Topic: Health and Religion - page 78. (Read 211012 times)

And I congratulate you on your choice. If it is right for you.... then all the power to you.

You for one are not trying to prove the existence of your god to me.

Interesting that you show your own history and how you belief it was detrimental to you, and I am sorry for you on that point. However, throughout history there has been occasions when the opposite has also occurred.

"The Crusades" served the same purpose that they fought for their belief against others who did not share their belief.

Until a single god can ever be proven as the one and only god, then they are all placed in the same basket..... no true.

I am sure you will argue this point, however, you will need to prove to me that your god is the one and only god for me to believe.

Until then, religion is based on faith to the individual..... nothing more.

I am that I am. I chose.

My return to God from nihilistic positions, that engulfed the West like a cancer took several years, Stats. And it has to some degree purely rational basis. I witnessed time and time again "scientists", who tried to understand desert by counting every single stone in it. It was not problem of the methodology, but of their choices, of their resignation on any non-materialistic argument. Without faith in what you do, all your work loses purpose besides feeding you. Degrading you in process from human being created in His image to something more akin to beast with large cranial capacity.

Faith forms culture, culture forms civilization. Civilization gives a Man purpose. When the faith dies, so does the culture and when culture is replaced civilization ends. Then men start to die. - Patrick Buchanan

Even atheist or rather agnostic greatly benefits from moral compass of religion and faith, as it provides for social stability, hope and drive. Giving entire culture what could be described as "soul". Marxists like Fromm and Freud understood this, as did scientists like Darwin and Newton.

I come from the most agnostic, godless place on planet, Stats. And I have witnessed how the place, without faith that formed its culture for the past millenia, slowly turned to Animals farm. Youngest being the hardest hit. Every generation in western Europe is now by full third (!) smaller than the previous one despite peace and welfare and health care. As I saw with my compatriots at foreign owned factories, women sell themselves to highest bidder, while men spend all their income on gambling and paying back high interest loans. Sounds almost like Bitcointalk, right? They dont do it for any purpose, but to feed themselves.

From industrial heart of Europe, into place full of aging, fearful corporate slaves, that wait for highest bidder. Fukuyama was indeed right, his "Last men" cannot be fought on battlefield by "barbarians". However, these "Last men" that I turned my back to also fail to do most most basic of things, that Darwin demands of victors in evolutionary race. Offspring. Because they have only interests, not beliefs. As did Greco-Romans before their demise.

Thats one of the points, why I personally chose to become "born again". I have grown up among secular liberals, saw their fashionable cults masquerading pointless materialism. And saw it for what it is. Nails to the coffin of our culture. I would hate the sight of my children as the "Last men".

If secular liberalism has any future, than why its adherents arent even able to replenish their own numbers? I already mentioned, that sir Darwin was anglican, yes? Well, atheists love to turn to him as a reference aswell. Will you? For a materialistic proof, friend.



Stats, you can look at the following as a list of developed, secular countries. Or as a graveyeard of their respective cultures and tribes. It is your choice. Guess, where is my homeland on the list? The very existence of these facts disprove that you can build anything that survives you on reason alone. It is against human nature. And therefore "science" aswell.

Since you won't accept the proof of science, and since you won't except the evidence of your own eyes when they behold nature, and since you won't accept the eye witness reports of the Bible, you are simply in denial for your own reasons.

Since you don't provide proof, and since you continue to only provide evidence which is based on your own assumptions, and you believe a fantasy novel as proof, you are simply in denial for your own reasons.

Since you won't accept the proof of science, and since you won't except the evidence of your own eyes when they behold nature, and since you won't accept the eye witness reports of the Bible, you are simply in denial for your own reasons.

Hi everyone,
I have sought to answer the GOD question for a long time and the evidence convinced me that humanism is false, this realization changes the game for the GOD question.

Survival of the personality is borne out by physical evidence, but atheists rarely know very much about this evidence. In my posts I have presented over 100 pieces of evidence that suggest survival, to start with, the skeptic can investigate the top 20 spirit-contact cases and the top 20 reincarnation cases:
http://www.aeces.info/Top40/top40-main.shtml
Then there is 20 more reincarnation cases, from one researcher:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_Cases_Suggestive_of_Reincarnation

This evidence could be key to a proof of GOD; consider this:
All rational atheists are humanists since what else could they be?
There are only 2 possible answers to the god(s) question (yes or no--theism or atheism).
Humanism is strictly opposed to the survival hypothesis, but the evidence strongly suggests survival and therefore theism.

