

Now before I go *completely* on a tangent, I think I'll just stop there :)

BUT...what if there's some vital piece of information we need that would give us the answer about this once and for all?
And what if this information is in a form that our human sensorium is simply not constructed to detect? Aye, there's the rub...:)

Lotho

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by Lotho_Pimple
BUT...what if there's some vital piece of information we need that would give us the answer about this once and for all?
And what if this information is in a form that our human sensorium is simply not constructed to detect? Aye, there's the rub...:)

Lotho

Such as ether (i think) ;)


But what about Gravety Cir? Thats a constant force of energy, i think....and when the Universe stops expanding, it will be gravity that causes it to collapse again...i think.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Celebthôl
Such as ether (i think) ;)


But what about Gravety Cir? Thats a constant force of energy, i think....and when the Universe stops expanding, it will be gravity that causes it to collapse again...i think.

'Twas brillig, and the slithey toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe. All mimsy were the borogrove, and the mome raths outgrabe!:D

Lotho

[Ciryaher]

Constant does not mean Infinite, Thol. Gravity is in fact one of the weakest of all forces in the universe, especially when compared to electromagnetism (there are four forces in the universe that we know of; gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces).

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by Lotho_Pimple
'Twas brillig, and the slithey toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe. All mimsy were the borogrove, and the mome raths outgrabe!:D

Lotho

Im guessing thats Flowers for Algernon? I dont really know, but on hearing that, that name came to my head...

Cir: but Gravity IS a powerful force, black holes are unscapeable even for light...and it doesnt run out ever....as far as i know...

[Eriol]

Thôl, I don't see what is the relationship between Gravity (weak or strong ;) ) and the impossibility of an Universe with infinite duration towards the past as stated by Ciryaher.

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by Eriol
Thôl, I don't see what is the relationship between Gravity (weak or strong ;) ) and the impossibility of an Universe with infinite duration towards the past as stated by Ciryaher.

LOL neither do I :D Ooops...:p

[Lantarion]

Speaking of inexplicable forces, did you know that in outer space there is an actual energy which is quite powerful, and exists in or of the very void or vacuum of space? I read an article about it recently, in NewScientist I think..
And also the forces of quantum mechanics are strange and wonderful, and practically inexplicable.

Right that's enough meandering for now.. ;)

[Eriol]

As far as I know, vaccum energy is the absolute minimum energy. It has a positive (above zero) value. However, since it is -- by definition -- the theoretical minimum energy at a given place, it can't be "tapped" (or the energy there would fall below the minimum). Of course, physicists are stubborn guys and are always trying to do the "impossible"... since we really don't know enough about physics to state impossibilities anyway.

Quantum mechanics is FUN :).

[Celebthôl]

Quantum mechanics, astro physics, i love all that stuff...never was too good at it tho :(

[Eriol]

Originally posted by Celebthôl
Quantum mechanics, astro physics, i love all that stuff...never was too good at it tho :(

As Stephen Hawking said, "only God passes the final exam of physics"

:)

[Ciryaher]

Actually, black holes do eventually "die"...though the supermassive black holes at the center of a galaxy are constantly "fed" matter to convert into energy...but once it eats the galaxy, there's no more "food" and it "dies" :)

But the point is that nobody has any evidence that the universe is infinite, while there is much evidence that it is finite.

In the case of a finite universe, there is always the option of deciding whether the Big Bang was just a random event (secular) or if something caused the Big Bang to Be (religious). That is the crux of the matter, and of course the only thing that cannot be proved either way...until you die, of course ;)

Speaking of God, I read an interesting article in Astronomy magazine dealing with time and the afterlife. The author proposed that "heaven" is in a separate hyper-time. The result of this seperation means that regardless of how much time passes in this universe/time stream, all souls arrive in heaven at the exact same time when they die...It is similar to the idea that time remains constant to the subject moving at ever-increasing velocities, but the observer(s) experience a different amount of time elapsement.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Celebthôl
Im guessing thats Flowers for Algernon? I dont really know, but on hearing that, that name came to my head...

Cir: but Gravity IS a powerful force, black holes are unscapeable even for light...and it doesnt run out ever....as far as i know...

