Topic: Do you believe in god? - page 150. (Read 316068 times)

There was never equality between people and never will. Religion was invented to control people. What is equality if people fall on their knees before the preacher. I don't believe in God. Religion is a vestige of the past, when there was no state.

I believe in universal God, Parent of all humankind.
I believe that God is parent not only for Christians, but also Buddhists, Hindu, Muslims, Jews, Atheists etc.
If so, it means that we all have one common Parent and therefore we are all part of one global family, brothers and sisters.
When people realized it, wars and conflicts will stop and era of peace and Blessing will start.
It's so sad to see that many believers use religion as tool to attack others, less fortunate people.
God loves us all equally.

But just what if the question refers to a more holistic God context. As in the age-old idea of God. The God beyond all else, the God governing everything. Across diverse religion, do anyone of you believe in that?

No man can divide and conquer quite as effectively as the ethical "Monotheistic God" can. Look at how exceedingly well "Ethical Monotheistic God" has conquered for his kingdom right across the globe, through the religions that originated in the mid east, a multitude of beautifully organized NATURALLY formed indigenous cultures. Look how much more wonderfully integrated and balanced these cultures, who have existed for thousands of years on their own, have become since "God" has enacted his astoundingly magnificent ethical kingdom into their hearts - all across the globe. It is by far the best testament to his abundantly overflowing love and respect for the diversity (of cultures) he himself has ordained eons ago.

The ancients could kill you in a million different ways and give you a million different reasons why it needed to be done. In much of the pre-modern world, ritual sacrifice was framed as necessary for the good of the society at large — the only way to guarantee, say, a plentiful harvest or success in war.

But the priests and rulers who sanctioned such killings may have had another motive, a new study suggests. An analysis of more than seven dozen Austronesian cultures revealed that the practice of human sacrifices tended to make societies increasingly less egalitarian and eventually gave rise to strict, inherited class systems. In other words, ritual killings helped keep the powerful in power and everyone else in check.

That finding might seem intuitive — societies in which some members are habitually killed probably value certain lives over others — but it has broader implications, the researchers said in the journal Nature. It suggests a “darker link between religion and the evolution of modern hierarchical societies,” they write, in which “ritual killings helped humans transition from the small egalitarian groups of our ancestors and the large, stratified societies we live in today.”

The motivation and method of the killings differed across cultures, the researchers explain in a piece for the Conversation: Sacrifices could be demanded for the death of a chief, the construction of a home, the start of a war, the outbreak of disease or the violation of a social taboo. The victims might be strangled, drowned, bludgeoned, burned, buried, crushed with a newly built canoe, or rolled off a roof and then decapitated.

But the link between the sacrifices and social hierarchies seemed to transcend those differences. The victims were almost always of low social status, and the more stratified the culture was, the more prevalent ritual killings were likely to be.

This finding supports the “social control hypothesis” of human sacrifice, the researchers said. This idea suggests that ritual killings are a way to terrorize people into submission, allowing the religious and political leaders (and in many cultures, those were one and the same) who ordered the killings to consolidate power unopposed.

To understand society we need to understand what our options are. There are only two ways to build and sustain a large and complex society. The first is oppression and slavery. Using oppression and slavery one can enforce control through violence. The second and far harder path is to build a free society but this path is challenging and slow as humans are not inherently designed to function in large groups.

 

Elon Musk: Moving Toward Universal Basic Income Due To ... - YouTube
Video for elon musk wants universal income youtube▶ 2:02
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJgtRBkFnfw
4 Nov 2016 - Uploaded by CNBC
Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk told CNBC on Friday that economies would most likely need a form of

Elon Musk - Universal incomes and robots. - YouTube
Video for elon musk wants universal income youtube▶ 9:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJB9FrBQKCs

Basic Income: Has its Time Come? - YouTube
Video for elon musk wants universal income youtube▶ 26:30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhugmXSHdfE

U.S. Congress Discusses AI, Automation, Robotics and Basic Income ...
Video for elon musk wants universal income youtube▶ 1:50:56
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX06f3DPXt4
28 May 2016 - Uploaded by Singularity Lectures

Universal Basic Income - YouTube
Video for elon musk wants universal income youtube▶ 3:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqESogRgrYw
29 Sep 2016 - Uploaded by Inequality Media
Robert Reich explains why a universal basic income may be the answer. Learn...

