Dywyddyr do you ever contribute anything? Or do you have a small supply of stock criticisms that you recycle over and over and over?
Certainly. I highlight people's stupid errors and false claims. I dunno, are you ever going to post anything other than trite falsehoods?
scheherazade, A clash of natures maybe? Without belief in God we waste our human ability. What use is all this scientific knowledge when we die? jan.
Belief in a God, in leiu of seeking to gain a deeper appreciation of the true nature of the reality that we exist within (when you are in a position to do so) is the biggest waste of a life that I can imagine. At least some theists do both, which is something. You, on the other hand, are wasting this life by obsessing about some other imaginary life that you think is coming next.
Really? What "human ability" is it that we waste? How exactly do we waste it? Er, possibly not. Maybe (wild guess here) it could be used by future generations.
Rav, That's sounds like a contradiction to me. Why do you think belief in God is an alternative to seeking the true nature of reality that we currently exist in? You, a so-called person of science, have made two claims: 1) i'm wasting my life 2) i'm obsessive about an imaginary life If by ''imaginary life'' you mean the transmigration of the spirit-soul from one medium to the next, please show why you think it is imaginary as opposed to just plain NOT existing, or cannot be known to exist for lack of physical evidence. You still haven't answered my other question: What use is all this scientific knowledge when we die?
You don't need to believe in God to eat, sleep, and reproduce, which is all our activity without the belief in God and the search for spiritual understanding, amounts to. Yet we have so much more within our human-ness that is capable of understanding who/what we are, how we came to be, and what happens when we cease to be. What will the future generation use the knowledge for? jan.
Pure speculation. Why is a belief in god required to understand who we are? Isn't that pre-supposing answers? Whatever they want. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's pretty damned obvious isn't it? Many religious people have a tendency to substitute "God did it" for a proper understanding of how the universe works. It's been happening since the beginning of recorded history (and certainly before that). You are one of many modern-day examples. You set the rules Jan. If you're going to get all upset about people making 'claims', then don't fucking make them yourself. The hypocrisy here is mind-boggling. To me, if I simply cease to exist when I die, nothing. But like I've said on at least one previous occasion, implying that things are meaningless if we don't live forever is like going on a date with a pretty girl and being depressed the whole time because you know it's eventually going to end. Anyone who does that is a fucking idiot, or at least someone who needs to see a therapist or something. The point is that acquiring scientific knowledge is something that can enrich ones life while they are here. Only someone who is oblivious to the wonders of the natural world would try to argue that it's all pointless just because that knowledge might one day pass into oblivion.
I do not think so. Even eating, sleeping, mating and defending require some notion of transcendence, however rudimentary that notion may be.
Then stop making statements as if they are fact without any irrefutable evidence. Why do you assume it is in another universe? Another thought from nowhere with no basis. Oh and as for arguments. Well all arguments can have counter arguments. We can make up any kind of argument relating to Hell. Hell could exist in it's own reality no need for a universe for it. But again totally irrelevant. LOL tourist attraction attempt. But genuine belief. I doubt it very much. I see athiests screaming prove it prove it prove it. But when they get the same coming back at them they react like the above. I know it is imposable to prove God and it is imposable to disprove God. I hope now you have come to understand this. Never said i had irrefutable proof they do not exist. I would not be so foolish to try and put any effort into disproving them. Like the amount of effort athiests put into trying to disprove God. Good, seems you have come up a bit in wisdom. Then stop making absolutist statements. As if making a statement makes it fact. Oh man.. You must be totaly new to all this right? Excerpt from the 1796 treaty of Tunis between the usa and tunisia Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. There you go, denial of Christianity from the very start of the usa. A true muslim follows the orders of muhammad. Qur’an 9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” Qur’an 8:7 “Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: ‘Wipe the infidels out to the last.’” Qur’an 8:39 “So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.” All muslims are called to fight until all the world is in submission to islam and to exterminate all infidels/non-believers. Move along? As if you have any authority to move me along. Tell me do you suffer power delusions? Think you’re a cop? I will leave this thread when i am good and ready. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
When we die, probably nothing. But it is considerably enjoyable to acquire it - which may lead to a better death.
