"A billion and a half years ago two black holes collided"

[SemperFiDawg]

I agree that what people believe is an experience absolutely seems real to them. Often life changing.
Sfd, in all sincerity, what do you think is happening to people that have those same life changing experiences who are not Christians? Who or What is responsible for those? Are they AS undeniable?

Bullet, I’m vaguely familiar with most world religions. I don’t know of ONE where the laiety claim a personal one on one relationship is possible with God and are secure in their salvation solely because of his character.

 

[WaltL1]

Bullet, I’m vaguely familiar with most world religions. I don’t know of ONE where the laiety claim a personal one on one relationship is possible with God and are secure in their salvation solely because of his character.

So?
Who decided this is some sort of determining factor? Does this prove something? Does this prove a god that you don't have a personal relationship to not exist or be "false"?
Its like saying -
"I don't know one other religion who has a god that looks like a Doobie Brother".
"Therefore"...….. what?

 

[bullethead]

Bullet, I’m vaguely familiar with most world religions. I don’t know of ONE where the laiety claim a personal one on one relationship is possible with God and are secure in their salvation solely because of his character.

Are you familiar with the Ancient Greeks and how active their gods were in every day life? Have you ever heard of Judiasm? Islam?
Maybe you have heard of Hinduism?
Hindus also worship several gods and goddesses. They are not different entities but different aspects of the same highest Brahman. In their deepest essence, they are same as Brahman. They also have some features or qualities or energies that distinguish them from other divinities and which are essential to uphold the Divine Law or Dharma. There is also a belief that the gods of Hinduism, including the Hindu Trinity are advanced souls of previous cycles of creation, and they are elevated as gods by virtue of their good deeds. Devout Hindus worship them as their personal gods and goddesses representing the highest Truth. One of the tenets of Hinduism is, "ekam sat viptra bahuda vadanti", which means the Truth is one but perceived and spoken in different forms. If God has many forms and if they are all the same in the final essence, it logically follows that He can be worshipped in many ways and that we can reach Him through any of His forms and manifestations.

Akasat patitam toyam yatha gacchati saagaram,
Sarva deva namaskara kesavam pratigacchati

Which means:

Just as the rain water wherever it falls finally flows down into the ocean, so also worship offered to any god will ultimately reach the supreme God.

According to Hinduism all life is sacred and every being is an aspect of God in a latent form. God creates the worlds and populates them with different beings for His own pleasure. A self realized person is but God in human form. God also incarnates upon earth from time to time to restore order and protect the weak and the meek from the evil. The fact that different gods are but aspects of one and the same God.

 

[bullethead]

So, now that it is established that there are in fact more than one religion that has personal relationships with their god(s) and those gods interact with the believers personally, AND those believers are secure in their salvation because of their gids character...is the experiences of those believers on equal ground proof wise as yours?

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Are you familiar with the Ancient Greeks and how active their gods were in every day life? Have you ever heard of Judiasm? Islam?
Maybe you have heard of Hinduism?
Hindus also worship several gods and goddesses. They are not different entities but different aspects of the same highest Brahman. In their deepest essence, they are same as Brahman. They also have some features or qualities or energies that distinguish them from other divinities and which are essential to uphold the Divine Law or Dharma. There is also a belief that the gods of Hinduism, including the Hindu Trinity are advanced souls of previous cycles of creation, and they are elevated as gods by virtue of their good deeds. Devout Hindus worship them as their personal gods and goddesses representing the highest Truth. One of the tenets of Hinduism is, "ekam sat viptra bahuda vadanti", which means the Truth is one but perceived and spoken in different forms. If God has many forms and if they are all the same in the final essence, it logically follows that He can be worshipped in many ways and that we can reach Him through any of His forms and manifestations.

Akasat patitam toyam yatha gacchati saagaram,
Sarva deva namaskara kesavam pratigacchati

Which means:

Just as the rain water wherever it falls finally flows down into the ocean, so also worship offered to any god will ultimately reach the supreme God.

According to Hinduism all life is sacred and every being is an aspect of God in a latent form. God creates the worlds and populates them with different beings for His own pleasure. A self realized person is but God in human form. God also incarnates upon earth from time to time to restore order and protect the weak and the meek from the evil. The fact that different gods are but aspects of one and the same God.

Yes. I am familiar. You are much too learned to not recognize the major differences, and I honestly don’t care to beat this dead horse of an meme. I was simply answering Bush’s question the most honest I know how.

 

[bullethead]

Yes. I am familiar. You are much too learned to not recognize the major differences, and I honestly don’t care to beat this dead horse of an meme. I was simply answering Bush’s question the most honest I know how.

Sfd, I just want an honest answer, even if you have to write up a lengthy explanation as to why people of other faiths, religions and beliefs, all claim what you claim and yet you refuse to acknowledge that their life changing experiences are the same.
What are the major differences?
As far as I can tell, Jesus is the only difference, they are not experiencing Jesus, but the rest is exactly the same. But kind of like what Walt said, claiming Jesus is the difference is semantics. You are substituting one god for another and by that alone you want to negate the very experiences of others that you say are the vital difference in your claim.They have their god(s) reach out to them. Their gods save them from bad things and harm, their gods interact with them. Their gods fill them with emotions and on and on.

I am just asking you to back up answer with more detail.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

So?
Who decided this is some sort of determining factor? Does this prove something? Does this prove a god that you don't have a personal relationship to not exist or be "false"?
Its like saying -
"I don't know one other religion who has a god that looks like a Doobie Brother".
"Therefore"...….. what?

Well first and foremost it points out the obvious: that all religions make exclusivistic truth statements. This being the case, only one COULD be true.....not all or even some which kills the meme “all roads lead to Rome./all religions are the same”

As to your second point. I really can’t add anything over which I have already stated.

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

I never would have suspected this thread would devolve into an anti-thiest thread.

 

[bullethead]

I never would have suspected this thread would devolve into an anti-thiest thread.

After it devolved into a pro-theist thread, anti is the natural next step..

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

So, by that reasoning all of those here that are vehement about NOT being anti-thiest are completely incapable of a neutral response as a "non-theiest / athiest" and in fact see the need to defend their stance as anti-thiests.

Clear as mud.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Sfd, I just want an honest answer, even if you have to write up a lengthy explanation as to why people of other faiths, religions and beliefs, all claim what you claim and yet you refuse to acknowledge that their life changing experiences are the same.
What are the major differences?
As far as I can tell, Jesus is the only difference, they are not experiencing Jesus, but the rest is exactly the same. But kind of like what Walt said, claiming Jesus is the difference is semantics. You are substituting one god for another and by that alone you want to negate the very experiences of others that you say are the vital difference in your claim.They have their god(s) reach out to them. Their gods save them from bad things and harm, their gods interact with them. Their gods fill them with emotions and on and on.

I am just asking you to back up answer with more detail.

I’ve given you the most honest answer I know. No point in writing a thesis that’s sure to be rejected.

My only question to you would be this: If, as you readily affirm, all religions are the same, and all peoples of varying religions believe in God and are blessed by God, what’s your excuse? HOnestly you don’t need bother answering that. I pretty much know the narrative by now.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

I never would have suspected this thread would devolve into an anti-thiest thread.

That’s my fault. I allowed myself to be pulled into argueing the sky is up. Sorry. Too ignorant for my own good.

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

That’s my fault. I allowed myself to be pulled into argueing the sky is up. Sorry. Too ignorant for my own good.

I don't believe anyone here is "ignorant". I do think it gets old when every single thread devolves into a "My God's bigger than your no god" and both sides are to blame. Neither are ignorant, just passionate about their beliefs, which at times gets in the way of them actually and neutrally addressing a topic at hand. In this arena I would think that the atheist would be more adept at offering cogent debate of substance than the non-atheist, though both are quite capable.

 

[ambush80]

I don't believe anyone here is "ignorant". I do think it gets old when every single thread devolves into a "My God's bigger than your no god" and both sides are to blame. Neither are ignorant, just passionate about their beliefs, which at times gets in the way of them actually and neutrally addressing a topic at hand. In this arena I would think that the atheist would be more adept at offering cogent debate of substance than the non-atheist, though both are quite capable.

That's pretty interesting. Why do you think that?

 

[bullethead]

I’ve given you the most honest answer I know. No point in writing a thesis that’s sure to be rejected.

My only question to you would be this: If, as you readily affirm, all religions are the same, and all peoples of varying religions believe in God and are blessed by God, what’s your excuse? HOnestly you don’t need bother answering that. I pretty much know the narrative by now.

Which God would be my answer.

 

[bullethead]

So, by that reasoning all of those here that are vehement about NOT being anti-thiest are completely incapable of a neutral response as a "non-theiest / athiest" and in fact see the need to defend their stance as anti-thiests.

Clear as mud.

Is it too much to ask or unreasonable to expect someone who makes a claim to back that claim up with facts?
Should we, any of us, accept whatever anyone else says as truthful just because they say it?

I don't live my life that way. Maybe I am different??

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

Is it too much to ask someone who makes a claim to back that claim up with facts?

You mean like a thread about the color of Watermelon and the next question / post in the thread is; "What makes you think God created that watermelon?"

Sure, run with that if it satisfies your need for relevancy, but it still offers no subject content on the actual topic at hand.

 

[ambush80]

Is it too much to ask or unreasonable to expect someone who makes a claim to back that claim up with facts?
Should we, any of us, accept whatever anyone else says as truthful just because they say it?

I don't live my life that way. Maybe I am different??

You mean like a thread about the color of Watermelon and the next question / post in the thread is; "What makes you think God created that watermelon?"

Sure, run with that if it satisfies your need for relevancy, but it still offers no subject content on the actual topic at hand.

Bullet's getting off in the weeds a little bit but my intention with the OP was, in fact an examination of how we know what we know and why we believe it or not. I thought you and I were going somewhere interesting, Miguel. I hope we can get back to it.

 

[bullethead]

You mean like a thread about the color of Watermelon and the next question / post in the thread is; "What makes you think God created that watermelon?"

Sure, run with that if it satisfies your need for relevancy, but it still offers no subject content on the actual topic at hand.

But that isnt normally how a non religious thread goes.
A discussion about a watermelons color would take place in a non-religuous way until someone comes in and makes a claim about the watermelon is colored like that because God made it that way...and THEN I am dying to know the details.

But, this thread started off talking about faith in the original post so....

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

We are all dying, which makes the details a little less important in the big picture.
Live for the here and now.