|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Religion? |
| Bad Idea. |
|
73% |
[ 38 ] |
| Good Idea. |
|
26% |
[ 14 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 52 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 2:32 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I make a distinction between innocent atheists - which I think probably the great majority of professed atheists are - and the really demonic atheists who (apart from hypothetical arguments) would prefer to kill God rather than surrender to His will.
As far as intelligent apes go, I think that they can be trained to perform some humanlike activities, exercise some reason, and express some humanlike emotions, but their consciousness is not sufficiently developed to understand philosophical concepts.
Although they're spiritually the same as humans in that their essential identity is also spirit-soul, their conscousness is more covered/filtered by the lower modes of nature - ignorance and passion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| I make a distinction between innocent atheists - which I think probably the great majority of professed atheists are - and the really demonic atheists who (apart from hypothetical arguments) would prefer to kill God rather than surrender to His will. |
Step outside of your little krishna bubble for a second and try to see the absurdity of this statement. Got any references to atheists who want to kill a god that by definition they don't believe in in the first place.
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| well atheists were brought up with christian principals.. so yeah... |
What? Since when are principals proprietary to Christians?
Ethics and morality are not a product of religion. Unless you think ancient humans somehow came up with the concept of a god before they decided it wasn't a good thing to kill their offspring. In fact, if I recall correctly it was the Christian god who suggested Abraham kill his son as a test of faith, not to mention committed multiple genocides and inspired a few in its followers.
I respect religion for it's ability to draw people together to follow certain values they may not have followed otherwise, but by and large religion is now a corrupt, money-driven institution whose moral code is so open to interpretation it's of little value anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| t;]well atheists were brought up with christian principals.. so yeah... |
What? Since when are principals proprietary to Christians?
Ethics and morality are not a product of religion. Unless you think ancient humans somehow came up with the concept of a god before they decided it wasn't a good thing to kill their offspring. In fact, if I recall correctly it was the Christian god who suggested Abraham kill his son as a test of faith, not to mention committed multiple genocides and inspired a few in its followers.
I respect religion for it's ability to draw people together to follow certain values they may not have followed otherwise, but by and large religion is now a corrupt, money-driven institution whose moral code is so open to interpretation it's of little value anymore. |
Are you from USA or canada? if so..
then most of the principals in society came from Religion in some way.
I mean it's what our nation was founded on!
its how the laws were made and governed!
and its past down through generation to generation and just stays in society! look at our history!!
sure you we have athiests, but they came from christian roots and they grew up in a christian society . remember your school days?
most are probably oblivious to it, but fact of the matter is. its here all around us we are a christian nation, sure most of us might not be christians! but the message and their principals are here..
you can't get away from it.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| I make a distinction between innocent atheists - which I think probably the great majority of professed atheists are - and the really demonic atheists who (apart from hypothetical arguments) would prefer to kill God rather than surrender to His will. |
Who? Dawkins. And then you wave your hands around a lot. Even many of us atheists don't fully agree with Dawkins' position.
| Quote: |
| As far as intelligent apes go, I think that they can be trained to perform some humanlike activities, exercise some reason, and express some humanlike emotions, but their consciousness is not sufficiently developed to understand philosophical concepts. |
They've not evolved to that point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
Are you from USA or canada? if so..
then most of the principals in society came from Religion in some way. |
Did the idea of free speech come from religion? Did the idea of not killing your neighbor come from religion? Are capitalism and democracy Christian ideals? They may have been adopted into religions but it seems pretty unlikely they originated there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Atheism is a complex topic - as is indicated in this article that distinquishes various recognized types:
http://religion-school.com/#athiesm
Technically, a Vaishnava devotee who accepts the supreme authority of Krishna considers any principles that contradict the the principles spoken by "God" in Bhagavad-gita some 5000 years ago to be atheistic.
According to the Vedic tradition, the same essential spiritual knowledge was first spoken by Krishna to the predominating deity of the Sun, Vivasvan, many millions of years ago.
http://www.iskcon.net/oregon/rv6.htm
All the various impersonalist and voidist philosophies may have some temporary, limited usefulness, but Krishna philosophy is eternally useful and beneficial.
http://prabhupadabooks.com/?g=157288
Atheists - along with agnostics and materialistic/phony theists - are offensive according to their degree of God-envy and how influencial they are in misleading people from the path of devotion.
Krishna makes it clear what type of behavior is most pleasing to Him - and that is the essence of real religion ...
At the end of 12th Chapter of Gita Krishna describes that the person "who is very dear to Him, or His best friend, is one who is not envious but is a kind friend to all living entities, who does not think himself a proprietor, who is free from false ego and equal both in happiness and distress, who is always satisfied and engaged in devotional service with determination and whose mind and intelligence are in agreement with Me . . .
http://www.prabhupada1973.com/2006_12_31_prabhupadaletters1973_archive.html
I think that it's a much better idea to please God by our words and behavior than to displease Him. Of course, nonbelievers counter that there is no reason to believe the proposition that God exists.
