What will it take for theists to stop believing?

drnihili · Jun 28, 2003

Re: Scope of vision

Originally posted by tiassa
I'm of the notion that it's an issue of breadth of vision. A dash of interpretation and a smidge of perspective.

:m:,
Tiassa
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click to expand...

Somehow that's more or less what I expected.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

SkinWalker · Jun 29, 2003

Re: You surrender too easily Tiassa...

Originally posted by Prisme
I politetly oppose Skinwalkers replies accross the board.

I never made that assumption. .....
Theists are not quitters for they are still attempting to have a spiritual life........

Originally posted by Prisme
This said, the atheist is a quitter in the sense that he has revoked his personal search for a spiritual life.
Click to expand...

I wasn't attempting to imply these were your assumptions. I merely stated that one could easily argue the "quitter" analogy either way. It is but a matter of perspective. From a theist's point of view, an atheist "revoked his personal search for spiritual life."

However, from the point of view of an atheist, he/she is merely without a god. Certainly there are some that create a belief system that surrounds this notion, as I see humans as creatures that have a cognitive awareness that makes the establishment of belief systems necessary.

But to say that an atheist cannot be spiritual... well, unless you become an atheist, you may never know. But the question is: does spiritualism necessitate a god?

Originally posted by Prisme
Theists believe there is a meanning and they try to formulate that meanning through religion.
Agnostics review the facts in order to make a decision

Atheists say there is no transcendantal meanning and are content on remaining with that assumption.
Click to expand...

I suppose I can go along with this. I personally do not discount the possibility of a deity or deities, but I go through life with a reasonable confidence that there is no underlying "meaning" to it. We are accidental. The human race and life on Earth is an unplanned child. The meaning(s) that exists are constructs of man. The remainder of Earth's life has not the cognitive awareness that we do (so far as we know), and therefore don't trouble themselves with meanings.

There are many atheists that I know who see this life as ALL WE GET. There is no afterlife, heaven, valhala, etc., so it is vital that we make the most and the best of what we have. Consequently, these people are very stable and focused in their lives. They are considerate beyond that of the theists I know. This, by no means is conclusive data, but it is certainly telling to me.

Originally posted by Prisme
The only difference between the theist and atheist is the first proposition: existence of God.
Click to expand...

Well... there's that. But there's also the idea that this is all we get. This life, this planet, this existance. If I get hit by a car tomorrow or live longer than Bob Hope, I'll make the most of it every day. Beyond that, there's the idea that there is no "meaning to life." No plan. No destiny.

Originally posted by Prisme
So atheists are not as 'enlightened' as they usually pretend to be. They act just like theists, except for the first clause... but what is even more funny in their position is that they are actually 'acting' like theists when 'believing' there is no God.
Of course, they will never admit it, they don't have any faith.. right?
Click to expand...

Which is all very characteristic of human behavior. We are not only self-aware, but we are aware that we are self-aware. This is significant and creates these paradoxes about "meaning of life," beginnings of the universe, end of the universe, who planned it, who made it, who made the entity that made the universe.... etc.

You make a subtle mistake when saying: "Theists are quitters, since they've quit looking for the truth (they think they've found it, remember) and put all their faith in superstition.... Atheists are seekers "

Originally posted by Prisme
Atheists can't believe in finding the 'truth' concerning God, for they presuppose there is none (remember?). So atheists cannot be seekers as theists are, for they say to have no faith to doubt.
Click to expand...

But what is sought isn't a god. It is knowledge. It is understanding... gods frequently get in the way of this throughout history (flat world, geocentrism, evolution, genetics, cloning, etc.).

Originally posted by Prisme
Atheists are not seeking anything, for there is nothing to seek (according to them) and have not even bothered to realize that their own position is equally founded on faith as that of the theist.
Click to expand...

Not god. Knowledge/understanding. And faith is the "assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting solely and implicitly on his authority and veracity." Atheists tend to rely more on evidence, sources, hypotheses, and theories. These are all bounded concepts that can be tested or updated as new information and data is obtained or discovered. Theists detest this kind of reasoning when it encroaches upon faith.

Originally posted by Prisme
As for 'putting their faith in supersition', that's just another pejorative and unproven assumption concerning God. Only if he doesn't exist does religion become superstitious.
Click to expand...