I believe in us humans to do the right thing..
LETS GET THE OLD THINKERS OUT  ..They kill our children to line there own pockets ..

When people have money they have less children and the children turn out to be good citizens instead of bad ones ..

Popcorn1 you appear to be both an atheist and a moral nihilist. Congratulations your worldview is appears to be rational. However, don't get too cocky.

Remember: Evil is often Rational

I have argued elsewhere that the philosophy of nihilism is not comparable with the sustained growth of knowledge and is thus inherently destructive. However, those arguments are too long and abstract to reproduce in this post. If you wish to read them they start here.

Unfortunately time constraints will prevent me from participating further in this debate. I agree with  
af_newbie that this is indeed a fundamental choice. You can embrace a belief of existential nothingness that is inherently self-destructive or you can choose something better.

Your pick.

On a biological level the purpose in life is to pass your genetic material to future generations.  This is hardwired into all living things, plants and animals.

On a personal level, the purpose of one's live is to enjoy it.  You only got one, so enjoy it in whatever you do.  Believe in some bat shit crazy bronze age stuff or teach people about the evils of religions.

Your pick.

Yes and that's why  no god  ..

Ok lets go a bit deeper looking at this through the worldview of moral nihilism. Moral nihilism is not the deepest form of nihilism but it is the most common.

You say that your purpose in life is to work towards finding another world for humanity to live on.
Lets take a look at your purpose from the perspective of nihilism:

1 ) We want to find a new world so that the human species continues to exist after the sun goes out.
YES WE DO ..
2 ) We want the human species to continue to exist because they represent our genetic descendants and offspring.
YES WE DO ..
3 ) We want our genetic descendants and offspring to survive because we care about them.
YES WE DO ..
4 ) We care about them because evolution selected for this trait.
Evolution because i am a plant or because i am a human? ..
5 ) Evolution is the fitness and selection of life to its environment.
Yes the strongest survive ..
6 ) Life is a self replicating chemical reaction.
100% of neurotransmitters, such as norepinephrine, serotonin, GABA, acetylcholine, aspartate, glutamate, are made of amino acids. 100% of hormones are made up of amino acids. Sex hormones are made up of amino acids plus fat or lipids.
7 ) Chemical reactions are the spontaneous thing that happens when higher energy compounds are converted to lower energy compounds.
If the products are associated with less energy, then the conversion of the reactants to products is a spontaneous process ..
8 ) Spontaneous reactions occur throughout the universe and are ultimately processes of basic physics and chemistry.
YES ..
9 ) Basic physics and chemistry have no value or meaning they just happens to occur.
Basic physics and chemistry have a meaning?.If you add the 2 together you get value?..
Meaning they just happens to occur..What happens to occur?.. Gives you meaning?..

Therefore your "purpose" also has no objective value or meaning it is ultimately just the spontaneous result of simple physics and chemistry.Yes and that's why  no god ..

Personally I entirely disagree with this argument. However, if you are not a moral nihilist you have to prove this argument is false not just say "no its not" or say you don't like it but prove it to be false.

I had a look at the definition of 'rational' on google. Here are what came up under 1: based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
 
down-to-earth,      with no illusions or pretensions; practical and realistic.

Atheism is irrational unless it is absolute nihilism this is simple fact.
I am a non believer but one day we will make our own new world or find another ..

Atheism is irrational unless it is absolute nihilism this is simple fact.?
So what you just said is a lie?.. I have just proved you wrong

Atheism is irrational?..
Make our own new world find another new world.. Is what i say absolute nihilism?..

So as an atheist how am i irrational..

Make our own new world find another new world..A PURPOSE ..

Why do you think i keep saying science is the key to life?..It gives us a purpose..
You wont find it rattling bones praying or voodoo..
we have found out through science one day this planet will blow up or the sun will die?..
What's our purpose?..

So as an atheist what i said is it absolute nihilism..And is it useless to want to find new worlds or make
another?..

"If you're rational you don't get to believe whatever you want to believe.”
― Michael Huemer YOU DO IF IT'S PROVED SO ..

If your rational you would ask for proof..
        Popcorn1 ..