Actually, it's from Alice in Wonderland. I guess I was thinking about all the spirito/intellectual claptrap I've run into when approaching people who hold themselves up as intellectual giants of religion/philosophy/science, when all they are doing is voicing their opinion based on too much opinion and too little knowledge. And of course, I can't count the number of times I've done that myself! When we let our heads float in the skies to the point our feet leave the ground, we get into trouble!:p

—Lotho

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Ciryaher
Speaking of God, I read an interesting article in Astronomy magazine dealing with time and the afterlife. The author proposed that "heaven" is in a separate hyper-time. The result of this seperation means that regardless of how much time passes in this universe/time stream, all souls arrive in heaven at the exact same time when they die...

That is exactly the kind of absolutely fascinating thought that generates hours of intense discussion — and comes to naught in the end because the premise can neither be proven nor disproven. And that's my big problem with most religio/mystical assertions.

—Lotho

[klugiglugus]

All the intelligent minds that have contributed to this thread should now be thinking about another nature of god, an astrophysical god.

I do have all the answers for example the meaning of life is the rape criterion macrobiotic capacity to construct an innovative connotation and I will give you information of the true god once you get close to finding him through debate: This should be an amusing theological tower of Hanoi.

To conclude I am sure many of you have pontificated to the best of your abilities however if you keep at it and employ imagination you should forge a close link to the protocols of the true god by the year 2007...

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
All the intelligent minds that have contributed to this thread should now be thinking about another nature of god, an astrophysical god.

I do have all the answers for example the meaning of life is the rape criterion macrobiotic capacity to construct an innovative connotation and I will give you information of the true god once you get close to finding him through debate: This should be an amusing theological tower of Hanoi.


Intriguing assertions, Klugi! I can't wait for your upcoming revelations! But are we not ahead of ourselves: how do we know that any kind of "God" (let alone a whole pantheon of anthropomorphic ones) exists in the first place? And what if there's a race of beings out there someplace (either in this dimension or another) whose basic construction allows them to apprehend the real skinny on all this? What if we're so made that we're fundamentally incapable of ever knowing? Those are the things needing to be settled first, methinks!:)

Frankly, I rather enjoy Tolkien's version of God: the Supreme Musician, making up musical themes for his angels to follow. All of Middle-earth being created by angels doing jazz riffs! How cool is that?:p

—Lotho

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
I do have all the answers for example the meaning of life is the rape criterion macrobiotic capacity to construct an innovative connotation

Huh!? :confused:

[klugiglugus]

I know of the differing humanities on other planets and I know of god and if I simply told you the simple truths of them as I did with the meaning of life you simply cannot comprehend their meaning deep though that meaning maybe as Celebthôl has just demonstrated...

Think in physical terms do not think in religious terms or mythical terms think as the ancient Europeans though as they began to live off the feasts of the oceans and paint their dead elders red, think as the Egyptians thought as they built their pyramids.


You shall eventually understand, who knows perhaps I will not have to tell you; maybe you shall work the mysteries out for yourselves.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
I know of the differing humanities on other planets and I know of god...

Damn! I should have come to you in the first place!:p

—Lotho

[Celebthôl]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
I know of the differing humanities on other planets and I know of god and if I simply told you the simple truths of them as I did with the meaning of life you simply cannot comprehend their meaning deep though that meaning maybe as Celebthôl has just demonstrated...

I did? :confused:

I just didnt understand the big words, could you explain it in laymans terms?

[Ciryaher]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
All the intelligent minds that have contributed to this thread should now be thinking about another nature of god, an astrophysical god.

I do have all the answers for example the meaning of life is the rape criterion macrobiotic capacity to construct an innovative connotation and I will give you information of the true god once you get close to finding him through debate: This should be an amusing theological tower of Hanoi.

To conclude I am sure many of you have pontificated to the best of your abilities however if you keep at it and employ imagination you should forge a close link to the protocols of the true god by the year 2007...

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word when a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive when you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

~ From George Orwell's Politics and the English Languages 1947

Don't overtalk yourself, klugiglugus ;) And also remember the wisest man is he who realizes that he knows nothing at all.

[Elessar II]

how do we know that any kind of "God"

Because all logic points to it.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Elessar II
Because all logic points to it.

