• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

reasons for your theistic mind set?

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I need to know whether truth genuinely produces liberation or not or whether I should take up @Amanaki's advice and try Buddhism from the New Year: can you help me with this because I an seeking counselling for my persistent delusional disorder that the UK Mental Health authorities require me to take 'risperidone' and 'sertraline' medications for and they are unable to provide me with this form of counselling until at least March 2019.

I hope I have now clarified.

When you put it that way, I think that there is hardly a choice.

Truth with a capital "T" is not particularly accessible for human beings. It is very questionable whether it should even be a goal.

Meanwhile, the basics of Buddhism involve training the mind to attain the best possible balance of serenity and awareness of our circunstances and situations.

If you have the opportunity, I very much think that you should give Vipassana (or Zazen, or Shamata) a try. I have considerable hope that it may be helpful to you, and there is essentially no reason not to try it.
 

Shantanu

Well-Known Member
When you put it that way, I think that there is hardly a choice.

Truth with a capital "T" is not particularly accessible for human beings. It is very questionable whether it should even be a goal.

Meanwhile, the basics of Buddhism involve training the mind to attain the best possible balance of serenity and awareness of our circunstances and situations.

If you have the opportunity, I very much think that you should give Vipassana (or Zazen, or Shamata) a try. I have considerable hope that it may be helpful to you, and there is essentially no reason not to try it.
Is Vipassana (or Zazen or Shimata) within Theravada Buddhism?
 

Shantanu

Well-Known Member
I don't think either way really matters in the grand scheme of things by which all of it remains empty. During my time as a theist, I never dreamed that id ever be an atheist, even though I knew that's how life started as being without gods. Given the dynamics and potential throughout what I view as a continuum , I suspect no one will ever be able to escape designations such as atheism and theism in any permanent way.
Do you mean Reality is essentially empty, contains nothing real?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Is Vipassana (or Zazen or Shimata) within Theravada Buddhism?
Yes, they are very similar practices from different forms of Buddhism.

Vipassana is Theravadin.
Zazen is from Soto Zen Buddhism.
Shamata is found in Tibetan Buddhism.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Do you mean Reality is essentially empty, contains nothing real?
More like illusory. I tend to think and suspect reality is multifaceted and dependent on our senses and our instrumentation. There may be other facets of reality that are undetectable at present that we are not aware of.

To put it in another way, I think there are aspects of reality that we cannot detect due to our limitations that are just as real as our own perceptions and experiences.

A good hypothetical example to get an idea of what I'm trying to say, would be to imagine yourself shrunk down to the atomic-level where all that is seen is nothing more than individual atoms and initiate an exhaustive search for life. If perchance we were not aware that atoms were actually components that create various molecules, I would suspect we would conclude that life does not exist anywhere you look, but of course we know that is not true as we are aware that atoms create molecules and molecules can form organic and inorganic forms that result in living organisms.

The reality around us may be only a facet of reality that we can see and experience within a continuum that is dynamic and in flux , where what we see as reality today, may be something vastly different.

By emptiness it's not saying reality isn't real but rather the 'realness' by which reality is approached and is accepted at the moment is essentially phenomenal and temporary in terms of rising and falling and therefore never permanent and static. I tend to think reality changes, and takes on different characteristics in a continual and neverending manor.
 

Shantanu

Well-Known Member
More like illusory. I tend to think and suspect reality is multifaceted and dependent on our senses and our instrumentation. There may be other facets of reality that are undetectable at present that we are not aware of.

To put it in another way, I think there are aspects of reality that we cannot detect due to our limitations that are just as real as our own perceptions and experiences.

A good hypothetical example to get an idea of what I'm trying to say, would be to imagine yourself shrunk down to the atomic-level where all that is seen is nothing more than individual atoms and initiate an exhaustive search for life. If perchance we were not aware that atoms were actually components that create various molecules, I would suspect we would conclude that life does not exist anywhere you look, but of course we know that is not true as we are aware that atoms create molecules and molecules can form organic and inorganic forms that result in living organisms.

The reality around us may be only a facet of reality that we can see and experience within a continuum that is dynamic and in flux , where what we see as reality today, may be something vastly different.

