Jump to content

Do you believe in God and why


ivor bigun

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Yet, if your values are right, even if you do mistakes, you will be pushed on the "right track" by the immensely powerful force which some Christians refer as the "Guardian Angel".

I appreciate your attempts to tie your beliefs to Christianity but here is the thing. In Christianity Angels are actual spiritual beings created by God. This spiritual being is tied directly to the belief in Christianity.  So Christians are definitely NOT talking about an immensely powerful force - some mysterious force of the Universe. The Christian is talking about a Spiritual being that is written of in the bible. You may refer to the force as a Guardian angel, but the Christian does not. No Christian is calling the force you are speaking of (I am not at this point making any claims for or against) as being part of Christianity. Christians are NOT referring to your force as their Guardian Angel. You are.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i am here to practice English as well, is there anything wrong with the use of that term ?

I am not sure you mean to say this as a theory of a particular religion, which would not really be a theory, more likely called dogmas, Theology,  or practices. But studying about religions in general, how and why they exist, and how they function in a broader sense there are several theories. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

I appreciate your attempts to tie your beliefs to Christianity but here is the thing. In Christianity Angels are actual spiritual beings created by God. This spiritual being is tied directly to the belief in Christianity.  So Christians are definitely NOT talking about an immensely powerful force - some mysterious force of the Universe. The Christian is talking about a Spiritual being that is written of in the bible. You may refer to the force as a Guardian angel, but the Christian does not. No Christian is calling the force you are speaking of (I am not at this point making any claims for or against) as being part of Christianity. Christians are NOT referring to your force as their Guardian Angel. You are.

Well, i am born Catholic, and the "Guardian Angel" was often mentioned as a personal spiritual guide everyone has.

You can call it with another name if you wish, no objection from me.

 

PS i would never take a book like the Bible literally, but i would try to interpret it at the best of my intellectual honesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i am here to practice English as well, is there anything wrong with the use of that term ?

And as a part 2 of this answer to elaborate. Take catholicism for example. the Religion itself has dogma, theology, practices. And study of various aspects of such as Christology. Likewise someone could have a Theory about the development of some certain aspect withing the religion over time such as iconography, the rosary etc, that could be studied through history or archaeology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i am born Catholic, and the "Guardian Angel" was often mentioned as a personal spiritual guide everyone has.

You can call it with another name if you wish, no objection from me.

 

PS i would never take a book like the Bible literally, but i would try to interpret it at the best of my intellectual honesty.

Yes as a spiritual guide but still defined within Catholicism - you can find this in the Catechism of the Catholic Church - as Spiritual beings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

I am not sure you mean to say this as a theory of a particular religion, which would not really be a theory, more likely called dogmas, Theology,  or practices. But studying about religions in general, how and why they exist, and how they function in a broader sense there are several theories. 

Ok, my use of the term "religious theories" was in the broad sense of the meaning, as a counter argument to those who would be happy to burn all the religious books.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

Yes as a spiritual guide but still defined within Catholicism - you can find this in the Catechism of the Catholic Church - as Spiritual beings.

Yes, i was born Catholic and went to Catechism for a few years.

I can identify the "guardian angel" as the highest spiritual part of myself, but i would not bet on this being the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a simple thinking individual,

I learned here that different individuals have different "beliefs", some none. 

 

Some paths used here seems complex for the non-practitioner;

so are some descriptions of belief and faith, for a lay-person. 

 

The "sensations" one's experienced  being not measurable, one cannot , or should not, claim they may be superior to others. 

 

The goal seems however for all, to reach some kind of happiness, peace of mind, serenity.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

You are telling me several things that I must do. How is it that you can make the claim to that you are in any position to tell me what I must feel? You are making a claim that I cannot possibly have any faith unless I have a maximum amount as in your mind faith is either all or nothing. In other words you cannot ever find yourself in a situation of struggle with faith, or questioning, because if you do this is to say that the faith is not faith at all.  Next you claim that i must be a liar if I do not feel it. I must presume here that I must also accept whatever definition you might have for what "feeling" faith is.  Next you attack the faith of others who claim a belief in Jesus Christ but do not live up to it. Again, I must presume that this is to a standard that you have set. Next you pose a rhetorical question I believe, implying that such a person, not living up to the level of living that you have set, is claiming by his actions that he can do whatever he wants without regard to such things as what would be considered sin in Christian orthodoxy. In other words you are setting up a standard that implies that you can decide who or who is not a true believer by these ideas you have which to me seem quite black and white and deny the weaknesses of mankind to be less then perfect.  Next you again repeat either you have faith or you do not. Yet the teachings of Jesus and Judaism is filled with teachings about persons having little faith, or great faith. Admonitions as well as encouragements - such as the idea that faith the size of a mustard seed can move a mountain. You end with an admonishment that if someone believes in Jesus they should live up to it. I would agree with that statement but I am certain I would disagree with what you consider living up to it to be.  A lack of faith, questioning faith, feeling weak of faith, etc are not mortal sins in Christian dogma. 

