Are there ANY Christians on RIU?

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
If we are talking about a methodology for providing answers, I can not say there should be even ground. No doubt there is great value in stories, history, past ideas, religious inspired art and philosophy, but that value does not lie in judging truth. So I would say in most matters other than that of the spirit, there should not be even ground. There shouldn't be hostility or exclusion, but we don't give eons of experience any credit simply for being antique. I gave this example in the other thread, but if your mother was accused of being a witch you would probably favor the truth which examines the particles.

Now if you want to examine questions of the spirit or soul we can give religious history a little more weight. That is because our subject has moved a bit from the realm of testable science and cannoned knowledge and into the area of ignorance and obscurity. It's possible that religious mussing might offer us some insight when wrestling with questions of this nature. But that inspiration must still eventually be supported with reason and substance before it could be considered dependable. If religion provides us with answers that can not be explained, demonstrated and defended, then it has given us nothing meaningful in terms of truth.
I would like to expand a bit on this last point. I find that "meaningful in terms of truth" should be given more definition. Not that I don't agree, in fact, you gave me a foundation to build on. Isn't that what science does? The findings of one scientist are taken for granted by the next such that the research, experimentation and demonstration do not have to be repeated. With that in mind, theories continue to evolve and disciplines coalesce together or at least verify one another. Some theories are even so coherent as to give a predictive model. For example, armed only with a copy of "On The Origin Of Species" anthropologists knew where to look for Darwin's missing link, which indeed they found, Australopithecus Afarensis or Lucy. This is extremely meaningful in terms of truth. This occurs through strict adherence to (empirical) methodology.
 

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
If we are talking about a methodology for providing answers, I can not say there should be even ground. No doubt there is great value in stories, history, past ideas, religious inspired art and philosophy, but that value does not lie in judging truth. So I would say in most matters other than that of the spirit, there should not be even ground. There shouldn't be hostility or exclusion, but we don't give eons of experience any credit simply for being antique. I gave this example in the other thread, but if your mother was accused of being a witch you would probably favor the truth which examines the particles.

Now if you want to examine questions of the spirit or soul we can give religious history a little more weight. That is because our subject has moved a bit from the realm of testable science and cannoned knowledge and into the area of ignorance and obscurity. It's possible that religious mussing might offer us some insight when wrestling with questions of this nature. But that inspiration must still eventually be supported with reason and substance before it could be considered dependable. If religion provides us with answers that can not be explained, demonstrated and defended, then it has given us nothing meaningful in terms of truth.
...that's totally fair. So, if a religion says 'do "x" thing' and you follow it the way they described you could potentially experience something 'other' (as in meditation). This something 'other' has been given the same description by people worldwide, so the practitioners must have something in common. The thing is, you don't see scientists practicing catholicism (f.e.) to find this 'other'. They usually want to test things in their arena, if I am not mistaken. It's the equivalent of a person becoming an atheist without ever having questioned himself. It don't work. To get to deep spiritual places you have to do the work. Due-Diligence, let's say.
 

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
I would like to expand a bit on this last point. I find that "meaningful in terms of truth" should be given more definition. Not that I don't agree, in fact, you gave me a foundation to build on. Isn't that what science does? The findings of one scientist are taken for granted by the next such that the research, experimentation and demonstration do not have to be repeated. With that in mind, theories continue to evolve and disciplines coalesce together or at least verify one another. Some theories are even so coherent as to give a predictive model. For example, armed only with a copy of "On The Origin Of Species" anthropologists knew where to look for Darwin's missing link, which indeed they found, Australopithecus Afarensis or Lucy. This is extremely meaningful in terms of truth. This occurs through strict adherence to (empirical) methodology.
Indeed. Religion is not equipped to give us answers on this level of certainty. Just as anecdotal evidence gives us a place to start, but does not allow us to make conclusions.


