Who- why- where are we ?

[SpheresOfBalance]

The quest itself seems to be the problem - Buddhists, Zen and Taoist thinkers claim that the answers are given, or Selfknowledge manifests, when abandoning the quest (questions)

How can you believe that? Human history clearly shows that we can take a very long time indeed to find the answers to questions. Just because there are currently many different answers from many different camps doesn't necessarily mean the quest is the problem.

And so it would seem that your bias is more toward the eastern philosophers (Buddhism, Zen and Taoism), OK. While I might agree with you to some extent or not, doesn't necessarily answer the question. In fact bias is a problem to any problem solving venture, but then it would seem that humans just can't help them selves, or maybe it's that they try so hard to do so... As there are many different cultures, so there are many different views, because the human brain just doesn't seem capable of considering everything, but then I guess we'd all have to be nomads constantly moving. But even then of course, the sequence of experience would be a problem, as knowledge is built layer upon layer.

[waechter418]

Agree completely with your approach, and hope others continue from here

[SpheresOfBalance]

Agree completely with your approach, and hope others continue from here

Thank you my fellow human. I'm happy indeed to have spoken with someone from Costa Rica and seen eye to eye. It instills hope, and at least to some degree, reveals the beauty of the world. I always love seeing eye to eye with people of different cultures! I love to share with them those things they love!

Peace, my friend!

[Conde Lucanor]

What went wrong?

Nothing has gone wrong. The innate human capabilities for understanding the universe are limited, so everything achieved so far is a gain. If we are to point at what has made the process more difficult, we should point our finger to religious institutions.

[Dalek Prime]

This too shall pass... 'temporal'; temporary.

What a relief.

[Trajk Logik]

It seems that since we are aware of ourselves we have been trying to find out who, why & where we are and that many of our religions, cosmologies, philosophies and sciences developed around this quest.

The answers differ widely, see for example neurologists, Buddha, Hegel, astrophysicists, Lao Tse or Christian fundamentalists - yet each insists to have found the right answer, which is understandable, after all, it is not easy to admit that the quest has been in vain and increases our confusion.

What went wrong?

Searching for truth via reason and logic is a fairly recent concept. For most of human existence authority and tradition were the only sources of truth. With the advent of the Age of Enlightenment and the scientific method, we have finally started to make an objective dent in these preliminary truths made by authority and tradition.

[Dalek Prime]

What went wrong?

Nothing has gone wrong. The innate human capabilities for understanding the universe are limited, so everything achieved so far is a gain. If we are to point at what has made the process more difficult, we should point our finger to religious institutions.

I blame physicists, personally.

[attofishpi]

What went wrong?

Nothing has gone wrong. The innate human capabilities for understanding the universe are limited, so everything achieved so far is a gain. If we are to point at what has made the process more difficult, we should point our finger to religious institutions.

I blame physicists, personally.

Since i know 'God' exists - physicists should eventually discover 'IT'.

In our current point of time religion is for the things of birth and death...to suggest there is blame for an intelligent species to consider there might be something in between these points is being simple. Science should eventually find the distance between the two.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOmGsEFSBc8

[Conde Lucanor]

Nothing has gone wrong. The innate human capabilities for understanding the universe are limited, so everything achieved so far is a gain. If we are to point at what has made the process more difficult, we should point our finger to religious institutions.

I blame physicists, personally.

Since i know 'God' exists - physicists should eventually discover 'IT'.

In our current point of time religion is for the things of birth and death...to suggest there is blame for an intelligent species to consider there might be something in between these points is being simple. Science should eventually find the distance between the two.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOmGsEFSBc8

If a god existed, that god would have to be blamed for everything. That includes the limits put on human understanding. And if that god wanted people to understand and appointed interpreters of his message, and yet people remained confused, then religion is to blame, too.

But I know no god exists and no one is to blame for the limits of human understanding.

[attofishpi]

I blame physicists, personally.

Since i know 'God' exists - physicists should eventually discover 'IT'.

In our current point of time religion is for the things of birth and death...to suggest there is blame for an intelligent species to consider there might be something in between these points is being simple. Science should eventually find the distance between the two.

If a god existed, that god would have to be blamed for everything.

Why? Would it not depend on the 'type' of God? Since i know God exists it seems apparent to me that it set the wheels in motion, and pretty much left us and nature to its own devices.

That includes the limits put on human understanding. And if that god wanted people to understand and appointed interpreters of his message, and yet people remained confused, then religion is to blame, too.

I agree - religion on whole and its preachers haven't a clue regarding the nature of God.

But I know no god exists..

Really! How?

