God Exists

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Is it typical for an atheist to have the last word?
or is it typical of a narcissist to have a last word?
Why does an atheist forces his/her view on others. I do not have a problem in having an opinion on God, type of God, absence of God. It is personal philosophy and in a free world we are allowed that freedom. Do remember that is a freedom allowed by the majority.

 

[Nara]

"On the contrary, atheism is barbaric, impractical, egoistic, haughty, and what not." post 1573

Very wrong and inflammatory... ..

Y, I agree, this is wrong, but I rather have an idea criticized in this fashion than personal insults.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Is it typical for an atheist to have the last word?

No.

or is it typical of a narcissist to have a last word?

Yes.

Why does an atheist forces his/her view on others.

This is a question based on prejudice.

I do not have a problem in having an opinion on God, type of God, absence of God. It is personal philosophy and in a free world we are allowed that freedom. Do remember that is a freedom allowed by the majority.

Freedom is a natural inalienable right that manifests just by the fact we are born as human beings. All a majority can do is take away this right to the extent they can.

 

[Yamaka]

Is it typical for an atheist to have the last word?
or is it typical of a narcissist to have a last word?
Why does an atheist forces his/her view on others. I do not have a problem in having an opinion on God, type of God, absence of God. It is personal philosophy and in a free world we are allowed that freedom. Do remember that is a freedom allowed by the majority.

Why do you read posts you don't like, anyway?

You have a FREEWILL not to read things that you don't like or handle well!

Use your FREEWILL ... that will solve your discomfort! LOL

 

[happyhindu]

God/Supreme power is the truth and religions emerged with messengers of GOD as the manifestation of GOD himself.

Humans are the products of GOD and Science is the product of Humans. The same humans manupulate anything for any purpose.

How are humans 'products' of God? Why does God allow Humans to manipule things?? Does God enjoy creating faulty humans??

Both GOD/Spirituality AND Science is creating negative consequences some or other way, from its purest forms.

Who gets to decide what is a negative consequence? Can a muslim decide that for a hindu and vice-versa? Muslims will like to create Dar ul islam of only muslims living for allah all over the world. Hindus will like to get rid of anything non-hindu. Christians beleive in the second coming of christ and expect to convert the whole world into christians. So who gets to decide what is negative for a hindu, muslim, christian?

 

[ShivKC]

When you combine all the above, you get FATALISM... no room for FREEWILL.

Theists here are dancing around FATALISM... why?

Yam, i think, you should attempt to view this fatalism, by sitting in the shoes of god.

by definition, god is perceived to be beyond time & space and hence he could enjoy to be a time traveler too.

consider this situation: the time traveler (god), having returned from the future, knows in advance what humans will do, but while god knows what humans will do, that knowledge does not cause humans to do so: in this context, humans had free will, even while the time traveller had foreknowledge(fatalism). so the fatalism what we call here is the advance knowledge god has about events.

however, i agree with you, few people wrongly perceive this 'fatalism' and take it to themselves and live it with blame. if you could read through dvaitha schools, you you find it interesting to know the depth at which freewill is explored.

 

[sarang]

Hindus will like to get rid of anything non-hindu.

Not true and way off the mark. Hindus believe and practice tolerance for other faiths and never keen to convert. You are dishonest to say this. Perhaps you should read more from both indian and non indian sources.

 

[happyhindu]

Not true and way off the mark. Hindus believe and practice tolerance for other faiths and never keen to convert. You are dishonest to say this. Perhaps you should read more from both indian and non indian sources.

These are your own opinions. That's fine. However i am entitled to my opinions. It is my opinion some sections of hindus are getting radicalized (malegoan blasts are an example). Such radicalized fundamentalist hindus are either reactionaries or purists. Their aim is to fight off what they perceive as invasion of their culture.

Btw, sections of hindus never had tolerance for other faiths. If they did, one wud not see puranas where gods fight. Its an other matter that people reconcile their religious identities after such fights/wars. However, the tolerance aspect (ascribed to religion) is a tall claim.

