what makes a good person?

just out of interest, what do you believe to be the top three things, that make a good person, and why.

if you believe your religion or lack of religion, helps makes a good person.
or society, family etc.. then mention it please.

1 kindness.( to yourself and others)
2 honesty.( to yourself and others)
3 actions.(speak louder than words)

I've kept mine short, as it's your input, I'm interested in.

A good person is one who does no evil...

There is no such thing. Only God is 'good'.

Adaptability
Endurance
Strength
Cunning
Agility
Inventiveness/industriousness
Determination
Courage
Loyalty (to social unit- strong family ties- powerful tribe)
Intolerance (of rivals)
Absolutely no sympathy (for rivals)
alert... ness(?)
focus
familiarity with environment (similar to court awareness in basketball, but territory awareness)
Social skills
sex appeal and parenting skills(or its all a waste of time)

And they should have good well bred dogs just to give them that extra edge.

I don't live up to all these categories, for one I'm way too tolerant, and I fully realise it's a weakness and that I consequently should not exist.
Its unlikely anyone alive today completely fits the human standard, not all should but each social unit should be strong in all those areas and more I couldn't think of.
But none are, because the species has been subject to hideous dysgenics for thousands of years.
These standards need to be bred for, nature lost control of us which is precisely when it became our responsibility to strictly selectively breed ourselves. Right now it would take many generations of repair to get anything close to a good person.

Adaptability
Endurance
Strength
Cunning
Agility
Inventiveness/industriousness
Determination
Courage
Loyalty (to social unit- strong family ties- powerful tribe)
Intolerance (of rivals)
Absolutely no sympathy (for rivals)
alert... ness(?)
focus
familiarity with environment (similar to court awareness in basketball, but territory awareness)
Social skills
sex appeal and parenting skills(or its all a waste of time)

And they should have good well bred dogs just to give them that extra edge.

I don't live up to all these categories, for one I'm way too tolerant, and I fully realise it's a weakness and that I consequently should not exist.
Its unlikely anyone alive today completely fits the human standard, not all should but each social unit should be strong in all those areas and more I couldn't think of.
But none are, because the species has been subject to hideous dysgenics for thousands of years.
These standards need to be bred for, nature lost control of us which is precisely when it became our responsibility to strictly selectively breed ourselves. Right now it would take many generations of repair to get anything close to a good person.

So we have a nation of flawless ones say 200 years from now. These are the genetic kings of their age - they are confident that no one can defeat them because they know themselves to be the strongest.
Are they allowed to kill?
If the answer is no - then how do they cope with the revolt of the poor and weak who will rise up against them as they seek to conquer more and more of the earth to sustain their own strong kind?
If the answer is yes - how do you justify this?

thanks

c20

Nothing's good except "the good" alone. It's not always good to be honest, you might hurt someone... it's not good to have too much courage... you might hurt yourself... focus is not good, you might not see what happens around... strength is not good, it might be used in a wrong way... ETC! So there's no evil or good things really, but it depends on how they are used... and there is no good except the good.....................

Everything here is totally futile because as long as there is potential for bad we are on to a loser from the start.
From that point we only have 3 things ...

Faith - believe one day it will change i.e. no more bad
Hope - not in this life though where we know nothing will change
Love - cos its the one thing we all agree is good!

Love is therefore the greatest.

Live in love therefore not just with words but with deeds. Somebody might then 'see' you as being the 'bearer' of that which is 'good'. You cannot be good of yourself.

No one is good. God is good. God is Love.

Go figure!

Simple: humility.

Everything else comes from this.

what makes a good person?


Living his/her life with the realization that others wellness are contigent upon ones decisons beliefs and actions. Good is factoring in those immediatly affected by your decison and the impact it will have on them while still preserving your emotional stablity.

Accomodation is what makes community feasible and we are communial by nature. by creating an enviroment where each and every person factors in the impact of their actions on those around them they have thought was it good and the manifestion of those thoughts if they are in congruence with communial well being are good.

In solitude goodness is doing what is good for oneself. As everyone needs some solitude to be mentally and spirtually healty that is a time when being selfish is very good.

Goodness may be a set of attributes put into us by DNA but the manifestations of those attrubutes are the things that make us good or bad.

C20h25n30 by your logic of "only god is good" meaning that we are not you have just made God all of our enemies by creating him to be the archtype of which we are not. To think that humnanity is bad by invention and than salvaged by good it the same as suggestion that man is polar to God and as such has no relationship to him. And before you use the "Jesus bridge" that if we are who we are which is according to you bad and it is our desire to be so ...why cross that bridge at all?

Glaucon with your answer of humility than is your affirmation congurent with C20h25n30's who humbily accepts that man is bad and that Jesus is the path to all that is good?

Dr.that is a list for survival of the fittest...right? Is your contention that survival of the fittest is good and dilution of that forumla is bad? Just want clarification.

mis-t-highs,

imho, the top 3 things that make a person good are:

Self-betterment through self-control and the persuit of growth. - Before anyone can do good to anyone else, one must first understand how to help others, be capable of helping others, and be capable of making the greatest possible use of his faculties in helping others. Primarily, however, this activity brings happiness to the individual, and happiness is good.

Service. - Every human is bound to service, it is better to accept this, and in fact persue this, than attempt to avoid it. Once it is accepted and sought, then the greatest good toward others can be accomplished.

Connectivity. - Recognizing, and seeking unity within one' self and with those around him, as well as those things around him brings both fulfillment to him, and helps to bring fulfillment to those who and that which surrounds him. Happiness is the result of fulfillment, and in bringing fulfillment, one brings about happiness.