Logic is just a way of reasoning. If logic is based on a false premise, or insufficient or distorted facts, it will lead to false or specious conclusions. Logic alone is anything but a guarantor of truth.

—Lotho

[Eliot]

I know there's a God, but there's no way for me to prove it. God is something you feel inside you. I'm a Baptist Christian, by the way.

[klugiglugus]

It looks as if I am going to have to administrate your progress and try to make sure you walk on the right paths to get to the golden fountain of knowledge!

I know there's a God, but there's no way for me to prove it. God is something you feel inside you. I'm a Baptist Christian, by the way.

You are thinking of God in the conventional Christian sense, a religious sense, a mythical sense, a sense by which no true information can be taken from.

Because all logic points to it.

That’s the right way to think to get to where you need to go.

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word when a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive when you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

~ From George Orwell's Politics and the English Languages 1947

Don't over talk yourself, klugiglugus And also remember the wisest man is he who realizes that he knows nothing at all.

Interesting point I am surprised it came from the mouth of a Marxist and secondly thought and evolution are one, we think for progress your intellectual frivolity isn't moving forwards, to put it in plainer terms as thought and debate is like building a house you need to stir the cement, lay the bricks down, follow the design, listen to all the builders to make sure your house is being built correctly.

Your neo-bolshevism is obsessed with stirring the cement, only intellectual jargon is produced meaning that allot of your ideas and plans have no real basis in reality for example communism! The political protocol that was supposed to make every body equal and yet Stalin killed Jews, caused suffering and subjected his people to random persecutions!

[Eriol]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
You are thinking of God in the conventional Christian sense, a religious sense, a mythical sense, a sense by which no true information can be taken from.

What is your definition of "true information"? Are there any criterions to identify it?

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Eliot
I know there's a God, but there's no way for me to prove it. God is something you feel inside you. I'm a Baptist Christian, by the way.

Hi Eliot,

What you are talking about is Faith in its purest and strongest form. I do envy you, and all true believers!

What you feel as God inside you is what I would call a conclusion based on life experiences, hopes, needs and temperament, and possibly even indoctrination.

I believe that a strong belief, more, an unassailable conviction does not in itself prove truth, nor does strong emotion in itself prove truth. But that's my belief, or my conclusion formed from my life experiences. So you see my conundrum!;)

—Lotho

[Lantarion]

Hahaha Ciryaher, excellent Orwell-quote; very '1984'! ;)

Elessar how do you think logic points to the existence of God?? Isn't it the very opposite, which is why 'faith' is required?

[Ciryaher]

Originally posted by klugiglugus
Interesting point I am surprised it came from the mouth of a Marxist and secondly thought and evolution are one, we think for progress your intellectual frivolity isn't moving forwards, to put it in plainer terms as thought and debate is like building a house you need to stir the cement, lay the bricks down, follow the design, listen to all the builders to make sure your house is being built correctly.

Your neo-bolshevism is obsessed with stirring the cement, only intellectual jargon is produced meaning that allot of your ideas and plans have no real basis in reality for example communism! The political protocol that was supposed to make every body equal and yet Stalin killed Jews, caused suffering and subjected his people to random persecutions!

You make a lot of assumptions based on my avatar, and assumptions killed the cat. My ideas are based on logical thought and reasoning; not on jargonous terms (I don't go around spouting "proletariat" and "burgeousie").

Rather than pointing your finger at me for being a Marxist, maybe you should just take what I said seriously and stop using the ridiculously complicated words to attempt to get your point across...and at the moment, you're coming off as being half-crazy. Now, try and make your argument without the over-speak.

[Lantarion]

Perfect example of why threads like this have not been popular in the past to Moderators or WM.. Klugiglugus, drop the 'finger pointing' and offensive attitude (also dropping the excessive terminological dialect ;) would be great); and Cir please don't continue klug's sidetracking attempts. ;)

[Eriol]

As for me, I hope klugiglugus will do his best to answer my question...

The best way to deal with excessive terminology is to hammer away at definitions ;).

[ms Greenleaf]

I beleive that there is a higher being because if we are the extent of Mind power and being than that is just depressing.

I beleive in Socialism

I also hate when people mark down communism as horrible without having any un-bias knowledge ofit. In Western places we are taught that capitalism is good and COmmunism is Bad. That is not how subjects should be delt with

I think that we all go to some "better place" not because we do or do not beleive but because we are good and humane...

