![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 47 to 71 of 77. Go back in thread:
Posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:06:07
In reply to Lou's request for clarificatio to Michael83's post » Michael83, posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2006, at 12:04:31
I'm trying to reply to your post as best I can without it looking like I'm blaming anyone, as Bob would like. I don't want to break the rules, so I'll describe it the best I can.
A. I do not believe that God created human beings uninvited, gave them an illogical belief system, and will punish them for simply following their logic. I do not believe that God would create faulty human beings and then blame them for their mistakes (which he created). There are just too many holes in a belief system like that.
B. Well no, a lot of it is good advice. I was just emphasizing how confused I am with it.
Posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:10:03
In reply to Lou's request for clarification from Michael83 » Michael83, posted by Lou Pilder on September 28, 2006, at 13:43:38
For your 3rd reply, I cannot answer those questions on here. I have my opinions, but I still respect everyone's belief. Some people just believe what makes them happy, and I guess the thing I've asked the most is "what's wrong with that?" I do the same as them, believe in what makes me happy.
Posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:11:35
In reply to Re: please be civil » Michael83, posted by Dr. Bob on September 29, 2006, at 23:30:32
I'm sorry Bob, I'll try to be more careful about what I say. I didn't mean to make it look like I'm pointing fingers. I just felt threatened by people who claim I'm going to burn in hell.
But I will try to be more careful about what I say, I understand completely.
Thanks.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2006, at 8:12:40
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to Michael83.. » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:02:26
Michael83,
You wrote,[...it's {incorrect} to say (we know [the nature] of the ruler of the universe)....we should describe our belief in God as "hope" rather than "belief"...].
A.Are you saying that those that say that they know in their heart that God is love, are incorrect to say that they know that the nature of God is love?
B.Are you saying that those that describe that they believe in their heart that God is love, and they say that they have experianced the Love of God, {should} really be saying that they hope that God is love instead of that they believe in their heart that and that those that say that they believe are {incorrect}?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2006, at 8:38:00
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarificatio to Michael83's, posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:06:07
Michael83,
You wrote,[...I do not believe that (God) gave {them} an illogical belief system...there are too many holes in a belief system like that...]]
A. Are you saying that the Jews and others that believe that they are recipiants of a belief system that they say that God gave them, is an illogical system, so thearfore , according to you, the Jews and others that believe that they are recipiants of a system given to them by God are beliveing something that is not true, because you say that it is {illogical}?
B. in your statement,[...there are too many holes in a belief system like that...],could it not be that what you think are {holes in the beliefe system} could possibly be explained with things that may be unbeknowing to you so that if you knew those things the holes might not be there?
Lou
Posted by SLS on October 1, 2006, at 8:46:20
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to Michael83.. » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:02:26
> A. I believe it is impossible to "believe" in something if you have no evidence to base that belief on.
Wait. Wait. Wait.
People come to believe things in many different ways. Sometimes they need no evidence other than the word of someone they have come to trust. That is called faith.
That someone comes to believe is sufficient to make belief possible without the type of evidence you would deem necessary for yourself. I guess we all have our own standards for what we need to have in order to believe. I believe in God. That we exist is enough evidence for me. See. It is possible to believe without the type of evidence that you obviously feel is necessary for you to believe for yourself. That I believe proves that belief is possible without evidence, unless, of course, you consider mere existence evidence. If you believe that what I believe to be evidence is indeed a type of evidence, and you agree that we do exist, then perhaps you might then believe in God afterall.
Uncertainty allows for belief without evidence. It is impossible to believe otherwise.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by SLS on October 1, 2006, at 9:12:02
In reply to for clarification » Michael83, posted by SLS on October 1, 2006, at 8:46:20
> Uncertainty allows for belief without evidence.
Where do I get this crap from?
- Scott
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 1, 2006, at 12:56:15
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarificatio to Michael83's, posted by Michael83 on October 1, 2006, at 0:06:07
> I'm trying to reply to your post as best I can without it looking like I'm blaming anyone, as Bob would like. I don't want to break the rules, so I'll describe it the best I can.
