Religious Beliefs

13468934

Comments

  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    redrock wrote:
    hmm the afterlife.. could it be a delusion happening in an extrememly traumatic situation for our brain and mind? could it be under the extreme stress of trauma our minds do go someplace else trying to return to the here and now? call that an afterlife if you like. i shant. .

    The afterlife is a concept which comforts people during their life, helps them deal with any trauma perhaps? Such as loss, a shit life ('it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after'...), etc. Some think there must be another reason we are on this planet, that this life is only a beginning, waiting for something 'bigger'.

    As I said before, god/religion/religious concept (which 'cross-over' with god without being organised religion) are a crutch for those who need it. It creates an illusion, a power taken out of our hands and put in 'higher' hands when necessary - shifted responsibility. Or, I guess a way to explain/justify what we consider the 'unexplainable' - 'it's god's will...' It's easier to say god this or god that in certain circumstances or certain times of our life as opposed to I this or I that.... My thoughts.


    i think for a whole mass of people the thought that 'this' is all there is, is just too much of nothing, you know? its like theyre living a less than 'perfect' existence and they think surely theres more than this... surely 'this' cant be all my life will amount to. a reward for a shitty life lived graciously.. or perhaps not so graciously. or maybe they just expect more.

    We need to take into account supersymmetry and M theory. Before we come to the conclusion that 'this' is all that their is. Which you must agree with?
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    MrAbraham wrote:
    well i dunno.. shooting a man in reno just to see him die seems to have a truth to it. its not mired by any motivation other than to know what its like. and once you know what its like.. theres your truth.

    Yes a desire to want to know what it's like. Yes. Like I said everything has a truth. Then again, we should forget about what it 'seems', just deal with what adds up.

    Now, is it a good thing to do? Of course 'good', can be relative, but not when it comes to life and death, as this is all that their is. right? When we die, nothing else is around, when we die we die.

    So you would agree that it is wrong to just go and kill someone,


    what id the person you kill is, unbeknownst to you, a serial killer.. does that make what you did any better? what if no one knew he was a serial killer? only he knew.. but his secret died with him. was killing him wrong?

    Well again we must bring physics into the equation, as intention and positive energy related. What was my intention for the killing? simply to satisfy my ego? take a life just to know what it's like?

    A simple coincidence? The day I shoot someone just to know what it's like, happens to be a killer that I killed.

    We go back down to, a simple truth, killing is wrong.

    Also what brought the killer in that spot the moment I run up with a gun? A set of choices perhaps he made that had led him to where I will be? Brings back to the balance of life, the simple algorithm which I spoke about in previous posts. Which nature has. The balance.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    hmm the afterlife.. could it be a delusion happening in an extrememly traumatic situation for our brain and mind? could it be under the extreme stress of trauma our minds do go someplace else trying to return to the here and now? call that an afterlife if you like. i shant. .

    The afterlife is a concept which comforts people during their life, helps them deal with any trauma perhaps? Such as loss, a shit life ('it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after'...), etc. Some think there must be another reason we are on this planet, that this life is only a beginning, waiting for something 'bigger'.

    As I said before, god/religion/religious concept (which 'cross-over' with god without being organised religion) are a crutch for those who need it. It creates an illusion, a power taken out of our hands and put in 'higher' hands when necessary - shifted responsibility. Or, I guess a way to explain/justify what we consider the 'unexplainable' - 'it's god's will...' It's easier to say god this or god that in certain circumstances or certain times of our life as opposed to I this or I that.... My thoughts.

    Do you feel this way about ALL religious/spiritual beliefs?

    I guess I just think any attempt to truly understand or explain other people's relationship with "God" is futile. Personally, I believe in an afterlife for the same reason I believe in aliens: because it just seems improbable to me that this is all there is - not because I need to have something to comfort me during difficult times.
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    I use drugs to comfort me in difficult times and use science,physics and math to reach my conclusions.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    MrAbraham wrote:

    i think for a whole mass of people the thought that 'this' is all there is, is just too much of nothing, you know? its like theyre living a less than 'perfect' existence and they think surely theres more than this... surely 'this' cant be all my life will amount to. a reward for a shitty life lived graciously.. or perhaps not so graciously. or maybe they just expect more.