[klugiglugus]

I think the basis for your thinking that I am insane is basically because I am insane; sanity is a water I have paddled through feeling ever so slightly bored...

I do have much of the higher answers to the higher questions such as god and life on other planets because of my insanity and my will.

I think that part of the reason for why you are so stuck on a node of disbelief is because you cannot understand my answer to the meaning of life, either that or you simply do not wish to understand.

Plato made a story that I think is akin to this situation 3 men are chained inside a cave from the age of 3 months to the age of 20, the only world they know is the one of the shadows displayed by an array of light from the out side world and the creatures from the out side world however one day on of the 3 men brakes free and sees the light of reality and basks in the warm glow of the barren sun when he goes back to tell the others of what he has seen they claw his eyes out and beat him into the ground.


I cannot guarantee you that my ideas are totally valid but I can guarantee you that they will enlighten you if you just open your mind! Even if they are not true they will lead to more questions being asked and the more questions you ask the closer you get to the truth! Will you open your mind???

[Lantarion]

Well Klug could you repeat that great revelation for us then please?

Originally posted by ms Greenleaf
I beleive that there is a higher being because if we are the extent of Mind power and being than that is just depressing.

In which case you believe in God because you know that if you did not, life would be depressing. Would you not say that God in such a case would be akin to an 'easy answer'?
In fact, in my opinion a far more plausible answer to that clause ("If we are the extent of mind power and being...") is that we are not because it is more than likely that there are sentient beings that exist in the universe who are far superior to us in many ways. But you wouldn't call them your Gods would you?
Originally posted by ms Greenleaf
I also hate when people mark down communism as horrible without having any un-bias knowledge ofit. In Western places we are taught that capitalism is good and Communism is Bad. That is not how subjects should be dealt with.

I agree 100%; but let's not go there in this thread.

[klugiglugus]

You havn't asked the questions I had put forward for you to ask you have just danced around the subect and that is what human nature is so I shall make this very simple for you to understand ask me the ultimate question and I shall give you the answer!

[Gothmog]

Very well then.

Why?

[ms Greenleaf]

I phrased that badly did I not. I do not beleive in going to church as a nessissary part of beleiving in god. Actually I think god can be found more redily in the world around oneself. TO me naming something a "god" means nothing. Words are nothing. I do not think that any of the religions can be taken as the"Ultimate" truth because they were all created in part by men.

Thats it

ps I have no problem with insanity
I also think communism is close to what jesus wanted,,, if you take communism in its purest form which really has not yet occured

[Elessar II]

Elessar how do you think logic points to the existence of God?? Isn't it the very opposite, which is why 'faith' is required?

That is also true. But any thinking human mind can see that all of the ideas and philosiphy of man that have ultimately attempted to destroy the fact that there is a God are completely preposterous.
I cannot believe that some condensed element suddenly ignited and exploded, forming the earth, stars, planets and galaxies billions of miles apart and gigantic in size.
And that over billions and billions and billions of years the evolutionary process converted a tiny organism into the human race. It is utterly ridiculious!
For example, without ALL of its assets, the human eye would absolutely NOT function. So evolutionists expect me to believe that for millions of years prehistoric man stumbles his way across the globe, and then suddenly BOOM, wow! the final part of the eye has completed the evolutionary process, Prehistoric man can now see!
Also how many fish have we seen with legs? None? But wait, didn't we at some point come from the ocean?
And how many animal have we seen in that are in the MIDDLE of the evolutionary process?
And although scientists have repeatedly claimed that missing links have been found, there is yet to discover a real missing link.
The whole idea is just totally bizarre. Even Charles Darwin himself said and I quote " If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
That was way back in the 1800's before the organ systems ( reproductive, digestive, endocrine, excretory, etc.... were discovered! Since then we have discovered at least 7 complex organs that could not possibly have evolved.

This all just goes to show that there IS a Higher Power, a Master Designer, who must laugh at all the futile attempt of man to wipe Him from history. And any really thinking human mind must realize how ILLOGICAL it is that evolution did occur.
The only possible way we could be here is through the design of God.

