81 replies to this topic

[Karomesis]

in the words of sylvestor stallone in Rambo......" I'm your worst FU@#IN nightmare"

if there WAS a patriarchal diety that had any mercy whatsoever, he wouldn't torture us incessantly with proseletysers.

[Live Forever]

[maestro949]

Biology is too strong a force, even for opiates like religion.

The ethnographic record says otherwise. That record shows man is very versatile and capable of adapting to challenging circumstances.

I'm not aware of this data you refer to. Please point me to it. To date, the only effective means of instilling any morals into individuals on a widespread basis that I've seen is through torture, brainwashing or the fear of eternal punishment. I'd like to see us work towards using our versatility to not have to resort to such medieval practices.

Look at what man has learned to do with science and technology. Certainly man can learn, with God's help, to defeat the biological urges you mention and live life in peace and happiness forever.

Indeed, please do look. It's just the tip of the iceberg. We should be able to continue on this technological trajectory to a point where we can transcend our biological weaknesses without resorting to the ancient scare tactics that have been used for millennium. Instead we can develop technologies and knowledge that allow every individual to see with crystal clarity the boundaries within their own minds as to what are biologically driven desires versus conscious decisions and then evaluate all of the costs and consequences with extreme accuracy of every decision made. We need no assistance in this. Not from the flying spaghetti monster, not from Athena, Zeus, Budha, or any other deity you care to dredge up.

Both. Surely you've heard of vaccines.

Yeah, but I've heard they have significant side effects too. From my understanding, medical science is unable to develop a successful vaccine until after the new disease has developed and spread into the population and caused significant harm. This has been the lament of those trying to prepare a successful vaccine to combat the bird flu should it become transmissible from human to human.

Of course it requires a disease or virus to exist prior to treatment as predicting every possible outcome of evolution is probably a fairly distant possibility however we are building the tools now that will allow more rapid responses to evolving pathogens such that fewer need suffer with each new strain that emerges. Better tech and communications within the health care industry is already allowing disease experts to quickly identify new emergents and get virologists studying them within weeks of their initial infections. With rapid DNA screening technology we can identify many viruses and bacteria within hours of drawing blood from a patient. A real-time device for virus detection was just approved by the FDA. 10 years ago it would take days or weeks to identify these. 50 years ago we couldn't even do it. 100 years ago, millions of people would die before we could quarantine the population properly. 1000 years ago and before we simply blamed angry gods and demons for these outbreaks. See a trend? Viruses and diseases will be with us for a long time but we are turning the corner on fighting them to a point where they will barely be a noticeable impact on society.

Even if our front teeth are well suited for meat eating, this does not change the fact that meat eating is unhealthy and a source of disease. The problem of Zoonoses should be enough of a lesson to us. We don't have to eat meat to live.

I won't argue whether meat's an optimal nutritional source but it can be safely eaten with little concern for disease assuming it's properly raised, screened and prepared for consumption (same goes for plants). Furthermore plants and animal food sources have many common proteins as they diverged relatively recently from an evolutionary perspective. When our digestive track breaks these proteins down, there is much overlap in the building blocks (amino acids, etc) from a nutritional and energy perspective.

Once we have better data as to what the optimal mix of proteins are for maximum health, we will one day be able to develop technology that can synthesize and recycle these molecules without needing to grow plants or animals. Organic based diets will be a footnote in history books hundreds of years from now.

Edited by maestro949, 20 January 2008 - 02:00 PM.

[william7]

I'm not aware of this data you refer to. Please point me to it.

The primitive egalitarian societies studied by anthropologists show that man is capable of living simple, peaceful lives with a sharing of resources. See, for example, http://72.30.186.56/...&...=1&.intl=uk.

In the book Kibbutz Goshen: An Israeli Commune, about an anthropological study of a kibbutz conducted in the early to mid 1970s when Israel's kibbutz project was still functioning well, noted it was:

“... the fact that no delinquency, sexual aberrations or child neglect are to be found within its domain, that the incidence of emotional disturbances is low, that the physical, intellectual and ethical standards of the pupils are commendable, is a source of encouragement and evidence of substantial achievement. It is also our warrant for attempting to present communal education to a wider public.”

