SS AKAL JI.
ATHEIST JI.
"EXTREME BELIEF OR GAINS IN ANY ANY THING, WILL LEADS TO GOD'S REALIZATIONS WITHIN YOU" JASPI
Here I take liberty to display my thoughts with advance apology if DAS has written any words to offend some one 's feelings.
This is only my way of thinking that HOW human being started to believe in God and realized HIS presence.Your comments are welcome if you have a different thoughts.
As built in human nature is to lean on something to be secure like we witness by growing up to lean on Mother or father or others siblings in early age for love or to be secure or to cry on some one shoulders or for our demands.
Same in further growth one passes through adult hood leaning on many relations friends,wife or husband and other materialistic gains to feel secure.
When pain come with no end in sight, no where to finish and we are helpless beyond our efforts to cop up with the circumstances but no where to lean on something ,gives a birth of God's realization to lean on to bear the pains and end the passage of life.
Extreme situations brought upon us by pains,wealth gains,powers,poverty or any situations LEADS TO EXTREME where there is no more maneuver to play or to achieve THERE COMES THE GOD'S REALIZATIONS.
We have countless examples from our:
PROPHETS,MESSENGERS,GURUS,BHAGATS,LOVERS,MUSICIANS, WARTIER LIKE ASHOKA THE GREAT AND MANY MORE WHO TOUCHED THE EXTREMES OF THEIR WISDOM REALIZED GOD'S PRESENCE IN THEIR HEART AND LEFT ALL THEIR FINDS FOR US TO FOLLOW WITHOUT GOING TO THAT EXTREME TO HAVE HARMONIOUS LIVINGS.
That is why our prophets or Bhagats Gurus sorted to extreme resolves to realize the Creator to go to the extreme on spiritual path or committed to realize the presence of GOD a ultimate TRUTH..
FEW OF THEM LIKE BUDHA, BABA FARID JI AND MANY MORE..
"KAGA CHUN CHUN MASS KHAIO .PER DOW NAINA MAT KHAIO ,MUJE PIA MILAN KI ***" BABA FARID JI.
THESE PROPHETS,MESSENGERS AND GURUS REALIZED THE GOD'S EXISTENCES AND LEFT A MESSAGES FOR the HUMANITY TO FOLLOW THEIR FINDINGS TO HAVE HARMONIOUS LIVES.
IT IS JUST LIKE MAN WHEN GROWING UP HAVE A BLIND FAITH IN BELIEVING MOTHER AND FATHER TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY TEACH IS ALWAYS RIGHT OR WITHOUT QUESTIONING IF THEY ARE YOUR REAL FATHER OR MOTHER.
SIMILARLY ALL OUR GURUS OR PROPHETS LEFT FOR US WITH GURUBANI OR SPIRITUAL TEACHINGS LIKE A GPS TO PASS THIS LIFE IN COMPLETE HARMONY. .
Millions wealthy people when they got fed up by having so much money and power realized the ultimate curious reasons based on what is next theories to seek KNOWLEDGE of extreme power.
Some warrior, kings abandon their KINGDOM like Asoka the Great by seeing the extreme in killings of masses during KALINGA WAR for his personal gains.
Lots of Bhagts or Gurus some time went to extreme to realize the GOD'S existences
FEW OF THEM LIKE BUDHA, BABA FARID JI AND MANY MORE..
"CHUN CHUN MASS KHAIO .PER MO DOW NAINA MAT KHAIO ,MUJE PIA MILAN KI ***" BABA FARID JI.
ALL OUR PROPHETS AND GURUS REALIZED THE GOD'S EXISTENCES AND WE ARE BELIEVING IN EVERY THING THEY LEFT FOR US TO BELIEVE IN GOD'S EXSISTANCES.
OUR GURUS AND PROPHETS BLESSED US WITH TREASURE OF GURBANI AND KNOWLEDGE TO PERUSE TO REALIZE ULTIMATE TRUTH WITHOUT GOING THROUGH EXTREME STAGES LIKE BABA FARID JI AND OTHERS TO REALIZES THE ULTIMATE TRUTH.
JUST LIKE WE BELIEVE IN OUR MOTHER AND FATHER WHAT EVER THEY TOLD US IN OUR CHILD HOOD STAGE,WE ACCEPTED WITHOUT KNOWING IF THEY ARE OUR MOTHER OR FATHER FOR REAL.
SIMILARLY WHEN HUMAN BEING IS STILL AT CHILD LIKE STAGE TO UNDERSTAND SPIRITUALITY OR GOD'S EXISTENCES CAN GET ENLIGHTENED BY FOLLOWING GURBANI UNDERSTANDINGS.
"TO BE ,BE A EXTREMIST BEYOND YOUR CAPACITY OF THINKING OR
ACHIEVEMENTS WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN ,IF YOUR ARE ATHEIST THEN BE A COMPLETE ATHEIST,YOU WILL REALIZE HIS EXISTENCES."
JASPI.
YOU ARE A ATHEIST BECOME EXTREME ATHEIST YOU WILL REALIZE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD WITHIN YOU BASED ON OUR MANY BHAGATS AND GURUS PHILOSOPHY EVEN LOVERS WHERE : QUOTE . RANJHA KARDI NI MEN APON RANJHA HOIEE."
Jaspi
ATHEIST JI.
"EXTREME BELIEF OR GAINS IN ANY ANY THING, WILL LEADS TO GOD'S REALIZATIONS WITHIN YOU" JASPI
Here I take liberty to display my thoughts with advance apology if DAS has written any words to offend some one 's feelings.
This is only my way of thinking that HOW human being started to believe in God and realized HIS presence.Your comments are welcome if you have a different thoughts.
As built in human nature is to lean on something to be secure like we witness by growing up to lean on Mother or father or others siblings in early age for love or to be secure or to cry on some one shoulders or for our demands.
Same in further growth one passes through adult hood leaning on many relations friends,wife or husband and other materialistic gains to feel secure.
When pain come with no end in sight, no where to finish and we are helpless beyond our efforts to cop up with the circumstances but no where to lean on something ,gives a birth of God's realization to lean on to bear the pains and end the passage of life.
Extreme situations brought upon us by pains,wealth gains,powers,poverty or any situations LEADS TO EXTREME where there is no more maneuver to play or to achieve THERE COMES THE GOD'S REALIZATIONS.
We have countless examples from our:
PROPHETS,MESSENGERS,GURUS,BHAGATS,LOVERS,MUSICIANS, WARTIER LIKE ASHOKA THE GREAT AND MANY MORE WHO TOUCHED THE EXTREMES OF THEIR WISDOM REALIZED GOD'S PRESENCE IN THEIR HEART AND LEFT ALL THEIR FINDS FOR US TO FOLLOW WITHOUT GOING TO THAT EXTREME TO HAVE HARMONIOUS LIVINGS.
