I believe it's what we love that is important, not what others want us to believe. Believing what others want us to believe, in order to avoid punishement, is spiritual slavery. I believe that God wants lovers because it is His nature, and the Devil wants slaves because it is its nature.
oh boy, what a turn this thread took. as traders we mock and laugh at those 'sheep' who believe in the buy and hold mantra of wall street, trust their money to charlatans, and get destroyed because of it. and yet the average man's approach to questions of metaphysics (questions of the afterlife, purpose of existence, overall meaning of reality etc.) is so much worse, so much more pathetic. why do we think its okay to make up a bunch of hokey sounding crap about what happens after death and about what life is for without searching for real answers before we open our mouths and let smart sounding baloney come out? talk about dangerous. Much more dangerous than idiotic market philosophies that can only cost you money. "What I see here and now is real and that's it" is shallow and, after a moment's thought, silly. Which is more real, that which you can see, or that which you can't see? Let's compare my computer keyboard, which I am typing on, versus something intangible, like truth. My computer keyboard was built less than two years ago and has a finite lifespan. In a short time it will cease to exist. Truth, however, will always exist as long as any sort of reality exists. Which is more real? And why should your consciousness cease when your heartbeat stops? What evidence is there for that? And how can science measure that which it can't see? If there is a blue daffodil growing somewhere in the world where noone can see it or observe it, does that mean it doesn't exist? Choosing to believe something without spending the time and effort to find real truth, going with what you feel like believing instead of doing hands on research and deeply thought out study, is dangerous and dumb. I won't even go into how silly it is to say "y'know, like, if there's a God I'll just say sorry dude, your system was lame, and hell is cool. Okay, flame me now big G. Whatever." In otherwords, "if there is a God then I don't like his style so I'd rather be a smartass and flip him the bird than change..." if ANY group of individuals should believe in objective, absolute truth, it should be traders.
Rigel-- fair enough. Are you using God and Devil metaphorically or do you think there actually is, for lack of a better word, a physical entity with a long flowing beard and another in all his horned glory? And if so where do they reside? Heaven and hell respectively?
I'm taking your quote was meant for me so I will respond. This is not a self-righteous quest for me. I simply know my limitations of knowledge. You have to be right with yourself and those around you before you can be right with God. Otherwise your integrity and sincererity are compromised. And if any group of individuals should know how ambiguous, fleeting, and illusive absolute truth is, it should be traders.
No, not metaphorically. The beard and the horns would be a metaphore. I believe God is a real, and so is the devil. REAL. I KNOW it.
I didn't have you in mind specifically when I wrote that... I think the main thing that pushes my button is a casual, flippant approach to questions as serious as life and death (or more serious, if that is possible). I can respect anyone who has taken the time and effort to put together a coherent understanding of their beliefs and has the ability to defend it logically. It's the casual, off the cuff, who really cares but this sounds cool attitude that I find grating. Again I'm not speaking of you in particular, I just found that particular flavor developing in the thread. I agree with you in a sense regarding absolute truth- acknowledging that it exists, even if it is illusive and hard to find, is a foundation and a beginning. I would differ in that I do not think absolute truth is all that hard to find- the hard part is putting aside all our emotional baggage, misconceptions, twisted desires and general overall crap that stands in the way of us seeing it.
I can respect anyone who has taken the time and effort to put together a coherent understanding of their beliefs and has the ability to defend it logically. During the old christian times very few people were initiated into Mysteries. For masses there was (still is) the Church (Roman-Catholic religion). Discussion like this one doesn't make any sense because if you have at least certain degree of Realization you can't communicate it and logic doesn't apply. Higher the elevation more of a loneliness, so to speak.
in man's mind only. this is where he resides. a product of man's imagination. and his fear. watch monty python's "the meaning of life". you can't come away without serious doubts as to the validity of the supreme being. :-\
I disagree Cesko, I think that logic applies to philosophy and religion just as much as it applies to anything else, and I also do not thinkit is necessary for everyone to equate enlightenment with loneliness. I do agree with the spirit of your post though, in that it is not easy to communicate understanding from one person to another- in fact, more often than not it is impossible, for many reasons, not least of them being that intellectual assent is an act of will, and when emotion and reason go head to head, emotion frequently wins. I don't expect folks on this board to start embracing the truth as I see it simply through my presentation, I know I don't have that much influence. My main goal in posting was rather to encourage the search itself, to point out that resting on one's laurels with a comfortable but incomplete idea, not striving in great ernestness to validate the logic and implications of one's beliefs before calling the case closed, is foolhardy and dangerous.