'Bin Laden has won': Atheist and academic Richard Dawkins in airport security Twitter row over jar of honey

RICHARD Dawkins isn't a big fan of airport security.

The world-famous scientist and atheist activist was furious when his "little jar of honey" was confiscated and thrown away by "rule-bound dundridges" at an airport.

"Bin Laden has won, in airports of the world every day," Mr Dawkins said on Twitter. "I had a little jar of honey, now thrown away by rule-bound dundridges. STUPID waste."

Incidentally, Mr Dawkins says the word "dundridge" means a "petty, bossy, bureaucratic little rule-hound". You won't find it in any official dictionaries.

On the upside, the incident undoubtedly supports Mr Dawkins' belief that there is no god, because no loving deity could possibly allow one's little jar of honey to be taken away so callously.

Mr Dawkins embarked on a withering Twitter rant after the incident, earning scorn and sympathy in roughly equal measure. Here are some of the spectacular highlights.

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/scientist-and-atheist-activist-richard-dawkins-loses-it-after-airport-security-confiscates-his-honey/story-e6frfq80-1226753217875

http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1006/atheism-atheism-logic-richard-dawkins-political-poster-1275632243.jpg

http://thevitaminpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Dawkins.png

Dawkins is right.


http://www.thepeoplescube.com/images/IslamicRageBoy_Poster2.gif

Richard Dawkins is a funny guy. I follow him on Twitter.

What's the connection between Atheism and Science anyway?

Quote:

Atheism is the conceit to believe that a some men have infinite knowledge. And they have used this infinite knowledge to perform the God like task of proving a negative.

Any particular brand of mainstream theism is the conceit to believe that their brand (and only their brand) is supported by a God of infinite knowledge.

Any world view can be regarded as conceited by somebody not of that worldview.

Do Atheists believe that some men have infinite knowledge?
I've never met any who claim they do.

Do they use this infinite knowledge to perform the God like task of proving a negative?

I don't think anybody has claimed that they can prove a negative.

I can posit grandiose statements too, you know.

Islam is the conceited view that their strawmen are inspired by Allah and therefore have more validity than other strawmen. 

Maybe you could make it a new Hadith:

الإسلام هو رأي مغرور أن من القش الرجال هي مستوحاة من الله، وبالتالي يكون أكثر صحة من غيرها من القش الرجال.

Dawkins is right. Airport security is ridiculous nowadays. Like trying to swat a fly with an a-bomb.

Airport security measures are so well known that any terrorist group could smuggle explosives by dividing it into small portions for each terrorist and combining them on the flight. We've already had 3d printed guns that work. They wouldn't show up either.

All they do is to make life difficult for ordinary passengers.

Bin Laden Has Won,   ....his place in hell, if it exists.

            [.....i don't know what hell is.   God just makes it clear that the rejects will get what they have worked for [have 'demonstrated' that they want].        so i guess that they will be happy then.]

muso wrote on Nov 8^th, 2013 at 8:32am:

Airport security measures are so well known that any terrorist group could smuggle explosives by dividing it into small portions for each terrorist and combining them on the flight. We've already had 3d printed guns that work. They wouldn't show up either. All they do is to make life difficult for ordinary passengers.

Yep, us ordinary people just suffer, and suffer.

Is that fair ?        >:(



Once they put you in that box in the ground, muso, all of your problems will be over.        ;)

It is something to look forward to, for all atheists!

Peace at last!                  ;D

Yadda wrote on Nov 8^th, 2013 at 10:48pm:

muso wrote on Nov 8th, 2013 at 8:32am: Airport security measures are so well known that any terrorist group could smuggle explosives by dividing it into small portions for each terrorist and combining them on the flight. We've already had 3d printed guns that work. They wouldn't show up either. All they do is to make life difficult for ordinary passengers. Yep, us ordinary people just suffer, and suffer. Is that fair ?        >:( Once they put you in that box in the ground, muso, all of your problems will be over.        ;) It is something to look forward to, for all atheists! Peace at last!                  ;D

Sorry muso, i forgot.



Your not an atheist.

More of an agnostic.

Right ?

I'm a religious naturalist.
http://www.religiousnaturalism.org/faq.html

muso wrote on Nov 10^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

I'm a religious naturalist. http://www.religiousnaturalism.org/faq.html

Talk about purple prose!!!