Thanks for being flexible and trying.
> There are just too many holes in a belief system like that.
But the above could still lead others to feel accused or put down. Maybe try talking about yourself rather than others, for example, instead of the above, something like:
> I just find it hard to adopt a belief system like that.
Do you see the difference?
Bob
Posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 1:33:14
In reply to Re: trying as best I can » Michael83, posted by Dr. Bob on October 1, 2006, at 12:56:15
I understand completely. I will remember that, I promise. I really really don't want to make anyone feel bad and I try to remember than when I post.
Thanks.
Posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 1:40:01
In reply to Lou's reply to Michael83's reply to Lou.. » Michael83, posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2006, at 8:12:40
>>>>Are you saying that those that say that they know in their heart that God is love, are incorrect to say that they know that the nature of God is love?<<<<
Lou, I'm not a physiologist or psychologist like Dr Bob, but I do know that "love" is a chemical reaction in your brain. I think you know that too. But that doesn't mean love is unimportant. It's important to us because it's the fuel for our emotions, which give us the diverse personalities we were fortunate enough to have.
But I don't think God has a "brain" like us because he is not flesh and blood, so I'm not sure how to answer your question.
Posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 2:05:46
In reply to Lou's reply to Michael83's reply to Lou-B » Michael83, posted by Lou Pilder on October 1, 2006, at 8:38:00
Response to: >>>>You wrote,[...I do not believe that (God) gave {them} an illogical belief system...there are too many holes in a belief system like that...]]<<<<<<<
A. I'm not here to say something is or isn't right or wrong.
I'm only saying it doesn't make sense to me, to the point where (at least in my mind), it makes absolutely 100% no sense. Others may think different.
B. In my mind, just from my understanding, the things I am confused with makes such a belief system an absolute cop-out. In my mind, others may think differently.
Could there be things that are unbeknowing to me you ask? That's not the nature of my confusion.
My confusion lies in the question, "How am I supposed to know what is and isn't right if I'm unable to get all the answers?" How am I supposed to know what's unbeknown to me?
My question is:
If I have different 10 people...
telling me 10 different belief systems...
all of them saying that they're right...
all 10 belief systems unable to prove absolutely that they're correct (no religion has proven they're correct 100%, I think everyone can agree on that)...
and all 10 beliefs telling me to believe based on "faith"...
and all 10 beliefs saying I will be punished if I'm wrong...How am I supposed to know who to believe?
How is that "just", if all 10 beliefs require me to believe on "faith", yet they are competing in a competitive market with other beliefs saying the same thing, yet none of them offering any amount of proof?
So really the logic ends there. Forget what I "don't know," it doesn't matter. It's not what I "don't know," it's "why should I be expected to knwo those things"? See my point?
Think about that.
And then I "could" go deeper (although I won't) about how human error (implying I could (or anyone really) get led into the wrong things, no one has perfect logic, not even me :p) and other common faults of the human mind play into this and how it all relates to the "justice" behind it.
I'd really be interested to hear your response to this.
NOTE: If this post went to far for anyone, I am very sorry. The whole point behind it is that no one should be blamed for what they believe in, because none of us are perfect. That's the whole point to all my questions. My point was meant to defend those who do believe by saying they shouldn't be blamed for believing what makes them happy or what makese sense to them. So don't feel like I'm blaming, no, I'm defending. I really defending diversity of opinion.
Posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 2:29:27
In reply to Re: Lou's reply....(Lou this is root of my point) » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 2:05:46
There is one phrase, one thing that Jesus said, that was ignored by the apostles, ignored by most ancient and modern Christian churches, but makes the MOST sense of all the Bible. The one phrase that basically saves Christianity and the logic behind it.
