maadmax

A lot of bullshit with no basis in reality. O really, if you have reality figured out please by all means enlighten me. Or if you are like the rest of us mushrooms, maybe you should open the lid and let a little light into your world. ...

Faith doesn't provide any real knowledge other than how to blindly submit to authority. Faith and religious belief may have some seemingly positive effects on your life, but none that you couldn't have achieved on your own. In fact, the "knowledge" that all your sins will be forgiven only encourages sin in my opinion. The real problem is, having that faith is mentally stifling and probably holding you back in other ways you may not realize. If you already think you have the answers to the universe, why continue to search out and seek the real answers? Faith stifles human experience rather than enhancing it in my opinion. The faith that powers Christianity, is the faith to totally shed the ego and all of its baggage. The second birth is a second chance to become like a little child before it has been indoctrinated by self destructive worldly values. Real or not we become transformed through God's Word by the renewing & regeneration of our minds. ...

Actually, no one has given a reason yet other than saying they had an undisclosed mystical experience or just that it makes them feel good. What's funny is that just because people are disagreeing with your imaginary fantasy world, you construe that as some sort of "screaming and hollering" temper tantrum. What's entertaining is that you guys still believe this nonsense in the 21st century. Religion has been in permanent decline since the industrial age began and as science and human progress continue to advance, your iron age mumbo jumbo will inevitably go the way of Zoroastrianism. Faith is the bridge some take to gain access to knowledge and experience that answers previously unanswerable personal questions. The proof of our faith is in the results we see in our lives. ...

Reality based on truth is essential. Nothing else with stand the test of time. That is why science was developed to give us the best possible way to determine the truth about the world around us. This has worked much better then anything else and is why we have the technology we have today. Science is great, I am all for it. Still it is limited to the five avenues of perception. We are much more than science can explain. Give me the scientific explanation for meaning. Searching for meaning is one of lifes most rewarding pursuits. ...

It completely destroys the credibility of religion when believers cannot answer simple questions such as: Why do you believe in your religion? Do you care whether or not it's true? If you ask someone why they believe in evolution, they will likely be able to answer the question. Easy, if logic dictates that there is meaning to the cosmos then one will search for it by any means available. The five senses are a good starting point but there is so much more to reality than just physical impressions. Reality based on truth is essential. Nothing else with stand the test of time. ...

Is this some variation on the theme "We don't understand everything, therefore God exists"? Nope, not understanding something is no reason to conjure up a god to explain it. There is great benefit however in evaluating the entirety of reality including both physical and spiritual parameters and seeking answers.

It's the reason why atheists get so stressed out when others express the facts behind their lack of belief. If they see these facts they may have to think about them, and that may totally break their insecure faith and turn them to the 'dark side'. I don't think atheists doubt their atheism a lot. After all most atheists came to their position by rational thinking. When relis whine about atheist arrogance, they're really whining about the confidence atheists have in their stance towards God. Besides, atheists have usually literally nothing to loose religion wise. Religious folks OTOH have to reconcile talking snakes, world wide floods and water-walking Jews with reality. There are a lot of things that defy explanation and are in need of reconciliation. Quantum physics and general relativity, dark matter and dark energy, ever accelerating expanding universe, why we are here locked in a struggle between good and evil, why some need to put limits on a reality they have no comprehension of. ...

I got it figured out. But since it's a matter of faith, and strictly personal, I don't recruit. Sounds interesting. What do you know that is truth?

I have to wonder about Christian groups who present the Gospel as a means of avoiding future suffering. The real power of the Gospel enables and empowers so that we can live life to the fullest.

From the limited information presented in the video it appears to me that he is an angry, vengeful man who has passed his mental attitude on to his daughter.

Currency should be discontinued as a means of exchange in the US. A lot of problems would be solved with an electronic monetary system. Anyway, I bet God cares more about what is in our hearts than what is on our money.

Scientists don't disprove god. They prove science which explains the world in which we live. Those explanations simply don't require god. Which would be great if that was where atheistic scientists stopped with their explanation of reality. But taking the limited understanding of how physics works and extrapolating it into God does not exist is where science enters into the realm of religion.

