Question For The "others" Here

[LloydDobler]

notblinded wrote:

No one had the answer...even the ancient folks.

 

??????????????They'd be the last to know I 'spec.

The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first...

 

Whatevertheheck that means...

 

Isn't there something in the bible that says something like that?

 

I think there is.

No, no...it's he who laughs last, laughs least. Or is it he who laughs least, laughs last?

No, it's "He who laughs last, thinks slowest."

[Thackerie]

notblinded wrote:

No one had the answer...even the ancient folks.

 

??????????????They'd be the last to know I 'spec.

The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first...

 

Whatevertheheck that means...

 

Isn't there something in the bible that says something like that?

 

I think there is.

No, no...it's he who laughs last, laughs least. Or is it he who laughs least, laughs last?

 

He who laughs last ... didn't understand the joke.

[NotBlinded]

The first shall be last....yes.

What caught my attention though was "even the ancient folks". What they had was even more superstition than we do today, and we still have plenty to go around.

What I meant by that was many people claim that the "ancients" had specific knowledge of the Truth™. They didn't have any more access to the Truth™ than we do today. It's not that they had less, because I feel that what they were trying to get across were philosophies through metaphor and myth that were relevant to thier society and ways of life. The underlying message remains the same though as in the moral of the "Boy that Cried Wolf", but today we might say it as, "The Kid that Yelled Pit Bull!" (I actually like pit bulls...I just couldn't think of anything else!)

[Knightley]

I think so. It's really hard to describe having a relationship with God. It feels like it feels when you talk to another person. It's that warm, peaceful, otherworldly feeling that there is something there that religion pushers keep trying to shove down other people's throats (ironically enough). I've had information I never have could have possibly have known or ever read about pop into my mind, and I've had my prayers answered pretty consistantly.

 

BTW, I am emphatically against prostelyzation or pushing beliefs and I usually keep mine private because many people seem incapable of looking outside their own viewpoints and keep trying to "save" me (christians and atheists alike). If anybody here thinks I'm crazy, I really don't care. The question was asked.

 

But I'll say this much, I believe faith should be fluid. I don't have a problem with the idea of "oblivion" after death. Being "wrong" isn't going to damage me or who I am in the slightest. Honestly. I might become an Atheist someday too. I can't see it ever happening, but you never know. Because I don't think it really matters in the grand scheme of things what I worship anyway.

 

I really respect you, its not very easy to admit one is a theist, not a xian, and still has a relationship with god. People wants to put others in neat labels and people are more than labels, a belief system doesn't have to make sense to others, as long as it makes sense to you then that's all you need.

 

This is the trouble that I've had with xianity, the relationship with god part and the communication part, save for one instance which I realize was now a coincidence, there is no way that I could communicate with god. At times I thought that I had felt a presence, but now I just think it was my imagination and wishful thinking. I guess I never really "got" the relationship with god thing and I never will.

 

Xians encourage prayer and bible reading for communicating with god, but as a human being you just want more than that. I have accepted that there is no such relationship for me and never will be because I've tried so hard for so long and nothing ever really happened, and I just wonder hearing different experiences here, the mind is really powerful, and just how powerful is it when it comes to belief. Do we trick ourselves in and out of faith? I just got tired of the emptiness of me doing all the work and getting nothing from "god."

 

btw, Kurari no I don't think that you are crazy at all. I really commend you for speaking your peace, its really not easy, online or off.

 

 

That's actually a point taken in the book. There's more than a couple times Neale says, "But what if you're not God, you're just a voice in my head, my subconscious?" The answer is, so what if that is all God really is? If the ideas and lifestyles presented in the books work and lead to a better self-esteem and world, then who cares whether it was an actual God talking to us or just our better sense?

 

Now before anyone starts accusing me of promoting some kind of New-Agey world-wide sharia, I must point out that the books really don't say that much of anything, besides, Be as you are. It's not some dogmatic religion wrapped up with rules and laws and punishments and rewards. In fact, one key point made is that God wants nothing from us - not obedience, nor surrender, nor rigid conformity to some capricious divine "will". Our lives are what we create, nothing more, nothing less. And don't hate yourself for being human - you're a glorious example of life in motion. You're not better than anyone else, of course; but don't look at it as being just another face in a crowd, but a loving, glorious being among other loving, glorious beings. And for chrissakes, don't get into all this thinking that the good things in life are wrong.

