Do you believe in God and why

[sirineou]

Please forgive me for my late response, I was unable to open this website for the past 24 hrs, When I finally gained access I had 14 quotes, It will take me some time to read and respond to all of them. 

By the way, does anyone know what happened to this Forum? I am in the US now and I have not being able to open the website for the past 24 hrs, 

I see you were all posting 10 hrs ago, so obviously you had access 10 hrs ago

[Sunmaster]

11 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Because NO historian of the time made any mention or took any notice.

 

And yes...I am a Jesus mythicist. Haven't seen there is enough evidence of even the actual man, so much as the god. 

 

Anything as special a thing as the supposed son of the imaginary YHWH actually doing miracles in the first century would have been documented. Mundane people and events were, but not JC. 

I'm no expert in the Jesus department, so had to look this one up. 
Apparently there are historical, non-biblical mentions of Jesus, namely by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (93AD), Tacitus (116AD) and Roman governor Pliny the Younger.

Source:
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

[Sunmaster]

3 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Please forgive me for my late response, I was unable to open this website for the past 24 hrs, When I finally gained access I had 14 quotes, It will take me some time to read and respond to all of them. 

By the way, does anyone know what happened to this Forum? I am in the US now and I have not being able to open the website for the past 24 hrs, 

I see you were all posting 10 hrs ago, so obviously you had access 10 hrs ago

The forum was down only a short time for me last night (Thai time).

[WalkingOrders]

13 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Because NO historian of the time made any mention or took any notice.

 

And yes...I am a Jesus mythicist. Haven't seen there is enough evidence of even the actual man, so much as the god. 

 

Anything as special a thing as the supposed son of the imaginary YHWH actually doing miracles in the first century would have been documented. Mundane people and events were, but not JC. 

Then as a mythicist, you reject even the historical Jesus, but if you are going to allow for his existence, and then refer to the Jesus which is YOUR own made up Jesus, as mundane, well now you are creating a Jesus in your own mind with attributes that are unkind to Christians, and that is rather petty. If you are allowing that Jesus existed it is absolutely logical to think he must have had some special attributes in order for a mythology to spring up around him.

[sirineou]

3 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The forum was down only a short time for me last night (Thai time).

totally unreachable in the US for over 24 hrs 

[WalkingOrders]

6 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I'm no expert in the Jesus department, so had to look this one up. 
Apparently there are historical, non-biblical mentions of Jesus, namely by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (93AD), Tacitus (116AD) and Roman governor Pliny the Younger.

Source:
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

The josephus quote is considered by most scholars as a later added forgery.

[WalkingOrders]

19 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Nothing of what you just said contradicts my point that there are hierarchies in the spiritual practice (broadly: novice - practitioner - master).

You just say that there might be people who reject the spiritual path...so what? The hierarchy doesn't disappear because of that.

My purpose wasnt to contradict you simply to express a parallel view that may at times overlap or contradict, or add to it from my view. 

[Skeptic7]

20 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I'm no expert in the Jesus department, so had to look this one up. 
Apparently there are historical, non-biblical mentions of Jesus, namely by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (93AD), Tacitus (116AD) and Roman governor Pliny the Younger.

Source:
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

Yes but most are considered forgeries added later. And more importantly, Josephus wasn't even born until 37 CE and Tacitus not until 55 CE. Jesus supposed death was in 30 CE. Hardly contemporary. And these referenced writings were written much later, by your own post. Hardly first hand knowledge or contemporary. 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Skeptic7

[sirineou]

22 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I'm no expert in the Jesus department, so had to look this one up. 
Apparently there are historical, non-biblical mentions of Jesus, namely by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (93AD), Tacitus (116AD) and Roman governor Pliny the Younger.

Source:
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

93, and 116 years later. 

There are other historical references that occurred during the lifetime of jesus but no mention of him. One would thing historians would have mentioned such momentus occurrence. You would think one on them would had said, "And by the way there is a guy who walks on water, turns water to wine, and came back from the dead" ,

Personally I believe that such a person existed , he was a philosopher, robbed  the local authorities the wrong way, and they killed him. his disciples, fled and continued to teach his philosophy and to give themselves the gravitas that jesus had but they did not, embellished the story. Then Constantine converted to Christianity for political reasons, and we were of to races.   