Just a sec.... we are discussing "theism" vs. "atheism," correct? By introducing "God" in capital "G," you eliminate other world religions from the discussion. This is fine by me, but I think even you will agree that if the big G is the "correct" religion then it would follow that many if not all of the others involve superstition. The idea that we are reincarnated, that our ancestors revisit us each year, that witches fly around on bannana leaves and steal souls, or that a shaman can become a shapeshifter by eating the flesh of a relative each come to mind as superstition. Unless you belong to their religions or subscribe to their belief systems.

Originally posted by Prisme
Conclusion:

Theists and agnostics are not at rest with God, they are thus attempting to make something, to define something.
Atheists are quitters by ignoring the issue and don't even understand their contradictory position, all the while claiming 'knowledge superiority'.
Click to expand...

Partially correct (but, perhaps, only in my 'belief system'). I see your point about theists and agnostics. I see your perspective on atheists being quitters, but from my perspective, this is false. I don't believe that I'm in contradiction with my position, and I certainly do not claim knowledge superiority. I merely state that I see no reason to bother with a god or gods when it is clear (to me) that there is no evidence that is compelling enough to do so. I've examined many of the world's religions (and continue to do so with enthusiasm) and see some commonalities as well as differences. The frequency and nature of these are enough to convince me that 'belief' is a cognitive process that is related to our awareness of being self-aware.

Originally posted by Prisme
This is as scientifically proven as Freudian babbling concerning the innate desire of boy children to sleep with their mother... cognitivetly.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click to expand...

I challenge you to cite references to this 'scientifically proven' 'Freudian' babble.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm not suggesting that Religion is a reaction to infantile helplessness as Freud did. I'm merely suggesting that the human cognitive processes are conducive to creating belief systems. Humans go about their day-to-day existances in living out catagorizations of experiences. Our language is both an example and a method of this. Goodenough (Sept 1990) suggested that linguistic ability is one of the keys to this. Boyer (2001) pointed out that while there are many theories about why there is religion: it provides explanations; it offers comfort; it gives hope; it sets rules/boundaries for societies; etc., there is also the method by which humans learn that is conducive to creating belief systems such as religion.

He offers a whole chapter to this process, so I'll leave it to you and others to check into it if interested. Suffice it to say, it has to do with intuition and counter-intuitive ideas that don't break expected "templates" in ways that are complex or too contrary. Belief in ghosts is a good example, since it is a cross-religious belief. It full-fills the "person" template, but goes counter in that it adds non-corporeal properties. I'm honestly not doing his theory a service here by trying to explain it....

Originally posted by Prisme
This complex thought pattern of discovery can hardly be reduced to primitive practicality:
just look at physics and biology: there is absolutely nothing 'practical' or 'intuitive' in knowing these sciences, in fact they are very counter-intuitive.
Click to expand...

I think we are largely in agreeance here... although I would say that once the knowledge of, say physics, is thoroughly studied, many things about it become intuitive. Feynman was very famous for his unique outlook on life that was grounded in his physics background. An example would be his "safecracking" exploits while at Los Alamos (Feynman, 1997).

Originally posted by Prisme
counter-intuitive(<--recognize this word?)
Click to expand...

I'm assuming this is your subtle way of telling me that you read Boyer's work. If so, I'm interested in what you thought of his thesis from a theist point of view, considering that he was explaining his theory on all religion. Even if you only subscribe to one religion, there is still hundreds of others, some very colorful, that must have some explanation for their genesis. But then you pretty much state what you think later in your post....

Originally posted by Prisme
Practical physics tells us that the earth is flat... abstract physics show that it is actually round.
Click to expand...

Actually, all practical physics of modern times shows the world to be spherical. Nothing abstract about it.

Originally posted by Prisme
(other examples of counter-intuitive science:
existence of atoms, non eucledian geometry, relativity)

So Boyer, in an attempt to answer how man has faith, should bother to explain why man CAN think outside of his so called
-practical thought patterns = belief- equasion.
Click to expand...

But the interesting thing is, that once one is educated on each of these disciplines, they tend to become very intuitive. So I have to agree, man does have the ability to think outside of his practical thought patterns. Still, even scientists will cling to ideas and beliefs and are often very reluctant to give up on a theory until they can prove conclusively that it is wrong.

