REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

There is a God, or There is no god the next generation

POSTED BY: CITIZEN
UPDATED: Thursday, August 24, 2006 16:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 9203
PAGE 1 of 3

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:22 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Existentialism states that there are no universal truths. For something to be a universal truth EVERYONE has to believe it. So, in your example, even the blind have to believe that the sky is blue (which, I think, would be rather difficult, as they may not have any notion of color).

Can't somebody just start a new thread? It's really not that hard. Please?

Here you go.

EDIT:
Kindly supplied by Rue.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=22896



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:31 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Yay!

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:34 AM

HKCAVALIER


You beat me to it, citizen! I started one too.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=23013


HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:39 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Oh, it's okay. One is good; two is better.

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:45 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:52 AM

MAL4PREZ


Thanks citizen!

Quote:

Existentialism states that there are no universal truths. For something to be a universal truth EVERYONE has to believe it. So, in your example, even the blind have to believe that the sky is blue (which, I think, would be rather difficult, as they may not have any notion of color).


Yinyang - I see your point, but I can't take it that far or I'll end up laying in corner babbling "none of it's real, none of it's real..." and that's just not productive. Or fun.

My point is - the sky being blue is pretty universally agreed on. If you see (say, on TV or a painting) that certain shade of blue with a bird in it, you don't think, oh that bird is floating in the ocean. No - obviously it's the sky! And most everyone will agree because the sky is blue all over the world.

As for divinity and what is good and what is evil... none of that involves a single clear reality. That's all I mean by universal truth. Maybe a better phrase could be used, I don't know.

In any case, I felt that DukKati was using the statement "if God exists then Satan exists" with the same logical, um, power (do you know what I mean?) as "if a=b and b=c, then a=c", and that I certainly disagree with!

Anyway, have a good weekend folks! I'm outta here to enjoy my godless heathen weekend fun, yay!

-----------------------------------------------
I'm the president. I don't need to listen.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 10:59 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Gotcha, mal4prez! And, have a good time with 'the godless heathen weekend'!

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:06 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
No God, No Santa, no Fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Just get over it and find something else to argue about will you?

Small children believe in Santa. Most people accept that and don't tell their 4 year old that Santa is only a fiction, it's just your father and mother puting the presents under the tree--grow up, ya pipsqeek! Then there's the curmudgenly phase when we find out that Santa's all just a lie and we've been hoodwinked and our parents are unspeakably cruel for indulging our illusions. OED's original post expresses this phase to a "T." But later on, a lot of people accept Santa and return to believing in him, not as a literal man in a sleigh delivering 6 billion plus presents over the course of a few hours once a year, but as the embodiment of certain values: giving, charity, togetherness (is that really a word or was it invented by the Coca Cola Company?), etc. Santa is an ideal of wisdom and kindness which seems to transcend ordinary boundaries and unite all of us who partake in the yearly ritual of gift giving.

Mightn't God be pretty much the same thing, only on a much broader scale?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:12 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Brought over from previous thread, posted by Nanite1018:
Here's my problem with religion: there's no evidence to support it; other than people's word. Unfortunately, that's not good enough. This type of thing is so remarkbable, so important, that you can't just take people's word for it;

That's the whole point.

Science for the scientifical, Religion for the religigorical .

Can science help you create a moral code? Can science comfort you when a loved one dies? Can religion tell you the charge of an electron?

You don't say "my problem with cars is that they can't fly you across the Atkantic".



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:22 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Can science help you create a moral code? Can science comfort you when a loved one dies? Can religion tell you the charge of an electron?

Interestingly, I don't get any help from religion to create my moral code either. Maybe human beings don't need these "authorities" to do our thinking for us.

I've always found the consolation of religion just a little absurd and mainly I see it used to deaden real feeling rather than express it, i.e.: "Don't cry, your mother has gone to a better place." Oooh, that makes me crazy mad!

The interesting thing about the charge of an electron is that the vast, vast majority of people live their entire lives without needing that information for themselves.

Haha! Both science and religion are equally useless! Haha!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:28 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Interestingly, I don't get any help from religion to create my moral code either. Maybe human beings don't need these "authorities" to do our thinking for us.

You think you can honestly say that no religion has had any role in helping you create your moral code at all? I mean I came to my own morals my self, but I can't honestly say that I was not influenced by the religons around me and that I have come into contact with.
Quote:

I've always found the consolation of religion just a little absurd and mainly I see it used to deaden real feeling rather than express it, i.e.: "Don't cry, your mother has gone to a better place." Oooh, that makes me crazy mad!
There's a difference between taking solace in religion, whether that's the community it fosters, the concepts or the belief or even having someone too turn too, god the priest whatever, and repressing your emotions because 'they've gone to a better place'. I've never taken this solace myself, but I find it silly to ignore the experience of a great many people who do.
Quote:

The interesting thing about the charge of an electron is that the vast, vast majority of people live their entire lives without needing that information for themselves.
Your computer clockwork is it .



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:34 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Quote:

Haha! Both science and religion are equally useless! Haha!


Not necessarily. Science, for example, is very useful when it comes to medicine and such.

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 11:59 AM

HKCAVALIER


yinyang,

I was kinda kidding. I mean, I was a lot kidding. Yes, science has proven extremely useful.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 12:02 PM

RUGBUG


Copied from other thread:

Quote:

Originally posted by nanite1018:
Here's my problem with religion: there's no evidence to support it; other than people's word. Unfortunately, that's not good enough. This type of thing is so remarkbable, so important, that you can't just take people's word for it; which is what you're doing when you believe the Bible is true.



There is extra-biblical evidence to support existence of a higher power. Whether you choose to attribute that evidence to said higher power is a personal choice.

***************
"My feelings are changeable but intense" Anya (season 7 Buffy)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 12:07 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Oh, okay. That makes me feel much better about you.

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 12:10 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
You think you can honestly say that no religion has had any role in helping you create your moral code at all?

I can.
I found religion to be a tool for divisiveness quite early on.
I got all my early moral lessons from Star Trek.

Thank The Great Bird Of The Galaxy Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 12:12 PM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
You think you can honestly say that no religion has had any role in helping you create your moral code at all? I mean I came to my own morals my self, but I can't honestly say that I was not influenced by the religons around me and that I have come into contact with.

Plenty of influence, all of it bad. If some particular article of faith from this or that religion strikes my fancy, rings true, then I might appropriate the terminology, but I do my best to stay away from belief in general--I'd rather stick to what I know and what seems likely based upon previous experience. I don't need absolute proof of a thing to accept it, but I don't let myself get too attached either.