“Faith, if it is ever right about anything, it is right by accident." - Sam Harris
 

thump easy

Well-Known Member
yes i believe in Jessus and god above him. and the holy spirit, me for being a cristain man its a hard walk for shure so im just a believer.. i wish i could control myself but i cant... so not the best cristian..
 

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
...that's totally fair. So, if a religion says 'do "x" thing' and you follow it the way they described you could potentially experience something 'other' (as in meditation). This something 'other' has been given the same description by people worldwide, so the practitioners must have something in common. The thing is, you don't see scientists practicing catholicism (f.e.) to find this 'other'. They usually want to test things in their arena, if I am not mistaken. It's the equivalent of a person becoming an atheist without ever having questioned himself. It don't work. To get to deep spiritual places you have to do the work. Due-Diligence, let's say.
You have a point if you are speaking about me. Although I spend much time considering spirituality, I have not practiced it. However there are scientists and skeptics who have made serious effort to reach this 'other', Sam Harris and Julia Sweeney just off the top of my head. Houdini wanted very much to believe in the afterlife and made considerable effort to reach it. This sounds a bit like special pleading.
 

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
yes i believe in Jessus and god above him. and the holy spirit, me for being a cristain man its a hard walk for shure so im just a believer.. i wish i could control myself but i cant... so not the best cristian..
...the fact that you wrote that out, here, was enough - imo.
 

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
You have a point if you are speaking about me. Although I spend much time considering spirituality, I have not practiced it. However there are scientists and skeptics who have made serious effort to reach this 'other', Sam Harris and Julia Sweeney just off the top of my head. Houdini wanted very much to believe in the afterlife and made considerable effort to reach it. This sounds a bit like special pleading.
...I have no doubt that there are many scientists and skeptics who know waaaay more than me about the passages in the bible. I'm not a scripture reciter guy, at all. I feel my way through it. I have to assume that my reasoning abilities are present through it all, like in the autonomic nervous system or something :)
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
“Faith, if it is ever right about anything, it is right by accident." - Sam Harris

I like quotes. It reminds me of another one.

"I'd rather be lucky than good."
Baseball's Lefty Gomez

Really, if it is right by accident can it not be right by Design? Especially since the Design does not have to be from "other?" Who can say what is accidental in this life? Causality itself is in a bit of scientific hot water these days with Quantum Non-locality and whatnot.

So that leads me ever back to the question, is it really "other" or is it really ourselves? Are we "accidentally" intercepting our higher perceptions? Or are our higher perceptions helping us if we care to listen? One
needs a bit of hope, at least, to be open to the idea.

But, Yin and Yang, good and evil, Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt
, and the highest self sacrifice, is all in us. We can imagine. We can Create.

Perhaps the highest perception is a Universal birthright and we are slowly getting there. A Universal mind meld could
be the goal of the non-causality, quantum connected Super-Consciousness? Perhaps Super-C is quite aware of the
tenuous Solar situation we have here and has the WILL to get it's precious DNA out of the Gravity Well.

And at some point or level, why is that not GOD? Religion is the question. I'm just adding some of mine.
 

sonar

Well-Known Member
God is a superstition. It amazing me in this day and age in the West the lengths seemingly intelligent folks go to cling to this stuff. Not only that, but how such a small minority of fundamentalists can exert such influence on government and public policy.

I truly feel that 99% of people who claim to believe in God and Jesus and all the other children's characters are in denial. That if they look deep enough into themselves they know it isn't real. They are just too afraid to admit it for several reasons. The fact that they were lied to their entire life and have possibly been lying to their own children their entire lives. But most importantly the fact that there is no afterlife. It is a scary thought to think that this is it. Most people can't handle that.

I would LOVE to believe there was this guy called Jesus who was the son of God and was sent to earth to die for our sins. Why God would send his son to roam around the Middle East for 33 years only to have him tortured and crucified is beyond me, but I digress. That when I die I would be rewarded wih eternal life in heaven is a wonderful thought. But it is just a fantasy created to help people feel more comfortable with their own mortality. Organized religion sprung from that when they realized it could be used to instill fear and control the masses.

