87 replies to this topic

[Luckee]

I know what you're saying, but I'm not sure how accurate it is... obviously if you punch someone in the face it's going to hurt, because that's something physical ...but what about the non-physical? If God had only created good, then would we as humans appreciate that? If God did not allow evil, then would we still turn to Him and seek a relationship with Him, or would we just go on living not caring about anything. It's human nature, isn't it? When things are going good we forget about God, but when things are bad we become devout believers. I don't know, it's questions like this which interest me, but I guess there is no definitive answer.

Where did you get that idea? I hear allot of Muslim say that "too much good will make you forget about God" haha. It is you who forgets about God not the good things in your life! You choose to be distracted by it, it does not choose to distract you! When you choose to forget about God that is when the Hell appears and your task is to remember Him. The more often you forget, the more opportunities to practice remembrance, even under the most distracting conditions. So that you may be guided by His Will under all conditions. Planet earth is in that sense a very distracting reality to live in, thus the rewards for remembering God will be Great in the after life where everything is less distracting and less limiting.

I do understand that a temporary Hell may be needed to purify your soul after this life. To let go of pain and remember God again. I don't see how that will take a long time, thus I believe that eternal time in Hell simply means that there is allot of distraction and it will seem to trap you in the moment of timelessness, yet you are freed from the illusion that your suffering in Hell is eternal whenever you remember that God is the only eternity and unchanging there is.

This is how I view it. The eternal time in Hell is not implying its length, since eternal time has no length to it, but implying its intensity. The acceleration of suffering and the acceleration of the acceleration even.

Or what I have personally always believed:
I feel like Hell or Heaven reflects our own soul in the moment of death. Some people will just become afraid of God and continue to seek distraction by voluntarily going to Hell, because they fear the ultimate truth. I don't think God will force anyone to live in Hell forever. I think that it is your soul who accepts God as being the most scary idea and seek distraction in Hell from the truth. "Rather an eternity in Hell then one moment of facing the ultimate truth."

Edited by Luckee, 04 January 2012 - 01:37 AM.

[the sad clown]

Not all people find pain unpleasant. It can be addicting even. For example, spicy food. Or victim behaviour that keeps you in sadness and pain. Behaving like a victim can be addictive. The pain becomes something you crave. Some people cut themselves to feel alive.

I don't think chocolate tastes so good. Not all chocolate atleast. I've recently tasted a chocolate that tasted so good, the other chocolate I used to eat I no longer feel taste so good anymore.

I can appreciate how the incidentals of my examples have distracted you, nevertheless, the essential core of what I was saying still stands. It doesn't really matter if you can find individuals that lie outside of the norm and enjoy things that others may not. They still have things they find innately pleasant and unpleasant, without any need for a comparison to be made. It is inconsequential to this claim whether you like chocolate or not. It was an illustrative example, and not an essential part of the argument. It is a fundamental of human biology that there are things that are preferred and things that are avoided.

[the sad clown]

Allot of people that call them selves atheist are actually believers. They just can't accept that God is some person or thing.

So what, I wasn't talking about those people.

Saying that God is "not" is actually the same in faith as saying that God is someone or something. Atheist say "he exist not" yet that is also some sort of existance you see? There is no place for "not" in non-existance.

Don't confuse language with ontology. Saying something is not is not the same as saying that something is. If I say that Santa Clause is not, that the Tooth Fairy is not, that the Easter Bunny is not, that Leprechauns are not, it is not the same as saying that they are something. No existence should be assumed by such a statement, and it would be a fallacy (the same sort of fallacy I just warned you about assuming ontological import in the grammatical structure of language).

Atheist who jump from one truth to the next are obviously in search for higher truth and ultimate truth that is God. If they believed not in such a God, what is the point to their search? They would not be searching.

Atheists aren't jumping from one truth to the next, nor are they searching for a higher truth or ultimate truth. I think you are uninformed about what they are searching for, if they are in fact searching for anything. Instead of just assuming what you wish, why not just ask an atheist what they are searching for, and if in fact they are even searching for anything.