In answering this way, I have presupposed that you were not asking what makes a person intrinsically good. Contrary to what c20 believes, everything that exists is intrinsically good (that is, good by nature), and nothing that exists can be intrinsically evil (that is, evil by nature). When we speak of persons or things being good or bad, we actually refer to their activity, rather than their nature. Therefore, since one may act in good ways, and is naturally good, it is false to say that only God is good. If, what is meant in saying "only God is good," it is to say that only God is fully good, then I would agree with this, since the concept of God is that of the infinite, and only that which is infinite may be fully good, since every possible goodness is met out within the infinite. However, this does not seem to be what c20 meant.

Living his/her life with the realization that others wellness are contigent upon ones decisons beliefs and actions. Good is factoring in those immediatly affected by your decison and the impact it will have on them while still preserving your emotional stablity.

Accomodation is what makes community feasible and we are communial by nature. by creating an enviroment where each and every person factors in the impact of their actions on those around them they have thought was it good and the manifestion of those thoughts if they are in congruence with communial well being are good.

In solitude goodness is doing what is good for oneself. As everyone needs some solitude to be mentally and spirtually healty that is a time when being selfish is very good.

Goodness may be a set of attributes put into us by DNA but the manifestations of those attrubutes are the things that make us good or bad.

C20h25n30 by your logic of "only god is good" meaning that we are not you have just made God all of our enemies by creating him to be the archtype of which we are not. To think that humnanity is bad by invention and than salvaged by good it the same as suggestion that man is polar to God and as such has no relationship to him. And before you use the "Jesus bridge" that if we are who we are which is according to you bad and it is our desire to be so ...why cross that bridge at all?

Glaucon with your answer of humility than is your affirmation congurent with C20h25n30's who humbily accepts that man is bad and that Jesus is the path to all that is good?

Dr.that is a list for survival of the fittest...right? Is your contention that survival of the fittest is good and dilution of that forumla is bad? Just want clarification.

Man wasnt bad by invention! Man was tricked into disobeying God but not by God obviously!
There was a divide between Creator and created because that was the result of becoming like God knowing good from evil. Now our choices were not as simple as do not eat from a tree or you will die but our choices were suddenly ten trillion fold and God knew we needed saving from ourselves. We had become aware of all things not just the things our Creator would have for us. So Jesus was sent into the world as the light of the world. People rejected Jesus because He exposed their motives. Without Jesus all were plunged into darkness and thought that their acts would never be revealed in that darkness. This is why he was killed and persecuted and despised despite the fact that He came saying "I come not to judge the world but to save it"
The people that did believe in Him became just as despised as He was even though there was absolutely no condemnation of others whatsoever! Peter who loved Jesus so much was so scared by the persecution he saw that he even denied Jesus when challenged as being yoked to Him for fear of what would happen to him.
Those that rejected Him loved the darkness where their hypocrisy was power. Jesus primarily exposed hypocrisy and the worst example of this was the religious leaders of the day (sound familiar :rolleyes: ) who Jesus called "A brood of vipers".
Make no mistake - Jesus 'knew' His words were gonna get Him killed and yet He still said them. Some people on sciforums call Jesus 'weak'! How deceived are they!!!
Jesus performed many miracles but did He take credit for even one of them? No! He always transfered the Glory and Power back to His Father because he knew where the authority lay! He knew why He was here - to do the will of the One who sent Him even at the cost of His own life so that the Law would be fulfilled! The Law demands an innocent life for a guilty life but the Law cannot keep the innocent life because that would be against the Law. So the price was paid on the cross and because death couldn't keep Him ( it would have been unlawful for it to keep Him) Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to the living.
Those that believed were saved. Those that didnt remained under judgement because they had not accepted the free offer of life.
Jesus is the stumbling block to men just as the birth of light is the stumbling block to scientists and scholars. Seems like such an insignificant thing when you have billions of atoms and energies to play with, you know, the birth of light, seems like its so unimportant because you have so much to see in front of you. But I tell you scientists unless you can concieve the birth of light all your words and theories are nothing more than that - just words and theories. It is the same with Jesus - unless you accept Him the rest of your lives are just words and theories.

peace

c20

Contrary to what c20 believes, everything that exists is intrinsically good (that is, good by nature), and nothing that exists can be intrinsically evil (that is, evil by nature). When we speak of persons or things being good or bad, we actually refer to their activity, rather than their nature. Therefore, since one may act in good ways, and is naturally good, it is false to say that only God is good. If, what is meant in saying "only God is good," it is to say that only God is fully good, then I would agree with this, since the concept of God is that of the infinite, and only that which is infinite may be fully good, since every possible goodness is met out within the infinite. However, this does not seem to be what c20 meant.

Who was talking about the intrinsic nature of 'things'??? - the poster asked What makes a person good! I replied "There is no such thing as a 'good' person because only God is 'good'.
If you are saying that people are intrinsically good then you are very very much deceived and I take it you do not have children!

peace

c20

Love. All other virtues are simple manifestations of love.

EDIT: maybe "manifestations" are not the best word.... but if you have love, you have all the other virtues...

Love. All other virtues are simple manifestations of love.

God is love

Tell me something that I don't know... :rolleyes: :D ;)

If you are saying that people are intrinsically good then you are very very much deceived and I take it you do not have children!

peace

c20

Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide a reason for this belief? An argument, maybe? If you cannot, then do not simply make assertions, since they convince no one.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide a reason for this belief? An argument, maybe? If you cannot, then do not simply make assertions, since they convince no one.