That is why our prophets or Bhagats Gurus sorted to extreme resolves to realize the Creator to go to the extreme on spiritual path or committed to realize the presence of GOD a ultimate TRUTH..
FEW OF THEM LIKE BUDHA, BABA FARID JI AND MANY MORE..
"KAGA CHUN CHUN MASS KHAIO .PER DOW NAINA MAT KHAIO ,MUJE PIA MILAN KI ***" BABA FARID JI.
THESE PROPHETS,MESSENGERS AND GURUS REALIZED THE GOD'S EXISTENCES AND LEFT A MESSAGES FOR the HUMANITY TO FOLLOW THEIR FINDINGS TO HAVE HARMONIOUS LIVES.
IT IS JUST LIKE MAN WHEN GROWING UP HAVE A BLIND FAITH IN BELIEVING MOTHER AND FATHER TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY TEACH IS ALWAYS RIGHT OR WITHOUT QUESTIONING IF THEY ARE YOUR REAL FATHER OR MOTHER.
SIMILARLY ALL OUR GURUS OR PROPHETS LEFT FOR US WITH GURUBANI OR SPIRITUAL TEACHINGS LIKE A GPS TO PASS THIS LIFE IN COMPLETE HARMONY. .
Millions wealthy people when they got fed up by having so much money and power realized the ultimate curious reasons based on what is next theories to seek KNOWLEDGE of extreme power.
Some warrior, kings abandon their KINGDOM like Asoka the Great by seeing the extreme in killings of masses during KALINGA WAR for his personal gains.
Lots of Bhagts or Gurus some time went to extreme to realize the GOD'S existences
FEW OF THEM LIKE BUDHA, BABA FARID JI AND MANY MORE..
"CHUN CHUN MASS KHAIO .PER MO DOW NAINA MAT KHAIO ,MUJE PIA MILAN KI ***" BABA FARID JI.
ALL OUR PROPHETS AND GURUS REALIZED THE GOD'S EXISTENCES AND WE ARE BELIEVING IN EVERY THING THEY LEFT FOR US TO BELIEVE IN GOD'S EXSISTANCES.
OUR GURUS AND PROPHETS BLESSED US WITH TREASURE OF GURBANI AND KNOWLEDGE TO PERUSE TO REALIZE ULTIMATE TRUTH WITHOUT GOING THROUGH EXTREME STAGES LIKE BABA FARID JI AND OTHERS TO REALIZES THE ULTIMATE TRUTH.
JUST LIKE WE BELIEVE IN OUR MOTHER AND FATHER WHAT EVER THEY TOLD US IN OUR CHILD HOOD STAGE,WE ACCEPTED WITHOUT KNOWING IF THEY ARE OUR MOTHER OR FATHER FOR REAL.
SIMILARLY WHEN HUMAN BEING IS STILL AT CHILD LIKE STAGE TO UNDERSTAND SPIRITUALITY OR GOD'S EXISTENCES CAN GET ENLIGHTENED BY FOLLOWING GURBANI UNDERSTANDINGS.
"TO BE ,BE A EXTREMIST BEYOND YOUR CAPACITY OF THINKING OR
ACHIEVEMENTS WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN ,IF YOUR ARE ATHEIST THEN BE A COMPLETE ATHEIST,YOU WILL REALIZE HIS EXISTENCES."
JASPI.
YOU ARE A ATHEIST BECOME EXTREME ATHEIST YOU WILL REALIZE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD WITHIN YOU BASED ON OUR MANY BHAGATS AND GURUS PHILOSOPHY EVEN LOVERS WHERE : QUOTE . RANJHA KARDI NI MEN APON RANJHA HOIEE."
Jaspi
Dear Tejwant Singh Ji,
Thank you for your interesting article. The article makes the ridiculous claim atheists have a lot in common with evangelists, but anyone who thinks that is obviously missing the point. I will admit that both atheists and evangelists are passionate about what they think the truth is, however this is true for lots of people (even you, for example). If you are passionate about your belief, and a suicide bomber is passionate about their belief, it would be absolutely absurd to suggest you and the suicide bomber have a lot in common. Come on.
Expressing free speech for atheism is a right that anyone has. You express free speech, and so do fundamental christians who say islam is a lie and homosexuality is a sin. So if you express free speech, are you like those christians? Again, ridiculous.
Why does Christopher Hitchens not respect the belief of a muslim? Uh, maybe it's because he's referring to the extremist muslims that drive planes into buildings in the name of their fairy-tale religion so that they can have 72 virgins in heaven. I openly do not respect such an absurd and clearly dangerous belief that massacred US citizens and ignited war and hatred on both sides. So yes, I don't respect that belief. They are driving planes into buildings and committing acts of suicide bombing while the KKK (a religious christian organization) openly wants to rid the world of people who look like you and me, and atheists are the angry ones? Give me a break! How incredibly ridiculous. Yes, atheists are intolerant of these types of behaviors, and I certainly hope you're intolerant too, otherwise you're just as bad as the suicide bombers. Sikhi preaches tolerance, but I say that there are some things that cannot be tolerated, and those include but are not limited to holy wars, suicide bombing, terrorism (when not in suicide mode), the KKK, operation blue star, etc. Yes there may be political elements to these crimes, but they are crimes nevertheless and we can't simply say "oh it's their religion, we should be tolerant." Absolutely ludicrous.
Christians see atheists as susceptible to errors and evil? Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that true for ALL humans? Or are christians above this? Yeah, let's submit ourselves to the christian god and become KKK members...but wait, we're not white, now what?
At least the article makes mention of some of the stupid thing christians said about Haiti...can you believe some christians think that the citizens of Haiti are being punished by god? If I went to the deep south and said that New Orleans was being punished by the muslim god, I would be crucified (in the name of christ most likely). I can admit that the author is not as much of a fundamentalist as some are, but it is arguable that moderates can be just as dangerous as fundamentalists (separate, HUGE topic).
We don't say we live above god. We live without god, because there is no evidence for one. It would be absurd of me to suggest that you live above the flying spaghetti monster...no, the truth is, you live without the flying spaghetti monster, because there is no evidence it exists. But again, if I see evidence of a god, or if you have any, show me and I will believe (but it has to be real evidence).
Overall this article has no basis and is written from the point of view of a christian who misses an important point that atheists make. Yes you can have a "live and let live" attitude, but when there are things like suicide bombers and the KKK, we have a moral obligation to speak out against such crimes. If you don't, you might as well be supporting them. Together we have to defeat terrorism, holy wars, female circumcision, the KKK, and people trying to put christian creationism in textbooks to "explain the controversy" (there IS no controversy, evolution exists and creationism is a fairy tale). This christian is calling atheists angry and fundamentalists simply because we are trying to stop dangerous acts in the name of religion.
