Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Emmisal

The God Debate - Is it really about evidence?

1,043 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

psyche101

i am 10 foot tall.

Woops no iam not but i do exist .

A falsehood about me is irrelvant to my existence .

Not at all, a Man who is ten foot tall called Mr Walker SImply does not exist, if you gave that description to a policeman, they would not come for you, you are describing something else, something that does not exist- a ten foot tall version of you. That is Fantasy. That you exist in another format is irrelevant. It is a different thing.

I Am a psychopathic egomaniac . Woops no I am not, but i exist.

The fact that humans misunderstand and misinterpret things they have no way of understanding doesn't mean they don't exist

Are you a flood? Are you a rib bone? No, those things are clearly spelled out with goes hand in hand with their rudimentary understanding of the world we live in in that age. Around the days when we thought Zeus threw Lightning bolts too. That was just 100% wrong. So is the claims about the creation of man and the Universe and claims like the great flood - simply did not happen, but people made these stories up to explain what they were seeing visually. Now that we have the tools and gathered data to move beyond simple observation we find out more about the world we live in.

Moses did not misspell Quantum Mechanics and dumb it down into the ten commandments, the perceived correlations between science and relgion and nothing more than poetic license.

Humans believe because of the evolved characteristic of the human brain, which basically from birth uses beliefs to make sense of an environment it does not comprehend.

Exactly, we are indoctrinated to believe in creation myths from centuries ago as opposed to relying on modern findings, in that way as a species we let ourselves down and hold ourselves back, this is why relgion was the cause of the last Dark ages too. We have the ability to further our knowledge it is a shame that we have such a struggle to let go of the religious security blanket that promises an afterlife, and constant attention from the supposed creator of everything, which makes one pretty darn important right? Religion soothes the ego and makes fake promises, historically, that never pans out well.

All the anthropological and sociological evidence is that if you bring childen up in a god free environment they will simply create personal individualised god beliefs from observation and logic as they struggle to make sense of their environment without experience or knowledge. .

Garbage. I have seen my very own son refute this and mentioned it end of last year. You must have missed it. Given access to current knowledge, there is simply no need for relgion at all, in a modern world it is redundant, many just refuse to accept that because of the false promises mentioned above.

The Bible has been proven to be heavily flawed time and again, no other publication in history enjoys the amount of free passes that book gets.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

Because given free will humans must CHOOSE a life without causing harm or pain or suffering This life shows us the consequences of human frailty and evil, and sorts out those capable of living a safe /good life in a place without natural perils. You can't become an adult without going through the difficult and painful learning process of childhood.

So that is why God tells Muslims to kill Christians is it?

PA Said (and you seem to ignore calvinism here) that we have a completely new body, a new understanding, so that means to me that all that stuff we spend a lifetime suffering would just go straight out the window. This life, according to Religion, appears to be a total waste of time. It is already all worked out, and we have to start again anyway.

For experience? Laughable. Every experience is individual, so that cannot prescribe a common goal., that being God. Logically, God stuffed up there.

Unless free will is removed we have to LEARN how to live a wise, peaceful, cooperative, and peaceful life. Better to do it now in a short mortal trial than become immortal without learning the wisdom needed for safe living. Imagine a world of immortals as juvenile and immature as most adult humans are in this life Imagine a world like the one we live in today, going on forever .

Religion would like you to imagine that, but just the last 100 years proves otherwise.

(these are the theological and philosophical arguments and answers to your question.)

I really take zero stock in philosophy, it's boring and Physics outdoes it completely. And no, not any answers, just more hurdles to an answer, if one does exist. Which I seriously doubt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1

All the anthropological and sociological evidence is that if you bring childen up in a god free environment they will simply create personal individualised god beliefs from observation and logic as they struggle to make sense of their environment without experience or knowledge. .

Speaking as someone who has studied anthropology and myth and ritual (which is what you are really talking about here) for many years in an academic setting, this is complete horse lshit.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

Yes i included an article on tha t problem with my post

It is a belief based argument /construct As are all philosophical /logical premises tenets etc.

I. There exist instances of intense sulffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have been prevented without some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse

2. An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.

3. 'There . does not exist an omnipotent omniscient, wholly good being

Reading this you will notice many underlying belief statements inherent in it

Eg that a good being woud want to end suffering ( a belief that suffering is a bad or unnecessary evil with no redeeming quality, which should be ended).

That such a being COULD simply prevent suffering This is a mjor belief construct defining the nature f the god(s) constructed.

The most telling belief here is tha t a god must be omnipotent or omniscient. Thiis is simply a belief construct. A god does not have to be either to qualify as a god and most human gods never have been.

Hence this philosophical position is flawed by two inherent weaknesses. It presupposes the nature and intent of a good god (and indeed tries to strictly define good as wanting to end suffering) and it narrowly limits the nature of the gods which are caught in this dichotomy

But ALSO it gives an important escape clause

without some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse

unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.

A GOD might be able to identify a greeter harm which would be caused by preventing all suffering, and thus permit suffering to achieve this greater good.

So really the existence of suffering only philosophically negates the existence of one particular type of god, and even then only if you assume god cannot be restricted by conflicting outcomes, preventing it from ending one form of harm without causing another The classic example of this is that such a god could end human suffering by ending human free will.

But that would be a greater/more destructive form of harm to a self aware being, capable of choosing good and evil.

One can clearly determine that the conception (logical) and application(evidentiary) of this infinite perfection (God) in specific, an all good and all powerful being, as the premises argue for is unfounded and rationally at odds with the god that is said to exist.

Therefore, I conclude this being does not exist.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

Oops

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh

As I have said many times, atheism is an untenable position. A fallacy.

Rejecting deities is a fallacy? I reject Zeus, Odin, Yahweh, etc.

There a no atheists in foxholes:

http://www.conservap...sts_In_Foxholes

It's fine to claim that no God exists when all things go well but as soon as some challenges arise, atheism dissolves into thin air.

That makes you a liar.

http://americanhuman...st_in_a_Foxhole

Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

Not at all, a Man who is ten foot tall called Mr Walker SImply does not exist, if you gave that description to a policeman, they would not come for you, you are describing something else, something that does not exist- a ten foot tall version of you. That is Fantasy. That you exist in another format is irrelevant. It is a different thing.

Are you a flood? Are you a rib bone? No, those things are clearly spelled out with goes hand in hand with their rudimentary understanding of the world we live in in that age. Around the days when we thought Zeus threw Lightning bolts too. That was just 100% wrong. So is the claims about the creation of man and the Universe and claims like the great flood - simply did not happen, but people made these stories up to explain what they were seeing visually. Now that we have the tools and gathered data to move beyond simple observation we find out more about the world we live in.

Moses did not misspell Quantum Mechanics and dumb it down into the ten commandments, the perceived correlations between science and relgion and nothing more than poetic license.

Exactly, we are indoctrinated to believe in creation myths from centuries ago as opposed to relying on modern findings, in that way as a species we let ourselves down and hold ourselves back, this is why relgion was the cause of the last Dark ages too. We have the ability to further our knowledge it is a shame that we have such a struggle to let go of the religious security blanket that promises an afterlife, and constant attention from the supposed creator of everything, which makes one pretty darn important right? Religion soothes the ego and makes fake promises, historically, that never pans out well.

Garbage. I have seen my very own son refute this and mentioned it end of last year. You must have missed it. Given access to current knowledge, there is simply no need for relgion at all, in a modern world it is redundant, many just refuse to accept that because of the false promises mentioned above.

The Bible has been proven to be heavily flawed time and again, no other publication in history enjoys the amount of free passes that book gets.

I will acept your first two replies as acceptable opinion with which i disagree

The last two are simply wrong

it has been shown across many cultures and by experts in several fields that, while the TYPE of belief may be influenced by parents or other adults, humans from birth are programmed to develop belief because of several factors in our minds/thought processes.

Left totally alone a child will HAVE to develop a belief system in order to explain his world . I did miss your example of your son I would be interested, but unless he has actually been a part of one of the many studies into this i dont think you can say how or why he evolved his beliefs or lack of them

Most humans begin this process virtually from birth and certainly before language development or cognitive self awareness is developed. They observe and they try to explain thier observations.

They observe visible agents effecting change in their environment and so, when changes occur which they have not observed they attribute an agent that change. NOw it is soon obvious that all agents of change have direction and purpose, so the child develops a belief in "invisible " agents with direction and purpose, altering his environment Ask a very young child, how his toy got into a drawer and he will reply something put it there That something can just as easily be a "magic being" in the mind of a child as a real one because they have no data, experience, or knowledge,with which to discriminate

If presents appear under a tree and parents deny putting them there The child WILL attribute some magical agency for their appearance without being introduced to the idea of Father Christmas. They have to, or their world is chaotic and incomprehensible and thus terrifying. So just as they will create a being who puts presents under a tree, the y will create other beings who perform change. As we grow into adults this method of thinking is so engrained in our cognitive processes that it must be deliberately removed to be lost This occurs as a human learns to think in other ways, gains more knowledge and experience, and is influenced by older more sceptical humans.

This is all established scientific knowledge and you can access dozens of journals articles and experts who write about it. Studies have shown that children of atheist parents are no less likely to develop their own god constructs a t a very early age than those of theists. This is because it comes from within and is not learned from others. It develops before a child can even understand the words its parents are speaking, let alone complex ones, like god .

Mankind really does have a God-shaped hole waiting to be filled, according to the lead story in the March 17 New Scientist.

