Theology is the method for minimizing error.

 Again, I say the laws of thermodynamics and flux were discovered by Buddha some 2200 years before isaac, and by jesus (gnostic jesus) some 1600 years before Isaac.  Science is another school of theology.

Religion is science, science is religion - science is a deep practice of pursuing truth, but to convict yourself in the idea that it holds dominion over the schools of buddhism, hinduism, taoism and zen and the sorts is to be unenlightened as to the teachings of those schools.  I do not think that any religion holds dominion over the other - the only false religion is the one that demands itself in certitude and dogma.  I cannot say that science is better then zen nor is zen better then science.  They are simply two different schools.  To get caught up in saying "this one is better" is to get tangled in the nasty webs of dogma. 

I think I get it. Because a person reknowned for being religious first discovered a scientific idea ... science is a religion?

You see, again you assume that we are just too idiotic to understand you. I saw that you stated Buddha (who I've done some study on in the past and I think he was a pretty cool guy btw) had discovered a scientific ideal before we were labeling things like this science. That's great, but how does that illustrate that science is a religion.

 I'm sure the scientist of history / and present have been of many philisophical persuasions. I am just not sure that a theory discovered by a religious leader makes the entire field a religion. 

I mean, it's still science ... right?  

 

Didn't you arrive at your conclusions based on empirical observation? If so, then are you not confirming that empirical observation is reliable (at least in your opinion)? If your conclusions didn't come from observation then where did they come from, feelings, divine revelation, dreams, queen mab? Those things aren't reliable at all and certainly not more reliable than observation?

Religion is the pursuit of truth, science is the pursuit of truth. By distinguishing science as a seperate and allmighty school is to pretentiously claim that it holds dominion over all other schools. Did you ever know that nothing in the eastern religions actually combats science, in fact, not only has it made many revelations of reality before science did, science points to the reality that they perceive as well.

Bottom line - reality can only be perceived, perception is a subjective comprehension - comprehension is limited by the continuum of space and time and consciousness, so long as you remain a subject to the laws of space time and consciousness, you cannot hold high truth, you can only aspire to continue to perceive truth.

Socrates was a great man who pursued truth - a student once went to him and said "teach me the ways of truth", he then proceded to take that student out to a river, upon which point he dunked his head in the water and held the student down against his own will, he said "as soon as you start fighting to understand truth as you are fighting now for your life - come back to me". If you just want to know what truth is - you will be lost, but as soon as you can transcend your own human being in efforts to pursue truth - that is when you can then see into the deeper levels of truth.

A philosopher went to a zen master and asked "With what state of mind should one discipline ones self in the truth", to which the master responded "there is no mind to be framed, nor truth in which to be disciplined". Though these both seem like absurd notions of "hocus pocus nonsense", see into the deeper reality of the actions and the words, and you'll find truth. Eventually, you will learn to see the truth of all things. For example - the christian church wishes to give each person their own unique identity as the human being they are rather then the conscious being they are, all in the vain efforts of this is to give the community an ego, or an identity in which to fear death - thus creating the illusion that drives them TO the christian faith out of the implanted fear that they produced.

furthermore - there is a lot of good that is produced by the christian church - though it is coupled with domineering, manipulative and disgusting ideologies, there is a lot of goodness and truth in their practices as well. Just like when I read your posts, I dont see completely false lies, I see a lot of truth in your ideas as well.

You can come to the realization of this in your own time - in fact, it cant even be avoided, it is death - but let death come to your identity before it comes to your physical body, and you will see beyond your own ambitions and motives, and you will be able to assess things without any leaning of mind.

 

*edit - I just read your second post.  I am disappointed that you see religion so poorly, it is not because religion is actually hocus pocus nonsense in REALITY, it is becase you paint it that with your own ideas and conclusions.  You have not researched the depths of eastern religion - you have already come to the conclusion that it must be insipid and insane just because your all-mighty science is the dominion of truth.

 and other guy - yes it was empirical observation.  There is nothing wrong with empirical observation, it is a very good tool, in fact its also practiced in other religions as well.  however, I do not demand that empirical observation is THE answer or THE allmighty truth, rather, it is a way to pursue truth.  Although -once you get right down to it, all pursuit of truth in religion is observed empirically.

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!  Anbesol and Anbesol go head-to-head!  Which Anbesol will win?  The one who thinks Christianity is insipid?...or the one who thinks calling other religions "names" is disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant! Get your tickets now and find out.  Sunday!  Sunday!  Sunday!

You're an interesting guy, you really are. 

 But, thus far you have merely expressed that you practice eastern philosopy. 

Good stuff.

But seriously, WHAT IS YOUR POINT? 

You initially "proved" the existance of god by redefining it as consciousness. You got aggitated and started name calling when your argument was brought into question.

Now you've outlined some of the fundamental ideals of eastern philosopy.

Great, all good, now what? Seriously dude, what is your point? What is it you want to assert? That we percieve the world through our own minds? Ok (that's pretty obvious and I don't think you've really broken any new ground there). That you believe this same consciousness has some affect on the matter of the world? Rrrrr that's pretty interesting. That you consider the terms religion and science to have the same meaning? Ok (I disagree but I hardly think that is a topic worth putting a great deal of effort into). 

Where does that land us? 

also - there is plenty of evidence.  The evidence just must be seen without an alterior motive.  Like Jesus says, with the eyes of a child, or the Buddha teaches, the wisdom of nothingness.  If you look at something trying to prove your particular motive - you will make it prove your motive.  But if you assess something without any preference, bias, prejudices or preconceptions - with the eyes of a child, the wisdom of nothingness - you will see things as they really are, without the interference of your own mind.

 You believe science is knowledge.  But anybody that believes in knowledge is not open minded, rational, critical thinkers because they have made a conviction to their ideas.  There is no such thing as knowledge - as all states of knowing are perceived, conditioned, and subject to human comprehension.  Knowledge is not power, knowledge is bondage, wisdom is freedom.  This is the true meanings of the genesis parables - the fruit of knowledge.  The reality of it is not literal, but the fact that just as soon as people believe they have knowledge, they are expelled from the garden of eden (which runs parallel to kindgom of god), but when they become as the buddha says, empty, with the eyes of a child, dismissing knowledge as relative truths, you are invited back into the kingdom of god, the garden of eden, nirvana.

I assure you, you have not heard a thing I have said because you have not practiced the wisdom of nothingness, the eyes of a child.  Your mind was very present in reading my conjecture - but it was not doing you any favors, because it was taking from my post what you wanted to hear.  You have painted me to be a radical fanatic, but one law that you have yet to become familiar with is all forms of outward judgment are perfectly reciprocated.  The ways you have judged me, I can see that you also judge yourself.  You dismiss your own authority on your own life by submitting to dogma - by believing that you have a better truth - when you can openly perceive all forms of truth, in all religions, in all social systems, in all civilization, THEN you will have earned the wisdom of emptiness, the eyes of a child, an open mind.  But right now you are just cast in darkness, and you spread your darkness by coloring others with your ideas.

Your scientific hypothesis' cannot stand against the weight of all religious thesis, it can only augment it, and express the experience diferently.  Become a bit more multi-cultural and embrace all walks of life, and then you can actually work on helping them get rid of their own dogma.  It is just like Jesus Says, you must first remove the timber from your own eye, before you can see well enough to remove the sliver in others.

Now, without coming to any conclusions about what, who, or how I am, only discuss with me the exact contents of my conjecture - without associating me with anybody else, throw your conjecture to me based on the PURE CONTENTS i have expressed - I have not called god sparkly pixie dust in the sky and as you judged me to have, you have acted out of preconceptions and conclusions.

Psychotherapy is my life - I can see a lot about what kind of a person someone is just by the ideas they have and the way they express them.  I see in you a great intellectual capacity and a great compassion for the Christians who are so destroying our culture - but you are being your own enemy when you take up radical arms and make your preposterous broad brushed generalizations about the rest of the world without any direct or indirect experience whatsoever.  You have divided people into two categories, those who believe in god and those who dont believe - and just as you painted them, your ideas will color all those around you.

 

Through supernatural means based on faith.

Through natural means based on observations, empirical evidence, and observations.

Science should be seperate because it is completely different from religion. Science is based on facts and evidence, where-as religion is based on faith. To teach something in school that is virtually based off faith over evidence is absurd.

 

This is where your arguement becomes void. For the simple fact that, there were many religious scientists in the world then, and there still are today. Just because you are religious does not negate the fact that science is science. You can be religious, and be a scientist at the same time, they do not correlate.

Not true. Reality is defined by laws. We know what is possible, and what is not possible. We are limited by certain aspects in this existence and those limitations are what create our reality. Our ability to reason is natural. The universe is natural. We are more than capable of coming to an understanding of our universe, our existence through natural means.

I will not debate with you on the depths of religion because I admit that I do not know as much as you do about religion. I have not had nearly as sufficient enough years to study it as you have seeing as I am only 16 and still in high school yet I am doing my best to learn as much as I can about everything. 

 

Write a list of all the good religion[chrsitianity specifically] has done in this world. And write a list of all the bad. Lets see which one is bigger? 

In other words however. Welcome to the forums. And I hope you enjoy your stay. 

 

 

 

 

I agree. I wonder if when you are searching for your inner quiet if you are projecting your assumptions onto what you find? I wonder if your mind works the exact same way as you described? I'll bet it does. 

What then, does that suggest about your claims here? 

No one has made any such assertion.

I understand this idea, I wanted very much to be a Buddhist (so I've done some study fuck you very much) but I could not get past the idea of reincarnation. And yes, you who are so clever, I know that there are different ways to look at reincarnation. It's just like every ancient philosopy, rewritten a thousand times.

And here we see where we break down.  

You know, for such an enlightened guy you sure to think a great deal of yourself. You've been nothing but backhanded insulting since you got your first response. I wonder why that is. What do you think? Oh great and wise dickhead?

Why? I am not trying to be a prophet. I am not worried about getting into heaven or my spirit becoming eternal in some way. I'll leave that for you. 

That's pretty interesting bright eyes. I wonder, with your deep knowledge of the human mind/spirit if you can recognize the assumptions you've made. Or, are you so advanced that you are above such things?

I think that since you've been such a jerk that you are not. You keep making these "I'm so superior to you it must hurt" remarks. Do you apply your own philosophy to your life? I doubt it, otherwise you'd start looking at the things you've said and realize what a second rate bullshit artist you are.

 See? Now I'm pissed off. I suspect you're happy now. Halfwit.

Apologies Iruka. I took the bait and started flaming. That was my bad.  

 

Anbesol, with the information I have available I do consider all religious peoples wrong and myself correct. This is only true in the context of "does god exist" or "is Harry Potter real" (any fictional character will do). I make this assertion due to an utter lack of evidence. Through all of your philosophical tap-dancing you have thus far not given any evidence that your assumptions are correct. Merely that you have an assumption and you stand by it. 

Also, I understand that my human mind can only interperet so much information and that there are aspects of the universe / reality that I probably don't understand or don't perceive. Granted, this is not reason to just start absently believing in god or Harry Potter, just a statement that it is very unlikely that I can ever know everything.  

I have made no such assertions of superiority - I have only spoke of what is pertinent to the discussion, I said I believe in god and why, and I defended my conjecture.  If you felt persecuted by my words, then there is an inner reason to your feeling that persecution.  And you all have, several times, regarded science as knowledge - perhaps not in those words, but in your dogmatic implications.

 Look, I came here because I see this community as the most sane, ration minded community and hope for the future of humanity and especially the western world.  I came here out of deep respect for your motives and your drive - but I want to help you guys see the timber in your own eye.  I have not singled anybody out, if you felt singled out, thats the persecution complex telling you something.  I had made general statements that applied to whoever read them as such.

I also came here because Jesus spoke of some very divine truths, not ultimate, just empirically observed truths that were observed without the leaning of mind.  You guys are teh closest community to understanding the brilliance of Jesus' parables, you are far closer to understanding them then the modern Christians are, but you are hurting your self by dismissing and negating all other forms of thought as inferior to yours.  If you know the truth in Jesus' parables, and the metaphoric interpretations of the old testament, particularly Genesis, then when a christian tries to evangelize you - you will embrace them not as your enemy, but as your self, and express the compassion you wish to be shared unto you.  You need not submit to their demands, only calmly refute them.

If you understand their bible better then they do, nothing can stop you now.  But so long as you pick and prod about what theyre doing wrong, then you will only perpetuate these problems. 

It is no secret globally that the western world, particularly america is the least intelligent, spirituall and socially developed country on the planet, the entire social system is crushing under the weight of its own capitalistic foundations.  Its crushing under the weight of its own egocentricity, and concurrently its ethnocentricity.  But you guys are taking an approach of "fight fire with fire" and, well, fire begets fire, we must fight fire with water if we wish to be effective.

