And some people say there's no God..........

Page 2 of 7  


There are no objective Or subjective, repeatable, peer-reviewed studies that provide any evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn does NOT exist. That's why with most religions confidence is bullshit.

So, religion makes no sense. Now we are getting somewhere!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:22:50 +0930, Michael Gray

But THAT IS your religion. Your religion is telling people that religious confidence is bullshit. I support your right to believe that.

I didn't say it makes no sense. It doesn't make any sense to YOU. What you say about religion makes sense to me, but it's your interpretation and ours are different. It all doesn't matter. You're entitled to your theories and I'm also entitled to mine.
I think the who faith based initiative is the bullshit, not the sects which collect the money for their "community." In that we agree fully.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub skrev:

That is utter nonsense. You make the word meaningless.

Thank you very much. Coming to rational conclusions is not a religion.

Which are based on nothing of any substance.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Sorry, but that's not a religion.
I support your right to believe

That's nice.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:30:04 -0400, "Robibnikoff"

No, it's not nice at all. It's a right we all have in the United States as written in the Constitution of Independance. We don't have to agree, we do have to respect one another for a civilized world.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Sorry, but we don't have to respect one another either. There are very few people I do respect and I can assure you that I am quite civilized. It's not a requirement.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tell that to your President and his untouchable theistic genocidal murderers. You really live in a fantasy world, don't you?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:56:06 +0930, Michael Gray

I happen to agree with you on Bush. He is the worst president in US history. He's an embarrassment. He's a dictator. It's what happens when you have a fanatic of any sort telling you how to think.
I'm not telling anyone how to think. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then why are you posting anything, especially to the rag-tag collection of newsgroups as you have been? I don't live in your wonderful United States, and am not bound by your constitution, even in terms of my interactions with US citizens. I would ignore it even if it did apply. I rely upon my personal integrity as the source of my moral guidance. Not laws made by christian business-men, nor incoherent 'holy' books, nor moronic principles that have gained a patina of respectability solely through being ancient.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub skrev:

And I have not told you how to think. I have pointed out that your beliefs have no objective support; they are, in effect, based on nothing. As such there is no objective difference between them and any other irrational belief. If you believe in them anyway, that is your right. I respect your right; but you have no right to have your beliefs free of criticism.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What do you know about Buddhism?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub skrev:

We are discussing reincarnation. I stated that it has no objective support. Either you have evidence or you do not. If you do not, my above statement stands; there is no objective difference between your belief and any other irrational belief. I am not attacking Buddhism. I am not attacking you. I am not telling you how to think.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

There is no way to disprove it either. It's rather important for you to have some working knowledge about the whole picture than simply making comments on pieces of a philosophy.
Buddhism is very closely related to science in that the historical Buddha NEVER told anyone to believe him. He always said to go out and check for yourself. There are many millions of Tibetan Buddhists who have studied, debated, and defended their beliefs for many years. Buddhism has been around for over 2500 years. To this day, the main point is non-violence at any cost and simply to be a better person.
It doesn't much matter if rebirth can be proven or not. What is tangible is that, I am a happy person and I know my mind through meditation which IS proven to have amazing health benefits. So I draw on a lot of different things.
At my core, I do not believe in god and am indeed atheist. Anyone discussed as a Buddha was once a person who actually existed. Mind is endless. Nothing I say will offer enough information to you and I am not working all that hard on the challenge because you aren't really interested anyway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub skrev:

Which does not contradict my point in the slightest.

I did not mention proof.

Once again (let's see if it sinks in this time), I have not criticized Buddhism or your right to be a Buddhist. Why you insist that I am making personal attacks on you or on your belief system is beyond me, and why, if you think personal attacks are wrong, you feel so free to insult me in every response is also a mystery. One could suspect that they are meant as a smokescreen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You didn't respond to my main point which is that, energy cannot be created nor destroyed. The Dalai Lama, when asked what he thinks of the Big Bang Theory, he replied, "Big Bang, no problem, just not the first one."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub skrev:

What exactly does that have to do with reincarnation? I can't wait to read your answer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Mind is pure energy. Therefor it cannot be created or destroyed. It has to go somewhere so it continues, in its pure state to take a rebirth into what I'll categorize as a good rebirth. Taking a human rebirth is always best.
Look, I don't care much if you believe in anything. I also don't believe because I do believe in things I can't always explain doesn't make me an idiot. Far from it. But, you have your agenda of smacking people down and that's your baggage as a person, not mine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub wrote:

I think you are using the word "energy" somewhat metaphorically. In physics, the word "energy" has a very precise meaning. In physics it is true that there is a law of conservation of energy (or, to be more precise, a mass-energy conservation law provided we equate mass and energy via St. Albert's equation e=mc^2). But surely you are not claiming that mind is energy in the exact physical meaning of the word. If you claim that then I would remind you that energy, almost by definition, is the capacity to do WORK (in the precise physical meaning of the word "work"). If you claim that mind is physical energy, then I challenge you to affect the physical behavior of even a single dust mote using your mind alone.
Surely you don't claim that. You must be using "energy" merely as an analogy or metaphor for your conception of mind. But if we have only a mere analogy, you cannot blithly claim that mind cannot be created or destroyed and invoke the physical principle of energy conservation to do so. You are making mere word play here so as to give your concept of mind a veneer of scientificity.
If you see my point here, then you must admit that you are making a completely arbitrary assumption that mind cannot be destroyed --- an assuption that relies only on faith and not on reason. Hence your further inferences about reincarnation are null and void as far as reason is concerned.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

St. Albert? Isn't that a Catholic thing?
Indeed I am claiming mind is energy, but it isn't physical. The mind can thing and meditate, sleep and we only use a tenth of its capacity. See how mind works by doing just one minute of single pointed meditation and tell me you have the ability to be completely empty with nothing leaking in and I will bow at your feet at once.
I am using the term energy because pure mind is energy. Everything is connected to everything else. In string theory, the science community is having a hard time distinguishing theory and philosophy when addressing the subject of quantum mechanics.
I am by no means an expert on eitherthe science of nature, or Buddhism as I'm a practitioner for just a bit over two years.
Mind has absolutely no matter as a component. Not one particle. The mind is a complex thing to discuss. An analogy is tea in a cup. Break the cup and it is no longer a cup. It's broken shards of matter. The tea, is still tea. Mop it into a towel, still tea. Contents and container. All sentient beings have mind. Humans can develop. Animals cannot develop in a lifetime as a human can. I'm swaying off topic, sorry. Maybe I'm not qualified to debate this, but I like the challenge.

No, the science community is drawing these conclusions through the Mind Science Conference and other large bodies of professionals who invite The Dalai Lama annually. They do this because the brain function of an adept meditator is different than the average person. Meditators use much more of their brain function. This is being studied very closely with proper testing in blind studies in labs at four major universities.

Do you love anyone in your life? If the answer is yes, prove it. You can't. You just love. I don't know if we are on the same life track so this may become an irritating discussion for most. All I'm asking is for people to consider what I'm saying, not agree. I also don't think being called an idiot, moron, jerk, whatever, is relevant. I am none of the above, and to close I will say there is a relative amount of faith involved in Buddhism, but not in the same way we rely on a man in the sky. I respect those who believe in god, but I don't agree.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jangchub wrote:

Actually a Jewish thing, though he was not a practicing Jew, nor did he believe in a personal kind of God. But by my lights, he deserves canonization more than anyone else who has ever been called a saint.

Translate: You agree that whatever kind of ``energy" you associate with mind has absolutely NOTHING to do with physical energy. You create a deliberate obfuscation by even using the word ``energy". It is unnecessary to say that ``mind is energy" in some kind of vague analogous way since you already have a perfectly good word for mind (namely the word ``mind").

I am a bit skeptical about these opinions as to what exact percentage of our mind's capacities we use. Mind is not sufficiently understood to make these statements meaningful.

And I am using the term mere analogy because your words are mere analogy. If you must use the word `"energy" then perhaps we could clarify discourse this way: Let us agree never to use the word "energy" without a qualifying adjective. Thus we can say ``physical energy" when we speak in the sense of physics and we can say ``mind energy" when we speak of your mysterious kind of energy that you associate to consiousness. That way you will not only communicate more clearly with me and others, but you will think more clearly in you own mind and you will never arrive at confused ideas like citing the physical conservation of energy law as if it had the slightest relevance (it has no relevance) to your hypothetical conservation of mind energy.

Slight overstatement. You don't need to go as far as string theory. Ordinary old-fashioned classical quantum mechanics is philosophically puzzling enough.

``An analogy is tea in a cup" you said. And another mere analogy is your confused usage of the word ``energy". I am by no means opposed to making analogies, but only to drawing unwarranted inferences from mere analogies.

The pseudo-scientific community draws all kinds of idiotic conclusions of this type. If you are a big fan of this kind of New Age fluff you should check out the crackbrain theory of the ``morphogenic field" and other such absurdities. The world is full of idiots who dabble in quantum mechanics and other au courant fields of physics and draw preposterous philosophical and even spiritual conclusions from what they think they understand about physics. BE WARNED: Charlatans abound in these areas.

I you have a reference to any of these studies and if you think that any of them qualify as science, let me know.

I can give very strong evidence (short of proof) to those I love by simply being good to them. I have a naive idea that if a person practices good will and generous conduct to others than it is reasonable to believe that this is a loving person. This is not the kind of "proof" that would satisfy a mathematician but, to borrow a lovely phrase from Anglo-Saxon law, it is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

But friend, others on this thread have called you "idiot, moron, jerk". Go back and read my post and you will see that I did not.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.