But one of the themes that I took from Boyer's book was that "counter-intuition" was what lured people to believe, so it stands to reason that it can lure the disciplined mind to analyze, question and scrutinize.

Originally posted by Prisme
For if man can think outside of himself concerning physics, why not with religion and God? What makes 'faith' or 'believing' -as Boyer would say- necessarily without serious human thought?
Click to expand...

Again... we are not in disagreement here. I do, however, see mainstream religion as being very ingrained in our societies. As I was growing up, I remember hearing of "atheists" and also remember thinking they were very strange and obviously wrong in not believing in god. I, like most kids, was raised by parents who took the easy road in explaining things when I asked "why?" "Because god made it that way."

Because religion is so much a part of our culture(s), it is very easy to accept without thought by merely growing up. It was always true, therefore it must still be true. Serious human thought will always surround this topic, both pro and con.

Originally posted by Prisme
So Boyer is begging the question:
He is not talking about "human faith", he is talking about practical human thought patterns related to everyday life matters. Rather than explaining the religious side of man as he claims, he is getting lost in psychological thought patterns that do not answer anything about man and why he believes in God.
Click to expand...

I failed to see how this could be considered 'begging the question,' otherwise known as petitio principii. Regardless, Boyer made it clear on the outset that in order to explain the ultimate question and title of the last chapter, "Why Belief," he needed to discuss the processes by which we learn, why gods and spirits are important, etc.

I do, however, have at least one disagreement with Boyer and I'm still mulling over some of his other assertions. I, unlike Boyer, think that death is one of the essential issues as to why people choose religion. We, being aware, have difficulty accepting that our time is temporary.

Originally posted by Prisme
Boyer should seperate 'faith' and 'believing' and stop misleading people that his theories are actually explaining something new.
Click to expand...

I was disturbed not to see reference to other cult beliefs, such as ufos, astrology, etc. Though it is easy to see how these are similar and many even include rituals such as tarot card readings, meditations, etc. Still, I don't see how 'faith' and 'believing' are, or should be, separate.

Originally posted by Prisme
We 'believe' in things for practicality: (moving objects, gravity, locations).
Click to expand...

But these 'beliefs' are grounded in testable hypotheses.

Originally posted by Prisme
On the other hand, we have 'faith' in order to attempt to give meanning to this life, which has nothing to do with what is practical or intuitive.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that. For those who function out of 'faith' that their lives serve a higher purpose, I have respect. I don't agree, but I respect them. Perhaps with the exception of forums of discussion such as this one, though I still hope to come off as 'respecting.'

Originally posted by Prisme
So someone write an e-mail to Boyer and tell him to seperate faith from practical belief patterns.
Click to expand...

But it seems that faith is a form of belief, practical or otherwise.

Feynman, Richard, (1997). "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!": Adventures of a Curious Character. W.W. Norton & Company.

Goodenough, Ward H., (Sept. 1990). Evolution of the Human Capacity for Beliefs. American Anthropologist New Series Vol 92, Issue 3 597-612.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Gravage · Jul 10, 2003

Re: cracke goes my fingers

Originally posted by Prisme
This is just a theory that some psychoanalysists (those that say you want to sleep with your mother but don't in the fear of being castrated) hold and most likely is just a general assumption since psychoanalysis is not a science.
Plus, saying that all theists are wimpy children that need someone is about as developped as saying that all atheists are hard asses about science who have a God complex.

No,you got it all wrong.Psychoanalysts' researchements are based on facts and the truth.You believe that they are wrong,because you want to believe,not because it's reality.

Interesting you should say that. So are you saying that the feeling of God is 'natural' to human beings? That the feeling of need for a higher order imposes itself to all of us? Not only the weak among us? Interesting.

Yes,everything and everyone is natural,every part,every quark of our body and conscoiusness.Yes,it isn't my fault you went to live in imaginary world with wizard of Oz.

Control or repression?

Control is the repression of feelings.If humans hadn't willpower enough to repress and control feelings/emotions,they would be like animals.That's what makes us humans,despite there will always be an animal instinct inside our genes,no matter how much we evolved into superior beings,because we cannot escape from what we used to be-animals,actually monkeys.

If this would be true, then atheists would have more difficulty to survive difficult survival-related events? If so, then God is a good thing: it helps the creature (called man) survive better.

