User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 330

Thread: There is no God

  1. #81
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    The biggest misconception that religion has taught us is that you have to earn God's love or be perfect. That's not even possible, it's so false! And that's not what the Bible says anyway. It's a misinterpretation.

    The moral of the Bible is not about what we can do for God, it's about what God has done for us.

    God created us because he wants a family and a relationship with us. He made provisions for sin --> Jesus (God) came to earth as man to taste death for man to fulfill the law (the ten commandments) for us. We are no longer under the law. We are under the Holy Spirit. There is no condemnation for those in Christ. We are saved by grace through faith in Christ. God doesn't want a bunch of stupid puppets. He wants us to want to know him with our own free wills. That's the high level synopsis. That's the truth of the Bible. That's not Baptist, Mormon, Catholic, or any other religion. Religions miss the point. What is the point? Again, the point is that it's not about what we can do for God, it's about what God has done for us. It's that simple.

    No other God makes provisions for sin. The God of the Bible does. And since I am not a perfect person, the God of the Bible is the God for me. I'm not gonna die believing in nothing. I'm gonna go out of this world feeling good believing in the Holy Spirit, Jesus, a loving-forgiving God, and a heaven, and streets of gold, and I'm prayin for a Ford Mustang too because God is all powerful and loves us that much. Frankly, I want to see all of my friends there. I KNOW God is with us. I just know. (:

  2. #82
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

  3. #83
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    god is just demented. ever since he forgot, that he is god, almost everything in the world is all solid repetitive and predictable.

  4. #84
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousFeeling View Post
    Good luck trying to prove that God doesn't exist through empirical methods. You're going to go insane doing such a thing. Negative evidence to disprove such existence, so technically and logically speaking, saying there is no God is erroneous.
    But giving an definition of god that goes along with empirical data and is not supernatural in any way is imo possible. But its incredibly hard to put down in few words that would both summarize everything and is properly(enough to convince) understood in its whole complexity.
    Its just too bad that people with strong belief in god tend to be close minded about wanting to understand it from another perspective(this also is how unconscious mind functions in general).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #85
    From the Undertow CuriousFeeling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    3,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    But giving an definition of god that goes along with empirical data and is not supernatural in any way is imo possible. But its incredibly hard to put down in few words that would both summarize everything and is properly(enough to convince) understood in its whole complexity.
    Its just too bad that people with strong belief in god tend to be close minded about wanting to understand it from another perspective(this also is how unconscious mind functions in general).
    Indeed, this is where we get the problem with the "Does god exist, or doesn't god exist?" question. We need to first make it clear what definition of god we are going by. Second, what elements of such definition show evidence of God. But the elements, once broken down, aren't mutually exclusive of each other, and have overlap with each other, so the system at play to represent the evidence of God is much more complex and intertwined than a simple definition could possibly make. It's more than just taking a measuring tool to detect where God is. It just can't be done like that from that empirical sense. Would be unwieldy and inefficient to do such a thing. It's more of a global understanding, from my point of view.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Johari/Nohari

    “Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings -- always darker, emptier and simpler.”
    ― Friedrich Nietzsche




  6. #86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanook View Post
    god is just demented. ever since he forgot, that he is god, almost everything in the world is all solid repetitive and predictable.
    Sounds like VALIS or The Divine Invasion

  7. #87
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    god doesn't exist, we don't exist, this discussion about god doesn't exist either. we are all just strings of words in a thread, in a forum, in a gigantic internet, and there are uncountable other threads and forums. and this god that we seek for has nothing to do with it all. it's all created by machines that exist in a different dimension and there are alien lifeforms in front of the machines, who control our destiny by pushing buttons ...

  8. #88
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kraska View Post
    You've put on some nice text here from where I could only understand that when I'm looking at my book and see the title "Blut und Silber" I'm actually imagining it and the title is different. I'm not an expert so I could have understood wrong.



    Religions don't vary at all. There is only one religion based on one story that has been interpretated in different ways.



    Weapons were very usefull when we used them as tools. However they became our detriment and created the mess in which we live today when we chosed to use them against each other.



    Could those people also perceive God as our unconsciousness? You said that is more than possible. If so then their point are invalid as well.



    No thanks, I need nobody for that.

