zaxattacks wrote:
according to most organized religions, excluding budism, it is believed God takes a special interest in everyone.
Which? If "God" takes an interest in everyone, then "God's" interest in you is not "special".
Lifespan is the hand of God
Sort:
No religious debate please.
May 1, 2022
0
#64
Mattew298 hat geschrieben:
No religious debate please.
Too late after 75 posts....
May 1, 2022
0
#66
EscherehcsE wrote:
Yep, the horse is already out of the barn...
Uh - oh, let’s hope it’s not the pale horse.
May 1, 2022
0
#67
KevinTheChessGnome wrote:
archaja wrote:
KevinTheChessGnome hat geschrieben:
I am god, I am god, I am god, I am, I am, I am that I am ... ;0)
At least now we know that god is not exactly the strongest chess player of all times
I and my father are one
Your mother must be so confused
May 1, 2022
0
#68
zaxattacks wrote:
with eternal life comes eternal sadness, because no matter who you love, they will always die, until eventually you are the last living human being, whether in the heavens or the earth.
That's when only you have eternal life. Won't the others have it too?
May 1, 2022
0
#69
Mattew298 wrote:
No religious debate please.
It never fails. As soon as some busybody finds a subject with a religious theme, said busybody feels compelled to tell everyone else what they can't talk about. How about if busybodies who are offended by discussions just find some other way to amuse themselves that doesn't involve bossing around a bunch of strangers? They could avoid subjects that displease them and everyone else can go about without being scolded. Win/win.
May 1, 2022
0
#70
DrSpudnik wrote:
Mattew298 wrote:
No religious debate please.
It never fails. As soon as some busybody finds a subject with a religious theme, said busybody feels compelled to tell everyone else what they can't talk about. *Snip*
Not so much busybodies as teacher's pet wannabes. While at the same time chasing the 'largest thread' prize by spamming under the guise of games.
But this brings in more kids with paying parents which is great for business.
May 1, 2022
0
#71
Optimissed hat geschrieben:
archaja wrote:
Yuck!
As one atheist to another, this kind of ideation is a subjective reaction to the existential problem: "What am I?"
I am.
Nothing that can be added enhances that understanding. It applies to all of us ... the religious and the irreligious. And just simply the non-religious.
This thread disappeared for a while. Thought it had been destroyed. I'm getting slightly irritated by children treating mature people as if they're children and censoring them. It's clearly an attempt to make them stay children, even if some of us are probably 93.
It´s not the reaction of the question "What am I"! It´s only the reaction of the answer: "I´m my father" 
DrSpudnik a écrit :
Mattew298 wrote:
No religious debate please.
It never fails. As soon as some busybody finds a subject with a religious theme, said busybody feels compelled to tell everyone else what they can't talk about. How about if busybodies who are offended by discussions just find some other way to amuse themselves that doesn't involve bossing around a bunch of strangers? They could avoid subjects that displease them and everyone else can go about without being scolded. Win/win.
The thing that i said, is that true ?
May 2, 2022
0
#73
Mattew298 wrote:
DrSpudnik a écrit :
Mattew298 wrote:
No religious debate please.
It never fails. As soon as some busybody finds a subject with a religious theme, said busybody feels compelled to tell everyone else what they can't talk about. How about if busybodies who are offended by discussions just find some other way to amuse themselves that doesn't involve bossing around a bunch of strangers? They could avoid subjects that displease them and everyone else can go about without being scolded. Win/win.
The thing that i said, is that true ?
You didn't say anything (a declarative statement), you posted a demand, cushioned with a "please".
May 2, 2022
0
#74
Optimissed hat geschrieben:
archaja wrote:
Yuck!
As one atheist to another, this kind of ideation is a subjective reaction to the existential problem: "What am I?"
I am.
Nothing that can be added enhances that understanding. It applies to all of us ... the religious and the irreligious. And just simply the non-religious.
This thread disappeared for a while. Thought it had been destroyed. I'm getting slightly irritated by children treating mature people as if they're children and censoring them. It's clearly an attempt to make them stay children, even if some of us are probably 93.
Ah, by the way: The question of all questions is not "what am I", it is:
"Why is there something and not rather nothing? That is the question."
Martin Heidegger "Introduction in Methaphysics".
"
DrSpudnik a écrit :
Mattew298 wrote:
DrSpudnik a écrit :
Mattew298 wrote:
No religious debate please.
It never fails. As soon as some busybody finds a subject with a religious theme, said busybody feels compelled to tell everyone else what they can't talk about. How about if busybodies who are offended by discussions just find some other way to amuse themselves that doesn't involve bossing around a bunch of strangers? They could avoid subjects that displease them and everyone else can go about without being scolded. Win/win.
The thing that i said, is that true ?
You didn't say anything (a declarative statement), you posted a demand, cushioned with a "please".
There was no "?"
May 2, 2022
0
#77
The answer “because it’s the natural state of things” sounds close to a physical deterministic thought. Which may be closer to correct than i originally thought now that i think it over. It would fit nicely with the Rule of Simplicity or as @archaja put it, Occam’s Razor.
May 2, 2022
0
#78
Optimissed wrote:
miskit_mistake wrote:
Unlike in french a demand is not a question in English.
"Will you please be quiet" is just one example of a demand which is formally a question, in English. So your knowledge of English may be imperfect: but don't feel too tense about it.
English doesn't know me too well.
May 2, 2022
0
#79
why something, rather than nothing?
an eternal Spirit created time, space & matter:
'He who hath seen me hath seen the Father.'
would it be too hard for the Creator of everything to visit us & live a life in human form... or would He not remain Himself if He did?
could He not 'drop the mic' & ascend back from whence He came?
May 2, 2022
0
#80
Optimissed wrote:
archaja wrote:
Optimissed hat geschrieben:
archaja wrote:
Yuck!
As one atheist to another, this kind of ideation is a subjective reaction to the existential problem: "What am I?"
I am.
Nothing that can be added enhances that understanding. It applies to all of us ... the religious and the irreligious. And just simply the non-religious.
This thread disappeared for a while. Thought it had been destroyed. I'm getting slightly irritated by children treating mature people as if they're children and censoring them. It's clearly an attempt to make them stay children, even if some of us are probably 93.
Ah, by the way: The question of all questions is not "what am I", it is:
"Why is there something and not rather nothing? That is the question."
Martin Heidegger "Introduction in Methaphysics"."
OK, firstly I do rather like Heidegger. He's one of the few philosophers who tries to build on the small amount of information we have regarding our relationships with ourselves, with the World, and with our concepts of both those things. However, he does mysticise it all a bit.
I rather disagree with him on that question and also with his reaction to the very natural "what am I?"
Since things exist, we can assume that's the natural state of things, which makes the question as to why they exist trivial. We can ask "but why is it the natural state of things" and the only reasonable answer is "because it's the natural state if things". Personifying it, it then becomes "Why does it exist?" ... "Because it does". So "what am I? .... I am" is the natural corollary to Heidegger's question. It's also simpler and more delightfully to the point, because we have to exist in order to perceive things and to ask the question "why do things exist?"
And there is no question any more.
Which is precisely why Heidegger is awful as a philosopher. his prime contribution being derailing Phenomenology from its husserlian purity into a quagmire of bad scholarship in education and the humanities
Yuck!