|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:In my opinion no religious or scientific explanation of the genesis of the universe that has been provided is completely satisfactory. All explanations eventually run into the problem of explaining of how of a thing came into being from nothing. There is no difference I can see between saying that the universe was always been here or that a particular deity has always been here. I really don't understand why people might say the former is foolish but the latter is just common sense. The difference is in whether the universe or the deity has existence or is its existence. Thomas Aquinas didn't think it was possible to philosophically prove that the universe hadn't always existed, and the only reason his proofs assume that it was created is because God revealed that it was. God doesn't have existence, and never came into being; God simply is. The universe is contingent and composed of many parts, so it needed to have gotten its existence from somewhere, which is what requires an entity who doesn't require things. I know there's a couple people who've posted in the thread whose conception of God is basically "the universe as a whole, rather than any of its individual parts", and for them the question's even simpler: the source-of-all-existence and the-place-where-everything-that-exists-does-its-existing are just the same.
|
#
?
May 14, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
A way to say it is :God cannot be said to be. God is the Ground of Being. Or “God above God”
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2021 19:58
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:God doesn't have existence, and never came into being; God simply is. Saying God "is" is the same thing as saying He exists, i.e. it's nonsense. We're trying to talk about an entity that is by definition the source of everything, literally everything, including time and space and existence and reality. He is outside of all of these things and therefore it is impossible to talk non-metaphorically about God, or at least God the Father, because we cannot even imagine anything without time, space, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2021 20:01
|
|
|
mycophobia posted:Saying God "is" is the same thing as saying He exists, i.e. it's nonsense. We're trying to talk about an entity that is by definition the source of everything, literally everything, including time and space and existence and reality. He is outside of all of these things and therefore it is impossible to talk non-metaphorically about God, or at least God the Father, because we cannot even imagine anything without time, space, etc. We (well, Catholics) can say "God is" without it being nonsensical, because God said that "I Am Who Is" was his name. God's constant action is be-ing; what God does is be, and he be-s in a way we can't, because our existence is not only conditional, it's constantly supplied by God by God's continual be-ing. (Someday I will invent a conlang where talking about this makes sense.)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
mycophobia posted:Saying God "is" is the same thing as saying He exists, i.e. it's nonsense. We're trying to talk about an entity that is by definition the source of everything, literally everything, including time and space and existence and reality. He is outside of all of these things and therefore it is impossible to talk non-metaphorically about God, or at least God the Father, because we cannot even imagine anything without time, space, etc. That's how I always saw it. zonohedron posted:We (well, Catholics) can say "God is" without it being nonsensical, because God said that "I Am Who Is" was his name. God's constant action is be-ing; what God does is be, and he be-s in a way we can't, because our existence is not only conditional, it's constantly supplied by God by God's continual be-ing. I feel you tho
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
Not strictly true. The sciences have long imagined dimensions that transcend both time and space, but as I always say, don't be surprised if you find a whoole lotta angry gods behind the doors you open.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 10:08
|
|
|
Part of the trouble is that talking about God as having 'always existed' fails to make sense when you consider that one of the qualities God created (creates, is creating, will always have been going to create) is time itself. God didn't exist and then at some point create the universe. There was no 'before' the start of time. This is one of those things our languages are not great at.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 11:43
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:Part of the trouble is that talking about God as having 'always existed' fails to make sense when you consider that one of the qualities God created (creates, is creating, will always have been going to create) is time itself. God didn't exist and then at some point create the universe. There was no 'before' the start of time. This is one of those things our languages are not great at.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 12:28
|
|
|
This is kind of already baked into a lot of faiths. Paradise / Kingdom of God, the new God-cycle coming after the Kali-yuga, the new world growing from the ashes of Ragnarok, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 12:52
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What if God created another universe which had no connection with ours, other than a shared creator? Or other universes after the end or permanent stasis of this one? That'd be cool, and if, God willing, I reach Heaven and suddenly "know fully, as I am fully known", I'll get to find out all about it 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 14:18
|
|
|
Tias posted:Not strictly true. The sciences have long imagined dimensions that transcend both time and space time and space is still in those
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 16:35
|
|
|
or rather i should say, if something exists, then it has some kind of spatial representation, and if something exists, that means it is at least in a state of being, which belongs to time
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
Well, people argue about that one. One could claim that for instance mathematical truths exist independent of a physical universe that embodies them. From that viewpoint there's no conceivable universe or lack thereof where there's a greatest prime number.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What if God created another universe which had no connection with ours, other than a shared creator? Or other universes after the end or permanent stasis of this one? We would have no way to ever know. Not in this life anyway. Also 'after the end' of time is another idea that doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
Word to the wise: Be careful about adding church people on Facebook. You will see inspirational memes until you want to puke and the occasional questionable opinion. Plus there's no polite way to back out.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 01:15
|
|
|
Just don't have a Facebook. It's never led to any good.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:We would have no way to ever know. Not in this life anyway. Also 'after the end' of time is another idea that doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 01:29
|
|
|
Nessus posted:How does it not make sense? The universe we know will last for a finite amount of time (though arguably it will not literally end, but rather cease to have any activity in it between entropy and expansion). If there is a God outlined as per Christian theology, He (and the other two aspects of the Trinity) would certainly still exist when that has come to pass. If time ends then talking about 'after' doesn't make sense. There will be no time for anything to be happening in. Just as there was no time before the Big Bang that created spacetime. I should note here my astrophysics degree was a long time ago 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 02:46
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Can you clarify what you mean by infinite regression? Infinite regression is a sequence of finite things extending forever. A common story is a little old lady confronts a scientist, claiming that the earth is flat and sits on the back of a giant turtle. He asks her what the turtle stands on, she says another turtle, he asks what that one stands on and she gives the famous line "it's turtles all the way down". Another example is a child asking "Why?" every time you explain something, forcing you to keep explaining until you give up and say God did it. The problem with infinite regression is that since nothing that we observe in the universe causes its own existence but owes it to something else, you either have an infinite sequence of created things, which is paradoxical, or you have a finite sequence which either just happened, contrary to how we understand the universe operates, or God did it. No matter how you look at it you have something that breaks the rules. I find God to be the most reasonable explanation because the alternatives suggest to me that there's no way to understand the universe because it doesn't play by its own rules, how can we trust anything we understand about it since it could change whenever it wants to? Even the Buddha's insights into how the universe functions like karma might not be true anymore. BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:The genesis of the universe is considered an imponderable when his disciples asked the buddha about it, he responded with the parables of the poisoned arrow. The difference between the universe having always existed versus God having always existed is that the universe works in a way that seems to say that it can't have always existed while God works in a way that does. God in the Christian understanding is a person but He isn't an organism like the gods of other religions like Zeus or Odin are, who are born and are themselves subject to certain laws of the universe like time or Fate. God exists outside of (and within) time and space, and he not only created the universe but is responsible for its continued existence which is probably a more important distinction. We take it for granted that the universe just continues to exist and follow all the laws it does but why should it? If there's no one at the helm then how can we expect any consistency? Maybe killing things will make you get good karma in the next universe, or even next year?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
Hey we did it! Pulled off our first in-person get together for the holiday of Shavuot, *Pentacost. I chaired the event last year and was asked for an encore last year. Our tradition is to stay up late learning Torah so, like a Jewish nerdy rave or something. I love it. I organized 5 teachers this year on the theme of Trauma to Transformation. Particular highlights: Community members help One of my high school students spoke about his experiences of anti-semitism in life and encouraged others to speak about theirs.  My fiance the Rabbi :<3: spoke about the different strains of Jewish mystical traditions rose out of particular traumas I spoke about cognitive processing of trauma and explored looking at the texts of tradition for evidence the connection. We looked at the Passover Haggadah, the traditional text that we read on Passover, which is assembled from a number of time periods, a snippet of Genesis 3, and the part of Jeremiah where he talks about the house that your father would build vs your fraud and corruption of spirit in the same endeavor. Somebody Briscoe was a Jewish Irish Sioux. It's a whole thing. I'm currently coming down from my social and learning high now and thought I could spread the love and sparkles around.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 11:20
