Knowing is a dangerous thing, believing is superior in terms of morality. If you "know", then not even God can persuade you otherwise. If you believe, you're able to be led if what you believe ends up being wrong.

A lot of people just KNEW that it was right to burn witches at the stake, because the Bible says "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". The bible hasn't changed, and we don't believe that. Sometimes "knowing", especially in terms of a book that can be interpreted in such a varied way, can be very dangerous.

Suicide bombers "know" they are going to their harem when they blow themselves up. If they "believed", I doubt they'd be so quick to do it.

Suicide bombers "know" they are going to their harem when they blow themselves up. If they "believed", I doubt they'd be so quick to do it.

I appreciate what you're saying, BakerStreet. It is true that we all have our model of the world. A lot of people might say they "know" what is right, from within the context of their point of view, yet another might say that they "know" that such a point of view is wrong. I think all we can do is find peace with our own model of the world, and if we possess a bedrock conviction or a 'knowledge' of somekind, then we can have own own private confidence that some people's models of the world are more aligned with 'what is so' than others, and we can keep an open mind to boot.

My previous post was speaking more in terms of a 'broad stroke', in the sense that from my own point of view I 'know' that God exists; that another world (Heaven) awaits us beyond the veil of death, and that re-incarnation is true. I'm confident that this is Truth (due to something I can only describe as "more-than-intuition"), but I appreciate that others will say that I'm wrong. All to their own. We can still get along.

hey if we're going into prophecy....I've got lots to say. But I'll spare you....for now......who knows maybe there's a blog near you sometime that will get into this.......stay tuned!!!

"I think all we can do is find peace with our own model of the world, and if we possess a bedrock conviction or a 'knowledge' of somekind, then we can have own own private confidence that some people's models of the world are more aligned with 'what is so' than others, and we can keep an open mind to boot."

I think that kind of knowledge is fine, so long as we understand that the Pharisees had their book, and their dogma, and they 'knew' they were doing the right thing when they hung Jesus on the cross. It takes a bit of humlity to say that you are open to the idea that you might be very, very wrong, and grant that what we know can get us into as much or more trouble than constantly questioning the validity and purity of our beliefs.

Churches love to promote "knowing" because, as Foxjazz likes to point out, the last thing they want is for the people to differ with them. In terms of your soul, though, I can't see how it is beneficial to "know" much of anything. If you "know", then there is very, very little room for faith.

Truth can be tried over and over and weather it. "Knowing" usually spells an end to that kind of trial and self-reflection.

Churches love to promote "knowing" because, as Foxjazz likes to point out, the last thing they want is for the people to differ with them. In terms of your soul, though, I can't see how it is beneficial to "know" much of anything. If you "know", then there is very, very little room for faith.

yeah. What's that line? Belief ends where knowledge begins? if you know something is true, there's no need for faith or doubt.

Educate me then. Why is my POV incorrect when I liken Christians (the fundamentalist kind, not the "say they are" kind) to muslim extremists?
When I say enemy, I mean religion (real religion not fake religion). You can say " I believe" and just be lying, both to yourself and to the one your saying it to. However those people that blow themselves up believing they are doing it for God, are not fake. They actually do become dead because of their religion.

Why is this POV incorrect exacly, and please elaborate. And if you say "Well christians don't blow themselves up", let me remind you of the crimes that they did do.

Go ahead, please tell me why my POV is incorrect:

Truth can be tried over and over and weather it. "Knowing" usually spells an end to that kind of trial and self-reflection.

That’s right. To truly embrace the spiritual life, i.e. to actually walk it, rather than just talk it, can be a science all of its own to the individual. I believe that it’s possible for a person to reach a stage on their path when they’ve tried and tested their principles and beliefs to such a degree that the fruits that have been reaped – primarily within, but also often in their outer life as a natural by-product, (even though, ironically, such worldly fruits and success aren’t of importance to an enlightened soul), this, backed by an acute intuition, can be proof enough for the individual that their own convictions and beliefs are true.

