Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1

[ding]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

So, a position is only valid if held by the majority? Really? So the Earth really was flat, as long as the majority believed it was flat?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No. I did not say that. I said it goes to the weight of your argument and your coyness is a sign of your intellectual dishonesty. MisterBeale's request was valid and pertinent to the OP. Stop dodging and acknowledge the reality that you are a tiny majority of the world. Furthermore, it shows the ridiculousness of your argument of using the diversity of the overwhelming number of people who believe in God as an argument that God does not exist. You are making an incredibly stupid and irrational argument which I have already pointed out in my opening comment which has yet to be refuted.

 

[Czernobog]

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Then I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, when I talk about being able to almost draw a line from primitive Sun Worship to early agricultural, and fertility gods, to the more organised religions that arose with the invention of written language.

And you somehow believes that this proves that God does not exist? For a guy who says he doesn't need to prove that God does not exist, you sure do seem to be trying hard to do what you say you don't need to do.

Unlike you, I'm not sure what ARIS2CHAT has to say on the subject, but given your bias and dishonesty, I am more inclined to believe ARIS2CHAT than you.

Scepticism. Look it up. I keep telling you, it isn't up to be to prove nonexistence. It is on theists to prove existence. Nonexistence is the default presumption.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Then you have no proof that God does not exist and are taking it on faith. Is the ridiculousness of your argument lost on you? By definition God "exists" beyond the natural universe, beyond natural laws. We can only infer His existence through what He has created. You reject that. I don't. Therefore, you can't use the "I can't prove God exist, so He must not exist" argument because I have proven to myself that He exists. I have good reason to believe He exists. You do not have a good reason to believe He doesn't exist because your argument is based on a logical fallacy.

How convenient.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Czernobog]

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

So, a position is only valid if held by the majority? Really? So the Earth really was flat, as long as the majority believed it was flat?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No. I did not say that. I said it goes to the weight of your argument and your coyness is a sign of your intellectual dishonesty.

Meanwhile, I'm still interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on the actual topic presented in the OP.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[BreezeWood]

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

... and deities were created.
.
the difference being the scripted religions cease to search for the truth using text instead or allowing for their failure as a spoken one would fade without validity, then presumptuously believe they are the truth using their own script as their proof.

.

 

[Czernobog]

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

... and deities were created.
.
the difference being the scripted religions cease to search for the truth using text instead or allowing for their failure as a spoken one would fade without validity, then presumptuously believe they are the truth using their own script as their proof.

.

Kansal actually makes the same observation.

"Humanity suffered many illnesses for more than two thousand years, and people did not make concerted scientific efforts to find out the causes and remedies of diseases. What could have been the possible reason? In fact, priests advised people to read only the holy books and discouraged writing and reading of scientific texts. Furthermore, priests convicted and punished several secular philosophers and scientists during the last two thousand years."

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[ding]

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Then I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, when I talk about being able to almost draw a line from primitive Sun Worship to early agricultural, and fertility gods, to the more organised religions that arose with the invention of written language.

And you somehow believes that this proves that God does not exist? For a guy who says he doesn't need to prove that God does not exist, you sure do seem to be trying hard to do what you say you don't need to do.

Unlike you, I'm not sure what ARIS2CHAT has to say on the subject, but given your bias and dishonesty, I am more inclined to believe ARIS2CHAT than you.

Scepticism. Look it up. I keep telling you, it isn't up to be to prove nonexistence. It is on theists to prove existence. Nonexistence is the default presumption.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Then you have no proof that God does not exist and are taking it on faith. Is the ridiculousness of your argument lost on you? By definition God "exists" beyond the natural universe, beyond natural laws. We can only infer His existence through what He has created. You reject that. I don't. Therefore, you can't use the "I can't prove God exist, so He must not exist" argument because I have proven to myself that He exists. I have good reason to believe He exists. You do not have a good reason to believe He doesn't exist because your argument is based on a logical fallacy.

How convenient.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

lol, no. Not convenient... reality. You have no proof that God does not exist and are taking it on faith. By definition God "exists" beyond the natural universe, beyond natural laws. We can only infer His existence through what He has created. You reject that. I don't. Therefore, you can't use the "I can't prove God exist, so He must not exist" argument because I have proven to myself that He exists. I have good reason to believe He exists. You do not have a good reason to believe He doesn't exist because your argument is based on a logical fallacy. There is nothing convenient about this. It is 100% the truth.

