"Philosophy of Religion," is an Oxymoron

[attofishpi]

Philosophy in its most general definition is the love of wisdom within a basis of rationality.

To counter my point all you have to do is to prove that 'philosophy-proper' as theorized and practiced since it first emerged has nothing to do with wisdom and rationality.

It depends on what defines "wisdom".
To me, Atheist philosophy could be coined as "love of rationality", certainly that can be considered wise. However, by not taking that binary stance that the man that came in the name of, and died for (love) as insisted by Him, is not truly a love of wisdom at all. An atheist philosopher is rather stunted. Therefore the only true philosopher is a Christian, happy Easter.

Nope a non-theistic view of wisdom is not all about of 'rationality'.

READ what I stated - I never stated that rationality defines wisdom!

With theism the degree of what-is-wisdom is shallow and confined to what God dictates in God's holy texts or what God is supposed to command, which is not based on unbiased judgment, experiential self-knowledge, self-transcendence and non-attachment, etc. There is no room for optimality in the case of a theistic belief.

Rubbish. IF there is a God (there is) then the Christian theist has the optimal position to gain further knowledge via insight and indeed wisdom.

Per below example:-

Two men, on par with intelligence and knowledge:
Man A = atheist
Man B = theist

Indeed the ONLY difference between the two with regard to their reasoning and pursuit of knowledge is that Man B understands that it is wise to believe that there is a God and live his life accordingly, knowing that there may be consequences beyond man's 'justice', indeed, there may be the POSSIBILITY of greater insight.

Which of the two men has the POTENTIAL for greater knowledge?

WHICH ONE IS THE WISER OF THE TWO?

[Veritas Aequitas]

It depends on what defines "wisdom".
To me, Atheist philosophy could be coined as "love of rationality", certainly that can be considered wise. However, by not taking that binary stance that the man that came in the name of, and died for (love) as insisted by Him, is not truly a love of wisdom at all. An atheist philosopher is rather stunted. Therefore the only true philosopher is a Christian, happy Easter.

Nope a non-theistic view of wisdom is not all about of 'rationality'.

READ what I stated - I never stated that rationality defines wisdom!

With theism the degree of what-is-wisdom is shallow and confined to what God dictates in God's holy texts or what God is supposed to command, which is not based on unbiased judgment, experiential self-knowledge, self-transcendence and non-attachment, etc. There is no room for optimality in the case of a theistic belief.

Rubbish. IF there is a God (there is) then the Christian theist has the optimal position to gain further knowledge via insight and indeed wisdom.

Per below example:-

Two men, on par with intelligence and knowledge:
Man A = atheist
Man B = theist

Indeed the ONLY difference between the two with regard to their reasoning and pursuit of knowledge is that Man B understands that it is wise to believe that there is a God and live his life accordingly, knowing that there may be consequences beyond man's 'justice', indeed, there may be the POSSIBILITY of greater insight.

Which of the two men has the POTENTIAL for greater knowledge?

WHICH ONE IS THE WISER OF THE TWO?

Don't be too arrogant and shout 'Rubbish' too hastily since such 'Rubbish' is more applicable to theists.

One thing you overlooked is the time factor and the potential of knowledge to infinity.

Past to Present
Man A = atheist - flexible and adaptive
Man B = theist - rigid and dogmatic to God's dictates

The average intelligence of humanity has been increasing since 10,000 years ago. Every since the gradual introduction of new knowledge, theists-in-general has been resisting all forms of new knowledge then [confirmed to be true now] e.g. the round Earth vs Flat Earth, the Heliocentric versus Geocentric Models of the Universe. It the same pattern for the loads of new discoveries and theories which were initially resisted by theists but confirmed to be true.
Your point that theists has the greater potential for knowledge is a SHAM.

In terms of morality, I agree the Christian Moral System [rigid and based on the threat of hell] is more effective than all other moral system but only relative to the past and the present but not for the future. The Islamic Moral System being the worst. As for the other theism, e.g. pantheism or panentheism, they don't have a moral system at all.

However as humanity's average intelligence and wisdom quotients' increase toward the future, whatever the best theistic system will eventually be ineffective and need to be weaned off.

Present to Future
Man A = atheist - flexible and adaptive
Man B = theist - rigid and dogmatic to God's dictates

At present there is already a trend of an exponential increase in knowledge and technology which theistic rigid knowledge and moral system will have problem dealing with in the future.

As mentioned above, it is already evident humanity's average intelligence and wisdom quotients' is increasing at tremendous pace with increasing expansion of IT, artificial intelligence where young children are exposed to at a very early age.
Even old grandfathers and grandmothers are using Youtube to update their knowledge.

The point here is the rigid and dogmatic doctrines which the believers must cling to, if not they could go to hell, prevent them from exploiting the new knowledge that are introduced at exponential pace.

