quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek most of them don't even make sense

exactly...its stupid

quote:

Originally posted by Isannah exactly...its stupid

How about this, it's a solid, constructive theory that can't be proven wrong :


(1) The New Testament says people like you would question us.
(2) You question us.
(3) Therefore the bible is true.
(4) Therefore, God exists.








LOL

I wonder how the world would look like if someone went back in time and replaced the bible with this:

hahahahahaha

go for it.

if you can build a time machine and replace it, i'll give you a dollar.

___________________

quote:

philippe - In MEXICO says: ur the most clever pothead i know philippe - In MEXICO says: u deserve a fucking medal

Those proofs are strictly mathematical and philosophical (I heard enough of "beautiful" speeching to see similar embedded in those stupid explanations), and that nonsense cant make me ever believe in God again. The only way is if he actually shows up, or sends an angel to this planet and tell us the truth and stop hiding from us, ignoring us, alienating us, hiding the truth and not helping us as humanity ... Science can make the most simple and understandable explanations to the world so far. EXCEPT MAYBE FOR ONE PART: How did it all start / how were first atoms created?

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

We all live in our own dreams. Some dreams are logical, others aren't. Logic and reasoning are all we have to chip away at the unsolveable problem to this paradoxical existence.

The best analogy I can think of is the maze analogy. (I just now made this up, so bare with me; also bare with me that analogies are a poor and vague way of arguing.)

Imagine a maze with no finish. Such is solving the mystery of existence. Science, logic, reasoning: all get us closer, closer and closer, to the end of the maze, but we will never truly leave the maze and reach complete understanding.

Religion consists of men standing at the start of the maze, closing their eyes, and trying to invision a perfect path that does not exist. At first this was all men could do, with science being so primitive, and only great men of logic such as the Greek and Roman philosophers could see the futility of the maze of existence. Now that we have advanced through its corrodors, we know of the maze's paradox.

--

for more words on my belief, please read the Wednesday, August 13th entry in my weblog of thoughts. (it is the newest entry as of now, but might bump down later)

weblog here

___________________
The father made fetuses with flesh licking ladies / While you and your mother were asleep in the trailer park / Thunderous sparks from the dark of the stadiums / The music and medicine you needed for comforting / So make all your fat, fleshy fingers fingers to moving / And pluck all your silly strings and / Bend all your notes for me and / Soft silly music is meaningful, magical / The movements were beautiful / All in your ovaries / All of them milking with green fleshy flowers / While powerful pistons were sugary sweet machines, / Smelling of semen all under the garden / Was all you were needing when you still believed in me.

Last edited by davinox on Aug-13-2003 at 09:10

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium The only way is if he actually shows up, or sends an angel to this planet and tell us the truth and stop hiding from us, ignoring us, alienating us, hiding the truth and not helping us as humanity ...

And how are we deserving of help? What makes us entitled to God's divine intervention? Everybody thinks that something is owed unto them. Last I checked we're a pretty miserable group of people. If I was God I would probably hide from us too ... or just obliterate the monstrosity of a fuckup that is us.

___________________
Retro ...

davinox, I'd like to provide a different view for you on what you've been saying:

quote:

Originally posted by davinox for more words on my belief, please read the Wednesday, August 13th entry in my weblog of thoughts. (it is the newest entry as of now, but might bump down later) weblog here

Good stuff, I like your view. You say,

quote:

There is only one truth I know of, and that is quoted from René Descartes. "I think, therefore I am."

But I will quote from Nietzsche:

quote:

Let the people suppose that knowledge means knowing things entirely; the philosopher must say to himself: When I analyze the process that is expressed in the sentence, "I think," I find a whole series of daring assertions that would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to prove; for example, that it is I who think, that there must necessarily be something that thinks, that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being who is thought of as a cause, that there is an "ego," and, finally, that it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking -- that I know what thinking is. For if I had not already decided within myself what it is, by what standard could I determine whether that which is just happening is not perhaps "willing" or "feeling"? In short, the assertion "I think" assumes that I compare my state at the present moment with other states of myself which I know, in order to determine what it is; on account of this retrospective connection with further "knowledge," it has, at any rate, no immediate certainty for me.

This beautifully illustrates that we can't even be sure that "We think" (rather, "I think"). We can't even say, "I am." Who is it "that is"? Does it necessarily have to be a thing, and not a process? Etc.

But that's not to say that everything is false and a dream. I myself would venture to say that the only certainty is, "Existence Is." Nothing else -- all we know that there is an existence; a reality, "stuff is happening."

As for thinking, if I dream overnight that I am a butterfly, how do I know that that dreaming state is the actual "waking" state and that this dreaming state is not the actual "dreaming" state? Was I dreaming of being a butterfly, or am I just a dream of a butterfly right now? It can't be resolved... and my past is also fake; sure, I can say, "Yes, but I remember being here yesterday" -- yet the past doesn't exist. Can you bring it to me on a plate? The past is all in your mind, it is as formless as dreams. Nothing can be based on the past. Likewise, nothing can be based on the future. It hasn't occured yet -- how can you base any knowledge on it? How can you even consider it? What is there to consider? Possibilities, potentials? That is just groping in the dark...

No, the only certainty is that Here-Now, Existence IS.

See my sig on "my philosophy."

quote:

We all live in our own dreams. Some dreams are logical, others aren't. Logic and reasoning are all we have to chip away at the unsolveable problem to this paradoxical existence.