In Luke 23:34, Jesus said while on the cross, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
That one phrase has helped me in a lot of sleepless nights when trying to overcome the fear that I was going to go to hell. Although I do not believe, I have an incredible amount of respect for Jesus because of what he said.
He (Jesus) forgave the people crucifying and insulting him (without them asking for it), because he understood that they did not know who he really was. It technically wasn't there fault, they were ignorant.
Then this contradicts the "belief in Jesus is the only way to heaven story," which is the most popular form of Christianity.
Luke 23:34 basically implies "universal salvation." Because humans are not perfect and no religion offers 100% proof, so who is to blame those who don't believe?
The thing I wonder the most is why wasn't this included in modern (or even ancient, or any popularized Christianity at anytime) Christianity?
That one phrase saves the entire religion, but it seems to be ignored all too often.
I can honestly say 100%, if most churchs had believed and taught the truth of this phrase, and led it to imply universal salvation, I would not be suffering like I am today or like I have for the past 5 years.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 2, 2006, at 7:43:15
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Michael83's reply to Lou.. » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 2, 2006, at 1:40:01
Michael83,
You wrote,[...he (God) is not flesh and blood...].
Could you clarify the following?
By what authority do you use to write that God {is not} flesh and blood?
Lou
Posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 1:03:03
In reply to Lou's request for c to Michael83 » Michael83, posted by Lou Pilder on October 2, 2006, at 7:43:15
Lou come on, now you're just blurring the line between black and white and creating a grey area where anything goes.
I don't think that too many people believe that God is flesh and blood.
I mean if we believe that, the way to believe that God is flesh and blood is to accept by "faith," then that leaves us susceptible to believing practically anything. We could be vulnerable to believing anything anyone comes up and tells us to accept by "blind faith" without using our logic.
I'm still questioning whether or not you understand my whole point about the justice behind forcing faulty humans to believe in something that may not make complete sense to everyone.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 3, 2006, at 6:26:48
In reply to Re: Lou's request for c to Michael83 » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 1:03:03
Michael83,
You wrote,[...you're..blurring the line...and creating a grey area...]
It is not my intention to {blurr the line} or to {create} a grey area.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 3, 2006, at 6:43:20
In reply to Re: Lou's request for c to Michael83 » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 1:03:03
Michael83,
You wrote,[...if we believe that, (that God is flesh and blood)...then that leaves us..to believe ..anything....{>without< using..logic}...].
Well, are you saying that there is a system of logic that says that God {can not} be flesh and bone?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 3, 2006, at 7:08:58
In reply to Re: Lou's request for c to Michael83 » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 1:03:03
Michael83,
You wrote,[...I'm..questioning {whether or not you understand}..the {justice}...forcing.. humans to believe in something that may not make..sense to {everyone}...].
If this is about the concept of heaven and hell as you have written here, I could tell you what has been revealed to me concerning such and write to you concerning the {justice} aspect of such and if anyone would like to read such, I could do so by email if you request. Be advised that this will be from a Jew's perspective and will comment on the aspects of that doctrine such as:
A. The Lake of Fire
B. overcomming the harm of The Lake of Fire
C. The {justice} aspect
D. What is {unquenchable} fire?
E. What is The House of The Lord?
F. The resurrection of the dead
G. Can a man become a God?
H. other related topics
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
Posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 16:38:18
In reply to Re: Lou's request for c to Michael83 » Lou Pilder, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 1:03:03
> ... and creating a grey area where anything goes.
Life is gray, Michael. There are very all or nothing propositions.
>> ... then that leaves us susceptible to believing practically anything.
We ARE susceptible to believing practically anything. That doesn't mean we will, but we are not immune.
> ... forcing faulty humans to believe in something that may not make complete sense to everyone.
Who's being forced to believe and how?
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 16:39:32
In reply to Life is a gray area » Michael83, posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 16:38:18
> Life is gray, Michael. There are very [few] all or nothing propositions.I left out the "few" in the above post. Sort of a critical word there. :)
Posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 17:20:28
In reply to Life is a gray area » Michael83, posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 16:38:18
>>>>>>Who's being forced to believe and how?