Wrong.Atheists will have less difficulty,because they are not occupied with imagination,and so-called ever-loving God.They live in a real world.More you believe,the harder is to accept some of you loving persons is dead.

I agree that institutionalized religion have crazy laws that bi-pass the whole point of believing in God.
As for God having mind-reality altering properties... I would like to see studies on that. People are buying drugs to do that, not go to church.

So,what?They are buying these drugs,because they are too weak to confront with the real,ruthless world;they buy drugs to "reach" God,simply they are too weak.

No good and evil? I wouldn't want you to babysit for me man.

Jeez,I'm not a murderer.Although,as impossible it is,I would never hurt you chlild.I'm just not that kind of guy.Jeez,I simply even refuse fight against someone,if attacks me,as much as I can.And yes,there's no good or evil.It's an ideal situation for you or me.However,it's better to make ideal situations and stay together if our species wants to survive.

Ok, so there is a man-made good and evil. Glad to heir that.

Agreed with that,but however we must make ideal situations for us.That would mean "good" idealistic situation.

Law of survival only true law? Could you prove this to me?
I could just as well say that life is absurd and that no law truly applies. Or that we must obey the laws of our eco-system that have been given to us.

Yes,law of survival is the only law,because even people are killing each other in order to get top of their own species and command their own moral norms.So,good,evil,moral norms and laws,and etc. are actually made be man,as well as faith,as product of human imagination,which church used it to creadit themselves,and to make tradition in believing in fictional God.

Thought:
Just like we cannot be only a psychological being, we cannot only be a genetic being.
A man has a depression because his brain is unbalanced... but what caused the unbalance? Depression caused by post-traumatic syndrome after serving in Viet-Nam for 4 years.
Which comes first? The psyche trauma or the biological trauma?
Thus we are not only bio-chemical arrangements.

*Note that saying we are only genetic machines and then saying we live in a completly imaginary (psychological) world can become contradictory in the long run.

I don't know which comes first,but I do know it's all on purely physical level.Believe me,when science discovers the darkest secrets of the brain,and how it functions(entirely),there wouldn't be place for God.

Again, unproven theory that stems from gross caricatures of western social behavior.
Feelings do not have to be opposed to reason, you have a prejudice concerning that, but thats the way our society is rigged.

Aristotle: Only the man that engages in philosophy will truly know happiness. What is happiness for aristotle? Pleasures of the senses and emotions.
Thus one does not engage in reason to destroy his feelings, only to accentuate them.

That's true.It has been proven time and times again.

Actually belief in God pretty much stops believers from worrying that htey are purposeless atoms in the universe.
This does ot create fanatism, but a life with a meanning.

Oh,believe,we are just pieces of matter and energy,nothing more.

As for holy-wars and massacers... God didn't make them, humans did.
Please do not exclude your own right to rationally believe in a God for the simple reason that people in the past have organized institutions to control the masses.
Religions do not own God, they just like to say they do. Atheists should get that through their heads. This is not a copyright infringement to talk of God in a personnal way!!!!!

So,what everything what scientests saw was on purely materialistic,physical level.Time and time again there is no proof for otherwise.

Kiergegaard: Q: what creation of man would deserve to contain the greatness of God? (referring to religion and churches)
A: None. What man makes is not divine.

Thus God is not to be held by a group for Kiergegaard, but only within an intimate relation between a man and his God.
If this man chooses to be irrational and dogmatic about God.. he will do so on his own.

Conclusion:

So please do not abnegate a part of you: feelings. You will only go nuts with time, feelings were not meant to be repressed.. ask any psychologist. Sure, don't obey everyone of them, but ignoring them isn't so great either.
And don't base your decision about God with what 'religions' do\did with him.
IF you are the son of a God, you don't need a church to talk to your maker.
If you are not, then you have a freaking job of explaining to yourself why is life worth being lived and why should a bio-chemical machine struggle on through life knowing its existance is unsignificant in every way.....

It's not my fault,you don't accept reality the way it is.

The latter not being the argument I want to end with, just remember that atheists and theists are alike:
They both believe in something:
One in the presence and the other in the absence of God.

I only believe in 3 things:myself,energy-being totally indestructible,uncreated and uncreateable,only creating another form of energy from previous one,and the nature.Nature is real,God isn't.

Peace.
Click to expand...

Peace to you,too!

