atheism is a (religious position)

[shunyadragon]

And Taoism, I believe

Yes, in Taoism the 'Source?' the Tao is undefined and unknown from the human perspective.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It doesn’t have any meaning to you. I’m not sure that makes it arbitrary - baseball has no meaning to me, but it does to millions of people around the world.

In the game of football, how many players are on the field at one time?

Give only one answer, please.

 

[Bear Wild]

Not necessarily. There are a significant number of Jewish atheists and agnostics that do not include Gods. Yes through the history of humanity there many variable conflicting religions with many beliefs in Gods or whatever for there to be any consistency from the human perspective especially since they are ancient religions from an ancient cultural perspective with many conflicting views of the nature of our physical existence,

let me rephrase it to say to include supernatural god.

 

[Bear Wild]

Not necessarily. There are a significant number of Jewish atheists and agnostics that do not include Gods. Yes through the history of humanity there many variable conflicting religions with many beliefs in Gods or whatever for there to be any consistency from the human perspective especially since they are ancient religions from an ancient cultural perspective with many conflicting views of the nature of our physical existence,

Yes, which brings to question the validity of any one religion. First, the degree of equitability of the different religions is from the perspective of the believers of any one religion. The differences between the religion of Genesis, later Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Islam are different enough to question which God or Gods are involved, if any.

Out of curiosity how would you define religion in the way you perceive it to mean. I know that defining religion is difficult but if you could give me your perspective.

 

[Secret Chief]

Some Buddhists would presumably say yes.

@Secret Chief ?

Quite so. The Buddha was not interested in such speculations. Even the devas were still of finite life (albeit long) and were not "creators." If the God Concept was a part of Buddhism I'd never have been interested in it.

 

[RestlessSoul]

In the game of football, how many players are on the field at one time?

Give only one answer, please.

Twenty two

 

[Secret Chief]

And Taoism, I believe

O yes. Especially the one you can't speak of.

 

[LuisDantas]

Can you have a religion without the concept of God?

You can and you should. Among other reasons, because that is a faulty concept that does not help religions.

 

[paarsurrey]

And Taoism, I believe

Isn't Tao another name of G-d in another language, please, right?

Regards

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Twenty two

Well, no. It's exactly 36.

But also exactly 24.

But also exactly 30.

But also exactly 26.

Hopefully you see how this is relevant to the idea that there can be a universal definition for "god."

 

[Secret Chief]

Isn't Tao another name of G-d in another language, please, right?

Regards

No. Dao (also spelled Tao) means path / way / course.

 

[RestlessSoul]

O yes. Especially the one you can't speak of.

Is that the real one, or the other one? Confused here…

 

[Bear Wild]

Is that the real one, or the other one? Confused here…

That is a reference to the fact that the Tao is beyond words and cannot be limited by words. Thus if you try to say what the Tao is you have already limited it to much.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Well, no. It's exactly 36.

But also exactly 24.

But also exactly 30.

But also exactly 26.

Hopefully you see how this is relevant to the idea that there can be a universal definition for "god."

I’m all for plurality, in sport, in religion, in human endeavour.

God plays cricket btw.

 

[RestlessSoul]

That is a reference to the fact that the Tao is beyond words and cannot be limited by words. Thus if you try to say what the Tao is you have already limited it to much.

Yeah, I got that, thanks. The Tao that can be named is not the real Tao.

 

[Secret Chief]

Is that the real one, or the other one? Confused here…

As @Bear Wild says, the true Tao is ineffable. Dao De Jing beginning:

"The Dao that can be stated, is not the eternal Dao;
The name that can be named is not the eternal name."

 

[LuisDantas]

Isn't Tao another name of G-d in another language, please, right?

Regards

It is, for those inclined to say so.

Incidentally, the same can be said of Jesus. Or anyone or anything else, really.

 

[Secret Chief]

Yeah, I got that, thanks. The Tao that can be named is not the real Tao.

Uh, so whoccha confusion?

 

[Secret Chief]

God plays cricket btw.

Howzat?

 

[Bear Wild]

Yeah, I got that, thanks. The Tao that can be named is not the real Tao.

I Didn't mean to imply you did not know that, it came out because it reminded me of how many of these forum discussions often negate the importance of the subjective experiential knowledge as valid when it cannot be demonstrated in our current evidence based world. You know the Tao because you experience the Tao. When you try to translate that experience into words it looses its meaning. Same as in mystical experiences, you cannot translate the experience into words that conveys the real experience.