I'm not sure I agree that we are "living in our own dreams" so to speak (sounds a bit too much like solopsism for my liking) but there is no doubt that we see the world through the untranscendable "filter" of human perception and that absolute knowledge, as a result, is unattainable. Logic and reasoning may be "useful" tools in coming to grips with the world around us in this scenario, but they're still largely unreliable in the sense that they're subjective human constructs and the validation of these methods is entirely circular: namely we use human logic to validate human logic. Nothing is inherently logical or reasonable and that which we deem to be logical (say the perceived "logos" that gives the impression of natural order and subservience to natural laws within the universe) only appears so because of the way we cast our logic out onto the world. If we perceive something that doesn't fit in with our logical outlook, it's difficult for us to understand or appreciate. The reason we'll never solve the "problem of this paradoxical existence" is because we can't escape our subjectivity and, with that, the way in which we view and attempt to understand the world. We cannot know, for sure, whether our assumption are correct because we have no other acessible reality to callibrate it against.

It should be no suprise that early men, at the dawn of civilization, envisaged that the entire world was created by giant, very powerful men and women in the sky - I don't think we could expect anything else from a species of being armed only with its inexorable anthropocentricity and a logical method peculiar to itself.

quote:

And how are we deserving of help? What makes us entitled to God's divine intervention? Everybody thinks that something is owed unto them. Last I checked we're a pretty miserable group of people. If I was God I would probably hide from us too ... or just obliterate the monstrosity of a fuckup that is us.

No-one's saying that God is obliged to come down and help us, merely that there would seem to be little reason to believe in God unless God did manifest himself to us all in such a way.

Oh, and depending on the nature of "God" I do believe we, as a species, are entitled to divine intervention in some sense. If he's up there, sitting passively as his children destroy themselves while he has the power to stop it, then I have only two words to say to this God, and the second word is "you". Would we excuse a parent if, after his children had killed themselves within his view while he had the power to prevent it, he said "oh, but it's their own fault. They chose that path of violence themselves - not much I could do"? Why do we excuse God for his apathy then?

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by occrider And how are we deserving of help? What makes us entitled to God's divine intervention? Everybody thinks that something is owed unto them. Last I checked we're a pretty miserable group of people. If I was God I would probably hide from us too ... or just obliterate the monstrosity of a fuckup that is us.

Do we even need help? And why? That assumes that we are "in trouble", that something is "wrong", and that there is a "right" that is lacking. These are all just empty concepts, empty in the sense that they are not based on any reality, they are just constructs created by us, humans.

Who is to say that Utterly-Destroying-The-Planet is not a Good Thing? Can you imagine a civilization or race that holds a view -- no, that is hard-wired to seek destruction and not self-preservation? For us as humans, it is good to survive. But what if we were made to think that the only way to properly "Die" is with a "bang"? Then the destruction of the Earth would be the greatest funeral ever!!! It would be so honourable!

We might think that is absurd, but the point is to show that what we think is "right" and "wrong" is gibberish -- cannibals eat humans, they consider it "right" and "good," while we consider it "wrong" and "evil." Who is right? No one is! There is no right or wrong in reality. Of course, there *is* OUR concept of right and OUR concept of wrong, but those are just concepts. You can't base them on anything, so they don't actually exist.

Life is really pointless. There is no point, it is just THERE, to be lived through. So IMO, we are not "fuckups", we Are. It doesn't matter what happens. Eden on Earth or Nuclear Wasteland, it's all the same...

I like this thread now!

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade The reason we'll never solve the "problem of this paradoxical existence" is because we can't escape our subjectivity and, with that, the way in which we view and attempt to understand the world.

Why do you say there is a "problem" in the first place? We are made as great information processing / problem-solving machines. Seeking out problems is in our nature...even problems that don't exist...

quote:

It should be no suprise that early men, at the dawn of civilization, envisaged that the entire world was created by giant, very powerful men and women in the sky - I don't think we could expect anything else from a species of being armed only with its inexorable anthropocentricity and a logical method peculiar to itself.

Excellent point -- let's extend it a little: who is to say that us with our "technology" are any more Right than they were? We just have different tools and different explanations, different justifications rather -- but we can't prove anything either. We will never be able to "prove" Life or "prove" the Universe. Why is proof needed? Look outside -- that's all the proof I need...

quote:

No-one's saying that God is obliged to come down and help us, merely that there would seem to be little reason to believe in God unless God did manifest himself to us all in such a way. Oh, and depending on the nature of "God" I do believe we, as a species, are entitled to divine intervention in some sense. If he's up there, sitting passively as his children destroy themselves while he has the power to stop it, then I have only two words to say to this God, and the second word is "you". Would we excuse a parent if, after his children had killed themselves within his view while he had the power to prevent it, he said "oh, but it's their own fault. They chose that path of violence themselves - not much I could do"? Why do we excuse God for his apathy then?

Again, who is to say that maybe for "God", we should be destroyed? Maybe "God" thinks that species are meant to be created then destroyed, not to be "helped." Again, "helped" is based on OUR concepts and what we think is right... no one can really say that "God" isn't laughing in our foolishness right now. Maybe Blowing the Earth Up is the path to "God's heaven"? Maybe all the "do-gooders" and all the "pious" people in this world are the "Real Sinners"?

No one can be sure of anything like this... hence I say there is no point in even discussing "God" and "heaven". They are not!