Religious beliefs are unfalsifiable?
So are axioms in Science-three angles of a triangle is equivalent to 180 degrees,law of Causality/uniformity of nature..
What is evidence? Evidence is a set of facts perceived by the individual conditioned by law of causality and Uniformity of nature which is not correct.
Evidence as message-What exactly are you looking for?
Universe itself is a message.
Human mind sees evolution and links?
Tell me, what is your mind? And what is Universal intention and how does one know it, much less to say it has none.
Let us first define mind, then proceed further.
There is no such thing as Super natural as every thing is Natural.
Every thing we think and do is natural and you can not call something as Super Natural because you can not explain by Laws known to you.
You can not trust senses for they lie and change;you can not trust others.But you can not deny you doubt.Cogito Ergo, Sum ,I think, there fore I am (Rene Descartes)
The Universal principle which is being erroneously called God does not go about proclaiming its omniscience and Omnipotence.It has more important work(if it has any intentions) to do rather than proving itself to us.In what way do we arrogate ourselves that we are worth being noticed?
Things happen in the world.it is us who try to link them hence there is no question of any necessity to prophesy.
Probably this piece has been written based on The Bible without referring to Philosophical treatises of the West and religious systems of the East.
Name of Bhagavad Gita has been mentioned.By the very expectation of the Gita it is evident the author has not studied it.
While dealing with abstract subjects, it is better to study and the write.Philosophy is not pulp fiction or gossip writing.
for details one may read the sacred texts like Bhagavad Gita /Upanishads if one wants to be enlightened. Or the least one can read my blogs filed under Indian philosophy/Religion/Hinduism.
If one looks for tautology and intellectual masturbation -well, there is nothing to say.
http://www.alternet.org/story/147424/6_(unlikely)_developments_that_could_convince_this_atheist_to_believe_in_god
Tag: God
-
6 (Unlikely) Developments That Could Convince This Atheist To Believe in God
-
Should you be able to call your God whatever you want?
Muslims as a group seem to be sick.May be they do not know what their Religion is all about and they seem to be threatening world order. By their activities they make one feel that the civilization might be better off with out Islam.
Christians want to use the world Allah for proselytizing.
Instead of following Christianity they are attempting to increase their numbers as directed by Vatican, which calls a decade’ Decade of Harvest’,by spending huge sums for promotional activities(this is not restricted to Catholics;other denominations have a fair share too).Some promote by instant healing by demonstrating Healing on Stage( I know of people who are being paid to fake illness on stage and recover-funny thing is they are not even Christians ).
Fortunately or unfortunately Muslims respond in kind unlike other other followers.If Christians really want to use the name Allah, they might do it in private but not for converting others.By the way I am curious as to who, in the familial tree has not been converted at some point of time in the past as Religion is practiced as a matter of privilege of birth rather than conviction.I hope who want to be Religious to read their Religious texts, whether it Be The Bible or The Koran directly with out interpreters like the clergy or mullah for these gentlemen have their own axe to to grind or they are after riches which are being offered by the respective so called Protectors of the Faith.Religion is for self upliftment /realization.It is intensely personal..Be it Sal or Jesus they will be shocked if they were to return to earth to witness the perverted intrepretations of their teachings, which are meant to elevate human beings and not to make them behave like cavemen.UPDATE: Three churches have been torched in Malaysia as religion tensions rise. Churches are bracing themselves for further attacks.
God’s just been to court. Well in Malaysia anyway.
The Malaysian government has filed an appeal against a court ruling that allows non-Muslims to use the word Allah to refer to God.
Protests by Muslim groups are breaking out across the country and online. The blogs are going mad over this asking whose God is Allah anyway?
Malaysia’s Catholic Church says that it uses the word Allah to meet the linguistic needs of some Malay worshippers. The government believes that Allah is solely an Islamic word whilst the court upholds that the term predates Islam.
The debate got me thinking about how I would feel if another religion used a Hindu term to refer to their God, may it be “Ishwar” or “Krishna”. Whilst I don’t think I’d be angry, I think I might feel a bit uncomfortable.
Joel Trumpet isn’t impressed at the ruling and he’s a Christian. He feels that by using the word “Allah” Christians are sending out mixed messages.
For Blogger Lucia Lai however, it’s great news.
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is asking Muslims not to blow this out of proportion, but do they have a right to be angry?
“The idea of bringing Allah before the courts is abominable as it is abhorrent,” says Sakmongkol. ” In the Malaysian context, Allah has always been the god of Islam. Whose religion is this? It is the religion of the Malays. It is the religion of 15-16 million Malaysians as opposed to the religion of between 850,000 to 1 million Catholics. “
I’ve been taking a look at various online dictionaries and what they have to say about Allah. I couldn’t find a consensus.
So is it all about context?This blogger feels that both parties are blowing this out of proportion.
‘If I were a Muslim, I would probably say, “Oh never mind, let the Catholics go ahead and use the word Allah.
If I were a Catholic, I would probably say, “Oh never mind, let’s just drop the word Allah and use the word Tuhan instead.’”Space between the ears in California disagrees. “How one religion could have a monopoly on a generic term or name is beyond me,” he adds.
So should you have the right to call your God by any name you please?
http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/should-you-be-able-to-call-your-god-whatever-you-want/#comment-193970 -
Atheism and Diversity: Is It Wrong For Atheists To Convert Believers?
Atheists can try converting people into their school of thought.This is nothing new.This has been happening since 5000 years, as Indian Philosophy states.There is no harm in in it. It makes life interesting and a chance to note the fact that with out knowing that they are limited, human beings are arrogant enough to unravel the Universe which , as far as knowledge goes,is one a billion years old and Nature is yet to give up all Her secrets.
If religious belief makes the world drab and dull by its attempt by imposing its doctrines, what exactly are the Atheists trying to do by converting Theists into Atheists?
It is old wine under new label.
Yes, what is said about Christianity id true,in terms of trying to convert and imposing nonsensical religious edicts that do not agree with our basic moral sense, especially the sanctions of Papacy and intolerance.Also the concept that you are not responsible for your actions ;it is Satan that makes you to do so;that your salvation is through one individual and others are doomed to Hell.
Christianity is not the only Religion.
Hinduism calls for introspection and analysis of oneself and self inquiry.
It has included theism as school of Philosophical thought.
By systematic logic it proves that the world and the senses we have are illusory and goes on to guide one to realize oneself.
Religion ,according to Hinduism, is intensely personal and no dogma is allowed.
What is Reality/Too big a topic.Please refer to some of my blogs under Religion/philosophy/Indian Philosophy)
Story:
Do atheists hate diversity?Is the very act of atheist activism (trying to persuade people that atheism is correct and working to change the world into one without religion) an act of attempted conformity? Are atheists trying to create a drab, gray, uniform world, where everyone else is just like them?
It’s probably pretty obvious that I think the answer is a big fat “No!” (Probably said in the Ted Stevens voice.) But it certainly is the case that many atheist activists, myself among them, are working very hard to persuade religious believers out of their beliefs. Not all atheists do this, of course; many have the more modest goals of separation of church and state and religious tolerance, including tolerance of atheists and recognition of us as equal citizens. But a good number of atheists are, in fact, trying to convince religious believers to become atheists. I’m one of them.
And since many believers see this as an intolerant attempt to enforce conformity — particularly believers of the progressive, ecumenical, “all religions perceive God in their own way and we have to respect them all” stripe — I want to take a moment to address it.
http://www.alternet.org/story/144199/atheism_and_diversity:_is_it_wrong_for_atheists_to_convert_believers?page=entire -
JFK’s nephew barred from communion: Report
Who are these jokers to decide on who should have the communion?
Communion by the clergy is not sacrosanct and it is an interpolated concept.On the basis of religious qualification only Jesus is qualified.
The office of Papacy as a temporal power was a creation of Constantine.
If strict moral laws are applied, majority of Popes are unfit to to receive Communion because of their debauchery.
As to the concept itself, if all of us are the children of God, why should I receive permission from a joker to Commune with my Father?
God does not need brokers.
Story:
The nephew of ex-president John F Kennedy, a US lawmaker, has been barred from receiving communion at his Catholic church due to hisUS Representative Patrick Kennedy, son of the late senator Edward Kennedy, was told of the move by Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin, according to The Providence Journal newspaper in the US state of Rhode Island.
Kennedy represents a district in Rhode Island in the US Congress.
“The bishop instructed me not to take communion and said that he has instructed the diocesan priests not to give me communion,” the paper quotes Kennedy as saying in a telephone interview.
Kennedy said the bishop had explained the penalty by telling him that he was not a good practicing Catholic because of the positions that he had taken as a public official, particularly on abortion, the report said.
The congressman declined to say when or how Tobin told him not to take the sacrament or whether he had obeyed the bishop’s injunction, the report said.
Tobin, through a spokesman, declined to address the question of whether he had told Kennedy not to receive communion, The Journal noted.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/5257835.cms
You must be logged in to post a comment.