2 of 17
2
Annihilation, Afterlife, Majesty & Immaculate Conception
Posted: 24 February 2007 07:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16
[quote author=“homunculus”]Thanks for the sermon, andonstop. Sabbath is quickly approaching, and your message has great healing powers. Anything else before the sun sets?

Sorry, homunculus. I don’t like to be preached at either. Maybe I got carried away a bit, eh? What was it you found offensive?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 08:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2819
Joined  2005-04-29

It was nothing significant, A. My apologies. I guess I’m a little confused about what sort of faith or belief systems you go by. When you first started posting, I assumed you were somewhere other than you now appear to be. But that’s my lack of understanding; not your lack of ability to communicate.

Needless to say, I’d be glad to read a frank synopsis of your spiritual history, if you feel up to revealing such a thing publicly. You’d no doubt leave yourself open to rough treatment, so I’ll understand if you decline.

 Signature 

Philosophy may in no way interfere with the actual use of language; it can in the end only describe it. For it cannot give it any foundations either. It leaves everything as it is.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 09:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16

[quote author=“Mia”][quote author=“andonstop”]
CanZen, why do you insist on finding knowledge only from material sources? Faith is the evidence of things not seen. It is through faith one is able to develop those majestic characteristics, and they are attainable by all. They are ours for the taking.

‘Round these parts, we’ve come to refer to this sort of statement as a ‘conversation stopper’, pal. You’re now talking the language of fairytale imaginings, which leads us into never-neverlandlike circles, since faith allows you to make up whatever happens to feel right to you at any given moment, and not a shred of proof required to support any of it.

By all means, have at it, but your particular spin—“He’s all about the LOVE!!!”—can only honestly be considered a wish and a hope, not knowledge. First you postulate that the deity absolutely exists, then that It is a “He”, and further that He is all-loving. Lacking in anything to compel me, I take none of those unnecessary steps.

As to your take on the Bible. . . are you suggesting it’s just a collection of tribal literature, based on tradition, and not a divine and vital communication from your deity? If so, we agree. . . but that also eliminates the sole basis for Christianity.

I do apologize, though, for having been unaware of CanZen’s use of the word ‘annihilate’ in his previous posting, and was instead responding only to what I perceived as your  use of it, meaning an annihilation set in motion by a deity.

[chuckling] You will be happy to know I believe gender only exists in material life, so “He” is just the closest earthly term available. (In case I’m right about the gender thing, have sex while you can.)

The “faith” I describe is not whatever happens to feel right, it is about eternal values like courage and compassion. Those exist for an individual only if that person first believes they are possible, then wills them to exist. Please consider the possibility that while material things come from matter, personality comes from personality.

I am saying the Bible was mankind’s best interpretation of religious thinking in its time. (Prob’ly woulda been better if womankind had helped, eh?)  I do think it is time for Christianity to move on from the doctrine of the Bible to the true teachings of Jesus.

A very gracious apology. Thank you.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 09:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16

[quote author=“Mia”][quote author=“andonstop”]
“Begotten, not created” was intended to reveal that Jesus’ material being evolved as did any other human’s, through sexual reproduction. (Which is inconsistent, by the way, with the concept of immaculate conception.)

Are you aware that the Immaculate Conception refers solely to Mary having been born to a sinless existence, and has nothing to do with Jesus’ birth?

Oops. Was not. Thought it was the same as Jesus being born to a virgin (something I don’t agree with either, but also view as irrelevant). Thank you for the education. Who’d have thought I’d be learning about Catholicism here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 09:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16

[quote author=“Ted”]
The point I was was making, andonstop, was about the difference between begetting and making.  For instance, I can make a bowl, but I can only beget another human.  Similarly, God made Man (different critter), but begot Jesus (same critter).  Point is that God and Jesus are the same, while we are different from both.  We strive for that sameness.  Basically, we are trying for a promotion to little gods.  See?