 

[MisterBeale]

All of them are true.

And all of them are false.

You know so very little child.

Your opinion has been noted, and given all of the consideration that it deserves.

The fact that you don't give the answer to your OP any consideration, is the very reason why you are lost.

How much have you studied the source of all these different faiths?

I'm willing to bet in your arrogance, you haven't even bothered, have you?

"Not only did secular scientists rout the Christian fundamentalists, they placed themselves in the posture of knowing more, on the basis of their own very short-term investigations, than the collective remembrances of the rest of humankind."

Vine Deloria Jr., God is Red.

 

[ding]

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

So, a position is only valid if held by the majority? Really? So the Earth really was flat, as long as the majority believed it was flat?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No. I did not say that. I said it goes to the weight of your argument and your coyness is a sign of your intellectual dishonesty.

Meanwhile, I'm still interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on the actual topic presented in the OP.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Yes, it is a ridiculous argument that has no bearing on the existence of God. You are a tiny minority of the world's population arguing that the diversity of the overwhelming population is wrong because they all don't agree on the same thing. I can only assume that your IQ is below 100 to even try to make such a stupid argument. How was that? Was that enough thoughts on the actual topic presented in the OP?

Oh yeah, my opening comment has still not been refuted.

 

[MisterBeale]

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

So, a position is only valid if held by the majority? Really? So the Earth really was flat, as long as the majority believed it was flat?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

No. I did not say that. I said it goes to the weight of your argument and your coyness is a sign of your intellectual dishonesty.

Meanwhile, I'm still interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on the actual topic presented in the OP.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I'm not going to reveal anymore to you than I already have. If I reveal anymore, it could be dangerous.


Only seekers with love and kindness in their hearts should know the secrets of truth about the universe. You have too much hate and anger in you still.

 

[aris2chat]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Then I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, when I talk about being able to almost draw a line from primitive Sun Worship to early agricultural, and fertility gods, to the more organised religions that arose with the invention of written language.

around the world, but not always so straight

from the cave to today........yes

sun, moon and earth the first view of science and life

Some are asking the same question only getting less rational answers

If there is a spirit, force or energy that can be related to a super power or godhead, it has little to do with religion as most know it.

Till we know everything, I'll leave the door a crack open that some organization or "order" of things exists

but god??????

For those who do believe, one of the most profound saying, after the golden rule, "Split wood, I am there. Lift up a rock, you will find me there", we all have a bit of the universal origins in us, we might all be a tiny particle of "god". All the more reason to treat others with respect.

All the rest............ just filler or a means of control of the masses.

I have respect for gentle people of deep faith, even if I don't share their belief, but not "organized" religion as it exist today....too much war, violence, cruelty and manipulation, business of "profit" and all that

My thesis, way be when, was on theurgy and healing, spoonful of sugar and all that It still has it's place

 

[aris2chat]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Can you please share some of your knowledge on religious anthropology? I'd be interested in hearing it. I have no preference for an outcome.

Outcome? It's not about outcome, I lectured on origins, commonalities and archeological evidence.

I don't believe in organized religion of today, but from the first burial and symbol of life and death, early man needed answers, any answers. It gave them continuity and purpose to the chaos. The earth gave them food, son gave them warmth and caused the plants to grow, which gave them animals to hunt for food...... to them it was a gift.

Religion gave them organization and community, a single purpose to ask to please the "gods", it in turn led to the building of cities, and wars.

There is thread that leads through all faiths. Many aspects of god or one god, it is a respect for life and all it brings us.

If you had a particular question perhaps. Been years since I was at a podium.

Are you interested in inner faith, a set of rules to order your life by or just curious about how it began? Are you seeking truth or something to believe in?
Is this about history, this life and now or some interest in what is come? Psychology of mankind?

 

[aris2chat]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Then I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, when I talk about being able to almost draw a line from primitive Sun Worship to early agricultural, and fertility gods, to the more organised religions that arose with the invention of written language.

And you somehow believes that this proves that God does not exist? For a guy who says he doesn't need to prove that God does not exist, you sure do seem to be trying hard to do what you say you don't need to do.

Unlike you, I'm not sure what ARIS2CHAT has to say on the subject, but given your bias and dishonesty, I am more inclined to believe ARIS2CHAT than you.

Just cause I don't believe, does not mean there is not a place for some to want to believe in something "beyond".

