6000 years of history

[RonE]

6000 years of recorded history, it seems to me that if there were gods (or God), by now we would all know. Science has found no place for god in any hypothesis explaining the laws of nature.

We are presented with two alternatives, either there are no gods or they are hiding, playing tricks on us trying to test us, but really why would such powerful beings need or want to do that. Occam’s razor points us to the obvious answer, simple… no one is there.

Let’s move out of kindergarten and make believe, let’s feed the poor and starving, let’s put hate and war out of business.

What say you?

[Zzyzx]

.

Faith is a hope the evidence is true, not that it is proven true as all religions show us.

If faced with an important decision regarding finance and real estate, would you (generic term) "hope" that what your were told was true -- or would you check to see if it was true?

Would you transfer tens of thousands of dollars to a seller on the "hope" s/he was telling the truth that there were no liens, encumbrances, liabilities, etc?

If the seller was a preacher who could not or would not provide documentary evidence regarding ownership, would you go ahead on "hope" that he was being honest?

If the same preacher tells you that you will be rewarded after you die if you follow what s/he says, are you willing to structure your life around that belief / worship system in the "hope" that it will ensure your eternal future (or whatever the religion claims)?

[dianaiad]

.

Faith is a hope the evidence is true, not that it is proven true as all religions show us.

If faced with an important decision regarding finance and real estate, would you (generic term) "hope" that what your were told was true -- or would you check to see if it was true?

Would you transfer tens of thousands of dollars to a seller on the "hope" s/he was telling the truth that there were no liens, encumbrances, liabilities, etc?

Oh, one would check...and hope that the information one is getting is accurate, and that there aren't any scams or surprises. Sometimes there are, which is why, even after one checks these things, it's still faith. Or hope.

If the seller was a preacher who could not or would not provide documentary evidence regarding ownership, would you go ahead on "hope" that he was being honest?

If the same preacher tells you that you will be rewarded after you die if you follow what s/he says, are you willing to structure your life around that belief / worship system in the "hope" that it will ensure your eternal future (or whatever the religion claims)?

Actually, no.

I don't 'structure my life' around anything any man says, without checking.

Just as one would, if one has two synapses to rub together, check the public records to make certain that there are no liens against the property...and even then get title insurance...

I do not accept anybody's word for what God says. I go to the Source.

Now whether I actually get an answer or not isn't something I can prove to anybody else, but then I don't have to, do I?

How would anything I say be any different, in terms of 'hearsay' evidence, than the preacher?

Nah...you want to check this stuff, you go to the source and ask yourself.

[Zzyzx]

.

I don't 'structure my life' around anything any man says, without checking.

Do you accept words of the Bible or Book of Mormon (both of which are the words of man)? If so, how can they be checked to insure truth and accuracy (that is at least as good as checking the title on real estate)?

I do not accept anybody's word for what God says. I go to the Source.

What do you mean by "go to the source?"

Do you go to your mind (and have a mental "conversation" with God)? If so, does it matter to you that the entire "conversation" may well be nothing more than imagination?

Now whether I actually get an answer or not isn't something I can prove to anybody else, but then I don't have to, do I?

Proof (substantiation) would only be required if you attempted to use the "answer" in debate or other communication with others who are interested in checking accuracy of what they are told.

Just as one would, if one has two synapses to rub together, check the public records to make certain that there are no liens against the property...and even then get title insurance...

It might be wise to also engage an attorney or title company to certify clear title.

Shouldn't one do at least as much research into beliefs that are central to (or important in) their decision process and their life?

How would anything I say be any different, in terms of 'hearsay' evidence, than the preacher?

EVERYTHING said about "gods" and supernaturalism is hearsay, conjecture, opinion, testimonial (ancient or modern).

Nah...you want to check this stuff, you go to the source and ask yourself.

When you "ask yourself" how do you check for accuracy? Humans are quite capable of constructing mental images that are pure fantasy – and perhaps believing them to be real.

[dianaiad]

.

I don't 'structure my life' around anything any man says, without checking.

Do you accept words of the Bible or Book of Mormon (both of which are the words of man)? If so, how can they be checked to insure truth and accuracy (that is at least as good as checking the title on real estate)?

I do not accept anybody's word for what God says. I go to the Source.

What do you mean by "go to the source?"

I think that Capitalizing the Word "Source" is a pretty good hint.

Do you go to your mind (and have a mental "conversation" with God)? If so, does it matter to you that the entire "conversation" may well be nothing more than imagination?

Nope. It COULD be my imagination, but...I don't think so. See, here's the thing: scientist or philosopher or engineer or writer of romance novels, geologist or theosophist, it doesn't matter what sort of evidence one is looking at, one looks at it with one's eyes, and examines it with one's brain, and uses one's imagination to connect dots.

Everything comes down to what one's own mind does with the information it is presented, and somewhere, sometime, one must decide to trust the process. Some believe that everything one can imagine is 'real,' and some refuse to believe that anything can be trusted. Most of us live between those two extremes, and draw that 'trust' line at different points on the spectrum.