Sorry, Ted. I’m not with you there. I believe humankind evolved. In my mind, that in no way diminishes the majesty of God or his creation. I understand our quest is to strive to become Godlike (perfect), not gods. Perfection does not necessarily include power or authority.

If you think of the relationship of the scale of the earth to the rest of the universe, then apply that scale to personality. I think that provides a very rough appoximation of the difference between God and us.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 09:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  93
Joined  2007-02-19

[quote author=“andonstop”][quote author=“Ted”]
The point I was was making, andonstop, was about the difference between begetting and making.  For instance, I can make a bowl, but I can only beget another human.  Similarly, God made Man (different critter), but begot Jesus (same critter).  Point is that God and Jesus are the same, while we are different from both.  We strive for that sameness.  Basically, we are trying for a promotion to little gods.  See?

Sorry, Ted. I’m not with you there. I believe humankind evolved. In my mind, that in no way diminishes the majesty of God or his creation. I understand our quest is to strive to become Godlike (perfect), not gods. Perfection does not necessarily include power or authority.

If you think of the relationship of the scale of the earth to the rest of the universe, then apply that scale to personality. I think that provides a very rough appoximation of the difference between God and us.

Godlike, “little gods”.  potato, potato.

the point was we are not sons and daughters, yet.  We are creations striving for… whatever you want to call it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 09:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16

[quote author=“homunculus”]It was nothing significant, A. My apologies. I guess I’m a little confused about what sort of faith or belief systems you go by. When you first started posting, I assumed you were somewhere other than you now appear to be. But that’s my lack of understanding; not your lack of ability to communicate.

Needless to say, I’d be glad to read a frank synopsis of your spiritual history, if you feel up to revealing such a thing publicly. You’d no doubt leave yourself open to rough treatment, so I’ll understand if you decline.

Very gracious, homunculus. Thank you.

Tempting on the spiritual history synopsis, I’m flattered and humbled. I think for the time being it is best that we continue to exchange ideas. Rough treatment doesn’t scare me, but I’d rather not clutter the message with the messenger.

That I think is one of the major problems, if not the main problem with Christianity—it has primarily become a religion about Jesus rather than a religion spreading the message of Jesus.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 04:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  775
Joined  2006-12-04

Ted,

There cannot be sin without Christianity. It’s like, there can’t be Home Runs without baseball.

SaltCreek,  nicely stated….‘what God devalues’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 11:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16

[quote author=“CanZen”]andonstop, you first of all knocked the wheels of my little red wagon and you’re now dragging it through the dirt on its axels.  Look, you, by leaving out all my talk about the fact that we are “children of motion” (that is, living is a momentous event, we are propelled to life and to live by certain forces all of which exhibit motion as their primary constituent).  That’s from where the my conclusion arises: from the FACT that we are NOT materials (or objects) that happen to be in motion while occupying time and space.  I was quite clear about the FACT that living beings are phenomenal events which occupy spacetime (this perspective makes motion the basis for our existence . . . even prior to the idea of substances in space and time, all these latter ones are concepts that we ourselves contribute to our reality). 

My main point was blunt and factual . . . once motion (in the living sense) stops (at death), there is nothing left to continue the process of life.  I was not implying that there is some sort of other ethereal force called annihilation that comes like the grim reaper to snuff you out of existence.  No, the end of the motility IS the force of annihilation.  So there is no choice in the “matter” - I will be dead and there will be no choices left for me at that point; existence will have ceased for me.  Now knowing that to be a FACT, I really don’t see the point of making a choice between annihilation or afterlife while I am alive, that’s just wishful thinking, as Mia has already said.  Even to think that I have such a choice to make is to already delude myself into believing that I have god-like powers - and I am not that crazy. In keeping with Joad’s thoughts about the possiblity of heaven, I don’t want to have god’s power either (although I see rather clearly that such is your whole purpose in this life).