Edited January 28, 2020 by sirineou

[Sunmaster]

15 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Yes but most are considered forgeries added later. And more importantly, Josephus wasn't even born until 37 CE and Tacitus not until 55 CE. Jesus supposed death was in 30 CE. Hardly contemporary. And these referenced writings were written much later, by your own post. Hardly first hand knowledge or contemporary. 

The existence or non-existence of Jesus is irrelevant to my own belief system, so I don't really care one way or another. 
I generally distrust anything coming from the bible anyway.

[WalkingOrders]

20 minutes ago, sirineou said:

93, and 116 years later. 

There are other historical references that occurred during the lifetime of jesus but no mention of him. One would thing historians would have mentioned such momentus occurrence. You would think one on them would had said, "And by the way there is a guy who walks on water, turns water to wine, and came back from the dead" ,

Personally I believe that such a person existed , he was a philosopher, robbed  the local authorities the wrong way, and they killed him. his disciples, fled and continued to teach his philosophy and to give themselves the gravitas that jesus had but they did not, embellished the story. Then Constantine converted to Christianity for political reasons, and we were of to races.   

If you are able to convince yourself of a whacky story like that, I would think you would find it easier to believe he is Christ crucified under pilate, died, decended to the depths, and on the 3rd day he rose, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead.

Edited January 28, 2020 by WalkingOrders
Sp

[Skeptic7]

7 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The existence or non-existence of Jesus is irrelevant to my own belief system, so I don't really care one way or another. 
I generally distrust anything coming from the bible anyway.

But you refuted, so got answers to your rebuttal.

[Skeptic7]

42 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Then as a mythicist, you reject even the historical Jesus, but if you are going to allow for his existence, and then refer to the Jesus which is YOUR own made up Jesus, as mundane, well now you are creating a Jesus in your own mind with attributes that are unkind to Christians, and that is rather petty. If you are allowing that Jesus existed it is absolutely logical to think he must have had some special attributes in order for a mythology to spring up around him.

Just using for sake of argument to make certain points and show contradictions and omissions that are ignorantly taken for granted by most of the "sheeple". Surely you understand this. 

 

Maybe there was an historical character, doesn't matter...was certainly not divine. Just a human IMO. No evidence yet to think otherwise. 

[Sunmaster]

2 hours ago, sirineou said:

Ok so you got your first confused  emoticon.

How does what you said have anything  to do with what I said? Never mind proving me wrong?

No doubt meditation exists, and it has benefits, such meditation has being studied , using the scientific method, and a system of meditation has being developed. I practice meditation with excellent results, and I believe I have reversed a medical condition ,throw meditation biofeedback.  The only thing that science has not prove  is a metaphysical connection. 

 

 

That's interesting. 

You meditated and felt the benefits on your own skin. You verified the claims of the yogis that meditation gives psychophysical benefits through practice and agree that there's evidence for their claims to be true. Mind over matter in your case.

But then you stop short at the metaphysical claims, stating that there are [I quote you] "no spiritual realities".

 

Now, what would be more logical?

 

That the yogis were right when it comes to body and mind, but then completely lost it somehow when they talked about Spirit.   

 

....Or....

 

That you've reached your own limitation when it comes to the spiritual aspect of reality, and then blew that up to signify that there can't be any spiritual realities for anybody. 

 

Quote

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Sunmaster

[mauGR1]

2 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Hardly first hand knowledge or contemporary. 

What did you expect, a video with voice recording ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sirineou]

56 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

That's interesting. 

You meditated and felt the benefits on your own skin. You verified the claims of the yogis that meditation gives psychophysical benefits through practice and agree that there's evidence for their claims to be true. Mind over matter in your case.

I have nothing against meditation , on it's ability to access metaphysical realms. 