Certainly - my kids are born, I do the best I can breaking my balls to support them and make sure they have quality of life. This doesnt stop my 4 year old son from kicking me in the shins and throwing a tantrum after a hard days work because I have forgotten to bring him some paper home to scribble on! I love my son, but he is NOT intrinsically good. He can be a little monster! Now if children were intrinsically good this would not happen huh?
Oh and lose the haughty tone m8! Just a piece of advice :)

Certainly - my kids are born, I do the best I can breaking my balls to support them and make sure they have quality of life. This doesnt stop my 4 year old son from kicking me in the shins and throwing a tantrum after a hard days work because I have forgotten to bring him some paper home to scribble on! I love my son, but he is NOT intrinsically good. He can be a little monster! Now if children were intrinsically good this would not happen huh?
Oh and lose the haughty tone m8! Just a piece of advice :)

Thank you for the experiential argument, but I believe it is flawed. I presume you are talking about a son who is not of the age of reason yet (derived from "kicking me in the shins" and "to scribble on"). If this is the case, then we are not talking about a rational animal. Sure, your son will come to an age of rationality. However, prior to this point, he will act as he is designed to act. In original creation, and you believing in such must agree to this, there was no need, as such, for humans. In other words, humans could grow steadily at whatever pace they were capable of, and they could experience any form of liesure whenever they desired. It was a veritable heaven on earth. Happiness was in no sense lacking. However, just as any animal, whenever there is an occasion of non-fulfillment of their nature, they would become frustrated and that frustration would be expressed physically. While such non-fulfillment wouldn't have been present in original creation, the nature of our reaction to it would have been as it is now. Since we do now live in a world on non-fulfillment (but only partial fulfillment) we do experience and express this frustration. It is simply part of our design. The child, then, is acting according to its design. Since it has not reached an age of rationality, and does not comprehend its situation of scarcity, it cannot act in any other way, unless taught to do so (very much like an animal can be taught to act in certain ways). Since nothing God creates can be said to be evil, coming out of the infinite, it is necessarily true, then, to say that the child's actions are not bad, according to its nature. Rather, it would be more proper to say that, given a state of fulfillment, such actions would not be manifested, but are, in fact, part of human nature. Once the child reaches the age of reason, and can learn of its current state and the state of scarcity in the world, it may then rationally choose to suppress such physical outbursts of frustration. If, when the child reaches the age of reason, it continues to choose such actions, it may then be culpable of wicked actions, since then it understands its situation, and chooses to ignore it.

Ergo, your argument isn't strong enough to say that only God is good.

c20H25N3o: God is love
*************
M*W: God is a name for all creation; therefore, humans are good, too.

c20H25N3o

It also depends on how young children we mean. Those who are 1 year old are "good"... agree? I think trees and flowers, and rivers are good too... lol.. at least they do no evil.

c20H25N3o: God is love
*************
M*W: God is a name for all creation; therefore, humans are good, too.
Humans were made good, but humans also have a dualist mind.
God is perfection (http://csunx4.bsc.edu/bmyers/3MEDPRF.htm).

Humans are finite, God is infinite.

TruthSeeker: Humans were made good, but humans also have a dualist mind. Humans are finite, God is infinite.
*************
M*W: Please explain your concept of God and why God is infinite. No Bible scripture... please!

Mmh, a good person...


morally right or based on religious principles; kind and helpful

Great, so this is a matter of religion?

successful, or able to do something well

No religion in this definition, and there are many more. So I suppose many people can be considered good. So, a christian can be good, but a mean satan worshipping manager can also be good...

What makes a good person? I would say rhetoric.

a person


philosopher philocrazy
the one that is a person

TruthSeeker: Humans were made good, but humans also have a dualist mind. Humans are finite, God is infinite.
*************
M*W: Please explain your concept of God and why God is infinite. No Bible scripture... please!
Well... if He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent... I guess He IS infinite. :eek:

I can't remember now what I read in Descartes' third meditation..... but he talks about that. I think it has something to do with the idea of God being inconceivable to an imperfect being. In other words... the idea of God can only come from God Himself... Something like that... :D

TruthSeeker: Well... if He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent... I guess He IS infinite. :eek:
*************
M*W: You think, but you do not know.
*************
TruthSeeker: I can't remember now what I read in Descartes' third meditation..... but he talks about that. I think it has something to do with the idea of God being inconceivable to an imperfect being. In other words... the idea of God can only come from God Himself... Something like that... :D
*************
M*W: It doesn't matter what Descartes said. He was a philosopher. He said whatever was convenient. The fact is that we are not 'imperfect beings.' The idea of God does not necessarily come from God himself, but from the human mind who has an innate desire to believe in an higher power. That doesn't make it true, real or right. Humans have a need to know an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god exists for their own belief. Otherwise, god need not exist. God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe. God is just a fig newton of our imagination. This God does not really exist anywhere but in our limited imagination.

M*W: Humans have a need to know an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god exists for their own belief. Otherwise, god need not exist. God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe. God is just a fig newton of our imagination. This God does not really exist anywhere but in our limited imagination.

This is interesting and says much about M*W.

Statement of fact from M*W - Humans have a need to know an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god exists for their own belief.

Then we have M*W arrogantly seperating herself from the rest of humanity as though she didnt arrive as a human being herself - "God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe."

Then we see the nature of M*W's personal conflict - "This God does not really exist anywhere but in our limited imagination."

