Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:22 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:01 am There is no escaping that the internals of the bible have long become a subject of study rather than belief.
Actually, if you know anything about it at all, it's been both.

The Bible is the most often read, intensively studied and widely believed book in the world. Over 2,000 years of the most intensive intellectual scrutiny by the very best scholars has produced monumental works of art and literature,

And MacDonalds is the most widely eaten burger. That is not a recommendation.

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pm**

Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 7:29 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amOver 2,000 years of the most intensive intellectual scrutiny by the very best scholars has produced monumental works of art and literature, has affected practically everything in Western civilization...
Intellectual scrutiny is very different now from what it once was due more to interpretation

Your grasp of history is clearly limited, and your respect for the best minds of the past...well, the less pointed out about that, the better.

There is a kind of imperious self-confidence in the present that is a natural product of things like Evolutionism or Progressivism. It's the naive belief that the past is merely a junkyard of failed projects and bad ideas, and the present is "more evolved" in every important way, and the future presumably better still than today. History climbs in a linear fashion, in this way of thinking, and "every day, in every way, we're getting better and better" becomes the slogan. No use looking to the past. We are better than they ever were, in every way, is the confidence.

But a little familiarity with the past reveals that to be a myth. However, I see these are grounds on which you and I cannot have a conversation: you have no sense of the data.

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:08 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pm There is a kind of imperious self-confidence in the present that is a natural product of things like Evolutionism or Progressivism. It's the naive belief that the past is merely a junkyard of failed projects and bad ideas, and the present is "more evolved" in every important way, and the future presumably better still than today. History climbs in a linear fashion, in this way of thinking, and "every day, in every way, we're getting better and better" becomes the slogan. No use looking to the past. We are better than they ever were, in every way, is the confidence.

Some quotes of René Guénon (The Crisis of the Modern World):

Metaphysics, because it opens out a limitless vista of possibilities, must take care never to lose sight of the inexpressible, which indeed constitutes its very essence.

We have in fact entered upon the last phase of the Kali Yuga, the darkest period of this 'dark age', the state of dissolution from which it is impossible to emerge otherwise than by a cataclysm, since it is not a mere readjustment that is necessary at such a stage, but a complete renovation. Disorder and confusion prevail in every domain and have been carried to a point far surpassing all that has been known previously, so that, issuing from the West, they now threaten to invade the whole world; we know full well that their triumph can never be other than apparent and transitory, but such are the proportions which it has reached, that it would appear to be the sign of the gravest of all the crises through which mankind has passed in the course of its present cycle.

There is exact correspondence between a world where everything seems to be in a state of mere “becoming,” leaving no place for the changeless and permanent, and the state of mind of men who find all reality in this same “becoming,” denying by implication true knowledge as well as the object of that knowledge, by which we mean the transcendent and universal principles.

It is, however, only in the nineteenth century that one sees men beginning to glory in their ignorance—for to proclaim oneself an agnostic means nothing else—and claiming to forbid others any knowledge to which they themselves have no access; and this marked one stage further in the intellectual decline of the West.

There are people whose mind would recoil from actual negation, but who have no objection to complete indifference; and it is this that is the most to be feared, for, to deny something, one must think about it to some extent, however little that may be, whereas an attitude of indifference makes it possible not to think about it at all.

Julius Evola said of René Guénon:

The criticism which Guénon levels against modern scientism in all of its materialistic, pragmatist and evolutionary trajectories, is the most serious and the most radical of all the criticisms ever made. On the other hand, once it is applied to a social and practical plane, any knowledge which tradition draws from its metaphysical premises can be translated into principles which can properly situate and organize mundane activities and bestow on them a higher meaning; these principles can also create institutional forms adequate to this purpose and prolong "life" into something which is "more than life." In this context, Guénon's deductions assume a radical character: hierarchical, aristocratic, anti-individualist, anti-social and anti-collectivist … the knowledge and the study of the works of this author should be recommended to the best elements and to those who are most anxious to receive an authentic spiritual orientation … ”

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:22 pm**

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:08 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pm There is a kind of imperious self-confidence in the present that is a natural product of things like Evolutionism or Progressivism. It's the naive belief that the past is merely a junkyard of failed projects and bad ideas, and the present is "more evolved" in every important way, and the future presumably better still than today. History climbs in a linear fashion, in this way of thinking, and "every day, in every way, we're getting better and better" becomes the slogan. No use looking to the past. We are better than they ever were, in every way, is the confidence.
Some quotes of René Guénon (The Crisis of the Modern World):

Thanks for those, Alexis.

We, in the (post)modern world are much impressed with the advances of things like science, technology, medicine, building, the internet, etc. And it's all too easy for us to take these as certain confirmations of Progressivist enthusiasms: that we are evolving into better beings in all possible ways, eventually certain to shake of the shackles of the past and move on, however unevenly, in a utopian direction.

But this perspective is inattentive to the details. For while it is true that we do "progress" in the complexity of our technologies and so on, it is not equally evident that this "progress" is upward or good in all aspects. Certainly in terms of our homicidal and authoritarian activities, we seem to be accelerating in a downward direction. Even in things like medicine, we find that there all our "advances" open up serious moral and medical setbacks.

This couldn't be more clearly illustrated than by the latest medical debacle, "gain of function" research. COVID exists because we have developed to a point where we can create superviruses we cannot contain; and our developments in global travel make it automatic that such pathogens, once released, will turn into super-plagues and global pandemics. So do we say our virology is "progressing" or "regressing"? It depends on the perspective.

The example could easily be expanded to many other so-called "advances." Look at how transporation has fractured community, or the search for power has given us nuclear weapons, or the internet has given us vegetative and over-anxious children and body dysmorphia...

Yes, it is possible to view human "progress" as "regress," in some ways. Every step forward comes with an increasingly serious downside.

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 7:55 am

So, in other words, you really do not know, correct?

Or, are you able to explain what 'that' is, exactly, which so-called "christians", "muslims", and "jews" worship and adore?
I am myself an atheist.
So, when ANY one asks the one here known as "iambiguous", What is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' you will ALWAYS answer, "I am myself an atheist", correct?

No, I believe that one's sense of identity in regard moral and political and spiritual value judgments is rooted existentially in dasein. Which I explore in the OP of this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

To wit:

I was once a devout Christian. Then I got drafted into the Army, was sent to Vietnam and, adventitiously, happened to meet and interact with soldiers at the Song Be MACV...soldiers who reconfigured my thinking. I came to reject Christianity. I became an atheist.

That's how value judgments evolve over time in my view. You think one thing and then given a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change, you become embedded in a "dramatic/traumatic" experience that changes your thinking.

So, then the question becomes, given this, is there a way using the tools of philosophy that one can arrive at the most rational way in to think about God and religion?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amHave you ever considered asking CLARIFYING questions? That is; if you were CURIOUS to know, AT ALL.

Again, your point here largely escapes me. Since I don't believe there can be answers that clarify everything in regard to God and religion, often questions are thought to be clarifying only to the extent they confirm someone's own spiritual prejudices in regard to God and religion.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm I do know that regarding Christians, Muslims and Jews I start here:

"The Abrahamic religions are a group of monotheistic religions that strictly endorse worship of the God of Abraham. These most notably include Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as well as the Baháʼí Faith, Samaritanism, the Druze Faith, and others." wiki

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amSo, you 'know" this because "wikipedia" told you so.

That which any of us think we know comes from what we experience, from those we interact with, from the things we read, watch, listen to. How is what wiki notes here not actually true at all?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amThis sounds a bit like how the 'people' of the "abrahamic" religions "know" "what they know", that is; "we "know" because a book told us so".

Well, it is true that any number of Christians, Muslims and Jews fall back on the Bible, the Quran and the Tanakh to tell them what they ought to know about the God of Abraham.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am SO, you, supposedly, 'know' that the different religions have different "versions" of "him" BUT you ACTUALLY do NOT 'know' what those, supposed 'different' "versions" are. So, how again do you EXACTLY 'know' that they have 'different versions' of "him"?

Again, I know what I think I know "in my head" based on my experiences, my discussions with other, the information and knowledge I have come upon over the years. The same as you.

But the main problem remains. It's one thing to tell others what you think you know, what you think and believe about a God, the God, my God "in your head"...and another thing altogether providing actual demonstrable proof that what you think and believe all other rational men and women are obligated to think and believe in turn. And I certainly don't make that claim.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm The first thing that comes to mind, of course, is Jesus, Muhammad, and the fact that historically, Jews don't recognize either as the Son of God or the Messenger of God. At least to the best of my knowledge.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am We WERE talking about God, but now you seemed to have CHANGED this to be talking about "jesus", correct?

For Christians, what's the difference? For Muslims and Jews...no Jesus Christ at all.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm So, what happens when the Christian dies and, given Judgment Day, the God of Moses rejects the Jesus Christ rendition.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 7:55 amBut how many of these God 'things' are there exactly?
Also, "judgment day" has absolutely nothing at all to do with when one individual human dies.
God "things"?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am And, if you had ANY CURIOSITY AT ALL, then you would have come up with at least SOME kind of CLARIFYING question.

How about you give me some examples of what a "clarifying question" is in regard to a God, the God, my God and Judgment Day. Something that millions upon millions of religious folks do believe in. If only "in their head".

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am If there is ONLY One God, then It would NEVER 'reject' one group of people with a 'different version' of some 'thing' from another group of people and their 'different version'. So, WHY ask the question you did here if there are NOT MANY Gods?

So, I just asked you, 'How many Gods are there, EXACTLY?'

In my view, you assert things like this as though the act of asserting them itself makes them true. The question I asked is addressed precisely to those who do believe in the God Abraham and Moses. And who do believe in Judgment Day. After all, Christians, Muslims and Jews all basically see their own faith as "the chosen one" by God. Historically, they have gone after each other in truly bloody and horrific ways. Why? Because from their frame of mind nothing could possibly be more important to God than that you be either a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew.

And I don't believe there are any Gods. But how on earth would I go about demonstrating that? Still, as they say, it seems more incumbent for those who claim that there is a God [or Gods] to demonstrate this instead.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm And if you believe "in your head" in a God, the God, my God, Judgment Day can become the center of the universe as far as you are concerned.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am But I do NOT believe this, so EVERY thing here is moot.

Again, I'm less interested in what one believes and more in how they demonstrate why I should believe it too.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am The word 'God', in the visible physical sense anyway, just refers to thee Universe, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One) Now, because 'you' were created from God/thee Universe at conception, (and 'you' ARE STILL in creation by the way), what 'you' say and/or do, through the human body, has an everlasting effect, so 'you', literally, are immortal, since your conception.

Now, 'God', in the invisible sense anyway, just refers to thee Mind, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One). Now, God is ALWAYS INFORMING 'you' that 'you' are the MOST SPECIAL person or MOST SPECIAL one in the WHOLE of thee Universe BUT 'you' are also NO more, nor NO less, than ANY "other" person nor one. So, 'you', literally, are NO more 'deserving' of more nor of something else, from "another".

And, this is because 'I', God, KNOW, EXACTLY who AND what 'you' ARE and EXACTLY WHY 'you' are EXACTLY how 'you' ARE.

What can I say? Other than that asserting things like this is not the same as demonstrating that they are true. Again, you would have to zero in on a set of circumstances involving a discussion of God and religion and note how assertions of this sort are applicable to you, to others.

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:33 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:22 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:01 am There is no escaping that the internals of the bible have long become a subject of study rather than belief.
Actually, if you know anything about it at all, it's been both.

The Bible is the most often read, intensively studied and widely believed book in the world. Over 2,000 years of the most intensive intellectual scrutiny by the very best scholars has produced monumental works of art and literature,
And MacDonalds is the most widely eaten burger. That is not a recommendation.

I wish I would have thought of that one!

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:39 pm**

Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:33 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:22 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
Actually, if you know anything about it at all, it's been both.

