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

[ViewFromAbove]

"Golden Rule"

If there are rules, then there is a rule maker. Ergo proof of God.

LOL, the simplistic, naive watchmaker argument. You're not much of a philosopher or cultural anthropologist.

 

[ViewFromAbove]

The evidence is creation. Nothing circular about that.

Your "evidence" is circular if you don't define "creation" specifically.
Does the hen that lays an egg create life, or does the egg create a chicken?

 

[ViewFromAbove]

The US tried that and now they mutilate the genitals of children, chase Jews into attics during Left wing protests of the Zionist state, tell people they no longer know what a woman is, and that men can have babies.

Yea, that did not work so well.

Obviously, not much empathy/fairness/respect was exercised. Religion did not help!
Educational systems need to be deployed with emphasis on science & critical thinking, as well as "ethics" (my golden rule).

 

[ViewFromAbove]

Really? Do you know that Vedic scientists were describing the cycles and layers of the universe, and the atom as a building block of the universe 5,000 years ago?

Vedic "science"? How specific were they? Incarnation too?

 

[toobfreak]

Vedic "science"? How specific were they? Incarnation too?

VERY specific. There is one chapter in their Srimad Bhagavatam called "Calculation of Time From The Atom." Mind you, this stuff goes back to about 5,000 years ago!

 

[BreezeWood]

Read what I wrote.

... were the chinese turned into jews.

well, are they the same as you, a jew ...

the moses 10 commandments were they etched in the heavens - and the liar happened to have the ever convincing tantrum to destroy them before they could be read ... so has anyone ever wondered what's written in your book.

 

[Blues Man]

That's how you need to see it to rationalize your choices but that's not reality.

Reality is an illusion

 

[Blues Man]

It actually did.

You see, Jesus was sent here to spread the word of God (his father).

Jesus's message originated with God who is the creator of all things.

No it really didn't

It was paraphrased by Jesus, allegedly anyway , but since Jesus was illiterate and never wrote anything down himself we'll never really know will we?

 

[ding]

You do NOT have a scientific view. You have a faith-based theistic worldview.

This says otherwise.

The Early Universe

 

[ding]

Reality is an illusion

 

[Blues Man]

Discover it on your own.

I have no obligation to prove anything to you.

 

[ding]

Your beliefs about creation (hardwired? Huh??) have no scientific merit, or even philosophy-of-science merit.

This says otherwise.

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

 

[ding]

Discover it on your own.

I have no obligation to prove anything to you.

I discovered you can't back up your claim with evidence or logic.

 

[Blues Man]

This says otherwise.

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

And other people have to accept this guy as an authority why exactly?

 

[Blues Man]

I discovered you can't back up your claim with evidence or logic.

I realize you are incapable of doing anything thinking for yourself

Google is free use it.

 

[ding]

Your "evidence" is circular if you don't define "creation" specifically.
Does the hen that lays an egg create life, or does the egg create a chicken?

Creation begins with the creation of space and time and encompasses everything which has unfolded since (i.e. the evolution of space and time).

 

[ding]

I realize you are incapable of doing anything thinking for yourself

Google is free use it.

Until you either provide your evidence for your belief or your logic for your belief, your beliefs are just your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[Blues Man]

Until you either provide your evidence for your belief or your logic for your belief, your beliefs are just your unsubstantiated opinion.

IDGAF what you think.

You have not proven anything you spout here

 

[ding]

And other people have to accept this guy as an authority why exactly?

No, they should read about his evidence and logic for his belief, and then explain why they disagree.

 

[Blues Man]

No, they should read about his evidence and logic for his belief, and then argue against that if they disagree.

There you go again telling people what they "should" do.

Just because you like what one guy says in no reason for me to read it. In fact it's more likely a reason not to.

I really don't care what this guy believes. We all create our own realities and are more than capable of being our own authorities on what we experience.