An atheist is not without God. Most atheist practice idolatry, placing the pain or pleasure or physical as highest truth and thinking that it is the unchanging truth when in fact they just forgot that it is not the unchanging truth in front of them. It is the changing truth. Everything changes, thus nothing is God. What I've been told is that Muslims call the ultimate truth Allah because this name has been revealed to them. Whatever they call Him, Muslims are steadfast in recognizing the changing nature of our reality and steadfast in remembering the unchanging existance of Allah. This is dedication and diligence of Muslims in my opinion.

Two problems with this. First, you said that the ultimate suffering was denying God's existence was the greatest suffering, not the absence of God. These are two different things. And second, you continue to happily make uninformed assumptions about atheists and then continue to build your esoteric theories on these ideas without ever stopping to check the veracity of them. Your little theories, to borrow a Biblical metaphor, are built upon the sand. So let me help you clear away a little of this sand so that you can find a surer footing for your prognosticating. Many atheists don't believe in a higher truth or an unchanging truth or an ultimate truth. These are all the purvey of religious truths and religious claims to objective truth. They aren't actually believers who are just having problems with anthropomorphism or the like. Atheists are not united by the idea that pain or pleasure is a higher truth. Some indeed might view hedonism as their guiding principle, but this is merely one of many ways atheists can and do structure their lives. If you would like, you may ask me any question you would like about the subject, although of course I will only be able to answer for myself. I even have an active thread here for just such a purpose: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?showtopic=732760.html&"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?showtopic=732760.html&[/url]

[the sad clown]

Where did you get that idea? I hear allot of Muslim say that "too much good will make you forget about God" haha. It is you who forgets about God not the good things in your life! You choose to be distracted by it, it does not choose to distract you!

How is that different than what he said?

I do understand that a temporary Hell may be needed to purify your soul after this life.

That is your concept of hell, not Islam's. Islam understands hell as punishment and not as purification.

This is how I view it.

And yet the question you asked was not how you view it, but how it is understood in Islam.

[Luckee]

And yet the question you asked was not how you view it, but how it is understood in Islam.

Stating so that I may learn how Islam differs in their view to mine. Ofcourse there are many diffrent perspectives in Islam. I just like to discuss this to see if I can find the most common believes in Islam about this subject. This is indeed my goal.

I find that you are a very realisitc and straight to the point, you raise my curiosity. Do you have believes? I'm curious about your view on believes. Do you consider yourself to believe in nothing or something or everything or do you not believe? Just a personal question. How would you respond if someone asked you "what do you believe in?". If you are willing to share it, I would love to know it. Even if you think the question is dumb or something, hehe.

[the sad clown]

Stating so that I may learn how Islam differs in their view to mine. Of course there are many different perspectives in Islam. I just like to discuss this to see if I can find the most common believes in Islam about this subject. This is indeed my goal.

Then why not challenge the statements here with these legitimate perspectives in Islam, instead of constantly wondering why Islam as described by the members here doesn't line up with your views? Of course it doesn't line up with your views. If it did, you'd likely be Muslim.

I find that you are a very realisitc and straight to the point, you raise my curiosity. Do you have believes? I'm curious about your view on believes. Do you consider yourself to believe in nothing or something or everything or do you not believe? Just a personal question. How would you respond if someone asked you "what do you believe in?". If you are willing to share it, I would love to know it. Even if you think the question is dumb or something, hehe.

Yes, I have beliefs. I believe many things on many levels. I believe in the keyboard beneath my hands. I believe that this keyboard is composed of various parts made from plastic, metals, and rare earth elements necessary for electronic devices. I believe that these parts are composed of various molecules that are themselves composed of atoms. And these atoms are made up of various sub-atomic particles that can be further divided. I believe each of these is true of what is currently beneath my fingers as I type this post. My answer to "what do you believe in?" would be to ask "about what?". My beliefs are not monolithic nor are they united by any central concept. Thus, without additional clarification into the frame of reference implicit in the question it would be difficult, if not impossible for me to answer. I would merely flail about trying to guess at what the questioner was hoping to discover.

[Luckee]

So what, I wasn't talking about those people.
Don't confuse language with ontology. Saying something is not is not the same as saying that something is. If I say that Santa Clause is not, that the Tooth Fairy is not, that the Easter Bunny is not, that Leprechauns are not, it is not the same as saying that they are something. No existence should be assumed by such a statement, and it would be a fallacy (the same sort of fallacy I just warned you about assuming ontological import in the grammatical structure of language).

Wow, thank for responses.

Ok maybe my perspective is so diffrent its not easy for me to reach your level of understanding or to easily understand your perspective...

When someone says "santa claus does exist" i experience it diffrently from someone saying "santa claus exists". One seems to deny other allow.

The cause or intention behind the words differ. But their effect seems to be exactly the same. Both are equally contributing to the existance of santa claus. One is contributing by denying santa clause the other by allowing santa claus. Santa claus exists in both realities. The realities are essentially of equal vibration.

[the sad clown]

When someone says "santa claus does exist" i experience it diffrently from someone saying "santa claus exists". One seems to deny other allow.

The cause or intention behind the words differ. But their effect seems to be exactly the same. Both are equally contributing to the existance of santa claus. One is contributing by denying santa clause the other by allowing santa claus. Santa claus exists in both realities. The realities are essentially of equal vibration.

The effect of the two statements "Santa clause exists" and "Santa clause does not exist" are not the same at all. One claims that we can locate Santa Clause in space and time, where as the other denies that this is possible. There is no existence in the second statement for Santa Clause.

[Luckee]

Then why not challenge the statements here with these legitimate perspectives in Islam, instead of constantly wondering why Islam as described by the members here doesn't line up with your views? Of course it doesn't line up with your views. If it did, you'd likely be Muslim.
Yes, I have beliefs. I believe many things on many levels. I believe in the keyboard beneath my hands. I believe that this keyboard is composed of various parts made from plastic, metals, and rare earth elements necessary for electronic devices. I believe that these parts are composed of various molecules that are themselves composed of atoms. And these atoms are made up of various sub-atomic particles that can be further divided. I believe each of these is true of what is currently beneath my fingers as I type this post. My answer to "what do you believe in?" would be to ask "about what?". My beliefs are not monolithic nor are they united by any central concept. Thus, without additional clarification into the frame of reference implicit in the question it would be difficult, if not impossible for me to answer. I would merely flail about trying to guess at what the questioner was hoping to discover.

I don't desire to follow Islam or call my self a Muslim at the moment. I have just gained interest in Islam and also people who know allot about it.

Ok, stupid question. We all have believes indeed. What do you believe in most strongly? If you do believe stronger in certain things then others. What idea brings up the strongest emotion in you? What idea do you value most in life? Do you also change what idea you value more any given moment?

For example, the idea I value most currently is that I keep forgetting God. I always feel the failure in trying to remember. This is currently the idea I value most. No idea why, but I might wanna value something else, hehe. Just giving an example.

Edited by Luckee, 04 January 2012 - 03:47 AM.

[the sad clown]

Ok, stupid question. We all have believes indeed. What do you believe in most strongly? If you do believe stronger in certain things then others. What idea brings up the strongest emotion in you? What idea do you value most in life?

I don't know. I don't really think of my beliefs in those terms, of what I believe in most strongly or have the strongest emotional attachment to. I suppose that is because, as I said earlier, I don't have a unifying or central concept. I do have beliefs that I feel more certain about than other beliefs, but that doesn't really carry the sort of emotional weight you seem to be referring to. An example. I am pretty confident that the language I am using in this post is English. You would have a very difficult time dissuading me of this belief. However, do I feel any emotion about it? No, not really. Thus, I hold this belief quite strongly, but without much emotion.

Which isn't to say that I don't also have emotional attachments to certain ideas. I feel that the wanton destruction of what I perceive to be innocent lives to be particularly egregious. But this emotion has more to do with my ability to imagine myself in such a situation and the emotions that I would experience if something like that occurred around me than with the particular idea itself. I suppose, if you wished me to identify something I did have a strong emotional attachment to, it would be to people, particularly the people closest to me.

[Luckee]

The effect of the two statements "Santa clause exists" and "Santa clause does not exist" are not the same at all. One claims that we can locate Santa Clause in space and time, where as the other denies that this is possible. There is no existence in the second statement for Santa Clause.

I see! That is obvious now.

So existance is in space time and non-existance is outside of it? If this is how the two differ, may I ask you how they relate?

Edited by Luckee, 04 January 2012 - 04:04 AM.

[the sad clown]

I see! That is obvious now.

So existance is in space time and non-existance is outside of it? If this is how the two differ, may I ask you THE question of "how do they relate"?

Existence is referentially dependent. If you asked me if Santa Clause existed within a particular story, I would answer in the affirmative. Unless there is surrounding context that would make one think otherwise, the most oft assumed frame of reference for such a question is the space-time universe around us, in which non-fictional people operate. Since you did not specify a frame of reference, I went with the default. If you meant something other than that, then it is incumbent upon you to make this clarification.

[Luckee]

I don't know. I don't really think of my beliefs in those terms, of what I believe in most strongly or have the strongest emotional attachment to. I suppose that is because, as I said earlier, I don't have a unifying or central concept. I do have beliefs that I feel more certain about than other beliefs, but that doesn't really carry the sort of emotional weight you seem to be referring to. An example. I am pretty confident that the language I am using in this post is English. You would have a very difficult time dissuading me of this belief. However, do I feel any emotion about it? No, not really. Thus, I hold this belief quite strongly, but without much emotion.

Which isn't to say that I don't also have emotional attachments to certain ideas. I feel that the wanton destruction of what I perceive to be innocent lives to be particularly egregious. But this emotion has more to do with my ability to imagine myself in such a situation and the emotions that I would experience if something like that occurred around me than with the particular idea itself. I suppose, if you wished me to identify something I did have a strong emotional attachment to, it would be to people, particularly the people closest to me.

Thank you for sharing. I totally respect your believes!

Existence is referentially dependent. If you asked me if Santa Clause existed within a particular story, I would answer in the affirmative. Unless there is surrounding context that would make one think otherwise, the most oft assumed frame of reference for such a question is the space-time universe around us, in which non-fictional people operate. Since you did not specify a frame of reference, I went with the default. If you meant something other than that, then it is incumbent upon you to make this clarification.

I see what you mean. You seem to be very clear and aware about how things differ. I was curious if you perhaps if you were willing to share how existance and non-existance relate. Or do you mean that they relate to the frame of reference?

Edited by Luckee, 04 January 2012 - 04:18 AM.

[the sad clown]

Thank you for sharing. I totally respect your believes!

What beliefs?

I see what you mean. You seem to be very clear and aware about how things differ. I was curious if you perhaps if you were willing to share how existance and non-existance relate. Or do you mean that they relate to the frame of reference?

Existence and non-existence are both questions revolving around what is properly considered to populate a particular system or frame of reference.

[Abu Firdaws]

Where did you get that idea? I hear allot of Muslim say that "too much good will make you forget about God" haha. It is you who forgets about God not the good things in your life! You choose to be distracted by it, it does not choose to distract you!

Of course, but we are talking about the nature of human beings.

[Luckee]

What beliefs?
Existence and non-existence are both questions revolving around what is properly considered to populate a particular system or frame of reference.

Oh, just any believe I respect as yours as I respect my own believes. I respect the shape you have given to life, just as I respect mine. Yet I don't hold fast to the shapes. Or atleast, I try not to.

So you're saying that both existance and non-existance are equal in mystery, right?

Edited by Luckee, 04 January 2012 - 01:36 PM.

[the sad clown]

Oh, just any believe I respect as yours as I respect my own believes. I respect the shape you have given to life, just as I respect mine. Yet I don't hold fast to the shapes. Or atleast, I try not to.

I would prefer it if you didn't respect my beliefs because they were mine. I don't mind respecting people, but beliefs need to be measured and judged, not valued beyond their usefulness. If I have bad ideas, they are not worthy of respect and I would not ask you to respect them.

So you're saying that both existance and non-existance are equal in mystery, right?

No, I have no idea where you got "equal in mystery" from, it certainly wasn't me. They are opposite sides of the same question. To say that something exists is to say that it is found in the enumeration of objects within a set, a system, or a frame of reference. To say that something doesn't exist is to deny that is is found in such an enumeration. I have no idea why you would attribute something like "mystery" to me. It sounds more like something you would believe and say than something I would utter.

[Luckee]

I would prefer it if you didn't respect my beliefs because they were mine. I don't mind respecting people, but beliefs need to be measured and judged, not valued beyond their usefulness. If I have bad ideas, they are not worthy of respect and I would not ask you to respect them.
No, I have no idea where you got "equal in mystery" from, it certainly wasn't me. They are opposite sides of the same question. To say that something exists is to say that it is found in the enumeration of objects within a set, a system, or a frame of reference. To say that something doesn't exist is to deny that is is found in such an enumeration. I have no idea why you would attribute something like "mystery" to me. It sounds more like something you would believe and say than something I would utter.

I respect your believe that there are "bad" believes and that they are unworthy of respect. Yet I also respect my believes that there are no "bad" believes! Don't have to change your believe. I can only change my own by choosing which idea to believe in and place value upon. If others addopt my believes, its not because I impose it upon them, it is because they feel attracted to it. If no one addopts my believe, it doesn't mean to me that my believe is "bad" as long as I choose to believe it. It matters only that I desire to believe it. Not other people. We are not sheep to follow people around and think in terms of "good" and "badness". True goodness have no definition to it, it comes from within. It does not follow the laws of the human mind. That is what I have chosen to believe.

You said that they're both questions. So maybe instead of mystery, is it more accurate to say that "they are equal in uncertainty" ?

[the sad clown]

I respect your believe that there are "bad" believes and that they are unworthy of respect. Yet I also respect my believes that there are no "bad" believes! Don't have to change your believe. I can only change my own by choosing which idea to believe in and place value upon. If others addopt my believes, its not because I impose it upon them, it is because they feel attracted to it. If no one addopts my believe, it doesn't mean to me that my believe is "bad" as long as I choose to believe it. It matters only that I desire to believe it. Not other people. We are not sheep to follow people around and think in terms of "good" and "badness". True goodness have no definition to it, it comes from within. It does not follow the laws of the human mind. That is what I have chosen to believe.

Of course there are bad ideas. Everyone has goals, hopes, aspirations and the like. Bad ideas take them away from these goals while good ideas move them closer. I'm not talking about bad and good in moral terms, but rather in utilitarian terms. The goals and hopes can be judged as well, but these are not as clear. In the absence of any objective paradigm by which to measure them, I have adopted basic biologically ingrained paradigms centering around devotion to family and others in close relationship to me. Outside of that my ideals are largely centered around fostering an environment in which I am free to follow my beliefs and ideals without either endangering myself or those close to me. The convenient thing about a religion like Christianity or Islam is that you can easily sweep away all of the ambiguity you can see in my position and replace it with the objective paradigm not available to someone like me.

You said that they're both questions. So maybe instead of mystery, is it more accurate to say that "they are equal in uncertainty" ?

"They are equal in uncertainty". I suppose so. If you are uncertain about one, then you would be uncertain about the other, and conversely, if you are certain about one, you would be equally certain about the other. Rather than say they are both questions, I would rather say they are the same question, just phrased differently.

[Luckee]

Of course there are bad ideas. Everyone has goals, hopes, aspirations and the like. Bad ideas take them away from these goals while good ideas move them closer. I'm not talking about bad and good in moral terms, but rather in utilitarian terms. The goals and hopes can be judged as well, but these are not as clear. In the absence of any objective paradigm by which to measure them, I have adopted basic biologically ingrained paradigms centering around devotion to family and others in close relationship to me. Outside of that my ideals are largely centered around fostering an environment in which I am free to follow my beliefs and ideals without either endangering myself or those close to me. The convenient thing about a religion like Christianity or Islam is that you can easily sweep away all of the ambiguity you can see in my position and replace it with the objective paradigm not available to someone like me.
"They are equal in uncertainty". I suppose so. If you are uncertain about one, then you would be uncertain about the other, and conversely, if you are certain about one, you would be equally certain about the other. Rather than say they are both questions, I would rather say they are the same question, just phrased differently.

Okay, my respect can also mean "agreeing to disagree".

I can understand when someone says existance is an question (uncertainty) or answer (certainty). How can there be a question in non-existance when it exists not.

Maybe I should phrase the question diffrently. "What is the relation between Everything and Nothing?"

I have found it impossible to answer. The ultimate opposites. Sometimes I contemplate on the two and I come up with this: nothing is my pure "being" and everything is an expression of the pure being.