The God Helmet

[Moonbeam]

If that's the case, wouldn't the laughter be a delusion of the brain as well?

Yes, but you make me laugh. I'm not the one who has problems with what others what to call delusions.

 

[woolfe9999]

I think the more interesting question is, why do you feel the need to discredit religion? Why is it important to prove there is no God?
Why not simply get over it and allow people with faith to be comforted by it?

Oh the irony that anyone would complain that an atheist can openly offer his opinion that religion is a silly fantasy, and would suggest that this is a form of intolerance. Religious people have beaten, burned, hanged, and tortured people for believing in the wrong religion, or none at all, for the better part of human history. Now we've just recently reached a stage where an atheist can actually outright say that God does not exist without fear of draconian retribution, and it's called intolerance. Now it's the religious people who are the victims, we're told. Give me a break.

- wolf

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm not sure I follow, in fact I'm pretty sure I don't as this is probably your "usual sarcasm and in no way reflects [a] real opinion".

Fern

Your point is my point too.

Jesus has a vision where he brings forgiveness for sin and millions who die to his truth find their way to God. Hitler has a vision of the Third Reich and 50 million die.

It isn't the chemicals or the brain location or the experience that matters so much but whether they derive from love or hate. It is all about a person's aim. Jesus set out to rectify a problem the Jews had that they could find God by obedience to law. Robots can obey laws but they remain robots. There is this difference referred to by the notion of letter and spirit. The ego is all for letters but the meek find spirit.

 

[Moonbeam]

Oh the irony that anyone would complain that an atheist can openly offer his opinion that religion is a silly fantasy, and would suggest that this is a form of intolerance. Religious people have beaten, burned, hanged, and tortured people for believing in the wrong religion, or none at all, for the better part of human history. Now we've just recently reached a stage where an atheist can actually outright say that God does not exist without fear of draconian retribution, and it's called intolerance. Now it's the religious people who are the victims, we're told. Give me a break.

- wolf

Arm or leg? When does the last moron to the game get a break? You might note that many Atheists think the OP sort of Atheist is a fool, eh? The irony, my dear wild dog, is that those who fancy themselves to be free of religious bigotry are as big of bigots and any religious wingnut can be.

 

[CKent]

.
.

 

[bfdd]

I liked reading this thread. It really drives home why I don't call myself an atheist, I might not believe in a God or Gods, I might not have any spiritual beliefs or religious practices, but I'd never say any of my non-beliefs are truths to anyone including myself.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Yes, but you make me laugh. I'm not the one who has problems with what others what to call delusions.

Apparently we make each other laugh. As far as you not having problems with what others want to call delusions, your arguments in this very thread and your post history in P&N pontificating to others decidedly argues against that claim. You most definitely have that problem.

 

[piasabird]

People use psychology as a scapegoat all the time. It is all a big excuse. So what you got picked on at school. Everyone gets picked on at school, get over it. Communitsts tried to stamp out religion. So are communist countries better off or worse of for that?

 

[bfdd]

Arm or leg? When does the last moron to the game get a break? You might note that many Atheists think the OP sort of Atheist is a fool, eh? The irony, my dear wild dog, is that those who fancy themselves to be free of religious bigotry are as big of bigots and any religious wingnut can be.

I think a lot of people who call themselves Atheists aren't real Atheists. To myself and others Atheism has become a religion itself awhile ago. Now you have people who call themselves Atheists because they follow the basic principles, but they're not hardcore followers of what Atheism has become and are no different than Sunday Catholics as far as I'm concerned. Again, more reason why i don't call myself an Atheist.

 

[Moonbeam]

Apparently we make each other laugh. As far as you not having problems with what others want to call delusions, your arguments in this very thread and your post history in P&N pontificating to others decidedly argues against that claim. You most definitely have that problem.

Perhaps you misread what I said. I do not believe that because a spiritual experience can be induced or produced in the brain means anything at all as to the validity or life changing impact such an experience might bring. I like to have sex and just because it's chemical or can be caused by electrodes in the brain does not mean I have any intention of giving it up. Similarly, because I have experienced death of the self and ended moral suffering, does not mean, if I could do that with drugs or a machine, I would go back to being in misery, the methodology being in genuine. Awakening happens by grace. It is a gift. The ego can't force it to happen.

