Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Saint, Nov 18, 2012.
Explain the what now?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
We have more fake gold than real gold, but that does not make gold fake.
But people with different names for water generally agree on the properties of water. People tend to disagree more about the properties of gods than they do about the names, so Gods are a much more subjective concept than water.
Religion becomes fake gold when it diverts impressionable minds from the immense value of scientific knowledge about what the real world is, and how the processes of nature have nothing to do with good or bad behavior.
And that's money you can take to the bank!
Go home, kid.
Had 'God' been murder, had 'God' been stupid.
when you start bandying around words like "reality" in a philosophical void and make claims totally outside of the authority of your cited discipline (like words to the effect : science establishes that the processes of nature exist independently of any sentience) its pretty clear that you are simply raving along the lines of someone who has already had their mind substantially "impressioned" upon
Salient point (although if you throw a political slant on water, such as environment vs industry, then the differing views on its main relevant properties tends to become obvious)
Perhaps we should then discuss the many different names for "political ruler/official"
IOW its usually the aspects of utility (which then expand out into aspects of organization, application, value etc) that contribute to a varied interpretation.
Doesn't really matter what subject we are talking about
Religionists do the same thing: they bandy around words like "reality" - and "authority," "obligation," "duty" - in a philosophical and practical void and make claims totally outside of their jurisdiction.
Unless, of course, we are to believe that religionists, specifically, theists, are all fully empowered representatives of God and all non-theists are under their jurisdiction, so that if a theist comes to a non-theist's property, the non-theist has to abide by the instructions of the theist, lest the non-theist would commit an offense to God.
Do you think that the authority of theists over non-theists is established independently of God Himself making this clear to the non-theists Himself?
And theists are like a bunch of Americans who go into a foreign country and demand that those people acknowledge and live by the US Constitution.
Given that you also have problems with persosn who promote the "real" world through the (apparent) authority of science, its pretty obvious you are just being a troll
Not really sure what you are talking about .... much less how it is relevant to this thread
errr ... okay
It's you (and others) who are avoiding the point I am making.
People of different persuasions (theists, atheists, whichever they may be) are trying to lord over people (and everything else) by usurping the definition of terms like "reality," because therein lies power: the one who gets to define what is "real" gets to have power over others.
We briefly addressed this at least once before - namely, how the desire to lord it over material nature doesn't manifest just in the form of cutting down trees, building dams, killing animals and people etc., but also on the mental level where people try to rule over material nature by way of defining concepts in a way that seems to put them in the position of power and exonerate them (such as defining the unborn as "just tissue").
Oh, I think you know what I'm talking about.
I'm just using what you taught me. I'm just mirroring it back at you.
As if you aren't.
And sweetcheeks, you, too, play the power game. Everyone does.
Already the very concept of "Power" has a bad reputation in many people's minds, but per the philosophy of your religion, it is inherent to all living beings anyway. - God is the supreme Ishvara, and we are little ishvaras. We are not powerless. Nor is power a bad thing.
Power does tend to go into people's heads, and afterwards, once they inevitably fail, they are embarrassed, and start talking like monists.
If God is the first cause of all things,
can this first cause explain himself?
Why would he have to?
I suppose he was just a little tired after creating the world, and all that. Forgot to tell those who were around before the concept of an all knowing creator became common knowledge.
Hell, I forget to pass on some things after a hard day at work too.
If I'm not around, honestly, they run around like bloody headless chickens trying to figure out what the hell is going on before I get back.
It happens, man. Let it slide. Just leave a message, I'll get back to you.
No, which is why it's a fallacy.
Im sure God understands Science.
You are so sure of your self , You are marvelous
The thing is are you just talking in terms of the Abramhic religions, Judaism, christian, and islam
What of others
The way I see it you limit yourself in what to believe
From all the " religions " that I have come across none promotes Humanity in a sane way as the Spohia or Gnostic teachings
Women are treated equally and are encouraged to learn as much as men
How can anyone understand god, with our punny human brains? If any scientists or theologian thinks they can explain this to you they are lying.
Science keeps asking this question, why would any human have the answer. Science has no answers to this to why would any other person understand.
We are inside a system, how can anything inside a system understand whats outside it. This is why science will never really answer any question, as they too will always be inside the system. Real scientists understand that.
There was a time when we were more advanced in thought upon this question
Gnostic were these people
If you care to take the time and have the patience go on YouTube and have a listen to John lash
Separate names with a comma.