You andonstop, some across as if you have discovered a new “lifeline” to god, but in getting to this “higher place” you have basically jettisoned all the dogma and the creeds of the bible.  All that is left for us to grasp is that you and god are like “one” in some mystical union . . . but in FACT all of that is completely in your own head, maybe as far as you are concerned you are god?  Therefore, the only way for us to critique your andonstop-like god is to criticize you personally.  Maybe it’s time to call in the ad hominem troops?

Sorry, CanZen. My intent was to help you realize your little red wagon has wings and does not need to be dragged at all. Quoting just your conclusion was an effort at brevity, I think the fact that viewers are able to see your entire original post anyway should be proof of that. In the future, I will include your entire post with my reply. My conclusion, however, remains the same. Whatever your reasons, you have chosen to believe you will be annihilated when your human body dies. Since personal faith determines personal action, that affects how you live your life.

Jettisoning all dogma and creeds is exactly what I think will make our world a better place. That and being more open to other sources of truth. I think you will agree there is much in Zen which is lacking in today’s Bible-focused Christianity. In reality, any faith can learn from the best of other faiths.

It is my view that fundamentalists on both the atheist and religionist sides see others with faiths different than their own essentially as primitive savages. Please consider the following story in that light:

In the mind’s eye conjure up a picture of one of your primitive ancestors of cave-dwelling times—a short, misshapen, filthy, snarling hulk of a man standing, legs spread, club upraised, breathing hate and animosity as he looks fiercely just ahead. Such a picture hardly depicts the divine dignity of man. But allow us to enlarge the picture. In front of this animated human crouches a saber-toothed tiger. Behind him, a woman and two children. Immediately you recognize that such a picture stands for the beginnings of much that is fine and noble in the human race, but the man is the same in both pictures. Only in the second sketch you are favored with a widened horizon. You therein discern the motivation of this evolving mortal. His attitude becomes praiseworthy because you understand him. If you could only fathom the motives of your associates, how much better you would understand them. If you could only know your fellows, you would eventually love them.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2007 11:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  54
Joined  2007-02-16
[quote author=“Joad”]There cannot be sin without Christianity. It’s like, there can’t be Home Runs without baseball.

[chuckling] Great line, Joad. Don’t necessarily agree with it, but it is a great line.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2007 04:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1453
Joined  2005-01-22

Oh no!  There goes my little red wagon flying away from me, up, up above the clouds!

I guess it’s a bit too late for reposting the FACTUAL part of my piece andonstop, since you just blindly go on ignoring the FACTS anyway almost as if you just don’t want to go there because FACTS will ruin your speculative, majestic theory about the god you love.

I can sympathise with your predicament, I was the same way perhaps 15 years ago, but in learning to accept the scientific method and to approach explanation with one eye on science and the other on experience, my epistemic horizon has cleared up considerably.  Unlike you, I have thrown away my imaginary wings (unless I am describing a situation where FACTS play no relevant part).  You still feel that when the facts get in the way of your own personal experience, you can still strap on those imaginary wings and fly off to an explanitory heaven.  Look out Icarus, you’re getting too close to the sun!

I liked the story about the “primitive savage” - but that little story is agreeing with my own need to “look at all the FACTS” before you make your conclusions.  It’s in the first part where the observer straps on his wings and imagines the cruel nature of the beast, that is describing your talk about god and afterlife and choice.  It’s the real FACTS of the circumstances when they are brought to our attention that clarify the situation.  You are still ignoring the FACTS because they might compromise your own cosmic importance or the very structures and functions of your imaginary world.

Look andonstop, I am not berating you for your ultimate hopes for humanity where peace and love reign supreme, but giving that little red wagon (the FACTS, in other words) some sort of imaginary wings is not going to get us (or you) anywhere.  I’m sure there’s an Aesop’s Fable that describes your propensity to mistake fables for reality, or maybe it’s the mere FACT that Aesop’s Fables exist at all, and like zen koans, their whole purpose is not to be taken literally but to be interpreted in response to the reality to which they are pointing.  They are not real but they definitely point to something true, to something factual.

