The God Obsession.  

Gr8
I agree with u

I have a question, if GOD is forgiveness then how do we get forgiven?

You know this is a test, because well should I just say be very careful...

I would say the answer is, being like God and forgiving others.

How does GOD come to forgive others?

You know I hate to ask that question, and I have no doubt that you know the answer it is almost insulting to ask, but I'm not going to answer the question for you until I have some sign that you really need my help.

1. Not in all cases but in most when faith slips the bounds and becomes obsession.


2. Faith is one thing, obsession is another. All too many times this is the result.

Well that's a different matter and a different claim

all the best urban

Sorry, I made a typo. I called atheism a passion and pursuit of nothing. I meant fanatical atheism. Quiet atheists don't raise my eyebrows; I used to be one myself.

But again, you puzzle me with the "God doesn't need your help" statement. Who says religious people are rushing to God's aid? Religious people and spiritual people come to God as children, not parents.

BTW, while you rarely hear of a terrorist wreaking havoc in the name of "No God!," religion is not the only one who wears a bloody glove: http://www.geocities.com/...

Eliminating religion would not make the world a better place; that's just you looking for fault in religion. The truth is not subjective; do your homework. Cheers!

All I can say is Dang! :)

I assume that you mean the absolute truth is not subjective. The absolute truth can be proven time and time again.

Does GOD exist? Certainly, but how can you prove this as a fact? All I can say is look around and see... Turn around bright eyes, Look up here, Look around all you see are sympathetic eyes... Look to the skies and see... The Look of Love...

Hi TheGreatWhiteBuffalo! I like your comment, and think I know exactly what you're feeling. I wasn't raised by a religious family; my faith was arrived at when I was 16. I remember at one point the screen behind my bedroom window was damaged, and my father pulled it out until he got around to installing a new one. I had a clear view of the sky, and would stare out my window for almost an hour before going to sleep. I couldn't tell you if this had anything to do with my coming into faith (all I remember is being moved by the ID arguments from those Jehovah's Witnesses tracks), but I could tell you that I felt the numinous while staring up into that big sky.

Our Maker really put some thought and a lot of love into the beautiful home He made for us. I enjoy plant life today, and looking at all the wondrous varieties out there. I like willow trees, and maple trees in the fall, and wisteria, and birds of paradise, and marigolds, and clovers, and ground covers, and grass itself. I like looking at a little cloud in the baby blue sky on a warm day, as well as the lightning bolts and thunder cracks during a storm. I have slept outside my tent in Yosemite, and in my old bedroom in my parents' house on 187 acres near the Altamont Pass in California. I appreciate the lullaby of the cicadas and the frogs. I don't believe that our Maker is just making "whatever" for the sake of being creative; I believe our Maker is making things that are appealing to Him/Her/It/Them as well.

Anyway, when I said "the truth," I wasn't actually referring to the ultimate truth. The truth in this case is that the OP in this thread had some bad experiences in the past with Christians, and his resentment toward them made it easier for him to reach the conclusion, "That's it! There is no God, that's why those Christians are like this!" Scales covered his eyes, and he would never again be able to look objectively at any form of evidence. As many debates as I have engaged him in, never once has he fought science with science. All he does is use philosophical arguments (unfortunately the Plato in his head is already rigidly biased against religion), and look for Web pages written by atheists with a nice linguistic flair to link me to. He never quotes anything on the page, and he runs off when I ask him to. He came up with a new rant within the past couple of weeks about a discovery that this universe is one of many, and that the Big Bang has happened many times and continues to happen. He said this somehow proved to him that there is most definitely no need for a Creative Intelligence, but he won't explain to me how he makes this connection.

He believes in his heart that all religion is inherently a disease, whose virtues are questionable and certainly not nearly comparable to its liabilities. He is implying that without religion there would be no extremism, no terrorism, no war. I'm saying that the only reason he came up with this was because it fit his agenda. Ever since Christians turned him off for religion, he has been actively campaigning against it. And whenever he finds something that looks like it could be another nice, stingy slap in the face for believers, he jumps on that bandwagon and runs with it. It occurred to me that I could quickly refute this point by finding some atheistic terrorists in the annals of history. This should be enough to demonstrate that terrorism is not the exclusive product of religion.

As far as the ultimate truth goes, I do believe in a loving and personal God. I have posted my testimony before; perhaps our mutual agent friend could brief you on it sometime. ;) While I have yet to arrive at a place where I connect to a particular deity or belief system, I am for the time being a firm believer in universal causation, a personable Creator, and the effectiveness of prayer. Salute!

-santuccie

P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good for your health!!!

Hey' Hi,

You know I love the creation but how we determine our beliefs is a lot different as in some respects I agree with Chai Ming Boy while in some areas I agree with you.

Take the Big Bang...