Quote:

There's a difference between taking solace in religion, whether that's the community it fosters, the concepts or the belief or even having someone too turn too, god the priest whatever, and repressing your emotions because 'they've gone to a better place'. I've never taken this solace myself, but I find it silly to ignore the experience of a great many people who do.
Hey citizen, I think you might have to run this one by me again, I'm a li'l confused as to your meanin'. I find organized religion enormously repressive of emotions, sexuality, aggression, heterodox thinking, the list goes on and on. Tends to make me think that a lot of people have acquired a taste for repression, not that the religion isn't really repressing them just because it comforts them.
Quote:

Your computer clockwork is it .
We kid, we kid, but all kidding aside: do you think it's important for someone who uses a computer to know how it works? Just as the proper functioning of a democracy demands an informed electorate, does the proper functioning of a technologicaly society demand informed users? Do you think I'm giving up important power if I don't understand modern technology? I'm curious.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 12:27 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:

Originally posted by mal4prez:
I'll end up laying in corner babbling "none of it's real, none of it's real..." and that's just not productive. Or fun.



Says who?

Quote:

And most everyone will agree because the sky is blue all over the world.


Ummm...Los Angeles?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 1:31 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


OH ! OH ! OH ! OH ! I Know ! I Know!

:WavingHandInAir:

SCIENCE teaches us how to build a nuclear bomb!
RELIGION teaches us when to use it!

Did I learn good, teacher ?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 3:15 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


HK - I tend to lean in your direction.

I've known three religious people in my life for whom religion deepened their souls (one a parent, one a grandparent). Except for those three, the rest of the religious people I've known have been seriously arrogant little pricks. So while I can't say my experience with religion and religious people has been uniformly bad, it's been overwhelmingly so. OTOH, two of the religious-but-still-good people I knew were immigrants. So maybe US religion in particular just has a bad flavour, and Citizen is speaking from a different background.

Both my parents were nominally RC (being Polish), but well educated, broad-minded and tolerant. I never grew up in a strictly religious atmosphere. That's probably the reason why I've thought of people like Jesus and Buddha as teachers, and all religions as a window into the human soul - for better or worse (like the Aztecs).

No conclusions here, just rambling ....

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 5:45 PM

ANTIMASON


i think Christians need to study thoroughly their faith, and seek answeres to questions they have, because this would prevent this stereotype about shallow, ignorant or indifferent believers. part of being a faithful disciple is being able to justify and defend your beliefs to skeptics, who would otherwise deny its importance

actually, the biggest threat facing the world is the complacency of the American Christian. we have been taken by the lie that the establishment "Christians" in office have propogated, about the mission of America to defeat these "evil Islamic fascists", and have lost site of the reality that our own system is the evil fascist organisation.

i realized lately there are 2 ultimate schools of thought regarding this coming NWO scenario, and it becomes two sets of Christians:
-those who believe the government, and the official story about 9/11;
- and those who dont

the Christians who believe the 9/11 lie havent looked into the occult conspiracy taking place to bring America online as the prophesied Mystery Babylon, the great harlot who sits on many waters. instead some Christians believe America is not mentioned in prophecy at all, but also think we are at the end of the age. if we are the current superpower, what does that imply?

these Christians, although their motives appear pure(democracy and freedom), they fail to make accurate connections to the real world. they are oblivious to the occult, therefore they fail to accurately recognize prophecy. how can you seek to understand the rise of antiChrist then, if you do not seek the circumstances leading up to it; or do they at all?. our government is striving towards bringing upon the final kingdom of the Beast, and many Christians are supporting the establishments motives, unbeknownst to them!

these i believe will be the elect believers who are decieved in the end times because they missed the signs of the occult forces at work in the world; and adopted heretical philosphies opposing to Gods plan

America was founded by secret societies, such as the Freemasons, and no one will deny that; only Masonic and Satanic symbolism are identical. if you believe in God, what kind of signs do you need that Satan is at work in the world?

we have an incredible dichotomy between our beliefs, and our actions; we are hypocritical, and selfish, and for being the most affluent super power in history, we have completely negated our responsibilities to represent Gods will on earth and have become literally the great prostitute. we have such obligation, because we are the most wealthy Christian nation, to expose the Satanic heresies which threaten Gods wrath upon us; and yet we find ourselves provoking it! we are Mystery Babylon of Revelation 17/18!

and this current war on terror will give rise to the system of Antichrist, which will be a totalitarian, fascist global government control grid. the Patriot act, Homeland Security, Fema, CIA, NSA, they will continue to undermine the constitution until political dissidents can be classified as terrorists and sent to concentration camps.

i realize this sounds dramatic, but for the Christians out there, it is crucial that you get on board

here is a great link to get caught up on this theory, i recommend you do so, even if you are not a Christian, so that you know the truth about what is to befall us all
http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/denemcgriff/in_search_of_babylo
n_intro.htm





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 6:22 PM

NANITE1018


Evidence is required to believe in something. if someone has evidence that they can show me or tell me that supports a higher power, bring it on. But i will probably be able to show you how it fits science remarkably well and doesn't require a higher power.

And Citizen; i realise that science doesn't provide a moral code (although you could make a case that it could, i won't right here, unless you want me to). But simple logic dictates that you don't want to live in a world where people rape, murder, or steal so you don't do those things. Basically, the Golden Rule is pretty much followed, and it makes sense logically. Of course, utilitarianism works also, and that is as scientific as it gets in terms of ethics. Well, as logical as it gets, not as scientific.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 11, 2006 7:39 PM

ANTIMASON


one form of evidence is eye witness accounts right?

why does the Bible not qualify as evidence? the OT is constantly being proven archeologically to be historically accurate, and both the old and new testaments provide equal-if not greater eye witness testimony then most outside sources

we have verifiable second hand accounts of Jesus'healings and other miracles, recorded by early Jews of the pharasiac sect, who opposed Jesus, such as Josephus. and we have Roman historical accounts such as Tacitus' who verify Jesus beating and death.
http://www.carm.org/bible/extrabiblical_accounts.htm

Paul, one of Jesus' most relentless persecutors, became one of the most cherished apostles after he witnesses the ressurected Jesus, 3 days later. life after death, would that not be considered reality defying?

and theres other stuff, but i mean..this is what we have to work with. what do you want from these people, it was 2000 years ago!..and the OT goes even farther back. its not like they had pen and paper lying around to record things with. but reletive to other religions, atleast the gospel of Jesus was written within his lifetime.

no one really likes to take into consideration the nature of our ancestors and their customs. traditions were mainly oral, for many thousands of years; so they knew how to retain practices. but the Jews were meticulous in documenting their belief in Yahweh as creator God aswell, which singled them apart from the polytheistic religions.

this is considered evidence i thought. we have numerous prophecies which have literally been fullfilled, you can do a search on that, most recently with Isreal becoming a nation again after 2500 years, which happened in 1948. who could have predicted that they would even be around, in any form, after 4000 years?

and we have prophecies which are soon to be fullfilled, such as the rebuilding of the Jewish temple mount, the mark of the beast, the antichrist, the false profit, and mystery bablon etc. if you accept that the NWO agenda is real, and that the 9/11 conspiracies are true, suddenly the prophecies regarding the tribulation become a lot more comprehendable. but it takes the time to research

then you will know first hand whether there is a God or not, because you will have seen with your own eyes the fullfillment of prophecy.