That being said I still believe that you are lying andonstop when you say “Quoting just your conclusion was an effort at brevity,” because the part you left out is the part where the FACTS are inserted, and nowhere do you acknowledge that.  In fact, you do just the opposite and completely ignore those FACTS just to enable the assertion of your own agenda.  Then you go to another thread and quote the same “brevity” without any of the FACTS, but then you go one step farther in your explicit lie and claim that I have no facts to support my position so that makes my “belief” unfounded (or based on a kind of faith). You are still in all of your subsequent postings ignoring the FACTS.  This has to stop andonstop.  I will not respond to such outright deception again.

Bob

 Signature 

It’s definitely a moon! . . . and now it’s become a sunflower!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2007 10:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  93
Joined  2007-02-19

[quote author=“Joad”]Ted,

There cannot be sin without Christianity. It’s like, there can’t be Home Runs without baseball.

Pay attention, Joad.  I think in your desire to appear clever, you are losing focus.  Christianity was the implied and very obvious context,  especially since I was talking about the difference between Christ being begotten, while I was created (using evolution or whatever means necessary, andonstop).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2007 10:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  775
Joined  2006-12-04

Ted,

I was talking about the difference between Christ being begotten, while I was created

Well, that goes straight to the point. Christ is an actual entity and we are not.

Christ has value, we don’t. Christ must be preserved, we are disposable.

There is no reason to make the begotten/created distinction other than to further denigrate humanity. It is the tired old argument of the lesser of two evils. No matter what problems we might find in Christ, at least he wasn’t a lousy human.

It is the basic reason I detest Theism. It is far less a love of a god than a hatred of humanity. Rather than admit that their imperfect diety created a flawed world, Christians manufactured the concept of sin in order to blame mankind.

“It is a poor workman who blames his tools”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2007 11:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1585
Joined  2006-10-20

[quote author=“andonstop”]In the mind’s eye conjure up a picture of one of your primitive ancestors of cave-dwelling times—a short, misshapen, filthy, snarling hulk of a man standing, legs spread, club upraised, breathing hate and animosity as he looks fiercely just ahead. Such a picture hardly depicts the divine dignity of man. But allow us to enlarge the picture. In front of this animated human crouches a saber-toothed tiger. Behind him, a woman and two children. Immediately you recognize that such a picture stands for the beginnings of much that is fine and noble in the human race, but the man is the same in both pictures. Only in the second sketch you are favored with a widened horizon. You therein discern the motivation of this evolving mortal. His attitude becomes praiseworthy because you understand him. If you could only fathom the motives of your associates, how much better you would understand them. If you could only know your fellows, you would eventually love them.

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave is better and leaves out the b.s. of love.  However, did you notice behind the saber-toothed tiger are its dead cubs killed by the man while the mother was away?  And it doesn’t end there, the picture is wider and deeper than any of us can imagine, and inserting a god into it is either cruel or irrelevant, depending on what you want to see.

 Signature 

“All extremists should be killed!” - neighbor’s bumper sticker

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2007 11:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  93
Joined  2007-02-19

[quote author=“Joad”]Ted,

I was talking about the difference between Christ being begotten, while I was created

Well, that goes straight to the point. Christ is an actual entity and we are not.

Christ has value, we don’t. Christ must be preserved, we are disposable.

There is no reason to make the begotten/created distinction other than to further denigrate humanity. It is the tired old argument of the lesser of two evils. No matter what problems we might find in Christ, at least he wasn’t a lousy human.

It is the basic reason I detest Theism. It is far less a love of a god than a hatred of humanity. Rather than admit that their imperfect diety created a flawed world, Christians manufactured the concept of sin in order to blame mankind.

 


Joad, Wow.  I feel like my words have either been entirely inadequate, or that you are twisting them for some reason.  I sense that we can not come to a mutual agreement other than to respectfully disagree with one another.  Thanks for your time and observations.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 17
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed