Do you think/believe that your body was designed/created?

[Kirran]

I fully agree that we should deal with the real world as the real world and not formulate purely imaginary entities, and my position on God is expressed on my signature statement found at the bottom of this post. Pretty hard to argue with, right?

Well I agree entirely. I don't think of God as an entity! As for the signature, I long ago disabled being able to see them, so I am deprived of that wisdom.

 

[Godobeyer]

Shame? I responded directly to a point you made about creationism, illustrating my point with an example. The fact that you have harangued me for days over not understanding the example was not something I intended.

Its like we are all comedian actors.

As supposing.
So it's like I am talking about history of comedy in cinema, so I said "Comedy term is make most of people laughing"
so you said there was "Charly Chaplin movies was not make laugh much as today because had no sound "

I said "there is no sound in that time for all products" !

Flat, I reckon. Although there were no Hindus 3000 years ago in the modern sense of the term, in that they wouldn't have identified as Hindu, this being a product of Islamic conquest. As for atheists, I'm not sure there were many around at the time. Certainly the theist-atheist dichotomy had not yet emerged in public thinking.

Hinduism is a religion, or a way of life,[note 1] found most notably in India and Nepal. Hinduism has been called the oldest religion in the world,[note 2] and some practitioners and scholars refer to it as Sanātana Dharma, "the eternal law," or the "eternal way,"[4] beyond human origins.[5] Scholars regard Hinduism as a fusion[note 3] or synthesis[6][note 4] of various Indian cultures and traditions,[7][note 5] with diverse roots[8][note 6] and no founder.[9] This "Hindu synthesis" started to develop between 500 BCE and 300 CE[10] following the Vedic period (1500 BCE to 500 BCE)



Do you know that Hinduism teach earth is flat ?

Hindu Vedic Cosmology suggesting Flat Earth

 

[Kirran]

Its like we are all comedian actors.

As supposing.
So it's like I am talking about history of comedy in cinema, so I said "Comedy term is make most of people laughing"
so you said there was "Charly Chaplin movies was not make laugh much as today because had no sound "

I said "there is no sound in that time for all products" !

I tried to make sense of this.

Hinduism

is a religion, or a way of life,[note 1] found most notably in India and Nepal. Hinduism has been called the oldest religion in the world,[note 2] and some practitioners and scholars refer to it as Sanātana Dharma, "the eternal law," or the "eternal way,"[4] beyond human origins.[5] Scholars regard Hinduism as a fusion[note 3] or synthesis[6][note 4] of various Indian cultures and traditions,[7][note 5] with diverse roots[8][note 6] and no founder.[9] This "Hindu synthesis" started to develop between 500 BCE and 300 CE[10] following the Vedic period (1500 BCE to 500 BCE)



Do you know that Hinduism teach earth is flat ?

Hindu Vedic Cosmology suggesting Flat Earth

Hinduism teaches nothing, being an umbrella term for a wide variety of traditions and philosophies.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"There is nothing created by it self" it's very simple idea,but you seems don't get it

So God has a creator?

 

[Godobeyer]

So God has a creator?

That's over our knowledge,why should be our business!

 

[Kirran]

That's over our knowledge,why should be our business!

If your reasoning for 'there is some external creator' is 'everything has to have a creator' you can't duck out when people ask this obvious question!

 

[Godobeyer]

If your reasoning for 'there is some external creator' is 'everything has to have a creator' you can't duck out when people ask this obvious question!

External Creator is had sense more than intern creator.

 

[Godobeyer]

I tried to make sense of this.

Sorry It's was hasty post.

I just want to figure out why you laugh, and why you criticised my point about "majority" , which is valid.

You pick a creationism exemple as invalid to refute my point,despite you are believe in creation !

Hinduism teaches nothing, being an umbrella term for a wide variety of traditions and philosophies.

If Hinduism teaches nothing, so it's not way of life nor religion too!

 

[Kirran]

External Creator is had sense more than intern creator.