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:37 AM

CITIZEN


At the end of the day I was talking about faith and spirituality fulfilling a part of our lives wholly different to scientific understanding.

People seem to think it's silly to believe in something that can't be scientifically proven, that proof is required for faith. Nothing, quite frankly, can be further from the truth. I think as beings we tend to NEED faith, perhaps that doesn't hold for all but I can't off hand point to anyone and say they don't have faith in something.

Proof utterly destroys faith; if there was proof of god we wouldn't need faith, which diminishes the experience. Like the Babel fish argument from The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, an animal as useful as the Babel fish proves the existence of god, which precludes faith and without faith god cannot exist...

Saying "you have to have proof to believe" is making religion and spirituality a science, which is just as bad as making science a religion. Both should and do fill very different roles in our lives and by holding one to the standards of the other we're missing the point entirely.

Science attempts to explain the physical world, and in that capacity it does rather well, but there's more to life than the physical world and materialism, and this is where a whole slew of things including faith, religion and spirituality come in.
Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Plenty of influence, all of it bad. If some particular article of faith from this or that religion strikes my fancy, rings true, then I might appropriate the terminology, but I do my best to stay away from belief in general--I'd rather stick to what I know and what seems likely based upon previous experience. I don't need absolute proof of a thing to accept it, but I don't let myself get too attached either.

Are you sure? We've spoken on subjects before where your responses required some component of belief.

Some people don't need help to learn, some people need teachers, and this seems like an argument of some minority saying teachers aren't necessary. Sure religions tend to fall prey to the old Human desire for power and control, but when it all comes together a priest is a teacher and should be pointing the way, not leading it.
Quote:

Hey citizen, I think you might have to run this one by me again, I'm a li'l confused as to your meanin'. I find organized religion enormously repressive of emotions, sexuality, aggression, heterodox thinking, the list goes on and on. Tends to make me think that a lot of people have acquired a taste for repression, not that the religion isn't really repressing them just because it comforts them.
Are you really saying that those who confess to be comforted by religion, spirituality or even faith really just have a 'hard on' for being repressed?
Quote:

do you think it's important for someone who uses a computer to know how it works? Just as the proper functioning of a democracy demands an informed electorate, does the proper functioning of a technologicaly society demand informed users? Do you think I'm giving up important power if I don't understand modern technology? I'm curious.
No, but holding the knowledge yourself and it affecting your daily life are two very different things. Without the knowledge of the electron and its properties and behaviours the electronic computer could not have been designed and built, thus whenever you use a computer your life is being affected by the knowledge of the electron, whether you yourself hold that knowledge is irrelevant.

If a miracle cancer drug was invented tomorrow and used to treat your cancer it has deeply affected your life, understanding how it works really isn't required for this.

If we transplanted Neanderthals to the 21st century they wouldn't understand any of our modern technology, but I can't see the argument that they wouldn't be affected by it.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:26 AM

DREAMTROVE


Antimason,

I think there are christian groups which do that, get serious about their christianity, but mindless masses grow to larger numbers and elect moronic representatives.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:44 AM

DUKKATI


I shall venture a few questions here.

1. If there is no God who created all, then what happens to these fact packed minds of great knowledge and the lowly uneducated when the body dies?

2. If there are no absolute truths , then what keeps us from flying apart at the sub atomic level?

3. Why is it a person needs more faith and reasoning to believe there is NO God?

I will try to read all that is posted to answer these questions, but please remember I only have a limited amount of time here and I aint gotts but a piece of edumacation.



I've been through the system.
It don't work.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 8:15 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by DukKati:
1. If there is no God who created all, then what happens to these fact packed minds of great knowledge and the lowly uneducated when the body dies?

Well that's a fair question. Not even arbent believers of christianity can answer that one, they believe you either go to heaven or to hell, or purgatory(but christians can't decide on this point) depending on the denomination but they don't know. What's Hell/Heaven/Purgatory really like? Don't know that either.

You can't ask a question that is answerable by anyone then assumes it proves anything when it isn't answered.
Quote:

2. If there are no absolute truths , then what keeps us from flying apart at the sub atomic level?
Erm, the strong binding force, which isn't a 'Truth'.

If there is a god how come purple rasberries?
Quote:

3. Why is it a person needs more faith and reasoning to believe there is NO God?
Because it doesn't.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 8:29 AM

NANITE1018


Quote:

Originally posted by DukKati:
I shall venture a few questions here.

1. If there is no God who created all, then what happens to these fact packed minds of great knowledge and the lowly uneducated when the body dies?

2. If there are no absolute truths , then what keeps us from flying apart at the sub atomic level?

3. Why is it a person needs more faith and reasoning to believe there is NO God?

I will try to read all that is posted to answer these questions, but please remember I only have a limited amount of time here and I aint gotts but a piece of edumacation.



I've been through the system.
It don't work.



Um... they die? Pretty easy. They no longer exist. The information content degrades due to decay from lack of oxygen (natural decay of the brain after death). So the brain can no longer function even if it gets oxygen again. At that point the person is dead, although some of the information content is probably still there and retrievable (if we had nanotechnology or something) and if we did have nanotech we might still be able to repair the damage, in a few hours it would become totally impossible to repair the damage no matter what, in which case the person is irretrievably gone.

There are absolute truths in a sense, the laws of physics. Although those might change due to the natural quantum uncertainty dictated by them, that kind of transition is extremely unlikely and isn't expected to occur for a googol years (10^100 years). So that's what keeps us from flying apart at the subatomic level, the laws of physics. But those might be arbitrarily selected when the universe was created (which may have occurred when a black hole was formed in another universe). There may be an infinite or near-infinite number of universes, in which case it's just pure luck that the laws of physics can support life (the weak anthropic principle basically, the universe is how it is because if it were much different, we couldn't be here to ask the question).

I don't think that is the case. You just have to be mildly skeptical and require real hard evidence, beyond word of mouth which isn't good at all in determining objective truth, we have the strange ability to change what happened and warp it to fit our perceptions and inclinations in our own memory and when we tell it to others (oral traditions aren't very reliable). Like Russell's teapot, you don't believe there's a teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars, because you can't see it and have no reason to think it's there, other than people's say-so; and they can't do anything but point at other people's say-so as evidence.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 8:46 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Are you sure? We've spoken on subjects before where your responses required some component of belief.

