Religious folks views of Atheists

[JD50]

It must be an exogenous factor as endogenous factors all rationally point to continuing retrospectively making sense in an ever-sedimenting way.

Nice word salad. Do you have any evidence that a God is affecting change in people?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

but descends into incomprehensibility.

This is the crux though. So where does it fall apart for you so I can explain further.

It's upon the "meaning we give our senses is social-jibberish" foundation that the steady march towards knowing is more social-jibberish than it is 'reality'.

Nice word salad. Do you have any evidence that a God is affecting change in people?

Just because you don't understand what I said doesn't mean that its wrong, it just means you don't know (and didn't bother) to look up the words I used. It would make a lot more sense to ask about what you don't know.

Here's a quick google scholar search, i've not vetted them all, but its not hard to find a good deal of support for the positive role of God in some folk's lives.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8281003658711443742&as_sdt=5,48&sciodt=0,48&hl=en

 

[Charmonium]

The first part starts off ok, but descends into incomprehensibility.

The second part really isn't a problem. We can Know, it just takes Time and a reliable Method before we can accomplish it.

What we can't Know though is the un-Knowable. That is, two possible things:

1) Things that are impossible to detect because there is no technology capable of such things

2) Things that do not exist

Gods, Leprechauns, Faeries, Angels, etc could fit in either of those categories, though certainly some are more likely to fit in 2 rather than 1.

If "God" is the Unknown, then there is no God to find. It is just an invention to give ancient people the sense of understanding of the phenomena that frightened or delighted them. Most of which we now Know to be Natural. Some of those Ideas and even Practices continue today, but those who continue them don't really understand Why they existed in the first place. They just continue on the Superstition, but with new "Meaning" attached.

There are more than those 2 options. There is also the possibility that there is some metaphysical level that we're not capable of understanding or observing - at least not in our natural state. It's possible that we can only access this level when we are properly attuned to it. Another way of looking at it is that we haven't evolved to the point where we can recognize it manifestations.

Take for example the ability of many animals to sense magnetic field lines. It's believed that this arises from microscopic crystals of magnetite in certain neurons. Humans have the same magnetite but we can't "see" those field lines. The only reason we know that they exist is because we have stumbled upon their existence and have developed methods of measuring them.

It's equally possible that there are other phenomena that we haven't yet discover and never will discover because we aren't looking for it and can't find it unless we know to look. And even then, it might defy human reason to even recognize it.

Another example is quantum mechanics. No one really understands this despite the fact that the standard model has existed in some form or other for about 100 years. Ask someone to explain to you any of a variety of quantum phenomena and they can't. The best they can do is point you to the equations that describe the phenomena.

And yet the ability to detect field lines is almost certainly the result of the existence of biological quantum systems that we have yet to understand.

I think religion falls into a similar category. If you are sensitive to the existence of other levels of existence and don't willfully look right past them, who's to say that you can't see things that most people can't see. Personally, I'm not one of those people but I do recognize the possibility.

 

[sandorski]

There are more than those 2 options. There is also the possibility that there is some metaphysical level that we're not capable of understanding or observing - at least not in our natural state. It's possible that we can only access this level when we are properly attuned to it. Another way of looking at it is that we haven't evolved to the point where we can recognize it manifestations.

Take for example the ability of many animals to sense magnetic field lines. It's believed that this arises from microscopic crystals of magnetite in certain neurons. Humans have the same magnetite but we can't "see" those field lines. The only reason we know that they exist is because we have stumbled upon their existence and have developed methods of measuring them.

It's equally possible that there are other phenomena that we haven't yet discover and never will discover because we aren't looking for it and can't find it unless we know to look. And even then, it might defy human reason to even recognize it.

Another example is quantum mechanics. No one really understands this despite the fact that the standard model has existed in some form or other for about 100 years. Ask someone to explain to you any of a variety of quantum phenomena and they can't. The best they can do is point you to the equations that describe the phenomena.

