jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (109 posts)

Let me hear your religious philosophy

  1. maplethorpej profile image80
    maplethorpejposted 7 years ago

    I want to start a conversation with all faiths about belief. I'm particularly concerned with understanding how people from different faiths view each other.

    I'm not religious in the typical sense of the word, although I do believe in a creator. Whether or not he/she has any effect on humans here on Earth, I'm undecided. But it's difficult for me to understand why people are so obsessed with pronouncing their God the one and only God. If you take a second to think about it, it doesn't come down to whether there's a God or not, but what that God might be. Despite your religions interpretation, that God would be the same for all of us.

    So, back to my question. Why is the belief in God prioritized below whom that God is? I think it's an amazing thing to have faith because it makes you contemplate life. There are a lot of people who try to skim by with their religious ideologies, but people can usually pick their arguments apart fairly quick.

    How would you find faith in a higher power without your books? Why can't we all come to our own (and possibly same) conclusion by mere contemplation? Why do so many people have to be told what to believe?

    Your thoughts...

    1. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      i believe it offers people a means of answers and hope.  not a bad thing, it helps many people.  i personally cannot bring myself to believe in anything, and have tried.  Whether it be i am looking for proof or something that won't dictate what i must do, i am unable to trust.

      This is no judgement on anyones religious beliefs, it would not change my opinion of anyone.  i wonder often if this would ever change.  but let's allow others to believe what they choose to.

      cheers

      kimberly

      1. maplethorpej profile image80
        maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, I'm not trying to tear apart anyone's religion whatsoever. I too don't follow any religion myself and so it's a bit difficult to understand the absolute faith that I observe in others.

        There are so many different religions praying to different Gods. The funny thing is that they're all looking and praying to the same thing, yet feel more comfortable not acknowledging it. Why is that?

      2. maplethorpej profile image80
        maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I don't understand what I stated that made you upset? I wanted to have a discussion on the various beliefs. Yes, I am stating my own opinion in order to challenge others, but that's how you learn WHY people believe what they do.

        I do apologize for stating that anyone is 'ignorant' in their religious beliefs. It was clearly the wrong word.

        I just think it's all interesting and fun to talk about, that's all. There are no ramifications of a 'wrong' belief, or lack thereof.

    2. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Same reason they do not believe what they are told or believe what they are not told; even more tell others what they believe is not what they are told or told not to tell others what to believe -it is called the human condition. The endless parallel of the Need To Know aka the human consciousness.

      1. profile image0
        kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        and the weed.

        1. profile image0
          Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol

    3. Don W profile image82
      Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      [ramble]
      In my opinion: Two assumptions, 1) what we can observe is all there is. It constitutes "reality". 2) what we can observe is not all there is. It's does not constitute "reality".

      The theism/non theism debate boils down to these assumptions. Atheists/anti-theists make the first assumption. Theists make the second assumption. Entire belief systems and approaches to truth are built on top of these assumptions.

      Both are guesses. Subscribers to each will argue their guess is a "better" guess because of convoluted arguments involving X,Y and Z. They remain just guesses. Subscribers to each will characterise the other as flawed in some way for making the assumption they are making. They remain just guesses. Subscribers to each will characterise the other as being the cause of problems in the world. They remain just guesses.

      These two assumptions remain just guesses. However those making the assumptions generally tend to refuse to acknowledge they are in fact just guessing. Why? Because that would mean they are the same as the others who are just guessing. Human beings need an "other". It's a biological imperative. We have a greater chance of survival if we form groups that co-operate. Exclusion is a prerequisite of groups. Those "groups" would have once been the equivalent of a school of fish or a pack of wolves. They became tribes. They are now countries, political parties, religions etc. They allow for the characterisation of "others". People who don't belong in our group.

      The key factor in all these groups is that essentially they are the same, because we are the same. We simply construct "others" because it's in our nature to do so. If it was not republican vs democrat, theist vs non theist, north korea vs south korea, it would be something else, e.g. blue eyes vs brown eyes. The need for "others" is no different to the need to reproduce in that they are both biological imperatives. And the ultimate expression of exclusion is violence towards "others". Most acts of violence and/or war are perpetrated not in the name of religion or politics, but in the name of "otherness".