 

It works for me, so I'll stick with it. If it doesn't work for you, that's all very fine and well.

 

You're one smart chick The Sage. I do see your point, the only thing is that I don't want to feel as if I'm talking to myself or an imaginary friend. I did that for years as a xian and I couldn't take anymore of it. And I agree, if there is a god then free will would let us do whatever we want with no punishment for not choosing god.

[Ouroboros]

I'm a nontheist and ignostic, but sometimes I'm a bit of egotheist. I believe that the only thing that I know of for sure, is that I, somehow, do exist. If it is real that I experience or not, really doesn't matter, because I do experience, and that is the only truth I know of.

 

All means of communication or transference of ideas or thoughts about the divine or thoughts of something metaphyscial, is limited to the boundaries of our language. Words change meanings and are not exact in defining what we think. So any words or descriptions of our existence is vague, and hence the definitions of a the supposed divine is also extremely vague and misleading. This just means that God can't be defined with other peoples words. Only I understand what I mean with the words I use. Only I can understand my god. So does God exist? Only in someones mind. The real question is "what is a mind"?

[BlueGiant]

I'm the one with the "doesn't give a flying fuck" line. Really, a signifigant amount of what I do and believe is based on something that I will freely admit is UPG (Unsubstantiated Personal Gnosis), i.e. something that screams to me: this is true. One should keep in mind that what sort of theology one believes is not a binary system, that there isn't just this god or none at all, and that concepts of god can be surprisingly varried.

 

It also works to fill in what I percieve to be gaps within material-based understanding.

 

I started re-examining what I believe and this is what I came up with. I have to admit that it is a real pain to remove years of mental programming, of buying into what I "should" believe, to try and start with a clean-slate again.

[The Sage Nabooru]

What I meant by that was many people claim that the "ancients" had specific knowledge of the Truth™. They didn't have any more access to the Truth™ than we do today. It's not that they had less, because I feel that what they were trying to get across were philosophies through metaphor and myth that were relevant to thier society and ways of life. The underlying message remains the same though as in the moral of the "Boy that Cried Wolf", but today we might say it as, "The Kid that Yelled Pit Bull!" (I actually like pit bulls...I just couldn't think of anything else!)

 

Oh man, you should try being in New Age circles for a while.....Everything was just so much better when the Aztecs/Mayans/Incas had all thirteen crystal skulls, before Atlantis went under, back when the Egyptians had perfected divine geometry.......The ancients, the golden age of man.

 

Lest we worry, though, since the Mayans were so incredibly "tuned in" and superintelligent, their calendar stops at the year 2012 when they must've known some kind of Second Golden Age was going to come along, and since the Egyptians, Atlanteans, Druids were supergeniuses too, they must've known something really cool will happen that year too! We're all in for a treat in six years! Maybe they'll find all the crystal skulls or something! ............ Puh-leeze.

 

Let me tell you......have you ever heard of NESARA? If not look it up on Wikipedia, on their "hoaxes" list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NESARA_conspiracy_theory It's the saddest most laughable thing you could ever read - it makes Scientology look halfway intelligent - and yet I know people who eat this shit up. Not only do they believe it, they're donating their little paychecks and credit-card miles to this chick. Why? Because she's all ALTERNATIVE-SPIRITUAL and into CHANNELING and talks about THE ANCIENTS and SAINTS and ALIENS and stuff! And if you don't buy it you're just PRIMITIVE and BACKWARD and you'll be LEFT BEHIND when the happy aliens come and you're all into DARK ENERGIES and shit!

[Fweethawt]

notblinded wrote:

No one had the answer...even the ancient folks.

??????????????They'd be the last to know I 'spec.

The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first...

 

Whatevertheheck that means...

 

Isn't there something in the bible that says something like that?

 

I think there is.

No, no...it's he who laughs last, laughs least. Or is it he who laughs least, laughs last?

He who laughs last ... didn't understand the joke.

Actually, you all have it wrong. It's, "He who laughs at a fart, ain't smelt it yet."