From the moment of birth, babies show predilections in what they pay attention to writes Justin L Barrett in the New Scientist. “One of the most important of these is to recognise the difference between ordinary physical objects and ‘agents’—things that can act on their surroundings”, writes Barrett. This reasoning about agencies works if no human or animal is present, which sets children up to think about invisible gods.

“A natural propensity to look for agents in the world around us is part of the building blocks for beliefs in gods. Once coupled with some other cognitive tendencies, such as the search for purpose, they make children highly susceptible to religion.”

Barrett cites studies that show that “purpose-based explanations of natural objects” are attractive in childhood and beyond.

Children under ten embrace creationist explanations – even if their parents and teachers are evolutionists. One study shows that this view is not outgrown but “must be forcibly tamped down through formal education”.

Children have natural tendencies towards religion, writes Barrett (who runs a research institution at Fuller Theological Seminary (a major Christian institution in California), but not towards any one particular religion. “Instead the way our minds solve problems generates a god-shaped conceptual space waiting to be filled by the details of the culture into which they are born.”

- See more at: http://www.biblesociety.org.au/news/new-scientist-god-special#sthash.qydC1Ave.dpuf

Unfortunately this reproduction is from a source you might not trust, but the original is now inaccessible without paying money for a subscription to the New Scientist .

The issue is the British edition 17/3/2012

There are number of excellent articles about HOW children develop a god construct and pieces fromm a number of experts who have worked with children form many cultures and backgrounds to establish this.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

I will acept your first two replies as acceptable opinion with which i disagree

The last two are simply wrong

it has been shown across many cultures and by experts in several fields that, while the TYPE of belief may be influenced by parents or other adults, humans from birth are programmed to develop belief because of several factors in our minds/thought processes.

Left totally alone a child will HAVE to develop a belief system in order to explain his world . I did miss your example of your son I would be interested, but unless he has actually been a part of one of the many studies into this i dont think you can say how or why he evolved his beliefs or lack of them

Most humans begin this process virtually from birth and certainly before language development or cognitive self awareness is developed. They observe and they try to explain thier observations.

They observe visible agents effecting change in their environment and so, when changes occur which they have not observed they attribute an agent that change. NOw it is soon obvious that all agents of change have direction and purpose, so the child develops a belief in "invisible " agents with direction and purpose, altering his environment Ask a very young child, how his toy got into a drawer and he will reply something put it there That something can just as easily be a "magic being" in the mind of a child as a real one because they have no data, experience, or knowledge,with which to discriminate

If presents appear under a tree and parents deny putting them there The child WILL attribute some magical agency for their appearance without being introduced to the idea of Father Christmas. They have to, or their world is chaotic and incomprehensible and thus terrifying. So just as they will create a being who puts presents under a tree, the y will create other beings who perform change. As we grow into adults this method of thinking is so engrained in our cognitive processes that it must be deliberately removed to be lost This occurs as a human learns to think in other ways, gains more knowledge and experience, and is influenced by older more sceptical humans.

This is all established scientific knowledge and you can access dozens of journals articles and experts who write about it. Studies have shown that children of atheist parents are no less likely to develop their own god constructs a t a very early age than those of theists. This is because it comes from within and is not learned from others. It develops before a child can even understand the words its parents are speaking, let alone complex ones, like god .

I would suggest children are predisposed to easily believing anything the parent says,( I agree they beleive anything and everything when they are really young) but it is in part what they pick up in their enviornment and it is reinforced by the culture and parents so they pick up all kinds of things, typically what ever the parents, siblings, relatives, and culture support/ teach, my three kids when little raised without God did not just naturally come up with God on their own, the first Ideas of God and Jesus and other belief systems, came from their little friends who they played with.

The most commonly asked question as a parent to their kid is where did you hear that from and the kid will say Timmy told me or I heard Christopher's dad say that etc etc etc. this is parenting 101.

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

Speaking as someone who has studied anthropology and myth and ritual (which is what you are really talking about here) for many years in an academic setting, this is complete horse lshit.

Be careful what you claim. it is very easily proven. Again, access the new scientist edition i reference and read for yourself.

it does not relate to those things, but to studies in cognitive development, the construction of belief in the human mind and the way the human mind makes sense of its environment Children develop their own god constructs even if their parents are atheists, because they do it BEFORE they can learn such constructs from another . Parents and societies only influence the shape of the belief construct , Every human being basically constructs their own original belef construct before they are two years old and this is then refined by others as they learn the abilty to communicate ideas with others. Modern psychology is another field very interested in this and doing a lot of work in the area.

