Definitive Proof that GOD Exists?

[hobelim]

lol, we are sick because we dare to disagree with secularist dogma, in their view anyway..

No you are sick because you are irrational.

lol, you secularists used to say that irrationality was due to ignorance, but now its a mental illness? Guess that was so last century, or previously last century to this one, roflmao

You only say I am irrational because I disagree with you. If it were true that I were irrational and you rational, yo wouldn't really have to say it explicitly, you could demonstrate it through a discussion..

No you are irrational because you believe that a human being was God and that you can be a sinner, according to the very scriptures you claim to believe in, dead, yet justified by faith in lies.

THATS IRRATIONAL.

The mental illness is the cognitive dissonance in your inept attempts at resolving what you have always known to be true about reality - dead people stay dead, a human being cannot be God, people don't walk on water, feed 5000 people fish sandwiches out of thin air, or float up into the sky - with your professed belief that scripture is a literal record of the historical truth, an impossibility. .


That's why you are such an angry and unpleasant person. You may fool other people within your pretentious circles that you are 'saved' but you will always know that you are simply an acceptance freak, a confused cowardly and false person, a balless wonder with no self respect or even the slightest trace of integrity.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No you are sick because you are irrational.

lol, you secularists used to say that irrationality was due to ignorance, but now its a mental illness? Guess that was so last century, or previously last century to this one, roflmao

You only say I am irrational because I disagree with you. If it were true that I were irrational and you rational, yo wouldn't really have to say it explicitly, you could demonstrate it through a discussion..

No you are irrational because you believe that a human being was God

But I don't believe that.

and that you can be a sinner, according to the very scriptures you claim to believe in, dead, yet justified by faith in lies.

But I don't believe that.

I don't believe lies can save me from anything.

THATS IRRATIONAL.

But I don't believe the things you claim I do. So you are the one being irrational, and dishonest, and a jack ass.

The mental illness is the cognitive dissonance in your inept attempts at resolving what you have always known to be true about reality - dead people stay dead, a human being cannot be God, people don't walk on water, feed 5000 people fish sandwiches out of thin air, or float up into the sky -

If God can do the Big Bang, you really think 5000 ******* fish is just way beyond Him? lol, now that is irrational.

with you professed belief that scripture is a literal record of the historical truth, an impossibility. .

But I don't believe that. The scripture is a collection of many types of literary forms, some meant to be taken literally and some not. 1&2 Kings is literal, but Psalms and Revelations are not. Get it?

That's why you are such an angry and unpleasant person.

Lol you are confused. I am not angry at you, I just have a low regard for your bullshit and completely no concern for what you think of my disregard. You are an ass of a fool and you like to pretend you are something more than an average person with apparently an expensive edumacashun but they failed to teach you how to think critically. So don't shoot the messenger, fucktard.

You may fool other people within your pretentious circles but you will always know that you are simply an acceptance freak, a confused cowardly and false person, a balless wonder with no self respect or even the slightest trace of integrity.

I have no pretentious circles. roflmao

One of these days you may wake up and weep for weeks realizing what an ignoramus you have been, but try to remember that the saving grace is that you finally woke up.

 

[Tuatara]

I have experienced spiritual things that have removed any trace of doubt in my mind that God exists and that He intervenes in this universe. I wont bother to tell any of it to you as it is unbelievable unless you experience it for yourself.

But the evidence is there; what isn't there is your willingness to think you might be wrong about all of it.

Which god are you talking about? Did he introduce himself? Did he call himself by name. Might he be a god from the past like Zeus or Ra. Maybe it was a god from the future like Lawrence or Zydor. How did he intervene. Did you actually see him throw a lightning bolt down or did he answer a prayer? (even though millions of other prayers go unanswered). Have you been on medication lately. Do you suffer from schizophrenia or other mental disorders? Have you been taking hallucigenics during these times? What exactly did you experience? A voice, a sighting, an image in a piece of toast, something you can't explain? What exactly are these spiritual things you have experienced?

 

[Boss]

It doesn't make sense to you because you can't comprehend spiritual nature. There is tons and tons of spiritual evidence to prove spiritual existence definitively.

Sorry but there is zero evidence. Please provide this evidence.

You won't accept it as evidence because it is spiritual and you don't believe in spiritual nature. It's presented in the OP argument, have you read that yet? Or are you a knee-jerk disbeliever who just popped in to interject your profound wisdom? Look... it's very simple, there IS proof, definitive proof, that God does exist (exists in spiritual state of existence). The proof is spiritual in nature, therefore, you reject it because you don't accept spiritual nature. You are demanding for me to show you PHYSICAL evidence and proof, and as I said in the OP, I can't do that for a spiritual entity. If I could, it would be a PHYSICAL entity. Are you grasping this yet?