Well, Im happy for you, but not for those who feel they failed. Religion, faith and belief can be cruel on people. 

 

I have seen people struggle with exactly what I ranted about. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

This is like saying any potential science fiction plot may be true. Everything written here is simply fiction. An imagination. Not bad imagination, but imagination none the less.

It is a hypothesis, whether or not it is true, no one knows.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tagged said:

Religion, faith and belief can be cruel on people. 

 

I have seen people struggle with exactly what I ranted about. 

Perhaps you are exaggerating a bit ?

I have seen more people, including myself, struggling with love and passion, should i hate love and passion ?

What i see is mostly people being cruel on people.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i found Mozart's life interesting, not to support, but to consider the theory of reincarnation.

Mozart, at the age of 5 or 6, i heard, was able to understand and reproduce complex musical pieces.

That ability didn't come by study or from his parents, where did it come from ?

 

I've always been interested in 'classical' music, so I've investigated this issue you've raised. 

 

It would indeed be very remarkable if a child raised in a family, or an environment, with no associations with music, were to become a musical genius. One might think that would be a good example of reincarnation. ????

 

However, in the case of Mozart, this situation is far from the truth. Mozart's father, Leopold, was a trained musician and composer before he married, and it's reasonable to suppose that his wife, Anna Maria Pertl, would also have been interested in music, would have been able to read music and perhaps even compose music.

 

The family had 7 children, only two of whom survived, Wolfgang Mozart and his elder sister, Nannerl. The elder sister was already showing signs of great musical talent by the time that Mozart was born. She was tutored by her father and would have passed on her increasing musical skills to the younger Mozart, as sisters and brothers naturally play around, and elder sisters tend to have a parental attitude to the younger siblings.
Mozart would also have received a greater teaching priority from his father because of the greater inequality of the sexes in those days.

 

Another interesting aspect of this is the recent 'scientific' discovery that developing babies in the womb, after they've developed ears, can hear music and even remember that music for several months after they are born, and are effected by the emotional response of their pregnant mother to such sounds.

 

Before Mozart was born, he would have heard his sister practicing the piano on numerous occasions, and would also have shared (or felt through a hormonal response) the joy his mother would have felt when hearing her daughter's remarkable talent playing the piano.

 

For those who want references and links to the above 'opinion', here they are, below.

 

"The largest influence on Mozart had to have been his father, Leopold. His father not only gave up his own musical ambitions to tutor him but he also exposed him to a great many things to open up his mind. Leopold concentrated most of his life on making Mozart a child prodigy. By the time he was four years old he was composing minuets and by the age of six he was well taught on the violin."
https://spinditty.com/genres/Mozart-Looking-at-what-Inspired-the-Inspiration

 

"Nannerl (Mozart's elder sister) was the fourth of the seven children, but the first to survive beyond infancy. Mozart himself was number seven. By the time Mozart was born, Nannerl was already showing signs of being a musical prodigy. Such was the role of women at that time, though, that despite her obvious gifts, Leopold (Mozart's father) would devote much more energy into nurturing his son's talents than those of his daughter."
https://www.classicfm.com/composers/mozart/guides/mozarts-family/

 

"This letter indicates that Anna (Mozart's mother) could read music, and therefore must have been a musician, perhaps a composer."
https://carnegiemuseums.org/magazine-archive/1996/novdec/feat3.htm

 

"Wolfgang’s early musical start also had the benefit of two teachers, his father and his sister. “Nannerl was of an age where she understood and was more aware of what her father was doing,” says Noel Zahler, director of the School of Music at Carnegie Mellon University. “Nannerl probably interpreted for Wolfgang and reinforced for Wolfgang what Leopold was trying to teach. She showed him that music is not only fun, but a way to communicate without words.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/maria-anna-mozart-the-familys-first-prodigy-1259016/

 

"Listening to all kinds of music encourages early brain development in the fetus because music facilitates neuron connections in the brain. Listening and experiencing music stimulates the fetus’ brain and assists with the growth of brain structures.
New studies even suggest that babies remember music they listened to in the womb for up to four months after being born!"

https://www.tinylove.com/pregnancy/music-in-the-womb/#.XjIj3mgzbO0

 

Okay? Still believe that Reincarnation explains Mozart's exceptional musical talent? ????
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VincentRJ said:

Okay? Still believe that Reincarnation explains Mozart's exceptional musical talent? ????
 

Not sure it was you, but we had the same discussion months ago.