Dywyddyr, I agree, but it makes for an interesting discussion regarding God, spirituality, and religion. The point of this forum. I think that belief in God can open the mind to revelations that cannot be had with a mind closed to the notion of God. No. Great! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! jan.
Rav, No. And many religious people don't. You don't know that. Scriptures reveal that ''God did it'' is not a substitute for answering how the universe works. Calm down, I'm not getting upset. You claim to be a person of science, a rational human being. Now you've made claims about me. What is the basis of your claims? Or are you being irrational? Lot's of things can enrich ones life while they are here, what's so special about scientific knowledge? I think it's pretty difficult to be oblivious to the wonders of the natural world, so I'm not sure what you mean by that. I didn't say scientific knowledge was pointless. You think belief in God is an obsession, a substitute explanation for the world, and imaginary. That's more a case of accusation of pointlessness, than simply asking what the benefit of scientific knowledge is in the greater scheme of life and death. I ask it in relation to your comments. jan.
I disagree, I think these are mechanics of life. The planet provides, the body is designed for this planet. But I woud be interested to hear why you think these activities require some notion of trancendance. jan.
Yes, it is, in spite of your apparent inability to recognize such. It's so common that you'd have to have your head buried in the sand not to see it. So what? I said many people do. I even clearly alluded to the fact that some don't myself when I said: so this is a pointless retort. If you're suggesting that I don't know that you substitute "God did it" for proper scientific understanding, then clearly you're wrong since you dismiss evolution as nonsense in favour of I.D, and since the TOE is widely regarded as the best evidenced theory in all of science, it qualifies as a prime example. If, on the other hand, you're suggesting that I don't know that it's been happening since the beginning of recorded history, well, you obviously don't know your history very well. I made the claims to give you a taste of your own medicine, since making unsubstantiated claims is your specialty. And I might keep doing it to, since you clearly believe them to be admissable. I'm not saying that such knowledge is more 'special' than anything else that one could choose to spend one's time doing, only that it is indeed special. You, for example, are obviously oblivious to the wonders of local reversals of entropy due to an abundant source of energy that results in the diversity of biological life that we find on our planet. In other words, the wonder of evolution.
It's true that not all of them were Christians. Many were deists. But I think that most of them probably were at least nominally Christian. They belonged to some Christian church, because that's what was done in the late 18'th century. Quite a few of those were sincere believers of one sort or another, whether theologically liberal or conservative. In other words, there were many different "founding fathers" who had a whole range of religious ideas. What brought them together was a shared political vision, not a common religious belief. They were more concerned with founding a new nation, conducting the Revolutionary War, then writing the Constitution and creating the new country's institutions, than they were with religious preaching. If one thing typifies most of them, it's that they were generally pretty secular people concerned with this-worldly affairs. Our view of the "founding fathers'" general religiosity is going to depend a great deal on which 'founding father' a contemporary writer chooses to quote, and in what circumstances. And that often has more to do with our contemporary purposes than with those of the person we're quoting. It is significant that Thomas Jefferson was probably among the least Christian 'founders', this side of the stoutly-atheist Thomas Paine. Jefferson never tried to hide his views. And he had no problem later being elected President. So it clearly wasn't a big issue to the electorate.
Rav, I know it's not obvious, but you're an angry millitant atheist who see only that perspective, and there's no arguing this point with you. You said; ''at least some theists do both'', meaning that ALL theists do it. I believe in evolution, just not the molecule to man part. I.D. (not necessarily the movement, but the notion) makes more sense to me, and I'm sure it does to you as well. Regarding TOE, why is it such a big deal if someone disagrees that the evidence amounts to molecule to man? How does it impact upon society, and the future of society if some people don't accept it? And finally, is it just a coincidence that one who disagrees with the theory has no understanding of TOE, or is levelled at him because he disagrees?? Scriptures are recorded history, are they not? Why don't you include them in your summation? And I thought you were just an angry millitant. jan.
