people playing: 173, servers online: 57, games played: 135,984,116 Top Player: Shmevin

  Toribash Community » General » Discussion
Register FAQ General Rules Community
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Jul 5, 2017   #1
MisterDarky
Junior Member
 
Yellow Belt
Join Date: Jul 2017
Clan: Legit



Do God exists?
So uhm, there's a thing called 'religion'. They are many types of religion out there such as Muslim [ Which I'm ], Christian, Buddha and more. They all have different rules in religion. But my question is, do God exists?
MisterDarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2017   #2
Karstnator
Raconteur
 
Master Belt
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,730



I dont know if there is a god but I think that they came up with "religion" to keep someone's insanity.

Religion : Example 


there may be things that might be good for me but will be bad for you ; that is why we have "rules" to keep order.

not only rules in religion but we also have the law that gives us more rules

so I think "bad" would mean "directly interfering with a person" ( i guess )

Murder Example 


My teacher in the subject UCSP (Understanding Culture, Society & Politics) said that if a person does not have an explanation for something, he will go crazy. That might be the reason why religions are made :^) to keep a persons sanity.
ES Artist ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Karstnator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2017   #3
hayabusa8
Senior Member
 
3rd Dan Black Belt
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 658



Objectively, God is a subjective & omnicient thing we cant rationaly find or sight.
Something can be interpreted as God for some, but not for some others, depending over every religion background people can be related to.

The question isnt to know if God exists, the true question is if "you believe in God".
This is the primary value religions are all based from : "Faith"
"Believe without having the need to verify the truthness of it"
[LoP] | [TMM]
hayabusa8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2017   #4
MisterDarky
Junior Member
 
Yellow Belt
Join Date: Jul 2017
Clan: Legit



Originally Posted by hayabusa8 View Post
Objectively, God is a subjective & omnicient thing we cant rationaly find or sight.
Something can be interpreted as God for some, but not for some others, depending over every religion background people can be related to.

The question isnt to know if God exists, the true question is if "you believe in God".
This is the primary value religions are all based from : "Faith"
"Believe without having the need to verify the truthness of it"

I would say that I believe more into the religion logic but in my mind, we have no proof that God exists. Well, as you say God isn't visible but still. We still have no proof.
-----
Originally Posted by Karstnator View Post
I dont know if there is a god but I think that they came up with "religion" to keep someone's insanity.

Religion : Example 


there may be things that might be good for me but will be bad for you ; that is why we have "rules" to keep order.

not only rules in religion but we also have the law that gives us more rules

so I think "bad" would mean "directly interfering with a person" ( i guess )

Murder Example 


My teacher in the subject UCSP (Understanding Culture, Society & Politics) said that if a person does not have an explanation for something, he will go crazy. That might be the reason why religions are made :^) to keep a persons sanity.

So A murder B. A is bad, but A murder B because B got in a fight with C. My question, if A murder himself/herself. Will he/she be a bad person?

Last edited by MisterDarky; Jul 5, 2017 at 02:36 PM.. Reason: <24 hour edit/bump
MisterDarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2017   #5
Lazors
Chatterbox
 
7th Dan Black Belt
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,533
Clan: duck



I think that with the empirical knowledge system we started to value knowledge over experience, as paradoxical as it might sound. By proving more and more phenomena objectively, we've lost contact with what we feel. This is mostly a good thing, because it's an antidote to pseudoscience. Knowledge from experience is very bad at determining why something has an effect.
My problem with it is that it makes us blind to knowledge that isn't based on scientific research. Religious experiences, artistic feelings, and general faith is shunned for this reason. I'm not proposing we go back to putting faith above knowledge, but that we see that some knowledge can only be experienced and observed. To fully understand something you must experience it, not be taught it. There is a hierarchy in communicating thought, where text is very low on the list because it requires a translation into images. Images are the most powerful means of expression, and are the closest we can get to an understanding of things that are beyond text.