We can even use physical science to confirm that something is going on, humans are definitely making connection to something, they've been doing it for all of human existence in some form. If there weren't anything there, or it was a product of imagination, the attribute would have diminished over time, especially with the advent of science, and it hasn't....still our most defining attribute as a species.

Religious people ignore science and facts. They hold on to their religion because someone they love and trusr (parents) told them it was true. For most they didn't experience any spiritual existence. Not everyone who is religious has claimed to seen god or talked to god or any kind of spiritual experience.

I haven't said a thing about "religious" people, we're talking about spiritual nature. Are you having trouble with the two distinctly different things? Where did I say anything about "seeing god" or "talking to god?" Again, you are completely not comprehending spiritual nature here. I can't help you with that, you seem to be completely ignorant. You want to conflate religion and spirituality, imagine people talking to and seeing invisible beings, and no telling what else. All I ever made an argument for, was human spiritual connection. That is completely different from imagining things that aren't there, or various religious teachings.

Other spieces of animals do not have the concept to create imaginery beings. Even today many religious people show their acceptance of a god because they can't deal with their own mortality.

Humans don't have the concept to do that either, that's why this isn't what happened. If God were product of imagination, God would have ceased to be a factor the first couple of thousand years, as soon as other upper primates who didn't need a crutch, began surpassing humans in nature. You've dreamed up an illogical theory that defies Darwin, if you believe that God is merely human imagination.

Humans can't deal with their own mortality because we are spiritually aware. This is why you don't find other examples in nature, of things grappling with their mortality. Again, your Darwinist scientific theories are on the side of spirituality causing the fear here. We see no evidence of this fear anywhere else in nature, and if it were natural, we would.

Yes they do. You even provided detail when people used gods to explain why the rain fell and thunder and lightning.

Sorry, they didn't "use gods to explain" anything, or we would have never discovered it scientifically. They believed that it was caused by spiritual nature. This was because they had spiritual connection, which prompted this belief and others. It's more powerful evidence to how well-connected humans are to something greater than self.

Again they do not have the cognitive concept, a point you keep ignoring.

You are aware that many upper primates have just as much cognitive capacity as humans, and some should have more, given their larger cerebral cortex? So why didn't 'evolution' take on them? How did humans get so lucky? Our seemingly 'advanced' cognitive ability, stems from our ability to spiritually connect, which no other animals we know of are doing, or ever have done. Again, Darwin would tell you that these two things are likely related, and you understand that, but you are adopting an illogical and anti-scientific viewpoint to assume that humans created spiritual connection. There is no evidence of any other living thing, ever inventing something imaginary, which is fundamental to the advancement of the species. And spirituality is obviously fundamental to humans, as it is our most defining attribute, and present in 95% of the species since existence. Billions and billions of testimonials from people who profess great things through spiritual beliefs. Don't give a shit if you hate Christians, that is a fact that can't be ignored in any objective evaluation.

As I said once something is instilled in you at a very young age over and over again it's very hard to break your mind free from these constraints. Just ask atheists who were brought up religiously. For some it took them quite awhile to reject god or religion. They will even admit they were not using reason or even questiong these beliefs.

You're back to talking about 'religious beliefs' again, and I will again state for the record, I am not a religious person, I don't subscribe to any organized religion. I don't believe that God is a "deity" or that God has humanistic attributes. I don't think God cares whether you believe or not, nor does God care what a despicable low-life person you aspire to be. God doesn't "care" because that is a human emotion, and God is a spiritual entity. I don't know if there is heaven(s) or hell(s), it's possible to have multiple dimensions in the same universe.

I think that every human is born a spiritual creature, and becomes an Atheist. I also think that most Atheists, despite their vociferous protests to the contrary, are spiritual as well. Some have simply adopted "science" as their spiritual foundation. This works in a society where a majority of the species are spiritually connected, humans can get by without practicing spirituality, they simply substitute science. Of course, they are mostly narrow minded idiots who can't think outside the box for anything. And over time, the lack of a legitimate spiritual connection, generally leads to drug abuse, alcoholism, depression, suicide, mental illness, liberalism... a whole lot of problems.

But it has changed. No longer do people believe in Ra or Thor or Zeus. These gods were just as real to those who believed them just as Yahweh is real to other today.. New gods replace the old ones. New religions were forced on new generations. Also by your argument all these other gods are just as real as the christian/judaism god.

