And I'm an Orthodox Christian, though I'm not religeous, I mean that I don't practice, for example now I shouldn't eat meat and some other things, but I do eat, but many people here use it to loose their weight, well, thank God I don't neet it yet
Ok, what does auf der Reise mean? I thought you were from Germany!
nope, I'm not German, I just like the language, no any cheating
Non-religious, non-atheist, do my own thinger. Don't want an interpretive middle-man. I was raised Episcopalian but not stringently so. At 13 I decided Christianity was not for me. I'm just not interested in joining a religious organization, though the subject of religion and spirituality interests me greatly.
Non-religious, non-atheist, do my own thinger. Don't want an interpretive middle-man. I was raised Episcopalian but not stringently so. At 13 I decided Christianity was not for me. I'm just not interested in joining a religious organization, though the subject of religion and spirituality interests me greatly.
So you're classically agnostic then. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
Not at all. An agnostic doubts the existence of God or the possibility of knowing whether there is a God or not. I'm doubting the veracity of most religious credos I'm familiar with and the wisdom of trusting any of them as having more inherent authenticity than my own subjectivity with regard to said knowingness. If your comment is made under the assumption that it is only an established religious authority who can authenticate any idea or experience about God at all, then yes I'm agnostic. So much for labels.
To the extent that God is a word applied to an extrapolated teleology no one yet can independently verify, then I uphold my prerogative to apply that term just as liberally as the rest of humanity. To me, one's subjective experience is the more valid enterprise, and to my mind at least, its cultivation provides the most utility in addressing existential questions or to quell the Sturm und Drang of existence. Isn't that why God is contemplated at all? Whether the label "God" is accurately applied to experience or not is a linguistic and interpretive concern, not an empirical one.
If your comment is made under the assumption that it is only an established religious authority who can authenticate any idea or experience about God at all, then yes I'm agnostic. So much for labels.
No. No one ought to have a monopoly on any resource. But established religious organisations exist because they possess the accumulative wisdom that is helpful in unlocking the secrets of divinity, Creation and other issues that throw humanity into periods of intense self-doubt.
Quote:
To the extent that God is a word applied to an extrapolated teleology no one yet can independently verify, then I uphold my prerogative to apply that term just as liberally as the rest of humanity. To me, one's subjective experience is the more valid enterprise, and to my mind at least, its cultivation provides the most utility in addressing existential questions or to quell the Sturm und Drang of existence. Isn't that why God is contemplated at all? Whether the label "God" is accurately applied to experience or not is a linguistic and interpretive concern, not an empirical one.
That was an illuminating explanation of your religious philosophy. Unfortunately, I have not come any closer to understanding your position. Do you then, reasonably believe in the existence of a higher being that you might subjectively call God or by any other term that catches your fancy? _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
"But established religious organisations exist because they possess the accumulative wisdom that is helpful in unlocking the secrets of divinity, Creation and other issues that throw humanity into periods of intense self-doubt."
If you say so.
Do you then, reasonably believe in the existence of a higher being that you might subjectively call God or by any other term that catches your fancy?[/quote]
Well, my in terms of relegion ridiculously versatile family (you can find all relligions of the Judeo-Christian sort) has evolved into an an masse Roman Catholic one.
Apart from the fact that I'm officially a Roman Catholic, I'm quintessentially agnostic, having been raised by an ex-Catholic agnostic father and an atheist mother. However, my mum thinks "atheist" is too harsh a word to use to describe her (lack of) faith (in God) as the word "atheist" has some negative connotations, implying that the person in question is a fierce opponent of any kind of religious belief, which she definitely isn't. I see it that way, too.
However, I haven't really met people who think "atheist" has negative connotations as described above but it simply means that the person doesn't belive in God. What do you think? _________________ Az alvástól megéhezem. Az evéstől elálmosodom. Az élet szép.
Location: San Francisco, Noord-Kalifornië, Noord-Amerika
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 10:04 pm Post subject:
I'm an atheist and to me, it simply means that I don't believe in God. My mother was an agnostic, and to her, that meant that she didn't really know.
(When I was younger, I used to say I wasn't either of the two -- at that time, I figured being an atheist meant that you had to be actively going about denying the existence of God, and I rarely even thought about the subject.)
I consider myself more of an agnostic than an atheist because, in my opinion, it cannot be proven whether God exists or not. However, I'm inclined to think that he doesn't, but I'm not that convinced (for want of a better word) as others claim to be. And I don't think I need to.
Now, am I an atheist or an agnostic in fact? I've got a little mixed up. _________________ Az alvástól megéhezem. Az evéstől elálmosodom. Az élet szép.
Sometimes I tend to think that the term "agnostic" is merely a euphemism to denote those who can't really decide what to believe in. Even if it's true, I don't think it's a shame. _________________ Az alvástól megéhezem. Az evéstől elálmosodom. Az élet szép.
Location: San Francisco, Noord-Kalifornië, Noord-Amerika
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 10:28 pm Post subject:
Oh, I'm absolutely convinced there is no God -- unless you consider the nature of God to be simply a belief, in which, case I can freely admit that there is a God -- for those who believe. (I'm kidding, but I've known people to really stretch to come up with a definition of God in order to prove that I do, after all, believe in God.)
No, absolutely not. It wasn't my intention as I'm not a sophist by nature.
I've also me those people who wanted to prove that I'm a "latent Catholic"(sic!) LOL
I don't think they would be glad if I wanted them to admit that they are latent atheists. _________________ Az alvástól megéhezem. Az evéstől elálmosodom. Az élet szép.
Hi
my relgion's catholic. I'm writting here because I'm wondring abou time /relgion. This is because since some days I've some prpblmes what are annying me and prevent (with succes for them) I can't concentrate. i thought before it' s better don't write during such times on the fourmbut now I've disocvered that this will force my thoughts to fcus not on themself or to things what are causing this annoyance. this is much better and ther are peopl who can do ths although it's vry diffcult and then time would get to adiffrent velocity. I hate tiem, it's stessful and i wish time would soemtimes stop. not completely stop, of course, but tmporary, or if it would become flxible as it's a quite pressurizing thng (feeling) that it does continue. so anywya this post is a quetsion abut religion and time, as i need to knwo if there''s a religion in whch there's some controlling of time, even sme authority. What's a quite confsing thing as well is the wind, especially in teh trees because ths put time to the inversd diretcion, adn this is absoluty overwhemling because it puts those thoughts (memorys) in your mind of a cerain time, even day, or moment. this are thoughts of sometimes vry longtime ago btu the wind in the rtees contains the souls of those peope and especially those memories so you cry.Wind in the trees has ths special power to put yur thoughts to this thing, adn i'm wondering if ther's a relgion who knwo abut this, or maybe i'm bit lost,as time make me to get muddle up bcause of the parallel continuation btu slowing, reversing and generally atlerations during the mathematical divided tims for exple hours, days, mnths. hours aren't a problme, I think, it's in particluar months and yeasr what i cna't comprehend but until now I ddnt' hear of a religion what hsa a phlosohy about ths so please tell me if it exist because i must disocver it.Thanks.
Location: San Francisco, Noord-Kalifornië, Noord-Amerika
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject:
Pauline, I've never heard of a religion that deals with controlling time, but meditation, as I'm sure you know, is supposed to help with that feeling of time getting out of control. While I was searching for the answer to your question, I came across this interesting article:
It might be hard to wade through if you're having trouble concentrating (expecially since it's not in your native language); on the other hand, it might help you concentrate.
i didn't knwo that mditation is supposd to help with it, because it's nto allowed for me to do it (i love yoga but it's not with medtation). It was a very inertesitng articl, and I would like to leanr more how the peol go in the zonewher teh time is more slwoly. the paragrpah about doapmine was interesting; two medications i take are dopmine (and serotonin)regulatrs. so,I suppose that it wil be teh dopamine, what I ddn't know ;i thought it was because of anxieyt /fear after some days whn my brain is so noisy and i don't get some quiet frm it and much frustation to correctly interprt all the things.i'm absoluty not gone mad or somerhing like this, but it's difficlut to concettrate when you constantly hear everyhting what the other peopl don't ntice.this week i will be at home so i wil serach some infos about those methods to experince slowly time. it would be much nicer.Thank ou very much for your reply and the article. of cours i knwo that time doesn't be quick orslow, but it's our idnividual interpretation of it makieng this abstract concetp concrete, and putting the corrct amount of time to teh minutes, hrous, days etc.. or even more confusimg is the passage of time; when the weather's widny I've mostly this problem as wind in the trees has thsi special message to em from the souls of cerain people, and today it was windy, btu this was the other feeling -not too fast but inversd.I'm not sure if this is logic or bit weird. I wonder who invented minutes, huors, months, years and put the time into those, and if the time was constantly equally divded in this groups, as until this has ocurred time was free to go quickly or slwoy. as the magnetic force, maybe atone point, time wil reverse. this is a frightening perpective what i wish I didn't consider.Okay, it's evident that ths post is too long.
I wish I could be helpful, but I am not very well-versed in religious dogma.
But since you are a Catholic, why don't you talk to your priest? However, I doubt if he is able to answer any of your probing questions as they seem a bit too esoteric to me. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
thank youfro yoru suggestion. Today i'm feeling little bit lesser anxious about thsi things. Maybe i will ask the priest; sometims i've talked with him before and he was helfpul. as he's told before, not all (in fatc many) thinsg havn't an answer, or it's not posible to definitly know if it's the case or nto so it wil remain a mystery for sometime, possibly eternally.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