The way I see it, there's a top-bottom and bottom-up faith system. The bottom-up is the scientific knowledge, that breaks everything up in small parts and tries to go to the bottom of explaining the universe.
The top-bottom faith is that there is one origin point that cannot be split into seperate parts and observed without losing the quality of the whole. You can learn more about the whole object by observing the parts, but the objective existence of the whole changes once you split it up.

I'm not advocating one system over the other, I think both are legitimate ways to look at the universe. Although one is definitely preferable in some situations. Where I'm going with this is about the nature of the universe and how we percieve it. By realizing that the universe as a whole is something we will never observe or experience, one has to accept only having knowledge of its parts. Every understanding and observation of the universe and its parts is summarized in a model that is approachable by us humans. One therefore has to accept that different models that are logically dissonant are two different ways of observation.

The bottom-up scientific analysis is good for a large amount of reasons, and the top-bottom is in comparison not essential to survival. None of these will give you a full understanding on its own, and neither will both of them.


Apologies if this is nothing but a confused ramble from a philosophically illiterate person.
So take your wings off, sisters, get down and jam
And let the nymphs be the judges of our poetry slam!
Lazors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2017   #6
xero901
Member
 
3rd Dan Black Belt
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 241



I think many people carry this misconception of the idea of 'God'. I think people believe the idea of God to be some sort of tangible entity that exists within a higher realm of existence, in all omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence. Watching, judging, and creating. That the devil is an evil being that resides within the lowest realms and is responsible for the ills of mankind.
However, I follow more of a 'new age' idea about the idea of God. I believe that humanity is a projection of a much larger entity. In the same way cells, proteins, and such all work together in order to help the body function, we as humans are part of the earth's body, the solar system's body, the universe's body.
Which makes one think,
"When does the cycle end?".
And I believe it to be an illusion that there is a cycle in the first place. I believe that all of life is a projected hologram inside our conscious. A voice that tells us what we are seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, thinking, moving, interacting. When in reality, it is all in our head. For what reason? I believe it to be a lesson in attempting to learn how to be an architect in training. We as humans are very powerful beings. The spirit of human innovation, condition, and manifestation has created many great things. Our thoughts literally become reality through the aide of light-workers, energies, whatever you want to call it, existing within the universe. This connection is accessed through a higher presence or consciousness.
I believe Yahweh, God, Krishna, Nirvana, whatever you wish to call this higher power is something that ever-present in ourselves as we ourselves are Gods in training. It may appear in forms of pure white light, violet fire, or whatever. But it is strong, it is there, and it is love. Be it called the collective unconscious, Christ-consciousness, or mass consciousness, we are all connected through this presence.
But I can't really prove this with literal evidence. I can only attempt to convey what I have seen, experienced, felt, and used in my life before in a manner that doesn't seem too crazy.
A samurai of the oldest kind, watch me shine, but don't get blind from the light that exists behind.
xero901 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2017   #7
Ezeth
Item Frogger
 
3rd Dan Black Belt
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,659



I'm just gonna quote all the statements in here and make a shitstorm kk?

Originally Posted by xero901 View Post
I think many people carry this misconception of the idea of 'God'.

I'm pretty sure most people know what a god is.
Originally Posted by xero901 View Post
I think people believe the idea of God to be some sort of tangible entity that exists within a higher realm of existence, in all omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence. Watching, judging, and creating. That the devil is an evil being that resides within the lowest realms and is responsible for the ills of mankind.

Yes, the textbook definition of a god is what people believe a god is yes. Odd.

Originally Posted by xero901 View Post
And I believe it to be an illusion that there is a cycle in the first place. I believe that all of life is a projected hologram inside our conscious. A voice that tells us what we are seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, thinking, moving, interacting. When in reality, it is all in our head. For what reason? I believe it to be a lesson in attempting to learn how to be an architect in training. We as humans are very powerful beings. The spirit of human innovation, condition, and manifestation has created many great things. Our thoughts literally become reality through the aide of light-workers, energies, whatever you want to call it, existing within the universe. This connection is accessed through a higher presence or consciousness.
I believe Yahweh, God, Krishna, Nirvana, whatever you wish to call this higher power is something that ever-present in ourselves as we ourselves are Gods in training. It may appear in forms of pure white light, violet fire, or whatever. But it is strong, it is there, and it is love. Be it called the collective unconscious, Christ-consciousness, or mass consciousness, we are all connected through this presence.

