I am prompted to agree with you once more. Religion, as I have interpreted as, is a sort of replacement for great things that we lack in our lives. So instead of aiming for those things that we want for in life, we miss our objective completely and settle for an established set of rules. This to me is religion. I know, this is more philosophical then it is rational. But sometimes we get so caught up with our beliefs that we forget what religion was intended for originally. This is why religion will never work. I don't care what kind. Many christians do the very same thing.
ah yes, man's quest to fill up the God shaped vacuum.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
is this all in reference to the bible, or in some other religion?? cause if it's the bible, I'd like to have a conversation with you.
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm speaking about some personal spiritual experiences I have had--numerous ones.
Also, I'm speaking to the fact that people think there is equal proof that divinity does not exist as there is that it does exist, when that is not the case.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Also, I'm speaking to the fact that people think there is equal proof that divinity does not exist as there is that it does exist, when that is not the case.
There is no proof either way.
I don't think it needs to be proven that divinity doesn't exist. I think the onus is on proving it does exist. Which, there is no proof.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm speaking about some personal spiritual experiences I have had--numerous ones.
Also, I'm speaking to the fact that people think there is equal proof that divinity does not exist as there is that it does exist, when that is not the case.
I understand about "personal spitual experiences", but it's just that you said certain things that have nothing to do with the scriptures... i was a little clueless about your statements.
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
I don't think it needs to be proven that divinity doesn't exist. I think the onus is on proving it does exist. Which, there is no proof.
When one has a personal experience with something, one has KNOWledge and experience. That is quite different than having a lack of experience and a complete void of experience with something. I have had all the personal proof that I ever need, and then some! I completely understand if others don't believe. For me, it's not about having others believe based on my experience. For me it's about how my life dramatically changed for the better.
As for proof in an argument, someone, say cornnifer or CurranPete can make an argument or an assertion, and it will either stay standing, or it can be disproven. If an argument cannot be disproven, it must stand by virtue of it's own standingness.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
faith requires NO PROOF. that's why they call it FAITH. the onus is on no one.
In that regard, a lot of things exist that can not be proven. Like the Easter Bunny.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
When one has a personal experience with something, one has KNOWledge and experience. That is quite different than having a lack of experience and a complete void of experience with something. I have had all the personal proof that I ever need, and then some! I completely understand if others don't believe. For me, it's not about having others believe based on my experience. For me it's about how my life dramatically changed for the better.
As for proof in an argument, someone, say cornnifer or CurranPete can make an argument or an assertion, and it will either stay standing, or it can be disproven. If an argument cannot be disproven, it must stand by virtue of it's own standingness.
Divinity is lacking in logic. Every argument I've heard is illogical, but it's delivered by people that are illogical, so it's awefully difficult to convince them they are wrong.
I'm glad you don't consider your personal experience a valid argument on this subject, because experience is subjective and could be attributed to many different things you aren't aware of.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Possibilities are possibilities for a reason. I don't make the basic rules of reason or proof. They exist independently of me.
Everything is possible within the laws of nature. But the probabilities are so low that it's pointless to make an assumption that it must exist.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Divinity is lacking in logic. Every argument I've heard is illogical, but it's delivered by people that are illogical, so it's awefully difficult to convince them they are wrong.
If you cannot disprove something using logic, it stands. You can't blame your inability on someone else. Lack of being able to disprove something means it's not disproven at all.
I'm glad you don't consider your personal experience a valid argument on this subject, because experience is subjective and could be attributed to many different things you aren't aware of.
My experience is certainly valid for me to assert as my experience. You know I assert it all the time.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Divinity is lacking in logic. Every argument I've heard is illogical, but it's delivered by people that are illogical, so it's awefully difficult to convince them they are wrong.
Convince me that I am wrong. If it is true and you are sure beyond a reasonable doubt that someone with faith is wrong, then convince me. For instance, convince me that Jesus is not the Son of God.
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
If you cannot disprove something using logic, it stands. You can't blame your inability on someone else. Lack of being able to disprove something means it's not disproven at all.
My experience is certainly valid for me to assert as my experience. You know I assert it all the time.
Exactly, you are convinced, so it's impossible for you to change your mind, and therefor impossible for me to disprove it to you.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Convince me that I am wrong. If it is true and you are sure beyond a reasonable doubt that someone with faith is wrong, then convince me. For instance, convince me that Jesus is not the Son of God.
I can't, you are already convinced that Jesus is the Son of God, and your mind is locked tight.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I can't, you are already convinced that Jesus is the Son of God, and your mind is locked tight.
No. That is exactly why I posted it, because my mind is completely open to you. As educated as you sound in your posts, I thought you would figure that. And regardless if someone's mind is tightly locked or not, if you convince someone then you convince someone. Convince me.
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
Try disproving my assertion to the message board. You don't have to disprove it to me, only disprove it period. Go ahead.
Now I admit, you and I have been over and over this--I present a point you try to disprove it using some rationale or another. Then I present a valid counterpoint, etc. All the while nothing gets disproven because of the many variables of our ongoing debate on the subject. But that's the point. They are opinions that we are basing on fact. Neither of us holds the final word on the subject. If you could disprove divinity, you'd be a celebrated and rich man right now. Sometimes we have to accept the grey areas that do exist in life, and acknowledge that for what we know, there is sooooo much that we don't know.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Now I admit, you and I have been over and over this--I present a point you try to disprove it using some rationale or another. Then I present a valid counterpoint, etc. All the while nothing gets disproven because of the many variables of our ongoing debate on the subject. But that's the point. They are opinions that we are basing on fact. Neither of us holds the final word on the subject. If you could disprove divinity, you'd be a celebrated and rich man right now. Sometimes we have to accept the grey areas that do exist in life, and acknowledge that for what we know, there is sooooo much that we don't know.
And this, my friends, ends the discussion of, "Was christianity a hoax?" Tune in next time for another heated discussion of "Are all Muslims terrorists?"
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
And this, my friends, ends the discussion of, "Was christianity a hoax?" Tune in next time for another heated discussion of "Are all Muslims terrorists?"
That's hysterical!
(something tells me Ahnimus has something brewing, however. )
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Proof as interpreted by an outsider would require empirics, usually objective.
Things like mysticism, aliens, divinity and so on can not be proven objectively and rarely empirically. Certainly I can go to a cold-reader and have my fortune told, if it's accurate I may be convinced, and assert that psychics are real. However, in reality it is just cold-reading, the illusion must have worked to convince me, but none-the-less it is still an illusion. Psychics are poor, they slip up way too often. But they identify with the desire imbued in us as children for mysticism. So, mathematically speaking, at least some people will believe that the readings are accurate. Once they commit themselves to believing in the readings they are prone to believe blatantly wrong readings.
An example of how flawed we are is love. Love at first sight, which is lust ontological to a series of chemical reactions within the brain, fades over time as the norepinephrine, testosterone and/or estrogen surges become more tolerated. At this point we see beyond our infactuation and begin to realize people aren't always who we think they are.
Beliefs are the same way, once we believe in something it's like love at first sight, we become blinded by it, we fail to see the evidence stacking up against it. This is especially true if it's a result of personal experience. Now, experience is subjective, things like psychosis are very common, there are many illusions as well, false memories and so on. The human condition is that of flawed awareness, we only see what we are looking for, wether it actually exists or not. There are two realities, the external reality which obeys the laws of nature and the internal reality which is ontologically subjective and doesn't seem to obey any laws in the sense that it's subjective.
So basically, in order to prove something, I mean to really prove it beyond reasonable doubt, you have to be able to see it, hold it, lick it and manipulate it. Then you have to be able to pass it around to others so they can do the same. That is proof. Asking me to disprove a personal subjective experience or a shady historical account is asking me to disprove something that has never really been proven to begin with. It's disproven simply by that fact, that it can not be proven.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Proof as interpreted by an outsider would require empirics, usually objective.
Things like mysticism, aliens, divinity and so on can not be proven objectively and rarely empirically. Certainly I can go to a cold-reader and have my fortune told, if it's accurate I may be convinced, and assert that psychics are real. However, in reality it is just cold-reading, the illusion must have worked to convince me, but none-the-less it is still an illusion. Psychics are poor, they slip up way too often. But they identify with the desire imbued in us as children for mysticism. So, mathematically speaking, at least some people will believe that the readings are accurate. Once they commit themselves to believing in the readings they are prone to believe blatantly wrong readings.
An example of how flawed we are is love. Love at first sight, which is lust ontological to a series of chemical reactions within the brain, fades over time as the norepinephrine, testosterone and/or estrogen surges become more tolerated. At this point we see beyond our infactuation and begin to realize people aren't always who we think they are.
Beliefs are the same way, once we believe in something it's like love at first sight, we become blinded by it, we fail to see the evidence stacking up against it. This is especially true if it's a result of personal experience. Now, experience is subjective, things like psychosis are very common, there are many illusions as well, false memories and so on. The human condition is that of flawed awareness, we only see what we are looking for, wether it actually exists or not. There are two realities, the external reality which obeys the laws of nature and the internal reality which is ontologically subjective and doesn't seem to obey any laws in the sense that it's subjective.
So basically, in order to prove something, I mean to really prove it beyond reasonable doubt, you have to be able to see it, hold it, lick it and manipulate it. Then you have to be able to pass it around to others so they can do the same. That is proof. Asking me to disprove a personal subjective experience or a shady historical account is asking me to disprove something that has never really been proven to begin with. It's disproven simply by that fact, that it can not be proven.
Right, and you cannot disprove what is beyond physical. It's all a moot point. Let's just live in harmony!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
how can someone prove something doesn't exist if they believe it doesn't exist? just as someone who believes can not be dissuaded from that belief. a non believer can not offer any evidence because there is none to offer up.
personally for me God does not exist because i have seen no evidence or been privy to anything that proves to me he/she does. the idea of a divine entity makes no sense - to me. but then again faith requires no proof, just belief.
oh and ryan, i hate to break it to you but the easter bunny doesn't exist. :(
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Proof as interpreted by an outsider would require empirics, usually objective.
Things like mysticism, aliens, divinity and so on can not be proven objectively and rarely empirically. Certainly I can go to a cold-reader and have my fortune told, if it's accurate I may be convinced, and assert that psychics are real. However, in reality it is just cold-reading, the illusion must have worked to convince me, but none-the-less it is still an illusion. Psychics are poor, they slip up way too often. But they identify with the desire imbued in us as children for mysticism. So, mathematically speaking, at least some people will believe that the readings are accurate. Once they commit themselves to believing in the readings they are prone to believe blatantly wrong readings.
An example of how flawed we are is love. Love at first sight, which is lust ontological to a series of chemical reactions within the brain, fades over time as the norepinephrine, testosterone and/or estrogen surges become more tolerated. At this point we see beyond our infactuation and begin to realize people aren't always who we think they are.
Beliefs are the same way, once we believe in something it's like love at first sight, we become blinded by it, we fail to see the evidence stacking up against it. This is especially true if it's a result of personal experience. Now, experience is subjective, things like psychosis are very common, there are many illusions as well, false memories and so on. The human condition is that of flawed awareness, we only see what we are looking for, wether it actually exists or not. There are two realities, the external reality which obeys the laws of nature and the internal reality which is ontologically subjective and doesn't seem to obey any laws in the sense that it's subjective.
So basically, in order to prove something, I mean to really prove it beyond reasonable doubt, you have to be able to see it, hold it, lick it and manipulate it. Then you have to be able to pass it around to others so they can do the same. That is proof. Asking me to disprove a personal subjective experience or a shady historical account is asking me to disprove something that has never really been proven to begin with. It's disproven simply by that fact, that it can not be proven.
Then evolution is an illusion. I'll say more on this later, but to summarize, you are saying that Jesus is not the son of God because it cannot be proven that he is. I will chew on this and reply with more later. btw, are you an atheist?
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
how can someone prove something doesn't exist if they believe it doesn't exist? just as someone who believes can not be dissuaded from that belief. a non believer can not offer any evidence because there is none to offer up.
personally for me God does not exist because i have seen no evidence or been privy to anything that proves to me he/she does. the idea of a divine entity makes no sense - to me. but then again faith requires no proof, just belief.
oh and ryan, i hate to break it to you but the easter bunny doesn't exist. :(
my point exactly. it's impossible to prove and impossible to disprove. my request to ahnimus was to prove that Jesus is not the son of God and he disproved it by not being able to prove it.
In the court of law, there are many men/women who went to prison for crimes they indeed did not commit but somehow were proven that they did. How do you explain that?
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
my point exactly. it's impossible to prove and impossible to disprove. my request to ahnimus was to prove that Jesus is not the son of God and he disproved it by not being able to prove it.
In the court of law, there are many men/women who went to prison for crimes they indeed did not commit but somehow were proven that they did. How do you explain that?
shoddy police work.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Right, and you cannot disprove what is beyond physical. It's all a moot point. Let's just live in harmony!
Nothing has ever been proven to exist beyond reality!
I can't prove that something I conjure in my mind exists, obviously because it doesn't. Existence beyond reality is a theory, we can't even prove there is a reality beyond physical reality, so arguing that is moot.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
how can someone prove something doesn't exist if they believe it doesn't exist? just as someone who believes can not be dissuaded from that belief. a non believer can not offer any evidence because there is none to offer up.
personally for me God does not exist because i have seen no evidence or been privy to anything that proves to me he/she does. the idea of a divine entity makes no sense - to me. but then again faith requires no proof, just belief.
oh and ryan, i hate to break it to you but the easter bunny doesn't exist. :(
Haha, that's right there is no easter bunny, I know. I am an atheist. But, I'm not one of these dudes that thinks we need to amass in some congregation and make plans to eliminate religion. Those guys are really no better than a theist.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Nothing has ever been proven to exist beyond reality!
I can't prove that something I conjure in my mind exists, obviously because it doesn't. Existence beyond reality is a theory, we can't even prove there is a reality beyond physical reality, so arguing that is moot.
so you're saying something in the mind doesn't exist? why not? does something need to be corporeal in order to exist?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Then evolution is an illusion. I'll say more on this later, but to summarize, you are saying that Jesus is not the son of God because it cannot be proven that he is. I will chew on this and reply with more later. btw, are you an atheist?
Umm, there is billions of pieces of evidence that proves evolution is fact.
It can't be proven that Apollonius of Tyana was the son of God either, but he claimed he was and so did his followers. Jesus fits the "hero" formula that thousands of people before him and after him fit. He's just another myth, a bed time story.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
ah yes, man's quest to fill up the God shaped vacuum.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Also, I'm speaking to the fact that people think there is equal proof that divinity does not exist as there is that it does exist, when that is not the case.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
There is no proof either way.
I don't think it needs to be proven that divinity doesn't exist. I think the onus is on proving it does exist. Which, there is no proof.
faith requires NO PROOF. that's why they call it FAITH. the onus is on no one.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
As for proof in an argument, someone, say cornnifer or CurranPete can make an argument or an assertion, and it will either stay standing, or it can be disproven. If an argument cannot be disproven, it must stand by virtue of it's own standingness.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
In that regard, a lot of things exist that can not be proven. Like the Easter Bunny.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Divinity is lacking in logic. Every argument I've heard is illogical, but it's delivered by people that are illogical, so it's awefully difficult to convince them they are wrong.
I'm glad you don't consider your personal experience a valid argument on this subject, because experience is subjective and could be attributed to many different things you aren't aware of.
Everything is possible within the laws of nature. But the probabilities are so low that it's pointless to make an assumption that it must exist.
My experience is certainly valid for me to assert as my experience. You know I assert it all the time.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Exactly, you are convinced, so it's impossible for you to change your mind, and therefor impossible for me to disprove it to you.
I can't, you are already convinced that Jesus is the Son of God, and your mind is locked tight.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
(something tells me Ahnimus has something brewing, however. )
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Proof as interpreted by an outsider would require empirics, usually objective.
Things like mysticism, aliens, divinity and so on can not be proven objectively and rarely empirically. Certainly I can go to a cold-reader and have my fortune told, if it's accurate I may be convinced, and assert that psychics are real. However, in reality it is just cold-reading, the illusion must have worked to convince me, but none-the-less it is still an illusion. Psychics are poor, they slip up way too often. But they identify with the desire imbued in us as children for mysticism. So, mathematically speaking, at least some people will believe that the readings are accurate. Once they commit themselves to believing in the readings they are prone to believe blatantly wrong readings.
An example of how flawed we are is love. Love at first sight, which is lust ontological to a series of chemical reactions within the brain, fades over time as the norepinephrine, testosterone and/or estrogen surges become more tolerated. At this point we see beyond our infactuation and begin to realize people aren't always who we think they are.
Beliefs are the same way, once we believe in something it's like love at first sight, we become blinded by it, we fail to see the evidence stacking up against it. This is especially true if it's a result of personal experience. Now, experience is subjective, things like psychosis are very common, there are many illusions as well, false memories and so on. The human condition is that of flawed awareness, we only see what we are looking for, wether it actually exists or not. There are two realities, the external reality which obeys the laws of nature and the internal reality which is ontologically subjective and doesn't seem to obey any laws in the sense that it's subjective.
So basically, in order to prove something, I mean to really prove it beyond reasonable doubt, you have to be able to see it, hold it, lick it and manipulate it. Then you have to be able to pass it around to others so they can do the same. That is proof. Asking me to disprove a personal subjective experience or a shady historical account is asking me to disprove something that has never really been proven to begin with. It's disproven simply by that fact, that it can not be proven.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
personally for me God does not exist because i have seen no evidence or been privy to anything that proves to me he/she does. the idea of a divine entity makes no sense - to me. but then again faith requires no proof, just belief.
oh and ryan, i hate to break it to you but the easter bunny doesn't exist. :(
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
In the court of law, there are many men/women who went to prison for crimes they indeed did not commit but somehow were proven that they did. How do you explain that?
shoddy police work.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Nothing has ever been proven to exist beyond reality!
I can't prove that something I conjure in my mind exists, obviously because it doesn't. Existence beyond reality is a theory, we can't even prove there is a reality beyond physical reality, so arguing that is moot.
Haha, that's right there is no easter bunny, I know. I am an atheist. But, I'm not one of these dudes that thinks we need to amass in some congregation and make plans to eliminate religion. Those guys are really no better than a theist.
so you're saying something in the mind doesn't exist? why not? does something need to be corporeal in order to exist?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Umm, there is billions of pieces of evidence that proves evolution is fact.
It can't be proven that Apollonius of Tyana was the son of God either, but he claimed he was and so did his followers. Jesus fits the "hero" formula that thousands of people before him and after him fit. He's just another myth, a bed time story.