I believe in multiple bangs and you can find more on how I came to this conclusion in my writings called the Evolution of Religion. What is wrong with multiple massive creations of Galaxies? Now think this out and I'll show you why... In other words keep reading. 1st question, do we have a border to our universe? See I disagree with Chai Ming Boy on this issue. One infinite universe is what I believe like one GOD great in spirit for all. Now if the universe is infinite how could the universe be created? See Houston we have a problem here. Now better yet find the center of that infinite universe ooppps! another problem... Can this be rectified either through religion or science? Certainly not as we currently apply our thoughts to the creation of something that could not be created. That takes us to the theory of relativity and E = mc2 If all mass and energy are a constant then there had to be multiple explosions and the whole thing could not have started with one singular event.

That changes everything...

We need change...

Hi again,

That's not what I meant. I too believe in the meta universe, and in the recurring Big Bang (without it, everything slows to a stop, and it's game over). My question is how multiple universes and multiple Big Bangs rule out the possibility of life's Designer. Einstein himself believed in universal causation, and I don't know of any practicing scientists today who still believe in Sagan's "quite by chance" theory (doesn't mean they're not out there). Even Richard Dawkins said that pantheism was understandable. Here are just a few of my arguments: http://www.mylot.com/w/di...

Science is in my blood. I learned much of what I know from my maternal grandfather, who was the only fatherly figure I had in my life until I was four. He worked at Lockheed for 34 years, and supervised the team that built the "little black box," a large module that controls the solar arrays on HST. He and I cringed together in front of the TV during the "seven minutes of terror," waiting for confirmation that the Phoenix Mars Lander had successfully completed each step of the landing sequence, and finally landed in one piece. I used to be an atheist; the cosmos alone wouldn't be enough to impress me. And neither was life itself, until I knew a little more about it. Cheers!

Oh! Cool,

Hey, I'm not even going to think about the accomplishments that you were a witness to, what a great experience, I'm jealous, geeze... You have had quite a life... I'm sorry that your father wasn't a good role model (You didn't elaborate, I'm not prying) Just let's say that we might have something in common in some ways my father was not a good role model and in some ways he was good, I had both extremes in one person. I wonder how many other people can say the same, maybe even my children if they are so influenced to think in a twisted way... It is a shame that children can be so influenced but this does happen... Enough about family...

As for multiple universes I believe that is only fantasy and that creates a problem because it can not be disproved neither can it be proven as a workable theory. Also how could that rule out a creator? For those that believe it certainly can not rule out a creator. Their faith will keep the creator alive. Now that brings us to the next problem what does the creator look like and who is the creator or where can we find this creator? So yes pantheism has part of the answer but pantheism is not complete because technically pantheism is a belief in nothing or the gods of other religions. A group of friends got together and they coined a new word I kind of like it because it would be defined a little differently. Try this Panentheism where GOD is a personality that lives in all things, as the universe is alive and the fabric of the universe makes up all things in the universe. There is only one GOD and you can meet GOD each and every day of your life if you only know where to look.

Now about those big bangs... We could and should talk more about how the universe operates. I find the things from the NASA web site very interesting, have you checked out that I have a link on my blogs to the NASA web page?

Hi,

Of course you didn't ask me to elaborate, but I thought I would be a little more specific for you. My mother was 15 when I was conceived. By the time I was born, my biological father had left California with his mother. I never met him.

As far as multiple parallel universes go, I admit there is no real reason for me to believe in something like this, except that our own universe is finite in size, and that the possibility of a meta universe emerges in quantum mechanics. Now, my whole life's study of quantum mechanics amounts to about 45-60 minutes, more or less. I am no authority here. And just for discussion, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project (and a Christian) apparently does not believe in multiple parallel universes. Perhaps a better word choice on my part would have been, "I have no contention with the notion of multiple universes."

I do not believe pantheism is complete, either. I was just mentioning that Professor Dawkins acknowledged it. And yes, I have heard of panentheism. But even panentheism doesn't cover the extent of my belief. I have seen some things and participated in the workings of some miracles since coming into faith; I have no doubt in my mind that Someone/Something far greater than myself was getting involved. If not, then I seem to have an underdeveloped yet highly effective ability to control people.

I have looked briefly at your blog, but not enough to know that you have links to NASA there. I'll look into it when I have the chance. Cheers!

-santuccie

P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good for your health!!!

P.P.S.: There is water ice on Mars!

I'd like to add that water ice on Mars equals brown gas and that is significant.

Also, you wrote that you believe the universe to be finite in size??? I didn't know that science has found the outermost edges of the universe, this is new news to me...

I doubt that what they think is the outer limits is actually the outer limits I saw some writings and talk about the idea that there might be shape and form to the universe but that hasn't yet been proven without a shadow of any doubt it was a hypothesis. The problem with that hypothesis is that obviously the universe would have to exist in some other vacuum or something creating layers which I really doubt could be true. That only fits in well with people who want to get away with another cover up. How can I prove that? Well? Let's look at the big bang theory and other such ideas what religion could benefit from such a suggestion?