Learn of Jesus' parables, see the wonderous truth in them, then see the sharp contrast of the current social conception of him, and see the sharp contrast in his teachings and in the religious practice.  I promise you, I do not know what kind of persons you all are, I only know that you have a piece of you that is motivated to help counter the terroristic evangelist movement in this country - I have personally gone through a *lot* in the religious communities, not only in spiritual practice from all over the world, but in honest academic interest in all religions, including the abrahamic ones.  I have been personally subject to the torturus behaviors of the evangelical community, and I am well aware of their misaction and misconduct and most of all their own short-sighted idiocy.  I have already been married with a child and been seperated all thanks to the wonderful world of ideological dogmatic segregation - I now have an ex mother in law who wishes to zombify her 2 year old grandson with the deluded rantings and horrid ideas of heaven, hell, and the self serving behaviors of our modern church.  I have made it my life dedication to battle this movement not for personal gain, but for societal gain - and this requires fighting fire with water.  So, by demanding that the whole "does god exist" conception as the foundation of your seperation from other christians is superficial, and perpetuating the problem, fire is begetting fire.  But, next time a christian condemns you to hell, realize that outward condemnation and inward condemnation are one in the same, as is revealed by their own Lord and Savior - Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged.  Condemn not, and ye shall not be condemnd.  Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.

take the dogma out of your site, and out of your movement, and your movement will grow.  If you build it, they will come.  But darkness can only beget darkness.

I'll bet you $100 that you have only proved it about your self by convicting your idea into me. I do not convict others by my own ideas, thats for the Christians. I have made simple empirical observations based on the words you spoke in the context of this discussion. I have not decided what kind of people you are, what kind of relationships you have, or what kind of intelligence you are outside of the very context of this discussion. I only wish to help you all, and again, as Jesus Says, you can only help those who will help themselves. You guys are really good, and I do respect you all, but I am just exploiting your own dogma, as to help remove the timber from your own eye, to see clearly enough to remove the sliver in theirs. I hope you guys know I do not mean any disrespect or condescent. I only wish to help improve the efficiency of your movement.

The best battle against Christianity - is understanding the person of christ. The modern Christians shit on his word, and if you can stand in the awareness of his words against the hypocrisy of his followers, they cannot stand against the weight of your conjectures.

Again, the "does god exist" inquiry is just about the most irrelavent and unimportant question to ask, its founded on preconceptions and superficiality behind semantics. Instead, ask about the contrast between the synoptic gospels, and the rest of the canonized new testament. Ask about the absurd notions of any specific texts in the book of revelations, and how the book is in direct competition with the teachings of christ. Ask about the gospel of Thomas and the other gnostic gospels, and the meanings behind refering christ as "the living christ", and why didnt they make it into the new testament, and why did the canon close, and why did the gospel of john feel it neccesary to take strong overtones and dismiss authenticity of the gnostic gospels by ridiculing the disciples who wrote them.

THOSE are questions to be asked, so long as you stick to your "does god exist" theory, you will get nowhere, and you will continute to fight fire with fire.

 

I just saw another post that said Im trying to convince people by having faith.  PLEASE KNOW I SAID NO SUCH THING.  I'm not asking you to believe anything that isnt self-evident and that you dont believe your self.  Buddha says "Do not believe anyone, not even me, unless you your self intuitively agree".  This is to lead ones spirit to the fruition of self-actualization, in which one can see the projections of others quite clearly in their expressions.  This is observed realities - not leap of faith realities.  Please - dont take anything anybody says on blind faith - but, seek to understand what they said, and why they said it.     

I do not have any high truths I wish to impose upon you, I only wish to show you your own means of self-destruction.  You have a goal, and you are hindering your selves from your goal.  I play and see both sides of this argument - and I promise you, your behavior is giving fuel to their fire.  I do not wish to tell you that you are wrong about anything, I only wish to show you that your behavior is battling your cause.

Listen to Hank Hanegraaf, or Lee Strobel, or many of the other countless evangelists.  Theyre very intelligent and they have very good rebuttals to your behaviors and claims, so stop giving them behaviors, ideas, and claims for them to refute - instead, give them a pure refutation to their own imposing dogma.  I really wish to help and I have no high truths to impose, please know this.  But, I cannot help you if you refuse to help your selves.  If I have been not gentle in my approach, then I'm sorry, I certainly strive to be kindly spoken, and the sharp words are simply to contrast sharp words misdirected towards me.  If I have unneccesarily insulted anybody then I'm sorry, it was not intended...