Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51394)	6/2/1999 7:18:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Ah, you are a seeker. That is wonderful. Me too, at least that is my intention life long. You mention that you accept things (whether you find them from a religious source or otherwise) simply because they seem right and true. Me too. I am a religious person and I have found evidence in the religions that you are always able to confirm the truth in your heart (mind, center, whatever) simply because that is part of what you are given as a human. I also find scriptural evidence that says many questions will remain unanswerable until the end of this life. So like you, I am fine with leaving some mystery to remain, as is. I did notice that you stated some things as fact or as assumption that you base your logic on. I would encourage you to continue to study your own philosophies as I do mine. For example: <<However, the belief that they were created by a supreme being requires the assumption that this supreme being just sprang into being spontaneously. >> The assumption that you made here dismisses the concept of eternity (something without beginning or end). In order for the Universe to spring into being, there has to be a starting place which also implies the beginning of time (which I consider to be a temporal creation). I suppose you could argue that something sprang into being before that (space for example) but we are merely pushing the beginning point further back. In order to imagine a beginning you have to imagine something outside of the beginning. For me that is eternity. Eternity, by definition, doesn't have a starting or ending point or limitations of any kind. What do you think about this concept?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51394)	6/2/1999 8:12:00 PM
From: miraje	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

BLT, Nice post. Agnosticism and atheism are words that seem to be defined in vague terms. and because there is no concrete evidence upon which to base any conclusions, I prefer to simply leave them unanswered. That is the heart of agnosticism. By that definition I would also call myself an agnostic. Using the term to mean fence sitting, regarding belief in God as postulated by conventional religions, would leave me no alternative but to call myself an atheist. The unknowable and the irrational are two different animals. On the other hand, your example of the Golden Rule is a definitely rational concept, regardless of the source. It's my basic credo as well. And, as you say, the world would be a much better place if all adhered to it. JB