Other research of this nature has found similar conditions on the kibbutz and has offered encouragement to the world for a Utopian future. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz.

Indeed, please do look. It's just the tip of the iceberg. We should be able to continue on this technological trajectory to a point where we can transcend our biological weaknesses without resorting to the ancient scare tactics that have been used for millennium. Instead we can develop technologies and knowledge that allow every individual to see with crystal clarity the boundaries within their own minds as to what are biologically driven desires versus conscious decisions and then evaluate all of the costs and consequences with extreme accuracy of every decision made. We need no assistance in this. Not from the flying spaghetti monster, not from Athena, Zeus, Budha, or any other deity you care to dredge up.

This is a matter of opinion and not some scientifically proven fact. The God of the Bible offers more than just scare tactics. He's provided a detailed plan of action that people can act on today to build a better world.

Of course it requires a disease or virus to exist prior to treatment as predicting every possible outcome of evolution is probably a fairly distant possibility however we are building the tools now that will allow more rapid responses to evolving pathogens such that fewer need suffer with each new strain that emerges. Better tech and communications within the health care industry is already allowing disease experts to quickly identify new emergents and get virologists studying them within weeks of their initial infections. With rapid DNA screening technology we can identify many viruses and bacteria within hours of drawing blood from a patient. A real-time device for virus detection was just approved by the FDA. 10 years ago it would take days or weeks to identify these. 50 years ago we couldn't even do it. 100 years ago, millions of people would die before we could quarantine the population properly. 1000 years ago and before we simply blamed angry gods and demons for these outbreaks. See a trend? Viruses and diseases will be with us for a long time but we are turning the corner on fighting them to a point where they will barely be a noticeable impact on society.

Again, this is your opinion and your hopes and desires. New diseases are always cropping up and they adapt to and become resistant to our newly designed medicines. The last I heard, scientists were saying it would take months to produce an effective bird flu vaccine should it become human to human transmissible, and considerable loss of life would likely occur threatening the very stability of our so-called civilization.

I won't argue whether meat's an optimal nutritional source but it can be safely eaten with little concern for disease assuming it's properly raised, screened and prepared for consumption (same goes for plants). Furthermore plants and animal food sources have many common proteins as they diverged relatively recently from an evolutionary perspective. When our digestive track breaks these proteins down, there is much overlap in the building blocks (amino acids, etc) from a nutritional and energy perspective.

Once we have better data as to what the optimal mix of proteins are for maximum health, we will one day be able to develop technology that can synthesize and recycle these molecules without needing to grow plants or animals. Organic based diets will be a footnote in history books hundreds of years from now.

You shouldn't even attempt to argue in favor of meat eating. I'm totally amazed at how irrational some scientific thinkers can get over a piece of meat or "stray booty" as the Afro-American culture terms it.

Again, you're expressing your hopes and desires for the future. What should we do today about eating meat and sexual immorality? Did you notice ludongbin's post at http://www.imminst.o...&...st&p=219800?

Edited by elijah3, 20 January 2008 - 07:38 PM.

[william7]

[maestro949]

This is a matter of opinion and not some scientifically proven fact .... Again, this is your opinion and your hopes and desires.

Hah! The irony. You're arguing from a faith perspective presenting a roadmap from some supposed diety. I am proposing one based on rational thought and the use of human ingenuity, one that excludes the need for any mythical constructs. And these aren't simply my hopes and desires as this is the progress curve that much of the advanced world is traversing - like it or not. Treatments and rapid detection technology for disease detection are being developed, people are living longer (even your meat eating immoral homosexuals) and healthier, viruses are slowly being eradicated. These are not merely hopes and desires, they are happening as we speak, without your kibbutzes, communes, Armageddons, demons and all the other nonsense you promote. My hope and desire that human suffering is eliminated and I can see a clear path forward without any metaphysical assistance. No aliens, no supernatural powers but rather by continuing to gather data from the world around us and then engineering the technology to make it happen.

[synaesthetic]

God told me that the bible was written by men as a faith and fear control mechanism to influence the population. He also told me to have doubt instead of relying on blind faith in order to be able to think critically. He also told me that he's just a figment of my imagination.

[Matt81]

Great ... another religious fundamentalist.

This time I'm just going to node my head in agreement hoping they will see their fallacy.

Yes, God created the Earth in 6000 years.
Yes Adam and Eve were real.
Yes heaven is real and with an infinite amount of chocolate.
Yes God has a plan to make us all immortal.
Yes the Earth will be destroyed by a six headed monster.
Yes God loves everyone equally and passionately (except the children which he kills every year from horrible diseases and the people he sends to hell which should be about all of humanity).
Yes Jesus was real and was some how his own father even though there are no historical documentation of him.

And yes the Bible is REAL and TRUE about everything because GOD wrote it, published it and systematically distributed it around the world ... Science, logic, and reasoning are all sin! Praise Jesus!

He did not create it in 6000 years, but the age of Universe is consistent with the Scriptures in that it is plus minus 15 billion years old. Each day mentioned in Genesis 1 equates to a time period (not necessarily equal, the preceding day is twice as long as the following day, called the universal spiral), and if you look close you'll notice the order of appearence of things fits neatly into what science has discovered. If you dig into the original Hebrew you'll find Yahuweh mentions the Big Bang and dinosaurs (great reptiles). Genesis 1 is scientifically accurate, it also portrays the last 6000 years of man's history (example the second day of the separation of the waters (gas clouds in space, and early formation of water on earth) equates to the second millennium where man was wiped out by a flood), and it is also prophetic in nature, that Yahuweh is about to enter His 7th day rest when the Millennium commences soon, but first the Tribulation needs to occur. Scientists also agree that "light" was the first thing to appear as it has the ability to creat matter. Light is the purest form of energy. Also from God's perspective the Universe is also 6 days (24 hour periods) old, just by using Einstein's theory of Relativity to calculate it. Time is not a constant, instead it is a dimension. Time is slower where there is greater energy and matter, at the speed of light time stops (it becomes eternal). Gives new meaning to the phrase "God is Light." At the moment of the Big Bang time ran 0.9 x 10¹² (900,000,000,000) times slower than what earth time does today. Therfore 15,000,000,000 years (+-age of Universe) times 365.25 days per year to get the age of the Universe in days, then divide that by the difference of the rate of time and you get 6 days. The Universe is 6 days old from God's perspective, and 15 billion years old from our perspective looking back in time. You might want to ask how the sun, stars and moon were created on the 4th day, after vegetation was already on the earth, well, once the atmosphere calmed down after being bombarded by asteroids and from volcanic activity and enough oxygen had been formed the heavenly bodies "appeared" through the atmosphere, they could be seen from earth looking up into the heavens. God was telling us that His Son would appear during the 4th millennium as well as many prophets before Him would guide the way.

The problem with the Science vs Creation debate is the people behind it, one trying to prove God and the other trying to disprove. Their agendas are getting in the way, and it doesn't help when Christians haven't the faintest idea what God actually said. They deny the Truth, when it's staring them in the face. They're scared at what they'll find because they think it might lead away from the faith, while the contrary is true, it will lead them to the Truth.

Adam and Eve weren't the first humans on earth, no, they were the first who were given a conscience, the ability to think for themselves, to reason, to understand, to communicate. There were other humans before, as fossils tell us they lived from about 200,000 years ago, but they were similar to animals, they ran on instinct, they were conscious but did not have a conscience, they had limited brain capacity. God breathed into Adam the breathe of life.

The gift of eternal life is just that, a gift. It is only for those who choose to acknowledge Him, love Him, and have a relatonship with Him. This means also having to ask for forgiveness, accepting that He walked amongst man (as Yahushua, errantly known by the name Jesus) and was the one of died in our place. His soul was separated and went to Hades to face judgment on our behalf, was found innocent and so was raised to life. For all those people who choose to live life as they please will simply return to dust, a state of non-existence, like before you were born, God will respect your decision. You won't know God and God won't know you. Going to hell is for those who willingly teach deception, who lead others stray, basically those who join themselves to the enemy and do his job, to deceive. And hell is not burning flames of fire as they church errantly preach, but the fire is a symbol for judgment. In hell there is eternal anguish, the knowing of being eternally separated. As i said, the majority of humans will end up having their souls annihilated, simply going to the grave. There is only one way to live eternally, and that His through Yahushua. All God wants is a relationship with us, He wants us to choose Him, eternal life is for those who want to be with Him. He will not influence your decision, as it is your choice to make. He will call you, in many ways, like maybe reading this post, but if you continue to ignore unfortunately your end will be turning back to dust. The enemy's biggest deception is religion, trying to earn your salvation, doing good works. That is why there are so many religions, from Christianity (yes it can be one), Judaism, Islam, Catholicism, Secular Humanism, Atheism, etc.