You're still talking about RELIGION. My argument doesn't have a thing to do with Religion. Well... it does in the sense that; Religions are a manifestation of human spiritual connection, and help to establish this connection is not superficial by any means. That's not to say that any religion is "right" or "wrong" ...it is evidence that humans believe passionately they are connecting to something spiritual. To the point of willing to lay down their lives.

Yes and a way for some to have faith in these spiritual connections is to have evidence where there is zero. That is what faith means. To believe in something without evidence of it's existence.

As I said, there is plenty of spiritual evidence to support spiritual nature. The problem is your disbelief in spiritual nature, therefore, you can't rationalize spiritual existence. It ***** with your head and makes you conjure up images of imaginary people who others see and speak with, or an invisible man in the sky who lays down the law with a voice like Charlton Heston. Of course, this seems rather silly to you and why would anyone 'believe' in such a thing? I certainly don't, nor do I know anyone who does. I believe in a spiritual nature, which is just as present and part of nature as physical nature, in fact, IT created physical nature.

I think people want the spiritual world to exist so much and they find it difficult to come to terms with the alternative.

Is that why people who reject spiritual nature are doing, do you suppose?

95% have not experienced this. They only blindy believe because generations have told them it was the truth. Don't also forget that many people were harshly punished for not holding these beliefs.

So human beings... the most advanced and cognitive species on the planet, has clung to myths and fairytales for all their existence for no reason whatsoever? Just blindly following along like little sheep, being told what to believe in, and capitulating? Do you really honestly believe this total load of crap? Look... go do a google search for "Nihilists" and see how many there are? The estimates vary depending on the sources, but 5% is a fairly reasonable middle. These are people who don't believe in anything outside the physical at all, nothing else is possible to them. This leaves 95% who aren't Nihilists. Interestingly enough, this 'trend' follows the course of human history, all the way back. We've ALWAYS been spiritual creatures, we connect spiritually, we've been doing it for our entirety.

But even religious people can show zero signs of spirituality. Met a girl who says she belives in god because she does not want to go to hell. When asked other questions she said she gave them no thought before. Her belief is not because of spirituality. It's because of fear. Fear of eternal damnation.

Again, I am not here defending Religion, or religious people/views/ideas/dogma. The girl obviously believes she has a spiritual soul, and there is a spiritual higher power. Why else would someone "fear eternal damnation?" You see, this is more "spiritual evidence" you will simply ignore, because you can't rationalize spiritual nature.

Yes and new evidence may support or contradict this theory. The big crunch theory is relatively new and the evidence is minimal at best. As for the J trial I think the interpretation of the law was argued which resulted in differences of opinion. Evidence can also be skewed or misrepresented. Just ask Colin Powell.

Well you are agreeing with me then, that "physical evidence" can be interpreted differently by different individuals, for any number of reasons. So much for that complaint about spiritual evidence.

This is a prime example of people having a different opinion on physical evidence, and it happens all the time... ask OJ! And this is pointed out in the OP, we have to understand that evidence is perceptual, based on the individual, it is subjective to whether you accept it as evidence. What you think may be valid evidence of something, I may not agree that it's even evidence at all. I may think you fabricated the evidence, I may think you are barking up the wrong tree, or I may just think you're loony tunes.

Exactly but some evidence is overwhelming and the tons more evidence comes along and supports the claim.

Evidence, and the relative "strength" of evidence, relies on faith. You believe there is "overwhelming" evidence, not everyone always agrees with you. Such is the case with the overwhelming spiritual evidence for spiritual nature, some people reject the evidence.

 

[hobelim]

If God can do the Big Bang, you really think 5000 ******* fish is just way beyond Him? lol, now that is irrational..

One would have to eat a whole lot of stupid to drink that wine.

Even if God is the cause of the big bang and everything that exists, everything exists and everything known to be true about life in this reality proves that your belief that Jesus poofed fish sandwiches out of thin air is irrational.

You claim to believe in something known to contradict the reality that exists but find it too hard to believe that you are wrong and have either been misled or made great errors in your own speculations?

yeah right, some faith you have there...


Would you like to know what the story is actually about?

 

[numan]

Mentally ill? So now the 95% of humans who spiritually connect, are mentally ill people?

It is obvious that many of them ARE mentally ill !! · ·

.

 

[Boss]

Yes, they are sick and not by accident.

People like you who fill the minds of the gullible with superstitious and irrational doubletalk make mental health impossible for them.

Tying to reinforce the delusions of people with unrestrained imaginations by validating every irrational violent and bizarre thing people have ever done in the past 70,000 years by calling it evidence of spiritual reality, only serves to keep them sick or make them sicker.

What a guy!