So I do not have a problem with realizations people get however they get them, if they cause life changes that make people much better. I don't give a shit who calls them delusions. And I will happily argue that folk who do dismiss such things to be fools, like the OP. And unlike the Pope, I actually know nothing which makes my vision very clear. It's because you are full of shit and I know nothing that you always lose these debates even if you don't notice.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Just for arguments sake, though, the Chinese government did in fact kill and/or prosecute people effectively in the name of atheism. Just ask some Tibetans . . .

Shhh. Don't spoil the fantasy.

Let me explain a very important distinction that you two have utterly failed to understand and acknowledge.

It's actually very simple, but hardly anybody ever acknowledges it because they're too interested in pointing tu quoque fingers at their perceived opponents to really think about it.

The fact is that theists, despite their wide variety and disparate belief-sets, are all united by at the very least 1 thing: They do believe in a god.

In contrast, and for comparison, atheists, despite their wide variety and disparate belief-sets, are united at the very least by 1 thing: They do not believe in a god.

Now, consider for a moment what kinds of things motivate your actions. How much influence in your decision-making, moment to moment, does your non-belief in Santa Claus have? How much does the fact that you do not believe in faeries and leprechauns influence your choices? When you call a coin toss, are you more influenced by the fact that you do believe that the coin will be heads or tails, or do you also take time to consider all of the infinitely conceivable things which you do not believe could cause the coin to be either heads, or tails, or neither, or both.

Do you see what I'm getting at? People don't commit atrocities "in the name of atheism" because people aren't motivated by what they do not believe. They are motivated by what they do believe. It may be the case that certain fanatical Chinese atheists sought to exterminate religious people, but it wasn't atheism that motivated them to do it any more than the fact that you do not believe a tricky apparition will make a tossed coin land heads-up influences you to call tails.

I'll be the first to acknowledge the fact that lots of theists killed lots of people specifically in the name of their respective gods still does not mean that no gods exist, but you must acknowledge at the very least that theism appears to motivate people to do unthinkable things specifically for the cause of their theism in a way that atheism simply cannot.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think a lot of people who call themselves Atheists aren't real Atheists. To myself and others Atheism has become a religion itself awhile ago. Now you have people who call themselves Atheists because they follow the basic principles, but they're not hardcore followers of what Atheism has become and are no different than Sunday Catholics as far as I'm concerned. Again, more reason why i don't call myself an Atheist.

I think I agree. Atheists think they have science on their side. There is no scientific proof of God so there is no God. But that is silly because God is not a thing anybody can measure. So God has nothing at all to do with science. To say that science proves anything about something it has nothing whatsoever to do with, is silly. It takes belief to fall for that bullshit.

Of course, there are lots of loons that try to say that God can be proved scientifically, the Creationists and their nut case Creation-science for example, human footprints with dinosaurs and such shit.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Let me explain a very important distinction that you two have utterly failed to understand and acknowledge.

It's actually very simple, but hardly anybody ever acknowledges it because they're too interested in pointing tu quoque fingers at their perceived opponents to really think about it.

The fact is that theists, despite their wide variety and disparate belief-sets, are all united by at the very least 1 thing: They do believe in a god.

In contrast, and for comparison, atheists, despite their wide variety and disparate belief-sets, are united at the very least by 1 thing: They do not believe in a god.

Now, consider for a moment what kinds of things motivate your actions. How much influence in your decision-making, moment to moment, does your non-belief in Santa Claus have? How much does the fact that you do not believe in faeries and leprechauns influence your choices? When you call a coin toss, are you more influenced by the fact that you do believe that the coin will be heads or tails, or do you also take time to consider all of the infinitely conceivable things which you do not believe could cause the coin to be either heads, or tails, or neither, or both.

Do you see what I'm getting at? People don't commit atrocities "in the name of atheism" because people aren't motivated by what they do not believe. They are motivated by what they do believe. It may be the case that certain fanatical Chinese atheists sought to exterminate religious people, but it wasn't atheism that motivated them to do it any more than the fact that you do not believe a tricky apparition will make a tossed coin land heads-up influences you to call tails.

