Total Pageviews

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

RELIGION OR FAITH





It might come as surprise to all, that well, there is a difference between these two concepts. Are people religious, or are they men/women of faith. At the end, I will go into more details because you find that by observing, you can note the difference between the two.
This post has the potential to be a long one, therefore, I am going to cliff note it as much as I can.
So here is an introduction course to religions. ( To clear up some misunderstandings)
There are, two frame works in religion:
1. Western thought (Islam, Judaism, Christianity). These are also termed as Abrahamic Religions.
2. Eastern thought (eg. Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism...). Also known as Dharmic Religions.
These two frameworks are coined, partially based on their point of origin, but mostly in their differences. Western religions are monotheistic, and Eastern religions are polytheistic. They consequently follow the differences between Eastern and Western philosophies...that is to say, what we all must know by now...the east and the west have different ways of life.

When I accepted to be a contributor, my main reason was to clear up some misunderstanding, on God/Gods. and how authors in this blog and those who made comments loosely used the word. Western religions believe in ONE God. Therefore, I do not understand why ignorance calls for people to say a Muslim God, a Jewish God, and a Christian God. That is wrong, because all three religions believe in the same God. Allah, is not another God. ( we can discuss this further if people wish) and Yahweh is not different from God...although it is deemed more respectable.

It is also wrong to say, Hindu or Buddhist God....because there are many Gods. For example, there are approximately 330 million gods in Hinduism. Some of them actually can be termed as henotheistic. I dont have to go through all these religions, and the breakdown of their gods because that requires a lifetime of dedication to the study of this. However, it must be noted that Eastern religions are much embedded in their philosophy, and the two are most of the time synonymous.

Now back to faith and religion.
Religion exists to control faith, faith exists to keep religion in check. Religion is man's interpretation of God's will, faith is its acceptance. Or rather, Religion is man's attempt to reach God, and faith, is a lifestyle of total contentment in who you are as Created being, living and breathing in assurance that there is a higher power that is watching over you.
Faith is our fundamental understanding of reality. This is an expression of the way we understand the world, what values we believe are important not only to us, but to others as well, what ideals we hold sacred and what is not, what we believe is right and wrong, what we aspire for not only in this world, but beyond this world. Religion on the other hand, is an outward expression of that belief. This is why I will tell people that I am a woman of faith, but I am not religious. I go to Church when I want to, and I participate in organized religions, when and however I chose to, because my practicing religion does not affirm my faith.

BY SACRED

44 comments:

Lady X said...

I like the way you ended the post. "Practicing my religion does not affirm my faith..."
Good to have you on the blog!

Controversy said...

Nice post.
But nowhere in this post do u mention or make mention of these religious books that help you affirm your faith. I understand that books can be written, but to write books and then term those books as the "Word of God" when God had nothing to do with you writing the book is simply ludicrous. Moreover, your fellow men voted to have the books compiled into a collection, God had no path in the voting process and anybody that thinks that God could have inspired that many men on how to vote is simply insane.

Bubbles said...

Maybe it was just me
but the red font color and the small font made it mad difficult for me to read
so either increase the font or change the color.

Nice post tho

~B~ said...

"My practising religion does not affirm my faith.."
I lyk dt.
Best believe I'll b quoting u sometym soon.

Controversy said...

Lol miss B

Enoch said...

@Sacred Africanqueen.
BABE. Nice post.
I am amused you are still hung up on this polytheism/monotheism stuff. For those that don't know the history behind SacredAfrican's beef that led her to quip that "It is also wrong to say, Hindu or Buddhist God....because there are many Gods." let me give you a crash course.

It all started because a commenter known as Enoch was trying to make a point that different religions have their own version of eternal damnation/hell and as a result it is a bad idea to fall for the famous Pascal's bargain because the odds are not in your favor if you properly scrutinize belief in God as a gamble. Blaise Pascal's bargain essential states it is better to live like there is a God because if there is one, you'll make heaven but if there's none then no wahala.

Enoch pointed out that the error in this reasoning stems from assuming there is one God and one hell when there are indeed potentially an infinite number of possible Gods and definitely a large number of mainstream Gods so believing one and meeting the wrong one in the afterlife skews the odds in favor of several different versions of hell. This makes Pascal's bargain rubbish. Enoch made this point by making a statement along the lines of "If we die now and meet a Christian God, you're good and I go to Christian hell. Muslim God? we both go to Muslim hell. Buddhist God? we both go to Buddhist hell. Hindu God? we both go to Hindu hell."

Since then Sacredqueen has been having trouble sleeping. She ignored Enoch's larger point and fingered the phrases "Hindu God" & "Buddhist God" as an implicit admission that Hinduism and Buddhism are monotheistic because Enoch did not add esses as in "Hindu Gods" & "Buddhist Gods." Esses he is not obliged to add.

Let me ask AfricanSacred a question. If I want to refer to Rama or Vishnu or one of those 330 million Gods in isolation, how do I do it? Keeping in mind that you said "It is also wrong to say, Hindu or Buddhist God....because there are many Gods." How do I refer to these Gods in isolation? To be as explicit as possible let me break it down primary school style. QueenSacred, please fill in the following blanks.

Vishnu is a Hindu _________.
Apollo is a Greek _________.

My dictionary disagrees with you faith/religion thesis. Sorry but I side with dictionary. While it is good to have ready made arguments for these issues I don't see the relevance. Abeg let us focus on the truth here. Humans worship their own creation when they worship God because we humans invented God.

On Abrahamic religions. Because a bunch of men saw it fit not to start from scratch in inventing God(which is a shared tenet of inventors), they chose to use the Abrahamic literature as their foundation(A case can be made for Abrahamic literature plagiarizing preexisting books as its foundation). As far as am concerned if their resulting inventions make the case distinguishing themselves, that's proof positive that they are different Gods. That should be an unmistakable distinction their similarities can not outweigh. Why does Allah deny three persons in one God including the son? In the Quran's Surah 17 111 it says "Praise be to Allah, who begets no son, and has no partner in (His) domain. . .". The same Allah does not forgive belief in trinity&claims salvation is gotten by a balance of good deeds while the bible preaches salvation via belief in Christ.Tell me why the same God says Mark 1:11 to Christians & Surah 17 111 to Muslims. On this basis, Stalin giving his life to Christ at the point of his death would be accepted by the fictitious God of the bible and not that invented by the Quran regardless of their Abrahamic similarities. These men with their different agendas grab what is available and amenable to their cause and then construct their God.

Tragically for you, your blog post, unintentionally, makes my point that God is a human invention.

Sacred said...

@Controversy...there will be a post dedicated to religious texts. That was not the point of this post...let me handle the more serious, misguided enoch.


@ Enoch
Once again with the familiarities. I gues chivalry is dead to you.
"If we die now and meet a Christian God, you're good and I go to Christian hell. Muslim God? we both go to Muslim hell. Buddhist God? we both go to Buddhist hell. Hindu God? we both go to Hindu hell.".....
What is a Buddhist Hell, or Hindu Hell?....is there even Hell for them, as coined in your dictionary?

and actually, I am not concerned with your "s" or lack thereof in understanding basic grammar. You seem to have failed you classes anyways, it is your assumption that there is a concept of a singular being who is to be adhered to. And off course your calculation of religion and these different Gods.

I am sorry? what again? your last part is a little confusing because it is not clear, as to what your point is...and how that relates to your final statement.
In either case, I am not a defender of faith. I am not a defender of God, because He can do that Himself. YOu chose to believe that there is not God, and I chose to believe that there is a God. How we base our judgments or beliefs, well, that is left to us.

Controversy said...

Sacred,
U did not answer his question, u said that all the gods are the same. If all the Gods are the same, or there is one God. Why does One God need so many different ways to worship him? why does one God need somany different books that claim to be his word?

cerberus said...

@ enoch.
ALL religions accept that there are lesser gods (note the small g) but only one supreme being (the big G)

To answer Vishnu is a Hindu god
Apollo is a greek god.. ( Remember Zeus..that's big G to his little G)

Controversy said...

@ cerberus.
Lol @ the big G. And does this Big G ever speak to men like u and I? See i do not disbelief that there is indeed a God, someone supernatural/supreme had to have created the world. I just refuse to believe that a book laced with somany errors could be rightly termed as his WORD!

ttlolla said...

Nhm, i was expecting something much more fiery but the disagreement between enoch and africanqueen/sacred rumbles on.

I remember sacred doing the G and g in one of her comments; Thats just English, the ultimighty knows am referring to him


Religion was created by man, for form filling process i think

I am a person of faith, i am a follower of christ, not part of a 'religion' so i never feel the need to defend xtianity

Enoch said...

@Sacred

You get a big ZERO with compound eyes, Obama ears and a long mouth for ignoring my fill in the blanks section. But that was expected.

Please nobody is asking you to be a defender of God. Any defense offered in that regard is at best a weak one. There is no credible evidence of a God.

I am instead asking you to defend yourself. Make a case for your belief system. Surely you must believe it is true. Tell us why. If there is no case to be made, as seems to be the case, then acknowledge it. Let us know that you can believe anything you pick up on the streets.

In your classic style, you've sidestepped the main issue and you're fighting with your distortion of my position and I'm tired of setting you straight.

I like how you ignore what people are actually saying to you and reach into their heads and see their ideas. The way you saw my "conception of a singular being" for Dharmic religions. I also love the way you stick with your vision of their ideas even if it is radically different from what the owner of the head is telling you. Telling you repeatedly.

The first time I made the "Hindu God" statement your response was "by the way, there is no Hindu God, or Buddhist God...however, there are Hindu gods and Buddhist gods...these eastern religions defer from the western religions as there is one God vs the gods that they believe in." Now you're claiming "actually, I am not concerned with your 's' "

You are acting like these religions. Switching positions at will. I don't know if I'm talking with the Abrahamic-muslim AfricanQueen or the Abrahamic-xtian AfricanQueen.

In a way, you've highlighted the rigidity of your concept-space. Your faith based approach to life makes it difficult for you to imagine an afterlife with perhaps only Vishnu in existence. I'll tell you for the last time. Human belief does not dictate reality.

I'm guessing all that religious tutelage has got you convinced you have a monopoly on these issues and everyone else is dense. Knowledge my dear, follows no capitalist model. As much as you would like to, you can't run a monopoly on it. How you come to the conclusion that polytheistic ideas must be strange to everyone tickles the hell outta me. I thought it was a joke but now I see you really think those ideas are esoteric. Ideas I had fun with back in primary school with my Sikh friend. No one on this blog is that ignorant and there is nothing you can do about that.

In spite of your refusal to answer my questions. Questions pertinent to the main issue of the existence of a God, I'll answer yours about hell. Eastern religions preach something along the lines of burning off bad Karma in a realm of suffering. The popular Buddhist one is Narakas & the Hindus in their usual style have many and the one I know is the Raurava. Both translate to English as "hell".

Now lets see how creative you'll get with ignoring the main issue. Telling us why you think what you believe is true. If that happens again, I'm putting you on ignore.

@cerberus
You think she ignored that answer without reason? You forget I had preempted it quite a while ago.
http://eche-crates.blogspot.com/2009/09/conception-of-jesus.html#comment-815747535329176342

Controversy said...

@ ttlolla
If you are a follower of Christ.
How do u follow him though? How did u come to believe in him? Was it not through religion?
Lol sacred hmm glad to know we have enoch to keep you straight lol.

Rhapsody B. said...

Blessings.....
Interesting piece although you left out the African religion/spirituality, (p.s. just to clarify - I understand why you said there are "two frame works in religion" and I still ask why have you forgotten/not acknowledge African religion/spirituality?)

There is only one God who has many names as there are languages in the world. The controversy comes because many get bogged down in competition of right and wrong. You say Allah, I say God, another says Jehovah etc...same difference. Some see religion as a practice others as a way of life, living and being.

I do agree that faith and religion are two very different things and that practicing any particular religion does not affirm my faith.

Great piece.....
Please by mindful of the erasure
Have a blessed day

Controversy said...

Hmm u all keep sayingt that there is one God.
QUESTION - is there anything wrong with having more than one True God? Why can't there be multiple God's?

Sacred said...

@Cerberus...i Concur. Each religion seems to have a Henotheistic in a some shape of form.

@Rhapsody...I did not merely put aside spirituality...that has a play in each religious thought or system. As for African religions...they are much in the Eastern philosophy.

It seems that the question to all the concerns is why...what I believe is true. Or rather why am I not a Deist, or an atheist.
The simple answer to that is that Christianity works for me. Everyone, in a sense, subscribes to a system of beliefs that works for them. Now to the matter of whether it is true, or not....I took a gamble. if my assumptions, and beliefs are wrong, and there is nog God, well, then I have nothing to lose, but years of my life. but if I am right, well then I have everything to gain. and beyond that, I cannot try to convince you why the world around tells me of a created order. or why history proving the existence of Jesus, is enough for me.
If you want more answers...you might want to engage the physicist/atheist turned theologian Polkinghorne. Controversy will like him, because he was also in search for truth, or All truth.

@"Human belief does not dictate reality." yet science does? even though it has proved to be sometimes wrong and disastrous numerous times?

@"I'm guessing all that religious tutelage has got you convinced you have a monopoly on these issues and everyone else is dense. Knowledge my dear, follows no capitalist model. As much as you would like to, you can't run a monopoly on it. How you come to the conclusion that polytheistic ideas must be strange to everyone tickles the hell outta me. I thought it was a joke but now I see you really think those ideas are esoteric. Ideas I had fun with back in primary school with my Sikh friend. No one on this blog is that ignorant and there is nothing you can do about that."
for Once I agree with you. However, one point to that. Polytheistic ideas might not be strange to many, neither are they to me, however, the point is that, these ideas, do not explain the world to me.

The same way that God or an existence of such a being does not explain the world to you, is the same reasoning that I can't seem to get past with the idea that all we have came in big bang.

@"You are acting like these religions. Switching positions at will. I don't know if I'm talking with the Abrahamic-muslim AfricanQueen or the Abrahamic-xtian AfricanQueen."....
You can speak to whomever you chose. that is your prerogative. I am going to make the mistake and make an assumption on how you believe I should be acting. YOu probably think that I should be looking down on Muslims and Jews etc, because they are not Christians. In truth, I admire them for those who practice it to its rigidity...they are pious, a trait that I could learn from.

and as you make an assumption in the beginning of how people can believe whatever they pick up on the streets...that is true. How else do you think ideas are passed around.

ttlolla said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ttlolla said...

@ controversy:

Thats why i said its for form filling purposes, they had to call it s'thn,


Dont you thnk that if organized religion is eradciated from the world and people just followed what their holy book says, there will be peace in the world

Controversy said...

@ Sacred.
Nobody denies that there was somebody named Jesus who once existed. I however, disagree that he was a divine being. Nobody living in those days believed that "divine being" crap. The church kept on pushing that idea later on.

Sacred said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sacred said...

@Controversy
The Church did not push anything that was not based on facts.
Jesus existed, and he was either a liar, lunatic or Lord
"Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

nonny said...

Hmm, at the risk of being called callous by yours truly;



I think faith is a belief that is not based on reality. We have five senses and when we are asked to believe something that contradicts any of these senses without proof, we need faith.


when you get two or more people that have this same faith, you have a religion.

faith is our fundamental excuse for things that contradict reality. religion takes this faith and turns it into a standard that you are expected to live by.

call me ignorant but i think a religious person is someone who believes in a certain deity. faith just kinda specifies what deity we talking about.



I think when we comment and say things like Christian God or Muslim God.... we are just trying to differentiate the different faiths surrounding ' these God 's...


anywayz.....welcome to tha blog...xxx

Controversy said...

Wow nonnyyyy..
I am tres impressed @ when you have two or more people believin in a faith, that becomes religion. Honestly that makes more sense to me.

Enoch said...

@Sacred
"The Church did not push anything that was not based on facts. Jesus existed, and he was either a liar, lunatic or Lord" Imagine a father who kept a scimitar in his apartment. One that he sharpened weekly. when asked what it is for? He goes like "Well, just in case any of my kids curse at me or my wife, I need to have something to put them to death with." Would you consider that person a lunatic? I know I will and most sane people would. But when we consider that's what Jesus would do (Mathew 15:4 "...Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death") then everyone that's making excuses and remembering the use of metaphors.

When you consider that the New Testament was formed from writings that had been moving from church to church being modified and you consider that eventually men like you and I decided which disciple wrote what book, it is no wonder his so called disciples couldn't agree on when Jesus was born. Luke and John disagreed by at least 24yrs. You either have to question the legitimacy of the Jesus story or the credibility of the disciples who expect us to believe what they tell us about a God in heaven when they can't keep their story straight about their friend that shared the earth with them & the object of their worship.

"I took a gamble. if my assumptions, and beliefs are wrong, and there is nog God, well, then I have nothing to lose, but years of my life." This is not true. Its a common error I have addressed in the past on this blog. If you live life according to the doctrines of Jesus or many other religions, then you could very well loose much more than years of your life. The Moral restrictions that apply to a Christian, even if it is not as radical as Mat 15:4, could conflict with your earthly interests. Here is an example I gave to EDJ not too long ago. Stolen from a Nigerian movie.

"Imagine you are a Taxi driver working hard to make ends meet. You have a son who is ill and deteriorating daily but you can't afford the medical bills needed to heal him. One fine day while doing your taxi rounds, a stranger forgets a huge sum of money in your taxi cab. Just enough to pay for your son's medical bills. Being a strong believer of the word of God, you ignore the pleas of your husband to use the money to save your son rather you worked tirelessly to find the owner of the cash and returned it. A couple of days later your son dies.

To clear all doubt, If I were in the same situation I would not hesitate to choose the life of my son over some arbitrary moral standard. When I do get married and have a son, I would love him that much. Damn the consequences, be it jail time or death."

This is is just one specific example. Depending on how creative you are, you can construct a much more ruthless scenario people actually face daily on this planet. It could be much worse, perhaps, costing all that is dear to you. So please if you loose that much and there is no God how can you reconcile that with "I have nothing to lose, but years of my life"? Besides Pascal's wager is crap. So you could loose all that is dear to you and end up in a foreign hell.

"Human belief does not dictate reality. yet science does?"No one says Science dictates reality. The unmistakable consensus is that truth dictates reality. I celebrate science because it is the one pursuit that objectively seeks truth. Unlike religion or faith that represents everything truth detests.

Enoch said...

"The same way that God or an existence of such a being does not explain the world to you, is the same reasoning that I can't seem to get past with the idea that all we have came in big bang." The truth is no respecter of persons. We ascribe it all kinds of adjectives like "radical", "senseless" and sometimes claim it "does not explain the world to me" because we are deep in a mind frame constructed from falsehoods and ill equipped to rid ourselves of them. I personally feel we as humans worship truth. We worship it everyday in our daily lives when we are at the airport expecting our flight schedule to be truth. Driving to somewhere new believing absolutely that the GPS lady speaks truth. Planning our lives assured that what our banking website tells us we've got in our account is truth. We are in essence disciples of truth. It is on this basis I believe all men should be dedicated to the endless pursuit of truth. My point being, If you could speak the language of physics and the mathematics necessary to confirm the big bang theory, you'll try to confirm it and treat it how it deserves to be treated. But when you can't, you rely on dogmas to fill that void. If God is truth science will find him.

"You probably think that I should be looking down on Muslims and Jews etc, because they are not Christians." There you go again pulling phantom ideas from my head. Focus on what I say please.

"and as you make an assumption in the beginning of how people can believe whatever they pick up on the streets...that is true. How else do you think ideas are passed around." I couldn't have put it any better. If the worship of truth is metaphorically considered to be Christianity then what you've just explained is Satanism. It should be detested with the most disgust not celebrated like you just did. As innocuous as it may sound it is the practice of worshiping lies. Believing untested ideas.

Sacred said...

Well that depends enoch. If there is no God, no hell. The worst that could happen, I die, and I become dust. Oh, and my "loved" ones, will probably or probably not be distraught. In a couple of days, I will be forgotten, and life will go on.
As for losing loved ones or losing that which is dear to me, C'est la vie. Whether I believe in God, or not has nothing to do with the fact that man is born, man live and man dies. its a principal of life that we gain and we lose.
However, If I am right, then I have everything to gain.

If passing of ideas from one spectrum to another is to be termed satanism, then there is a lot disgusting and abhorred ideas out there.

Thank you for pointing out that Truth is no respecter of persons. In a way, each person has subscribed to a truth, that they live by and are willing (to an extent) stand by. Therefore it is quiet alright to have something that works for you and absolutely does not work for others. So if worshiping a tree, or dancing around a fire naked is true for you...then by all means go for it.

bear with me for a bit here, because I am going to ask questions...
Where do we get our morals? our values? or can man live without a prescribed system of values?
if essentially we are all looking for truth, and I find that it is okay for me to kill my brother, steal from them, or become the most unpleasant person to be around...and is what I find to be truth, should anyone else come enforcing it upon me that killing is wrong, and stealing is wrong, and maybe being nice to others might be the right thing to do?
Should anyone impose their "truth" on my "truth"?

Controversy said...

I just came across this quote and i feel it applies to this topic from the perspective of an unbeliever.
"If I am right, then Christians will not go to Heaven, because there is no Heaven. If they are right, then they will not go to Heaven, because they are hypocrites"
And no, nobody should impose their truth on your truth sacred. But there is a difference between truth and what is perceived to be true/truth

Enoch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Enoch said...

You have totally misconstrued the idea of truth. It is not a relative quantity. It is universal. There is nothing like my truth, his truth or Amanda's truth.

If Amanda takes "guns are always harmless" as true, the truth(which is universal) will bite her in the @$$ if she pulls the trigger on herself.

On the issue of morals. I subscribe to the nihilist idea that nothing is inherently bad. Like Shakespeare says "There is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

This may seem very radical to someone who hasn't thought it through or subscribes to faith based morals but it is the truth all the same. We are just higher animals governed by individual interests.

Simultaneously, I do realize there is value in social order and as such morals can be very helpful in avoiding chaos. (I believe this is the reason a lot of philosophers and thinkers of the past embraced religious beliefs to placate the masses.) BUT because something has perceived social value does not automatically promote it to the status of truth.

Should anyone impose their "truth" on my "truth"?
Of course not!! If I see that Amanda is convinced that a gun is harmless I am not obliged to set her straight. But if I choose to, I could show her what evidence I have and she reserves the right to go on believing nonsense. Now if someones belief affects me adversely and vice-versa, it could lead to chaos and that's why I believe there's value in morals but it is not based on anything true.

But does the world work that way? nope! Crude examples; Galilei was forced to recant his true views on earth and the sun, Walter Freeman thought he could cure psychiatric ailments with lobotomies until the his license was forced away from him. So your beliefs can very easily run afoul with dominant persons who can enforce their beliefs on you regardless of if there's any truth in either your belief or theirs.

Like Friedrich Nietzsche said "You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist." If you have a keen eye, you'll notice that most countries that engage with high stakes in geopolitics understand this very well.

I am convinced this is the truth. But no one can deny it is easily judged radical. I do agree there is value in social order but not because it has any basis in truth.

Lady X said...

LOL @ all the comments. Controversy in your profile you said you're a hypocrite and a liar. I'm sure that has a hidden meaning. Do tell what it means!

Controversy said...

Lol lady X
. I say that I am a liar and a hypocrite because that is what I am. I do not hide it, i embrace it i am human. Someppl tend to shy away from it, but i embrace it as my own personality.

Sacred said...

@ Controversy....that does not make sense. If they are Christians, and they are right, and they believe there is is a Heaven, then they go to Heaven.

YOu say that truth is universal...if that is true, ( and I believe it is...although we do in different ways)
who ordains this universal truth?

and if we are merely animals of higher order...why are we blasting on each other if we kill each other?

so in your world, we have morals and values (that are not based on truth), just for the mere purpose of avoiding chaos? Doesn't that make an entire human race of hypocrites and liars, and a race that is living on principles based on a facade?

Controversy said...

@ Doesn't that make the entire human race a race of hypocrites/liars.
Sacred that has been enoch's point the whole time, lol that is why my about me lists me as a liar and a hypocrite because that is what I am. I do not deny it, i embrace it

Enoch said...

@Sacred
"who ordains this universal truth?"
The question shares a silly symptom with religious attitudes. The overriding tendency to anthropomorphize. Why must there be someone ordaining truth? I believe the proper question is how do these truths come about? what causes them? Some causes are obvious. Some are complicated and some have not been discovered. Perhaps in the future we will discover that some are causeless, who knows. Whatever the case, we should seek the truth rather than bask in some warm untestable/unconfirmed belief that we happen to like. If we are just going to pull an explanation out of our behinds, the least we should do is test it for truth not write it in a book and believe it because it is written. If someone 2000 years from now believes the ideas on this blog without testing it for truth wouldn't you cringe at that?

"and if we are merely animals of higher order...why are we blasting on each other if we kill each other?"
???????disambiguate.
Do you mean why don't we accept our violence towards one another as natural?

"so in your world, we have morals and values (that are not based on truth), just for the mere purpose of avoiding chaos? Doesn't that make an entire human race of hypocrites and liars, and a race that is living on principles based on a facade?"
Please make an attempt to understand what I say. I said a world without morals would be chaotic and social order is valuable. A majority of earthlings are religious and they act out their morals in accordance to their beliefs. I'm just saying those beliefs have a strong foundation in lies. Is that a Facade? yes. Is the benefit relative social calm? yes. To add that this is the intended purpose of morals would suggest that was the intent of the men who designed the religious beliefs. I can't say that with certainty. I can imagine scenarios with parallel intentions yielding such benefits as a side effect. I can also see how social order might be a desired end. If I lived in those times and I had the means, I could see the profit in creating religion for such reasons amongst other things like offering a sense of higher purpose, coping mechanism for loss, blah, blah, blah.

Question time.

Let me get this straight. You believe in Jesus because it works for you. Regarding if it is true, you consider it a fair gamble? Despite my debunking of Pascal's bargain and my illustration of how moral restrictions need an after life to balance out or else you loose out on living a more robust life on earth? Shockingly illogical.

IS THERE ANYTHING AND I MEAN ANYTHING HYPOTHETICAL (LET YOUR MIND RUN WILD) THAT WOULD CONVINCE YOU GOD DOES NOT EXIST? CAN YOU DREAM UP A SCENARIO WHERE YOU GO LIKE "OH THAT DOES IT! THERE'S NO GOD" LIKE FOR EXAMPLE FINDING THE BONES OF CHRIST?

@Controversy
Would love to write for the blog. I'll have to do it over the weekend though. Thursday/Friday is tight.

nonny said...

Hell yea!!! Enoch i look forward to reading

Sacred said...

I think I am beginning to understand. and this is going to be my last statement on this issue.
so we are all liars and hypocrites...
to what end? Controversy...and you blame God for cheapening life? I think you are doing it all by yourself.

can anything disprove the existence of God? Yea, find the bones of Jesus, and use your science to prove that it is Him without undeniable proof. Find them, and I will recant. That is probably the only thing that can persuade me that God does not exist. Actually, since I imagine that science is what is used mostly to disprove God...I will give it an easy beginning. if you believe in Love, and if Science can prove its existence...then I will seat, shut up and listen, or wait as you disprove God.
Can you really disprove the existence of God? You give me intellectual arguments, and those are acknowledged as so. You philosophize religion and faith/ and mostly God. The real problem here is that the nature of God is completely contrary to an intellectual understanding. The nature of God is consciousness; and this can only be experienced through that. To get an understanding of God or trying to reason out his existence through mental reasoning alone is like a blind man trying to describe the characteristics of an lion.
You have pointed out errors and deficiencies in different religions, or in different ways of practicing these beliefs. That is well and good. But I have to point out that, through those means you make a mistake. Controversy has repeatedly pointed out the Bible, and for me to prove its credibility, as if these are the means by which God exists and without these texts, God evaporates or rather loses meaning. Religious texts are written, interpreted and practiced by humans. There is definitely divine inspiration. However, these texts are not and will never be a perfect reflection of God's nature. Words are by nature imperfect translations of who God is/ or an affirmation of his existence.
One more thing....God cannot be judged on the behavior and teachings of religious adherents. To judge God, by judging religions is like judging a father through the actions of his children.(something that some of you might relate to) . The fact that religious people rarely live up to this ideal does not mean God doesn't exist.


You are entitled to believe that we are here by Design or a big bang...or we evolved. You can also embrace the steady-state theory, and in that we have always been here and always will be.
However, what I have found to be true,, and what I embrace as truth and try my very best to live by that truth, indicates that there is a designer, that the world cannot be as it is, by mere chance.
The World works like clock work, human DNA, the fact that the world in a sense operates on a uniform natural law...that might not do it for you, but it is enough for me. Does that make me a simpleton? Foolish?...maybe so.

Controversy said...

Lol @ to what end.
To the end of death my dear sacred. To the end of death, we've been turned into this. And if u referrin to cheapenin of life, the christian God u serve is who cheapened life drastically. So lay the almighty blame @ his feet

Sacred said...

by dearest Controversy...you do not believe in the "christian" God. Therefore, how can he cheapen life, if he does not exist for you?

Controversy said...

Lol u didn't answer the question sacred.
It is your belief is it not? I asked a question about ur belief. Ur response has nothing to do with the question. Unless of cus, u have no answer?

Enoch said...

@Sacred
Nice conversation. If I could, I would send you a box of Neuchatels.


Love is almost an open and shut case as far as science is concerned. Its primitive basis in animals as altruistic behavior, parent-child empathy and sexual drive can be traced through the evolutionary ladder to our current understanding of human affection. I would ask you to read up on the interplay of dopamine, oxytocin and vasopressin hormone/neurotransmitters as well as the Limbic system and the Amygdala brain region to get a sense of the biological basis for emotions and love but your faith is invested in what cannot be explained and not the reverse. As strange as it might sound, all your sensory perceptions and subjective experiences are just a bunch of chemical and electrical interactions in your brain, consequently, love can, in theory, be invoked pharmaceutically or electrically. The pharmaceutic approach is already possible today. Radical but true. I wish love were different and special but fighting truth is a lost battle.

"One more thing....God cannot be judged on the behavior and teachings of religious adherents. To judge God, by judging religions is like judging a father through the actions of his children." No one is judging God. How can you judge what does not exist? If I imagine a holy periwinkle deity and believe in salvation through this periwinkle does it make any sense for you to judge my periwinkle God?

You won't know this about me but I envy you. I envy Christians and other true believers in God. And I don't mean that in a sarcastic way. I just wish my mind worked differently so that I can settle for a faith based explanation for my existence. I wish curiosity never had me raptured in constant inquiry. I wish I could confidently believe without evidence. Create an artificial sense of purpose and the accompanying feeling of completeness. I really do wish so. Its a pity I was born in an era with insufficient answers leaving me with no truly interesting options. Just the agony of not knowing true purpose or the intellectual dishonesty of believing a lie.

Sacred said...

@ Controversy. I answered your question. God does not cheapen life, humans do. and Since you don't believe in God...Even though u claim to be a deist, I feel like that question should not apply to you. If the christian God does not exist, he cannot cheapen life.

@Enoch,
It has been a pleasure. I assume we will be at it again with my next post. But it won't be for a while yet.
I can't send you Neuchatel, as I reserve that pleasure for me. but I would send you a Bottle of Montepuliciano. It would do you some good
I know you wouldn't know this, but Neuchatel truffles are my favorite treat. and by mentioning them, you remind me that I haven't had a piece for a while now. and since I can only get them in about 6 stores in the US, I might be making some trekking to uptown Manhattan tonight. (and I can blame that on you...if only to make myself feel better...lol)

Controversy said...

@ Sacred.
how did humans cheapen life? Or are u blind? Don't u read your bible? How many mass genocides are recorded in the bible?

Sacred said...

I read my bible, but I am afraid you don't read at all.
its okay though. You are excused

Controversy said...

Lol there u go again with ur assumptions.
In your bible does it not show that a God slaughtered millions of people with the flood?