Regardless, you can't say everything needs a creator then say it's none of our business what created the creator and expect anyone to take you seriously. You spit on your own logic!

 

[viole]

Part of respecting people is knowing how to react to their beliefs.
No need to respect a belief, but disrespecting a belief includes disrespecting its people.

Why? Allegedely, the head of the RAF during WWII, one of the main contributors to the defeat of Germany in the skies of England, believed tha his garden was populated by little fairies.

What do you do when you hear that? Do you keep a straight face and start discussing about the metaphisical possibility of garden fairies or do you laugh out loud (at least inside) even if you respect the man and what he did in his life?

I am sorry, but if he confuses himself with such a belief, it is his problem. Not mine. All beliefs can be scrutinized and ridiculed. Especially when they are ridicolous. So, if they do not like that, they should stop believing ridicolous things, basically.

i actually strongly suspect that people that are offended when their beliefs are ridiculed are exactly the people who know, deep inside, that their beliefs are, indeed, ridicolous. They just do not like to be reminded of this simple fact.

If those beliefs stood on their own legs, instead of depending on the psychology of the believer, what need is there to be offended?

After all I cannot imagine a "believer" in evolution or in relativity taking offense if someone ridicule evolution or relativity, like some creationists do. Ouch, you hurted my cherished belief that we all share a common ancestor. A belief that is so strongly depending on my person that I am going to punch you in the face.

You say you wish to be so... you can, if you want. It is not really that difficult.

On second thought, I am not sure I wish to be more respectful.

But anyway, where does this watch+forest thingy fit in our discussion?

I don't remember. I believe you replied to someone who addressed something similar. Feel free to ridicule this belief, too

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kirran]

Sorry It's was hasty post.

I just want to figure out why you laugh, and why you criticised my point about "majority" , which is valid.

You pick a creationism exemple as invalid to refute my point,despite you are believe in creation !

Ah, OK, I see. Right, well the example wasn't a creationist example. You don't need to be a creationist to believe the Earth is flat. And the example about the majority was invalid, because so what if the majority believes something? Does that effect its truth?

If Hinduism teaches nothing, so it's not way of life nor religion too!

Different traditions within Hinduism teach things, that's how it works. Hinduism is a bit of a catch-all term. Advaita teaches things, Vaishnavism teaches things, Lingayatism teaches things. But I don't think one can really say a grouping as broad as Hinduism teaches X or Y.

Anyway, while it's the tradition I'm broadly based in, I don't really identify too much with Hinduism per se. The group I have an affinity with here in the UK is called the Community of the Many Names of God.

Here's a logo:

 

[Godobeyer]

Regardless, you can't say everything needs a creator then say it's none of our business what created the creator and expect anyone to take you seriously. You spit on your own logic!

Because even if I made Him an exception,the debate will continuous. That's why I said its beyond our knowledge.

 

[Kirran]

Because even if I made Him an exception,the debate will continuous. That's why I said its beyond our knowledge.

OK, it's fair enough from your own perspective, but do you reckon this logic will stand to convince anybody? It's fine from the perspective of someone convinced, but for dawah it doesn't hold much weight.

 

[Godobeyer]

Ah, OK, I see. Right, well the example wasn't a creationist example. You don't need to be a creationist to believe the Earth is flat. And the example about the majority was invalid, because so what if the majority believes something? Does that effect its truth?



Different traditions within Hinduism teach things, that's how it works. Hinduism is a bit of a catch-all term. Advaita teaches things, Vaishnavism teaches things, Lingayatism teaches things. But I don't think one can really say a grouping as broad as Hinduism teaches X or Y.

Anyway, while it's the tradition I'm broadly based in, I don't really identify too much with Hinduism per se. The group I have an affinity with here in the UK is called the Community of the Many Names of God.

Here's a logo:

1- was not my point if their beliefs are correct or not,that's deviation you made.

Majority full stop.

