religion is just brainwashing

[zaangalewa]

Catholic bashing is so last century.

I'm not Catholic bashing as much as bashing ''humans''--humans invented religion

Never in history existed human beings without religion. Also atheism is only a belief. So you speak about that human beings have to be bashed because they are human beings. A full time job for a slave driver, who tries to enslave everyone and oneself.

I'm not bashing anyone

Then I do not understand your intention. Do you love your parents? Do you give them to us as a beacon? Do you like to enlighten ... whom?

 

[zaangalewa]

... If you mean a ghost like spirit that is separate from the rest, I have no reason to believe that exists. If you have evidence of that, I would like to see it.

"Spirit" exists for example in every book about mathematics. The spirit of Euclid is for example a basics for the spirit of Gauß. If you like to find Euclid and Gauß outside of books for mathematics then this is easily possible. But if you know nothing about Euclid and Gauß then it's not so easy to find within nature and culture their spirit again. I remember in this context a very long search of a problem Fermat solved once - without saying how, because it was very easy for him to solve this problem. It needed hundreds of years to find a solution again. So "spirit" is often much more concrete than lots of people seem to think. We could call "the spirituality of physics" or "the ghost of physics" for example "mathematics" and the "particles of mathematics" "mathematicians".

 

[zaangalewa]

Taz
I made a little mistake in #158. You would not be able to be an agnostics and atheist if agnosticism would be a belief too. But atheism is a belief and agnosticism is the philosophy, which finds out that theism as well as atheism are both beliefs. So you are able to say "I don't know, I believe" "(I'm an agnostics, who believes in atheism" (Sure you can say everything else too - but this is in case you like to be a rational human being, a philosopher). The alternatives "I don't know, that's why I do not believe" and its pseudo-twin "I know, that's why there's no belief for me" is the typical Dawkinian double-mistake.

And another word too: Sure it is possible that god exists and not exists the same time - he is almighty. So why we are not able to believe this? On reason of logic - and do not forget please: god is "the logos" on its own too. The problem now: It would be everything true, what follows out of an "as well A and not A is true"-premise. And this would not only be senseless - it is for sure wrong that everything is true. I have not only not no blue skin - there are also white rhombuses on; (rhombuses are buses, which drive to Rhome).

 

[Taz]

I'm agnostic, and no, people aren't born religious, it's a man-made concept.

If you follow the philosophy agnosticism then you know that atheism is belief. And it's completely clear that every human being is religious. The first human cultures started with religion. And never existed a culture without religion including atheism.Your problem is perhaps that you are a brainwashed brainwasher on your own.

Man has used religion to explain that which he did not understand. Nobody is born religious and you can't prove it either. But go ahead and try, we'll wait.

Interesting creed. But the questions behind this creed are not spiritual and I don't share any creed in case of questions of philosophy and science. You deny facts by using empty phrases - that's all.

What "facts" am I denying?

For example the fact, that the belief of "scientists" religion tries to be a better form of natural science is not only a little stupid, even if Nobel price winners argue in such stupid ways. Some people seem to confuse empiricism and imperialism. The world all around exists not in anyone's brain - also not in your brain. If you say you are an agnostic then you have to accept that atheism is a belief. If you say you are an atheist then you are not an agnostics. Why the most people in the English speaking world are using the word agnosticism instead of atheism is a strange miracle.

It must be difficult for you to navigate the real world when your so want to live in a fantasy world. Science isn't a religion, it's an observation and discovery of the universe around us built up with real facts.

Atheists are just as deluded as theists, as there's no proof either way for or against the existence of a god. That's why agnosticism is the thinking person's position. And I'm even open to changing my mind given real proof either way. Can't be any fairer than that.

 

[zaangalewa]

If you follow the philosophy agnosticism then you know that atheism is belief. And it's completely clear that every human being is religious. The first human cultures started with religion. And never existed a culture without religion including atheism.Your problem is perhaps that you are a brainwashed brainwasher on your own.

Man has used religion to explain that which he did not understand. Nobody is born religious and you can't prove it either. But go ahead and try, we'll wait.

Interesting creed. But the questions behind this creed are not spiritual and I don't share any creed in case of questions of philosophy and science. You deny facts by using empty phrases - that's all.

What "facts" am I denying?

For example the fact, that the belief of "scientists" religion tries to be a better form of natural science is not only a little stupid, even if Nobel price winners argue in such stupid ways. Some people seem to confuse empiricism and imperialism. The world all around exists not in anyone's brain - also not in your brain. If you say you are an agnostic then you have to accept that atheism is a belief. If you say you are an atheist then you are not an agnostics. Why the most people in the English speaking world are using the word agnosticism instead of atheism is a strange miracle.

It must be difficult for you to navigate the real world when your so want to live in a fantasy world. Science isn't a religion, it's an observation and discovery of the universe around us built up with real facts.

Atheists are just as deluded as theists, as there's no proof either way for or against the existence of a god. That's why agnosticism is the thinking person's position.

Your problem is you do not think. And my problem is that I am an idiot. But I know why.

 

[Taz]

Man has used religion to explain that which he did not understand. Nobody is born religious and you can't prove it either. But go ahead and try, we'll wait.

Interesting creed. But the questions behind this creed are not spiritual and I don't share any creed in case of questions of philosophy and science. You deny facts by using empty phrases - that's all.

What "facts" am I denying?

For example the fact, that the belief of "scientists" religion tries to be a better form of natural science is not only a little stupid, even if Nobel price winners argue in such stupid ways. Some people seem to confuse empiricism and imperialism. The world all around exists not in anyone's brain - also not in your brain. If you say you are an agnostic then you have to accept that atheism is a belief. If you say you are an atheist then you are not an agnostics. Why the most people in the English speaking world are using the word agnosticism instead of atheism is a strange miracle.

It must be difficult for you to navigate the real world when your so want to live in a fantasy world. Science isn't a religion, it's an observation and discovery of the universe around us built up with real facts.

Atheists are just as deluded as theists, as there's no proof either way for or against the existence of a god. That's why agnosticism is the thinking person's position.

Your problem is you do not think. And my problem is that I am an idiot. But I know why.

Why do I not think? because I can tell that there is no real proof for or against a god? Seems to me that those who believe in invisible people nobody has ever seen are the lazy thinking, who accept some fictional story without thinking the proof (or lack of it) through.

 

[Hawkins]

but there is no proof of god--god's deeds
we do have proof of WW2, the Revolutionary War, etc

No, you don't have any evidence (or not as much as you think). They are all the different forms of human witnessing/testimonies. That's why the Japanese can deny Nanjing massacre any day of the week. It's an old saying that the winner wrote history. It's so because history is about the testimonies written by winners in terms of wars.

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

 

[harmonica]

but there is no proof of god--god's deeds
we do have proof of WW2, the Revolutionary War, etc

No, you don't have any evidence (or not as much as you think). They are all the different forms of human witnessing/testimonies. That's why the Japanese can deny Nanjing massacre any day of the week. It's an old saying that the winner wrote history. It's so because history is about the testimonies written by winners in terms of wars.

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

 

[Hawkins]

but there is no proof of god--god's deeds
we do have proof of WW2, the Revolutionary War, etc

No, you don't have any evidence (or not as much as you think). They are all the different forms of human witnessing/testimonies. That's why the Japanese can deny Nanjing massacre any day of the week. It's an old saying that the winner wrote history. It's so because history is about the testimonies written by winners in terms of wars.

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

If you think you have, why not just show us here! Don't BS!

I actually want you to just show one for me to demonstrate that it's not an evidence as you think!

As for your statement about Jesus, then show a random historical figure in your history books , who lived 2000 years ago and ask for the same evidence!

You are just so brainwashed!

 

[harmonica]

but there is no proof of god--god's deeds
we do have proof of WW2, the Revolutionary War, etc

No, you don't have any evidence (or not as much as you think). They are all the different forms of human witnessing/testimonies. That's why the Japanese can deny Nanjing massacre any day of the week. It's an old saying that the winner wrote history. It's so because history is about the testimonies written by winners in terms of wars.

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

If you think you have, why not just show us here! Don't BS!

I actually want you to just show one for me to demonstrate that it's not an evidence as you think!

As for your statement about Jesus, then show a random historical figure in your history books , who lived 2000 years ago and ask for the same evidence!

You are just so brainwashed!

ww2 documentary - YouTube

wtf are you talking about?? you are saying WW2 didn't happen??

 

[Hawkins]

No, you don't have any evidence (or not as much as you think). They are all the different forms of human witnessing/testimonies. That's why the Japanese can deny Nanjing massacre any day of the week. It's an old saying that the winner wrote history. It's so because history is about the testimonies written by winners in terms of wars.

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

If you think you have, why not just show us here! Don't BS!

I actually want you to just show one for me to demonstrate that it's not an evidence as you think!

As for your statement about Jesus, then show a random historical figure in your history books , who lived 2000 years ago and ask for the same evidence!

You are just so brainwashed!

ww2 documentary - YouTube

wtf are you talking about?? you are saying WW2 didn't happen??

Like I said. It's just a video. There are more videos about UFO. So you take UFOs as truths?

What we trust are those behind the video for the contents to be considered factual. This is a process of human witnessing!!!!!!!!! Got that!?!?

You don't seem to read my posts carefully!

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yes. Catholicism is one of the best examples ever of how brainwashing works. It is a truly sick cult.

Yet you'll never say that about Islam

 

[harmonica]

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

If you think you have, why not just show us here! Don't BS!

I actually want you to just show one for me to demonstrate that it's not an evidence as you think!

As for your statement about Jesus, then show a random historical figure in your history books , who lived 2000 years ago and ask for the same evidence!

You are just so brainwashed!

ww2 documentary - YouTube

wtf are you talking about?? you are saying WW2 didn't happen??