You are speaking of something completely different Not individual belief construction by very young children, but social sharing and evolution of common beliefs.This is the step which occurs as a child grows older and learns to share and understand its own belief with those in its society. THEN commonality of beliefs and ritualisation of worship develops, Then atheist parents can teach a child NOT to believe, and theist parents can teach a child their preferred form of belief. WE DO NOT LEARN TO BELIEVE FROM OTHERS, IT COMES FROM OUR OWN MIND, before we even learn to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

I would suggest children are predisposed to easily believing anything the parent says,( I agree they beleive anything and everything when they are really young) but it is in part what they pick up in their enviornment and it is reinforced by the culture and parents so they pick up all kinds of things, typically what ever the parents, siblings, relatives, and culture support/ teach, my three kids when little raised without God did not just naturally come up with God on their own, the first Ideas of God and Jesus and other belief systems, came from their little friends who they played with.

The most commonly asked question as a parent to their kid is where did you hear that from and the kid will say Timmy told me or I heard Christopher's dad say that etc etc etc. this is parenting 101.

Given the research dhows they develop the ideas/concepts before they can communicate this isnt possible.

BUT of course when they can communicate and can share ideas, this sort of answer is logical and common You cant REMEMBER constructing your own cognitive development before you are 2 so you cant remember how you constructed 'gods' to make sense of your environment. and most people cant remember before the y are 4. None the less, non verbal assessments with young children around the world show this is what they do. it explains how our minds are evolved and conditioned to think like this and thus why so many adults continue to think in the same way. A human being has to be quite strongly re- conditioned in order to STOP processing their environment using this sort of thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1

Be careful what you claim. it is very easily proven. Again, access the new scientist edition i reference and read for yourself.

it does not relate to those things, but to studies in cognitive development, the construction of belief in the human mind and the way the human mind makes sense of its environment Children develop their own god constructs even if their parents are atheists, because they do it BEFORE they can learn such constructs from another . Parents and societies only influence the shape of the belief construct , Every human being basically constructs their own original belef construct before they are two years old and this is then refined by others as they learn the abilty to communicate ideas with others. Modern psychology is another field very interested in this and doing a lot of work in the area.

You are speaking of something completely different Not individual belief construction by very young children, but social sharing and evolution of common beliefs.This is the step which occurs as a child grows older and learns to share and understand its own belief with those in its society. THEN commonality of beliefs and ritualisation of worship develops, Then atheist parents can teach a child NOT to believe, and theist parents can teach a child their preferred form of belief. WE DO NOT LEARN TO BELIEVE FROM OTHERS, IT COMES FROM OUR OWN MIND, before we even learn to speak.

You, as usual, have simple no idea what you are talking about. You have this high and mighty attitude and spout things as absolute fact, which they are not.

The truth is that you are wrong. I'm sure you have no understand as to what that means, but you are. And I'm not going to take the time to explain to you how and my myth and ritual are different than religious belief and how what you are talking about is, again, horse ****.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

So that is why God tells Muslims to kill Christians is it?

PA Said (and you seem to ignore calvinism here) that we have a completely new body, a new understanding, so that means to me that all that stuff we spend a lifetime suffering would just go straight out the window. This life, according to Religion, appears to be a total waste of time. It is already all worked out, and we have to start again anyway.

For experience? Laughable. Every experience is individual, so that cannot prescribe a common goal., that being God. Logically, God stuffed up there.

Religion would like you to imagine that, but just the last 100 years proves otherwise.

I really take zero stock in philosophy, it's boring and Physics outdoes it completely. And no, not any answers, just more hurdles to an answer, if one does exist. Which I seriously doubt.

God doesn't tell Muslims to kill Christians (and most muslims will also tell you this) that is their human fear, anger, and hate speaking. Such people have no hope of entering any sort of paradise because they would continue hating killing and being afarid and thus destroy the paradise.

PA and i have somewhat different interpretations BUT I think he believes that humans on the new earth will still have free will. If so then they must be capable of exercising that free will constructively compassionately ad cooperatively, NOT as most do on earth today.

There is no predestination and no future as yet exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I will acept your first two replies as acceptable opinion with which i disagree

The last two are simply wrong

it has been shown across many cultures and by experts in several fields that, while the TYPE of belief may be influenced by parents or other adults, humans from birth are programmed to develop belief because of several factors in our minds/thought processes.

Left totally alone a child will HAVE to develop a belief system in order to explain his world . I did miss your example of your son I would be interested, but unless he has actually been a part of one of the many studies into this i dont think you can say how or why he evolved his beliefs or lack of them

Most humans begin this process virtually from birth and certainly before language development or cognitive self awareness is developed. They observe and they try to explain thier observations.

They observe visible agents effecting change in their environment and so, when changes occur which they have not observed they attribute an agent that change. NOw it is soon obvious that all agents of change have direction and purpose, so the child develops a belief in "invisible " agents with direction and purpose, altering his environment Ask a very young child, how his toy got into a drawer and he will reply something put it there That something can just as easily be a "magic being" in the mind of a child as a real one because they have no data, experience, or knowledge,with which to discriminate

If presents appear under a tree and parents deny putting them there The child WILL attribute some magical agency for their appearance without being introduced to the idea of Father Christmas. They have to, or their world is chaotic and incomprehensible and thus terrifying. So just as they will create a being who puts presents under a tree, the y will create other beings who perform change. As we grow into adults this method of thinking is so engrained in our cognitive processes that it must be deliberately removed to be lost This occurs as a human learns to think in other ways, gains more knowledge and experience, and is influenced by older more sceptical humans.