We were not created to be eternal, but living for eternity is a gift presented to us... if only we'd accept it.

Yes the Tribulation is soon, and no it's not a 6-headed literal monster (actually a 10 headed monster, representing 10 kings, my guess is the EU). Of those who know Him and His Word they also know the exact date the Tribulation will start and end, let's just say everything is falling into place, as much as the world try deny it. The Tribulation will start soon after a crazy Event, earth will then have to pull itself together, the media will probaby blame the Event on aliens, as they will be duped by the enemy and the political leaders of the day, who themselves are duped.

Yahushua (Jesus) is the most documented person to have ever lived, even according to secular standards. There is no way denying it. Even the eye-witness accounts are historically accurate. You can even find Pontius Pilate's letters in the British Museum concerning Him. Better go tune them He was not real.

As a note: Psalm 83 depicts Islam against Israel, read it and see how accurate the psalm is concerning Islam's wanting to wipe Israel out, to deny it as a nation. Also see how God calls them a whirlwind of dust, haha.

The reason people (children as well) die of horrible things is because of the choices men make, it is a natural consequence for bad decisions. It's not His punishment, but is the result of man's poor choices. God gave us free-will, He will not influence our decisions, He can teach us the right and wrong way, but on our own man will naturally make poor decisions.

The Jews were commanded to wipe out 7 certain tribes completely, of which the didn't, but it serves as the 5 main sins God will becoming to judge the earth, and to wipe man (those not for Him) off it. Adultery, Sacrifice of children, Homosexuality, Blasphemy, and Beastiality. There is more adultery today than ever before, both physically in marriage and spiritually in serving others gods. The tribes of old sacrificed unwanted children (because of sleeping with temple prostitutes) in the arms of a blazing hot statue of Molech in the name of prosperity, which is the same as today's abortions in the name of convenience. Do i need to speak about homosexuality?! Anything other than the Truth is blasphemy, as it speaks against the Truth. You might question me about beastiality, but when the world sleeps with (align themselves to) the Beast (the world leader under the influence of the enemy (the Beast)) during the Tribulation you'll know what i'm speaking about.

All He wants is a relationship with each individual. It does require a set-apart life, which the world don't understand. But it is so wonderful being in a relationship with my Creator, and knowing that I will be living with Him for all eternity.

[Cyberbrain]

Religion demands faith, and faith demands conviction.

If there was even the slightest evidence to support theistic claims, it would not be considered as spiritualism ... it would be science.

So far no scientific paper or book has been published supporting religious dogma. Nor has there been any consensus among the scientific community justifying religion. As for Christianity, aside from the fact it parallels dozens of ancient religions, the bible can either be interpreted as 100% literal or 100% symbolic. There cannot be any personal interpretations of texts written thousands of years ago. That's like saying the Iliad predicted the Iraq war. Aside from its historical origin and political purposes, the reasons for the prosperaty of religion threw time are: 1) to conquer the fear of death; 2) to explain unexplainable phenomena; and 3) to have a connection with a greater good so as to give one hope and purpose in life. The third reason would also serve to increase the tolerance of suffering in life, to condition for benevolence through the promise of an afterlife and to set the standards for ethics and morals in life.

I came up with the idea that religion was in a way a psychological security blanket and removing it would risk inflicting emotional collapse on the vulnerable. I also later learned that this metameme actually goes hand in hand with evolution of our mind: for as soon homo-sapiens developed the ability to conjure imagination, they needed a reason to help explain how the world worked, so what better approach than to say that a God did it? In a way, since the dawn of man, the belief in another world of pure bliss where the self would defy death to live there forever, has simply proved far too great a temptation, I think, for mankind to resist. Thus it came as a realization that if one should seek to remove this blanket they should not do so without first replacing it with an alternative source of ethics.