      In a nutshell our beliefs and social constructs are intimately intertwined with our biology. That doesn't make a case for against theism/non theism. It just suggests that our behaviour and beliefs are not as independent of our biological nature as we'd like to think.
      [/ramble]

      1. Cagsil profile image59
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I find a flaw in your thinking, just to let you know.

        Your two assumptions isn't actual truth.

        Your first claim on assumption (1) is wrong. There is no assumption that what we can observe is all there is, simply on the basis that science continues to explore the unknown. Thus, leaving people not only to observe what has been discovered, but open to more things being found out.

        On that basis alone, your theory(post) falls apart.

        Just a thought.

        1. Don W profile image82
          Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          For accuracy's sake the first assumption constitutes the theory of knowledge known as empiricism, not science. Although science is based on this theory of knowledge.

          By 'what we can observe' I mean assertions for which empirical evidence is possible. Not every assertion fits that category. Some assertions preclude such evidence. So the first assumption is the assumption that everything we can have knowledge of in a particular way constitutes "reality" and anything we can't have knowledge of in that way, doesn't.

          In other words there are some assertions that an empirical approach to knowledge can't discover the truth of, not because we haven't developed sufficiently to do so, but because of the nature of the assertions.

          1. Cagsil profile image59
            Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Even by your description, it sounds like you are running yourself in circles. But, I'll leave it at that. wink

            1. Don W profile image82
              Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Fair enough. It can be tricky though. Think of this way. Empiricism as an approach to knowledge is limited in scope. Some people make assertions that fall outside that scope. Those assertions are considered by empiricists as not part of reality, therefore unknowable, therefore not justified. So the assumption is that nothing outside the scope of empiricism is knowable. Don't know if that clarifies things for you. Was worth a try.

              1. Cagsil profile image59
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I am not exactly sure that is accurate. But, okay.
                Well, if something is unknowable, that would mean that it does not exist within reality, which is knowable, based on the existence of things that which are real or exist already.

                Reality exists. Reality exists free of thoughts, desires, will or wishes. Reality is all knowable.
                That again sounds like you are running in circles. I understand that something that is unknown, isn't knowable presently, but does not mean it cannot be known or disproved.
                I'm not trying to be difficult, but my education is limited in itself, so some things take longer to grasp. And, again, it appears as if running in circles, as I said above and before.

                So, I guess it's beyond my grasp. hmm *I don't really believe anything is beyond my grasp, but via your explanation just isn't doing it.

                I do appreciate the effort, but I'll have to look into it further on my own. wink

    4. figment profile image79
      figmentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I think your hot!

      1. Cagsil profile image59
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hey Figment, interesting "religious" philosophy. lol lol lol

        1. figment profile image79
          figmentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          big_smile

      2. figment profile image79
        figmentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Oh wait .... you wanted to know what I thought about religion and God.  People are going to have their own beliefs...some more judgmental than others, some kinder than others.  We are all the same in this one one big galaxy - how ever the hell we got here...I have know clue, but I do feel like  Mother Earth (my God) is pissed and ready to kick ass.

    5. Jerami profile image75
      Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I am speaking from a basic, basic level of understanding.       
         If we take into acount the people that have had out of body experiences, seen Ghosts, seen flying sausers,   Have been in touch with some sort of higher inteligence than our own
      (in any number of ways); I think that this would include a large majority of people today.

         To me these things point to a different dimention of reality than what we are unequipted to understand! 
         Some people are so full of them selves, cause they know everything, that they can not accept the truth if it bit their leg off!! 

         The God of Abraham would have to be from a diffrent dimention of reality than we are living in!   DUH;
         He might be the captain of all aliens that fly in UFO's I do not know?   
         God is that higher inteligence that trys to lead us to a higher plane of existence.

         As I said;  This is the least of what he is!

         Anyone that believes that mankind is on the top of the totum pole deserves only one  HA; though I might not be able to restrain my self and they hear a bunch of them.

    6. Kimberly Bunch profile image58
      Kimberly Bunchposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Since I was five years old I have discovered spirituality. How? By walking out of my body and viewing my solid body laying on the operating table. I have had countless paranormal and supernatural experiences my whole life. It tells me -- in one summary is that there is a divine being, and a spirit world, and we are spirit beings. By life experience alone I believe from my own life journey that there is a maker of the universe, of us and an aspect of that creator lives in all living things. It is our choice to access our God Consciousness or not. That spark.

