Jesus Was A Liberal!

I see what your saying, and I knew all about that, but my point is this: following what somebody else did to reach your own enlightenment, in my opinion, defeats the purpose. Buddha reached enlightenment because he did his own thing. I know thats what Buddha tought, as, in my opinion, was what Jesus tought, but most westerners (as thats all Im exposed to...) want a set system to follow, its what we've been doing for thousands of years. And I know what your saying about the ism, and thats pretty much who I'm talking about. Reading quotes from siddartha and following them to the T is ridiculous, in my opinion. And I know that asians approach it much different than dumb college kids, but you have to admit, it IS out there. And its growing in numbers.

nice diligence, welcome to the mine of the mind, as in quarry or source material, not mine vs yours.
In the spirit of increasing intolerance, taking one sentence out of context and responding with vehement negative personal response is in itself intolerant.
Let’s keep pointing at the truth, at least ideally……….

More people who think Jesus was a liberal: http://www.prayforreason.org/

which, it seems, he was

You're missing the point again. The issue is the way in which science gains knowledge, not the end results which will change with technology etc. The point is the process of scientific understanding starts by asking questions, religion starts with the answer. There is a chasm of a difference.

Hope that finally clears that one up.

sorry gramsci, i guess while obtaining my master's degree in biochem years ago i missed that point. you know there have been many well known intellectuals,scientists and philosphers throughout the history of the world who all had a the belief in a higher being. i base my own belief on my own personal experiences in my life i have encountered.

however it is enjoyable to read all the pseudo-intellects here on sg give out lessons in omnipotence.

Second sentence: true.

First sentence: gives you no special insight into the existence of any higher being.

Back to square zero we go.

Good night all.

sleep well.

oh yeah, the first sentence is in response to gramsci. but knowing how most liberals take things out of context, i'll leave it at that.

[Edited on Aug 01, 2004 by dragonreborn]

Maybe you shouldn't use phrases like "smell their being" if you wish to be taken seriously. It's nice you have an M Sci but you might note that some of the rest of us here have a Master's as well, myself included. You also might have read some of my earlier posts on this thread rather than letting your ego get carried away and going for the personal insult. Hardly a very Christian thing to do ;-)

Yes many "well known intellectuals, scientists and philosophers throughout the history of the world" have used the phrase "God" that doesn't make them right. You might also note -as I said earlier and you failed to bother reading- that "God" is often used as a metaphor by scientists for the "unknowable".

As I said "I don’t mean to detract from your life experiences, but there is no “miracle of life” its just simple biology", and my statement stands and since you have a M Sci in Biochemistry I can’t see why you should disagree with me.

[Edited on Aug 01, 2004 by gramsci]

hey i realize it is simple biology. sperm meets ova etc....... however there has been one experience in my life as i have grown older that really changed how i view things and that is the birth of my children. so by saying smell their being is an experience that has had a tremendous effect on my life. 10 years ago i looked at kids as just seeds of the next generation of humans, our evolution just prospering more and more. it is a little different when it becomes a personal experience.

That's fine, but you implied I was being a pseudo-intellectual -you did use this phrase replying to me-, which is incorrect. As a scientist you should also accept that your personal experience, however empowering and magical that may seem to you, is not the foundation of sound research in any field other than the social sciences.

[Edited on Aug 01, 2004 by gramsci]

Here's a post from another board should give the angle of my general position on Humanism vs Faith:

well said, hombre.

The key factor in all spiritual belief systems is that the human nervous system can process them. What is so appealling about them is that they have a jumping point that your nervous system can deal with and is attracted to. They are all multi-layered systems of trigger-mechanisms that your brain and body can process. They are all time-tested pathes that seem to fill the void of that missing a "sense of purpose" we all seem to have. How fucking powerful is that? Many times "religon" is the catalyst for great accomplishments. Look all around you. Although potentially helpful and pleasurable though, they are all potentially addicting and dangerous, like any other drug. And worst of all, THEY CAN BE USED TO MANIPULATE YOU! I guess what I'm saying is that I think religon has alot to do with psychology and biology. Regardless of whether or not "god" exists, we as a species feel obliged to have one. It's a needy thing. Like a hobby you're hung up on.

You've been listening to too much Tool

Christ was a man. See how they covered all the bases? His good points are our good points. This is sort of like the Buddha nature.

What it also is, is just BEING OK W/ YOURSELF . You can't be ok w/ the world unless you're ok w/ yourself. See how simple that is? Once you've got that down, you can live your life the "right" way. But if you needed god to do this for you, I guess you owe "him" alot & you'd better follow "his" orders, or else. His "servents" will "help" you if you "need them".

That, unfortunately, is one of the things I dont like about religion. It seems like it almost preaches that if you fuck up, its ok, which I agree with, but it also preaches that you dont need to improve your life, God has a plan, so its ok to be lazy and blame shit on "but destiny is out of my hands". Just my take on it.

the way i look at it is, we as humans just cant rest until we know all the answers... certain religions that defined the begining were no different than our scientists today who came up with the big bang theory.... we just cant except the fact .. that we dont know, and never will...probly hehe....then other religions that define the afterlife is just our need to explain the unknown again... something science just passes off as were fertalizer. But whatever it is or isnt well never really know the answer to that either.....again probly... but as far as practicing a religion or beleiving in a god... wether i beleive in it or not... more power to the people who do... so they live their lives doing what they beleive is "the right thing" or "gods will" which USUALLY entails helping others and some form morals and standards. so whats the worse case scenario... they die and they lead what they thought to be a meaningful existance for nothing... oh well... better then living a life you didnt beleive stood for anything... and best case scenario.. in some way what they beleive is right... and they go to wherever they beleive they should...

moral...........to each his own, cant hurt, and "god's will be done"

have you just never seen proof that he existed and are assuming because you have no knowlage of it, it cannot therefore exist? i have seen from many different sources(as, i get the impression, have many on this board) that he did exist as a historical character.

as for no proof of the supernatural there are many things that have happened that have no reasnable explanation within science, unless they have all been faked e.g. the stigmata(ok a lot of these HAVE been faked, but come on all of them?), various paintings/statues that have been seen to bleed.
What about lourds in southern france? sic people have visited there and actually been cured, can this be a big hoax? people cured by blind faith? really healthy drinking water? seriousley, crippled people have been able to walk without sticks after visiting there. now im not saying that this is the work of god, im not saying it isn't but its definately not explainable, is it?
also the process of cannonisation(shit hpe thats the right word!), there has to be EVIDENCE of miracles in order for someone to become a saint. again, just because you havent seen this evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist. i mean its possible that millions of people are being hoaxed but is it that likely?

ok this has turned into a rant and im sounding like an ass-hole, but im just trying to make the point that just because something hasn't been proven to you dosen't mean there is no proof.
im not someone who believes this stuff but i do think there is more to life than we're fully aware of. its sad to just dismiss life as meaningless and devoid of anything supernatural

P.S. read PREACHER by garth ennis, its a fantastic take on religion.

Bwahahaha!

God: But this is my creation!

Saint of Killers: It outgrew you.