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

biblthmp · Jul 12, 2003

Absolutely nothing

Once a person has an experience with God, there is nothing that can unconvince him.
Similar to a person, who is run over by a car, who is later visited by the FBI, and told that there are no cars within ten thousand miles of here.
God must seek the person, before the person will ever seek God with sincerity. The nature of humanity is inate rebellion. It is a virus in the human operating system installed by a trojan horse, called the temptation of the apple, that infected all descendant operating systems, and only the original programmer (Jesus), can remove the virus, and restore the O.S. back to normal.

Gravage · Jul 14, 2003

Re: Absolutely nothing

Originally posted by biblthmp
Once a person has an experience with God, there is nothing that can unconvince him.
Similar to a person, who is run over by a car, who is later visited by the FBI, and told that there are no cars within ten thousand miles of here.
God must seek the person, before the person will ever seek God with sincerity. The nature of humanity is inate rebellion. It is a virus in the human operating system installed by a trojan horse, called the temptation of the apple, that infected all descendant operating systems, and only the original programmer (Jesus), can remove the virus, and restore the O.S. back to normal.
Click to expand...

Oh,really?From my own experience,I know it's posssible to cure people from "God" experiences.Let's just I had experience in that.
If I was able to strand myself(and I was faar more than just a believer),than anyone else,but ,of course,if YOU want to.People don't want to strand themselves from faith...

Christian Sodomy · Mar 8, 2007

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic

Seriously, what would it take? I mean really, what MORE could you possibly need?
I get the impression the only thing that could sway you would be if a god came down from the sky and said "please, stop believething in me" but there is no god so that won't happen and if there was and he did you would still believe because you would have just seen him..... see the predicament you got yourselves into?
Click to expand...

Religion is a sentimental response, not a logical one. Thus the answer to your question is "death."

[link deleted]

Satyr · Mar 5, 2007

Dr Lou Natic said: ↑

- the simpsons

Seriously, what would it take? I mean really, what MORE could you possibly need?
I get the impression the only thing that could sway you would be if a god came down from the sky and said "please, stop believething in me" but there is no god so that won't happen and if there was and he did you would still believe because you would have just seen him..... see the predicament you got yourselves into?
Click to expand...

Divine intervention.

kerux · Mar 5, 2007

theists to stop believing in what? theism?

Dr Lou Natic said: ↑

- the simpsons

Seriously, what would it take? I mean really, what MORE could you possibly need?
I get the impression the only thing that could sway you would be if a god came down from the sky and said "please, stop believething in me" but there is no god so that won't happen and if there was and he did you would still believe because you would have just seen him..... see the predicament you got yourselves into?
Click to expand...

theism? Perhaps you are trying to call the attention of mono- and polytheists.
I believe there is one God who created the worlds. But I do believe there exist gods.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And I hope you have seen them.

The Devil Inside · Mar 5, 2007

absolute, definable proof that my system of beliefs is harmful to my mental or physical health.
thats all it would take.

Medicine*Woman · Mar 5, 2007

biblthmp said: ↑

Once a person has an experience with God, there is nothing that can unconvince him.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: False.

Similar to a person, who is run over by a car, who is later visited by the FBI, and told that there are no cars within ten thousand miles of here. God must seek the person, before the person will ever seek God with sincerity.
[/QUOTE]

*************
M*W: Again, false.

The nature of humanity is inate rebellion. It is a virus in the human operating system installed by a trojan horse, called the temptation of the apple, that infected all descendant operating systems, and only the original programmer (Jesus), can remove the virus, and restore the O.S. back to normal.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: And, again, false.

The very nature of mankind is atheism. But for some creative reason, ancient man needed guidance. He got that guidance from the stars. He created a guider later he called 'god,' because 'god' was 'good.' Later he created 'religion.' It worked for a time, but then it failed. Then later man argued over 'god,' but they realized no 'god' could exist. They were then called 'atheists.' And, they prevailed in the end. People wizened up. They realized they didn't need a 'god' after all. The End.