By emptiness it's not saying reality isn't real but rather the 'realness' by which reality is approached and is accepted at the moment is essentially phenomenal and temporary in terms of rising and falling and therefore never permanent and static. I tend to think reality changes, and takes on different characteristics in a continual and neverending manor.
Of course reality changes: that is a scientific fact. We appear to be programmed like a computer machine of the universe set along a particular path until a God decides to alter that direction of travel with interjections to change the programme.
 

GoodbyeDave

Well-Known Member
One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.
The argument from causation seems a reasonable one on the balance of probabilities. Obviously it is not conclusive, but what argument is, outside mathematics? If you don't like a conclusion, there's always an alternative explanation, even if you are the only one to accept it.

All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking.
I'd go along with that.

… the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her particular faith is correct and all the other wrong. Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories. However, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Messianic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.
Very true. If you create a new religion, then you naturally need to explain what you've got right and everyone else has got wrong. The obvious problem is that all these invented religions, from Zoastrianism to Baha'i lack evidence and contradict each other.

So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false. If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.
Polytheism is the practice that everyone followed before the monotheists came along. I would not describe it as a "faith". Christianity depends on the truth of the resurrection, as Paul said, but no-one saw it happen. Islam depends on the truth of Muhammad's claim to have received a message from an angel, but no-one has been able to call the angel and check. Both require you to take these assertions on trust, to have faith. For that reason, I reject them.

Polytheism is based on the experiences of the many, not on the claims of single individuals. I have experienced some of the gods I worship, others have experienced others, but they've all been experienced by many people over the years.

Polytheism is inclusive in that the different "denominations" are compatible. An American professor told the tale of how some on his course expressed astonishment that the Greeks relied on the Delphic oracle, but a Hindu student said it was obvious: only fools would ignore the advice of a god. That student may not have worshiped Apollo, but he knew that those who did relied on the same sort of evidence as those who worshiped Vishnu or Shiva.
 

Axe Elf

Prophet
I do like your interpretation of christianity. unfortunately it does appear to be the the majority view and from what i can study it does not seem to be the theological view of the core faith.

{Jesus said, “I am the truth, the way, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me” (John 14:6) and “For unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins” (John 8:24). The Apostle Peter echoed these words when he said, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12, KJV).
St. Paul concurred, “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus …” (1 Timothy 2:5, KJV). In fact, it is the united testimony of the New Testament that no one can know God the Father except through the person of Jesus Christ.}

This is taken from a web site called "bethinking" I could give you many others but the modern consensus is that one must believe in the death and resurection of Jesus in order to be saved from our God given damnation. The bridge must be recognized or no deal.
Again I like your outlook on christianity I just dont think it's true . The idea that Jesus was the only way is backed up by the historical facts as well. In the formation of christianity the majority of the people were pagan. Pagans had no problem with worshiping various gods for various needs. They may have had there favorites but monotheism was just strange to them.
Now comes along the greek writers of the letters that would become the new testaments (well some of them anyway). In the face of this pagan idea they had to convince people to abandon polytheism. After they gained power they soon made worship of other gods illegal. Had they believed the way you do that might not have happened.
As much as i like a faith that can accept other views I dont feel that christianity , theologicly or historically, is one of them.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time that human beings have taken the words of Jesus and ran with them beyond their intended boundaries. I can interpret each of the verses you cited in the sense that I proposed--that Jesus is the Son (the body) of God, and that His sacrifice made it possible for man to enter into the presence of God again. If that is true, then Acts 4:12 is true, 1 Timothy 2:5 is true, and John 14:6 is true--all without having to recognize that Jesus was the means, the way, the mediator, by which one is able to be saved.

The only verse you cited that seems to be more specific is John 8:24, but it appears in this passage that Jesus was talking to a particular group of Pharisees, not the world in general, as He says a few verses before (v. 21) to this same group of people, "I am going away, and you will be looking for Me, and you will die in (under the curse of) your sin. Where I am going, it is not possible for you to come."

So I don't think Jesus is telling everyone that they will die in their sin even though they are looking for Him, or that it is not possible for anyone to go to heaven with Jesus--just that the Pharisees will die in their sin because they don't really know God.

