Yes Tell us how...even Darwin cannot prove how he was born...
I can question a man...but never question God....the ever omnipotent ONE.....

Madam and Kelot,
Are you guys sure you want to touch this question and are you confident that your reason/basis holds water? Man, aren't we all tired of this? Mang Tonio raised this question before in the atheism thread and it was critically discussed there. Guys, you answered the initial question if you believe in God or not. You said yes. Then the follow up question inquired about your basis for your answer. Don't you guys realize that this is by faith? I ask again, are you sure you want to touch this question and are you confident that your reason/basis holds water? If I debunk your reason, would you abandon your faith? Or should we just respect our respective answers and try not to assert that your (Christians/theists) own beliefs is right and the other guy's (nontheists) belief is wrong?

*Sigh* Must....resist....temptation. Hit delete! Hit delete! hahaha

Eraserheads,
Dude, the topic is always interesting. But I think you may be in danger of playing with fire here. Such questions/topics are flame baiters. You strike me as a nontheist as well. If you are, here is a nickel's worth of free advice, theists and nontheists live in different antithetical epistemological worlds! They speak the language of faith, we speak the language of reason. We have to consider their perspectives as well by putting ourselves in their shoes once in a while.

Upon discussion with theists, I came to realize their perspectives better and I came to respect their thoughts more. I no longer have big problems with faith. But my concern is how faith and reason were made to quarrel with each other as if one is wrong and the other is not which leads us to this trap, this conflict in the battlegrounds of dualism. Ask yourself, is it reasonable for man to use reason as the ONLY means to know God? Is it also reasonable to use faith as the other ONLY means to know Him? If so, then both parties would be equally guilty of absolutism and exclusivism. There has to be another way other than faith vs. reason. We have to appeal to our common ground. Before Madam and Kelot ever became Christians and before we became nontheists we were all first Humans. That is our common core. Is a Christian baby worth more than a Hindu infant? Is a Muslim mother worth more than an atheist mother? God is not defined by one religion or belief system alone, but rather, God is defined in our human heart. Socrates taught us to "know thyself". If we know ourselves and we know what is in our hearts, then knowing God will follow.

Take care, guys!

Is this a threat or what? Are you into recruiting or brainwashing?

Are you sure you didn't quote from the book or some documents? Just asking.

Basta sagutin mo ang itinatanong ko at pwede pakitagalog.

A threat? Where did that come from? Recruiting? Recruit into what? Brainwashing? Oh give me a break! hahaha Tell me, do you ever encounter questions from religious groups asking “Have you been saved”? Have you encountered any statements asserting religion X (or deity X) is the one true religion (deity) because it is going to “save” one’s soul? That this deity is the “Truth”, the “Way”, and the “Life”? That you must believe in this deity in order to be “saved”? Now do you know of a lot of nontheists assert that nontheism is the Way, the Truth, and the Life? That there are a lot more joys and happiness to nontheism and it is in one's best interest to be a nontheist? You ask about about recruiting and brainwashing? Come on, get real!

Are you sure you are just asking? Anyway, I get ideas from books, reading materials, from discussions with others, etc. I read, I rationalize things, I use the things I learn, and I substantiate my statements with what I have learned. Now does that satisfy your query? By using things I have learned, does that necessarily discredit my beliefs? Tell me, are mere opinions worth more to you? To say things without substance, wouldn’t that be just blowing hot air? How much better is using verses in the bible in statements than with using ideas from books, documents, etc.?

Upon my encounters with reading materials and discsussions, like I said, I have come to understand theist's perspectives and have more respect to their beliefs. A fellow forumer here, justice league, for instance, is a theist who I admire because he can substantiate his claims. Actually, I have recently been in a discussion with a very sensible theist (a bible scholar) who got me to look at Christianity in a better light. So like I said, I have no big problems with the issue of faith anymore. My concern now is the reason why faith and reason are so much at odds with one another. There has to be a better way to know God. I encountered an argument for God that appealed to me. The argument suggests that God is defined in our hearts. This definition does not subscribe to absolutism or exclusivism. So now I have a change of heart when it comes to God. I still am not convinced in the traditional definition of God being an entity that is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. But I do believe now that God is what our hearts tell what or who God is after knowing ourselves. That God transcends religion (be it Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hindu, Buddhism, Wicca, etc), dogma, or creed.

So since you are now in the fray, do you believe in God? Why or why not? If you believe in God, how do you define this god you believe in and why do you choose this particular god over other "gods"?

Okay, susubukan ko.

