207 replies to this topic

[RighteousReason]

the new anti-aging molecule those Korean scientists are working on doesn't pan out as expected?

That's an obscure random detail in just one field.

There are a million other things going on right now in a million other fields and places that you obviously have no clue about.

And 99.9% of those aren't even relevant to AGI.

[william]

qrail, understanding Bible prophecy can help you improve your chances in the face of the coming disasters. The free booklet "You Can Understand Bible Prophecy, at http://www.wnponline...ts/UP/index.htm, points this out. You should checkout this free publication whenever you get a chance.

I believe it will take a new and better understanding of the Bible to restore civilization after the prophesied disasters occur in order to avoid similar calamities in the future and in order to support a communal way of life necessary for successfully achieving a long, healthy, and happy life. Take Israel's kibbutz system; it worked for awhile, but due to external and internal pressures it failed. I'm thoroughly convinced, had they had a better understanding of the Bible and applied it correctly to kibbutz living, they would've done much better and lasted much longer.

If you ever take a close look at God's law and Christ's teachings, you'll notice they're perfectly crafted for educating a people to live communally. The way I see it, it's going to take a new way of life in a kibbutz to produce the necessary type of character to practice strict vegetarianism, fasting, and calorie restriction for longevity. It will take strong character and willpower to live communally and to follow the strict dietary practices necessary for achieving success. Once people are living like this successfully, they'll be on the correct path to living forever, the path that Adam and Eve missed due to their disobedience. Genesis 3:22.

I don't believe the teachings of the churches that try to deny the fossil record. God is a creator God. He probably had to experiment awhile before He came up with better forms of life. You should checkout some of the interesting free literature on this at www.gnmagazine.org.

[william]

hankconn, I think you're exaggerating alittle bit here don't you think? Sure there's some research and experiments being done, but I haven't seen anything that sounded real definite or real soon. I think Calorie Restriction holds the most promise for the near future. I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket if I were you.

[RighteousReason]

I think you're exaggerating alittle bit here don't you think

no

Sure there's some research and experiments being done, but I haven't seen anything that sounded real definite or real soon

sucks for you - see next question

I think Calorie Restriction holds the most promise for the near future

read more stuff

I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket if I were you.

cliche, irrelevant

[emerson]

qrail, my dilemma is that I'm nobody of any consequence in this world that anybody should pay any special attention to me on this.

It's a pretty rare person of consequence who starts down the path of his life already applauded for his accomplishments. If you have the truth, as you believe you do, than you have a ladder with which to begin lifting yourself up.

I have no college degrees in anything.

With enough hard work, and the humility to admit the frequent misunderstandings which are common in self study, you can still get the equivalent from a good library. Get a perfect grasp of just one good textbook on experimental design and you'll already have a heads up on quite a few published scientists.

Let me say again, I believe, for any new life extension techniques to work, scientific minds need to fashion or adopt a new and better understanding of the Bible that's in direct opposition to the false religions of the world. This new religion is going to have to satisfy God's requirements as stated in the Bible and have a very strong "reverence for life" ideal.

They're not going to, at least not in the sense you're talking about. The scales have been weighed on that issue, and the verdict passed. If you want that changed, it's up to you and others with a similar viewpoint. Study the scientific method, obsess over experimental design to the point where you can rapidly flip through a journal and immediately see potential mistakes which might lead to flawed data or conversely be able to list 'why' the experiment was well constructed. Develop a love of citations as strong as your new distaste for the lack of them. Lean the language of the scientific method until it's as natural to you as English. As it is now, any attempt you made to express your viewpoint to most scientists would be like a German trying to grasp what someone was saying in Cherokee. You'll never convince someone that a viewpoint different than their own is correct without being able to express its complexities within language they can grasp. Put together a proposal, beg for money from fellow believers to fund it. Create something which is repeatable, and sticks to rigid terminology that can't be subjectively reinterpreted any more than 1+1 might. It needs to be concise, to the point where even a short paragraph would be enough to make one pretty sure that you were on to something. A happens because B happens and we have shown this by modification of B in a way which produces predictable outcomes in A.

If it's true, if there's evidence to be found and Christian rules to the universe in play, than you can put them to the test. A good beginning might be your comment about false religions. Put together a method for weighing the validity of a religion which uses measures totally removed from subjectivity. Or perhaps a blinded study of prayer which shows Christians have a special "umph" compared to people of other faiths. Run it by the folks at skeptic.com. They'll tear it to shreds, but if your beliefs are true, you can paste the design together with concrete and keep repeating this until it's hard as a rock. People devoted to a particular belief system can be pretty rabid about it, so I doubt even a perfectly formed experiment would meet with much approval there. But by that point you should also be able to realise when you've reached a point where solid criticism has given way to bias.

That said, aside for a love of the bible, there's not much to your arguments that I'd agree with. And even my love of the bible comes partially from fascination over the fact that it's been a common shared element between such giant masses of humans stretching the gulf of time. Reading the bible is a chance to have many of the same concepts pass through my mind as did people who died long enough in the past to be little more than dust now. It's not exactly the same text as many read, and the same meaning is impossible to acquire without firm grounding in the culture and time of a particular reader. Still, its longevity never ceases to impress me. But I could say the same for Gilgamesh. Both fall into the other source of my love for the bible, the fact that I love what I perceive to be mythology. All of it acts as a wonderful mirror held up to the culture which created it. Look at it, and the face reflected is that of the hopes, dreams, and fears of an entire people. Even, especially with the bible, a study of their growth and evolution. A christian bible holds a place of honor on my shelf, but it shares that space with collections of native american stories, The Nag Hammadi Library, the dead sea scrolls, the Qur'an, a number of Buddhist texts, and a translation of the I Ching.

But, here's the thing, I'm still cheering you on to prove me and the world wrong. I find the idea of a life which doesn't spend time reflecting on the 'reasons' behind its own beliefs to be something far short of its potential. I see the same effect in myself, in friends, family, all humanity in general. We talk out of our ass when it comes to topics we haven't spent a lot of time studying. We 'think' out of our asses when it comes to topics we've not studied. Humanity needs as many people out there as it can handle who will ask questions which make us ponder the nature of our beliefs, and remind us that the need for further learning and study is always there.

And, just as importantly, you might be right. I don't think you are, but I'm hardly the sole arbitrator of truth. To be human is to also possess and be possessed by bias created by the culture one was raised in. Mavericks who exist with just a tiny distortion of the normal bias of his time and place have the potential for some of the greatest leaps imaginable. And quite often they do in fact sound like the raving nutters on the street corner. Right up until the point that they have hard solid indisputable and totally replicable proof.

And, as a side note, I keep scrolling down the main page and for a split second seeing this topics title as "Down with the athletes." Which manages to achieve the perfect level of humour by being in a forum which so often perfectly combines a love of health and exercise with a love of science and philosophy.

[zoolander]

I've come in late and haven't read everyones replies.

As far as I have read, William is correct, the bible conclusivley supports life extension. So my question is, why are the vast vast vast majority of religious people against life extension. Someone else made a good point that you can read and interpret the bible any way you want and have it support any ideology. It has been used in the past to justify slavery and subordination of women.

Why are the vast vast vast majority of religous people against life extension?? Because most organised religions tend to take the "conservative" approach. They tend to be "pro-life" and are anti-abortion, Anti-euthanasia and anti-suicide. Paridoxically they reject or sondemn life extension.

Why? I think that this is one of the arguments.......(sorry if I am repeating something)

"Essentially, the doctrine is that life is a gift to the person that is alive, and the willful rejection of this gift (suicide) or else the taking of whatever circumstances of it away from another (Murder, abortion, euthanasia) are infringements of the divine prerogatives., which the giver (God) is held to retain over this gift.......If it is the case that life itself is fundamentally a gift "designed" and ordained" by God, then the fundemental circumstances that attend it, such as the endogenous span of the lives of humans, will be held to be similairly part of the ordained design, which is a frame of the gift itself, and so falls within divine prerogative".

So essentially, the taking away of a life is no different to the extending of a life. You are messing with the divine gift and intevention on any level is not permitted.

Just for the record....I do not believe in God. I do agree that life is a gift but I do not believe that anyone claims ownership or power over this gift. The gift that is life. The gift of life has been given to us to do as we please. It is our choice, which I guess is the counter argument against pro-lifers and that is pro-choice.

[rjws]

/agree

My thoughts exactly Zoolander

[MichaelAnissimov]

I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket if I were you.

They're already in one basket - trusting in human intelligence. How about we distribute our eggs in more basket by creating something smarter than we are? Sounds wise to me.

[william]

emerson, thanks for the encouragement! I will always self-educate myself. That's the only option I have.

From the sounds of what you wrote, you have a very open and searching mind. It shouldn't be very hard for you to take the small step to a belief in God and a belief that the Bible is His word - showing His plan and providing us with direction. You should checkout the free literature at http://www.gnmagazin...itreq/index.htm. They don't have a perfect understanding of the Scriptures yet, but they're an excellent place to start a serious study of the Bible for an educated and opened minded person, such as yourself, who might recognize the strong potential of the Bible to bring us out of the serious mess we're in.

Have you ever read the book "The Revolution of Hope: Toward A Humanized Technology"(1968), by Erich Fromm, where he recognized the need for "the emergence of new forms of psychospiritual orientation and devotion, which are equivalents of the religious systems of the past" as a part of any plan necessary for overcoming man's characterological deficiencies or weaknesses and the negative aspects of our modern industrial and technological society? I believe Erich Fromm was onto something of major importance here. I also believe psychology and social science can play a role in the process of educating people to a new religious system based on the Bible as well as monitoring its progress. I figure it's about time for a major shift and for the soft sciences to replace the hard sciences in importance in the scheme of things anyway.

[brandonreinhart]

Never had anyone give me any trouble for being an atheist. Of course, I live in the liberal island in deep red Texas: Austin.

Religious rhetoric drives me nuts. So many words, so much subjective interpretation without objective meaning. Is "God" the most subjective word in the language? Excepting "I" of course: which is inherently subjective, but never nebulous. The intensions and referants of "I" are obvious. But with "God" you really have no idea what someone means when they say it, and you have to wade through seriously deep rhetoric before you get to what that person REALLY means. Even among believers of the same denomination, definitions of "God" vary widely.

[william]

MichaelAnissimov, if we're trying to create something that's "kinder-than-human" with "smarter-than-human intelligence" aren't we creating our own god? And, what happens if this god we humans create with superior moral attributes, technical knowledge, and creative ability decides, in all wisdom, justice and mercy, that there's no other recourse but to destroy us and replicate itself? I'm sure this superior intelligence could figure out some way to do this that we might over look.

[william]

brandonreinhart, don't let this "Down with the athiests" thread bother you. I think it was started by some young college kids looking to start a philosophical argument. I knocked the crap out of one of them the other day.

You should take a look at the video and literature at http://www.beyondtod...ProgramID=bt015 and give it some deep thought. Some athiests change their beliefs when confronted with the obvious.

[Live Forever]

brandonreinhart, don't let this "Down with the athiests" thread bother you. I think it was started by some young college kids looking to start a philosophical argument. I knocked the crap out of one of them the other day.

[?] [mellow] [?]

You seriously are delusional if you think you knocked the crap out of anyone on this thread. Hank started the thread. (I assume you refer to by "young college kids") You are using the same tired religious rhetoric that all religious people use, and it becomes tiring to keep reading it over and over, which is why, I assume people quit responding eventually. Do not make the mistake of thinking it is because you have said anything on this subject that is particularly profound. The ones (at least in this thread) that are on the side of "atheism" (although I am agnostic, so I don't take such a hardline approach) are the ones that seem to me to have weighed both sides of the debate to the fullest. I know I used to be a hardcore religious zealot as well (was raised that way), but when I began to critically examine things (about the time I went to college), the religious dogma wilted under the light of intellectual examination. I can see that you have never had such a point where you examine your beliefs intellectually, but perhaps you will at some point. (or perhaps not)

Some athiests change their beliefs when confronted with the obvious.

Religious people often change their beliefs when confronted with the truth.

[maestro949]

Don't be afraid william. It's going to be ok. Us, you living an immortal life without the fear of dying a slow and painful death or a wrathful god who destroys those that don't agree with powerful institutions that prey on the weak using fear to manipulate them. Cleanse your mind of the fear that grips you and you will be free from the gobbledy gook that poisons your thoughts. You will be truly enlightened by the freedom the clarity presents. Your judgement will improve above the mental self flagilation you unknowingly heave upon yourself and you will be truly free. Toss those crappy books aside as they are weakening your true spirit and distracting you from utilizing your potential. Your judment is clouded as your only mission in life is to try and get people to agree with you. How terribly sad. Your ego which allows you to believe that you can plant seeds in our minds that will cause us to question our own understanding is blinding you. In reality this is only going to backfire and cause many of us to work harder. Some of the weaker minded will fall prey to your tactics but most of us, those that are moving the ball forward will continue to do so. Let go of the fight william. We are going forward whether you join us or not and we will reverse engineer life and this universe and gain mastery of many of its secrets so that we can more fully enjoy all this universe has to offer. Surely you must recognize the pattern of failure in attempts to block scientific progress throughout history. Your intelligent design movement will backfire. Your alliance with corporate America in it's short sighted desire to grab political and economic power is already backfiring. The impassioned human spirit will not be swayed from this regardless how hard you and the other prosylites work to distract us and convert us to your feeble way of thinking. Stop wasting yours and our time. Your videos and literature you reference is unconvincing at best and insulting at worst. They are clearly the work of simple minded mortals and not inspired by any divine motivation. Their petty arguments, illogical fallacies, canned talking points, fables, circular references and appeals to emotions will work on children and the unhealthy but not us. Cast them aside. Join a real "community" in the only search that matters. A search of the universe we can see, touch and feel. It is going to happen and you know this. You are simply attempting to delay the inevitable. You might as well give us a hand so you can see all of the majesty this universe has to offer in your lifetime. Why wait for the next which likely does not exist?

[Centurion]

I won't get into an argument about who's right or wrong, but what's the point in arguing over all of this? It's obvious you aren't going to convert any atheists on this forum. I'm not trying to say that you aren't welcome here or that we won't tolerate your beliefs, imminst is a forum of open minded toleration, but surely God and religion aren't your only areas of interest, lets talk about something we can all agree on, or at least disagree constructively on.

[maestro949]

but what's the point in arguing over all of this?

They are just mind exercises. Nothing to worry about. Nobody is getting hurt. I've yet to ever see someone ever go "Gee, he's write. I think I'll change my mind."

It's obvious you aren't going to convert any atheists on this forum.

They don't care. People like william believe they are carrying {insert favorite diety here}'s will by trying. And by trying they work on sharpening their message and reaffirm their own convictions with each exchange. My dad explained it to me (he's a missionary) that the point is to plant seeds and when people have weak moments in life, especially in their middle and later years, they contemplate what their existence means and look for some form of hope to cling onto that there's more to life than this. Many turn to religion for comfort.

The only hope we have for people like william, as he will never relinquish his faith to become agnostic or an atheist (not that we care), is that he help us explore the material world or at a minimum, leave us to do it rather than attempt to sabotage or distract. Some of the most avid scientists believe in a higher power and are driven in their research to behold the beauty of this higher power rather than fear what revealing what its secrets might yield.

[zoolander]

William you are sounding like a broken record.

A broken record played backwards......rerehtobdog

[emerson]

what's the point in arguing over all of this? It's obvious you aren't going to convert any atheists on this forum.

Perhaps not many of the people motivated enough to post in it, but there's always the hypothetical folks with viewpoints midway between the two areas who might be swayed. Even aside from that, I don't think it's so uncommon for folks on either extreme to find themselves opposed to everything they used to believe was true. I've personally known a few atheists who started out among the most obsessive of Christian practitioners. And while I've never known anyone personally who held themselves as an atheist or agnostic and then underwent some crisis which when clear revealed a diehard believer, they're definitely represented out there. To be sure, on the atheist side of the conversion it's usually heavily weighted to people who "believe" in science rather than understand it. Even so, it's pretty good pickings. The public schools love of substituting memorization of trivia for an actual education in the scientific method has given the world pretty high choice in that category. And it's certainly not to preclude scientists from religious conversion. As much as I find the two quite incompatible, there are respectable scientists out there who profess a belief in an interventionist God. Many of whom counted themselves as atheists at some point.

Humans have a pretty wide variability in what they're able to mash into their worldview, and often the part reason has to play is solely as an excuse maker for justifying an already adopted new belief. As maestro949 mentioned, crisis's happen in peoples lives. They review what they believe, examine what they hope, and often search for what they feel on an intuitive level. It's easy to think ourselves immune from something like that, but it's one of those things that's hard to gauge without going through a similar trial yourself. And in those moments, who's to say that some half remembered thread on a message board won't come to mind, and be the tiny bit of extra weight which causes a person to reach for a bible.

And, personally, I often just plain like to see the arguments of people in dynamic opposition to my own viewpoint. In the best case, I might stumble on an idea that occurs naturally with their outlook but which would have been some time coming in mine. And, at worst, I can get a chance to examine why I believe what i believe and why I don't believe another viewpoint which is presented to me. It's not something I'd like to take part in every day, but it's a nice way to light an odd fire in the brain every now and again.

[william]

What emerson is trying to tell you young guys, is keep an open mind you never know what better idea or way of life might come along. You haven't experienced much in life yet, and haven't even scratched the surface of knowledge and wisdom.

Most of you, I'm sure, were turned atheist as a result of the false teachings of the catholic and protestant churches. How many of you avowed atheists still keep christmas, easter, and sunday observance - pagan practices made up by roman emperors, popes, and ancient philosophers instead of by God through His prophets? Checkout the free booklet "Holy Days or Holidays Which Days Should We Keep?" at http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/HH/ for the truth about the origins of these pagan practices.

Live Forever, don't get so touchy. You're being over sensitive. I was just trying to get a rise out of hank. He must of stepped out for a cigarette break or something.

For your information, I was self-studying alot of psychology, philosophy and other educational subjects before I got into the Bible. I got called and shown a better idea. When you were a religious zealot in one of those false religions, you probably never experienced God's Holy Spirit. You more than likely were doing just what your parents, minister, and youth group peers wanted you to do. There's a big difference between religious zealotry in a false church and true conversion into God's church.

[RighteousReason]

Most of you, I'm sure, were turned atheist as a result of the false teachings of the catholic and protestant churches

William, it's important that you, too

keep an open mind you never know what better idea or way of life might come along

I'm sure the former statement is true for many (if not most) atheists. However, here at imminst, there are others who reject religion just as much as they reject ghosts, zombies, psychics, spirits, and magic. It's is these people who model our beliefs based on a scientific approach to reality (see emerson's post).

If you want to convince people like us of accepting a supernatural belief that you hold, you are going to have to show us some empirical data collection, credible scientific experimentation, and a rigorous and falsifiable theory.

All of the italisized words above have important meaning in science which are key to the message I am trying to communicate.


Secondly, I would be wary of posting a link to some website and claiming that it shows one of the above criteria in support of religion without being absolutely sure it is of solid credibility. Some of us probably won't even click it- just out of the sheer improbability that this is not an obvious waste of time. There is a lot of creationist psuedoscience populating the web today which can easily be mistaken for actual science by a novice.

[Centurion]

They are just mind exercises.  Nothing to worry about.  Nobody is getting hurt.  I've yet to ever see someone ever go "Gee, he's write.  I think I'll change my mind."

Nothing wrong with a bit of mind exercise Perhaps I have a kneejerk tendency to avoid the topic of religion arising from where I have grown up.

Surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you and all that....

[Live Forever]

I agree completely with hank's post. I have yet to, in all my years of searching, see conclusive evidence for the existence of some sort of "supreme being". If someone were to show some hard evidence (take a look at the words hank italicized) I would be the first to jump on board, I assure you. I really want to believe in something greater than I, but my head always gets in the way. (something about requiring proof for such extraordinary claims) I simply cannot accept that if there was a God (at least one similar to the "Christian God"), that he would not create a world (& universe) that did not show proof of His existence. As a side note, william, these links you have been providing have not shown any evidence whatsoever that cannot be torn apart by someone who is educated on the subject.

[william]

You guys are limiting your capacity to experience and acquire other forms of knowledge due to a too strict application of the scientific method. Eminent science practioners, such as Einstein, Newton, etc., have been able to set aside the scientific method to see the existence of a Superior Intelligence being involved in creation. Even DonSpanton in frame 5 of this thread had to cry uncle - although grudgingly - and admit to this when I wrestled him down on this point.

I strongly urge you guys to not stunt your intellectual and moral growth through an unreasonable applicaion of the
scientific method. There is much more to life than just science. You should research and rethink the limits of the scientific method. Broaden your horizons!

maestro949, you really have me wrongly pegged where you say I'm in "alliance with corporate America in it's short sighted desire to grab political and economic power..." I'm strongly opposed to private property and the monetary system. I've studied alot of Marxism and see capitalism as a major evil in the world. I in no way agree with everything taught by the churches I've been providing you links to.

Edited by william, 18 June 2006 - 09:30 PM.

[Live Forever]

You guys are limiting your capacity to experience and acquire other forms of knowledge due to a too strict application of the scientific method. Eminent science practioners, such as Einstein, Newton, etc., have been able to set aside the scientific method to see the existence of a Superior Intelligence being involved in creation. Even DonSpanton in frame 5 of this thread had to cry uncle - although grudgingly - and admit to this when I wrestled him down on this point.

I strongly urge you guys to not stunt your intellectual and moral growth through an unreasonable applicaion of the
scientific method. There is much more to life than just science. You should research and rethink the limits of the scientific method. Broaden your horizons!

maestro949, you really have me wrongly pegged where you say I'm in "alliance with corporate America in it's short sighted desire to grap political and economic power..." I'm strongly opposed to private property and the monetary system. I've studied alot of Marxism and see capitalism as a major evil in the world. I in no way agree with everything taught by the churches I've been providing you links to.

So, william, you are saying we should accept what you say without proof?

Also, has it occured to you that you are stunting your own "intellectual growth" by hanging on to myth and mysticism teachings without requiring proof?

I have to say that this is a rare occasion. Normally (at least in my experience) Christians (at least the hard line ones) will argue night and day for their ideals, misrepresenting facts, using pseudoscience, etc. to prove creationism, or that being homosexual is a choice, or the existence of God, or whatever else suits their fancy, but never have I heard the "You guys are too interested in facts, and I agree that there isn't sufficient scientific proof for God"-method of argument. Perhaps this is a new tactic that I should introduce to the debate team at my former university. He might be unaware of the potential of admitting that your opponent has too many facts and too much evidence on their side.

[RighteousReason]

the only thing I am concerned about william is the number of Christians and others who use their religious interpretations of the Universe to draw erroneous, and sometimes actively harmful, and entirely unfalsifiable (at least to them, if not in principle), conclusions.

[emerson]

So, william, you are saying we should accept what you say without proof?

I'd say it's not so much accepting without proof as differing in criteria for evaluating the validity of something. I, and it would seem most of the posters here, approach potentially subjective experiences with a large amount of skepticism. For whatever reason, logical or not, we begin with the presumption of our emotional and intuitive faculty being a whirlwind of often misleading data. There's a sign over those faculties warning that something we strongly believe in has marked them untrustworthy. From that point on, the scientific method becomes a necessity with this belief system in order to cover for the occluded nature of our perceptions and consciousness.

For many religious people, the situation is quite a bit different. Their emotional faculties, and their intuitive flashes, are often accepted as having a greater validity to them. It might range from viewing it as a piller of truth covered by slight deceptions from our fallen nature, all the way to being seen as a direct pipeline to truth. It also goes a long way into allowing anecdotal evidence, a sinner in science, to be seen as a saint. Along with that, acceptance of perceived meaning within a pattern of seemingly unrelated daily events in a persons life. I'm sure all of us at some time or another have had the experience of a period of time that seems to contain no wrong for us. We win, we succeed, unexpected help comes from near strangers before we even knew it was needed. The first viewpoint would dismiss those as a combination of coincidence, statistical fluctuation and a trend to surround oneself with those most willing to help us at times of adversity. The second, with a willingness to accept what his intuition tells him to be true might see within it God's favour to help his path for humanity and the individual human in question. I'd say this is most exemplified among Mormons, who I've often seen using it as an aid in their missionary work. It's heavily represented in other denominations as well of course. "Read the Gospels every day, and afterward ask God to show himself to you within the world." has become a fairly common method to try and bring people to the side of religion.