Mediations, power of mind and body, healing, a faith in pure science and numbers, a faith in life and each other...........

But a god handing out laws and dealing punishment... NO. A god manipulating us like toys for his amusement, NO

From aliens, to hallucinogens, to dreams, ancient man share a certain psychology or something or group beyond what they were. They were also simple minded and seeking answers to complex question, mostly beyond their ability to even put in words back then. A figure of magic was the easy answer to just about everything without straining the brain too much.

A child ask a million questions but lacks the capacity to comprehend a long lecture of basic to advanced science. Early man was the same, only there was no one with a knowledge of nature to teach them even if they could sit and learn. The parent's answer would be "because I said so". Well a god that "says so" serve the same purpose only with more awe and a touch of fear. A storm and a bit of lightening, you get obedience.

Now we have explanations, or seeking then through science. When ask "why" we can tell them. It's not a short "because god said so".

We have millions of years of question still ahead of us, but we will find real answers, not some magic, if we keep looking.

Is there some order, some force or power out there to tape into, or within ourselves, possibly, even probably. Some figurehead treating us like lab rats on a whim, not so likely.

 

[aris2chat]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

God? Which god or god? In the past, present or something invented in the future? With all the planets in all the galaxies, and possibly universes, life is created in what image and why. If there is an energy, why would it care about us and why should be egotistical to believe we are some reflection of it anymore than an ant or a worm?

We create a god to suit our needs. Why would a god need to create us to serve his/hers/its/theirs????

That does not mean there is not some unifying particle through all life out there, but any idea of a "god" as depicted in religion is of our creation, to serve us, not the other way around.

Some old bearded guy in the clouds handing out laws and judging us......... really? We do that on our own, not always for the better.

Faith in humanity, science, nature.............
A believe in a mental spirit beyond the physical body, some universal energy, possibly.

That one faith is right and all the rest are wrong? Bigotry and hate, not very nice. Is that really what you think a "god" should want from us?

Most myth have some basis in fact, but they are not themselves the whole truth. We create stories to help us understand and find order. Our god are just part of that.

 

[shockedcanadian]

I can save you a whole lot of time, and I don't say this to seem arrogant or rude. In the end, this is why religion is called "faith". I was an atheist because my family didn't actively practice religion (though my grandfather did and he had an impact on me), in time, I found my own pursuits in religion. There is always questions and education, but that's just the cycle of life. It's just faith, I can't prove anything anymore than a scientist can prove the Big Bang Theory and there is plenty of contrary facts to all beliefs and theories.

Rarely does anyone live a life not wondering about death and what it will mean. Is there a meaning behind death, or life? Deep stuff right? Ultimately, faith is all we have.

 

[ding]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Can you please share some of your knowledge on religious anthropology? I'd be interested in hearing it. I have no preference for an outcome.

Outcome? It's not about outcome, I lectured on origins, commonalities and archeological evidence.

I don't believe in organized religion of today, but from the first burial and symbol of life and death, early man needed answers, any answers. It gave them continuity and purpose to the chaos. The earth gave them food, son gave them warmth and caused the plants to grow, which gave them animals to hunt for food...... to them it was a gift.

Religion gave them organization and community, a single purpose to ask to please the "gods", it in turn led to the building of cities, and wars.

There is thread that leads through all faiths. Many aspects of god or one god, it is a respect for life and all it brings us.

If you had a particular question perhaps. Been years since I was at a podium.

Are you interested in inner faith, a set of rules to order your life by or just curious about how it began? Are you seeking truth or something to believe in?
Is this about history, this life and now or some interest in what is come? Psychology of mankind?

Having a preference for an outcome prevents one from seeing reality. Or I could answer that it is through outcomes that we know whether we are doing good or that we are doing evil and rationalizing that we are doing good. But it was the former.

Organized religion, being comprised of imperfect human beings will only be as good as their imperfect human beings can take it. I believe their good has outweighed their bad.

Agreed. It is this thread which lends credence to the belief in a higher power than man. Rather than the diversity of faith being a weakness, this thread binds their beliefs into a strength.

I did not have a particular question. I was just curious and interested in hearing your unvarnished thoughts.

All of the above. Thank you.

 

[ding]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

.
there is a difference in ever changing spoken religions that in antiquity came and left by their own volition and those that are pretentiously scripted for adoration by their adherents to sustain themselves beyond their limited value.

.

I'm not so sure there is. I'm reading a fascinating book by Ajay Kansal that traces the evolution of religion, from the invention of language through the development of writing, and there is an almost direct line of progression of religious thought. There is an actual path that can be followed of when, how, and why religions rose, and deities were created.

Used to lecture on religious anthropology, a lifetime ago....sometimes seems like two

Then I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, when I talk about being able to almost draw a line from primitive Sun Worship to early agricultural, and fertility gods, to the more organised religions that arose with the invention of written language.

And you somehow believes that this proves that God does not exist? For a guy who says he doesn't need to prove that God does not exist, you sure do seem to be trying hard to do what you say you don't need to do.

Unlike you, I'm not sure what ARIS2CHAT has to say on the subject, but given your bias and dishonesty, I am more inclined to believe ARIS2CHAT than you.

Just cause I don't believe, does not mean there is not a place for some to want to believe in something "beyond".

Mediations, power of mind and body, healing, a faith in pure science and numbers, a faith in life and each other...........

But a god handing out laws and dealing punishment... NO. A god manipulating us like toys for his amusement, NO

From aliens, to hallucinogens, to dreams, ancient man share a certain psychology or something or group beyond what they were. They were also simple minded and seeking answers to complex question, mostly beyond their ability to even put in words back then. A figure of magic was the easy answer to just about everything without straining the brain too much.

A child ask a million questions but lacks the capacity to comprehend a long lecture of basic to advanced science. Early man was the same, only there was no one with a knowledge of nature to teach them even if they could sit and learn. The parent's answer would be "because I said so". Well a god that "says so" serve the same purpose only with more awe and a touch of fear. A storm and a bit of lightening, you get obedience.

Now we have explanations, or seeking then through science. When ask "why" we can tell them. It's not a short "because god said so".

We have millions of years of question still ahead of us, but we will find real answers, not some magic, if we keep looking.

Is there some order, some force or power out there to tape into, or within ourselves, possibly, even probably. Some figurehead treating us like lab rats on a whim, not so likely.

I don't believe He is commanding us or treating us like lab rats, but I do believe He is pruning us. Mind you not actively, but passively through the Laws of Nature. Virtue is the greatest organizing principle of men. When people behave virtuously, predictable success will NATURALLY follow. When people behave without virtue, predictable failures will NATURALLY occur. Would a Creator who was good, not leave a way for us to figure out the difference between right and wrong?

Man is born with the ability to know right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept, he rationalizes that he did not violate it. Men don't do evil for evil's sake, they do evil for the sake of their own good. So from this we can know that man prefers good over evil.

So getting back to the concept of God pruning us, how can we know if we are truly doing good or doing evil and rationalizing that we are doing good? The answer is simple... outcomes. Moral laws are not like physical laws. When we violate a physical law, the consequence is immediate. Not so for moral laws. The consequence of violating a moral law is not usually immediate, but since error cannot stand it will eventually fail. And when it does, if we are honest and paying attention we will come to know the error of our way and repent (i.e. transform). Thus evolving our consciousness (i.e. growing as human beings) and continuing our march towards the next leap in the evolution of matter.

"Remember, man, you are dust and to dust you will return." This too was scientifically correct.

 

[ding]

you need nine reason????

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

God? Which god or god? In the past, present or something invented in the future? With all the planets in all the galaxies, and possibly universes, life is created in what image and why. If there is an energy, why would it care about us and why should be egotistical to believe we are some reflection of it anymore than an ant or a worm?

We create a god to suit our needs. Why would a god need to create us to serve his/hers/its/theirs????

That does not mean there is not some unifying particle through all life out there, but any idea of a "god" as depicted in religion is of our creation, to serve us, not the other way around.

Some old bearded guy in the clouds handing out laws and judging us......... really? We do that on our own, not always for the better.

Faith in humanity, science, nature.............
A believe in a mental spirit beyond the physical body, some universal energy, possibly.

That one faith is right and all the rest are wrong? Bigotry and hate, not very nice. Is that really what you think a "god" should want from us?

Most myth have some basis in fact, but they are not themselves the whole truth. We create stories to help us understand and find order. Our god are just part of that.

His invisible attributes can be seen in what He has created. The universe is a self-referential system which in certain ways behaves mentally like a mind. It is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. You can't know what something is by how it starts, you can only know what it is when it has arrived at its destination. We live in a universe where the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. Every step of the way matter complexified until we had beings that know and create. Consciousness is now following a similar trajectory just as every phase before it. Some would argue that the purpose of the universe is to not only to grow beings that know and create but to grow consciousness until it to reaches the point of departure and makes the next leap in the evolution of matter.

There is only one Creator. Common sense tells us that. Many religions are men seeking God. There is only one which is God seeking man. Why does He do so? I have no earthly idea, but I bet He does. If I had to guess, I would say that it has to do with the point of departure I mentioned. What is His true nature? An ant would have a better chance of explaining the true nature of man than I would of explaining the true nature of God. The best I can do in human terms is the Trinity.

Order exists in the universe independent of man. In fact, I believe His law of compensation (i.e. cause and effect) relies on order being created from chaos. I call it the conflict and confusion process of arriving at objective truth.

"But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.... " That too was scientifically correct.

 

[Mudda]

Oh, I think there are a plethora of reasons. I am only presenting nine for the purpose of discussion. Then there are lost causes like MisterBeale, who seems to get his entire world view from reading fortune cookies.

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

God? Which god or god? In the past, present or something invented in the future? With all the planets in all the galaxies, and possibly universes, life is created in what image and why. If there is an energy, why would it care about us and why should be egotistical to believe we are some reflection of it anymore than an ant or a worm?

We create a god to suit our needs. Why would a god need to create us to serve his/hers/its/theirs????

That does not mean there is not some unifying particle through all life out there, but any idea of a "god" as depicted in religion is of our creation, to serve us, not the other way around.

Some old bearded guy in the clouds handing out laws and judging us......... really? We do that on our own, not always for the better.

Faith in humanity, science, nature.............
A believe in a mental spirit beyond the physical body, some universal energy, possibly.

That one faith is right and all the rest are wrong? Bigotry and hate, not very nice. Is that really what you think a "god" should want from us?

Most myth have some basis in fact, but they are not themselves the whole truth. We create stories to help us understand and find order. Our god are just part of that.

His invisible attributes can be seen in what He has created. The universe is a self-referential system which in certain ways behaves mentally like a mind. It is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. You can't know what something is by how it starts, you can only know what it is when it has arrived at its destination. We live in a universe where the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. Every step of the way matter complexified until we had beings that know and create. Consciousness is now following a similar trajectory just as every phase before it. Some would argue that the purpose of the universe is to not only to grow beings that know and create but to grow consciousness until it to reaches the point of departure and makes the next leap in the evolution of matter.

There is only one Creator. Common sense tells us that. Many religions are men seeking God. There is only one which is God seeking man. Why does He do so? I have no earthly idea, but I bet He does. If I had to guess, I would say that it has to do with the point of departure I mentioned. What is His true nature? An ant would have a better chance of explaining the true nature of man than I would of explaining the true nature of God. The best I can do in human terms is the Trinity.

Order exists in the universe independent of man. In fact, I believe His law of compensation (i.e. cause and effect) relies on order being created from chaos. I call it the conflict and confusion process of arriving at objective truth.

"But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.... " That too was scientifically correct.

I'm curious, how do you make the leap from seeing a universe and then inferring that it was made by the creator described in the bible as wanting us to obey and worship it or we'll be roasted? I know I like to joke a lot, but in all seriousness, I don't see the link. Please explain.

 

[ding]

Tell me, in all those stats you posted, you neglected to post how many millions are agnostics, humanists, and atheists.

Hmmm?

You sure are good at disrespecting others beliefs. A bit insecure in your own are you?

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

God? Which god or god? In the past, present or something invented in the future? With all the planets in all the galaxies, and possibly universes, life is created in what image and why. If there is an energy, why would it care about us and why should be egotistical to believe we are some reflection of it anymore than an ant or a worm?

We create a god to suit our needs. Why would a god need to create us to serve his/hers/its/theirs????

That does not mean there is not some unifying particle through all life out there, but any idea of a "god" as depicted in religion is of our creation, to serve us, not the other way around.

Some old bearded guy in the clouds handing out laws and judging us......... really? We do that on our own, not always for the better.

Faith in humanity, science, nature.............
A believe in a mental spirit beyond the physical body, some universal energy, possibly.

That one faith is right and all the rest are wrong? Bigotry and hate, not very nice. Is that really what you think a "god" should want from us?