[arisen pheonix]

if you want proof of god just listen to the wording of the big bang theory....

to be taken literally


all the nothing in existance got togeter in a tiny spher smaller than this dot . and exploded


really people:rolleyes:

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Elessar II
That is also true. But any thinking human mind can see that all of the ideas and philosiphy of man that have ultimately attempted to destroy the fact that there is a God are completely preposterous.


To believe in something, even to the point of unshakeable conviction, does not make it true. To believe that an idea is absolutely prepostrous does not make it false.

What "makes sense" does not mean it's true. What appears to be utter nonsense does mean it's false.

—Lotho

[Eriol]

It's rare to have an opportunity to quote yourself :D.

Originally posted by Eriol

Originally posted by klugiglugus
You are thinking of God in the conventional Christian sense, a religious sense, a mythical sense, a sense by which no true information can be taken from.

What is your definition of "true information"? Are there any criterions to identify it?

I don't want the ultimate answer to the ultimate question, not right now ;). I want the answer to that question I made earlier, in order to attempt to understand what you are saying, klugiglugus.

Wow, this thread is spinning and spinning in off-topic terrain... Communism and Evolution now?

The thread "Communism" in the Archives was quite enlightening.

And these threads:

Question on the Bible (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=11655)

Thoughts on Darwinian Evolution (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=10832)

were about Evolution. My thoughts on these two topics, summarized, are these:

Communism is not only morally wrong, it is also self-contradictory and impossible in practice;

Evolution is as proven as any other scientific theory, and it does not threaten -- at all -- Christianity.

I'd be glad to discuss these thoughts in depth in some other thread if anyone wants to know the grounds for these assertions of mine... both subjects are a bit of "pet hobbies" for me, especially Evolution which is a bit more than a hobby.

But what I REALLY want to know is the meaning of "true information" as used by klugiglugus ;).

[Elessar II]

To believe in something, even to the point of unshakeable conviction, does not make it true. To believe that an idea is absolutely prepostrous does not make it false.

Would you expound on that statement a little Lotho?

Evolution is as proven as any other scientific theory, and it does not threaten -- at all -- Christianity.

Are you kidding me? It just threatens the fact that there is a God and it implies that the Word of God (the Bible) is nothing but a book of lies.
Also, explain to me how evolution is as proven as any other scientific theory.:confused:

[Eriol]

Originally posted by Elessar II
Are you kidding me? It just threatens the fact that there is a God and it implies that the Word of God (the Bible) is nothing but a book of lies.
Also, explain to me how evolution is as proven as any other scientific theory.:confused:

No, I'm not kidding :). Read those threads. Question on the Bible looks at it from the Biblical viewpoint; Thoughts on Darwinian Evolution looks at it from the scientific viewpoint.

If you still have questions after reading those threads (and of course you will :D), open a new thread (since those threads are archived now) or PM me. I answered those concerns of yours in the threads. Of course, whether my answer was good enough to assuage your concerns remains to be decided by you ;). But it is good enough for me. I'm a Christian, and an Evolutionist, and I see no contradiction in that.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Lotho said: "To believe in something, even to the point of unshakeable conviction, does not make it true. To believe that an idea is absolutely prepostrous does not make it false."

Ellessar II: Would you expound on that statement a little Lotho?

Lotho: What's to expound?:) If I have the unshakeable conviction that the world is flat, that doesn't make it true.

If I believe that the idea of going to the moon is utterly preposterous, that doesn't make it false (Obviously all of mankind held both propositions totally once upon a time).

Just because propositions or assertions are invested with strong emotion, that makes a proposition neither true nor false, although the presence of strong emotion tends to convince one that something is true, which is a trap many people fall into. A thing is either true or false independent of what we think, independent of our convictions, and independent of our emotions.

—Lotho

[Elessar II]

Just because propositions or assertions are invested with strong emotion, that makes a proposition neither true nor false, although the presence of strong emotion tends to convince one that something is true, which is a trap many people fall into. A thing is either true or false independent of what we think, independent of our convictions, and independent of our emotions.

But the fact that there is a God is not just a proposition, it's a known fact, a proven fact, and emotions have nothing to do with it.

If you still have questions after reading those threads (and of course you will ), open a new thread

I'll do that. :D

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Elessar II
...the fact that there is a God is not just a proposition, it's a known fact, a proven fact, and emotions have nothing to do with it.


And just exactly what is that proof?

—Lotho

[Lantarion]

Originally posted by Elessar II
But the fact that there is a God is not just a proposition, it's a known fact, a proven fact, and emotions have nothing to do with it
Stop posting opinions as truths, or you will be given Warning Points and this thread will be closed. I'm serious. This thread is for discussion, not for laying 'truths' out and saying which is the actual one.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Lantarion
Stop posting opinions as truths, or you will be given Warning Points and this thread will be closed. I'm serious. This thread is for discussion, not for laying 'truths' out and saying which is the actual one.

Hi Lantarion,

I appreciate you doing your moderation duties, but please don't give warning points to Ellessar II. I wasn't aware he was getting close to breaking a rule. I'll be happy to keep up my dialogue with him via PM, and take this whole thing off the boards, if you wish.

—Lotho

[Elessar II]

Stop posting opinions as truths, or you will be given Warning Points and this thread will be closed. I'm serious. This thread is for discussion, not for laying 'truths' out and saying which is the actual one.

I'm sorry. I was getting excited.

[Helcaraxë]

Hmm...I think that there is no simple answer to your question. It is a topic that has been hotly debated for thousands of years. Personally, I am a panentheist. I believe that everything is a part of god, the Absolute being.

MB

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by MorgothsBane
Hmm...I think that there is no simple answer to your question. It is a topic that has been hotly debated for thousands of years. Personally, I am a panentheist. I believe that everything is a part of god, the Absolute being.

MB

Ah, what is the basis for your being a pantheist? That's not a position one comes to lightly, especially not in a Western country such as the USA. How did you come to hold that belief?

(I myself have been a member of a Hindu spiritual path for many years, and am also mildly attracted to some of the tenets of Tibetan Buddhism, especially those which espouse kindness and compassion toward self and others.)

—Lotho

[Elessar II]

I myself have been a member of a Hindu spiritual path

Is it true that Hindu's worship over three hundred million gods, many of which are animals?:confused:

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Elessar II
Is it true that Hindu's worship over three hundred million gods, many of which are animals?:confused:

That's true. It is also true that in the Hindu take on reality, what's important is that a person believe in any version of God that makes sense to him no matter how simple or complex, as long as it influences him to act with kindness, compassion and love toward himself and others.

Yep, there are gods and goddesses for just about everything you can think of (like separate facets of a huge God-diamond), but they're only aspects of God.

In Hinduism (at least in Kashmir Shaivism) the only thing that exists (and does not exist) is God. God is all space, time, matter and nothingness. God is everything we can understand and is beyond our understanding.

A child goes to the beach, sits down in the sand. He makes castles, cars, people, horses, etc. Yet they're all sand. The sand is God. Everything is made of God.

All matter and energy are transmutations of God, Spirit. Think of H2O. Freeze it and you have ice. Melt it and you have water. Boil it and you have steam, yet it's all H2O in different states of being. God is like that. Matter and energy are congealed spirit.

Each wave is part of the ocean, there's no difference exept that we see a "wave" and give it a name, an artificial construct. We're all waves in the God-ocean.

But in Hinduism, you don't have to believe any of it, and that's OK too, because everything is God including you. including the people who don't believe any of it. God is playing myriad roles. Why? For divine sport, or leela in Sanskrit. God is taking the parts of you having a dialogue with me. God is taking the part of the Christian, the Jew, the Buddhist, the atheist, the agnostic, the Indian tribesmen who have religions and spiritual paths we never even heard of. God is George Bush, Joe Lieberman, Saddam Hussein, Bette Midler, Stalin, Hitler, Einstein, Hawkings and Ghandi, Leno and Letterman.

There's nothing and no one that isn't God. Hinduism says that God is all there is, and everything and everyone that is, including everyone who thinks this whole post is absolutely crazy and Lotho is a madman or hopelessly lost for his beliefs and is damned to everlasting hell for his heretical ideas.:p

One more thing: I do not believe that all this is literally true, as I do not believe that the mythology of any religion is literally true. How could any one religion be the one and only truth? What does that make all the other religions? That's like saying that pepperoni pizza is the One True Pizza — ridiculous! Religions have much wisdom. We figured out long ago what to do to make earth into heaven. But there are also a lot of fear and guilt-generating ideas embedded in religions that I think are sheer ****.