And yet the ability to detect field lines is almost certainly the result of the existence of biological quantum systems that we have yet to understand.

I think religion falls into a similar category. If you are sensitive to the existence of other levels of existence and don't willfully look right past them, who's to say that you can't see things that most people can't see. Personally, I'm not one of those people but I do recognize the possibility.

All of these examples of existing phenomena that we Humans can't sense are still Natural phenomena that we now Know.

If we are to Pre-Suppose that Religious Founders have some unique Sense,ok, that's possible, but it really doesn't help us to Know anything. We would have to accept all Claims and Religions on an equal footing, because only They can sense this thing. They become completely unreliable as a source, for all we know their Sense could be too poorly attuned to really draw proper conclusions of their experience.

What we do Know though is that people who make certain claims Never are able to do what they claim to be able to do when tested scientifically. We also know that certain experiences are Caused by chemical imbalances and some of these can be artificially induced in the Lab. Some of those are even Psychiatric conditions that can be corrected with medication. In Ancient times it was common to think many such people were inhabited by Spirits of some sort, unfortunately many still think that today to tragic consequence.

It should be as no surprise that most "Miracles" or alleged interactions with Gods/Strange Beings occurred in the Ancient world. They simply didn't understand what is Common Knowledge today. Most of us when seeing someone flail on the ground understand the person is having a seizure. The person talking to themself strangely is Schizophrenic, on Drugs, or has some other condition. To the Ancient Person these occurrences were entirely different, involving Gods, Spirits, or Demons.

Sometimes what seems Real is not Real.

 

[Charmonium]

The part about not being able to prove things is sort of a non sequitur because the whole idea here is that some things are, for the most part, simply beyond us. Or to put it differently, some things can only be "validated" by personal experience.

Granted that people often abuse that claim to personal experience. And granted that such experiences probably don't validate particular dogmatic beliefs. I'm only invoking this for the general proposition that a metaphysical plane can't be dismissed out of hand and that some people might be more capable of experiencing that aspect of reality better than others.

Also, in terms of never being able to prove claims, that's debatable. If you're talking peer reviewed studies, then in general you're probably correct. But again, we might be talking about something that doesn't abide systematic study - at least not in the ways we're able to understand.

But there are plenty of well documented anecdotal data. There is even some that probably can stand up to such scrutiny. For example there are Tibetan monks who have been documented being able to raise their body temperature through meditation. And they do it to such an extent that they can dry a blanket soaked with water in a room that is below freezing. At the very least this takes you into some very curious mind-body territory.

 

[Moonbeam]

The first part starts off ok, but descends into incomprehensibility.

The second part really isn't a problem. We can Know, it just takes Time and a reliable Method before we can accomplish it.

What we can't Know though is the un-Knowable. That is, two possible things:

1) Things that are impossible to detect because there is no technology capable of such things

2) Things that do not exist

Gods, Leprechauns, Faeries, Angels, etc could fit in either of those categories, though certainly some are more likely to fit in 2 rather than 1.

If "God" is the Unknown, then there is no God to find. It is just an invention to give ancient people the sense of understanding of the phenomena that frightened or delighted them. Most of which we now Know to be Natural. Some of those Ideas and even Practices continue today, but those who continue them don't really understand Why they existed in the first place. They just continue on the Superstition, but with new "Meaning" attached.

What you are doing is perpetuating the superstition that no God exists by inventing delusions you imagine fill the gaps in your absence of knowing. You are describing yourself without knowing it because you do not know yourself.

You left out a whole category of things we don't know, feelings repressed in the unconscious, psychic death, our separation from union with God, the feelings we carry unconsciously that determine our motivations, in this case, never again to allow such pain into consciousness. This is why God appears to the desperate, the needy and broken, not because they are noble or worthy, but because the their need to avoid emotional pain serves no function. They are already wrecked.