Like I said. It's just a video. There are more videos about UFO. So you take UFOs as truths?

What we trust are those behind the video for the contents to be considered factual. This is a process of human witnessing!!!!!!!!! Got that!?!?

You don't seem to read my posts carefully!

your argument is ridiculous
there are no videos of UFOs..NO videos of UFOs
there are videos of WW2
jesus could not have been born without sex
no video of jesus, jeusus rising, jesus as god
there is no chain of custody of the bible writings--anybody could've wrote those
no proof of a god...of jesus as god......
who saw jesus rise from the dead? is there a video?? NO

 

[harmonica]

all of these battles, events are cross checked by the Germans, British, US ,etc records.
what are you saying?? these didn't happen?

Records are basically human writings which should be classified as human testimonies instead of evidence. They are testimonies because in the end you need human credibility to believe that they are factual. There are possibly same amount of records of UFOs. It's the credibility (or the lack of it) behind the reports which made UFOs not factual enough.

You are brainwashed to think otherwise!

That said. If you have evidence of A-bombs or Pearl Harbor attack then show us! When you see the bombing, most likely you don't even know whether it is a shot of the Japanese soil. You need to have faith in the US agencies made that video! It's so because in the end, videos are just yet another form of human testimony.

The two cities have been rebuilt. As time goes by, it makes it more difficult to gather any evidence. Moreover, evidence is more about the subjective human explanation on a physical existence. Different people pointing to the same evidence may have different explanations!

this is so full of shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--no evidence of WW2?? you are out of your mind
you know the A Bombs were dropped
the 101st was at Bastogne
they landed at Omaha Beach--there is VIDEO
there is VIDEO of WW2
hundreds of witnesses--per battle
etc
what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

If you think you have, why not just show us here! Don't BS!

I actually want you to just show one for me to demonstrate that it's not an evidence as you think!

As for your statement about Jesus, then show a random historical figure in your history books , who lived 2000 years ago and ask for the same evidence!

You are just so brainwashed!

ww2 documentary - YouTube

wtf are you talking about?? you are saying WW2 didn't happen??

Like I said. It's just a video. There are more videos about UFO. So you take UFOs as truths?

What we trust are those behind the video for the contents to be considered factual. This is a process of human witnessing!!!!!!!!! Got that!?!?

You don't seem to read my posts carefully!

if you deny WW2, or it's battles/etc--there is no point continuing this discussion

 

[Meriweather]

what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

People are not talking about proof and/or evidence. That is in the realm of science. People are talking about testimony. You mention your brother has testimony, as do I, as do many, many other people.

The comment that Jesus was born without sex is interesting. Did this come from the comment Jesus made that some people are born eunuchs, some are made eunuchs, and some become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom? Do you believe he was speaking of himself? If so, which category do you think he may have been?

We have Gospel testimony. We have letters of testimony, and although few and not all that comprehensive, we have mention of Jesus and/or his followers by other historians.

 

[harmonica]

what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

People are not talking about proof and/or evidence. That is in the realm of science. People are talking about testimony. You mention your brother has testimony, as do I, as do many, many other people.

The comment that Jesus was born without sex is interesting. Did this come from the comment Jesus made that some people are born eunuchs, some are made eunuchs, and some become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom? Do you believe he was speaking of himself? If so, which category do you think he may have been?

We have Gospel testimony. We have letters of testimony, and although few and not all that comprehensive, we have mention of Jesus and/or his followers by other historians.

how old are these testimonies?

 

[harmonica]

what proof is there of jesus rising from the dead/etc? they didn't even witness that--did they?
proof of jesus being god's son? born without sex? etc
start being realistic and reasonable

People are not talking about proof and/or evidence. That is in the realm of science. People are talking about testimony. You mention your brother has testimony, as do I, as do many, many other people.

The comment that Jesus was born without sex is interesting. Did this come from the comment Jesus made that some people are born eunuchs, some are made eunuchs, and some become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom? Do you believe he was speaking of himself? If so, which category do you think he may have been?

We have Gospel testimony. We have letters of testimony, and although few and not all that comprehensive, we have mention of Jesus and/or his followers by other historians.

maybe I'm wrong, but I thought Mary was a virgin?

 

[Meriweather]

maybe I'm wrong, but I thought Mary was a virgin?

That was Mary. We're speaking of Jesus and his followers wrote of his humanity, saying he was fully human. We are told Mary gave birth to a son, and the sacrifices for a first born son were made at the Temple.

 

[harmonica]

maybe I'm wrong, but I thought Mary was a virgin?

That was Mary. We're speaking of Jesus and his followers wrote of his humanity, saying he was fully human. We are told Mary gave birth to a son, and the sacrifices for a first born son were made at the Temple.

and she was a virgin--?

 

[harmonica]

34 And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?”4

l“The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of hthe Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born5 will be called mholy—nthe Son of God. owho was called barren. pnothing will be impossible with God.” 6 of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And qthe angel departed from her.