I submitted a reply to this post, I don't know what happened to it.
Is google acting weird again?

On Feb 23, 11:34 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> Meh!  As I say in my first post what interest this one will have for
> the athiest I really don't know.  Take it as read my freind that I
> belive that God exists and so any post relating to 'my invisible
> friend'  none existance is counter productive to this particular
> debate.
>
> It may happen that in the fullness of time I may well 'do an Ian'.  It
> may not, who can see into the future?
>
> You are right though all of human exeriance and all ideas are
> subjective, however with religoin there really is nothing else that is
> comparible, so it is quite literaly a branch of thought out there on
> it's own.
>
> On 23 Feb, 17:25, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Lee;
> > How can a message transcend that of culture when the fact is that the
> > entire concept of deity existence is a product of culture and simply
> > exists within the minds of humanity.
>
> > Note:  The addition of the letter o to the word God gives us Good and
> > the addition of the letter d to the word Evil gives us Devil.  Hence
> > we have the primary basis of any belief, the obvious difference of
> > good and evil portrayed by representations of a god and a devil and
> > perceived to be separate entities in a constant state of confrontation
> > and entanglement in pursuit of the aligned capitulation of all
> > humanity to one or the other.  This of course has resulted in
> > humanity's constant state of dichotomous deity beliefs which are more
> > numerous than existing cultures.
>
> > The fact that any human belief or for that matter any human 'Idea' is
> > contingent upon mans subjectivity therefore rendering it open for
> > multiple interpretations, conclusions, dictum and dogmas.  Ultimately
> > the only "Void" in the whole scheme of things is the one left empty by
> > the deities themselves, who only make their presence known through the
> > imaginations of the human mind.
>
> > The ancients sat around open fire pits in the wilderness needing to
> > find answers to the whys of life, they obviously couldn't find any
> > tangible answers so understandably they attributed all things to a
> > deity, one that could create all things, was omniscient, omnipresent
> > etc etc.
>
> > Once man established human thought as being the veritable words of a
> > deity and also recognized that being a direct recipient of messages
> > from a deity had its advantages in the form of controlling the masses
> > of ignorant people, all hell broke loose.  As people learned to
> > position  themselves as transcendent beings deserving of higher status
> > in the cultural strata, they began to issue the dogma that is still
> > prevalent today.
> > As a convenience these same people used this position to declare other
> > people and other cultures as evil and initiate decrees for the
> > complete annihilation of any and all who would oppose the rule of
> > "GoOD".
>
> > The world has become "littered" with religions and littered is a good
> > word because much so that is all they have become.  Nothing has
> > changed on account of religion, no deity has descended from the sky as
> > a glowing light or ball of fire, man is still running around in the
> > dark without a clue, people are still taking up the sword in the name
> > of a god that wants to kill those who don't believe.  Catholicism has
> > amassed great wealth in the process while catholics suck up to the
> > pope and pedophile priests, Muslims are out to kill thousands, gurus
> > are out in a multitude of different colors dancing and chanting
> > transcendence amidst human squalor and "new" religions are popping up
> > daily, claiming to be the new Truth drug.  Its a circus to say the
> > least.
>
> > Meanwhile back at the "Reality" ranch, the governments have a lanyard
> > wrapped around our gonads with their own form of religion, that being
> > the patriotic duty of all citizens to forfeit a good portion of their
> > funds to the people that boss them around, the patriotic duty to
> > blindly lay down your life as a pawn in some declared military
> > operation regardless of right or wrong and the duty to bend over and
> > take it without lubrication when they act irresponsibly.  God giveth
> > and Gov taketh.
>
> > On Feb 23, 6:51 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hey OM.
>
> > > I guess we can say by message I mean scripture.  What is holy
> > > scripture if not Gods message to humaity, encompassing teachings, Gods
> > > plans, what God requires of us etc...
>
> > > The notion of life including a divine spark is included in this
> > > message, or where else would you have the idea from?  I guess I am
> > > also talking about reveled truth, something that I certianly belive
> > > in.  How can a theist not belive in such a thing?  If the truth of God
> > > message is not reveled by God then the assumption is that it is made
> > > up by the minds of humans.
> > > Anybody could literaly say anything they liked, promote any idea they
> > > wanted about God and Gods plan, the ultimate authority on what God
> > > wants us to do, must come from God, otherwise, all manor of these
> > > 'truths' sping up, which of course makes it hard to choose wich one to
> > > belive.  In every belife there must be a yardstick by which to measure
> > > the validity.  Reveald truth is one of  the ones that I use to measure
> > > religoin.
>
> > > In Sikhi the very first lines of Guru Granth Sahib are:
>
> > > 'Ikoncar, sat naam'  Which translates literaly into '1 God, true
> > > name'  But we know the problem with literal translations, and so I
> > > personaly translate it (wrongly or rightly I know not) as meaning, '1
> > > God, whose name is true/truth'
>
> > > Delving further the idea is thus:  '1 God, who is the only absolute
> > > truth'
>
> > > This is an example of such a message.
>
> > > Yet from just this little line, many ideas are formulated, God is the
> > > only truth must also mean that God is immenent throughout the
> > > creation, and thus your idea of a divine spark in humanity is also
> > > addressed.
>
> > > The problem I'm having curently is with dogma, and it's cultural
> > > bounderies.  In the east it is rude and impolite to point your feet
> > > towards somebody.  Hence show throwing or hiting somebody or
> > > somebodies effigy with your shoe is an insult, whilst washing
> > > sombodies feet is an act of supreame humility and respect.
>
> > > We have an example of this in the Bilbe, with the prostitue washing
> > > the feet of Jesus.
>
> > > This though is 100% cultural, and it's meaning is lost on those of a
> > > diffrant culture.  Divine message, easpecialy if the intent is global
> > > should transcend culture, I think.
>
> > > Why do I say this?  It is virtualy impossible for us humans to thing
> > > outside of our cultrual norms. If this its true then God surely knows
> > > this and so any message from God, I would expect to be cultural-less,
> > > and timeless.   relevant to all soscity over all time.  Again
> > > otherwise the assumption is the message come from the minds of man.
>
> > > On 23 Feb, 12:13, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Lee, if by ‘message’ you mean some linguistic directive or informative
> > > > event, the notion of such commentary by a deity transcending culture
> > > > is a strange one, no? Perhaps you mean things like “Don’t kill.”
> > > > “Treat others like you want to be treated” etc. I’m not sure. Perhaps
> > > > you could expand upon your premise here some, OK?
>
> > > > Beyond revealed ‘truths’ (something I don’t embrace), perhaps we
> > > > should include the notion that life itself includes a divine spark…
> > > > shall we? If so, all sorts of results are possible.
>
> > > > The issue here as I see it is inherent in the meaning of ‘theist’
> > > > itself. . . one who believes in the existence of a god or gods.
> > > > Linguistically, the term ‘believes in’ has been interpreted in almost
> > > > countless different ways…each suited to support the sensibilities of
> > > > the interpreter. So, as interesting as analysis is, for such things,
> > > > few can find actual clarity. So, how does intuition fit into this? So
> > > > far, there seems to be a general consensus here that we all have this
> > > > ability. My guess is that even using intuition, core belief systems
> > > > can and do easily overshadow any direct application of such a rarefied
> > > > methodology.
>
> > > > So, again, for me…it appears that one must clarify all core beliefs
> > > > first. Find out how/when/why they were formed…transcend any blind
> > > > beliefs with more informed ones…etc. How else do we have any hope for
> > > > knowing anything for sure? Yet, even here, difficulties abound as we
> > > > know.
>
> > > > Returning to your theme here, your main issue seems to be “…how to
> > > > seperate the message of God from that of man.” A quick analysis here
> > > > may be of interest. What exactly is the difference? Do theists find
> > > > god something separate from themselves, thus requiring some sort of
> > > > objective qualifier of any ‘messages’ therefrom? One would have to
> > > > address the very nature of god here to have a chance at arriving at a
> > > > satisfactory answer it would seem. And, here again, we run into the
> > > > issue of confused beliefs that humans can come up with. So, what if we
> > > > assume that all thoughts…rational or not are to be considered? Is this
> > > > of any use? I’m sure not for some, yet it is an interesting question,
> > > > no? In such an epistemological pursuit, the subjective nature of all
> > > > concepts and language becomes readily apparent. So, back to your
> > > > question. Perhaps you wish to *know* on some deep level that which you
> > > > (or anyone) should follow as being divine will, is that more of the
> > > > issue for you?
>
> > > > On Feb 23, 3:19 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > So you Atheists can of course get involded in this one, I really don't
> > > > > know why you should or what the interest for you would be, but do feel
> > > > > free.
>
> > > > > I was thinking the other day about religion and culture.  I'm somewhat
> > > > > worried about how to seperate the message of God from that
>
> ...
>
> read more »

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.

Reply via email to