Medicine*Woman · Mar 5, 2007

Satyr said: ↑

Divine intervention.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: No... divine intercourse!

lightgigantic · Mar 7, 2007

Dr Lou Natic said: ↑

- the simpsons

Seriously, what would it take? I mean really, what MORE could you possibly need?
I get the impression the only thing that could sway you would be if a god came down from the sky and said "please, stop believething in me" but there is no god so that won't happen and if there was and he did you would still believe because you would have just seen him..... see the predicament you got yourselves into?
Click to expand...

nothing quite so dramatic required - the path of falling away from spiritual life is quite clear and easy - associating to intimately with gross materialists and developing an offensive attitude to saintly persons and scripture in general

(Q) · Mar 7, 2007

lightgigantic said: ↑

nothing quite so dramatic required - the path of falling away from spiritual life is quite clear and easy - associating to intimately with gross materialists and developing an offensive attitude to saintly persons and scripture in general
Click to expand...

So, theists are NOT gross materialists? And theists do NOT develop offensive attitudes towards other theists saintly persons and scriptures?

Yeah, right.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Godless · Mar 7, 2007

absolute, definable proof that my system of beliefs is harmful to my mental or physical health.
thats all it would take.
Click to expand...

http://www.psywww.com/psyrelig/mental.htm

http://ehealthforum.com/health/topic16385.html

http://archives.betterhumans.com/Columns/Column/tabid/79/Column/313/Default.aspx

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/6931/740

The more one believes in fairy tale, the further your mind deteriorates!

Kendall · Mar 7, 2007

The very nature of mankind is atheism. But for some creative reason, ancient man needed guidance. He got that guidance from the stars. He created a guider later he called 'god,' because 'god' was 'good.' Later he created 'religion.' It worked for a time, but then it failed. Then later man argued over 'god,' but they realized no 'god' could exist. They were then called 'atheists.' And, they prevailed in the end. People wizened up. They realized they didn't need a 'god' after all. The End.

Kendall-I would think we needed a god because we did not know enough about our world, that the only thing worse then a bad king is no king.

Kendall · Mar 7, 2007

10 Kings or 10 pairs of kings from what i am told by the prophets.

lightgigantic · Mar 14, 2007

(Q) said: ↑

So, theists are NOT gross materialists? And theists do NOT develop offensive attitudes towards other theists saintly persons and scriptures?

Yeah, right.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Click to expand...

which explains why its not uncommon to meet theists practicing on an uncommon level of performance

CC Antya 3.213: A characteristic of a pure devotee is that he excuses any offense by an ignorant rascal. A characteristic of Kṛṣṇa, however, is that He cannot tolerate blasphemy of His devotees.

lightgigantic · Mar 14, 2007

Kendall said: ↑

The very nature of mankind is atheism. But for some creative reason, ancient man needed guidance. He got that guidance from the stars. He created a guider later he called 'god,' because 'god' was 'good.' Later he created 'religion.' It worked for a time, but then it failed. Then later man argued over 'god,' but they realized no 'god' could exist. They were then called 'atheists.' And, they prevailed in the end. People wizened up. They realized they didn't need a 'god' after all. The End.

Kendall-I would think we needed a god because we did not know enough about our world, that the only thing worse then a bad king is no king.
Click to expand...

ok so you have an opinion - all you need now are premises for your opinion and then we have the necessary ingredients for a discussion

Log in or Sign up

What will it take for theists to stop believing?

drnihili Registered Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

Gravage Registered Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

biblthmp Registered Senior Member

Gravage Registered Senior Member

Christian Sodomy Registered Senior Member

Satyr Banned Banned

kerux Registered Senior Member

The Devil Inside Banned Banned

MedicineWoman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!* Valued Senior Member

MedicineWoman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!* Valued Senior Member

lightgigantic Banned Banned

(Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

Kendall ......................... ..... Registered Senior Member

Kendall ......................... ..... Registered Senior Member

lightgigantic Banned Banned

lightgigantic Banned Banned

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

What will it take for theists to stop believing?

drnihili Registered Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

Gravage Registered Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

biblthmp Registered Senior Member

Gravage Registered Senior Member

Christian Sodomy Registered Senior Member

Satyr Banned Banned

kerux Registered Senior Member

The Devil Inside Banned Banned

Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

lightgigantic Banned Banned

(Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

Kendall ......................... ..... Registered Senior Member

Kendall ......................... ..... Registered Senior Member

lightgigantic Banned Banned

lightgigantic Banned Banned

Share This Page

Useful Searches

MedicineWoman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!* Valued Senior Member

MedicineWoman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!* Valued Senior Member