[Kurari]

I really respect you, its not very easy to admit one is a theist, not a xian, and still has a relationship with god. People wants to put others in neat labels and people are more than labels, a belief system doesn't have to make sense to others, as long as it makes sense to you then that's all you need.

 

This is the trouble that I've had with xianity, the relationship with god part and the communication part, save for one instance which I realize was now a coincidence, there is no way that I could communicate with god. At times I thought that I had felt a presence, but now I just think it was my imagination and wishful thinking. I guess I never really "got" the relationship with god thing and I never will.

 

Xians encourage prayer and bible reading for communicating with god, but as a human being you just want more than that. I have accepted that there is no such relationship for me and never will be because I've tried so hard for so long and nothing ever really happened, and I just wonder hearing different experiences here, the mind is really powerful, and just how powerful is it when it comes to belief. Do we trick ourselves in and out of faith? I just got tired of the emptiness of me doing all the work and getting nothing from "god."

 

btw, Kurari no I don't think that you are crazy at all. I really commend you for speaking your peace, its really not easy, online or off.

 

Thanks, Knightly, I really appreciate that.

 

There are many, many paths to inner peace. I think that's something most everyone strives for in life. God is not a necessary requirement to living a full, rich, and spiritually healthy life. Atheists are not "wrong."

 

The surity we feel in our beliefs don't amount to any kind of impact on anything as far as keeping the univers turning, so who believes in what is not worth the quibble. I've been reading and considering the atheistic arguments here very seriously, and it's made the point that our lives are very precious that much more clear to me. Making sure we take care of the here and now is the most important thing we can do as mortals.

 

And if oblivion is all we're destined for, then we're not there yet.

[garrisonjj]

There seems to be a good population of New Age/Pagan/other cafe-blends ex-Christians here. Could someone please explain how you get from one to the other. From my standpoint, it looks like an exchange of one myth for another, many of them highly dependent on divine revelation or just made up from some loose gossimer and spider webs that happened to be lying around.

 

I'm not attacking here, just trying to explain my confusion.

 

Despite my label for gods is not a godamn one, I still,deep down,think there is a higher power.I just don't care to worship or think that i as a mere mortal has any control over the situation.Religion is nothing but a fuckin circus created by man. Therefore, I don't know what my official label is.

[HadouKen24]

There seems to be a good population of New Age/Pagan/other cafe-blends ex-Christians here. Could someone please explain how you get from one to the other. From my standpoint, it looks like an exchange of one myth for another, many of them highly dependent on divine revelation or just made up from some loose gossimer and spider webs that happened to be lying around.

 

What kind of paganism are you talking about? Neo-paganism is just one kind. There's also Reconstructionist Paganism, and even non-religious forms of paganism. I've self-identified for a while as a pagan in a broad, not necessarily religious sense. Even if I don't necessarily engage in ancestor worship or sacrificing to the spirits and demigods which protect the family or city, I am pretty close to the attitudes from which those came out--as well as to the attitudes which criticized the old mythologies. In one sense, I suppose that one could characterize my mental life as something like the intellectual battle between Plato and the poets. Though that doesn't exactly work, since I feel more of a pull to the deities of Northern Europe than the Greek or Roman gods.

 

The problem with Christianity, really, is not that it is a myth. Myths give shape to one's life, whether or not they're true. (In one sense, worrying about whether a myth is "true" or not is to entirely miss the point.) The problem with Christianity is that it's a piss poor myth that tries to pretend it isn't, in fact, a myth. That's the whole point of the John 1--to present Christianity as logos rather than mythos, in the Greek terminology.

 

I do muck about a bit with Tarot cards and stuff, but I regard that as an entirely different thing. Mainly because I've seen some fairly convincing evidence that there's at least something to it. Nothing I could reproduce, so it's not something I'd pass off as science, strictly speaking, but what I've seen is good enough for me.

[The Paineful Truth]

(In one sense, worrying about whether a myth is "true" or not is to entirely miss the point.)

 

Then how does Truth fit in, in your philosophy and in your daily life? Is Truth not necessary to determine morality, or to determine the veracity of God/the gods who present your morality? Is it not necessary since it defines reality?

[Skankboy]

Is it not necessary since it defines reality?