The metaphysics of dualism , in my view, posits two distinct categories, mind and matter, neither of which can be reduced to the other. Thus the problem I had was how can one explain how mind and matter can influence or affect the other? However before moving on, I would like to mention one epistemological problem that I see when defining real or reality. In truth I believe no one can be certain of reality. So what is reality? What is to distinguish reality from a lucid dream to being awake and could experience carry with it sure criteria to distinguish it from imagination? To make this sort, to me reality is what one perceives with their five senses, whether directly or in directly with tools. Now whether the reality that we perceive is the only one, or the ultimate one or a false one, I cannot say for sure.

However, overall I take reality as nothing more than electrical signals in my mind. It also follows that what we perceive as real can also be redefined as neuro-chemical impulses accruing in our heads. And I believe it is from these electrical cognitive signals that we form facts and are at large able to perform a posteriori deductions. So looking back to atheism, I tried to see how it paralleled my insights on reality. After some time, I distinguished two positions in which one may recognize with if one were an atheist. These two monistic metaphysical theories were materialism and idealism (the philosophical theory that ideas are the only reality). To my surprise these theories were very close, if not the same, to my own theories – for in a way both also presuppose space-time as conditions of existence.

Some people can live quite content without a purpose to life above that of everyday living. Personally, I discovered I cannot live without a philosophy – a wider meaning to life; for there is nothing more desirable to me than to be able to derive the scattered multiplicity of the concepts or principles which had occurred to me in concrete use from my life, and to unite everything in cognition. Philosophy is, as its Greek translation reveals, the love of wisdom. It is a kind of insight into fundamental questions that revolve around our lives. For me, it is also the acquisition of knowledge to form a path way or dogma to follow so that I may not only accomplish my biological purpose in life (that is survival), but to also strive for more profound forms of knowledge and existence.

From what I understand, the goal of human life is survival – we are programmed that way. To increase our ability to survive we must evolve. Science and technology offer us the chance to overcome limitations of the human condition. We can easily also see how the advancement of technology has benefited mankind, and the by the Law of Accelerating Returns (stating that technology will grow exponentially), overcoming these limitations is within our grasp. The transhumanist philosophy I espouse may also be condensed into the three most important corresponding areas of any philosophical system: metaphysics, psychology and ethics. These can also be stated as: what is the nature of the world, the nature of humans, and what is the best way to live? The view that I uphold in correspondence to these three areas is that the world is expanding toward evermore complex structures, forms, and operations; that as conscious life we are imbued with an inborn instinctive drive to expand our abilities in pursuit of ever increasing survivability and well-being. Thus it is in our greatest interest to foster this drive by continually striving to expand our capacities throughout life and therefore by acting in harmony with the essential nature of the evolutionary process we may one day discover a new sense of purpose, direction and meaning.

[speda1]

Yes Jesus was real and was some how his own father even though there are no historical documentation of him.

Just a minor correction, Flavius Josephus does make some mention of Jesus (nothing too significant). The point is the same though, Jesus was not a prominant historical figure (except for the major religion that bears his name).

[mentatpsi]

Great ... another religious fundamentalist.

This time I'm just going to node my head in agreement hoping they will see their fallacy.

Yes, God created the Earth in 6000 years.
Yes Adam and Eve were real.
Yes heaven is real and with an infinite amount of chocolate.
Yes God has a plan to make us all immortal.
Yes the Earth will be destroyed by a six headed monster.
Yes God loves everyone equally and passionately (except the children which he kills every year from horrible diseases and the people he sends to hell which should be about all of humanity).
Yes Jesus was real and was some how his own father even though there are no historical documentation of him.

And yes the Bible is REAL and TRUE about everything because GOD wrote it, published it and systematically distributed it around the world ... Science, logic, and reasoning are all sin! Praise Jesus!

Lol awesome

Thank you greatly... you have now reaffirmed what i have been trying to tell people all along... how can you doubt the bible at all... praise be the bible for not lying to me .

I came up with the idea that religion was in a way a psychological security blanket and removing it would risk inflicting emotional collapse on the vulnerable.