I have a theory that by now, we would be a space-faring species if it wasn't for organized religion. Mainly Christianity in Europe. For over 1000 years the shackles of the Church kept us in the Dark Ages. Advancements in science and technology pretty much came to a halt once the Romans left and scientists were persecuted in Europe until well into the 19th century.
 

carl.burnette

Well-Known Member
Indeed. Religion is not equipped to give us answers on this level of certainty. Just as anecdotal evidence gives us a place to start, but does not allow us to make conclusions.


“Faith, if it is ever right about anything, it is right by accident." - Sam Harris
I'm very happy that we are having this conversation on an adult level. I hate debating where the answers are "Your a dumb fuck blinded by your parents forced views!"

You would have to agree that science can share the same state as your statement about religion & no having answers on a level of certainly. How often is a scientific proof proven wrong? One of the fundamental scientific statements is that nothing goes faster than the speed of light. THey are now saying that there are particles that travel faster than light. THere are a ton of other examples of this sort of thing. Various finds that were totted as one thing but ended up being something else.

THe thing about science is that they don't stop looking. But for example, almost all theoretical physics is just that, theory. But its treated as fact. Saying belief in an unseen God is some form of coping mechanism can be turned back & said that many scientific theories are just used to cope with not wanting to deal with an unseen God. On paper, neither argument is more valid than the other. Neither can be proven. They are both faith based.

It's funny, if it God created the universe in a week its a fairy tail. But if it happened over 13.5 billion years its a fact. We have the Big Bang & the proof of it with the echos of the microwaves & such.. Where my Christian views say the Lord spoke it into existence. An instantaneous act. (from my point of view). Science & religion both agree that it happened in an instant, but we just disagree on the cause.

That's why we all need to lose the judgements on others beliefs wether religious or scientific until proven. The moon is not made of cheese. We know that because we've been there. (OH NO.. The we didn't land on the moon conspiracy! :) ) Until your dead, I feel pretty certain we have no idea what comes next. as for me, I choose to believe in the heaven of talked about in the bible. OThers are free to believe in what ever they like & I will not judge them for it.
 

carl.burnette

Well-Known Member
yes i believe in Jessus and god above him. and the holy spirit, me for being a cristain man its a hard walk for shure so im just a believer.. i wish i could control myself but i cant... so not the best cristian..
I don't think there's a good or bad type. Jesus is either your Lord or he's not. Don't sweat screwing up. Every apostle screwed up. Peter denied him, the rest all fucked off when the heat was on. David screwed the guys wife then had him killed in battle to cover it, Lot nailed his 2 daughters, etc etc. We're all crappy Christians on the outside. All we can do is try. When we screw up, we know we screwed up & we try not to screw up again. I believe that's the Holy Spirit helping to change you more into what Christ want you to be. We're not made perfect at the point of salvation, we're just given the guidance of the Holy Spirit to help us along. Takes time & practice to learn to follow the still voice.
THe best part is He promised to never leave us or forsake us so even when you do mess up, he's there to pick you up again! Seriously, how AWESOME is that?!
Don't take my word for it, read it yourself. Study the gospels & ask the Lord to reveal his word to you. I personally enjoy reading in the morning after my hippie speedball (a joint & a coffee) :)
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
I'm very happy that we are having this conversation on an adult level. I hate debating where the answers are "Your a dumb fuck blinded by your parents forced views!"

You would have to agree that science can share the same state as your statement about religion & no having answers on a level of certainly. How often is a scientific proof proven wrong? One of the fundamental scientific statements is that nothing goes faster than the speed of light. THey are now saying that there are particles that travel faster than light. THere are a ton of other examples of this sort of thing. Various finds that were totted as one thing but ended up being something else.

THe thing about science is that they don't stop looking. But for example, almost all theoretical physics is just that, theory. But its treated as fact. Saying belief in an unseen God is some form of coping mechanism can be turned back & said that many scientific theories are just used to cope with not wanting to deal with an unseen God. On paper, neither argument is more valid than the other. Neither can be proven. They are both faith based.

