God? What do you think:

[Dr. Zaus]

Let's say for instance that you have a very devout Christian, who every day thanks the lord for their blessings, and every time something good happens, they thank God. Now if you take a look at that person's brain, I would bet that there would be numerous neuron clusters that all point their way to the religious portion of their brain.

Interesting point; I agree as I have seen this in practice.

But it was the other way around.

Three people I know were free-base coke addicts and replaced the need for positive affect they were getting from coke with a reference to God.

Can you elaborate?

Believing in god does not make you happier, but it changes your standards on happiness?

Yes. I suffered suicidal bipolar depression for nearly a decade. One day I sacrificed self-hate and self pity to God and I've suffered significantly less since. Looking at it in terms of the preceding quote makes sense.

I would not have previously described waking up before noon on Sunday to sing happy songs as something that would in any way define 'happy'. There are numerous other examples that are less 'religious' in nature and simply exemplify a shift in my world-view.

Clearly there has previously been shown a bio-psychological basis for 'spiritual' feelings and for the outcomes I have described. But this no more disproves God as it proves God, it only shows that some are wired with the ability to over come psychological problems through faith. (not that I think that all of the psychological problems that everyone has would be cured by faith; some people are simply wired differently)

So even though God is not something that we can empirically disprove, properly placed faith is something we can empirically support to be positive for as many people as I have sampled. (I again do not dismiss the thousands of years of misuse many of the 'key holders' of religion are guilty of, this is why I advocate personal relationship over hierarchical corporate-centric faith)


I would like to note that a couple of the people I most respect for their character are Atheist/Agnostic leaders of my local planed parenthood: so no, I am not saying you can't be moral without being a Christian.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I'm not arguing about the age of the universe. I am just saying that his argument, as presented, was flawed and I pointed out the flaws.

Well sure, you can prove that squares don't really have corners if you ignore the relevant facts.

 

[Onceler]

I really dislike thumpers who do not believe in evolution and believe that God made everything the way it is now as it's finished form. Have these people ever really read the book of Genesis and not meditated on it? What I got from it was this-God made Eve from Adam's rib therefore He does not make things from scratch when the building blocks are already there waiting to be utilized. I do not believe in Genesis but I do believe that people over look a lot of things when they read it. For instance it also said that God gave man every plant to do with as he likes(pass the bong) therefore there is nothing wrong with it. It also says something like let Us create man in Our Own Image, male and female He made them in His own image(so there is definatly some part of the Elohim that is female).

 

[Malak]

I really dislike thumpers who do not believe in evolution and believe that God made everything the way it is now as it's finished form. Have these people ever really read the book of Genesis and not meditated on it? What I got from it was this-God made Eve from Adam's rib therefore He does not make things from scratch when the building blocks are already there waiting to be utilized. I do not believe in Genesis but I do believe that people over look a lot of things when they read it. For instance it also said that God gave man every plant to do with as he likes(pass the bong) therefore there is nothing wrong with it. It also says something like let Us create man in Our Own Image, male and female He made them in His own image(so there is definatly some part of the Elohim that is female).

I don't know how creation occurred, but evolution isn't about that. Half the scientists that support evolution are theists. If God can do anything, he can design the evolutionary process. I don't disagree with the theory because of any religious reason, and neither do the scientists that disagree with it.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I don't know that creation occurred.

FTFY

 

[Malak]

FTFY

You can't exist otherwise.

 

[HAL9000]

You can't exist otherwise.

We can, what he means is while the universe may have come into being, you can't know that it as a creation.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You can't exist otherwise.

False.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

We can, what he means is while the universe may have come into being, you can't know that it as a creation.

No, I do not stipulate that the universe came into being at all.

 

[Malak]

We can, what he means is while the universe may have come into being, you can't know that it as a creation.

To come into being is to be created, by design or otherwise.

 

[Malak]

No, I do not stipulate that the universe came into being at all.

I didn't stipulate that either.

 

[HAL9000]

No, I do not stipulate that the universe came into being at all.

Neither do I, I said may have come into being, I assumed you were aiming at the "create" part of his sentence... sorry.

To come into being is to be created, by design or otherwise.

Not so I believe a creation implies a creator.

 

[SlickSnake]

I asked GOD if he existed when I was about 10 while being religiously indoctrinated, and he still hasn't gotten back to me. Either he's really, really busy making all this stuff like the entire Universe and completely ignoring me, or, you know, he don't exist. But I'll be sure and let y'all know if or when he ever gets back to me, like right after the hallucinogens finally kick in.

 

[SlickSnake]

I posted this earlier in a thread about Karma. But I think it applies here, too, if you want to know what I believe in, or don't believe in, as the case may be.


Karma exists, like it or not, just like your immortal soul exists, like it or not.

Karma is a psychic balance used in the discipline and measure of quality of your immortal soul, but it's also used as a learning tool to keep people and their souls in line, much like religion is used.

