So which of your relatives was the liar?
|
| Dover | Remove this stupid comment |
|
3 up. You are swirling in samantics. God and radiation is not analogous. God is a rumor based on simple-minded men with an agenda living 2000 years ago who wrote a book that have been rewritten by other men with their own agenda. They made their god a man because men ruled the world back then. It is not unlike that of victors in war. The write the history and make the agenda. That agenda has been passed down through the family tree as truth and is given legitimacy by parents who it was given to by their parents and so on. By the way, how do you know your god is a man other than how I just explained it.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
1 up. You are correct. It is called faith for a reason. But just because people have it does not mean that those who don't have faith are wrong. That is why it is called faith. It is based on conjecture. If I am going to believe on a god concept based on conjecture I may as well worship a rock. At least a pretty one.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
It's called faith morons. Just because you don't have it doesn't make those who do wrong.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
7^ Easy actually, though you set it up as a straw man. Radiation and God are analogous circumstances. Radiation would not have been discovered, tools to see it would not have been devised, without a preceding belief in its existence based off subjective observation.However, I was speaking more about the soul, not the Christian version of God. Everything we know about human anatomy and physiology is insufficient to explain the reality our subjective experiences.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
In regard to the original comment let me just say...that's crazy talk.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
its all fecal matter !!
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^What experience isn't just that...a thought? if dismissing the reality others experience gets you to sleep at night, you should just keep it to yourself.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
It's a nice thought but just that...a thought. Whatever gets you to sleep at night...
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
I like dreamtime. ^thanks for sharing.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^ROLMFAO^^
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
cont... "Yes! Yes!, it must be the gods and they are pissed for some reason. Let's get the f u c k in the cave before they start throwing more fire at us. Oh, shit. The fire outside. We forgot to put out the fire. The gods will be able to see us. Penelope, get your nasty ass out to the entrance and put out the fire before I drag you out there by the hair." Ah, yes. The adventures of togetherness, trials, tribulations, creation, and Truth.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
2 up. I see you are the one not interested in truth. If you are not willing to see through a typo, then nothing anyone says to you will be relevant. Especially considering that your own typo of 200 years should have read 2000 years as in my statement. But we both know you are not interested in truth; only oneupmanship. I mentioned semantics not to be avoiding debate at all, but rather, I was simply illustrating that your points in argument had stalled in substance and has simply begun to run in circles. So, if an idea of a god of some type has been around since man began to communicate with each other, that somehow warrants the legitimacy that a god exists? I can see it now. Men are sitting outside a cave chewing meat off a bone around a campfire. A meteor streaks across the sky in their presence for the first time. Freaked out, they scramble into the cave. Then slowly emerge with only half their faces exposed at the entrance as they gaze into the night sky. "Wh..wh..What was that?", they whisper to each other. "What was that?" The one among the tribe who had a bit more creativity than the others, you know, like an artist would today, speaks and says, "It..it.. it.. must be the gods". "Bu...Bu...But, what are gods", the others ask. "The gods are the ones who put us here among nature", says the creative one. "Ohhh", the others respond in amazement.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
I like the oral tradition........
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^God, the idea of a creator, is much older than 200 years. As far back as oral tradition goes, there have been tribes on this planet that believed in a Creator.If you call what I said before "swirling in semantics," then I guess that absolves you from actually responding to any of it. How convenient. Your statements on religion have some bearing with religion, but I was not speaking of religion. Try reading something all the way through, moroff, instead of pushing your own agenda at every opportunity. you might learn something.And it's are, as in God and radiation ARE not analogous. I see why you steer clear of semantics.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Op umm more ninja than vampire. And wow interesting, thanks for your comments. Now u see why i keep it a secret
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
2^ No, that's what you assumed my deduction was, which makes it your deduction. You consistently set up my arguments as straw men that a 10yo could argue against: "So, if an idea of a god of some type has been around since man began to communicate with each other, that somehow warrants the legitimacy that a god exists?" You fail to comprehend my hypothesis, because you are locked into an agenda and making assumptions of my thoughts based on your agenda's stereotyping of "believers." Enjoy that.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
that SURE is some antics !!!
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^Read your comment again. Then read what I posted. I explained your semantics in my next sentence. That is exactly what deduction is. If you cannot deduce from that then you do not understand deductive reasoning by definition. Therefore, your hypothesis will simply be relegated to semantics.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
5^ Again, you spend half a comment talking about semantics. You claim I lack substance and fail to say how. It's clear you are not familiar with the use of deductive and inductive logic. You're actually worse than a most Christians for pushing an agenda. You illustrated nothing."that somehow warrants the legitimacy that a god exists?" No, you missed the point, because you are focused on your agenda. It was a response to your initial diatribe on the Christian God and the agenda of believers. You are no different than them. Actually, you are worse. At least they are upfront with having an agenda, while you claim to represent science and objectivity.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^ STFU if you are not intelligent enough to engage this conversation. If that is all you can say, you are in over your head.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
WOOOOOOOOWIEEEEEEEEEE....the inpatients got to the computer again....call security !!!!!!
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
I think this existence is an illusion
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
empirical ?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
.....And what empirical evidence to you have to prove your belief?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
The Aboriginals believe in a concept called the "Dreamtime". Its purely mythical, but the concept does have some interesting characteristics. The "Dreamtime" is the place you come from before you are born, the place you co-exist with while you are alive, and the place you return to when you die. Time does not exist in the "Dreamtime" and has no meaning. The concept points out the requirement of memory to perceive time. Being able to remember the past, comparing memories of the past to present observations, and using those memories and observations to anticipate the future are essential components to self-awareness. All said and done, our awareness is composed of memories. When we die, we continue to live in the memories of others. So, in a way we only exist because we know that others also exist.In the end, all we have is each other... When good people pass on, we honor them by remembering their positive traits and aspiring to be better people in their image. I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation, but we're on the same page.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^ Not going anywhere. I understand enough to know you are an intellectual poser with narcissistic tendencies.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
1 up. Go away light weight. You do not even understand the basic tenets of debate.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
You have the right and freedom to believe what ever you choose to stir up but in the end there's only truth and /od is its author and his word say to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. You already held those skills but held no faith in it until someone you loved with the same skill died convincing yourself you've inherited their skill when if you believed in yourself you'd realize you possessed the skill all along. Believe in you, believe in who you are you don't need any one else to make you worthy!!! You are already priceless!!!! You just have to believe!!!
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
6 up. Yes, Empirical. I asked the OP what empirical evidence do they have to believe what they do. If they have no empirical evidence then it is based on guessing and emotions, which of course, means their position on the matter is b u l l s h i t
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Nope. When you die, you go to hell. There is noone that goes to Heaven anymore. They haven't gone to Heaven for 2000 years. You need to get use to the idea that you will die and have unimaginable horror for all eternity.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Jim Morrison believed that the souls of dying Navahos entered him when his family came upon a pickup truck carrying several Indians overturned in New Mexico. He was 8 when it happened. Of course, we all know how he turned out.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
What a bunch of bull.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
that is an interesting analogy.If I were gonna head in that line of thought I am more likely to think that that the energy dispersement would be like a last contact with certain loved ones here on earth. kind of like a goodbye.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
..as in concrete evidence ?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
1 up: LOL
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^ was it amazing? thank you :)~
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
so you absorbed amazing cock sucking ability?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
The word empirical denotes information gained by means of observation or experiments
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
2up.....and what in HELL is empirical ?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
I'll be right back-(I need to move my bowels)
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
1 up. People like you is why leaders of countries oppress people. You cannot have it both ways. Either he OP has the truth about the afterlife, or they are wrong.Period! If the Op cannot provide empirical proof that the afterlife exists, then they are wrong. It is plain and simple. It is even more simple than you. So, why can't you see it?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
People can believe whatever they wantto believe. Who are you people to judge them because of it. Also, "empirical" evidence is not needed to have the beliefs that have. Maybe the OP should be asking you what turned you so cynical? Some people are more spiritual in their beliefs while some need evidence. Neither is wrong, it is just who we are. Don't listen to the empirical one and let people put you down for the way you believe. People who judge others do it out of their own insecurities.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
ok...."the new road is asphalt, and I have concrete evidence"
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Don't be-LIEve anything. Know and be certain within yourself. I noticed OP, you said "think" and explained this is something you have experienced. That is more in line with knowing than believing. I don't know if what you claim is correct or not. I think it's possible. I also think it's possible darker traits could be absorbed under the right conditions. Read Dark Materials by Philip Pullman. All very interesting.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
1 ^ Correct. Empirical, as in concrete evidence.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
^They are also assuring where everyone else is going too.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
2 up. Not only do they think they have a lock on the afterlife. They are predicting, no, they are assuring everyone where they will spend their time in the afterlife.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Are you a vampire?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
One thing I don't understand is how religious people can believe their god exists. They have never seen him. They have never touched him. They have never talked to him. Hell, they don't know for sure if their god is a woman. Yet they think that they have a lock on reality about the afterlife.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
Radiation and the existence of God are two different circumstances. How can you compare radiation existing since the beginning of time until it was discovered and the existance of God in the present day when he supposedly existed among the world 2000 years ago, but has not shown himself again since they strung up Jesus on a cross?
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
People who demand empirical evidence for things which defy measurement by current scientific instruments are retarded. Plenty of things exist for which we lack the tools to measure. Radiation for instance was here long before humans devised a means prove its existence. If you can't prove or disprove something empirically, then the only relevant question is whether it holds up to logic, which is deductive and inductive thought.
|
| Remove this stupid comment |
|