Naw, citizen, actually no. Here's how it is. I've had psychic experiences. I've gotten information by some means other than the official 5 senses. This information is still what I would call "sensory" and every bit as reliable (and unreliable) as sight or hearing or touch or smell or taste.

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to credit my experiences as real unless they've had similar experiences or unless they find me to be a credible witness. I sure as heck don't want anyone to put their faith in me.

You may believe that you need faith in a higher power in order to say there is one. I have heard this trans-personal awareness speak. This awareness has told me things which have later panned out. I therefore have come to rely on this kind of information.

I understand the intuition to be a kind of sense. In modern humans this sense is greatly atrophied due, apparently, to our centuries old reliance on technology and violent manipulation of our environment to get our needs met. Who needs intuition when you can simply lay down some cash and get anything you desire?

Quote:

Some people don't need help to learn, some people need teachers, and this seems like an argument of some minority saying teachers aren't necessary. Sure religions tend to fall prey to the old Human desire for power and control, but when it all comes together a priest is a teacher and should be pointing the way, not leading it.
citizen, you and I have been having arguments like this for a couple weeks now. You seem to want to reduce my arguments down to some simplified, binary oppositions. My mistrust of organized religion, and my own bad experiences with same, imply to you that I don't believe anyone needs teachers. lol

You're kinda driving me a little crazy with this stuff.

I think you put your finger on it, though, when you said teachers should "point the way" rather than "lead." I see organizations and institutions as fundamentally hierarchical most of the time. They're all about leading. I may be splitting hairs, but to my mind, the extent to which an individual member of such an institution points the way as you put it, she is being a good teacher. Such a teacher is abdicating the power with which the institution she belongs to has vested her; in essence, stepping outside the institution and interacting with the student as an individual. Such people are the good teachers, the ones who so often seem to have a problem getting tenure.

Quote:

Are you really saying that those who confess to be comforted by religion, spirituality or even faith really just have a 'hard on' for being repressed?
First of all, I sure don't lump religion, spirituality and faith together like that. When I'm speaking against religion, I'm speaking against a man-made institution or hierarchy. As I understand it, when we defer to institutions and hierarchies we suppress a part of ourselves in order to do so. Freud called this "sublimation" and believed that it was necessary for "civilization." This can be a mindful compromise we make with the world as it is in order to survive. It saddens me, but as things stand, we all must do this to some degree. By the time you have a two thousand year old institution claiming to have all the answers, it seems to me you have to value repression itself in order to put up with all the unjustifiable strictures they lay down.

Emotions can be pretty scary; sexuality can be pretty scary; aggression--scary; speaking truth to power--scary. And fear motivates a lot of people to allow themselves to be repressed. To such people, repression becomes comforting, easy, the sign of an orderly and manageable life.

Quote:

No, but holding the knowledge yourself and it affecting your daily life are two very different things. Without the knowledge of the electron and its properties and behaviours the electronic computer could not have been designed and built, thus whenever you use a computer your life is being affected by the knowledge of the electron, whether you yourself hold that knowledge is irrelevant.

If a miracle cancer drug was invented tomorrow and used to treat your cancer it has deeply affected your life, understanding how it works really isn't required for this.

If we transplanted Neanderthals to the 21st century they wouldn't understand any of our modern technology, but I can't see the argument that they wouldn't be affected by it.


Ack, ack, ack! My original comment which started all this was this one here:
Quote:

The interesting thing about the charge of an electron is that the vast, vast majority of people live their entire lives without needing that information for themselves.
Without needing the information for themselves. I never, never said that I or you or any transplanted Neanderthals didn't or couldn't benefit from modern technology. Never! I don't see how any of what you've been arguing against is implied by what I've said.

I find talking to you and reading your discussions with others very interesting because your views don't seem to fit into any easy catagories. You strike me as an authentic, highly self-actualized person. I don't think you're a hypocrite or deluded or irrational, but I'm getting the feeling that you kinda think I am. At this point, I actually would appreciate it if you would clarify whether or not you think I'm any of these things. It might simplify matters between us.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 10:08 AM

ANTIMASON


so lets get this straight: there is no scientific evidence to disprove a "God" or it cant be proven either way

but we do however, have a form of evidence from prior cultures and civilazations, which supports a God; but those wont be taken into consideration?

maybe this explains the contexts of these quotes?

"i praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, for this was your good pleasure" Mt.11:25

"OH, the depth of the riches of the law of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! who has known the mind of the Lord? who has ever given to God, that God should repay him? for from him and through him and to him are all things." Ro.11:33

"do not decieve yourselves. if any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. for the wisdom of this world is foolishness in Gods sight. as it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again "the lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile." so then, no more boasting about men! all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or the world or the life or death or the present or the future- all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God" 1Co.3:18

"for the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. for it is written:"i will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent i will frustrate.".. where is the wise man? where is the scholar? where is the philosopher of this age? has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? for since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. ..for the foolishness of God is wiser than mans wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than mans strength." 1Co.1:18

"you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and the ruler *of the kingdom of the air*(Satan), the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. all of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its deisres and throughts. like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath." Ep.2

"see to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ....these are a shadow of things to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. he has lost connection with the head, from which the whole body.. grows as God causes it go grow." Co.2:8+

"who is wise and understanding among you? let him show it by his good life, by the deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. but if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in you hearts, do no boast about it or deny the truth. such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven, but is earthly, unsprititual, and of the devil. for where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every kind of evil" Ja.3:13

i could dig up more, but heres my point: this in itself does not amount to proof, but the message is clear: what do we really know about the nature of our reality, and is it not arrogant to presume we know the mechanisms of the universe and all its intricate connections?

and there are certainly universal truths..actually Satans greatest diceptions was convincing man otherwise. "did God really say you cannot eat.." "surely you wont die, but God knows that your eyes will be opened..." ..notice, lies and half truths become deceptive provocations. this is why in John it says that Satan is the father of lies, and when speaks a lie, he speaks his native language.







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 10:25 AM

NANITE1018


I do not presume to know all of the intracracies of the universe, i just don't see any sense in attributing what i don't know to something for which there is no hard evidence for. Say-so has some meaning, but doesn't denote truth. It simply means that the idea of god serves some purpose whether there actually is a god or not. I think not, and the idea of god and afterlife exists to alleviate people's concerns, make them more forgiving and give them hope in an unjust world. And now it is perpetuated because the world is still unjust, although now it is counter-productive because religion allows people to not work as hard for justice (in my opinion) because you always have an out, a better place to go to. And that is now a cop-out of responsibility in my opinion. It isn't right, it isn't righteous.