I suppose there is room for a legitimate difference of opinion here, but given the legitimate option to be loving and inclusive as opposed to selfish and exclusive, I'll choose the former. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, and we will let others work out their own salvation.
 

Segev Moran

Well-Known Member
One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.
I think its less by something and more that something caused it.
It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning.
Indeed.
From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.
Yep.
Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe.
Indeed. yet we do know the beginning was instant and full. meaning that we know that the entire physical scope of our universe, meaning everything we can observe and sense in our universe was once a singular point of existence.
This is at least the most accepted theory we have today.
Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.
I disagree.
Most people I know have no problem admitting not knowing. most people I encounter are common :)
Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.
I Don't think this is the issue.
I think that as an atheist, you think that the theist presume to have the answer you lack.
The fact is that most theist don't claim to know more than you with the exception they believe that something that is far more complex for our mind to understand is what governs our universe.
No theist knows what God is. I have yet to encounter anyone who claims he knows this answer.
All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking.
I Think that here lies the confusion of yourself and most atheists.
You assume the theist don't really know what God is, and you are right, but what theists do know that the atheist POV fails to see, is the affect God have on our existence.
You can think of it as understanding what electricity can do without understand what electricity is (which is the reality for most people on earth :))
So here, the deistic POV is actually the exact opposite of the theistic POV.
The deist claims he has no idea if there is or isn't a God.
The theistic POV has a clear understanding that there is a God, yet we can't really explain what God is. I can tell you how it affects my (and your) life, I can clearly see (literally) this influence on my life and i have no doubt at all that God is what causes this influence.
As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Obviously. The deist is an atheist in the sense of not believing there is a God.
Now comes the plot of this thread.
Yey :)
Even if I, as an atheist,
Been there, done that ;)
concede that it is possible maybe even probable that the universe had a "creator" the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her's particular faith is correct and all the other wrong.
I can provide such reasoning quite easily actually.
There is a problem though. My reasoning and yours are very different.

I had the same reason as you had (in the sense of not accepting the fact there is a God), I thought the same that the theists' logic is corrupt, something in the theistic thought is wrong.
Today i understand it was the other way around.
[/QUOTE]
Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories.
[/QUOTE]
Its not relevant.
There can be million religions, all talking about the same thing in different words.
Native Americans for example, have stories about spirits and energies, all are part of the same force we call God.
They had a small understanding of the big picture.
Science, today, is in the same state. it's got only a small part of the puzzle figured out.
You'll be amazed to learn that if you analyze the world's religions, they usually all speak of different parts of the same puzzle.
Some religions take it to the next level and build mystical ideas around those pieces of puzzle, causing the religion to be rendered weird or at times abusive.
however, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Mesionic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.
ALL religions, without an exception try to tell the same story. the Abrahamic religion, without a doubt, presents the most elaborated and full image that includes in it every aspect of reality as we know it and beyond.
Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.
I Agree.
Sad.
This is usually an outcome of lack of education or a "forced religion".
You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.
Same reason as the above.
I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.
I can be counted as such candidate.
I was raised non religious. I still am non religious.
Although i learned some aspect of the Jewish religion, it was in the form of academic pov of the bible and not a religious pov.
So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
There is one reason that led me to reconsider my dis-belief in God.
It is the most basic and simple reason that it simply works!

I hope I will not be censored, as I am not really trying to convince anyone to become religious :) I am not religious myself!
But I will try and explain why I know it works:
The Jewish religion in its most basic form, simply works.
For me, it took much study and learning to understand how to see it. i was very negative regarding the possibility of a god, let alone the God.
But there is a small saying in the Jewish religion (quoted from the bible of course :)), Try it and you'll find it.
It sounds very weird... but this is what i did.
NO! i did not try to be religious person in an instant. I do not pray 24/7, i do not dress differently, I am not religious.
The Jewish teaching explains to you how things work. more importantly, why they work as they do.
So I tried. very little, the main change was to change the way I look at things. change the way I experience things.

Going back to the electricity example, i don't know what it is, yet i have a clear understanding of its affect on my life.