I'll be the first to acknowledge the fact that lots of theists killed lots of people specifically in the name of their respective gods still does not mean that no gods exist, but you must acknowledge at the very least that theism appears to motivate people to do unthinkable things specifically for the cause of their theism in a way that atheism simply cannot.

Of course their theism motivates some to kill people. So does politics, tribalism, nationalism, most everything. What you fail to acknowledge is that while atheists may not believe in a deity, they DO believe in the superiority of their position and some are prepared to back it up with their own brand of intolerance.

To be blunt being an atheist doesn't prevent people from being assholes about it.

How about the other side of it? Those who travel to other lands to help people because they believe a god approves of it? What good has atheism ever positively encouraged people to do? Nothing, because it's nothing but a belief about god.

So atheism does nothing. Religion can motivate people to do good or evil or nothing at all. I can say that about people who have political sensibilities too.

That doesn't stop some atheists from being condescending asses, does it?

 

[Moonbeam]

I'll be the first to acknowledge the fact that lots of theists killed lots of people specifically in the name of their respective gods still does not mean that no gods exist, but you must acknowledge at the very least that theism appears to motivate people to do unthinkable things specifically for the cause of their theism in a way that atheism simply cannot.

How do you reach the conclusion that atheists generally can't reach such conclusions? What conclusion do you come to if you are right? If atheism saves lives and the religious cost lives, don't you think it's time for atheists to kill off the religious for the betterment of everybody? What better idea can an atheist have than that of utility, the greatest good for the most people, no?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

How do you reach the conclusion that atheists generally can't reach such conclusions? What conclusion do you come to if you are right? If atheism saves lives and the religious cost lives, don't you think it's time for atheists to kill off the religious for the betterment of everybody? What better idea can an atheist have than that of utility, the greatest good for the most people, no?

An individual or group of people decide that they do not believe in a deity and that their position is correct and further those who do are a danger and must die simply cannot happen. That means that all those who died for that reason never existed. Logic forbids it.

 

[nonlnear]

An individual or group of people decide that they do not believe in a deity and that their position is correct and further those who do are a danger and must die simply cannot happen. That means that all those who died for that reason never existed. Logic forbids it.

Logic has never forbidden a war in any meaningful way. Logic forbidding it is typically offered as a great reason not to follow logic. Hawks tend to paint logic yellow and ridicule it as further justification for their ends. This pattern is quite independent of the underlying claims, be they (a)theistic, nationalistic, egotistic, or simply idiotic.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Logic has never forbidden a war in any meaningful way. Logic forbidding it is typically offered as a great reason not to follow logic. Hawks tend to paint logic yellow and ridicule it as further justification for their ends. This pattern is quite independent of the underlying claims, be they (a)theistic, nationalistic, egotistic, or simply idiotic.

You see.

 

[bfdd]

An individual or group of people decide that they do not believe in a deity and that their position is correct and further those who do are a danger and must die simply cannot happen. That means that all those who died for that reason never existed. Logic forbids it.

Then Atheism becomes a religion(which I believe it already has) and it has all the same flaws as every other religion.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Perhaps you misread what I said. I do not believe that because a spiritual experience can be induced or produced in the brain means anything at all as to the validity or life changing impact such an experience might bring. I like to have sex and just because it's chemical or can be caused by electrodes in the brain does not mean I have any intention of giving it up. Similarly, because I have experienced death of the self and ended moral suffering, does not mean, if I could do that with drugs or a machine, I would go back to being in misery, the methodology being in genuine. Awakening happens by grace. It is a gift. The ego can't force it to happen.

Sex is a physical reality. God is a metaphysical concept. We know for a fact that sex is real. It is not proven that God exists except maybe in your own mind and it's not likely it ever will be proven. iow, you're not making a valid comparison.

So I do not have a problem with realizations people get however they get them, if they cause life changes that make people much better. I don't give a shit who calls them delusions. And I will happily argue that folk who do dismiss such things to be fools, like the OP. And unlike the Pope, I actually know nothing which makes my vision very clear. It's because you are full of shit and I know nothing that you always lose these debates even if you don't notice.

You are merely the opposite extreme of the OP. A reasonable person would consider both of you to be fools because extremists are generally detached from reality. Nor do I care what someone who is so detached from reality feels about their own debate prowess. In fact I'd expect someone that demonstrates delusional thinking such as yourself to vastly overestimate their own abilities, so thanks for proving me correct.