However, one can appreciate God's existence by coming to the transcendental platform. How one can do so is described by modern Vedic scientists in this article, which concludes as follows:
If individuals have no consciousness of something then for them it appears as if it is not there. However it may actually be there, but they are not taking any note of it. They do not notice it due to their absorption in particular ways of living, or thinking or their particular stage of awareness. So when awareness is not awakened, then one may be in at a stage of making no distinctions and consider things to be indeterminate. The finer determination of things is there but only by coming in contact with those who have knowledge of that distinction, then we may also learn from them how to become aware of it. What is already there is not known to the sleeping consciousness, but is known to the awakened sage.
www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/01-09/editorials3807.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
If individuals have no consciousness of something then for them it appears as if it is not there. However it may actually be there, but they are not taking any note of it. They do not notice it due to their absorption in particular ways of living, or thinking or their particular stage of awareness. So when awareness is not awakened, then one may be in at a stage of making no distinctions and consider things to be indeterminate. The finer determination of things is there but only by coming in contact with those who have knowledge of that distinction, then we may also learn from them how to become aware of it. What is already there is not known to the sleeping consciousness, but is known to the awakened sage.
www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/01-09/editorials3807.htm |
That has to be the most indefinite "conclusion" I've ever read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I've always felt the best evidence against the existence of god is the existence of children's hospices. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| I've always felt the best evidence against the existence of god is the existence of children's hospices. |
I'd like for you to expand this before I follow my instincts and tear it apart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| I've always felt the best evidence against the existence of god is the existence of children's hospices. |
I'd like for you to expand this before I follow my instincts and tear it apart. |
First, I did not say proof. If you have a christian god hypothesis, you should see evidence for your god. Your hypothesis should make predictions of what you should see and what you should not see.
Prayer should have an effect, for example.
A god of love that takes time to make sure your team wins the super bowl you think would take some more time to keep kids free of cancer.
Anyway, what would your god hypothesis predict and how can we test it?
Is there no way? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| I've always felt the best evidence against the existence of god is the existence of children's hospices. |
I'd like for you to expand this before I follow my instincts and tear it apart. |
First, I did not say proof. If you have a christian god hypothesis, you should see evidence for your god. Your hypothesis should make predictions of what you should see and what you should not see.
Prayer should have an effect, for example.
A god of love that takes time to make sure your team wins the super bowl you think would take some more time to keep kids free of cancer.
Anyway, what would your god hypothesis predict and how can we test it?
Is there no way? |
Your last sentence is correct. You cannot put a square peg in similarly sized round hole. You cannot use reason to challenge revelation.
But trying to put a square peg in a round hole is fun, which is why we keep coming back to it. So, then, I say you have the concept of prayer backwards. Its no surprise, many 'Christians' do as well.
A prayer isn't a wish list and God isn't Santa Claus. Prayer is a form of meditation and a way of accessing God's grace. God's grace is (partly) the peace of mind and wisdom that comes from understanding.
There's nothing in Christianity that promises a life without suffering, although death is supposed to be a relief from suffering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jajdude
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah these threads, do they ever really die? It's odd in a way because we understand so little about life and people, but we're happy to argue about deep stuff. I admit it's fun and a bit addictive but there's no end to it. For me at least it's like a toy to a restless child. My mind is restless and full of trivial and petty crap, so getting into these deep thoughts by Jack Handey is entertaining. There's nothing really deep about it I guess if the mind is just a restless thing spouting out its contents and flying around in all directions looking to be satisfied.
Never mind, I didn't sleep so well and am a bit caffeinated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
[A prayer isn't a wish list and God isn't Santa Claus. Prayer is a form of meditation and a way of accessing God's grace. God's grace is (partly) the peace of mind and wisdom that comes from understanding.
|
That's your opinion. But I wonder if that's the opinion of people who pray to god before buying a scratch and win ticket. It doesn't seem to be the message conveyed by preachers. Prayer works, we're told. Define works.
| Quote: |
| There's nothing in Christianity that promises a life without suffering, although death is supposed to be a relief from suffering. |
But it does promise a good and all loving god. That hypothesis does not seem compatible with the fact children die of horrible disease that is the fault of no one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the conclusive Vedic view, praying for material things is less intelligent, and it's less intelligent for people to desire to remain in this material world full of suffering.
Sentimental altruism is ultimately of no value without being God-centered, What's needed is scientific understanding of our constitutional position as eternal loving servants of God and acting accordingly...
I don't claim to be perfect myself - and here's the proof of that:
http://www.singsnap.com/snap/r/b1ca08f6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
[A prayer isn't a wish list and God isn't Santa Claus. Prayer is a form of meditation and a way of accessing God's grace. God's grace is (partly) the peace of mind and wisdom that comes from understanding.
|
That's your opinion. But I wonder if that's the opinion of people who pray to god before buying a scratch and win ticket. It doesn't seem to be the message conveyed by preachers. Prayer works, we're told. Define works. |
What do you mean that's my opinion? Surely you're not suggesting that one opinion is just as good as anyone else's. Or is what you mean to say that my concept of prayer is bad/inaccurate/unfaithful to dogma?