It's funny, if it God created the universe in a week its a fairy tail. But if it happened over 13.5 billion years its a fact. We have the Big Bang & the proof of it with the echos of the microwaves & such.. Where my Christian views say the Lord spoke it into existence. An instantaneous act. (from my point of view). Science & religion both agree that it happened in an instant, but we just disagree on the cause.

That's why we all need to lose the judgements on others beliefs wether religious or scientific until proven. The moon is not made of cheese. We know that because we've been there. (OH NO.. The we didn't land on the moon conspiracy! :) ) Until your dead, I feel pretty certain we have no idea what comes next. as for me, I choose to believe in the heaven of talked about in the bible. OThers are free to believe in what ever they like & I will not judge them for it.
the difference with science and religion is that science will and does change when new evidence that arises WRT to speed of light the whole thing was about scientists getting results that didnt seem right and ASKING the rest of the scientific community to help prove them wrong
guess what they were wrong LINKY
religion doesnt change of its own accord faith doesnt allow to even question it

"many scientific theories are just used to cope with not wanting to deal with an unseen God."
you dont not need to invoke god at all to want to have an understanding about our surroundings science gets on fine without ever refering to a god

there is mountains of evidence that points to a very very old earth and an even older universe yes it is laughable the story of genesis and a 6000 year old earth

scientists dont think the universe as we see it sprung into form instantly it was hundreds of thousands of years before matter even condensed into existence

while we cannot prove/disprove the existence of "god" in what ever his form we can happily look at the holy scriptures where his "idea" comes from and cast a critical eye over them and say this is not gods words. and if people open go about saying they believe in pink unicorns that survive on love and worship from faithful followers then it perfectly reasonable to question them on such beliefs
 

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
Roger, my point being that one can easily google a quote to fit any occasion or back most any position.

...I agree with that for sure - but felt compelled to add this one to lend some credibility back to quotes: (not that I'm saying you discredit them :) )

"Knowledge of the self is the mother of all knowledge. So it is incumbent on me to know my self, to know it completely, to know its minutiae, its characteristics, its subtleties, and its very atoms." - Khalil Gibran
 

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
“Faith, if it is ever right about anything, it is right by accident." - Sam Harris

I like quotes. It reminds me of another one.

"I'd rather be lucky than good."
Baseball's Lefty Gomez

Really, if it is right by accident can it not be right by Design? Especially since the Design does not have to be from "other?" Who can say what is accidental in this life? Causality itself is in a bit of scientific hot water these days with Quantum Non-locality and whatnot.
I believe I framed my post in the context of faith as a method of finding truthful answers, so I am not sure what bearing quantum causality would have on the use of 'accident' as a descriptor.


Faiths design is such that any answers it delivers are stumbled upon, making them all accidental, right or wrong. The method avoids clear reasoning and honest observation giving it no utility in the application of judging truth value, which makes it seem a poor choice of authority when pondering what many feel are the most important questions in life. Faiths design detaches us from the full potential of human learning. Faith has a history of delivering irrational and indifferent superstition in the place of genuine explanation. As I said, faith has it's place, and that place is rather like the value we find in anecdotal evidence, and for similar reasons faith can not be trusted to make conclusions. Faith lives in obscure procedure without structure or candor yet feels it's information is important and righteous, it would be very strange if this approach lead to anything objectively meaningful by itself, and indeed the track record says it hasn't. The cloud of ambiguity faith dwells in shrinks in proportion to the answers science uncovers.

