03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth===================================
My "real" belief? Alas, people can see your lips moving, so your ventriloquy has missed its mark. 😵
My "real" belief? Alas, people can see your lips moving, so your ventriloquy has missed its mark
===================================
You'd have to explain this. I didn't understand it.
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by jaywillYou contended that my "real belief" is that God is unconcerned or incompetent or powerless to really enact ultimate justice or reconciliation. This is not so. In a thread about my beliefs, lasting almost 400 posts, I did not make any such claim. So these are your words inserted in my "mouth", so to speak. Moving lips, ventriloquy etc. etc. 😀
You'd have to explain this. I didn't understand it.
03 Jan 11
============================
It's more the standard 'I can't really take seriously lectures on the meaningfulness of life from those who look to the supernatural and to their unilaterally declared immortality
================================
I should not have sounded so sarcastic. I apologize for that tone.
I think everybody can make some meaning for their life. It could be to hit more home runs then Hank Aaron. It could be to put bad guys behind bars. It could be to win a gold medal or best actor. Or maybe it could be to raise good children.
It could be to be a good neighbor or best husband. It could be any number of things a person could say "This is the most important thing to me."
My meaning in life is what is called "the eternal purpose" in the New Testament. That is why I live. That is why my heart beats. That is why I breath, get up in the morning, and do everything.
I am not yet as fully occupied with this "eternal purpose" as I would like or as I should. But I think I am on the right track. And He is growing within me.
I think this "eternal purpose" of God spoken of in the Bible is the reason why God created a universe and came into it as Jesus Christ.
My purpose is the eternal purpose of God.
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth=========================
You contended that my "real belief" is that God is unconcerned or incompetent or powerless to really enact ultimate justice or reconciliation. This is not so. In a thread about my beliefs, lasting almost 400 posts, I did not make any such claim. So these are your words inserted in my "mouth", so to speak. Moving lips, ventriloquy etc. etc. 😀
You contended that my "real belief" is that God is unconcerned or incompetent or powerless to really enact ultimate justice or reconciliation. This is not so. In a thread about my beliefs, lasting almost 400 posts, I did not make any such claim. So these are your words inserted in my "mouth", so to speak. Moving lips, ventriloquy etc. etc.
===========================
I see. Where's that thread ?
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth=====================
You contended that my "real belief" is that God is unconcerned or incompetent or powerless to really enact ultimate justice or reconciliation. This is not so. In a thread about my beliefs, lasting almost 400 posts, I did not make any such claim. So these are your words inserted in my "mouth", so to speak. Moving lips, ventriloquy etc. etc. 😀
You contended that my "real belief" is ...
===========================
Did you imply that epiphenahas's real belief was fretting about being punished by God ?
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by epiphinehasThere are plenty of Buddhist systems, all with a single aim: the end of the suffering. Karma is not considered a moral absolute (check Lamaism, Madhyamaka, Koan Zen and Yogacara amongst else). And reincarnation has nothing to do with the "immortality of the personal soul" but with the constant accumulation of specific forms that encourage the event of life to keep up occuring constantly by countless ways.
[b]What do you see as "not consistent" for Buddhists?
The Buddhist belief system presupposes a moral absolute (Karmic Law) and the immortality of the soul (Reincarnation). Therefore, Buddhists living as if moral absolutes exist, etc., is consistent with their world-view. If an atheist were to hold that moral absolutes exist, this would not be co ...[text shortened]... iverse is a hostile environment, produced by mere chance, without ultimate purpose or value).[/b]
Buddhists follow specific doctrins according to their personal level of conceptual and non-conceptual awareness in order to become able to stop suffering. There is no such a thing as an esoteric teaching offered by Buddha, who clarified that he teached his dogma without making the slightest discrimination between the so called "esoteric" and the "non-esoteric" reality. Clearly, a Buddhist does not live as if moral absolutes exist -s/he is living according to the evaluation of the mind that, according to her/ his respectful systems, can enable her/ him to stop suffering
😵
03 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillWell he said this: "Within the Christian world-view a believer can expect to enjoy eternal life and fellowship with God after dying physically. Further, God punishes those who do evil and rewards those who do good. Within this context the Christian's life is both meaningful and consistent." So it's fair to assume that while he can expect to enjoy eternal life, he does not enjoy - or seeks to avoid - punishment by God. If "fret" understates the reality of fear of God's wrath then one should bear in mind it was a somewhat tongue in cheek word choice.
Did you imply that epiphenahas's real belief was fretting about being punished by God ?
