"What it requires of it's God, Doctor..."

[JustKate]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

I think all Rush is trying to say is that there are indeed written eye-witness accounts. Of course eye-witness accounts are far from perfect -very far from perfect, actually - their value depends entirely on the veracity of the witness and the accuracy of the transcriber. But there are such things as accurate eye-witness accounts. Surely each of us has accepted some of these at some time or other. It's up to each individual to decide which accounts to accept and which to discard. I don't think you can use logic alone to discard all eye-witness accounts...not even those that are very old.

Oops - left something out. Darn it, I need an editor. Unfortunately, I am an editor, but editors just aren't that great at editing their own writing.

What I meant to say was that I personally don't base my belief solely on those eyewitness accounts I mention above. To me, the Bible is a wonderful resource, but belief has to come from inside. This is why those "Repent Or Go To Hell" billboards offend me. 1. They are divisive and smug as all get out. 2. They are almost certainly wholly ineffective.

 

[rahullak]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

I think all Rush is trying to say is that there are indeed written eye-witness accounts. Of course eye-witness accounts are far from perfect -very far from perfect, actually - their value depends entirely on the veracity of the witness and the accuracy of the transcriber. But there are such things as accurate eye-witness accounts. Surely each of us has accepted some of these at some time or other. It's up to each individual to decide which accounts to accept and which to discard. I don't think you can use logic alone to discard all eye-witness accounts...not even those that are very old.

True. But guess what. Eyewitness testimony is prone to a lot of errors. Cognitive psychologists have proven that eyewitness testimony is very suspect even 2 hours after witnessing an event. Even if we were to assume an expert eyewitness account of an event, at the very least I would expect that personal opinions, colorful language, lyrical and metaphorical references are kept to a minimum so I can get the facts of the event straight. Throw in a lot of grandiosity and that's a surefire way to begin to suspect veracity, at least for me. Not to mention that if something someone said a long time ago goes against some very fundamental things I know to be true (such as: human beings can't walk on water, or fly without any assisting technology or part seas with just a thought or turn a loaf of bread into a ton or be the son of an omnipotent creator), I'm either going to have to witness these events myself, or have these events actually take place in the recent past (less than a 100 years) with a whole lot of witnesses who can testify.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

I think all Rush is trying to say is that there are indeed written eye-witness accounts.

Sorry, i have an issue with anyone using the handle "Rush." But that may just be my thing.

may I call you Chris?

I suspect that will be a pretty common experience.

That much is certain. It is the exact definition of the even that is in question.
Possibilities as I see them:
*We go to Heaven if we're good: cool, I could live with that.
*We are reincarnated (my pick): a tree, a frog, or another human, it's all good.
*We go to Hell if we don't pass: Satan would have a hard time dealing with ME as I laugh at his attempts to torture a non-corporeal dude.
* We become simple matter, devoid of consciousness: in that case, I would not really be in a position to gripe about it, would I?
* We sit by the side of Crom, see our enemies crushed, and enjoy the lamentation of de women: joke.

 

[JustKate]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

I think all Rush is trying to say is that there are indeed written eye-witness accounts. Of course eye-witness accounts are far from perfect -very far from perfect, actually - their value depends entirely on the veracity of the witness and the accuracy of the transcriber. But there are such things as accurate eye-witness accounts. Surely each of us has accepted some of these at some time or other. It's up to each individual to decide which accounts to accept and which to discard. I don't think you can use logic alone to discard all eye-witness accounts...not even those that are very old.

True. But guess what. Eyewitness testimony is prone to a lot of errors. Cognitive psychologists have proven that eyewitness testimony is very suspect even 2 hours after witnessing an event. Even if we were to assume an expert eyewitness account of an event, at the very least I would expect that personal opinions, colorful language, lyrical and metaphorical references are kept to a minimum so I can get the facts of the event straight. Throw in a lot of grandiosity and that's a surefire way to begin to suspect veracity, at least for me.

Rahullak, I don't mean to sound snotty here, but I did note in my post that there are major problems with eye-witness accounts. My exact words, as you can see, were that they are "very far from perfect." But that doesn't mean all eye-witness reports are valueless. It's up to everybody to decide - in all sorts of situations, including spiritual, secular and legal - what to believe and what not to believe. You have exactly the same decision to make every single time you have to take somebody else's word for something. Every single time.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

. To me, the Bible is a wonderful resource, but belief has to come from inside.

There was a great line in the series Firefly concerning that- "You don't fix the Bible; the Bible fixes you."
I always thought that was deep.

 

[TIN_MAN]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

Also, there's a differance between eye-wittness acounts of someone who has spent years with someone they look up to, and hang on their every word, and an eye-witness acount of a brief glimpse of a suspect in a bank robbery.

 

[rahullak]

^@Justkate
True. You did note so. I was simply expanding upon it. Yes, every single time.

I will note however that it is easier for me to believe in events that are logically consistent with the basic assumptions I have made about the world and for which there is some modicum of evidence which can be verified, and harder to believe something someone wrote a long time ago which rests on assumptions with no evidence and which no one alive today has any way of verifying.

I however don't doubt the power of faith, since that is how we deal with uncertainty.

@Tin_Man

Also, there's a differance between eye-wittness acounts of someone who has spent years with someone they look up to, and hang on their every word, and an eye-witness acount of a brief glimpse of a suspect in a bank robbery.

True. But both have possibilities for being accurate as well as for being inaccurate and are colored by different perceptions. ("My mom is the best mom in the world, my dad is the best dad in the world." Sure. So are your mom and dad).

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

2000 years from now, I conjure, Bruce Lee will be considered a martial arts furie come to live in our world to show us the way towards efficiently kicking ass.
It's the way of things.

 

[RyuRoots]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

. To me, the Bible is a wonderful resource, but belief has to come from inside.

There was a great line in the series Firefly concerning that- "You don't fix the Bible; the Bible fixes you."
I always thought that was deep.

Really? I dunno. Just sounds like another IN SOVIET RUSSIA joke to me.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: "What it requires of its God, Doctor..."

Really? I dunno. Just sounds like another IN SOVIET RUSSIA joke to me.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Not to get all preachy, but just for the record, Jesus never claimed to be the "one and only" Son God, others claimed he was "the only begotten of the Father" but this does not mean "ONE AND ONLY" which is a miss-translation.

Unfortunately...he did. Remember the classic John 3:16?

"Only begotten" means the only authentic (as opposed to adopted) Son.

And...He certainly allowed people to worship him--even though the Scriptures had said to worship God alone.

And in case you're wondering...he also claimed that he was not around to "abolish" any of the Old Testament.

He did however, say "Ye are gods, all of you Sons of the Most High" Quoting from scripture, as a way of reiterating a truth to the religious leaders of the time that had been as completly ignored in his day as it has in ours.

I don't recall "sons" in this verse being capitalized. But even if it was...again, "only begotten Son" implies a far different meaning than this more metaphorical passage.

...I did note in my post that there are major problems with eye-witness accounts. My exact words, as you can see, were that they are "very far from perfect." But that doesn't mean all eye-witness reports are valueless. It's up to everybody to decide - in all sorts of situations, including spiritual, secular and legal - what to believe and what not to believe. You have exactly the same decision to make every single time you have to take somebody else's word for something. Every single time.

Exactly. Luke, for example, was a hard-core historian who, in his prologue, indicated that he interviewed A LOT of eyewitnesses of the events he recorded--so as to get as accurate a picture as possible.

Paul constantly established TONS of eyewitnesses for folks to interview if they had any doubts about the events.

 

[neozeks]

And in case you're wondering...he also claimed that he was not around to "abolish" any of the Old Testament.

Including those parts where God an his Chosen continuously and mercilessly slaughter tribe after tribe of men, women and children?

(Exo 12:29 NRSV) At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the prisoner who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of the livestock.

I do hope Jesus would have had a problem with genocide...

 

[Nardpuncher]

Sigh, and we were doing so well at the "civil" and "respect" bit.

Well of course you were. Mine was the first reply to state that God that does not exist.

Also, it's literally impossible for me to respect belief in higher power, God, creationism etc. It works the other way because to religious people, belief is kinda rational and likewise not believing is kinda rational, but to me - an atheist - believing is so unbelievably irrational that to respect it is to basically betray my own position.

QFT.

One thing I can't stand is an agnostic. I think it may have been George Carlin that called them chicken-shit athiests.

 

[Misfit Toy]

EVERYONE


Where is the Trek-related content? This is a good topic, but right now it belongs in Misc or TNZ. Give me a reason to keep it open in GTD.

 

[Forbin]

EVERYONE


Where is the Trek-related content? This is a good topic, but right now it belongs in Misc or TNZ. Give me a reason to keep it open in GTD.

I'll throw this in - in one of my fanfics, Ens Gomez witnesses the destruction of a civilization from orbit:

Sonya slowly went to her knees, one leg at a time. Was God closer in space? Or was He back watching Earth, letting other Gods tend to their own worlds? Four hundred years exploring space and no one had come close to finding that answer. Did it matter? She needed to talk to Him, so He was there.

Discuss.

 

[barnaclelapse]

That makes me think of the whole tragedy of Star Trek V. I think if it had been allowed its full potential it could have been a really fascinating parable on God in the Trek-universe. It certainly (and I could be wrong) seems to be the most ambitious attempt Trek ever took at including God in their universe, one-shot episodes and references aside.

 

[TheGodBen]

I was a believer before I ever had said experiences. However...I have had visions (NON-drug-induced...I neither take drugs nor drink) on a couple occasions, which were extremely powerful. In one case...I will never know, but there is the possibility that I stopped breathing in my sleep.

I'm just curious, but do these visions mainly happen at night, or during sleep? Because, if so, there is a possibility that you suffer from sleep paralysis, an affliction which causes vivid hallucinations for the sufferer, sometimes causing out-of-body experiences.

The paralysis itself is frequently accompanied by additional phenomena. Typical examples include a feeling of being crushed or suffocated, electric ‘tingles’ or ‘vibrations’, imagined speech and other noises, the imagined presence of a visible or invisible entity, and sometimes intense emotion: fear or euphoria and orgasmic feelings. SP has been proposed as an explanation for at least some alien abduction experiences and shadow people hauntings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnagogia#Sleep_paralysis

(If it seems you might fit this description then you should consult a doctor and not rely on Wikipedia. )

 

[rahullak]

I think at the heart of Trek is a pervasive sense of faith. Faith not in a higher supernatural God being or some sacred text written by sentient beings that purports to be the message of said God being, but faith in one's abilities, faith in the inherent goodness of all sentient beings (or at least of UFP citizens), faith and trust in colleagues, faith in their science and technology, faith that all sentient beings can live in peace and harmony and that there is enough richness in the Universe for all sentient beings to enjoy etc. The opening score of Star Trek: Enterprise captures this very well (although, I thought as Trek title songs go this one was the odd one out).

I look at religion today as merely a vehicle for faith (faith is necessary since, for eg. I can't really say what will happen the next time I walk around the block). I strongly suspect that all religions began as a way of life, and all the rituals, ceremonies and attire that came with them were actually necessary at the time (and some are necessary even today). I won't go into details, suffice it to say, being a Hindu, I have understood this to a good degree. As far as God (or Gods since Hinduism is polytheistic), go I regard them as symbols of the different aspects of man and these symbols can be powerful motivators for self-improvement. So also is true, I suspect of all the major religions of the world. They are tools to "better ourselves" and live happily and peacefully in a civilization. They are by no means the only tools available. As we have found new knowledge, new ways of finding knowledge, and new ways of passing this knowledge on, we've developed ways of living that don't require following a religion. One can get by just fine by not subscribing to any religion, or by subscribing to many religions. What matters in the end, is what works for each individual to "live long and prosper".

I think I've sprinkled that monologue with enough Trek references, so the Mod doesn't get ticked off.

 

[neozeks]

One thing I can't stand is an agnostic. I think it may have been George Carlin that called them chicken-shit athiests.

Hey, I'm an agnostic!

Of course, there are different types of agnostics. I can't logically and with complete certainty disprove that there is something greater behind the universe's laws, beyond our understanding, so I allow for the possibility. However, like I said, I definitely don't believe in a theist, personal, interfering god of any of the religions, so in that respect I'm an atheist.

In the end I choose to call myself an agnostico-atheistical possibly-deist secular humanist. Try fitting that into a questionnaire...

 

[USS Triumphant]

In the end I choose to call myself an agnostico-atheistical possibly-deist secular humanist. Try fitting that into a questionnaire...

Well ... do you really think you have a reason to care, or is it just interesting to you? Because if you don't care, you could just call yourself an Apatheticist and be done with it.

And yes, I am an evangelical Apatheticist. I don't care, and I don't think other people should, either. It'll all sort itself out, whatever we do. So, no reason to worry about it. Just Be Good.