 

[Moonbeam]

Then Atheism becomes a religion(which I believe it already has) and it has all the same flaws as every other religion.

Which is why I am interested to hear what Cerpin Taxt has to say. I find his points to be interesting, but here not very fleshed out.

 

[bfdd]

Perhaps you misread what I said. I do not believe that because a spiritual experience can be induced or produced in the brain means anything at all as to the validity or life changing impact such an experience might bring. I like to have sex and just because it's chemical or can be caused by electrodes in the brain does not mean I have any intention of giving it up. Similarly, because I have experienced death of the self and ended moral suffering, does not mean, if I could do that with drugs or a machine, I would go back to being in misery, the methodology being in genuine. Awakening happens by grace. It is a gift. The ego can't force it to happen.

So I do not have a problem with realizations people get however they get them, if they cause life changes that make people much better. I don't give a shit who calls them delusions. And I will happily argue that folk who do dismiss such things to be fools, like the OP. And unlike the Pope, I actually know nothing which makes my vision very clear. It's because you are full of shit and I know nothing that you always lose these debates even if you don't notice.

That's one thing I don't get either. This just as much proves a God as it disproves a God. I mean to say if people are stimulated in a region of the brain they "feel God" well hell how the fuck do we know that wasn't put there by God for us to recognize his presence? Maybe all this dude did was find the frequency God is on.

TLC, I have to admit I agree with you for the most part on Moonbeam. It's almost like he thinks he's a Buddha.

 

[nickstar]

So just because you can affect our thoughts by messing with our brains now im supposed to think religion doesnt exist? okayyy

 

[Moonbeam]

TastesLikeChicken: Sex is a physical reality. God is a metaphysical concept. We know for a fact that sex is real. It is not proven that God exists except maybe in your own mind and it's not likely it ever will be proven. iow, you're not making a valid comparison.

What we think we know is what we tell ourselves we know. God and sex are chemical reactions that happen in the brain. You have had one chemical reaction and not the other. From that you assume that one is real and the other likely not. The difference between the two in in your mind. Some folk know God first hand but may not have ever had sex.


TLC: You are merely the opposite extreme of the OP. A reasonable person would consider both of you to be fools because extremists are generally detached from reality. Nor do I care what someone who is so detached from reality feels about their own debate prowess. In fact I'd expect someone that demonstrates delusional thinking such as yourself to vastly overestimate their own abilities, so thanks for proving me correct.

M: Hehehehehehe. You can't make something true just by saying it. How am I like the OP but his opposite. I am not like him at all nor am I his opposite, in my opinion. I don't know anything. And of course I had to tell you of my abilities because you were bound to overestimate your own and never see it. Here for example, you appeal to 'the reasonable person' a delusion you have that he is you and that you know what reasonable is. You always make such overestimations of your abilities. You are the living exemplar of the delusions you claim to see in me.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's one thing I don't get either. This just as much proves a God as it disproves a God. I mean to say if people are stimulated in a region of the brain they "feel God" well hell how the fuck do we know that wasn't put there by God for us to recognize his presence? Maybe all this dude did was find the frequency God is on.

TLC, I have to admit I agree with you for the most part on Moonbeam. It's almost like he thinks he's a Buddha.

Hehehehe, don't you see that it's you who sees the Buddha in me, whoever he is. Maybe we're on the same frequency.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

That's one thing I don't get either. This just as much proves a God as it disproves a God. I mean to say if people are stimulated in a region of the brain they "feel God" well hell how the fuck do we know that wasn't put there by God for us to recognize his presence? Maybe all this dude did was find the frequency God is on.

Fern already pointed out that only 1% of those tested claimed to see God. More than likely that's based on an existing bias that would cause a person to assume that the presence that's perceived is god. The ultimate fact is, despite a presence being sensed, in reality nothing was there.

imo, it's a fascinating finding. It could provide a rational explanation why people believe they've seen ghosts or other non-existent beings.

TLC, I have to admit I agree with you for the most part on Moonbeam. It's almost like he thinks he's a Buddha.

Traditionally, the kind of crap that comes out of Moonie's mouth has been proferred by either mentally unstable self-deluded types or con-artists.