And the belief in an immortal soul and/or Karma does not have to imply you also believe in a religion, but religions try to bridge that gap anyway.

And those who deny Karma and their souls immortality the loudest are ironically the ones usually most effected by it, as well, but they will never see the correlations of their actions or admit to it, of course. Because that would be admitting to their souls existence and what they fear most is they would be judged somehow for their misdeeds now, or also later after they die.

Karma exists as the lingering after effects that your relationships with others has on you now, and how it effects your soul later. Karma is like spiritual currency.

Obviously, not everyone will immediately experience the effects of their Karma or others Karma in this lifetime, but most will. And you will certainly pay with Karma in your next lifetimes, if your lucky enough to move on. If not, blame your negative Karma.

The fact is, there is a lot out there that physically we can't even begin to perceive of with our limited range of senses and perceptions, such as our limited range of visible light. But that don't mean those light frequencies don't exist, we just can't see them without the help of science.

Religion, when used rightly, simply tries to be an aid to understanding the soul and it's Karmic implication, just like science tries to make sense of what we can't perceive without it.

 

[Onceler]

My point was that God does not reinvent the wheel everytime he makes something, no evolution is guided to fill in the jobs that only God fully comprehends. For example compare hummingbirds and hummingbird moths(I got to see one of these about two feet away from me when I was going through a time that I questioning God's existance), they both look alike, they fly similar and can hover and both drink nectar although the moth uses a very long proboscus. They obviously have a purpose that is being fulfiled by both of them.
Compare triceratops with modern bison or bulls, they do the same thing they eat grass and headbutt each other with those horns. When triceratops died out a mamal replace it serving
the same purpose.
I don't believe that BS that when someone gets hurt it is God's will. Man has freedom of choice and it is him and not God that must take responsibility.
You mean a design implies a designer.
I can't remember what it was but Newton said something really profound like God is glorified and revealed in the scientific study of His creation.

 

[Nik]

You can't exist otherwise.

Apparently we can because there's evidence of our existence while there's no evidence that your god does in any way shape or form.

 

[Nik]

My point was that God does not reinvent the wheel everytime he makes something, no evolution is guided to fill in the jobs that only God fully comprehends. For example compare hummingbirds and hummingbird moths(I got to see one of these about two feet away from me when I was going through a time that I questioning God's existance), they both look alike, they fly similar and can hover and both drink nectar although the moth uses a very long proboscus. They obviously have a purpose that is being fulfiled by both of them.
Compare triceratops with modern bison or bulls, they do the same thing they eat grass and headbutt each other with those horns. When triceratops died out a mamal replace it serving
the same purpose.
I don't believe that BS that when someone gets hurt it is God's will. Man has freedom of choice and it is him and not God that must take responsibility.
You mean a design implies a designer.
I can't remember what it was but Newton said something really profound like God is glorified and revealed in the scientific study of His creation.

If you have freedom of choice, why did your god create you with an irresistable urge to sin called man's carnal nature? That's not a choice, to me. Additionally, your Bible says that you cannot be saved but through Christ and that you do not deserve salvation in any way (this is why it's a glorious gift, blah blah). That means that you have the propensity to sin and will continue to do so uncontrollably unless your split-peronsality psycho of a deity decides to give you salvation on no deciding factors other than his own.

He could have created everyone to go to heaven, but he didn't. He created some people with the sole intention of sending them to hell. If he can see the future and knows you before you are born and has the power to change you so that your sinning heathen ass will wise up and live a pious life, and he DOESN'T, then he's a malevolent god instead of a loving god and you are living a lie.

You do not have free will if you believe in the judeo christian god. You were created for a specific purpose; you do not have control over your actions; you do not have control over your salvation.

What a fucking joke.

 

[Nik]

Three people I know were free-base coke addicts and replaced the need for positive affect they were getting from coke with a reference to God.

So they replaced the object of their addictive personalities with something they cannot touch or see or taste or smell or hear that has absolutely no logical foundational on which to base any sort of belief that includes an existing deity. Awesome.

It sounds like your free-basing coke addicted friends went from one drug that makes you dumb to another drug that makes you dumb.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Three people I know were free-base coke addicts and replaced the need for positive affect they were getting from coke with a reference to God.

So they replaced the object of their addictive personalities with something they cannot touch or see or taste or smell or hear that has absolutely no logical foundational on which to base any sort of belief that includes an existing deity. Awesome.

It sounds like your free-basing coke addicted friends went from one drug that makes you dumb to another drug that makes you dumb.

And yet their lives are significantly better. Is it better to be a drug-dependent person incapable of functioning in society, depressed and jonesing half of the time; or is it better to be someone that loves God and his fellow man and lives an existence that helps others, being generally joyful throughout the day?

Further there is a logical foundation:
We are physiologically wired to have spiritual experiences. For these people a focus on Christ has lead to faith that has changed their lives for the better. It truly is an awesome thing, I agree.

