Members Prog Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 There's nothing at all arrogant about what I said. It's completely true. If what really matters is whether I bow down to God and not how I act, then that is screwed up and it's God who is arrogant, not me.The height of arrogance. Now, tell us of your humilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 Please explain how that is arrogant? Please explain how, if any person acted in such a way (i.e. that your subservience to that person was more important for your reward in life than your kindness and decency in your actions) that that wouldn't be considered the ultimate in arrogance and how you, if you refused that system, would be considered the arrogant one. I fail to see how you make that add up. If any person took that attitude they would be considered a complete psycho, and those who fought that system would be considered completely in the right. So why would God not be considered the same for taking the same position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TBush Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 Acting perfectly isn't even a requirement in my opinion. If everyone just acted with consideration and kindness and justice in mind most of the time, this world would be infinitely better. I see no reason to have to appologize or beg forgiveness for myself. I've done my best to be a nice person, to help others, and so forth. If my life isn't good enough to warrant any kind of reward or at least to avoid punishment in any system, then that system is not just and or reasonable. If I'm expected to believe in something without any proof, else I'm going to be punished, then that is not a just or reasonable system. Dean- I am in 100% agreement with that last statement regarding proof. I know what it took for me personally- so what would constitute enough evidence for you? Or what type of evidence would it take? And yes- if everyone acted with more consideration and kindness it would be great. The problem with your "best" (or mine or anyone's- this is not a personal slur on you) is that it is woefully and infinitely lacking in purity, in intent, and even in the results when compared to the holiness and perfection of Jesus Christ. If you follow Him (or are "in Him", as we say), then His perfection becomes yours positionally, but if you don't, then you're left with attempts to be "good enough" on your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 The problem with your "best" (or mine or anyone's- this is not a personal slur on you) is that it is woefully and infinitely lacking in purity, in intent, and even in the results when compared to the holiness and perfection of Jesus Christ. If you follow Him (or are "in Him", as we say), then His perfection becomes yours positionally, but if you don't, then you're left with attempts to be "good enough" on your own. See, this just flabbergasts me that people in the 21st century could still believe stuff like this. It's really scary to me, nothing personal. I find it very scary that people can hold such irrational beliefs as this, for the reasons I pointed out earlier in this thread. As to evidence, I'd want real and absolutely undeniable evidence. The same type of evidence I'd require if someone claimed they met aliens or saw a Yeti, or any other claim that would similarly strain the credulity of a rational person. When the claim is extreme, the evidence has to be overwhelming. Believing that some voice talked to you is not evidence at all. Voices talk to everyone, it's a side effect of the way our brain works. That kind of 'evidence' is on par with the evidence the 911 folks have for doing what they did, which is why any rational person would reject it out of hand. It's not real evidence at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Prog Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 Please explain how that is arrogant?For someone who thinks he understands the entire meaning of life, or the lack thereof, you sure ask a lot of questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 See, you just keep taking shots, but you never back up anything. It leads one to believe you don't really have enough faith in your beliefs to try to back them up. And you also are making claims for me that i never made, which makes it easier I guess to take pot shots. Try debating instead of just heckling, and try answering the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Prog Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 You're the one trying to figure out the Life Riddle, grasshopper. Have fun with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 OK, you obviously don't have anything meaningful to contribute to the conversation. I'll leave it to others to judge what that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Meriphew Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 I don't have a problem with you choosing your own path in life Dean. It's your God given right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted September 23, 2007 Author Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 It looks like God also gave you plenty of arrogance to use as you wish. Is there some reason you keep launching pot shots at Dean instead of actually discussing something of substance? Agree or disagree with him, but at least he's trying to explain something coherent. And it looks all the worse for you when you choose a thread in which the topic was started because of a special needs kid with bone cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 Bad things happen to good people and the reason why is basically irrelevant. I think the important point here, which Angelo figured out way back on the first page, is that the world is fortunate there are people like Ken taking care of the really difficult things in life. We need more people doing that, regardless of whether there is or is not a God, the Bible is or is not true, etc. etc. All of that is theoretical. The people needing help are physically here, now, and that deserves our immediate attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Prog Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 ... at least he's trying to explain something coherent. And it looks all the worse for you when you choose a thread in which the topic was started because of a special needs kid with bone cancer.He's not on the subject of the kid. He's trying to prove the substandard intellect of people who believe in (a) God.So, I played the devil's ( ) advocate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 Again, you put words in my mouth that I never said. I wasn't trying to prove anything of the sort. I was trying to prove the irrationality of people who believe in a specific mythology made up by humans, and why that's a dangerous thing. If people who did believe such things would try to actually rationally defend their beliefs, they might get a chance to prove they aren't of substantard intellect, but they seldom seem to want to. I can only assume because they don't really want to think critically about their own beliefs, because they might have to face some uncomfortable disparities in their belief system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Meriphew Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 He's not on the subject of the kid. He's trying to prove the substandard intellect of people who believe in (a) God. That's kind of what I gathered from Dean's posts as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super 8 Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 I was trying to prove the irrationality of people who believe in a specific mythology made up by humans, and why that's a dangerous thing. But that's assuming that it is a myth made up by humans. People of faith do not believe it to be a myth, and you cannot prove them wrong. If people who did believe such things would try to actually rationally defend their beliefs, they might get a chance to prove they aren't of substantard intellect, but they seldom seem to want to. I can