What was the question?

1. 61

   Jeramiposted 13 years ago

   I've been talking and listening here in these forums for quite some time.
   
     And it seems to me that most Christians and Muslams think that a person can not believe in "The Right" God unless they believe their book to be the inspired word of God. The Whole truth, And nothing but the truth.
     And for all others ? ...   they will burn in hell.
   
     Lets all think God right now for the printing press.  Imagine all of those people before the printing press that didn't have a book. who are now burning in hell.
   
     It is as if "The Book" became bigger than God Himself.
   
     IF five people read this short little post, there will be five different opinions as to what my intentions are.  What was he thinking?
   
     The more I attempt to explain it, the longer it gets and the posabilities of even more opinions of my intentions. 
   
     Every thread should be asking a question!  so here it is finally!
   
     What was he thinking??

   replyreport
2. 61

   Leaderofmanyposted 13 years ago

   Who is the "right God"? That is the question?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      NAaa   that ain't it?

      replyreport
   2. 71

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      That's not even a legitimate question.
      
      @Jerami- the question you posed isn't even a question I was thinking about. Your intentions on this thread are quite clear and actually written quite nicely(accurate).
      
      For the interest of PEACE- any and all religions speak to a collective of different G/gods. Many claim that the G/god which is in their book is the GOD supreme over all other G/gods. Some religions even goes as far as to eliminate any possibility of any other G/god(s).
      
      Yet, all speak of G/god, as an entity in which actually intervenes in the lives of the people on Earth. The ironic part is that people don't find it completely irrational or foolish.
      
      Like I have said before and gladly repeat myself- It's simple enough to understand that no rationalization made by any human being on Earth can dispute what I'm about to say.
      
      (A) Life doesn't require any knowledge of any G/god to be understood.
      (B) Life doesn't require any knowledge of any G/god to be lived.
      
      It's pretty cut and dry. But, many will deny it because of whatever reasons they need to feel better about themselves.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Your answer was a good one though not the only question being asked.
         
           And as you didn't affirm nor deny the existance of said God!
         
           I'd agree.
           If God "did done it".  I think he/she wouldn't want to distract us from living the kind of life which was intended.
         
           He/she wouldn't want to be our blinders nor a stumbling block keeping us from living life to the fullest.   As long as we didn't steal someone elses joy and peace thinking to increasing our own.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You're right, I didn't affirm or deny the existence of a G/god. There's no need or reason to do so.
            
            Knowledge of a G/god, as I said, isn't required for living or understanding one's own life.

            replyreport
      2. 68

         jdflomposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Cagsil: I think your explanation was interesting. I've often pondered those sentiments:
         (A) Life doesn't require any knowledge of any G/god to be understood.
         (B) Life doesn't require any knowledge of any G/god to be lived.
         
         ...but have never really seen anyone state them. I still choose to deny the existence of god(s), yet I really like the way you worded that.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Hey Jdflom,
            
            No reason to deny the existence of a G/god(s). Denial is nothing more than the refusal to accept.
            
            I hold no belief of any G/god(s) ever existed because there's logically NO reason for one(or more) to exist to begin with.
            
            A person can live out their entire life and know nothing of any G/god(s). A person can do good for others and no G/god is required or needed to make it happen.
            
            A person can live a high moral life and still have no need for any thoughts with regards to a G/god(s).
            
            A person can LOVE all of humanity, similar to Jesus' writings and still never have to learn a damn thing about a G/god(s).
            
            But, I am glad you enjoyed the way I worded it. And, as you can see, I have more words above.

            replyreport
            1. 68

               jdflomposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I was just kind of going with the basic definition for simplicity's sake as I identify mostly with atheism.
               
               I am completely okay with the fact that I don't know for certain and I don't claim to. In a way, that gives me the freedom to do as you put it, "...live a high moral life and still have no need for any thoughts with regards to a G/god(s)."
               
               I like your style of critical thinking.
               
               

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I was never told that I think "critically" or even possess any "critical" thinking ability. Thank you for the compliment.

                  replyreport
3. 61

   Disturbiaposted 13 years ago

   Nobody's burning in hell for not reading the holy books because there is no hell.  Hell was invented by the same bunch of guys who decided what stories would go into those books.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      calynbanaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hell was a pagan concept. At least the hell that we understand. The word hell used to just mean grave.

      replyreport
4. 61

   Jeramiposted 13 years ago

   AH  HA ...  another good take on how the statement was conceptualized.
   Guess we could say this was a hidden questions within a statement. ??
   Myself?  …  Maybe hell does exist?  But what it is, where it is, why it is, etc is another matter entirely!

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I would say that "hell" is "grave" because one is no longer living "life" and not living life is "hell".

      replyreport
5. 61

   Wayne Tildenposted 13 years ago

   The greatest question in Philosophy?:
   "WHY?"
   The only correct answer to that question:
   "WHY NOT?"

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      That would be untrue as the hub I wrote says.

      replyreport