Now onto Gursikhi.Jeevan Ji,
Atheist parents have a child. They raise him with ideas similar to their own, stating there is no God. The father finds his son secretly praying to God. Where does the child's belief come from? Why does a child who is raised with atheist perspective prays and belives in God?
That's like saying if I raise someone to think there is no santa clause, but then all of a sudden they start asking santa clause for gifts, that there now must be a santa clause. Sorry, doesn't work that way.
Do you fully believe there is no God or are you not sure?
Good question. I believe in god to the same extent that you believe in unicorns. It's not totally 0%, because no one can prove that something does not exist. Therefore technically we are all agnostic to the unicorn, but in practice we are all "a-unicornists." Similarly, no one can disprove the existence of god, which technically makes me an agnostic, but in practice, I am just as much an atheist as you are an "a-unicornist"
I have faith in God therefore I have no doubt at all on his existence. You on the other hand are asking this question "Is there A god?", Why? Because you know that there is God but you do not want to believe it
So if I tell you I have faith in the cookie monster therefore I have no doubt at all on his existence, would that impress you? Would that motivate you think the cookie monster really exists? No, of course not. You can't just say you have faith in something and expect other people to believe in the fantasy. I am asking is there a god because I was curious to know what people's reasons are. It is certainly not that I really know that there is one but I do not want to believe in it. It would be great if mormonism were true and god watched out for me and I could have my own planet after I die.
I will say once again: Believing in something does not make it so. Therefore, believing I will have my own planet after I die as the mormons say I will does not actually mean it will happen. Of course you think that the mormons are delusional for that belief right? You don't believe it too right? But they think you're delusional for not believing in christ and joseph smith. So how do you know that your delusions are more right than theirs?
Finally, there is a reason for that "white" light that some patients see. In the medical community it is a well-known fact that in some people, their brain responds to a low level of oxygen with that same "white light." It is not heaven, it is simply the brain's (intentional or not) reaction to low levels of oxygen. Go into one of those things that astronauts train in (that rotate you really fast). In some people, they see a white light as it twirls them around at high speeds. Why? Because such a huge velocity temporarily disrupts proper blood flow, and they see a white light. It has nothing to do with heaven.
Thanks!
Oh and if I missed another question that someone wanted me to answer just let me know.
Thank you for your interesting article. The article makes the ridiculous claim atheists have a lot in common with evangelists, but anyone who thinks that is obviously missing the point. I will admit that both atheists and evangelists are passionate about what they think the truth is, however this is true for lots of people (even you, for example). If you are passionate about your belief, and a suicide bomber is passionate about their belief, it would be absolutely absurd to suggest you and the suicide bomber have a lot in common. Come on.
Expressing free speech for atheism is a right that anyone has. You express free speech, and so do fundamental christians who say islam is a lie and homosexuality is a sin. So if you express free speech, are you like those christians? Again, ridiculous.
Why does Christopher Hitchens not respect the belief of a muslim? Uh, maybe it's because he's referring to the extremist muslims that drive planes into buildings in the name of their fairy-tale religion so that they can have 72 virgins in heaven. I openly do not respect such an absurd and clearly dangerous belief that massacred US citizens and ignited war and hatred on both sides. So yes, I don't respect that belief. They are driving planes into buildings and committing acts of suicide bombing while the KKK (a religious christian organization) openly wants to rid the world of people who look like you and me, and atheists are the angry ones? Give me a break! How incredibly ridiculous. Yes, atheists are intolerant of these types of behaviors, and I certainly hope you're intolerant too, otherwise you're just as bad as the suicide bombers. Sikhi preaches tolerance, but I say that there are some things that cannot be tolerated, and those include but are not limited to holy wars, suicide bombing, terrorism (when not in suicide mode), the KKK, operation blue star, etc. Yes there may be political elements to these crimes, but they are crimes nevertheless and we can't simply say "oh it's their religion, we should be tolerant." Absolutely ludicrous.
Christians see atheists as susceptible to errors and evil? Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that true for ALL humans? Or are christians above this? Yeah, let's submit ourselves to the christian god and become KKK members...but wait, we're not white, now what?
At least the article makes mention of some of the stupid thing christians said about Haiti...can you believe some christians think that the citizens of Haiti are being punished by god? If I went to the deep south and said that New Orleans was being punished by the muslim god, I would be crucified (in the name of christ most likely). I can admit that the author is not as much of a fundamentalist as some are, but it is arguable that moderates can be just as dangerous as fundamentalists (separate, HUGE topic).
We don't say we live above god. We live without god, because there is no evidence for one. It would be absurd of me to suggest that you live above the flying spaghetti monster...no, the truth is, you live without the flying spaghetti monster, because there is no evidence it exists. But again, if I see evidence of a god, or if you have any, show me and I will believe (but it has to be real evidence).
Overall this article has no basis and is written from the point of view of a christian who misses an important point that atheists make. Yes you can have a "live and let live" attitude, but when there are things like suicide bombers and the KKK, we have a moral obligation to speak out against such crimes. If you don't, you might as well be supporting them. Together we have to defeat terrorism, holy wars, female circumcision, the KKK, and people trying to put christian creationism in textbooks to "explain the controversy" (there IS no controversy, evolution exists and creationism is a fairy tale). This christian is calling atheists angry and fundamentalists simply because we are trying to stop dangerous acts in the name of religion.
Now onto Gursikhi.Jeevan Ji,
Atheist parents have a child. They raise him with ideas similar to their own, stating there is no God. The father finds his son secretly praying to God. Where does the child's belief come from? Why does a child who is raised with atheist perspective prays and belives in God?
That's like saying if I raise someone to think there is no santa clause, but then all of a sudden they start asking santa clause for gifts, that there now must be a santa clause. Sorry, doesn't work that way.
Do you fully believe there is no God or are you not sure?
Good question. I believe in god to the same extent that you believe in unicorns. It's not totally 0%, because no one can prove that something does not exist. Therefore technically we are all agnostic to the unicorn, but in practice we are all "a-unicornists." Similarly, no one can disprove the existence of god, which technically makes me an agnostic, but in practice, I am just as much an atheist as you are an "a-unicornist"
I have faith in God therefore I have no doubt at all on his existence. You on the other hand are asking this question "Is there A god?", Why? Because you know that there is God but you do not want to believe it
So if I tell you I have faith in the cookie monster therefore I have no doubt at all on his existence, would that impress you? Would that motivate you think the cookie monster really exists? No, of course not. You can't just say you have faith in something and expect other people to believe in the fantasy. I am asking is there a god because I was curious to know what people's reasons are. It is certainly not that I really know that there is one but I do not want to believe in it. It would be great if mormonism were true and god watched out for me and I could have my own planet after I die.