      Human beings are all linked together by the God Head. WE are all connected. We are all spirit beings having a human experience for our soul's growth. That is what I have learned from my own experiences that may appear as hallucinations by some but to me they are called: visions/remote viewing/mediumistic abilities/clairvoyance/ clairaudience/ etc..

      Someone can say it was psychosis or some other absurdity but one doesn't go through life having countless supernatural experiences that all equal to a heavenly realm for nothing.

      Spirituality leads to love without the religious hate involved. There is a big difference between spirituality and religion. To be spiritual isn't the same as being religious.

      1. Beelzedad profile image58
        Beelzedadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        If they have a psychosis, they would go through life believing in those things. There are many other explanations that don't rely on things that violate physical laws, but it seems the one most claimed is the supernatural, which does.

        Funny how all those other explanations just sit idly by, being ignored. smile

    7. pylos26 profile image76
      pylos26posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Don’t have one…but uncle Janus said that anything could fly if it had a big enough motor.

  2. wilmiers77 profile image60
    wilmiers77posted 7 years ago

    Contemplating to heaven is out. Since God is an Infinite Potential, we can't behold Him at once. It is impossible to please God without faith. Yes, you can pick me apart if you haven't tried the faith. One must accept Jesus' love and teachings. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

    Contemplation goes as far as listing evidence for and against; pros and con. When one discovers that it takes more faith to be an atheist than a believer, than faith must be exercised.

    Monotheistic God made more sense to me even with my training in science. Jesus simply made all the sense in the world to me. I can defend my faith until the cows come home, but the other person must choose faith in his own spirit.

  3. maplethorpej profile image80
    maplethorpejposted 7 years ago

    I see what you're saying, but it's not really the response I was looking for. The Bible doesn't have all of the answers and you never knew Jesus. Regardless, you follow his 'teachings' and believe you are a good person. Is this really the only way?

    There has to be something more to life than being told what to believe and what to do.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      But - you are asking for a "religious" philosophy - which means getting it from "religion."

      Perhaps if you ask for a "philosophy" instead?

      1. maplethorpej profile image80
        maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yea, but specifically pertaining to the religious claims such as God, the afterlife, good and evil, etc.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Cultural and tribal influences. I don't believe in a god, am pretty sure there cannot be a conscious "afterlife," and do not recognize the concepts of "good" and "evil" outside the constructs we have made society-wise. This bothers a lot of religionists when I say that - because they recognize "inherently evil," Acts and I do not.

          Let's face it - following what you were told is a lot easier than thinking it up for yourself.

          1. maplethorpej profile image80
            maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I agree with you about good and evil. People don't like believing that humans exhibit human characteristics (good and evil) when they can easily justify them as supernatural. But, if there isn't a God, then why does anything exist whatsoever? To me, it seems the only person that can answer that question is God.

            1. Cagsil profile image59
              Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Ask yourself one question, so you can judge whether or not, your previous question is actually valid or need be answer.

              Why would it matter to know to your own personal individual existence?

              Life does not require a god or worshiping of a god to be lived. wink

              1. maplethorpej profile image80
                maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                No, no one needs a God to worship in order to experience life, but the problem I have with atheism is that it asserts the same thing that religion does, in the opposite sense. We won't ever figure out if there is a God or not. You can believe in one if you'd like, but to be entirely certain that there isn't a God is, in my opinion, more ignorant than to assert there is one.


                It's easy to criticizes religion for many of it's wild claims, but atheists don't provide much inspiration for being alive...

                1. Cagsil profile image59
                  Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  It isn't ignorant to support the belief that there is no god. Reality dictates the truth of no god. Those make the claim of something outside of reality known to humankind, is the chosen ignorance of believers. To focus on anything outside of reality is foolish.
                  Inspiration comes from within, not from some group. Meaning of life and purpose of life is not a guidance from others people are supposedly to undertake. Both are for people to put in place in their own life. smile

                2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Ah - now we are getting to the nub of things. Despite the fact that you are "not religious in the typical sense of the word," - you need to believe in a god to have inspiration for being alive and not believing in one is "ignorant."

                  Why can't you just enjoy being alive?

                  1. maplethorpej profile image80
                    maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    I enjoy being alive very much.

                    I understand now why you both are atheists: You've focused your attention solely on what can be known in this reality. That is obviously perfectly fine and I have no reason to believe either of you have bad intentions.

