I believe it as soon as I see it

Credendovidis · Mar 31, 2008, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by simoneaugie

I believe that we cannot conceive of/find God because we keep looking at, or away from a particular religion or spot on the wall. We are all part of God. Yes, he is out there, or up there, or in here.

Precisely : that is what you BELIEVE. But is that reality?
.

Originally Posted by simoneaugie

We wage war, to kill the others that we disagree with. We are killing ourselves. What a waste of time and resources.

I note that the claimed-to-be Christian US Nation is waging war nearly worldwide, and killing the others that you all disagree with.
But I as non-Christian do not wage war. Nor do I as a non-Christian kill those who I disagree with.

But I agree with your line : What a waste of time and resources.
Indeed. But not only a waste. How immoral!
;)

ordinaryguy · Apr 1, 2008, 05:39 AM

Originally Posted by Credendovidis

Precisely : that is what you BELIEVE.

The etymology of the word BELIEVE. Is interesting:

O.E. belyfan, earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (W.Saxon) "believe," from P.Gmc. *ga-laubjan "hold dear, love," from PIE base *leubh- "to like, desire" (see love).

Originally Posted by Credendovidis

But is that reality?

Is anything we "hold dear" real? What do you hold dear, Credendovidis? Isn't it your "vidis"--your point of view? That certainly is one of the things I hold dear for myself, even though there's no "objective proof" that mine is in any way superior or preferred to anyone else's.

Credendovidis · Apr 1, 2008, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

... the word BELIEVE is interesting: Is anything we "hold dear" real? What do you hold dear, Credendovidis?

Any BELIEVES one may have MAY BE REAL. Of course. But to have these believes getting accepted as real by other not co-believers, one should provide objective supporting evidence for that. And that is precisely why I do not try to proselytize my personal world view onto others. Unlike those Christians do whom I refer to here in this topic, who attack me and/or talk down on me, all because I am not one of them.
.
My "Credendovidis" handles shows my approach : I BELIEVE it when I see it. At the same time I do not try to convince anyone else that what I believe or not believe is factual or "the one-and-only-truth".
.
So what do I hold dear (i.e. : what do I believe)?
I hold dear that for everything there will be a good natural reason/explanation. Some of the explanations were found thousands of years ago. Other were only discovered recently by increasing scientific understanding. Again others may only be found in the future. And may be there even will be certain things for which we can not find any explanations.
But on itself that is no reason for me to introduce and BELIEVE in some deity/deities, for whom in my personal views is no reason to exist, as nature seems to be quite capable of getting to all that there is now without any deity or deities involved. And science is increasingly supportive of that view with real objective scientific findings and Theories explaining that what still needed to be explained on a scientific basis. Note that a Scientific Theory is an objective supported thesis, with near "factual" value.
.
Of course I can not prove a negative. I can not (and do not feel any reason to) prove that no deity/deities exist.
Those who BELIEVE in a deity (a positive and therefore much easier to prove belief) should continue to BELIEVE in the deity/deities of their preference (no problem).
But if they insist that what they BELIEVE should be the reality for all others also, I always ask for objective supported evidence for that wild claim. So far I still have to receive the first ever objective evidence. That seems a rather problematic item to provide...
.
Just as you do I not hold that my believes are superior or preferred to anyone else's believes. Therefore I do not make wild claims based on that what I believe to be correct (as in true). I always make sure that when I make a statement that I hold to be true, that I can back that statement up with objective supporting evidence. And not with empty metaphysical and/or religious claims.
.

simoneaugie · Apr 1, 2008, 11:21 PM

Reality, I hold dear, is both tangible and intangible. It cannot be "pinned down" and written about, thus supporting a belief, because it defies classification and a complete description.

Does physics not support this duality? I'm thinking about how a light photon is both a wave and a particle. You can describe the experimental results, but not really explain the phenomenon. And light seems to precognitively go where it can, not where it can't.

A light photon can shine upon a religious person and on one who can't say, "I believe." The sun is warm on both. It may be a particle or a wave but we just feel the warmth and have light to see by. We are limited by our reason. (And possibly the fact that we did not bring our electron microscope to the beach.)

Socrates is one of the fathers of the age of reason. But to make reason, he leaves out all ideas that do not follow logic. Reason cannot explain reality, but it thinks that it can. Reality does not follow a pattern that our minds can grasp. Some follow religion to explain the gaps.

Credendovidis · Apr 2, 2008, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by simoneaugie

.... Reason cannot explain reality, but it thinks that it can. Reality does not follow a pattern that our minds can grasp. Some follow religion to explain the gaps.

First of all reason does not think. Humans think.
.
Secondly : reality is the state of things as they are or appear to be, rather than as one wish them to be. Note that religion (based on belief) tends to involve more of that "wish them to be".
.
Maybe reasoning can not explain all of reality (or better : what appears to be reality), but most of our reality is properly and objective-supportively explained by reason.
Some may indeed follow religion to explain the gaps. But these religious explanations have an even smaller chance to be reality, as they fail any objective support. That grey area is small and gets smaller every day.
;)

talaniman · Apr 2, 2008, 04:45 AM

I do agree that as man's knowledge grows and he can explain what was a mystery, his attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, will be affected in many ways. But as we wait for that knowledge, we can only deal with what we have, the best way possible. For now we have a structure for our government, which is changing and growing and our religion, which is going through the same changes albeit slower. They both are for order, and consistency, and stability, basically for the whole of society, until we discover a better way, or improve on the way it is. There is room for many beliefs, thoughts, and endeavors, as we learn more about ourselves, and the culture of others, and the conflicts that come with change, and no compromise.

Donna Mae · Apr 2, 2008, 05:57 PM

[QUOTE=Credendovidis
It is only on the Christianity board that one feels that constant attempt to put pressure towards conversion.
Why can (some) Christians not understand that one can be interested in their religion without any need or wish to become a Christian? Their pushy approach only adds up to resentment.
;)[/QUOTE]

You won't like my response any more than you did Chuck's, but I think it needs to be said again.

Christians know what the devastation will be in the end. We know what is going to happen to unbelievers. We care! We do what we do--because we don't want to see anyone lost.
I know, I know, you don't believe in hell, but we do. We know it is a real place and we are doing the very best we can to keep people from ending up there. I hate being pushy but it has to be said before it's to late.

Credendovidis · Apr 2, 2008, 06:18 PM