Okay, your theory that humans are mentally ill, thus they have to create imaginary spiritual nature, is debunked by Darwinist theory. So you don't accept Darwinism? You think Darwin was full of shit? Or was Darwin only correct about things you agree with, and full of shit when he articulated things you disagree with?

The evidence shows a species who has exhibited the same relative behavioral characteristic for all of it's known existence, an attribute that is unique to the species, and the species most defining characteristic. Darwin, and others who study Ethology, would say the attribute must be "fundamental" else, it wouldn't exist in the species, and certainly wouldn't be the most defining characteristic.

Evolution tells us (if the theory of Darwin is correct) that a thing called "natural selection" takes place in nature, whereby, certain attributes are favored over others, according to how beneficial they are to the species. Animals who are unable to adapt, eventually become extinct. We have evidence of Neanderthals, a species very similar to humans. The Neanderthals were not known to be generally spiritual, while there is some evidence that some Neanderthals attempted spirituality, it is very rare in occurrence, they simply weren't spiritually inclined like homo sapiens. Now, if your theory of spiritual irrelevance were true, the Neanderthals, not being burdened by silly superstitions and cumbersome rituals to imaginary beings, would have advanced as a species over humans, who would have eventually gone the way of the dodo. This obviously didn't happen, did it?

The evidence shows, humans at some point, became "inspired" to rise up and do what all mankind has done, which distinguishes us from all other forms of life. Nothing else in nature has aspired to such greatness as humankind, and nothing else shows signs of spiritual awareness and connection. Again, science and Darwin would suggest this is not simply coincidental, but unquestionably related.

The idea that we evolved into beings with greater cognitive ability, and thus, invented spiritual nature, is a contradiction in logic. We're smart enough to invent math,physics, and even philosophy.... but cling to imaginary beings to explain what we don't know? That makes no sense whatsoever.... but then, we're mentally ill, right?

So we see, the person being irrational here, is you. Because you so don't want to believe in spiritual nature, you have taken to refuting your own beloved science and logic. Man is delusional, mentally ill, they just made it all up because they have better brains, it's all in their heads and means absolutely nothing, they needed something to explain the unknown, they needed a way to console themselves about death..... all of these are refuted by Darwinist theory, nature, logic, and scientific observations of animal behaviors.

What I keep seeing here, is the tendency to want to shift this away from a benign objective analysis of scientific facts, to a debate on religious theocracy, which resulted from human spiritual connection. It's like trying to argue that Henry Ford was an evil man for inventing cars, and we would have been better of without them, because SUVs get such crappy gas mileage. You are using "religion" to argue against human spiritual connection, which has been happening for all our existence. Religion is just more solid concrete evidence that humans PROFOUNDLY and PASSIONATELY connect to spiritual nature. If this connection were superficial and imaginary, we would not have a history of thousands of religions.

Now.... Are "religious beliefs" often delusional? YES! YES! YES! Indeed they are! This doesn't refute spiritual nature, if anything, it reinforces the profoundness. Humans DO make some sort of connection to something greater than self, it is the source of human inspiration, and what has enabled our species to excel to unprecedented heights in relation to other species. Every other natural thing you can point to, is also present in other animals to some degree, what they lack is spiritual connection. (or apparent awareness of this connection, Breeze)

An adult ape has a cerebral cortex that is about 20% larger than a human. Their brains are slightly larger than humans. Apes can be very smart, creative, ingenuitive, they can make tools and communicate, even. Chimpanzees also possess very strong cognitive skills, they've flown space missions! So how did humans become SO lucky, and able to crawl from the muck? Certainly it wasn't because they clung to a meaningless attribute that served no purpose except to waste resources and energy practicing it. The logic of that fails me completely.

What is "reality?" Is it ONLY what we can acknowledge through our five senses? Could there be things that humans are unable to sense? Observing other animals, we see that many of them display erratic behaviors shortly before an earthquake or natural disaster. We can theorize through science, that perhaps they sense changes in atmospheric pressure, or have more sensitivity to seismic disturbance? But aren't they "sensing" something that humans are unable to do? (without machines) This should demonstrate that it is possible for "reality" to exist that we are not aware of or cognizant of, relying solely on our five senses. Other animals have much more keen senses than humans, so why do you believe our five limited senses are the basis for "reality" and nothing else is possible?

 

[Boss]

If God can do the Big Bang, you really think 5000 ******* fish is just way beyond Him? lol, now that is irrational..

One would have to eat a whole lot of stupid to drink that wine.

Even if God is the cause of the big bang and everything that exists, everything exists and everything known to be true about life in this reality proves that your belief that Jesus poofed fish sandwiches out of thin air is irrational.

You claim to believe in something known to contradict the reality that exists but find it too hard to believe that you are wrong and have either been misled or made great errors in your own speculations?

yeah right, some faith you have there...


Would you like to know what the story is actually about?

Why do you continue to try and have a religious argument about Jesus, when we are talking about spiritual nature, which is MUCH older than Jesus? Is your profound disbelief in spiritual nature related to your disdain for Christian believers in Jesus? It appears that way to me, because you won't shut up going on and on about Jesus and the Bible.

Since you won't shut up about it, let's set the record straight.... The Bible is a collection of books written a couple thousand years ago, by men who were spiritually inspired. This was a time before television and recording or photography, and in fact, written language was still in early days. When stories were told back then, the teller would often use parables or exaggerated embellishment to establish an overarching point or "moral" to the story. A lot of what is in The Bible, is told in such a manner. Some humans take the stories literally, while some are able to discern what the point of the story is, and accept that it's not intended literally as written, that was just a style back then in telling any story. This is why it's not conducive to the OP argument to introduce religious dogma, and I have requested we check our religion hats at the door in this debate. We can never explore the question by arguing religion, it becomes lost in the minutia of what we personally believe.

 

[Tuatara]

You won't accept it as evidence because it is spiritual and you don't believe in spiritual nature. It's presented in the OP argument, have you read that yet? Or are you a knee-jerk disbeliever who just popped in to interject your profound wisdom? Look... it's very simple, there IS proof, definitive proof, that God does exist (exists in spiritual state of existence). The proof is spiritual in nature, therefore, you reject it because you don't accept spiritual nature. You are demanding for me to show you PHYSICAL evidence and proof, and as I said in the OP, I can't do that for a spiritual entity. If I could, it would be a PHYSICAL entity. Are you grasping this yet?

I already asked you to redefine bith your terms because they are both ambiguous. By your logic Santa and the Tooth fairy exist because throughout time a high percentage of children believed in them. Isn't that as you put it existing in a spiritual state of existence. If you are trying to say the belief of god exists (in people's minds) then you would be correct but to say he actually exists then everything else tied to spiritual whatever must exist. That would also include aliens that have anal probed people.

I haven't said a thing about "religious" people, we're talking about spiritual nature. Are you having trouble with the two distinctly different things? Where did I say anything about "seeing god" or "talking to god?" Again, you are completely not comprehending spiritual nature here. I can't help you with that, you seem to be completely ignorant. You want to conflate religion and spirituality, imagine people talking to and seeing invisible beings, and no telling what else. All I ever made an argument for, was human spiritual connection. That is completely different from imagining things that aren't there, or various religious teachings.

Humans don't have the concept to do that either, that's why this isn't what happened. If God were product of imagination, God would have ceased to be a factor the first couple of thousand years, as soon as other upper primates who didn't need a crutch, began surpassing humans in nature. You've dreamed up an illogical theory that defies Darwin, if you believe that God is merely human imagination.

First you say you yourself don't belive in god. Then you say he exists (in spiritial existence whatever that is) and now you say god is not from human imagination. Holy contradiction Batman. Please look at yourself here. Several other posters have also made note that your going close to the nut-bar realm.

Humans can't deal with their own mortality because we are spiritually aware. This is why you don't find other examples in nature, of things grappling with their mortality. Again, your Darwinist scientific theories are on the side of spirituality causing the fear here. We see no evidence of this fear anywhere else in nature, and if it were natural, we would.

Woah!!!???? Seeing no fear anywhere else in nature?? I'm done here. Thanks for coming out . Please pick up the loose screws on your way out.

 

[Boss]

You won't accept it as evidence because it is spiritual and you don't believe in spiritual nature. It's presented in the OP argument, have you read that yet? Or are you a knee-jerk disbeliever who just popped in to interject your profound wisdom? Look... it's very simple, there IS proof, definitive proof, that God does exist (exists in spiritual state of existence). The proof is spiritual in nature, therefore, you reject it because you don't accept spiritual nature. You are demanding for me to show you PHYSICAL evidence and proof, and as I said in the OP, I can't do that for a spiritual entity. If I could, it would be a PHYSICAL entity. Are you grasping this yet?

I already asked you to redefine bith your terms because they are both ambiguous. By your logic Santa and the Tooth fairy exist because throughout time a high percentage of children believed in them. Isn't that as you put it existing in a spiritual state of existence. If you are trying to say the belief of god exists (in people's minds) then you would be correct but to say he actually exists then everything else tied to spiritual whatever must exist. That would also include aliens that have anal probed people.

Have children gone to their graves believing in Santa, or are they willing to lay down their lives rather than refuse to believe in Santa? And have they been doing this as long as humans have existed?

