Tweet
This has nothing to do with NHB, but, who here beleives in God? Tell me why or why not.
-
-
I do, I do....
I believe in "a superior being", if you will; the creator of ALL things.
"THE MOST HIGH"
Ronnie.
________________________________
A straight arm's still a broken arm - Master JPF -
...and "why" you ask?....
...I don't exactly know why. It's just something I cannot put into words of meaning.
One thing I do know though....
The creator was and is a superior Martial Artist (inside info)...
Kazushi Sakuraba or Rickson Gracie have NOTHING on him!
Ronnie.
_______________________________
A straight arm's still a broken arm - Master JPFComment
-
Damn...dare I venture into this time bomb waiting to explode?
The belief in God can be seen as very blindly followed, very scientific, very arrogant, very ignorant, etc. etc.
People seem to have way too much bias to listen on this subject, but here I go anyway.
I am a student of philosophy, and do have my own personal faith. Faith aside, let's look at this from a more reasonable standpoint. First thing's first. There is not many people who will truly try to see this from a deep philosophical standpoint. Many do not "like" the idea of "God" because it means that we must be responsible for our behaviors, morals, etc. Some people see "God" as a repressive force (or farce) that does not allow freedom to individuals, sexuality, etc. This is not the case however if you look into this from deeper opinions.
St. Anselm was one of the first to tackle the notion of "proving" God exists. His theory was that God must be the highest concievable being for us to concieve. And since this being's non-existence would mean that it was not the highest concievable, then existence must be the case.
This is hard to refute a bit, but it does not go above the realm of human consiousness. It becomes a "nanny nanny boo boo" type of argument.
St. Thomas Aquinas was a man who tackled the question of God's existence with science, and logic. Scientifically, we are in an existence of causes and effects. Each effect has an initial cause, and that cause is the effect of another cause, etc. This can go backwards for however long, but CANNOT go on into infinity. If it did go on into infinity, then nothing would be effected in our world. So therefore we must have a first cause that is the ultimate cause of all causes. This, Aquinas said, is what people call God. Mathmaticians have also discovered this same principle. Another similar argument of Aquinas' was that of motion. This is basic physics. IN order for there to be motion, there must be a mover. Things at rest tend to stay at rest. We must have an initial mover to start the motion. Again, if this goes backwards into infinity, nothing would move. Therefore, logically, we must have a first mover. Aquinas says that this is what people call "God." Now in this kind of scientific logic, it is quite possible to "prove" that there is a first starter. For an atheist to dispute causes him to appear illogical, and unscientific. This is the genius of the argument in Thomas' point. We cannot claim that creation can come from nothing in science, because this is the most illogical thing we can say. So science dictates we must have a first cause of things. A cause that can have no other causes.
Now, whether or not this "first cause" is a conscious, benevolent being that shows providence remains a question of faith.
There is much much deeper arguments that can be told here.
This is just the tip of the ice berg. What bothers me is that people take "religious zealots" as what the actual religion is about, and says. That's not necessarily the case. In order to look at the Bible, for instance with educated eyes, we must read it as a literary piece, study the historical significance of it, the political significance, understand that it was written in the language and images that were known to the people of its time, and also study it for the divine moral that is within it as well. It is too easy to say "this contradicts this, etc etc" But that is not being intelligent in my opinion.
So all in all, I hope this gives you something to think about. I personally have my own faith. So yes, I believe in God. But I do not blindly follow faith, I deeply study religion so as to actually be religious.
St. Augustine held the standpoint that Grace does not destroy nature, but perfects it.
Take care,
RyuComment
-
I believe, my bruthas!!!!Comment
-
I used to be an agnostic, but now I believe in God.
Mostly because I need to. It just seems so pointless otherwise. The "Prime Mover" theory is also persuasive. What started it all? Had to be something, or someone.
I'm still working on the Jesus part. I believe in his basic philosophy, as I understand it, but I'm not sure about the Resurrection. Still thinking about it.
Like Ryu, I'm into a lot of Zen Buddhist, Taoist, and Hindu ideas as well. It's a weird mix, but I suppose it works for me.Comment
-
I believe in Jesus Christ...
I also believe in "relationship with God" rather than "religion"
Comment
-
I know this is gonna offend somebody but believe me, THIS IS NOT MY INTENTION!!!!!!! I believe I am my own God. I control my own destiny. I do not beleive in Jesus or in an afterlife. Once you die, that's it. I could be wrong but I believe there is no God (besides myself), no angels, prayer is also bullshit (again, in my opinion, not trying to offend anybody), and The Bible might as well been written by Dr. Seuss because there are atleast 272 contradictions in the bible. All who don't believe me go to
http:/www.skepticsannotatedbible.com
Enjoy and God bless....or not.
[Edited by The Colonie Crusher on 11-10-2000 at 12:54 AM]Comment
-
CC...
you just proved St. Aquinas' point...
Read what I said about the "Bible", and other aspects there.
You have to look at this with the education of a scholar, and a scientist, as well as a theologin. Religion becomes pale otherwise. Nothing wrong with creating your own destiny. That's not God's business anyway.
RyuComment
-
No offense Ryu, but I didn't read ALLLLLLLLLL of you rpost. Sorry.Comment
-
Shalom,
Shalom,
I'm a jewComment
-
This thread should have been called
"I'm just bi-curious"Comment
-
Ronin,
You seem very sincere.
About the Resurection:
Here are some points for you to think about.
1. No other fact has been backed up with historical liturature than that of the empty tomb. Yes many fictional
theories have arrived, but they can all be thrown out. They just don't hold water to the facts. No other story or evidence has been given.
2. The person of Joseph of Aramathia(sp?)a Pharasee who's tomb Jesus' body was laid would never have been included in the Disciples "story" if it were not true.
3. The fact that women(who were not even considered fair testimony in court and were lower class than men) discovered the empty tomb and that Jesus appeared to them first is something to consider. You see this is an imbaressment to the Judeo Christian Jews in that time. Women definetly would not be included in the resurection story if they made it up.
4. Jesus not only appeared to women and the 12 disciples,
but to over 500 jews. Surely this claim would have openly been torn down if Jesus did not rise. Many of these jews lived long after he rose. Imagine: If I told you that President Reagan made the blind see, the lame walk, died on the cross and rose the third day, you would say I was nuts.
But Jesus did just that. Believe me, people would talk, if it wasn't true.
5. The tranformation of the disciples. Think about it. These men wimps and now they were willing to die for their beliefs, and they did. Sure there are many who die for their faith in other religions too but this is different. These men saw what had happened. Would you die for something you new for a fact to be false?
6. James, the half brother of Jesus. He was very sceptic,
until the resurection.Why? Imagine if my brother claimed that he was God's son, prophecied that he would die and raise himself up the third day, I would be very sceptical too!!! But He did rise, and James died believing just that.
Simon Greenleaf, the professor of legal evidences at Harvard
University stated that there is more evdence for the resurection than any other historical piece written. The resurection can be proven without a doubt.
A good book to read is called "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel, written by a then sceptical jouralist who was looking only for the facts.
Comment
-
hmmm
Hi-
I think that "belief" is a highly personal matter.
I also "believe" that as soon as you state a belief you are no longer able to learn more because when you "believe" you no longer question.
with the case in point IE: God, this is not a matter of belief so much as it is a matter of one of two things.
1-Faith - faith that there is a higher power guiding and directing our destiny and existance
2-fear- inability to accept the facts of reality, IE: we will die,we are totally responsible for our own actions, people do bad things, God won't keep you from nuclear annihilation ...etc.
Having said that, I can say I am of the belief that God is all things, the sum of its parts, the parts being made up of all things in existance throughout the known and unknown cosmos.
peaceComment
-
I've pondered hard on this and for me, god is pain.
I wake up every morning and I must force myself to open eyes and continue another day of this bullshit called life.
It's pain to breathe.
It's pain to think.
It's expecially pain to move and do things.
For me god is deeply buried in doing something highly self-destructive; as parajumping, driving my car at 150 mph or fighting. During those rare, elusive moments, I must rely only on my basic insticts and I have really no time to think that "I'm".
That is my rest and recreation.
Other than that, I live in a body that I hate, relate with people that I couldn't care less, do a horrible job and just can't mantain a stable relationship.
I've tought hard and long about self-destruction, expecially now that an ex employee of mine did suicide after a really bad divorce; but I have some kind of responsabilities to my family, so I must hold on for now, but it's a pain.
Surely I cannot envision myself at 35: I feel real old by now.
God? surely exists and he's just like a dumb child; he do continuosly stupid things without knowing....Comment
Comment