Speaking of God...

[quote="Bob"]

PkrBum wrote:

Bob wrote:

i'm saying there is a natural state that doesn't care if it's clothed or not.

this is a simple state. neurosis are taught... you are knot an island.

You could be right. But even if it's all due to learned behaviour, the fact remains that I still prefer to look at many bodies when clothed than to look at those bodies without clothing. Which is still the answer to your question "why wear clothing (aside from the need for warmth)?".

To protect our delicate and thin skin from injury.

Slicef18 wrote:

QUESTIONS:
(1) What makes a bible "holy?"
(2)What happens to the soul of a child living deep in the forest of South America and dies having no contact with the Christian word?

(1) That the Bible claims to be inspired by God and a great many people in our region of the world accept that claim to be true, I suppose is the best answer.

(2) I remember hearing tv preachers say the Bible gives those children a pass and they're given entry to heaven anyway. But I just tried to google the chapter and verse on it and it's unclear to me what that is exactly. Maybe someone else can supply the answer for us.

Bob wrote:

Slicef18 wrote:

QUESTIONS:
(1) What makes a bible "holy?"
(2)What happens to the soul of a child living deep in the forest of South America and dies having no contact with the Christian word?

(1) That the Bible claims to be inspired by God and a great many people in our region of the world accept that claim to be true, I suppose is the best answer.

(2) I remember hearing tv preachers say the Bible gives those children a pass and they're given entry to heaven anyway. But I just tried to google the chapter and verse on it and it's unclear to me what that is exactly. Maybe someone else can supply the answer for us.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

Maybe I missed something but I don't believe we addressed what makes the Bible "Holy." What does the word "holy"mean as in "Holy Bible, or Holy Thursday or Holy Saturday or Holy matrimony or Holy Grail

Bob wrote:

(2) I remember hearing tv preachers say the Bible gives those children a pass and they're given entry to heaven anyway. But I just tried to google the chapter and verse on it and it's unclear to me what that is exactly. Maybe someone else can supply the answer for us.

So what's the age cut-off? Do children under six go to heaven, and children over six go straight to Hades? Or is puberty the cut-off?

Knowing the bias that those who compiled most of the versions of the Bible had against women, the cut-off for girls was probably menses.

Slicef18 wrote:

Maybe I missed something but I don't believe we addressed what makes the Bible "Holy." What does the word "holy"mean as in "Holy Bible, or Holy Thursday or Holy Saturday or Holy matrimony or Holy Grail

Well it's like this. I took this photo in a parking lot this morning...



He speaks for a great many people. "REAL MEN LOVE JESUS" and "MATH AND SCIENCE ARE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T REALIZE HOW IMPORTANT FOOTBALL IS".

He doesn't care how we determine what is "holy". For him and so many others, the Bible is holy because others have convinced him of it.

Now of course you'll want to challenge this and I understand that.
But my question to you is why?
As I stated earlier, I'm of the opinion that no person has ever known, knows now, or very likely will ever know what the nature of existence is. And that includes those with religious faith and those who have none.
So I have no desire to quarrel with anyone's perspective on this so long as that perspective does not adversely impact on me.
If you care to try to convince me that it does and explain to me how it does, then I will surely listen to that. And I will be opposed to it if you can convince me of that.
It goes without saying that I definitely do no want to ever live in a society which makes religious beliefs and the accompanying intolerance the rule of law.
But aside from that, I honestly don't care. Religious faith of one sort or another has been with us since the beginning of civilization and it's still going strong and that will very likely continue for the foreseeable future.
It provides a coping mechanism for the harsh realities of human life. And a coping mechanism for facing human suffering and human mortality. And I don't find that to be a bad thing.

But to reiterate, and I think you already know this to be true. What makes the Bible or any other religious text be "holy" is masses of people believing it to be holy. It's really as simple as that.

I'll bet he says God Dammit when his team has a bad play..

PBulldog2 wrote:

So what's the age cut-off? Do children under six go to heaven, and children over six go straight to Hades? Or is puberty the cut-off?

Knowing the bias that those who compiled most of the versions of the Bible had against women, the cut-off for girls was probably menses.

I have no earthly idea or even no unearthly idea for that matter.

I've never even been able to wrap my mind around the concepts of "heaven and hell" to begin with.
My understanding of heaven is that it's supposed to be all good with no bad. And all love with no hate. And all virtue with no vice.
I cannot understand how that's even rational. I cannot comprehend something being only good when there is no bad to compare it to.
How would I know what "good" food is or a "good" movie is or a "good" human relationship is, unless there is also "bad" food or a "bad" movie" or a "bad" human relationship to help me understand what is good about it.
For me, good without bad makes no sense.

And then there's hell. The notion that the entity which created all existence is going to punish human beings for all the rest of eternity is an even harder concept for me to try to wrap my mind around. And even if by some stretch of the imagination I ever did accept such a notion, I don't think my inclination would be to want to worship such an entity. That entity sounds a lot like teo's "illuminatti" to me.

Bob wrote:

Slicef18 wrote:

Maybe I missed something but I don't believe we addressed what makes the Bible "Holy." What does the word "holy"mean as in "Holy Bible, or Holy Thursday or Holy Saturday or Holy matrimony or Holy Grail

Well it's like this. I took this photo in a parking lot this morning...



He speaks for a great many people. "REAL MEN LOVE JESUS" and "MATH AND SCIENCE ARE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T REALIZE HOW IMPORTANT FOOTBALL IS".

He doesn't care how we determine what is "holy". For him and so many others, the Bible is holy because others have convinced him of it.

Now of course you'll want to challenge this and I understand that.
But my question to you is why?
As I stated earlier, I'm of the opinion that no person has ever known, knows now, or very likely will ever know what the nature of existence is. And that includes those with religious faith and those who have none.
So I have no desire to quarrel with anyone's perspective on this so long as that perspective does not adversely impact on me.
If you care to try to convince me that it does and explain to me how it does, then I will surely listen to that. And I will be opposed to it if you can convince me of that.
It goes without saying that I definitely do no want to ever live in a society which makes religious beliefs and the accompanying intolerance the rule of law.
But aside from that, I honestly don't care. Religious faith of one sort or another has been with us since the beginning of civilization and it's still going strong and that will very likely continue for the foreseeable future.
It provides a coping mechanism for the harsh realities of human life. And a coping mechanism for facing human suffering and human mortality. And I don't find that to be a bad thing.

But to reiterate, and I think you already know this to be true. What makes the Bible or any other religious text be "holy" is masses of people believing it to be holy. It's really as simple as that.

That is one of the best, all encompassed, thought-out responses that I've seen about peoples religious beliefs to date. I can't tell you what a pleasure it is to see an answer that has been thought about and not some smart ass quip.

For what it's worth, my views parallel very close to what you wrote which is probably why I was so impressed.

Well there is one other possibility, slice, and we would be remiss to ignore it in my opinion.

That even though I'm convinced of what I have said, that we have no capacity "to know" these things and very likely never will, there is always that possibility that we've been provided with an intervention (for lack of a better term) by whatever it is that we cannot understand. And that intervention was communicated to us in a way which we can understand.

I offer this admittedly weak analogy in attempt to explain.
I'm fond of what I call the "scuba diver and the school of minnows" scenario. I often make use of this to help me articulate many different ideas.

Other than the capacity to sense the presence of the scuba diver, the minnows have no other capacity "to know" (comprehend) the scuba diver.
But even still, the scuba diver can and does influence the behaviour of the minnows. He can do that simply by letting his presence be known.

Similarly, we could have the same experience. An intellect or deity or whatever other entity (which indeed does have the capacity to know the nature of existence) could make it's presence known to us.
There is that possibility that this has occurred. Or that it is always occuring. And it could be that this took the form of a Jesus or a Mohammed. Or that this entity made it's presence known to a few of us or to many of us.
This could be manifest in those who author a religious text. Or in those who witness aerial phenomena which is not understood. Or in many other ways.

There is always that possibility. And my mind is open to that.
So far I have not been given enough reason and enough evidence to believe that it has occurred. In fact, at this point all the claims of it that I am aware of are sorely inconvincing (I made that word up).
But I don't shut the door to it.

See that's the beauty of recognizing an "unknown" or even an "unknowable" (which is the basis for my own religion). It is a recognition that just about anything can be possible regardless if we don't possess the capacity to conceive of what it is.

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why should any God care about some abstract human construct?

And yet, according to ancient folklore...

Bob wrote:Well there is one other possibility, slice, and we would be remiss to ignore it in my opinion.

That even though I'm convinced of what I have said, that we have no capacity "to know" these things and very likely never will, there is always that possibility that we've been provided with an intervention (for lack of a better term) by whatever it is that we cannot understand. And that intervention was communicated to us in a way which we can understand.

I offer this admittedly weak analogy in attempt to explain.
I'm fond of what I call the "scuba diver and the school of minnows" scenario. I often make use of this to help me articulate many different ideas.

Other than the capacity to sense the presence of the scuba diver, the minnows have no other capacity "to know" (comprehend) the scuba diver.
But even still, the scuba diver can and does influence the behaviour of the minnows. He can do that simply by letting his presence be known.

Similarly, we could have the same experience. An intellect or deity or whatever other entity (which indeed does have the capacity to know the nature of existence) could make it's presence known to us.
There is that possibility that this has occurred. Or that it is always occuring. And it could be that this took the form of a Jesus or a Mohammed. Or that this entity made it's presence known to a few of us or to many of us.
This could be manifest in those who author a religious text. Or in those who witness aerial phenomena which is not understood. Or in many other ways.

There is always that possibility. And my mind is open to that.
So far I have not been given enough reason and enough evidence to believe that it has occurred. In fact, at this point all the claims of it that I am aware of are sorely inconvincing (I made that word up).
But I don't shut the door to it.

See that's the beauty of recognizing an "unknown" or even an "unknowable" (which is the basis for my own religion). It is a recognition that just about anything can be possible regardless if we don't possess the capacity to conceive of what it is.

That is a good analogy Bob.....X-Rays existed long before we had the technology to detect them.

The Bible talks about a realm , (dimension) our eyes don't work in.....

2 Kings 6:14-17 When the servant of the man of God got up
and went out early the next morning, an army with horses and chariots had
surrounded the city. “Alas, my lord,
what shall we do?” the servant asked. “Don’t be afraid,” the prophet answered.
“Those who are with us are more than those who are with them.” And Elisha
prayed, “O LORD, open his eyes so he may see.” Then the LORD opened the
servant’s eyes, and he looked and saw the hills full of horses and chariots of
fire all around Elisha.

Slicef18 wrote:

Bob wrote:

Chrissy8 wrote:

Why does it have to be the "God of the Bible" ?

Because that's the only version of what "God" is which is societally correct where we live.
If your God is something other than what is described by the Holy Bible then that's considered to be just plain odd in these parts. Even more odd than if your political view is democrat. Because that's one thing that both democrats and republicans even agree on. That the "real" god is ONLY the one described by the Holy Bible.

"Because that's the only version of what "God" is which is societally correct where we live."

"God" is which is societally correct sounds like a God made by the people where we live.

"That the "real" god is ONLY the one described by the Holy Bible."

QUESTIONS:
(1) What makes a bible "holy?"
(2)What happens to the soul of a child living deep in the forest of South America and dies having no contact with the Christian word?

1) Our personal interpretation and implementation of its' message.

2) A child living deep in the forest of South American is a child of God.

Bob wrote:Well so far all I've done is suggest that we have this inate curiousity which leads us to ask these questions. So far I haven't made any attempt to either provide my own ideas in response or to pass judgement on anyone else's ideas.
I believe it to be inate because, as I said, I think it's just a natural product of human intellect.

My own take on it is that, while we have the intellectual capacity to ask these questions, we don't have the intellectual capacity to know the answers. Or put another way, while we have the intellectual capacity to have this curiousity, we don't have the capacity to satisfy it.
Which puts us in a sorta state of intellectual limbo.
But I also recognize that most of us will never accept that as our reality and will continue to be in denial of that reality. So because of that it really doesn't matter what I think to anyone but me. lol

Negatory, oh, insightful one. Every day we're alive, from the time we can communicate with others, we're faced with choices. I personally believe we are endowed with an innate conscience that knows which choice is best for us. This is both a product of having been exposed to the ideas as a part of religious and spiritual training and of embracing certain ideas because I believed them to be right and true. The hard part, then, is trying to live them.

Bob wrote:

PBulldog2 wrote:

So what's the age cut-off? Do children under six go to heaven, and children over six go straight to Hades? Or is puberty the cut-off?

Knowing the bias that those who compiled most of the versions of the Bible had against women, the cut-off for girls was probably menses.

I have no earthly idea or even no unearthly idea for that matter.

I've never even been able to wrap my mind around the concepts of "heaven and hell" to begin with.
My understanding of heaven is that it's supposed to be all good with no bad. And all love with no hate. And all virtue with no vice.
I cannot understand how that's even rational. I cannot comprehend something being only good when there is no bad to compare it to.
How would I know what "good" food is or a "good" movie is or a "good" human relationship is, unless there is also "bad" food or a "bad" movie" or a "bad" human relationship to help me understand what is good about it.
For me, good without bad makes no sense.

And then there's hell. The notion that the entity which created all existence is going to punish human beings for all the rest of eternity is an even harder concept for me to try to wrap my mind around. And even if by some stretch of the imagination I ever did accept such a notion, I don't think my inclination would be to want to worship such an entity. That entity sounds a lot like teo's "illuminatti" to me.

I think we error if we try to apply the earthly concept of "good" to the place we call heaven. (some cultures call it "Paradise") I think "purity" may be a more accurate word as there is no corruption of time, space or structure. (In short, I don't think we have the vastness of intelligence (as you said " to wrap my mind around the concepts")I think our true understanding of heaven is as lacking as a blind persons understanding of a rainbow.

Bob wrote:Well there is one other possibility, slice, and we would be remiss to ignore it in my opinion.

That even though I'm convinced of what I have said, that we have no capacity "to know" these things and very likely never will, there is always that possibility that we've been provided with an intervention (for lack of a better term) by whatever it is that we cannot understand. And that intervention was communicated to us in a way which we can understand.

I offer this admittedly weak analogy in attempt to explain.
I'm fond of what I call the "scuba diver and the school of minnows" scenario. I often make use of this to help me articulate many different ideas.

Other than the capacity to sense the presence of the scuba diver, the minnows have no other capacity "to know" (comprehend) the scuba diver.
But even still, the scuba diver can and does influence the behaviour of the minnows. He can do that simply by letting his presence be known.

Similarly, we could have the same experience. An intellect or deity or whatever other entity (which indeed does have the capacity to know the nature of existence) could make it's presence known to us.
There is that possibility that this has occurred. Or that it is always occuring. And it could be that this took the form of a Jesus or a Mohammed. Or that this entity made it's presence known to a few of us or to many of us.
This could be manifest in those who author a religious text. Or in those who witness aerial phenomena which is not understood. Or in many other ways.

There is always that possibility. And my mind is open to that.
So far I have not been given enough reason and enough evidence to believe that it has occurred. In fact, at this point all the claims of it that I am aware of are sorely inconvincing (I made that word up).
But I don't shut the door to it.

See that's the beauty of recognizing an "unknown" or even an "unknowable" (which is the basis for my own religion). It is a recognition that just about anything can be possible regardless if we don't possess the capacity to conceive of what it is.

Not to be trite, but I'm going to digest some of this and get back to you tomorrow. I may try to send you a personal message or email direct. OK?

Slicef18 wrote:

Not to be trite, but I'm going to digest some of this and get back to you tomorrow. I may try to send you a personal message or email direct. OK?

I never know when I have a personal message (if there's a way to switch on notification of it I wish someone would let me know). So if you do send one please post and let me know it's there for me to read.

Floridatexan wrote: personally believe we are endowed with an innate conscience that knows which choice is best for us. This is both a product of having been exposed to the ideas as a part of religious and spiritual training and of embracing certain ideas because I believed them to be right and true. The hard part, then, is trying to live them.

Every significant religion ever conceived (including secular humanism) shares one moral and ethical precept. That being the "ethic of reciprocity" (better known as the "Golden Rule").
In my observation, it is also the one moral and ethical standard that devotees of all those various religions most often fail to put into practice.
I've tried to understand why exactly that is and so far I come up empty.

By the way, when I first conceived a religion of my own about ten years ago and put it into words on another internet forum, the "Golden Rule" became a part of it from the outset too.
And sadly I fail to practice it is much as anyone fails to practice it. So this applies not only to the "significant" religions, but to insignificant ones as well. lol

What is the purpose of life? To reproduce, all life, animals, plants, insects, etc.

That is it, period.

Anyone want obscure Bible books? Read the books of Enoch, he had been around. He went to Heaven and came back, alive.

Most everything is online, Thomas, Mary, Judas, etc. Their writings are online, it's not a mystery. One only has to look and read...

NaNook wrote:What is the purpose of life? To reproduce, all life, animals, plants, insects, etc.

That is it, period.

If that's it, period, then what do you say to the person who is born sterile and cannot reproduce and therefore has no purpose for living.

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:Why should any God care about some abstract human construct?

And yet, according to ancient folklore...

...God is everywhere and everything, both good and bad. It even says so in what you and others refer to as the Holy Bible.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky1nY3jlq1M