If God doesn't exist...

[ChrisL]

Sensing the universe and the wonder of it does not require dogma.

I find all kinds of things wondrous. Doesn't have to do anything with superstitious beliefs though. For example, I find history to be fascinating and wondrous and I would love to visit some historical sites around the world some day. I also find the universe and how it was created and how vast it is to be wondrous, but that doesn't mean I have to believe that some "entity" created it all.

So where did life originate? Why do you exist? Where are you going? Why are you here? How do you know this?

Oh my "god." Go back to grade school and learn about evolution, will ya?

 

[zaangalewa]

1. Indoctrination into Atheism
2. Indoctrination into Anti-Xxxxxxx Bigotry
3. Peer and Family Pressure
4. Fear of Death
5. Wishful Thinking
6. Fear of Freedom and Responsibility
7. Lack of Basic Skills in Logic and Reasoning ...

Alternative for this atheistic lifestyle?

Where do you see a real difference between religious people, antireligous people like lots of mindmanipulating atheists or godless liars in the name of god? What's worthful in your eyes?

I see atheists/agnostics as being truthful and religious people as being paranoid and frightened little sheep.

And I don't see why the only possible result of the two possible results of the philosophy agnosticism should be the belief in atheism. And I would also say not every atheist is like Mr. Feynman. But okay - who cares about what paranoid and frigthened sheep say?

 

[zaangalewa]

Sensing the universe and the wonder of it does not require dogma.

... dogma ~= doctrine ~= theory ...

 

[ChrisL]

Sensing the universe and the wonder of it does not require dogma.

... dogma ~= doctrine ~= theory ...

You don't make much sense, TBH. You are definitely brainwashed and in denial. You are going to live out your entire life without even questioning the "book" that some old men wrote thousands of years ago.

 

[james bond]

Evos: The geographic and rock layers of the earth support a gradual development of life. Darwin expected that if fossils were found in Precambrian rocks they would show a gradual development.

Not true. Stephen Jay Gould states, "the Precambrian fossils that actually were found after Darwin’s death." Also, evos are basing their "religion" on old books such as Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology (1830) and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (1859).

Evos: The fossil record proves evolution is true. For example,the fact that primate or ape-like fossils are not found in Devonian layers proves that apes had not evolved yet.

False. If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos (anything that contradicts evolution is ignored) or say it was planted. Creationists say that the layers are based on geography, not time.

Let's look at the layers. Even their names are based on geography, not time.

Geologic Strata - The distinctive characteristic of a layer might be the kind of minerals found in it, or the kind of. There is something unique about the layer that geologists recognize and think is significant.

Geologists, like biologists, like to classify similar things by giving a name to a group of similar things. This makes it easier to study the rocks, and talk to other geologists about the rocks.

Devonian Layer - It is named after Devon, England, where rocks from this period were first studied.There are lots of fish fossils in this layer, but noprimate fossils, as evolutionists love to point out. Why is this? Is it because primates did not exist anywhere in the world when the Devonian rocks were formed? Or was it because apes don’t live where fish live?

To find fossils of extinct primates, paleontologists go to Tanzania or Kenya; but they don’t find fish fossils there. Is that because fish did not exist when
Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived? Or is it because fish don’t live on dry land where Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived?

Fossils are formed when things get buried rapidly by a landslide, sandstorm, tsunami, flood, or any other disaster that might bury things. The things that get buried are the things that happened to be at the place that got buried.

On rare occasions, things get buried out of place. Someone might have caught a fish and brought it back to camp just before a rockslide buried the camp, causing a fish fossil to be foundmysteriously out of place. But that’s a rare anomaly. Fossil-bearing strata overwhelmingly tend to contain fossils associated with a particular habitat. In fact, that’s how paleontologists determine what the habitat was like.

Geographic Names
There are a few exceptions, but generally speaking, strata have geographic names. For example,

The Jurassic is named after the Jura Mountains within the European Alps, where limestone strata from the period was first identified.

The Mississippian is so named because rocks with this age are exposed in the Mississippi River valley.

The Pennsylvanian is named after the American state of Pennsylvania, where rocks with this age are widespread.

Notice that each layer is associated with an age. Why is that? Mississippian rocks are supposedly older than Pennsylvanian rocks; but Pennsylvania was a state before Mississippi was. Chronologically, the two names make no sense. That’s because the names are based on geography, not time.