    We need to take into account supersymmetry and M theory. Before we come to the conclusion that 'this' is all that their is. Which you must agree with?

    take into account a theory that relies on me believing in string theory as a truth before i could even entertain its existence?

    so what do you think.. do you think i must agree?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    MrAbraham wrote:

    i think for a whole mass of people the thought that 'this' is all there is, is just too much of nothing, you know? its like theyre living a less than 'perfect' existence and they think surely theres more than this... surely 'this' cant be all my life will amount to. a reward for a shitty life lived graciously.. or perhaps not so graciously. or maybe they just expect more.

    We need to take into account supersymmetry and M theory. Before we come to the conclusion that 'this' is all that their is. Which you must agree with?

    take into account a theory that relies on me believing in string theory as a truth before i could even entertain its existence?

    so what do you think.. do you think i must agree?

    Mea Culpa,

    But we are getting to the truth here, or are we ;)
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    MrAbraham wrote:
    what id the person you kill is, unbeknownst to you, a serial killer.. does that make what you did any better? what if no one knew he was a serial killer? only he knew.. but his secret died with him. was killing him wrong?

    Well again we must bring physics into the equation, as intention and positive energy related. What was my intention for the killing? simply to satisfy my ego? take a life just to know what it's like?

    A simple coincidence? The day I shoot someone just to know what it's like, happens to be a killer that I killed.

    We go back down to, a simple truth, killing is wrong.

    Also what brought the killer in that spot the moment I run up with a gun? A set of choices perhaps he made that had led him to where I will be? Brings back to the balance of life, the simple algorithm which I spoke about in previous posts. Which nature has. The balance.


    id say it was you who made the set of choices that brought you into contact with him, not the other way around. YOU were the one who woke up that morning and said wow i wonder what its like to kill someone, so YOU set about to make that happen. YOU are the determinant here, not the man you killed. yesterday you wouldve walked right by him, maybe even tipped your hat and said g'day. you might even change your usual behaviour so you find yourself in a part of town youre not usually associated with.. itd be a bitch to kill someone you knew, even just in passing. in this little scenario id go so far to say that you were nudging that so called balance of life out of whack.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    MrAbraham wrote:
    MrAbraham wrote:
    We need to take into account supersymmetry and M theory. Before we come to the conclusion that 'this' is all that their is. Which you must agree with?

    take into account a theory that relies on me believing in string theory as a truth before i could even entertain its existence?

    so what do you think.. do you think i must agree?

    Mea Culpa,

    But we are getting to the truth here, or are we ;)

    and what is truth again??? 8-)
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    MrAbraham wrote:
    what id the person you kill is, unbeknownst to you, a serial killer.. does that make what you did any better? what if no one knew he was a serial killer? only he knew.. but his secret died with him. was killing him wrong?

    Well again we must bring physics into the equation, as intention and positive energy related. What was my intention for the killing? simply to satisfy my ego? take a life just to know what it's like?

    A simple coincidence? The day I shoot someone just to know what it's like, happens to be a killer that I killed.

    We go back down to, a simple truth, killing is wrong.

    Also what brought the killer in that spot the moment I run up with a gun? A set of choices perhaps he made that had led him to where I will be? Brings back to the balance of life, the simple algorithm which I spoke about in previous posts. Which nature has. The balance.


    id say it was you who made the set of choices that brought you into contact with him, not the other way around. YOU were the one who woke up that morning and said wow i wonder what its like to kill someone, so YOU set about to make that happen. YOU are the determinant here, not the man you killed. yesterday you wouldve walked right by him, maybe even tipped your hat and said g'day. you might even change your usual behaviour so you find yourself in a part of town youre not usually associated with.. itd be a bitch to kill someone you knew, even just in passing. in this little scenario id go so far to say that you were nudging that so called balance of life out of whack.

    So is killing wrong? Does it set the balance of life out of whack? Also, what choices did the killer make? Did he just kill someone a few mins before I did, if he is setting off a negative energy, is my negative energy hitting against his? Causing me to shoot him out of many other potentials?

    Was it truly random that I picked a killer to kill? Taking into account what we know about positive and negative forces.
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    MrAbraham wrote:
    take into account a theory that relies on me believing in string theory as a truth before i could even entertain its existence?

    so what do you think.. do you think i must agree?

    Mea Culpa,

    But we are getting to the truth here, or are we ;)

    and what is truth again??? 8-)

    Exactly! What is correct here? The truth even in my own mistake. It's not subjective, I was wrong. Or was I?
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    edited March 2011
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    hmm the afterlife.. could it be a delusion happening in an extrememly traumatic situation for our brain and mind? could it be under the extreme stress of trauma our minds do go someplace else trying to return to the here and now? call that an afterlife if you like. i shant. .

    The afterlife is a concept which comforts people during their life, helps them deal with any trauma perhaps? Such as loss, a shit life ('it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after'...), etc. Some think there must be another reason we are on this planet, that this life is only a beginning, waiting for something 'bigger'.

    As I said before, god/religion/religious concept (which 'cross-over' with god without being organised religion) are a crutch for those who need it. It creates an illusion, a power taken out of our hands and put in 'higher' hands when necessary - shifted responsibility. Or, I guess a way to explain/justify what we consider the 'unexplainable' - 'it's god's will...' It's easier to say god this or god that in certain circumstances or certain times of our life as opposed to I this or I that.... My thoughts.

    Do you feel this way about ALL religious/spiritual beliefs?

    I guess I just think any attempt to truly understand or explain other people's relationship with "God" is futile. Personally, I believe in an afterlife for the same reason I believe in aliens: because it just seems improbable to me that this is all there is - not because I need to have something to comfort me during difficult times.

    I do - for all beliefs where there is an almighty god. (Note: 'spiritual' does not automatically mean a god) If one extrapolates scientific data, it's more probable that there are aliens than a god/afterlife.
    Post edited by redrock on
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    MrAbraham wrote:

    id say it was you who made the set of choices that brought you into contact with him, not the other way around. YOU were the one who woke up that morning and said wow i wonder what its like to kill someone, so YOU set about to make that happen. YOU are the determinant here, not the man you killed. yesterday you wouldve walked right by him, maybe even tipped your hat and said g'day. you might even change your usual behaviour so you find yourself in a part of town youre not usually associated with.. itd be a bitch to kill someone you knew, even just in passing. in this little scenario id go so far to say that you were nudging that so called balance of life out of whack.

    So is killing wrong? Does it set the balance of life out of whack? Also, what choices did the killer make? Did he just kill someone a few mins before I did, if he is setting off a negative energy, is my negative energy hitting against his? Causing me to shoot him out of many other potentials?

    Was it truly random that I picked a killer to kill? Taking into account what we know about positive and negative forces.

    so youre trying to tell me the universe decided for you that the person you 'decided' to kill, would be a serial killer. how very convenient.

    is killing wrong? no it is not. is murder wrong? yes, i think it is.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    MrAbraham wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    MrAbraham wrote:
    e, it's important to not confuse ultimate truth with point of view or some sort of opinion, fair?

    Ultimate truth? From who's point of view? The theist? The atheist? The truly religious person? Anyone in between? There is no 'common' ultimate truth.

    Let's say this, killing someone, pick up a gun and go shoot some random person, the truth is what? A thing we should not do, why?

    Let's say, no one else would see it, know about it, we just for whatever reason want to feel what it's like to kill soneone. Why is it 'wrong' to do so? Is it wrong? Basic rule we know, don't hurt others. We know we all will die one day, this is an ultimate truth. As we know this life is transitory. That is the truth.

    It's not a point of view. correct?

    Social and moral constraints tell the majority of us that killing is wrong. It may be a truth/fact for these people but for some others that live outside of these constraints, it's not the 'truth'.

    Yes we all die, fact. It's a medical/physical fact but this is not the ultimate truth as some would seek it. The ultimate truth is sought after in different ways, depending on your faith (or lack thereof). The ultimate truth is revealed individually.