    I have one question. What created the little ball that exploded and created everything?
    All religion isnt based on one story. Bible is an book that put together different stories, which changed over time. For example many books in old testament are versions from early egyptian books. Now its true that the early egyptian writings also spread on india and many concepts in hinduism are from egyptians. Early western alchemy(which has affected egyptian religion also) travelled to east and this eastern alchemy is the origin of buddhism. And these seem to have alot of incommon with nordic gods.
    Its just that at one point in time after these groups separated and modified their belief to different directions, they started to transform different from each other. Some people didnt see these teachings of gods as god at all, but their own mind(buddhism) and saw the teachings as a way to live, sort of guideline for happy life(and afterlife) and how to act towards others. Some saw these gods as entities that sort of guide your life and that learning from them and aknowledging their existance, you aknowledge how life goes(and for them it goes on the right tract if you follow this way of life)(hinduism). Some people combined the gods as one god(chistianity, muslims etc) and saw it as someone you need to obey or you wont get to go to heaven(amongst other things). And ofc there are other groups coming from the same source, but they are mainly subgroups of these groups.

    But for example the religion of australian aboriginals comes from totally different from those religions mentioned earlier, so are native american religions, which seem to have more incommon with the beliefs of some jungle people near asia.

    Its funny that one thing incommon with these groups is that you tap into the divine, by tapping into your unconsciousness.
    Psychoanalysis uses the same methods to some extend(jungian more than freudian), dream analysis(usually god/angels apper in dreams). Art = mandalas, which are used from early christianity to buddhism, in jungian analysis drawing an mandala is a good way to analyze the persons psyche. Churches are usually covered with symbolic art(sculptures, drawings, overall design), so are temples. But its not just art where the religious symbols appear, they appear in forms of speech, religious stories often have symbolic meaning(jesus might not had actually fed thousands of people with one fish and bread, but might had fed the spiritual hunger of people with one wise word). Etc etc. In jungian psychology symbols is defined something like this:

    Symbol The best possible expression for something unknown.

    "Every psychological expression is a symbol if we assume that it states or signifies something more and other than itself which eludes our present knowledge."["Definitions," CW 6, par. 817.]

    Jung distinguished between a symbol and a sign. Insignia on uniforms, for instance, are not symbols but signs that identify the wearer. In dealing with unconscious material (dreams, fantasies, etc.), the images can be interpreted semiotically, as symptomatic signs pointing to known or knowable facts, or symbolically, as expressing something essentially unknown.

    "The interpretation of the cross as a symbol of divine love is semiotic, because "divine love" describes the fact to be expressed better and more aptly than a cross, which can have many other meanings. On the other hand, an interpretation of the cross is symbolic when it puts the cross beyond all conceivable explanations, regarding it as expressing an as yet unknown and incomprehensible fact of a mystical or transcendent, i.e., psychological, nature, which simply finds itself most appropriately represented in the cross."[Ibid., par. 815.]

    Whether something is interpreted as a symbol or a sign depends mainly on the attitude of the observer. Jung linked the semiotic and symbolic approaches, respectively, to the causal and final points of view. He acknowledged the importance of both.

    "Psychic development cannot be accomplished by intention and will alone; it needs the attraction of the symbol, whose value quantum exceeds that of the cause. But the formation of a symbol cannot take place until the mind has dwelt long enough on the elementary facts, that is to say until the inner or outer necessities of the life-process have brought about a transformation of energy."["On Psychic Energy," CW 8, par. 47.]

    The symbolic attitude is at bottom constructive, in that it gives priority to understanding the meaning or purpose of psychological phenomena, rather than seeking a reductive explanation.

    "There are, of course, neurotics who regard their unconscious products, which are mostly morbid symptoms, as symbols of supreme importance. Generally, however, this is not what happens. On the contrary, the neurotic of today is only too prone to regard a product that may actually be full of significance as a mere "symptom."["Definitions," CW 6, par. 821.]

    Jung’s primary interest in symbols lay in their ability to transform and redirect instinctive energy.

    "How are we to explain religious processes, for instance, whose nature is essentially symbolical? In abstract form, symbols are religious ideas; in the form of action, they are rites or ceremonies. They are the manifestation and expression of excess libido. At the same time they are stepping-stones to new activities, which must be called cultural in order to distinguish them from the instinctual functions that run their regular course according to natural law."["On Psychic Energy," CW 8, par. 91.]

    The formation of symbols is going on all the time within the psyche, appearing in fantasies and dreams. In analysis, after reductive explanations have been exhausted, symbol-formation is reinforced by the constructive approach. The aim is to make instinctive energy available for meaningful work and a productive life
    And it is possible for a christian to believe that god is his own unconscious mind, but that would require for him to drop his faith in the god that he sees as real.