 

I think 'truth' is an approximation of reality, but any kind of objective truth is unattainable due to the limitations of our perceptions and language.

 

Remember Obi-wan in Return of the Jedi? "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

 

IMOHO,

[Ouroboros]

I think 'truth' is an approximation of reality, but any kind of objective truth is unattainable due to the limitations of our perceptions and language.

Very well said. I like it.

[Skankboy]

Thanks Han, I thought you were going to comment on the Starwars quote...

[HadouKen24]

Then how does Truth fit in, in your philosophy and in your daily life? Is Truth not necessary to determine morality, or to determine the veracity of God/the gods who present your morality? Is it not necessary since it defines reality?

 

My morality is not dependent on any belief in God or gods. It is dependent on my beliefs about what kind of person it is best and most admirable to be.

 

In my experience, people who talk about Truth with a capital T general mean what they themselves believe, and why can't you accept it as Truth, too?

 

The truth is, I don't know what you mean by Truth in the first place. I thought you were probably a correspondence theorist, but then you said that Truth "defines reality." I have no idea what you might mean by that. It almost sounds like you have some kind of idealist metaphysic going there, but not many atheists are idealists (metaphysically speaking. I don't mean "holding to ideals."). So... yeah. You're going to have to tell me what you mean by Truth a little more clearly before I can answer that question.

[Ouroboros]

Thanks Han, I thought you were going to comment on the Starwars quote...

...Luke, I am your father...

 

I like the quotes from Spaceballs:

"Oh, the almighty Yogurt!"

"Nah, just plain Yogurt."

[woodsmoke]

Simply put...for some people...accepting that we live in an entirely mechanistic universe with no higher power whatsoever, no other levels of reality whatsoever etc. is as much a faith proposition as christianity. It is from that place that people like myself come from. Please don't misunderstand me, i'm not saying those who are atheists and have no beliefs whatsoever are living on "faith" What I AM saying is...what is more important than successfully deconverting and being "atheist" to be accepted fully by your peers is to be fucking honest with yourself and think for YOURSELF.

 

I'm glad you made the distinction there, the myth that all atheists are hard-liners who have (foolishly) decided that deitic and spiritual beliefs are not only unfounded but truly impossible irritates me nearly as much as those few who actually match that profile.

 

That said, I agree completely. There's a reason you don't see many prominent/populous atheist organizations. It's not about fitting in with the new clique, it's about figuring out what works for you and embracing your individuality.

[Minstrel]

Actually, I haven't selected another religion or religious philosophy since exiting Christianity. For the first few months, I was searching wildly through the writings of all the religions (even Islam - shudder), because of the huge void that seemed to have arisen...but, after a while, it seemed apparent that they all wanted me to take someone-else's word for it... I figured that if God really cared whether I (or any individual) found the right path...he would let me know. And since it seemed that all the paths I've found, claiming "divine" encounters, required that I submit to someone-else for the remainder of my journey...I just figure, I'd rather go to hell than serve (believe in) such a God.

Sorry...this may not be New-Agey-enough for the original postor...but, I do count myself an "Other" than atheist...

[trashy]

There seems to be a good population of New Age/Pagan/other cafe-blends ex-Christians here. Could someone please explain how you get from one to the other. From my standpoint, it looks like an exchange of one myth for another, many of them highly dependent on divine revelation or just made up from some loose gossimer and spider webs that happened to be lying around.

 

I'm not attacking here, just trying to explain my confusion.

 

Thanks for this post. I've been wondering the same thing.

 

Just don't ask about belief in ghosts!

[The Paineful Truth]

 

I think 'truth' is an approximation of reality, but any kind of objective truth is unattainable due to the limitations of our perceptions and language.

 

Remember Obi-wan in Return of the Jedi? "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

 

It's not that Truth is an approximation of reality, it's that our perceptions of reality/Truth are sometimes an approximation. Objective Truth is not dependent on our perception. The universe was here long before there was even an amoeba to observe it.

 

On the surface, this looks like I'm in disagreement with Obi-wan, but if we cling to a truth, it's probably because it isn't true in the first place. (I can't believe we're using Star Wars characters as source material, but if the shoe fits....)

 

HadouKen wrote:

My morality is not dependent on any belief in God or gods.

