Faith – A Conflict- free Zone (Page 3)

Zanjan: GTG, what is your faith?

GeraldtheGnome: I believe that there possibly is at least one god around somewhere right now, I’m a strongly agnostic theist who is also an atheist with a Protestant Christian background, I get along well with Buddhists most of the time as well as Christians that don’t bring up Christianity with me or at least slightly do in the most minor way. I get along best with those that are more for that at least one god is possibly around somewhere right now and for those that think that it’s possible that all gods are made up. My real first name is very common and my middle name is a celtic name. I’m always at odds with why some people don’t leave a space before a question mark. Each to their own.

Zanjan: In other words, you don't subscribe to any established religion. What is the aim of your faith belief? Do you have any rituals?

GeraldtheGnome: No one needs one, I don’t, it’s not a must have thing, either, I prefer certain religions and I believe that there is possibly at least one god around somewhere right now. Sorry, I still wonder why some don’t use spaces before question marks. My aim is just to at least try to be fair to all knowing that everything that I cannot prove or disprove is possible, my plan is to find a situation where myself as well as everyone religious and those who are even anti-religious or at least non-religious can find enough in common that even when I go against any of them or they go against each other or they go against me there is fair yet harsh criticism of each other that we won’t like at times without unreasonable censorship, insults, slander and anything else unfair. Rash generalizations like all Christians or all this or all that about any group on any side always gets cracked down by me, I centre on what the person is like, the centre left and the centre right are fine, so too those that don’t go too far with their religious beliefs or too far with their beliefs against one religious belief or a number of religious beliefs or all religious beliefs.

I like balance, not submission or inferiority or superiority or bullying or persecution. I even got disgusted when someone told everyone that he enjoyed seeing Christians getting harassed. Maybe there is or at least was a son of a god, possibly, I though think that it is possibly the case in a similar way to Arianism or more accurately like the way early Christianity and early Judaism had it. That’s why I laugh about extremists of Christianity and of Judaism telling me they are just going by the ways of what we’re written long ago, they aren’t, they will tell you that they are the only true Christians and Jews of Judaism. In reality they aren’t, they are just intolerant hypocrites. If someone isn’t for religion then he or she isn’t doomed and if someone has an opposing religion to anyone of any kind then that person isn’t doomed either. Despite what anyone believes we’re all only know what is certain by everyone so we all must make the most of everything during every second of our lives during every waking moment. Anyone can have rituals, it doesn’t improve anything or make it worse, it’s just different approaches to the same thing so I don’t take part in even one ritual.

Zanjan: I would suggest that you can't achieve your aim alone - too many people. Seems you're looking for someone else to set up the ideal place for discussion, meaning, you have to play by *their* rules. No special treatment.

We agree that one doesn't make headway with personal criticism of each other. However, harsh criticism of other's beliefs or actions makes them dig in their heels and fight back; alternatively, they'll ignore you. You'll end up breathing your own exhaust.

I find people can read the situation and others for themselves; it doesn't need to be re-announced. An equitable response enlightens. In my experience, eliminating ignorance and prejudice can only be done through education - that is, by presenting historical facts, showing the working dynamics. Those who are mislead need something new to work with - a bigger view.

I have a couple of little rituals I made up myself - no one knows about them. These help me get into the right frame of mind before I approach God.

You see, some of the prayers we say are obligatory, to be recited at specific times - to imagine one is always prepared would be unrealistic. One has to set the world aside to focus; however one does that is right for them.

Zanjan: Now, having said all that, I share your disappointment that most posters on the Religion forum just want to fight. They love scandal and are attracted to sensationalism but it ends up nowhere.

Thus, the ideal place you describe won't attract input from those who detest peace and learning. It's a shame, really, that they aren't up for the noble challenges.

Nevertheless, there must still be a place for everybody's delight, no matter how few. Perhaps we can establish those "balances" together.

rhia28: I trust in God, whether we fully understand everything, discuss it etc. I trust it all the same even if I can't see all ends, which none of us can.

Zanjan: Yes, trust is everything in any kind of relationship. Most people don't realize that God wants us to be worthy of His trust as well.

rhia28: I find it better at times instead of trying to understand everything in what God has planned for us, to just trust it instead, knowing it can always be trusted coming from God. That's faith to me, fully trusting in God even without knowing or understanding

Zanjan: If I'm not sure how to do what God asks, I just make a start, then the way will be shown. Some things can't be explained, like how to balance on a bike - it would be easy to give up but we don't because we know its possible.

Sometimes I've thought there must be better people to do this task. Why me? He has said not to worry about that..... help will come where I need it. Basically, all He asks us to do is arise. Our calling is to be ever ready to say yes.

That's what I tell atheists when they complain God didn't give them what they'd prayed for.

rhia28: That's the mistake they make. Instead of trying to deconstruct what God wants of them, instead of rising him instead. There could be other people, but perhaps God isn't wanting better petiole for the task. In that event, I'm grateful to God and thankful for it. Like you said, always ready to say yes to God. It is more liberating if anything to just trust and have a full commitment to God.

rhia28: God is forgiving and understanding, but it doesn't mean we should take advantage of that. He will know if we do. We should still make as much effort as we can to be worthy of it. Whenever it's hard or difficult, God does this for a reason. For me, I'm thankful to God at those times because I know it is for a reason.

GeraldtheGnome: So many mistakes have been made on here. You are both agnostic atheists, you can both claim otherwise but it is not so. Anyway God still is a medieval name, if you both don't believe me then look at every form of religious text that was around prior to then. The Hebrew name was the original name for the same god that you both believe in, the one that is believed to be around yet the claim is that he had no origin. That means that you both worship a god that came from nothing. A god that came from nothing is a made up god.

There possibly is at least one god that is around somewhere right now, if there is at least one then we no nothing about a god of any kind. The non religious that don't even believe in a god named God never prayed for that god or any other, the non religious never complained about something that they didn't do, only the religious people who are skeptics yet are agnostic theists, like all of us are right now, are the only ones who complained that a god named God didn't give them what they prayed for. Even then that only includes those that use English, Dutch, Frisian and Afrikaans that are believers of a god named God.

To Zanjan. Did your version of atheists solely meant the non religious that don't believe in a god named God ? If so then you are wrong.

Zanjan: An atheist is anyone who either denies the existence of any deity or doesn't believe in a deity, whether they belong to a religion or not. Some atheists openly announce their position while others remain in the closet, pretending to be something they aren't.

Can the unjust determine the merits of the just?

GeraldtheGnome: There is only one true god, as soon as those words are used the denial of the possibility of all but one god being around somewhere now (or in the past when it was used) is a declaration of atheism on a massive scale. Agnosticism is just the pure fact that even the strongest believers of there's at least one god who is around or that there's no god around whatsoever cannot prove what they believe is true. That is why everyone, including you and I are agnostics as well as atheists. It's not what most religious and non-religious people agree about but it is true.

Zanjan: We all worship something - there's no escaping this fact. The object of worship, whatever the idol is, drives everything one does in relation to it. The worshiper is a slave to the worshiped.

What is meant by the term "One true God", is the unchanging Source of Creation, not a god of the created. This living Being existed prior to creation and exists eternally whether anyone notices or not. Conversely, the false idol comes into being only by the hand of man and is destroyed by the same method.

We don't assign our own definition to words - that's determined by the language of a given nation. Anyone who attempts to diverge from proper usage will be slapped back into compliance or be labelled ignorant or incoherent.

One's perspective doesn't alter or add to the language - the storymind of the nation does. Otherwise, it would be impossible to translate anything from one language to another. Therefore, the official language changes only in tiny increments - slowly, one word, one generation at a time, like the changing colour of a single leaf on a tree.