If you really are into disbelief as you claim to be, turn that disbelief on yourself and you will discover, as I did, that you know nothing.

The truth is always hidden by what some call our dominate concealed prejudice. Like any form of bigotry, it is based on an unexamined sense of certainty, a result of external programming. In your case you believe that to be able to believe in God requires testable facts when in reality the awareness of the existence of God requires an alteration of that false belief, the appearance of a qualitatively different conscious state, the end of thought and time in the now, an awakening from a state of sleep.

Real learning isn't adding new knowledge, but unlearning all the lies you have been taught. This lies are our unexamined assumptions, the things we treasure most. To give them up is to die a second time. They are what saved you from unbearable pain at a time when you were helpless. All the damage has been done. The only pain left now is to remember.

 

[Anteaus]

I'm an existentialist who doesn't lean on spirituality to get me through life. While I tend to have a hard line view regarding the validity of religions which were created by and currently exist through the word of man, even I must admit that, assuming the Big Bang Theory is correct, the triggering mechanism is unknown.

I see the world in its current state as originating in one of two ways:

1. There is no god, the big bang was initiated by a yet undiscovered realm of physics, and everything we've observed since are part of natural processes. This is my default position.

2. Some sort of god figure triggered the big bang, but then immediately left everything to be formed by natural processes. This is the only way I can get behind a god (extra-terrestrial or trans dimensional) while not contradicting human evolution; therefore, even though I'm not spiritual I am agnostic to the possibility (albeit very low) of a creator.

There is too much that we can observe through science that contradicts the historical context of modern day spirituality based religions. Even so, discussions like this rarely make a mark. As long as my born-again christian neighbor maintains a position where dinosaurs and man existed together as a way of explaining biblical time tables and the fossil record, no fruitful discussion can exist.

 

[Charmonium]

I'm pretty sure we're working on a much different level from your neighbor in this thread.

BTW, I think there are some problems with the clockwork universe idea (god set things in motion and left) but I'm too lazy to go looking for what they are.

Personally, I think agnosticism is the only approach that makes any sense for the vast majority of people. True religious experiences are pretty rare and w/o something like that to support you, all you're really doing is going through the motions.

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm an existentialist who doesn't lean on spirituality to get me through life. While I tend to have a hard line view regarding the validity of religions which were created by and currently exist through the word of man, even I must admit that, assuming the Big Bang Theory is correct, the triggering mechanism is unknown.

I see the world in its current state as originating in one of two ways:

1. There is no god, the big bang was initiated by a yet undiscovered realm of b physics, and everything we've observed since are part of natural processes. This is my default position.

2. Some sort of god figure triggered the big bang, but then immediately left everything to be formed by natural processes. This is the only way I can get behind a god (extra-terrestrial or trans dimensional) while not contradicting human evolution; therefore, even though I'm not spiritual I am agnostic to the possibility (albeit very low) of a creator.

There is too much that we can observe through science that contradicts the historical context of modern day spirituality based religions. Even so, discussions like this rarely make a mark. As long as my born-again christian neighbor maintains a position where dinosaurs and man existed together as a way of explaining biblical time tables and the fossil record, no fruitful discussion can exist.

This story is your prison, the story that makes sense in the limits of your experience, moss that grows on a stone that might otherwise continue to roll, but fixes it in place.

Suppose instead, let's say, that God is a sum of awareness, adding yours to His the moment you become aware and him to you if you become aware of Him.

Perhaps if such a silly idea had ever occurred to you before you were sure of things, you would think, well well, God didn't actually create anything. It's the nature of the universe that He is what awaits me at the root of my own being.

 

[Anteaus]

This story is your prison, the story that makes sense in the limits of your experience, moss that grows on a stone that might otherwise continue to roll, but fixes it in place.

Suppose instead, let's say, that God is a sum of awareness, adding yours to His the moment you become aware and him to you if you become aware of Him.

Perhaps if such a silly idea had ever occurred to you before you were sure of things, you would think, well well, God didn't actually create anything. It's the nature of the universe that He is what awaits me at the root of my own being.

I respect your point of view thought I can assure you I don't feel my experience limits me. On the contrary, my existentialism provides me with a direct path toward wherever it is my humanity is meant to take me. For myself, it is far more challenging to be accountable to myself than to others (or religion), especially when not under the watchful eye of my peers. Growing up I felt that religion often had the right sentiment, but wrongfully shifted accountability. Failing morally shouldn't be about angering a vengeful god....it should be about angering yourself and lowering your intrinsic value as a human. If people worried more about self worth and less about what would make their gods happy, there would be less violence in the name of religion.

Prior to my awakening, I was a confirmed Catholic with the preparation that came with it. The "awakening" that some people describe as experiencing when they find god, I found by walking away it.

Don't get my wrong, I have great respect for people who choose to be spiritual. I'm not judgemental. I can only judge what I feel within and live by that standard. I believe my value as a human being is calculated based on the sum of my actions. In spite of being non-spiritual, I very much respect the teachings of Jesus and many of the great philosophers that have given the world their thoughts.

So, no, I don't believe it is a prison. On the contrary, it is much simpler interpreting the world around me when I don't have documentation constant telling me what things are supposed to mean. I won't reduce the value of this conversation by attacking god or what knowledge he/she/it is shared among followers, but as long as it was man himself that carried the quill from ink to paper, then I will continue to view religious documentation as man-made and therefore fallible. In other words, even the bible has a error budget, and no one knows which parts are wrong; therefore, it is all right and all wrong at the same time. That is where the prison is.

 

[sandorski]

The part about not being able to prove things is sort of a non sequitur because the whole idea here is that some things are, for the most part, simply beyond us. Or to put it differently, some things can only be "validated" by personal experience.

Granted that people often abuse that claim to personal experience. And granted that such experiences probably don't validate particular dogmatic beliefs. I'm only invoking this for the general proposition that a metaphysical plane can't be dismissed out of hand and that some people might be more capable of experiencing that aspect of reality better than others.

Also, in terms of never being able to prove claims, that's debatable. If you're talking peer reviewed studies, then in general you're probably correct. But again, we might be talking about something that doesn't abide systematic study - at least not in the ways we're able to understand.

But there are plenty of well documented anecdotal data. There is even some that probably can stand up to such scrutiny. For example there are Tibetan monks who have been documented being able to raise their body temperature through meditation. And they do it to such an extent that they can dry a blanket soaked with water in a room that is below freezing. At the very least this takes you into some very curious mind-body territory.

If they are beyond us, then they can't be validated, even anecdotally. At best a person could sense something, but if it's beyond us it would not be sensical.

People add things to their experience all the time. Near Death Experiences are a good experience of this. Some Christians report seeing Jesus or some Christian figure. Hindus report seeing Krishna or some Hindu figure. Muslims report seeing Mohamed or some Muslim figure.

Even people who witness something as mundane as an Auto accident give accounts of it that are embellished and even change over time. "Experience" is one of the least reliable ways of Knowing.

Ah ya, sure they have. I'm sure Cletus's well documented anecdotal Alien Abduction story is 100% legit too.

With all that said, it's funny we are even discussing these issues in such a vague mystical fashion. The Authors of Holy books seem far more certain about this "beyond us" plane of reality. With amazing(even by today's standards) and grandiose displays of might and ability from their gods and other beings. With all sorts of witnesses to boot. Not only that, but receiving very explicit instructions and information(much of it disproved by Science btw). Why such a contrast?

The contrast exists because the Ancients were very much like us, they were very Curious and wanted to Know things. However, they lacked the foundational Knowledge that we now possess. In their lust for Knowledge, they often used their Imaginations to fill that gap, much the same way we use ours today for Entertainment. Hence was born gods and places beyond our perception.

Unfortunately, "Spiritual" people, despite honestly and earnestly seeking Truth and other noble things are not actually experiencing some Phenomena of Reality. Instead what they are experiencing is the phenomena of mimicry of the Ancient Mind. It is full of Wonder and Amazement, I experienced it myself, by being a Child and then later as a Spirit Filled Born Again Pentecostal Christian. Both times it was due to looking at Reality from a state of Ignorance. As a Child it was not my choice, as a Christian I chose to be Ignorant in order to experience it.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Unfortunately, "Spiritual" people, despite honestly and earnestly seeking Truth and other noble things are not actually experiencing some Phenomena of Reality. Instead what they are experiencing is the phenomena of mimicry of the Ancient Mind. It is full of Wonder and Amazement, I experienced it myself, by being a Child and then later as a Spirit Filled Born Again Pentecostal Christian. Both times it was due to looking at Reality from a state of Ignorance. As a Child it was not my choice, as a Christian I chose to be Ignorant in order to experience it.

Sandorski! Brother 🙂

Science teaches us that we know something is real if 1) you experience it 2) by replication others can experience it.

So to say that the phenomenon of religious ecstatic experiences isn't 'real' defies scientific definition.

Your argument is simply that your experiences are natural... to which I wonder why you ever thought they wouldn't be?

I agree, we lie to ourselves, focusing on this sense of God like only First Assemblies of God has access to Him. The truth that the church hides isn't the falsehood of God; but that Holy Spirit of God is in All Men... This is the secret behind why Jesus is the Son of Man.

If you choose to interpret Feeling the Presence of God as naturalistic and thus NOT God that's fine; but its no more (or less) rational an interpretation than naturalistic and thus a GIFT from God.

I totally respect, and am good friends with many, who believe it's the former. I choose to believe it's the later because it makes my life better, and I feel helps me to be a better person.

 

[Charmonium]

If they are beyond us, then they can't be validated, even anecdotally. At best a person could sense something, but if it's beyond us it would not be sensical.

People add things to their experience all the time. Near Death Experiences are a good experience of this. Some Christians report seeing Jesus or some Christian figure. Hindus report seeing Krishna or some Hindu figure. Muslims report seeing Mohamed or some Muslim figure.

Even people who witness something as mundane as an Auto accident give accounts of it that are embellished and even change over time. "Experience" is one of the least reliable ways of Knowing.

Ah ya, sure they have. I'm sure Cletus's well documented anecdotal Alien Abduction story is 100% legit too.

Remember, I put 'validated' in quotes. So I see your point but it doesn't exclude the possibility of having direct experience of the metaphysical. And it doesn't really matter how you label that experience - god, afterlife, nirvana, etc. Jesus, Mohammed, Krisha, etc. That's not the point. As I said, I don't really think that personal experience validates dogmatic believes. And in that I include the idea of a supreme being, regardless of name. What I'm talking about is something far more visceral and fundamental.

With all that said, it's funny we are even discussing these issues in such a vague mystical fashion. The Authors of Holy books seem far more certain about this "beyond us" plane of reality. With amazing(even by today's standards) and grandiose displays of might and ability from their gods and other beings. With all sorts of witnesses to boot. Not only that, but receiving very explicit instructions and information(much of it disproved by Science btw). Why such a contrast?

I'm not talking about individual religions. In fact I'm barely talking about religion at all. I'm talking about experience things that are beyond the bounds of what would be considered empirical knowledge.

I think the problem you're having is that your scope is artificially narrowed. You're still bound by the constrains of traditional Western thought and religion. You need to look beyond that. It's hard to imagine anything beyond that exists because that is the primary focus of virtually every waking moment. But once you see it, even a glimpse, it changes everything.

The contrast exists because the Ancients were very much like us, they were very Curious and wanted to Know things. However, they lacked the foundational Knowledge that we now possess. In their lust for Knowledge, they often used their Imaginations to fill that gap, much the same way we use ours today for Entertainment. Hence was born gods and places beyond our perception.

Again, we're not really talking about mundane things like trying to understand or control physical phenomena.

Unfortunately, "Spiritual" people, despite honestly and earnestly seeking Truth and other noble things are not actually experiencing some Phenomena of Reality. Instead what they are experiencing is the phenomena of mimicry of the Ancient Mind. It is full of Wonder and Amazement, I experienced it myself, by being a Child and then later as a Spirit Filled Born Again Pentecostal Christian. Both times it was due to looking at Reality from a state of Ignorance. As a Child it was not my choice, as a Christian I chose to be Ignorant in order to experience it.

I'm not sure what you did or didn't experience but whatever it was obviously had an effect on you. All I'm saying is try to be open to what the effect was without trying to understand it logically. Once you start conceptualizing about it, you lose sight of it.

 

[Moonbeam]

I respect your point of view thought I can assure you I don't feel my experience limits me. On the contrary, my existentialism provides me with a direct path toward wherever it is my humanity is meant to take me. For myself, it is far more challenging to be accountable to myself than to others (or religion), especially when not under the watchful eye of my peers. Growing up I felt that religion often had the right sentiment, but wrongfully shifted accountability. Failing morally shouldn't be about angering a vengeful god....it should be about angering yourself and lowering your intrinsic value as a human. If people worried more about self worth and less about what would make their gods happy, there would be less violence in the name of religion.

Prior to my awakening, I was a confirmed Catholic with the preparation that came with it. The "awakening" that some people describe as experiencing when they find god, I found by walking away it.

Don't get my wrong, I have great respect for people who choose to be spiritual. I'm not judgemental. I can only judge what I feel within and live by that standard. I believe my value as a human being is calculated based on the sum of my actions. In spite of being non-spiritual, I very much respect the teachings of Jesus and many of the great philosophers that have given the world their thoughts.

So, no, I don't believe it is a prison. On the contrary, it is much simpler interpreting the world around me when I don't have documentation constant telling me what things are supposed to mean. I won't reduce to value of the conversation by attacking god or what knowledge he/she/it is shared among followers, but as long as it was man himself that carried the quill from ink to paper, then I will continue to view religious documentation as man-made and therefore fallible. In other words, even the bible has a error budget, and no one knows which parts are wrong; therefore, it is all right and all wrong at the same time. That is where the prison is.

You have made a masterful defense against an a argument I did not make. What you just did is tell me more about your prison, a story about stepping out of one prison into another. Please understand that you don't have to defend your position to me. I understand your truth quite deeply. Everything you described I know very well because they all happened just as you described to me.

The experience I suggested you might have had that would change your basic perspective is not one you've had, so naturally your perspective remains unchanged, but the reason I suggested it as a theoretical was to say that an experience of that kind if possible to have is not one that makes one religious. It is one that reveals why religion exits where they are wrong, and what was the real intention.

The situation as I see it is that you are a believer and I am not. I am empty and because of that fact I hear where you are not. Thus everything that I say to you will come out of the dark. What you will hear instead of emptiness is the walls of your prison, the container that holds your stuff, all of those wonderful treasures I also once had and lost.

I am not here to compete with you or to steal your treasures. I am here only to say that there is an ocean unexpected for those who have lost everything and the water is fine. In this ocean of the shipwrecked and forsaken there is an island of souls who have left only what can never be taken, a blackboard and eraser, and the dust of ones old self.

There is a question a lover never asks, and that's where love comes from. The lover is gone, has ceased to exist, at one with Beloved.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I was not feeling sensitive. You are projecting your own feelings onto me, or you're taking a guess as to how I felt when you simply could not know that given the method of our communication. A lot of non verbal communication is missing in a forum post. You would have been aware of my emotional state much better had this been in person or a video.

And I was not in the least bit angry as you maintained. Yet, you think that I was the one projecting. You might want to rethink this.

Back to what I was talking about earlier before that tangent. This higher power people experience is the subconscious mind. It protects you all the time. Whether you are sleeping or awake, it never sleeps. Most people are unaware that it even exists let alone what it's doing or how.

Possibly you are correct, possibly not. I don't know. You seem to be quite convinced....I'll give you that.

There is a lot of reading material on this subject so I suggest you put down the Bible and start learning what is really going on that you've been unaware of until now. You might be surprised at what you discover. Everyone's discovery and journey is different. That's what makes life so great.

You seem to be very knowledgeable regarding this subject. Where do you suggest I start?

You can always come back to the Bible or whatever holy book you adore if any later if you want.

I don't think you intended to be condescending....so I thank you for being so gracious.

In the end the truth is "God" really was inside of you all along just like most religions say. They just don't give you all of the details so that they can control you. They would prefer that to you're learning how to control yourself. That is because they fear what you will do with that knowledge.

You see great conspiracies, I see ignorance and the nature of man.

 

[Bart*Simpson]

I see a lot of thoughts on this forum from religious people about atheists and how we are.

Atheists to my perception are a pretty diverse group but for myself they come in three general categories:

1. Atheists who don't believe in anything supernatural and don't care if anyone else does or doesn't. Perfectly fine people in my opinion.

2. Atheists who may not really be atheist but who thrive on thinking they're being oppressed so they call themselves 'atheist' just so they can lay claim to some form of victimhood (usually at the hands of Christians who they can't name).

3. Evangelical Atheists. Okay, I hate these idiots. It isn't enough for them that they don't believe in anything supernatural, oh no. They go all jihadi on religious people and insist that no one else is allowed to believe in anything either. Silent prayer offends these assholes. Someone reading a Bible offends them. A Nativity crèche on private property offends them and they'll sue to get it removed. These idiots invest so much hatred against God (but not Allah, Buddha, etc.) that they end up demonstrating a devout faith that not even most Christians demonstrate these days!

Seriously, kids. If you fight hard enough against something then somewhere along you're making the case for its existence.

Mind you I totally support the right of people to be free from religion.

But then I should also be free from their lack of it. It's a two-way street.

 

[disappoint]

You seem to be very knowledgeable regarding this subject. Where do you suggest I start?


I don't think you intended to be condescending....so I thank you for being so gracious.


You see great conspiracies, I see ignorance and the nature of man.

I'm not that knowledgeable about it yet, I only just started learning about it. I suggest you start with this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCsX6CeRJNY

It's 2 hours long but worth it. Don't skip the beginning because it explains why the system works.

The book that accompanies that video is Success is not an Accident by Dr. John Kappas. The cover of the book is red and the title is printed on a slant. I mention that because there have been some books with the exact same title by different authors but the original is the best.

 

[disappoint]

Atheists to my perception are a pretty diverse group but for myself they come in three general categories:

1. Atheists who don't believe in anything supernatural and don't care if anyone else does or doesn't. Perfectly fine people in my opinion.

2. Atheists who may not really be atheist but who thrive on thinking they're being oppressed so they call themselves 'atheist' just so they can lay claim to some form of victimhood (usually at the hands of Christians who they can't name).

3. Evangelical Atheists. Okay, I hate these idiots. It isn't enough for them that they don't believe in anything supernatural, oh no. They go all jihadi on religious people and insist that no one else is allowed to believe in anything either. Silent prayer offends these assholes. Someone reading a Bible offends them. A Nativity crèche on private property offends them and they'll sue to get it removed. These idiots invest so much hatred against God (but not Allah, Buddha, etc.) that they end up demonstrating a devout faith that not even most Christians demonstrate these days!

Seriously, kids. If you fight hard enough against something then somewhere along you're making the case for its existence.

Mind you I totally support the right of people to be free from religion.

But then I should also be free from their lack of it. It's a two-way street.