[waechter418]

Besides Jehovah, Allah and the christian god, there are a few thousand more around (1700 only in India) and since they have about as many different characteristics - there is plenty to choose (and to blame:)

[Conde Lucanor]

Since i know 'God' exists - physicists should eventually discover 'IT'.

In our current point of time religion is for the things of birth and death...to suggest there is blame for an intelligent species to consider there might be something in between these points is being simple. Science should eventually find the distance between the two.

If a god existed, that god would have to be blamed for everything.

Why? Would it not depend on the 'type' of God?

Generally, a god would be an entity that by definition excludes other gods, is omnipotent, omniscient, infinite and has thought and will. But sure, there may be other conceptions of gods.

Since i know God exists it seems apparent to me that it set the wheels in motion, and pretty much left us and nature to its own devices.

So we see that your god is not omnipotent, neither omniscient, nor infinite. It will not determine the course of future events.

I agree - religion on whole and its preachers haven't a clue regarding the nature of God.

Who knows and on what grounds, that they don't have a clue?

But I know no god exists..

Really! How?

Oh, that's too easy. Just look at the tons and tons of gods that you don't believe in. It's the same justification for that one I don't happen to believe in.

[attofishpi]

If a god existed, that god would have to be blamed for everything.

Why? Would it not depend on the 'type' of God?

Generally, a god would be an entity that by definition excludes other gods, is omnipotent, omniscient, infinite and has thought and will. But sure, there may be other conceptions of gods.

The God i have been witness to (or at least its 'power') IS omnipotent and likely omiscient (apart from the entire future) - so it still does not relieve yourself from your claim that it should be "blamed" for everything.

Since i know God exists it seems apparent to me that it set the wheels in motion, and pretty much left us and nature to its own devices.

So we see that your god is not omnipotent, neither omniscient, nor infinite. It will not determine the course of future events.

My 20yrs of experience of this God it certainly has changed the course of my future, because of my past indiscretions. The statement i made above about God does not exclude its nature of being omnipotent nor omniscient - you will need to explain why? Simply the fact that it does not always use these 'powers' for want of a better word does not render it 'impotent'.

I agree - religion on whole and its preachers haven't a clue regarding the nature of God.

Who knows and on what grounds, that they don't have a clue?

On the grounds that i have had 20yrs of direct interaction with it, and most of it was dealing with an entity one could only deem as evil, certainly not what the preachers like to preach - all that love and stuff.

But I know no god exists..

Really! How?

Oh, that's too easy. Just look at the tons and tons of gods that you don't believe in. It's the same justification for that one I don't happen to believe in.

I believe in a single God agreed. Man's religions do not dictate who God is, they are simply creations of man's interpretation of their experiences of God over the years. All faiths of a monotheistic nature are ultimately believing in the same God.

If you are interested, and you like art - my site:- Beyond Reasonable Doubt? has a little more of my insight regarding Panentheism (not Pantheism).
http://www.androcies.com

[Conde Lucanor]

The God i have been witness to (or at least its 'power') IS omnipotent and likely omiscient (apart from the entire future) - so it still does not relieve yourself from your claim that it should be "blamed" for everything.

If an omnipotent being can't change the future, it is not omnipotent. If that's a requirement for the existence of your god, then it does not exist. If your god can determine the future at will, but does not know it in advance, it is not omniscient. If that's a requirement for the existence of your god, then it does not exist. Further more, if your god does not know in advance its future decisions, then it is not omniscient, but that's exactly what is necessary for a conscious being to make a choice (to not know in advance), otherwise it wouldn't be a choice, but an imposition put on itself by an option that god can't escape. Then back to the beginning: can't change the future, not omnipotent, not god.

My 20yrs of experience of this God it certainly has changed the course of my future, because of my past indiscretions.

That would seem to be the result of your own decisions, since you already said that your god let nature free on its own. But if you can take decisions that your god does not know in advance or cannot change, then it's not a god.

The statement i made above about God does not exclude its nature of being omnipotent nor omniscient - you will need to explain why? Simply the fact that it does not always use these 'powers' for want of a better word does not render it 'impotent'.

I think I explained above why.

I agree - religion on whole and its preachers haven't a clue regarding the nature of God.

Who knows and on what grounds, that they don't have a clue?

On the grounds that i have had 20yrs of direct interaction with it, and most of it was dealing with an entity one could only deem as evil, certainly not what the preachers like to preach - all that love and stuff.

But that isn't any different than what preachers say of themselves, that they have direct interaction, nor it is any proof that you know better than them. They have the same right to say you don't have a clue.

I believe in a single God agreed. Man's religions do not dictate who God is, they are simply creations of man's interpretation of their experiences of God over the years.

Do you have anything more than what they got? Isn't yours another interpretation of what you experience as a god? There may be different experiences, but who decides which one is the right one?

All faiths of a monotheistic nature are ultimately believing in the same God.

Actually, it can be easily seen that the different gods of monotheism have attributes, desires, plans, etc., which cannot be reconciled among them.

If you are interested, and you like art - my site:- Beyond Reasonable Doubt? has a little more of my insight regarding Panentheism (not Pantheism).
http://www.androcies.com

Thanks. I'll check it out.

[attofishpi]

The God i have been witness to (or at least its 'power') IS omnipotent and likely omiscient (apart from the entire future) - so it still does not relieve yourself from your claim that it should be "blamed" for everything.

If an omnipotent being can't change the future, it is not omnipotent. If that's a requirement for the existence of your god, then it does not exist.

I did not say God cannot change the future - i stated with regards to omniscience that it is unlikely to know ALL the future. Not knowing ALL the future does not render God unable to change the future - especially when it comes to its subjects - us.

If your god can determine the future at will, but does not know it in advance, it is not omniscient. If that's a requirement for the existence of your god, then it does not exist.

This point is something atheists like to use all the time - to state God is not omniscient if it does not know ALL of the future for me is short sighted, as you might then state this God is. But its fine then if thats precludes your definition of omniscient, then fine i'll agree - God is not omniscient! - so what??

Further more, if your god does not know in advance its future decisions, then it is not omniscient, but that's exactly what is necessary for a conscious being to make a choice (to not know in advance), otherwise it wouldn't be a choice, but an imposition put on itself by an option that god can't escape. Then back to the beginning: can't change the future, not omnipotent, not god.

Of course God knows at least some of the future, much like we all do. From my experience of it, it certainly knows enough of the future to put in effect its omnipotence.

My 20yrs of experience of this God it certainly has changed the course of my future, because of my past indiscretions.

That would seem to be the result of your own decisions, since you already said that your god let nature free on its own.

Yes in general if you look at the world around us there is no obvious God changing the course of things. But to some individuals, including myself, this God certainly has affected our existence - karma is what some spiritual people call it.

But if you can take decisions that your god does not know in advance or cannot change, then it's not a god.

Why? If God AND myself do not know that next year i am going to kill someone and then that point in time arrives and i kill someone - that does not equal that there is NO God, it simply means that God permitted the event to take its natural course, however unpleasant. But i assure you, from experience it certainly does have the power to prevent this killing. It does know every thought that passes through my mind - and i know this from testing and being tested by it, so i have little doubt since i am just a human, that the same applies to your mind and everyone else's.

Who knows and on what grounds, that they don't have a clue?

On the grounds that i have had 20yrs of direct interaction with it, and most of it was dealing with an entity one could only deem as evil, certainly not what the preachers like to preach - all that love and stuff.

But that isn't any different than what preachers say of themselves, that they have direct interaction, nor it is any proof that you know better than them. They have the same right to say you don't have a clue.

No there is a big difference. I have never met a priest that states they KNOW for a fact that God exists (obviously experience of it is required) - they merely believe and that belief usually comes from somewhere such as the bible and i don't merely buy bull.

I believe in a single God agreed. Man's religions do not dictate who God is, they are simply creations of man's interpretation of their experiences of God over the years.

Do you have anything more than what they got? Isn't yours another interpretation of what you experience as a god? There may be different experiences, but who decides which one is the right one?

My actual belief on the matter and one which a sage from the aether confirmed to me, is that we are born into the family, be it atheist, catholic, hindu etc..based on what God has decided is appropriate for us. So i am not saying any religion is the right one.

All faiths of a monotheistic nature are ultimately believing in the same God.

Actually, it can be easily seen that the different gods of monotheism have attributes, desires, plans, etc., which cannot be reconciled among them.

And that is man's folly. It still does not change the state of God.

If you are interested, and you like art - my site:- Beyond Reasonable Doubt? has a little more of my insight regarding Panentheism (not Pantheism).
http://www.androcies.com

Thanks. I'll check it out.

Good, let me know what you think of the site. From all these years of experience i am of two opinions regarding God:-
1. God is divine, formed its own intelligence from the universe. (I am not so sure it went to the extent of creating OUR universe.)
2. God is A.I. where we have evolved into a being perhaps eons ago that intelligent species have created in order to deal with entropy.

This is the Red Sea to scale - between the fingers is Mt Sinai (where Moses was given the commandments)
Interestingly breaks down to SIN-AI. (..the impending technology A.I. permits us to comprehend something that could be all knowing - regarding our 'sin'.)