Most myth have some basis in fact, but they are not themselves the whole truth. We create stories to help us understand and find order. Our god are just part of that.

His invisible attributes can be seen in what He has created. The universe is a self-referential system which in certain ways behaves mentally like a mind. It is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. You can't know what something is by how it starts, you can only know what it is when it has arrived at its destination. We live in a universe where the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. Every step of the way matter complexified until we had beings that know and create. Consciousness is now following a similar trajectory just as every phase before it. Some would argue that the purpose of the universe is to not only to grow beings that know and create but to grow consciousness until it to reaches the point of departure and makes the next leap in the evolution of matter.

There is only one Creator. Common sense tells us that. Many religions are men seeking God. There is only one which is God seeking man. Why does He do so? I have no earthly idea, but I bet He does. If I had to guess, I would say that it has to do with the point of departure I mentioned. What is His true nature? An ant would have a better chance of explaining the true nature of man than I would of explaining the true nature of God. The best I can do in human terms is the Trinity.

Order exists in the universe independent of man. In fact, I believe His law of compensation (i.e. cause and effect) relies on order being created from chaos. I call it the conflict and confusion process of arriving at objective truth.

"But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.... " That too was scientifically correct.

I'm curious, how do you make the leap from seeing a universe and then inferring that it was made by the creator described in the bible as wanting us to obey and worship it or we'll be roasted? I know I like to joke a lot, but in all seriousness, I don't see the link. Please explain.

Easy... I don't make the association that you do that, "the creator described in the bible as wanting us to obey and worship it or we'll be roasted."

 

[Mudda]

How would such numbers be relevant to the point being made in the OP? Or do you just feel like changing the subject?

They are relevant because it goes to the weight of your argument. The title of the OP is, "Nine Reasons for Religious scepticism - Part 1." If the number of skeptics is small in contrast to the number who do believe in God, then by inspection, we should be skeptical of your skepticism, as it goes to the weight of your argument. The fact that you are being coy about this is just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

God? Which god or god? In the past, present or something invented in the future? With all the planets in all the galaxies, and possibly universes, life is created in what image and why. If there is an energy, why would it care about us and why should be egotistical to believe we are some reflection of it anymore than an ant or a worm?

We create a god to suit our needs. Why would a god need to create us to serve his/hers/its/theirs????

That does not mean there is not some unifying particle through all life out there, but any idea of a "god" as depicted in religion is of our creation, to serve us, not the other way around.

Some old bearded guy in the clouds handing out laws and judging us......... really? We do that on our own, not always for the better.

Faith in humanity, science, nature.............
A believe in a mental spirit beyond the physical body, some universal energy, possibly.

That one faith is right and all the rest are wrong? Bigotry and hate, not very nice. Is that really what you think a "god" should want from us?

Most myth have some basis in fact, but they are not themselves the whole truth. We create stories to help us understand and find order. Our god are just part of that.

His invisible attributes can be seen in what He has created. The universe is a self-referential system which in certain ways behaves mentally like a mind. It is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. You can't know what something is by how it starts, you can only know what it is when it has arrived at its destination. We live in a universe where the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. Every step of the way matter complexified until we had beings that know and create. Consciousness is now following a similar trajectory just as every phase before it. Some would argue that the purpose of the universe is to not only to grow beings that know and create but to grow consciousness until it to reaches the point of departure and makes the next leap in the evolution of matter.

There is only one Creator. Common sense tells us that. Many religions are men seeking God. There is only one which is God seeking man. Why does He do so? I have no earthly idea, but I bet He does. If I had to guess, I would say that it has to do with the point of departure I mentioned. What is His true nature? An ant would have a better chance of explaining the true nature of man than I would of explaining the true nature of God. The best I can do in human terms is the Trinity.

Order exists in the universe independent of man. In fact, I believe His law of compensation (i.e. cause and effect) relies on order being created from chaos. I call it the conflict and confusion process of arriving at objective truth.

"But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.... " That too was scientifically correct.

I'm curious, how do you make the leap from seeing a universe and then inferring that it was made by the creator described in the bible as wanting us to obey and worship it or we'll be roasted? I know I like to joke a lot, but in all seriousness, I don't see the link. Please explain.

Easy... I don't make the association that you do that, "the creator described in the bible as wanting us to obey and worship it or we'll be roasted."

Thats basically what the bible says, so how do you make the leap?