If you think this is all there is, you are going to fight that much harder than someone who thinks they'll be able to go to a better place after they die.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 10:43 AM

HKCAVALIER


But Antimason, the Bible is a thoroughly self-contradictory text. Christianity is a thoroughly self-contradictory ethos. The few, brief passages you quote are all that's needed to demonstrate at least 2 such contradictions.

Firstly, Paul goes on and on and on about wisdom being worldly and untrustworthy, but then goes on to say, "who is wise and understanding among you? let him show it by his good life, by the deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom." Notice how he don't mention God at all in this definition of wisdom. So apparently, there actually is some real worldly wisdom out there.

And then there's this: "see to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." Isn't Paul arguing precisely against your "form of evidence from prior cultures and civilazations?" Before you monotheists took the stage there was politheism and before that, anamism. Anamism is arguably the oldest human spiritual belief and it don't credit the existence of an autonomous deity of any kind. Which prior cultures are we to credit then?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:04 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
citizen, you and I have been having arguments like this for a couple weeks now. You seem to want to reduce my arguments down to some simplified, binary oppositions. My mistrust of organized religion, and my own bad experiences with same, imply to you that I don't believe anyone needs teachers. lol

Am I the only one around these boards who understands the concept of an analogy?

The idea I was trying to impart was that while you say that religion is counterproductive it may be for you, not necessarily for others, and that your personal experiences may not be replicated for everyone or even the majority.

What I was trying to say is that some people may be able to create a moral code, their own faith and spirituality etc without any help, but just as some gifted people don't need teachers to learn, most do. And just like teachers and schools some are good some are adequate and some are bad. In fact I was actually paying you a compliment.
Quote:

Without needing the information for themselves. I never, never said that I or you or any transplanted Neanderthals didn't or couldn't benefit from modern technology. Never! I don't see how any of what you've been arguing against is implied by what I've said.
You seemed to be implying that the knowledge of electrons as an example is not required for modern living, well no it isn't, neither do we have to kill an animal ourselves, but our lives are intimately affected by each. The implication of the statement whether that is what you meant or not is that that information is not important to us in our daily lives, which of course it is, whether we benefit directly or indirectly from that knowledge seems irrelevant to me.
Quote:

I don't think you're a hypocrite or deluded or irrational, but I'm getting the feeling that you kinda think I am.
I don’t think you are any of those things. I do find it curious that you *seem* quick to dismiss the idea that religion can be good for some people, given your other postings I’d of thought you would be the last person to do something like that, am I misunderstanding your intent?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:46 PM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
so lets get this straight: there is no scientific evidence to disprove a "God" or it cant be proven either way



I won't get into why this doesn't make any sense, but I'll ask you this. There's no scientific evidence to disprove a "Flying Spaghetti Monster" either. That puts the concept of God on par with any fantasy people might dream up. Is that what you intend?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 3:20 PM

ANTIMASON


lets say then that you rely on evolution for all your answeres. as a scientist, are your arguing that there are limits to the probability of variations of life in the universe? would you deny that any being could possibly exist beyond our own intelligence or dimension?

because you would then be making a presumption that you cant prove otherwise.

in other words, we have such an incredible abundance of life on our planet, literally the mother load..just by random chance, yet nothing superior exists in all the vastness of space and time? thats what im hearing..

any ancient culture who acknowledges super-human beings lends credence to the creation theory, because any polytheistic belief can be equated to the fallen angels of Gen. 6, beings which came from the heavens unto early Man, and taught him knowledge beyond his maturity; this includes any ancient mythological cities, entities or technologies that cant be explained by modern science, or which is conflicting with traditional timelines(such as the Sphynx and the possibility that they were built 10,000+bc)

and what about things which defy physics or reality? like rising from the dead, turning water into wine, healing the blind and the other miracles? Jesus said that we too could walk on water, but that we lacked faith.. similar to this mind over matter theory.

like that guy David Blain, or this new guy mindfreak, theyre more recent examples, but can you argue for a natural explanation as to how someone can pass through solid objects, or levitate? i would argue that there are paranormal phenomon that cant be explained conventionally, and as with ghosts or excorcisms or near death experiences, i think there is more evidence of an extra dimension or plain of existence, or for that matter an afterlife, then no afterlife. if such things are possible, then why not an all powerfull collective consciensousness

and lastly im not so sure you can prove those quotes to be contradictory if you read them in their full context; such as the specific book in its entirety, or even the whole of OT and NT scriptures. for example, most prophetic texts draw from terms and symbolism used in previous books, like Revelation, which requires knowledge of the previous books such as Jeremiah and Daniel. i would argue that in the same way, to understand the progression of thought, the scriptures must be studied in their collective forms




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 5:30 PM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
...like that guy David Blain, or this new guy mindfreak, theyre more recent examples, but can you argue for a natural explanation as to how someone can pass through solid objects, or levitate? i would argue that there are paranormal phenomon that cant be explained conventionally, and as with ghosts or excorcisms or near death experiences, i think there is more evidence of an extra dimension or plain of existence, or for that matter an afterlife, then no afterlife. if such things are possible, then why not an all powerfull collective consciensousness.



Uh... you're kidding right? David Blaine is a street magician, an illusionist. He takes advantage of the desire most people have to believe in magic to entertain them. It's my observation that belief in the other things you mention is motivated by exactly the same desire. But that doesn't make it truth.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 12, 2006 6:25 PM

NANITE1018


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
lets say then that you rely on evolution for all your answeres. as a scientist, are your arguing that there are limits to the probability of variations of life in the universe? would you deny that any being could possibly exist beyond our own intelligence or dimension?

because you would then be making a presumption that you cant prove otherwise.

in other words, we have such an incredible abundance of life on our planet, literally the mother load..just by random chance, yet nothing superior exists in all the vastness of space and time? thats what im hearing..

any ancient culture who acknowledges super-human beings lends credence to the creation theory, because any polytheistic belief can be equated to the fallen angels of Gen. 6, beings which came from the heavens unto early Man, and taught him knowledge beyond his maturity; this includes any ancient mythological cities, entities or technologies that cant be explained by modern science, or which is conflicting with traditional timelines(such as the Sphynx and the possibility that they were built 10,000+bc)

and what about things which defy physics or reality? like rising from the dead, turning water into wine, healing the blind and the other miracles? Jesus said that we too could walk on water, but that we lacked faith.. similar to this mind over matter theory.