 

The fact that Mozart the genius was born in a family of accomplished musicians, in a circle of music enthusiasts, in fact is not against the reincarnation theories.

On the contrary, for some law of attraction, similar tend to attract the similar.

 

Anyway, great scientists have not been able to prove any theory of reincarnation, but the simple fact that it's being discussed, is plain evidence that there are clues.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

 

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

I've always been interested in 'classical' music, so I've investigated this issue you've raised. 

 

It would indeed be very remarkable if a child raised in a family, or an environment, with no associations with music, were to become a musical genius. One might think that would be a good example of reincarnation. ????

 

However, in the case of Mozart, this situation is far from the truth. Mozart's father, Leopold, was a trained musician and composer before he married, and it's reasonable to suppose that his wife, Anna Maria Pertl, would also have been interested in music, would have been able to read music and perhaps even compose music.

 

The family had 7 children, only two of whom survived, Wolfgang Mozart and his elder sister, Nannerl. The elder sister was already showing signs of great musical talent by the time that Mozart was born. She was tutored by her father and would have passed on her increasing musical skills to the younger Mozart, as sisters and brothers naturally play around, and elder sisters tend to have a parental attitude to the younger siblings.
Mozart would also have received a greater teaching priority from his father because of the greater inequality of the sexes in those days.

 

Another interesting aspect of this is the recent 'scientific' discovery that developing babies in the womb, after they've developed ears, can hear music and even remember that music for several months after they are born, and are effected by the emotional response of their pregnant mother to such sounds.

 

Before Mozart was born, he would have heard his sister practicing the piano on numerous occasions, and would also have shared (or felt through a hormonal response) the joy his mother would have felt when hearing her daughter's remarkable talent playing the piano.

 

For those who want references and links to the above 'opinion', here they are, below.

 

"The largest influence on Mozart had to have been his father, Leopold. His father not only gave up his own musical ambitions to tutor him but he also exposed him to a great many things to open up his mind. Leopold concentrated most of his life on making Mozart a child prodigy. By the time he was four years old he was composing minuets and by the age of six he was well taught on the violin."
https://spinditty.com/genres/Mozart-Looking-at-what-Inspired-the-Inspiration

 

"Nannerl (Mozart's elder sister) was the fourth of the seven children, but the first to survive beyond infancy. Mozart himself was number seven. By the time Mozart was born, Nannerl was already showing signs of being a musical prodigy. Such was the role of women at that time, though, that despite her obvious gifts, Leopold (Mozart's father) would devote much more energy into nurturing his son's talents than those of his daughter."
https://www.classicfm.com/composers/mozart/guides/mozarts-family/

 

"This letter indicates that Anna (Mozart's mother) could read music, and therefore must have been a musician, perhaps a composer."
https://carnegiemuseums.org/magazine-archive/1996/novdec/feat3.htm

 

"Wolfgang’s early musical start also had the benefit of two teachers, his father and his sister. “Nannerl was of an age where she understood and was more aware of what her father was doing,” says Noel Zahler, director of the School of Music at Carnegie Mellon University. “Nannerl probably interpreted for Wolfgang and reinforced for Wolfgang what Leopold was trying to teach. She showed him that music is not only fun, but a way to communicate without words.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/maria-anna-mozart-the-familys-first-prodigy-1259016/

 

"Listening to all kinds of music encourages early brain development in the fetus because music facilitates neuron connections in the brain. Listening and experiencing music stimulates the fetus’ brain and assists with the growth of brain structures.
New studies even suggest that babies remember music they listened to in the womb for up to four months after being born!"

https://www.tinylove.com/pregnancy/music-in-the-womb/#.XjIj3mgzbO0

 

Okay? Still believe that Reincarnation explains Mozart's exceptional musical talent? ????
 

I watched a very interesting documentary about a scientist who aggressively pursued his passion, which was to find out more about that "eureka' moment, when a person has a brainwave or a rush of inspiration. JK Rowling once said she couldn't keep up with the words that were being 'given' to her when the idea first entered her head re Harry Potter. She wrote the first 3 stories in just over an hour on a train.

 

She is on the record for saying that, in her opinion, Harry Potter was "given" to her by someone or something. Many famous artists have said that their talent seemed to be sent to them and they recorded what they were given.

 

Maybe the entire universe's energy can be tapped into ....... This researcher concludes that there is a magical connection that some people just happen to log into ....... A very interesting topic.

Edited by geronimo
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, geronimo said:

Maybe the entire universe's energy can be tapped into ....... This researcher concludes that there is a magical connection that some people just happen to log into ....... A very interesting topic.

Yep, also Neil Young, one of the greatest (imho) music composers, when asked about his method of writing songs, answered that the music is already there, somewhere in some higher realm, he just picks it up.

One has just to connect, apparently.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yep, also Neil Young, one of the greatest (imho) music composers, when asked about his method of writing songs, answered that the music is already there, somewhere in some higher realm, he just picks it up.

One has just to connect, apparently.

Not only connect, but connect to the right provider.

 

Many composers, writers, painters...don't have any success despite they may also recent something similar.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

Not only connect, but connect to the right provider.

 

Many composers, writers, painters...don't have any success despite they may also recent something similar.

This is very true, many great artists are completely unknown, and many die in poverty.

 

Perhaps, right now, a genius child is starving, and others are being killed in the name of some great ideology.

 

We live in a strange place.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Just that a natural process (meditation or fasting) works or shows promise. 

 

Not to interfere with your God-bashing, but what you call "natural process", is clear evidence of intelligent design.

You can call it how you like, but it exists.

Edited by mauGR1
  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Not to interfere with your God-bashing, but what you call "natural process", is clear evidence of intelligent design.

You can call it how you like, but it exists.

LOL No it isn't and no it doesn't. So...SURPRISE...I disagree. You can "woo" it whatever you like, but no evidence for your claim...and that is why it's not accepted nor taught in the majority of public schools in western countries and many of the more affluent Asian countries. 

 

Let me clarify what shouldn't need clarifying. I said meditation and fasting are natural processes. Meditation is a natural human activity. Fasting is a natural human activity. If you still disagree, then maybe someone else can be bothered to draw you a picture. :vampire: 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

LOL No it isn't and no it doesn't. So...SURPRISE...I disagree. You can "woo" it whatever you like, but no evidence for your claim...and that is why it's not accepted nor taught in the majority of public schools in western countries and many of the more affluent Asian countries. 

 

Let me clarify what shouldn't need clarifying. I said meditation and fasting are natural processes. Meditation is a natural human activity. Fasting is a natural human activity. If you still disagree, then maybe someone else can be bothered to draw you a picture. :vampire: 

Lol, perhaps it's you who need a drawing :whistling:

 

I was referring very broadly to the known and to the unknown natural laws.

The existence of such laws is a clear evidence of the existence of intelligent design.

 

For those who have eyes to see, obviously.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Lol, perhaps it's you who need a drawing :whistling:

 

I was referring very broadly to the known and to the unknown natural laws.

The existence of such laws is a clear evidence of the existence of intelligent design.

 

For those who have eyes to see, obviously.

Intelligent Design (ID) implies an intelligent, self-aware agent as the cause behind the claim.

 

PROVE it.

 

Also...what is an "unknown natural law"? If it's unknown, then how do you know it?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skeptic7 said:

Intelligent Design (ID) implies an intelligent, self-aware agent as the cause behind the claim.

 

PROVE it.

 

Also...what is an "unknown natural law"? If it's unknown, then how do you know it?

Do you want me to prove that the sky is blue ? Or that the trees are green ?

If there are known natural laws, it's obvious that there are unknown natural laws, is that simple.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Do you want me to prove that the sky is blue ? Or that the trees are green ?

If there are known natural laws, it's obvious that there are unknown natural laws, is that simple.

I concur...it's "simple". ????

Edited by Skeptic7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"One can learn all the secrets of the Universe and effectively control it,  yet still not know ME" 

 

My feeble attempt to interpret that quote would be, that on the highest level of being, above all dimensions of reality and beyond, nothing exists except pure, unconditional love.  This love always existed, it was never born, therefore could never die, it just is, was and will forever will be.  That's probably why the sages insist that God is everywhere, always, and can not be understood with the intellect,  but through the actual being of the essence itself and is the ultimate gift for us to discover.

Edited by steve654
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Yep, also Neil Young, one of the greatest (imho) music composers, when asked about his method of writing songs, answered that the music is already there, somewhere in some higher realm, he just picks it up.

One has just to connect, apparently.

Countless composers, artists have made such claims. A Religeous person might say his talent comes from God, a gift,  the discussion here is making similiar claims, no doubt the evidence would have something to do with feelings, or no better way to describe where ideas come from, so the reason develops in the mind that the ideas come from outside of ones self.

 

Nature and nuture, and the development of talent, intellect, etc is a subect with much unknown, but I think a fair amount of pseudoscience seems to be being pushed here as somehow being science.

 

Things such as the Secret. There is NO scientific law of attraction to my knowledge beyond magnetism, if there is I don't think there is any spiritual scientific connection established. I think that attempting to call this stuff science is no different then attempting to call theology science.

 

I myself might argue about effects God has on my own life. I also have zero proof that ANY thing I have in the form talent or anything else that could be construed as gifts, comes from God or some spiritual realm outside of myself, regardless of if I believe it so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...