Is this what you REALLY believe tho, or are you just telling yourself this to ease your mind or appear knowledgeable. Religions makes people believe they got the answers to everything, that is why they are so appealing.

Originally Posted by xero901 View Post
But I can't really prove this with literal evidence. I can only attempt to convey what I have seen, experienced, felt, and used in my life before in a manner that doesn't seem too crazy.

And in court this is the lowest form of testimony.

Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
I think that with the empirical knowledge system we started to value knowledge over experience, as paradoxical as it might sound

No, I'm pretty sure people still value experience as well, even tho this is probably as vague of a statement you can possibly get.
Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
. By proving more and more phenomena objectively, we've lost contact with what we feel. This is mostly a good thing, because it's an antidote to pseudoscience. Knowledge from experience is very bad at determining why something has an effect.
My problem with it is that it makes us blind to knowledge that isn't based on scientific research.

how is making yourself less acceptable to knowledge that can't be backed up by evidence a bad thing? I also think just by doing so you can be more knowledgeable because you don't look at something amazing and say "this is great, it must be the work of god" rather than trying to understand what it is and what it does.

Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
Religious experiences, artistic feelings, and general faith is shunned for this reason. I'm not proposing we go back to putting faith above knowledge, but that we see that some knowledge can only be experienced and observed. To fully understand something you must experience it, not be taught it. There is a hierarchy in communicating thought, where text is very low on the list because it requires a translation into images. Images are the most powerful means of expression, and are the closest we can get to an understanding of things that are beyond text.

Depends on the subject really. How would you explain mathematical formulas through images? Also science and reason doesn't do shit to art, you can still express how you feel through imagery without science standing in the way. You can still have mindfullness and be at one with yourself without mixing in religion as well.

Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
The way I see it, there's a top-bottom and bottom-up faith system. The bottom-up is the scientific knowledge, that breaks everything up in small parts and tries to go to the bottom of explaining the universe.
The top-bottom faith is that there is one origin point that cannot be split into seperate parts and observed without losing the quality of the whole. You can learn more about the whole object by observing the parts, but the objective existence of the whole changes once you split it up.

One could argue that science is not really a faith system. One one end you can say "you need to believe the research scientists have done" but if thousands of tests are all pointing towards one direction with 99.9999% accuracy you don't really have to make all that much of a leap of faith.

Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
I'm not advocating one system over the other, I think both are legitimate ways to look at the universe. Although one is definitely preferable in some situations. Where I'm going with this is about the nature of the universe and how we percieve it. By realizing that the universe as a whole is something we will never observe or experience, one has to accept only having knowledge of its parts. Every understanding and observation of the universe and its parts is summarized in a model that is approachable by us humans. One therefore has to accept that different models that are logically dissonant are two different ways of observation.

Yes, since we don't know everything, we can't disprove that there is a god....
god......

Originally Posted by Lazors View Post
Apologies if this is nothing but a confused ramble from a philosophically illiterate person.

no it was pretty good, 10/10


Originally Posted by Vin786 View Post
Yes god exists. God is consciousness itself.

Well, then god basically wrote this. Why are god arguing with himself on the internet right now?

Last edited by Ezeth; Jul 6, 2017 at 10:53 AM..
Ezeth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2017   #8
Lazors
Chatterbox
 
7th Dan Black Belt
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,533
Clan: duck



Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
No, I'm pretty sure people still value experience as well, even tho this is probably as vague of a statement you can possibly get.