 

[prasad1]

wow 3 last words, decide who is the most important and then claim the last word,

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Once Devi Sita was seperated from Lord Rama. Many others helped her to find
Lord Rama. If anyone passed by, they would ask Sita 'Is he your husband Rama ?'
She would say ' no'. This went on for some days. Finally Lord Rama himself came
that way and, as usual, they asked her ' is he Lord Rama ?' .She looked at him and
kept quiet . She did not deny. She has found Rama.

Like this, people go on arguing about God's existence till they find HIM. Once
they find HIM ( I mean realisation ) , they will keep silent - mounam .

(extracted from Bhagawan Ramana maharishi's converations )

 

[Haridasa Siva]

Once Devi Sita was seperated from Lord Rama. Many others helped her to find
Lord Rama. If anyone passed by, they would ask Sita 'Is he your husband Rama ?'
She would say ' no'. This went on for some days. Finally Lord Rama himself came
that way and, as usual, they asked her ' is he Lord Rama ?' .She looked at him and
kept quiet . She did not deny. She has found Rama.

Like this, people go on arguing about God's existence till they find HIM. Once
they find HIM ( I mean realisation ) , they will keep silent - mounam .

(extracted from Bhagawan Ramana maharishi's converations )

Good citation. But it is perhaps too much to expect some people to have "realisation" and to "keep silence". One they do not know and the other they do not want. I am afraid material well being incites some people to turn against the Creator.

 

[renuka]

Good citation. But it is perhaps too much to expect some people to have "realisation" and to "keep silence". One they do not know and the other they do not want. I am afraid material well being incites some people to turn against the Creator.

Its better not to know and to keep silent then to not know but roar that we know it all.Dont you agree?
I prefer to be called stupid then to imagine that I know it all.
Dont you agree?

I disagree that material well being incites some people to turn against Creator.
Its only when one doesnt know the value of material that people turn against the Creator..get what I mean?

 

[wrongan]

Good citation. But it is perhaps too much to expect some people to have "realisation" and to "keep silence". One they do not know and the other they do not want. I am afraid material well being incites some people to turn against the Creator. --------------I like your letters.Saint (sithar) Thirumoolar says about the realisation of God as "kandavar vindilar,vindavar kandilar"ie, one who has seen the GOD will never reveal and one who proclaims that he had seen HIM realy did not see HIM.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

I thought Renuji will come out with a mantra from Kena upanishad , english
translation of which is 'those who think they know , do not know; those who
think they do not know , know '.

 

[Yamaka]

Once Devi Sita was seperated from Lord Rama. Many others helped her to find
Lord Rama. If anyone passed by, they would ask Sita 'Is he your husband Rama ?'
She would say ' no'. This went on for some days. Finally Lord Rama himself came
that way and, as usual, they asked her ' is he Lord Rama ?' .She looked at him and
kept quiet . She did not deny. She has found Rama.

Like this, people go on arguing about God's existence till they find HIM. Once
they find HIM ( I mean realisation ) , they will keep silent - mounam .

(extracted from Bhagawan Ramana maharishi's converations )

Is this not part of the FICTION - the Mythology - that the Great Valmiki wrote about 2000 years ago?

So, you want to use one FICTION as a proof of another FANTASY - the Super-Natural God?

Way to go!! LOL

 

[Yamaka]

wow 3 last words, decide who is the most important and then claim the last word,

Here is our beloved Word Counter! Including the First and the Last Word!

Good job!

ROFL... then LOL

 

[Yamaka]

Yam, i think, you should attempt to view this fatalism, by sitting in the shoes of god.

by definition, god is perceived to be beyond time & space and hence he could enjoy to be a time traveler too.

consider this situation: the time traveler (god), having returned from the future, knows in advance what humans will do, but while god knows what humans will do, that knowledge does not cause humans to do so: in this context, humans had free will, even while the time traveller had foreknowledge(fatalism). so the fatalism what we call here is the advance knowledge god has about events.

however, i agree with you, few people wrongly perceive this 'fatalism' and take it to themselves and live it with blame. if you could read through dvaitha schools, you you find it interesting to know the depth at which freewill is explored.

Shiv:

I insist that you read the definition I posted.. if you don't agree with the definition, then our discussion is meaningless, and we are in a different topic!

You know I don't believe in the existence of any God (defined as the Super-Natural Agent, probably in the form of a super human being, controlling ALL activities of living beings including humans and inanimate things)

Then how could you ask me to be "sitting in the shoes of God"?

I say it again, FATALISM is the root cause of all problems in places like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia and other places...all very religious countries.

This Fatalism is a FICTION and a FANTASY perpetrated by ALL Religions, including Hinduism.

 

[nachi naga]

Shiv:

I insist that you read the definition I posted.. if you don't agree with the definition, then our discussion is meaningless, and we are in a different topic!

You know I don't believe in the existence of any God (defined as the Super-Natural Agent, probably in the form of a super human being, controlling ALL activities of living beings including humans and inanimate things)

Then how could you ask me to be "sitting in the shoes of God"?

I say it again, FATALISM is the root cause of all problems in places like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia and other places...all very religious countries.

This Fatalism is a FICTION and a FANTASY perpetrated by ALL Religions, including Hinduism.

In my opinion USA,is more religious than India.Even currencies have god printed on them.Chritanity rules in USA.Jesus Christ is Lord in USA,is my humble opinion.Yamaka knows it as well.Thank You.

 

[Yamaka]

In my opinion USA,is more religious than India.Even currencies have god printed on them.Chritanity rules in USA.Jesus Christ is Lord in USA,is my humble opinion.Yamaka knows it as well.Thank You.

In another Thread I wrote about my view on Religiosity in the US -

1. Except in the so-called Bible Belt of the Confederate South, most Americans are week-end, month-end or year-end Church goers... In the Baptist Church close to my home, I see more people during our Civic Club Meetings conducted there than during Sunday or holy day "masses".

For most of the Americans, religion is just a Cultural Link to the distant past.

2. Yes, in the US currency there is what's called "In God We Trust" inscribed... this is just a Trust in God - the Nature, I understand..

This does not subscribe to any Abrahamic or Puronic God.. this does not require any bhajans, poojas or prayers... and the Constitution is Secular.

3. Most of the Americans DO NOT follow any Fatalism of Religion.. there are a few Evangelicals who believe in it.

For example, Christmas is celebrated at the end of the year MORE as an occasion to share love, joy and gifts (from Santa!) than as the birth day of Jesus Christ.. this is a fact in most of America.

Therefore, I strongly believe that US is not that Religious as India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia etc etc.

America is a Pragmatic Country.

My two-cents on this!

 

[renuka]

I thought Renuji will come out with a mantra from Kena upanishad , english
translation of which is 'those who think they know , do not know; those who
think they do not know , know '.

Dear sir,

You know what? If I had quoted Kena Upanishad in this thread...some who are not too fond of Sanskrit cos they think its confusing, might have confused the meaning of the word Kena(Kena–ishitam, “by whom directed.”) and thought of it as some கேன பைய்ய and just scoff everything off as fiction.
In this thread I wont quote any religious text.I will reserve religious texts for other threads.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Is this not part of the FICTION - the Mythology - that the Great Valmiki wrote about 2000 years ago?

So, you want to use one FICTION as a proof of another FANTASY - the Super-Natural God?

Way to go!! LOL

Sir,
Even Bhagawan Ramana has become a mythological figure now . He attained
Mahasamadhi in 1950. He was one of the self-realized Masters of our time
and it is a pity that such a great Maharishi is commented upon by us. No
use in arguing with you. ( I have to point out that this passage is taken by
Maharishi's conversations ) Any way thank you,

 

[renuka]

Sir,
Even Bhagawan Ramana has become a mythological figure now . He attained
Mahasamadhi in 1950. He was one of the self-realized Masters of our time
and it is a pity that such a great Maharishi is commented upon by us. No
use in arguing with you. ( I have to point out that this passage is taken by
Maharishi's conversations ) Any way thank you,

Matthew 7.6 in Bible answers the situation well.

 

[sangom]

What examples are you referring to, Sri Nara? Can you please give msg nos. etc.? My response pertained to the irrelevancy of google hits of "Swamiji arrested" to the issue of whether theism induces one to be more immoral.

Regards

Shri Narayan,

Sorry for this late response, my internet connection did not work yesterday. The swamiji is supposed to be different from the ordinary, run-of-the-mill hindu. (hence if we are talking about search results for "hindu arrested" it will not make any sense just as a search for "atheist arrested" will be.) When we find that even swamijis get into such unlawful activities as to deserve arrest and punishment, it means that the additional, higher level of religious training also is ineffective in curbing the criminal tendencies latent in a person. In the present situation this "cover of swamiji" has become a convenient mode for all such criminally oriented people to make some fast money and, even if they are exposed and caught, the followers who have been hypnotized by religion and religious inputs continue to honour that swamiji (Nityananda is the latest instance perhaps).

That is why I hold the view that religion is not a socially beneficial thing.

 

[ShivKC]

Shiv:

I insist that you read the definition I posted.. if you don't agree with the definition, then our discussion is meaningless, and we are in a different topic!

You know I don't believe in the existence of any God (defined as the Super-Natural Agent, probably in the form of a super human being, controlling ALL activities of living beings including humans and inanimate things)

Then how could you ask me to be "sitting in the shoes of God"?

I say it again, FATALISM is the root cause of all problems in places like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia and other places...all very religious countries.

This Fatalism is a FICTION and a FANTASY perpetrated by ALL Religions, including Hinduism.

Yam, fine points taken. i agree with you, few doctrines deny free will and few agree to the existence of free will. before i go in to details or vedic/BG references, here is the premise i counter, based upon your favorite Karma.

The doctrine of karma requires both that we pay for our actions in the past, and that our actions in the present be free enough to allow us to deserve the future reward or punishment that we will receive for our present actions. without free will, there can be no 'pariharams'.

so, for religionsists, there is a way to reconcile, to chose or not to chose 'fatalism'. this particular trait of 'choosing a doctrine' & reconciling itself is the effect of 'freewill'. so, you cannot arbitrarily claim hinduism is all bound by fatalism/no-free will. some sects agree, some dont agree, but there is always a chance for reconciliation.

but this is not the case with 'atheism', which has noting such as 'holy books/divine works" to bench mark or attempt for reconciling other than relying with what the majority of the society behaves. its very much evident, as we can see around that the atheist morals are set mainly based upon the what the theists behaved in the surrounding society.


"""""Yes, in the US currency there is what's called "In God We Trust" inscribed...""

Yam, what are the chances of winning, if an U.S presidential candidate got to proclaim himself as an atheist, in the his night speech to the nation? when likely its gonna happen?

 

[ShivKC]

Shri Narayan,

Sorry for this late response, my internet connection did not work yesterday. The swamiji is supposed to be different from the ordinary, run-of-the-mill hindu. (hence if we are talking about search results for "hindu arrested" it will not make any sense just as a search for "atheist arrested" will be.) When we find that even swamijis get into such unlawful activities as to deserve arrest and punishment, it means that the additional, higher level of religious training also is ineffective in curbing the criminal tendencies latent in a person. In the present situation this "cover of swamiji" has become a convenient mode for all such criminally oriented people to make some fast money and, even if they are exposed and caught, the followers who have been hypnotized by religion and religious inputs continue to honour that swamiji (Nityananda is the latest instance perhaps).

That is why I hold the view that religion is not a socially beneficial thing.

shankar sir, the answer to your question lies right there!.

guess why we dont find press headlines like 'atheist arrested' where as you often find swamiji/priest/imam's arrest? because, as you said, the religious leaders are expected to live a high moral life (which is a thing good again), and when they cross, its definitely a grave thing, and gets highlighted, and makes us more disappointed too.

but consider this situation for atheist. does any one got worried about EVR's child marriage / PolPot's, Stalins killing spree.. no one bothers to address that as an atheist killing, just because, the society never expected an atheist to follow such morals!

again i refer one of the interesting points raised by C.RAVI. do we blame einstein for inventing nuclear power, and stop all nuclear activities, just because of hiroshima? your citing of nityananda issue is just the same. lets attack these issues with a broader spectrum