Religion on the decline around the world

inlet13 wrote:

Have you read The Bible multiple times or the other theologian writings? I DO practice critical thinking and am skeptical of what I hear but at some point you just have to accept the OVERWHELMING evidence regarding God.


***You don't seem to get it. You're advocating one position (critical thinking, skepticism, etc.) for a position you don't seem to agree with than advocating another (read and agree with the models or you're a denier) for another position you agree with. I'm just pointing it out to you.

Yes, I've read the entire Bible (NIV). Deuteronomy and Numbers: proof that man wrote the Bible. Song of Solomaon: prove that "love and only love will endure", nowhere, proof that humans are not the major cause of current climate change. Other theological writings? Yes, many major works on many religions. Even Martin Buber- challenging stuff!

Overwhelming evidence of the existence of God? Sure- but which one?

inlet13 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

What I meant was that once there is no intelligent purpose, it's just not God anymore. God doesn't mean just anything you can come up with including nature. For God to be God, it needs to have intelligent purpose, and if you are conceiving something that lacks that, then you aren't conceiving God at all. Otherwise, we can call anything anything. We can call tree "door", we can call paper "apple", and we can call Pearl Jam "Water Slides".

...
Okay... what do I call it, then?
I'm just tagging a term for the sake of this discussion that people can relate to when I'm referencing this... thing... that I can't comprehend, let alone, explain. I mean, could use the term, 'the thing that I can't comprehend, let alone, explain'... but, G-o-d is much easier for a lazy sot as myself.

I think one could use the word - the origin. I get you though, God's the entity that set it all in motion.

When I was a kid, I do remembering reading the bible and stumbling on the part - 'I am, who am'. I thought that was profound. It doesn't really answer the question other than - look around, he/she/it/the origin/God's everywhere.

Who or what set god in motion?

Cosmo wrote:

Just to set the record straight... whenever I use the term, 'God'... I use it because of the lack of a better term. I do not prescribe to the description of God as the Bible and related holy texts refer. My opinion being, those texts were written by Man... who attached human traits to God in order to connect Man with God and set up some sort of relationship bond.
That's why the God of the Bible can be kind of a dick at times. It's not God being a dick... it's more like Man creating the dickishness that is part of Man...

yes it would seem mankind has written God in his own imagine... flaws and all.

catefrances wrote:

yes it would seem mankind has written God in his own imagine... flaws and all.

...
God of the Bible is a dick sometimes... because Man is a dick sometimes. If God wrote the Bible, thing would be different. He didn't... that's why He is portrayed with human characteristics and traits.

Cosmo wrote:

markin ball wrote:

Who or what set god in motion?

...
Maybe... It was always in motion. Something our physics bound logic in incapable of processing.
There is the theory that, in order for the mathematical equations to be correct, says there are multiple universes (multiverse) where everything is passed on from one universe to another. As our universe, for example, expands as the dark energy pushes matter apart, it will flow into the next universe. All of that will create a 'big bang' event as our universe contorts and touches the adjacent universe.
It's weird shit that doesn't make sense to most of us... but there are these theorists that come up with equations to figure out things. These equations came about when trying to merge quantum mechanics with general relativity. Once the equations came about... it becomes a matter of explaining the results.
....
Again... I revert to my belief that there are just those things that cannot be explained using the laws of nature we are accustomed to. And really, who knows for sure? My guess is nobody living on this planet, at this time... of this species. Maybe my cat knows the answers, but just cannot communicate them to me.

afterall he/shes manages to have you at his/her beck and call taking care of his/her every whim and need.who has domesticated who i wonder.dogs too.

Cosmo wrote:

catefrances wrote:

afterall he/shes manages to have you at his/her beck and call taking care of his/her every whim and need.who has domesticated who i wonder.dogs too.

...
I saw Ed Helms last week and part of his bit talked about cats and dogs. He said that having a cat meant you have to keep a box of shit in one of your rooms and having a dog means you follow him, picking up his shit. Who is mastering who?
Of course, he said it a lot funnier than I just did.

oh its funny no matter who says it.

catefrances wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

... But, in the big picture, Man is nothing more than a highly evolved ape that resides on a tiny blue rock... circling a mediocre star in an average galaxy...

what makes you think that? what if mankind as we are today is the epitome of evolution?

...
Any way you look at it... Human and apes are related. We just happen to be the highest on the evolutionary ladder, so, we run the show. Why would the great, creator of the universe and everything in it focus all of His love and attention on us? The universe is a big place and is pretty complicated... and I bet a pretty tough thing to run. If we are it... then, why the fuck are we so fucked up? If we are God's greatest creating... it doesn't say much about His creation skills... in my opinion.
And if we have evolved to the point where we cannot evolve any further... well, then good luck to us.

catefrances wrote:

i would say we are so fucked up cause that is the nature of the beast... that it has zero to do with a creator cause there is no creator per se. like everything else on this planet, we evolved to where we are today. we did it alone without any help from an almighty. we are intelligent creatures but i think we have not used that intelligence to our ultimate benefit... and we may never. we seem to be on our own self destructive kick where accumulative wealth is the name of the game to the detriment of everything else. as it turns out this isnt advantageous for all mankind(go figure), but it seems its what the 1st world has a boner for. we dont seem to be able to live collectively to the betterment of ALL mankind... and that will be our downfall.

i agree that humans and apes are related.. that they have a common ancestor, NOT that humans evolved from apes.

...
Agreed. I opinion is that Man created God in order to lean on... to explain nature... to explain the unexplainable.
...
And we are really just apes. A man, much greater than myself, had a better way to put it:
"I think I'm sophisticated 'cos I'm living my life like a good homosapien.
But all around me everybody's multiplying and they're walking round like flies, man.
So I'm no better than the animals sitting in their cages in the zoo, man.
'Cos compared to the flowers and the birds and the trees I am an apeman.
I think I'm so educated and I'm so civilized 'cos I'm a strict vegetarian.
But with the over-population and inflation and starvation and the crazy politicians... I don't feel safe in this world no more, I don't want to die in a nuclear war, I want to sail away to a distant shore and make like an ape man.
I'm an apeman, I'm an ape, apeman, Oh, I'm an apeman.
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man, oh I'm an apeman.
'Cos compared to the sun that sits in the sky, Compared to the clouds as they roll by, Compared to the bugs and the spiders and flies... I am an apeman.
In man's evolution he has created the city and The motor traffic rumble.
But give me half a chance And I'd be taking off my clothes and living in the jungle.
'Cos the only time that I feel at ease, Is swinging up and down in a coconut tree.
Oh, what a life of luxury to be like an apeman.
I'm an apeman, I'm an ape, apeman, Oh, I'm an apeman.
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man, I am an ape man.
I look out the window, but I can't see the sky, 'Cos the air pollution is fogging up my eyes.
I want to get out of this city alive And make like an ape man.

Come and love me, be my apeman girl And we'd be so happy in my apeman world.
I'm an apeman, I'm an ape, apeman, Oh, I'm an apeman.
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man, Oh, I'm an apeman.
I'll be your Tarzan, you'll be my Jane, I'll keep you warm and you'll keep me sane, And we'll sit in the trees and eat bananas all day, Just like an apeman.

I'm an apeman, I'm an ape, apeman, Oh, I'm an apeman.
I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man, Oh, I'm an ape man.
I don't feel safe in this world no more, I don't want to die in a nuclear war.
I want to sail away to a distant shore And make like an apeman."

PJ_Soul wrote:

brianlux wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

Have you read The Bible multiple times or the other theologian writings? I DO practice critical thinking and am skeptical of what I hear but at some point you just have to accept the OVERWHELMING evidence regarding God.


***You don't seem to get it. You're advocating one position (critical thinking, skepticism, etc.) for a position you don't seem to agree with than advocating another (read and agree with the models or you're a denier) for another position you agree with. I'm just pointing it out to you.

Yes, I've read the entire Bible (NIV). Deuteronomy and Numbers: proof that man wrote the Bible. Song of Solomaon: prove that "love and only love will endure", nowhere, proof that humans are not the major cause of current climate change. Other theological writings? Yes, many major works on many religions. Even Martin Buber- challenging stuff!

Overwhelming evidence of the existence of God? Sure- but which one?

:?: :?: :?:

I'm laughing at myself because I have no idea why I said that. I think I was tiring of the debate and was just trying to goof on it.

But anyway, I don't think the existence or absence of God has anything to do with "overwhelming evidence". That's for scientific matters, not religious or spiritual-- unless your into one of the forms of religious science but to me that's an oxymoron.

Cosmo wrote:

brianlux wrote:

I'm laughing at myself because I have no idea why I said that. I think I was tiring of the debate and was just trying to goof on it.

But anyway, I don't think the existence or absence of God has anything to do with "overwhelming evidence". That's for scientific matters, not religious or spiritual-- unless your into one of the forms of religious science but to me that's an oxymoron.

...
Sometimes... isn't the absence of proof... proof?

proof of what?