Why do religious people beleive the author of the scripts but ?

[TheBrokenSoul]

But the truth is, that statement was made by an atheist, and has no evidence to it whatsoever. So he was just indoctrinated into believing it. It was his faith. You failed to see it.

Cheers.

But the truth is, that statement was made by an atheist, and has no evidence to it whatsoever. So he was just indoctrinated into believing it. It was his faith. You failed to see it.

Cheers.

You likewise missed my point in return which leads me to the point of a whole meaning can be misinterpreted .

 

[CG Didymus]

But "messenger" is not my frame-of-reference. Mine is from the East - those who have realized their identity with the Divine and those that see the Divine. From a bit in the past Ramakrishna Paramhamsa is one example. Ramana Maharshi is a more recent figure

And that's pretty important. There are many spiritual teachers. Does spiritual truth contradict? Maybe ways and methods are different, but the goal is the same, spiritual growth and awareness.

But then there's the "organized" religions. They have someone claim that they are from God and that God is this or that. Then others, who think they know, will say "no" God is really like this. Thinking in terms of messengers sure puts people into an "us" and "them", "we're right" and "you're wrong" way of thinking about spiritual truth. So, it becomes "your guy can't be a true messenger, because my guy said something different."

 

[firedragon]

Why do religious people believe the author of the scripts or books but then instantly disbeleive when somebody of modern times claims to be Gods messenger ?

Maybe you should ask very specific questions if you are really asking a question. Specifically refer to the exact religious people, which prophet, who came and claimed after that, why did you reject that person.

Only then your question will be an authentic question. Otherwise, it is just a repetition of a script you heard somewhere without question. That is dogma.

 

[Jainarayan]

Why do religious people believe the author of the scripts or books but then instantly disbeleive when somebody of modern times claims to be Gods messenger ?

I think we’re conditioned that what’s in our respective scriptures is history and a done deal.

With statements such as “Whenever there is a decline in righteousness and an increase in unrighteousness, O Arjun, at that time I manifest myself on earth. To protect the righteous, to annihilate the wicked, and to reestablish the principles of dharma I appear on this earth, age after age” (Bhagavad Gita 4.7-8) I’m less inclined to dismiss a claim that someone is a messenger or appearance of (a)God. Maybe He makes small “adjustments”.

We’re also conditioned to think of messengers or God himself making grand entrances, with fire, flame, lightning, and other great fanfare.

 

[firedragon]

You likewise missed my point in return which leads me to the point of a whole meaning can be misinterpreted .

Oh I got your point. But as you said, a whole meaning can be misinterpreted.

The point is, some atheists behave more religiously than any other religious person. No evidence, nothing factual, but blindly believe a cut and paste. Blind faith.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

There are as many reasons as there are followers really.

There is only one reason in reality and that is hope . We all hope there is something more , an afterlife . We all have empathy for somebody and this is why everyone on the planet is ''insane'' . Our Neurological Reference Frames when connected to the universe by all 5 sensors , experience so much live traumatic experience . Everyday a death or pain reminds us of our truly weak nature compared to a rock .

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

I think we’re conditioned that what’s in our respective scriptures is history and a done deal.

With statements such as “Whenever there is a decline in righteousness and an increase in unrighteousness, O Arjun, at that time I manifest myself on earth. To protect the righteous, to annihilate the wicked, and to reestablish the principles of dharma I appear on this earth, age after age” (Bhagavad Gita 4.7-8) I’m less inclined to dismiss a claim that someone is a messenger or appearance of (a)God. Maybe He makes small “adjustments”.

We’re also conditioned to think of messengers or God himself making grand entrances, with fire, flame, lightning, and other great fanfare.

View attachment 57753

When we are born we are born with the absense of all knowledge and information , our neurological reference frames are all equal in innnocence and blank .
We aren't conditioned , we are prisoners of neurological circumstance from birth and the information our 5 senses gain for the Neurological reference frame , is what we are mainly .

 

[CG Didymus]

It isn't contradiction , when contradiction is truths , honesty is for the wise , accepted dishonest belief is not truths .

Okay, but I see an honest interpretation by the Jews. But it contradicts how Christians interpret it. They both think they are being honest. And, when it comes to the Bible, is it "truth" to take it as literally as possible? Each religion, that believes and uses the Bible, takes somethings literally, some things figuratively and maybe even some things wrong. All they all think they are being the honest ones. Who's got it right? Who's being honest. The ones who say God is one and not three, or the Trinitarians? They both have their verses and interpretations that "proves" their beliefs.

 

[Jainarayan]

When we are born we are born with the absense of all knowledge and information , our neurological reference frames are all equal in innnocence and blank .
We aren't conditioned , we are prisoners of neurological circumstance from birth and the information our 5 senses gain for the Neurological reference frame , is what we are mainly .

So why did you ask?

We’re conditioned by our experiences, influences and educations.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

So why did you ask?

We’re conditioned by our experiences, influences and educations.

Well no , not really . In a sense maybe but that isn't accurate enough .

It doesn't determine our outcome because each and every person has Neurological Immunity and Neurological Security , this is the part of our Neurological Reference Frame that allows us to say no and think for ourselves , accessing preferred data .

 

[Jainarayan]

Well no , not really . In a sense maybe but that is isn't accurate enough .

It doesn't determine our outcome because each and every person has Neurological Immunity and Neurological Security , this is the part of our Neurological Reference Frame that allows us to say no and think for ourselves , accessing preferred data .

All well and good but all that psychobabble doesn't answer "Why did you ask?" since you apparently have the answer.

 

[CG Didymus]

There are as many reasons as there are followers really.

With a lot of us, we were taught that God, Jesus and the Bible were true. How many really bother getting into it to see if that's true or not? For some of us it doesn't take much to get us to say, "no, this can't be right." Like a talking serpent, Moses' cane turning into a snake, dead people coming out of their graves and walking through Jerusalem and so on. So, for those that stay with a religion, how deeply do they believe in the Bible or the Scriptures of their religion? It seems like some have chosen not to take somethings literally true, but they do believe in the spiritual truths that are found in their Scriptures. But then what do they call those other things? Myth?

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

All well and good but all that psychobabble doesn't answer "Why did you ask?" since you apparently have the answer.

Those who seak to question ones own answer shall be tested in wisdom .

 

[Lain]

With a lot of us, we were taught that God, Jesus and the Bible were true. How many really bother getting into it to see if that's true or not? For some of us it doesn't take much to get us to say, "no, this can't be right." Like a talking serpent, Moses' cane turning into a snake, dead people coming out of their graves and walking through Jerusalem and so on. So, for those that stay with a religion, how deeply do they believe in the Bible or the Scriptures of their religion? It seems like some have chosen not to take somethings literally true, but they do believe in the spiritual truths that are found in their Scriptures. But then what do they call those other things? Myth?

It is sad that many do not question what was given to them. Those who take spiritual truths often do call it myth, or they just allegorically interpret the whole thing.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Really ? According to science the universe started from a high dense state of matter . Matter and energy being equivalents .
The big bang does not explain how this high dense state of matter was formed . Physics can't describe where this energy manifested from at all , that is a false statement from you .

You need to recognize first what science is as oppose to philosophy.

This is not science but philosophy at best. Likely taken from Enstiens special theory of relativity.

I think I heard this argument before.

Taken from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.


The Equivalence of Mass and Energy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


You need to be better with the specifics before you bunch in science with philosophical thought.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

It is sad that many do not question what was given to them. Those who take spiritual truths often do call it myth, or they just allegorically interpret the whole thing.

Isn't Budha spiritual and Hinduism ?

 

[Lain]

Isn't Budha spiritual and Hinduism ?

I have no idea. I don't know much about either of those religions.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

I have no idea. I don't know much about either of those religions.

I'm pretty sure they are pretty relaxed religions , quite calm in belief and would rather have peace than mayhem . I think the Chinese beleive in Budha , quite a spiritual thing , quite respectful , peaceful and wise .

 

[CG Didymus]

It is sad that many do not question what was given to them. Those who take spiritual truths often do call it myth, or they just allegorically interpret the whole thing.

As was said earlier... By their fruits you shall know them. Catholics are another one, where I will probably never believe in your doctrines, but so many Catholics are genuinely nice people. I call these people, no matter which religion they're in, "Golden Rule" people. They put the "love thy neighbor" part of their beliefs as most important. Rather than getting all worried about dogmas and doctrines that for sure are going to be controversial and lead to an argument.

 

[Valjean]

The Neurological Reference Frame and Neurological Creationism is my own work and there is no link as it is unwritten and unpublished .

Could you give us a quick summation?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Hmmmm..... Historically, Christianity has a pretty bad record of war, bloodshed and repression.
You're hoist on your own petard, methinks.

This is talking of the Messengers, which then reflects to the beleiver, the beleiver can reflect those fruits, or they may not.

First we are asked to judge the Messenger by their fruits, and accept or embrace them. If we embrace them, then we are asked to judge no one else but ourselves after that.

Regards Tony