Sorry for being vague, I think that people disregard emotional thought in favor of intellectual thought. If you feel something and there's no scientific explaination for it, your feelings are likely to be seen as hypocondria or lunacy. Electro-allergics are seen as insane nowadays despite being a real health concern and observable phenomenon. Granted, this phenomenon isn't caused by electricity, but by our unstable frightened minds. This is an example of the hierarchy of intellectualism before experience. Nothing bad with this hierarchy, but it's important to understand this concept when dealing with spiritual questions.

Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
how is making yourself less acceptable to knowledge that can't be backed up by evidence a bad thing? I also think just by doing so you can be more knowledgeable because you don't look at something amazing and say "this is great, it must be the work of god" rather than trying to understand what it is and what it does.

I'm familiar with skyhooks. Not arguing for using God as an answer to stop looking for scientific truth, or to in any way dismiss scientific thought. Ultimately, I think all things can be explained with logical thought, but some mediums are better than others at communicating different kinds of thought. The predictive power of science makes it a great tool of explaining how everything happens, but is incapable of observing an object as a whole, only as a sum of its parts. A general behavior of the materia and energy is still one perspective of the whole.
My view is that observation of the universe takes on several forms and perspectives, but really there's virtually an unlimited number of ways to look at an object, including the variety of esthetic appreciation you can apply to something. It's founded on there being an objective existence that we appreciate through observation, experience, and various fields of study. Not familiar with any deeper meaning of materialism vs. idealism (yet) so I might be stating something obvious here.

I'm arguing for using science as a lens of observation without giving it a monopoly on the things it's worse at explaining. What exactly it's bad at explaining is hard to define, because in my view it lies beyond the communication of words. Words is simply a model of understanding that fits the wide majority, but in terms of expressive power, it's very low on the scale. Maybe because the brain doesn't process words directly, but has to translate them into images. Don't know if this applies to more abstract thought.
I'm sure that as a friend of discourse you will hate the idea of having an argument over a concept that cannot be put into words. If you want to view it as a rhetorical trick or a flimsy thought with no argumentative value, that's ok. I know I'm being controversial and possibly very annoying.

Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
Depends on the subject really. How would you explain mathematical formulas through images? Also science and reason doesn't do shit to art, you can still express how you feel through imagery without science standing in the way. You can still have mindfullness and be at one with yourself without mixing in religion as well.

Mathematics is a system that's separate from nature, it's also a lens through which you observe reality. It has an incredible value in deciphering patterns in nature, but if you compare it to a painting, it's obvious which has more expressive power. You can analyze a painting with mathematics, but you'd lose much of the art in the process.

Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
One could argue that science is not really a faith system. One one end you can say "you need to believe the research scientists have done" but if thousands of tests are all pointing towards one direction with 99.9999% accuracy you don't really have to make all that much of a leap of faith.

Yeah, science has a well-deserved monopoly on predictive thought, leaving little for speculation. I shouldn't have used the word faith.

Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
Yes, since we don't know everything, we can't disprove that there is a god....

Yeah, I see the logical fallacy. It's no coincidence religion present unquestionable faith as a virtue. I do think some things are beyond logic and rational thought, because the spectrum of observation is so large. This is why you'll always run into miscommunication when using logic to disprove a religious person. Emotional thought, and the value of experience is more important to believers than what others see as rational.
I would point out that God is a flimsy thought which I interpret as something which definition is something that goes beyond human observation. I see this as the undevidable whole of the universe.


On a personal note, I'm not a religious person, although spiritually inclined since recently (much due to reading Hesse and Pirsig). Most of my life I've been a complete atheist, but I have an interest in bridging the gap between spiritual and rational thought. I just hope I can be more challenging than the usual religious person.
So take your wings off, sisters, get down and jam
And let the nymphs be the judges of our poetry slam!
Lazors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2017   #9
xero901
Member
 
3rd Dan Black Belt
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 241



Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
I'm just gonna quote all the statements in here and make a shitstorm kk?
I'm pretty sure most people know what a god is.
Yes, the textbook definition of a god is what people believe a god is yes. Odd.

