I am not arguing on the side of faith or not. I do believe metaphysical and existential questions have to be asked, these are very much part of human intelligence and psychology. Our life is very much a tiny blip on a giant radar screen that has been running for many years. How is it that ONE singular God that is of ONE faith loves just YOU, the tiny blip, so much, and then allows a murderer to exist and kill over and over? How do we reconcile questions of conscious and morality? Do they exist?

No, of course not. Thats what I'm trying to suggest. Nothing is big "t", Truth. Even Truth is traceable, contingent, of the human context, a human construct. Its origins are actually very well known, as well. Plato started the whole thing. The whole subject/object distinction, the ocular metaphor for us perceiving reality. Thats the problem, that relationship Plato talked about so many thousands of years ago is still effecting us. That relationship doesn't exist, we are not necessarily even subjects relating to object, like "i see reality" or "i know truth".
Metaphysics suffers from the same problem. If you want to "get at the bigger truth", you're probably shit out of luck in a philosophical context. Of course, science is the preferable tool for metaphysicians, but it has its limits, and its limits include introspection or for that matter a functioning model of the brain. In case someone had mislead you into thinking otherwise: we have absolutely no idea what so ever about how our mind works. If we've learnt anything from the patterns of history it is that things to change, and to harness that change, i'd recommend everyone drop their spiritual or religious inclinations. Unless you're like some murderer who would be killing people if it wasnt for jesus... those guys need to stick with jesus.

I am a Deist myself and if any of you know something of it ,then it offers as you know, tons of leeway on who God is or what he is? Could be a he,she ,it deal also.
But I am pretty sure God intended for us to treat each other decently Yeah ,I say that but I have already begun to feel a bit hostile toward some room members. I like stoicism ,where philosophy is concerned. And if something other than Stoicism made Brutus stab that rat Caesar .I want it also. And yes faith makes people do ignorant shit, but hey if the Amish don't want TVs ,X BOX & Vibrators that glow in dark, fuck 'em
more for the rest of us ,eh?

yeah i so live my private like with your final sentiments in mind, but publicly i do want them to evolve.

as for deism, im not familiar with how it is perceived to you, but only to Ben Franklin (another hero of mine), who believed in a clockwork universe created by God. This is a brilliant attempt at synthesizing science and religion, and is a far more advisable theism than most. None the less, as an ironist (atheist), i still insist on its failed attempt to rustle up the Truth. If you've got the will power and the balls to handle stoicism, you'll go places.

Well I can appreciate to some degree your remarks on stoicism, but maybe I can't live up to it ,suburbanite. I looked it up in the dictionary, just to make sure I knew what the hell I was talking about, the definition basically states that a Stoic is one who accepts all events or circumstance as coming from their god's will ,or as law of nature. That part I can live up to, but then it says something about accepting WITHOUT Emotion, which is a real tough thing for me to do.

__________________
America has no distinct criminal class excepting maybe Congress
MARK TWAIN

James Otis of Massachusetts on Parliament
1768 :A parcel of button-makers ,pin-makers, horse jockeys,gamesters, pensioners,pimps, and whoremasters.

sic semper tyrannis

Ignore those fools. They're nuts. Too ancient. Plato, aristotle, descarte, all these people are a bit out dated. The only philosophers of the past that I think were on to something were the Sophists, an ancient philosophy most like my own. And Socrates was alright when he wasnt talking to Plato. The Sophists were ahead of their time by thousands of years, it wasn't until language philosophers that they came back.