 

[Malak]

Apparently we can because there's evidence of our existence while there's no evidence that your god does in any way shape or form.

Proving once again why I put you on ignore. Take something out of context, make an insult, and show to everyone you can't even comprehend what is being talked about. You waste your time in these threads because you make no sense.

 

[Nik]

Proving once again why I put you on ignore. Take something out of context, make an insult, and show to everyone you can't even comprehend what is being talked about. You waste your time in these threads because you make no sense.

Asking you a pointed question is making no sense?

Questions that you continue to ignore, including ignoring those same questions from anyone else who asks?

Right. Paint it however you like, buddy. The truth is that you are just a troll that likes to get involved in these arguments and tell people that they're wrong, that god exists, but refuses to provide anything other than a proclamation, just like every other religious zealot. Sigh. I'm tired of reading your garbage in these religious threads.

 

[Nik]

And yet their lives are significantly better. Is it better to be a drug-dependent person incapable of functioning in society, depressed and jonesing half of the time; or is it better to be someone that loves God and his fellow man and lives an existence that helps others, being generally joyful throughout the day?

Neither of those two livestyles are positive lifestyles, to me. However, if someone wants to lead that kind of life, they're more than welcome to as long as it doesn't interfere with my life. However, in a situation like this, an online discussion forum, if someone wants to talk about their insane drug binging leech like lifestyle, I'm going to call them out on it. I do the same for some of the nonsense religion conversations.

Further there is a logical foundation:
We are physiologically wired to have spiritual experiences. For these people a focus on Christ has lead to faith that has changed their lives for the better. It truly is an awesome thing, I agree.

A spiritual experience is nothing more than electrochemical responses in certain parts of your brain. You believe, because you're wired to believe, that it's some sort of external mystical something-or-other. Others of us who don't have that pavlov-dog-like response (which can be measured and recreated, providing an experience where users claim to see god) or who have broken it through reason do not believe that spiritual experiences are external. It's like a drug affecting someone's brain and that person thinks they've legitimately seen god during the experience.

I'm glad a religious effort in people's lives makes it seem to them like their lives are somehow better. It's pretty sad to think that there are people who believe that a book with largely unsubstantiated claims is infallible, or that living the same way they live and believing the same way they believe is the only way to live a correct life and that, if you do, you'll be rewarded with some completely ethereal eternal positive afterlife, but if you don't life that way, you get rewarded with some completely ethereal eternal negative afterlife. It's completely unreasonable.

 

[bfdd]

bfdd: If you didn't face those negatives that you have in life would you still be the person you are today?

If not then God removing those things would have destroyed who you are.

I'm happy to hear it. As I pointed out, the happier I'm talking about isn't by your own standards today, but by those standards you would have if you had a relationship with God.

You cannot quantify my happiness because you would have to hold my beliefs to be able to. Your relationship with God prevents you from being able to reach my level of happiness with oneself.


See how that works?

 

[SlitheryDee]

And yet their lives are significantly better. Is it better to be a drug-dependent person incapable of functioning in society, depressed and jonesing half of the time; or is it better to be someone that loves God and his fellow man and lives an existence that helps others, being generally joyful throughout the day?

Indeed it is. Though I don't see those as the only two options. I felt a similar elation when I made the decision to get my drinking under control. Being free from something that is destroying you, but you didn't previously see any way out of is wonderful in and of itself.

Further there is a logical foundation:
We are physiologically wired to have spiritual experiences. For these people a focus on Christ has lead to faith that has changed their lives for the better. It truly is an awesome thing, I agree.

You're going past the conclusions that only logic would lead you to. We are perhaps wired to be struck with wonder at the world we live in and to posit explanations for those things for which the causes are not immediately evident. Your own imagination has lead you to inject an immaterial "spiritual" aspect into this process. Whenever I consider consider the scope and grandeur of the universe (as well as I can anyway), I am filled with a sensation that you would no doubt equate to a "spiritual" experience. But if that is so, then there is nothing "spiritual" about a spiritual experience at all, for I need no consideration of the immaterial to incite it. I wouldn't call even my strongest experience of that type "spiritual", because to me it's simply not. It's an appreciation of the universe as a wondrous, but ultimately mechanical and rational thing. I believe my positive emotional response to life to be much more potent when I am not citing some nebulous "Spiritual" aspect as it's source.

 

[Minjin]

Is it better to be a drug-dependent person incapable of functioning in society, depressed and jonesing half of the time; or is it better to be someone that loves God and his fellow man and lives an existence that helps others, being generally joyful throughout the day?

That's one of the most basic logical fallacies out there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Further there is a logical foundation:
We are physiologically wired to have spiritual experiences. For these people a focus on Christ has lead to faith that has changed their lives for the better. It truly is an awesome thing, I agree.

We're physically wired to do many things we should not do. Part of being an educated, civilized society is learning to overcome these vestigial parts of our brain.