Which preachers are we talking about? Yes, there are even evangelical leaders who have sophisticated theological training. One of the problems is that their flock do not. After studying some theology, I went back to Church a few times (I'm no longer Christian) and I found the sermons a lot more interesting.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| There's nothing in Christianity that promises a life without suffering, although death is supposed to be a relief from suffering. |
But it does promise a good and all loving god. That hypothesis does not seem compatible with the fact children die of horrible disease that is the fault of no one. |
I addressed that. Goodness and love does not mean the alleviation of all suffering. I understand that modern materialism believes that some of the highest goods are comfort and the alleviation of ailments.
Dostoevsky originally made the point you made in the Brothers Karamazov.
| Quote: |
"But I've still better things about children. I've collected a great, great deal about Russian children, Alyosha. There was a little girl of five who was hated by her father and mother, 'most worthy and respectable people, of good education and breeding.' You see, I must repeat again, it is a peculiar characteristic of many people, this love of torturing children, and children only. To all other types of humanity these torturers behave mildly and benevolently, like cultivated and humane Europeans; but they are very fond of tormenting children, even fond of children themselves in that sense. it's just their defencelessness that tempts the tormentor, just the angelic confidence of the child who has no refuge and no appeal, that sets his vile blood on fire. In every man, of course, a demon lies hidden -- the demon of rage, the demon of lustful heat at the screams of the tortured victim, the demon of lawlessness let off the chain, the demon of diseases that follow on vice, gout, kidney disease, and so on.
"This poor child of five was subjected to every possible torture by those cultivated parents. They beat her, thrashed her, kicked her for no reason till her body was one bruise. Then, they went to greater refinements of cruelty -- shut her up all night in the cold and frost in a privy, and because she didn't ask to be taken up at night (as though a child of five sleeping its angelic, sound sleep could be trained to wake and ask), they smeared her face and filled her mouth with excrement, and it was her mother, her mother did this. And that mother could sleep, hearing the poor child's groans! Can you understand why a little creature, who can't even understand what's done to her, should beat her little aching heart with her tiny fist in the dark and the cold, and weep her meek unresentful tears to dear, kind God to protect her? Do you understand that, friend and brother, you pious and humble novice? Do you understand why this infamy must be and is permitted? Without it, I am told, man could not have existed on earth, for he could not have known good and evil. Why should he know that diabolical good and evil when it costs so much? Why, the whole world of knowledge is not worth that child's prayer to dear, kind God'! I say nothing of the sufferings of grown-up people, they have eaten the apple, damn them, and the devil take them all! But these little ones! I am making you suffer, Alyosha, you are not yourself. I'll leave off if you like."
"Nevermind. I want to suffer too," muttered Alyosha.
"One picture, only one more, because it's so curious, so characteristic, and I have only just read it in some collection of Russian antiquities. I've forgotten the name. I must look it up. It was in the darkest days of serfdom at the beginning of the century, and long live the Liberator of the People! There was in those days a general of aristocratic connections, the owner of great estates, one of those men -- somewhat exceptional, I believe, even then -- who, retiring from the service into a life of leisure, are convinced that they've earned absolute power over the lives of their subjects. There were such men then. So our general, settled on his property of two thousand souls, lives in pomp, and domineers over his poor neighbours as though they were dependents and buffoons. He has kennels of hundreds of hounds and nearly a hundred dog-boys -- all mounted, and in uniform. One day a serf-boy, a little child of eight, threw a stone in play and hurt the paw of the general's favourite hound. 'Why is my favourite dog lame?' He is told that the boy threw a stone that hurt the dog's paw. 'So you did it.' The general looked the child up and down. 'Take him.' He was taken -- taken from his mother and kept shut up all night. Early that morning the general comes out on horseback, with the hounds, his dependents, dog-boys, and huntsmen, all mounted around him in full hunting parade. The servants are summoned for their edification, and in front of them all stands the mother of the child. The child is brought from the lock-up. It's a gloomy, cold, foggy, autumn day, a capital day for hunting. The general orders the child to be undressed; the child is stripped naked. He shivers, numb with terror, not daring to cry.... 'Make him run,' commands the general. 'Run! run!' shout the dog-boys. The boy runs.... 'At him!' yells the general, and he sets the whole pack of hounds on the child. The hounds catch him, and tear him to pieces before his mother's eyes!... I believe the general was afterwards declared incapable of administering his estates. Well -- what did he deserve? To be shot? To be shot for the satisfaction of our moral feelings? Speak, Alyosha!
"To be shot," murmured Alyosha, lifting his eyes to Ivan with a pale, twisted smile.
"Bravo!" cried Ivan delighted. "If even you say so... You're a pretty monk! So there is a little devil sitting in your heart, Alyosha Karamazov!"
"What I said was absurd, but-"
"That's just the point, that 'but'!" cried Ivan. "Let me tell you, novice, that the absurd is only too necessary on earth. The world stands on absurdities, and perhaps nothing would have come to pass in it without them. We know what we know!"
"What do you know?"
"I understand nothing," Ivan went on, as though in delirium. "I don't want to understand anything now. I want to stick to the fact. I made up my mind long ago not to understand. If I try to understand anything, I shall be false to the fact, and I have determined to stick to the fact." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