However my reference was more a generic one to Christian preoccupations - fear/reward/fellowship/immortality - and how they do not have the potential to fill my life with meaning, where I said: "Seizing the extraordinary opportunity that life offers and navigating one's way through, and experiencing, its many wonders is legitimate 'meaning' in itself surely. Furthermore, by my estimation, the wonder of life is not made any more wondrous or meaningful by speculating about what happens after it ends or fretting about being punished for sins by a God. Indeed, conjuring up some sort of 'extra meaning' or claiming to transcend the "meaninglessness" through speculation and surmise strikes me as being rather pointedly nihilistic on the part of theists."
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by jaywillI understand and appreciate this. I have been there myself, although I don't make any grand claims as to the degree or duration. The distance between your acknowledgement of others' "meaningfulnesses" and all the theist trash talk - or trash sophistry 😵 - that's been going on these last 24 hours with josephw and epipheneus, is refreshing.
...[meaningfulness] could be any number of things a person could say "This is the most important thing to me."
[lots snipped]
My meaning in life is what is called [b]"the eternal purpose" in the New Testament. That is why I live. [/b]
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth==========================
I understand and appreciate this. I have been there myself, although I don't make any grand claims as to the degree or duration. The distance between your acknowledgement of others' "meaningfulnesses" and all the theist trash talk - or trash sophistry 😵 - that's been going on these last 24 hours with josephw and epipheneus, is refreshing.
I understand and appreciate this. I have been there myself, although I don't make any grand claims as to the degree or duration. The distance between your acknowledgement of others' "meaningfulnesses" and all the theist trash talk - or trash sophistry - that's been going on these last 24 hours with josephw and epipheneus, is refreshing.
==========================
What is God's eternal purpose ? Since you've "Been there, done that".
What did Paul mean by God's "eternal purpose" ?
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by jaywillI don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one. I've been there. But I'm not there anymore. Quoting me rather too approximately as saying "Been there, done that" of course makes it sound like I was sneering at you, whereas what I actually meant was that I appreciate and understand your comments in that previous post because of some limited - and certainly flawed - degree of empathy and experience.
What is God's eternal purpose ? Since you've "Been there, done that".
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth=============================
I don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one. I've been there. But I'm not there anymore. Quoting me rather too approximately as saying "Been there, done that" of course makes it sound like I was sneering at you, whereas what I actually meant was that I appreciate and unde ...[text shortened]... post because of some limited - and certainly flawed - degree of empathy and experience.
I don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one.
=============================
I didn't ask for speculation of your own or if you believed there was one. I simply asked what Paul meant. I didn't ask if you agreed with Paul.
"I don't know what he meant" would have been a more straight forward reply.
========
I've been there. But I'm not there anymore.
==============
"There ?" You've been ... "there?" I don't know what that means.
=============================
Quoting me rather too approximately as saying "Been there, done that" of course makes it sound like I was sneering at you, whereas what I actually meant was that I appreciate and understand your comments in that previous post because of some limited - and certainly flawed - degree of empathy and experience.
==============================
If it was "flawed" then maybe you were somewhere else. But thanks for your intention to be empathetic.
03 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillWell it might have been a more straight forward reply but it wouldn't be the truth. I no longer have the slightest interest in what Paul meant nor regurgitating it for you. If you wanted to make some point by quizzing me, then why not just make your point regardless now that I have opted not to try to impress you with my memory of the dogma?
"I don't know what he meant" would have been a more straight forward reply.
"There ?" You've been ... "there?" I don't know what that means.
We shall drop it then.
03 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillI don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one. I will leave it to Christians to worry about what Paul meant.
What is God's eternal purpose ? Since you've "Been there, done that".
03 Jan 11
5 edits
Originally posted by epiphinehasOnce again, "you've admitted that Buddhists can have moral absolutes as well as meaningful lives without a god." I've been speaking of Buddhists who ARE atheists. They ARE "consistent" by your own admission. Are you being intentionally obtuse?
[b]What do you see as "not consistent" for Buddhists?
The Buddhist belief system presupposes a moral absolute (Karmic Law) and the immortality of the soul (Reincarnation). Therefore, Buddhists living as if moral absolutes exist, etc., is consistent with their world-view. If an atheist were to hold that moral absolutes exist, this would not be co iverse is a hostile environment, produced by mere chance, without ultimate purpose or value).[/b]
03 Jan 11
Originally posted by John W Booth============================
I don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one. I will leave it to Christians to worry about what Paul meant.
I don't speculate about "God's eternal purpose" because I personally don't have any reason to believe that there is one. I will leave it to Christians to worry about what Paul meant.
=================================
Regenerated Christians would be the only ones who can "see the kingdom of God".
That's probably where you never were.