Since it is glaring that the average human intelligence and wisdom are increasing, more and more people will veer off from rigid theism to flexible non-atheism and thus has the greater potential for new knowledge without the threat of God and Hell behind them.

[attofishpi]

Nope a non-theistic view of wisdom is not all about of 'rationality'.

READ what I stated - I never stated that rationality defines wisdom!

With theism the degree of what-is-wisdom is shallow and confined to what God dictates in God's holy texts or what God is supposed to command, which is not based on unbiased judgment, experiential self-knowledge, self-transcendence and non-attachment, etc. There is no room for optimality in the case of a theistic belief.

Rubbish. IF there is a God (there is) then the Christian theist has the optimal position to gain further knowledge via insight and indeed wisdom.

Per below example:-

Two men, on par with intelligence and knowledge:
Man A = atheist
Man B = theist

Indeed the ONLY difference between the two with regard to their reasoning and pursuit of knowledge is that Man B understands that it is wise to believe that there is a God and live his life accordingly, knowing that there may be consequences beyond man's 'justice', indeed, there may be the POSSIBILITY of greater insight.

Which of the two men has the POTENTIAL for greater knowledge?

WHICH ONE IS THE WISER OF THE TWO?

Don't be too arrogant and shout 'Rubbish' too hastily since such 'Rubbish' is more applicable to theists.

Sure, just stop talking rubbish and I will oblige. (as in your next statement)

One thing you overlooked is the time factor and the potential of knowledge to infinity.

You do know that atheists believe you live one life don't you - not sure how infinity of knowledge is kindled there.

Past to Present
Man A = atheist - flexible and adaptive
Man B = theist - rigid and dogmatic to God's dictates

Man A = atheist - has made a binary choice where IF there is a God, he will receive no insight from IT.
Man B = theist - being Christian is simply the belief in the words and actions of Christ - where can one no longer be flexible and adaptive? To the contrary, once God introduces itself and does provide deep insight, further knowledge in the true pursuit of love of wisdom can be expanded upon, perhaps towards that 'infinity' you mentioned.

Why do you always feel the need to write an essay?

PS. Dogma is an interesting word. AM_GOD.

[Veritas Aequitas]

READ what I stated - I never stated that rationality defines wisdom!




Rubbish. IF there is a God (there is) then the Christian theist has the optimal position to gain further knowledge via insight and indeed wisdom.

Per below example:-

Two men, on par with intelligence and knowledge:
Man A = atheist
Man B = theist

Indeed the ONLY difference between the two with regard to their reasoning and pursuit of knowledge is that Man B understands that it is wise to believe that there is a God and live his life accordingly, knowing that there may be consequences beyond man's 'justice', indeed, there may be the POSSIBILITY of greater insight.

Which of the two men has the POTENTIAL for greater knowledge?

WHICH ONE IS THE WISER OF THE TWO?

Don't be too arrogant and shout 'Rubbish' too hastily since such 'Rubbish' is more applicable to theists.

Sure, just stop talking rubbish and I will oblige. (as in your next statement)

One thing you overlooked is the time factor and the potential of knowledge to infinity.

You do know that atheists believe you live one life don't you - not sure how infinity of knowledge is kindled there.

Past to Present
Man A = atheist - flexible and adaptive
Man B = theist - rigid and dogmatic to God's dictates

Man A = atheist - has made a binary choice where IF there is a God, he will receive no insight from IT.
Man B = theist - being Christian is simply the belief in the words and actions of Christ - where can one no longer be flexible and adaptive? To the contrary, once God introduces itself and does provide deep insight, further knowledge in the true pursuit of love of wisdom can be expanded upon, perhaps towards that 'infinity' you mentioned.

Why do you always feel the need to write an essay?

PS. Dogma is an interesting word. AM_GOD.

• John3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Just believe [pure blind faith] and one is guaranteed and saved from eternal hellfire.
In general and in this case, why should a theist be bothered with searching high and low for "limited" human knowledge?

What is most critical for a believer is to defend one's beliefs with tooth and nail, impose blasphemy laws to feel secure or kill those who threaten one's belief in the case of Islam.

[attofishpi]

Don't be too arrogant and shout 'Rubbish' too hastily since such 'Rubbish' is more applicable to theists.

Sure, just stop talking rubbish and I will oblige. (as in your next statement)

One thing you overlooked is the time factor and the potential of knowledge to infinity.

You do know that atheists believe you live one life don't you - not sure how infinity of knowledge is kindled there.

Past to Present
Man A = atheist - flexible and adaptive
Man B = theist - rigid and dogmatic to God's dictates

Man A = atheist - has made a binary choice where IF there is a God, he will receive no insight from IT.
Man B = theist - being Christian is simply the belief in the words and actions of Christ - where can one no longer be flexible and adaptive? To the contrary, once God introduces itself and does provide deep insight, further knowledge in the true pursuit of love of wisdom can be expanded upon, perhaps towards that 'infinity' you mentioned.

Why do you always feel the need to write an essay?

PS. Dogma is an interesting word. AM_GOD.

• John3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Just believe [pure blind faith] and one is guaranteed and saved from eternal hellfire.
In general and in this case, why should a theist be bothered with searching high and low for "limited" human knowledge?

Well surely that is what an atheist has succumbed to, cutting off the binary position that God insists upon. (to further ones knowledge)

[Dontaskme]

Well surely that is what an atheist has succumbed to, cutting off the binary position that God insists upon. (to further ones knowledge)

John3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

What does the ''John'' quote mean attofishpi ?

If whoever believes in Jesus will have eternal life? ..how does one understand ''eternal life'' as may be conceived or imagined to be a life in which one never dies...when we already know we die, even as we also know nothing of ''death'' in and of itself.

I'm asking you atto because you are more approachable than Veritas is, whom in my opinion is too choosy as to whom to discuss their personally created topics with...no offence Veritas.

.

[promethean75]

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

That's a very, very strange plotline tho. Immediately I'm wondering why an all powerful god would make it so he would wanna or havta give his only son up to Roman executioners (but get him back) if he ever wanted to prove his love for the world and give those capable of believing all this, a shot at eternal life.... whatever that is.

[promethean75]

It's weird and unnecessarily sadistic I think. One can only imagine a 'god' who doesn't have his shit together or a 'god' who has a morbid sense of how to use his power.

Seems to me there are other, easier ways to convey to and convince one's creation of one's existence than having your son executed.

[attofishpi]

Well surely that is what an atheist has succumbed to, cutting off the binary position that God insists upon. (to further ones knowledge)

John3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

What does the ''John'' quote mean attofishpi ?

If whoever believes in Jesus will have eternal life? ..how does one understand ''eternal life'' as may be conceived or imagined to be a life in which one never dies...when we already know we die, even as we also know nothing of ''death'' in and of itself.

Well, since being told a couple of things re my previous life via the sage, I think it means people should consider reincarnation - even when the body does fail. Since the sage appears to know me better than I know myself...I think the ultimate win to Christianity would be to live eternally (as the sages), without needing to have ones knowledge wiped each life, and have to learn all over again and have to suffer all over again.
To live on Earth in heaven, among kindred 'spirits' gaining knowledge and watching silly people play the game wrong.

[Dontaskme]

Well surely that is what an atheist has succumbed to, cutting off the binary position that God insists upon. (to further ones knowledge)

John3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

What does the ''John'' quote mean attofishpi ?

If whoever believes in Jesus will have eternal life? ..how does one understand ''eternal life'' as may be conceived or imagined to be a life in which one never dies...when we already know we die, even as we also know nothing of ''death'' in and of itself.

Well, since being told a couple of things re my previous life via the sage, I think it means people should consider reincarnation - even when the body does fail. Since the sage appears to know me better than I know myself...I think the ultimate win to Christianity would be to live eternally (as the sages), without needing to have ones knowledge wiped each life, and have to learn all over again and have to suffer all over again.
To live on Earth in heaven, among kindred 'spirits' gaining knowledge and watching silly people play the game wrong.

Thanks for your candid honesty atto...

Personally... All I know is that I know nothing of my conception, and will know nothing of my death. Everything in between conception and death is likened to a dream..since I have no knowledge of my conception nor will I have knowledge of my death.

During this inbetween conception and death is likened to a dream, where my beliefs have been a substitute for knowing....since I've always known... I do not know.

And that's the only knowledge I can be absolutely certain of as far as I am aware ...everything else is just pure speculation or wishful thinking.....thanks.


PS..in the dream it feels like I am a sentient living autonomous self-governing entity with the power to choose between two opposing options at will ..to either hate being alive...or love being alive, and even feeling like if I could choose to be alive, I would not choose it ever again... or I would choose to be alive over and over again,forever...because I love being alive...but these choices...I also know are not real, they are just ideas about who and what I am, within my particular dream story.

[Dontaskme]

It's weird and unnecessarily sadistic I think. One can only imagine a 'god' who doesn't have his shit together or a 'god' who has a morbid sense of how to use his power.

Seems to me there are other, easier ways to convey to and convince one's creation of one's existence than having your son executed.

You can only understand and be with your own thought stream.. the only reality that is genuine and real for you, and is all that really matters, because there is no other you, and so yours will always be a unique private reality that only you know...Everything else is just someone elses imagination...so it's best just to be true to your own self, and leave others to be their own self.

All I know is that I was born not knowing anything...but then had no other option but to take the shape of the thought stream that was already here, before I arrived on the scene... All who are alive, in essence, are just a vast open space of awareness in which multiple clouds of ''thought'' come streaming through us, from cradle to grave, thoughts which are infinite in variety...and that's all we can know, is our collective thoughts.

Personally...to me, most ''thoughts'' are just a poison we use to rationalise shit we don't understand so we think we do understand when we don't...especially the weird and bizarre scripture that's written in all the religious doctrines that ever was dreamed up using this thought stream, that seems to be a part of who we are... all to be taken with a pinch of salt of course.


Personally, I cannot imagine anything more sadistic and cruel than living forever...so thank the fuck in hell we do not.

I really like this quote...I resonate with it so much..

The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.

Erwin Schrodinger

Some ''thoughts'' really are vile poison ..and is why to grow in wisdom is when you are able to separate the wheat from the chaff....discernment is the key to knowing the whole and full truth of your being...which is not-knowing, and trusting only in that seamless flow of being.

[Dontaskme]

Well, since being told a couple of things re my previous life via the sage, I think it means people should consider reincarnation - even when the body does fail.

Since the sage appears to know me better than I know myself...I think the ultimate win to Christianity would be to live eternally (as the sages), without needing to have ones knowledge wiped each life, and have to learn all over again and have to suffer all over again.
To live on Earth in heaven, among kindred 'spirits' gaining knowledge and watching silly people play the game wrong.

Are you able to choose which country you will reincarnate into..Do you get to choose beforehand which country you are reincarnated in? or is the country in which you reincarnate in..just random?


.

[Dontaskme]

If it's religion, it's not philosophy. (It's superstition)
It it's philosophy, it's not religion. (It's reason)

Both are mostly nonsense, however.

Any form of HUMAN self-inquiry..can only be of a 'pure speculative' nature.
Our ideas are formed from the inability to NOT KNOW....then we call our speculation 'philosophy or religion'...which are basically the same idea insofar as the pursuit or interest in knowledge goes.
The pursuit of ''something'' is the retreat from our original starting block of NOT-KNOWING.

All human ''knowledge'' originates from one fundamental place - we ARE that place ..which is Never Not Here

[attofishpi]

Well, since being told a couple of things re my previous life via the sage, I think it means people should consider reincarnation - even when the body does fail.

Since the sage appears to know me better than I know myself...I think the ultimate win to Christianity would be to live eternally (as the sages), without needing to have ones knowledge wiped each life, and have to learn all over again and have to suffer all over again.
To live on Earth in heaven, among kindred 'spirits' gaining knowledge and watching silly people play the game wrong.

Are you able to choose which country you will reincarnate into..Do you get to choose beforehand which country you are reincarnated in? or is the country in which you reincarnate in..just random?

I think the country for reincarnation, like everything with this God entity is based on karma, your life decisions. Just a few months ago I was considering my next door neighbour - a real arsehole over the years, his wife left him a couple of years ago and I think he is either growing weed or actually might be into something a lot heavier. I've seen tradies screaming outside his gate demanding to be paid for work they have done.
When I was considering that since he has moved out (he still owns the house) that he is growing or making drugs in there - as part of a syndicate (so I will mind my own biz), and that he should reincarnate somewhere in Asia, the sage or God called out "Right then, so be it!" (or something akin to that), so I guess that's his destiny. (apologies if I am offending anyone born in Asia!)

So ya, play the game of life as Christ instructed.

[Dontaskme]

I think the country for reincarnation, like everything with this God entity is based on karma, your life decisions. Just a few months ago I was considering my next door neighbour - a real arsehole over the years, his wife left him a couple of years ago and I think he is either growing weed or actually might be into something a lot heavier. I've seen tradies screaming outside his gate demanding to be paid for work they have done.
When I was considering that since he has moved out (he still owns the house) that he is growing or making drugs in there - as part of a syndicate (so I will mind my own biz), and that he should reincarnate somewhere in Asia, the sage or God called out "Right then, so be it!" (or something akin to that), so I guess that's his destiny. (apologies if I am offending anyone born in Asia!)

So ya, play the game of life as Christ instructed.

Life is our only instructer/ teacher...

I do not think there's any requirement to give Life a royal title.

It's self-evident that in LIFE ..our experience of hate begets more hate - and our experience of love begets more love...that's self-evidently known in one's direct experience....In one's direct experience the nature of opposites become very apparent to us in an instant... if it hurts, don't go there...if it feels good, go there.

Life provides as a given the nature of opposites for every individual to taste... the proof is always in the pudding, knowledge is always self-evident...

So why does bad things happen to good people? ...was that their karma for being good?

And was it our karma to live for millions and millions of years wearing a dinosaur suit?