 

Neither is mine, but it is dependent on Truth. Any morality that isn't, something cobbled together out of feelings and emotions, would be irrational.

 

In my experience, people who talk about Truth with a capital T general mean what they themselves believe, and why can't you accept it as Truth, too?

 

I don't. Truth, both that which we know and what we don't know, is God, in the sense that God is the highest ideal, like money, fame or power are for some people. The only Truth I claim that we posess are facts and our individual consciousness, which certainly don't give any indication about whether God is a sentient omni-present being or not. There is a lot more Truth for us to discover and create than what we posess thus far.

 

My only dogma or metaphysic is the supremacy of Truth, whatever it actually is.

 

The truth is, I don't know what you mean by Truth in the first place. I thought you were probably a correspondence theorist, but then you said that Truth "defines reality." I have no idea what you might mean by that.

 

Whatever is real is true, but Truth also includes our individual impressionist perceptions (which is only applicable to individuals).

 

It almost sounds like you have some kind of idealist metaphysic going there, but not many atheists are idealists (metaphysically speaking. I don't mean "holding to ideals."). So... yeah. You're going to have to tell me what you mean by Truth a little more clearly before I can answer that question.

 

Pursuing the Truth is not idealistic, but trying to convince people that we should all pursue it is. To use a quick analogy, Truth is white light composed of at least four primary colors: natural law, justice, love and beauty--pure objectivity blending to pure subjectivity, but all part of the whole. Yin and yang. My personal belief is in deism, not in atheism, one being almost as likely as the other, however.

[HadouKen24]

Neither is mine, but it is dependent on Truth. Any morality that isn't, something cobbled together out of feelings and emotions, would be irrational.

 

How exactly do you plan on going about finding a morality based entirely on reason? Even Immanuel Kant couldn't quite manage that one; even after he thought he had expunged everything but pure reason from his morality, it still popped up.

 

Whatever is real is true, but Truth also includes our individual impressionist perceptions (which is only applicable to individuals).

 

Dude, I still have no idea what you mean by "Truth."

 

I tried to be subtle. Now I'm going to be more straightforward.

 

I think it's clear by now that you don't really know what you mean by the word "Truth." "Whatever is real" is true? Come now, that's ridiculous. You're saying that my microphone here is true. But... it's not. That doesn't make any sense. No, what's real is that my microphone is here next to my keyboard. Only statements can be true or false in any strict, rigorous sense. And we can't go mixing up different senses of the word, or we'll make silly logical bait-and-switch errors and never know quite what we're talking about.

 

But it's silly to get hung up on "Truth." What you should really be concerned with is how you can know what is true. And... I really doubt you've done much study in that area. I recommend studying epistemology.

 

Pursuing the Truth is not idealistic, but trying to convince people that we should all pursue it is. To use a quick analogy, Truth is white light composed of at least four primary colors: natural law, justice, love and beauty--pure objectivity blending to pure subjectivity, but all part of the whole. Yin and yang. My personal belief is in deism, not in atheism, one being almost as likely as the other, however.

 

Bwah? Now I have no idea what you're talking about. I figure you're just taking the things you value most--or at very least think you should value most--and lumping them under the umbrella of "Truth," with the capital T just to lend it some artificial Significance.

 

I told you, I didn't mean idealist in the sense of being idealistic. I was talking about the philosophical position know as idealism.

[Asimov]

Neither is mine, but it is dependent on Truth. Any morality that isn't, something cobbled together out of feelings and emotions, would be irrational.

 

How exactly do you plan on going about finding a morality based entirely on reason? Even Immanuel Kant couldn't quite manage that one; even after he thought he had expunged everything but pure reason from his morality, it still popped up.

 

 

Kant was batshit insane.

[Ouroboros]

Kant was batshit insane.

You mean, Kant do shit?

[HadouKen24]

Kant was batshit insane.

 

Not really. The man was brilliant, whether you agree with him or not. His ethics is a load of bollocks, but his metaphysics is the crowning achievement of Enlightenment philosophy. Though that does indicate something about Enlightenment thinking (whose basic emphases and values you seem to have been influenced by, Asimov, whether you realize it or not). Namely, that Enlightenment thinkingmay have been brilliant at the sciences, but failed to understand its relation or application to human life.