 

[Kirran]

1- was not my point if their beliefs are correct or not,that's deviation you made.

Majority full stop.

You said that the majority always wins.

Thanks for ignoring the rest of the post

 

[Godobeyer]

OK, it's fair enough from your own perspective, but do you reckon this logic will stand to convince anybody? It's fine from the perspective of someone convinced, but for dawah it doesn't hold much weight.

I m not here to convince anyone about my belief,I proposed my belief,everyone is free, and exchange opinions and discuss.

For example:
Your belief don't convinced me,everything is god!

 

[Godobeyer]

You said that the majority always wins.

Thanks for ignoring the rest of the post

I meant majority win in static, NOT belief, get it now ?

 

[Kirran]

I m not here to convince anyone about my belief,I proposed my belief,everyone is free, and exchange opinions and discuss.

For example:
Your belief don't convinced me,everything is god!

Certainly not! If you were meant to believe it, you would

I meant majority win in static, NOT belief, get it now ?

Win in statistics? What does that mean? Just, there being more of them? What are they winning, is there a prize?

 

[Godobeyer]

Certainly not! If you were meant to believe it, you would

Just save it in your mind , " Godobeyer is not here to convince people about Islam, He is here to explain it"

Win in statistics? What does that mean? Just, there being more of them? What are they winning, is there a prize?

I posted a wiki link,remember ?
Most of humanity/religion are believe in creation,Creator :"Islam,Christianity,Hinduism....etc"

Now you get my point,it's was not about beliefs correct or wrong!

I am Muslim I see all other religion are wrong even in creationism, but we share the "creationism and creator." idealogy, get it ?

Maybe we will prize,who knows

 

[Smart_Guy]

Why? Allegedely, the head of the RAF during WWII, one of the main contributors to the defeat of Germany in the skies of England, believed tha his garden was populated by little fairies.

What do you do when you hear that? Do you keep a straight face and start discussing about the metaphisical possibility of garden fairies or do you laugh out loud (at least inside) even if you respect the man and what he did in his life?

I am sorry, but if he confuses himself with such a belief, it is his problem. Not mine. All beliefs can be scrutinized and ridiculed. Especially when they are ridicolous. So, if they do not like that, they should stop believing ridicolous things, basically.

i actually strongly suspect that people that are offended when their beliefs are ridiculed are exactly the people who know, deep inside, that their beliefs are, indeed, ridicolous. They just do not like to be reminded of this simple fact.

If those beliefs stood on their own legs, instead of depending on the psychology of the believer, what need is there to be offended?

After all I cannot imagine a "believer" in evolution or in relativity taking offense if someone ridicule evolution or relativity, like some creationists do. Ouch, you hurted my cherished belief that we all share a common ancestor. A belief that is so strongly depending on my person that I am going to punch you in the face.

On second thought, I am not sure I wish to be more respectful.

I'm not sure if you're listening to what you are saying. Ridiculing what others believe? What decent person would do that? And why would they in the first place? I don't get it. As people grow up, they should mature more instead of less, and get more awareness and understanding accordingly. I understand if it is "debate", "disagree", "be surprised", "be amazed", or even be "shocked", but "ridicule"? That word is a bad word. Ridicule what one thinks is ridiculous is simply like calling others ugly because one thinks they are ugly. I don't think you or I would appreciate being called ugly if others think we are! (we aren't tho )

By the way, I didn't say to make a straight face. I don't see how that adds to this discussion. I also never said anything about getting offended. That's completely different.

I don't remember. I believe you replied to someone who addressed something similar. Feel free to ridicule this belief, too

Cool! It just does not fit in our discussion.

I wouldn't ridicule it. I'm better than that. It's just a belief that does not harm others, except maybe if they for some reason decide to get offended over it just for hearing it and cannot make a straight face

I once even said something that a vegetarian/vegan thought was offensive and was honest with me about it, so I apologized and deleted the post. That's me working on becoming more and more of a decent person.