Faith VS Atheism

[UKRuss]

So you are inventing a new religion that simply relies on your faith of a god existing but does not conform to any of the accepted texts? What is this religion called?

If we are reduced to religion simply being a set of rules that define how to live our life as good people I think you'll find most people do not need an instruction leafelt to have a decent moral compass or to be good people.

This dilution is fine by me however becasue it can only end one way: The acceptance by all men that there is no god.

[crumhorn]

Nobody knows what causes the universe. But ultimately it must have a cause. The so called Unmoved Mover of ancient philosophy. The search for this cause is the quest of both physics/cosmology and most if not all religions.

IMHO no one will ever know the answer, but it is beautiful thing to contemplate.

[beats me]

IMHO no one will ever know the answer, but it is beautiful thing to contemplate.

Or it's a complete time waster usually associated with potheads and time would be better spent proactively improving your life based on facts.

[crumhorn]

^^ I like to think there is time for both doing and dreaming. But then, as you rightly suspect, I am indeed an old hippy pothead.

[beats me]

Everything I post in this thread should include an assumed "just sayin'" to lighten it up a bit.

I refuse to read every response and take everything said into consideration.

Maybe just ignore me.

[crumhorn]

It's a left brain / right brain thing. today I am letting my right brain do the posting. You sound just like my left brain, it's almost like talking to myself.

over and out.

[Donnie]

So you are inventing a new religion that simply relies on your faith of a god existing but does not conform to any of the accepted texts? What is this religion called?

If we are reduced to religion simply being a set of rules that define how to live our life as good people I think you'll find most people do not need an instruction leafelt to have a decent moral compass or to be good people.

This dilution is fine by me however becasue it can only end one way: The acceptance by all men that there is no god.

For what reason would I need to create a religion? There are plenty out there to facilitate those who need that type of structure.

I find it interesting that you find it necessary to make it so concrete, in a way that mimics the progression of religion we have today. Some people just need things that solidified in order to get a proper hold on it. So they come up with guidelines and ideas in order to more clearly draw the path….and of course not everyone’s going to agree with how they are drawn. However there is no way to perfectly outline a metaphysical concept with physical means, it needs to be experienced on another level. Those guidelines might just help get you started in the right direction to reach that experience, but they aren’t brick walls.

[H20nly]

This is my last post regarding this so you'll have to find someone else to mince words with if thats what you want to do...

re-neg in support of accuracy...

It was written AS a book (not fragmented writings) and was protected for years to avoid the possibility of forgery (which some claim may have happened with the Biblical texts, and in effect is the reason the Quran was created...to clear up some of those errors.)

As someone with an equal interest in religion and science, and who has read nearly every religious text, I can safely say that both books leave much open for interpretation when it comes to evolutionary theory (however the Quran states many things that could directly back science.) What mankind does with these stories, and the convictions they place on them, is a completely different story.

big +1... on your point, which is solid, but your facts are just slightly off.

Not "forgery", alteration... of any kind. it has been preserved in its original form. Very early on when mistakes started popping up the original version was copied down and mass produced. All other copies were burned with a serious threat of don't fuck with this lingering after wards.

It was originally memorized, and is in fact poetry in Arabic. 114 poems. There are challenges within to gather all the poets in the land and see if they could throw down like this (obviously paraphrased). Mohammad could be considered the smoothest freestyle rapper that ever spit a rhyme. It took 23 years to recite/write and was memorized in parts. Then it was written down later by his friends/followers during his life time as he could not write.

Its riddled with references to scientific facts/phenomena that (perhaps arguably) a dessert merchant (if anyone) probably wouldn't/couldn't have known back in the day... such as the slanted unseen barrier where at the mouth of a river the sweet water is preserved against something like a wall of salty water. Where the mixing occurs along this line one water looses its properties and then takes on the properties of the other. This happens where oceans meet as well.

You can call it a revelation or you can call it poppy cock, but I don't believe that his camel was that good of a swimmer or that this was done by mouth. The cool digital gauges that are used to find this fine line today weren't available in the dessert circa 630 AD. I dunno, maybe they were analog??

Nobody knows what causes the universe. But ultimately it must have a cause. The so called Unmoved Mover of ancient philosophy. The search for this cause is the quest of both physics/cosmology and most if not all religions.

IMHO no one will ever know the answer, but it is beautiful thing to contemplate.

/thread. seriously, can't we all agree on this? beats really? smoke a bowl yo.

[beats me]

/thread. seriously, can't we all agree on this? beats really? smoke a bowl yo.

I was JUST SAYIN'.

Just sayin'.

[H20nly]

at least this isn't a flame war.

*hats off to everyone* and much respect for the faith to have faith in your decisions to believe either way.


Peace.

[Donnie]

Not "forgery", alteration... of any kind.

True true, forgery wasnt the best word to use. Just the first that came to mind while typing at work

[beats me]

at least this isn't a flame war.

*hats off to everyone* and much respect for the faith to have faith in your decisions to believe either way.


Peace.

And your thoughts on those who find their faith an endorsement for death and destruction?

Just...

[mikemc]

I have to comment on a couple of things:

It is always the details are what get people in wars. The more general picture everyone pretty much agrees on.

For example, the creation thing-- yes, nothing is clearly stated other than creation occurs in stages. Isn't creation occurring in stages equivalent to evolution?

Expecting to get a precise treatise on the creation of the universe, or any other technical info, from a book about a deity and man's interactions with that deity is kind of like hoping to get a schematic for a microwave from a cookbook.

And also

If we are reduced to religion simply being a set of rules that define how to live our life as good people I think you'll find most people do not need an instruction leafelt to have a decent moral compass or to be good people.

I struggled mightly to decode "leafelt", thinking it was more of that britspeak slang until "d'oh leaflet" occurred.

The reason people do not now need such a leaflet is *because all of the current civilizations of any real effect have been based on the moral codes imparted by major religions*.

Prior to these religions, people were pretty damn mean as a matter of course. For example, one of the more popular idol deities worshipped by the pre-Abrahamic North African/Middle Easterners was a large kneeling figure with outstretched hands known by variations of "Molech". The outstretched hands facilitated the practice of infant sacrifice which involved burning a child alive.

and of couse just sayin'.

[H20nly]

And your thoughts on those who find their faith an endorsement for death and destruction?

Just...

yeah, yeah, just sayin....

well, until now, that wasn't covered here, as in one of the forum members threatening to lynch or suicide bomb anyone/thing, so my blanket statement might leave the ass on those folks cold. Still, the point is, to each his own. I think MW, Russ and nuperspective could agree that the lame part is where people won't accept you as you are and feel the need to convert you... one way or the other. A healthy discussion is just that, healthy. When it gets in to chest pounding judgment, its time to order a pint and talk about music or something else entirely.

[Machinesworking]

And your thoughts on those who find their faith an endorsement for death and destruction?

Just...

yeah, yeah, just sayin....

well, until now, that wasn't covered here, as in one of the forum members threatening to lynch or suicide bomb anyone/thing, so my blanket statement might leave the ass on those folks cold. Still, the point is, to each his own. I think MW, Russ and nuperspective could agree that the lame part is where people won't accept you as you are and feel the need to convert you... one way or the other. A healthy discussion is just that, healthy. When it gets in to chest pounding judgment, its time to order a pint and talk about music or something else entirely.

Generally I could care less what religion or lack of a person has. IMO religion even though people think it's an inner core identity puzzle piece is not. It's far more an outward refection than that. Ethics IMO simply do not have anything to do with what you 'say' you believe in, it's how you act, and what you do when I'm vulnerable. When money is on the table do you divide it up fairly when no one is looking? In my experience, religion has ZERO to do with true ethics one way or the other, meaning I simply don't get all excited when someone tells me they are an atheist, or christian as I see it as skin deep, not core values like most do.