This is all established scientific knowledge and you can access dozens of journals articles and experts who write about it. Studies have shown that children of atheist parents are no less likely to develop their own god constructs a t a very early age than those of theists. This is because it comes from within and is not learned from others. It develops before a child can even understand the words its parents are speaking, let alone complex ones, like god .

Mankind really does have a God-shaped hole waiting to be filled, according to the lead story in the March 17 New Scientist.

From the moment of birth, babies show predilections in what they pay attention to writes Justin L Barrett in the New Scientist. “One of the most important of these is to recognise the difference between ordinary physical objects and ‘agents’—things that can act on their surroundings”, writes Barrett. This reasoning about agencies works if no human or animal is present, which sets children up to think about invisible gods.

“A natural propensity to look for agents in the world around us is part of the building blocks for beliefs in gods. Once coupled with some other cognitive tendencies, such as the search for purpose, they make children highly susceptible to religion.”

Barrett cites studies that show that “purpose-based explanations of natural objects” are attractive in childhood and beyond.

Children under ten embrace creationist explanations – even if their parents and teachers are evolutionists. One study shows that this view is not outgrown but “must be forcibly tamped down through formal education”.

Children have natural tendencies towards religion, writes Barrett (who runs a research institution at Fuller Theological Seminary (a major Christian institution in California), but not towards any one particular religion. “Instead the way our minds solve problems generates a god-shaped conceptual space waiting to be filled by the details of the culture into which they are born.”

- See more at: http://www.biblesoci...h.qydC1Ave.dpuf

Unfortunately this reproduction is from a source you might not trust, but the original is now inaccessible without paying money for a subscription to the New Scientist .

The issue is the British edition 17/3/2012

There are number of excellent articles about HOW children develop a god construct and pieces fromm a number of experts who have worked with children form many cultures and backgrounds to establish this.

You can disagree with the first two, that is your prerogative, but I doubt too many would agree with you, especially authority figures.

You are going back even one step further than I was speaking of, My son was given both options, relgion and secular, relgion did not stand a chance as understanding grew.

What your studies refer to are even more basic, what people think without ANY knowledge, a blank slate, they cannot understand a process, so they dumb it down to something they are happy with and leave it at that.

Religion has been doing exactly that for 2,000 years, and suppressing knowledge so that people found it difficult to move past relgion, and indoctrination has kept that fairy tale in place.

That is what your study is telling me, the most basic of understandings will start with grasping at relgion and work up from there. And that is why I state that relgion is redundant today. And it is, and this study seems to reinforce that notion.

Are you sure this is going where you want it too? It is not seeming to favour your argument, rather the opposite.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

You, as usual, have simple no idea what you are talking about. You have this high and mighty attitude and spout things as absolute fact, which they are not.

The truth is that you are wrong. I'm sure you have no understand as to what that means, but you are. And I'm not going to take the time to explain to you how and my myth and ritual are different than religious belief and how what you are talking about is, again, horse ****.

If you cant be bothered trying to prove me wrong i will stick with the knowledge i gain from scientists/ and professionals .until someone does.

I just explained how myth and ritual are COMMON, while religious belief is INDIVIDUAL, That is what differentiates them A psychologist might explain to you that one of the problems with human communication is the individualisation/internalisation of ALL beliefs not just religious, so that often two people are speaking from completely different internal understandings, creating mis understandings and mistrust.

We learn myth and ritual and traditional belief from others. We construct our own god concepts and understandings and beliefs in our minds as we learn to think and speak and connect to our world. They exist in human children BEFORE they have the abilty to communicate with others, and hence to learn them from others..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

God doesn't tell Muslims to kill Christians (and most muslims will also tell you this) that is their human fear, anger, and hate speaking.

So what's with quoting and waving the Koran around? Fundamentalists say if you do not follow the Hadith, you are not a true Muslim. So how do you explain them praying to their God telling him they will happily cut of our infidel heads and fingers for him?

That is the Hadith where that hate comes from, the lost individuals quoting it are just repeating what is says. How do you explain that as Non-violent? The rewards of Virgins for Killing us westerners, all that insane rubbish, that is from their Holy Book.

Such people have no hope of entering any sort of paradise because they would continue hating killing and being afarid and thus destroy the paradise.

Not according to their book, they get 72 virgins and God praises them if they were to murder you or I tomorrow. These women are described as virgins with "full grown", "swelling" or "pears-shaped" breasts.