I choose to trust that the very different experiences I have when I pray are indeed real.

You either don't pray or don't trust any answer you get when you do, if you think you got one. You need to deal with your own 'line,' there. I simply understand where mine is.

Now whether I actually get an answer or not isn't something I can prove to anybody else, but then I don't have to, do I?

Proof (substantiation) would only be required if you attempted to use the "answer" in debate or other communication with others who are interested in checking accuracy of what they are told.

Just as one would, if one has two synapses to rub together, check the public records to make certain that there are no liens against the property...and even then get title insurance...

It might be wise to also engage an attorney or title company to certify clear title.

That's what you do when you get 'title insurance.' I used to be a real estate agent. A spectacular failure of a real estate agent, mind you, but I got the education.

Shouldn't one do at least as much research into beliefs that are central to (or important in) their decision process and their life?

ABSOLUTELY! (shouting deliberate) The problem is, religion ain't real estate. Religion is about God, and when it comes down to it, there is only One Source that can confirm anything about it.

How would anything I say be any different, in terms of 'hearsay' evidence, than the preacher?

EVERYTHING said about "gods" and supernaturalism is hearsay, conjecture, opinion, testimonial (ancient or modern).

Yeah, well....with all due respect, pretty much everything we believe and use today in modern culture is hearsay. Unless you have actually done the experiments yourself, (built the battery, launched the rocket, walked the moon, lived through a hurricane, run through the mathematical proofs, etc.,) we all live by hearsay; that is, we trust those who tell us stuff, and we believe 'em because we trust them.

In most of life, that's how we HAVE to work. Next month I hope to put a whole bunch of solar panels on the roof of my house. I'm TOLD that doing so will lower, if not eliminate, my electric bill. I'm TOLD that doing so will be a good thing for my family, and for 'the planet.' I'm TOLD all sorts of things. I believe them, because I did a lot of research.

So where did I go to do research? I went to articles about solar energy. I talked to the city managers, who are trying to make the entire city of close to a hundred thousand people, completely energy independent; 'off grid,' and doing so with solar and wind power.

Hey. We live in the Mojave high desert. There are few places in the world better situated to do this.

I talked to several different solar energy companies, and Southern California Electric. I got all sorts of information, and from that, chose what I want to do.

But I didn't make a solar cell. I didn't do the math to see how it works. Every bit of information I have is 'hearsay,' from sources that I trust have told me the truth...and frankly, short of going back to school and getting an engineering degree, I'll never get first hand knowledge of exactly how solar cells work. I don't have the equipment or background required to learn this stuff first hand.

................................................and until I actually start seeing my electric meter spin backwards, I won't have any first hand experience with it, either, but I'm about to sink $30,000 into it, anyway. Because I trust the folks I've spoken to.


But now we have religion. JUST like the average person with science, theists trust the guys who tell them that they know what's what. JUST like 'real life,' they are going to get conflicting stories (whew, I could tell you a few about solar energy companies wanting my business!) Unlike science, however, every single theist can do his own experiment. Every single theist can ask God him or herself.

Now, whether that theist gets an answer, understands it or trusts it? A whole 'nuther story. We can only 'get our own.'


I got mine. I trust it.

But believe me, I also did the research.

Nah...you want to check this stuff, you go to the source and ask yourself.

When you "ask yourself" how do you check for accuracy? Humans are quite capable of constructing mental images that are pure fantasy – and perhaps believing them to be real.

Of course. However, at some point every one of us has to say...OK, this COULD be my imagination. This COULD be wrong, but I have to trust my own thinking at some place, and this is where that place is.

I guess that's faith.

I personally do not see any difference between the trust I have in God, and the trust I have that all those solar panels will actually work.

I mean...'trust' and 'faith' are about the believer, not the evidence.

(addendum, just because I was thinking about it)

....................About seven years ago I read a 'letter to the editor' in our local paper, from a woman who blamed the high winds we get here on the wind farms north of us. "we never had these winds before you put up all those fans!"

A few months ago I read a similar letter...hopefully from a different woman...blaming global warming on all those solar panels. She claimed that the panels were grabbing all the heat from the sun, and then sending it to the ground in the form of electricity, and heating up the planet. Without those panels, she wrote, the sunshine would have made it to plants and trees and would have been cooled down.

It is people like these two which confirm for me the idea that it doesn't matter what field you are in, you are going to have to filter everything you encounter through your brain, and figure out for yourself what to trust.

Since we have to anyway, I choose my own level of trust.

[ttruscott]

.

Faith is a hope the evidence is true, not that it is proven true as all religions show us.

If faced with an important decision regarding finance and real estate, would you (generic term) "hope" that what your were told was true -- or would you check to see if it was true?

I suggest checking of course. But you are speaking of material things and spiritual things cannot be checked or proven so easily, as you might have noticed or I would have proven them to you already!

Not every one gets blinded on the road to Damascus though many claim to have met Christ in different ways and suggest that to meet Him is to accept His deity.

If the same preacher tells you that you will be rewarded after you die if you follow what s/he says, are you willing to structure your life around that belief / worship system in the "hope" that it will ensure your eternal future (or whatever the religion claims)?