I will say once again: Believing in something does not make it so. Therefore, believing I will have my own planet after I die as the mormons say I will does not actually mean it will happen. Of course you think that the mormons are delusional for that belief right? You don't believe it too right? But they think you're delusional for not believing in christ and joseph smith. So how do you know that your delusions are more right than theirs?
Finally, there is a reason for that "white" light that some patients see. In the medical community it is a well-known fact that in some people, their brain responds to a low level of oxygen with that same "white light." It is not heaven, it is simply the brain's (intentional or not) reaction to low levels of oxygen. Go into one of those things that astronauts train in (that rotate you really fast). In some people, they see a white light as it twirls them around at high speeds. Why? Because such a huge velocity temporarily disrupts proper blood flow, and they see a white light. It has nothing to do with heaven.
Thanks!
Oh and if I missed another question that someone wanted me to answer just let me know.
Atheist ji,
Guru fateh.
You write:
First of all it is not MY article as you inferred. It was only posted by me.
Secondly, your have a false presumption and assumption of my belief or lack there of. If you had read all my posts regarding the interaction we had between us, you would have noticed that I never called Sikhi a belief. I can only presume that either you missed it or forgot it just to prove your belief in the non belief..
This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post.
Lastly, allow me to repeat what I said before in my earlier post and I hope as a Truth seeker you adhere to that.
Thanks & regards
Tejwant Singh
Guru fateh.
You write:
First of all it is not MY article as you inferred. It was only posted by me.
Secondly, your have a false presumption and assumption of my belief or lack there of. If you had read all my posts regarding the interaction we had between us, you would have noticed that I never called Sikhi a belief. I can only presume that either you missed it or forgot it just to prove your belief in the non belief.
.This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post.
Lastly, allow me to repeat what I said before in my earlier post and I hope as a Truth seeker you adhere to that.
Thanks & regards
Tejwant Singh
Dear Tejwant Singh Ji,
Yes I put "your" article but I simply meant the article you posted. This is evidenced by the fact that later in my post I wrote that the article was written by a christian. It is true, of course, that I assumed you are not a christian. However I have made wrong assumptions before.
Secondly, your have a false presumption and assumption of my belief or lack there of. If you had read all my posts regarding the interaction we had between us, you would have noticed that I never called Sikhi a belief. I can only presume that either you missed it or forgot it just to prove your belief in the non belief..
I was merely saying that it is very likely that you are passionate about what you think the truth is, whatever that may be. I am not telling you what you believe necessarily, just that whatever it is, chances are you are passionate about it. Otherwise, why would you be on this forum exploring these ideas? Most people who are not passionate about such things don't care about these forums.
This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post.
Right. And no one has distorted what atheism means on this post at all...oh and let's not forget your article (that you posted but someone else wrote) that totally distorts atheism...I am not trying to distort you, simply saying that WHATEVER it is that YOU think the truth is, chances are you are passionate about it. And you should be.
Quote:
"Please look up what I asked you sometimes ago which you seem to have ignored in your consequential interactions with other members in one of my posts regarding differentiating Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods when you mention your belief of non-belief"
So, where exactly shall I look this up? If you can give me a link that specifically differentiates Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods I mentioned, I will read it. You must remember to an atheists, all "gods" fit in the same category...the box of imagination. Ik Ong Kaar is thus (for me at least) no different than the other gods I mentioned, another fictional character. However I am more than willing to investigate such a differentiation, which is the reason I am on this forum anyway. So please tell me what I should read to differentiate it, thanks!
Atheist
Yes I put "your" article but I simply meant the article you posted. This is evidenced by the fact that later in my post I wrote that the article was written by a christian. It is true, of course, that I assumed you are not a christian. However I have made wrong assumptions before.
Secondly, your have a false presumption and assumption of my belief or lack there of. If you had read all my posts regarding the interaction we had between us, you would have noticed that I never called Sikhi a belief. I can only presume that either you missed it or forgot it just to prove your belief in the non belief.
.I was merely saying that it is very likely that you are passionate about what you think the truth is, whatever that may be. I am not telling you what you believe necessarily, just that whatever it is, chances are you are passionate about it. Otherwise, why would you be on this forum exploring these ideas? Most people who are not passionate about such things don't care about these forums.
This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post.
Right. And no one has distorted what atheism means on this post at all...oh and let's not forget your article (that you posted but someone else wrote) that totally distorts atheism...I am not trying to distort you, simply saying that WHATEVER it is that YOU think the truth is, chances are you are passionate about it. And you should be.
Quote:
"Please look up what I asked you sometimes ago which you seem to have ignored in your consequential interactions with other members in one of my posts regarding differentiating Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods when you mention your belief of non-belief"
So, where exactly shall I look this up? If you can give me a link that specifically differentiates Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods I mentioned, I will read it. You must remember to an atheists, all "gods" fit in the same category...the box of imagination. Ik Ong Kaar is thus (for me at least) no different than the other gods I mentioned, another fictional character. However I am more than willing to investigate such a differentiation, which is the reason I am on this forum anyway. So please tell me what I should read to differentiate it, thanks!
Atheist
Atheist ji,
Guru Fateh.
I am bewildered to say the least that you forgot our interaction in this thread especially when you claim to be a truth seeker. I know, you have been too busy with your work as all of us are. All of us have a life and profession as you do.
You write:
Please read my post number 92 in this thread and many of our interaction before that. It will give you the answer.
Thanks and regards
Tejwant Singh
Guru Fateh.
I am bewildered to say the least that you forgot our interaction in this thread especially when you claim to be a truth seeker. I know, you have been too busy with your work as all of us are. All of us have a life and profession as you do.
You write:
Please read my post number 92 in this thread and many of our interaction before that. It will give you the answer.
Thanks and regards
Tejwant Singh
Dear Tejwant Singh Ji,
Ah yes, I know what you are talking about. So, Mool Mantar defines god as that which is formless, genderless, and timeless right? I would argue that those are characteristics of god, not necessarily a definition.
In other words, if I said that "something" was square-shaped, heavy, and rough, you wouldn't know what I was talking about, although you would know about those three characteristics. I agree Mool Mantar gives us several important characteristics about god, and will also agree that these characteristics are far different from, say, the god of the old testament (who is more of the old man with a beard in the clouds). Would you say that god and energy are synonymous or simply with similar characteristics?
Atheist
Ah yes, I know what you are talking about. So, Mool Mantar defines god as that which is formless, genderless, and timeless right? I would argue that those are characteristics of god, not necessarily a definition.
In other words, if I said that "something" was square-shaped, heavy, and rough, you wouldn't know what I was talking about, although you would know about those three characteristics. I agree Mool Mantar gives us several important characteristics about god, and will also agree that these characteristics are far different from, say, the god of the old testament (who is more of the old man with a beard in the clouds). Would you say that god and energy are synonymous or simply with similar characteristics?
Atheist
Atheist ji,
Guru Fateh.
Just spend sometime and re read our interaction which happened in several posts in this very thread and you will find the answer. It is a duty of a truth seeker as you call yourself to do that or you want to restart the whole thing again?
Tejwant Singh
Guru Fateh.
Just spend sometime and re read our interaction which happened in several posts in this very thread and you will find the answer. It is a duty of a truth seeker as you call yourself to do that or you want to restart the whole thing again?
Tejwant Singh
Atheist ji,
Guru Fateh.
You write:
Your being in the medicine field should be very aware of the correct language you use. Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions before and they are self evident in many of your own posts.
Once again, you said something totally different and feels insecure to apologise for the distortions. A truth seeker should be the first one to step forward in this manner. Now you seem to claim about most people's dispassionate side. One wonders how you jumped to the conclusion about others in this manner! It seems you claim to know more about others than about yourself. Once again, re read what you wrote, it has nothing to do with what you have said now in your post.
My words:
"This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post."
It is hillarious to notice that you call other people's opinions as distortions. This is an opinion by someone as you have an opinion from the Atheist viewpoint. Shall we call your opinions as distortions? Yes, you did distort what I said and I corrected you by directing you towards my posts.
My words:
"Please look up what I asked you sometimes ago which you seem to have ignored in your consequential interactions with other members in one of my posts regarding differentiating Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods when you mention your belief of non-belief"
If you re read our interaction, you will learn to differentiate.
It is not a definition but a very limited description as mentioned in my post #92.
Gurbani says that Ik Ong Kaar which is not god in any sense the way god is defined can not be defined nor described even if we use all the paper and ink available.
Regards
Tejwant Singh
Guru Fateh.
You write:
Your being in the medicine field should be very aware of the correct language you use. Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions before and they are self evident in many of your own posts.
Once again, you said something totally different and feels insecure to apologise for the distortions. A truth seeker should be the first one to step forward in this manner. Now you seem to claim about most people's dispassionate side. One wonders how you jumped to the conclusion about others in this manner! It seems you claim to know more about others than about yourself. Once again, re read what you wrote, it has nothing to do with what you have said now in your post.
My words:
"This forum is to breed open-mindedness. This is the reason you can express your views freely here but please do not distort others' as you have tried to do in this post."
It is hillarious to notice that you call other people's opinions as distortions. This is an opinion by someone as you have an opinion from the Atheist viewpoint. Shall we call your opinions as distortions? Yes, you did distort what I said and I corrected you by directing you towards my posts.
My words:
"Please look up what I asked you sometimes ago which you seem to have ignored in your consequential interactions with other members in one of my posts regarding differentiating Ik Ong Kaar from the other gods when you mention your belief of non-belief"
If you re read our interaction, you will learn to differentiate.
It is not a definition but a very limited description as mentioned in my post #92.
Gurbani says that Ik Ong Kaar which is not god in any sense the way god is defined can not be defined nor described even if we use all the paper and ink available.
Regards
Tejwant Singh
Dear Atheist,
When you asked the question why any one believe in God. Tejwant Singh was very quick to ask what you mean by the word God. Even you explained in your view what you meant by God. He never explained why he believed in God. He rejected the personal God. People always do not want to explain their belief. They just want to criticize the one who ask the question. He gave the reference from mool mantar. There are few million Sikhs in the world they all don’t believe same. Every one has their personal belief. That mean they believe in their personal belief. Did God created man or man created God? All religious people believe that God created man. Man get angry at other man if the other man make a mistake. So men also believe God also get angry and punish man who made the mistake. Isn’t it true that man created God? Religious people worship God so that they don’t have to go to hell or be born again. Is the life is so bad here on this earth that we don’t want to come back? God is figment of imagination. In Japji Guru Nanak made it clear that God don’t have body, God can not be seen God do not take birth. If God can’t be seen or heard nor he speaks then chances are God is not real. If God don’t have body then it is understanding that he don’t have heart, “man” Ho can God bless some one or punish some one. It is very difficult to get angry with out heart.
Many religious people asking the atheists to prove that there is no God. One can not prove if nothing is there. It is the believer who have to prove that there is God.
There was a time when God did every thing. He makes fire he made rain, he made the air.
Now we know that is not what God does.
Most people claim the ardas is heard by God. God has no body so no ears. God can not hear the ardas. Lets say he can hear the ardas. When we leave for the journey. We say the ardas that God protect us from getting hurt. If it was meant to be that we are destin to die in the accident then doing the ardas can God change what was already set by him? Can judge who make the laws also can break the LAWS? So why do we do the ardas? Are we trying to bribe the God by doing the ardas? Or putting few penies in front of the Granth Sahib.
Almost all the holy books say that God can not be seen and what is set can not be changed, Why then we doing the puja and ardas.
People in Russia did not believe in God, yet every thing was working fine. I am not talking about the communist in India. I have meat many who were born in USSR and till they left Rusia and came to Canada or USA they never heard the name as God. Yet they are very nice people to deal with. Who were guiding them?
If any one want keep on believing in God it is his problem. They should read the SGGS and try to understand it. Not just to the path.
Seeker3k
When you asked the question why any one believe in God. Tejwant Singh was very quick to ask what you mean by the word God. Even you explained in your view what you meant by God. He never explained why he believed in God. He rejected the personal God. People always do not want to explain their belief. They just want to criticize the one who ask the question. He gave the reference from mool mantar. There are few million Sikhs in the world they all don’t believe same. Every one has their personal belief. That mean they believe in their personal belief. Did God created man or man created God? All religious people believe that God created man. Man get angry at other man if the other man make a mistake. So men also believe God also get angry and punish man who made the mistake. Isn’t it true that man created God? Religious people worship God so that they don’t have to go to hell or be born again. Is the life is so bad here on this earth that we don’t want to come back? God is figment of imagination. In Japji Guru Nanak made it clear that God don’t have body, God can not be seen God do not take birth. If God can’t be seen or heard nor he speaks then chances are God is not real. If God don’t have body then it is understanding that he don’t have heart, “man” Ho can God bless some one or punish some one. It is very difficult to get angry with out heart.