That is God speaking, not some dirty old man is it?

You know, somehow I cannot believe you here, I doubt any sane person would.

According to your understanding of your Bible, that is incorrect, they are probably saying the exact same thing about you right now. He said she said, that is ALL religious nonsense is.

PA and i have somewhat different interpretations BUT I think he believes that humans on the new earth will still have free will. If so then they must be capable of exercising that free will constructively compassionately ad cooperatively, NOT as most do on earth today.

So now PA has it wrong as well hey?

You are starting to sound like a false prophet!!

Even Christianity cannot get this crap straight, it has caused arguments across time, and forced mankind apart.

There is no predestination and no future as yet exists.

I'd like to see you discuss that with PA rather than I, as I feel neither of you are actually "following the evidence" and working with "what works for you"

Like all aspects of relgion, that too is a personal belief constructed in your own head. We can follow evidence now, we have no longer any need for belief.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

If you cant be bothered trying to prove me wrong i will stick with the knowledge i gain from scientists/ and professionals .until someone does.

I just explained how myth and ritual are COMMON, while religious belief is INDIVIDUAL, That is what differentiates them A psychologist might explain to you that one of the problems with human communication is the individualisation/internalisation of ALL beliefs not just religious, so that often two people are speaking from completely different internal understandings, creating mis understandings and mistrust.

We learn myth and ritual and traditional belief from others. We construct our own god concepts and understandings and beliefs in our minds as we learn to think and speak and connect to our world. They exist in human children BEFORE they have the abilty to communicate with others, and hence to learn them from others..

So relgion is keeping human understand at infant level, yeah I get it.

It's not a good thing.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1

We learn myth and ritual and traditional belief from others. We construct our own god concepts and understandings and beliefs in our minds as we learn to think and speak and connect to our world. They exist in human children BEFORE they have the abilty to communicate with others, and hence to learn them from others..

This is where you are failing.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

You can disagree with the first two, that is your prerogative, but I doubt too many would agree with you, especially authority figures.

You are going back even one step further than I was speaking of, My son was given both options, relgion and secular, relgion did not stand a chance as understanding grew.

What your studies refer to are even more basic, what people think without ANY knowledge, a blank slate, they cannot understand a process, so they dumb it down to something they are happy with and leave it at that.

Religion has been doing exactly that for 2,000 years, and suppressing knowledge so that people found it difficult to move past relgion, and indoctrination has kept that fairy tale in place.

That is what your study is telling me, the most basic of understandings will start with grasping at relgion and work up from there. And that is why I state that relgion is redundant today. And it is, and this study seems to reinforce that notion.

Are you sure this is going where you want it too? It is not seeming to favour your argument, rather the opposite.

I have no horse in the race. i want people to understand how and why humans construct beliefs. It is NOT about indoctrination from without, that merely SHAPES belief, and yes a person can be taught to disbelieve also via "indoctrination' or teaching.

You are getting close to an important realisation Humans are literally "born to believe" because of the way we think and learn AND as young children the original pattern of learning is burned into our neurons and synapses (Even if our parents are atheists) So as we become adults we can consciously decondition ourselves, but most people never do. For most adult humans the default cognitive process is one to believe. And hence approx 90% of modern adult humans still do.

Because of this internalised nature of belief it has huge health and other benefits to a self awre being Belief literally has the power to heal, to stop non clinical depression, to ease pain, to reduce cardio vasular diseases, to reduce the incidence and severity of cancer All because it is so interwoven in who and what we are as self aware beings. And so whether a god or god exists or not is irrelevant BELIEVING is an evolved survival trait and gives humans distinct physical and emotional advantages which are measured and assessed by medical science.

Many cultural anthologists and psychologists argue that this commonality of belief in all humans allowed humans to live together in large groups not clan related, and to develop the first major examples of civic buildings because it was a psychological glue which mended the individualised internal perceptions of every human being Ie " you are not me but i can trust you because you THINK/ BELIEVE like me. No other animals share this understanding of a common internal belief, and thus remain separated by evolved biological drivers into small groups.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

This is where you are failing.

I Dont understand. This is factual modern knowledge across a number of disciplines It is not me saying it, and it is not a religious belief- driven thing. It comes from dozens of articles i have read by professionals working with children on the nature of human cognition, human psychology, and the construction of belief. It is important not because of it religious connotations, which is really just a significant side effect, but because it better helps us understand the nature of human self awareness and cognitive development, and thus of ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

Provide links.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

You must be speaking about why you are not an athesiest then , 'got God' in a foxhole did you ? because, of course, no way toy can speak for how others handle their issues in life.

Intersing theory if you trying to say this relates to others .... I had no idea atheists never had to meet challengs ( if they did , it would have already dissolved, according to you ... into thin air .... just like that ! )

Shall we ask them about that ?

