Is religion about to die out?

[Horta]

Oh, right. It's not discrimination unless you approve it as such.... That not believing in god is punishable by death is fine if they are not "secular" lol.

Religion is associated not only with discrimination, but with social problems right across the world.

What about pushing anti science to the 3rd world, encouraging them to shun the only known effective methods to stop the spread of AIDS, because god frowns on it? 

"Abstinence only" education for young people, resulting in high levels of unwanted pregnancy and STD's?

The massive ignorance that pushes for "intelligent design" in science classrooms?

The "christian charity' based welfare that is preferred in some places, that is a massive failure? As opposed to systems where the state takes full responsibility for the less fortunate and that are far more successful.

The massively higher levels of incarceration where religious belief is higher?

The wealth inequality that rises massively with increase in religion? Apparently a camel does fit through the eye of a needle.

If we keep going long enough (which we could), it still really won't make an impression on you at all, will it?

[Habitat]

There are no such problems in Australia that I can see. Migrate !

[Horta]

5 minutes ago, Habitat said:

There are no such problems in Australia that I can see. Migrate !

Lol.

Although I have yet to find anything I agree with you on, I enjoy your sense of humor!

[Habitat]

Be warned that in certain parts of Australia, not guzzling large quantities of beer is frowned upon !

[Elsupremo]

Now through meditation we come to realize that the sun is not a ball of fire but a light skinned colored girl with a huge Afro dressed in a long white robe holding a lantern whose light is the light of the sun. Now upon further investigation through meditation again, we discover the light of the sun that is actually coming from her lamp is her inside her own lantern holding another lantern. And the light that lantern, well you get the picture. So Liberty should be holding a lantern not a torch.

[Frank Merton]

I think 

1 hour ago, Horta said:

You are not that dumb. Despite your belief in the airy fairy.

How many openly non believing leaders has the US had? God is still used as an acceptable pretext for military invasion by modern "secular" leaders (US and England).

It seems fairly clear that Lincoln was not a believer, at least not in Christianity, but he kept his mouth shut.  

[Frank Merton]

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

Be warned that in certain parts of Australia, not guzzling large quantities of beer is frowned upon !

Alcoholics do not like non-drinkers for defensive reasons.  They want the excuse that everybody does it.

[Frank Merton]

4 minutes ago, Elsupremo said:

Now through meditation we come to realize that the sun is not a ball of fire but a light skinned colored girl with a huge Afro dressed in a long white robe holding a lantern whose light is the light of the sun. Now upon further investigation through meditation again, we discover the light of the sun that is actually coming from her lamp is her inside her own lantern holding another lantern. And the light that lantern, well you get the picture. So Liberty should be holding a lantern not a torch.

The sun is not a ball of fire and no physicist ever said it was.  Fire is a chemical process and the sun runs via nuclear processes.

[GoldenWolf]

10 hours ago, Habitat said:

You have to look at things on balance, you may imagine a utopia where organized religion never existed, in reality you might have had something much worse. after all, Stalin shut down the church, and the paradise you anticipate did not happen.

Life was crap for every country on the planet at the time.

[Elsupremo]

3 hours ago, Frank Merton said:

The sun is not a ball of fire and no physicist ever said it was.  Fire is a chemical process and the sun runs via nuclear processes.

It says in in the holy dribble that the Illuminati Satanist are so smart that they deceived the whole world and even the elect if that were possible. It's not possible to deceive the elect who talk directly to God. All that being said 2 questions remain: 1. Deceive the world about what? 2. Who are the elect?  500 years ago Illumnati agents Kepler and Coppernicus proposed the heliocentric theory, 500 years later Freemason astronauts get high enough in the air to verify that bull**** is true. The elect is anyone to whom God said. "That's bull****"

[GoldenWolf]

10 minutes ago, Elsupremo said:

It says in in the holy dribble that the Illuminati Satanist are so smart that they deceived the whole world and even the elect if that were possible. It's not possible to deceive the elect who talk directly to God. All that being said 2 questions remain: 1. Deceive the world about what? 2. Who are the elect?  500 years ago Illumnati agents Kepler and Coppernicus proposed the heliocentric theory, 500 years later Freemason astronauts get high enough in the air to verify that bull**** is true. The elect is anyone to whom God said. "That's bull****"

1.  We are on the path to destruction.

2.  One Percenter:

• 1-percenter

Etymology

one + percent +‎ -er. After Thomas Edison: "Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration." The motorcycling sense comes from a supposed 1948 statement by the American Motorcycle Association that ninety-nine percent of motorcyclists are good people enjoying a clean sport, and it is only one percent who are antisocial barbarians.

Noun

one-percenter ‎(plural one-percenters)

1. A member of the top one percent of a population by wealth, ability, etc. (same as the ninety-ninth percentile); especially in a society with high wealth inequality.  [quotations ▼]
2. (comedy) An esoteric joke which is unlikely to be appreciated by a general audience.
3. One who seeks or is granted honor far greater than their perceived contribution would warrant.
4. One who wishes to be recognized for an idea without putting forth the "ninety-nine percent perspiration" needed to implement that idea.
5. An outlaw biker, such as a member of the Hells Angels motorcycle club.  [quotations ▼]

[Space Commander Travis]

You've completely lost me now.

[Space Commander Travis]

43 minutes ago, Elsupremo said:

It says in in the holy dribble that the Illuminati Satanist are so smart that they deceived the whole world and even the elect if that were possible. It's not possible to deceive the elect who talk directly to God. All that being said 2 questions remain: 1. Deceive the world about what? 2. Who are the elect?  500 years ago Illumnati agents Kepler and Coppernicus proposed the heliocentric theory, 500 years later Freemason astronauts get high enough in the air to verify that bull**** is true. The elect is anyone to whom God said. "That's bull****"

Have you been experimenting with what happens if you eat some of those mushrooms you found in the woods?

[Forever Cursed]

The elect are like 40,000 teachers ......... but don't worry last I heard the J.W.'s had that all sewed up..........

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

2 hours ago, Forever Cursed said:

The elect are like 40,000 teachers ......... but don't worry last I heard the J.W.'s had that all sewed up..........

[GoldenWolf]

5 hours ago, Mystic Crusader said:

1.  We are on the path to destruction.

2.  One Percenter:

• 1-percenter

Noun

one-percenter ‎(plural one-percenters)

1. A member of the top one percent of a population by wealth, ability, etc. (same as the ninety-ninth percentile); especially in a society with high wealth inequality.  [quotations ▼]
2. (comedy) An esoteric joke which is unlikely to be appreciated by a general audience.
3. One who seeks or is granted honor far greater than their perceived contribution would warrant.
4. One who wishes to be recognized for an idea without putting forth the "ninety-nine percent perspiration" needed to implement that idea.
5. An outlaw biker, such as a member of the Hells Angels motorcycle club.  [quotations ▼]

Wanted to add something else to this:

The average ratio of Church attendee's to Church pastors is around 86:1 or 1.16%

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1600&bih=760&q=ratio+of+pastors+to+church+members&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjL7fjboo_OAhVm5YMKHeX2CAg4ChDVAgheKAA#q=what+is+the+average+ratio+of+church+members+to+pastors

Ironically, Lifetime prevalence of NPD is estimated at 1% in the general population.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Mystic Crusader

[Frank Merton]

6 hours ago, Otto von Pickelhaube said:

Have you been experimenting with what happens if you eat some of those mushrooms you found in the woods?

I think he's just experimenting with the ancient and revered art of leg-pulling.

[psyche101]

21 hours ago, Elsupremo said:

Generally in the Bible God reveals himself through dreams and visions. I experienced God while tripping on LSD in the 70s. For me, in that revelation God showed itself to be the Sun. Yes the sun in the sky.

You are way behind, Akhenaten must have tripped on the same LSD. He found the same thing in about 1330 BC. When he died, the Sun God was removed again. Not much of a God, it has to consult man for it's status. 

[psyche101]

7 hours ago, Elsupremo said:

It says in in the holy dribble that the Illuminati Satanist are so smart that they deceived the whole world and even the elect if that were possible. It's not possible to deceive the elect who talk directly to God. All that being said 2 questions remain: 1. Deceive the world about what? 2. Who are the elect?  500 years ago Illumnati agents Kepler and Coppernicus proposed the heliocentric theory, 500 years later Freemason astronauts get high enough in the air to verify that bull**** is true. The elect is anyone to whom God said. "That's bull****"

I forgot how fun being devilish was & i’m relapsing
So quick shorten my rehab stint that ****’s boring I need that hit
Got withdrawals I itch for it my skin crawls & my face has ticks

I'm rude and nasty , i’m super cocky, yeah who can stop me
These dudes’ll prolly spread rumors bout me **** Illuminati, I’ll ruin their party

Seth Sentry Hellboy.

[Mr Walker]

On 24/07/2016 at 3:24 AM, Horta said:

Not very convincing. Lots of empty claims once again, but in the end, who really knows?

It might seem like you have the ability to make choices, but look further for long enough, and an illusion might be apparent. The choice you make is the only one possible for you to make at that point. Thoughts aren't made by consciousness, they can appear consciously, but from somewhere else, from some other process. Experiments do show this. As to free will...

The concept is irreconcilable with logic.

It is irreconcilable with a naturalistic view of the world/universe.

It is unsupported by experimental evidence (which seems to imply the opposite).

It might be worth considering the possibility that we are no more than another species of apes, only with a developed intellect.

 

Next time, get his autograph!

 

As to the bolded/underlined, how is this done? Do they take it out and weigh it, then put it back? Use a tape measure? Generally it would involve, at some stage, measuring brain activity. Wouldn't that in itself tell you something?

Your post seems to have a rather pie in the sky, idealistic view of humanity. Is there another one somewhere lol? At any rate, intelligence doesn't confer free will and many people who've had a pet will see many of those qualities in them. Dogs, cats and even horses and the like can be beautiful, intelligent and noble creatures in their own way. They are obviously conscious, make decisions and considerations and are quite capable of communication, love, devotion and even selflessness and altruism. No doubt puss, adorable little thing that it is, would see humans not so much as "the bringer of meals" but as "the meal itself" were it as big as it's cousins, but we won't hold that against it. That's nature. We might have more intelligence in certain ways, but about the same free will underneath it all (none, most likely).

 

The claims are not empty. They are modern medical and scientific fact. there Is NO known mechanism which prevents the formation of free will or free action in a human being, thus NO evidence of any mechanism which might prevent us from forming intent and then acting without any form of physical restraint or barrier.   Data and information may INFORM an intent or action but cannot impede or prevent it.  Knowing you will die if you shoot yourself forms no mechanistic barrier which prevents you forming the intent or attempting the action.

 Why on earth d you think that at any one point you only have one choice?  Logic and physics demonstrates that there are MANY  choices  Hence there ids a multitude of possible or potential futures not just one. Theoretically this is part of quantum physics although in my opinion once an action is taken in this linear time line, it solidifies into an irreversible solid thread unlike in the quantum model where it may create a multiverse effect.   UNTIL you act you can change your mind and many actions are possible in every instant of time by every individuals on earth, creating a HUGE range of possible futures. . This is a known effect  of the nature of linear time.  Do you honestly believe your life is preordained and that you cant shape it, and make it, according to your will?  All the evidence contradicts such a view. 

Thoughts are electro chemical impulses ( both individual and patterning throughout the brain). With modern technology we can not only decode such patterns and read them,  but we can even record words and images directly from the brain. Hence we can control machines using nothing more than thought to direct a machine interface. However it is clear tha t due to the nature of the human brain and mind and especially due to language both direct and abstract, we can SHAPE and create the processes of ur mind  A human being can eliminate fear anger etc through will and discipline of the mind, and can certainly  form creative, abstract intents, eg to kiss or not kiss a beautiful woman/man, or to feel happy or sad., and then direct the body to make these take place. 

I don't see this as an optimisitic view. It is a realistic one and confers both advantages and responsibilities on a human being.

 Other animals cant form free will UNLESS they have the same degree of self aware intelligence as a human being No amimal has more awreness than a 4 year old human  Almost no animal can see linear time as an abstract concept and thus be able to visualise consequence They dont have the abstract concept of self and non self and do not form abstract concepts of beauty love etc ( This requires much more sophisticated language skills tha any non human possesses  They don't have the abilty to imagine and only a limited abilty to extrapolate down a linear time stream to predict consequences and make informed choices. ( there is ONE  non human primate individual (with a long association with humans)  which has shown the abilty to do this in storing up rocks to throw at rivals at some later date.   Most, if not all, are driven by genetic and biological drivers and conditioned via evolution. So they can not make  conscious free willed choices although they can be conditioned or trained.  About 50000 years ago (or perhaps a little more, because the progress while rapid in evolutionary terms took some time) something happened in human evolution which gave us these skills and abilities, and changed the future of humanity for ever. 

 

No non human animal is capable of love or altruism in the way a human is, because, to be so capable, an entity must be able to form and understand the CONCEPT of such an action.  Unless it is a  conscious choice, it is not altruism or love as humans know it,  just some programmed biological imperative. It is not altruistic if it is programmed into a species, only where it is a self conscious choice to do something with no expectation of any benefit or reward. A lot of apparent altruism in non humans is actually species advantageous  or gives an advantage to the animal helping others.  

Ps i just read in the paper today  that humans who are altruistic also get more sex, but i don't know what the causation for this link is .   I do know that, if you act  apparently altruistically, in the expectation of improving your sex life,then you are not being altruistic at all. 

[Mr Walker]

On 25/07/2016 at 0:59 PM, Horta said:

God requires people to believe in him. It is not unreasonable therefore, that he demonstrates that he does actually have an existence. Then we could take it from there. It's not like it (religion) hasn't already been quite disastrous.

You've just captured one good  argument why god does not manifest universally,  inside your  own statement.  IE god requires people to believe in him Belief is an act of faith without a shred of evidence to act upon.

If he demonstrated his existence, belief would be impossible, as would disbelief. No one can believe the sun exists and no one can disbelieve that it does.

Knowledge would change the relationship between man and god and might actually diminish gods authority in the world ( I know it does for me . 

It is like a parent saying to a teenager, " I want you to do this because you have faith in me, not because I can force you to do so"

. By acting in faith we confirm our independence from god  but, at the same time, our choice to follow him, through faith and confidence in him. 

In reality how would a universal manifestation of god's presence solve anything?  Are you supposing god might say, "well you jews got it right but everyone else is terribly mistaken."   or  what would happen if god said,  "Look you can worship me in any way you like, but you have to stop being so selfish, materialistic  and destructive. "   

[+Sherapy]

On July 10, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Habitat said:

I have outlined why there is no openly available "objective basis". In the same way people do not whisper in your ear if the intent is for the message to be public. I have seen more than enough to convince me there is no doubt. As for mechanisms, I don't bother speculating, it is certainly not conventionally explicable.

Oops

[+Sherapy]

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

You've just captured one good  argument why god does not manifest universally,  inside your  own statement.  IE god requires people to believe in him Belief is an act of faith without a shred of evidence to act upon.

If he demonstrated his existence, belief would be impossible, as would disbelief. No one can believe the sun exists and no one can disbelieve that it does.

Knowledge would change the relationship between man and god and might actually diminish gods authority in the world ( I know it does for me . 

It is like a parent saying to a teenager, " I want you to do this because you have faith in me, not because I can force you to do so"

. By acting in faith we confirm our independence from god  but, at the same time, our choice to follow him, through faith and confidence in him. 

In reality how would a universal manifestation of god's presence solve anything?  Are you supposing god might say, "well you jews got it right but everyone else is terribly mistaken."   or  what would happen if god said,  "Look you can worship me in any way you like, but you have to stop being so selfish, materialistic  and destructive. "   

For your perusal: there is an interesting and odd quality/ element to implicit memory ( in particular; the area of the brain that is fully concious/ aware; in other words, it plays a part in belief formation) memories create mental models, these mental models can show up as feelings in our bodies, emotions or perceptual biases in our conscious awareness. As the neuropsych my friend sees explained to me, we do not know how biased we are to the past, oh we tend to argue ( me too) passionately that our beliefs and reactions are based in sound present good judgment or faith etc. etc. and if you have any experience with Alzheimer's you can see this aspect of the human mind clearly. Faith is similar for ex: your last quote is an implicit memory this is one way it shows up " look you can worship however you like, but you have to stop being selfish, materialistic, and destructive." This is a powerful belief for you and it shows itself in many of your posts. So you are not acting on "faith" you are acting on implicit memory. Just a fun add too. 

[Elsupremo]

16 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I forgot how fun being devilish was & i’m relapsing
So quick shorten my rehab stint that ****’s boring I need that hit
Got withdrawals I itch for it my skin crawls & my face has ticks

I'm rude and nasty , i’m super cocky, yeah who can stop me
These dudes’ll prolly spread rumors bout me **** Illuminati, I’ll ruin their party

Seth Sentry Hellboy.

Well God plays games, why can't I? As a matter of factoid, reminds me of a dream I had about Brainiac, who was a villain in the old Superman Comics. Now if you are fan of Superman comics from the 60s when I was a kid you remember that the android Brainiac shrunk an entire city down to put it in a bottle. Major hint people. Anyway, in my dream I wake up on an odd plan of existence where Braniac greeted me with the question, "What's it like being human? I was getting ready to tell the truth as I am know to do, being stupid as I am, but I stopped and for the first time in my life I felt a benevolent hatred for another life form or maybe it was jealousy that Braniac had not experienced how ridiculous humans are and I hated him for it, so I lied and said barely able to keep the smile of my face, "Not bad". I woke up immediately laughing my butt off saying, "Poor, poor Braniac soon he will be able to appreciate the greatest cosmic joke of all time and I will have an enemy for eternity.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

Habitat: 

You have to look at things on balance, you may imagine a utopia where organized religion never existed, in reality you might have had something much worse. after all, Stalin shut down the church, and the paradise you anticipate did not happen.

In some sense, I can see your point. In another, I'm not so dead set that it's all that great be it under one religious rule or total Atheist rule. I do feel, that secular rule, with the freedom of practicing subjectively religion or no religion, tends for me to see that is more in a paradise outlook, then one rule governments and it's people. I feel that Atheism as a sole forced outlook didn't work out as I see Catholicism, Islam, and the sort in the areas where they are the sole legal belief and regime, they either failed, or show how they fail now. 

Frankly, we are all lucky, to believe or not believe without ramifications.

Elsupremo:

Now through meditation we come to realize that the sun is not a ball of fire but a light skinned colored girl with a huge Afro dressed in a long white robe holding a lantern whose light is the light of the sun. Now upon further investigation through meditation again, we discover the light of the sun that is actually coming from her lamp is her inside her own lantern holding another lantern. And the light that lantern, well you get the picture. So Liberty should be holding a lantern not a torch.  

I'm not knocking meditation, and I do it from time to time. And I feel, it helps me. Using it to prove things in the objective sense, that I don't see as the common sense thing to do. Are you saying that society came to it's conclusions of things by meditating? Wasn't it actually scientific and logical thinking and actual investigating and learning that gave society that knowledge? 

Frank Merton: 

Alcoholics do not like non-drinkers for defensive reasons.  They want the excuse that everybody does it.

And there happens to be those, who cannot stand the taste of beer,........................ but is a lover of various alcoholic beverages though.  Frankly, the remark about not guzzling beer is frowned upon, I find with distaste and insensitive like I found the commercial on cheese, having a town react negatively to a prospective politician who claimed he hates cheese. I do love most cheeses myself, ( well except blue cheese ) so that wouldn't be me. But as someone who has some issues with eating and being forced to eat some things, I will get very  toward those who think that they can look down on someone who cannot eat or drink what they do. 

Maybe, this might be a good point to make, since it seems that there is negative ramifications to still pushing those to do things, believe in the most point of what this thread is about, and not allowing freedom to believe or something else you want and still be respected for it. Kind of like one customer said to me about not wanting Oprah telling her what to read, when talking about the Oprah book suggestions.