• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Belief in god or not?

Simple Hatred said:
^The existence of God is a personal thought, there is also those who argue that the creation of the universe can be explained scientifically
Click to expand...

oh. everything can be explained scientifically. but that ability in no way negates God. in fact, it reinforces God ad a real, sentient being. think of how many separate scientific disciplines must incrieasingly brought to bear to answer riddles of science. in truth, science has only theories, which are tested over and over again. but in the end, its just theories
 
The problem with discussing god, is the fact that the very word takes on so many different meanings dependent on context. Yes, in the end they are just theories, but it comes down to plausibilty. The big bang happened, if I drop a ball it will hit the ground, this is fact.

I most definitely refute the claim of intelligent design or creationism. As Christopher Hitchens states that a notion, such as intelligent design, makes as all objects in a cruel experiment, in which we are created sick and commanded to be well and over us to supervise this is a celestial dictatorship, a kind of divine North Korea.

Its truly a peculiar thing to ponder, either the universe is infinite or not, in the end both ideas are just as perplexing.

I don't know where I'm going, its very late and im a bit burnt out, but I do not believe in some separate entity that is in control.
 
The Big Bang is essentially a scientific creation story. No proof of it what so ever, a myth, a fantasy upon which the entire enterprise of modern science rests. Don't forget it was a Catholic priest who helped come up with the idea.. fucking Catholic church trying to imprison peoples minds with this beginning/end bullshit instead of conceding to infinity.

I don't follow any religion and I'm interested greatly by science, psychology, and philosophy. The idea which resonates with me the most is the non-dual philosophy of Advaita Vedanta.. which basically means that at the deepest root of everything there is "primordial, natural awareness without subject or object". That awareness is "God". And it is available to any human being who dares to turn his (mental) head in that direction and see who they really are.

Where does a dream begin and end? I have my own ideas about how matter forms (centre of galaxies/electricity) but the actual space that matter occupies I believe is infinite and has always existed (and not existed).. it's all a kind of mirage, hologram, dream. I don't really like using the word "universe" because it seems to imply a boundary condition to me.
 
If you're perceptive and look into the face of a young child, or even many animals, you can see God there. Children are really so adored because they're so pure and holy and that divine spirit is so strong in them. When we reach adulthood we have lost most of that (or most have).
 
Journyman16 said:
Belief might create certainty, but it doesn't create facts. Facts are things independent of what people might think is true and can be demonstrated in spite of belief.Belief can also conceal facts - in some cases people literally cannot see a fact because it conflicts with their belief.
Click to expand...
finally. lap top.you said that facts are things independent of what people might think is true and that can be demonstrated in spite of belief. the truth of the matter is that we have no way to demonstrate anything unless the one sense-touch (manifested five ways)-is involved. and since this is true, such demonstrations cannot be accomplished lest faith be a resort. facts are totally dependent on what people thinkthen you said some ppl cannot see facts because those facts conflict with their beliefs. exactly!
 
Ninae said:
If you're perceptive and look into the face of a young child, or even many animals, you can see God there. Children are really so adored because they're so pure and holy and that divine spirit is so strong in them. When we reach adulthood we have lost most of that (or most have).
Click to expand...

this. perfect. and this is why i find abortion such an insidious practice. any society which preys upon the weak and helpless is doomed. ours is such a society
 
higherconciousness said:
The problem with discussing god, is the fact that the very word takes on so many different meanings dependent on context. Yes, in the end they are just theories, but it comes down to plausibilty. The big bang happened, if I drop a ball it will hit the ground, this is fact.

I most definitely refute the claim of intelligent design or creationism. As Christopher Hitchens states that a notion, such as intelligent design, makes as all objects in a cruel experiment, in which we are created sick and commanded to be well and over us to supervise this is a celestial dictatorship, a kind of divine North Korea.

Its truly a peculiar thing to ponder, either the universe is infinite or not, in the end both ideas are just as perplexing.