    EDIT: I will take catefrances' view that 'murder' is wrong. Better choice of words.
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    MrAbraham wrote:

    id say it was you who made the set of choices that brought you into contact with him, not the other way around. YOU were the one who woke up that morning and said wow i wonder what its like to kill someone, so YOU set about to make that happen. YOU are the determinant here, not the man you killed. yesterday you wouldve walked right by him, maybe even tipped your hat and said g'day. you might even change your usual behaviour so you find yourself in a part of town youre not usually associated with.. itd be a bitch to kill someone you knew, even just in passing. in this little scenario id go so far to say that you were nudging that so called balance of life out of whack.

    So is killing wrong? Does it set the balance of life out of whack? Also, what choices did the killer make? Did he just kill someone a few mins before I did, if he is setting off a negative energy, is my negative energy hitting against his? Causing me to shoot him out of many other potentials?

    Was it truly random that I picked a killer to kill? Taking into account what we know about positive and negative forces.

    so youre trying to tell me the universe decided for you that the person you 'decided' to kill, would be a serial killer. how very convenient.

    is killing wrong? no it is not. is murder wrong? yes, i think it is.

    It was I think you who sampled in a serial killer, so I factored in the negatives and the positives to the equation,

    Murder is what they say, unlawful killing of another human. Unlawful based on what? Also take note of 'killer'.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    MrAbraham wrote:
    so youre trying to tell me the universe decided for you that the person you 'decided' to kill, would be a serial killer. how very convenient.

    is killing wrong? no it is not. is murder wrong? yes, i think it is.

    It was I think you who sampled in a serial killer, so I factored in the negatives and the positives to the equation,

    Murder is what they say, unlawful killing of another human. Unlawful based on what? Also take note of 'killer'.

    unlawful based on the law i imagine. based upon the ingrained opinion of societies trying to create order out of chaos.

    everyone who kills is a killer but not everyone who kills is a murderer... based on the law. self defense anyone??
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    Personally, I believe in an afterlife for the same reason I believe in aliens: because it just seems improbable to me that this is all there is -.
    The 'it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after' train of thoughts?

    Why must there be something else? Can we just not accept that our life on earth is it, that we are part of evolution and we are doing our bit like everything else on this planet?
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    The afterlife is a concept which comforts people during their life, helps them deal with any trauma perhaps? Such as loss, a shit life ('it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after'...), etc. Some think there must be another reason we are on this planet, that this life is only a beginning, waiting for something 'bigger'.

    As I said before, god/religion/religious concept (which 'cross-over' with god without being organised religion) are a crutch for those who need it. It creates an illusion, a power taken out of our hands and put in 'higher' hands when necessary - shifted responsibility. Or, I guess a way to explain/justify what we consider the 'unexplainable' - 'it's god's will...' It's easier to say god this or god that in certain circumstances or certain times of our life as opposed to I this or I that.... My thoughts.

    Do you feel this way about ALL religious/spiritual beliefs?

    I guess I just think any attempt to truly understand or explain other people's relationship with "God" is futile. Personally, I believe in an afterlife for the same reason I believe in aliens: because it just seems improbable to me that this is all there is - not because I need to have something to comfort me during difficult times.

    I do - for all beliefs where there is an almighty god. (Note: 'spiritual' does not automatically mean a god) If one extrapolates scientific data, it's more probable that there are aliens than a god/afterlife.

    But, again, "God" can mean anything to anyone, so I don't feel like your (or anyone's) understanding of "an almighty god" is necessarily applicable to others' beliefs about God. For some people, "God" just means nature, or "God" refers to energy or good vibes, or whatever. I think people can even belief basically the same thing, but people get too hung up on language. If everyone defined their terms exactly the same way, perhaps there could be a more meaningful discussion. But, as it stands, I think people are generally just misunderstanding one another.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    Personally, I believe in an afterlife for the same reason I believe in aliens: because it just seems improbable to me that this is all there is -.
    The 'it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after' train of thoughts?

    Why must there be something else? Can we just not accept that our life on earth is it, that we are part of evolution and we are doing our bit like everything else on this planet?

    No, not that train of thought. (I don't think we're really understanding each other.) Quite an opposite train of thought, actually. The train of thought to which you refer seems to me to be egocentric. I'm referring to a train of thought that says there's got to be much more to space & time than our little insignificant lives on this earth.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    Yes, of course, a god can be anything - just look through history or the various cultures. My perception for this thread is that one was talking about a christian type god (talking about religion/signs/divine intervention). Certainly, earlier in my posts, I stated I was making this assumption.

    Also, 'afterlife' is usually a religious reference whether this reference is from a theists or non-theistic religion.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    The 'it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after' train of thoughts?

    Why must there be something else? Can we just not accept that our life on earth is it, that we are part of evolution and we are doing our bit like everything else on this planet?

    No, not that train of thought. (I don't think we're really understanding each other.) Quite an opposite train of thought, actually. The train of thought to which you refer seems to me to be egocentric. I'm referring to a train of thought that says there's got to be much more to space & time than our little insignificant lives on this earth.

    I don't think that thinking we are part of a whole, doing our bit is egocentric, on the contrary. And I don't believe our lives are insignificant - if so, why bother? Might as well pop yourself and go straight into the afterlife!
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    Yes, of course, a god can be anything - just look through history or the various cultures. My perception for this thread is that one was talking about a christian type god (talking about religion/signs/divine intervention). Certainly, earlier in my posts, I stated I was making this assumption.

    Also, 'afterlife' is usually a religious reference whether this reference is from a theists or non-theistic religion.

    Well I'd say I'm a Christian, but I don't think we're talking about the same God.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    The 'it can't be that's all I'm here for - there must be something after' train of thoughts?

    Why must there be something else? Can we just not accept that our life on earth is it, that we are part of evolution and we are doing our bit like everything else on this planet?

    No, not that train of thought. (I don't think we're really understanding each other.) Quite an opposite train of thought, actually. The train of thought to which you refer seems to me to be egocentric. I'm referring to a train of thought that says there's got to be much more to space & time than our little insignificant lives on this earth.

    I don't think that thinking we are part of a whole, doing our bit is egocentric, on the contrary. And I don't believe our lives are insignificant - if so, why bother? Might as well pop yourself and go straight into the afterlife!

    I don't understand your original train of thought as merely being about being part of a whole. And significance is relative. I'm certainly significant to those who love me & maybe even to this time period, but less so relative to ALL of space & time.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    Yes, of course, a god can be anything - just look through history or the various cultures. My perception for this thread is that one was talking about a christian type god (talking about religion/signs/divine intervention). Certainly, earlier in my posts, I stated I was making this assumption.

    Also, 'afterlife' is usually a religious reference whether this reference is from a theists or non-theistic religion.

    Well I'd say I'm a Christian, but I don't think we're talking about the same God.

    In order to debate one must make assumptions. My assumption is based on what, in general, is defined as god in christianity, ie an omnipotent and divine being. There are other 'parts' to this definition such as creator, holy, etc.

    As said, god can be anything for anyone but a 'base' is needed for discussion. If your god is not the typical christian god, that's fine.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    I don't understand your original train of thought as merely being about being part of a whole. .

    Not sure what you mean. If one believes that our 'time' is our life on this planet, we are part of the whole ecosystem in a way. Part of evolution, part of how this planet develops (for good or bad), part of a whole.

    _ wrote:
    And significance is relative. .

    Like anything else. It's how one perceives it.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    Yes, of course, a god can be anything - just look through history or the various cultures. My perception for this thread is that one was talking about a christian type god (talking about religion/signs/divine intervention). Certainly, earlier in my posts, I stated I was making this assumption.

    Also, 'afterlife' is usually a religious reference whether this reference is from a theists or non-theistic religion.

    Well I'd say I'm a Christian, but I don't think we're talking about the same God.

    In order to debate one must make assumptions. My assumption is based on what, in general, is defined as god in christianity, ie an omnipotent and divine being. There are other 'parts' to this definition such as creator, holy, etc.

    As said, god can be anything for anyone but a 'base' is needed for discussion. If your god is not the typical christian god, that's fine.

    Yeah, I see your point about debate & assumptions, at least when it comes to the merits of religion. I think we could debate the assumptions/definitions themselves if we wanted to but, until those are agreed upon (and they probably never will be), I guess I don't think we can really move forward to discuss the merits.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    I don't understand your original train of thought as merely being about being part of a whole. .

