Philosophy Now Forum

sthitapragya wrote:And he was definitely different from Jesus because he said that tolerating injustice was a bigger sin than the injustice itself.

This is interesting in that he appears not to believe there is justice beyond man's existence.

Dalek Prime wrote:

attofishpi wrote:Sure - but i know that things and matter are thought and it matters more than a bit.

Well, I'm not certain matter is thought, though consciousness only manifests as a product of our matter. As to mattering, only thought can give 'matter' to matter. So, what can matter, if there's no thought to give it any concern?

Matter is what thought exists within.

Its interesting that this God likes to state 'you bit' to me.

If i call God evil - i 'bit'...i changed a binary position.

attofishpi wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:And he was definitely different from Jesus because he said that tolerating injustice was a bigger sin than the injustice itself.

This is interesting in that he appears not to believe there is justice beyond man's existence.

No, there is definitely justice beyond man's existence. But he will be judged even for his toleration of injustice. But there is a catch there. It only applies if you believe in heaven and hell, sin etc. If you don't believe that there justice beyond man's existence, then there is no justice beyond man's existence.

This is complex in the sense that it does not work if you suddenly discover that there is no justice beyond man's existence and therefore change how you act and start taking advantage of that. If you start sinning because there is no justice beyond man's existence, you will definitely be judged. However, if your sinning is independent of your knowledge of the fact that there is no justice beyond man's existence, then you will not be judged. Does that make sense?

Basically a lot of importance is given to knowledge. If your knowledge is basic then the most basic laws apply. The more you give time towards understanding dharma, the more you are freed from the cycle of sin and heaven and hell and even life and death.

Reflex wrote:I would argue that you are not skeptical enough of your own understanding and 'knowledge.'

Very well; let's see this argument.

Reflex wrote:You have to be willing to get out of your head, to actively unknow by putting all thinking aside, by listening with a kind of passive receptivity.

This is precisely the sort of cobblers that makes religion dangerous. Christianity was invented by the Romans in an attempt to mollify the increasingly messianic Jerusalem. Christ actually means messiah. People who didn't listen passively faced the full fury of Rome. The Jews refused to accept the pacifist Jesus as their messiah and have been paying the price ever since. Mohammed came along, recognised a good wheeze and created his own version, Islam, etymologically from the same root as salem, as in Jerusalem, it means peace. It also means submission.

Reflex wrote:Only in this way can you transcend the limitations of looking from your preestablished point of view and becomes united with the One -- to see, as it were, from another dimension.

So this was just nonsense:

Reflex wrote:Have you ever made a leap from the observable known to the logical but invisible unknown?

There is in fact no logic to it.
And this:

Reflex wrote:The problem is this: an abstraction does not exist until it is triggered by the perception of something that needs to be defined.

There is in fact, nothing to perceive except by switching off all critical faculties. What sort of idiot god would furnish us with cerebral capacities, the only function of which is to blind us to his existence? Wassat? One who gave us free will? Just to test us? And to burn the failures forever in Hell?
I really don't know if god exists, but I am quite certain that if there is any such thing, it does not exist in any form that just happens to suit the ambitions of ancient and medieval imperialists.
Anyhow, Atto: how could god logically exist? Well, since I have not been party to the experiences that have informed your beliefs, I had to make something up, based on the objective evidence. I told my children that once upon a 13.78 billion years ago, there was a tiny thought. It was everywhere, it knew everything and it could do anything. But there was nowhere to go, no one to know and nothing to do, so the tiny thought blew itself up into the universe. As for your soul, well whatever the universe is made of, we are made of the same stuff and by some miracle, our consciousness is a product of it. I really don't know how consciousness works, but I do know that every example I have ever witnessed, has been associated with the electromagnetic activity of a brain. It is conceivable that consciousness is the field, in the way that light is the field associated with a light bulb. It is therefore logically possible that consciousness survives the death of the brain, much as there are stars you can see that went out aeons ago. I could easily believe that. I just happen not to.

And atheists take pride in calling themselves "free thinkers." Ironic.

Reflex wrote:And atheists take pride in calling themselves "free thinkers." Ironic.

Do we? Can you cite a source for this claim?

uwot wrote:

Reflex wrote:And atheists take pride in calling themselves "free thinkers." Ironic.

Do we? Can you cite a source for this claim?

What's wrong with calling oneself a freethinker, when it's always been applied that way? Besides, if one comes to a conclusion outside a system of belief, is that not independent, free thought? It's not like atheism has a central structure. I consider many theists to be freethinker's as well, at least those who aren't fundamentalists.

uwot wrote:

Reflex wrote:And atheists take pride in calling themselves "free thinkers." Ironic.

Do we? Can you cite a source for this claim?

LOL! You really ought to get out more. There's a Free Thinker magazine. Look it up.

Reflex wrote:LOL! You really ought to get out more. There's a Free Thinker magazine. Look it up.

So there is. Anyway, back to the issue:

Reflex wrote:I would argue that you are not skeptical enough of your own understanding and 'knowledge.'

Very well; let's see this argument.

Reflex wrote:You have to be willing to get out of your head, to actively unknow by putting all thinking aside, by listening with a kind of passive receptivity.

This is precisely the sort of cobblers that makes religion dangerous. Christianity was invented by the Romans in an attempt to mollify the increasingly messianic Jerusalem. Christ actually means messiah. People who didn't listen passively faced the full fury of Rome. The Jews refused to accept the pacifist Jesus as their messiah and have been paying the price ever since. Mohammed came along, recognised a good wheeze and created his own version, Islam, etymologically from the same root as salem, as in Jerusalem, it means peace. It also means submission.

Reflex wrote:Only in this way can you transcend the limitations of looking from your preestablished point of view and becomes united with the One -- to see, as it were, from another dimension.

So this was just nonsense:

Reflex wrote:Have you ever made a leap from the observable known to the logical but invisible unknown?

There is in fact no logic to it.
And this:

Reflex wrote:The problem is this: an abstraction does not exist until it is triggered by the perception of something that needs to be defined.

There is in fact, nothing to perceive except by switching off all critical faculties. What sort of idiot god would furnish us with cerebral capacities, the only function of which is to blind us to his existence? Wassat? One who gave us free will? Just to test us? And to burn the failures forever in Hell?
I really don't know if god exists, but I am quite certain that if there is any such thing, it does not exist in any form that just happens to suit the ambitions of ancient and medieval imperialists.
Anyhow, Atto: how could god logically exist? Well, since I have not been party to the experiences that have informed your beliefs, I had to make something up, based on the objective evidence. I told my children that once upon a 13.78 billion years ago, there was a tiny thought. It was everywhere, it knew everything and it could do anything. But there was nowhere to go, no one to know and nothing to do, so the tiny thought blew itself up into the universe. As for your soul, well whatever the universe is made of, we are made of the same stuff and by some miracle, our consciousness is a product of it. I really don't know how consciousness works, but I do know that every example I have ever witnessed, has been associated with the electromagnetic activity of a brain. It is conceivable that consciousness is the field, in the way that light is the field associated with a light bulb. It is therefore logically possible that consciousness survives the death of the brain, much as there are stars you can see that went out aeons ago. I could easily believe that. I just happen not to.

Eloquently put, uwot.

uwot wrote:

Christianity was invented by the Romans in an attempt to mollify the increasingly messianic Jerusalem.

Actually the essence of Christianity is far older than normally understood. It has nothing to do with Judaism. St Augustine wrote:

"The very thing that is now called the Christian religion was not wanting among the ancients from the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh, after which the true religion, which had already existed, began to be called "Christian."

Uwot is not nearly as informed as he (?) Pretends to be.

Nick_A wrote:uwot wrote:

Christianity was invented by the Romans in an attempt to mollify the increasingly messianic Jerusalem.

Actually the essence of Christianity is far older than normally understood. It has nothing to do with Judaism. St Augustine wrote:

"The very thing that is now called the Christian religion was not wanting among the ancients from the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh, after which the true religion, which had already existed, began to be called "Christian."

The Christian attitude to pain and hardship is essentially the stoicism conceived by Zeno of Citium in about 300 BC. Plato was said to be the son of god, specifically Apollo, and his mother was a virgin. If you want to see the template for the Christian model of hell, look no further than the myth of Er at the end of Plato's Republic. In that myth, Er is resurrected, wouldn't you know? The cosmology of Genesis is identical to the creation myths of Mesopotamia and Egypt, the Enuma Elish will give you all the details. The trinity of father, son and holy ghost are simply the Christian response to the fundamental questions that have probably been thought from the moment intelligence kicked in: Where did the world come from? What is it made of? How does it work? So yeah, there are many elements of Christianity which predate the supposed events; that's where the Romans took the ideas from.

uwot wrote:

Nick_A wrote:uwot wrote:

Christianity was invented by the Romans in an attempt to mollify the increasingly messianic Jerusalem.

Actually the essence of Christianity is far older than normally understood. It has nothing to do with Judaism. St Augustine wrote:

"The very thing that is now called the Christian religion was not wanting among the ancients from the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh, after which the true religion, which had already existed, began to be called "Christian."

The Christian attitude to pain and hardship is essentially the stoicism conceived by Zeno of Citium in about 300 BC. Plato was said to be the son of god, specifically Apollo, and his mother was a virgin. If you want to see the template for the Christian model of hell, look no further than the myth of Er at the end of Plato's Republic. In that myth, Er is resurrected, wouldn't you know? The cosmology of Genesis is identical to the creation myths of Mesopotamia and Egypt, the Enuma Elish will give you all the details. The trinity of father, son and holy ghost are simply the Christian response to the fundamental questions that have probably been thought from the moment intelligence kicked in: Where did the world come from? What is it made of? How does it work? So yeah, there are many elements of Christianity which predate the supposed events; that's where the Romans took the ideas from.

That a concept predated a particular belief system, does not invalidate the truth of that system, nor does it invalidate the inclusion of that concept into a particular belief system. That some celebrations existed as pagan events, does not invalidate them as Christian celebrations.

uwot wrote: The Christian attitude to pain and hardship is essentially the stoicism conceived by Zeno of Citium in about 300 BC. Plato was said to be the son of god, specifically Apollo, and his mother was a virgin. If you want to see the template for the Christian model of hell, look no further than the myth of Er at the end of Plato's Republic. In that myth, Er is resurrected, wouldn't you know? The cosmology of Genesis is identical to the creation myths of Mesopotamia and Egypt, the Enuma Elish will give you all the details. The trinity of father, son and holy ghost are simply the Christian response to the fundamental questions that have probably been thought from the moment intelligence kicked in: Where did the world come from? What is it made of? How does it work? So yeah, there are many elements of Christianity which predate the supposed events; that's where the Romans took the ideas from.

What else would expect with one God and many diverse perceives of the one God?