Can you give me a very short 'elevator pitch' of what Religious Naturalism is all about?

A religious naturalist adopts as her/his core narrative our understandings of nature as made manifest by scientific inquiry, and develops integrated religious responses … interpretive, spiritual, and moral/ethical … to that narrative.




'develops integrated religious responses', does it?


I am very sorry Mr Musician, but I am smirking.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yqS6fyCyovQ/UntvFNGyj8I/AAAAAAAAZN8/ieHPtBawqZ4/s1600/politicians.jpg
Apologies for the extra apostrophy.

Other people's "World Views" are eminently smirkable. Generally I try to understand what I'm smirking at though.

RN is a second cousin to Deism, but not all Religious Naturalists are Deists. Not all Religious Naturalists are theistic. Do you need me to remind you what Deism is?

If you smirk at RN, you're smirking at people like Adam Smith, Abraham Lincoln, Dmitri Mendeleev,  John Muir, George Washington, Victor Hugo and Thomas Paine to name but a few.

Smirk away.

To me, God is one aspect of nature/ the Universe. God is life, love. The natural world has enough miracles of its own without supernatural miracles. Do we need the term God? Maybe it's useful sometimes, but we can get by without it most of the time.

I don't mock traditional theism. I see parallels in ancient wisdom.

Dawkins may be right about BinLiner winning.

However as a farmer who had his livelihood ruined by lack of quarantine controls ,,I think Dawkins is an arsehole.

muso wrote on Nov 10^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

I'm a religious naturalist. http://www.religiousnaturalism.org/faq.html

Thanks for the link, muso.

I read the page.

Religious Naturalism sounds like a psychological structure for 'religious belief', i.e. for 'needy' agnostic humanists.

".....There are also theistic naturalists among us,....
......We do not focus on the differences of interpretation elicited by the religious quest but rather use both science and religion to enrich understanding and appreciation of being....
......Our attitudes makes us religious. Being religious is not about rituals and churches, but about how we feel and address our philosophy of life......"

And is there an element of pantheism too ?

Religious Naturalism sounds like a collection of humanists, who are still troubled with 'niggling' 'religious' 'questions', relating to human existence and being ?



My take is that the focus in Religious Naturalism, is man [the 'collective'].

The focus in Religious Naturalism, is a focus on man [and upon his wondrous potential    :P    ], in seeking to come to an understanding of the big questions concerning, his [man's] 'being'.

Understandable, in the circumstance [today] of man's inflated appraisal of his own intellectual abilities and capacities.

But a silly, futile, direction to strike out on, imo.

An undertaking directed largely [as per usual] by human vanity - "Oh! In our human journey, we have come so, so far, already! The answer we seek may well be, just around the very next corner!"

A silly, futile [mis-taken] path, imo.

The hopeful supposition is that;
Humanism can provide its own 'pot of gold' [which humanists identify with], at journeys end.

Humanism imagines a future in which man himself, can answer all of the 'big questions'.

[reminds me of the absurd conclusion to the great quest, in HGTTG,   ....42 ???]

But hey, go for it!

+++





An alternative meditation;

Men are 'coarse' and flawed.

All of them.

Dictionary;
coarse = =
1 rough or harsh in texture; unrefined.      consisting of large grains or particles.
2 (of a person’s features) not elegantly formed or proportioned.
3 (of a person or their speech) rude or vulgar.



The intellect of man [the intellect of even the wisest of men] is incapable of comprehending the nature of our God [and creator].

The God of creation is HOLY.

He [God] is full of truth and light and purity.

And man, sadly, is not,              ......full of truth and light and purity!

[and of course, i include my own self, my own nature, in that description of the flawed/limited human intellect and condition.]



+++

At every step of his revelation, God has demanded of man, that man should seek to aim high.

And for each of us to do, that thing, which God knows, is impossible for men to do;

Genesis 17:1
And....the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

Exodus 19:5
Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people:.....

Leviticus 11:44
For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy:....


But do not curse God.

God is merely 'working out' [completing] his creation.




Psalms 23:1
The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
2  He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
3  He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
4  Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
5  Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
6  Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.


Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness;....


Psalms 27:8
When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said unto thee, Thy face, LORD, will I seek.


Luke 11:13
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?





+++

muso,

i apologise for my blunt appraisal of the Religious Naturalism path.

but that is me, and that is why you love me.      ;)




back later

muso wrote on Nov 11^th, 2013 at 11:01pm:

Other people's "World Views" are eminently smirkable. Generally I try to understand what I'm smirking at though. RN is a second cousin to Deism, but not all Religious Naturalists are Deists. Not all Religious Naturalists are theistic. Do you need me to remind you what Deism is? If you smirk at RN, you're smirking at people like Adam Smith, Abraham Lincoln, Dmitri Mendeleev,  John Muir, George Washington, Victor Hugo and Thomas Paine to name but a few. Smirk away. To me, God is one aspect of nature/ the Universe. God is life, love. The natural world has enough miracles of its own without supernatural miracles. Do we need the term God? Maybe it's useful sometimes, but we can get by without it most of the time. I don't mock traditional theism. I see parallels in ancient wisdom.

muso,

Men seem incapable of comprehending what the universe is [its limits], at least at this time.




My own conception of God, is that my God is outside of what we humans understand as 'time and space'.

But how can i say that ???

Hmmmm.





Go your own way.

Walk your own path muso.

Yadda wrote on Nov 11^th, 2013 at 11:47pm:

My own conception of God, is that my God is outside of what we humans understand as 'time and space'. But how can i say that ??? Hmmmm.

You can say that because you believe it.

The Deist God, like the Religious Naturalist "God" is the God of Nature.

Natural Laws apply outside Space-Time.  For example causality exists outside of Space Time as we know it.

In other words, I agree with you. "God" is not constrained by  Space-Time.

Is Religious Naturalism Pantheism?

No.  Would you regard Deism as Pantheistic?

Pantheism is the belief that everything is God.  That implies that there is nothing special about God, and by implication, that is virtually atheistic.

Religious Naturalism is an umbrella of world views. My own view  within that umbrella is that God is not cognitively meaningful.

Can you define or understand God?

I'd regard myself as an ontological non-dogmatist. The  ontological chips may fall wherever they may, just so long as the theory specifying the ontology is the best one going. I jealously reserve the right to be mistaken in my view of what exists, given that theories often change under pressure from further investigation.

In other words because naturalists are driven by the quest for reliable knowledge, we are not in the business of defending a particular picture of what finally exists, a particular ontology.


Quote:

muso, Men seem incapable of comprehending what the universe is [its limits], at least at this time.

Looks like I just agreed with you again. Embarassing, isn't it?


Quote:

My take is that the focus in Religious Naturalism, is man [the 'collective'].

My take is that the focus is naturalism. The God of nature as it were.

Yadda, do you really believe in life eternal? Does that eternal life include a beginning?

muso wrote on Nov 12^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Yadda wrote on Nov 11th, 2013 at 11:47pm: My own conception of God, is that my God is outside of what we humans understand as 'time and space'. But how can i say that ??? Hmmmm. You can say that because you believe it.

Yes, i do believe it.
And by implication, yes, i concede, that i am unable to prove, that which i have come to believe.







Quote:

The Deist God, like the Religious Naturalist "God" is the God of Nature.

John 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:31
He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

John 8:23
And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.i
Quote:

Natural Laws apply outside Space-Time.  For example causality exists outside of Space Time as we know it. In other words, I agree with you. "God" is not constrained by  Space-Time. Is Religious Naturalism Pantheism? No.  Would you regard Deism as Pantheistic? Pantheism is the belief that everything is God.  That implies that there is nothing special about God, and by implication, that is virtually atheistic.

Dictionary;
pantheism = =
1 a doctrine or belief which identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.
2 [rare] worship that admits or tolerates all gods.


Space-Time;

I believe that time and space must have boundaries.

But at this time, i find it very difficult to comprehend the existence of those boundaries.

e.g.
[for clarity, let me declare, that i find it difficult to accept the possibility of the concept of 'circular time'.]
I believe that [what we understand as] time, can end [and i believe that time will likely have 'an' ending], but yes, 'it hurts my head' to  try and comprehend,
1/ an 'end' of time, and
2/ what consequence we would observe [if observation were possible].

But does that mean that i must equate the limited universe, or, the limit-less universe, with 'God' ?

No.

I do not understand what God is, or how he exists.

At this time, i see perceive God [i.e. my creator], as real, as an interventionist God [and i believe that i have occasionally experienced the 'intervention' of angels in my life [in night visions, and, in experiencing 'knowing advice' [NOT 'voices'] in the waking state] [the last such 'intervention experience' was in 2006, more than 6 years ago]. but these 'experiences' are unprovable, and i know that they would be viewed by others [by 'normal' people], as delusional.]

[in experiencing this 'knowing advice', in the waking state [in the past];   e.g. i am fully awake, and if i am in prospect, of doing [a specific thing] something which [unknown to me!] could prove to be physically dangerous, it is not unusual/surprising for me to experience a 'knowing advice' incident.   and this experience is not in any way 'auditory', in its experience.   i can only describe it as suddenly 'knowing' 'something', inside my heart [yes, deep inside my chest].   of suddenly 'possessing' a 'knowing', which i was unaware of an instant ago.   i have had the experience where this 'knowing advice' will advise me; "Don't do 'A'. Do 'B' instead."   further, 1/ there is never any sense, of, an overriding authority, which is trying to force me, to choose 'B'.   and 2/ my own perception is that the 'source' of this 'knowing advice' always comes from somewhere external to my 'being'.]i


Quote:

Religious Naturalism is an umbrella of world views. My own view  within that umbrella is that God is not cognitively meaningful.

My own experience is different.

In 'my universe', God reveals himself as being 'cognitively meaningful', in his interaction with mankind, imo.

Job 7:17
What is man, that thou shouldest magnify him? and that thou shouldest set thine heart upon him?

Job 15:14
What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?

Psalms 8:4
What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

Psalms 144:3
LORD, what is man, that thou takest knowledge of him! or the son of man, that thou makest account of him!



God does seek to have a relationship with men.

Men shun God, or rather, men shun the purity of God.

Men, are lost sheep, lost in the wilderness [which is this world].

muso wrote on Nov 12^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Can you define or understand God?

Very, very difficult.

No [i can not].

Again, i do not understand what God is, or how he exists.

But i perceive that 'God' is interested in being a nurturing 'father' [being], to me [and to all who would seek him].
[In my own 'experience of being', God has convinced me, that he is a being [an existing entity], who has my best interests at heart.
And he has convinced 'what i am' [whatever that may be] that i should seek [as best i can] to come to know him.
But i also understand, that i do find myself, a [spirit] being, being 'contained' within a 'clay temple', and find myself standing in a miry pit. Metaphorically speaking.]


1 Chronicles 28:9
And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

Jeremiah 17:13
O LORD, the hope of Israel, all that forsake thee shall be ashamed, and they that depart from me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living waters.
14  Heal me, O LORD, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved: for thou art my praise.i




Quote:

I'd regard myself as an ontological non-dogmatist. The  ontological chips may fall wherever they may, just so long as the theory specifying the ontology is the best one going. I jealously reserve the right to be mistaken in my view of what exists, given that theories often change under pressure from further investigation. In other words because naturalists are driven by the quest for reliable knowledge, we are not in the business of defending a particular picture of what finally exists, a particular ontology. [quote] muso, Men seem incapable of comprehending what the universe is [its limits], at least at this time.

Looks like I just agreed with you again. Embarassing, isn't it?


Quote:

My take is that the focus in Religious Naturalism, is man [the 'collective'].

My take is that the focus is naturalism. The God of nature as it were.

Yadda, do you really believe in life eternal? Does that eternal life include a beginning?

[/quote]


Again, very, very difficult.

Personally, i don't seek 'life eternal' [too nebulous a concept for me to comprehend!     ;D    ], but i do seek [hope] to escape the mire [that i find myself 'standing' in].

And, God, is my redeemer.

That is the promise that God makes.

And i believe God.



'Does that eternal life include a beginning?'

I am told [in scripture] that we [mankind] had our beginning in God.

But then, how, and in what, did God have his beginning ?

It is a legitimate question.

And i do not know what the answer is.

Would i like to know what the answer is ?

Yes.





But, another question, muso;
Man's science today, 'understands' and verbalises to us, the hypothesis, that the universe [that we know], is expanding.
Oh ?
Well, if that is so, into 'what' exactly [...beyond its current boundaries], is this universe expanding ?     [i.e. what is outside of this universe ?]

Well, we do not know.
Q.
Does that lack of comprehension and knowledge [on our part], imply that 'the universe' does not exist ?
OR [alternatively], does our inability to know [the answer to every question which we pose], simply expose the shortcomings in our own intellectual capacity ?




Suppositions have been a great 'tool' [for the enquiring human mind], for leading us down unexplored paths [....and those new paths have exposed the human mind to many new experiences, and 'real-isations'].
But we should always understand and try to delineate the distinction between supposition, and truth.


Dictionary;
supposition = = an assumption or hypothesis.


I have heard it said, that there is no such thing as absolute truth.
Many men like to believe that supposition.

Yes, yours is an interventionist God. Mine is not, and even my use of the word "God" may give rise to a misinterpretation of my position.

I'm happy with where I am, and I respect where you are, while disagreeing fundamentally with you.  ;)   That doesn't imply that I am blind to the wisdom that is written in parts of the Bible though. (See my next post)

No, God is not equated with the Universe in most versions of Religious Naturalism.  A Pantheist might pick up a rock and say that it's part of God.

A religious naturalist sees "God" in the forces of nature, including life, love and the human condition. All these things come from "God" although "God" is not something you can quite define or put your finger on. (compare with the Dao  concept in Dao De Qing).  It's not humanism either, although some RNs happen to be humanistic. 

RN's have a deep respect of natural processes and an awe of life and the "miracle" of existence. That awe is reinforced by scientific enquiry. It is not diminished in any way.

Yadda,

You may have missed this earlier post of mine. I don't seek to promulgate or pontificate on my world view. I just want to explain it.  In this post, I talked about eternity in its original interpretation. (First paragraph of highlighted text in bold ). There are two sides to this interpretation if you read further.  You'll probably find this excessively theological. As a matter of fact, my worldview was partially inspired from long conversations with a theologist.

I have a lot of respect for ancient religions. They were  quieter simpler times, free of city living and the world wide web. Some of my greatest personal epiphanies have been experienced while camping in remote quiet wilderness locations. Somewhere where you can get the noise out of your head.


muso wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 10:29am:

Raven wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 3:27am: However the Nazarene said "through me you shall find the kingdom of heaven" which virtually all Christians will say means if you don't believe he is the son of God you won't go to heaven. Actually it's "believe in him" (John 3:16) " For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that  whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." which is different from believing he is the Son of God. Original Ancient Greek: ....ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον, Literally: So all the-one trusting of him shall not perish but may have life eternal. What does it mean by life eternal? Well unlike what you might think, it doesn't focus on the future per se, but rather on the quality of the age aiṓn it relates to. Thus believers live in "eternal/aiṓnion life" right now, experiencing this eternal quality of God's life now as a present possession. Note the use of the Greek present tense of having eternal life. What it doesn't say is the converse - anyone not believing in him....    .... The Greek word αἰώνιον (aiṓnion) is translated as eternal, without end, everlasting etc, but it also means "perpetual" in other words without beginning or end. So there is the implication that when you die, you will continue on as part of the whole universe that is perpetual. The "no beginning" aspect is interesting, because it implies existence before what we would normally consider to be the beginning of your life (your conception or birth). It puts a whole new spin on things that aligns quite well with Buddhism, which talks about an infinitely continuing (forward and reverse) state of existence. You are, and always will be part of the cycle of life. So, I am a son of man(kind) like you. Trust me (what I say) and understand that you are a part of the cycle of life, which is part of the perpetual cycle of the universe (God if you like) and you will continue on as part of that cycle after death as it was before birth.  (Not quite the usual Christian spin on it) The implication is that if you are aware of the fact that you are part of something much bigger, you will live life accordingly and be at one with "God" (the cycle of life/ the universe etc). Conversely if deprived of that knowledge, you will live in a state of hell (separated from "God") http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Buddha_image_-_stone_-_with_disciple.jpg See the reverse swastika? That's a very ancient symbol. It looks like a water paddle wheel. The four paddles represent earth air fire and water- the four ancient elements thought to encompass totality. It's the cycle of the Universe if you like.  It was a prototype for the wheel of Dharma or the sun wheel and it originally implied infinity or continuing creation or "the self" as part of infinity. (Life/God whatever you want to call it, goes on.) The Jains have a different "spin" on it again but I won't go into that.

 

muso wrote on Nov 14^th, 2013 at 7:50am:

Yadda, You may have missed this earlier post of mine. I don't seek to promulgate or pontificate on my world view. I just want to explain it.  In this post, I talked about eternity in its original interpretation. (First paragraph of highlighted text in bold ). There are two sides to this interpretation if you read further.  You'll probably find this excessively theological. As a matter of fact, my worldview was partially inspired from long conversations with a theologist. I have a lot of respect for ancient religions. They were  quieter simpler times, free of city living and the world wide web. Some of my greatest personal epiphanies have been experienced while camping in remote quiet wilderness locations. Somewhere where you can get the noise out of your head. muso wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 10:29am: .... .... .... The Greek word αἰώνιον (aiṓnion) is translated as eternal, without end, everlasting etc, but it also means "perpetual" in other words without beginning or end. So there is the implication that when you die, you will continue on as part of the whole universe that is perpetual. The "no beginning" aspect is interesting, because it implies existence before what we would normally consider to be the beginning of your life (your conception or birth). It puts a whole new spin on things that aligns quite well with Buddhism, which talks about an infinitely continuing (forward and reverse) state of existence. You are, and always will be part of the cycle of life. So, I am a son of man(kind) like you. Trust me (what I say) and understand that you are a part of the cycle of life, which is part of the perpetual cycle of the universe (God if you like) and you will continue on as part of that cycle after death as it was before birth.  (Not quite the usual Christian spin on it) The implication is that if you are aware of the fact that you are part of something much bigger, you will live life accordingly and be at one with "God" (the cycle of life/ the universe etc). Conversely if deprived of that knowledge, you will live in a state of hell (separated from "God")

muso,

Thanks for your response.

[above...]
Man is one with the universe ?

In the experience of existing [as a sentient being], man's being is melded with, the universe ?

[am i mis-reading what is being said ?]

Not, Pantheism ?

Dictionary;
pantheism = =
1 a doctrine or belief which identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.
2 [rare] worship that admits or tolerates all gods.i

By the way muso; about John 3:16


muso wrote on Aug 4^th, 2013 at 10:29am:

Raven wrote on Aug 4th, 2013 at 3:27am: However the Nazarene said "through me you shall find the kingdom of heaven" which virtually all Christians will say means if you don't believe he is the son of God you won't go to heaven. Actually it's "believe in him" (John 3:16) " For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that  whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." which is different from believing he is the Son of God. Original Ancient Greek: ....ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον, Literally: So all the-one trusting of him shall not perish but may have life eternal. What does it mean by life eternal? Well unlike what you might think, it doesn't focus on the future per se, but rather on the quality of the age aiṓn it relates to. Thus believers live in "eternal/aiṓnion life" right now, experiencing this eternal quality of God's life now as a present possession. Note the use of the Greek present tense of having eternal life. What it doesn't say is the converse - anyone not believing in him....

Read on....

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18  He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.






+++

muso,

Being [.....i.e. 'existing'].

How can i put this ?



A harvest [is what, we, 'are'].

[From my perspective] this [our being] is not random existence.





But deism is for you ?

Go for it.


We are back to 'mountaintops' and views, muso.

I have a differing perspective [from you], from where i am 'standing'.



+++

Matthew 13:47
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48  Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
49  So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50  And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.


Harvest.


Isaiah 57:15
For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

Quote:

Man is one with the universe ? In the experience of existing [as a sentient being], man's being is melded with, the universe ? [am i mis-reading what is being said ?]

No. I was careless in what I said.  By understanding the workings of nature (of God) we tend to be more aligned with  the eternity of natural processes.  The concept is that we are an intrinsic part of nature. If we harm nature, we also harm ourselves.



Quote:

deism is for you

Religious Naturalism. Deism is similar in concept but different in practice.  I'll explain when "God" is not thundering and sending lightning in my direction so ferociously :)

This Topic was moved here from Atheism by freediver.