Zone1 Religion is not needed if a "golden rule" is valued

You don't know Darwin, but he lived more recently than Moses.
From the atheist's vantage point religion exist because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that spirituality offers a functional advantage over materialism. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that spirituality is a behavior which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for spirituality has not diminished. In fact, the more materialistic we became the less satisfied we became.
 
From the atheist's vantage point religion exist because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that spirituality offers a functional advantage over materialism. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that spirituality is a behavior which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for spirituality has not diminished. In fact, the more materialistic we became the less satisfied we became.
Spirituality does not require organized religion or gods
 
So you admit that people don't need gods or religion and yet you get your panties is a twist when I say that very thing.
How did you make that leap in logic, Einstein?

If you want to become the best version of yourself that you can become then you need God.
 
How did you make that leap in logic, Einstein?

If you want to become the best version of yourself that you can become then you need God.

And no I don't need gods

YOU need gods because you believe you are weak and flawed and would awful things if you weren;t afraid of some authority
 
No. I am defending myself from your attacks. It's quite natural to do so.
I am not attacking you I am criticizing organized religion

How many times does that have to be repeated before you understand?
 
Incorrect. The aggressors are not at peace which is why they attack others. The ones being attacked are just defending themselves.

I'm not aggressive and words are not violence.

And once again I am criticizing the institutions of organized religion not individual people
 
'You need to stop telling people what you think they need because people don;t really care what you think
My observation that you are not at peace is based upon your attacks of other people's faith. It's pretty much all you do in this subforum. It seems you want to criticize the faith of other people but you don't want the people whose faith you are attacking to do the same thing to you.
 
The problem would not exist if all practiced a golden rule based on empathy, fairness, and respect.
IOW, if everyone agreed on a morality that superseded individual or even tribal wants and desires. You know, like a morality created by and imposed on man by a creator.
 

Forum List

Back
Top