Why do/don't you believe in ? ?
Options
Comments
-
I do. Can't tell you why. I figure better to believe and there be nothing, then not believe and there be something .
-
In Your Moms Room wrote: »I do. Can't tell you why. I figure better to believe and there be nothing, then not believe and there be something .
To be more specific, are you saying its better to be 'saved' so just in case you die and there is an afterlife, you don't go to hell? Because there is nothing innately wrong with believing that something exist when it doesn't make itself known only to later find it does exist. Moreover I think it's stupid that ? would be such a fear monger, nothing benevolent about that. -
I don't live my life out of fear of ? . Or of going to hell. I'm just saying, why not believe?
-
i know its more than a few of u pinkpeople with smarts n knowitall get in here n tell us why ? is fake n what are your thoughts. stop being scared n show the world all of that knowledge u have mr pinkman
-
In Your Moms Room wrote: »I don't live my life out of fear of ? . Or of going to hell. I'm just saying, why not believe?
Because maybe it's nonsense?
Just ? in itself defeats itself, it contradicts itself and it's definition of ? . It even contradicts all theists "logic" of the universe and creation.
There never was a creator, couldn't happen. -
I believe in ? but not sure the bible is 100 percent accurate enough to live ones life by.
-
Well JJ, if the only reason why people read the Bible as a depiction on how to live, then it's 0% accurate for no one can live the life that the Bible suggests people should live. It would take an intervention of some sort.
-
If I was never told ? existed I would have NOTHING to base belief in his existence on. His theoretical existence only lives on because people will not let go of it.
I have found there is nothing concrete or absolutely factual to support ? 's existence.
Thus, I choose to do the logical thing: I do not presume more than I am entitled.
If there is no credible evidence to believe that ? exists, I do not believe so until i find some. -
There is more to the truth than just the facts. Evidence can change the mind, but it can't change the heart. Eventually, the heart has to get involved in discovering the truth or it will never learn to trust and confide in it. There is a lot of truth out there in the hands of those you just don't trust.
-
psalms 14:1
-
Atheism is a Religion & Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby! Atheist are the ones Attacking, But it's a Church on Every Corner or some Idiot saying they Believe with no Evidence & Forcing Everyone Else to Just Accept it!. The Goofy ? Christians say about Feeling Empty Inside after they can't Defend they Position is meant to throw people Off the Trail of they ? . The People who Make Laws that Affect all our Lives Believing in Some ? is Scary to me & They Beliefs Should be Questioned & Challenged at all Times!
-
Atheism is a Religion & Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby! Atheist are the ones Attacking, But it's a Church on Every Corner or some Idiot saying they Believe with no Evidence & Forcing Everyone Else to Just Accept it!. The Goofy ? Christians say about Feeling Empty Inside after they can't Defend they Position is meant to throw people Off the Trail of they ? . The People who Make Laws that Affect all our Lives Believing in Some ? is Scary to me & They Beliefs Should be Questioned & Challenged at all Times!
...and atheism can't be questioned and challenged at all times? There is the impression that because atheism has this "passive" approach at the non-existence of ? , that it doesn't affect perspectives on how people live their lives. To say that ? doesn't exist has a lot more weight to it than what it suggest.
-
Everything Should be Questioned & Challenged at Every Time & I Think Atheist do that All the Time. There is not a Atheist on the Planet who's Mind Can't Change if EVIDENCE is Presented, If not Then it'd a be a Faith! We Take this Passive Approach to There Being No ? the Same as We take the Passive Approach to there's no Smurfs, It Holds no Weight! There are Countries where Atheism Leads. They Haven't Descended in Doom & Despair. In Fact They Doing Better than us! ? Didn't invent Humans & Morality , Humans & Morality invented ?alissowack wrote: »Atheism is a Religion & Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby! Atheist are the ones Attacking, But it's a Church on Every Corner or some Idiot saying they Believe with no Evidence & Forcing Everyone Else to Just Accept it!. The Goofy ? Christians say about Feeling Empty Inside after they can't Defend they Position is meant to throw people Off the Trail of they ? . The People who Make Laws that Affect all our Lives Believing in Some ? is Scary to me & They Beliefs Should be Questioned & Challenged at all Times!
...and atheism can't be questioned and challenged at all times? There is the impression that because atheism has this "passive" approach at the non-existence of ? , that it doesn't affect perspectives on how people live their lives. To say that ? doesn't exist has a lot more weight to it than what it suggest.
-
I have a personal relationship with ? . It was something that I decided and I believe. ? has been good and his grace and mercy has been proven in my life over n over again. I don't know what others do but I give ? all praise:) If you doubt him..try him:)
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »
Everything Should be Questioned & Challenged at Every Time & I Think Atheist do that All the Time. There is not a Atheist on the Planet who's Mind Can't Change if EVIDENCE is Presented, If not Then it'd a be a Faith! We Take this Passive Approach to There Being No ? the Same as We take the Passive Approach to there's no Smurfs, It Holds no Weight! There are Countries where Atheism Leads. They Haven't Descended in Doom & Despair. In Fact They Doing Better than us! ? Didn't invent Humans & Morality , Humans & Morality invented ?alissowack wrote: »Atheism is a Religion & Not Collecting Stamps is a Hobby! Atheist are the ones Attacking, But it's a Church on Every Corner or some Idiot saying they Believe with no Evidence & Forcing Everyone Else to Just Accept it!. The Goofy ? Christians say about Feeling Empty Inside after they can't Defend they Position is meant to throw people Off the Trail of they ? . The People who Make Laws that Affect all our Lives Believing in Some ? is Scary to me & They Beliefs Should be Questioned & Challenged at all Times!
...and atheism can't be questioned and challenged at all times? There is the impression that because atheism has this "passive" approach at the non-existence of ? , that it doesn't affect perspectives on how people live their lives. To say that ? doesn't exist has a lot more weight to it than what it suggest.
Evidence may change the mind, but it is not going to change the heart. Atheism suggests a "non-commitment" to the evidence; that you don't have to feel a certain way about the evidence. In the discovery of evidence, you don't have to think about what it means in respect to who you are, what is your purpose, and where you are going. People may know the universe exist, but they could care less if doesn't affect what they do with their lives. Things that destroy the world isn't going to stop someone who loves partaking in things that implicitly does so. -
The Mind is What Guides you in Life or Pose to & There are Times When that Can Fail You, The Heart is not a Reliable Guide.. Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
As vivid as the experience of our hearts and minds can feel, if we’re going to treat it as evidence in support of a hypothesis, we can’t give it any more weight than we would anyone else’s experience. Intuition is important, but it’s notoriously unreliable and subject to bias. We have to step back from it, and view it like we’d view anyone else’s experience. And when we look at human experience in general, we see that our hearts and minds can’t automatically be trusted. That's Why Evidence is Important in These Matters, Instead of Believing Any Old Thing Cause You Feel it in your Heart that it Gives you purpose can be dangerous Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
That’s the whole point of the scientific method: it’s a method of verifying our physical perceptions of the world, and seeing if those perceptions can be replicated, and testing whether our interpretation of them is likely to be right.
All of which strongly suggests that, even if our interpretation of our physical perceptions is flawed, there is a real entity with real existence that we’re perceiving.
And that conspicuously does not work for religious experiences. There is no consistent way to induce a perception of Jesus in all people, or even in most people. Religious experiences are un-measurable, un-replicable, un-verifiable. Everyone who has them has them in different ways; there’s no way to consistently generate them; many people don’t have them at all. And attempts to verify religious experiences using rigorous, double-blind, placebo- controlled scientific methods have universally failed across the board. -
maestro_lungs wrote: »The Mind is What Guides you in Life or Pose to & There are Times When that Can Fail You, The Heart is not a Reliable Guide.. Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
As vivid as the experience of our hearts and minds can feel, if we’re going to treat it as evidence in support of a hypothesis, we can’t give it any more weight than we would anyone else’s experience. Intuition is important, but it’s notoriously unreliable and subject to bias. We have to step back from it, and view it like we’d view anyone else’s experience. And when we look at human experience in general, we see that our hearts and minds can’t automatically be trusted. That's Why Evidence is Important in These Matters, Instead of Believing Any Old Thing Cause You Feel it in your Heart that it Gives you purpose can be dangerous Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
That’s the whole point of the scientific method: it’s a method of verifying our physical perceptions of the world, and seeing if those perceptions can be replicated, and testing whether our interpretation of them is likely to be right.
All of which strongly suggests that, even if our interpretation of our physical perceptions is flawed, there is a real entity with real existence that we’re perceiving.
And that conspicuously does not work for religious experiences. There is no consistent way to induce a perception of Jesus in all people, or even in most people. Religious experiences are un-measurable, un-replicable, un-verifiable. Everyone who has them has them in different ways; there’s no way to consistently generate them; many people don’t have them at all. And attempts to verify religious experiences using rigorous, double-blind, placebo- controlled scientific methods have universally failed across the board.
You brought up that our hearts and minds can't be trusted, yet it is the heart and mind that is responsible for why science exists. It took intelligent thinking and a passion to pursue it. If our hearts and minds can't be trusted, then why should we trust science? It is a byproduct of what we created.
You make some valid points, but at the end of the day, just like religion, you have to go out into the world and deal with the happenings of the world and answer for the struggles of life. You will lose trust and respect if you treat people as a science project or "unholy". -
I'm Skip out on the Mumble Jumble of Why Science Exist & Just say Science Continues to Exist Because of The Scienctific Method & We Trust it, Cause The Evidence is Reviewed Over & Over. Not Because of Our Feelings which Betray us Time & Time Again. I Can give you Many Reasons to Trust Science as Opposed to Religion, But It's Not The same Kind of Trust as Being Faithfully Blind to a Religion, Cause Things can Change. The human mind is very, very far from perfect.
The human mind is an amazing instrument… but it’s a strikingly flawed instrument, loaded with biases and cognitive errors. The human mind did not evolve to perceive and process information 100% accurately. The human mind evolved to find food and escape from predators. Many of our cognitive errors are important and useful in helping us function (or they were 100,000 years ago on the African savannah when we were hunting gazelles and escaping from tigers)… but they make our minds not entirely trustworthy as sources of information.
And even taking these cognitive errors into account, the mind doesn’t always operate as it should. You don’t have to be mentally ill, or even on drugs, to have weird experiences of things that aren’t there. It’s not that hard to alter our consciousness. Exhaustion, stress, distraction, trance-like repetition, optical illusion, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, sensory overload… any of these, and more, can create vivid “perceptions” that are entirely disconnected from external reality. You can’t say, “I had an intense personal experience of ? — therefore ? exists.” You have to say, “That’s interesting. Person X (insert your name here) had an intense personal experience of ? . What’s the most plausible explanation for this? Is there any corroborating evidence for this being an accurate perception of a real ? ? Are other people’s experiences of ? consistent with this one? Does this experience too conveniently dovetail with this person’s biases and expectations? Is there a better explanation than a real perception of a deity? Is it more likely to have been a psychological glitch in this person’s brain function?” You can’t treat yourself as a special snowflake. As vivid as your own experiences may feel to you, you can’t give them any more weight than you would anyone else’s experiences.alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »The Mind is What Guides you in Life or Pose to & There are Times When that Can Fail You, The Heart is not a Reliable Guide.. Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
As vivid as the experience of our hearts and minds can feel, if we’re going to treat it as evidence in support of a hypothesis, we can’t give it any more weight than we would anyone else’s experience. Intuition is important, but it’s notoriously unreliable and subject to bias. We have to step back from it, and view it like we’d view anyone else’s experience. And when we look at human experience in general, we see that our hearts and minds can’t automatically be trusted. That's Why Evidence is Important in These Matters, Instead of Believing Any Old Thing Cause You Feel it in your Heart that it Gives you purpose can be dangerous Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
That’s the whole point of the scientific method: it’s a method of verifying our physical perceptions of the world, and seeing if those perceptions can be replicated, and testing whether our interpretation of them is likely to be right.
All of which strongly suggests that, even if our interpretation of our physical perceptions is flawed, there is a real entity with real existence that we’re perceiving.
And that conspicuously does not work for religious experiences. There is no consistent way to induce a perception of Jesus in all people, or even in most people. Religious experiences are un-measurable, un-replicable, un-verifiable. Everyone who has them has them in different ways; there’s no way to consistently generate them; many people don’t have them at all. And attempts to verify religious experiences using rigorous, double-blind, placebo- controlled scientific methods have universally failed across the board.
You brought up that our hearts and minds can't be trusted, yet it is the heart and mind that is responsible for why science exists. It took intelligent thinking and a passion to pursue it. If our hearts and minds can't be trusted, then why should we trust science? It is a byproduct of what we created.
You make some valid points, but at the end of the day, just like religion, you have to go out into the world and deal with the happenings of the world and answer for the struggles of life. You will lose trust and respect if you treat people as a science project or "unholy".
-
again...criticism of christianity does not = debunking ?
i see a bunch of elaborate points made from basic errant concepts -
again...criticism of christianity does not = debunking ?
i see a bunch of elaborate points made from basic errant concepts
What Criticism of Christianity Sir? I was Talking About The Deity called ? . I Said Nothing about The Holy Trinity or the Followers of Jesus. I'm Talking About Belief & How the Brain & Heart are not the Most Reliable Tool as Proof of Anything, Much Less a ? !
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »again...criticism of christianity does not = debunking ?
i see a bunch of elaborate points made from basic errant concepts
What Criticism of Christianity Sir? I was Talking About The Deity called ? . I Said Nothing about The Holy Trinity or the Followers of Jesus. I'm Talking About Belief & How the Brain & Heart are not the Most Reliable Tool as Proof of Anything, Much Less a ? !
how you describe this ? is only as christians understand it. the attributes, characteristics etc..its all grco roman christian -
this is ? as described by christians, jews & muslims, which is based on the gods who came before them. It's also the way the majority of people view ? ! Now if You Have Your Approach I Applaud You, But I'm Only Talking about The Harmful Effects of Belief & Why I Don't Believe in What We all Consider ? . Not Your Personal Custom Made ? that You Define!
-
maestro_lungs wrote: »I'm Skip out on the Mumble Jumble of Why Science Exist & Just say Science Continues to Exist Because of The Scienctific Method & We Trust it, Cause The Evidence is Reviewed Over & Over. Not Because of Our Feelings which Betray us Time & Time Again. I Can give you Many Reasons to Trust Science as Opposed to Religion, But It's Not The same Kind of Trust as Being Faithfully Blind to a Religion, Cause Things can Change. The human mind is very, very far from perfect.
The human mind is an amazing instrument… but it’s a strikingly flawed instrument, loaded with biases and cognitive errors. The human mind did not evolve to perceive and process information 100% accurately. The human mind evolved to find food and escape from predators. Many of our cognitive errors are important and useful in helping us function (or they were 100,000 years ago on the African savannah when we were hunting gazelles and escaping from tigers)… but they make our minds not entirely trustworthy as sources of information.
And even taking these cognitive errors into account, the mind doesn’t always operate as it should. You don’t have to be mentally ill, or even on drugs, to have weird experiences of things that aren’t there. It’s not that hard to alter our consciousness. Exhaustion, stress, distraction, trance-like repetition, optical illusion, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, sensory overload… any of these, and more, can create vivid “perceptions” that are entirely disconnected from external reality. You can’t say, “I had an intense personal experience of ? — therefore ? exists.” You have to say, “That’s interesting. Person X (insert your name here) had an intense personal experience of ? . What’s the most plausible explanation for this? Is there any corroborating evidence for this being an accurate perception of a real ? ? Are other people’s experiences of ? consistent with this one? Does this experience too conveniently dovetail with this person’s biases and expectations? Is there a better explanation than a real perception of a deity? Is it more likely to have been a psychological glitch in this person’s brain function?” You can’t treat yourself as a special snowflake. As vivid as your own experiences may feel to you, you can’t give them any more weight than you would anyone else’s experiences.alissowack wrote: »maestro_lungs wrote: »The Mind is What Guides you in Life or Pose to & There are Times When that Can Fail You, The Heart is not a Reliable Guide.. Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
As vivid as the experience of our hearts and minds can feel, if we’re going to treat it as evidence in support of a hypothesis, we can’t give it any more weight than we would anyone else’s experience. Intuition is important, but it’s notoriously unreliable and subject to bias. We have to step back from it, and view it like we’d view anyone else’s experience. And when we look at human experience in general, we see that our hearts and minds can’t automatically be trusted. That's Why Evidence is Important in These Matters, Instead of Believing Any Old Thing Cause You Feel it in your Heart that it Gives you purpose can be dangerous Our hearts and our minds can’t automatically be trusted.
That’s the whole point of the scientific method: it’s a method of verifying our physical perceptions of the world, and seeing if those perceptions can be replicated, and testing whether our interpretation of them is likely to be right.
All of which strongly suggests that, even if our interpretation of our physical perceptions is flawed, there is a real entity with real existence that we’re perceiving.
And that conspicuously does not work for religious experiences. There is no consistent way to induce a perception of Jesus in all people, or even in most people. Religious experiences are un-measurable, un-replicable, un-verifiable. Everyone who has them has them in different ways; there’s no way to consistently generate them; many people don’t have them at all. And attempts to verify religious experiences using rigorous, double-blind, placebo- controlled scientific methods have universally failed across the board.
You brought up that our hearts and minds can't be trusted, yet it is the heart and mind that is responsible for why science exists. It took intelligent thinking and a passion to pursue it. If our hearts and minds can't be trusted, then why should we trust science? It is a byproduct of what we created.
You make some valid points, but at the end of the day, just like religion, you have to go out into the world and deal with the happenings of the world and answer for the struggles of life. You will lose trust and respect if you treat people as a science project or "unholy".
But what makes you think that when someone says that ? exists, they are doing so out of some "out-of-this-world" experience or seeing a bunch of magic tricks? To suggest an existence of ? involves as much thought as you might think. To just generalize it requires considering how much of a role a deity would have in the existence of everything we know and don't know. If ? exists, does He have a transcending view of the things we value as important like truth, justice, love and equality? Is it possible for a deity to share in the emotions associated with who we are. And is it possible that we could experience the things we value in a transcending way?
Unfortunately, because of the same "bias" you talk about, people are going to treat the the issue in a delusional way. -
Well, when you have people who have been told by one or few people of who they think "? " is, it is automatically assumed that it applies to everybody else who believes in ? . So far, I've been on the receiving end of jokes in regards to ? being something I don't think of Him as. However, I think it's well deserved by people who have a certain disrespect for who they are posting to so I just let it go. It doesn't matter.
I don't quite understand why you ask the "common" questions about the things that do or don't exists. It's almost like you just want to "trap" someone into answering something that has absolutely nothing with why people believe that ? exists. To me, it makes no sense to say "? exist because I saw Him in the sky one day" or "He showed me this cool trick on how to walk on water" or "I got a revelation on the end of the world from ? ". Asking why ? would exist is a lot more sensible. If the miracles happen, I want to know why. If Jesus did die and rise again, I want to know the reason for that. If evil and suffering exists in the world...then why does it? I believe ? exist because He has answered those...and a lot more...questions through the Bible. -
alissowack wrote: »Well, when you have people who have been told by one or few people of who they think "? " is, it is automatically assumed that it applies to everybody else who believes in ? . So far, I've been on the receiving end of jokes in regards to ? being something I don't think of Him as. However, I think it's well deserved by people who have a certain disrespect for who they are posting to so I just let it go. It doesn't matter.
I don't quite understand why you ask the "common" questions about the things that do or don't exists. It's almost like you just want to "trap" someone into answering something that has absolutely nothing with why people believe that ? exists. To me, it makes no sense to say "? exist because I saw Him in the sky one day" or "He showed me this cool trick on how to walk on water" or "I got a revelation on the end of the world from ? ". Asking why ? would exist is a lot more sensible. If the miracles happen, I want to know why. If Jesus did die and rise again, I want to know the reason for that. If evil and suffering exists in the world...then why does it? I believe ? exist because He has answered those...and a lot more...questions through the Bible.
I Can't go on Your Personal Perception of ? , All I Can go on is The Majority Perception of ? & That Automatically Does Apply to Those who call Them selves Christians. I Can Answer You Why People Think ? Exist. Easy Answer to a Complex Question. It's Easier to Chalk it up to ? than do the Actual Research. It's Something that has been Passed down generation to Generation Mostly with the Warning of Do Not Question these Things or ? works in Mysterious ways...lol. Miracles don't happen, It's Just Easy to Chalk it up as One & Ignore the Thousands of Lucky Breaks & Co Winky ? that Happen per day Worldwide. Other Than the Bible, What Makes you think Jesus Died for Your Sins or Even Existed? The Fastest Way to Become Atheist is to Read the Bible from Front to Back. Evil & Suffering Exist in The World Cause Good & Pleasure Exist. Everything has a Yin & a Yang. No Evil, Then How can you Know what Good is. Human Nature. We do Good, We do Bad! How can you Possibly Think 7th Century People had a Better Idea on How to Live Life Now?