So at 67 years into the game, that's why my Deep Thought is: "It all boils down to how you treat yourself and others."

—Lotho

[Lantarion]

Fabulous post Lotho, I dno't think I've ever heard a better summary of the Hindu religion. :)

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by Lantarion
Fabulous post Lotho, I don't think I've ever read a better summary of the Hindu religion. :)

Aw, shucks, :::bows, stands with one foot over the other, blushes furiously::: thanks!

—Lotho

[Helcaraxë]

Lotho, the Hindu coneption of God and mine are very, very similar.
As for how I came to be a panentheist, I'm not sure I understand the question. I'm a panentheist (<--note spelling; panentheism and pantheism are different;)) because that is the way that I believe the universe to be. That is my view on the way things are.
I don't know if that was your question.

MB

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by MorgothsBane
Lotho, the Hindu coneption of God and mine are very, very similar.
As for how I came to be a panentheist, I'm not sure I understand the question. I'm a panentheist (<--note spelling; panentheism and pantheism are different;)) because that is the way that I believe the universe to be. That is my view on the way things are.
I don't know if that was your question.

MB

Omigod! I thought you'd misspelled "pantheist!" :::blushes furiously::: Now — what is panentheism?

—Lotho

[Helcaraxë]

Originally posted by Lotho_Pimple
Omigod! I thought you'd misspelled "pantheist!" :::blushes furiously::: Now — what is panentheism?

—Lotho

From "A world of Ideas: A dictionary of important theories, concepts, beliefs, and thinkers":

Pantheism and panentheism: Related but distinct ways of understanding the relation of God to the world. Pantheism (literally, "God in all") holds that God and nature are identical, while panentheism ("all in God) holds that God contains the world but is greater than it.

Hope that helps.

--MB

[Barliman Butterbur]

Thanks for the definition. A subtle, but important difference between the two: so panentheism is a synergistic kind of cosmology in which all the elements of reality go to make up God, who is more than the sum of the parts — is that right?

—Lotho

[Helcaraxë]

Yes, that's the basic idea.:) So I take it that as a Hindu you are a panentheist as well? (Your description of Brahman is very panentheistic.:) )

MB

[Barliman Butterbur]

Originally posted by MorgothsBane
Yes, that's the basic idea.:) So I take it that as a Hindu you are a panentheist as well? (Your description of Brahman is very panentheistic.:) )

MB

Hi MB,

I wouldn't call myself a Hindu by any means! I was very deeply involved in a Hindu path for many years when I was searching for the answers to so-called "Perennial Questions." I have moved to the very periphery of that path since then. My Deep Thought says it all for me now.

I'd never heard of panentheism until just a few days ago, and I mistook the term for a misspelling of "pantheism."

I suppose Hinduism could be considered either one, depending on one's own outlook. It's so inclusive that one could consider literally anything as some facet or other of Hinduism, since one of the basic tenets is, "There is nothing that isn't Shiva (God)." What term you put on that is up for grabs, I guess.:)

—Lotho

[celebdraug]

So you're not actually a hindu?

Can i ask, if a child has been Baptised but later in life, they decide that they dont want to be a christian anymore, is it possible for them to change Religion and God? :confused:

[Starflower]

of course it is possible to change religion and God, it is after all a personal choice. But I think the official stand of the christian churches is that you cannot be 'unbaptised', once you have been baptised it will stay with you, even if you choose to practice another religion. So in the event that later in life you decide to follow Christianity again, you will not have to re-baptised.
Though there are some Christian movements where you can be re-baptised if you have left the movement and come back later. ( I know I used to be part of one)

[Sarde]

So you're not actually a hindu?

Can i ask, if a child has been Baptised but later in life, they decide that they dont want to be a christian anymore, is it possible for them to change Religion and God? :confused:

You can change religion, but it would be pretty hard to 'change God', assuming that there can be only one God. Contrary to what is generally assumed, even Hinduism is a monotheistic religion. It just assumes that God can take on an unlimited number of forms. Which isn't so hard to imagine, assuming that God is all-powerful.