like that guy David Blain, or this new guy mindfreak, theyre more recent examples, but can you argue for a natural explanation as to how someone can pass through solid objects, or levitate? i would argue that there are paranormal phenomon that cant be explained conventionally, and as with ghosts or excorcisms or near death experiences, i think there is more evidence of an extra dimension or plain of existence, or for that matter an afterlife, then no afterlife. if such things are possible, then why not an all powerfull collective consciensousness

and lastly im not so sure you can prove those quotes to be contradictory if you read them in their full context; such as the specific book in its entirety, or even the whole of OT and NT scriptures. for example, most prophetic texts draw from terms and symbolism used in previous books, like Revelation, which requires knowledge of the previous books such as Jeremiah and Daniel. i would argue that in the same way, to understand the progression of thought, the scriptures must be studied in their collective forms






Well of course there may be super-advanced civilizations, and they very well may be the origin of the religious figures (Childhood's End anyone?). And maybe some super advanced civilization created this universe in an experiment (by creating a black hole in the laboratory) or maybe a super-advanced civilization could seed Earth with life. They're possible, i'll admit. but that means the religions are wrong, there are no gods. Just other sentient beings further along in their level of technological development.

Now raising the dead may be possible if you can scan their brain prior to death (which might be done discretely by simply injecting them with a few nanites that would replicate then make their way to the brain and scan it from the inside). Then you could use local materials and self-replicating universal assemblers to reconstruct the brain and repair damage to the tissue. It's possible. And turning water into wine wouldn't be too awfully difficult given adequate carbon. Nitrogen could be gotten from the air, oxygen and hydrogen from the water. Then the universal assemblers could produce the necessary chemicals to reproduce wine. That'd be possible given adequately advanced technology. Healing the blind would be comparitively easy with only biotech, and downright simple with nanotech and biotech together.

So really, Jesus's miracles could be performed with nanotechnology and biotechnology. Isn't more than a few hundred years or so ahead of us. Hell, it might not even be 100 years ahead. And of course they probably didn't actually occur.

"Sufficiently advanced technology will seem like magic."--Arthur C. Clarke

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 3:51 AM

NANITE1018


bump!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 6:59 AM

ANTIMASON


first of all, im not out to convert those who disbelieve, that is a personal choice and i respect that; i do think its hypocritical to say that its ok to disagree as long as someone elses beliefs arent being forced up on you...when evolution is the sole curriculum taught in America. God forbid they teach an alternative theory to life, besides that we live and die and theres nothing more to it. i guess its only offensive when there are positive ethical and hopefull messages that are teached aswell

gods, angels, aliens, or whatever term you want to use for super-human beings does not create a contradiction to the bible. there is only one God, creator of the universe, but many accounts of beings perceived as (g)ods, which litter ancient cultures; even the flood story is nearly universal. the mainstream historical view is that Humans evolved from nothing, and after millions of years arrived at where we are today, solely out of our own ingenuity. yet that is contrary to what all of our ancestors have recorded, when they say that they were visited by "gods"


christianity is based on the belief that there is one, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent being, which exists beyond our reality, like a main frame computer.

can you prove otherwise? can we disprove that any supernatural entity can exist? and i suppose we should just throw out every recorded incident of apparitions, ghosts, evp's, or any thing else un-explained by science presently?

this is the problem, you deny whatever doesnt fit into your strictly physical darwinian view; including the accounts of Jesus, which have been as proven as reletively possible

we could argue about the semantics of this all day..and no one will win, because at the end of the day, there is noscientific evidence which supports either theory conclusively.

the difference is, im an not so arrogant as to believe that humans are the pinnacle of developement and uniqueness in the universe.

i am no so close minded as to deny that a greater consciousness might be at work in the universe.

and ultimately, i dont disregard everything my ancestors recorded as physical events, which actually occured...especially when we are just now rediscovering what the ancients already knew about the universe

you have to deny a greater amount of information to be an athiest, than you do to be a creationist






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 7:17 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
you have to deny a greater amount of information to be an athiest, than you do to be a creationist

You have to deny more information to ignore spot the dog than you do to believe in spots existance, what's your point?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 7:47 AM

NANITE1018


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
first of all, im not out to convert those who disbelieve, that is a personal choice and i respect that; i do think its hypocritical to say that its ok to disagree as long as someone elses beliefs arent being forced up on you...when evolution is the sole curriculum taught in America. God forbid they teach an alternative theory to life, besides that we live and die and theres nothing more to it. i guess its only offensive when there are positive ethical and hopefull messages that are teached aswell

gods, angels, aliens, or whatever term you want to use for super-human beings does not create a contradiction to the bible. there is only one God, creator of the universe, but many accounts of beings perceived as (g)ods, which litter ancient cultures; even the flood story is nearly universal. the mainstream historical view is that Humans evolved from nothing, and after millions of years arrived at where we are today, solely out of our own ingenuity. yet that is contrary to what all of our ancestors have recorded, when they say that they were visited by "gods"


christianity is based on the belief that there is one, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent being, which exists beyond our reality, like a main frame computer.

can you prove otherwise? can we disprove that any supernatural entity can exist? and i suppose we should just throw out every recorded incident of apparitions, ghosts, evp's, or any thing else un-explained by science presently?

this is the problem, you deny whatever doesnt fit into your strictly physical darwinian view; including the accounts of Jesus, which have been as proven as reletively possible

we could argue about the semantics of this all day..and no one will win, because at the end of the day, there is noscientific evidence which supports either theory conclusively.

the difference is, im an not so arrogant as to believe that humans are the pinnacle of developement and uniqueness in the universe.

i am no so close minded as to deny that a greater consciousness might be at work in the universe.

and ultimately, i dont disregard everything my ancestors recorded as physical events, which actually occured...especially when we are just now rediscovering what the ancients already knew about the universe

you have to deny a greater amount of information to be an athiest, than you do to be a creationist








Evolution is the only scientifically proven theory about how life got to where it is today. Every fact we have supports it, nothing is out of place. We don't have fossil rabbits in the Precambrian. So why teach something that has no evidence? Now, i wouldn't mind if you had it in an elective class on religion, but it shouldn't be forced on those who don't want to learn something for which there is no evidence.

I don't say it isn't possible that there are super-beings; i simply say they can't be supernatural. There is no God in the classical sense. Just much more advanced species than us. Nothing supernatural exists, how could it? There might be beings who live in other universes, or in 11-dimensional space-time. They would be considered god-like. But they aren't outside of the nature, they aren't outside the multi-verse.

Apparitions and ghosts are people's imagination. People want to believe they exist so they see them. I have never seen a ghost. Why? Because i don't think they exist. The human brain is very good at picking out patterns where there isn't one. So when someone sees something that by chance appears semi-human-esque; they say "GHOST!!!".