Many religious people asking the atheists to prove that there is no God. One can not prove if nothing is there. It is the believer who have to prove that there is God.
There was a time when God did every thing. He makes fire he made rain, he made the air.
Now we know that is not what God does.
Most people claim the ardas is heard by God. God has no body so no ears. God can not hear the ardas. Lets say he can hear the ardas. When we leave for the journey. We say the ardas that God protect us from getting hurt. If it was meant to be that we are destin to die in the accident then doing the ardas can God change what was already set by him? Can judge who make the laws also can break the LAWS? So why do we do the ardas? Are we trying to bribe the God by doing the ardas? Or putting few penies in front of the Granth Sahib.
Almost all the holy books say that God can not be seen and what is set can not be changed, Why then we doing the puja and ardas.
People in Russia did not believe in God, yet every thing was working fine. I am not talking about the communist in India. I have meat many who were born in USSR and till they left Rusia and came to Canada or USA they never heard the name as God. Yet they are very nice people to deal with. Who were guiding them?
If any one want keep on believing in God it is his problem. They should read the SGGS and try to understand it. Not just to the path.
Seeker3k
Seeker3k ji,
Guru Fateh.
You said:
I would not dissect the rest of your babble but what you claimed about me is not only incorrect but also misleading. A responsible person like you should not do that.
Please post my comments in my posts to Atheist and/or others that prove your point. I hope you are honest enough this time.
Thanks and regards
Tejwant Singh
PS: Do not hesitate to ask questions because that is one of the learning processes in our lives that our Gurus used a lot of.
Guru Fateh.
You said:
I would not dissect the rest of your babble but what you claimed about me is not only incorrect but also misleading. A responsible person like you should not do that.
Please post my comments in my posts to Atheist and/or others that prove your point. I hope you are honest enough this time.
Thanks and regards
Tejwant Singh
PS: Do not hesitate to ask questions because that is one of the learning processes in our lives that our Gurus used a lot of.
Tejwant ji,
Why then you did not reply to Atheist question? You should have answered his question. But you asked him a question. You believe in God so what shame was there to explain why you believe in God.
Atheist was good enough to explain that why he dont believe in God. You did not explained why you believe in God.
What you want me to do about it. I am being honest about what I write. If my reply dont fit in your thinking that dont mean I am not honest.
seeker
Why then you did not reply to Atheist question? You should have answered his question. But you asked him a question. You believe in God so what shame was there to explain why you believe in God.
Atheist was good enough to explain that why he dont believe in God. You did not explained why you believe in God.
What you want me to do about it. I am being honest about what I write. If my reply dont fit in your thinking that dont mean I am not honest.
seeker
Seeker3k ji,
Guru Fateh.
One thing I asked you was to be honest and you failed to do that. Please read 16 pages of this thread and then prove what you claimed in your post.
Take your time, because truthful living is never in a hurry.
Tejwant Singh
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
Seeker ji,
You have raised good questions and have addressed many issues in your "babble" and I applaud you for that and your honesty. Good work! :thumbsupp:
You have raised good questions and have addressed many issues in your "babble" and I applaud you for that and your honesty. Good work! :thumbsupp:
Dear Seeker Ji,
Thank you for your comments. Despite Tejwant Singh Ji's claim what you said makes sense.
I will re-iterate, I originally posted this because I was curious about other people's beliefs. Hardly something to get criticized for. Unless of course one believes religion looks down upon curiosity...god knows that's how most christians feel I've talked to.
Onto Tejwant Singh Ji:
Your being in the medicine field should be very aware of the correct language you use. Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions before and they are self evident in many of your own posts.
My my...you know if you read my entire response first it would not have even been a question what I was talking about. Yes I said "your article" but you were too concrete and assumed I meant "the article that YOU PERSONALLY WITH YOUR OWN HANDS wrote." As I explained before and if you had read my whole reply first, later on I mentioned that article was written by a christian (ie, NOT you). I don't know how much more clear I could have been. Once again I ASSUMED (yes ASSUMED) rather incorrectly that you got it. You didn't. I said "I have made wrong assumptions before" to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just retorted and said "Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions..." Who does that??? I'm just here because I'm curious! You make it seem like such a crime. Has religion made you this utterly critical (not an assumption, a question)?
Once again, you said something totally different and feels insecure to apologise for the distortions. A truth seeker should be the first one to step forward in this manner. Now you seem to claim about most people's dispassionate side. One wonders how you jumped to the conclusion about others in this manner! It seems you claim to know more about others than about yourself. Once again, re read what you wrote, it has nothing to do with what you have said now in your post.
Frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. You claim to know that I feel insecure? And that I'm apologizing for distortions? Once again - I am here for my curiosity, and many people have satisfied my curiosity here but you are making ASSUMPTIONS (that's right - assumptions!) about me now. You are assuming that I'm jumping to unreasonable conclusions about other people and are bewildered by it. All I said was more than likely people are passionate about what they believe, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE. Why else would they be on this forum? Take you for example. You are so passionate about what you believe that you continue to challenge me and make these assumptions. Perhaps you are the one that should re-read what you wrote.
Please do not make assumptions about me and criticize me based on those faulty assumptions. I assumed you were not christian and passionate about your beliefs (whatever they are, and admittedly not the same as my beliefs - that's life). Am I right? And where does this notion come from that I am insecure? I am very secure in my beliefs, like I said again and again, I'm simply curious. If that's a religious crime, I want nothing to do with your religion.
It is hillarious to notice that you call other people's opinions as distortions. This is an opinion by someone as you have an opinion from the Atheist viewpoint. Shall we call your opinions as distortions? Yes, you did distort what I said and I corrected you by directing you towards my posts.
Wow you really just don't get it. What I said was that article (that YOU made me aware of but did NOT WRITE - are we on the same page now about it?) distorted atheism. And then you just took that to mean that I am calling other people's opinions as distortions...no, I'm saying THAT ARTICLE is distorted. Sheesh, if someone wrote an article about Sikhism and CLAIMED that sikhs believe in Jesus wouldn't you say that's a distortion? And then would it be right for me to accuse you of calling other people's opinions distortions? No, I would say "oh my, you are right to point out that this article made an incorrect claim." Seriously how much more clear can I make it.
Anyway, it's not to say I've learned nothing from you. I have learned the pantheistic side of Sikhism, something my parents did not teach. They made it seem much more like a personal god, and you make it seem like a pantheistic god. Again I am not criticizing, simply thanking you for satisfying my curiosity.
I will re-iterate again: I am here to satisfy my curiosity about why people believe what they do.
So, THANK YOU for sharing your beliefs with me. Although I can clearly see you jump to conclusions about me (like I'm insecure), I appreciate that you shared your pantheistic beliefs with me. An eye-opener!
Cheers!
Thank you for your comments. Despite Tejwant Singh Ji's claim what you said makes sense.
I will re-iterate, I originally posted this because I was curious about other people's beliefs. Hardly something to get criticized for. Unless of course one believes religion looks down upon curiosity...god knows that's how most christians feel I've talked to.
Onto Tejwant Singh Ji:
Your being in the medicine field should be very aware of the correct language you use. Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions before and they are self evident in many of your own posts.
My my...you know if you read my entire response first it would not have even been a question what I was talking about. Yes I said "your article" but you were too concrete and assumed I meant "the article that YOU PERSONALLY WITH YOUR OWN HANDS wrote." As I explained before and if you had read my whole reply first, later on I mentioned that article was written by a christian (ie, NOT you). I don't know how much more clear I could have been. Once again I ASSUMED (yes ASSUMED) rather incorrectly that you got it. You didn't. I said "I have made wrong assumptions before" to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just retorted and said "Yes, I know you have made lots of wrong assumptions..." Who does that??? I'm just here because I'm curious! You make it seem like such a crime. Has religion made you this utterly critical (not an assumption, a question)?
Once again, you said something totally different and feels insecure to apologise for the distortions. A truth seeker should be the first one to step forward in this manner. Now you seem to claim about most people's dispassionate side. One wonders how you jumped to the conclusion about others in this manner! It seems you claim to know more about others than about yourself. Once again, re read what you wrote, it has nothing to do with what you have said now in your post.
Frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. You claim to know that I feel insecure? And that I'm apologizing for distortions? Once again - I am here for my curiosity, and many people have satisfied my curiosity here but you are making ASSUMPTIONS (that's right - assumptions!) about me now. You are assuming that I'm jumping to unreasonable conclusions about other people and are bewildered by it. All I said was more than likely people are passionate about what they believe, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE. Why else would they be on this forum? Take you for example. You are so passionate about what you believe that you continue to challenge me and make these assumptions. Perhaps you are the one that should re-read what you wrote.
Please do not make assumptions about me and criticize me based on those faulty assumptions. I assumed you were not christian and passionate about your beliefs (whatever they are, and admittedly not the same as my beliefs - that's life). Am I right? And where does this notion come from that I am insecure? I am very secure in my beliefs, like I said again and again, I'm simply curious. If that's a religious crime, I want nothing to do with your religion.
It is hillarious to notice that you call other people's opinions as distortions. This is an opinion by someone as you have an opinion from the Atheist viewpoint. Shall we call your opinions as distortions? Yes, you did distort what I said and I corrected you by directing you towards my posts.
Wow you really just don't get it. What I said was that article (that YOU made me aware of but did NOT WRITE - are we on the same page now about it?) distorted atheism. And then you just took that to mean that I am calling other people's opinions as distortions...no, I'm saying THAT ARTICLE is distorted. Sheesh, if someone wrote an article about Sikhism and CLAIMED that sikhs believe in Jesus wouldn't you say that's a distortion? And then would it be right for me to accuse you of calling other people's opinions distortions? No, I would say "oh my, you are right to point out that this article made an incorrect claim." Seriously how much more clear can I make it.
Anyway, it's not to say I've learned nothing from you. I have learned the pantheistic side of Sikhism, something my parents did not teach. They made it seem much more like a personal god, and you make it seem like a pantheistic god. Again I am not criticizing, simply thanking you for satisfying my curiosity.
I will re-iterate again: I am here to satisfy my curiosity about why people believe what they do.
So, THANK YOU for sharing your beliefs with me. Although I can clearly see you jump to conclusions about me (like I'm insecure), I appreciate that you shared your pantheistic beliefs with me. An eye-opener!
Cheers!
Sat sri akal,Tejwant ji, You have pick all the pionts which I was thinking Thanks, Now Athiestji I have just read less then two pages of this topic and I am very confused as you said you are from sikh family and as you mention well practiced( I mean more deeper then usuall commen person).You have lot of knowlge about other religion too,then how come still ther is a place for doubt. If you don't mind I have a question for you which age group are you in, because my own son years ago asked the same question( and I was stunned)
Dear a.mother Ji,
Thank you for your post! I always appreciate questions of this nature posed to me. Here I go:
Now Athiestji I have just read less then two pages of this topic and I am very confused as you said you are from sikh family and as you mention well practiced( I mean more deeper then usuall commen person).You have lot of knowlge about other religion too,then how come still ther is a place for doubt.
It is true that I come from a traditional Sikh family. Both my parents and brother have taken amrit and are complete GurSikhs. I have gone through many motions, such as memorizing JapJi Sahib, performing kirtan, playing the tabla, being able to tie a pagh (and wearing one to Gurudwara), reading Gurmukhi (slowly), reading stories about the Guru's lives etc. But I cannot take credit for being well-practiced or deeper than the common person or having vast knowledge of other religions...though that is my goal (perhaps someday!)
So why the doubt, you ask? Well I could literally go on for hours upon hours upon days about this topic and it would take me forever to type it all out. I am actually even making a presentation on powerpoint for this, which is a cumbersome task. If I had to choose one reason though, it simply comes down to evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (as Christopher Hitchens would say). So when one claims that there is a celestial wizard that creates and destroys universes, listens to 6 billion prayers at the same time, performs miracles, intervenes, reads our thoughts, cares about our sex lives, etc. there better be darn good evidence for it. So far, there is none. There are typically 2 responses to this:
Response #1: "There is no 'evidence' for god - it is a matter of faith." My response: If I told you that I had "faith" for the pink unicorn on the moon, would you be impressed enough to believe it? No? Why not? Because there is no evidence for a pink unicorn? But there doesn't have to be evidence for it - it's a matter of faith.
Response #2: "There is no 'evidence for god - it is a matter of personal experience." My response: If I Told you that I had a "personal experience" in the pink unicorn on the moon, would that impress you enough to believe it? No? Why not? Because there is no evidence for a pink unicorn? But there doesn't have to be evidence for it - it's a matter of personal experience.
Now if you say god is not a personal god but rather the total sum of the laws of the universe and energy, then you are a pantheist (like Einstein). But a pantheistic god is a far cry from a god that voluntarily intervenes in human affairs and cares about us. I have no trouble with pantheists because pantheists are atheists that use the word "god" as a poetic metaphor for the vastness and complexity of the universal laws.
Another reason is the arguable claim that religion has caused at least as much misery as it has good. For example, we have 9/11, the KKK (depending on what part of the world you are in, the KKK is a christian religious organization based on white supremacy, racism, and utter prejudice & hatred), Galileo's imprisonment, the children who have killed themselves because they were sikh and couldn't cut their hair, the crusades, the witch hunts, suicide bombers, teaching creationism in school, not letting gay people get married, slavery, Hitler & the holocaust, etc. ALL are due to religion. The most common response to this is "but those things were due to human error" - but who made religion? Humans. Human stupidity came up with religion, and human stupidity, in the name of religion & god, has committed these atrocities. Even "religious" GurSikhs do not allow disabled people to perform the amrit ceremony (there is a separate forum that I started about this).
There are many more reasons that I would be happy to go into as much or as little as you desire. If you want to know a lot more, you can read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Now, most religious people would not dare read this book - they've already made up their minds right? But part of life is being open minded and investigating things. I have read parts of the bible, discussed mormon theology, read the stories of the Gurus, had numerous religious discussions with my father, and read material on atheism, islam, b'hai, and jehovah's witnesses. So although I can't claim to be especially advanced, I can at least say I've seriously looked into both sides of the argument and from more than one religion. So religious people should be open minded enough to read this. The worst that will happen is they will say "no, I still believe what I do."
I don't mind your asking my age range. I am in my upper 20's. All my schooling has stressed evidence and investigating. I simply cannot believe in something for which there is no evidence. Do not be so shocked that your son expressed doubt. That doubt and uncertainty is more prevalent than you might think. I hope you did not get mad at him but rather allowed him to express his thoughts with an open mind. As long as he is not acting immorally there is no harm.
I thank you again for your post, feel free to ask me further questions.
Thank you for your post! I always appreciate questions of this nature posed to me. Here I go:
Now Athiestji I have just read less then two pages of this topic and I am very confused as you said you are from sikh family and as you mention well practiced( I mean more deeper then usuall commen person).You have lot of knowlge about other religion too,then how come still ther is a place for doubt.
It is true that I come from a traditional Sikh family. Both my parents and brother have taken amrit and are complete GurSikhs. I have gone through many motions, such as memorizing JapJi Sahib, performing kirtan, playing the tabla, being able to tie a pagh (and wearing one to Gurudwara), reading Gurmukhi (slowly), reading stories about the Guru's lives etc. But I cannot take credit for being well-practiced or deeper than the common person or having vast knowledge of other religions...though that is my goal (perhaps someday!)
So why the doubt, you ask? Well I could literally go on for hours upon hours upon days about this topic and it would take me forever to type it all out. I am actually even making a presentation on powerpoint for this, which is a cumbersome task. If I had to choose one reason though, it simply comes down to evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (as Christopher Hitchens would say). So when one claims that there is a celestial wizard that creates and destroys universes, listens to 6 billion prayers at the same time, performs miracles, intervenes, reads our thoughts, cares about our sex lives, etc. there better be darn good evidence for it. So far, there is none. There are typically 2 responses to this:
Response #1: "There is no 'evidence' for god - it is a matter of faith." My response: If I told you that I had "faith" for the pink unicorn on the moon, would you be impressed enough to believe it? No? Why not? Because there is no evidence for a pink unicorn? But there doesn't have to be evidence for it - it's a matter of faith.
Response #2: "There is no 'evidence for god - it is a matter of personal experience." My response: If I Told you that I had a "personal experience" in the pink unicorn on the moon, would that impress you enough to believe it? No? Why not? Because there is no evidence for a pink unicorn? But there doesn't have to be evidence for it - it's a matter of personal experience.
Now if you say god is not a personal god but rather the total sum of the laws of the universe and energy, then you are a pantheist (like Einstein). But a pantheistic god is a far cry from a god that voluntarily intervenes in human affairs and cares about us. I have no trouble with pantheists because pantheists are atheists that use the word "god" as a poetic metaphor for the vastness and complexity of the universal laws.
Another reason is the arguable claim that religion has caused at least as much misery as it has good. For example, we have 9/11, the KKK (depending on what part of the world you are in, the KKK is a christian religious organization based on white supremacy, racism, and utter prejudice & hatred), Galileo's imprisonment, the children who have killed themselves because they were sikh and couldn't cut their hair, the crusades, the witch hunts, suicide bombers, teaching creationism in school, not letting gay people get married, slavery, Hitler & the holocaust, etc. ALL are due to religion. The most common response to this is "but those things were due to human error" - but who made religion? Humans. Human stupidity came up with religion, and human stupidity, in the name of religion & god, has committed these atrocities. Even "religious" GurSikhs do not allow disabled people to perform the amrit ceremony (there is a separate forum that I started about this).
There are many more reasons that I would be happy to go into as much or as little as you desire. If you want to know a lot more, you can read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Now, most religious people would not dare read this book - they've already made up their minds right? But part of life is being open minded and investigating things. I have read parts of the bible, discussed mormon theology, read the stories of the Gurus, had numerous religious discussions with my father, and read material on atheism, islam, b'hai, and jehovah's witnesses. So although I can't claim to be especially advanced, I can at least say I've seriously looked into both sides of the argument and from more than one religion. So religious people should be open minded enough to read this. The worst that will happen is they will say "no, I still believe what I do."
I don't mind your asking my age range. I am in my upper 20's. All my schooling has stressed evidence and investigating. I simply cannot believe in something for which there is no evidence. Do not be so shocked that your son expressed doubt. That doubt and uncertainty is more prevalent than you might think. I hope you did not get mad at him but rather allowed him to express his thoughts with an open mind. As long as he is not acting immorally there is no harm.
I thank you again for your post, feel free to ask me further questions.
Atheist ji,
Guru Fateh.
Welcome back.
It was a bit odd to see you disappear and become mum all of a sudden or were you on some penance journey of Atheism? j/k.
You write:
We will talk about the rest of your post later because you have been dishonest in this one too. I never claimed Sikhi to be a religion or a belief as you have claimed in this post, rather to the contrary.
So , please take your time, read all the 16 pages of interaction because honesty is not a belief or a non- belief. It is what Guru Nanak calls- truthful living.
Regards
Tejwant Singh
Guru Fateh.
Welcome back.
It was a bit odd to see you disappear and become mum all of a sudden or were you on some penance journey of Atheism? j/k.
You write:
I asked Seeker3k in post #'s 153 and 155 to be honest and read all 16 pages to prove what he claimed that I said and be honest about it. He unfortunately disappeared and I ask you the same question as you agree with Seeker3K to be honest about it. Take your time and do not disappear as he did.
We will talk about the rest of your post later because you have been dishonest in this one too. I never claimed Sikhi to be a religion or a belief as you have claimed in this post, rather to the contrary.
So , please take your time, read all the 16 pages of interaction because honesty is not a belief or a non- belief. It is what Guru Nanak calls- truthful living.
Regards
Tejwant Singh
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:
