Topic: Religious beliefs on bitcoin - page 6. (Read 22437 times)

      If you believe in a transcendent truth you are more likely to do good works. In Buddhism it may be to attain a place in the pure lands, or to try to do enough to skip the pure lands and go straight to nirvana.

    The more you believe in an afterlife whose quality is determined by actions in this life, the more likely you are to do whatever it is that will improve that afterlife.

To the point where some give up everything in this life to attain happiness in the next. The beauty of it is that by making sacrifices in this life to improve the next, this life also improves in quality by freeing us habits that trap us in cycles of desire. Gratifying these desires makes us happy for a while but leaves us less satisfied in the long run.

Thankfully, I don't have a toddler, but I'm not surprised. When babies are babies, be they human, or wolf pups, or kittens, or bird chicks, they compete pretty hard for the limited resources of the food and stuffs provided by mama. Often the weaker babies don't survive due to bullying by stronger ones. Sad as that is, it does keep those who may have physical or psychological birth defects from propagating the species in the animal kingdom. Once they grow up, those babies start to recognize the value of individual members of their pack, and learn some of it's customs. In the same way that human babies go from "Mine!" to understanding that we have to work together to survive, whether that baby grows up in downtown London, a small village in Africa, or a native tribe in Australia. We are not social because it was something taught to us by our society or religious texts. There's a good reason social acceptance is one of the items on Maslow's list of fundamental needs.



As mentioned, physics sort of broke that idea when it showed that time needs matter, aka universe, to exist. How can a god be "before" there was a thing like time?

Why can't the universe be the eternal self-existing one, with there never being a time when the universe didn't exist? More importantly, since time is a function of matter, velocity, and space, time could not have existed without the universe. In other words, the father you go back to the point of the Big Bang, the slower the time moves, until it reaches zero, I.e. time did not exist. So, how could god exist before time? Any sort of action of his part would require change over a period of time, but if there was no time...?


Just biology and sociology. There are many examples of species that are social and tribal in nature, just like us, who take care of others within their pack who might have fallen on hard times. Wolf packs are very well known for this, bringing food and caring for expectant and new mothers, and even those of their pack who get injured. Darwinism isn't survival of the fittest, it's survival of whoever can propagate their species the best, whether that be as individuals (hawks, turtles), or as social packs (ants, bees, wolves, dolphins). Charity, or specifically caring for vulnerable members, provides greater safety and security of a pack, and it's easier to help the injured recover and come help you hunt and defend your territory than to breed a new replacement. Especially since you'll be preserving already established wisdom and knowledge.



Could it be that feely-cary types are simply more attracted to a philosophy that already fits their feely-cary nature? The question is, does Christianity make someone go from an uncaring a-hole to a caring person, or does it selectively attract caring people and rejects uncaring a-holes? If it's the latter, then those who are caring and charitable, but who couldn't be gullible enough to be convinced by Christianity's claims, will still be the same caring and charitable people. They just wouldn't be associated with Christianity. The other issue is that Christianity and other religions demand one to be charitable, so it's much more likely for Christians to constantly loudly proclaim about how charitable they are, to prove that they are good Christians and are following the rules. Secular charities don't have anything to prove to anyone, so they wouldn't be advertising about how charitable they are because of their atheism on city billboards.


Yeah, I disagree with that. Humans generally help each other out. You see that most prominently on smaller scale, around neighborhoods, especially after a severe snowstorm or flood. People come out to help out neighbors dig themselves out our clean up the mess, regardless of what their religion is. Besides, one of the biggest philanthropists in the world, who has given more to charity than anyone else, is an atheist, while one of the richest Christians in the world outside of the Vatican, has given practically nothing to charity. I'm peaking of Bill Gates and Pat Robertson.

Rassah,  I take it you are not a parent of a toddler?  Having children at that age shows you that we are naturally pretty selfish.  One of the first words of most kids this age is "mine!"  I think that there is a sense in which animals will join together to try to help each other out for sure, but the heart of humanity is selfish, I strongly believe.

As for your belief in Theism being that the the universe was empty, then it wasn't and we have a God that creates the entire universe.  That is just the start of it.  Then God, out of his infinite love for us, chose to come into this world as a baby so he could understand us and then give His life for us, as the greatest gift ever.  How can my response not be to thank Him for caring enough about me, and others around me, and because of the change in my heart love others with the same love given to me?  

Somewhat. Perhaps neither argument deserves a worldwide generality.

  Please refer to direct first hand experiences to justify your claim of outright falsehood. I am speaking from my direct experi3nce. Are you?

That's not even true. While sometimes hospitable to strange wealthy foreigners, there's little selflessness. Take Uganda. There's a Canadian Christian lady that's baked over 8000 loaves of banana bread to raise money to build an orphanage for the young orphaned children she discovered were living in a dump, suffering untreated aids, scabies, and malaria. People have come from far and wide because they don't understand why, the culture is simply each man for himself.

  Try going to the poorest countries in the world, and you will find the people are the most generous. The vast majority of humans are very generous and good hearted, regardless of religion.

God is the eternal self-existing one, there was never a time when God was not present.


Interesting, do you have source for charitable DNA? And what do you see as the primary advantage of charity, doesn't that conflict with Social Darwinianism?