As to EVPs, those are caused by random noise and the same phenomenon of picking out patterns in random noise. I don't think you can point me to an EVP that would have a computer analysis be able to link it to someone who is dead and who's vocal patterns were recorded. You can't show me one of someone who i also have a voice of. Or maybe they are the sounds of some noise in the room. My point is you don't have conclusive evidence. You can't show me conlusive evidence, like a clearly defined ghost seen by many reliable witnesses and recorded by multiple cameras and video recorders. Until there is conlusive evidence like that, i can't say they exist and won't think they do; because why beleive in something i don't know exists?

And i don't discount the Bible and whatnot, simply say it isn't good enough evidence to believe in something. There is no archeological evidence to show Jesus performed those miracles, or came back from the dead. Just the bible.

And as i said, i don't say we're the pinnacle of development in the universe, i simply say there isn't anything that can break the laws of physics. And if God cannot break the laws of physics, God isn't supernatural; just a much more technologically advanced species/being. And we'll get to be just as advanced eventually.

There is no classical god, just super-advanced extraterrestrial species.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 8:29 AM

REAVERMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by nanite1018:

Evolution is the only scientifically proven theory about how life got to where it is today. Every fact we have supports it, nothing is out of place. We don't have fossil rabbits in the Precambrian. So why teach something that has no evidence? Now, i wouldn't mind if you had it in an elective class on religion, but it shouldn't be forced on those who don't want to learn something for which there is no evidence.



Very well said. It irritates me to no end that so many religious folks can't see the simple logic of the situation. If there is no evidence, don't teach it in a science classroom. If you feel you MUST teach it, do so in an elective class so people can chose whether or not they want to have theology rammed down their throats.

Quote:

I don't say it isn't possible that there are super-beings; i simply say they can't be supernatural. There is no God in the classical sense. Just much more advanced species than us. Nothing supernatural exists, how could it? There might be beings who live in other universes, or in 11-dimensional space-time. They would be considered god-like. But they aren't outside of the nature, they aren't outside the multi-verse.



Exactly. Nothing is supernatural, just strange.

You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 8:48 AM

REAVERMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:

this is the problem, you deny whatever doesnt fit into your strictly physical darwinian view; including the accounts of Jesus, which have been as proven as reletively possible



Perhaps you would be so kind as to show us this proof? Because, the last time I checked, there was not only no proof, but zero evidence at all.

Quote:

we could argue about the semantics of this all day..and no one will win, because at the end of the day, there is no scientific evidence which supports either theory conclusively.


True, there is no proof of evolution, because it hasn't been studied long enough to see major changes in species coinciding with environmental changes. There is, however a huge amount of evidence for evolution, making it very convincing, and absolutely none for creationism. Dont try to claim the theories are equal, 'cause they're not.

Quote:

you have to deny a greater amount of information to be an athiest, than you do to be a creationist


So what? Information is not synonimous with fact. Just 'cause we filter out the BS doesn't discount atheism. In fact, the fact that christians dont seem to send any information through a BS filter before believing it is the only real barrier between the two beliefs. If more people analyzed what they believed and asked the question "does this make sense?", I'd be willing to bet there would be a helluva lot more atheists out there.








You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 8:59 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Am I the only one around these boards who understands the concept of an analogy?

The idea I was trying to impart was that while you say that religion is counterproductive it may be for you, not necessarily for others, and that your personal experiences may not be replicated for everyone or even the majority.

What I was trying to say is that some people may be able to create a moral code, their own faith and spirituality etc without any help, but just as some gifted people don't need teachers to learn, most do. And just like teachers and schools some are good some are adequate and some are bad. In fact I was actually paying you a compliment.

Citizen, you ever think we were put on this earth by a higher power to drive each other crazy in the RWED forum?

I appreciate your analogies. It's just when you present your analogies as if paraphrasing my ideas that I get cranky. Instead of telling me what my argument means, you could bring up your analogy as something new and entirely citizen-generated: "What you're saying about religion, HK, reminds me of a larger argument to do with teachers..." Then I could appreciate your idea without having to gum up the conversation with "but I didn't say anything about teachers! Blah, blah, blah."

I don't quite agree that some people need spiritual teachers and some people do not. Not fundamentally. As I understand these matters, spiritual decisions are profoundly personal. For everybody. It is profoundly unhealthy to defer to anyone about matters of spirit because to do so interferes directly with our ability to percieve spiritual reality in the first place.

That's really the heart of the matter: It is profoundly unhealthy to defer to anyone about matters of spirit because to do so interferes directly with our ability to percieve spiritual reality in the first place.

Our spirituality and our uniqueness are inseparable. To let someone else tell us what is true or false spiritually is like letting someone else tell us who to fall in love with or what our favorite color should be.

That said, I have had spiritual mentors in my life. But these have been people I have recognized as being further along on a path I was already on. That's how I was able to trust them. When the student is ready the teacher shall appear type o' deal.

So perhaps you say, "But what if you're not on a path yet?" Well, then, you knock around, trying this and that, take some wrong turns, listen to the wrong people for too long and then you wake up. You say to yourself, "Hey, that guy doesn't make any sense! Whereas, that gal I brushed off a few months ago, is making more and more sense the more I think about it. Now, what was her name again?"

That's really the issue for me. It comes down to answering the question, "Why do we trust?" If we trust because we were told to, then I say we don't really trust, we submit. We can't really trust until we have an inkling of who we really are.

Quote:

The implication of the statement whether that is what you meant or not is that that information is not important to us in our daily lives, which of course it is, whether we benefit directly or indirectly from that knowledge seems irrelevant to me.

And you are quite right. Well said. I won't quibble anymore.
Quote:

I do find it curious that you *seem* quick to dismiss the idea that religion can be good for some people, given your other postings I’d of thought you would be the last person to do something like that, am I misunderstanding your intent?
Couple things: one, I'm kind of in a weird space with these issues. I have a lot of sympathy for the atheists because I find so much religiosity to be dangerous nonsense. At the same time, I'm not anyone's idea of a scientific materialist. I see dead people--and fairies and angels and maybe a couple aliens even (can't be sure, it was dark).

Secondly, in the last five years, and more and more each day, I have found myself becoming more and more convinced that Christianity is really, fundamentally effed up. When people go on and on about the evil of Islam and the Koran, I see the very same principles at the heart of Christianity and the Bible. Sure Jesus was an alright dude, but my favorite sayings of Jesus aren't even in the Bible! So I'm more willing than ever to say of the Christian Project, "Shut it all down! Next!"