By necessity I'm stereotyping a bit on both counts, and it's of course not applicable to either atheists or religious people as anything more than probability rather than certainty. I'm also guilty of making a rather bad immediate connection between atheists and what might be better described as rationalists. Going by rationalist automatically creates an uncomfortable unspoken implication of the other group as "not rational". So I have to apologise a bit for sloppy use of terminology. Still, I offer it up as one explanation of why a Christian might believe something and feel there is evidence, which to another seems totally lacking in substantiation.

but never have I heard the "You guys are too interested in facts, and I agree that there isn't sufficient scientific proof for God"-method of argument.

An early christian bishop, I think possibly St. Augustine, once defined faith as devout belief in something not because it's obvious, but because its truth is hidden. Actually, as i write that, I think it may not have been Augustine. The sentiment and style don't quite seem to mesh. Oh well. The gist of it is that much like Job's refusal to denounce God, persistent belief even when evidence is sparse can be seen as among the most powerful traits within humanity and even as a proof of God in itself. I've never been able to really wrap my mind around such a statement, but it's certainly been there since fairly early times in many branches of Christian thought.

In the above quote, the "scientific proof" part should be specially noted. While not scientific, the bible does hold many aspects of action and predictions of the outcome that will result. In particular, it can be a remarkable tool for strengthening social cohesion, and helping people to overcome behavioral or situational problems which they had previously felt inescapable. The difference again comes down to a definition of proof. Many Christians might look at a series of events with that nature, see them repeated, and mentally mark it down as confirmation of the bibles truth. An atheist might see the same event, and then begin looking for alternative explanations which would also account for them, and then make attempts at seeing if those explanations when repeated would give the same results. Heck, many Christians are also quite willing to take both of those views and declare that the event arose from sociological prompting while also stating the 'meaning' behind that prompting as the movement of God.

[Grail]

It took a supernatural experience to prompt you onto this path William, why think that we would be any different? The amount of times you have posted that link...I'm tempted to call "spammer".
You aren't going to inspire much confidence if you continue to behave in such a condescending manner towards those younger than yourself.

[zoolander]

You guys are limiting your capacity to experience and acquire other forms of knowledge due to a too strict application of the scientific method.

I could equally say Willaim that you are limiting your capacity as a human being to experiance the full spectrum of your existence by subscribing to a too strict application of rules placed upon you by a narrow-minded escapist approach.

So many people have asked for it but you fail to give any proof.

I strongly urge you guys to not stunt your intellectual and moral growth through an unreasonable applicaion of the
scientific method.

What sort of intellectual and moral growth are we talking about? Your idea of intellectual and moral?

Even DonSpanton in frame 5 of this thread had to cry uncle - although grudgingly - and admit to this when I wrestled him down on this point.

Oh man! Can I call you Nacho Libre?

[william]

qrail, you're absolutely right about it took supernatural experiences to make me a believer. Otherwise, my way of thinking would be pretty much like emerson's. I have a hunch some of you will be having supernatural experiences in the near future. Revelation 6:12-17 strongly suggests that God is going to expose Himself publicly in the beginning stages of the tribulation. See http://www.biblegate...2-17&version=31. It's my job to prepare you for this and which direction He wants you to take to enter His Kingdom on earth.

What does "spammer" mean precisely? I'm not advertising for any church or organization. I'm flat broke and do not belong to anything. I'm on a family computer which I just started to learn how to use on or about 1/17/06. Also, what does "IMO" mean? My sister couldn't tell me.

zoolander, you're tempting me to flash my mug shot on here. Keep it up! I can whip that guy in the picture no problem.

qrail, what other stick than my age can I use on the young guys in this forum to keep them civilized? Some of them are aggressively advocating those "survival of the fittest", Neitzsche, and Machiavelli type philosophies typified in Jack London novels. Philosophies of the psycho or sociopath.

[maestro949]

Face it william. You're just a series of complex chemical reactions and nothing more. You are just one slight genetic strain different than a monkey, only slightly more different than a mouse and virtually genetically indistinct from a cornstalk if you take the entire gene base into consideration. You are on no mission from God to prepare us for anything. You are delusional and the one here exhibiting any sociopathic tendencies by claiming to know what is best for us and that you are somehow morally superior because of your belief structure.

Spamming is repeatedly sending unwarrented and unsolicited messages to people via email or messageboards. But you knew that. It's what you and your fellow proselytes do.

Have your faith william but don't suggest that those that don't choose to see things your way are on the wrong path. Even your own prophet that you follow teaches that each must choose their own freely.