Further, Christians are more likely to be charitable, as charitable-ness is a command in Christianity, I reject that people are simply using Christianity as an excuse to be charitable.

Athiests might be charitable, if they want to loose the extra money, or time, but experience speaks that unless you have an over abundance of either you are unlikely to be charitable. Humans are inherently greedy (which I doubt you would dis-agree with, even from a purely atheistic world-view).

People are naturally charitable. It's in our DNA, since we are a social species that tends to live in packs. Wolves are charitable to members of their pack as well. So, with non-profits, some people start them because they are charitable, and some people start them because they are charitable, and use Christianity as an excuse for why they feel that way.

Theism:
The belief that the universe was empty, then it wasn't, then splat you have a god who then goes on to create the entire Universe.

I'm not seeing the logical connection between athiesm and charity, and I certainly don't know if you could derive charity in an entirely athiestic worldview. Now, certainly there are athiestic charities, however I don't know if there is a connection directly between athiesm and charity. And certainly no driving force of it, I guess you could arbitrarily decide if it was good to donate to charities?


vs.

Comparatively you almost sound pro-thiest 

I also knew someone who was beaten for his belief in God, although this was in a public school.

That's not a logically valid statement.

I don't think anyone wants a world ruled by non-profits?

Further, bitcoin and OSS are all nice I use both (Currently running Ubuntu exclusively, with all OSS tools), however the goal of OSS as I understand it (feel free to reference material that says otherwise) is that many people together can create something better than commercial software, not that someone in need would benefit, indeed Linux has only rencently even become user friendly, it used to be a bunch of hackers attempting to create awesome software, usability left off to the side.

Bitcoin, as far as I know was not created for charitable means.

This is the type of thing I am speaking of, athiest use language like this all the time. Word twisting fairly rude, this is basically an ad-hominem attack more than anything else.


Athiesm:
The belief that the universe was empty, then it wasn't, then splat you have the entire Universe. Your ancestors are monkeys, and black people are racially inferior because they are more monkey like. Objective morality doesn't exist, so Hitler was A-OK as long as he thought he was doing good and didn't think the Jews were human. And really even if they were, we're all just molecules in motion. What if a pile of molecules stop moving, who cares?

When 75%-80% of the US population is Christian, is it surprising that 75%-80% of those things would be started by Christians?

Sure I can relate not all priest are kind to children and neither are all anti theists, but religion isn't the distinguishing line in universally socialy beneficial behavior. I shared an office with a minister for 6 months I ate lunch and  with him every day, we had deep philosophical talks and at the end of it all I could only concluded one's ability to pair intelligence with wisdom is the goal.

Also wisdom is not limited to religious practitioners and spirituality or tranquility or whatever you call a higher state of consciousness is not exclusive to Christianity or religion for that matter.

But that said I love some religious practices and spiritual places they are moving, I just don't come out believing in whoever's God or gods are responsible for the exercise.

Apologies in advance if you don't like my tone, given this media is far from my first choice. I would prefer to leave you to your way of being and encourage you to focus on growing the good in the world.

Fortunately I came to know at age 13 that a belief in your God can't be beaten into you.

Firstly,
http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9553.htm

Secondly,
http://www.weareatheism.com/resources/secular-charities/

Thirdly, have you ever read any Dawkins? Libraries. Kick. Ass.

Schizophrenia is the automatic and persistent disassociation of the un/subconscious from the waking self.
Case in point.

Ftfy.
You left out Eris you fnording twat. 
See: Discordianism
Also, you're prolly not actually a twat. In fact I like you.

I however do not care if it rains or freezes....................................................

https://myspace.com/thefishheads/music/song/plastic-jesus-22696809-22497994

Can I have an "Amen"?

"...and they tend to think along the lines of reason and logic. It is through this lens you can begin to see that God is not a personal god, but actually a metaphor for the fundamental laws of physics."

From the opposite angle, the same are victims of a limited data set, disconnected from spiritual aspects of life, coddled by ego-feeding sociopaths into an unhealthy certainty regarding matters which they are admittedly naive to, as demonstrated by the shallow and inadequate deception parroted above. If you believe that a proper knowledge of physics is sufficient to nullify God, then you haven't truly met my God.

They do you just can't see it.

It takes all types of people to make a society. Looking at a simply breakdown like Myer Briggs Colours you see the general population divides up, and about 3% in general are more logically minded and they tend to think along the lines of reason and logic. It is through this lens you can begin to see that God is not a personal god, but actually a metaphor for the fundamental laws of physics. And why call him god anyway it is a delusion. (These are the inventors - problem solvers) typically called athletes

Now on the other hand the vast majority well over 50% of people they are sensing or feeling, they see the world through values of good and bad, emotional wrong and right.  (These are the charitable workers - people helpers) depending on your cultural reference  typically called Christians.

So dumbed down if you want a world run by non profits - get rid of the green and replaced with gold, oh and those tools you use (the wheel, metallurgy, the plow, the printing press, the internet, ) well there source is from the marginalized innovators.

Community work and altruistic contributions to society from the innovators abound today - you just need to know where to look - Bitcoin and other OSS is testimony to that.

Of course!  I expected nothing less because for you to actually read my post might induce independent thinking, which in turn could call for that most feared of human experiences; I refer of course to change.

My $.02.