Stephen Hawkings believes in God?

[josie_L]

Yet, any power inherent in prayer isn’t the work of any extrinsic paranormal third party. If there is any benefit in it – it’s purely psychological.

Do not attempt to undermine my experiences with your limited worldview, you have no clue what I have lived through or what God has done for me.

Nevertheless there’s rapid population growth in the third world.

And there’s rapid death too, so the one balances the other.

Yet these same peoples remain poor, indigent, and largely illiterate.

Not for those people that have had the benefit of schooling, health services and the like, things will change (but again take into consideration the many civil wars, epidemics, the still felt effects of colonization . . .etc.).

The idea of self-sacrifice is probably derived from Buddhism, and I find no virtue in needless sacrifice. If it accomplishes something and serves a legitimate (and real) purpose, then fine.

No, it doesn’t, and moreover, any sacrifice if it provides a loving action that produces good is always legitimate.

I think those you call saints were usually (though not always) very strange people, we would probably think were insane today.

They were very strange because you can’t understand how much they loved God.

In reality no, in the mind of the Christian yes.

Absolutely false, in fact, that’s what differentiated people like Mother Theresa from the rest of us, if she was just good, no one would have heard of her.

loving your neighbor isn’t a duty?

It’s not a duty to be kind and generous and loving, these are virtues.

but it is lying, yet it serves a higher purpose. This is why, while there may be some value in ancient texts, we have to apply all the things mankind has learned since (and our own intelligence) when we make moral decisions.

If these ancient texts were truly inspired by an omniscient and omnipotent god, it’s rational to believe they would contain rules that foresaw every possible contingency (and of course they do not).

Actually our God has provided such a rationale in that the 10 commandments are ordered by way of importance, and if you noticed “thou shalt not bear false witness” comes after loving God, obeying your mother and father, not murdering . . .etc., So it explains what basically takes precedence in any given situation, moreover the Cathechism of the Catholic Church (and all the encyclicals) is more than sufficient in explaining morality and how one should follow their conscience.

 

[yankee_doodle]

Do not attempt to undermine my experiences with your limited worldview, you have no clue what I have lived through or what God has done for me.

ah, so now you’ve taken to trying to bully your debate opponents? I do know one thing, whatever experience you may have had, it wasn’t any supernatural deity

And there’s rapid death too, so the one balances the other.

Is it just you … or do all Catholics need basic facts explained to them repetitively?

Here’s an article:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth

Population growth obviously means the difference between the birth rate & death rate. Did you go to Catholic schools?

Not for those people that have had the benefit of schooling, health services and the like, things will change (but again take into consideration the many civil wars, epidemics, the still felt effects of colonization . . .etc.).

OK … do you try and understand what you’re reading before replying to it?

No, it doesn’t, and moreover, any sacrifice if it provides a loving action that produces good is always legitimate.

again, re-read what I said in the first place.

They were very strange because you can’t understand how much they loved God.

nahh, they were just strange

Absolutely false, in fact, that’s what differentiated people like Mother Theresa from the rest of us, if she was just good, no one would have heard of her.

I don’t even see what was so great about her?

It’s not a duty to be kind and generous and loving, these are virtues.

so virtues are not duties? Have you ever studied philosophy?

Actually our God has provided such a rationale in that the 10 commandments are ordered by way of importance, and if you noticed “thou shalt not bear false witness” comes after loving God, obeying your mother and father, not murdering . . .etc., So it explains what basically takes precedence in any given situation, moreover the Cathechism of the Catholic Church (and all the encyclicals) is more than sufficient in explaining morality and how one should follow their conscience.

hmmm … whatever

 

[josie_L]

ah, so now you’ve taken to trying to bully your debate opponents? I do know one thing, whatever experience you may have had, it wasn’t any supernatural deity

I’m bullying??? You think you can override my beliefs and define my personal experiences for me because of your materialistic world view, I don’t think so, Yankee.

Is it just you … or do all Catholics need basic facts explained to them repetitively?

Population growth obviously means the difference between the birth rate & death rate. Did you go to Catholic schools?

Oh, great another insult, anyways I made a mistake, I confused growth rate with birth rate.

OK … do you try and understand what you’re reading before replying to it?

Yes I do, but what does this mean in light of what I said?

again, re-read what I said in the first place.

You purposely enboldened "real’ as if to signify that what the saints sacrificed is not worthy or significant because, of course, you don’t believe in God.

nahh, they were just strange

Because they didn’t bother to assimilate or pursue worldly goals? Why were they strange? Does their holiness disturb you or make you feel unconfortable? Give me a clue here.

I don’t even see what was so great about her?

so virtues are not duties? Have you ever studied philosophy?

Is this coming from the man who I’ve heard repeat more than once how useless philosophy is? And to answer your question, no virtues are not duties or at least they shouldn’t be perceived as such. I think what I’m trying to say is that it shouldn’t be a duty to do something good, i.e., you want to want to do something good as opposed to you have to do something good.

hmmm … whatever

Very mature response, Yankee.

 

[yankee_doodle]

Because they didn’t bother to assimilate or pursue worldly goals? Why were they strange? Does their holiness disturb you or make you feel unconfortable? Give me a clue here.

I just think they’re a bad example. I’d rather name someone like Bill Gates as a saint. If there was a few thousand people like him there would be no poverty.

Is this coming from the man who I’ve heard repeat more than once how useless philosophy is? And to answer your question, no virtues are not duties or at least they shouldn’t be perceived as such. I think what I’m trying to say is that it shouldn’t be a duty to do something good, i.e., you want to want to do something good as opposed to you have to do something good.

before you call a pursuit worthless, I think it’s a good idea to be familiar with it.

Very mature response, Yankee.

even atheists sometimes like to have fun at the expense of others

 

[josie_L]

even atheists sometimes like to have fun at the expense of others

So basically you’re just teasing me, that’s nice to know. God “blast”, I mean bless.

 

[simplynoone]

Well, actually I was a theist at one time (and studied religion fairly intensely for a period).

The most logical explanation is usually the right one, which is that Judaism is an offshoot of earlier mythology (with the caveat of its monotheistic innovation).

The most logical explanation is that theism, in all its forms, is false.

I have studied religion almost the whole of my life and very intensely as well … even in the formal institutions for education in just this area. You are so stuck on your dogmatic view that you refuse to understand that I have little interest in arguing God’s existence with you or whether or not you reject Judaism. These things you are arguing matter little to me. What does matter to me is the christian distortion of the Tanakh and the attempt at replacement theology. If you would like to pull out the Sumerian writings and tell me how the Tanakh was used as an instrument specifically for the purpose of replacing those ppl and their beliefs, then I will acknowledge you. Else, there is not the comparison that you are wishing was there.

 

[simple_soul]

The story of Noah is a conceptual metaphor for the place of mankind in Life. Abraham did not have faith, rather he had faithfulness. This means that he already had the knowledge and the understanding of it. How we can know he was faithful to the knowledge he already had and not blindly moving by faith is by the words that are written in Genesis 15:1 … “AFTER these things…”

Dear Simplynoone,

Here is were I believe our paths will part.
I will take my leave for now with what I said to Ben Masada, we could go round and round in circles trying to convince each other of who has the correct interpretation of scripture or who knows the great I Am more fully. The Truth is that only the great I AM can reveal His Truth to us. I can not prove it to you, and no other human being can. It comes only from the great I Am Himself in the revelation that His Word was made flesh and did dwell among us. It is in His revelation that I have knowledge and faithfulness of His Truth. Weather it is logical to me or not. The same as Abraham had revelation from the great I Am in his dream. It is Truly a very humbling thing to know.

May the Spirit of the great I Am continue to bless you and guide you on your journey to know His Word.

 

[simple_soul]

Too mystical. What do you think is meant in Psalm 28:5? I am curious as to your thoughts here.

As for AdrianP’s posts in the other thread, I have read them. I find his interpretations to be replacing what is actually written in the Tanakh. I have actually answered a thread on this forum once and addressed each of the prophecies that Christians claim are about Jesus. I will find it and post it for you as soon as I can.

The great thing about the prophets is that they weren’t prophesying mystically; meaning all the answers are already within the same context.

Trust me, I take head to the works of the Lord and what His hands have done through how He has revealed Himself to me through His creation and what He has accomplished through it and it humbles me and makes me love Him and glorify Him all the more.

 

[yankee_doodle]

I have studied religion almost the whole of my life and very intensely as well … even in the formal institutions for education in just this area. You are so stuck on your dogmatic view that you refuse to understand that I have little interest in arguing God’s existence with you or whether or not you reject Judaism. These things you are arguing matter little to me. What does matter to me is the christian distortion of the Tanakh and the attempt at replacement theology. If you would like to pull out the Sumerian writings and tell me how the Tanakh was used as an instrument specifically for the purpose of replacing those ppl and their beliefs, then I will acknowledge you. Else, there is not the comparison that you are wishing was there.

The fact that anyone can term common sense as dogma only makes their blind zealotry shine. As far as the replacement theology stuff, well, the first Christians were allegedly Jews (perhaps self-hating Jews … I don’t know). It’s certainly true that antisemitism has been a Christian sport for nearly two thousand years, now I guess the Muslims have taken the torch of Jew hating. I suppose you can accuse Muslims of the same distortions of your mythological text, but I accuse you all of stupidity and ignoring common sense, science, and logic (so why aren’t my complaints equally relevant and deserving to be heard).

Your a people who still base your ethnicity on ancient mythology (it would be like Italians still believing they’re the product of Romulus and Remus). There were so many interpolations of whatever Jesus Christ said or taught (and Hellenic, Roman, and Egyptian mythology were woven in to such an extent) your complaints hardly have a rational basis.

Who cares whose version of ancient mythology was more right than the other? If it wasn’t for religion we would have a peaceful world today. Even the antisemitism that spurred Hitler was born from Christianity. I certainly don’t blame Jews for wanting their own homeland; and I also know many Jews are very secular (and intelligent enough to know this stuff is nonsense) … apparently you’re not one of them?

 

[josie_L]

The fact that anyone can term common sense as dogma only makes their blind zealotry shine. As far as the replacement theology stuff, well, the first Christians were allegedly Jews (perhaps self-hating Jews … I don’t know). It’s certainly true that antisemitism has been a Christian sport for nearly two thousand years, now I guess the Muslims have taken the torch of Jew hating. I suppose you can accuse Muslims of the same distortions of your mythological text, but I accuse you all of stupidity and ignoring common sense, science, and logic (so why aren’t my complaints equally relevant and deserving to be heard).

Your a people who still base your ethnicity on ancient mythology (it would be like Italians still believing they’re the product of Romulus and Remus). There were so many interpolations of whatever Jesus Christ said or taught (and Hellenic, Roman, and Egyptian mythology were woven in to such an extent) your complaints hardly have a rational basis.

Who cares whose version of ancient mythology was more right than the other? If it wasn’t for religion we would have a peaceful world today. Even the antisemitism that spurred Hitler was born from Christianity. I certainly don’t blame Jews for wanting their own homeland; and I also know many Jews are very secular (and intelligent enough to know this stuff is nonsense) … apparently you’re not one of them?

Anti-semitism existed before Christianity, and it was never as you so put it a Christian “sport” to spite/hate Jews (although there were those who did).

 

[buffalo]

Anti-semitism existed before Christianity, and it was never as you so put it a Christian “sport” to spite/hate Jews (although there were those who did).

Actually each and every Mass until recently prayed for the conversion of the Jews.

 

[yankee_doodle]

Anti-semitism existed before Christianity, and it was never as you so put it a Christian “sport” to spite/hate Jews (although there were those who did).

The delusion continues

 

[yankee_doodle]

Actually each and every Mass until recently prayed for the conversion of the Jews.

it get’s much better, but I’d rather not start down the road of quoting guys like St. John Chrysostom (or for that matter the new testament itself).

 

[josie_L]

it get’s much better, but I’d rather not start down the road of quoting guys like St. John Chrysostom (or for that matter the new testament itself).

I think a reasonable response was given to you as to why St. John Chrysostom spoke thusly by another poster here (but as usual you ignore such posts), and the other point I’d like to make is that there is nothing in the NT that is anti-semitic (where the heck are you getting this)?

 

[simplynoone]

Dear Simplynoone,

Here is were I believe our paths will part.
I will take my leave for now with what I said to Ben Masada, we could go round and round in circles trying to convince each other of who has the correct interpretation of scripture or who knows the great I Am more fully. The Truth is that only the great I AM can reveal His Truth to us. I can not prove it to you, and no other human being can. It comes only from the great I Am Himself in the revelation that His Word was made flesh and did dwell among us. It is in His revelation that I have knowledge and faithfulness of His Truth. Weather it is logical to me or not. The same as Abraham had revelation from the great I Am in his dream. It is Truly a very humbling thing to know.

May the Spirit of the great I Am continue to bless you and guide you on your journey to know His Word.

There is always the option to read what is actually written. I understand that it is hard to argue power of suggestions with someone who is using what is actually written … so, have a nice one. Perhaps you will have your wish to see what is there in front of your eyes. Good luck!

 

[simplynoone]

I certainly don’t blame Jews for wanting their own homeland;

Because it only makes sense they would. Who is the more harmful of the zealots here? The one who does not have issue with those who don’t subscribe to God or the one who takes issue with those who do? I am the former, you are the latter. You are just as zealous as the Christians to push your “religion” on the world. I only am correcting the Christians as they can’t seem to understand what is actually written there in front of their eyes. Whether I believe in God or not, what issue is that to you that makes you care so much? … especially when I do not believe in seeking to convert you? Hmmmm? Why are you so damned set on having me convert to your dogmatic beliefs?

I admit to being zealous for the Jewish People and their Laws, but I don’t force that on random others.

 

[simplynoone]

This is why Barnabas and Paul split up and not as you thought:

Acts 15
36 ¶ Then after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us now go back and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they are doing.”
37 Now Barnabas was determined to take with them John called Mark.
38 But Paul insisted that they should not take with them the one who had departed from them in Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work.
39 Then the contention became so sharp that they parted from one another. And so Barnabas took Mark and sailed to Cyprus;
40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, being commended by the brethren to the grace of God.
41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

And why did John called Mark leave? Could have to do with Paul perhaps? I think so since it was Paul and not Barnabas who had the issue with him. Thus, my point is still valid.

 

[yankee_doodle]

Because it only makes sense they would. Who is the more harmful of the zealots here? The one who does not have issue with those who don’t subscribe to God or the one who takes issue with those who do? I am the former, you are the latter. You are just as zealous as the Christians to push your “religion” on the world. I only am correcting the Christians as they can’t seem to understand what is actually written there in front of their eyes. Whether I believe in God or not, what issue is that to you that makes you care so much? … especially when I do not believe in seeking to convert you? Hmmmm? Why are you so damned set on having me convert to your dogmatic beliefs?

I admit to being zealous for the Jewish People and their Laws, but I don’t force that on random others.

Just as you are here advocating a certain viewpoint, so am I (that’s what we’re all doing here isn’t it?). The reason I do is because I do view many aspects of religion as harmful.

I believe the evidence tells us religion is simply another rendition of ancient mythology, without any basis in fact. I think living in this land of fairy tales makes mankind more stupid (and wastes our energy in its worthless pursuits). Since I believe our best avenue of evolution is intelligence, and I hope mankind can evolve, I naturally oppose stupid things. Religion is stupid, therefore I oppose it

You think anyone who calls a stupid thing … stupid – is a zealot pushing a dogma. You think the intelligent should sit by and remain silent while the world drowns itself in fanatical nonsense. Well, I think that’s stupid, because objectively it is stupid (and stupidity rarely results in progress).

 

[yankee_doodle]

I think a reasonable response was given to you as to why St. John Chrysostom spoke thusly by another poster here (but as usual you ignore such posts), and the other point I’d like to make is that there is nothing in the NT that is anti-semitic (where the heck are you getting this)?

I did read it … and I don’t buy the apologetic version of St. Chrysostom’s horrible oratory toward Jews. He said they are fit for slaughter. If you find any redeeming value in those words (and the many other antisemitic rants from Chrysostom), then I question your decency.

 

[simplynoone]

Just as you are here advocating a certain viewpoint, so am I (that’s what we’re all doing here isn’t it?). The reason I do is because I do view many aspects of religion as harmful.

I believe the evidence tells us religion is simply another rendition of ancient mythology, without any basis in fact. I think living in this land of fairy tales makes mankind more stupid (and wastes our energy in its worthless pursuits). Since I believe our best avenue of evolution is intelligence, and I hope mankind can evolve, I naturally oppose stupid things. Religion is stupid, therefore I oppose it

You think anyone who calls a stupid thing … stupid – is a zealot pushing a dogma. You think the intelligent should sit by and remain silent while the world drowns itself in fanatical nonsense. Well, I think that’s stupid, because objectively it is stupid (and stupidity rarely results in progress).

I don’t really believe you thought this through before posting it. First, there is that you say I would advocate sitting by without speaking. Have you read my posts? Second, you completely twisted what it is I said about zealots pushing dogmas. Read my post again and read it without the dogmatic goggles you have on at the moment.

Being zealous only becomes a problem when it prevents you from seeing things from another view point. I have seen things from the Christian view point and then I have seen things from the view point of one who was tired of religion. Then … I saw the sense in the Law of God which is cause and effect; though this is not something I believe in forcing on others … only I hope to help others to think about it. The reason I seem to be speaking against Christianity is only because of you and others misunderstanding my intentions. Rather I am trying to defend the point of view that the Tanakh was written from: the Law of cause and effect. This is what the Tanakh is based on. That you do not see it only shows you are blinded by your own ignorance. You are no match for a discussion with me concerning its content and thus, this will be fruitless unless you are able to overcome your narrow minded views.