                    I enjoy believing that we aren't the most intelligent, superior beings in existence even if I don't have any evidence to back it up.

                    Neither of you can be convinced of any other ideology, but what's so bad about agnosticism? Why would you rather choose absolute knowledge of God's non-existence over simply stating that you cannot know?

                3. the pink umbrella profile image71
                  the pink umbrellaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  create your own inspiration, or draw it from the people you love, and the sense of purpose you have every day.

            2. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well - that is where religion comes from. You are just at the first step, because - having assumed this god - now you need to give him characteristics. wink I see you already decided He needs to be Capitalized, and is a Person. All you need to do now is tell us what He wants. lol

              Why does there have to be a god for anything to exist?

              1. maplethorpej profile image80
                maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Your logic is sound but your conclusion is merely what you want it to be, not what it in fact is, for that cannot be known.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I did not draw any conclusions. Merely made an observation.

                  I have observed that:

                  You have assumed a god.
                  You have decided He needs to be capitalized and is a person.
                  He knows the answer to why things exist.

                  I merely pointed out that this is the past progression of religious development and you are being true to form.

                  1. maplethorpej profile image80
                    maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    That's actually pretty cool that you pointed that out! smile

    2. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You replied to me  in the exact opposite way about what i said?

      The answer you weren't looking for yet you say curious of peoples thoughts?

      I thought it could be an interesting thread until now.

      Thanks for not reading my post and just saying YOUR opinion, clearly what your looking for, no different than the behaviors of those you are starting to insult.  Judgement is  just fabulous.

      This is the smallest amount of power, I have ever seen go to someone's head

      Good Bye, no disrespect

      Have a good day, sorry you missed my views

      hhers

      Kimberly  smile

    3. maplethorpej profile image80
      maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      LOL hmm I am a bit hungover and was being distracted by my roommates while I was writing this haha. As you can tell, my train of thought was a bit sporadic. Sorry about that!!

  4. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    Essentially, we all live in a yellow submarine.

    1. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      and the smart ones take the blue pills not the red ones that seem obvious to others when taken

      1. Rishy Rich profile image77
        Rishy Richposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah but we usually dont get the blue pill

        1. profile image0
          kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol  lol   lol   lol

          You must know where to seek and bring your sword as it can be dangerous, that and twenty bucks 

          lol

          1. Rishy Rich profile image77
            Rishy Richposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            lol...sword wont be enough...now a days they have got suicide bombers for us. Either u take the red one or you die!!

  5. cheaptrick profile image72
    cheaptrickposted 7 years ago

    "You can tell you have created God in your own Image when God hates all the same people you do".
    The final level of matter consists of Bosons which are made up of charges[not anything physical]that maintain there relationships due to the influence of the Higgs Boson...also known as the Strange-let or God particle...What ever the Higgs Boson consists of...is God.
    Or it could be"Some old dude with a beard that does things for you if you pray hard enough".
    The behavior of Bosons is the cutting edge of Quantum Physics.It will be interesting to see what this baby branch of Physics will reveal about the nature of"Being"and consciousness...and where the hell is the"Observer"located in the body?No one seems to know.

    1. Dave Barnett profile image55
      Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      There is a deeper understanding, the path I try to follow. The connectivity that all things in this particular universe share. On earth, we are in an ecosystem, and to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, therefore, whatever we do to our peice of the world, has a bearing on every other peice. Man disrupts the balance because we are caught between what we were, and what we are becoming. Our wold is in a solar system, much the same as the ecosystem, and that is in a galactic system. Each is effected by our presence. The universe, as a whole, is a massive energetic, entity. We cannot define what life really is because we veiw it from the perspective of a very small species, on a very small planet, in an unremarkable solar grouping. The symbiosis which is a requirement for our existence, is akin to the forest which one cannot see, because the trees obscure our vision. My veiw is simply this. Life is a characteristic of this universe, therefore the universe contains life, therefore the universe IS alive AND connected. We just don't comprehend at this time what amounts to something Jesus said God is in you, and you are in God. Scientists will tell us the same thing. We are in the universe, and the universe is in us. Finally, A body in motion tends to stay in motion, and a body at rest, tends to stay at rest. Tells us that in all likelihood, the universe has ALWAYS been in motion. Eternal Spirit I.E. "God"

      1. maplethorpej profile image80
        maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Well stated! I like the forest analogy: our vision is obscured by the trees. It's amazing how little we know...

      2. cheaptrick profile image72
        cheaptrickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Very well said...now try to explain it to others.
        Solipsism is the order of the day...find your way out and you will be famous!...And please explain the solution to the measurement problem.Once you do that perhaps we can move on to reality...if reality even exists as an absolute.I like the way you think...at last,a worthy mind to banter with.
        GRINS:)))

      3. cheaptrick profile image72
        cheaptrickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Boy am I with you!The organisational essence that keeps this universe..esss in relationship and therefore our existence is God in my opinion.The term God removed from the"old guy with a beard" stereotype is the ineffable unknowable ultimate ISness that Christ was trying to get people to understand IMO."for have I not told ye that ye are All gods"Don't remember chapter and verse or even new or old testament but that one was burned into my mind.In a very real and physical Quantum way we Are all one.The photo show of the molecular changes in water when emotions were focused on it are Spectacular![done in Japan by a Zen master I believe].they beg the question...If thoughts can reform the shape of water molecules...What do they do to Us...and others?...apparently Love really is the answer to the worlds problems!

        I'm gonna go to Scullys Pub Right Now!...And Find Somebody to LOVE!!!

  6. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    The bottom line is we are all Christians here.

    1. Cagsil profile image59
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      lol

    2. maplethorpej profile image80
      maplethorpejposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, I just realized that this was posted in the "Christianity, the Bible and Jesus" category... my bad.

      I heard that Martin Luther was anti-Semitic. Is that true whatsoever?

      1. Dave Barnett profile image55
        Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        S'o.k. by me, I just go to whatever intrigues.

        1. Dave Barnett profile image55
          Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          In WW2, the papacy sat silently by as Hitler eradicated all those he felt ere inferior.

          1. Greek One profile image77
            Greek Oneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Hitler.. there is an atheist for ya!

            1. Dave Barnett profile image55
              Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Actually, he considered himself a christian.

              1. Greek One profile image77
                Greek Oneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                oh please.. he was nothing of the sort...

                he had a Messiah complex, and would say what it took to get political support, but he wast a follower of any organized religion

      2. Greek One profile image77
        Greek Oneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Since Martin Luther wasn't Greek Orthodox.. he wasn't REALLY Christian, so it doesn't matter smile

  7. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    "There could be alien species living in other galaxies that are far more intelligent than us. We wouldn't worship them, would we?"

    Well actually, I think a lot of us would lol..

    http://www.thedirectorscutradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/trekkie_inspirational.jpg

    1. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      not more intelligent than me though, eh?

      1. Greek One profile image77
        Greek Oneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        can YOU fix a warp drive?  hmmmmmmmmmmmmm??

      2. Adult Content profile image54
        Adult Contentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Certainly nowhere near as sexy!

        Seriously though I find it amusing that people would even bother sharing their personal religious beliefs in a place where many use nothing but a screenname.

  8. maplethorpej profile image80
    maplethorpejposted 7 years ago

    As far as aliens go, anyone hear of the Ancient Astronaut theory? It's quite interesting. I wouldn't say it's impossible but hard to imagine. If aliens descended upon Earth, they would be the closest thing we could possibly know to Gods.

    1. Dave Barnett profile image55
      Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I cannot conceive of a species that is so  advanced as to cross interstellar space to build stuff out of stone blocks. I look for another answer, unless someone digs up an X-wing fighter someplace!

    2. Greek One profile image77
      Greek Oneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      As my ex girlfriend used to say to me...

      "The are living beings that come out of Uranis that can just not be explained"

      1. Dave Barnett profile image55
        Dave Barnettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry, just saw my proctologist. Have you checked your'n

    3. Beelzedad profile image58
      Beelzedadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Space travel really isn't possible for the great distances that have to covered and the fact that any space vehicle cannot attain light speed or beyond. Way too many other issues arise when we take into consideration biological entities living in space for very long stretches of time. Add to that the fact that any alien species traveling in space would only come across the earth by sheer chance with astronomical odds against it. smile

  9. profile image0
    Over The Hillposted 7 years ago

    Thanks Don W.

    1. Don W profile image82
      Don Wposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      For what?

      1. Cagsil profile image59
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hey Don W, I'm only guessing here, but I think Over The Hill was appreciating your response. wink

  10. profile image0
    china manposted 7 years ago

    We are part of the Universe in the same way as our brain is part of us - we are the Universe becoming aware of itself.

    Maybe we will start to grow up soon.

  11. Jerami profile image75
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    When we consider the proponderence of 10,000 pieces of circumstancial evidence one piece at a time and exclude it, for lack of absolute proof, Do this one piece at a time and we will never grow up. 

    .

    1. Cagsil profile image59
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Jerami, not to butt into your conversation...however, I found something interesting in what you said.

      I'm just want to see if I can take it a step further...?

      "When we consider the proponderence of 10,000 pieces of circumstantial evidence one piece at a time and exclude it, for lack of absolute proof" I would like to point out that absolute proof is the only foundation to build or work on growth. Otherwise, everything is conjecture or supposition, based on assumptions. What is real? Everything built or developed or discovered, is our objective reality. All knowledge known to humanity is all knowable. Which means it can be learned by all.

      "Do this one piece at a time and we will never grow up." There is a reason for many branches of science, each working on a different part of reality. Each exploring new areas to bring new knowledge to others. We discard only what's not needed or useful and incorporate everything new.

      Just a thought. smile

      1. Jerami profile image75
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Lets say that my neighbor was murdered in his home.

           He and I was seen fighting two days earlier. That is absolute proof of nothing so we have to forget about it.

           He was shot with a shotgun, I own a shotgun. A lot of people own shotguns so this proves nothing. So we forget about this cause it is proof of nothing.

           My other neighbors believe that my wife was having an affair with my neighbor. No proof, just suspicions. Do not consider this as any proof so we must didmiss this.

          My fingerprints were found on a glass that was sitting on his coffee table.  It might have been left from two days earlier?
        proves nothing so we disregard this fact.

           Gun powder on my hands ... I had just gotten home from hunting.  Proves nothing so forget it.

           Each individual piece of evidence in itself proves nothing, but put all of them together, and the timeline fits, and it appears to prove my guilt.
          So my question is ...  when is it enough circumstantial evidence to be considered as Proof?

           My point is that in Daniel 9 Gabriel says that 62 weeks is the same as 568 years. How do I prove this to be true or untrue?
           And what difference does it make?
           If this concept were to be tested...  There will be 10,000 pieces of circumstantial evidence that fit together like a jigsaw puzzle making a complete picture.
           But when each piece is examined in and of itself, it will not carry enough weight to prove anything.  One brick does not a building make!
           But when they are ALL gathered together as a whole and put in the right order, ya wouldn't want to jump off of that building cause it would be so tall.

           I am not speaking of proving the existence of God.
           That is a different subject to be considered after the facts as written in the bible are understood in their correct prospective.  "Uninterpreted"
            Does it tell a story that can be considered as coherent.  My answer is YES!
           But it isn't the same story as "Religion" has been teaching it for the last 1600 years. 
           My question is WHY does theologians NOT want to even  consider the 62 weeks in prophesy = 568 years?

           I believe it is because it is too revealing.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Not in my book he doesn't. Gabriel says no such thing in Daniel's dreams. Where are you getting this Jerami? Is an angel telling you into your head?

          1. Jerami profile image75
            Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Daniel 9:23   At the beginning of thy supplications the Commandment came forth.

            9:25  know therefore that from the going forth of the commandment ... until Messiah the Prince shall be 69 weeks.

            9:26  and it shall be 62 weeks then he will be cut off (killed)

            Daniel had this vision in 538 BC.

            568 years later Jesus was killed.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Right. So you are making it up when you say "Gabriel says that 62 weeks is the same as 568 years."

              You are "interpreting" it, based on a date which is by now means agreed upon by anyone. I thought you were against that sort of thing?

              You also have a bad translation - because my book says "know therfore and underftand that from the going forth of the commandement to reflore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Meffiah the Prince, shall be feven weekes". 7 weeks - not 69 weeks.

              You are also interpreting "cut off" to mean killed and neglecting to mention that the city was supposed to be destroyed by a flood and "the ende therof shall be with a flood " and "unto the ende of warre" (I still do not know what that is supposed to mean.)

              The Jews do not agree that Jesus was the "messiah," and I have never ever found anything to prove the man even existed. So - what do you have in that case?

              Hopes?

  12. cherilsword profile image61
    cherilswordposted 7 years ago

    What is belief? Is belief a fact or is it a supposition in how a person feels about their faith in God? What is faith? Faith is the substance of things hoped for. What is the substance of what is hoped for? Obviously the thing the person believes will give them a cause of what they want because they cannot supply this for themselves. Religion is thus a way to define the substance that God will supply for us because we do not know how to supply this for ourselves. What do we believe we cannot supply for ourselves that God can supply for us? This is called religion. Whatever works best for the faith to attain the substance or purpose for a cause is what religion is for.....now, spirituality, that is a different matter.

  13. Onusonus profile image85
    Onusonusposted 7 years ago

    God always has and always will speak through his Prophets.

  14. akirchner profile image93
    akirchnerposted 7 years ago

    I have been in every spectrum I would say in my 56+ years from ultra-religious to non-religious and I do believe that religion is something that is very personal to all of us. 

    To me, religion means that you believe in something greater than you and that you understand that being here is a gift.  It is not something to be wasted or taken lightly - it is an opportunity to do something to mark the time that you were here.  Not meaning that you are to be famous or well liked - just that you did 'the right thing' and you did it almost always without fail.  We all know what 'the right thing' is I feel.

    My philosophy is basically that of medicine, etc. I guess - do no harm - that means to others, that means to the environment, that means on every level in life.  And I believe that we are supposed to take care of and nurture what we were given - whatever corner of the earth we live on.  It is our 'job' to give back, to take no more than we give, and to always, always think of people less fortunate than we are. I hope God whoever he or she is is happy with my religion!

  15. Jerami profile image75
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    When saying that seven weeks, and three score and two weeks is 69 weeks; would this be interpreting this statement?

      It is commonly understood that "Cut off" does mean killed.

      One of the reasons that the Jews did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah is because from their "Interpretation" of prophesy; they thought that he wouldn't come until the 14 king of the fourth kingdom (Beginning with Babylon) to be given dominion over the earth (Israel).

      Jesus came during the reign of (I think) the third emperor of The Roman Empire.  Jesus was early according to their understanding.

       Concerning the FLOOD ?? Rev. 12:15  And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood that he might cause her to be carried away by the flood.
       Is this actually talking about water?
       
      12:16  and the earth swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

       I believe there are many scriptures stating that nothing comes out of his mouth that isn't lies and deception.

       A flood of deception and the earth took it all in

       Is it an interpretation when we cross reference different statements or is it using  analytical deduction?

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Ah - semantics.

      You saying "Gabriel says that 62 weeks is the same as 568 years." when it said no such thing is not interpretation?

      You changing what the bible sez to suit your self is exactly what all the religionists do - and what you argue against.

      But - it is OK when Jerami does it? Then you call it "analytical deduction," and I call it "lying for Jesus."

      What I know for sure is that the bible was written after the events and attempts to retroactively fulfill a number of prophecies. It has also been aggressively defended when challenged because of this. Hence the wars and conflicts.

      Sure - call it a flood of misinformation instead of water - why not? Say "destroyed" actually means "invaded by Romans a few years before, they just got the date wrong" - why not? "Unto the ende of warre," can mean a nuclear holocaust if you like and it is 2,550 years really - not 568. Why not? The Shroud of Turin (that you have never seen) is proof enough for you that Jesus was the One And Only Son of God - so yeah - why not?

      Technically - Jesus (if he had existed) would have been born in the rule of the first Roman Emperor. wink

      Interesting fact for you - I am doing some research for a book I am writing with some one else. The Holy Roman Emperors go back to 800. Their line is unbroken, except for a gap between 1313 and 1328, when there was no Holy Roman Emperor. Why not? wink

      1. Jerami profile image75
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        What a mixed up load of gobblie goog that that was.  That had little if anything to do with what I was talking about.

           Mercy !   The prophesy that was given to "that" Hebrew Nation 500 to 600 BC was talking about those emperors that had dominion over  that Hebrew nation. 14 emperors were spoken of and that is all that there were until those prophesy was fulfilled and that Nation ceased to exist.

           That is not interpreting the facts.
        If I said that there was going to be 12 moon cycles and then I am going to retire and 310 days later I did,  it would be an anilitical deduction NOT an Interpretation, to say that a moon cycle was 28 days.

            Call it whatever you have to as long as you get to keep stiring up conflict.

            There is a clear difference between translation, interpretation and analitical deduction.

           But you can mix them all up as much as you can while you keep your fight alive. Keep your faith alive at any cost!

  16. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    60,000 thoughts per day x (Gregorian) 365 = 21,900,000 annum x 75 years (average human lifespan) = 1,642,500,000 thoughts per person.

    Multiply that by just the present 7 Billion humans on the planet. 11,497,500,000 thoughts. Lets multiply that by the Hebrew Calendar system: 5770 = 66.340575 Trillion thoughts. Add to that the words spoken, written concerning those thoughts.

    Yet not one -from any religion or science- has done anything to unite, validate, prove, explain, let alone express the full epistemological critique of its purpose.

    The human condition:
    I need to know; I am man; I am not a slave but my thoughts are all I am. I rule myself, but don't know a single elements name or purpose and how it came to be. I die. I think no more. Before that event, I need to know why I am man and my purpose so I can die in peace and never know the answer, passing on this dilemma to my offspring, so they may face the same 'fate'.

    Going for coffee. Good Morning Human Kind smile

    1. Jerami profile image75
      Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Morning 21 ... and I gotta go to work in a few,,,, Back later this afternoon

  17. Mark Knowles profile image60
    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago

    Tour De France - final stage. big_smile

  18. profile image61
    rjlv1019posted 4 years ago

    Faith in God is the breath of our soul. When we look into the Bible we can see that our soul exist and it is our soul who will be judged on the last day Judgment Day. However, there are many faith in this world from many different people who have many different beliefs. What faith must we have? Definitely, we must have the true faith on the true God first. We must press on to know God because the Bible says that God's people are destroyed from their  lack of knowledge about God. In order to have true faith, let us know God. First, why did God said Let US make man in Our image in Our likeness? This verse from the Bible implies thatvour Creator is not singular but plural. This have been a mystery from the Bible for ages. However, this is only a mystery to the people who have a fixed idea that God is one. Actually the Hebrew word for God on this verse is Elohim. Elohim means plural Gods. Then if God is plural,not singular, how many Gods are there? Actually the next verse tells us the answer. Genesis 1:27 says, then God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them. Here let us not forget that God refers toElohim, a plural Gods. Here when God created man, God created it according to the image of God itself. And according to the image of God, the man that was created are male and female. It means that God has two images. The male image of God which brought forth a result of male being and female image of God which brought forth a female being. It means that God is not one but two. Some insist that Us refers to the Trinity. If that were right, then there must be three images of man who came out of creation. First, a man who was created in the image of the Father. Second, a man created in the image of the Son and Third a man created in the image of the Holy Spirit. However these are all male images. How about the female image? This is the greatest mystery in the Bible that up until now became a mystery to those who have a fixed idea that God is one. The male image of God was called God the Father for centuries. Then what should we call the female image of God? Shouldnt we call Her, God the Mother? The reason why we call God, Father indicates that there is also a Mother God. The reason why we are called the children of God is because we have a Mother in heaven. Why onlyknowbdo we have a knowledge of God the Mother? Well, it is because it was already prophesied in the Bible that in the last days She will appear. We can find it in the Book of Revelation.

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Quite a claim there.
      Chapter, and verse(s) please.

      1. janesix profile image60
        janesixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah right. I've read Revelation a hundred times. There's nothing about a "Mother"

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Indeed.
          I've heard a pretty famous preacher on tv (Joseph Prince) talk about how God's grace is a "third person in the Trinity", as though "grace" were an actual person or entity separate from God.    And I heard a Catholic priest "preach" about how Mary the earthly Mother of Jesus is a part of the Godhead.    All nonsense of course.   I don't think this is a very prevalent philosophy;   just was wondering where those false ideas came from!   Maybe the truth can be pointed out to this poster.........

          1. janesix profile image60
            janesixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            What I'm wondering is if they actually even READ the Bible

            1. profile image0
              Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              lol
              yes I wonder!
              Doesn't look like they've read it at all.
              And while Revelation is kinda complicated to understand (I don't claim to understand it all myself),  it's also true that a lot of people make parts of it complicated when it's actually so simple.  Even some Evangelical preachers and people do that.

          2. profile image0
            riddle666posted 4 years ago in reply to this

               

            Some honesty there!

 
working