So if the ruler of the universe tells you to believe in something or face eternal punishment, that's not forcing?
Posted by Phillipa on October 3, 2006, at 19:07:45
In reply to Re: Life is a gray area » gardenergirl, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 17:20:28
What about an atheist who just doesn't believe. How could something he doesn't believe in force him to do anything? I'm not saying that I am just something to think about. Love Phillipa ps we all have to come to our personal own conclusions.
Posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 20:54:53
In reply to Re: Life is a gray area » gardenergirl, posted by Michael83 on October 3, 2006, at 17:20:28
> >>>>>>Who's being forced to believe and how?
>
> So if the ruler of the universe tells you to believe in something or face eternal punishment, that's not forcing?Isn't that still a choice?
gg
Posted by Michael83 on October 4, 2006, at 2:59:09
In reply to Re: Life is a gray area » Michael83, posted by gardenergirl on October 3, 2006, at 20:54:53
I'm sorry that you do not understand what I'm trying to say.
It's obvious you believe the Christian doctrine. I've been in those shoes. It's hard to understand the things I'm saying when you're under that influence. It's not your fault. I didn't understand them when I believed. But once I lost my believe, day after day, it became more and more clear.
The point is, it is forcing. I don't for a second question whether or not I'm right on this issue. I am. I am just questioning the justice behind it.
Posted by Michael83 on October 4, 2006, at 3:05:08
In reply to Re: Life is a gray area » Michael83, posted by Phillipa on October 3, 2006, at 19:07:45
>>>How could something he doesn't believe in force him to do anything?
Well, it would be "forcing" when the atheist is not allowed into heaven at death and forced to go the opposite direction.
You're almost there Phillipa. :D
Take your phrase "What about an atheist who just doesn't believe."
That's my entire point.
What about someone who just doesn't believe? We don't control what we do and don't believe. Some people would like to believe we do, but we don't, that's a fact.
So if we don't control our beliefs, yet we a punished for not having a certain belief, how is that just?
That's like saying some people are going to hell no matter what, because they cannot believe.
People have never lost their belief dont' understand that some people just CANNOT believe. It just doesn't work the way some believers would like it to.
I could sit here and say I believed. I could go to church. I could try and try and try. I could pray. I could do it all. But in my heart, I still would not believe. Yet I am going to be punished for that.
How is that just?
Posted by gardenergirl on October 4, 2006, at 7:14:11
In reply to Re: Life is a gray area » gardenergirl, posted by Michael83 on October 4, 2006, at 2:59:09
> I'm sorry that you do not understand what I'm trying to say.
>
> It's obvious you believe the Christian doctrine.Please don't jump to conclusions about me.
> I've been in those shoes. It's hard to understand the things I'm saying when you're under that influence. It's not your fault.
Well that's certainly generous of you. I'd say I feel put down by that statement, but really all I can do is chuckle and shake my head. I was in my early 20's once. I remember thinking I knew a great deal about life and about others. At 40, I realize that 20 year old me had a great deal more to learn. I was earnest and idealistic. Well-meaning. But clueless. I'm less clueless now, but at 40, I look forward to continuing to learn more about life. I expect that at 60, I'll look back at 40 year old me and have a loving chuckle.
> The point is, it is forcing. I don't for a second question whether or not I'm right on this issue. I am. I am just questioning the justice behind it.
I do question it. Please read again what I wrote: >
> So if the ruler of the universe tells you to believe in something or face eternal punishment, that's not forcing?Isn't that still a choice?
As you set out the options: A) Believe in something. B) Face eternal punishment. Ya got options as you yourself lay it out.
And frankly, if you believe that you will face eternal punishment for "not believing", I would suggest that you really DO believe at least part of the doctrine. Otherwise, you wouldn't be at all concerned about eternal punishment, because you wouldn't believe it exists.
gg
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.