The Bible is the most often read, intensively studied and widely believed book in the world. Over 2,000 years of the most intensive intellectual scrutiny by the very best scholars has produced monumental works of art and literature,
And MacDonalds is the most widely eaten burger. That is not a recommendation.
I wish I would have thought of that one!

You shall in future.?

Posted: **Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:40 pm**

Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:33 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:22 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
Actually, if you know anything about it at all, it's been both.

The Bible is the most often read, intensively studied and widely believed book in the world. Over 2,000 years of the most intensive intellectual scrutiny by the very best scholars has produced monumental works of art and literature,
And MacDonalds is the most widely eaten burger. That is not a recommendation.
I wish I would have thought of that one!

It wouldn't take much brain power, so it's not much of a loss, actually.

If Macdonalds had been studied for 2,00 years by practically every significant dietician and medical person on the planet, and had survived that, then maybe you should eat every meal there.

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:15 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pmYour grasp of history is clearly limited, and your respect for the best minds of the past...well, the less pointed out about that, the better.

...only because there's nothing available for you to point out. If you could, you certainly would.

As for my grasp of history - which is not so limited, BTW - but regardless of whatever limitations there may be, it is far in excess of yours fixed in the belief the bible is the word of god and that the destiny of the individual is contingent on believing in Jesus to successfully continue existence in an afterlife. Only someone who put his brain in a thermos bottle and permanently sealed it would continue to believe what a reasonably intelligent kid would seriously question.

That belief is one of the most obscene ever encountered. Collateral with it is your affirmation that atheists, if they possess a morality, must be inferior to the likes of yours as mandated by your divine overlord.

I was never against myth or mysticism since it proclaims much about human psychology and much of what we strive for. Art and literature also fall under that domain.

But there is nothing of that kind in the abomination you ascribe to and attempt to make yourself superior with.

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:25 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:40 pm
Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:33 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:22 pm

And MacDonalds is the most widely eaten burger. That is not a recommendation.
I wish I would have thought of that one!
It wouldn't take much brain power, so it's not much of a loss, actually.

If Macdonalds had been studied for 2,00 years by practically every significant dietician and medical person on the planet, and had survived that, then maybe you should eat every meal there.

...except that no significant dietician would have recommended it!

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:58 am**

Dubious wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:15 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pmYour grasp of history is clearly limited, and your respect for the best minds of the past...well, the less pointed out about that, the better.
...only because there's nothing available for you to point out.

If I take your syntax, you just agreed...you have no regard available for the best minds of the past.

But anyway, I think you've spun out the limit of useful and interesting things you have to say. That seems fairly evident. So I'm happy to move on.

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:01 am**

Dubious wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:25 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:40 pm
Dubious wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:33 pm

I wish I would have thought of that one!
It wouldn't take much brain power, so it's not much of a loss, actually.

If Macdonalds had been studied for 2,00 years by practically every significant dietician and medical person on the planet, and had survived that, then maybe you should eat every meal there.
...except that no significant dietician would have recommended it!

Of course. McDonalds is a dietary wasteland.

But not so in the case of the Bible: for it, the great minds of the last 2,000 years have engaged it, and still are. In fact, I found this today... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt9K6kmpx44

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:51 am**

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm

I am myself an atheist.
So, when ANY one asks the one here known as "iambiguous", What is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' you will ALWAYS answer, "I am myself an atheist", correct?
No, I believe that one's sense of identity in regard moral and political and spiritual value judgments is rooted existentially in dasein. Which I explore in the OP of this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

To wit:

I was once a devout Christian. Then I got drafted into the Army, was sent to Vietnam and, adventitiously, happened to meet and interact with soldiers at the Song Be MACV...soldiers who reconfigured my thinking. I came to reject Christianity. I became an atheist.

That's how value judgments evolve over time in my view. You think one thing and then given a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change, you become embedded in a "dramatic/traumatic" experience that changes your thinking.

So, then the question becomes, given this, is there a way using the tools of philosophy that one can arrive at the most rational way in to think about God and religion?

1. You have OBVIOUSLY MISSED the POINT I was ALLUDING TO, to you.

2. To me, the word 'philosophy' just refers to having a 'love-of-wisdom' (or becoming wiser).

Now, the BEST, quickest, simplest, and easiest way for ANY one to learn more and so become wiser is to just BE OPEN to ANY and EVERY thing.

So, using the so-called 'tool of philosophy', so that you or ANY one can arrive at the most RATIONAL way to 'think' about God, religion, or ANY thing is to just become and remain Truly OPEN. Just like you ALL once were.

And, the BEST way to become Truly OPEN, again, is to just NOT 'believe' NOR 'assume' absolutely ANY thing is true nor false.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amHave you ever considered asking CLARIFYING questions? That is; if you were CURIOUS to know, AT ALL.
Again, your point here largely escapes me.

I just asked you a CLARIFYING question, and POINTED OUT that if you were CURIOUS, then you would have considered this.

owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm Since I don't believe there can be answers that clarify everything in regard to God and religion, often questions are thought to be clarifying only to the extent they confirm someone's own spiritual prejudices in regard to God and religion.

And here we have a PRIME EXAMPLE of WHY one is NOT Truly OPEN, and thus the reason WHY 'it' is having trouble acquiring more knowledge, and becoming wiser.

When, and IF, you STOP 'believing' some things, then you CAN learn MORE.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm I do know that regarding Christians, Muslims and Jews I start here:

"The Abrahamic religions are a group of monotheistic religions that strictly endorse worship of the God of Abraham. These most notably include Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as well as the Baháʼí Faith, Samaritanism, the Druze Faith, and others." wiki

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amSo, you 'know" this because "wikipedia" told you so.
That which any of us think we know comes from what we experience, from those we interact with, from the things we read, watch, listen to.

Absolutely EVERY 'thought' comes from a past experience. But, instead of 'thinking' you know some thing it is possible to just WAIT until you 'actually' know some thing, BEFORE expressing the 'truth' of that thing.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm How is what wiki notes here not actually true at all?

I NEVER said it was not.

