How did the Universe get here?

[emilynghiem]

Hi [MENTION=36773]Boss[/MENTION]
Are you sure this is the best way to approach explain or express this to someone
who doesn't see things the same way?

1. If you were talking to a color blind person about color.
And we agreed that the color is not coming from the actual object.
But the color is caused by "reflecting" that part of the spectrum of light that isn't absorbed,
so it is not the actual object emitting color, but a "reflection"

would you insult the person and say they are wrong
for not seeing what is meant by color

wouldn't you speak differently and try to explain the situation and not say it is the person's fault for not seeing AT ALL what is being talked about as color

2. my brother tried to explain to me what a four dimensional object looked like
he said that for every dimension, the shadow of that object is one dimension less.

The shadow of a line pointing one end to the light source becomes a point.
the shadow of a plane held sideways to the light will be a line.
the shadow of a cube held flat side toward the light will be a plane.

so the shadow of a 4d object held to the light will be a cube.

we cannot see the 4d object in its entirety as our plane is limited to 3d.
but we can see the shadow as a representation and extrapolate from there
the higher level based on what we can see

does any of this help?

3. I asked about explaining the level of "collective' humanity or "collective truth"
if you will, or "collective knowledge of all things ever existing or occurring"

We can hold a representation of this abstract level in our minds.
it represents the higher level called spiritual or where spiritual concepts belong

we can work with our finite perceptions in finite words and finite reactions in our brains
as physical and within our reach. but what they represent is a level beyond that.

are we okay with that?

is there any further reason to nitpick over why one person emphasized the physical manifestation
or reflection, and another focuses on the higher or spiritual level represented,
if we agree we are talking about the same body of truth
or the same process going on in life. isn't it interacting between both levels, so whichever one you focus on it's the same process anyway?

 

[emilynghiem]

[MENTION=19302]Montrovant[/MENTION] and [MENTION=42916]Derideo_Te[/MENTION]
the same way we would prefer those who see/talk with God in a personified way
NOT exclude or dismiss other ways as wrong
how can we explain or express this same approach to others by including them
even when we do not share these same experiences

what is wrong with someone talking with God or Jesus as a personal connection
why does that have to be deemed false, imaginary or unreal

I have friends who have communicated in terms of seeing angelic figures, or seeing lights that they recognized spiritually as Jesus or angels etc.

why can't their experiences be as real to them
as my way of receiving wisdom or insights through my conscience?

why are these different ways seen as threats to others, or reasons to judge each other.
Secular scientists and others study Life through investigation
and "answers about Life" come through the conscience just as the mechanism for Christians who pray or Buddhists who meditate.

when I had the realization that these processes were the same thing but in different forms for each person, I no longer worried why there were different religions or ways.
We are all connected by conscience, and that is the central connection that Christ represents in all people.

I wanted to learn all the different ways so I could figure out how they work together.

are you okay taking that approach
and letting people who see these spiritual interactions as real, let those be real for them

will this help them to know it's not about rejecting that
just because you me or others don't have those same experiences.

so if we don't reject others for their ways, why would they reject back
can't we include both the theistic and nontheistic ways and not treat them as mutually exclusive

 

[Mr. H.]

You've got much bigger worries than to contemplate this shit.

Feet on the ground, soldiers. Buck up, fly straight and PLEASE stop fucking with the peeps.

Bitching, moaning fuckers.

We are 13 billion years in the slammer. That's some hard core time in the hole.

Your God done left the gate. You are on your own. Drifting endlessly by the bridge. To be over...

 

[Montrovant]

I've never seen evidence of a sense which allows someone to observe something non-physical

Well sure you have! Haven't you ever been moved by a musical composition or shed a tear over a movie? Haven't you ever felt a sense of elation that your favorite sports team won a big game? Have you never felt proud of a child who accomplished their goals? All through life we experience a sense of that which we cannot observe in any physical sense. These are things that touch our spirit.

I'm pretty sure someone like GISMYS would call you arrogant for thinking you know better than the Bible, and he's far from the only one.

I have never said that I know better than the Bible. You are interpreting that because I don't adhere to a faith associated with the book. I can only believe in what I know is true. If I am not sure whether it is true, I can't believe in it... that's just me. That doesn't mean I condemn it as something not true, I don't know! I have no idea if the Bible is true or not! It really doesn't matter to me one way or the other, I am going to believe what I know is true.

I have an opinion, but my opinion doesn't mean I believe everyone who doesn't share it is wrong. Is that how YOU operate? Should we assume that when you give your opinion it means that anything different from that is wrong in your mind? To me, that defines bigotry.

I would say that our feelings are definitely physical and can be seen as such by looking at activity in the brain. That is also not what I mean by sensing something; I'm talking about a spiritual sense that is similar to our 5 physical senses. It would give us a sense of something being there that otherwise we would not have.

Now, you may think that emotion is our way of sensing the spiritual, and that's fine. However, there is no evidence of that. No one has ever shown what the spiritual is nor how it interacts with humanity to create the emotional reactions. I cannot see, hear, taste, smell, or touch the spiritual. I cannot sit with another person, experience sadness, and expect them to feel the same thing because we are both sensing something spiritual. Our emotions are, by and large, limited to ourselves.

You have often stated your beliefs as though they are fact. Some of your stated beliefs are contradictory with the Bible. If, as you say, you know you are correct, then you know that at least in some ways, the Bible is wrong. I feel confident the same is true of most or all of the world's major religions. So, in effect, you are saying those religions are wrong.

Not all beliefs automatically mean you dismiss other beliefs. However, when only one or the other can be true, having a belief will inherently mean thinking the other belief is wrong. If you believe that democracy is the best form of government, and someone else thinks communism is the best form of government, do you not automatically think that person is wrong? If you think the Seahawks are going to repeat as Super Bowl champions, and I think they are not, do you not automatically think I am wrong? We can't both be right, they are contradictory beliefs!

I would say that our feelings are definitely physical and can be seen as such by looking at activity in the brain.

Well you are wrong, and if that's what you think, you are ignorant. Our feeling cannot be seen by a machine. You may be able to see our feelings being registered as impulses, but that is not seeing or feelings, that is seeing an effect caused by our feelings which simply are not physical.

That is also not what I mean by sensing something; I'm talking about a spiritual sense that is similar to our 5 physical senses.

Those are all examples of spiritual senses. What do you mean "similar to" here, our five physical senses are all different as night and day from each other. Nothing smells like red... Nothing feels like sour. And what the hell, you're going to now construct criteria that for spiritual to exist in must conform to confirmation by one of our five senses? Well, guess what? It never will! You're simply constructing a way to support your disbelief. You are creating impossible criteria and insisting that because the spiritual doesn't meet those, it must not be real! If the spiritual could be readily experienced, confirmed and verified by our five senses, it would cease to be spiritual.

Now, you may think that emotion is our way of sensing the spiritual, and that's fine. However, there is no evidence of that.

You stated that you knew of nothing we could observe that was non-physical, and I gave you examples. What do you mean by "evidence of that?" Physical evidence the spiritual exists? I think all of us can agree, that IS the root of the whole debate here. If we could physically show evidence the spiritual exists, none of us would be arguing about this. Yes, our emotions are very much "spiritual" because they certainly are not physical.

No one has ever shown what the spiritual is nor how it interacts with humanity to create the emotional reactions.

People do it all the time. I've just given you a lengthy list of emotions related to our human spirit. You want to dismiss them, find excuses to rationalize your disbelief, draw impossible criteria for the spiritual to meet. You don't even want to admit our emotions are not physical!

You have often stated your beliefs as though they are fact.

Well that's because my beliefs ARE facts. I believe I am connecting with Spiritual Nature... that's a fact! I'm sorry it's a fact, I wish I could just ignore that fact and pretend something else was a fact instead, then maybe I could see things from your perspective. But I can't. Now I think we can rationally agree, there can be facts that you don't realize or acknowledge. None of us are privy to all the facts known to the universe, are we?

If, as you say, you know you are correct, then you know that at least in some ways, the Bible is wrong. I feel confident the same is true of most or all of the world's major religions. So, in effect, you are saying those religions are wrong.

No, that's not what I am saying. I don't know what is "wrong." Just because there is something I don't believe, doesn't mean I think it is wrong. I don't like rhubarb pie, it doesn't mean I think it's wrong or other people shouldn't eat rhubarb pie. I don't accept organized religions because they are man-made and man is flawed. It's not that I think they are wrong, I just don't believe in them. All across America, people are cheering on their favorite American Idol contestant, but I don't have one because I don't watch American Idol, and I don't think the contestants there are truly the best talent in America, much less idols. I don't think it's wrong, I don't think people are wrong to cheer for their favorites, it doesn't matter to me what people do.

Is it your contention that, even absent impulses in the brain, we feel emotion? Again, you have no evidence of that, it's merely an opinion you are giving based on nothing but your own belief. Even if it's true, there's no way for you to show it to another person.

I explained what I meant by similar to our 5 senses, you for some reason ignored that. When I'm talking about sensing the spiritual, similarly to our 5 senses, I mean the ability to observe or experience something that otherwise you would not know was there. If you cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or touch something you cannot observe it and generally will not know it exists. Even when we use tools to observe things our senses normally can't, we use those senses to observe the machines. So what I mean is do we have some sort of spiritual sense whereby we can observe or experience the spiritual which we otherwise could not? If so, why do some people seem not to have this sense?

Happiness is an emotion. Do we use happiness to experience or observe something spiritual? Or are you saying happiness is a result of some sort of spiritual interaction? Are you saying emotions in general are a sense, and the specific emotions are descriptions of the experience of that sense (sort of like bitter, spicy, sour are different descriptions of tastes)? What leads you to believe this is true? What evidence do you have of it? You gave me examples of emotions and declared them to be senses, and senses for the spiritual. You gave no reason for this, just said it is true.

You say I'm making excuses and rationalizing my disbelief. That's pretty funny considering both your problems with the word rationalization and the way you rationalize declaration such as emotions are senses. You expect me to accept that as true despite not only a lack of evidence but definitional problems (I've never seen emotions defined as senses rather than mental states).

Again, you've ignored my explained point. Not everything you don't believe is wrong, but if you believe something and someone else has a contradictory belief, you inherently believe they are wrong. If you believe god is not concerned with what people do, not paying attention to how we act, or whatever it is you've described as god's regard for humanity; if your belief about god and the Bible's description of god cannot both be true simultaneously, then one must be wrong. Are you saying god can be loving, jealous, wrathful and whatever other emotional descriptions are given in the Bible at the same time god is without human-like emotion, as I believed you have described it?

If you know what is 'right', what is true, you usually know what is 'wrong' or untrue because of it.

If there is a way to sense the spiritual in a way similar to how our 5 senses allow us to perceive the physical universe, have you considered the possibility that some people may be spiritually handicapped, so to speak? Perhaps we do not have this spiritual sense, like being spiritually blind. Maybe, instead of lying about belief in god or the spiritual, we truly do not perceive it. Wouldn't that mean you are getting upset with and often insulting people for their handicap?

 

[Boss]

Is it your contention that, even absent impulses in the brain, we feel emotion? Again, you have no evidence of that, it's merely an opinion you are giving based on nothing but your own belief. Even if it's true, there's no way for you to show it to another person.

I have no evidence we feel emotion? Are you kidding or was that a typo? I think most rational people would agree we do feel emotions and they are not physical in a material sense. How many milligrams of oxytocin do you love your mother?

I explained what I meant by similar to our 5 senses, you for some reason ignored that. When I'm talking about sensing the spiritual, similarly to our 5 senses, I mean the ability to observe or experience something that otherwise you would not know was there. If you cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or touch something you cannot observe it and generally will not know it exists. Even when we use tools to observe things our senses normally can't, we use those senses to observe the machines. So what I mean is do we have some sort of spiritual sense whereby we can observe or experience the spiritual which we otherwise could not? If so, why do some people seem not to have this sense?

People who are strongly spiritually connected DO feel something. They DO have an experience. Our senses of see/hear/smell/taste/touch are used to relate to a material physical world. No, God doesn't exist in material or physical form. Just as love doesn't exist in a material physical form. Thoughts and dreams are also not material and physical. You can observe some machine that registers brain waves, you can pinpoint some chemical that is released, you can measure the effects on the physical body, but you can't measure or quantify actual thoughts and dreams.

Some people seem not to have a "spiritual sense" for the same reason some people could blindfold themselves and stuff cotton in their ears and deny they have a sense of sight and hearing. Don't ask me WHY anyone would do such a thing, I can't figure that one out myself. Why DO people fight so vigorously to deny their spiritual senses?

Happiness is an emotion. Do we use happiness to experience or observe something spiritual? Or are you saying happiness is a result of some sort of spiritual interaction? Are you saying emotions in general are a sense, and the specific emotions are descriptions of the experience of that sense (sort of like bitter, spicy, sour are different descriptions of tastes)? What leads you to believe this is true? What evidence do you have of it? You gave me examples of emotions and declared them to be senses, and senses for the spiritual. You gave no reason for this, just said it is true.

Emotions are spiritual experiences, for lack of a better way to say it. They are non-physical manifestations of our human spirit, the essence of who we are. Sometimes our emotions can actually qualify as "senses" in some regard... A sense of dread... a sense of danger... a sense of pride... a sense of joy... we've all heard these terms a million times. Are you going to deny that?

You say I'm making excuses and rationalizing my disbelief. That's pretty funny considering both your problems with the word rationalization and the way you rationalize declaration such as emotions are senses. You expect me to accept that as true despite not only a lack of evidence but definitional problems (I've never seen emotions defined as senses rather than mental states).

Emotions are defined as emotions, not mental states. I gave you examples of emotions as senses above. Is this now going to be a theme? Are we stuck for 3 days now on arguing semantics because you're too stubborn to try and see a point being made?

Again, you've ignored my explained point. Not everything you don't believe is wrong, but if you believe something and someone else has a contradictory belief, you inherently believe they are wrong. If you believe god is not concerned with what people do, not paying attention to how we act, or whatever it is you've described as god's regard for humanity; if your belief about god and the Bible's description of god cannot both be true simultaneously, then one must be wrong. Are you saying god can be loving, jealous, wrathful and whatever other emotional descriptions are given in the Bible at the same time god is without human-like emotion, as I believed you have described it?

Well you just crawled up my ass about making declarations without any evidence, and here you want me to commit to some declaration about religions and will not accept me telling you that I have made no such declaration. I do not know what is wrong! The Bible could be absolutely right! God could be absolutely concerned with what we do and paying attention to how we act! I do not know! Since I do not know, I don't feel comfortable claiming that I do.

I relayed MY perspective so you could understand what I personally believe. I don't know that I am right, I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but I don't know that I am not. I only KNOW what I believe in, and it's as I've described it to you.

If you know what is 'right', what is true, you usually know what is 'wrong' or untrue because of it.

But that's just not true. What is "right" for me may not be "right" for others. It's not for ME to decide. The only thing I know is untrue is that something spiritual doesn't exist. I know this because I make contact with it daily and realize benefit from it. I know others who experience the same thing in their own way. Perhaps spiritual nature has different channels or frequencies and there are different ways to connect? If that's the case, perhaps all religions are valid? Again... don't know, don't care.

If there is a way to sense the spiritual in a way similar to how our 5 senses allow us to perceive the physical universe, have you considered the possibility that some people may be spiritually handicapped, so to speak? Perhaps we do not have this spiritual sense, like being spiritually blind. Maybe, instead of lying about belief in god or the spiritual, we truly do not perceive it. Wouldn't that mean you are getting upset with and often insulting people for their handicap?

I'm not getting upset. I know that some of you god-haters like to picture me all upset and pounding my keyboard with smoke coming out of my ears, but really... doesn't bother me a bit. If you wish to be unbelievably stupid with regard to your spirituality, it's your loss not mine. Yes, I do think some people become "spiritually handicapped" by their own doings. Just like if you blindfolded yourself for years you'd lose your sense of sight. I don't really feel sorry for people who cause their own handicaps. They deserve to be insulted and ridiculed.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Because you believe that your God had to "make" the Universe!

You can't have it both ways.

well actually, I can have that both ways because they are different things.....science tells us that our universe has a beginning....does science tell us God had a beginning?.....

The scientific process has never turned up a single shred of evidence for the existence of your imaginary God. Therefore it is illogical to expect it to find a "beginning" for something that does not exist.

then why do you pretend God would have to have a beginning?......apparently I can not only have it both ways, I can have it six ways.....

 

[Montrovant]

Is it your contention that, even absent impulses in the brain, we feel emotion? Again, you have no evidence of that, it's merely an opinion you are giving based on nothing but your own belief. Even if it's true, there's no way for you to show it to another person.

I have no evidence we feel emotion? Are you kidding or was that a typo? I think most rational people would agree we do feel emotions and they are not physical in a material sense. How many milligrams of oxytocin do you love your mother?

I explained what I meant by similar to our 5 senses, you for some reason ignored that. When I'm talking about sensing the spiritual, similarly to our 5 senses, I mean the ability to observe or experience something that otherwise you would not know was there. If you cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or touch something you cannot observe it and generally will not know it exists. Even when we use tools to observe things our senses normally can't, we use those senses to observe the machines. So what I mean is do we have some sort of spiritual sense whereby we can observe or experience the spiritual which we otherwise could not? If so, why do some people seem not to have this sense?

People who are strongly spiritually connected DO feel something. They DO have an experience. Our senses of see/hear/smell/taste/touch are used to relate to a material physical world. No, God doesn't exist in material or physical form. Just as love doesn't exist in a material physical form. Thoughts and dreams are also not material and physical. You can observe some machine that registers brain waves, you can pinpoint some chemical that is released, you can measure the effects on the physical body, but you can't measure or quantify actual thoughts and dreams.

Some people seem not to have a "spiritual sense" for the same reason some people could blindfold themselves and stuff cotton in their ears and deny they have a sense of sight and hearing. Don't ask me WHY anyone would do such a thing, I can't figure that one out myself. Why DO people fight so vigorously to deny their spiritual senses?



Emotions are spiritual experiences, for lack of a better way to say it. They are non-physical manifestations of our human spirit, the essence of who we are. Sometimes our emotions can actually qualify as "senses" in some regard... A sense of dread... a sense of danger... a sense of pride... a sense of joy... we've all heard these terms a million times. Are you going to deny that?



Emotions are defined as emotions, not mental states. I gave you examples of emotions as senses above. Is this now going to be a theme? Are we stuck for 3 days now on arguing semantics because you're too stubborn to try and see a point being made?



Well you just crawled up my ass about making declarations without any evidence, and here you want me to commit to some declaration about religions and will not accept me telling you that I have made no such declaration. I do not know what is wrong! The Bible could be absolutely right! God could be absolutely concerned with what we do and paying attention to how we act! I do not know! Since I do not know, I don't feel comfortable claiming that I do.

I relayed MY perspective so you could understand what I personally believe. I don't know that I am right, I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but I don't know that I am not. I only KNOW what I believe in, and it's as I've described it to you.

If you know what is 'right', what is true, you usually know what is 'wrong' or untrue because of it.

But that's just not true. What is "right" for me may not be "right" for others. It's not for ME to decide. The only thing I know is untrue is that something spiritual doesn't exist. I know this because I make contact with it daily and realize benefit from it. I know others who experience the same thing in their own way. Perhaps spiritual nature has different channels or frequencies and there are different ways to connect? If that's the case, perhaps all religions are valid? Again... don't know, don't care.

If there is a way to sense the spiritual in a way similar to how our 5 senses allow us to perceive the physical universe, have you considered the possibility that some people may be spiritually handicapped, so to speak? Perhaps we do not have this spiritual sense, like being spiritually blind. Maybe, instead of lying about belief in god or the spiritual, we truly do not perceive it. Wouldn't that mean you are getting upset with and often insulting people for their handicap?

I'm not getting upset. I know that some of you god-haters like to picture me all upset and pounding my keyboard with smoke coming out of my ears, but really... doesn't bother me a bit. If you wish to be unbelievably stupid with regard to your spirituality, it's your loss not mine. Yes, I do think some people become "spiritually handicapped" by their own doings. Just like if you blindfolded yourself for years you'd lose your sense of sight. I don't really feel sorry for people who cause their own handicaps. They deserve to be insulted and ridiculed.

You really never stop, do you?

I didn't say we don't experience emotions. I asked if, absent brain impulses, we experience emotion. Are you truly unable to see the difference?

You say thoughts and dreams are not physical at the same time you give examples of physical evidence of thoughts and dreams. Does the brain have nothing to do with thought and emotion?

Why do you assume that people who lack a spiritual sense must have intentionally kept themselves from using it? People are born blind, or deaf, people have accidents which damage them in ways that prevent use of senses, there are diseases that can do the same. Why, with spiritual sense, must it be by choice? You seem to base your belief about this on anti-atheist bias. You certainly haven't given any mechanism by which a person has a spiritual sense, yet seem sure that people without it intentionally found a way to suppress it.

I didn't say you 'made a declaration' about religion. What I said, at least twice now, is that belief in something can automatically include disbelief in contradictory things. I gave examples of that. Let me give a silly but plainer one, perhaps then you'll understand. If you believe the sky is blue, and I (standing next to you) tell you I believe it is neon green, you believe I am wrong. You don't have to declare it, it's inherent in believing it is blue; if it is blue, it is not neon green. Or how about this? You believe in your version of god. I don't believe in any god. You inherently believe I am wrong, since there cannot both be a god and not be a god. You don't have to say the words, "You are wrong.". It's inherent in the contradictory nature of the beliefs. It is unimportant if you accept the possibility you are wrong, this is about what you believe to be true.

I intentionally mentioned truth at the same time as right and wrong to show I wasn't using those words in a moral sense. By right I mean true, or correct, not good.

Emotions are defined as emotions? Such ridiculousness.
Emotions are not defined as mental states?
"1. A mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes; a feeling: the emotions of joy, sorrow, reverence, hate, and love."
emotion - definition of emotion by The Free Dictionary

If you do not get upset in these threads, why do you sometimes degenerate into tossing out insults, or do the message board equivalent of yelling?

And again, where do you get your information that someone who is spiritually handicapped must have done it to themselves? Really, this is just one example of the bigger question of where you get any of your information about all of this.

 

[sealybobo]

Now Boss will tell me I can't prove my mom is real or that she is my mom. Boss can get real deep, in the doo doo.

No, the truth is, nothing is proven. Science can't prove anything, it can only predict probability of possibility. Now, it may predict a very high probability of a possibility, and we may interpret that as "proof" of something, but that's not science, that is us drawing a conclusion.

Let me ask you this. Can you calculate the probability that you will wake up in the morning on Mars? Simple question, a yes or no will suffice.

I will give you $500 if you wake up on Mars tommorow. If not, you give me $20. That is pretty good odds I'm giving you. Will you take the bet? I'll give you $10,000 if God manafests itself in the next month? If not, you give me $100. Pretty goods odd. Are you willing to take that bet?

We all know that you will not take that bet. What odds are you willing to take to put your money where your mouth is?

We all know you won't back it up at any odds.

I'll take any odds you are willing and put up my current savings.

When it gets down to it, in your gut, you won't stake anything of real value to your belief. People of knowledge will and do, regularly.

Prove me wrong, make it worth the effort and I guarantee I'll come up with someone else that'll double the offer.

How much are you willing to put up to prove your belief? Talk is cheap.

And reality just isn't that complicated.

So true great post

Never thought to give him all the odds he wants and it is on him to prove his imaginary friends is real. But he wants us to prove his imaginary friend isn't real.

I thought about this this weekend. I see everyone walking around, even the christians and I don't see people LIVING FOR CHRIST. They go to church, think about other things during the sermon and then forget about church as soon as they walk out the door. Some are good people, some are not. Is church really making my nephews better people? No. Am I an atheist helping to make them better people? Of course. Do I ever tell them about god or there not being a god? No. That isn't my place. But I will suggest that church isn't necessary to making them good people. It may be making them feel better about themselves but a lie is still a lie even if it makes you feel good. Who says we need the lie?

I really have no problem with teaching kids right from wrong. If you think your kid needs a lie to be good, I guess that is your choice. But I don't think anyone who teaches their kid about god thinks they are telling a lie. Most religious people were lied to themselves either as children or at some point when a born again or catholic got their claws on them so I doubt anyone who doesn't believe in god ever tells their kid that story unless maybe you were raising a devil child and you wanted to put the fear of "GOD" in them. I think one day when my nephews are adults I'll throw out a question or two and see if they really believe. My brother is a devout christian and I think even he realizes just how big a scam the whole thing is. But like many others, they don't abandon god, they just distance themselves from the church. Most people can understand the church is a scam but can't go that one extra step and realize the whole concept of god is a scam.

It is what I love about science, logic and reasoning.

 

[sealybobo]

Spirituality is not of the physical world: correct. It is of the mind. Things of the mind exist in the mind.

Spirituality is describing an attribute held by a physical being. It is the awareness of something Spiritual. Saying "spirituality" is purely in the mind is no different than saying "philosophy" is purely in the mind. Does that mean everything man can philosophize about is fake and not real?

To explain the universe, physicists need the absolute smallest building block, and the laws of physics.

To explain the physical universe, yes. The laws of physics only apply to that which are physical in nature. You continue to demonstrate your inability to recognize anything beyond physical nature. If it's not physical, it cannot exist. However, there are things in the physical universe that are not physical, or at least not 'material' and they do exist. You don't need me to give you examples, you are aware of these things. You accept them as part of the physical because you are aware of them and know they exist in physical nature. But the spiritual also exists in physical nature, you just don't accept it. Instead of comprehending it as part of physical nature that you can't materialistically quantify, you reject it and pretend it doesn't really exist. Since the spiritual doesn't exist materially, it's not possible to provide you with material evidence.

1. Yes, are minds don't imagine a non physical god but your mind does.

2. You are probably a proud man and hate admitting when you are wrong, but I think you are a bigger man than most righties because I see you backing down on this.

3. What are some of the things in the universe that exist but are not physical other than god? Has science weighed in on those things? What are a few examples?

4. Are you saying god is unable to transform himself into a physical being and perform miracles for us? So if he can't even play in the physical, how the hell did he create the physical? Stupid.

5. Scientists pretty much even know what part of the brain made up god/spirituality. I can't believe you can't understand that primitive men invented god. Healthy fear of the unknown. I've explained this to you several times. You are stubborn.

But I do see you backing down. Now you are saying god exists "in our minds". Sure, as long as that is where you keep it because when you tell us about it we should lock you up for being insane. When I was a baby I had an imaginary friend. I grew out of it. You didn't.

1. Yes, are minds don't imagine a non physical god but your mind does.

I don't imagine what I connect with because I obtain enormous benefit from it. IF I were only imagining something that wasn't real, there would be no discernable benefit. I wouldn't be able to tell any difference between when I connect with this and when I didn't connect. But I can, so I obviously know the connection is real and does work to my advantage.

2. You are probably a proud man and hate admitting when you are wrong, but I think you are a bigger man than most righties because I see you backing down on this.

If I am proven wrong on anything, I am the first to admit I was wrong. I haven't "backed down" on anything here. Perhaps that is how you are going to define your coming to understand my point of view? Rather than admitting that you now "get it" you're going to pretend that I am "backing down" from something you erroneously assumed to begin with. I don't really know what "rightie" or "leftie" has to do with this, but I am curious as to how many left-wing liberal idiots here are the god-haters and how many spiritually-inclined people are politically right-leaning. I bet there is a correlation. And maybe that has something to do with why you all hate God so much... you see God as a manifestation of conservatism that you hate politically. That's really a sad testament to you as a human being, as well as your spirituality and politics, if such is the case.

3. What are some of the things in the universe that exist but are not physical other than god? Has science weighed in on those things? What are a few examples?

Uhm... Gravity, time, space, magnetism, just to name a few. Science has weighed in on these things, it can measure and calculate them, but they still have no physical material presence. In humans, we have all kinds of emotions that are not physical. Love, hate, lust, anger, empathy... should I list them all? Surely these things exist, and surely they don't have physical material presence.

4. Are you saying god is unable to transform himself into a physical being and perform miracles for us? So if he can't even play in the physical, how the hell did he create the physical? Stupid.

I don't think I've said anything remotely close to that. How do you know God doesn't do this? If something truly "miraculous" happens, don't you just chalk it up to a fluke, a coincidence, an anomaly? Dumb luck? Fortune? Or even, worst case scenario, strange unexplained phenomenon? How many times has something happened that was "against all odds?" Do you KNOW that God didn't have a hand in that? Where is your evidence?

Why do you somehow think that God has this NEED to prove himself to you? Are you that arrogant and self-important? Oh... God must not be real or he'd stop me from being such a goob! ...STUPID is right! IF God was "concerned" with whether you believed in him or not, do you honestly think there would be a way to avoid that? It would be like breathing air... try not doing that and see if God lets you! Go ahead, defy God!--Stop breathing! lol

5. Scientists pretty much even know what part of the brain made up god/spirituality. I can't believe you can't understand that primitive men invented god. Healthy fear of the unknown. I've explained this to you several times. You are stubborn.

No, scientists pretty much DON'T know any such thing. There is no evidence, you've NEVER presented any. You keep SAYING this, you have not proven this or offered any evidence to support your theory. Meanwhile, our archeological discoveries show that humans have ALWAYS been spiritual. We know when man invented stone tools, we call it the stone age. We know when man began working with iron, we call it the iron age. There is no PRE-SPIRITUAL age for humans. If it were invented, you'd have the evidence to show this, and you simply don't. Now you can BELIEVE that... nothing wrong with having FAITH... but that's what it is.

Wow are you slow. Just because a lie makes you feel better doesn't make it real. Placebo's buddy!

Hey look, smarter people have been denying/doubting the existence of god since the beginning too. Think about it. The kings/pharoahs/slave owners/churches use god to manipulate/con the masses. You can't deny that. So you ask yourself, if the smarter people (the minority) don't believe but the masses do, who's probably right?

Right? Think about this. If it weren't for the 1% of the population who invented medicines, fire & cars, where would man be? I wouldn't know how to build a home or fix a broken bone. That's the 1% who have advanced all mankind. You and me would be cave men if it weren't for the 1% lets be honest. You didn't build your home or car and you wouldn't know how to invent phones or electricity or airplanes, right? You and me (the masses) are barely more than apes.

Protagoras, (died 420 BCE), Greek Sophist and first major Humanist, who wrote that the existence of the gods was unknowable.

Diagoras of Melos (5th century BCE): Ancient Greek poet and sophist known as the Atheist of Milos, who declared that there were no Gods

Empedocles (c. 490–430 BC): Greek pre-Socratic philosopher and a citizen of Agrigentum, a Greek city in Sicily. Empedocles' philosophy is best known for being the originator of the cosmogenic theory of the four Classical elements.

I could go on and on. Now consider all the people who kept their mouth shut for thousands of years in fear of being crucified or alienated. You are so dumb boss to not see that god has been drilled into our heads. And yes scientists agree being religious had it's benefits, otherwise it would have died out. Has to do with social bonds, unity, finding a mate. They get why your primitive ass is religious, what part of the brain it comes from and why it continues.

 

[sealybobo]

Miracles have not been demonstrated to occur. The existence of a miracle would pose logical problems for belief in a god which can supposedly see the future and began the universe with a set of predefined laws. Even if a ‘miracle’ could be demonstrated it would not immediately imply the existence of a god, as unknown natural processes or agents could still be at work.

Most alleged miracles can be explained as statistically unlikely occurrences. For example, one child surviving a plane crash that kills two hundred others is not a miracle, just as one person winning the lottery is not. In the absence of any empirical evidence, all other claims can be dismissed as the result of magical thinking, misattribution, credulity, hearsay and anecdote. Eye-witness testimony and anecdotal accounts are, by themselves, not reliable or definitive forms of proof for such extraordinary claims.

Divine intervention claims most often concern systems and events for which we have poor predictive capabilities, for example, weather, sports, health and social/economic interactions. Such claims are rarely made in relation to those things we can accurately predict and test e.g. the motion of celestial bodies, boiling point of water and pull of gravity. If a god is constantly intervening in the universe it supposedly created, then it is with such ambiguity as to appear completely indistinguishable from normal background chance.

Note: Theists often fail to adequately apportion blame when claims of their particular god’s ‘infinite mercy’ or ‘omnibenevolence’ involve sparing a few lives in a disaster, or recovery from a debilitating disease – all of which their god would ultimately be responsible for inflicting if it existed. See also Confirmation bias, Cherry Picking.

Why won’t god heal amputees?

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” - Carl Sagan

“Elite athletes make first place, strange shapes appear on toast and some people narrowly escape death, but amputated limbs never regrow, mountains never move and food never spontaneously appears in front of the hundreds of children that starve to death each hour.” – Anonymous

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus

“Because if the only way the supreme creator of the entire universe can demonstrate his existence to me is to create images of Mary or Jesus on food items, I’m not impressed.” – Anonymous

 

[sealybobo]

Is it your contention that, even absent impulses in the brain, we feel emotion? Again, you have no evidence of that, it's merely an opinion you are giving based on nothing but your own belief. Even if it's true, there's no way for you to show it to another person.

I have no evidence we feel emotion? Are you kidding or was that a typo? I think most rational people would agree we do feel emotions and they are not physical in a material sense. How many milligrams of oxytocin do you love your mother?

People who are strongly spiritually connected DO feel something. They DO have an experience. Our senses of see/hear/smell/taste/touch are used to relate to a material physical world. No, God doesn't exist in material or physical form. Just as love doesn't exist in a material physical form. Thoughts and dreams are also not material and physical. You can observe some machine that registers brain waves, you can pinpoint some chemical that is released, you can measure the effects on the physical body, but you can't measure or quantify actual thoughts and dreams.

Some people seem not to have a "spiritual sense" for the same reason some people could blindfold themselves and stuff cotton in their ears and deny they have a sense of sight and hearing. Don't ask me WHY anyone would do such a thing, I can't figure that one out myself. Why DO people fight so vigorously to deny their spiritual senses?

Emotions are spiritual experiences, for lack of a better way to say it. They are non-physical manifestations of our human spirit, the essence of who we are. Sometimes our emotions can actually qualify as "senses" in some regard... A sense of dread... a sense of danger... a sense of pride... a sense of joy... we've all heard these terms a million times. Are you going to deny that?

Emotions are defined as emotions, not mental states. I gave you examples of emotions as senses above. Is this now going to be a theme? Are we stuck for 3 days now on arguing semantics because you're too stubborn to try and see a point being made?

Well you just crawled up my ass about making declarations without any evidence, and here you want me to commit to some declaration about religions and will not accept me telling you that I have made no such declaration. I do not know what is wrong! The Bible could be absolutely right! God could be absolutely concerned with what we do and paying attention to how we act! I do not know! Since I do not know, I don't feel comfortable claiming that I do.

I relayed MY perspective so you could understand what I personally believe. I don't know that I am right, I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but I don't know that I am not. I only KNOW what I believe in, and it's as I've described it to you.

But that's just not true. What is "right" for me may not be "right" for others. It's not for ME to decide. The only thing I know is untrue is that something spiritual doesn't exist. I know this because I make contact with it daily and realize benefit from it. I know others who experience the same thing in their own way. Perhaps spiritual nature has different channels or frequencies and there are different ways to connect? If that's the case, perhaps all religions are valid? Again... don't know, don't care.

If there is a way to sense the spiritual in a way similar to how our 5 senses allow us to perceive the physical universe, have you considered the possibility that some people may be spiritually handicapped, so to speak? Perhaps we do not have this spiritual sense, like being spiritually blind. Maybe, instead of lying about belief in god or the spiritual, we truly do not perceive it. Wouldn't that mean you are getting upset with and often insulting people for their handicap?

I'm not getting upset. I know that some of you god-haters like to picture me all upset and pounding my keyboard with smoke coming out of my ears, but really... doesn't bother me a bit. If you wish to be unbelievably stupid with regard to your spirituality, it's your loss not mine. Yes, I do think some people become "spiritually handicapped" by their own doings. Just like if you blindfolded yourself for years you'd lose your sense of sight. I don't really feel sorry for people who cause their own handicaps. They deserve to be insulted and ridiculed.

You really never stop, do you?

I didn't say we don't experience emotions. I asked if, absent brain impulses, we experience emotion. Are you truly unable to see the difference?

You say thoughts and dreams are not physical at the same time you give examples of physical evidence of thoughts and dreams. Does the brain have nothing to do with thought and emotion?

Why do you assume that people who lack a spiritual sense must have intentionally kept themselves from using it? People are born blind, or deaf, people have accidents which damage them in ways that prevent use of senses, there are diseases that can do the same. Why, with spiritual sense, must it be by choice? You seem to base your belief about this on anti-atheist bias. You certainly haven't given any mechanism by which a person has a spiritual sense, yet seem sure that people without it intentionally found a way to suppress it.

I didn't say you 'made a declaration' about religion. What I said, at least twice now, is that belief in something can automatically include disbelief in contradictory things. I gave examples of that. Let me give a silly but plainer one, perhaps then you'll understand. If you believe the sky is blue, and I (standing next to you) tell you I believe it is neon green, you believe I am wrong. You don't have to declare it, it's inherent in believing it is blue; if it is blue, it is not neon green. Or how about this? You believe in your version of god. I don't believe in any god. You inherently believe I am wrong, since there cannot both be a god and not be a god. You don't have to say the words, "You are wrong.". It's inherent in the contradictory nature of the beliefs. It is unimportant if you accept the possibility you are wrong, this is about what you believe to be true.

I intentionally mentioned truth at the same time as right and wrong to show I wasn't using those words in a moral sense. By right I mean true, or correct, not good.

Emotions are defined as emotions? Such ridiculousness.
Emotions are not defined as mental states?
"1. A mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes; a feeling: the emotions of joy, sorrow, reverence, hate, and love."
emotion - definition of emotion by The Free Dictionary

If you do not get upset in these threads, why do you sometimes degenerate into tossing out insults, or do the message board equivalent of yelling?

And again, where do you get your information that someone who is spiritually handicapped must have done it to themselves? Really, this is just one example of the bigger question of where you get any of your information about all of this.

He said we aren't born with spiritual sense? That's the point. No one is. I would be willing to bet it wasn't until we became social animals and started talking to each other that we first invented god. I doubt that if you let 20 human's grow up by themselves without any human interaction that any of those 20 would create god in their minds. I'm sure to come up with the concept you'd have to be discussing the possibility of it and someone else would have to buy into this idea and as a group if 11 said they believed the other 9 better go along or else lord of the flys starts happening. Maybe the first leader of the pack called himself god and the rest of them had to serve and worship him.

But you need community/groups/more than one person to come up with the idea of god.

Every human-being ever born begins life as an implicit atheist and must be taught the concept of theism or, more commonly, indoctrinated with it.

 

[GISMYS]

KNOWLEDGE OF GOD IS PROGRAMED INTO HUMAN DNA. Go anywhere on earth and you will find people know there is God but many have allowed demons to lead them to false gods!!

 

[sealybobo]

Read a book boss "Alper uses a Socratic technique to brilliantly and flawlessly argue that our concepts of spirit and God are derived from the mechanics of our brain...enormously important...full of scientific and philosophical truths."

The 'God' Part of The Brain | A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God

And if we haven't 100% fully yet, when we do will you then admit god is all made up in your head? Of course you won't. Like all theists, you move the goal post every time we prove you wrong. What will prove to us god exists? God. What will prove to you he doesn't exist? Nothing.

What makes us feel spiritual? It could be the quieting of a small area in our brains, a new study suggests.

The area in question — the right parietal lobe — is responsible for defining "Me," said researcher Brick Johnstone of Missouri University. It generates self-criticism, he said, and guides us through physical and social terrains by constantly updating our self-knowledge: my hand, my cocktail, my witty conversation skills, my new love interest …

People with less active Me-Definers are more likely to lead spiritual lives, reports the study in the current issue of the journal Zygon.

Most previous research on neuro-spirituality has been based on brain scans of actively practicing adherents (i.e. meditating monks, praying nuns) and has resulted in broad and inconclusive findings. (Is the brain area lighting up in response to verse or spiritual experience?)

So Johnstone and colleague Bret Glass turned to the tried-and-true techniques of neuroscience’s early days — studying brain-injured patients. The researchers tested brain regions implicated in the previous imaging studies with exams tailored to each area’s expertise — similar to studying the prowess of an ear with a hearing test. They then looked for correlations between brain region performance and the subjects' self-reported spirituality.

Among the more spiritual of the 26 subjects, the researchers pinpointed a less functional right parietal lobe, a physical state which may translate psychologically as decreased self-awareness and self-focus.

The finding suggests that one core tenant of spiritual experience is selflessness, said Johnstone, adding that he hopes the study "will help people think about spirituality in more specific ways."

Spiritual outlooks have long been associated with better mental and physical health. These benefits, Johnstone speculated, may stem from being focused less on one’s self and more on others — a natural consequence of turning down the volume on the Me-Definer.

In addition to religious practices, other behaviors and experiences are known to hush the Definer of Me. Appreciation of art or nature can quiet it, Johnstone said, pointing out that people talk of "losing themselves" in a particularly beautiful song. Love, and even charity work, can also soften the boundaries of "Me," he said.

The greatest silencing of the Me-Definer likely happens in the deepest states of meditation or prayer, said Johnstone, when practitioners describe feeling seamless with the entire universe.
That is, the highest point of spiritual experience occurs when "Me" completely loses its definition.

"If you look in the Torah, the Old Testament, the New Testament, in the Koran, a lot of Sufi writings, Buddhist writings, and Hindu writings, they all talk about selflessness," said Johnstone.

We may be finding the neurological underpinnings of these writings, he said.

 

[sealybobo]

KNOWLEDGE OF GOD IS PROGRAMED INTO HUMAN DNA. Go anywhere on earth and you will find people know there is God but many have allowed demons to lead them to false gods!!

Where do you live so I can come see people like you describe.

And no gismys. Going to afganistan and seeing taliban women worshipping god only proves they are as dumb as you.

 

[GISMYS]

KNOWLEDGE OF GOD IS PROGRAMED INTO HUMAN DNA. Go anywhere on earth and you will find people know there is God but many have allowed demons to lead them to false gods!!

Where do you live so I can come see people like you describe.

And no gismys. Going to afganistan and seeing taliban women worshipping god only proves they are as dumb as you.

SILLY TARD!!! Taliban gods are not they are false gods,ALMIGHTY GOD is the only ONE TRUE GOD!!!!!!

 

[emilynghiem]

KNOWLEDGE OF GOD IS PROGRAMED INTO HUMAN DNA. Go anywhere on earth and you will find people know there is God but many have allowed demons to lead them to false gods!!

Dear [MENTION=42952]GISMYS[/MENTION]
Take care that this does not apply to you, too.
You worry if I or others are presenting some "false perception of God"
How are you sure that your perception of God and what
you think you should be teaching is not skewed by demonic fear.

Is all that you share here out of truly unconditional and all-inclusive love of all people?

if there is any fear or division in your mind, then your perception/words
may be skewed by that division.

So remove the division first, and then your words reflect God more purely and fully.

GISMYS is there ANYTHING in your mind that makes
you divide the people you address into groups different from where you place yourself,
so that not all people you see are included in God's salvation, but you are placing
some below you or assuming they are excluded from God. is this the cause of division?

 

[emilynghiem]

Hi [MENTION=35236]itfitzme[/MENTION]
I am willing to make a 10 million dollar bet with
Stephen Hawkins, Richard Dawking, and Bill Gates
that humans can form a consensus on God (ie agreeing on meanings of God and God's attributes that are real within their natural understanding)
between representative groups over the internet;
by first proving the process of reconciliation works by forgiveness
between the different groups so that nobody has to change their beliefs.
The main thing that changes is their perception of other people's beliefs
so as not to be in irreconciliable conflict any more.

I need at least 10 million to save a historic district for Vets to set up a campus
for sustainable housing and health care as part of business education and govt training.

So the money will go to a good cause.

If you are willing to be the skeptic coordinating the financial backers
and I am willing to be the coordinator of the team to try to prove
a consensus can be reached networking groups together online,
are you ready to go for it?

I think the people here alone could likely pull off a good part of the effort.
And I can throw in some other atheists and Christians, Muslims Buddhist and Bahai to
help coordinate between the diverse groups who will want to be represented.

Thanks let me know
I already have domain names set up for
Consensus on God
Consensus on Law

Are you interested or are you just bluffing yourself?

Now Boss will tell me I can't prove my mom is real or that she is my mom. Boss can get real deep, in the doo doo.

No, the truth is, nothing is proven. Science can't prove anything, it can only predict probability of possibility. Now, it may predict a very high probability of a possibility, and we may interpret that as "proof" of something, but that's not science, that is us drawing a conclusion.

Let me ask you this. Can you calculate the probability that you will wake up in the morning on Mars? Simple question, a yes or no will suffice.

I will give you $500 if you wake up on Mars tommorow. If not, you give me $20. That is pretty good odds I'm giving you. Will you take the bet? I'll give you $10,000 if God manafests itself in the next month? If not, you give me $100. Pretty goods odd. Are you willing to take that bet?

We all know that you will not take that bet. What odds are you willing to take to put your money where your mouth is?

We all know you won't back it up at any odds.

I'll take any odds you are willing and put up my current savings.

When it gets down to it, in your gut, you won't stake anything of real value to your belief. People of knowledge will and do, regularly.

Prove me wrong, make it worth the effort and I guarantee I'll come up with someone else that'll double the offer.

How much are you willing to put up to prove your belief? Talk is cheap.

And reality just isn't that complicated.

 

[GISMYS]

CRAZY,EVIL,IGNORANT,DEMON INSPIRED IDEA=" first proving the process of reconciliation works by forgiveness
between the different groups so that nobody has to change their beliefs." OUR GOAL SHOULD BE TO SEEK TRUTH,TO KNOW =THE ONE TRUE ALMIGHTY GOD!!

 

[emilynghiem]

CRAZY,EVIL,IGNORANT,DEMON INSPIRED IDEA=" first proving the process of reconciliation works by forgiveness
between the different groups so that nobody has to change their beliefs." OUR GOAL SHOULD BE TO SEEK TRUTH,TO KNOW =THE ONE TRUE ALMIGHTY GOD!!

[MENTION=42952]GISMYS[/MENTION]
YES and in order to seek truth, one must forgive whatever conflicts
in the past BLOCK ONE'S FAITH that people can all be about seeking the same truth.

If you do not believe I am seeking and speaking about the same truth as you,
something is blocking your faith so that must be FORGIVEN and REMOVED
then you and I can better see we are both seeking the same truth.

Something is blocking you if you do not have faith it is the same truth of God.
What is that conflict coming from, how can it be forgiven and corrected
so it is not a 'stumbling block' to either you or me? What is causing this blockage?

 

[Montrovant]

I have no evidence we feel emotion? Are you kidding or was that a typo? I think most rational people would agree we do feel emotions and they are not physical in a material sense. How many milligrams of oxytocin do you love your mother?

People who are strongly spiritually connected DO feel something. They DO have an experience. Our senses of see/hear/smell/taste/touch are used to relate to a material physical world. No, God doesn't exist in material or physical form. Just as love doesn't exist in a material physical form. Thoughts and dreams are also not material and physical. You can observe some machine that registers brain waves, you can pinpoint some chemical that is released, you can measure the effects on the physical body, but you can't measure or quantify actual thoughts and dreams.

Some people seem not to have a "spiritual sense" for the same reason some people could blindfold themselves and stuff cotton in their ears and deny they have a sense of sight and hearing. Don't ask me WHY anyone would do such a thing, I can't figure that one out myself. Why DO people fight so vigorously to deny their spiritual senses?

Emotions are spiritual experiences, for lack of a better way to say it. They are non-physical manifestations of our human spirit, the essence of who we are. Sometimes our emotions can actually qualify as "senses" in some regard... A sense of dread... a sense of danger... a sense of pride... a sense of joy... we've all heard these terms a million times. Are you going to deny that?

Emotions are defined as emotions, not mental states. I gave you examples of emotions as senses above. Is this now going to be a theme? Are we stuck for 3 days now on arguing semantics because you're too stubborn to try and see a point being made?

Well you just crawled up my ass about making declarations without any evidence, and here you want me to commit to some declaration about religions and will not accept me telling you that I have made no such declaration. I do not know what is wrong! The Bible could be absolutely right! God could be absolutely concerned with what we do and paying attention to how we act! I do not know! Since I do not know, I don't feel comfortable claiming that I do.

I relayed MY perspective so you could understand what I personally believe. I don't know that I am right, I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but I don't know that I am not. I only KNOW what I believe in, and it's as I've described it to you.

But that's just not true. What is "right" for me may not be "right" for others. It's not for ME to decide. The only thing I know is untrue is that something spiritual doesn't exist. I know this because I make contact with it daily and realize benefit from it. I know others who experience the same thing in their own way. Perhaps spiritual nature has different channels or frequencies and there are different ways to connect? If that's the case, perhaps all religions are valid? Again... don't know, don't care.



I'm not getting upset. I know that some of you god-haters like to picture me all upset and pounding my keyboard with smoke coming out of my ears, but really... doesn't bother me a bit. If you wish to be unbelievably stupid with regard to your spirituality, it's your loss not mine. Yes, I do think some people become "spiritually handicapped" by their own doings. Just like if you blindfolded yourself for years you'd lose your sense of sight. I don't really feel sorry for people who cause their own handicaps. They deserve to be insulted and ridiculed.

You really never stop, do you?

I didn't say we don't experience emotions. I asked if, absent brain impulses, we experience emotion. Are you truly unable to see the difference?

You say thoughts and dreams are not physical at the same time you give examples of physical evidence of thoughts and dreams. Does the brain have nothing to do with thought and emotion?

Why do you assume that people who lack a spiritual sense must have intentionally kept themselves from using it? People are born blind, or deaf, people have accidents which damage them in ways that prevent use of senses, there are diseases that can do the same. Why, with spiritual sense, must it be by choice? You seem to base your belief about this on anti-atheist bias. You certainly haven't given any mechanism by which a person has a spiritual sense, yet seem sure that people without it intentionally found a way to suppress it.

I didn't say you 'made a declaration' about religion. What I said, at least twice now, is that belief in something can automatically include disbelief in contradictory things. I gave examples of that. Let me give a silly but plainer one, perhaps then you'll understand. If you believe the sky is blue, and I (standing next to you) tell you I believe it is neon green, you believe I am wrong. You don't have to declare it, it's inherent in believing it is blue; if it is blue, it is not neon green. Or how about this? You believe in your version of god. I don't believe in any god. You inherently believe I am wrong, since there cannot both be a god and not be a god. You don't have to say the words, "You are wrong.". It's inherent in the contradictory nature of the beliefs. It is unimportant if you accept the possibility you are wrong, this is about what you believe to be true.

I intentionally mentioned truth at the same time as right and wrong to show I wasn't using those words in a moral sense. By right I mean true, or correct, not good.

Emotions are defined as emotions? Such ridiculousness.
Emotions are not defined as mental states?
"1. A mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes; a feeling: the emotions of joy, sorrow, reverence, hate, and love."
emotion - definition of emotion by The Free Dictionary

If you do not get upset in these threads, why do you sometimes degenerate into tossing out insults, or do the message board equivalent of yelling?

And again, where do you get your information that someone who is spiritually handicapped must have done it to themselves? Really, this is just one example of the bigger question of where you get any of your information about all of this.

He said we aren't born with spiritual sense? That's the point. No one is. I would be willing to bet it wasn't until we became social animals and started talking to each other that we first invented god. I doubt that if you let 20 human's grow up by themselves without any human interaction that any of those 20 would create god in their minds. I'm sure to come up with the concept you'd have to be discussing the possibility of it and someone else would have to buy into this idea and as a group if 11 said they believed the other 9 better go along or else lord of the flys starts happening. Maybe the first leader of the pack called himself god and the rest of them had to serve and worship him.

But you need community/groups/more than one person to come up with the idea of god.

Every human-being ever born begins life as an implicit atheist and must be taught the concept of theism or, more commonly, indoctrinated with it.

While I'd agree it seems easier to believe in something that others tell you is true, I don't think the idea of god requires a group. Have 20 people grow without human interaction and there's every possibility at least one would come up with the idea of a god, or something similar.