Ang original na tanong ay “Do you believe in God?”, dba? Ngayon ang mensahe ng tanong mo sa mga hindi naniniwala sa Dios, “Kung walang Dios, paano kami lumitaw ng walang lumilikha sa amin?” Hindi mo ba napapansin ang tanong mo? Ina-assume or assert mo na kaagad na Dios talaga ang lumikha sa amin or sa lahat! Hindi pa naman nae-establish yun, dba? Base lang sa paniniwala mo na Dios ang lumikha o na may Dios nga. Ang tanong mo kasi, maihahalintulad sa isang suspect na ini-interrogate ng pulis ng tanong na “Saan mo tinago ang ninakaw mong singsing?” Suspect pa lang yung tao, hindi pa napapatunayan na nagnakaw nga siya ng singsing, pero ang tanong ay naglalaman na guilty na agad yung suspect. Ngayon, paano mo sasagutin ang mga ganyang tanong?

May sinabi ba kami na walang lumikha sa ating lahat? Mayroon ngang lumikha o nakalikha sa atin, pero nangangahulugan ba na “Dios” iyon? Kung lahat ng bagay ay may lumikha, sino ang lumikha sa Dios?

Siguro mas magandang tanong ay "May lumikha ba sa atin?" Ang sagot ko, oo, mga magulang natin. Tapos ang susunod na tanong ay "Dios ba ang lumikha sa ating lahat?" Ang sagot ko: "Hindi ko alam". Kung ikaw ang tatanungin, malamg ang sagot mo ay "Oo, ang Dios ang lumikha sa ating lahat". Ngayon, ano ang batayan mo sa ganyang sagot? Ito ba ay dahil lahat ng bagay ay may lumikha? Kung ganoon, paano nito napapatunayan na Dios nga ang lumikha? Nasaan ang batayan na nagtuturo na ang Dios nga ang lumikha? At kahit ilang beses mo pang sabihin sa sarili mo na lahat ng bagay ay may lumikha at ang Dios ang lumikha ng lahat ng bagay, sino ang lumikha sa Dios?

Hindi ba masasagot mo lang ito sa iyong pananampalataya sa Kanya? Dahil iyon ang iyong paniniwala? Kaya nga sinabi ko kay Eraserheads na dapat namin intindihin kayong mga naniniwala sa Dios at sinuggest ko sa inyo ni Kelot na irespeto na lang natin ang ating mga paniniwala, dahil dito rin naman mapupunta ulit ang pagtatalo, hindi ba?

Batayan Ko Bible, at sa Bible ang God ay walang Beginning at Walng End, kaya nga Diyos e,
pero another thing, if you don't believe in the Bible, walang usapin o pagtatalo dito, at least may batayan ako o kami. Kaysa sa opinyon lamang na batayan ang sariling pagiisip.

Anyway, I got your point, so OK na. Sabi mo nga irespeto na lang natin ang ating paniniwala, so, this will put a period on this.

Madam, hindi lahat ng nontheist na kagaya ko ay hindi naniniwala sa bibliya. Naniniwala ako sa ilang katotohanang nakasulat dito, tulad ng pagmamahal sa kapwa tao at sa mga iba pang magandang aral na turo rito. Pero sa ngayon, hindi pa rin ako kumbinsido sa depinisyon ng Dios na sinabi mo. Isang bagay na walang beginning at walang end? Very strange yata yang depinisyon na yan, paano kaya natin masusuri ang katotohanan diyan? Paano natin mapapatunayan na totoo ngang walang pinagmulan o katapusan ang Dios? Anyway, sa palagay ko subjective ito. Kung ganun, eh tama nga, dapat walang pagtatalo rito. Tungkol naman sa batayan, sige, kung bibliya ang batayan mo rito, good for you. Pero sana naman, huwag kang maghusga ng sariling pagiisip ko lamang ang batayan ko at mga tulad ko dahil hindi ako napunta rito sa ganitong paniniwala mula lamang sa opinion ko. Dati rin akong naniwala sa paniniwala mo ngayon. Pero sa mga napag-aralan ko mula sa iba’t-ibang paniniwala, napunta ako sa kinalalagyan ko ngayon. Malay natin, magbalik ang paniniwala ko sa dios ninyo (Christianity), hindi ba? Mayroon din kaming batayan na hindi lamang galing sa sarili namin.

Maraming salamat. Actually, ayaw ko na ngang makipagtalo sana eh. Kasi, medyo sawa na rin ako dahil ilang beses ko nang pinagdaanan ito. Sabi ko nga kay Eraserheads na ang mga ganitong topic ay may tendency na maging “flame-baiters”. Ang pagkakamali ko, ay kumagat ulit ako. Pasensya na. Sige, susubukan kong huwag nang ulitin. Salamat ulit sa pagintindi.

Sabi ni Labguy:

[May sinabi ba kami na walang lumikha sa ating lahat? Mayroon ngang lumikha o nakalikha sa atin, pero nangangahulugan ba na “Dios” iyon?]

Naniniwala ka pala sa depinisyon niya (lumikha sa ating lahat), pero di ka naniniwala sa may ari ng depinisyong ginamit mo. Sa madaling salita yung pinaniniwalaan mong lumikha sa iyo, iyon po ay ang iyong Diyos maging ano man ang kalagayan niya.

Sabi ni Labguy:

[Kung lahat ng bagay ay may lumikha, sino ang lumikha sa Dios?]

Hindi po isang bagay ang Diyos. Ang Diyos po ay Diyos.

Salamat.

naniniwala ako sa dyos.. pero in doubt ako sa religion.

Walang highblood dito...mga opinyon lang ng lahat..

max,

Hindi na lang ako magre-react sa sinabi mo ha? Baka kasi lumala ito. Kung iyan ang sa tingin mo ang tamang depinisyon ng Dios, sige, malaya kang paniwalaan iyan.

Salamat din!

I agree. After further searches and discussions with theists, I now seriously consider dios. But I am not yet convinced in the traditional religious definition of dios. Right now, this strikes me as very subjective. Maxtomax actually has a good point when he said “…yun po ang dios maging ano man ang kalagayan niya”. And since sabi rin niya na ang dios ay hindi bagay, then dios can be anything. Perhaps an event in the cosmos, perhaps dios as described by pagans, dios ng Hudyo at Kristyano at Muslim, dios ng mga Zoroasterians, depende kung paano ipipinta ang dios sa puso at isip ng tao.

Now regarding religion, well yes, I also have doubts in religion. However, I don’t think it is religion per se that has problems. Just like how I disagree that money per se is evil. It is the use of money that has the potential issues, it is the use of religion that has the potential issues as well. I think things start to have some problems when religion has become institutionalized, organized, and dogmatized. Kasi when that happens, boundaries tend to develop that identify it. It’ll be Religion X against what is not Religion X, a Baptist against what is not a Baptist (e.g. Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Sunni Muslim, etc.). Nagiging parang bakod tuloy itong mga boundaries na ito dahil ang nangyayari, yung mga nasa loob ng fences ay naniniwala na sila ang may katotohanan at yung mga nasa labas ng bakod nila ay mali. Ang nakakalungkot dito, nagkakaroon tuloy ng tendency na kailanganing i-defend yung mga fences (actually fortress na nga) nila sa mga taong may salungat na paniniwala or “enemies” of their belief. Nagkakaroon tuloy ng mga “Crusades”, “Jihads”, “Missions”, etc. Anyway, here is a parable I came across at which I find very interesting, and entertaining as well:

Ang nangyayari kasi ay nalululon ang mga relihiyoso sa “Exclusivism". Heto ang tingin kong isa sa malaking sanhi ng problema. Yung mga tipong Religion X says "God is this and that", then Religion Y says "No, God is this and that", then Religion Z says "You're both wrong! God is this and that". Many Christians, for instance, claim that Christianity has exclusive rights to truth. But within the Christian circle itself, this problem is very evident as each sect claims to have exclusive rights to truth as well. Sometimes what happens is, if Christian group X disagrees with what Christian group Y says, an accusation that Christian group Y are not "true" Christians, is made. So yes, exclusivism is very much an issue.

John 14:6 states the famous “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” words supposedly spoken by Christ. With that in mind, a good question to ponder on is, is this exclusivity something Jesus actually taught or is it a notion presented later by His followers?

The context of the verse does not strike me as directly saying that one must worship or believe in Jesus Christ in order to go to heaven. One way to interpret this is to say that we just need to live a “Christ-like” life in order to go to heaven. So with that, I believe that regardless of one’s religion or belief, living a “Christ-like” life is the key as oppose to strictly believing in Jesus Christ (and accepting Him as a “personal Lord and Saviour”). The serial killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, believed in Jesus Christ as his “personal Lord and Saviour”. With this belief in Jesus Christ, would that mean he is in a better light than, let’s say, Carl Sagan (a nontheist), or even Mahatma Gandhi (a Hindu)? If the criteria to meet in entering the pearly gates of heaven is merely the acceptance of Jesus Christ as “personal Lord and Saviour”, or merely to be a member of the “Christian” religion, then I find it really dubious. It strips meaning or significance to living the “Christ-like” life.

Going back to John 14:6: “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life”, I for one am skeptical that Jesus really uttered those words. Maybe the writer was just in awe of this man that he must have put these grandiose claims in His mouth. Reading the Gospel according to John really gives us more of the writer’s insights than about the historical Jesus.

A little sidenote: The Christian philosopher, John Hick, explained how the famous “I am” lines are metaphorical rather than literal.

The way I see it, I think it is just sad to see that so many Christians think that the Christian belief/religion alone holds exclusive rights to "The Way, The Truth, and The Life". Assuming that Christ said those words, he may have meant something else - maybe it's not really His Self that He was referring to as "The Way, The Truth, and The Life", but rather, the message of the ethics He taught. And these ethics, regardless of who said those ethics, be it Gautama Buddha, Lao Tzu, Confucious, Muhammad, or whoever, the ethics themselves are "The Way, The Truth, and The Life". A “Christ-like” life, taking the eight-fold path to Nirvana, living the good life according to the Tao (I-Ching), etc. – these are “ways”, “truths”, and “ways of life”.

Anyway, going back to religious organizations/institutions, yung mga tao namang hindi miyembro ng kung ano mang organization or relihiyon, to them there are no boundaries. They are seekers who don’t recognize boundaries set by organized religions where truth supposedly is found. These guys are always on a journey to understand the world. For these guys, truth can be found in a lot of places, not just a particular region. For them they know that they do not know everything yet and they are in a constant journey picking up wisdom, knowledge, and truth in the places they visit. This certainly appeals to me at the moment, but I do realize that this is unimaginable to others belonging in fenced regions.

With that, all I can do is continue on my journey, continue to know more about the world and about myself, and perhaps one day, to know God.

Everyone, it has been a pleasure. If I hurt anyone's feelings, I ask for forgiveness. I think I'll move on and charge my time spent at PTF to experience. I not only feel unwelcome here but I feel that I have caused a lot of animosity here as well, something that is not my intention. My departure, I'm sure, would call for a party or a celebration here. Perhaps this is one call for celebration in the approaching Oplan 51 or any other EBs to come. hehehe

Saint Francis once prayed: "Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and, the wisdom to know the difference."

A friend (a theist who I encountered and admire) told me that the prayer was an acceptance of certain realities perceived by men to be true and having the wisdom to differentiate the essence of such perceptions. St. Francis became brother to all men and things living and nonliving, knowing that all matter does not matter at all, for what matters is oneness with the self. He had conquered that thought system which perceived man as separated from God and while being alive, similar to the mantras of Buddhism, he saw the image of God in himself and everything around him.

Shouldn't Christianity be that way? Shouldn't all religions be that way? Don’t we all seek to be that way, regardless of what or who we believe in?

Have a good life, everyone!

I won't be celebrating!

A teacher once said "it is when the question arise that we seek an or the answer". Or words to that effect. This doesn't mean I enjoyed every question thrown at me in my entire life or answering it back.

As a Catholic; I was once taught that Jesus Christ after his physical death went to hell and limbo and released all the souls (or the goods one anyway who could not go to heaven because we could not inherit heaven because of the original sin) so they can ascend to heaven.

Hebrew, Jew, Christian, etc.; I know there is the First commandment but I don't think that God would be so narrowminded.


To Labguy.

Hope you can read this- Glad to know that you're considering some aspects of God. In our brief encounter here, I know you are neither blessed nor cursed. If ever you become one, (just something about reason vs. something not reasonable) an item of reason that will be hard to overcome is the reasoning that no 2 matter can occupy the same space.

Hope you reconsider to stay but if not then good luck and farewell.

I sometimes forget to pray (specially when I'm real tired). But I made my own prayer dealing with the ends of prayer. Adoration, thanksgiving, etc. and I make it a point to pray for "all the souls whether living or dead". So you're already included.

hi guys,

just a quick browse, sorry, I didn't have a chance to visit here again. i didn't read all the thread here lately, busy for my coming trip, i just have something to say......

I agree with Labguy, let us settle this down to our basis of our beliefs, we already touch this issue before, it's going back and forth again.

As discussed this before, one's belief is either based on faith/trust or REASons. It is not easy to come into terms to either deny or agree with each other because we don't have a common ground.

Whatever we choose to believe, up until now, noone can prove who holds the truth.

what is the definition of "believe"? It is an acceptance of truth, whether it is factual, that is different from the truth or reality. We already discussed this on other thread.

The truth or reality can be perceived as true by the beholder. Good example, one will plea guilty or not guilty, becuase,this is what he believe and it is true to her/him, but the reality is different from the true event that had happened.

As an agnostic, I beleive that there is a creator of everything, again, that creator may or may not be a God/deity/theist after all. I don't limit myself to any possibilities.
What holds for me is the REASONS that satisfy my limited six senses as of now is the "law of cause and effect". A great philosopher said that the cause of everything is what we called "GOD".

All the best! Forumers, i try to be back on October after holiday.