Sneaky Stealth Thread About God Posing as Yet Another Political Thread....

[Kirran]

Do you often feel that we spend too much time debating the exact meanings of words that can't help but be interpreted in deeply personal terms anyway?

I'll agree, with the proviso that we shouldn't be spending no time discussing these things.

It's all about the mindset we discuss things in really. People with very dogmatic views, generally but not always coming out of the Abrahamic traditions (well, two of them in particular!) and the atheistic mindsets that have been influenced by them (i.e. much of Western irreligion, which takes much of its mindset from the more rigid forms of Protestantism AFAIK) often don't bring a good attitude to the discussion table, just because they have certain constrictions on their ability to listen to others and engage with them on certain subjects.

 

[Kemosloby]

Sorry. Far as I am concerned, that means that according to you Christianity is neither a religion nor particularly worth pursuing even on its own terms.

As far as your concerned extends pretty far into as far as i'm concerned...

 

[Kirran]

As far as your concerned extends pretty far into as far as i'm concerned...

How would you define 'religion' Kemosloby?

 

[Kemosloby]

How would you define 'religion' Kemosloby?

If I was webster perhaps my definition would be. Religion- things which pertain to God.

 

[Kirran]

If I was webster perhaps my definition would be. Religion- things which pertain to God.

What about Buddhism and Daoism? What about forms of Hinduism that refrain from the word 'God'? What about people who believe in God, and who worship, but don't identify as religious?

 

[Kemosloby]

What about Buddhism and Daoism? What about forms of Hinduism that refrain from the word 'God'? What about people who believe in God, and who worship, but don't identify as religious?

Philosophy-things to do with humans.

 

[LuisDantas]

A significant hurdle, @Kemosloby , is that the idea of God is hardly well defined or demonstrated. As a core concept it can be very disappointing. It is probably more useful to define God in specific religious terms than the other way around.

 

[Underhill]

The practical significance of Christian religion is to gain everlasting life. So in a nutshell, you don't get paid until the next life. But the pay is good.

I wish I could pull that off as an employer. Do what I say now and in the next life, I'll take care of you... trust me!

 

[Kemosloby]

A significant hurdle, @Kemosloby , is that the idea of God is hardly well defined or demonstrated. As a core concept it can be very disappointing. It is probably more useful to define God in specific religious terms than the other way around.

I've found God to be very rewarding. Elijah prayed it wouldn't rain and it did not rain for 3 1/2 years. I prayed for an easy way to quit smoking, 2-3 months later quit cold turkey after 20 years of smoking, without the least desire to smoke. I asked for a fish and caught one next cast. I suspect the only reason I haven't had more prayers answered is I don't like asking, and have limits in my belief of what God will do for me. But that's not God's fault, it's my own fault.

 

[Kirran]

Philosophy-things to do with humans.

You don't think Buddhism is a religion, but a philosophy :O

What about Hinduism and Sikhism? Neopaganism?

 

[Kemosloby]

You don't think Buddhism is a religion, but a philosophy :O

What about Hinduism and Sikhism? Neopaganism?

Not my problem...

 

[Kirran]

Not my problem...

Sorry? I didn't say there was any problem. I expressed surprise at your position, and asked you some follow-up questions.

 

[Kemosloby]

Sorry? I didn't say there was any problem. I expressed surprise at your position, and asked you some follow-up questions.

Buddism is a philosophy unless they say Buddah is a God. Same with any. If they follow God it's religion, if they follow a man it's philosopy. If they follow a cow it's probably evolution.

 

[Kirran]

Buddism is a philosophy unless they say Buddah is a God. Same with any. If they follow God it's religion, if they follow a man it's philosopy. If they follow a cow it's probably evolution.

I'm not sure when we get into the region of religious slurs, but we're in the area here.

So which would you say are religions? Only Christianity, Islam, Judaism and their derivatives (like the Rastafari movement and the Baha'i Faith)?

 

[Kemosloby]

I'm not sure when we get into the region of religious slurs, but we're in the area here.

So which would you say are religions? Only Christianity, Islam, Judaism and their derivatives (like the Rastafari movement and the Baha'i Faith)?

I don't know, which follow a God? I do believe you're leading me down the path of rule infraction so, as I said before. it's not my problem.

 

[crossfire]

Now that I've got your attention by posting this sneaky stealth thread under the false flag of "North American Politics", what do you make of Paul Tillich's notion that "God is not a supernatural entity among other entities. Instead, God is the ground upon which all beings exist."? Does it make any sense to you? Why or why not?

Such stealth deserves a rebuttal from Chuangzi! From his "Discussion On Making All Things Equal"

"The torch of chaos and doubt - this is what the sage steers by.11 So he does not use things but relegates all to the constant. {the constant being Change--crossfire} This is what it means to use clarity.

Now I am going to make a statement here. I don't know whether it fits into the category of other people's statements or not. But whether it fits into their category or whether it doesn't, it obviously fits into some category. So in that respect it is no different from their statements. However, let me try making my statement.

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something."​