If the universe is actually infinite that would better fit into the answer to a lot of the scientific discoveries that we have learned about with out removing the spiritual aspect of our existence. We could prove that in a way the universe is alive as we are living in the universe there is life.

Now do I have to hunt agent down...

Agent needs a pick me up, maybe a dumb joke or something... ;)

Should you or I start a new discussion on the subject of the universe? I'd like to see more of what you have on this subject, quantum mechanics aside...

Hi,

No one knows for sure how big the universe is, but the subject of its finiteness has nothing to do with religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...

I don't know if I could dazzle your mind with what I know about space. I know some, but I'm no astronomer (I'm a PC service tech, LOL). Maybe it would interest you to know that HST can see 40 billion light years away. And the funny thing is that, if we observe a star birth from that far away, we are observing something that no longer exists; it just took light 40 billion years to carry the image here.

If the Hubble were in Seattle, WA, and someone was holding up a dime in NYC, NY, you could theoretically see every letter in crisp detail. In reality, however, it would never work. Two reasons for this are: 1) The Earth is not flat; I don't think you can see New York from the ground in Washington. 2) You could blow a circuit on the Hubble; it's not designed to focus on anything that close.

Go ahead and start a new discussion if you like. I'll see if I can add anything of substance; no guarantees. Cheers!

-santuccie

P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good for your health!!!

Something just occurred to me. Supposedly the Hubble can see 40 billion light years away, but I am also of the understanding that this universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Don't know what to tell you about that one; I'll let you know if I find anything. Cheers!

I would suggest the difference between a 14. billion year old universe, and the Hubble seeing 40 billion light years away would be that:

a) the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, or at least some elements: This how ever would have one problem, if something moves faster than light it becomes invisible as it takes on tachyon properties. and secondly why would some particles be ejected from the singularity "Big Bang" at different speeds? Is it possible that some smaller stars are not governed by general relativity, but by quantum mechanics and behave as sub atomic clusters?

b) The universe is much older than originally established: Problems with this is that it would upset many other dating theories.

c) The theory I like best. At the expulsion of mater from the singularity, particles indeed traveled faster than light, as they traveled further from the singularities gravitational center, it began to slow a bit, and began cooling but still under the center of the universes control. as it expands the forces of the centers gravitational pull weakens allowing different velocities of starts, clusters, and galaxies. Gravitational forces of nearby bodies when in a struggle of more than two enormous bodies may sling shot smaller bodies out and away from the larger like a sling shot.

Well just a hypothesis.

Hi,

There are a few different models used to compute the age of the universe, and all of them seem to be pretty much in agreement. The problem is variables, values which are not known beyond the shadow of a doubt. However, scientists are claiming that the error margins are not large (doesn't mean they are right). Let me thicken the air for a moment, and proudly say that scientists' ability to determine the rate of expansion is owed to HST.

I am of the understanding that the universe is at least 93 billion light years in diameter. It has been proposed that the universe underwent a brief period of cosmic inflation following the Big Bang, during which matter did indeed take on tachyon properties.

My problem is that much of what I "know" is what I have been told. I am not a mathematician, nor am I an astronomer. Pretty much everything I know about space comes from encyclopedias and word of mouth. Certainly the figure of 40 billion light years is one that should be easy to reach, given known data such as the dimensions of the telescope, the dimensions of the lenses and distances from one another (and from the mirror), the size of the mirror and its incredibly smooth surface, and the effects of zero gravity on light and its reflection.

Perhaps my grandfather was saying that the Hubble is "capable" of seeing 40 billion light-years away. If something is presently visible from that distance, and the universe is indeed 13.7-13.8 billion years old, then that would mean light speed is not a constant, or at least not at one time. I think the answer is C, but I dunno. Cheers!

-santuccie

P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good for your health!!!

P.P.S.: Here's a picture of some of my grandfather's memorabilia for you to admire: http://www.shareapic.net/...

Hi Santuccie and Agent :)

This is quite an interesting conversation, I have a thought about how the universe works from the beginning as I've described before and the two of you bring up some very interesting points.

I have to see do we have an interest in Astronomy?

When I get the chance I'll start this discussion in an appropriate interest either science or philosophy...

Here is the thing, one we don't need a singular event or even if there was a singular event that one event could have triggered many other events as a consequence so matter could not be found moving in an expanding direction.

I believe we will find the universe to be infinite and that would change the age of the universe greatly, we can date the known universe all to about the same time period but what about the unknown? We have much to explore and the HST is only the first step in our ability to become enlightened about what is out there.

The imagination can not compare to reality...

Science can not bend the facts...

So as we move forward we will see a new tomorrow...

The past needs to be fixed so that we can live in the present...

I'll start that new thread later in three or four hours at the latest GOD willing...

Peace,

Gary

I'll keep an eye on your discussions, Gary. See you there!

Okay, I found an interest called Astrology and created that discussion... As you will see it is a wide open discussion, I allowed for a lot of different ideas to be shared.

See you there... :)

If you have any problems, let me know I'll create a link if needed...