I never followed any preacher in my life and rebuked most of those I met, albeit silently. I was then challenged to understand what I thought was real and to parse that out perfectly if I was serious and not just a dilettante pretending to be involved in spiritual things.

This led me to seek GOD and viola, as they say, 5 years later I was a new man. So, spiritually I'd suggest I did my due diligence and am greatly pleased with the result and the new found happiness in my life.

My claim is I was not 'led' so much as challenged to really deeply understand what I really really believed...to look at my thoughts and beliefs for things to cut away and things to grow but things that were already somewhere in my conscious make-up.

This led me into the lifestyle predicated by my beliefs rather than my habits and compulsions, an effect that I have greatly enjoyed.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

...

When you "ask yourself" how do you check for accuracy? Humans are quite capable of constructing mental images that are pure fantasy – and perhaps believing them to be real.

Not to step on dianaiad's answers, which I think are going well, but checking for the truth in the answer is involved in all economies. Once one has a firm understanding of what they accept as reality then all things coming into their vision will be checked against that definition.

The world presents us with a multitude of realities especially spiritually. We accept some and discard others to self create the reality we are committed to the strongest. While grey areas will always be held in abeyance, black and white certainty tends to become paramount. This is how I use the dictum to live the self examined life.

Do I believe in spirituality or just materialism? Committing to that answer changes one's life and provides one with a measuring stick for the next question.

As for hearsay, with demons whispering in one ear and the Holy Spirit in the other, GOD seeking Christians come to understand the difference by trial and error, or at least I did. It is a process and the only way to proceed is to trust, that is, have faith in HIS promise that those who seek HIM will find HIM, not a demon. The whirling dervish and the peyote eater will also find the God they seek. I contend that everyone gets to fulfill their faith on earth that they chose as their core belief pre-earth. I can't prove it but that is the only Christianity that makes sense to me.

That I am resolving things like this in spiritual terms that others only use for material situations should not be a source of concern, eh?

Peace, Ted

[Wordleymaster1]

[Replying to ThePainefulTruth]

You might want to reword that question.

Nope no need

And you said "Evil is what you say is evil at the time."

Correct.

So if morality is relative based on whatever you say is "evil at the time", so too would an insult be whatever one says is offensive at the time.

Nope. It's what the insulter intended at the time. Besides, who says an insutl is evil? You'd have to prove it evil for that to be even remotely true. Which you can't.

Of course that could all change in the following seconds depending the whim of whoever it is determining what's morally relative at that moment.

If you're talking evil, that's correct

No, the "ansers" is our self-awareness,

Which, as I said, is YOU. Very good - glad I could help

[Wordleymaster1]

[Replying to post 67 by ttruscott]

"Either He created it (evil) or didn't prevent it from being created (evil)." well of course this is exactly what I wrote and what I have contended here for the last 2 years - GOD allowed the creation of evil by the people HE created. BUT HE is NOT guilty of sin for this as you suggest because the maker of the match is not responsible for the arsonists flames.

If God is the God you seem to accept, He coudl have prevented it. He didn't so he's just as 'blamable'. Sometimes the truth hurts

Please follow:
1. GOD wanted to share true love within a pure holiness with HIS creation.

2. True love and real holiness can only be created by the true free will decision of the person. Any other 'creation’ of love or holiness is not real and falls short of true love and holiness. No power can change this necessity.

3. For a choice to be a real or true choice, it must offer all options available to the choice, both pro and con, or the choice, contstrained as it is, is not a true choice but a limited choice. No power can change this necessity.

4. Given GOD’s goals and the necessity of our ability to make true free will choices, GOD could not prevent the creation of evil by the choice of some of HIS people choosing it and no power can change the necessity of HIS method once HIS goals were set.

No thanks - I don't follow poor understandings of a poorly constructed religion. I'm curious though - why do you speak for God? Why can't I understand God my own way? You seem to preach a lot here so I'm curious.

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to ThePainefulTruth]

You might want to reword that question.

Nope no need

You wrote: "What proof do you have that evil is not what you say it is?" IOW, what proof do I have that what I said is wrong?

And you said "Evil is what you say is evil at the time." Correct.

No, I was quoting you.

You go on from there. We're done.

[Wordleymaster1]

[Replying to ThePainefulTruth]

You might want to reword that question.

Nope no need

You wrote: "What proof do you have that evil is not what you say it is?" IOW, what proof do I have that what I said is wrong?

And you said "Evil is what you say is evil at the time." Correct.

No, I was quoting you.

You go on from there. We're done.

You didnt' use the quote correctly so your train of thought is jumbled here. You might want to re-do it for appropiate clarification.
All in all, neither one of us gets to define what is/isn't evil to everyone else. What's evil to me may/may not be to you. I won't change it to fit your description nor would (should) you change it to be in line with mine.
So, evil is what we each say it is to ourselves (which should have been obvious). This won't change. Unless you adhere to the God concept that Christianity demands, of course.
Still glad I could help