 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I suggest you read more History and look for what is accepted as History
and Jesus is, not the Biblical one but the actual carpenter who married
Mary Magdalene, yeah, Jesus never existed is just so convenient, finally
is just the same you as any another Materialist only find safety in
material stuff, any doubt will give you the perfect excuse to deny it.
Man, is up to you, spiritual things because of you POV will never be as
a sign of anything, to start understanding you need to broader it and
focus it in the direction of: maybe there is something spiritual that is
not clear but it has it's own world of existence that intersects with
ours in a blurred way for some reason, because this is apparently the
truth about it.
Also, looks like you have seen documentaries that support your material
POV, not the ones that look truly to clear as much as possible spiritual
mysteries.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> clipka wrote:
>>> Well, I take Darren's attitude as "Your /argument/ is crap because it
>>> is based on wrong assumptions; try again"; as long as he doesn't make
>>> any statement whether a religion not teaching universal love for each
>>> other is crap or not, his posting cannot be read as "God and any
>>> religion is crap"
>>
>> His attitude is not his words, you're missing the point, Islam for
>> example teaches the purity of God's love and that we most promote this
>> among us,
>
> Yet it also teaches war, killing, stoning, etc, not love. So, no, I
> don't believe that.
>
>> exactly where? and I don't know exactly, is what I conclude from the
>> many Koran fragments I've heard or read in an unknown period of time.
>
> Certainly. That's precisely my point. The followers of a religion pick
> and choose the parts they want to hear. If you haven't read the *whole*
> Koran yourself, arguing about what it says is kind of silly, don't you
> think?
>
> "Hey, Darren's wrong, because some people who may or may not have read
> the Koran themself tell me he's wrong."
>
> What about the other dozen religions you just *ignored*, compared to
> which Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are essentially identical?
>
>> No he didn't, his attitude also speaks for him.
>
> My attitude is that I call BS on people who tell me what my god wants me
> to believe without ever having read my holy books, let alone don't
> believe them. I find it an amazing amount of hubris for you to speak for
> the basic premise of every religion in the entire world, don't you?
>
> > And even if the
>> quotation is flawed is what we all need to do anyway, as one possible
>> way for a harmonious co-existence, makes sense to me.
>
> I'm not arguing the truth of the assertion for people. I'm disagreeing
> with your assertion that every religion wants you to love everyone.
>
> Do you even know what the basic premise of the mayan religion is?
Really, you think Maya religion is something people do now? maybe some
Mexicans, but anyway yes I honestly believe Love is the answer and if
it's not what every religion says it should; for what I have understand
every religion teaches how to love better according to the philosophy of
a certain deity, love takes many shapes but is love in the end. And I
didn't ignored the other religions, you just thought I did.
You have say many wrong assuptions here but you don't care about it and
you wrote that I BS, right, dude, I'm sure you don't have a clue what
Islam is about, just because some Islam members attacked you Country,
there are extremist in every religion, that do stupid things in the name
of their God, that don't make those religions useless, just wrongly
followed, I have even chat in a Dalnet #Islam IRC channel, so you and
your closed minded certainties are your own.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> since you missed the point of my post, Ill say this is a wrong
>> assumption.
>
> BTW, I don't think we missed the point of your post.
>
> I have also noticed it's very *very* common for the faithful to think
> anyone who disagrees with any of their statements to be attacking, and
> anyone who disagrees with their faith just "doesn't understand" it.
> Right up there with "if only you asked sincerely enough, you'd be
> answered."
>
> So, yeah, typical "debating" tactic: "You're wrong, because you don't
> understand what you meant, and you don't understand what *I* meant, and
> what I meant isn't what I said but that doesn't matter because you're
> wrong, and I know you're wrong because you disagree with me, because I
> know what *your* god wants *you* to do."
Everyone is saying the same but you think the problem is everyone, and
don't even care to reflect on it, yeah, that must be it...
Very mature...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> So, yeah, typical "debating" tactic: "You're wrong, because you don't
> understand what you meant, and you don't understand what *I* meant, and
> what I meant isn't what I said but that doesn't matter because you're
> wrong, and I know you're wrong because you disagree with me, because I
> know what *your* god wants *you* to do."
^
|
This ---| was never my tactic, but you just assumed it was, again,
what ever you say man...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> take the good and the truth and apply it to our life for constructive
>> benefice which is basically what religions, governments and society in
>> general strives for, right?
>
> This is again an overgeneralization. Clearly Mugabe isn't running a
> government which strives for good and truth. You could probably go
> through history and list dozens if not hundreds of governments that
> don't even strive for the welfare of their citizens let alone goodness
> and truth.
>
> You overgeneralize too much, which is one of the fatal flaws of monotheism.
I don't think I'm writing 'in general' not 'every single person &
entity', OF COURSE there are people that do the wrong thing and
misuses/betrays what ever was trusted to them, but the general
philosophy of organizing ourselves in governments and institutions, and
in turn in our homes and our lives is all for good, all for love to
ourselves, all based on the truth (at least originally), tendency to
good in general, at least there are people that try to be as good as
they can.
I just knew you were going to go... but, there are people that don't
comply with this so therefore you're completely wrong, etc. you just me
to be always wrong since I'm a God believer... and you have "the POV" on
everything... hehehe, you're so biased about denying everything
religious, that you don't see what everyone on a religion is saying to
you, OPEN YOUR EYES, there are a spiritual world out there maybe all
religious are wrong but they're based on sort of spiritual base that you
comfortably try to deny, but OK, I leave you alone.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> It also depends on your definitions of "goodness" and "truth". Many
>> consider "goodness" to mean, "Upholding the natural order of their
>> gods world.", and "truth" to be, "The truth of what this order is."
>
> Yes, that too. Islam preaches goodness *and* murder if you leave Islam,
> because that's the goodness of truth! But you know, it's a book about
> goodness.
You being an expert on the Koran, right?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-10-2009 22:57, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>> It also depends on your definitions of "goodness" and "truth". Many
>>> consider "goodness" to mean, "Upholding the natural order of their
>>> gods world.", and "truth" to be, "The truth of what this order is."
>>
>> Yes, that too. Islam preaches goodness *and* murder if you leave
>> Islam, because that's the goodness of truth! But you know, it's a
>> book about goodness.
>
> You being an expert on the Koran, right?
Just a word of warning: Darren *has* read a lot about religion, both
holy books and secondary literature, so don't try to out-sarcasm him
without having done your share of reading.
I think this discussion might have been more fruitful if you all tried
to learn from one another in stead of trying to be nasty and sticking to
your point. But that may be just me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-10-2009 22:14, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> I suggest you read more History and look for what is accepted as History
> and Jesus is, not the Biblical one but the actual carpenter who married
> Mary Magdalene, yeah, Jesus never existed is just so convenient, finally
> is just the same you as any another Materialist only find safety in
> material stuff, any doubt will give you the perfect excuse to deny it.
>
> Man, is up to you, spiritual things because of you POV will never be as
> a sign of anything, to start understanding you need to broader it and
> focus it in the direction of: maybe there is something spiritual that is
> not clear but it has it's own world of existence that intersects with
> ours in a blurred way for some reason, because this is apparently the
> truth about it.
>
> Also, looks like you have seen documentaries that support your material
> POV, not the ones that look truly to clear as much as possible spiritual
> mysteries.
POV is not the best abbreviation to use in this forum, especially if you
pair it with 'material'. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> You being an expert on the Koran, right?
Have *you* read it?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> I don't think I'm writing 'in general' not 'every single person &
> entity', OF COURSE there are people that do the wrong thing and
> misuses/betrays what ever was trusted to them, but the general
> philosophy of organizing ourselves in governments and institutions, and
> in turn in our homes and our lives is all for good, all for love to
> ourselves, all based on the truth (at least originally), tendency to
> good in general, at least there are people that try to be as good as
> they can.
Sure. But when you talk about "every government" you're still
overgeneralizing. You're taking how you want the world to be, saying "this
is how it is, any any variance is unimportant." I, on the other hand, find
the variance from what we want to be the important part to concentrate upon,
as that's the only way to improve the world.
> I just knew you were going to go... but, there are people that don't
> comply with this so therefore you're completely wrong, etc. you just me
> to be always wrong since I'm a God believer...
Not at all. You can be entirely wrong about religion without believing in
any of them either. Indeed, when atheists say "every religion" and then go
on to refer to "God, the creator of the universe", I correct them also. It's
far from every relgion where there was one god that created the universe.
> you're so biased about denying everything religious,
I do not deny everything religious. In this particular conversation, I'm
simply denying that there is one blanket commandment from God that applies
to every religion regardless of how many Gods they have or don't have.
> that you don't see what everyone on a religion is saying to
> you, OPEN YOUR EYES, there are a spiritual world out there maybe all
> religious are wrong but they're based on sort of spiritual base that you
> comfortably try to deny, but OK, I leave you alone.
What makes you think I'm not "spiritual"? What makes you think I'm not
hearing, understanding, and even agreeing with you about how people should
behave? What makes you think I don't love my neighbor? Simply because I deny
that you should be able to impose that on others, or that there's some giant
cosmological intelligence that wants it that way?
The very fact that you don't think someone can be loving and spiritual
without God is exactly the fact I'm saying you have wrong when you claim
every religion is based on God's love, including the host of religions where
there isn't even a god.
Really, I don't think you have any idea what I believe or don't. You've said
what you believe, but I've never told you any details of what I believe.
I don't disagree with you in terms of being nice to others etc. I am just
disagreeing that when you say "every government" it really means what you
say, and I am disagreeing that when you say "every religion's God wants you
to love people", that's just plain factually incorrect regardless of how you
try to spin it.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