|
|
|
The US Supreme Court is going to hear a case about Roe v. Wade. I don’t want to talk about abortion since that’s a powder keg, but something that did get me thinking was seeing people bringing up how the six Republican Justices are or were Catholic. Specifically I was wondering how many religious heads are also secular rulers. One anti-Catholic trope is that they owe allegiance to a foreign power and so can’t be trusted, and I wanted to know who else that argument could be applied to, to make people shut up. The only others I could think of to whom it might apply are the Queen of England, the Supreme Leader of Iran, and the Dalai Lama.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
White Coke posted:The US Supreme Court is going to hear a case about Roe v. Wade. I don’t want to talk about abortion since that’s a powder keg, but something that did get me thinking was seeing people bringing up how the six Republican Justices are or were Catholic. Specifically I was wondering how many religious heads are also secular rulers. One anti-Catholic trope is that they owe allegiance to a foreign power and so can’t be trusted, and I wanted to know who else that argument could be applied to, to make people shut up. The only others I could think of to whom it might apply are the Queen of England, the Supreme Leader of Iran, and the Dalai Lama. If you mean in the latter sense, the Emperor of Japan's ceremonial/religious roles have been very important, and in many periods they were the only real power/role the imperial family had.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
White Coke posted:One anti-Catholic trope is that they owe allegiance to a foreign power and so can’t be trusted, and I wanted to know who else that argument could be applied to, to make people shut up. Well if you really really want enjoy crazy arguments with crazy people: two of the three Democratic-appointed justices are Jewish. When Ginsberg was alive it was three out of four.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 13:15
|
|
|
Jesus has building instructions for everyone, says my six-year-old: "sand is the worst"
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 14:21
|
|
|
We got to sing at Mass for the first time in over a year. Thanks, Lord!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 15:49
|
|
|
White Coke posted:One anti-Catholic trope is that they owe allegiance to a foreign power and so can’t be trusted, and I wanted to know who else that argument could be applied to, to make people shut up. A similar trope that has been used against religious people of many different faiths is the idea that people of religion X are only loyal to their faith and "their" people and thus can't assimilate to "our" society. It happens over and over throughout history and is happening today right now too.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:A similar trope that has been used against religious people of many different faiths is the idea that people of religion X are only loyal to their faith and "their" people and thus can't assimilate to "our" society. It happens over and over throughout history and is happening today right now too. I mean, if nothing else the last five years showed that quite a lot of American 'Christians' do in fact owe their allegiance to the state rather than their purported religious beliefs. It's no surprise that they think everyone is as cynical and self-interested as they are. https://i.imgur.com/15booIS.mp4
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Your example is a little confusing. Do you mean 'heads of state or similar figures, whose religious profession has implicit connection to a hierarchy,' or do you mean 'heads of state/similar figures who are at the top of a religious hierarchy'? The Queen of England is the head of the Heads of state or similar figures (or people who were heads of state like the Dalai Lama) who are at the top of religious hierarchies was what I was thinking. I’m mostly concerned with contemporary figures, but I won’t say no to past examples.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
White Coke posted:Heads of state or similar figures (or people who were heads of state like the Dalai Lama) who are at the top of religious hierarchies was what I was thinking. I’m mostly concerned with contemporary figures, but I won’t say no to past examples.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
The position of Dalai Lama is a bit more nuanced as he's not really the at the top of any religious hierarchy: he's very influential of course especially within the dominant school (Gelug) but even that has a seperate leader (the Ganden Tripa) and he doesn't have any authority in the religious matters of the other schools which have their own leaders. For example he supports female ordination but it hasn't happened so far. It's a bit more like in a community of astrophysicists, if Stephen Hawking came out with a new theory about black holes I imagine people would really have paid attention, not because he was the boss but because it's most likely something worth paying attention to and may well enhance ones career. In Thailand since the junta came to power the king appoints the Supreme Patriarch, scourge of feminists worldwide. Or rather is the head of and comes from the ordained sangha. Not the same person as the king but the closest I could think of.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
Is the Pope the actual formal head of state of Vatican City?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Is the Pope the actual formal head of state of Vatican City? Yes, though I think he retains citizenship in his own country.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 19:06