I believe that it’s within the human potential to rise above faith and doubt. The first stage involves getting in touch with inner-intuition, and then, over time, (which may take many lifetimes), psychic faculties eventually bloom, which is an acute form of spiritual awareness.

It takes a bit of humlity to say that you are open to the idea that you might be very, very wrong,

I agree with that. I'm open minded, and I accept the possibility that I might be wrong. I also accept the possibility that I might be wrong regarding my assumptions that the world is round. I haven't seen the earth from outer space with my own eyes. But I trust my own judgement and awareness, based on other sources of information, and until my awareness runs into contrary information, which holds substance, I'd be a fool to conclude otherwise. A similar principle applies to my belief in God, just on another level.

the Pharisees had their book, and their dogma, and they 'knew' they were doing the right thing when they hung Jesus on the cross

I think they were doing the right thing, in the sense that Jesus’ crucifixion had great significance, and was all part of the Master Plan in the first place. But this principle is also very subjective.

Regarding this issue of subjectivity, I believe that “God is Spirit”, which means that the ultimate dimension of reality – and the intrinsic nature of Reality itself, at its deepest level - is Spirit, which itself is inherently subjective.

If God exists and we are spiritual beings, then by definition, we should expect our assumptions about life to be very subjective indeed. “Enlightenment” would be a case of aligning our consciousness with the Spirit of God, who possesses all wisdom and all-knowledge, and gaining better insights into the purpose of life and our place in the bigger picture.

People of all religions do bad things, Foxjazz. What does that have to do with demanding pearls appear in your coffee? Are we shifting gears to avoid the fact your premis here is meaningless?

You can lay a lot of wrongs at the feet of Christians, sure. How many can you find that believe killing women and children is the duty of a Christian, and it will gain them entrance into heaven? If you want to compare modern fundamentalist Islam to middle ages Christianity, fine, but admit that when you do so you are giving Islam a 1000 year handicap.

And before you start in on Hitler being a Christian, he and those who committed the atrocities of the Nazi party weren't Christians. Hitler courted many people getting into power, even people of many religions, but he said that you couldn't be a good Christian and a good German at the same time. Members of the SS were expected to adopt their pagan worship and reject Christianity.

You'll find that people who do these things do so in the BREACH of Christian principles, not in observance of them. For that reason it is difficult to lay the blame on the religion itself. If you want to talk about Atheism, we could discuss the 100 million or more people murdered at the hands of the adamantly Atheist regimes of the Soviet Union and China, where religion was repressed and scientific 'logic' was supposed to make the world a better place.

AndyBaker: I think the disconnect that many people have with my way of thinking is they rule out God's guidance in our every day life. It troubles me that if Jesus were to come for a visit, most Christians would be the first to deny Him because His appearance wouldn't jive with the way they think things are going to happen. They'd have him labeled that anti-christ before supper.

There has to be room for God to be the one who is perfect. I think you and I agree for the most part. I have a lot more tangible belief than I seem to, but I insist that it remain 'belief' out of respect for my own limited understanding and the complexity of a being that could be considered a perfect God. For me to assume I have it all wrapped up is to inflate my own understanding and vastly underestimate what God must be.

BakerStreet, it troubles me that you actually you have some insight into what you think God might be.
You don't. Religion is one of the greatest sources of oppression our citizens have in this life.
It is in its nature that it is extistential. And just because the Evil mostly happened in the past, doesn't negate the possiblity that it will also be a problem in the future.

Your God is just a figment of your imagination, with no real affect in the world we live.
That is why my pearls work, it teaches you that your imaginary God still doesn't do anything. And will not do anything ever, simply because of non existance.

Oh and by the way, south park says its the Mormons that is the true religion. Everyone else goes to hell, directly.

You can lay a lot of wrongs at the feet of Christians, sure. How many can you find that believe killing women and children is the duty of a Christian, and it will gain them entrance into heaven? If you want to compare modern fundamentalist Islam to middle ages Christianity, fine, but admit that when you do so you are giving Islam a 1000 year handicap. And before you start in on Hitler being a Christian, he and those who committed the atrocities of the Nazi party weren't Christians. Hitler courted many people getting into power, even people of many religions, but he said that you couldn't be a good Christian and a good German at the same time. Members of the SS were expected to adopt their pagan worship and reject Christianity. You'll find that people who do these things do so in the BREACH of Christian principles, not in observance of them. For that reason it is difficult to lay the blame on the religion itself. If you want to talk about Atheism, we could discuss the 100 million or more people murdered at the hands of the adamantly Atheist regimes of the Soviet Union and China, where religion was repressed and scientific 'logic' was supposed to make the world a better place

You're the man Baker!! I thought this was worth repeating. I agree.

Fox....I am a fundamental Christian. I do not believe in hurting anyone, anyhow, anyway. Neither do my brothers and sisters in Christ. We are doing our best to be like him. He said for us to be peaceable. How does that compare us to the Muslims?

I think you have religionists and Christians on the same page and they should not be. I do not consider myself religious. Some say that for lack of a better word but you can be religious about anything. To be a Christian means you follow Christ. That's it; pretty cut and dry. I follow Christ.

Religion is one of the greatest sources of oppression our citizens have in this life.

Religion can be, this is true. But Christianity sets you free!! There are many groups out there that claim they are Christian, but they are religous institutions that are mixing truth and error and can be very opressive. I've been there.

You have to be so familiar with the truth that you can spot a lie when it crops up.

Religion is one of the greatest sources of oppression our citizens have in this life.

Fox it is not the greatest source. I suggest restating it as this. Religion is one of the greatest TOOLS for oppression our citizens have in this life. The greatest incentive is belief of truth. But only enough truth to keep one satisfied.

What about governments? It's not limited to religion.

But Christianity sets you free!!

One man's freedom is another man's bondage.

Once we’ve experienced enough incarnations, however, and our flower has blossomed, and we’ve learned all the lessons we need, we’ll move on to other adventures in higher planes of existence. Ultimately, at the end of all our adventures we will surrender all and become One with God.

You have managed to sum up my entire philosophy about what happens after death in 2 sentences.

Thank you. It's incredibly comforting to know that I'm not the only one who believes in the 'oneness'.

"Religion is one of the greatest sources of oppression our citizens have in this life."

Lack of religion didn't stop China and the Soviet Union from killing over 100 million people between them and torturing billions in the most oppressive regimes in human history. Perhaps as a 'science' buff you might realize that the problem isn't religion, it is a separate problem that hateful people both with and without religion share.

"And just because the Evil mostly happened in the past, doesn't negate the possiblity that it will also be a problem in the future."

How does that prove anything? I thought you were supposedly logical. No culture, religious or otherwise, is free from atrocity and horror. Just because some people who wear boots kill people doesn't mean you can accurately predict if they will be brutal by their footwear. You just want to demonize one aspect of humanity when humanity as a whole is to blame.

"Your God is just a figment of your imagination, with no real affect in the world we live."

Again, you drop back to infantile declarations of "truth" since you can't make your point.

"That is why my pearls work, it teaches you that your imaginary God still doesn't do anything. And will not do anything ever, simply because of non existance."

No, your pearls example only works if the religion has some expectation that God delivers pearls on demand, and so far I know of none that do. It's just a clumsy way for a blind man to describe an elephant, and worse, the blind man ignorantly hates the elephant without feeling more than its tail. Anyone who thinks the above experiment has any relavance to Christian theology doesn't have enough knowledge of it to even discuss.

"Oh and by the way, south park says its the Mormons that is the true religion. Everyone else goes to hell, directly."

No, actually they spent the whole show calling the fundamental beliefs 'dumb'. In the end though, they made the excellent point that whether the beliefs were true or not, they had concrete benefits to the mormon boy, his family, and his community. That's something that they understand that you don't seem to be able to.

I think we have already determined that communism is inherently evil and full of opression.

I never said that taking God out of the equation makes you peacful. I only said that putting God in the equation makes you corrupt.
You can say "I follow the real Christ", not the fake one. But you can be lying just as much as the next guy.

By the way, you are correct, it is a TOOL of oppression. But it is also a source, for without it (the source), it couldn't be used as a TOOL. I like your statement, but its not complete.

And if you have a God that you expect nothing of, then its a benign God. It is meaningless, and it is just as good as the atheist, just you say "I think this God", but it doesn't matter cause there is no expectation or affect that means anything other than your belief in and of itself. And belief in and of itself is meaningless without action. "Lots of words, nothing with any reality".
Science is STILL the only reliable way to obtain knowledge.

When we die, it will be like it was before we were born. Don't you remember how it was?

I dare you to pretent like your an atheist and you have changed your worldview infront of your fellow Christians. You will find your true friends quick enough.

Fox

You have managed to sum up my entire philosophy about what happens after death in 2 sentences. Thank you. It's incredibly comforting to know that I'm not the only one who believes in the 'oneness'.

That's an interesting reply. Thanks Dharma. Do you believe that after each life, we become re-incarnated automatically, with nothing inbetween lifetimes - until we attain our goal, so to speak? That's an exclusive Buddhist perspective, which I have great respect for. I personally believe there's more to the story than that. I believe that our individual journeys continue in another plane, inbetween lifetimes, and that it’s our choice to re-incarnate on earth. With each incarnation we learn more lessons, garner more wisdom and strength, and become more evolved spiritually, in ways that we can't on the other side. But that's just my view.

The easiest way to becoming an athiest? Close your eyes and don't think....LOL.....

That's not much of a stretch from having faith. Just believe, don't think. So in my mind, not thinking leads to theism, not atheism.

BakerStreet:

No, actually they spent the whole show calling the fundamental beliefs 'dumb'. In the end though, they made the excellent point that whether the beliefs were true or not, they had concrete benefits to the mormon boy, his family, and his community.

You confused episodes, Baker. There's one about the Mormon boy and mormon beliefs, etc...and one where there are a bunch of people just arriving in hell and someone shouts out "Well who is right then?" (meaning whose cosmological views were the correct ones) and the "greeter" in hell says "The Mormons. Yes, the correct answer was 'Mormons'"

I still haven't heard a compelling argument as to the benefits of atheism. Why would someone wish to "become an atheist"? Again I will compare faith to being in love. Being in love is wonderful. People who aren't in love didn't chose to be so. The love just isn't there. Would someone in love decide "nah, I'd rather not be in love"?

An atheist is an atheist because they aren't inspired by that 'love' in their heart. They don't have a 'feeling' that there is a God. Because if they did, no amount of logic would take it away.

I'm not christian. I don't 'know' that Jesus is the son of God. But if I did feel that to be true, I am sure nothing would cause me to lose that feeling. I guess that is why I can't understand the antichristian mentality.

By the way, you are correct, it is a TOOL of oppression. But it is also a source, for without it (the source), it couldn't be used as a TOOL. I like your statement, but its not complete.

Okay Fox how about this.

Religion is one of the greatest TOOLS for oppression our citizens have in this life. The greatest incentive is belief of truth. But only enough truth to keep one satisfied and but not content. It is out of this designed ignorance that the troubled heart seeks dominance over the appeared weak when they themselves are truly the ones that are weak. This all stems from selfishness and greed (ie uncontentment). These are weaknesses of man and therefore man would be the soul root NOT religion. Religion is often laid prey by such wolves in sheeps clothing. Which I see as a strong basis why many veer away from religion or faith. But maybe that's just me.

AD

Adventure-Dude, that is an interesting perspective. I think in a lot of ways its right on the money.

The problem I have is who is to say that the religious do this oppressing consciously, or just as a byproduct of their religion. In my case, I didn't know shit and just believed because of feelings, and visiting with like minded people. I never intentionally wanted to cause harm, however I believe I did (a little). And you are correct, in that there was never real contentment during my religious time, I think because it is designed that way.

I want to thank you for your contribution.

Fox

Problem with you folks is that you live in the material world and don't get it.

I dont belive in the Christian, Muslim or any of the other "contemporary" Gods.

I do like and subscribe to many of their basic practises and principles however, such as the 10 commmandments. Many (not all) of the Buddhist ideas on spiritual living are pure wisdom and have no flaws as far as i can tell.

There is without a doubt some kind of Creator but it's pure arrogance on behalf of the human species to believe we actually understand anything about any of the big questions. Contemporary religions are a part of the process towards advancing our understanding of the Universe and our place in it. Just like the move from polytheism to monotheism, we will gradually move towards a more evolved understanding of our place in the Universe. This is the position from which I interpret your position.

You appear to be advocating (very poorly) the use of scientific principles to "disprove" the existance of God. But you base your assertions on logic that is fundamentally flawed.

As i understand it, the Christian God, which is who you seem to be denouncing with your black pearls theory requires that you have faith in Him. I can't actually quote scripture but from the little religious programming i have seen, as i understand it there are passages in the Bible that specifically talk about "thou shall not test me", or something to that effect.

So here we have someone claiming that God doesn't exist because He isn't performing miracles for that person during a test specifically designed to prove that He, God, doesn't exist in the first place.

Thats doesn't prove God doesn't exist. It does however suggest you are forming your opinions based on very flawed and entirely unscientific practises and principals. Whats more you demonstrate a total lack of understanding of the subject you are trying to debunk.

I was under the impression that God allows free will. Your freewill is that you will not believe in Him. Your black pearls theory is simply the process by which you will exert your freewill, given to you by Him, to disbelieve.

Your test does not disprove the existance of God, it simply confirms that He hath given you that which He hath offered. In fact I would suggest that anyone praying to God for 30 days straight is more of a believer than most of Us.

Your problem is that you have attempted to use religious processes in order that you be able to debunk religion. If you want to truely be able to deny the existance of God then you need to be able to explain all that is .... without Him.

the eagle turned on Saddam and Attacked

Saddam was one of our warriors way back
we crowned him a prince

he fucked up and we fucked up
hell everybody was fucking up
it was war & shit never goes the way anyone really wants

son went all mad dog in the end
when we decided
to use the kurds
to take him down

HE HITLERED UP
for security purposes
went to war

saddam's head was so dangerous
the executioner ripped it right off
the crowds screamed and cried
tried to drive his mighty spirit away from the gallows
rightly so trembling in fear
at the horror of his coming wrath

His spirit surprised everyone & no one
with a wave and a tear
he forgave them their place in history
as great men do

as
great men

expect



sorry old soldier left hungry alone in your fox hole

wish i could have told you

we are praying
for you


to all enemies we sing: our hearts are still open
our minds are still free

we were not effected
by they great they's
enchantment spells

we too are sickened
by
the
rotting diseased cloak of these lies







we are coming for you

i am
a man of my word
the word
your word
our word



YOU ARE FORGIVEN

forgive us


We just didn't make it in time saddam
this stoic crusader was still marching silently
through the carnage
seeking rank on missions top secret
waging war from under deep cover
pretending always to go along



waiting

waiting

waitng

for the order

to come down




you know how that is

I

salute

u



we all salute you

Jill, long time no write... sry...

I don't necessarily "hate" Christians. Just the belief system. I prefer the Buddah system of belief, except that it has it's own flaws.

I have spent way too much of my life in the computer to really form a good opin. However it has been my experience in every case with every Christian that I have ever met that manipulation has been the promenent theme. There is a controlling nature associated with religion that I believe is pure evil, and not even seen by the people that commit these crimes.

So in essence, I know that Christianity is not only false, but borderline evil. And the deeper you fall into the belief system, the more evil you become.
That's been my sincere experience with the Christian religion.

Regards,

Fox

Jill, long time no write... sry...

I don't necessarily "hate" Christians. Just the belief system. I prefer the Buddah system of belief, except that it has it's own flaws.

I have spent way too much of my life in the computer to really form a good opin. However it has been my experience in every case with every Christian that I have ever met that manipulation has been the promenent theme. There is a controlling nature associated with religion that I believe is pure evil, and not even seen by the people that commit these crimes.

So in essence, I know that Christianity is not only false, but borderline evil. And the deeper you fall into the belief system, the more evil you become.
That's been my sincere experience with the Christian religion.

Regards,

Fox