What?! you just contradicted yourself earlier

Hopefully people see this as sarcasm...

The above mentioned is what most people don't realize and it's very sad when you see people begin to critic so openly other religions... yes it's full of shit... yes there's no cohesive logic... but for whatever reason people feel comfortable holding an ancient book's interpretation of existence and absolute values on concepts such as fate, purpose, afterlife. These ideas trap people within dualistic thinking where there are absolutes, and most often create a stagnation rather than any type of progression. But not one atheists can provide any working model as to why we're here (they cannot provide a purpose section in a "Life for Dummies" instructional manual like religion can), science will never be able to tap that question because it retains that it is more an existential issue than an absolute one, turning to sociological and psychological perspectives to determine why the questions exist, and why certain answers exist. But these realities don't provide comfort, they merely answer questions. No i don't support religion, so don't take me to say to be an atheist is wrong... i'm just there needs to be an understanding of people rather than criticizing all the time, especially if you actually hope to solve a global issue. The failure of most atheists is that when they argue against a theist they actually expect facts and inconsistencies found within their holy book of choice to have a general effect on their stance. The only way to really leave religion and dogma is to start questioning, and as Kostas mentioned earlier how can this begin when the major cohesiveness of the fabric of religion is faith. If a being moves towards comfort, what driving force inspires the questioning that moves one away from comfort... more importantly what certainity awaits him on the other side of his act?

Do also note that scientific belief is situated on faith that the reality we perceive and can observe/detect is real rather than illusion (this can't be tested). More importantly even if the universe was an illusion, it hasn't shown any influence on daily living nor on any of the laws governing this universe... therfore it doesn't really make a difference. In this end, Kostas has the most accurate viewpoint of uncertainty but acknowledging what can be tested (empiricism) as more worthy than what must be held together by faith. I also cannot live by just the standards of everyday living, sorry work all day and small quantities of happiness spread throughout the day and night do not equate to a complete existence for me... if all i have to say in the end of my life is that i designed a program that gave my company a great deal of money, held a comfortable position within society, and enjoyed the family life i might still feel my life is deficit of something of greater value (depending on the latter)... i believe there are many elements that make life more enjoyable and what society offers us is but a generic version of life which isn't always the most enjoyable version. So can anyone really attack someone who feels he must add some absolute goals in order to feel his life is more meaningful in hopes of enlightening them?

Edited by mysticpsi, 01 April 2008 - 11:17 PM.

[VictorBjoerk]

Many parts of the bible can provide support for immortality and relentless improvement and technological advances for humans. On friday I will travel abroad to try living in a monastery for 2 weeks following their daily routins and so on.Quite an interesting experience for a 17-year old not particularly church-going guy like me.Let's see what I'll learn from that.

A dogma wide-spread through the world from religion is often that anything that brings pleasure is bad, and the more discomfortable and sacrificing something is the better..........

[Luna]

Ok I just seen it and this is old.
But I must do two things!

1) Agree with live forever, SEEK HELP.

2) MY EYES!

Oh yeah and 3) Sorry topic-starter, I am, and many others here, are being very rude to you probably and closed our minds to preachs in one way or another.

BUT you must see why, I mean, how can anyone believe in a fantasy book? if lord of the rings was based on earth people would have worshipped that book also!

[AdamSummerfield]

To all members:
Obviously, you are all thinkers, so you are asking the question which has plagued man since the beginning. May God Bless Everyone Reading This.

Thank you. (Even though he will perhaps never return to read this...)

He clearly wanted to help us, but the thing is, the Bible-bashers often try to persuade us with completely synthetic statements. They have to start proving things inductively, but when asked to do this, they simply recall past biblical events, which are always, just more synthetic statements.

[forever freedom]

To all members:
Obviously, you are all thinkers, so you are asking the question which has plagued man since the beginning. May God Bless Everyone Reading This.

Thank you. (Even though he will perhaps never return to read this...)

He clearly wanted to help us, but the thing is, the Bible-bashers often try to persuade us with completely synthetic statements. They have to start proving things inductively, but when asked to do this, they simply recall past biblical events, which are always, just more synthetic statements.