    If our species developed fighting(killing animals, including people for our survival) our way from africa all over the world conquering the planet. And this wouldnt had been possible without weapons, how is it not that people arent born to kill and fight(and all kinds of sinful stuff)?

    This "mess" we are in is the cause of our history naturally. Do you believe that god didnt intend the world to be like this, people starving etc?

    What caused the big bang is unknown, its even unknown if there are other worlds besides this one. We could just as well be only one part of something much bigger.
    I have few ideas how this world might have been born. Maybe its possible to matter stuff out of emptyness if you also pull out the anti-matter. Sort of like this:
    You know how if you combine a negative number with the same amount of positive? Like -1(antimatter of some type) + 1(matter of same type) = 0? It seems that this is possible in physics, combining matter and anti-matter of same type causes both to disappear. -9 + 9 is also zero, meaning, different types of antimatter can also be destroyed by combining them with their counterpart...
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #89
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    And continuing from previous post..

    Now if -1 + 1 is zero and -9 + 9 is zero, is it possible that zero can also become 1 if it also forms its antinumber(matter), if so, it could also become 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 etc, if their antinumber has been created also.
    Now its known that the universe has alot of antimatter, but the amount of it is obviously unknown, if there is the same amount of matter and antimatter, it would suggest that this theory of nothing being able to be something is possible. Now if this were true, then the universum simple formed because it is possible. But only one thing is certain, because we exist in this universum, this universum is possible.

    Maybe this universum is just the quantum world of another bigger universum and there are universuma in each particle in our universum?
    Maybe this world we are in is inside all particles(inside the quantum world) of our own world, so oir world is king of wrapped inside itself?
    Maybe each time something changes we drift into other realities, reality sort of separating from itself all the time, but just our perspective remaining the same, since we only are able to perceive one reality?
    Maybe its this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Om#In_Hinduism
    Maybe there was no god that said aum, but aum is just how the universum works?

    Who knows? People dont know shit about the world we live in, we can only guess the larger scale questions. Thinking we are right with one guess is delusional, only fact we know is that we dont know, we can only theorize.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #90
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousFeeling View Post
    Indeed, this is where we get the problem with the "Does god exist, or doesn't god exist?" question. We need to first make it clear what definition of god we are going by. Second, what elements of such definition show evidence of God. But the elements, once broken down, aren't mutually exclusive of each other, and have overlap with each other, so the system at play to represent the evidence of God is much more complex and intertwined than a simple definition could possibly make. It's more than just taking a measuring tool to detect where God is. It just can't be done like that from that empirical sense. Would be unwieldy and inefficient to do such a thing. It's more of a global understanding, from my point of view.
    Well i believe in sort of "afterlife", that activity on brains can be measured after the person "dies" and because its evident through near death experiences(where someone has died(as we define death) and reports experiencing things after returning to life), has been described in numerous religions. But the thing is that people has been unable to understand these experiences in the past, so they saw it something supernatural and work of the god.
    Also the fact that most religions see afterlife and going to god is pretty interesting, because i see god as your unconsciousness and when dying the whole brain activates slowly(your unconsciousness activates) before deactivating, in this state i dont see the possibility of perceiving time, so it should by reason be perceived as everlasting state.
    I think tibethian book of the dead also has really interesting view on this(which has alot in common with egyptian book of the dead, but differs slightly), basically the idea is that you go through your mind when you die, have sort of series of dreams, which you need to realize as not being true life(sort of like when you realize in a dream that you are lucid dreaming). Monks are trained to guide the dead person through these dreams and tell the dead person that he is dead and not to get cought up by the dreams, but pass from one stage to another. If the person doesent realize that he has died and face the demons and angels(which are seen as being products of the persons own mind) and get past them. They say that its like living parts of your life again(like being in dream) and you need to be able to let go of them or you stay in sort of limbo. Bla bla bla.

    Anyways, this is just one part of "god", im just using it as an example to point out my point on how we ahould be defining god.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

Similar Threads

  1. If there is no god of any kind...
    By iNtrovert in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-19-2013, 09:55 AM
  2. When there is no personality to type.
    By Tabula in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-04-2010, 10:24 AM
  3. In Charity There is No Excess - Help Type Me!!
    By Applez in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 10:45 PM
  4. There is no such thing as personality.
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-12-2009, 10:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO