Why do/don't you believe in ? ?
Options
Comments
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »@Judahxulu What Are You Talking About No Internets & Airplanes Back Then, What Made You Say that Goofy ? ?
Far as Explaining The Floods Scientifically, Why I Thought I Address This Flood stories are quite common in ancient mythologies around the world. Each of these myths arise in areas where independent local floods occurred. You Explain Why They are Similar to The Bible & Some of Them Pre Date the Bible! Let's Deal with the One You Seem to Believe & Work From There! Don't Think it Skipped me That You're Ignoring My Questions.
i accept ALL of them. u cant box me into your damn concept. the similarities are not just that there was a flood and its plain as day in the text i.e. animals, a patriarch with sons and wives, evil on the earth being the cause etc. -
maestro_lungs wrote: »With All Those Flood Stories...You Just Named, What is Your Reason for Thinking The Bible Flood is a True Literal Story?
? when did i say it was literal. another of your stupid ? presuppositions. quit projecting -
maestro_lungs wrote: »@Judahuxulu The Story of Jesus
Horus
"the Way, the Truth, the Life"
Of all the savior-gods worshiped Horus may have contributed more to the story of Christ than any other figure. Inscribed about 3,500 years ago [1500 years before Jesus' alleged advent] on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, and Adoration of Horus. It tells of Thoth announcing to the ? Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph the "Holy Ghost" impregnating the ? ; and with the birth being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. Countless parallels can be found when comparing stories of Horus to the stories of Jesus.
in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the ? mother Isis - the original "Madonna and Child."
You Also Don't Seem to Know who Odin is..Other Than the Father of Favorite Comic Book Character Odin is a Norse ? , the father of Balder, and Wednesday is named after him (Wodan). He was apparently hung on a tree and pierced with a spear, as Jesus was.
Peep The Similarities Between Buddah & Jesus Both went to their temples at the age of twelve, where they are said to have astonished all with their wisdom. Both supposedly fasted in solitude for a long time: Buddha for forty–seven days and Jesus for forty. Both wandered to a fig tree at the conclusion of their fasts. Both were about the same age when they began their public ministry:
“When he [Buddha] went again to the garden he saw a monk who was calm, tranquil, self–possessed, serene, and dignified. The prince, determined to become such a monk, was led to make the great renunciation. At the time he was twenty–nine years of age… “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age.” (Luke 3:23). Both were tempted by the “devil” at the beginning of their ministry: To Buddha, he said: “Go not forth to adopt a religious life but return to your kingdom, and in seven days you shall become emperor of the world, riding over the four continents.” To Jesus, he said: “All these [kingdoms of the world] I will give you, if you fall down and worship me” (Matthew 4:9). Buddha answered the “devil”: “Get you away from me.”
Jesus responded: “…begone, Satan!” (Matthew 4:10). Both strove to establish a kingdom of heaven on earth. According to the Somadeva (a Buddhist holy book), a Buddhist ascetic’s eye once offended him, so he plucked it out and cast it away. Jesus said: “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out, and throw it away;.” (Matthew 5:29).
You Have Krishna According to Bhagavata Purana some believe that Krishna was born without a sexual union, by “mental transmission” from the mind of Vasudeva into the ? of Devaki, his mother. Christ and Krishna were called both ? and the Son of ? . Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man. Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity. Krishna’s adoptive human father was also a carpenter. A spirit or ghost was their actual father. Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent. Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star. Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to ? the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna’s parents stayed in Mathura. Both Christ and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted. Both were identified as “the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.” Jesus was called “the lion of the tribe of Judah.” Krishna was called “the lion of the tribe of Saki.” Both claimed: “I am the Resurrection.” Both were “without sin.” Both were ? -men: being considered both human and divine. Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a ? whole. Each cured “all manner of diseases.” Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead. Both selected disciples to spread his teachings. Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners. Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies. Both were crucified and both were resurrected.
There's about 9 More, But Somehow The Story of Jesus is The Real one & I'm The Arrogant One
these stories all arose independent of one another is the point. u only have proof of similarities NOT DERIVATION! -
maestro_lungs wrote: »@Judahxulu What Are You Talking About No Internets & Airplanes Back Then, What Made You Say that Goofy ? ?
Far as Explaining The Floods Scientifically, Why I Thought I Address This Flood stories are quite common in ancient mythologies around the world. Each of these myths arise in areas where independent local floods occurred. You Explain Why They are Similar to The Bible & Some of Them Pre Date the Bible! Let's Deal with the One You Seem to Believe & Work From There! Don't Think it Skipped me That You're Ignoring My Questions.
i accept ALL of them. u cant box me into your damn concept. the similarities are not just that there was a flood and its plain as day in the text i.e. animals, a patriarch with sons and wives, evil on the earth being the cause etc.
You Are a Fool To Accept Anything You Have No Proof or Evidence of & I Wouldn't Waste my Time Trying To Disprove Each Flood Story to You, They Could Very well Be True or Have some Truth to It, But The Similarities Being what They are. You Should of Figured it Out You're Convinced of Some ? & Calling Yourself Intelligent
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »@Judahuxulu The Story of Jesus
Horus
"the Way, the Truth, the Life"
Of all the savior-gods worshiped Horus may have contributed more to the story of Christ than any other figure. Inscribed about 3,500 years ago [1500 years before Jesus' alleged advent] on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, and Adoration of Horus. It tells of Thoth announcing to the ? Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph the "Holy Ghost" impregnating the ? ; and with the birth being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. Countless parallels can be found when comparing stories of Horus to the stories of Jesus.
in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the ? mother Isis - the original "Madonna and Child."
You Also Don't Seem to Know who Odin is..Other Than the Father of Favorite Comic Book Character Odin is a Norse ? , the father of Balder, and Wednesday is named after him (Wodan). He was apparently hung on a tree and pierced with a spear, as Jesus was.
Peep The Similarities Between Buddah & Jesus Both went to their temples at the age of twelve, where they are said to have astonished all with their wisdom. Both supposedly fasted in solitude for a long time: Buddha for forty–seven days and Jesus for forty. Both wandered to a fig tree at the conclusion of their fasts. Both were about the same age when they began their public ministry:
“When he [Buddha] went again to the garden he saw a monk who was calm, tranquil, self–possessed, serene, and dignified. The prince, determined to become such a monk, was led to make the great renunciation. At the time he was twenty–nine years of age… “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age.” (Luke 3:23). Both were tempted by the “devil” at the beginning of their ministry: To Buddha, he said: “Go not forth to adopt a religious life but return to your kingdom, and in seven days you shall become emperor of the world, riding over the four continents.” To Jesus, he said: “All these [kingdoms of the world] I will give you, if you fall down and worship me” (Matthew 4:9). Buddha answered the “devil”: “Get you away from me.”
Jesus responded: “…begone, Satan!” (Matthew 4:10). Both strove to establish a kingdom of heaven on earth. According to the Somadeva (a Buddhist holy book), a Buddhist ascetic’s eye once offended him, so he plucked it out and cast it away. Jesus said: “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out, and throw it away;.” (Matthew 5:29).
You Have Krishna According to Bhagavata Purana some believe that Krishna was born without a sexual union, by “mental transmission” from the mind of Vasudeva into the ? of Devaki, his mother. Christ and Krishna were called both ? and the Son of ? . Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man. Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity. Krishna’s adoptive human father was also a carpenter. A spirit or ghost was their actual father. Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent. Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star. Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to ? the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna’s parents stayed in Mathura. Both Christ and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted. Both were identified as “the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.” Jesus was called “the lion of the tribe of Judah.” Krishna was called “the lion of the tribe of Saki.” Both claimed: “I am the Resurrection.” Both were “without sin.” Both were ? -men: being considered both human and divine. Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a ? whole. Each cured “all manner of diseases.” Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead. Both selected disciples to spread his teachings. Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners. Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies. Both were crucified and both were resurrected.
There's about 9 More, But Somehow The Story of Jesus is The Real one & I'm The Arrogant One
these stories all arose independent of one another is the point. u only have proof of similarities NOT DERIVATION!
Proof of Similarities Makes the Point That it's Highly Unlikely it is True! In Fact Some Are Stories That WE KNOW AREN'T True...
Dionysus was born of a ? on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger. He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles. He “rode in a triumphal procession on an ass.” He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification. Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25. He was the ? of the Vine, and turned water into wine. He was called “King of Kings” and “? of Gods.” He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.” He was identified with the Ram or Lamb. His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified. -
maestro_lungs wrote: »With All Those Flood Stories...You Just Named, What is Your Reason for Thinking The Bible Flood is a True Literal Story?
? when did i say it was literal. another of your stupid ? presuppositions. quit projecting
What is Your Point? You Mentioned it as if it Happen, When You wanted to Go Off on Your Meaningless Tangent About Who Wrote The Story in The Bible about a Flood that Didn't Happen! What was Your Reason for Bringing it up Again? -
Were the flooded places near oceans, large lakes etc? -
maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
-
alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
I have a Absoluteness About my Claim? Where? I'm Just Pointing out Things That Make it Highly Unlikely, Religion Claims to Be Certain, I'm Just Pointing out How There is No way to Be Certain. How Can Someone be a 100% That ? Exist? This is The Catch 22 You Trying to put me in, but it won't work. when I say, “No, I’m not 100% sure that there is no ? , there’s almost nothing that we can be 100% sure of — but so what, we can still make reasonable conclusions about what’s probable and plausible based on the available evidence, and all the evidence we have now points to ? not existing, so I feel confident in rejecting the ? hypothesis unless I see better evidence”… or if i say “Yes, I’m 100% sure that there is no ? : I Mean Cause the fragment of hypothetical possibility that ? exists is so insignificant that it’s not even worth considering, I’m 100% certain that there are no leprechauns or unicorns — or as close to 100% as anyone could reasonably expect — and I see no reason to treat ? any differently”, So we can Argue Semantics, But I'm I'm not saying nothing different or Selling Absoluteness, Unless You Agree with my Points & Perceive as That. I Suggest you Don't just take My word or Anybodies word..Look it up & Cross Reference it...Be Skeptic & Question Everything, Even Yourself! -
maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
I have a Absoluteness About my Claim? Where? I'm Just Pointing out Things That Make it Highly Unlikely, Religion Claims to Be Certain, I'm Just Pointing out How There is No way to Be Certain. How Can Someone be a 100% That ? Exist? This is The Catch 22 You Trying to put me in, but it won't work. when I say, “No, I’m not 100% sure that there is no ? , there’s almost nothing that we can be 100% sure of — but so what, we can still make reasonable conclusions about what’s probable and plausible based on the available evidence, and all the evidence we have now points to ? not existing, so I feel confident in rejecting the ? hypothesis unless I see better evidence”… or if i say “Yes, I’m 100% sure that there is no ? : I Mean Cause the fragment of hypothetical possibility that ? exists is so insignificant that it’s not even worth considering, I’m 100% certain that there are no leprechauns or unicorns — or as close to 100% as anyone could reasonably expect — and I see no reason to treat ? any differently”, So we can Argue Semantics, But I'm I'm not saying nothing different or Selling Absoluteness, Unless You Agree with my Points & Perceive as That. I Suggest you Don't just take My word or Anybodies word..Look it up & Cross Reference it...Be Skeptic & Question Everything, Even Yourself!
Again, you are thinking I'm trying to trick you. Let me put it like this...you not answering questions to my satisfaction doesn't determine whether ? exists. Me winning (or losing) an argument does not make ? more or less evident. The best it would do is boost or hurt my pride. People are going to be right and people are going to be wrong...and people are not going to know. However, the existence of ? is not depended on our understanding.
Do people have some outlandish perceptions on ? ? Yes. Do people do bad things in the name of ? ? Sure. Are there many books out there that claim to be from ? ? Yeah. But if you want the truth about all these things, you need to do more than just running tests. -
alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
I have a Absoluteness About my Claim? Where? I'm Just Pointing out Things That Make it Highly Unlikely, Religion Claims to Be Certain, I'm Just Pointing out How There is No way to Be Certain. How Can Someone be a 100% That ? Exist? This is The Catch 22 You Trying to put me in, but it won't work. when I say, “No, I’m not 100% sure that there is no ? , there’s almost nothing that we can be 100% sure of — but so what, we can still make reasonable conclusions about what’s probable and plausible based on the available evidence, and all the evidence we have now points to ? not existing, so I feel confident in rejecting the ? hypothesis unless I see better evidence”… or if i say “Yes, I’m 100% sure that there is no ? : I Mean Cause the fragment of hypothetical possibility that ? exists is so insignificant that it’s not even worth considering, I’m 100% certain that there are no leprechauns or unicorns — or as close to 100% as anyone could reasonably expect — and I see no reason to treat ? any differently”, So we can Argue Semantics, But I'm I'm not saying nothing different or Selling Absoluteness, Unless You Agree with my Points & Perceive as That. I Suggest you Don't just take My word or Anybodies word..Look it up & Cross Reference it...Be Skeptic & Question Everything, Even Yourself!
Again, you are thinking I'm trying to trick you. Let me put it like this...you not answering questions to my satisfaction doesn't determine whether ? exists. Me winning (or losing) an argument does not make ? more or less evident. The best it would do is boost or hurt my pride. People are going to be right and people are going to be wrong...and people are not going to know. However, the existence of ? is not depended on our understanding.
Do people have some outlandish perceptions on ? ? Yes. Do people do bad things in the name of ? ? Sure. Are there many books out there that claim to be from ? ? Yeah. But if you want the truth about all these things, you need to do more than just running tests.
My Answers Shouldn't have any Bearing on Whether You Think ? Exist or Not. You Should ask Your own question & Reexamine the Evidence. Look at it Skeptically & I Think You'll come to The same Conclusion that ? is Highly Unlikely. The Existence of ? is Depended on Our Understanding. We The One who Made him up & Applied him to Things We Didn't Understand. Don't Know how it Rained or Babies were Made or How The Sun Came up. Saying ? was The Perfect answer til we Found the Real Answer. You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist? -
maestro_lungs wrote: »You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist?
He doesn't have one.
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
I have a Absoluteness About my Claim? Where? I'm Just Pointing out Things That Make it Highly Unlikely, Religion Claims to Be Certain, I'm Just Pointing out How There is No way to Be Certain. How Can Someone be a 100% That ? Exist? This is The Catch 22 You Trying to put me in, but it won't work. when I say, “No, I’m not 100% sure that there is no ? , there’s almost nothing that we can be 100% sure of — but so what, we can still make reasonable conclusions about what’s probable and plausible based on the available evidence, and all the evidence we have now points to ? not existing, so I feel confident in rejecting the ? hypothesis unless I see better evidence”… or if i say “Yes, I’m 100% sure that there is no ? : I Mean Cause the fragment of hypothetical possibility that ? exists is so insignificant that it’s not even worth considering, I’m 100% certain that there are no leprechauns or unicorns — or as close to 100% as anyone could reasonably expect — and I see no reason to treat ? any differently”, So we can Argue Semantics, But I'm I'm not saying nothing different or Selling Absoluteness, Unless You Agree with my Points & Perceive as That. I Suggest you Don't just take My word or Anybodies word..Look it up & Cross Reference it...Be Skeptic & Question Everything, Even Yourself!
Again, you are thinking I'm trying to trick you. Let me put it like this...you not answering questions to my satisfaction doesn't determine whether ? exists. Me winning (or losing) an argument does not make ? more or less evident. The best it would do is boost or hurt my pride. People are going to be right and people are going to be wrong...and people are not going to know. However, the existence of ? is not depended on our understanding.
Do people have some outlandish perceptions on ? ? Yes. Do people do bad things in the name of ? ? Sure. Are there many books out there that claim to be from ? ? Yeah. But if you want the truth about all these things, you need to do more than just running tests.
My Answers Shouldn't have any Bearing on Whether You Think ? Exist or Not. You Should ask Your own question & Reexamine the Evidence. Look at it Skeptically & I Think You'll come to The same Conclusion that ? is Highly Unlikely. The Existence of ? is Depended on Our Understanding. We The One who Made him up & Applied him to Things We Didn't Understand. Don't Know how it Rained or Babies were Made or How The Sun Came up. Saying ? was The Perfect answer til we Found the Real Answer. You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist?
Well, I would suggest you do the same and re-examine. As important as those questions that you asked are, those are not the questions I would concern myself with. The introduction of science has helped us with that for the most part. My question are more on who are we, what are we suppose to do with our lives, what is right and wrong, why we do more wrong than right, what can be done about it. So far, science has come up short in dealing with those questions as much as it has advanced. There are people still searching for an identity, don't know what to do with themselves, living their lives with no regard for what is right and wrong and compromising how others their lives. And as governments of the world no longer have the authority or respect that it once had, it makes it that much harder to appreciate life for we don't have anybody looking out for us..or anybody we can trust to look out for us. It's just us. You might as well die these days...or eat, drink and be marry doing it. I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and that's why I believe He exist. -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist?
He doesn't have one.
Does it matter that I have one? That comment suggests to me that you don't quite know how to desensitize yourself from the matters of the world yet from what your beliefs are about life. This "? " business really gets you fired up especially when you have a companion who you think feels the same way. Don't get too attached to avatars in this place. Computers can't replace interaction with people...something I may need to consider myself. -
alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »No one can Have 100% Truth, The Same Reason You Can Disprove or Prove with a 100% there is a ? ! You can Only go with the Most Likely After Carefully Looking at The Solid Evidence
You say no one can have 100% truth, and yet in defense of the non-existence of ? , you have an "absoluteness" about your claim. Sure, you can say the same for the religious, but you can't have it both ways. I would like to think that if someone wants to know that ? exists, they would want to know absolutely and not just most likely...not even 99.99%.
I have a Absoluteness About my Claim? Where? I'm Just Pointing out Things That Make it Highly Unlikely, Religion Claims to Be Certain, I'm Just Pointing out How There is No way to Be Certain. How Can Someone be a 100% That ? Exist? This is The Catch 22 You Trying to put me in, but it won't work. when I say, “No, I’m not 100% sure that there is no ? , there’s almost nothing that we can be 100% sure of — but so what, we can still make reasonable conclusions about what’s probable and plausible based on the available evidence, and all the evidence we have now points to ? not existing, so I feel confident in rejecting the ? hypothesis unless I see better evidence”… or if i say “Yes, I’m 100% sure that there is no ? : I Mean Cause the fragment of hypothetical possibility that ? exists is so insignificant that it’s not even worth considering, I’m 100% certain that there are no leprechauns or unicorns — or as close to 100% as anyone could reasonably expect — and I see no reason to treat ? any differently”, So we can Argue Semantics, But I'm I'm not saying nothing different or Selling Absoluteness, Unless You Agree with my Points & Perceive as That. I Suggest you Don't just take My word or Anybodies word..Look it up & Cross Reference it...Be Skeptic & Question Everything, Even Yourself!
Again, you are thinking I'm trying to trick you. Let me put it like this...you not answering questions to my satisfaction doesn't determine whether ? exists. Me winning (or losing) an argument does not make ? more or less evident. The best it would do is boost or hurt my pride. People are going to be right and people are going to be wrong...and people are not going to know. However, the existence of ? is not depended on our understanding.
Do people have some outlandish perceptions on ? ? Yes. Do people do bad things in the name of ? ? Sure. Are there many books out there that claim to be from ? ? Yeah. But if you want the truth about all these things, you need to do more than just running tests.
My Answers Shouldn't have any Bearing on Whether You Think ? Exist or Not. You Should ask Your own question & Reexamine the Evidence. Look at it Skeptically & I Think You'll come to The same Conclusion that ? is Highly Unlikely. The Existence of ? is Depended on Our Understanding. We The One who Made him up & Applied him to Things We Didn't Understand. Don't Know how it Rained or Babies were Made or How The Sun Came up. Saying ? was The Perfect answer til we Found the Real Answer. You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist?
Well, I would suggest you do the same and re-examine. As important as those questions that you asked are, those are not the questions I would concern myself with. The introduction of science has helped us with that for the most part. My question are more on who are we, what are we suppose to do with our lives, what is right and wrong, why we do more wrong than right, what can be done about it. So far, science has come up short in dealing with those questions as much as it has advanced. There are people still searching for an identity, don't know what to do with themselves, living their lives with no regard for what is right and wrong and compromising how others their lives. And as governments of the world no longer have the authority or respect that it once had, it makes it that much harder to appreciate life for we don't have anybody looking out for us..or anybody we can trust to look out for us. It's just us. You might as well die these days...or eat, drink and be marry doing it. I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and that's why I believe He exist.
I Do Constantly Re Examine . Why are They Not questions You;d Concern Yourself With? Do You Not Care if What you Believe is True? What you Pose to do with Your Life is Your Own Choice that's The Beauty. The dangers of Letting the Bible or Any Religious Text make the Choice is Too Numerous to Name & Far as Right & Wrong (Morality) That's Subjective. One: There’s an increasing body of evidence supporting the theory that human morality is, to a great extent, genetically hard-wired. (No, this isn’t a tangent — stay with me.) There is, of course, tremendous variation in how that morality plays out in specific ethical systems, from person to person and from culture to culture. But there are certain core moral concepts that seem to exist cross-culturally, and which seem to be part of the human brain’s hard-wiring — a wiring that’s evolved over millions of years, just like the rest of our neurological hard-wiring has evolved. (And before you ask: Yes, there is so an evolutionary advantage to morality — or there is in a social species, anyway.) Even If Science Can't Answer your questions Yet. It's No Reason to Install a ? on How You Make Decisions, Especially when it can & Has Influenced so Many Bad Decisions. I'm not Gonna Get into all The Judgmental Christian Type ? with You on People Searching for Identity or not Knowing What to Do With Themselves, Cause it's Not True & It's a Blanket Statement that Your Religion makes you Think is True. I Suggest you Re Examine Life Godlessness is not something that one should be afraid of embracing. All the beauty in the world, all of the moral people, and all that brings you joy in life exists despite the lack of gods. This awe inspiring universe is exactly the type of universe one would expect to see if there were no gods. -
@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
-
alissowack wrote: »@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
What are You Basing that there is Something wrong with The World on? Bad News, Murder...Been here as Long as Good. There's Nothing Wrong with The World...Stop Letting Your Religion & ? Blind you! People do Bad Things & People do Good things...Human Nature, The Yin & The Yang, But Once you Start to Live Life & Stop Letting Sky daddy Hold you Back Life is Beautiful & You See There is More Good in the World Than Bad! We all share a Core Morals, Cause we Set our Standards of Morality. People Doing Bad & Good didn't Start in The Bible...it Was Happening way Before Then. We as People have set the Standards Your Book trys to make you Think it did! I Know You wanted to Sound Deep with this Line ( Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? ) You didn't! You ain't Gotta Know Yourself to Be Naturally who You are & I Really Think this Line is Why You Believe ( There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves) You Scared to ask the Real Hard Questions, Cause someone Might think you got doubt.
We as People are Evolving outta needing a ? & Religion. We Slow here in America, But Look at the Countries that Have Put Religion & ? on the Back Burner. They are Prospering way more than we are. You want Change? Put your Silly Books up & Stop Believing in Santa & The ? in the Sky & Live Life....Trust me, You won't ? nobody...lol -
alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »You Still Have Yet to Give me a Good Reason Why You Think a ? Exist?
He doesn't have one.
Does it matter that I have one?
In this conversation, yes -
@Jaded Righteousness @Squall & Anyone of My Free Thinkers on Here...If You got a Chance & Be on Facebook...Come Join This Group facebook.com/groups/168763889806433/ It's Called Knights of The Roundtable. I'm The Moderator & I Could Actually Use you Guys Fresh Perspectives over There. If You Could, It'd be Much Appreciated! Thanks!
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
What are You Basing that there is Something wrong with The World on? Bad News, Murder...Been here as Long as Good. There's Nothing Wrong with The World...Stop Letting Your Religion & ? Blind you! People do Bad Things & People do Good things...Human Nature, The Yin & The Yang, But Once you Start to Live Life & Stop Letting Sky daddy Hold you Back Life is Beautiful & You See There is More Good in the World Than Bad! We all share a Core Morals, Cause we Set our Standards of Morality. People Doing Bad & Good didn't Start in The Bible...it Was Happening way Before Then. We as People have set the Standards Your Book trys to make you Think it did! I Know You wanted to Sound Deep with this Line ( Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? ) You didn't! You ain't Gotta Know Yourself to Be Naturally who You are & I Really Think this Line is Why You Believe ( There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves) You Scared to ask the Real Hard Questions, Cause someone Might think you got doubt.
We as People are Evolving outta needing a ? & Religion. We Slow here in America, But Look at the Countries that Have Put Religion & ? on the Back Burner. They are Prospering way more than we are. You want Change? Put your Silly Books up & Stop Believing in Santa & The ? in the Sky & Live Life....Trust me, You won't ? nobody...lol
I have made it clear that regardless of religion, bad things happen meaning at a certain point we do agree. I was not making a case in my last post that the Bible was a moral standard (it's way more than that), but yet you made it about that. We've spend quite some time talking about the things that don't effect how people live. I wonder the same about you with this blindness. We live in a world in which you say "we" set the standard, and yet there is no reason to take heed to the standard if we can be "tricked" into lowering the standard or getting rid of a standard once and for all. But, you seem to feel it is natural that we do that...until someone does something you feel is wrong and expect them to acknowledge that what he or she did was wrong. You say the heart and mind can't be trusted and yet you offer "trust". How is that? Regardless of how "deep" I may sound, identity is still important and it's much bigger than genetics. -
alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
What are You Basing that there is Something wrong with The World on? Bad News, Murder...Been here as Long as Good. There's Nothing Wrong with The World...Stop Letting Your Religion & ? Blind you! People do Bad Things & People do Good things...Human Nature, The Yin & The Yang, But Once you Start to Live Life & Stop Letting Sky daddy Hold you Back Life is Beautiful & You See There is More Good in the World Than Bad! We all share a Core Morals, Cause we Set our Standards of Morality. People Doing Bad & Good didn't Start in The Bible...it Was Happening way Before Then. We as People have set the Standards Your Book trys to make you Think it did! I Know You wanted to Sound Deep with this Line ( Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? ) You didn't! You ain't Gotta Know Yourself to Be Naturally who You are & I Really Think this Line is Why You Believe ( There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves) You Scared to ask the Real Hard Questions, Cause someone Might think you got doubt.
We as People are Evolving outta needing a ? & Religion. We Slow here in America, But Look at the Countries that Have Put Religion & ? on the Back Burner. They are Prospering way more than we are. You want Change? Put your Silly Books up & Stop Believing in Santa & The ? in the Sky & Live Life....Trust me, You won't ? nobody...lol
I have made it clear that regardless of religion, bad things happen meaning at a certain point we do agree. I was not making a case in my last post that the Bible was a moral standard (it's way more than that), but yet you made it about that. We've spend quite some time talking about the things that don't effect how people live. I wonder the same about you with this blindness. We live in a world in which you say "we" set the standard, and yet there is no reason to take heed to the standard if we can be "tricked" into lowering the standard or getting rid of a standard once and for all. But, you seem to feel it is natural that we do that...until someone does something you feel is wrong and expect them to acknowledge that what he or she did was wrong. You say the heart and mind can't be trusted and yet you offer "trust". How is that? Regardless of how "deep" I may sound, identity is still important and it's much bigger than genetics.
There is a Reason to Take Heed to The Standard, The Law we as People Set. The Penalty Could be Death, Jail. Look at History & See what Happened to The People who didn't Live Right (Regardless of Religion) & See The Brutal Ends They Met. ? , Saddam...Both Men of ? I Might Add! This is Hot The Standard got Set...We're Social Creatures. We See That Murder, ? , Stealing, Slavery & a Host of Other Things Just weren't Good & We Said No More & Set Laws to Prevent them. Life is Trial & Error -
I honestly used to believe but let go of my belief once i realized that I was never going to get any proof for ? .
As a young misguided believer, I would speak to ? thinking I would receive a response some day.
By the time I hit college I was done waiting for a ? that either does not care to respond or can not respond.
This quote from the movie "the grey" embodies that really well.
Do something. Do something. You phony ? fraudulent ? . Do something! Come on! Prove it! ? faith! Earn it! Show me something real! I need it now. Not later. Now! Show me and I'll believe in you until the day I die. I swear. I'm calling on you. I'm calling on you! ? it. I'll do it myself. -
maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
What are You Basing that there is Something wrong with The World on? Bad News, Murder...Been here as Long as Good. There's Nothing Wrong with The World...Stop Letting Your Religion & ? Blind you! People do Bad Things & People do Good things...Human Nature, The Yin & The Yang, But Once you Start to Live Life & Stop Letting Sky daddy Hold you Back Life is Beautiful & You See There is More Good in the World Than Bad! We all share a Core Morals, Cause we Set our Standards of Morality. People Doing Bad & Good didn't Start in The Bible...it Was Happening way Before Then. We as People have set the Standards Your Book trys to make you Think it did! I Know You wanted to Sound Deep with this Line ( Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? ) You didn't! You ain't Gotta Know Yourself to Be Naturally who You are & I Really Think this Line is Why You Believe ( There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves) You Scared to ask the Real Hard Questions, Cause someone Might think you got doubt.
We as People are Evolving outta needing a ? & Religion. We Slow here in America, But Look at the Countries that Have Put Religion & ? on the Back Burner. They are Prospering way more than we are. You want Change? Put your Silly Books up & Stop Believing in Santa & The ? in the Sky & Live Life....Trust me, You won't ? nobody...lol
I have made it clear that regardless of religion, bad things happen meaning at a certain point we do agree. I was not making a case in my last post that the Bible was a moral standard (it's way more than that), but yet you made it about that. We've spend quite some time talking about the things that don't effect how people live. I wonder the same about you with this blindness. We live in a world in which you say "we" set the standard, and yet there is no reason to take heed to the standard if we can be "tricked" into lowering the standard or getting rid of a standard once and for all. But, you seem to feel it is natural that we do that...until someone does something you feel is wrong and expect them to acknowledge that what he or she did was wrong. You say the heart and mind can't be trusted and yet you offer "trust". How is that? Regardless of how "deep" I may sound, identity is still important and it's much bigger than genetics.
There is a Reason to Take Heed to The Standard, The Law we as People Set. The Penalty Could be Death, Jail. Look at History & See what Happened to The People who didn't Live Right (Regardless of Religion) & See The Brutal Ends They Met. ? , Saddam...Both Men of ? I Might Add! This is Hot The Standard got Set...We're Social Creatures. We See That Murder, ? , Stealing, Slavery & a Host of Other Things Just weren't Good & We Said No More & Set Laws to Prevent them. Life is Trial & Error
If memory serves me, ? didn't give his victims the satisfaction of justice. Suicide I think. I don't particularly see why you mention them as men of ? ...when it doesn't matter. Murder is murder whether it is done by a religious fanatic or a gang member. But what reason is there to fear death if we have people that don't care if they die for their wrongdoings? Or...why even suggest that death is a consequence when some people would gladly die than to face something they don't particularly like about life? There is something particularly unsatisfying about feeling as if death is seen as a favor by the one that is being punished.
We have set standards, but it doesn't stop (and it isn't going to stop) people from going against the standard. Why is that? Why is it that even though we have these so-called core morals, that we continue to "break the rules"? -
alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »alissowack wrote: »@maestro_lungs. The reasons those questions don't concern me is because it does not answer to what matters. There is something wrong with the world. Of all the advances intellectually and technologically, people still do bad things and it doesn't matter if someone is religious or irreligious. Why is that? You say morality is subjective and yet you say (well, you say that science says) that at the core is a set of morals we all share; which suggest there is an objectiveness to morality; that regardless of what anybody says, these core morals are ones we should take heed to. And if we are violating those core moral values, what are we doing to stop it? Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves (in respect to the things we consider good about who we are). And you got people who seek an identity in things that are destructive...again regardless of religion. Why do we do that?
And if this is indeed the work of evolution, when is the change gonna come? What hope is there for us worms to get to a point in our lives where we can reap the benefits of what Nature is suppose to sow? If that change is millions of years away from now, then why wait until that time comes? Why live for a distant future when we can live for now? If this is a matter of survival, then we have the freedom by any means.
Now, for the most part this a just me "ranting". But, I believe that these points can't be avoided. And...again you just think the religious are just tricksters. Again, I believe ? has answered those questions through the Bible and because of that I believe He exists.
What are You Basing that there is Something wrong with The World on? Bad News, Murder...Been here as Long as Good. There's Nothing Wrong with The World...Stop Letting Your Religion & ? Blind you! People do Bad Things & People do Good things...Human Nature, The Yin & The Yang, But Once you Start to Live Life & Stop Letting Sky daddy Hold you Back Life is Beautiful & You See There is More Good in the World Than Bad! We all share a Core Morals, Cause we Set our Standards of Morality. People Doing Bad & Good didn't Start in The Bible...it Was Happening way Before Then. We as People have set the Standards Your Book trys to make you Think it did! I Know You wanted to Sound Deep with this Line ( Identity is important. If we don't know who we are, then how can we be ourselves? ) You didn't! You ain't Gotta Know Yourself to Be Naturally who You are & I Really Think this Line is Why You Believe ( There are people that live a lie not because they want to, but because they don't want others to condemn them for being themselves) You Scared to ask the Real Hard Questions, Cause someone Might think you got doubt.
We as People are Evolving outta needing a ? & Religion. We Slow here in America, But Look at the Countries that Have Put Religion & ? on the Back Burner. They are Prospering way more than we are. You want Change? Put your Silly Books up & Stop Believing in Santa & The ? in the Sky & Live Life....Trust me, You won't ? nobody...lol
I have made it clear that regardless of religion, bad things happen meaning at a certain point we do agree. I was not making a case in my last post that the Bible was a moral standard (it's way more than that), but yet you made it about that. We've spend quite some time talking about the things that don't effect how people live. I wonder the same about you with this blindness. We live in a world in which you say "we" set the standard, and yet there is no reason to take heed to the standard if we can be "tricked" into lowering the standard or getting rid of a standard once and for all. But, you seem to feel it is natural that we do that...until someone does something you feel is wrong and expect them to acknowledge that what he or she did was wrong. You say the heart and mind can't be trusted and yet you offer "trust". How is that? Regardless of how "deep" I may sound, identity is still important and it's much bigger than genetics.
There is a Reason to Take Heed to The Standard, The Law we as People Set. The Penalty Could be Death, Jail. Look at History & See what Happened to The People who didn't Live Right (Regardless of Religion) & See The Brutal Ends They Met. ? , Saddam...Both Men of ? I Might Add! This is Hot The Standard got Set...We're Social Creatures. We See That Murder, ? , Stealing, Slavery & a Host of Other Things Just weren't Good & We Said No More & Set Laws to Prevent them. Life is Trial & Error
If memory serves me, ? didn't give his victims the satisfaction of justice. Suicide I think. I don't particularly see why you mention them as men of ? ...when it doesn't matter. Murder is murder whether it is done by a religious fanatic or a gang member. But what reason is there to fear death if we have people that don't care if they die for their wrongdoings? Or...why even suggest that death is a consequence when some people would gladly die than to face something they don't particularly like about life? There is something particularly unsatisfying about feeling as if death is seen as a favor by the one that is being punished.
We have set standards, but it doesn't stop (and it isn't going to stop) people from going against the standard. Why is that? Why is it that even though we have these so-called core morals, that we continue to "break the rules"?
No I mention ? as a Man of ? to say his Religion didn't stop Him & In Case of Saddam or Some of The Other Extremist They Idea of ? Might of Enhance it, Who said Anything About Fearing Death? The Majority of People Care About Life & Don't wanna Die, Unless You Believe in a ? & Thinks Your ? Commands you to Marty Yourself! A Person Who Kills Himself is Mentally Disturbed & For All Kinds of Reasons some People are Born Like This or Have Let They Idea of ? Make Them do This. Why Even Believe if Your ? isn't Preventing or Has no Influence or Has Bad Influence? -
@maestro_lungs. In your "standards" argument, you suggest that there are consequences for our actions. You mentioned death and jail. And I'm essentially saying there are people who look at that and say...who cares? Why is that? It's not even about suicide. It's about knowing that we are all going to die someday and for some people death is more appealing than life. Why is that? I could guess why. Maybe death is an excuse to get away from what life has to offer in respect to dealing with the struggles and pains; that death means you no longer have to deal with it anymore. I believe that death is not the "escape" that we make it out to be though, but that's another story.
You say a majority of people care about life, but what is it about life that they should care? What is the benefit of living a life we will never hold on to when we die?