It's not so much mind over matter , as much as the ability of the mind to affect changes to the body.

In my case ,as a result of an operation , there were nerve damage to the sympathetic ganglion (if i remember correctly the damage was at the L2 location), leaving me unable to perspire  above the chest, and causing excessive "comprehensive"  perspiration to Other lower parts of the body,

the only way to rectify the situation was an operation only done in Sweden at the time ,to reverse the damage,

  I  developed   picture of the sympathetic ganglion in my mind, and while in deep meditation I picture the nerve endings growing and re-attaching themselves, With in a year the situation was reversed and I perspired normally. My doctor could not believe it , he had said that unless I had the reversal operation the damage was permanent.

Not sure if it would have happened on it's own , or if the reversal was a result of my meditation, But my doctor said that such reversals are very rare on their own and that he had never seen one.

   many years ago I had seen a Hypnotisme exhibition  where a hypnotised person was made to believe that he was being burned in his arm with a cigaret, where in fact that person was being touched by a pencil, and he developed a burn welt. 

  So belief can indeed induce  physical changes, but not via any paranormal influence but perhaps a placebo effect. or accessing bodily processes not accessible in a normal state of mind.      

 

 

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

So belief can indeed induce  physical changes, but not via any paranormal influence but perhaps a placebo effect. or accessing bodily processes not accessible in a normal state of mind.      

 

Well, that's the so called "mystery of the faith" that so many seem to despise. Apparently can work in many ways.

You just told a story of a miracle, yet you seem to be slightly unimpressed.

[sirineou]

18 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, that's the so called "mystery of the faith" that so many seem to despise. Apparently can work in many ways.

You just told a story of a miracle, yet you seem to be slightly unimpressed.

I don't think many if any atheists despise faith, only religion, and it;s attempts to force its beliefs on others. 

and that seems to be a product of the Abrahamic faiths, During the Hellenistic period many faiths coexisted in harmony. Though the did make make Socrates drink the Hemlock, but it can be argued that nit was for political reasons.  

I don't believe my story was of a Metaphysical miracle,  I don't  believe any of the physical laws were suspended for my benefit, But I do believe that there is great value to  Meditation and everyone should engage in it, When one crosses the street one should look both ways , in this case outside and inside. 

After taking care of some of the inside, I am Going to the Gym now to take care some of the outside, talk with you all tomorrow

Good Night. 

Edited January 28, 2020 by sirineou

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

"Some" people...I agree. They are hard to find though.

Certainly none of us here.

Jesus ( I think ) said "a prophet has no honour in his own land" or words to that effect, which is true. Substitute wise man for prophet and it is the same.

 

In my opinion wisdom is a product of living long enough with an open mind and observing life. No one is born wise, IMO. However, one can be born clever, which some would mistake for wisdom.

 

I go away for one day and 5 new pages! I hope they are not all just the same circular arguments though.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

The josephus quote is considered by most scholars as a later added forgery.

The Arabs at the time of the start of Islam believed that Jesus existed and that he was a prophet.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

He knew Judas was going to betray him, did he not?

The whole point of Christianity ( the resurrection ) was only possible if Jesus died ( on the cross ). Had Judas not betrayed him, someone else would have had to.

Had Jesus lived on and got married, had a family etc Christianity would never have started.

[geronimo]

First off, a big shout to Ivor for creating a thread that seems to live forever,

 

Regarding faith, science is now proving that the power of the human conscious is awesome and indeed exists. It matters not whether your faith is real or not; only that you believe.

 

We all have this power, yet so few actually know how to use it and even fewer know of its existence.

[Tagged]

1 minute ago, geronimo said:

First off, a big shout to Ivor for creating a thread that seems to live forever,

 

Regarding faith, science is now proving that the power of the human conscious is awesome and indeed exists. It matters not whether your faith is real or not; only that you believe.

 

We all have this power, yet so few actually know how to use it and even fewer know of its existence.

And we are back to you, me, us and them. Faith comes from inside out, and maybe not a superpower who control our mind, or influence our mind. 

