Thoughts from a Simple Man

[PratchettFan]

We also disagree on the word "fact". You are free to believe as you wish, but all you are doing is expressing your belief - not stating fact.

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

Given that you can't even define spirituality let alone demonstrate what it is, the claim that it is a fact that there are signs of it is pure belief on your part. Every civilization does have religion, but I suspect that has everything to do with how we bond into a unit and nothing to do with this amorphous idea you call spirituality.

BTW, it is not my job to prove you are incorrect. It is yours to prove you are correct. You are not doing your job.

 

[PratchettFan]

We also disagree on the word "fact". You are free to believe as you wish, but all you are doing is expressing your belief - not stating fact.

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

This is my understanding too. There is no civilization discovered in the entire archeological, anthropological, and historical record in which there is no indication of belief in or worship of or recognition of some sort of higher power or deity.

Obviously there have been hugely differing perspectives and conclusions drawn about who and what such dieties are and what the human response to them should be, but however poorly understood, every civilization has had that sense of the divine or supernatural just the same.

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

 

[Foxfyre]

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

This is my understanding too. There is no civilization discovered in the entire archeological, anthropological, and historical record in which there is no indication of belief in or worship of or recognition of some sort of higher power or deity.

Obviously there have been hugely differing perspectives and conclusions drawn about who and what such dieties are and what the human response to them should be, but however poorly understood, every civilization has had that sense of the divine or supernatural just the same.

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

But sometimes religion and government are the same thing. I think most Bible scholars accept the story of Adam and Eve as allegory to explain why things are the way they are. At one point their 'eyes were opened' and they saw that they were naked and they were ashamed. And they clothed themselves. The implication is that all human beings since that time have clothed themselves because they are aware that they are naked.

Of course the story, like almost all Biblical stories, is highly nuanced and the symbolism goes far beyond mere nudity, but is the story a reflection of a sense of morality? I would think so. Scholars beieve it comes from some of the earliest manuscripts that are included in the Bible which likely places the story earlier than the invention of writing.

And perhaps you are correct that there is some sort of government in all civilizations but that is not as apparent in the archeological/anthropological record as are the religious expressions. It is the religious expressions that is so consistent in the record that we have to believe it was of great importance to the people.

The point is that a sense of good and evil, a sense of right and wrong, exists in all human cultures for as far back as we can trace a record. The conclusion is that it is not necessarily a learned trait of humanity, but something inate in the human creature who somehow recognizes the source of it as greater than himself/herself.

 

[Boss]

We also disagree on the word "fact". You are free to believe as you wish, but all you are doing is expressing your belief - not stating fact.

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

Given that you can't even define spirituality let alone demonstrate what it is, the claim that it is a fact that there are signs of it is pure belief on your part. Every civilization does have religion, but I suspect that has everything to do with how we bond into a unit and nothing to do with this amorphous idea you call spirituality.

BTW, it is not my job to prove you are incorrect. It is yours to prove you are correct. You are not doing your job.

Who says I can't (or haven't) defined spirituality or demonstrated what it is? There are signs of it, this is not my opinion, it is a fact. I didn't argue about "religion" that is you misinterpreting human spirituality for a construct OF human spirituality. It's like pointing to the Capitol and saying "that is government." It is a construction, built by a form of government, it's NOT government.

Your job is to prove me incorrect if you state that I am factually incorrect. You're not doing YOUR job.

 

[Boss]

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

Religion is a manifestation of human spirituality, you continue to conflate it with spirituality itself, and that is incorrect. Human spiritual beliefs far predate any known religion...or Government. Now we can bash and trash on religion all day long, for the most part, I'll be right there with you on that, some religions have been nothing but detrimental to man, and they have certainly had a history of violence and hate. But these are NOT human spirituality, they are byproducts of spirituality. Again, analogous to governments, some are terrible and reprehensible, some are noble and just.. we can't single out a bad example of government and condemn all forms of government, past, present and future. It's dishonest.

 

[Foxfyre]

We also disagree on the word "fact". You are free to believe as you wish, but all you are doing is expressing your belief - not stating fact.

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

Given that you can't even define spirituality let alone demonstrate what it is, the claim that it is a fact that there are signs of it is pure belief on your part. Every civilization does have religion, but I suspect that has everything to do with how we bond into a unit and nothing to do with this amorphous idea you call spirituality.

BTW, it is not my job to prove you are incorrect. It is yours to prove you are correct. You are not doing your job.

The definition of spirituality was not really the issue at hand was it? And because it means different things to different people, an iron clad definition for the purposes of this topic would be nigh onto impossible, wouldn't you think? But our sense that there is a spiritual side that is inate in human beings, and that spiritual side is ultimately where our inate sense of right and wrong comes from, is what is being argued. It cannot be proved or disproved because it is an intangible that cannot be measured.

But some of us find the subject itself interesting and appreciate an opportunity to explore it, discuss it, and test our theories about it with those who have a different argument and who will therefore challenge it.

 

[daws101]

hey bossy don't you have a whole other thread to masturbate in?

Hey dawsy... don't you have some offs to fuck?

you're not very GOOD at this are you?

 

[daws101]

best line of the century
LIFE NEEDS NO EXCUSE!!!!!!

 

[PratchettFan]

This is my understanding too. There is no civilization discovered in the entire archeological, anthropological, and historical record in which there is no indication of belief in or worship of or recognition of some sort of higher power or deity.

Obviously there have been hugely differing perspectives and conclusions drawn about who and what such dieties are and what the human response to them should be, but however poorly understood, every civilization has had that sense of the divine or supernatural just the same.

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

But sometimes religion and government are the same thing. I think most Bible scholars accept the story of Adam and Eve as allegory to explain why things are the way they are. At one point their 'eyes were opened' and they saw that they were naked and they were ashamed. And they clothed themselves. The implication is that all human beings since that time have clothed themselves because they are aware that they are naked.

Of course the story, like almost all Biblical stories, is highly nuanced and the symbolism goes far beyond mere nudity, but is the story a reflection of a sense of morality? I would think so. Scholars beieve it comes from some of the earliest manuscripts that are included in the Bible which likely places the story earlier than the invention of writing.

And perhaps you are correct that there is some sort of government in all civilizations but that is not as apparent in the archeological/anthropological record as are the religious expressions. It is the religious expressions that is so consistent in the record that we have to believe it was of great importance to the people.

The point is that a sense of good and evil, a sense of right and wrong, exists in all human cultures for as far back as we can trace a record. The conclusion is that it is not necessarily a learned trait of humanity, but something inate in the human creature who somehow recognizes the source of it as greater than himself/herself.

Humans clothe themselves because they have no fur and they freeze or burn if the don't. What is acceptable as clothing varies from culture to culture with nudity being accepted in tribes where the temperatures are warm. Mores related to clothing are far more likely to be about creating sexual tension and thus encouraging reproduction than about knowledge of our nakedness.

A sense of good and evil are entirely dependent upon one's position within a given society. The very same action can be deemed either good or evil based upon the circumstances. It is not about some great sense of right and wrong, it is about how the members of the society get along.

There really is nothing humans do that can't be explained without any spirituality involved. Human beings are animals and the bulk of their behavior is driven by instinct. Reproduction and survival, attract a mate and maintain your position within the group - that is what it is about.

That is not to say such a thing as spirituality does not exist, only that to claim it is a fact is absurd. The first step is to identify what it is we are talking about and no one has even come close to that so far. to this point it has just been pointing to a behavior - which can be explained from a biological perspective - and say "See. Spirituality."

 

[PratchettFan]

My statement of "fact" was: Every human civilization we've discovered, shows signs of human spirituality. Unless you can show evidence that I am incorrect, it's an indisputable fact. Now, maybe there were human civilizations devoid of spirituality, and we've not discovered them? I don't know, I can't prove something we don't know. But my statement was a fact, and not subject to your opinion to the contrary. Your opinion simply contradicts the known fact.

Given that you can't even define spirituality let alone demonstrate what it is, the claim that it is a fact that there are signs of it is pure belief on your part. Every civilization does have religion, but I suspect that has everything to do with how we bond into a unit and nothing to do with this amorphous idea you call spirituality.

BTW, it is not my job to prove you are incorrect. It is yours to prove you are correct. You are not doing your job.

The definition of spirituality was not really the issue at hand was it? And because it means different things to different people, an iron clad definition for the purposes of this topic would be nigh onto impossible, wouldn't you think? But our sense that there is a spiritual side that is inate in human beings, and that spiritual side is ultimately where our inate sense of right and wrong comes from, is what is being argued. It cannot be proved or disproved because it is an intangible that cannot be measured.

But some of us find the subject itself interesting and appreciate an opportunity to explore it, discuss it, and test our theories about it with those who have a different argument and who will therefore challenge it.

I am not aruging against what you believe, only stating that it is a belief. I am responding to Boss' claim that it is a FACT. His capitals, BTW.

 

[PratchettFan]

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

Religion is a manifestation of human spirituality, you continue to conflate it with spirituality itself, and that is incorrect. Human spiritual beliefs far predate any known religion...or Government. Now we can bash and trash on religion all day long, for the most part, I'll be right there with you on that, some religions have been nothing but detrimental to man, and they have certainly had a history of violence and hate. But these are NOT human spirituality, they are byproducts of spirituality. Again, analogous to governments, some are terrible and reprehensible, some are noble and just.. we can't single out a bad example of government and condemn all forms of government, past, present and future. It's dishonest.

Well, you won't be with me because I think religion has been an enormous positive for humans. I don't blame religion for bad things. People do bad things, not institutions.

No, I'm saying that until you can tell me what spirituality is then it's just a word. It means whatever you want it to mean and it conveys no information at all.

 

[daws101]

Given that you can't even define spirituality let alone demonstrate what it is, the claim that it is a fact that there are signs of it is pure belief on your part. Every civilization does have religion, but I suspect that has everything to do with how we bond into a unit and nothing to do with this amorphous idea you call spirituality.

BTW, it is not my job to prove you are incorrect. It is yours to prove you are correct. You are not doing your job.

The definition of spirituality was not really the issue at hand was it? And because it means different things to different people, an iron clad definition for the purposes of this topic would be nigh onto impossible, wouldn't you think? But our sense that there is a spiritual side that is inate in human beings, and that spiritual side is ultimately where our inate sense of right and wrong comes from, is what is being argued. It cannot be proved or disproved because it is an intangible that cannot be measured.

But some of us find the subject itself interesting and appreciate an opportunity to explore it, discuss it, and test our theories about it with those who have a different argument and who will therefore challenge it.

I am not aruging against what you believe, only stating that it is a belief. I am responding to Boss' claim that it is a FACT. His capitals, BTW.

to a lot of people believing IS fact..especially when there are no facts to bolster that belief.
TO quote jim morrison "people are strange."

 

[hobelim]

Okay, so men have used their spiritual connection in terrible ways. They have allowed their imaginations to run wild, and used the human attribute of spirituality for nefarious purposes. This only confirms mankind's intrinsic connection to something spiritual, by demonstrating how other men have exploited that fact.

You can show us all kinds of things through the ages which man has mistakenly attributed to spiritual nature, but what you've failed to show me, is scientific peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist, or that it is mere superstition. Those are your OPINIONS, and they aren't based in science of any kind.

What you call the attribute for spirituality I call being gullible.

When a hypnotist makes a person act silly without even knowing they are acting silly and they don't even retain a memory of acting silly are they having a spiritual experience or are they just a victim of mind control?

How is religion any different? How is what we understand as mind control any different than what the ancients described as demonic possession?


There is nothing spiritual about one person exchanging their birthright as a sentient being for the deeply held religious sentiments of a crazy person.


Being conned is not a religious experience. People are not born religious they are taught to outwardly profess to believe whatever religion they happened to be born into with threats of real and imagined violence, the terror of which some minds never recover.


The history of people being conned is not proof of spirituality, just evidence that some people are as unscrupulous as others are gullible, dingbat.



What do you think the hope of a new age is about if not a universal longing for a time when people stop acting like crazy animals completely out of their tree where real peace of mind and universal peace on earth will be the reality?

 

[Foxfyre]

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

But sometimes religion and government are the same thing. I think most Bible scholars accept the story of Adam and Eve as allegory to explain why things are the way they are. At one point their 'eyes were opened' and they saw that they were naked and they were ashamed. And they clothed themselves. The implication is that all human beings since that time have clothed themselves because they are aware that they are naked.

Of course the story, like almost all Biblical stories, is highly nuanced and the symbolism goes far beyond mere nudity, but is the story a reflection of a sense of morality? I would think so. Scholars beieve it comes from some of the earliest manuscripts that are included in the Bible which likely places the story earlier than the invention of writing.

And perhaps you are correct that there is some sort of government in all civilizations but that is not as apparent in the archeological/anthropological record as are the religious expressions. It is the religious expressions that is so consistent in the record that we have to believe it was of great importance to the people.

The point is that a sense of good and evil, a sense of right and wrong, exists in all human cultures for as far back as we can trace a record. The conclusion is that it is not necessarily a learned trait of humanity, but something inate in the human creature who somehow recognizes the source of it as greater than himself/herself.

Humans clothe themselves because they have no fur and they freeze or burn if the don't. What is acceptable as clothing varies from culture to culture with nudity being accepted in tribes where the temperatures are warm. Mores related to clothing are far more likely to be about creating sexual tension and thus encouraging reproduction than about knowledge of our nakedness.

A sense of good and evil are entirely dependent upon one's position within a given society. The very same action can be deemed either good or evil based upon the circumstances. It is not about some great sense of right and wrong, it is about how the members of the society get along.

There really is nothing humans do that can't be explained without any spirituality involved. Human beings are animals and the bulk of their behavior is driven by instinct. Reproduction and survival, attract a mate and maintain your position within the group - that is what it is about.

That is not to say such a thing as spirituality does not exist, only that to claim it is a fact is absurd. The first step is to identify what it is we are talking about and no one has even come close to that so far. to this point it has just been pointing to a behavior - which can be explained from a biological perspective - and say "See. Spirituality."

But both Boss and I have defined spirituality in this context as a discernment of something greater than ourselves, a sense of the divine or supernatural or however one would choose to define that. And it is that same discernment that can be attributed to a sense of right and wrong that seems to exist in all normal human beings. The true sociopath with no sense of right or wrong is so rare he is easily seen as an anomaly and defective among our species.

And just as we cannot prove that other than via our own personal testimony and using the stated testimony and observed behavior of others as support for our testimony, you cannot disprove that our testimony is either absurd or fabrication or wrong.

A fact is a fact whether or not it can be tested and supported by any known methods invented thus far by humans.

Disclaimer: I am stating this as my observation that Boss and I are on the same page on this one single point. If I am wrong about his position, I invite him to correct my observation.

 

[Boss]

I agree that religion is certainly present. However, so is government. Is that also proof of spirituality? Clothing is also present, tool making, and even the keeping of pets. More spirituality?

Religion is probably nothing more than a counterweight to government. Government wield immediate power but is transient. Religion endorses power and, through the use of eternal beings, provides stability. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with survival of the tribe.

Religion is a manifestation of human spirituality, you continue to conflate it with spirituality itself, and that is incorrect. Human spiritual beliefs far predate any known religion...or Government. Now we can bash and trash on religion all day long, for the most part, I'll be right there with you on that, some religions have been nothing but detrimental to man, and they have certainly had a history of violence and hate. But these are NOT human spirituality, they are byproducts of spirituality. Again, analogous to governments, some are terrible and reprehensible, some are noble and just.. we can't single out a bad example of government and condemn all forms of government, past, present and future. It's dishonest.

Well, you won't be with me because I think religion has been an enormous positive for humans. I don't blame religion for bad things. People do bad things, not institutions.

No, I'm saying that until you can tell me what spirituality is then it's just a word. It means whatever you want it to mean and it conveys no information at all.

Many religions have been enormously positive, but religions are not the topic. They are evidence of human spirituality. You can pretend to be stupid and not understand what is meant by "spiritual" all day long, I can't stop you. I've defined it as whatever "thing" humans feel they are connecting to, that is greater than self, and which Dorito admits is inherent in humans, and all animals, for that matter. Now that I have defined the word for you, maybe you can show me some evidence that humans don't have it. Because all the evidence I see, from the very first civilizations we know of, until this very day, show that humans have always had a very strong and intrinsic spiritual connection to SOMETHING! This is called SPIRITUALITY! It is real, it does exist.

The question then becomes, is spirituality legitimate, do people actually make some kind of real connection? ...and again, the evidence suggests they do. You're not presenting any evidence to the contrary, you're just repeating your cries for some kind of physical evidence to "prove" a spiritual nature, and that is plain old illogical, if it could provide you with physical evidence, it would not be spiritual. Physical evidence is great and wonderful, it provides us with a lot of understanding in our material universe, but it pertains to our five senses, and spiritual nature is not really measurable by those.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Religion is a manifestation of human spirituality, you continue to conflate it with spirituality itself, and that is incorrect. Human spiritual beliefs far predate any known religion...or Government. Now we can bash and trash on religion all day long, for the most part, I'll be right there with you on that, some religions have been nothing but detrimental to man, and they have certainly had a history of violence and hate. But these are NOT human spirituality, they are byproducts of spirituality. Again, analogous to governments, some are terrible and reprehensible, some are noble and just.. we can't single out a bad example of government and condemn all forms of government, past, present and future. It's dishonest.

Well, you won't be with me because I think religion has been an enormous positive for humans. I don't blame religion for bad things. People do bad things, not institutions.

No, I'm saying that until you can tell me what spirituality is then it's just a word. It means whatever you want it to mean and it conveys no information at all.

Many religions have been enormously positive, but religions are not the topic. They are evidence of human spirituality. You can pretend to be stupid and not understand what is meant by "spiritual" all day long, I can't stop you. I've defined it as whatever "thing" humans feel they are connecting to, that is greater than self, and which Dorito admits is inherent in humans, and all animals, for that matter. Now that I have defined the word for you, maybe you can show me some evidence that humans don't have it. Because all the evidence I see, from the very first civilizations we know of, until this very day, show that humans have always had a very strong and intrinsic spiritual connection to SOMETHING! This is called SPIRITUALITY! It is real, it does exist.

The question then becomes, is spirituality legitimate, do people actually make some kind of real connection? ...and again, the evidence suggests they do. You're not presenting any evidence to the contrary, you're just repeating your cries for some kind of physical evidence to "prove" a spiritual nature, and that is plain old illogical, if it could provide you with physical evidence, it would not be spiritual. Physical evidence is great and wonderful, it provides us with a lot of understanding in our material universe, but it pertains to our five senses, and spiritual nature is not really measurable by those.

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

 

[Boss]

Okay, so men have used their spiritual connection in terrible ways. They have allowed their imaginations to run wild, and used the human attribute of spirituality for nefarious purposes. This only confirms mankind's intrinsic connection to something spiritual, by demonstrating how other men have exploited that fact.

You can show us all kinds of things through the ages which man has mistakenly attributed to spiritual nature, but what you've failed to show me, is scientific peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist, or that it is mere superstition. Those are your OPINIONS, and they aren't based in science of any kind.

What you call the attribute for spirituality I call being gullible.

The problem with this is, it contradict Darwinism completely. You are maintaining that the "gullible" wing of our primordial ancestors, excelled over the "smarter" group, who were not burdened by stupidity. This disputes Darwin. Now, either present some peer-reviewed science to back this up, like you always enjoy bragging about, or shut your pie hole.

When a hypnotist makes a person act silly without even knowing they are acting silly and they don't even retain a memory of acting silly are they having a spiritual experience or are they just a victim of mind control?

How is religion any different? How is what we understand as mind control any different than what the ancients described as demonic possession?

First... ANY reputable practitioner of hypnosis will tell you, people do not behave any way under hypnosis than they wouldn't behave otherwise. You've been watching too many movies, or night club acts. Mind control is purely science fiction. The CIA may have some mind-altering drugs, and things like "truth serum" but we have no way of actually controlling a human mind to make it do as we please.

I don't know a lot about religion, which religion are we talking about? When have I mentioned religions? I have pointed out, numerous times, religion is evidence of human spirituality, and that is all. They are NOT human spiritual connection itself. Two different things.... The Capitol Building and the US Government.... Two different things... Got it?

There is nothing spiritual about one person exchanging their birthright as a sentient being for the deeply held religious sentiments of a crazy person. Being conned is not a religious experience. People are not born religious they are taught to outwardly profess to believe whatever religion they happened to be born into with threats of real and imagined violence, the terror of which some minds never recover.The history of people being conned is not proof of spirituality, just evidence that some people are as unscrupulous as others are gullible, dingbat.What do you think the hope of a new age is about if not a universal longing for a time when people stop acting like crazy animals completely out of their tree where real peace of mind and universal peace on earth will be the reality?

On and on and on you go about RELIGIONS! Do you have some sort of brain disconnect that keeps you from comprehending the words I am typing? Religion is not spirituality. It is proof that people are spiritual, it is the manifestation of people's various spiritual-based beliefs, and if not for human spiritual connection, would not exist. But religions are not spiritual connection, it's two different things we are talking about, and you just want to keep going on and on about religion. I get that you don't like religion, I don't like a lot of religions myself. It's why I am non-religious. Human spirituality has existed LONG before man ever even dreamed of the first religion.

Now, let's deal with this constant theme you have, of proclaiming humans "stupid" and "duped" into believing falsehoods. It can't be true, because the other upper primates in our family tree, would have surpassed us a long time ago. The more we wasted time on a useless endeavor of this delusional belief in nothing, they would have spent gaining knowledge and excelling as a species, and we would have quickly been left behind. We may have become extinct, like Neanderthal, who didn't really catch on to the whole "spiritual" thing until it was too late. But as Dorito points out, humans do seem to gain a sense of connection to something that encourages, lifts them up, inspires, and motivates them to be stronger physically or mentally, to meet challenge. This has been an attribute our species is known for, as long as we've been around.

 

[theword]

Neither religion or science was used to find the Truth. The Truth created religion and science to help His saints understand His invisible creation but at the same time, deceive the rest of His people by making them believe religion and science is something real.

 

[Boss]

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

 

[Derideo_Te]

As usual Boss is pulling his "spiritual connection" out of his rear end. It is all just a jumbo-jumbo, snake-oil, smoke-and-mirrors act to pretend that the trance state which exists in mammals (including animals) is some kind to "evidence" for the "existence" of his "creator". Furthermore it won't make the slightest difference asking him to provide anything substantive because he relies upon his superstitious "evidence" and accuses you of being wrong when you point out that it doesn't actually exist.

Having become a laughing stock in his original thread Boss is looking to hijack other threads in the vain hope of finding "converts" to his lost cause. Instead there will just be an even greater number of people laughing at his absurd "spiritual evidence".

...it most certainly does enable one to reach a sense of "inner peace" and a "feeling of connectivity"

I didn't pull this out of my rear end, I pulled it from a quote you posted yesterday in this thread. It is acknowledgement that humans do attain some value in spiritual connectivity. I think this is a huge step for you, Dorito. I've been using it today as an example to show others, that there is something intrinsic and fundamental about human spirituality.

I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, I don't care what you believe. I won't sit here and let you lie about what isn't factual, and claim you know all there is to know, when you don't. How the hell can you be so arrogant as to proclaim you know what exists in the entire universe? Where is your peer-reviewed evidence that spiritual nature doesn't exist?

You can try and make fun of me, if that's what you think will work here, I don't believe it will. You're chortling to your own choir with that crap. I came out of the box here with a 4,000-post thread which had over 10k views, I am proud of that to be honest, and I don't see anywhere in the thread where you made a fool of anyone but yourself.

Ironic given that you are lying yet again about your "creationist agenda". Nowhere did I claim that the trance state was "spiritual" connectivity but this is just your typical distortion of what others posted to meet your nefarious "creationist agenda". Too bad you also lied by omission that 90% of that thread you are so proud of was about debunking your mindless drivel.

I don't need to make fun of you. You became an object of ridicule all by yourself and judging by the fact that you haven't learned anything in the 1st thread you are about to become one to an even wider audience.

So whatever you do don't let me stop you from making a fool of yourself again!