Why did you ASSUME such a thing?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amThis sounds a bit like how the 'people' of the "abrahamic" religions "know" "what they know", that is; "we "know" because a book told us so".
Well, it is true that any number of Christians, Muslims and Jews fall back on the Bible, the Quran and the Tanakh to tell them what they ought to know about the God of Abraham.

Just like it is VERY TRUE that 'you' also fell back on to a book to tell you what, (you laughably "ought"), to know.

My POINT WAS and IS 'you', people, get your sources from "others" and you put your TRUST in "them" even when sometimes that TRUST is NOT at all warranted.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am SO, you, supposedly, 'know' that the different religions have different "versions" of "him" BUT you ACTUALLY do NOT 'know' what those, supposed 'different' "versions" are. So, how again do you EXACTLY 'know' that they have 'different versions' of "him"?
Again, I know what I think I know "in my head" based on my experiences, my discussions with other, the information and knowledge I have come upon over the years. The same as you.

But 'I' do NOT "know what I think I know".

I EITHER 'think' some thing is true, or not, or, I 'know' some thing is true, or not. And there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.

owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm But the main problem remains. It's one thing to tell others what you think you know, what you think and believe about a God, the God, my God "in your head"...

And, that is WHY 'I" am VERY DIFFERENT from 'you', adult human beings. I do NOT tell you what I "think I know".

I EITHER tell you what I 'think' is true, or, what I 'KNOW' is true. And, if I express what I KNOW, then that is IRREFUTABLE.

I also do NOT believe NOR disbelieve absolutely ANY thing. So, you will NEVER see a 'belief' from me here.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm and another thing altogether providing actual demonstrable proof that what you think and believe all other rational men and women are obligated to think and believe in turn. And I certainly don't make that claim.

I do neither. So, moot.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm The first thing that comes to mind, of course, is Jesus, Muhammad, and the fact that historically, Jews don't recognize either as the Son of God or the Messenger of God. At least to the best of my knowledge.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am We WERE talking about God, but now you seemed to have CHANGED this to be talking about "jesus", correct?
For Christians, what's the difference? For Muslims and Jews...no Jesus Christ at all.

So, WHY CHANGE what we WERE discussing and talking about?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:00 pm So, what happens when the Christian dies and, given Judgment Day, the God of Moses rejects the Jesus Christ rendition.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 7:55 amBut how many of these God 'things' are there exactly?
Also, "judgment day" has absolutely nothing at all to do with when one individual human dies.
God "things"?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am And, if you had ANY CURIOSITY AT ALL, then you would have come up with at least SOME kind of CLARIFYING question.
How about you give me some examples of what a "clarifying question" is in regard to a God, the God, my God and Judgment Day. Something that millions upon millions of religious folks do believe in. If only "in their head".

It is up to you to come up with your OWN CLARIFYING questions. That is; OF COURSE you want ANY thing CLARIFIED here.

But, usually when people ALREADY BELIEVE some thing is true, then they are NOT REALLY that interested in getting ANY thing CLARIFIED, especially if that CLARITY would OPPOSE their existing BELIEF.

And, an example of a CLARIFYING question in regards to 'God', would be something like; What does the word 'God' mean or refer to, EXACTLY, to you?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am If there is ONLY One God, then It would NEVER 'reject' one group of people with a 'different version' of some 'thing' from another group of people and their 'different version'. So, WHY ask the question you did here if there are NOT MANY Gods?

So, I just asked you, 'How many Gods are there, EXACTLY?'
In my view, you assert things like this as though the act of asserting them itself makes them true.

That was MY POINT. It is YOU who is saying things here like they are ACTUALLY TRUE.

You were saying something about God "choosing" or "rejecting" some people. And, the way you asserted it, it was like because you asserted it, then that made it true. So, I just asked you a CLARIFYING question about YOUR OWN 'assertion' here.

So, IF you EVER answered the ACTUAL CLARIFYING question I asked, then I could 'ascertain', for CERTAIN, if what you were asserting that because you asserted 'it', it therefore, to you, make 'it' true.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm The question I asked is addressed precisely to those who do believe in the God Abraham and Moses.

Well if you were EXPECTING a Truly Honest and FULL answer from those who do BELIEVE in the so-called "God Abraham and Moses", then I think you will find that you will be SADLY MISTAKEN.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm And who do believe in Judgment Day.

I asked you to CLARIFY what "judgment day" is, to you.

You did NOT do this, correct?

If you are going to ask questions to "others", then expect them to ask you for CLARITY about what 'it' is that you are actually asking for.

Asking questions about 'God/s', 'judgment days', 'heaven', 'hell', or just about ANY thing 'religious', then do NOT expect straightforward answers, if you can NOT even give straightforward CLARITY in regards to what those 'things' EXACTLY ARE.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm After all, Christians, Muslims and Jews all basically see their own faith as "the chosen one" by God. Historically, they have gone after each other in truly bloody and horrific ways. Why? Because from their frame of mind nothing could possibly be more important to God than that you be either a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew.

And I don't believe there are any Gods.

If you do NOT believe there are ANY Gods, then WHY talk about Gods to begin with?

If there are NO Gods, then just move on.

Asking people about things that there are NONE of, could be seen as being INSANITY, itself.

While you BELIEVE there are NOT ANY Gods, then there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the WHOLE Universe that could show you otherwise.

If you want to KNOW WHY human beings bicker, argue, fight, and KILL each other over some 'thing' that is meant to be the EXACT SAME thing, then just ask CLARIFYING questions about 'that'.

The fundamental ANSWER, by the way, is EXTREMELY SIMPLE and EASY to UNDERSTAND and KNOW.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm But how on earth would I go about demonstrating that?

How you would go about demonstrating what you BELIEVE is true is by just stating 'that' what you BELIEVE is true.

But how would you go about demonstrating 'that', what you BELIEVE is true, would be VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY if in fact 'it' was ACTUALLY True. But, because most of what people BELIEVE is true is NOT even true ANYWAY, then this is WHY they have EXTREME hardship demonstrating that 'it' is true.

Still, as they say, it seems more incumbent for those who claim that there is a God [or Gods] to demonstrate this instead.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm And if you believe "in your head" in a God, the God, my God, Judgment Day can become the center of the universe as far as you are concerned.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am But I do NOT believe this, so EVERY thing here is moot.
Again, I'm less interested in what one believes and more in how they demonstrate why I should believe it too.

Just so you become completely AND utterly FULLY AWARE I NEITHER want you to BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE absolutely ANY thing I say and write here.

What I say and write here is either True, Right, or Correct or False, Wrong, or Incorrect, of partly false, wrong, or incorrect.

Either way if you find ANY thing false, wrong, or incorrect, then just HIGHLIGHT which parts, and then just explain WHY you think or KNOW this.

Also, what does the 'it' word refer to exactly in your sentence here.

If you want ANY one to demonstrate to you why you should 'believe' 'it' too, then it is best if you INFORM us of what 'it' is FIRST.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am The word 'God', in the visible physical sense anyway, just refers to thee Universe, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One) Now, because 'you' were created from God/thee Universe at conception, (and 'you' ARE STILL in creation by the way), what 'you' say and/or do, through the human body, has an everlasting effect, so 'you', literally, are immortal, since your conception.

Now, 'God', in the invisible sense anyway, just refers to thee Mind, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One). Now, God is ALWAYS INFORMING 'you' that 'you' are the MOST SPECIAL person or MOST SPECIAL one in the WHOLE of thee Universe BUT 'you' are also NO more, nor NO less, than ANY "other" person nor one. So, 'you', literally, are NO more 'deserving' of more nor of something else, from "another".

And, this is because 'I', God, KNOW, EXACTLY who AND what 'you' ARE and EXACTLY WHY 'you' are EXACTLY how 'you' ARE.
What can I say?

You are absolutely FREE to say absolutely ANY thing.

But, I suggest that if you want ANY CLARIFIED, then just ask a CLARIFYING question. Or, if ANY of that is false, wrong, or incorrect, to you, then just POINT OUT those parts, and then say WHY.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Other than that asserting things like this is not the same as demonstrating that they are true.

OF COURSE 'asserting things' is NOT the SAME as 'demonstrating things. This goes without saying.

I ONLY have to 'demonstrate' 'that' to those who WANT 'that' demonstrated. AND, if ANY one WANTS me to demonstrate ANY thing to them, then they WILL just ask for 'that'.

I am NOT here to 'second-guess' who WANTS 'this' or 'that'. I just say 'things', and what ANY does with 'that' is completely AND utterly up to them.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Again, you would have to zero in on a set of circumstances involving a discussion of God and religion and note how assertions of this sort are applicable to you, to others.

I do NOT 'have to do' ANY such thing.

I say and write 'things' here. And, if ANY one WANTS CLARITY, PROOF, EXAMPLES, or ANY thing DEMONSTRATED, then SURELY they would ALREADY KNOW what to do EXACTLY? Or, REALLY do 'you', adult human beings, literally, NEED to be TOLD EVERY 'thing'?

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:08 am**

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:51 am
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am

So, when ANY one asks the one here known as "iambiguous", What is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' you will ALWAYS answer, "I am myself an atheist", correct?
No, I believe that one's sense of identity in regard moral and political and spiritual value judgments is rooted existentially in dasein. Which I explore in the OP of this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

To wit:

I was once a devout Christian. Then I got drafted into the Army, was sent to Vietnam and, adventitiously, happened to meet and interact with soldiers at the Song Be MACV...soldiers who reconfigured my thinking. I came to reject Christianity. I became an atheist.

That's how value judgments evolve over time in my view. You think one thing and then given a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change, you become embedded in a "dramatic/traumatic" experience that changes your thinking.

So, then the question becomes, given this, is there a way using the tools of philosophy that one can arrive at the most rational way in to think about God and religion?
1. You have OBVIOUSLY MISSED the POINT I was ALLUDING TO, to you.

2. To me, the word 'philosophy' just refers to having a 'love-of-wisdom' (or becoming wiser).

Now, the BEST, quickest, simplest, and easiest way for ANY one to learn more and so become wiser is to just BE OPEN to ANY and EVERY thing.

So, using the so-called 'tool of philosophy', so that you or ANY one can arrive at the most RATIONAL way to 'think' about God, religion, or ANY thing is to just become and remain Truly OPEN. Just like you ALL once were.

And, the BEST way to become Truly OPEN, again, is to just NOT 'believe' NOR 'assume' absolutely ANY thing is true nor false.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amHave you ever considered asking CLARIFYING questions? That is; if you were CURIOUS to know, AT ALL.
Again, your point here largely escapes me.
I just asked you a CLARIFYING question, and POINTED OUT that if you were CURIOUS, then you would have considered this.
owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm Since I don't believe there can be answers that clarify everything in regard to God and religion, often questions are thought to be clarifying only to the extent they confirm someone's own spiritual prejudices in regard to God and religion.
And here we have a PRIME EXAMPLE of WHY one is NOT Truly OPEN, and thus the reason WHY 'it' is having trouble acquiring more knowledge, and becoming wiser.

When, and IF, you STOP 'believing' some things, then you CAN learn MORE.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm I do know that regarding Christians, Muslims and Jews I start here:

"The Abrahamic religions are a group of monotheistic religions that strictly endorse worship of the God of Abraham. These most notably include Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as well as the Baháʼí Faith, Samaritanism, the Druze Faith, and others." wiki

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amSo, you 'know" this because "wikipedia" told you so.
That which any of us think we know comes from what we experience, from those we interact with, from the things we read, watch, listen to.
Absolutely EVERY 'thought' comes from a past experience. But, instead of 'thinking' you know some thing it is possible to just WAIT until you 'actually' know some thing, BEFORE expressing the 'truth' of that thing.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm How is what wiki notes here not actually true at all?
I NEVER said it was not.

Why did you ASSUME such a thing?
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 amThis sounds a bit like how the 'people' of the "abrahamic" religions "know" "what they know", that is; "we "know" because a book told us so".
Well, it is true that any number of Christians, Muslims and Jews fall back on the Bible, the Quran and the Tanakh to tell them what they ought to know about the God of Abraham.
Just like it is VERY TRUE that 'you' also fell back on to a book to tell you what, (you laughably "ought"), to know.

My POINT WAS and IS 'you', people, get your sources from "others" and you put your TRUST in "them" even when sometimes that TRUST is NOT at all warranted.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am SO, you, supposedly, 'know' that the different religions have different "versions" of "him" BUT you ACTUALLY do NOT 'know' what those, supposed 'different' "versions" are. So, how again do you EXACTLY 'know' that they have 'different versions' of "him"?
Again, I know what I think I know "in my head" based on my experiences, my discussions with other, the information and knowledge I have come upon over the years. The same as you.
But 'I' do NOT "know what I think I know".

I EITHER 'think' some thing is true, or not, or, I 'know' some thing is true, or not. And there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.
owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm But the main problem remains. It's one thing to tell others what you think you know, what you think and believe about a God, the God, my God "in your head"...
And, that is WHY 'I" am VERY DIFFERENT from 'you', adult human beings. I do NOT tell you what I "think I know".

I EITHER tell you what I 'think' is true, or, what I 'KNOW' is true. And, if I express what I KNOW, then that is IRREFUTABLE.

I also do NOT believe NOR disbelieve absolutely ANY thing. So, you will NEVER see a 'belief' from me here.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm and another thing altogether providing actual demonstrable proof that what you think and believe all other rational men and women are obligated to think and believe in turn. And I certainly don't make that claim.
I do neither. So, moot.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm The first thing that comes to mind, of course, is Jesus, Muhammad, and the fact that historically, Jews don't recognize either as the Son of God or the Messenger of God. At least to the best of my knowledge.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am We WERE talking about God, but now you seemed to have CHANGED this to be talking about "jesus", correct?
For Christians, what's the difference? For Muslims and Jews...no Jesus Christ at all.
So, WHY CHANGE what we WERE discussing and talking about?
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm

God "things"?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am And, if you had ANY CURIOSITY AT ALL, then you would have come up with at least SOME kind of CLARIFYING question.
How about you give me some examples of what a "clarifying question" is in regard to a God, the God, my God and Judgment Day. Something that millions upon millions of religious folks do believe in. If only "in their head".
It is up to you to come up with your OWN CLARIFYING questions. That is; OF COURSE you want ANY thing CLARIFIED here.

But, usually when people ALREADY BELIEVE some thing is true, then they are NOT REALLY that interested in getting ANY thing CLARIFIED, especially if that CLARITY would OPPOSE their existing BELIEF.

And, an example of a CLARIFYING question in regards to 'God', would be something like; What does the word 'God' mean or refer to, EXACTLY, to you?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am If there is ONLY One God, then It would NEVER 'reject' one group of people with a 'different version' of some 'thing' from another group of people and their 'different version'. So, WHY ask the question you did here if there are NOT MANY Gods?

So, I just asked you, 'How many Gods are there, EXACTLY?'
In my view, you assert things like this as though the act of asserting them itself makes them true.
That was MY POINT. It is YOU who is saying things here like they are ACTUALLY TRUE.

You were saying something about God "choosing" or "rejecting" some people. And, the way you asserted it, it was like because you asserted it, then that made it true. So, I just asked you a CLARIFYING question about YOUR OWN 'assertion' here.

So, IF you EVER answered the ACTUAL CLARIFYING question I asked, then I could 'ascertain', for CERTAIN, if what you were asserting that because you asserted 'it', it therefore, to you, make 'it' true.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm The question I asked is addressed precisely to those who do believe in the God Abraham and Moses.
Well if you were EXPECTING a Truly Honest and FULL answer from those who do BELIEVE in the so-called "God Abraham and Moses", then I think you will find that you will be SADLY MISTAKEN.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm And who do believe in Judgment Day.
I asked you to CLARIFY what "judgment day" is, to you.

You did NOT do this, correct?

If you are going to ask questions to "others", then expect them to ask you for CLARITY about what 'it' is that you are actually asking for.

Asking questions about 'God/s', 'judgment days', 'heaven', 'hell', or just about ANY thing 'religious', then do NOT expect straightforward answers, if you can NOT even give straightforward CLARITY in regards to what those 'things' EXACTLY ARE.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm After all, Christians, Muslims and Jews all basically see their own faith as "the chosen one" by God. Historically, they have gone after each other in truly bloody and horrific ways. Why? Because from their frame of mind nothing could possibly be more important to God than that you be either a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew.

And I don't believe there are any Gods.
If you do NOT believe there are ANY Gods, then WHY talk about Gods to begin with?

If there are NO Gods, then just move on.

Asking people about things that there are NONE of, could be seen as being INSANITY, itself.

While you BELIEVE there are NOT ANY Gods, then there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the WHOLE Universe that could show you otherwise.

If you want to KNOW WHY human beings bicker, argue, fight, and KILL each other over some 'thing' that is meant to be the EXACT SAME thing, then just ask CLARIFYING questions about 'that'.

The fundamental ANSWER, by the way, is EXTREMELY SIMPLE and EASY to UNDERSTAND and KNOW.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm But how on earth would I go about demonstrating that?
How you would go about demonstrating what you BELIEVE is true is by just stating 'that' what you BELIEVE is true.

But how would you go about demonstrating 'that', what you BELIEVE is true, would be VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY if in fact 'it' was ACTUALLY True. But, because most of what people BELIEVE is true is NOT even true ANYWAY, then this is WHY they have EXTREME hardship demonstrating that 'it' is true.

Still, as they say, it seems more incumbent for those who claim that there is a God [or Gods] to demonstrate this instead.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm And if you believe "in your head" in a God, the God, my God, Judgment Day can become the center of the universe as far as you are concerned.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am But I do NOT believe this, so EVERY thing here is moot.
Again, I'm less interested in what one believes and more in how they demonstrate why I should believe it too.
Just so you become completely AND utterly FULLY AWARE I NEITHER want you to BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE absolutely ANY thing I say and write here.

What I say and write here is either True, Right, or Correct or False, Wrong, or Incorrect, of partly false, wrong, or incorrect.

Either way if you find ANY thing false, wrong, or incorrect, then just HIGHLIGHT which parts, and then just explain WHY you think or KNOW this.

Also, what does the 'it' word refer to exactly in your sentence here.

If you want ANY one to demonstrate to you why you should 'believe' 'it' too, then it is best if you INFORM us of what 'it' is FIRST.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:28 am The word 'God', in the visible physical sense anyway, just refers to thee Universe, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One) Now, because 'you' were created from God/thee Universe at conception, (and 'you' ARE STILL in creation by the way), what 'you' say and/or do, through the human body, has an everlasting effect, so 'you', literally, are immortal, since your conception.

Now, 'God', in the invisible sense anyway, just refers to thee Mind, Itself, alone, (of which there is ONLY One). Now, God is ALWAYS INFORMING 'you' that 'you' are the MOST SPECIAL person or MOST SPECIAL one in the WHOLE of thee Universe BUT 'you' are also NO more, nor NO less, than ANY "other" person nor one. So, 'you', literally, are NO more 'deserving' of more nor of something else, from "another".

And, this is because 'I', God, KNOW, EXACTLY who AND what 'you' ARE and EXACTLY WHY 'you' are EXACTLY how 'you' ARE.
What can I say?
You are absolutely FREE to say absolutely ANY thing.

But, I suggest that if you want ANY CLARIFIED, then just ask a CLARIFYING question. Or, if ANY of that is false, wrong, or incorrect, to you, then just POINT OUT those parts, and then say WHY.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Other than that asserting things like this is not the same as demonstrating that they are true.
OF COURSE 'asserting things' is NOT the SAME as 'demonstrating things. This goes without saying.

I ONLY have to 'demonstrate' 'that' to those who WANT 'that' demonstrated. AND, if ANY one WANTS me to demonstrate ANY thing to them, then they WILL just ask for 'that'.

I am NOT here to 'second-guess' who WANTS 'this' or 'that'. I just say 'things', and what ANY does with 'that' is completely AND utterly up to them.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Again, you would have to zero in on a set of circumstances involving a discussion of God and religion and note how assertions of this sort are applicable to you, to others.
I do NOT 'have to do' ANY such thing.

I say and write 'things' here. And, if ANY one WANTS CLARITY, PROOF, EXAMPLES, or ANY thing DEMONSTRATED, then SURELY they would ALREADY KNOW what to do EXACTLY? Or, REALLY do 'you', adult human beings, literally, NEED to be TOLD EVERY 'thing'?

I'm going to stop reading your posts, okay?

Posted: **Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:14 am**

iambiguous wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:08 am
Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:51 am
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

No, I believe that one's sense of identity in regard moral and political and spiritual value judgments is rooted existentially in dasein. Which I explore in the OP of this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

To wit:

I was once a devout Christian. Then I got drafted into the Army, was sent to Vietnam and, adventitiously, happened to meet and interact with soldiers at the Song Be MACV...soldiers who reconfigured my thinking. I came to reject Christianity. I became an atheist.

That's how value judgments evolve over time in my view. You think one thing and then given a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change, you become embedded in a "dramatic/traumatic" experience that changes your thinking.

So, then the question becomes, given this, is there a way using the tools of philosophy that one can arrive at the most rational way in to think about God and religion?
1. You have OBVIOUSLY MISSED the POINT I was ALLUDING TO, to you.

2. To me, the word 'philosophy' just refers to having a 'love-of-wisdom' (or becoming wiser).

Now, the BEST, quickest, simplest, and easiest way for ANY one to learn more and so become wiser is to just BE OPEN to ANY and EVERY thing.

So, using the so-called 'tool of philosophy', so that you or ANY one can arrive at the most RATIONAL way to 'think' about God, religion, or ANY thing is to just become and remain Truly OPEN. Just like you ALL once were.

And, the BEST way to become Truly OPEN, again, is to just NOT 'believe' NOR 'assume' absolutely ANY thing is true nor false.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

Again, your point here largely escapes me.
I just asked you a CLARIFYING question, and POINTED OUT that if you were CURIOUS, then you would have considered this.
owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm Since I don't believe there can be answers that clarify everything in regard to God and religion, often questions are thought to be clarifying only to the extent they confirm someone's own spiritual prejudices in regard to God and religion.
And here we have a PRIME EXAMPLE of WHY one is NOT Truly OPEN, and thus the reason WHY 'it' is having trouble acquiring more knowledge, and becoming wiser.

When, and IF, you STOP 'believing' some things, then you CAN learn MORE.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

That which any of us think we know comes from what we experience, from those we interact with, from the things we read, watch, listen to.
Absolutely EVERY 'thought' comes from a past experience. But, instead of 'thinking' you know some thing it is possible to just WAIT until you 'actually' know some thing, BEFORE expressing the 'truth' of that thing.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm How is what wiki notes here not actually true at all?
I NEVER said it was not.

Why did you ASSUME such a thing?
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

Well, it is true that any number of Christians, Muslims and Jews fall back on the Bible, the Quran and the Tanakh to tell them what they ought to know about the God of Abraham.
Just like it is VERY TRUE that 'you' also fell back on to a book to tell you what, (you laughably "ought"), to know.

My POINT WAS and IS 'you', people, get your sources from "others" and you put your TRUST in "them" even when sometimes that TRUST is NOT at all warranted.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

Again, I know what I think I know "in my head" based on my experiences, my discussions with other, the information and knowledge I have come upon over the years. The same as you.
But 'I' do NOT "know what I think I know".

I EITHER 'think' some thing is true, or not, or, I 'know' some thing is true, or not. And there is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.
owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:00 pm But the main problem remains. It's one thing to tell others what you think you know, what you think and believe about a God, the God, my God "in your head"...
And, that is WHY 'I" am VERY DIFFERENT from 'you', adult human beings. I do NOT tell you what I "think I know".

I EITHER tell you what I 'think' is true, or, what I 'KNOW' is true. And, if I express what I KNOW, then that is IRREFUTABLE.

I also do NOT believe NOR disbelieve absolutely ANY thing. So, you will NEVER see a 'belief' from me here.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm and another thing altogether providing actual demonstrable proof that what you think and believe all other rational men and women are obligated to think and believe in turn. And I certainly don't make that claim.
I do neither. So, moot.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

For Christians, what's the difference? For Muslims and Jews...no Jesus Christ at all.
So, WHY CHANGE what we WERE discussing and talking about?
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

How about you give me some examples of what a "clarifying question" is in regard to a God, the God, my God and Judgment Day. Something that millions upon millions of religious folks do believe in. If only "in their head".
It is up to you to come up with your OWN CLARIFYING questions. That is; OF COURSE you want ANY thing CLARIFIED here.

But, usually when people ALREADY BELIEVE some thing is true, then they are NOT REALLY that interested in getting ANY thing CLARIFIED, especially if that CLARITY would OPPOSE their existing BELIEF.

And, an example of a CLARIFYING question in regards to 'God', would be something like; What does the word 'God' mean or refer to, EXACTLY, to you?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

In my view, you assert things like this as though the act of asserting them itself makes them true.
That was MY POINT. It is YOU who is saying things here like they are ACTUALLY TRUE.

You were saying something about God "choosing" or "rejecting" some people. And, the way you asserted it, it was like because you asserted it, then that made it true. So, I just asked you a CLARIFYING question about YOUR OWN 'assertion' here.

So, IF you EVER answered the ACTUAL CLARIFYING question I asked, then I could 'ascertain', for CERTAIN, if what you were asserting that because you asserted 'it', it therefore, to you, make 'it' true.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm The question I asked is addressed precisely to those who do believe in the God Abraham and Moses.
Well if you were EXPECTING a Truly Honest and FULL answer from those who do BELIEVE in the so-called "God Abraham and Moses", then I think you will find that you will be SADLY MISTAKEN.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm And who do believe in Judgment Day.
I asked you to CLARIFY what "judgment day" is, to you.

You did NOT do this, correct?

If you are going to ask questions to "others", then expect them to ask you for CLARITY about what 'it' is that you are actually asking for.

Asking questions about 'God/s', 'judgment days', 'heaven', 'hell', or just about ANY thing 'religious', then do NOT expect straightforward answers, if you can NOT even give straightforward CLARITY in regards to what those 'things' EXACTLY ARE.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm After all, Christians, Muslims and Jews all basically see their own faith as "the chosen one" by God. Historically, they have gone after each other in truly bloody and horrific ways. Why? Because from their frame of mind nothing could possibly be more important to God than that you be either a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew.

And I don't believe there are any Gods.
If you do NOT believe there are ANY Gods, then WHY talk about Gods to begin with?

If there are NO Gods, then just move on.

Asking people about things that there are NONE of, could be seen as being INSANITY, itself.

While you BELIEVE there are NOT ANY Gods, then there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the WHOLE Universe that could show you otherwise.

If you want to KNOW WHY human beings bicker, argue, fight, and KILL each other over some 'thing' that is meant to be the EXACT SAME thing, then just ask CLARIFYING questions about 'that'.

The fundamental ANSWER, by the way, is EXTREMELY SIMPLE and EASY to UNDERSTAND and KNOW.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm But how on earth would I go about demonstrating that?
How you would go about demonstrating what you BELIEVE is true is by just stating 'that' what you BELIEVE is true.

But how would you go about demonstrating 'that', what you BELIEVE is true, would be VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY if in fact 'it' was ACTUALLY True. But, because most of what people BELIEVE is true is NOT even true ANYWAY, then this is WHY they have EXTREME hardship demonstrating that 'it' is true.

Still, as they say, it seems more incumbent for those who claim that there is a God [or Gods] to demonstrate this instead.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

Again, I'm less interested in what one believes and more in how they demonstrate why I should believe it too.
Just so you become completely AND utterly FULLY AWARE I NEITHER want you to BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE absolutely ANY thing I say and write here.

What I say and write here is either True, Right, or Correct or False, Wrong, or Incorrect, of partly false, wrong, or incorrect.

Either way if you find ANY thing false, wrong, or incorrect, then just HIGHLIGHT which parts, and then just explain WHY you think or KNOW this.

Also, what does the 'it' word refer to exactly in your sentence here.

If you want ANY one to demonstrate to you why you should 'believe' 'it' too, then it is best if you INFORM us of what 'it' is FIRST.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm

What can I say?
You are absolutely FREE to say absolutely ANY thing.

But, I suggest that if you want ANY CLARIFIED, then just ask a CLARIFYING question. Or, if ANY of that is false, wrong, or incorrect, to you, then just POINT OUT those parts, and then say WHY.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Other than that asserting things like this is not the same as demonstrating that they are true.
OF COURSE 'asserting things' is NOT the SAME as 'demonstrating things. This goes without saying.

I ONLY have to 'demonstrate' 'that' to those who WANT 'that' demonstrated. AND, if ANY one WANTS me to demonstrate ANY thing to them, then they WILL just ask for 'that'.

I am NOT here to 'second-guess' who WANTS 'this' or 'that'. I just say 'things', and what ANY does with 'that' is completely AND utterly up to them.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:49 pm Again, you would have to zero in on a set of circumstances involving a discussion of God and religion and note how assertions of this sort are applicable to you, to others.
I do NOT 'have to do' ANY such thing.

I say and write 'things' here. And, if ANY one WANTS CLARITY, PROOF, EXAMPLES, or ANY thing DEMONSTRATED, then SURELY they would ALREADY KNOW what to do EXACTLY? Or, REALLY do 'you', adult human beings, literally, NEED to be TOLD EVERY 'thing'?
I'm going to stop reading your posts, okay?

Now you ask a CLARIFYING question.

Which is absolutely ABSURD considering the Fact that you would, supposedly, NEVER SEE my answer anyway.

Philosophy Now Forum

Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity