Good and Evil Span Both Belief and Non-Belief.

[Spensed]

If one has the faith to believe in God, then I don’t think one need be hostile and dismissive of non-believers.

Plus one’s faith can be the stronger for being full of doubt and self-examination and criticism.

One’s faith need not be all about woolly mysticism, insulated assertion or nuggets of religious writings.

If follows that non-believers can let believers be, except when religion has an adverse impact.

Too often on boards like this, people appear to want to characterize everyone into those who are pro-religion and those who are against religion, failing to grasp that the world is more than black and white.

Good and evil span both belief and non-belief.

 

[kallipolis]

It's always the other poster who is at fault.....don't worry your self....this friendly neighbourhood, devil's advocate does not take your predictable anti religion rants....seriously....for life is too short....but it is fun for me to take on the overwhelming majority..anti religion...narrative across these forums and provide some well needed balance...

 

[Spensed]

The trouble that one doesn't provide balance, or even levity, by unbalance and lack of understanding.

Sometimes silence, or at least respect, is the greater virtue.

 

[kallipolis]

The trouble that one doesn't provide balance, or even levity, by unbalance and lack of understanding.

Sometimes silence, or at least respect, is the greater virtue.

Regal airs, and graces are hardly fashionable here....princesses have much to learn....even, the older versions... I'll always confront the know all mindset with an alternative opinion...just for the fun of competing with the majority narrative across JUBs forums.... with thoughts that are unfashionably bitter to those who are determined that they represent the truth....very much the mirror image of the religious zealot...reflected by the anti religious fanatic....

 

[Spensed]

Ever tried looking in a mirror? LOL.

You seem to be saying that you troll these forums with contrary opinions just for the fun of it. No problem with that. You can self-pleasure yourself here in any way you please. However, it does explain the lack of comprehension and authenticity in some of your posts.

Please stay on topic. Your responses to this thread have, perhaps not surprisingly, little to nothing to do with its subject matter.

 

[Telstra]

Believer and non-believer can be as good or as bad.
It is just for some reason the believer don't need any evidence to believe.

 

[kallipolis]

Ever tried looking in a mirror? LOL.

You seem to be saying that you troll these forums with contrary opinions just for the fun of it. No problem with that. You can self-pleasure yourself here in any way you please. However, it does explain the lack of comprehension and authenticity in some of your posts.

Please stay on topic. Your responses to this thread have, perhaps not surprisingly, little to nothing to do with its subject matter.

Rather OCDesque....all very familiar....

 

[Kulindahr]

Believer and non-believer can be as good or as bad.
It is just for some reason the believer don't need any evidence to believe.

Most believers I know believe on the basis of evidence, not on a lack of it.

 

[kallipolis]

Most believers I know believe on the basis of evidence, not on a lack of it.

That's my experience...entirely.

 

[TX-Beau]

Most believers I know believe on the basis of evidence, not on a lack of it.

Yeah the problem here is that the faithful aren't defining evidence in any way the rest of recognize as any such thing.

 

[TX-Beau]

That's my experience...entirely.

Let's play shall we, what is your EVIDENCE that there is any flavor of supernatural or divine at all for any religion or philosophy - since your experience is that all of these contradictory faiths and fantastic claims proceed from "evidence," what is it and where can we find it.

 

[TX-Beau]

If one has the faith to believe in God, then I don’t think one need be hostile and dismissive of non-believers.

Plus one’s faith can be the stronger for being full of doubt and self-examination and criticism.

One’s faith need not be all about woolly mysticism, insulated assertion or nuggets of religious writings.

If follows that non-believers can let believers be, except when religion has an adverse impact.

Too often on boards like this, people appear to want to characterize everyone into those who are pro-religion and those who are against religion, failing to grasp that the world is more than black and white.

Good and evil span both belief and non-belief.

I find in my experience that many many people of faith take a simple and personal declaration of skepticism as a direct assault on the religious. I personally don't care much what people believe so long as they aren't trying to foist it off on me, but that point seems to be the first casualty in any discussion of the subject.

 

[kallipolis]

Let's play shall we, what is your EVIDENCE that there is any flavor of supernatural or divine at all for any religion or philosophy - since your experience is that all of these contradictory faiths and fantastic claims proceed from "evidence," what is it and where can we find it.

Evidence, as understood by me, is the very realization that my perceptions are not yours.

I'm not posting here to convert you, or anyone else to my beliefs.

- - - Updated - - -

I find in my experience that many many people of faith take a simple and personal declaration of skepticism as a direct assault on the religious. I personally don't care much what people believe so long as they aren't trying to foist it off on me, but that point seems to be the first casualty in any discussion of the subject.

I'm not such a person.

 

[TX-Beau]

Evidence, as understood by me, is the very realization that my perceptions are not yours.

I'm not posting here to convert you, or anyone else to my beliefs.

So, evidence, as understood by you, is the very realization that your perceptions are without it whatsoever. Typical.

Motives are absolutely pointless to any claim of evidence of the supernatural. If you had any actual "evidence" of any of it, it would be irrelevant who you might convert, or who might believe, because it would be fucking obvious it wasn't fantasy, just like evidence of science is obvious through the miracle of logic you are currently posting upon.

WEAK argument, just like always.

 

[TX-Beau]

Oh yeah, and you completely dodged the question. Of course.

You have no "evidence" at all whatsoever. Just admit it. "Spiritual" people are supposed to be honest.

 

[TX-Beau]

Most believers I know believe on the basis of evidence, not on a lack of it.

That's my experience...entirely.

Yeah the problem here is that the faithful aren't defining evidence in any way the rest of recognize as any such thing.

Evidence, as understood by me, is the very realization that my perceptions are not yours...

That is no definition of “evidence” I’ve ever come across.

Anyone care to try again.

 

[kallipolis]

I have learnt from research carried out on "spiritiual" or "religious" or "numinous" experience suggesting that a significant majority of the general public, religious devotees or otherwise reported having experiences that could be classified as "paranormal" — or, what Holy Scripture describes as "riddles", "dreams" and "visions". This research alsp suggested that the "reality" experienced was generally understood to be ineffable. The only way that recipients of the numinous experience could approach an adequate expression, was drawn from understandings developed during their years of religious instruction. Here it could be argued that the earlier "indoctrination" was providing an understanding that provided a rationalisation of the experience, sufficient to satisfy the recipient....the sceptic might argue that the indoctrination drove the recipient to believe that which they wanted to believe.

It would appear that there seems to be an inherent tension between a "universal" experience of the numinous, and claims to a particular revelation for the likes of Moses, Jesus or Paul. It is a "chicken-and-the-egg" problem — which came first; or, more disturbingly, is the claim to particular revelation even credible? Moreover, it has long been recognized that the question of the possibility of doing theology today coincides with the question of the very plausibility of revelation. Can we even assume that God does speak to us?

The great religious traditions of the world with their various spiritual disciplines offer a framework and set of strategies to experience the numinous world, and process the realities of the ineffable mystery. Such spiritual insights have shaped human societies in a profound way. There is value in all religious traditions that have stood the test of time; all are vehicles to the divine.

 

[TX-Beau]

That's just a bunch of irrelevant shit.

Where exactly can we find the verifiable and repeatable "research" you are referencing?

Whose holy scripture, whose "numinous experience" they are mostly mutually contradictory.

Where is it you have found some actual "evidence" of any of it?

Enlighten us, and not with a bunch of obfuscating twaddle that means nothing real whatsoever beyond your ego, WHERE are you getting your "evidence."

It is NOT a "chicken and egg problem" it is a simple question, WHERE is your "evidence" for any of it at all?

Of course you don't have any, and that is the fucking point. You can believe whatever you want, it matters nothing to anyone else, and whatever value you apportion to it is only relevant to you. Frankly people who pretend to supernatural realities have done far more harm than they have ever done anything else.

 

[kallipolis]

That ones experience of the numinous is restricted to the recipient it can be argued that my understandings, can never be yours.

Thus there can be no meeting of minds, there being no reason for you to embrace that which I have experienced.

On this, we can agree.

 

[TX-Beau]

That ones experience of the numinous is restricted to the recipient it can be argued that my understandings, can never be yours.

Thus there can be no meeting of minds, there being no reason for you to embrace that which I have experienced.

On this, we can agree.

We can agree you are dancing the dance of obfuscation to avoid ANSWERING THE FUCKING QUESTION.

Please answer the question, If there is anything at all factual about anything you're saying it has to be external to you. Because IF it is as subjective as you assert It's just your fucking opinion. Is your spirituality FACT or is it FICTION? If it's just pretty meandering of your fanciful mind so be it, but then please stop pretending it's anything else.

Please point us to your extensive research you have assured us you have completed.