But lets look at the spirit in which she says "This God"

M*W HATES "This God" because she knows she ought submit but cannot because she sees God as male dominance in her 'limited imagination' and personal experience of this life. She feels that to be set free of any authority over her, she must renounce God but more specifically Jesus.
What M*W fails to realise is that Jesus is meek and mild and is like a child.
Please just unify again M*W - you are worth much more to the cause as a believer - and you do know your God and He knows your heart and just wants to heal it. Dump your pain on the cross M*W :)

peace

c20

the other day c20H25N3o you prayed for the sciforums, and it was not appreciated by all.
you just dont do it.
you certainly dont Psycoanalyse anybody, this is down right "RUDE".

so I'd expect to have the same, happen to you, and you wont like it.

I posed the question "what make a good person".
not "lets pick on somebody, I dont like there views".

While I don't agree with c20's ad hominem comments, and your reprimandation of it is fitting, however you should make the same reprimands toward M*W. She may not have "picked on" a specific individual, but she certainly does a large bit of "picking on" groups of individuals, namely believers in God.

"God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe."

Perhaps you do not find this offensive, as it may not pertain to you. However, there are many on these forums who would find this offensive, as it stereotypes any individual who believes in a God as "fearful to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe." I take this as offensive, because it puts me into a false stereotype. I believe in God because, based upon the evidence that I have been presented, it seems most true to say that such an entity exists, and is necessary for the existence of things. It was Aristotle, a man who came by his own reasoning to belief in monotheism, in an era of polytheism, who first claimed (according to recorded history) that God was necessary to fulfill the need for an ultimate, final end that would satisfy perfectly the one thing that every human being seeks: happiness. While I personally ascribe to this notion, it isn't my primary reason for believing in an infinite God. As I have already stated, it seems, to me, logically necessary that such an entity exist. I most certainly do not believe in God out of fear, and I am offended that I would be categorized in such a way simply for the belief that I hold.

M*W: You think, but you do not know.
That's true. But I think that is a postulate. I guess we need to work on the concept of God. I think He is perfection. So... does perfection has those attributes?

M*W: It doesn't matter what Descartes said. He was a philosopher.
Well... in a way, it does.... It doesn't prove anything, but it is always good to read other's perspective. Specially when they are highly valued.

He said whatever was convenient. The fact is that we are not 'imperfect beings.' The idea of God does not necessarily come from God himself, but from the human mind who has an innate desire to believe in an higher power. That doesn't make it true, real or right.
His argument was that the idea of God is beyond his capability. And beyond his understanding....

Humans have a need to know an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god exists for their own belief. Otherwise, god need not exist. God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe. God is just a fig newton of our imagination. This God does not really exist anywhere but in our limited imagination.
Is that an argument? It sounds just like an explanation. Why hould I believe in that?

Well.... when I do look up in the sky and stare at the stars, I do fell a sense of connection, and I lose my sense of loneliness. Which is interesting after all. I do think there's a God, and I haven't been able to disprove that so far. And I'm not fearful, nor have a sense of longing. I just try to see the big mountain from all angles at the same time - which is fairly hard for a human...

While I don't agree with c20's ad hominem comments, and your reprimandation of it is fitting, however you should make the same reprimands toward M*W. She may not have "picked on" a specific individual, but she certainly does a large bit of "picking on" groups of individuals, namely believers in God.

"God dwells only in the minds of those fearful humans to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe."

Perhaps you do not find this offensive, as it may not pertain to you. However, there are many on these forums who would find this offensive, as it stereotypes any individual who believes in a God as "fearful to sequiet a longing they have from the repercussions of the universe." I take this as offensive, because it puts me into a false stereotype. I believe in God because, based upon the evidence that I have been presented, it seems most true to say that such an entity exists, and is necessary for the existence of things. It was Aristotle, a man who came by his own reasoning to belief in monotheism, in an era of polytheism, who first claimed (according to recorded history) that God was necessary to fulfill the need for an ultimate, final end that would satisfy perfectly the one thing that every human being seeks: happiness. While I personally ascribe to this notion, it isn't my primary reason for believing in an infinite God. As I have already stated, it seems, to me, logically necessary that such an entity exist. I most certainly do not believe in God out of fear, and I am offended that I would be categorized in such a way simply for the belief that I hold.

You 'know' God must exist but you dont put your 'faith' in Him. There is like ten zillion light years between the two ideas. There is only one path to get back to Him as well but this is the stumbling block to you, the thing you fall down on before you even get up! For you it is "science has no answers so there must be God", for me it is "Our Father who art in Heaven ... Amen". The words are on your lips but your heart is very far away. Seek out Gods love and you will see Jesus, then you will see the Father. Our Father.

peace

c20 :m:

Well.... when I do look up in the sky and stare at the stars, I do fell a sense of connection, and I lose my sense of loneliness. Which is interesting after all. I do think there's a God, and I haven't been able to disprove that so far. And I'm not fearful, nor have a sense of longing. I just try to see the big mountain from all angles at the same time - which is fairly hard for a human...

Thats the coolest thing written on here today imo :cool:

beyondtimeandspace: While I don't agree with c20's ad hominem comments, and your reprimandation of it is fitting, however you should make the same reprimands toward M*W. She may not have "picked on" a specific individual, but she certainly does a large bit of "picking on" groups of individuals, namely believers in God.
*************
M*W: Don't be fooled! I have rightly picked on many specific individuals on this forum and shall continue to do so when necessary.

Don't be fooled! I have rightly picked on many specific individuals on this forum and shall continue to do so when necessary.