Yes. They don't think about their arguments. They just heard, say, their preacher say the arguments and take them for undeniable truth without even taking the time to question and reason them throughoutly. Then they reproduce these exact arguments to other people thinking that these people "can't possibly counter argument that". And when people do counter argument it they just close their ears and think that these people don't know what they're talking about.

That's the way it is, i speak from experience as i used to be just like that.

[Cyberbrain]

He clearly wanted to help us, but the thing is, the Bible-bashers often try to persuade us with completely synthetic statements. They have to start proving things inductively, but when asked to do this, they simply recall past biblical events, which are always, just more synthetic statements.

I know whats you mean. I used to get into a debate with a friend of mine who is a hard core earth creationist and the only thing he said all the time was "God bless you ... GOD bless you!" as if he was trying to tell God to shut me up. I provided countless of scientific and historical evidence against the bible, but my words came in through one ear and out the other. These are good hearted people, but these people are the most naive ignorant humans alive! No matter what you tell them, they'll never change.

I'm constantly telling my friend that 2+2=4 ... but all he's telling me is that 2+2=5 not 4 (this is a reference from 1984).

No amount of evidence and information will change these peoples mind, unless god told them to do so.

And let me tell you, if I hear another bible quote ... I'm going to loose it

[mentatpsi]

These are good hearted people, but these people are the most naive ignorant humans alive! No matter what you tell them, they'll never change.

There must be a way to convince them... maybe? lol...

you should totally read Candide by Voltaire tho, you'd probably love that... i think if anyone had to suffer so much in their lives to the point that any notion of a pacifistic compassionate god would be slowly altered to something like Cthulu of H.P Lovecraft lol... maybe then you could offer them some rationality into a neutral universe, which operates using deterministic laws rather than by the hand of something that has lessons for you to learn. I think people just need a reason for living, and secularization takes away the awe of living unless you know how to do some emotional engineering, the people who bash the bible down your throats are the ones whose psyches are so unstable that they must fill it with notions of a compassionate god... it only works because there's still an idea of an afterlife where those who caused them harm will be judged by an absolute moral system.

Edited by mysticpsi, 29 April 2008 - 07:13 PM.

[eternaltraveler]

I'm talking about generally as a society. If you look at history, you can see how man has become more exploitative and destructive. The ruling classes of the world have most obviously learned to live more luxuriously and oppress those beneath them. And warfare has become more refined and deadly with each war. Since history shows that it's the strong (wicked) that dominate in our corrupt society, it only stands to reason that they would continue to improve on their technique to increase their dominance with increasing longevity.

watch this

http://www.ted.com/i...lks/view/id/163

[william7]

I'm talking about generally as a society. If you look at history, you can see how man has become more exploitative and destructive. The ruling classes of the world have most obviously learned to live more luxuriously and oppress those beneath them. And warfare has become more refined and deadly with each war. Since history shows that it's the strong (wicked) that dominate in our corrupt society, it only stands to reason that they would continue to improve on their technique to increase their dominance with increasing longevity.

watch this

http://www.ted.com/i...lks/view/id/163

Thanks for posting this video. I saw the video some months ago but could only watch the very first part of it. Steven Pinker is a research psychologist with big academic credentials who frequently speaks and writes books for public consumption and profit. He's very influential and slants his views in favor of biological science, atheism, and the status quo. These type of people rarely possess the truth and lead many astray with their false ideas. I'm sure Pinker would support a genetic or pharmaceutical fix for human aggression and sin. There are better and safer solutions than this.

Pinker clearly forgets or purposely ignores the ethnographic record showing a lack of crime and violence in some of the so-called primitive cultures. Take, for example, the Kung bushmen of the Kalahari. See . I just can't see how archaeologists can come up with an accurate body count due to violence during prehistorical and ancient times as claimed in the video. It doesn't seem possible to me.

I noticed Pinker doesn't consider the pain and suffering that comes from poverty, disease, and imprisonment that is obviously attributable to capitalistic exploitation and oppression. It's not just the level of violence and aggression that's threatening to destroy mankind it's the level of ignorance by people in elevated positions over others in society who don't engage in direct or overt violence themselves but tactically instigate or support it instead.