True.. But religion has no Exclusive on what god is. Religion is a poor excuse for a description of something it is too stupid to understand. People think.. RELIGION is the story.. Soz. organised religion, christianity, islam, exct. Is a poor excuse for a description.. I could write a better story in 1/2 an hour. Put organised religion where it belongs.. in the trash.. Think for yourself. Occam
You have a point. Our ability to measure our universe may be limited by the raw materials we have at our disposal for instrumentation, but the interpretations of our measurements and observations are continuously evolving. Religion is also a placebo for cowards to cope with their fear of the unknown.
Excellent Idea for a thread... Currently I am a what I consider myself to be a Heretic Catholic. I am feverishly trying to come to grip with the fact that Jesus may have reached his state of consciousness via Ancient wisdom of the East in particular perhaps Vedic Knowledge/Wisdom it would make ALOT of sense. Alot more then Mysteries and Guessing game and praying to the milk jug, with the yes, no, and wait game that is Christianity. If I do I will merge my catholic roots with Eastern Yogic principles and practices...
Nikalaus But DID the stone roll aside and he walked away on the 3rd day. THAT is the story. Me thinks not.. He was a man in the worst of situations and he stuck it out to the end without fear.. a great man. The entire bible is besides a supository of fables.. a good book.. But dont believe what it says jesus did.. he would not. I am in awe of the stupidity of those that argue their lives away on the hair splitting of words in the bible. What the FuK is a holy trinity..LOL... 'some are too stupid to know they are stupid' just about sums it up. Dont feel that you are arrogant in disparaging organised religion. It really is a load of crap. The number of people tha believe a thing lends NO validity to that thing. [ie.. everyone thought the world was flat...lol] Occam
if that is just fiction, it would be odd for the writer to make it so that females found the stone rolled away, considering their standing during the first century.
Who said females did.. Where you there? Women were in those times. Often chattle. To imply that as a repressed segment of humanity females would more oft be speakers of truth depends on if females actually were there. Personally i think NONE were there and its all fiction. The ONLY history of such. Is in the bible. And that is the word of god cause on the flyleaf it says 'this is the word of god' Beware the man of one book. Occam
that's what Im getting at. if it IS fiction, then why would they write in a female to discover the tomb empty? fictionally in the 1st century, wouldn't a man be more suitable for this discovery?
Dude. If someone in the street said."london sank into the sea' And you went home and there was no story of london sliding into the channel and nothing on the net or radio..for days. Would you still believe that person? Multiple points of verification IS the core of the human Epistemology. When ONE book says this or that happened..that a man came back to life. And there is no independent verification , anywhere, ever. Methinks only one who WANTED that to be true.. would believe it. This is called 'method'..try it sometime. Occam
Dude Never said i KNEW. There is a big large distinction between believing and knowing. I know the glass will fall from the table if i push it one more inch. I believe there is a city called Moscow. I do not KNOW anything about the events in pallestine in 32ad. [and no-one else does either] I believe the beliefs of others concerning these events borders on outright fantasy. So should i believe what others say they know when they can claim only belief? And a 30th hand belief at that. This is the point to most of my posts. Belief is a method...And should not involve any emotion It is the core of science That is because it works. However. 99% of what people believe is believed emotively. No. i dont believe jesus was resurrected. [though it is within the realm of the possible] The 'story' christianity proposes is infantile and contradictory. But i do believe in a designer. Occam
Agreed. Yes. Now we're getting to the core of epistemology, "if a tree falls in the woods...", knowledge versus belief. That which we "know" to be true is based on our experience of observing cause and effect, yet this is still limited by our perceptions and interpretations, which are subject to illusions and delusions. Contrast that with belief, which is based on our interpretations of others' observations, perceptions, and interpretations. Now the water becomes muddy. A good example is modern day journalism in America, if you call it that. My belief is there are no universal truths, only consistent observations, which have proven useful in providing us with the tools to manipulate our environment in the realm of science and engineering, economics, psychology, etc. The ether which is our soul rents the body, whose physical senses are imperfect, governed by physiological processes. Add to that the psyche, which can be altered by any of a number of different substances, emotions, etc., and you can appreciate how limited we are as beings. The ego is the enemy of knowledge, because it imposes our perceptions on reality, making us rigid and closed-minded.
Mellow... Agreed and agreed.. Recently i have faltered in my belief in my fellow human beings... become angry. With harsh words. Your post is an oasis of cool water to a thirsty man.. Occam PS.. 'big large' ..lol.. how did i come up with that... Next thing you know i'll be saying 'never did nothing'
Wow, Thank You! I'll try and keep the ego in check. Yesterday my wife received her Master's degree, and the speaker of her commencement ceremony went into the basis of knowledge, the whole idea that it's not about us, it's about being curious, probing our foundations, cracking that sucker open and looking at the chunks. The only path to knowledge is humility.
Just to clarify, I wasn't criticizing anyone's lack of humility, just making a point. I've read that some cultures hold their youth in high esteem, because children and infants are unencumbered by the boundaries of knowledge that are imposed on the intellect of adults by experience. Therefore, they're seen as being omniscient in a sense. The key then is to retain that sense of what I call the childlike mind, where you can shed the shackles of conventional knowledge, and look at things with a different perspective. We can learn a lot from our kids. As for religion, I don't follow anyone's interpretations literally. Though I see a lot of value in sacred texts such as the Bible, I read it metaphorically. I will have far more respect for organized religion when people get their act together and use it for it's intended purpose, which is spiritual guidance, instead of exploiting it to fulfill an agenda of greed, hatred and corruption.
Yellow Well thats deconstruction...It is a powerfull tool Curiousity does that.It deconstructs and defines. [logic] Imagination reconstructs.[Wet logic] Let her read this or tell her. I think all comes to this . We deconstruct/define.. then we take that and collate it with all other knowing to make a new definition. And sometime a genius pops up like einstein and makes new definitions from what no others can deconstruct. In the end.. all we wish is love and purpose. And while knowledge can be a purpose. Love is reserved for our fellow beings. Occam
And if we do a good job they learn 'well' from us. To have open minds and be free thinkers. Yellow Exactly Occam