Pick off our heads :D

Thats the coolest thing written on here today imo :cool:
Doesn't prove anything tough...
But thx for the appreciation anyways... :p

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker
Well.... when I do look up in the sky and stare at the stars, I do fell a sense of connection, and I lose my sense of loneliness. Which is interesting after all. I do think there's a God, and I haven't been able to disprove that so far. And I'm not fearful, nor have a sense of longing. I just try to see the big mountain from all angles at the same time - which is fairly hard for a human...


which is fairly hard for a human... :) Thats the kind of attitude that will get you places with The God of Abraham :D

All praise the Ancient of Days

which is fairly hard for a human... :) Thats the kind of attitude that will get you places with The God of Abraham :D

All praise the Ancient of Days

Absolutely! In fact lets discern the spirits further because it will reveal something interesting.

We have two voices in this piece of text.

We have the spirit of struggle and the spirit of submission.

The struggle is man trying to see the motives behind creation through an incredibly dark pair of spectacles. Trying to take it all in from a solitary perspective with all human strength available to him. Seeking with all strength the mind and loves of He Who Is.
The submission is the recognition that it is impossible for 'man' to know 'all' of God and understand all His ways and this submission produces yet another voice which is God's compassion for man's plight and appreciation for the struggle man goes through in seeking Him i.e. Which is fairly hard for a human! << This is God's voice to you Truthseeker! God sees your heart first Truthseeker and blesses you with a humble spirit because you have not loved yourself first. You are very pleasing to God, He feels the same way about you as He does His own Son when He said "This is my son in whom I am well pleased"

You are very blessed TruthSeeker and your name here is fitting.

peace

c20

:) Yo letter&numbersdude,

Quote:
"There is only one path to get back to Him as well but this is the stumbling block to you, the thing you fall down on before you even get up!"

No brother, now you try telling that to a dude who embraces Islam. Or the local Rabbi. What I don`t understand is how you can be so arrogant in your certainty that there is no way to god but through your Jesus. Verily I say unto you I disagree.

Quote:
" Seek out Gods love and you will see Jesus, then you will see the Father. Our Father."

Hmmm. What do these dudes look like?

"Originally Posted by TruthSeeker
Well.... when I do look up in the sky and stare at the stars, I do fell a sense of connection, and I lose my sense of loneliness. Which is interesting after all. I do think there's a God, and I haven't been able to disprove that so far. And I'm not fearful, nor have a sense of longing. I just try to see the big mountain from all angles at the same time - which is fairly hard for a human... ”

Quote letters&numbersdude:
"Thats the coolest thing written on here today imo"

Now that I can relate to.

Smooth.

Argument for God: If everything has a cause, then there would be an infinite number of causes going back forever. What caused the Big Bang? What caused that? However, and infinite number of roots for something is rather inconceivable. Some infinite thing must be the root cause for all reality, and that thing is God. God is infinite. It's unlikely that he cares one whit about humanity, but who knows?

The reason that we can't conceive an infinite being is that, to be honest, human minds are rational only to the environment we're in. We don't know the true secrets of the universe - whether the universe itself has a purpose or not.

I guess it comes down to what you think is more likely: an infinite chain of events(perhaps cyclic) or an infinite thing that started it all. Even the infinite chain of events must have had something to start it, right?

It's alien for the human mind to think of something that was not caused by anything. That something would be God, theoretically.

:) Yo letter&numbersdude,

Quote:
"There is only one path to get back to Him as well but this is the stumbling block to you, the thing you fall down on before you even get up!"

No brother, now you try telling that to a dude who embraces Islam. Or the local Rabbi. What I don`t understand is how you can be so arrogant in your certainty that there is no way to god but through your Jesus. Verily I say unto you I disagree.

Quote:
" Seek out Gods love and you will see Jesus, then you will see the Father. Our Father."

Hmmm. What do these dudes look like?

"Originally Posted by TruthSeeker
Well.... when I do look up in the sky and stare at the stars, I do fell a sense of connection, and I lose my sense of loneliness. Which is interesting after all. I do think there's a God, and I haven't been able to disprove that so far. And I'm not fearful, nor have a sense of longing. I just try to see the big mountain from all angles at the same time - which is fairly hard for a human... ”

Quote letters&numbersdude:
"Thats the coolest thing written on here today imo"

Now that I can relate to.

Smooth.

I am pleased you found something to relate to :) truthseekers post brightened up my day too. My text is for many eyes however and they know who they are as they read it.
Please do not judge me too harshly for my arrogance. It is with good reason that I say what I say.

thanks

c20

It's alien for the human mind to think of something that was not caused by anything. That something would be God, theoretically.

What do most scientists claim the universe was before the big bang again?

:) Yo letter&numbersdude,

Heh. No judgement brother, just observation. But I get your drift. Good for you.

Smooth.

You 'know' God must exist but you dont put your 'faith' in Him. There is like ten zillion light years between the two ideas. There is only one path to get back to Him as well but this is the stumbling block to you, the thing you fall down on before you even get up! For you it is "science has no answers so there must be God", for me it is "Our Father who art in Heaven ... Amen". The words are on your lips but your heart is very far away. Seek out Gods love and you will see Jesus, then you will see the Father. Our Father.

peace

c20 :m:

Excuse me? Since when did I believe "science has no answers, so there must be God?" Please do put words into my mouth, and then falsely judge me accordingly. Furthermore, I would appreciate it if you didn't make such bold judgements about me publicly either. You presume much if you believe to know a person's spiritual state based upon words posted on a computer screen. You're right, there is a huge difference between believing with the heart and believing with the mind. However, just because one believes with the mind doesn't mean that he does not also believe with the heart. That is a very large presumption on your part. Furthermore, I ask, if there is none to defend belief in God through the method of logic, then how are those who know the world through logic to come to understand rightly what is believed by the religious? If, and I know you believe this, God created humans with intellect and free will, then it would be a smack in the face to God to (so to speak) to abandon one's own intellect for the sake of blind faith. Faith yes, but understanding also. There is most definitely more than one way to come to belief in the supreme entity, and by way of logical deduction is one of them. Logic is a function of the brain, just as intuition is a function of the brain. Each function is controlled by either hemisphere. Those who operate mentally with the intuitive hemisphere more are going to be the kind of people who come to know God intuitively, as you do, and will simply argue that they 'just know' it to be true, without any logical analysis of their belief. And this is fine, since it is actually a function of the brain, and an accepted source of knowledge as such. Those who operate with the logical hemisphere more are the kind of people who will come to belief in God by way of logic. Such people will be able to offer logical analysis of the reasons for their beliefs. And this is also fine, since it is a function of the brain, and an accepted source of knowledge as such.

Don't sit there and tell me that because I am the type of person who has, both genetically been built, and developed in such a way that I use the logical hemisphere of my brain to come to the conclusion of a God that I am unable to love Him, and that it is a stumbling block for me. Each and every person will believe in their own unique way, as they are capable. Since the existence of God isn't proven, and every major theologian and philosopher throughout history would agree with me on this point, belief... FAITH is all that one can have concerning this point (at least until the day that the existence of God is proven, if it can be). So, whether I have faith by means of logic, or by means of intuition, it is still faith, and I have the capacity of love God every bit as much as you do. Don't sit there on your pedestal making such ludicrous and ill-formed judgements, not to mention ill-educated, about people you have never even met.

Excuse me? Since when did I believe "science has no answers, so there must be God?" Please do put words into my mouth, and then falsely judge me accordingly. Furthermore, I would appreciate it if you didn't make such bold judgements about me publicly either. You presume much if you believe to know a person's spiritual state based upon words posted on a computer screen. You're right, there is a huge difference between believing with the heart and believing with the mind. However, just because one believes with the mind doesn't mean that he does not also believe with the heart. That is a very large presumption on your part. Furthermore, I ask, if there is none to defend belief in God through the method of logic, then how are those who know the world through logic to come to understand rightly what is believed by the religious? If, and I know you believe this, God created humans with intellect and free will, then it would be a smack in the face to God to (so to speak) to abandon one's own intellect for the sake of blind faith. Faith yes, but understanding also. There is most definitely more than one way to come to belief in the supreme entity, and by way of logical deduction is one of them. Logic is a function of the brain, just as intuition is a function of the brain. Each function is controlled by either hemisphere. Those who operate mentally with the intuitive hemisphere more are going to be the kind of people who come to know God intuitively, as you do, and will simply argue that they 'just know' it to be true, without any logical analysis of their belief. And this is fine, since it is actually a function of the brain, and an accepted source of knowledge as such. Those who operate with the logical hemisphere more are the kind of people who will come to belief in God by way of logic. Such people will be able to offer logical analysis of the reasons for their beliefs. And this is also fine, since it is a function of the brain, and an accepted source of knowledge as such.

Don't sit there and tell me that because I am the type of person who has, both genetically been built, and developed in such a way that I use the logical hemisphere of my brain to come to the conclusion of a God that I am unable to love Him, and that it is a stumbling block for me. Each and every person will believe in their own unique way, as they are capable. Since the existence of God isn't proven, and every major theologian and philosopher throughout history would agree with me on this point, belief... FAITH is all that one can have concerning this point (at least until the day that the existence of God is proven, if it can be). So, whether I have faith by means of logic, or by means of intuition, it is still faith, and I have the capacity of love God every bit as much as you do. Don't sit there on your pedestal making such ludicrous and ill-formed judgements, not to mention ill-educated, about people you have never even met.

Ok Ok, I have made assumptions and put words in your mouth. Forgive me. Honestly forgive me.
I will say this though ( and please bear in mind that I am only trying to 'help' ), Jesus is the answer and Jesus is desperately illogical to most e.g. Whoever wants to be the greatest must be the least!
I am sorry if I have preached to you the converted, in such a way that you believe I have questioned your own faith on the matter. I did not mean to make you angry with me. I just know that there are many on here who despise the whole Least is Greatest thing and I am compelled to speak the truth on this matter. Logic will bear out the 'least is greatest' thing but first people have to throw away the logic of this life in order to understand what I mean.
Again, i did not mean to patronise you so sorry for that.

peace

c20

what makes a good person?

just out of interest, what do you believe to be the top three things, that make a good person, and why.


Religion has nothing to do anything!

1-knowing what is Right.
2-knowing what is Wrong.
2-knowing where/by whom you got that Right and wrong from.

Not what man's laws are or the intricacies of man's judicial system and following them.

What do most scientists claim the universe was before the big bang again?

The super-string theory is part of one hypothesis, I believe, but I really don't know. Not much of a scientist, sadly.

Argument for God: If everything has a cause, then there would be an infinite number of causes going back forever. What caused the Big Bang? What caused that? However, and infinite number of roots for something is rather inconceivable. Some infinite thing must be the root cause for all reality, and that thing is God. God is infinite. It's unlikely that he cares one whit about humanity, but who knows?

The reason that we can't conceive an infinite being is that, to be honest, human minds are rational only to the environment we're in. We don't know the true secrets of the universe - whether the universe itself has a purpose or not.

I guess it comes down to what you think is more likely: an infinite chain of events(perhaps cyclic) or an infinite thing that started it all. Even the infinite chain of events must have had something to start it, right?

It's alien for the human mind to think of something that was not caused by anything. That something would be God, theoretically.
I like this. But I think you are missing a little thing. An infinite chain of events have to "start", right? However, imagine a place that has no time at all. How could we have a problem with infinity in a place that has no time? Space and time were created, somehow. But before that was created, that wasn't any time at all (at least not the way we think of). So... "when" did the universe start!?!?!? :eek:

Geeeeezzz.... NOW I'm lost.... :p

The problem with this, is that without a timeframe, there shouldn't be any distinction between present, past and future. No time works in a similar way than infinite time. When would the universe start? Let's say it starts today. So... there was an infinite amount of time before us. How long it took for the universe start? An infinite amount of time. But that makes no sense! Because it started at some point! If there was an infinite amount of time before us, we would never have come to existance. The same way works if there was no time at all. The universe wouldn't have started at any given point, because wherever it start, it would take an infinite amount of "time" to start it.

Hence the paradox of existance. :eek:

We have the spirit of struggle and the spirit of submission.

The struggle is man trying to see the motives behind creation through an incredibly dark pair of spectacles. Trying to take it all in from a solitary perspective with all human strength available to him. Seeking with all strength the mind and loves of He Who Is.
The submission is the recognition that it is impossible for 'man' to know 'all' of God and understand all His ways
Yeh, yeh ,yeh.....! hold on a second. Of course it is possible! I said it is hard not impossible. It is hard because it requires a very broad understanding of both the universe and the human mind. And, you cannot be biased either way. Of course we cannot understand God by ourselves. But who said we are alone? Isn't God in us? All that you need to do is to find Him in you. If you do that, why wouldn't you be able to understand Him? As it is written:

1 Corinthians 13:8-13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&passage=1+Cor+13&version=NASB)
"8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.
9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part;
10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.
12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.
13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. "

If you find God's love within you, what else do you need to know Him?

and this submission produces yet another voice which is God's compassion for man's plight and appreciation for the struggle man goes through in seeking Him i.e.
Well... there's a balance to be achieved. Humility doesn't imply humiliation. God doesn't want us to submiss ourselves. I think He would even be glad if people would question things more, because the questioning can deepen your understanding of Him. I think it should just be blant honesty, that's all. You don't need to submiss yourself. Just stand up and look up, because God is up there - not on your feet. I'm not saying Christians should be proud, I'm just saying Christians should be less self-humiliating. We are children of God, after all.

Which is fairly hard for a human! << This is God's voice to you Truthseeker! God sees your heart first Truthseeker and blesses you with a humble spirit because you have not loved yourself first. You are very pleasing to God, He feels the same way about you as He does His own Son when He said "This is my son in whom I am well pleased"
Well, thank you...
But even if what you say it's true, you should worship me or something... :D
"Worship" God within me, instead.

You are very blessed TruthSeeker and your name here is fitting.
Well... that's why I chose that name. I hope I am blessed...

So... "when" did the universe start!?!?!?

The universe is an endless loop without beginning or end. It explodes, and it falls back into a kind of black hole, then it explodes again, forever. There was no beginning and there is no end, like in a circle. Why would Existence need to have a beginning, or why would it have to be created?

It is hard to understand for humans because they feel separated with their one sided body. Humans always want to think "this" rather than "that". They think there is a first or last, or up or down, but they are mere definitions to explain the ultimate, that nothing is separated. In space there is no up and down, and it is like this with every so called negative and positive thing.

what768:
your statement leaves no room for a god.

Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them? If so, again, where is his freewill and how is God thinking at all if everything seems to be one uncontrollable action/thoughts.[Note: I'd say a God cannot think at all. To do so, would strip him of omniscience. Thinking is a temporal process.]


ON GOD'S ATEMPORALITY
1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.
2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.
3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.
4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator of the Universe.
[Note: I guess I should also note here that a timeless being would be without the proposition of past, and future. But to be omniscient, God must know the past and future. Hence a God that is atemporal and omniscient cannot logically exist. :]

the infidelguy so you see no god.

the preacher

I don't believe in a thinking "god".

what about an omniscient one,,a thinking god cannot be omniscient

# Being positive or desirable in nature; not bad or poor
#

1. Having the qualities that are desirable or distinguishing in a particular thing
2. Serving the desired purpose or end; suitable

#

1. Not spoiled or ruined
2. In excellent condition; sound.

#

1. Superior to the average; satisfactory


#

1. Of high quality


# Worthy of respect; honorable
# Attractive; handsome
# Beneficial to health; salutary
# Competent; skilled
# Complete; thorough
#

1. Reliable; sure
2. Valid or true
3. Genuine; real

#

1. In effect; operative
2. Able to continue in a specified activity

#

1. Able to pay or contribute
2. Able to elicit a specified reaction

#

1. Ample; substantial
2. Bountiful


#

1. Pleasant; enjoyable
2. Propitious; favorable

#

1. Of moral excellence; upright
2. Benevolent; kind
3. Loyal; staunch

#

1. Well-behaved; obedient
2. Socially correct; proper



________________-

all that just from the dictionary... but it's all a preconcept, fed to us by our parents and society....There is no good.

Yeah, I believe in a kind of omniscient god...

What do most scientists claim the universe was before the big bang again?

Singularity.

The universe is an endless loop without beginning or end. It explodes, and it falls back into a kind of black hole, then it explodes again, forever. There was no beginning and there is no end, like in a circle. Why would Existence need to have a beginning, or why would it have to be created?

