Are there any Christians on this site anymore?

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

Firstly, I find your "C" versus "c" to be a false dichotomy.

How does it appear to be a false dichotomy? I truly apologize for my unskillful attempt to offer something of positive value.



Secondly, I was curious as to why you felt the need to define something that you clearly are not.

Because I keep my mind open and allow the thought disciplines of other people into my thinking so that I can understand them better. In particular I see the religious right using gay christians' own faith to cause self-loathing. By claiming to "know" that Christ condems gay folk for living true to their capacity for intimacy with the same gender, they are acting as proxy (speaking for him by "official" authorization).

My intent by introducing this dichotomy Of Christian versus christan is to offer a distinction between believing in Christ without having to also accept homophobic condemnation from a church.

The purpose is to suggest a tool to help the gay christian let go of the self condemnation activated by unskilled words from a church leader yet still keep his/her faith.

Believe it or not my Godparents are devout christians. They practice to the best of their capacity love and forgiveness. I have never heard a single word about sin or abomination in the 43 years that I have known them. It is part of what makes them two of the most beautiful people I know in the world. I know that christianity can also be used to nurture gay people and not always to condemn them because I have received such from my Godparents.

While like Rick, I do not have a metaphysical belief that Christ was anything more than a human possessed of rare genius, I find that his assertion that every being has the capacity and entitlement to love and be loved unconditionally, to be a touchstone. I find touchstones in many different thought paradigms contained within varied religious metaphysical constructs. I don't have to convince myself that all of the paradigm is true in order to embrace a touchstone within it.

Ths is why I allow into my awareness other folks' religious insights. I consider someone's faith to be a part of their mind created by their mind. Since I have begun mindful awareness meditation (Vipassana), I have begun to see the beauty and magnificence of my own mind. Since becoming aware of my own mind I have become aware of the beauty and magnificence of the minds of the people I encounter --and their faith is part of that beauty.

To me, metaphysical reality of a belief is unimportant. I see no value in proving or disproving it. If it reveals a touchstone, it is valuable to me. If it causes suffering, it is worthless and I allow it to leave the focus of my consciousness.

I hope this post is not as unskillful as my previous ones in this thread. I never had intent to cause negative feelings or offense. Quite the opposite. I was and still am attempting to help folks, in some small way, to more easily learn to let go of suffering.

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

Or imaginary atheistic beliefs, for that matter.

Originally Posted by Rick336

You've lost me here. How does this relate to imaginary religious beliefs?



Both are merely models used to understand obeservations. Neither is actally reality



So far, science has found no evidence that awareness exists outside of a human or animal brain. Since hickory trees and crescent wrenches lack a brain, logic tells me that they probably have no awareness.



I think the chances of a crescent wrench sensing anything is 0%. I don't know if the hickory trees can sense light, water, and temperature, but I doubt it.



I can sense light, water, and temperature.



The only similarities I have to crescent wrenches and hickory trees is that we are all made from the same atoms.



I would have to say that since a coral reef can't think, it probably has no clue about the forest. Same goes for the forest about the reef.

I did not intend to suggest that a reef was aware of a forest. Imeant that a reef in some uncharacterizeable way, appears to have an awareness arising from the connected awareness of the living organisms that are its components

The valleys, however, think the mountains are high on drugs.


Rick

Because a Hickory tree will grow toward and orient itself in response to light or water or react to insect invasion while a crescent wrench will not, I conclude that, on some level, it is aware.

I am convinced that it is an awareness different than ours that we could not possbly begin to characterize, but a reaction to these things in a living organism certainly suggests the appearance of awareness. We share 90% of the same genes in common with hickory trees and we have awareness.

Empiricism is a solid thought method, but belief in nonexistence of anything that isn't proven to you seems more like nihilism. Practicing nihilism in my moment to moment thoughts was something I did for many years. It killed any sense of wonder or appreciation.

Adrain, my Heart Brother, questioned my nihilistic belief that my "mind" was mereley predictable electrochemical reactions. He showed me the art and emotions he created with photograpy. Art arises from shared awareness of two beings. This put a chink in my nihilistic armor. Bit by bit beauty and wonder and appreciation returned to my day to day life experience.

The mystery of how a forest functions as an ecosystem with each of its living components interacting certainly appears to possess awareness on some uncharacterizeable level. The fact that humans are not able to characterize something using a tool of empiricism does not prove nonexistence. So if something appears to have awareness and it cannot be disproven, which discipline of thought is most compatible with a healthy mind? Nihilism and assumption of nonexistence or allowiing the benefit of the doubt to evoke mystery, wonder and appreciation?

For me it is the latter; opening my mind, to the possiblity of a mysterious wonder.

Obsession with Metaphysical accuracy blocks the potential for experiencing life. An atheist can be as comparably Obsessed with metapysical accuracy as a person with a religious belief. Both views are probably so far off from the mark of what is reality that their difference is virtually indistinguishable.

I agree that following a belief system that seems absurd is valueless, but allowing your mind to be open to the possibility of something not absurd but not provable can lead to discovery.

[Daniel]

I like the direction of your thought, especially the following....

Originally Posted by Scotty

Empiricism is a solid thought method, but belief in nonexistence of anything that isn't proven to you seems more like nihilism.

I would call this the out of mind of sight school. If it can't be proven, then it can't exist. Funny then, that so much of what we take for granted, like electricity, can't be proven either- that is- it exists, but no one has any idea how it works. Am I making a case of God? No. But I like to think there there is ample wiggle room in the universe for things that are 'real' but not understood. Just because we don't understand them, or can't prove them, doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Like you, I believe that keeping one's awareness open is what leads to discovery.

Doubt is an exceedingly good thing. It leads to the path less trodden.

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

An atheist can be as comparably Obsessed with metapysical accuracy as a person with a religious belief. Both views are probably so far off from the mark of what is reality that their difference is virtually indistinguishable.

Really?

I'll take my chances with poetry over a test tube any day.

'Course, I never was any good at science anyway....

[bnmoore]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Obsession with Metaphysical accuracy blocks the potential for experiencing life. An atheist can be as comparably Obsessed with metapysical accuracy as a person with a religious belief. Both views are probably so far off from the mark of what is reality that their difference is virtually indistinguishable.

I agree that following a belief system that seems absurd is valueless, but allowing your mind to be open to the possibility of something not absurd but not provable can lead to discovery.

I can offer something anecdotal here. One of my co-worker buds is pretty much a rabid atheist. As long as I don't use the G-word we pretty much agree on everything. I see what I call Spirit shining right out of the man's eyes. His wife and He are childless but they do dog rescue. My personal feeling is that you can learn a lot about unconditional love from a dog. My best friend and his partner have two dogs. I guess I'm their uncle. They seem determined to lick my eyebrows off every time I see them.

I see what I would call empirical evidence all the time but acknowledge that it might not appear as such to anyone else. In my faith God is all there is but I know I can't define it in anyone else's life. My feeling is It becomes personal to you, through you, as you.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Empiricism is a solid thought method, but belief in nonexistence of anything that isn't proven to you seems more like nihilism.

Please define what nihilism means to you because my definition of nihilism means rejection of everything as being real. That does not describe me.

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

An atheist can be as comparably Obsessed with metapysical accuracy as a person with a religious belief. Both views are probably so far off from the mark of what is reality that their difference is virtually indistinguishable.

I agree that atheists and fundamentalists can be equally obsessed with their view of reality. But what does this have to do with the existence or non-existence of the supernatural?

I can find hundreds of examples of how fundamentalist are "off the mark" of what reality is. But I'm curious about us atheists being off that mark. Can you give me examples including evidence to support the examples?

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

The fact that humans are not able to characterize something using a tool of empiricism does not prove nonexistence.

Nor does wishing and hoping that something exists prove its existence. Many people want ghosts to exist because the existence of ghosts is exciting and mysterious and spooky. Others want angels to exists because they believe angels are God's helpers who look after us when things go wrong. Still others want Satan to exist as an explanation for why there is so much bad stuff going on in the world.

But look around. Where are these things? Shouldn't logic and common sense tell us that if something is invisible and has no trustworthy evidence to support its existence that it probably isn't real? Just because lots of people believe that something is true doesn't mean that it is true.

Most adults over the age of 50 in the United States in 2009 believe that Lee Harvey Oswalt did not work alone when he assassinated President Kennedy in November 1963. Even after years of intense investigation and hundreds of interviews and hard physical evidence shows otherwise they continue to hold onto this belief. They refuse to believe Oswalt was the lone gunman because for one insane person to kill the president seems so random and senseless. They believe there's got to be more to it than that. A conspiracy just makes more sense. It also makes the story more exciting. And since so many Americans believe in the conspiracy theory, then they figure that it must be true. And besides, there was that movie.

Is reality so boring that we need conspiracy theories and ghosts and faeries and ESP to make it more exciting? Or is reality so frightening that we need make-believe gods and angels and aliens to save us from it?

For me, I don't need a magical make-believe world to make life more livable. I find the real world right in front of me to be beautiful, mysterious and adventurous all on its own. And I know that I can face the challenges of life with confidence because my survival up to this point is proof of it.

At night I can step out into my front yard and look up at a universe full of stars and planets and it thrills me knowing that I am part of it all. I can visit the Grand Canyon and be in awe of the millions of years it took to create it. I can enjoy a child's excitement of Christmas or the laughter with family or friends or a walk through a shower of golden leaves on a cool November afternoon.

The way I see it, we are all here for a very short time. And when we're gone, we will be forgotten. Fifty years after we die, few, if any will know or care that we ever existed at all. The most important thing is that we're alive now and that we enjoy the present.

Hoping that another life exists after we die doesn't mean it does. The fact that millions of people believe in an afterlife doesn't make it real. Only evidence makes it real and so far there is absolutely no evidence that we survive death to live forever in another world.

What we know for sure is that this life is what we have now. Enjoy it. Savor it. Celebrate it. Soak it in. But whatever you do, don't miss it by being distracted with anticipation of an even better party later.

This is the party! And it will end much sooner than you think.



Rick

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by Rick336

The way I see it, we are all here for a very short time. And when we're gone, we will be forgotten. Fifty years after we die, few, if any will know or care that we ever existed at all. The most important thing is that we're alive now and that we enjoy the present.

One of the more annoying things about certain denominations is their view that "now" is hell and the real party begins after death. It's a sad orientation and, frankly, a waste. That said, I don't believe there is anything necessarily inconsistent with theistic belief and enjoying the present. There certainly isn't for me.

In terms of us being forgotten, as a genealogist, I feel something spiritual-y when I learn more about people I never knew, but without whom I wouldn't be here. Not only haven't I forgotten them, I'm actively seeking to learn more about them. It's fascinating and connects me to the past. Jews actively incorporate remembering their dead into each religious service, especially noting the yahrzeit (death anniversary) of particular people. It's a beautiful tradition that reminds us that people continue to exist in our hearts.

Originally Posted by Rick336

Hoping that another life exists after we die doesn't mean it does. The fact that millions of people believe in an afterlife doesn't make it real. Only evidence makes it real and so far there is absolutely no evidence that we survive death to live forever in another world.

Whereas it's true that no one can prove an "afterlife", we do know and can prove that our mortal coil becomes wormfood. It's the ultimate recycling. Our carbon gets folded back into the universe of other carbon. We return to a totality we never really left. What happens to the soul is another matter...however, given what we know about the cycle of physical matter, is it so far-fetched to conclude something similar for the soul? I know my father's soul continues to live in me and in others, so it's not so weird for me to extrapolate from that the notion that his soul exists outside of me as well. I can't prove it, but I find I don't need to. I like the idea that he is "with God", "with the Creator". You can call it a crutch of you like, but I prefer to think of it as a beautiful and deeply-satisfying idea.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

.....I don't believe there is anything necessarily inconsistent with theistic belief and enjoying the present. There certainly isn't for me.

I believe you.

As long as you're not forcing me to behave according to your view of reality, why should I care? It doesn't really matter how one finds his happiness. Life is short. If it feels good, do it.


Rick

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by Rick336

I believe you.

As long as you're not forcing me to behave according to your view of reality, why should I care? It doesn't really matter how one finds his happiness. Life is short. If it feels good, do it.


Rick

Exactly. Yes. And amen.

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Please define what nihilism means to you because my definition of nihilism means rejection of everything as being real. That does not describe me.


To me in the context of this discussion I shared experience of my nihilism as an unwillingness to reject all unprovable ideas as nonsense, valueless, dangerous and wasting precious moments of life that could be spent in the here and now. As I mentioned before This killed any wonder or mystery in my experience


I agree that atheists and fundamentalists can be equally obsessed with their view of reality. But what does this have to do with the existence or non-existence of the supernatural?

I can find hundreds of examples of how fundamentalist are "off the mark" of what reality is. But I'm curious about us atheists being off that mark. Can you give me examples including evidence to support the examples?

I would like to share an example on a discussion between my God brother and I last year. I thought this was really cool.

A video appeared of salt water burning with a yellow flame when Radiofrequency was passed though it. The energy calculations show a total net energy output. My God brother is a Physicist and I am a medical practitioner by education so I am at a terrible disadvantage. However I also Know from practical experience that a patient with the appearance of having a srtoke but has no evidence of it on CT stlii usually is having one despite the"empiric evidence" to the contrary. Similarly The net energy equation showing a positive energy ouput using electromagnetic theory may not be a hoax.

He maintained that the whole thing is a hoax because there is never a net energy output, never! I agree I said but lets say these calculations are accurate for the sake of argument. How would you explain them?

I did some rsearch and found that a tiny fraction of Chloride is in an isotope (Cl-36) form that releases a beta particle (electron) and changes to a neutron to a proton. This changes the element fron Chlorine to Argon which is inert. If this Chlorine is attached to sodium, the sodium is suddenly un balanced in its electronic valence and becomes extremely explosive. A sodium flame is bright yellow (just like in the video)

The only last thing to verify if this is indeed occurring is: Does Radio frequency accelerate decay of Cl-36?

The energy is potential energy stored when a sun collapsed formining the Cl-36 isotope. The mass of the electron times the speed of light squared produces enough energy to generate a net positive energy output.

So My point is if I had just taken my God-brother's assertion that this whole video is a hoax because it defies electromagnetic theory, I would not have discovered a possible explanation using relativistic theory for an observation that "seems" real but is unproven.



What I did not do is use a Ouiga board or use faeries as an explanation. I used relativistic theory
My explanation is yet unproven as I cannot find anyone who knows if RF accelerates decay of Cl-36.

Sometimes having an open mind to something observed and unproven leads to discovery and wonder. The mystery of what we don't yet Understand, by embracing its possiblity is invigorating and leads to wonder!


At night I can step out into my front yard and look up at a universe full of stars and planets and it thrills me knowing that I am part of it all. I can visit the Grand Canyon and be in awe of the millions of years it took to create it. I can enjoy a child's excitement of Christmas or the laughter with family or friends or a walk through a shower of golden leaves on a cool November afternoon.

The way I see it, we are all here for a very short time. And when we're gone, we will be forgotten. Fifty years after we die, few, if any will know or care that we ever existed at all. The most important thing is that we're alive now and that we enjoy the present.

Hoping that another life exists after we die doesn't mean it does. The fact that millions of people believe in an afterlife doesn't make it real. Only evidence makes it real and so far there is absolutely no evidence that we survive death to live forever in another world.

What we know for sure is that this life is what we have now. Enjoy it. Savor it. Celebrate it. Soak it in. But whatever you do, don't miss it by being distracted with anticipation of an even better party later.

This is the party! And it will end much sooner than you think.

To the above I agree! Live in the moment!

Rick

Originally Posted by Rick336

I believe you.

As long as you're not forcing me to behave according to your view of reality, why should I care? It doesn't really matter how one finds his happiness. Life is short. If it feels good, do it.

Absolutely, and wonder of discovery using an open mind can be an invigorating part of it!


Rick

Have a great weekend!

[bnmoore]

Speaking for myself, I don't believe God is supernatural. I have run across this idea from atheists in other places and I'm just not clear on what is meant by it.

Science has already proven that it is all God to my satisfaction.

I just don't know what it is people are looking at and saying isn't.

I am a person that has experienced my own faith healings many times. I don't really care what agency they come through. It is done unto me as I believe.

[dsdrane]

I'm curious if you have any thoughts about what your thread has become.

And if your original question has been answered.