Philosophical materialism is not an updated theory of mind, it is not capable of addressing the evidence and that is why physicalism was rejected by these eminent researchers:

https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers

Some key points of evidence out of 100+ presented;

The transcendent nature of minds in NDEs corresponds with physics:
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a23
Skeptical arguments against NDEs are not valid:
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a35

The basic premises of my argument is that BADecker, and those like him make claims of his god being reality.

If this is the case, prove it.... don't show links to assumptions and then ignore when others disprove.

My belief is that no god can be proven, nor disproven..... I chose to not believe.

But if other's claim their god is real..... then prove it.

You have not provided proof.

Provide me with some and we can discuss further.

Stats,

I see you have a problem with way BADecker interperts holy Gospel, not with faith in and of itself. Even if I dont agree with every word he writes here, its not him that throws hateful insults at his opponents. On this forum, at time I could swear I am witnessing rally of bolsheviks ready to send any and all opponents of their nihilistic ideas to gulags. I will defend right of BADecker to say what he wishes to say. It were afterall protestants, not marxists, who in the name of God laid written foundation to freedom of consience and free speech. Concepts peculiar to western civilization.

"show me the proof" Your existence and the gift of free will that elevated you above mere animal is too small a proof for you? Or you consider that meaningless and granted?

If experience of Moses on mount Sinai is just made up story, why wasnt it confined to bedtime stories of ancient Jews and become known all over the world? In 30 AD mere forty men and women understood message of Jesus Christ. In the next 300 years "made up story" became after generations of state oppresion religion of 40 million. And eventually 2 billion of souls.

So tell me. Why Christianity and not any other, if we are talking about "made up" stories? What makes its message so special to all the people around the World, that it not only survived all human flaws and alternative views but also militant atheism? How and why did Christianity among competition not only survive but grow to form up culture, that build civilization spanning all continents? Eventually embracing democracy aswell.

There is your proof. We, all of us are the proof. You can choose to ignore us, the laws of Nature aswell as any grand purpose to it all, but you cannot deny our existence in rational matter.


The first is good question and ultimately dependant upon individual. We were granted free will to choose how and even if we embrace word of God or turn out back on Him. The second question represents false dilemma as believer does both to the best of his or her heart and means.

Since you only believe what you want to believe, there is no way to prove the existence of God to you. Rather than have proof knowledge, you want to believe whatever you want to believe, whether or not it is correct.

Since I have shown science proof of God that has been known ever since science has been around, you are proving to reject science.

The next best proof is nature, and then the Bible witness. Since you reject all these, you are holding yourself up to be better than science and witnesses and nature. What proof do you have that you are better than these?

I have no drama  with people following religion...... I have problem when they tell me it is the truth and condemn me for the life I choose.

Show me the proof of your god before trying to tell me that I am wrong. I have never said any person here is living their life wrong.... I just expect some proof to their points they raise. Real proof..... not BADecker's assumptions.

The Bible an account of witnesses.......

When your God and Moses spoke on Mount Sinai, there was no-on else present...... how then can the bible be an account of witnesses? It is a fictional story..... nothing more.

The 10 commandments do not worry me at all..... I find some of them to be correct. They are not my commandments, but the do fit with my sense of what is right.

If you say that the bible is open to interpretation, and another says the bible is the word of your god, and the bible says you should follow the word of your god, then who is correct? Do you interpret or follow it implicitly?

If you congratulate people, who inherently understand, that their life is valuable and purposeful, then why do you come here and spend more and more of yours and their time trying to tell them they are wrong?

Do Ten commandments offend you so much?

By the way, nobody here ever wrote that Bible in its present or past state is literal word of God. Rather it is account of past witnesses, who came closer to Him.

Bible is not Quran. It is and should be subject to interpretation, not step by step tutorial.

^^^^^ Religion is NOT completely truth and fact. Why not? Because people don't really understand complete truth, no matter who they are.