GeraldtheGnome: There are still too many errors on here. If you go off the English versions of at least the holy books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam then aren’t they examples where the authors attempt to tell the reader that there is only one god around somewhere right now, that there always was only one god around somewhere and that there always will be one around somewhere ?

How can anyone then and now think that there is certainly only one god around somewhere right now when no one can even prove or disprove that there is even one ? A lot of Jews, Christians and Muslims despite early religious history of their religions believe that the god, under the name that they use for that god, will be the one who decides who goes to heaven and who doesn’t. There possibly is at least one god around somewhere right now and there possibly isn’t a god around somewhere right now. There’s no certainty that there is even one god. Moses is made up, Jesus is made up, every god of every religious story is made up. When it comes to each religion not everything and everyone in the myth is made up but everything that is true in the religious story is tied into a myth. What bits of each religion is true and what bits are false ?

Whatever can’t be shown to be true or false are possibly true and possibly false. When it’s not proven and it’s not disproven then any false belief of certainty is a delusional one where you have become a slave to false religious ideology. When it comes to Judaism and Christianity if you just go off what Christians refer to as The Old Testament you have a made up god and made up people (at least most of the time if not all of the time)by anonymous authors. The Tanakh and the Bible were written only by anonymous authors. Why can’t all monotheists and polytheists just be content with the reality that every religious story is made up, that there maybe at least one god that is around right now and that if so then the name of any god is unknown ?

Each time I’m told that there is a god or gods around right now then it’s just someone’s guess, that person tries to make an excuse for the fact that what they are certain about will never be proven, in fact each person who is certain that there is a god and so on is enslaved by the fantasy that they have been taught. Be an expert of the known, a follower of the possible and someone who isn’t a believer of what has been disproven. Every religious god is false therefore every religion is false, be a believer that there is possibly at least one god who is around right now rather than a believer that a certain religion is true or that certain religions are true and that at least one certain god is around somewhere right now.

Zanjan: " then aren’t they examples where the authors attempt to tell the reader that there is only one god "

The writers are only conveying what their Revelator had confirmed. That's no ordinary person; He's the highest spiritual authority of the Age. He reasons with those asking questions so they can understand as well. These believers have recognized the rank and station of the Revelator, which is a very rare occurrence. If one doesn't understand what a Revelator is, they're not going to accept those words. Some know but reject Him anyway.

People are attracted to those they think are just like themselves because oil and water don't mix. They test the other to make sure of that since nobody wants to be in the wrong place. There's a dynamic that sifts the wheat from the chaff - it's crisis. This is when one's true colours will be seen by all; without it, all one sees is the surface presentation, which can be as fake as one chooses.

Zanjan: "What bits of each religion is true and what bits are false ?"

Only what the Revelator has said is true. If society didn't tend to go off the rails, humans wouldn't need a Revelator.

In time, the clergy added their own ideologies and have pressed others to adopt them. After all, they were professionals, getting paid commensurate with their level of scholarship. They had a vested interest - there one finds the power seekers and arrogance breeds corruption.

Each religion continues to exist because they have something to teach a person - religion is a system of health education - it's a school. The idea is to learn all of its lessons. When that happens, the person moves on to a new spiritual Teacher where he can learn new lessons. If he's held back, he becomes sick. If he moves forth when unready, he becomes sick.

Religion takes in all these sick and crippled people and tries to heal them at the stage they're in. So, you can't judge a religion by its students or patients. You refer to the Divine Teacher and Physician - its Revelator.

We all have free will - it's not ours to tell someone how to use theirs. None of us hold that degree of authority. We can share what we know works for us in a positive manner. If we're negative, what we're sharing isn't working for us or anyone else.

GeraldtheGnome: Mistakes have been made even though I understand that sometimes what is believed to be true is so strongly believed in that it's impossible to think that it isn't so. I myself have been there.

Because of the religious bias of some, which includes the religious bias oddly from the non-religious, there have been false claims made that not only do the current subspecies of humans includes people of religious beliefs but that also at least one other subspecies of humans had religious beliefs and that at least one other species of humans had religious beliefs too. I disregard all of the claims that have been made. Early humans of each species and subspecies except for the present subspecies that we belong to were non-religious. The next claim is that before the first city, before the first town and before the first village religion started, another false claim. The first possible time religion started was in what is now Turkey with what is claimed to be a Temple, it's very unlikely that it was where the first religion started.

It's difficult to know due to the oral tales in everywhere but the Indian subcontinent when religion started and where. Maybe there was religion around before Vedic Hinduism but it's something that most likely will never be known. So it comes down to which claimed revealer you mean. Even within Hinduism there are opposing beliefs on who that would be, some of them don't even believe that there is one. So do you mean the revealer within Hinduism ? Any Hindu that believes that there are gods only believe that there gods are around right now. It's the earliest form of agnostic theism. Their own gods were disproven long ago and yet they also falsely believe that there isn't even one other god who is around right now even though they still are yet to prove that. How is what you believe about the god that you believe in any different to the way that they think ? The original god in every god based version of Hinduism is never claimed to have no origin even though they never tell you that he does or doesn't. So without unknown origin each god of every religious story is a made up god. It's the first known human interpretation of the unknown.

So that leaves me with what all other religions are like. At least Brahma growing from a Lotus flower growing from Vishnu's navel is very different than every other religion. It's still about imaginary gods even though it's different.

Zanjan: Of course, we’ve all made mistakes yet that’s how we learn. Unfortunately, some attach to an idea before they’ve learned the full lesson. It’s like learning to tie your shoes – when one sees that their laces stay in place with only one loop, they decide they’ve accomplished the purpose. What they don’t realize is that the un-looped side may likely cause problems that could result in some broken bones.

One should do the job right, not half-heartedly. The wise know that practice makes perfect.
Once the individual has learned, a confirmation will arrive so that’s how they know their quest is over. They’ve captured the target. Eventually, one has to eat again; soon, a new hunt must begin.

Religion doesn’t compete with itself. Atheists create a competition; if they’re going to make sport, they should respect a worthy opponent’s skills. Religious bias is silly. If one has a something they’re happy with, why would they want to deprive someone else of their happiness by spitting on what they’ve got? So immature!

We don’t know exactly when humans got religion for the first time; we only know it required a necessary degree of brain development to be cognizant of the spiritual realities. We can confirm that H. Sapiens had the right equipment but not how long early man’s potential powers may have been latent. The first signs can only go back as far as what they left behind.

Zanjan: “So do you mean the revealer within Hinduism ?”

Yes, that was Krishna. This is the oldest religious documentation mankind has, a legacy to us all. Krishna never taught polytheistic beliefs – that occurred long after His Revelation, accompanying the later worship of cows.

So much time has passed that Krishna is worshiped as god, same as Christians worship Jesus as God – as an incarnation. This perspective is nothing new, a view that returns late in any Age isn’t reliable.

You recall the people Moses came to (Egyptians) also worshiped the same – actually, it was bulls. The Greeks also. It takes a bit of historical digging to figure out what this cattle obsession was with the ancient people in the Levant., Northern Africa and Turkey.

Not all Hindus believe in multiple gods. They recognize the powers are real but they bow to the spark of life, burning within each human. They respect what is sacred to all peoples because all of them understand there has been many Revelators, just one at a time.

Zanjan: Humans are a recent appearance in earth’s history – at least, human forms as we know them. One could hardly expect this nascent species to grasp everything possible at once. We’ve had to navigate social and technological development. It seems slow yet compared with previous creature developments over geological time, it’s been quick.

Yes, the temple you mentioned in Turkey is around 17,000 years old; there are other signs man’s intellect was active enough to process religious thought. The spear thrower was invented at the same time, also the oldest cave art ever discovered.

Ergo, art, crafts, and technology go hand- in-hand with religion. There had to be at least ONE, powerfully inspired human mind to enlighten all the rest.

Zanjan: Just thought I'd make a note about this special time on our calendars - it doesn't happen often.
This week 4 religions celebrate important events at the same time - Easter, Passover, Ramadan, and Rizvan.

Each of these religions have their own calendar, both solar and lunar - the former days stay the same but the latter always move each year. This is why:

"The adoption of a new calendar in each dispensation is a symbol of the power of Divine Revelation to reshape human perception of material, social, and spiritual reality. Through it, sacred moments are distinguished, humanity’s place in time and space reimagined, and the rhythm of life recast. " - Universal House of Justice, 2014

GeraldtheGnome: I see that more mistakes were were. Atheists create a competition; that is true, there are no opponents of Atheists because we are all agnostic atheists, even people that don't think that they are, you for example. Religious bias is silly. The thing is though that even out of the most broad ranging polytheists there's still at least one god that teach of them don't believe in.

Why are so many people (solely on the internet) so prone to use that no one uses off the internet ? If I was on a game show where rarely used words brought rewards to me by using them then only then would I do so. This is not a game show. I know what the words mean, it's just that no one uses them away from the internet most of the time and that's why when they are used it's so annoying. There isn't even one spiritual reality, not that is known at least and possibly never as well.

No one had potential powers and no one does now. Brahma is the first named Hindu god Yes, that was Krishna. This is the oldest religious documentation mankind has, a legacy to us all. Krishna never taught polytheistic beliefs – that occurred long after His Revelation, accompanying the later worship of cows.

http://www.veritablehokum.com/comic/the-hindu-god-family-tree/

If a god is believed not to be made up then that one is worshipped as a god, not as god. If there is more than one god in the religion then it's still a polytheist religion no matter how many ways so one claims it not to be, in reality even Christianity of a polytheist religion made out to be a polytheist one. Krishna is made up, the 522 year old named Jesus is made up. If you don't believe me then look at The Tyndale Bible to even see the name Jesus, you won't be able to. Then there's the myth that there is a god named God around. Even looking at all very early medieval Christian literature you will not find the name God ever used, you will find an alternative name to that though including the proper Hebrew name. But the name God was first used in the very early middle ages but just a little later when early English itself started to change.

Moses never existed. No one recognize any powers because it's all made up. The word is people, not peoples, I know the politically correct have really pushed for it to be people but people is already means a group of people so there is really no need to change what already is a plural form. What should be sacred to everyone is reality and what is possible, nothing else. There is no one who revealed in any supernatural revelation. It's all superstitious nonsense.

Humans were only ever in human form, sure there was a stage where there was a blurred moment between who was and wasn't a human but that happened ever so gradually. I just wish there was one day where I can go on a forum without seeing what I don't see or even here anyone use in the way of words. There's just no need to do it.

I told you that they guess that it is a temple in Turkey, I myself told you that it possibly was, I never told you that it was so please assume that I told you otherwise. The fact is that they just don't know. If people used their own intellect fully then people would not believe that something is certain when it comes to religion when it is possibly is or has been proven not to be so.; there are other signs man’s intellect was active enough to process religious thought.

Things don't call automatically with religion, you guess that it is so. Sure those things came into it in many cases but it's not tied into every religion. The only enlightenment was the scientific one.

There is no symbol of the power of Divine Revelation to reshape human perception of material, social, and by the way there is still no such thing as spiritual reality. The rest was just hippy like even though I did find your religion's website when checking that out. I personally prefer a Manor, Pancake Manor, which reminds me that I missed out on having Pancakes because I forgot that it was Shrove Tuesday at the time. I'm still very angry about that and I want some Pancakes ! "Mmmm, lovely." I have no idea what Rizvan is.