only assume because they don't really want to think critically about their own beliefs, because they might have to face some uncomfortable disparities in their belief system.You need to look a little deeper before you come to such snap conclusions, Dean. Check out www.apologetics.com and you will find plenty of discussion on this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 That's kind of what I gathered from Dean's posts as well... Then you gathered incorrectly. As I indicated above, I was commenting on their rationality, not their intelligence. They aren't the same thing. But that's assuming that it is a myth made up by humans. People of faith do not believe it to be a myth, and you cannot prove them wrong. I can't prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist, but I'd be worried about an adult who still believed in him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super 8 Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 I can't prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist, Actually you can disprove Santa pretty easily, Dean. Not so with god. You are again proceeding from the assumption that all religious philosophies are created equal, and they are not. Again, I think you need to look a little deeper into this before you arrive at such snap conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted September 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 He's not on the subject of the kid. He's trying to prove the substandard intellect of people who believe in (a) God. So, I played the devil's ( ) advocate. Right, I realize that, but when you look through the thread, it looks like he's trying to at least explain his point of view, and it looks like you're standing up on a hill lobbing grenades down at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 Actually you can disprove Santa pretty easily, Dean. Not so with god. Actually you cannot. You cannot prove a negative. This is a basic point of logic. You can prove Santa does exist, if you find him and document it. You cannot prove he doesn't exist because he could just be somewhere else. It only takes one example to prove something can happen, but no number of negative examples can prove that something will never happen. You can only assign greater and greater statistical likelihood that it's not going to happen. The likelihood of Santa existing is of course VERY low. But the point is, if you argue for the existence of something for which there is no evidence at all, then of course no one can prove it doesn't exist, for the same reason they cannot prove Santa doesn't exist. But the statistical likelihood is very, very low. You are again proceeding from the assumption that all religious philosophies are created equal, and they are not. Again, I think you need to look a little deeper into this before you arrive at such snap conclusions. I don't argue that they are *created* equal. I argue that they are all just human inventions and therefore not true. There is absolutely no reason to believe in Christianity or Islam or any other religion. There were hundreds of other religions before them all of which went the way of the Dodo bird, and all of them believed in just as hard as you believe in yours. Christanity and Islam will go the same way in time. And, of course, the people who believe those new religions will argue just as vehemently that theirs is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted September 24, 2007 Members Share Posted September 24, 2007 God doesn't care whether you believe in Him/Her/It or not. Does a housecat or stone or amoeba "believe" in God? I don't feel this larger body of action and intelligence requires anyone's worship or prayers, either. To paraphrase George Harrison, He goes on "within you and without you". We're just dancing within it; Hindus call this "lila", or "play". It's all we CAN do. We're just borrowing physical forms; when those forms die, we surrender them back to the larger body of life and action--- The Sea of Brahman. Remember the old Christian hymn, "The Old Rugged Cross"? I love that line that says, "When our trophies at last we lay down". The Christ said, "Lay not up thy treasures where moth and rust do corrupt." Everything's so transient, so impermanent; all any of us can do is stay in the moment and enjoy the ride. Life, like fractals, is never symmetrical; there's always some little "stitch" injected to screw things up, to alter so-called "perfection" in favor of later growth and potentiality... And we're all part of that huge, developing fractal; moreover, from our puny vantagepoints, we can only see a miniscule portion of the larger cosmic fractal that's unfolding. And we're each co-journeyers, dancing in that huge fractal, there's no need to pick on anybody or even contradict anybody. All we need to worry about are our Desires and our Actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kendrix Posted September 25, 2007 Members Share Posted September 25, 2007 For some reason I avoided this thread until now. I read it all. I have two things to add. 1) Ken, your karma account is runneth over. Glad to hear this most unfortunate kid is doing well. 2) Has no one had an experience that overwhelmingly suggests the presence of some sort of consciousness/entity beyond our 4 dimensions? My natural inclination is to be skeptical and to view things through the lens of the scientific model. I was never religious or even spiritual in the slightest. Then some totally inexplicble (not even by improbable coincidence) events occurred. This didnt cause me to develop blind faith. However, it did make me much more open to the potential reality of some sort of spiritual something that exists beyond our perception. For me this adds significantly to the great mystery. Unexplained hard data made my cozy little secular mind set not so cozy. A kind of inconvenient truth appeared. I still havent come to grips with it. I probably never will. YMMV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted September 25, 2007 Author Members Share Posted September 25, 2007 As blue2blue has said, I don't know everything...and I'm okay with that. I really don't have to pretend like I know how the universe works. I'm fairly bright, and I still have no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 25, 2007 Members Share Posted September 25, 2007 Then some totally inexplicble (not even by improbable coincidence) events occurred. This didnt cause me to develop blind faith. However, it did make me much more open to the potential reality of some sort of spiritual something that exists beyond our perception. For me this adds significantly to the great mystery. The odds of someone winning the PowerBall lottery are very, very low, but someone wins. When you have 6 billionish people on a planet in which all kinds of things are happening all the time, then everyone will experience a very unlikely coincidence or two in their lives that seems unlikely in the extreme, because it IS unlikely in the extreme. But, given 60 or 70 or 80 years, the odds will catch up to you on occasion. It's very unlikely you'll be hit by lightning, but a small number of people do every year. That's not a miracle. it's just that lightning strikes a lot and there are lots of people on the planet, and once in a while they happen to be in the same place at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kendrix Posted September 25, 2007 Members Share Posted September 25, 2007 If these events could possibly be explained as very improbable coincidences then I'd be more than happy to rationalize them accordinlgy. But nooooo. That would make it too easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dean Roddey Posted September 25, 2007 Members Share Posted September 25, 2007 If these events could possibly be explained as very improbable coincidences then I'd be more than happy to rationalize them accordinlgy. They clearly can be. But if you won't describe them, then no one can give you a rationale explanation for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.