It is so clear to me, that when i encounter someone who cannot see it it makes me wanna scream to him to open his eyes and see it (I of course don't do this :))
But before, I couldn't understand when people told me I am blind. i was irritated by this, Me? Blind? you are the one who believes in BS...
Wow! I was completely blind.
An important thing in the bible that many people don't take notice to, is the claim God give us.
It says that if you follow Gods way (of thought!) you will KNOW it is true.
This might seem very odd to the atheist, but to me, it is actually knowing!
I Know, for a fact, without a shred of a doubt, that God is here. it is as clear as I know my kids are real.
I have zero knowledge what God is, nor will i ever have, i know that! but i can see its affect on me, my relatives, my friends, my co-workers, i see it all over, not seeing it can only be the result of not understanding how to look.

What do i mean when i say it works? it means that I read a prediction of how doing A will cause B, and BOOOOOM... it simply happens! not miracles, not angels or prayers or all that new edge thoughts, simple, actual things in my life, change drastically because i change the way i looked at things.
Black is not really black, it is much more :)
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.
So far, every ideas and concepts i have red and learned from many religions are all described in detail in the Jewish religion.
I mean that in the sense of explanations how the spiritual world works, not in things a religion asks you to do.

Yin and Yang as an example, is a fraction of the knowledge you can find in the Jewish texts.
Energies, Meditations, Observation, Consciousness, Self empowerment, Karma, Dharma, Balance, Prayer, Sound, Music, Silence, Physical "maintenance"..
Everything!

As one contains all the others and much much more, I have no reason to assume it is not true :)
 

Ancient Soul

The Spiritual Universe
Although at the individual level, Xians can get caught up in the "We're right and you're wrong" trap, I don't believe that Xianity, as a theology, is exclusionist by nature.

Then you are going against your very own "god" then:

Exodus 22:20
"Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed.


Deuteronomy 13:12-16

12If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

13Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;

14Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;

15Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.

16And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again.


Deuteronomy 17:2-7

2"(A)If there is found in your midst, in any of your towns, which the LORD your God is giving you, a man or a woman who does what is evil in the sight of the LORD your God, by transgressing His covenant,

3and has gone and (B)served other gods and worshiped them, (C)or the sun or the moon or any of the heavenly host, (D)which I have not commanded,

4and if it is told you and you have heard of it, then you shall inquire thoroughly. Behold, if it is true and the thing certain that this detestable thing has been done in Israel,

5then you shall bring out that man or that woman who has done this evil deed to your gates, that is, the man or the woman, and (E)you shall stone them to death.

Deuteronomy 17:12-13
12 The person who acts arrogantly, refusing to listen either to the priest who stands there serving the LORD your God or to the judge, must die. You must purge the evil from Israel. 13 Then all the people will hear [about it], be afraid, and no longer behave arrogantly.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22
20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”
 
It isn't a very good one, in my opinion.
no but it seems to work for the majority.
This is the reason we are wrong so much of the time.
From what i have studied the path to wisdom is admitting what we dont know.
Show me a theist who believes we are important to the universe and I'll show you a green dog
the logic goes... if God created the universe then sent himself to die a horrible death to make himself happy so that we could be let into his heaven then by default that seems to imply that the creator thinks we are important.
Though there are a few claims of divine inspiration and references to creation in some religious texts, they are all vague and insubstantial with the exception of the Bible.
just to make sure i understand you point correctly.... you believe the bible is not vague. That it's substance can stand scrutiny. I want to make sure i understand so as not to commit a straw man fallacy.
Science can only speculate on the possible forming of the universe and planet earth. The current hypothesis is that the matter that formed the universe randomly and spontaneously appeared of it's own accord. The Bible, is, by far, the most likely authority on the subject. Creation Claims Conclusion | Gods And Men
So you believe that science claims that the universe came from nothing? You believe the Genisis story is most likely true?
First of all, I would say henotheistic rather than monotheistic and secondly it may be easy to point to them but somewhat more difficult to evaluate the possible alternatives. Then you can easily point.
I dont understand your point here. You may need to clarify if I am to understand this.
This is true, but I don't see what relevance it is, say, to an atheist born in Christendom . . . the Bible belt, for example. Atheist are always saying to me "If you were born in _______ 1,000 year ago you would be _______!" To which I say, so what? So would you.
The fact that you want to dismiss it tells me that it is highly relevant. I point this out because I want to make sure that the readers can pick apart what was given to them by culture and what can be shown to be "true" (in the sense of what they believe) without the culture they were raised in.
There is very little that people do that surprises me.
This may be my own fault for expecting that other people have the ability or the desire to critically examine their world views.
My father came from an irreligious home. He has always been atheist. My mother was dragged from Christian congregation to congregation where she quickly realized that they were all hypocrites and it was all nonsense. She became a believer in her 50's maybe? Somewhere around that time. I was raised an unbeliever and became a believer at 27 when I began an intense study of the Bible.
thank you for sharing. I too study the Bible and i come to a completely different view.
To say that my beliefs are true and any others are false would be foolish, irresponsible and incorrect. As I mentioned above one would only have to consider the primary Abrahamic branches in order to establish an authority on the creation. Islam and Mormonism are incompatible with what we now call "Judaism" and Christianity though those latter two are compatible with one another.
I appreciate your humble view that you could be wrong. That is the first step to wisdom (it helps me anyway) . So if I understand this correctly you believe that if some one studies the Bible critically then one will come to the conclusion that christianity is most likely correct.
Again, I dont want to commit the sin of the straw man.
 
The teaching story, The Blind Men and the Elephant, is my "go to" answer to your inclusion question. The fundamental postulate is that the human intellect is insufficient to understand the Divine. Thus the best we can do is to construct an incomplete picture which may be intellectually satisfying.

Another way of looking at it is contained in Hazrat Inayat Khan's "salat" prayer. Here's a relevant excerpt:

Thou art the first cause and the last effect,
The Divine Light and the Spirit of Guidance,
Alpha and Omega.
Thy light is in all forms,
Thy love in all beings,
In a loving mother, in a kind father,
In an innocent child, in a helpful friend,
In an inspiring teacher.
Allow us to recognize Thee In all Thy holy names and forms;
As Rama, as Krishna, as Shiva, as Buddha;
Let us know Thee as Abraham, as Solomon, as Zarathustra, as Moses, as Jesus, as Mohammad,
And in many other names and forms,
Known and unknown to the world.
I would definitely agree with this scenario as it seems to work in the field of science however, either one comes to the divine by X method or Y method. If advocates to each method could agree that maybe the other is onto something then your philosophy would work astoundingly. I wish it could happen.
 
Thank you father diego de landa or your very updated updated version from the 1500s. You were simply "a theist" glad you got rid of the gap since being an "atheist" is so profoundly different. You dont evolve very quickly do you, but eventually you simple become an extinctatheist. Like a lumbering dinasaur. What you think and what i think for that matter, is irelevant.
View attachment 26258
Sorry but if you have a point it flew right past me.
 
Well, I have a non-dual position meaning God and creation are not-two. This is best expressed in the Hindu Advaita Vedanta philosophy.

I have come to this view from the insights of those I have come to believe have experienced and delved deepest into the nature of reality. I find these types as basically all on the same page.
I cant argue with this point of view. Well done sir.
 

Ancient Soul

The Spiritual Universe
ALL religions, without an exception try to tell the same story. the Abrahamic religion, without a doubt, presents the most elaborated and full image that includes in it every aspect of reality as we know it and beyond.

I understood the rest of your post, but this part had me stumped.

How does a mythology that distorts reality for it's followers, present: "the most elaborated and full image that includes in it every aspect of reality as we know it and beyond."???
 
Would it not be better to be neither an atheist nor a theist until there is concrete proof one way or the other?
This only really matters in how one wants to live their lives as based on what they believe is true. For example I believe that if i get hit by a bus that is going 50mph I will most likely die. It may not be true but im not going to challenge that since I have good faith (and good evidence) that E=MC2.
On the other hand if i believe that demons cause disease instead of germs then that might be a problem for me and any one who depends on me.
I try to live in a fashion that guides my actions based on the most things that are true and the fewest things that are false or cannot be proven to be true.
I dont give Jewelery to the forest fairies in hopes of getting a wish granted because these beings cannot be proven to be true. They could be real but so far no evidence is forthcoming
Still that does leave the possiblity that evidence can be presented that could change my mind.
Since I cant disprove a negative I have little to no hope of changing the mind of a true believer in tinkerbell.
 
Top