It is hard to understand for humans because they feel separated with their one sided body. Humans always want to think "this" rather than "that". They think there is a first or last, or up or down, but they are mere definitions to explain the ultimate, that nothing is separated. In space there is no up and down, and it is like this with every so called negative and positive thing.
If it is an endless loop, than there is a beginning. You cannot describe something timeless using time. Can't you see that? Have you read my post or just the first sentence?

If it is an endless loop, than there is a beginning. You cannot describe something timeless using time. Can't you see that? Have you read my post or just the first sentence?

No, there is no beginning. I'm not using time. When the universe "explodes" it's the same thing as when it "implodes", and it has always "been" there "exploding" and "imploding", it has always "Existed"! It's hard to understand one-ness and infinity with a separated and finite mind, isn't it?

Quote:
"There is only one path to get back to Him as well but this is the stumbling block to you, the thing you fall down on before you even get up!"

No brother, now you try telling that to a dude who embraces Islam. Or the local Rabbi. What I don`t understand is how you can be so arrogant in your certainty that there is no way to god but through your Jesus. Verily I say unto you I disagree.

Jesus said:
John 14
1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2In My Father's house are many mansions if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4And where I go you know, and the way you know."
5Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?"
6Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

Now this is not just arrogant opinion this is what followers of the Messiah Jesus believe because Jesus said it plainly Himself. So part of our faith is the belief that there is only one way to God and that is through the Messiah Jesus.

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

No, there is no beginning. I'm not using time. When the universe "explodes" it's the same thing as when it "implodes", and it has always "been" there "exploding" and "imploding", it has always "Existed"! It's hard to understand one-ness and infinity with a separated and finite mind, isn't it?
No. You don't get it...
There can't be no explosion or implosion without time. It's impossible. All changes depend on time to happen. If there is no time, nothing can ever happen. But if there is infinite time, than there was infinite time in the past (before today), so how long did it take for us to arrive at the present moment? An infinite amount of time. Which doesn't make sense. So in order words, it doesn't make sense the fact that we exist.

Truthseeker,

But if there is infinite time, than there was infinite time in the past (before today), so how long did it take for us to arrive at the present moment? An infinite amount of time. Which doesn't make sense. So in order words, it doesn't make sense the fact that we exist.

It is good that you now understand that nothing can happen without time but you are still very confused about the concepts of infinity. Infinity is not a numerical quantity that can be manipulated like other numbers. Infinity is something that has no boundary. You are tying yourself in knots when you talk about “an infinite amount of time” since you are thinking of infinity as a large number. When we say the universe has always existed then that means there was no beginning boundary condition. We cannot say anything meaningful about the quantity of time before the present – it remains undefined.

Once you correct your erroneous concept of infinity then an infinite universe and our place in it will start to make sense.

Take care
Cris

It is good that you now understand that nothing can happen without time but you are still very confused about the concepts of infinity. Infinity is not a numerical quantity that can be manipulated like other numbers. Infinity is something that has no boundary. You are tying yourself in knots when you talk about “an infinite amount of time” since you are thinking of infinity as a large number. When we say the universe has always existed then that means there was no beginning boundary condition. We cannot say anything meaningful about the quantity of time before the present – it remains undefined.

Once you correct your erroneous concept of infinity then an infinite universe and our place in it will start to make sense.

Take care
Cris
By "infinity" I meant exactly what you said. I'm not thinking a large number. Even because if infinity is a large number, it is still a definite number. If infinity was a large number, and there was an "infinite" amount of time in the past, then the present would be possible because the universe would have to wait a large number of years to come to existance, but it would come eventually. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that there was an undefinite amount of time in the past, which makes the present impossible. Hence, there was no beginning boundary condition.

Get rid of your idea of explosions and implosions. Exploding and imploding is one and the same thing, (just like any other "opposites") and none of them have an absolute existence. It's not "happening", it "is". Everything just IS, we think something is HAPPENING, but it's not happening! In reality, nothing has ever happened. But in our dualistic and "free" minds things seem to happen. We think that things are different because we use different words from them, to "explain" them, but we're just confusing ourselves. Everything is just "existence".

Truthseeker,

I'm saying that there was an undefinite amount of time in the past, which makes the present impossible.

Why? That is a non sequitur. The amount of time that has passed has no connection with the present instant.

Hence, there was no beginning boundary condition.

Another non sequitur: And a conclusion that appears from nowhere!!!!

Cris

What768,

It's not "happening", it "is". Everything just IS, we think something is HAPPENING, but it's not happening! In reality, nothing has ever happened. But in our dualistic and "free" minds things seem to happen. We think that things are different because we use different words from them, to "explain" them, but we're just confusing ourselves. Everything is just "existence".

You are simply trying to ignore time. Things do “happen” since time allows a change of state.

Someone who doesn't think religious belief is inheritable. What I mean by this, are those who don't allow their own children to come to their own conclusions, but instead force feed them their own beliefs before the child can even walk.

A 'good person' would not do this, but would understand and recognise that their child is a unique individual who has the right to use his/her own brain to come to his/her own conclusions.

That's what defines a good person.

Haha, there is no absolute time! Time is an illusion of the human mind! When there is no observer there is no change.

what makes a good person?

top three things, that make a good person, and why.



1 love of freedom (lets you and everyone free!)
2 the ability to go past the appearances (no judgement, no mistake, no worry!)
3 faith in the oneness within the essence of all things (ego-transcendence, no harm to others, peaceful mind!)

It's up to a person whether he considers himself good or bad. But as far as I've observed, many claim to be "good". I don't know what instance in their lives seem to be good if there isn't any single :rolleyes: type of system of life they've followed.

I am a good atheist. You are a bad christian&trade;.