 

 

[geronimo]

Just now, Tagged said:

And we are back to you, me, us and them. Faith comes from inside out, and maybe not a superpower who control our mind, or influence our mind. 

 

 

agree

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, sirineou said:

A grammatical error on my part, I meant to say "I am sure there is a lot more to you than religion".

also I did not say Organised religion , I said religion, which is what the practice of God

is  IMO

Please point out where I was disrespectful, or where I Mock you.  I was simply responding to when you said 

"What I don't understand is why you seem to be on a crusade to convince those like me that we are wrong, instead of leaving us to our beliefs which do nothing to hurt anyone " 

to which I replied very politely that i would never want to rob you of your faith. but since you are in this thread I thought you were here because you wanted to talk about such things.

By the way, Your beliefs (not you personally) hurt plenty.

 

I don't understand. In the first sentence you say that that Science is incapable of proving or disproving God, and then you say you believe in that you believe in god because there are evidence everywhere. 

two incompatible statements because the Scientific process is an evidence based process.

I think you are confusing indications, with evidence.  
 

 

I did specifically say I WASN'T referring to YOU, unless you consider yourself to be a troll. Did you actually read and understand what I wrote before saying I accused you of mockery?

 

Religion is a man made construct which co opts faith to the benefit of the men in funny hats. I reject religion in every way.

 

I do want to talk about faith, but it's hard when most posters are talking about anything but faith. Just a few, from whom I have learned much of faith.

 

How on earth does my faith hurt anyone else?

 

Science does not have the tools or the knowledge to prove or disprove "God". It is far too primitive to even begin to understand how the universe life and everything was created- NB created, not the physical bit of the universe that we can see. There is so much more that we can't. 

the Scientific process is an evidence based process.

Exactly, and that is why it can't.

 

There is indeed evidence everywhere, but not to a closed mind that does not believe in faith or God. Frankly, if you don't understand what I mean, I can't explain it to you, and I'm not going to try.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

So  then looking at art and appreciating it, or swimming,  would be earthly pleasures, if so, and not holding this as an opinion you hold, but have seen it discussed across the board, why would anyone wish to remove or surpress such pleasure?

Where did he say that he did? I read no such indication.

[geronimo]

Science is finally figuring out what the human conscious can really do ... exciting times ahead .. for some ....

[WalkingOrders]

10 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Just using for sake of argument to make certain points and show contradictions and omissions that are ignorantly taken for granted by most of the "sheeple". Surely you understand this. 

 

Maybe there was an historical character, doesn't matter...was certainly not divine. Just a human IMO. No evidence yet to think otherwise. 

The first part of your response presumes you to be somehow above the masses of humanity. Possessing an enlightenment that the "sheeple" don't posess. No, I don't understand.

 

The second part of your response, I cannot contend as you are making a valid point that you have seen no evidence that you find convincing, cerrainly no proofs  of a historical Jesus, let alone a divine one, and... certainly no evidence of a mundane one ????

[WalkingOrders]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

That's interesting. 

You meditated and felt the benefits on your own skin. You verified the claims of the yogis that meditation gives psychophysical benefits through practice and agree that there's evidence for their claims to be true. Mind over matter in your case.

But then you stop short at the metaphysical claims, stating that there are [I quote you] "no spiritual realities".

 

Now, what would be more logical?

 

That the yogis were right when it comes to body and mind, but then completely lost it somehow when they talked about Spirit.   

 

....Or....

 

That you've reached your own limitation when it comes to the spiritual aspect of reality, and then blew that up to signify that there can't be any spiritual realities for anybody. 

 

Perhaps this person simply has seen no proof of spiritual realities, nor been offered any proofs. You are asking him to take an unreasonable jump in reasoning to simply accept your primise IMO.

[WalkingOrders]

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Where did he say that he did? I read no such indication.

You are missing the entire conversation by attempting to take a side here.

 

I make no accusation of him. I questioned him as a method of understanding the point of view he was holding regarding earthly pleasures. Not so that I could attack him later, but so I could understand him better.

 

He later answered, and I agreed with his response.