Are you trying to say the big bang theory is a religous mythology? Your post doesn't make sense. Not at all. It is currently the best theory explaining how the universe got its start. Problems arise when incomplete knowledge of God by the religious is used to distort science and when incomplete knowledge of science by atheists is used to squelch communion with God. Atheistic scientists who exclude God based on their limited understanding of science are as wrong as those who support religious creation myths. Discussions of the existence of God have no place in the "science class"

I think it's wrong either way. Mythology should not be included in a science class at all. I doesn't matter which creation myth is the local favorite it's still not science. I agree. But to be fair, atheistic scientists should not peddle their religion in " science class" any more that those who believe in Intelligent Design. No one can prove what initiated the creative forces of the big bang singularity

You all keep seeking the irrelevant while ignoring the obvious. The proof you seek will never be produced. The proof of changed lives and unlocked potential is all around you. Faith is just the bridge into a world of limitless real psychological possibilities. If that is your reason for being religious seeking God, then I hope you're extremely open minded to others religions. As they have all seen the changed lived caused by their beliefs and see the world as a result of the things they believe in. It doesn't take the belief in a God to see the beauty in the world, some just don't need to believe something bigger and more powerful created it. Like all conscientious souls, I am trying to make sense out of the chaos. I examine any system of faith or knowledge I can find. It is not difficult to differentiate what is of God and what is of our own creation. ...

You all keep seeking the irrelevant while ignoring the obvious. The proof you seek will never be produced. The proof of changed lives and unlocked potential is all around you. Faith is just the bridge into a world of limitless real psychological possibilities. ...

--I am an engineer with the ability and training to think logically and rationally If you were to apply that same ability and training to other areas of your life, you wouldn't be religious or "spiritual". Nothing supernatural stands up to rational scrutiny. Not true, the search for Truth and meaning is as strong as any of our core instincts. The answer ultimately can only be found in God.

The similarity I see in religions is that they distort the perfected Word of God to consolidate power and control over the masses.

You are confusing internally created meanings in response to questions of faith with physical response to natural stimulus. Do you think our mental capacity developed in response to a need to understand something as arcane as the meaning of life? Any chance it was a far more corporeal need? Such as the need to hunt, gather, communicate, defend the tribe, trade, etc. Agreed, enhanced mental capacity developed for many reasons. But I have observed, after the basic necessities of life are taken care of most of us find ourselves contemplating and searching for the meaning to our existence.

Pretty simple concept evolutionarily speaking. If there wasn't meaning to life we would never have developed the mental capacity to search for it Why not? Nature is not wasteful, everything serves a purpose or it is weeded out of the gene pool.

Him? I know, failing of the English language, God is neither male or female.

Searching for meaning has occupied the minds of the majority of people who have lived on this planet, excluding you of course. So therefore finding it must must be a common attribute of those who reproduce successfully It occurs to me that searching for meaning is a human invention, and has nothing to do with survival or reproduction. Horseshoe crabs, porcupines, and fruitflies seem to have adapted just fine, reproduce sucessfully, and appear to be in no danger of dying off. Pretty simple concept evolutionarily speaking. If there wasn't meaning to life we would never have developed the mental capacity to search for it. Just as if there wasn't any light, we would never have developed eyes to see it. Or if there wasn't sound we would not have developed ears to hear it. We have all of the attributes we need to know God. ...

Your reasoning breaks down on several fronts. First, evolution does not guarantee that every facet of a species represents the best solution for each problem. When an group of species goes too far down a certain path, further generations are sometimes stuck trying to bodge a particular adaptation to fit a completely different set of circumstances. Physiologically this is easy to see, for instance, whales have lungs. Whose great idea was that? Second, even if searching for meaning is an advantageous behaviour this does not show that there is meaning to be found. Your statement that finding meaning is a common attribute of those that reproduce in fact works against your earlier statement that there is an objective meaning to the univerese. Of the many, many completely different 'meanings' that have been found by many, many different sects and creeds over the centuries most of them don't appear to have made any difference whatsoever to the reproductive abilities of the finders. Except for the ones that found meaning in Kool-Aid, obviously. It appears to me that air breathing marine mammals have adapted very well to their particular reality. They are proof that individuals best adapted survive and reproduce. On the other point, I am willing to wait a couple of billion years to see who is right. If God exists those who find Him will be best adapted to survive, if he doesn't then we will just die off. Either way, I am truly thankful for all the blessings God has given me, and can't imagine living my life without Him. ...

Erroneous behaviors that make inefficient use of available resources don't convey a competitive advantage to the individuals that possess them. Therefore they die out. How does searching for meaning impair a human being's reproductive chances? Searching for meaning has occupied the minds of the majority of people who have lived on this planet, excluding you of course. So therefore finding it must must be a common attribute of those who reproduce successfully. The nice thing about evolution is that those best adapted to reality live, the rest just die off. ...

That is quite good.Smile In an evolving universe, if there was no meaning, we would not expend energy trying to find it. Why not? Erroneous behaviors that make inefficient use of available resources don't convey a competitive advantage to the individuals that possess them. Therefore they die out.