So I've lately become less tolerant of the religious frame of mind in general, so maybe that's what you're noticing.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 9:57 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Quote:

in other words, we have such an incredible abundance of life on our planet, literally the mother load..just by random chance,


Just by chance?!



http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/geo_timeline.html

http://www.biocrawler.com/encyclopedia/Evolutionary_timeline



---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:09 AM

ANTIMASON


to my understanding, Darwin cant prove macroevolution exists, because no fossil evidence has been recovered. http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/micromacro.htm
heres one such link.

are you saying you cant prove a murder case by using eye witness accounts? so what exactly is the Bible, and the numerous third person accounts of a historical Jesus, and the miracles he performed? as is well known, the apostle Paul witnessed Jesus before and after his ressurection, which is what converted him from a persecutor to one of the greatest believers! it is not hard to prove that Jesus existed, and died on the cross..or that hundreds of people witnessed his ressurection, to the extent that they were murdered and pursued ruthlessly by the Romans for their beliefs. would you die for darwinism, or especially something you couldnt prove even happened?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 11:09 AM

HKCAVALIER


Antimason,

Haven't y'all been over and over this ground a hundred times? Eye witnesses of the paranormal are routinely dismissed out of hand. And in our present scientific materialistic context, Jesus and God are every bit as paranormal as Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster.

How's this proof of non-human intelligence:

Huge patterns like this appear around the world apparently within the space of a few minutes. The plants are all bent at right angles without being broken or harmed in any way, even growing taller and healthier than the surrounding plants. Thousands of these things have appeared for decades and the mainstream culture utterly ignores them.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 11:32 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I appreciate your analogies. It's just when you present your analogies as if paraphrasing my ideas that I get cranky. Instead of telling me what my argument means, you could bring up your analogy as something new and entirely citizen-generated: "What you're saying about religion, HK, reminds me of a larger argument to do with teachers..." Then I could appreciate your idea without having to gum up the conversation with "but I didn't say anything about teachers! Blah, blah, blah."

I thought that's what I did when I said "it almost seems like"?
Quote:

I don't quite agree that some people need spiritual teachers and some people do not. Not fundamentally. As I understand these matters, spiritual decisions are profoundly personal. For everybody. It is profoundly unhealthy to defer to anyone about matters of spirit because to do so interferes directly with our ability to percieve spiritual reality in the first place.
I'm not sure I agree, I mean the same argument can be made for teaching, it is an individual process and some people can take this all the way and do it all alone where as other people can't, but any good teacher will tell you that every student is different. Some people need more help than others I think.

I see your sentiment, but not everyone can be a monk, and surely an individual like a monk or a priest who devotes their life to the understanding of these matters will have something to teach those of us who don't have the time or even the inclination to devote that sort of time to those pursuits? Would they not be able to help us, could they not have gained some insight that we may not be able to gain simply because they devote their entire life to these issues where as we do not?
Quote:

Secondly, in the last five years, and more and more each day, I have found myself becoming more and more convinced that Christianity is really, fundamentally effed up. When people go on and on about the evil of Islam and the Koran, I see the very same principles at the heart of Christianity and the Bible. Sure Jesus was an alright dude, but my favorite sayings of Jesus aren't even in the Bible! So I'm more willing than ever to say of the Christian Project, "Shut it all down! Next!"
Well the three Abrahamic religions trace their routes back to the cult of a Canaanite war god, so it's hardly surprising to me that they all share a certain darkness. But they aren't the only religions in the world, Buddhism is a religion for instance, I'm not sure we can condemn religion on the example of the Abrahamic.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 11:41 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
are you saying you cant prove a murder case by using eye witness accounts? so what exactly is the Bible, and the numerous third person accounts of a historical Jesus, and the miracles he performed? as is well known, the apostle Paul witnessed Jesus before and after his ressurection, which is what converted him from a persecutor to one of the greatest believers! it is not hard to prove that Jesus existed, and died on the cross..or that hundreds of people witnessed his ressurection, to the extent that they were murdered and pursued ruthlessly by the Romans for their beliefs. would you die for darwinism, or especially something you couldnt prove even happened?

The problem is that there is as much information, evidence whatever for Islam, Juadaism, Hinduism etc, which eye witness accounts are the good ones that we should listen to?

Furthermore there is more evidence for evolution than there is for any religion, that is why evolution is a scientific theory and religions require faith.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 13, 2006 12:25 PM

ANTIMASON


did you guys know Hitler was buddhist?..alright, but what if he claimed he was? you would laugh in my face, because his actions clearly contradict any ethical beliefs of buddhism..am i right?

the KKK claimed to be a Christian group too; even while they dressed in occultic robes, burned crosses, and alienated and murdered blacks and jews.

if the #1 commandment according to Jesus(God manifest) was "love your neighbor as yourself. for love does no harm", how can you truly claim their actions to be Christian? is not the saying "actions speak louder than words?"

i have tried to prove many times, aswell as others, that Bush is a known skull and bones member, and that the agenda he represents is anti-Christian, that their motives are divisive and oppressive; and that this war in Iraq is a front for a broader goal of global governance. nothing about any of that is Christian!

i would argue that the Abrahamic religions are under the most attack from these subversive entities, because of their occult nature, it is their goal to pervert our messages and turn us against eachother. i think that the submissive nature of our beliefs leaves us more vulnerable to the "Bushs" or the "OBLs" of the world, who use it as a political tool.

someone who does not follow Jesus' commands is not a real believer. theres plenty of people who just claim to be christian because they havent thought or dont care about it either way! but for the rest of us, theres always the occasional time that we slip up and loose your temper, or look at some porno, laugh at a dirty joke, or just flat out do something dumb, but theres always a lesson involved, and you grow from it. those are reletively minor, avg occurences.

but when you decieve and mislead people, when you rob it an entire nation of its wealth, fabricate its history and corrupt its youth, when you perform acts of war in the name of God, and you steal away the working peoples freedoms for profit and control; those arent just minor offenses. and those people will be judged when the Jesus does return, and God pays back the world for its evils.

i am not perfect, and i dont claim to be..i pray for forgiveness when i do slip, but the rest of the time im on my best behavior. so what kind of people do these things; completely driven by wealth and greed and control? not true Christians!

and heres the hypocracy: those people, do such things out of their own free will, just as you free thinking athiests and agnostics do! just as we Christians act of our own free will...but it doesnt come through a doctrine of love and forgiveness. i have a standard i know not to deviate from, since i believe life is a test, and i am expected to be Gods representative on earth. Hitler, Stalin, Caligula, name your crazy deviant.. tell me they share my beliefs?

what standards do these people hold to? and can you say the world and its elitist power infrastructure is an accurate reflection of Christian ideals?

i just dont see how murderers and lyers prove Christianity and God dont exist..?




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 21:40 - 495 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 21:25 - 981 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL