"And no religion, too"

[Dr.Drock]

I'm not talking about the species, or a people, culture, group, or community. I'm talking about you, and the shortcomings that make YOU only half a man.

Because I don't believe in a god, a view shared by hundreds of millions of people, who you know very few of yet have zero moral issue with categorically making a negative stereotype about them.

I didn't mention "a god," and I believe I told you before that I know many people who don't believe in God. Are you being a liar again? I guess that's what liars do...

I've never lied once on this board, prove me wrong.

Ok humor me with I'm sure with your brilliant intellect and spot on moral compass, what about me makes me "half a man"?

 

[FuelRod]

Proof?

I don't have time to google every War in history, the Crusades, Terrorist attack, etc.
Do your own homework.

I'm sorry, did you say you were completely full of shit? Ok, got it.

Were you absent the 7 years you were supposed to be taught about world history?
Or are you still in grade 5?

 

[Unkotare]

Because I don't believe in a god, a view shared by hundreds of millions of people, who you know very few of yet have zero moral issue with categorically making a negative stereotype about them.

I didn't mention "a god," and I believe I told you before that I know many people who don't believe in God. Are you being a liar again? I guess that's what liars do...

I've never lied once on this board, prove me wrong.

Ok humor me with I'm sure with your brilliant intellect and spot on moral compass, what about me makes me "half a man"?

We've already covered this. Do you have memory problems?

 

[Unkotare]

I don't have time to google every War in history, the Crusades, Terrorist attack, etc.
Do your own homework.

I'm sorry, did you say you were completely full of shit? Ok, got it.

Were you absent the 7 years you were supposed to be taught about world history?
Or are you still in grade 5?

Is this your way of saying you cannot support your claim and are full of shit? Ok, got it.

 

[catzmeow]

I'm happy that Unkotare apparently likes me, but saddened by the fact that Unkotare apparently dislikes Fuel.

 

[Unkotare]

I'm happy that Unkotare apparently likes me, but saddened by the fact that Unkotare apparently dislikes Fuel.

It was a great band.

 

[FuelRod]

I'm sorry, did you say you were completely full of shit? Ok, got it.

Were you absent the 7 years you were supposed to be taught about world history?
Or are you still in grade 5?

Is this your way of saying you cannot support your claim and are full of shit? Ok, got it.

Are you arguing more persons have not been killed in the name of God in world history or that it is God's fault?

 

[daveman]

Can't tell if srs.

Am.

Then you fail.

Not really.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I didn't mention "a god," and I believe I told you before that I know many people who don't believe in God. Are you being a liar again? I guess that's what liars do...

I've never lied once on this board, prove me wrong.

Ok humor me with I'm sure with your brilliant intellect and spot on moral compass, what about me makes me "half a man"?

We've already covered this. Do you have memory problems?

Yep I have memory problems.

I've never lied once on this board, prove me wrong.

Ok humor me with I'm sure with your brilliant intellect and spot on moral compass, what about me makes me "half a man"?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Man Made God | Science and religion: God didn't make man; man made gods - Los Angeles Times

Good editorial.

Beyond psychological adaptations and mechanisms, scientists have discovered neurological explanations for what many interpret as evidence of divine existence. Canadian psychologist Michael Persinger, who developed what he calls a "god helmet" that blocks sight and sound but stimulates the brain's temporal lobe, notes that many of his helmeted research subjects reported feeling the presence of "another." Depending on their personal and cultural history, they then interpreted the sensed presence as either a supernatural or religious figure. It is conceivable that St. Paul's dramatic conversion on the road to Damascus was, in reality, a seizure caused by temporal lobe epilepsy.

The better we understand human psychology and neurology, the more we will uncover the underpinnings of religion. Some of them, like the attachment system, push us toward a belief in gods and make departing from it extraordinarily difficult. But it is possible.


We can be better as a species if we recognize religion as a man-made construct. We owe it to ourselves to at least consider the real roots of religious belief, so we can deal with life as it is, taking advantage of perhaps our mind's greatest adaptation: our ability to use reason.

Imagine that.

Some people who believe in God and the creation stories would call many of the comments in that article Bigoted against their religion.

 

[Foxfyre]

[Trying to be gentle here. You either had a relationship with Christ or you didn't. If you did, you can't just make that going away by deciding you don't believe in Christ any more than you can make me go away by deciding you don't believe I exist in any form or you can make whatever relationship you have had with a spouse or children or friends or relatives or coworkers or even a casual acquaintance go away just because you decide they don't exist any more.

You can see how illogical it is to say you had a relationship with Christ but that he doesn't exist? Obviously, if you believe he doesn't exist, you never had a relationship at all. You were simply going through the motions and 'doing Church' and stuff.

I know that this is your belief, but you're incorrect. I understand that your paradigm is predicated on these views, but you're positing a false dichotomy. The OP is about the fact that many people have ecstatic religious experiences, in a variety of settings, with a variety of deities, and that this is a reflection of a condition within our brain, and not an external entity. You are willing to recognize only those ecstatic experiences which occur within your own paradigms. I would say that they are all the same.

In my experience, I realized that the religion (Christianity) was illogical, that there was zero evidence for it, and that it wasn't morally or intellectually coherent. I lost faith in the religion, and I lost faith in the existence of a savior.

However, since losing faith in the architecture of the religion itself, I've subsequently and often repeated the feelings of connection to a "higher power." I had those feelings at a rock concert, I've had them in my backyard, and I often have them on my drive to work. In short, the emotional connection that you routinely experience with "christ" is something I experience all the time, in spite of my loss of belief in the existence of Christ. I still feel connected to a higher power, I still have those feelings all the time, but I have zero confidence in the doctrines of the Christian religion.

That "relationship" is not predicated on believing in Christ, the Christian religion, or the Christian dogmas and doctrines, in spite of your views.

I'm not an atheist, though. I'm simply non-religious. I exercise that personal connection to the divine all the time, but I have zero interest in church or imaginary religious figures like Jesus Christ.

p.s. There's a huge, obvious difference between real living people and invisible deities. I'm going to hope that you're able to see it.

I understand why people don't believe in God or Christ or hold different religious beliefs that I hold. But I was not referring to that in my remarks specifically to you.

Let's try again.

In an earlier post you insisted that you had experience with a relationship with Jesus Christ. And now you no longer believe that Jeus Christ exists. That is illogical.

That is not much different than saying that you knew your mother but you no longer believe that she existed.

So, in order to be logical, you need to amend your original statement to say that you once THOUGHT you had a relationship with Jesus Christ but you have since determined that you did not and you don't believe he existed or that he has relationships with anybody now.

But that brings me back to the point I was making all along that it is illogical to assume that experiences claimed by others are false simply because we haven't had them or don't want to believe them.

 

[catzmeow]

In an earlier post you insisted that you had experience with a relationship with Jesus Christ. And now you no longer believe that Jeus Christ exists. That is illogical.

That is not much different than saying that you knew your mother but you no longer believe that she existed.

There is evidence of my mother's existence. That's a huge difference.

There is zero evidence of your imaginary friend.

What you call a relationship with Jesus Christ is an emotional/internal experience that can be duplicated by people in relationships with other deities and in settings that are non-religious. This "connection to the divine" results from the stimulation of a particular part of your brain. This sensation can even be created in a laboratory, utilizing electrons hooked to your scalp.

This is a verifiable phenomenon. Feel free to read up on it.

Wired 7.11: This Is Your Brain on God

But that brings me back to the point I was making all along that it is illogical to assume that experiences claimed by others are false simply because we haven't had them or don't want to believe them.

I don't believe that your experiences are false. In fact, I think they're very real. I've had similar experiences, both as a Christian, and subsequently, as a non-believer.

What I don't believe is that your experiences verify the existence of Jesus Christ or an invisible, all-powerful, omnipresent and all-knowing deity. Believers in all kinds of religions have those same experiences, and the experiences thus cannot be used to prove the veracity of an individual religion, because they are not isolated to a single religion. Those experiences are non-discriminatory. They occur for Hindus, and Pagans, and Buddhists and Christians and Jews. You experience what you believe to be Jesus Christ, but I guarantee that Sunni experiences what he believes to be Allah in a very similar way.

The only thing that your experiences verify is the existence of those experiences. They can't be used to prove the truth of your dogmas.

 

[Intense]

[Trying to be gentle here. You either had a relationship with Christ or you didn't. If you did, you can't just make that going away by deciding you don't believe in Christ any more than you can make me go away by deciding you don't believe I exist in any form or you can make whatever relationship you have had with a spouse or children or friends or relatives or coworkers or even a casual acquaintance go away just because you decide they don't exist any more.

You can see how illogical it is to say you had a relationship with Christ but that he doesn't exist? Obviously, if you believe he doesn't exist, you never had a relationship at all. You were simply going through the motions and 'doing Church' and stuff.

I know that this is your belief, but you're incorrect. I understand that your paradigm is predicated on these views, but you're positing a false dichotomy. The OP is about the fact that many people have ecstatic religious experiences, in a variety of settings, with a variety of deities, and that this is a reflection of a condition within our brain, and not an external entity. You are willing to recognize only those ecstatic experiences which occur within your own paradigms. I would say that they are all the same.

In my experience, I realized that the religion (Christianity) was illogical, that there was zero evidence for it, and that it wasn't morally or intellectually coherent. I lost faith in the religion, and I lost faith in the existence of a savior.

However, since losing faith in the architecture of the religion itself, I've subsequently and often repeated the feelings of connection to a "higher power." I had those feelings at a rock concert, I've had them in my backyard, and I often have them on my drive to work. In short, the emotional connection that you routinely experience with "christ" is something I experience all the time, in spite of my loss of belief in the existence of Christ. I still feel connected to a higher power, I still have those feelings all the time, but I have zero confidence in the doctrines of the Christian religion.

That "relationship" is not predicated on believing in Christ, the Christian religion, or the Christian dogmas and doctrines, in spite of your views.

I'm not an atheist, though. I'm simply non-religious. I exercise that personal connection to the divine all the time, but I have zero interest in church or imaginary religious figures like Jesus Christ.

p.s. There's a huge, obvious difference between real living people and invisible deities. I'm going to hope that you're able to see it.

I understand why people don't believe in God or Christ or hold different religious beliefs that I hold. But I was not referring to that in my remarks specifically to you.

Let's try again.

In an earlier post you insisted that you had experience with a relationship with Jesus Christ. And now you no longer believe that Jeus Christ exists. That is illogical.

That is not much different than saying that you knew your mother but you no longer believe that she existed.

So, in order to be logical, you need to amend your original statement to say that you once THOUGHT you had a relationship with Jesus Christ but you have since determined that you did not and you don't believe he existed or that he has relationships with anybody now.

But that brings me back to the point I was making all along that it is illogical to assume that experiences claimed by others are false simply because we haven't had them or don't want to believe them.

Now that is a reasonable argument.

 

[Intense]

In an earlier post you insisted that you had experience with a relationship with Jesus Christ. And now you no longer believe that Jeus Christ exists. That is illogical.

That is not much different than saying that you knew your mother but you no longer believe that she existed.

There is evidence of my mother's existence. That's a huge difference.

There is zero evidence of your imaginary friend.

What you call a relationship with Jesus Christ is an emotional/internal experience that can be duplicated by people in relationships with other deities and in settings that are non-religious. This "connection to the divine" results from the stimulation of a particular part of your brain. This sensation can even be created in a laboratory, utilizing electrons hooked to your scalp.

This is a verifiable phenomenon. Feel free to read up on it.

Wired 7.11: This Is Your Brain on God

Comes off as vindictive, bitter, and cutting. Just calling them as I see them. Now Play Ball!

 

[catzmeow]

Comes off as vindictive, bitter, and cutting. Just calling them as I see them. Now Play Ball!

I know it's hard to come to the realization that you aren't a unique little snowflake in this big universe. There, there.

 

[Foxfyre]

In an earlier post you insisted that you had experience with a relationship with Jesus Christ. And now you no longer believe that Jeus Christ exists. That is illogical.

That is not much different than saying that you knew your mother but you no longer believe that she existed.

There is evidence of my mother's existence. That's a huge difference.

There is zero evidence of your imaginary friend.

What you call a relationship with Jesus Christ is an emotional/internal experience that can be duplicated by people in relationships with other deities and in settings that are non-religious. This "connection to the divine" results from the stimulation of a particular part of your brain. This sensation can even be created in a laboratory, utilizing electrons hooked to your scalp.

This is a verifiable phenomenon. Feel free to read up on it.

Wired 7.11: This Is Your Brain on God

But that brings me back to the point I was making all along that it is illogical to assume that experiences claimed by others are false simply because we haven't had them or don't want to believe them.

I don't believe that your experiences are false. In fact, I think they're very real. I've had similar experiences, both as a Christian, and subsequently, as a non-believer.

What I don't believe is that your experiences verify the existence of Jesus Christ or an invisible, all-powerful, omnipresent and all-knowing deity. Believers in all kinds of religions have those same experiences, and the experiences thus cannot be used to prove the veracity of an individual religion, because they are not isolated to a single religion. Those experiences are non-discriminatory. They occur for Hindus, and Pagans, and Buddhists and Christians and Jews. You experience what you believe to be Jesus Christ, but I guarantee that Sunni experiences what he believes to be Allah in a very similar way.

The only thing that your experiences verify is the existence of those experiences. They can't be used to prove the truth of your dogmas.

All I'm saying my friend is that if there is zero evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ, then you could not have had the experience of a relationship with Him. You earlier said that you did have that experience.

THAT is what makes your argument illogical.

This is what you said in Post #159:

I guess you missed the part where I had a relationship with Christ for many years, and didn't wish to stop believing. But, thanks for playing.

This is the shit that gets annoying with you people. You are so busy parroting back your paradigms that you simply don't listen.

 

[Sky Dancer]

It's illogical to believe in God and Jesus when there is no empirical evidence of either.

You have faith, but so what?

 

[catzmeow]

All I'm saying my friend is that if there is zero evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ, then you could not have had the experience of a relationship with Him. You earlier said that you did have that experience.

THAT is what makes your argument illogical.

Everything in my upbringing, education, and experience told me that the experience I was having was with Jesus Christ, and that I was having a relationship with Jesus Christ. When I accepted Jesus Christ into my heart at age 6, I had the experience. I continued to have that emotional connection throughout my teenage and adult years.

I was indoctrinated, from my childhood, with the belief that this experience was "a relationship with Jesus Christ."

I know that you want to believe that what you experience in connecting to the divine is unique and demonstrates a relationship with your deity.

My point to you is that this experience, which you use to "prove" your faith, isn't isolated to Christianity. Many people, in many religions, and outside of religions, also report similar experiences. We don't know enough about the brain to know what causes them, but we do know that they can be manufactured. I've had them myself--in completely irreligious settings, which include my back yard and an Incubus concert.

What you call a relationship with Jesus Christ, and believe is unique to Christianity, and thus exists to serve as proof of the veracity of your faith--isn't unique.

There are many scientists, for instance, who suspect that Mohammed was an epileptic. Perhaps Paul was, as well. It would explain his experiences on the road to Damascus. We don't know where religion comes from, but the odds are good that it's something that comes FROM US, from inside our brains, and not from some sort of external connection to the divine (because it isn't limited to a single deity or religion).

Do I doubt your experiences? Nope. I believe with all my heart that you are experiencing something, because I too experience it. What I doubt is that it's a relationship with a mythological person.

 

[Intense]

It's illogical to believe in God and Jesus when there is no empirical evidence of either.

You have faith, but so what?

You are free to believe or not believe, that sounds pretty rational to me. No pressure.
Can you prove Time exists? Good luck with that.

Cause and Effect? Karma? Right? Wrong? 1+1=2? The shortest distance between two points is a straight line? Even math and science are rooted in Theory. Just saying.

 

[Sky Dancer]

It's illogical to believe in God and Jesus when there is no empirical evidence of either.

You have faith, but so what?

You are free to believe or not believe, that sounds pretty rational to me. No pressure.
Can you prove Time exists? Good luck with that.

Cause and Effect? Karma? Right? Wrong? 1+1=2? The shortest distance between two points is a straight line? Even math and science are rooted in Theory. Just saying.

A lot of Buddhist sutras are debated by khenpos and found to be true, logically.

It's not my area or lineage. The Gelukpa are famous for it.

Beliefs, to me, are things I have confidence in, that I've tested in my own experience. It's like "heart knowledge".