I clearly defined in the OP, the problem with having this debate is how we both interpret the terms. To "exist" can only mean one thing in your mind, but from my perspective, there can be an existence that isn't physical in nature, but still very much a part of nature. I tried to give the analogy of a "thought" and someone pointed out, thoughts can be measured with machines... still, we can't discern thoughts with our five senses in others, without a machine to help. In any event, there can be things beyond our five senses, that we aren't fully capable of understanding, and I believe this explains spiritual nature.

Humans don't have the concept to do that either, that's why this isn't what happened. If God were product of imagination, God would have ceased to be a factor the first couple of thousand years, as soon as other upper primates who didn't need a crutch, began surpassing humans in nature. You've dreamed up an illogical theory that defies Darwin, if you believe that God is merely human imagination.

First you say you yourself don't belive in god. Then you say he exists (in spiritial existence whatever that is) and now you say god is not from human imagination. Holy contradiction Batman. Please look at yourself here. Several other posters have also made note that your going close to the nut-bar realm.

I have never said I don't believe in God. I don't know where you read that. I don't believe in the God described in The Bible, I don't believe in any religious incarnations of God. Some of them may be true, or partially true, but I lack the faith needed to believe that... I am a spiritualist. I believe in Spiritual God, which is not a "man" and doesn't have human attributes. It's more of an energy we can't measure... invisible lightning... It isn't the product of imagination, science tells us that.

I personally don't care what disbelievers say about me, to be honest. My viewpoints have never been dependent on what other people think of me. I can understand if you are that way, it seems like you would be. So I am sure, when you posted this, you must have thought it would really effect me, but meh... not so much.

Humans can't deal with their own mortality because we are spiritually aware. This is why you don't find other examples in nature, of things grappling with their mortality. Again, your Darwinist scientific theories are on the side of spirituality causing the fear here. We see no evidence of this fear anywhere else in nature, and if it were natural, we would.

Woah!!!???? Seeing no fear anywhere else in nature?? I'm done here. Thanks for coming out . Please pick up the loose screws on your way out.

Where did I say anything about seeing no fear in nature? What we seem to have is, a problem with YOU UNDERSTANDING PLAIN ENGLISH! The "fear" we were talking about, is the "fear" that humans have about what comes after their mortality. This was articulated in the beginning of the paragraph quoted, did you not read that part? Do you comprehend that the first part of a paragraph, pertains to what follows in the remainder of the paragraph? So why do you want to idiotically take me out of context? You don't need any help proving to me that you're a moron.

 

[hobelim]

Yes, they are sick and not by accident.

People like you who fill the minds of the gullible with superstitious and irrational doubletalk make mental health impossible for them.

Tying to reinforce the delusions of people with unrestrained imaginations by validating every irrational violent and bizarre thing people have ever done in the past 70,000 years by calling it evidence of spiritual reality, only serves to keep them sick or make them sicker.

What a guy!

Okay, your theory that humans are mentally ill, thus they have to create imaginary spiritual nature, is debunked by Darwinist theory. So you don't accept Darwinism? You think Darwin was full of shit? Or was Darwin only correct about things you agree with, and full of shit when he articulated things you disagree with?

If I have to spell it out for you, I think that Darwin was right and that you are full of shit.

The clock is still ticking genius. I give it about 50 to 100 years and there won't be a single person left on earth gullible enough to believe that God can be eaten.

 

[Boss]

Yes, they are sick and not by accident.

People like you who fill the minds of the gullible with superstitious and irrational doubletalk make mental health impossible for them.

Tying to reinforce the delusions of people with unrestrained imaginations by validating every irrational violent and bizarre thing people have ever done in the past 70,000 years by calling it evidence of spiritual reality, only serves to keep them sick or make them sicker.

What a guy!

Okay, your theory that humans are mentally ill, thus they have to create imaginary spiritual nature, is debunked by Darwinist theory. So you don't accept Darwinism? You think Darwin was full of shit? Or was Darwin only correct about things you agree with, and full of shit when he articulated things you disagree with?

If I have to spell it out for you, I think that Darwin was right and that you are full of shit.

The clock is still ticking genius. I give it about 50 to 100 years and there won't be a single person left on earth gullible enough to believe that God can be eaten.

LOL... Eaten? You mean, like the religious symbolic ritual of communion? I honestly don't think they believe they believe they are literally eating God. But nevertheless, I once knew a guy who worked for the company who supplies the majority of communion crackers to various churches in America and worldwide. They sell billions per year, so I have to assume they aren't just buying them and throwing them away.

As for our discussion on spiritual nature, which is not about religious customs, your belief that humans are mentally ill, is not supported by Darwinist theory. If this were valid, humans would be in the zoo right now, and apes or chimps would be the zookeepers. That is, IF humans still existed at all, with such a debilitating mality.

You are trying to establish that spiritual connection is detrimental to the species, when the evidence suggests it is very fundamental. Even Darwin would agree, if the behavior has been around as long as the species, it must be fundamental, else natural selection would have eliminated the attribute long ago.

Now you claim that the previous 69,900 years of human history doesn't matter, you and the disbelievers will have killed off spirituality in 100 years, with such anti-Darwinist rants... but there are only 5% of the world population who identify as Nihilist, I would expect that number to be much higher, and growing by the day, if spirituality is going to be done in 100 years.

 

[hobelim]

Okay, your theory that humans are mentally ill, thus they have to create imaginary spiritual nature, is debunked by Darwinist theory. So you don't accept Darwinism? You think Darwin was full of shit? Or was Darwin only correct about things you agree with, and full of shit when he articulated things you disagree with?

If I have to spell it out for you, I think that Darwin was right and that you are full of shit.

The clock is still ticking genius. I give it about 50 to 100 years and there won't be a single person left on earth gullible enough to believe that God can be eaten.

LOL... Eaten? You mean, like the religious symbolic ritual of communion? I honestly don't think they believe they believe they are literally eating God. But nevertheless, I once knew a guy who worked for the company who supplies the majority of communion crackers to various churches in America and worldwide. They sell billions per year, so I have to assume they aren't just buying them and throwing them away. .

There are over a billion people who belong to a church that teaches that the eucharist is the flesh of God in actuality, not symbolically.

As for our discussion on spiritual nature, which is not about religious customs, your belief that humans are mentally ill, is not supported by Darwinist theory. If this were valid, humans would be in the zoo right now, and apes or chimps would be the zookeepers. That is, IF humans still existed at all, with such a debilitating mality. .

Many humans are in the zoo right now and being tended to by zookeepers, they are just called celebrities with their very own handlers..

You are trying to establish that spiritual connection is detrimental to the species, when the evidence suggests it is very fundamental. Even Darwin would agree, if the behavior has been around as long as the species, it must be fundamental, else natural selection would have eliminated the attribute long ago. .

How long ago do you think qualifies as long ago?

And what about the actual historical record of the rise and fall of many quite irrational civilizations with corresponding irrational religious beliefs does not suggest that the so called spiritual connection is detrimental?

Now you claim that the previous 69,900 years of human history doesn't matter, you and the disbelievers will have killed off spirituality in 100 years, with such anti-Darwinist rants... but there are only 5% of the world population who identify as Nihilist, I would expect that number to be much higher, and growing by the day, if spirituality is going to be done in 100 years.

No, you miss the point. The past does matter, its just not definitive proof of anything except that people have consistently turned to superstition that has consistently resulted in society descending to the lowest level of hell until they all fall in ruins.

Repeating irrational behavior by turning to superstition for supernatural assistance and expecting different results is the very definition of insanity.

 

[Boss]

There are over a billion people who belong to a church that teaches that the eucharist is the flesh of God in actuality, not symbolically.

I disagree, I think you have misinterpreted something, probably due to your lack of comprehension regarding spiritual nature.

Many humans are in the zoo right now and being tended to by zookeepers, they are just called celebrities with their very own handlers..

Is there supposed to be a point relevant to the debate here?

How long ago do you think qualifies as long ago?

And what about the actual historical record of the rise and fall of many quite irrational civilizations with corresponding irrational religious beliefs does not suggest that the so called spiritual connection is detrimental?

Well, we can only observe evidence we've unearthed about ancient civilizations. What may have happened before that, we can only speculate. That said, as far back as we can observe human civilization, there has been human spirituality.

Again, "religious beliefs" only pertain to spirituality in the sense they are products of it. They are evidence that humans certainly have profound belief in spiritual nature. You want to look at the historic record, let's look at the attempts humans have made to try and live without spiritual belief? Every one of those empires declined into immoral decay and corruption, usually ending with millions of people dying. Civilizations without spirituality have ALWAYS failed. So some civilizations may have failed with it, but all have failed without it.

No, you miss the point. The past does matter, its just not definitive proof of anything except that people have consistently turned to superstition that has consistently resulted in society descending to the lowest level of hell until they all fall in ruins.

Repeating irrational behavior by turning to superstition for supernatural assistance and expecting different results is the very definition of insanity.

LOL... So the past doesn't matter now? Darwin would be LIVID! Again, civilizations which tried to rebuke spirituality have failed miserably. There is no example of a success.

There is nothing "supernatural" or "superstitious" about spiritual nature, it is a part of nature and the universe, just like physical nature.

 

[AVG-JOE]

You believe a non-intelligent and undirected natural process would purposefully produce the many things necessary for life ? Do you believe that it is logical to assume that all the things necessary for life are only found on this planet in our solar system ?

No...

But I do believe that a non-intelligent and undirected natural process would, over time, produce the many things necessary for life and for life to evolve spectacularly. I also believe that liquid water and all the necessary chemicals for life are quite abundant in the universe.

I ass-u-me that you believe the creation process as described in the ancient story called The Bible?

What we have here is 2 Monkeys with a difference of opinion about where Monkeys came from. WYGD?

But if YWC is right, the reward is eternal paradise. If you're right, all you get is a deeper understanding of the natural world.

Considering that this is the only life that I know I get to experience, I'll take The Natural World and All its Wonders for all the marbles, Alex.

 

[Hollie]

It doesn't make sense to you because you can't comprehend spiritual nature. There is tons and tons of spiritual evidence to prove spiritual existence definitively. We can even use physical science to confirm that something is going on, humans are definitely making connection to something, they've been doing it for all of human existence in some form. If there weren't anything there, or it was a product of imagination, the attribute would have diminished over time, especially with the advent of science, and it hasn't....still our most defining attribute as a species. .

You are a very stupid man.

There you go again with the tons of spiritual evidence proving spiritual existence which makes no sense to anyone who does not comprehend spiritual nature.

pure unrefined bullshit.

However convincing your specious claim of providing evidence of "spirituality" indistinguishable from superstition or mental illness may be to those whose only aim in life is being your personal felcher no one with an intelligence above that of a monkey is ever going to buy your beat bag of fake religion.

why not just accept reality mr rational?

Spiritual reality or physical reality? Because, I accept BOTH... only one of us two is rejecting a reality. Mentally ill? So now the 95% of humans who spiritually connect, are mentally ill people? Are you going to stick with that argument, or abandon it for something even sillier when I destroy it? Seems to be the M.O. around here.

You're free to opine about your alleged "spirit worlds" but you should be aware that making emphatic statements about the existence of these supernatural realms makes you appear really desperate.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are a very stupid man.

There you go again with the tons of spiritual evidence proving spiritual existence which makes no sense to anyone who does not comprehend spiritual nature.

pure unrefined bullshit.

However convincing your specious claim of providing evidence of "spirituality" indistinguishable from superstition or mental illness may be to those whose only aim in life is being your personal felcher no one with an intelligence above that of a monkey is ever going to buy your beat bag of fake religion.

why not just accept reality mr rational?

Spiritual reality or physical reality? Because, I accept BOTH... only one of us two is rejecting a reality. Mentally ill? So now the 95% of humans who spiritually connect, are mentally ill people? Are you going to stick with that argument, or abandon it for something even sillier when I destroy it? Seems to be the M.O. around here.

You're free to opine about your alleged "spirit worlds" but you should be aware that making emphatic statements about the existence of these supernatural realms makes you appear really desperate.

Why?

We live in an age in which science has proven the existence of other universes, different forms of existence and forms of matter and energy that are not what we can see, or sense without tools to interpret them. In fact the tools don't sense them for us, but only measure other phenomena we theorize are related.

So why would a spiritual world be so desperate?

 

[JimBowie1958]

No...

But I do believe that a non-intelligent and undirected natural process would, over time, produce the many things necessary for life and for life to evolve spectacularly. I also believe that liquid water and all the necessary chemicals for life are quite abundant in the universe.

I ass-u-me that you believe the creation process as described in the ancient story called The Bible?

What we have here is 2 Monkeys with a difference of opinion about where Monkeys came from. WYGD?

But if YWC is right, the reward is eternal paradise. If you're right, all you get is a deeper understanding of the natural world.

Considering that this is the only life that I know I get to experience, I'll take The Natural World and All its Wonders for all the marbles, Alex.

lol, metaphysical bigotry for the win, Alex.

 

[Hollie]

There is nothing "supernatural" or "superstitious" about spiritual nature, it is a part of nature and the universe, just like physical nature.

... "because I say so." <-------- you forgot that part.

 

[Hollie]

Again, "religious beliefs" only pertain to spirituality in the sense they are products of it. They are evidence that humans certainly have profound belief in spiritual nature. You want to look at the historic record, let's look at the attempts humans have made to try and live without spiritual belief? Every one of those empires declined into immoral decay and corruption, usually ending with millions of people dying. Civilizations without spirituality have ALWAYS failed. So some civilizations may have failed with it, but all have failed without it.

And a few examples of civilizations that have failed without spiritual belief would include?