There are some things that are truth, fact, reality. Science shows some of these things. Among them are the scientific laws, and what the scientific laws uphold. The scientific laws uphold the fact that God exists, and the fact that the Bible is an impossible to exist book, making it a book that exists by Divine action. Science, also, upholds the fact that science theories are not known to be fact.

When a person believes the subjects that science theories talk about as though they were fact, trusting in them as though they were going to impact his life in a good way, that is religion. Such religion is based on things that are questionable, and are not known to be factual.

When a person bases his belief on God Who is known to be factual, that belief is stronger than belief in science theories that are NOT known to be factual. When the person believes the Bible that is shown to have been designed and set in place by God, that person is believing that his life will be impacted for his benefit, by two things that are known to be factual.

Nobody knows the future for a fact. People who trust what God says, have a religion of hope, because it is based on the facts of God and the Bible. People who trust in science theories should realize that their hope is really very weak, because it is based on things that are not know to be fact.

Will the strength of God-religion always be stronger than the strength of science-religion? Yes. Because a God-religion person understands that God controls every little electron and photon completely. A science-religion based person should realize that science can barely track individual electrons and photons in the lab, but has yet to begin tracking even one of them in nature. Science is not even in the race it is so far behind God.

God-religion is way stronger than science-religion.

@CoinCube...... when I stated that "I figured you to more intelligent than that", this was not an inflammatory claim, nor was it implying a low intelligence. It is simply stating that I thought your intelligence was greater than what I since believe. Should you determine that it was a statement of low intelligence or an inflammatory comment against yourself, then that is by your own thought process and not mine. In essence, your belief in my logical fallacy in that situation is flawed.

You claim that you are defending BADecker's conclusions, yet, his words state "When they believe in something that they do not know is truth and fact, they have religion.". I simply agreed that the comment was correct. This comment alone confirms that BADecker agrees that religion is not truth and fact.

Having read your link, I will concede that my statement of "Religion is all faith.... no truth" I will concede that a level of truth does occur in religion, but only to the individual and/or a core group of people with the same ideology. This does not make it factual for everyone.

I have no issue with a person having faith, in fact I congratulate them on their faith as it is a personal choice they make which best suits them. 

You bring a tear to my eye now that you are growing up BADecker. It is brilliant to see.

You made the perfect statement that you don't need faith to know I am real because I post here. Yet, your God doesn't make a single post.

Thanks for proving your god isn't real.

We have been asking and now you have finally admitted your god isn't real. 

That's the point about faith. Consider:

Imagine something that nobody ever dreamed of ever having existed. Then, try to have faith that it exists. This is difficult.

Science proves that God exists. The Bible and how it was put together prove that God is talking through the Bible. There is proof for this stuff. The thing that we don't have proof for is the promises that God has made to us. We believe these promises through faith.

God/Bible reality is based on fact and proof. Faith is required for accepting the unknown things that God tells us are going to happen.

Quite the contrary. The proof for the existence of God is shown here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.

Research topics on how the Bible developed, and you will see that the Bible is a miracle.

We don't need faith that you, stats, exist. You prove it all the time by posting. But because of WHAT you post, it is extremely difficult to have faith in anything you say.

Trump: ‘Freedom Is Not a Gift From Government — Freedom Is a Gift From God’
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/04/trump-freedom-not-gift-government-freedom-gift-god/

You again misunderstand me stats. I am not defending BADecker he is entirely capable of defending himself.

The reality is I do challenge BADecker when I disagree with what he says. In fact I have done so in this very thread.

What I am doing here is defending BADecker's correct conclusions. The truth of these conclusions rest on their own merit regardless of whatever BADecker has or has not said in the past.


As an aside I also challenge this statement of yours as false. However, unlike the simple logical fallacy above this is a deeper point of contention. If you are interested in why this statement is false I would direct you to the following link.

Debate on Nihilism

Where did I insult and insinuate a low intelligence of BADecker?

I merely pointed out his claim of "When they believe in something that they do not know is truth and fact, they have religion." and the correlation of this comment to his belief in religion.

Nothing more.

Interesting how you take the stance against me, yet have never mentioned the same context when BADecker makes comments about people belonging in mental institutions (funny farm) and having low intelligence.

CoinCube, can I suggest you take a long hard critical look at the way in which BADecker has argued his point, and the language with which he treats others to validate his point before defending him with your righteous comments.