More, as I get time.

I'll make a couple of points here.
1. How do you explain the starfilled sky?
2. "Even their names are based on geography, not time." , think that's stretching the truth quite a bit
Archean time period from the Greek for beginning.
Protorezoic time period Greek for earlier life
Phanerozoic time period Greek for visible life. the list goes on but you get my drift.
3. If you claim science supress data I would like proof of that statement. Not "If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos"
4. The fact that you admit to these layers, proves my point that the earth is older then 6000 years. Fossilazation in itself is a process wich is understood to take a minimum of 10000 years. Coal, oil are known to be biological in origin. and take hundred of thousands of years minimally, a few exeptions not withstanding. These are natural processes know and understood by science.
5. Ill make this point again. I can use different tracks to disprove a young earth. You might say they're both believe systems, but my belief system does seem to offer a tremendous amount of cooberating facts. I accept since you have faith you don't feel the need to prove what you belief. But if, and I'm talking about creatonism, you feel the need to use the Bible as the ultimate proof in a scientific world. I think it reasonable that the bible needs to go trough the same scrutiny as any scientific theory before you can actually put it in a classroom for instance.

1. I guess by "starfilled sky," you mean is it based on time. NDT corrected perfectionist Director James Cameron in one of the scenes of his movie Titanic. Yes, I agree with that but what does have to do with our discussion?
2. With few exceptions, the names of the strata layers are mostly based on location. Maybe you're so stuck on the names being associated with time because evolutionists have thoroughly indoctrinated generations of students to believe that rock layers are associated with time, not places. The names follow Occam's Razor -- The kinds of plants and animals present when the rocks were formed depends on geography (that is, ecological zone), not time. That’s why most have geographic names.
3. I claim science suppress creation and creation scientists. Science does not accept the supernatural since 1795.

One of the best known “human ancestors” is an Australopithecus afarensis skeleton called Lucy. What does she look like? A human skull? Uhh... no.

This is one of the best photos of the "250" hominid fossils:

4. Nope. The layers are based on catastrophism, not unifamitarianism. There was a global flood and our earth was shaped within months not millions or billions of years.
5. I already sketched the outline of my arguments, so please proceed with yours. It does not have to be in detail.

 

[james bond]

They are ridiculous. Does anyone really believe that Noah built an ark and had two of each animal on it? What did they eat? Lol. I'm sorry but your bible stories just do not add up when you use any kind of logic.

Not logic. Science. And we will have Ark Encounter coming soon to answer all your questions. Truth is stranger than fiction.

Ken Ham's Ark Encounter Takes Shape in Aerial Video Ahead of 40 Days, 40 Nights Opening

 

[forkup]

Evos: The geographic and rock layers of the earth support a gradual development of life. Darwin expected that if fossils were found in Precambrian rocks they would show a gradual development.

Not true. Stephen Jay Gould states, "the Precambrian fossils that actually were found after Darwin’s death." Also, evos are basing their "religion" on old books such as Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology (1830) and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (1859).

Evos: The fossil record proves evolution is true. For example,the fact that primate or ape-like fossils are not found in Devonian layers proves that apes had not evolved yet.

False. If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos (anything that contradicts evolution is ignored) or say it was planted. Creationists say that the layers are based on geography, not time.

Let's look at the layers. Even their names are based on geography, not time.

Geologic Strata - The distinctive characteristic of a layer might be the kind of minerals found in it, or the kind of. There is something unique about the layer that geologists recognize and think is significant.

Geologists, like biologists, like to classify similar things by giving a name to a group of similar things. This makes it easier to study the rocks, and talk to other geologists about the rocks.

Devonian Layer - It is named after Devon, England, where rocks from this period were first studied.There are lots of fish fossils in this layer, but noprimate fossils, as evolutionists love to point out. Why is this? Is it because primates did not exist anywhere in the world when the Devonian rocks were formed? Or was it because apes don’t live where fish live?

To find fossils of extinct primates, paleontologists go to Tanzania or Kenya; but they don’t find fish fossils there. Is that because fish did not exist when
Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived? Or is it because fish don’t live on dry land where Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived?

Fossils are formed when things get buried rapidly by a landslide, sandstorm, tsunami, flood, or any other disaster that might bury things. The things that get buried are the things that happened to be at the place that got buried.

On rare occasions, things get buried out of place. Someone might have caught a fish and brought it back to camp just before a rockslide buried the camp, causing a fish fossil to be foundmysteriously out of place. But that’s a rare anomaly. Fossil-bearing strata overwhelmingly tend to contain fossils associated with a particular habitat. In fact, that’s how paleontologists determine what the habitat was like.

Geographic Names
There are a few exceptions, but generally speaking, strata have geographic names. For example,

The Jurassic is named after the Jura Mountains within the European Alps, where limestone strata from the period was first identified.

The Mississippian is so named because rocks with this age are exposed in the Mississippi River valley.

The Pennsylvanian is named after the American state of Pennsylvania, where rocks with this age are widespread.

Notice that each layer is associated with an age. Why is that? Mississippian rocks are supposedly older than Pennsylvanian rocks; but Pennsylvania was a state before Mississippi was. Chronologically, the two names make no sense. That’s because the names are based on geography, not time.

More, as I get time.

I'll make a couple of points here.
1. How do you explain the starfilled sky?
2. "Even their names are based on geography, not time." , think that's stretching the truth quite a bit
Archean time period from the Greek for beginning.
Protorezoic time period Greek for earlier life
Phanerozoic time period Greek for visible life. the list goes on but you get my drift.
3. If you claim science supress data I would like proof of that statement. Not "If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos"
4. The fact that you admit to these layers, proves my point that the earth is older then 6000 years. Fossilazation in itself is a process wich is understood to take a minimum of 10000 years. Coal, oil are known to be biological in origin. and take hundred of thousands of years minimally, a few exeptions not withstanding. These are natural processes know and understood by science.
5. Ill make this point again. I can use different tracks to disprove a young earth. You might say they're both believe systems, but my belief system does seem to offer a tremendous amount of cooberating facts. I accept since you have faith you don't feel the need to prove what you belief. But if, and I'm talking about creatonism, you feel the need to use the Bible as the ultimate proof in a scientific world. I think it reasonable that the bible needs to go trough the same scrutiny as any scientific theory before you can actually put it in a classroom for instance.

1. I guess by "starfilled sky," you mean is it based on time. NDT corrected perfectionist Director James Cameron in one of the scenes of his movie Titanic. Yes, I agree with that but what does have to do with our discussion?
2. With few exceptions, the names of the strata layers are mostly based on location. Maybe you're so stuck on the names being associated with time because evolutionists have thoroughly indoctrinated generations of students to believe that rock layers are associated with time, not places. The names follow Occam's Razor -- The kinds of plants and animals present when the rocks were formed depends on geography (that is, ecological zone), not time. That’s why most have geographic names.
3. I claim science suppress creation and creation scientists. Science does not accept the supernatural since 1795.

One of the best known “human ancestors” is an Australopithecus afarensis skeleton called Lucy. What does she look like? A human skull? Uhh... no.

This is one of the best photos of the "250" hominid fossils:

4. Nope. The layers are based on catastrophism, not unifamitarianism. There was a global flood and our earth was shaped within months not millions or billions of years.
5. I already sketched the outline of my arguments, so please proceed with yours. It does not have to be in detail.

.1. sketched my point on the stars I'll do it again. If Genesis contents the earth is 6000 years old. Then logicaly the night sky should only have stars in it that are 6000 lightyears or less away, very local in cosmic terms.
2. Again the time periods I gave are not just based in time but even as my original point said, in the evolutionare fase of life. Sometimes in the type of rock found.( Cretacious) after large quantities of chalk found dating from that period. Sometimes geograpicaly. I'm not stuck on the naming. You brought it up, siting it as proof of the fact that science doesn't find time a factor when naming a strata. While geology is tightly intertwined with the theory of evolution as the names of some of the geolical periods prove.
3. Science has added some very unpopular ideas since before it was science. Evolution was one of them when it was introduced. So was plate tectonics, the big bang and numerous others we consider common knowledge. Supressing anything in it is extremely difficult if not impossible. Since any theory brought out by science constantly has to stand the test of reality. A scientist who can disprove an accepted theory becomes a hero to science. Claiming it supresses ideas is simply untrue.
4.Prominent Hominid Fossils
The link provided brings you to a site with homonid fossils and a description of what they found.Most are fragments but some are considerably more then that. And remember I don't have to prove that all of them are homonids just one is sufficient to invalidate Genesis.

 

[Militants]

Maybe planet earth are stone in land then water in sea.

 

[ChrisL]

Evos: The geographic and rock layers of the earth support a gradual development of life. Darwin expected that if fossils were found in Precambrian rocks they would show a gradual development.

Not true. Stephen Jay Gould states, "the Precambrian fossils that actually were found after Darwin’s death." Also, evos are basing their "religion" on old books such as Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology (1830) and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (1859).

Evos: The fossil record proves evolution is true. For example,the fact that primate or ape-like fossils are not found in Devonian layers proves that apes had not evolved yet.

False. If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos (anything that contradicts evolution is ignored) or say it was planted. Creationists say that the layers are based on geography, not time.

Let's look at the layers. Even their names are based on geography, not time.

Geologic Strata - The distinctive characteristic of a layer might be the kind of minerals found in it, or the kind of. There is something unique about the layer that geologists recognize and think is significant.

Geologists, like biologists, like to classify similar things by giving a name to a group of similar things. This makes it easier to study the rocks, and talk to other geologists about the rocks.

Devonian Layer - It is named after Devon, England, where rocks from this period were first studied.There are lots of fish fossils in this layer, but noprimate fossils, as evolutionists love to point out. Why is this? Is it because primates did not exist anywhere in the world when the Devonian rocks were formed? Or was it because apes don’t live where fish live?

To find fossils of extinct primates, paleontologists go to Tanzania or Kenya; but they don’t find fish fossils there. Is that because fish did not exist when
Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived? Or is it because fish don’t live on dry land where Homo habilis or Australopithecus Afarensis lived?

Fossils are formed when things get buried rapidly by a landslide, sandstorm, tsunami, flood, or any other disaster that might bury things. The things that get buried are the things that happened to be at the place that got buried.

On rare occasions, things get buried out of place. Someone might have caught a fish and brought it back to camp just before a rockslide buried the camp, causing a fish fossil to be foundmysteriously out of place. But that’s a rare anomaly. Fossil-bearing strata overwhelmingly tend to contain fossils associated with a particular habitat. In fact, that’s how paleontologists determine what the habitat was like.

Geographic Names
There are a few exceptions, but generally speaking, strata have geographic names. For example,

The Jurassic is named after the Jura Mountains within the European Alps, where limestone strata from the period was first identified.

The Mississippian is so named because rocks with this age are exposed in the Mississippi River valley.

The Pennsylvanian is named after the American state of Pennsylvania, where rocks with this age are widespread.

Notice that each layer is associated with an age. Why is that? Mississippian rocks are supposedly older than Pennsylvanian rocks; but Pennsylvania was a state before Mississippi was. Chronologically, the two names make no sense. That’s because the names are based on geography, not time.

More, as I get time.

I'll make a couple of points here.
1. How do you explain the starfilled sky?
2. "Even their names are based on geography, not time." , think that's stretching the truth quite a bit
Archean time period from the Greek for beginning.
Protorezoic time period Greek for earlier life
Phanerozoic time period Greek for visible life. the list goes on but you get my drift.
3. If you claim science supress data I would like proof of that statement. Not "If there were ape-like fossils found, then it would be ignored by evos"
4. The fact that you admit to these layers, proves my point that the earth is older then 6000 years. Fossilazation in itself is a process wich is understood to take a minimum of 10000 years. Coal, oil are known to be biological in origin. and take hundred of thousands of years minimally, a few exeptions not withstanding. These are natural processes know and understood by science.
5. Ill make this point again. I can use different tracks to disprove a young earth. You might say they're both believe systems, but my belief system does seem to offer a tremendous amount of cooberating facts. I accept since you have faith you don't feel the need to prove what you belief. But if, and I'm talking about creatonism, you feel the need to use the Bible as the ultimate proof in a scientific world. I think it reasonable that the bible needs to go trough the same scrutiny as any scientific theory before you can actually put it in a classroom for instance.

1. I guess by "starfilled sky," you mean is it based on time. NDT corrected perfectionist Director James Cameron in one of the scenes of his movie Titanic. Yes, I agree with that but what does have to do with our discussion?
2. With few exceptions, the names of the strata layers are mostly based on location. Maybe you're so stuck on the names being associated with time because evolutionists have thoroughly indoctrinated generations of students to believe that rock layers are associated with time, not places. The names follow Occam's Razor -- The kinds of plants and animals present when the rocks were formed depends on geography (that is, ecological zone), not time. That’s why most have geographic names.
3. I claim science suppress creation and creation scientists. Science does not accept the supernatural since 1795.

One of the best known “human ancestors” is an Australopithecus afarensis skeleton called Lucy. What does she look like? A human skull? Uhh... no.

This is one of the best photos of the "250" hominid fossils:

4. Nope. The layers are based on catastrophism, not unifamitarianism. There was a global flood and our earth was shaped within months not millions or billions of years.
5. I already sketched the outline of my arguments, so please proceed with yours. It does not have to be in detail.

.1. sketched my point on the stars I'll do it again. If Genesis contents the earth is 6000 years old. Ten logicaly the night sky should only have stars in it that are 6000 lightyears or less away, very local in cosmic terms.
2. Again the time periods I gave are not just based in time but even as my original point said, in the evolutionare fase of life. Sometimes in the type of rock found.( Cretacious) after large quantities of chalk found dating from that period. Sometimes geograpicaly. I'm not stuck on the naming. You brought it up, siting it as proof of the fact that science doesn't find time a factor when naming a strata. While geology is tightly intertwined with the theory of evolution as the names of some of the geolical periods prove.
3. Science has added some very unpopular ideas since before it was science. Evolution was one of them when it was introduced. So was plate tectonics, the big bang and numerous others we consider common knowledge. Supressing anything in it is extremely difficult if not impossible. Since any theory brought out be science constantly has to stand the test of reality. A scientist who can disprove an accepted theory becomes a hero to science. Claiming it supresses ideas is simply untrue.
4.Prominent Hominid Fossils
The link provided brings you to a site with homonid fossils and a description of what they found.Most are fragments but some are considerably more then that. And remember I don't have to prove that all of them are homonids just one is sufficient to invalidate Genesis.

I cannot believe that some people actually believe the earth is only 6000 years old. Lol. Too funny.

 

[zaangalewa]

Sensing the universe and the wonder of it does not require dogma.

... dogma ~= doctrine ~= theory ...

You don't make much sense, TBH. You are definitely brainwashed and in denial. You are going to live out your entire life without even questioning the "book" that some old men wrote thousands of years ago.

Euclid - old or not - wrote a kind of bible for mathematics some thousand years ago. What he did not know was for example: the world is flat - the universe follows his geometry, the geometry of Euclid. It could follow also other geometries - but indeed the sum of the angle of a triangle are always 180° - even if the trianangle has a size of thousands of lightyears.

So before I said this to you, you knew noting about what I think in this for you not existing question. You know just simple nearly nothing about what I think, feel and believe - but you live in the illusion to know. You live also in illusions like to know enough for example about biblical stories and characters - for example my grandafther: the singing king David. And indeed you don't need to know anything about me or David because you defined us to be your enemies. The only thing what someone needs to know about enemies is how to minimize their influence and how to kill them.

So if we speak together here you try to kill me ("Who kills the gods of a tribe kills the tribe" ) while I try to save your soul by leading you to the truth. The first step to find the truth is to say "I don't know" and the second is to find out "how to know". This is for example the way of science. But sometimes we are not able to know and need other steps for other kinds of questions. Sometimes we will find questions, where we never will find an answer. Sometimes even quesions, where we never will be able to find an answer. And somemtimes we have very important questions where no one has a good answer. Or do you know for example why my dog died last year? You did not even know that this is an important question?

 

[zaangalewa]

Jesus was a victim? Something about the story has escaped you.

Jesus was a victim of death penalty.

[

Jesus was a victim? Something about the story has escaped you.

Jesus was a victim of death penalty.

Jesus gave up his life, no one took it from Him. John 10:17-18 17“For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18“No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”

MEDIA=youtube]SZFNjsVmMgE[/MEDIA]

Jesus gave up his life, no one took it from Him.

Please. Don't speak bullshit. They crucified him and rammed a lance into his body to kill him.

John 10:17-18 17“For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18“No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”

He came back from death - that's why they were not able to take his life. But this justifies nothing what anyone did when they misused the system of human justice to kill the son of man who was the son of god too.

Still today lots of people are creating systems of pseudojustice or are misusing in perverted ways good laws of justice for torture and to kill human beings - while lots of people think what the authorities are doing is worthful. "Right or wrong, my country" No !!! No !!! No !!! It's good to do the right things and it's a shame to do what's wrong. The most easy and clear thoughts are often perverted in the craziest ways. When god came to the world they crucified him. Who expects something else - who expects god is a kind a pharao with godly mights like an showeffect - is crazy. No - he dies with us. He is together with us also in our deepest suffer, our worst situations, our most helpless and hopeless moments.

We don't have the illusion any longer who's the pharao is a good guy. And if we live this illusion then the next Hitler walks smiling and laughing through the next door. What for heavens sake do you think Jesus died for? To give everyone who is mighty the allowness to kill whomever he likes to kill - or did he came to tear the blindness of our eyes and to show to us what we are doing if we don't take care and do what's wrong? How often died Jesus together with prisoners in how many death camps of the world? And how often died we - died you, died I - together with someone else? We are blabbers in a blabber world. Don't make yourselve nor anyone else to a god. Don't make laws to a god. Don't make the bible to a god. Make nothing to a god what is not god. Specially never never never make an ugly death to a god. Human being are creating the crosses of this world here. God created the [re]surrection. God is life. God is love.

 

[there4eyeM]

Your doctrine contradicts the words of Jesus. See John 10:18.

 

[zaangalewa]

Your doctrine contradicts the words of Jesus. See John 10:18.

You answered before I was ready to read what I wrote. This shows thinkless automatisms. Specially: I don't have any doctrine. And I do not live in fear of god. If "god" fights against life then I will fight against "god". Only god is god. And god is life. God is love. God is truth. It was not god who killed Jesus - it were human beings who killed Jesus. I don't accept your cheap excuse.

 

[Boss]

Let's see boss challenge all that, but watch him try

I don't need to challenge anything. I am not a religious person, I am a spiritualist. Religions are man-made constructs which demonstrate intrinsic human spiritual connection. It's man's way of coping, not with fear or death, but with his own spiritual awareness that he cannot deny.

Now... You and Chris deny your spiritual awareness but there is an underlying reason. You've articulated that you disbelieve because of peer pressure. You weren't cool or hip, people thought you were a square because you believed in God. So in order to feel like you're not such a total loser, you abandoned your spirituality. Now all the cool people like you and think you're alright.

Chris, I strongly suspect, had an incident in her life where someone judged her or condemned her for something she did and she can't get over that. Her way of coping is to attack all things Christian. She comes here armed with atheist talking points, ready to do battle daily in her personal jihad. She has trained herself to believe there is no spirit or soul, that things like love are simply emotional and mean nothing, really. It's just a word people say when chemical shit happens in their brains... nothing else.

Religion is a mixed bag. There are admirable religious people who are good and there are despicable religious people who are bad. However, people who disconnect spiritually have a giant hole they can never fill. They try to fill it by being promiscuous or drinking and doing drugs. They fill their lives with immoral and sick perversions, searching for something that is missing, something they can't ever seem to find. They tell their friends and family they are happy and things are fine, but they know deep down inside they are living a lie. Non-spiritual people suffer more from depression, commit suicide more often, become addicts of some kind and struggle with social and psychological disparity more than those who are spiritually-inclined... not by just a little bit, but nearly 10 to 1.

Our spirituality plays such an important role in who we are as humans that world renown psychiatrist, Sigmund Freud once said... "If God didn't exist, man would have to invent Him." It's hard wired into our DNA. Now... that's not an endorsement for "God" of Abraham or the Bible, but rather, "God" in the generic sense of Spiritual Nature. The "logic" of which, is very simple... Physical nature, by it's own laws and parameters of physics, cannot possibly have created itself. Something greater, therefore, must exist.

 

[there4eyeM]

Humans may have effected the end of Jesus' life, but he consciously delivered himself into the situation.

 

[sealybobo]

Let's see boss challenge all that, but watch him try

I don't need to challenge anything. I am not a religious person, I am a spiritualist. Religions are man-made constructs which demonstrate intrinsic human spiritual connection. It's man's way of coping, not with fear or death, but with his own spiritual awareness that he cannot deny.

Now... You and Chris deny your spiritual awareness but there is an underlying reason. You've articulated that you disbelieve because of peer pressure. You weren't cool or hip, people thought you were a square because you believed in God. So in order to feel like you're not such a total loser, you abandoned your spirituality. Now all the cool people like you and think you're alright.

Chris, I strongly suspect, had an incident in her life where someone judged her or condemned her for something she did and she can't get over that. Her way of coping is to attack all things Christian. She comes here armed with atheist talking points, ready to do battle daily in her personal jihad. She has trained herself to believe there is no spirit or soul, that things like love are simply emotional and mean nothing, really. It's just a word people say when chemical shit happens in their brains... nothing else.

Religion is a mixed bag. There are admirable religious people who are good and there are despicable religious people who are bad. However, people who disconnect spiritually have a giant hole they can never fill. They try to fill it by being promiscuous or drinking and doing drugs. They fill their lives with immoral and sick perversions, searching for something that is missing, something they can't ever seem to find. They tell their friends and family they are happy and things are fine, but they know deep down inside they are living a lie. Non-spiritual people suffer more from depression, commit suicide more often, become addicts of some kind and struggle with social and psychological disparity more than those who are spiritually-inclined... not by just a little bit, but nearly 10 to 1.

Our spirituality plays such an important role in who we are as humans that world renown psychiatrist, Sigmund Freud once said... "If God didn't exist, man would have to invent Him." It's hard wired into our DNA. Now... that's not an endorsement for "God" of Abraham or the Bible, but rather, "God" in the generic sense of Spiritual Nature. The "logic" of which, is very simple... Physical nature, by it's own laws and parameters of physics, cannot possibly have created itself. Something greater, therefore, must exist.

Same reason parents wait as long as possible before telling their kids there is no Santa. Sure, it'd be much nicer if I believed but I can't get myself to believe something I don't. And sure we'd be happier if we thought we had a God looking out for us. Who wouldn't? Or to think a heaven is waiting for us.

But I don't fill the hole with drinking because I have Christian friends who drink more than I do.

People who believe in God don't commit suicide because they think they'll go to hell.

Deep down we are living a lie? No. That's what we did back when we believed.

And trust me dude, I'm not missing anything other than church services.

And what is it you think you benefit from that me and Chris are missing by believing in generic God? You think that makes you a happier person? You'll say yes but deep down I doubt that.

And peer pressure isn't that important but it did help meeting other atheists who helped me realize I wasn't alone. The peer pressure comes from theists not atheists. The 1 atheist you refer to opened my eyes. I was still an atheist when I left his home. If I believed in God I wouldn't care what he said but he made a lot of sense.

I'm glad religion fills the huge gaping hole you just admitted your life would have if you didn't believe.

 

[Dr Grump]

So where did life originate? Why do you exist? Where are you going? Why are you here? How do you know this?

Who knows? All I do know is that it is very, very unlikely some supernatural god is responsible.

 

[sealybobo]

Life

Sensing the universe and the wonder of it does not require dogma.

I find all kinds of things wondrous. Doesn't have to do anything with superstitious beliefs though. For example, I find history to be fascinating and wondrous and I would love to visit some historical sites around the world some day. I also find the universe and how it was created and how vast it is to be wondrous, but that doesn't mean I have to believe that some "entity" created it all.

So where did life originate? Why do you exist? Where are you going? Why are you here? How do you know this?

Life on our planet came from a star or stars that exploded billions of years ago.
You exist because your parents had you. Why does a turtle exist?
I'm going to get a coffee
I'm here because my parents had me.

What are your answers to your own questions?

 

[zaangalewa]

Humans may have effected the end of Jesus' life, but he consciously delivered himself into the situation.

Jesus Christ was a victim of death penalty. To say so is without any doubt true. If you don't take your time and don't like to think about then no one forces you or anyone else to do so. But to misuse Jesus - a victim of death penalty - for a political propaganda for death penalty is more than only disgusting.

 

[there4eyeM]

Choosing to reverse, inverse and totally misinterpret posts qualifies one to go unanswered. You do not understand. Perhaps because this is not your first language. If that is the case, you would be well advised not to engage in complex debates while lacking basic skills.