"Faith allows perfectly sane and decent people to believe by the billions what only a lunatic could believe on their own." - Sam Harris
 

carl.burnette

Well-Known Member
the difference with science and religion is that science will and does change when new evidence that arises WRT to speed of light the whole thing was about scientists getting results that didnt seem right and ASKING the rest of the scientific community to help prove them wrong
guess what they were wrong LINKY
religion doesnt change of its own accord faith doesnt allow to even question it

"many scientific theories are just used to cope with not wanting to deal with an unseen God."
you dont not need to invoke god at all to want to have an understanding about our surroundings science gets on fine without ever refering to a god

there is mountains of evidence that points to a very very old earth and an even older universe yes it is laughable the story of genesis and a 6000 year old earth

scientists dont think the universe as we see it sprung into form instantly it was hundreds of thousands of years before matter even condensed into existence

while we cannot prove/disprove the existence of "god" in what ever his form we can happily look at the holy scriptures where his "idea" comes from and cast a critical eye over them and say this is not gods words. and if people open go about saying they believe in pink unicorns that survive on love and worship from faithful followers then it perfectly reasonable to question them on such beliefs
I guess what I don't understand, and I mean this with all the respect I can type, is this.

All the tests we have, carbon dating for example. We know that carbon ?? looses so many electrons per year so by testing something we can get a general idea of how old it is. (this is VERY oversimplified, but so am I :) ) Now keeping my speed of sound point in mind, we have been able to study carbon atoms for say 100 years (its not that long.. I know) but lets just say it is. So we measure an item carbon, then 50 years later we study it again. Looses 5 electrons. So logic & science say that is something has say 1000 missing electrons than its 10000 years old. But what we don't know for certain is that perhaps after 100 years it loses electrons at a reduced rate, or a faster rate. Either way, we have no idea for certain because we've only had the ability to test for say 100 years. But carbon dating is taken as scientific fact. The sound barrier didn't work out the way logic & science said it would. BUt we take it as an absolute. I am skeptical of both religion & science when they make hard & fast rule.

The basics of a God/Jesus based faith is the golden rule. Love God more than anything else & love your neighbor more than yourself. This has never changes. Is the same now, yesterday & forever. The rest of the crap done in His name is irrelevant. Doesn't say anywhere in the bible to go on a crusade & kill the muslims, doesn't say priest cant marry, doesn't say 90% of what's done in His name & most of them were terrible & unnecessary. I believe Christ came to do away from all the superstitions & rules that man was enforcing to the death. You lit a match on the sabbath & they wanted you put to death.

True faith in Jesus allows for change & we are told to study & question. What you are referring to I think, with unchanging rules & what not are when religions try to push morals & how we should live things. Doesn't say you can;t dance, but the Baptist say no way. Not a biblical rule, its a Baptist rule. Pentecostals believe if you don't speak in tongues your not saved. Not a biblical rule, a pentecostal rule. Those are the religious beliefs that are fucked in my opinion & the ones that they fight to the death to not change. My father is a pastor & I have a fairly inside look at the inner workings of various church organization & what not. I know how people get an opinion of what they believe God wants & I know how hard they hold on to things like that. TIll death I swear.

Those are mans rules not the Lords. IMO. God made it so simple. I mean it. SOOO simple. We are referred to as sheep in the bible because sheep are not that smart. We may think we are, but we're really not. At least I'm not anyways. KISS: Keep It simple Stupid

If you put your neighbor before yourself & everyone else does as well, it would be a far superior world :)

Let you believe what you want, let me believe what I want. Lets have some great conversations without calling the other person a brainwashed fool or an ungodly heathen who's headed to hell.

Even though thats what you are & I can prove it! :) (JOKING)!!!!

Honestly, I would LOVE nothing better than to sit down with my father & discuss this, even having a nice blunt. Fuck.. where can you do that? Smoke a blunt & discuss life. I have never smoked with anyone else really other than at a concert or something. I picture like you know in the olden days the jews or the greeks would debate. I would LOVE that without all the childish name calling of course. That's where is looses all interest for me. I was talking with my father a couple weeks ago about the middle east & holy crap I couldn't believe his attitude. He made some comments that totally blew me away. THat is NOT what I consider a Christian I don't care how long he went to bible college or how long he's been a preacher. I love my dad & all that, but holy crap he's got some firm ideas. Similar to the baptist & the dancing.
 
Top