The origin of hatred, and anger is fear. Both on their part and yours. Given the kind of horrific acts devout religious people have demonstrated throughout history, for just one example the recent woman who decapitated a 4 year old toddler under her care, then proudly carried the severed head around in a train station in Moscow shouting ALLAH ACKBAR, I can understand people's fear of religion.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I'm not that knowledgeable about it yet, I only just started learning about it. I suggest you start with this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCsX6CeRJNY

It's 2 hours long but worth it. Don't skip the beginning because it explains why the system works.

The book that accompanies that video is Success is not an Accident by Dr. John Kappas. The cover of the book is red and the title is printed on a slant. I mention that because there have been some books with the exact same title by different authors but the original is the best.

I went for about 10 minutes and then started skipping ahead. It's fairly clear that we're light years apart in the way we perceive our existence. There is nothing here for me. But you seem to be completely sold and I wish you the best in your quest.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The origin of hatred, and anger is fear. Both on their part and yours. Given the kind of horrific acts devout religious people have demonstrated throughout history, for just one example the recent woman who decapitated a 4 year old toddler under her care, then proudly carried the severed head around in a train station in Moscow shouting ALLAH ACKBAR, I can understand people's fear of religion.

As demonstrated throughout history, I see the violent and mentally ill among us using all manner of "reasons" to rationalize their insanity. You see religion as the cause, I see the depravity of man as the cause.

 

[disappoint]

I went for about 10 minutes and then started skipping ahead. It's fairly clear that we're light years apart in the way we perceive our existence. There is nothing here for me. But you seem to be completely sold and I wish you the best in your quest.

Can you identify what caused you to want to skip ahead instead of watching it? For me it was like a good book, I couldn't put it down. I wanted to learn more and more about how the human mind really works because I want to program my mind to accomplish the goals that I want to accomplish.

If you fear it is anti-religion, it isn't and that is mentioned later on in the video near the end.

Thank you for wishing me well. I too wish you well in accomplishing the goals you set for your own life.

 

[disappoint]

As demonstrated throughout history, I see the violent and mentally ill among us using all manner of "reasons" to rationalize their insanity. You see religion as the cause, I see the depravity of man as the cause.

I do not see religion as the cause of all insanity. Just some of it.

This reminds me of some quotes by Steven Weinberg the Nobel Prize winning Physicist who won it for combining EM with the weak nuclear force into the electroweak force:

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

There are those whose views about religion are not very different from my own, but who nevertheless feel that we should try to damp down the conflict, that we should compromise it. … I respect their views and I understand their motives, and I don't condemn them, but I'm not having it. To me, the conflict between science and religion is more important than these issues of science education or even environmentalism. I think the world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief; and anything that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization.

 

[disappoint]

One more thing I'd like to add. The fight against religion should be a non-violent conflict of ideas and should always remain peaceful. If you can't handle someone challenging your idea of reality perhaps it's best you not participate.

Scientists have always and continue to take a non-violent approach to teaching people what they find is the best model of the universe and the best method for learning the true nature of reality.

If you want to compare violence no one group holds a candle to the violence religious people have displayed compared to their atheist counterparts.

 

[Charmonium]

This reminds me of some quotes by Steven Weinberg the Nobel Prize winning Physicist who won it for combining EM with the weak nuclear force into the electroweak force:

I'm always amused by people who quote famous scientists in support of their beliefs - especially atheists that use them to support their belief.

Scientists are no more capable of discerning the nature of reality than the Buddhist monk or anyone else for that matter. Appeals to authority are for people who can't think for themselves.

 

[disappoint]

I'm always amused by people who quote famous scientists in support of their beliefs - especially atheists that use them to support their belief.

Scientists are no more capable of discerning the nature of reality than the Buddhist monk or anyone else for that matter. Appeals to authority are for people who can't think for themselves.

If you really want some amusement why don't you regale us with some quotes on the nature of reality from religious authorities?