This is the point.
This line is your head.
I'm not trying to argue about the dictionary definition of Godliness. I'm trying to explain it as a shared term of higher presence, consciousness, "I am", etc. There is no 'textbook' definition of a god because the idea of God is clearly something that is so open, multi-faceted, and heavily discussed for many, many centuries. What you think is a 'textbook' definition is the ignorant, westernized idea of religion.
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
Is this what you REALLY believe tho, or are you just telling yourself this to ease your mind or appear knowledgeable. Religions makes people believe they got the answers to everything, that is why they are so appealing.

Why do you have to get so personal? You're not actually attempting to engage my points here, you're just trying to make a personal attack towards me. Establishing unsureness of my credibility, ensuring that you're not going to be even attempting to understand my perspective at all brah.
Regardless, this is what I legitimately believe. Through my studies of Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, New age philosophy, Christ-Consciousness, through DMT trips, through meditation fueled spiritual journeys, through shamanic experiences. This is the legitimate conclusion I have come to in my mind about the human experience taking ideas from Carl Jungian philosophy of archetypes and the collective unconscious.
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
And in court this is the lowest form of testimony.

I wish this was a legal case and not a philosophical debate about the existence of an entity we are not supposed to comprehend. Dunno what to tell you bro. I talk to it everyday. Whether it is God, Jesus, Yahweh, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Universe, the violet fire of St. Germaine, it speaks back and manifests reality for me when I put my intention out. Sounds really like hippy shit, but you wouldn't believe the things I've made pop up on my desk, literally.
No, I'm pretty sure people still value experience as well, even tho this is probably as vague of a statement you can possibly get.
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
how is making yourself less acceptable to knowledge that can't be backed up by evidence a bad thing? I also think just by doing so you can be more knowledgeable because you don't look at something amazing and say "this is great, it must be the work of god" rather than trying to understand what it is and what it does.

I dunno man. I've traveled into hyperspace and saw a reptilian with a Pharaoh's head dress while in the middle of a pyramid. Was it my own imagination? Was it real? What dictates reality? Our senses? I had a complete ego death, warping all of my senses. Of time, presence, feeling, etc. If reality and clear evidence is dictated by the usage of our senses and logical thinking, would that not mean in the conscious state we possess during dreams, that they too are a part of reality?
That's why I make the inference that all of it is a dream projected at us through our senses.
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
Depends on the subject really. How would you explain mathematical formulas through images? Also science and reason doesn't do shit to art

But I'm the ignorant one.. lol.
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
One could argue that science is not really a faith system. One one end you can say "you need to believe the research scientists have done" but if thousands of tests are all pointing towards one direction with 99.9999% accuracy you don't really have to make all that much of a leap of faith.

My favorite point to bring up. Because you listen to Terrance McKenna, Ram Dass, Alex Grey, or anyone who truly delved deep into the new age philosophy. Mixing psychedelic culture with ancient text, they introduce the visions of DMT into spirituality. And this is the thing that even scientists hate. Is that there are visions, entities, and different symbols that all show up reoccurring among different people in different trips. Despite this being, what should be, a reflection of only their own personal unconscious into a pictorial language. The reptilians, white light, violet fire, amphibians, the jesters, the elves, etc. Going back to Carl Jungian psychology, I believe this is proof of a mass consciousness. Proof of the collective unconscious at-least. Providing and creating mental images for us to see in our dreamwork and psychedelic journeys. So who's to say that it's not creating this particular image at this moment?
Originally Posted by Ezeth View Post
Yes, since we don't know everything, we can't disprove that there is a god....
god......

I'm glad you're the one that knows everything.
A samurai of the oldest kind, watch me shine, but don't get blind from the light that exists behind.

Last edited by xero901; Jul 6, 2017 at 02:26 PM..
xero901 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2017   #10
+Bodhisattva
Super Moderator
 
Mesa Belt
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,048
Clan: Parrot



This is already a very dicey thread topic that nobody can conclusively answer. You're free to discuss this but low quality posts like the ones removed will be infracted.
Bodhisattva is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ragdoll fighting game physics fighting game ragdoll fighting physics funmotion joints martial arts karate pc mac free game turn based game