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Brigham Young was the governor of Utah, though that's not quite 'head of state' If I'm remember correctly he might as well have been.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
zhar posted:The position of Dalai Lama is a bit more nuanced as he's not really the at the top of any religious hierarchy: he's very influential of course especially within the dominant school (Gelug) but even that has a seperate leader (the Ganden Tripa) and he doesn't have any authority in the religious matters of the other schools which have their own leaders. For example he supports female ordination but it hasn't happened so far. It's a bit more like in a community of astrophysicists, if Stephen Hawking came out with a new theory about black holes I imagine people would really have paid attention, not because he was the boss but because it's most likely something worth paying attention to and may well enhance ones career. What political power, de jure and de facto, did the Dalai Lamas wield? Does the king exercise any religious power aside from appointment of the SP?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 20:01
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Is the Pope the actual formal head of state of Vatican City? He is, but he's not merely the head of state. He's the absolute monarch.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
I'm not really an expert on either Tibetan history or Thai politics, what I know is just what I remember picking up in passing mostly double checked on wikipedia so I'll do my best but may miss the mark slightly. What I posted wrt the Dalai Lama before was specifically about his religious authority particularly now, but in times past he was political leader of a theocracy so in practice it was probably more complicated. There are four major schools of Tibetan buddhism, Gelug is the newest. All have monasteries all over Tibet, and this was where a lot of the power was prior to the Chinese invasion. something like 1/3 of the men were monks. Tibet after the introduction of buddhism was orginally an empire that got invaded by the Mongols, who had a Mongolian administer it from the top but pretty loosely. For political reasons a Mongol chief bestowed the title of Dalai Lama upon the abbot of the biggest Gelug monastery, a really gifted leader who along with his previous incarnations (retroactively recognised as the 1st and 2nd dalai lama) built Gelug monasteries and grew a soft-power base through skillful involvement in internal Tibetan politics, disputes etc. Not the leader of Tibet, but a real up and comer with an alliance with the Mongols. By the time of the 5th Dalai Lama the other schools were getting pissed off by the growing Gelug power which led to a civil war which the Dalai Lama and his Mongol ally won, fully unifying Tibet, then the Mongols transferred power to the Dalai Lama. Thus, the great 5th Dalai Lama ended up with pretty much absolute control I think it's fair to say at an emperor level with all the political power that entails. After that the balance fluctuates between the Dalai Lama, monasteries and Qing China. It's worth bearing in mind after a Dalai Lama dies, his reincarnation needs to be found usually three years or so later when he can talk, so regents and the Panchen Lama (the one who recognises the Dalai Lama) end up with a lot of power. The Dalai Lama is recognised as the reincarnation of Avolekiteshvara the bodhisattva of compassion which informs the ruling style. Today the Thai government is similar to the English one in that the King holds more of a symbolic role and the actual politics are handled by a prime minister and cabinet. But these institutions clearly meddle eg the junta changing the law around appointment of the SP. Historically the King exercised a lot of religious power. King Rama I tried to get rid of Brahmanism, King Rama IV (who was a monk for years) established the modern two branch structure and reformed a whole bunch of other stuff. Rama V's brother wrote the textbooks that were used for the sangha exams. The ordination powers were bestowed by government. But I think the role was more seen as the king being the "protector" of the religion than the "head" so to speak.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 23:48
|
|
|
zhar posted:
Should be noted that Tibetan practice places a higher emphasis on wisdom kings and wrathful manifestations of the buddhas/bodhisattvas than other schools so this dude, for example is also a form of Avalokitesvara.  Nowadays the Dalai Lama doesn't really do this but his previous incarnations would lead armies in battle, and invoke Mahakala to burst dams and wash opposing armies away etc. Good write-up on the subject from a Tibetan buddhist in the buddhism thread when asked about this: Paramemetic posted:Okay so I'm not a Tibetan culture scholar. I'm a white guy what speaks Tibetan and has been around Tibetan culture, but I'm not a Tibetan or a scholar of it. I am gonna base this on what I've been told by Tibetan people and people in the Tibetan milieu but I encourage you to remember that that's coming to you through a filter.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 00:43
|
|
|
Archbishop Damaskinos of Athens was regent of Greece for a couple years. He's the one who had previously basically dared the Nazis to execute him. Also, Bishop Makarios served three terms as the first president of Cyprus.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
What do you guys think about the new Israel war? Could this be part of the bibles chapters of revelation? Or just a bunch of pissed off people?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 06:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
The second one.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 08:11
|
|