Exactly! :yes: ( must confused the guy, considering my post to prove against post, and it's coming from a believer )

I wonder, where do some think they know someone else better than themselves? What is untenable, is actually being, thinking, experiencing someone else. Just being someone else's mind, how can someone else do that?

That is why I find things so confusing, people talk as if a common experience, but to my understanding, that cannot be the case can it?

I think you have a point there. Maybe it might just be 'close' to a common experience. I would think, that someone's personal experience, in hindsight is unique, but since it is talked about with a various individuals, it becomes........... kind of common. If that makes sense.

I have to say, that's a good way of putting it. It made me think.

Would that not simply be exaggerated emotions based on personal connections to certain things? Is this maybe why people claim to have spiritual experiences that lead them to God, when some luck has fallen their way and they do not know how else to explain it?

I catalogued my experiences as "spiritual" as they did sound like what other people describe as "spiritual" but it seems too strong a word for what is actually happening?

Maybe it is. :o I would think that's a good way of explaining it, for some. It could be, no amount of physical reaction could be accounted for, so something that's personal is struck deep, and yeah, I think that explodes into identifying that personal connection. ( who knows, maybe something physical or something biological is doing something in a reactionary way to exaggerate it.

Is that what I would call "character"? What makes a person, why they see thing a certain way, why two people can read the same thing and come up with different conclusions, why the outdoors appeal to some and not others, why some are bold and some are meek, which is all based on culture when scrutinised?
I don't know. I wouldn't think so. ( I could be wrong *shrugs* ) I think character would be best described within personality traits and behaviors, and thus stuck within the biological or physical. ( I think )

I do believe there are some who have additional 'senses' that partner their other well known senses. I think it's like some have the sixth sense. In which, could be explained as additional senses, brought on by the physical, but could happen to various individuals. Like here in these links ( I didn't know the stuff I got from these sites. :o )

http://www.cracked.com/article_19986_the-5-weirdest-sixth-senses-humans-have-without-knowing-it.html

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/07/humans-have-a-lot-more-than-five-senses/

So, I guess, some may have a 'soul sense' so to speak. ( While trying to find a site that I could reference for you, to better explain what I feel, I came across this site. I don't know if it best explains it, but in a sense, ((no pun intended! )) could show how it differs and be personal to some.

http://www.sensesofthesoul.ca/

Perhaps not, but there is one in every crowd ;)

Some people do seem to take things too far, and claim ridiculous things from a "spiritual world" and describe it as if an alternative Universe, then they hear about people hypothesising alternative Universes and think they have an answer, when they do not understand alternative Universes at all - or the theory behind them I should say.

I feel Mankind has had relgion forced upon us all as one person's original view that seemed like a good idea, and was made popular for belief by way of offering rewards - the afterlife, virgins, reincarnation, etc etc.

Yeah............. I think you're right. :);)

The way I see it, I could be one of those with those 'senses', and I have talked to, read about, and have friends like that. I even had a conversation with two fellow co-workers with the same thing, and it's like we understand each other when we talk of experiences. ( This is not to say, there is a sense of arrogance or a know it all, or self-pride type of thing, just that some people have a gift for something, while others have different other gifts for other things. )

The point I wanted to make is, that since what is more abundant and common in reality, is what is explained. There might be more of the unexplained of certain person's experiences, that will get a variety of people to sit up and take notice, there still isn't enough 'evidence' to show them that they have 'authority'.

I feel I have something, but it's kept within myself, while I understand, participate, and go along with the reasoning of the majority. ( I just hope we all see each other as unique and giving of each other and of ourselves. )

Those who think that they should 'take over' because of their 'senses', are not only fooling the populace, but are fooling themselves because the masses have every right to not take it it as face value.

I am still here so far........ :D
And so you should be. :yes:
It sounds like you walked the line, and perhaps still do to a point. What you have done from what I see is be honest to yourself and ask the questions that need asking, I think that the most helpful answers though have only become prevalent to the public within the last couple of decades. And that greater understanding has come from Atheism, and allowing for other things to allow the Universe to exist as opposed to the original ideal of an omnipotent creator - which really makes no sense whatsoever when we break that story down too. Why would a God create a Universe, and then bother only about the humans on this planet? Why would God create a Wasp that immobilizes prey so it's young can eat it alive? The harsh reality of life itself deposes the ideal of God.

I once was religious, but struggle to see why people would turn back, particularly is having read Hawking's, Greene's Dawkins and Krauss' works. To me that is the move from Phlogiston to Elements, I cannot see how an obviously flawed system that has been proven to be incorrect on so many occasions can still be taken seriously at all.

So would say you remained at "agnostic" as you remained in a position of "I just do not know" which is the most honest position, I just feel physics has well swung that balance of information to a tipping point.

I would think I do remain to be that. But I often have felt that could be that 'tipping point' or the base in which I coasted into my belief system. I would never deny the existence of logic of things or seeing reality, as point out by those authors you pointed out. But, :hmm: I find it interesting that you see me as 'asking questions', and I may have and still do. Actually, I wonder if we all ask questions, and we all answer them for ourselves in different levels.

I think, if I try to remember correctly my atheist days in my young adulthood, I think I became one, when I did ask those questions, and what was the norm in religion, didn't answer them.

Here's the kicker for my own path. Certain 'experiences' and things I did, then answered those questions for me in the long run. It also helped me answer them with the logical answers. I don't know if that makes sense to you, ( I would understand if it didn't ) but I guess that is how my 'soul sense' maybe helped me.

That is why I often say, my belief partners with me. It helps me be.............. logical? :D * looks sheepish *

Is he as big a clown as he seems?

Trump_meme_neg009-780x514.jpg

Oohhhh, I think so. My hubby has a different opinion. He's not entirely entranced with him, like some I know. ( Trump seems to have his 'groupies' because he says it as it is. )

He also got where he got, because of his business techniques, and other ventures. ( maybe why he feels he thinks he can run his mouth )

But, I really hope he doesn't become president. (granted, as I pointed out to some people in the real world, we did get an actor in the white house................ for two terms! :o:w00t: ) but I hope ............. and this is me, that rational takes hold soon.

I think you should feel grateful for being in your country and not that ......... exposed ............. to this.

Oy vey!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

Given the research dhows they develop the ideas/concepts before they can communicate this isnt possible.

BUT of course when they can communicate and can share ideas, this sort of answer is logical and common You cant REMEMBER constructing your own cognitive development before you are 2 so you cant remember how you constructed 'gods' to make sense of your environment. and most people cant remember before the y are 4. None the less, non verbal assessments with young children around the world show this is what they do. it explains how our minds are evolved and conditioned to think like this and thus why so many adults continue to think in the same way. A human being has to be quite strongly re- conditioned in order to STOP processing their environment using this sort of thinking.

Where are your links?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

If you cant be bothered trying to prove me wrong i will stick with the knowledge i gain from scientists/ and professionals .until someone does.

I just explained how myth and ritual are COMMON, while religious belief is INDIVIDUAL, That is what differentiates them A psychologist might explain to you that one of the problems with human communication is the individualisation/internalisation of ALL beliefs not just religious, so that often two people are speaking from completely different internal understandings, creating mis understandings and mistrust.

We learn myth and ritual and traditional belief from others. We construct our own god concepts and understandings and beliefs in our minds as we learn to think and speak and connect to our world. They exist in human children BEFORE they have the abilty to communicate with others, and hence to learn them from others..

Wow, you really need a link for this.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

And if those links are reputable to prove the point. *shrugs* ;)

Anyhow..................... :w00t:

I would suggest children are predisposed to easily believing anything the parent says,( I agree they beleive anything and everything when they are really young) but it is in part what they pick up in their enviornment and it is reinforced by the culture and parents so they pick up all kinds of things, typically what ever the parents, siblings, relatives, and culture support/ teach, my three kids when little raised without God did not just naturally come up with God on their own, the first Ideas of God and Jesus and other belief systems, came from their little friends who they played with.

The most commonly asked question as a parent to their kid is where did you hear that from and the kid will say Timmy told me or I heard Christopher's dad say that etc etc etc. this is parenting 101.

I wanted to go back to this post, because one, something came upon me, while reflecting, and two, a certain someone's post in reply to this, really made me go :no: in so many ways. (seriously, you can't remember constructing your own beliefs or such when you are a toddler, is because you're too young to do anything because of what one is aware of in their environment at that age. )

I find your post makes the most sense.

I wonder now, if a child grew up in an Atheist house hold, and in an environment that was all Atheistic, with no one speck of any belief systems what so ever, and end up in a foxhole, would they become a believer?

I would think............ uh............... no, they wouldn't. Where do they get the understanding of god, gods, or anything, to use as a basis to convince themselves that they believe, because they were scared?

Now, in my belief, I would believe there would be messages. But, it would end up to the person in the foxhole to translate it to either something of coincidence or a rational point of thinking that fear brought something in a chemical reaction to think things through and come to a more calming resolution, or think it's something else. Of course, what that something else is, could be unique. In the end, where is the evidence, in an Atheistic world one is brought up in (remember no belief at all came in contact) I don't think anyone can construct belief or turn to belief, when it's always been an atheistic point of view.

So in essence, Atheism is definitely a position which would make sense to be in. I see this, because I would think I have a logical way of looking at my belief, ( which could be something else ) and it calms me as well. :yes: And I wonder, if I have a belief, or an understanding of something in an unphysical way.

:hmm: Ach! Who knows. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grandpa Greenman

Trump_meme_neg009-780x514.jpg

Thanks, now I am going to have nightmares.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.