    Not sure what you mean. If one believes that our 'time' is our life on this planet, we are part of the whole ecosystem in a way. Part of evolution, part of how this planet develops (for good or bad), part of a whole.

    Well I believe we are part of a whole. It's just that, to me, the train of thought that concludes there must be something more to life because this can't be all I'm here for is more about oneself than about being part of a whole - because the conclusion is based on an egocentric premise.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    _ wrote:
    I don't understand your original train of thought as merely being about being part of a whole. .

    Not sure what you mean. If one believes that our 'time' is our life on this planet, we are part of the whole ecosystem in a way. Part of evolution, part of how this planet develops (for good or bad), part of a whole.

    Well I believe we are part of a whole. It's just that, to me, the train of thought that concludes there must be something more to life because this can't be all I'm here for is more about oneself than about being part of a whole - because the conclusion is based on an egocentric premise.

    It's not about 'I' per se but 'we' as a human race. Naturally, I am part of this as well.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    _ wrote:
    I think we could debate the assumptions/definitions themselves if we wanted to but, until those are agreed upon (and they probably never will be), I guess I don't think we can really move forward to discuss the merits.

    There is general consensus from the 'learned' people as to what these definitions are. Whether, as individuals, we agree to these is another issue.
  • ONCE DEVIDEDONCE DEVIDED Posts: 1,131
    NO RELIGOUS BELEIFS#just believ religon should be outlawed as a collective thing.it only give power to the few. profit for the few
    death and destruction for many
    however I BELIEVE IN YOU !!!
    AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Paul David wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    Paul David wrote:
    I am involved in a discussion.
    you entered discussion.
    I responded to your contribution to said discussion.
    your contribution to said discussion is apparently none of my business.

    alrighty. :?
    Well if responding means calling me names, misinterpreting what I say over and over to fit your purpose,
    and putting me down for my beliefs even though I was not trying to push them on you or any other non believer...

    it might be nice to just be ignored

    I didn't call you names.
    Misinterpretration is just as much the responsibility of those telling the story, as the ones listening. Just a thought.
    I never put you down for your beliefs, or for anything else, for that matter.
    I am here for honest, mature discussion.
    Paul David wrote:
    it bothers me, Pandora, that you (and many other theists) seem to think that people who don't believe in miracles need to open their heart to something. My heart is open as big as it can get, probably bigger than many who believe in miracles.

    Just because I don't believe what you do, doesn't make me any less of a person. that's what he means by narrow minded and egotistical. believing one is chosen for some greater understanding where others are left behind is not a nice thing to think of oneself, in my opinion.

    You might be considered defensive assuming someone who is a believer thinks them better than you...I never said I was better than anyone.

    I said I had a miracle that changed me

    This thread was to tell our beliefs and where they come from. I told my life story and where I am now in my beliefs.

    I do not feel chosen for anything your honest discussion seems prejudicial and jumps to that conclusion.

    I said to another poster open your heart to the fact I believe and not assume I am terrible things because I believe I had a miracle.

    His judgmental and negative response was a put down and yes you did put me down by agreeing with the other poster that I was egotistical and narrowminded...which I am neither.

    Miracles come from the most tragic of events.

    If anyone thinks I feel chosen for experiencing my miracle it would be like saying
    Jeanwah feels she was chosen by her terrible accident.
    Yes she rose above and learned positive things,
    as I hope I have, but I wouldn't pick it and I'm sure she wouldn't either.

    Would I have wanted to go through what I did no.
    It was shocking, tramatic, I carry regret and guilt and shame.

    I failed, I did not save the life of someone I loved dearly
    when it could have been easily in my power if only I believed in myself and what I was shown.

    What took me there to that place was a miracle...I was shown what I could do
    paths would have been changed.

    Why it happened I do not know ....at the time it certainly felt like a test,
    over time it has helped me overcome my fears and grow to be a more spiritual person.
    And I try to bring a positive to my life and the lives of others.

    I think that response was mature ...I think that will pass any standards.
    As I said feel free to ignore me if it doesn't.
Sign In or Register to comment.