I don't know where I'm going, its very late and im a bit burnt out, but I do not believe in some separate entity that is in control.
Click to expand...

christopher hitchings is a prime example of someone with a voice, but no substance or understanding. the essence of his statement is that atheists don't believe in God because they-the atheists-are not God. his brother though, saw the light, and is a born again Christian. lol! i bet their dinner conversation is....strained. lol!
 
vincubus said:
finally. lap top.you said that facts are things independent of what people might think is true and that can be demonstrated in spite of belief. the truth of the matter is that we have no way to demonstrate anything unless the one sense-touch (manifested five ways)-is involved. and since this is true, such demonstrations cannot be accomplished lest faith be a resort. facts are totally dependent on what people thinkthen you said some ppl cannot see facts because those facts conflict with their beliefs. exactly!
Click to expand...
Ah, well, if you're going to go there even touch doesn't count. Strictly speaking we have no way at all to tell from our 10, 15 or 20 physical senses (depending on whose definition of senses we take) whether there is anything at all except the sense of Self. We might be Neo, laying in a machine and having 'reality' piped direct into us, or even the body may nopt be real - all we really can say is something like "I, Journyman16, perceive mind pictures that I interpret as belonging to a physical body which I could easily be imagining."

After all, we don't even KNOW there's a brain present - all we have is changes to a hologram (that we call a mind) that inform us of events and perceptions.

And that's a whole different level of abstraction from whether or not we 'believe' in a god. :D
 
^
You can always reduce to the subjective because our senses can potentially fail us.
Maybe nothing in this universe is real cant rule this out with 100 percent certainty.

I like the concept "I doubt therefore I exist"

I dont know what you consider a "brain"
but I believe intelligent thought only comes from intelligence.
I think we can safely say information at the least exist.
 
I think about all we can truly say is 'Imagination exists' - I'd give you information but lets be realistic - any information we think exists is still just holo-twitches in the field that we view.
 
^
I think we can find common ground and say
thought exist.

Edit: or more ability/potential to think exist
 
If we accept cognition, the perception of cognition, or even the illusion of the perception of cognition, then the position that there exists something could be adopted. the self is somewhat in doubt, but i think its safe to cautiously suggest there is cosmic consciousness, and we are extensions of that
 
methamaniac said:
^
I think we can find common ground and say
thought exist.

Edit: or more ability/potential to think exist
Click to expand...
Perhaps - the reason I chose imagination is because to me, it encompasses creativity, which is often non-verbal, at least in the initial stage. To me, thought is a more structured process, perhaps a secondary level compared to the first conceptual stage. It seems to me one can perform the creative step without necessarily thinking - the conceiving of (whatever) is the beginning, the details are the thoughts.

But I can live with thought as a general name for it.
 
I call this "inspiration" but I experience it as a way of your mind being "lit up" (not really in a mental way) before you start forming mental constructs from it.
 
The church is just an attempt for humans to achieve some kind of closeness with God. Like everything else human it leaves a lot to be desired. You don't need to be in a church to connect with God, you can also be in nature, or all by yourself.

The strength of the church community is that it can, potentially, gather a group of people who are close to God and can inspire each other.
 
I have little objection to 'god' per se, but I can't accept the extant versions being preached in established Religions - too much of what they say is clearly self-serving and I reject it almost automatically. (I was inoculated against Religion at a very young age. :D)

Mind you, life experience has caused me to greatly elevate the importance of Spirituality.
 
Journyman16 said:
Something else is my view. For mine, 'god did it' is just a way to avoid the questions. The Big Bang is problematic because it relies on Redshift being equal to velocity and there is physical evidence that is not the case.

General Systems Theory (or at least Paul LaViolette's explanation of it) suggests it is non-expanding and perhaps infinite - we only see the part of it where light has had time to reach us, or maybe where it hasn't reddened so far by travelling through gravity wells that we can't register it.

Not sure about that simply because there is also mounting evidence that it's a hologram universe anyway, which opens up a whole cosmos of new questions and ideas.

So I am Agnostic, but not in favour of either of the 2 you mention.

Story-wise? I started in a religion but Science took me away from that and eventually there came to be too much corruption of Science and I stopped just accepting the 'consensus' views and started looking for alternatives.

Found quite a few of them so far. :D
Click to expand...

In my post I said: was it god, a big bang, or something else so I didn't offer two positions... I offered three.

And I side with your position on agnosticism. I don't believe anyone knows how the universe began. I was just wondering what peoples positions are because the topic has been brought up in my neuroscience courses in college.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top