Topic: Health and Religion - page 81. (Read 210871 times)

Train Passengers On Their Way To Work Join In Spontaneous Song

Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xctzp0dp9uc

Right!

There have been studies that show that as much as 1/3 of people who are healed by the medical, are really healed by placebo effect. How much more if religion is believed to be taking part in the healing? How much more if God is taking part in the healing.

There's a strong chance that nothing in life is needed. Possibly, all the manipulations of things that we do and are in life - from driving cars, to doing dishes, to learning, to sleeping, etc. - would not be necessary if placebo effect were strong enough in us. Possibly we could do all kinds of things like teleportation, telekinesis, levitation of self and objects, etc., etc., including having no need for food, water and air, if we only had strong enough placebo effect working and acting in us.

Religion is one of the things that properly "administered" can strengthen placebo effect in us.

Health and religion are closely connected. If someone are capable of following religious principle then health would be Hazard less, every religion offer a pleasant routine for human being.
Religion principle suggest us to live in a happy life. early rise, prayer, seeking work for surviving and come back to family after completing work. All these things suggested by religion.
Mental health is the key of leading healthy life. So religious principle should be followed.

Coincube,

thank you for more information on the subject. I find it rather amusing that agenda of secular liberals in democratic party is and has been for past two decades increasingly dependant upon votes of immigrants, who are very socially conservative. Regardless, if we are talking about catholic hispanics or predominantly muslim middle easterners. The moment these newcomers fully integrate into american society will be the moment they abandon party (unless it cleans itself of marxism), that let them in as it stands in almost direct opposition to their belifs and interests on most social issues.

As cosmopolitan atheists struggle to find answer to this affront, answer might be quite mundane. Natural selection favours people of the Book, who stick to moral compass it provides. People of God.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/

Every individual's or groups subjective truth is constantly tested against the actual Truth of existence. Subjective truth is guaranteed to be incomplete no matter who you are. As BADdecker noted above above.


We do not fully understand Truth but we can observe how well our beliefs serve us across time and space.



An interesting and informative article thanks for sharing.

As an aside some history about the Democratic Party. In 2012 they removed all references to God from their party platform. When they realized this was bad politics they attempted to put a reference to God back in. This required a clear two thirds majority vote. Here is a YouTube video of that vote which had to be called three times.

https://youtu.be/t8BwqzzqcDs

Time already tells,

we have reached high mark of secularization and witness tide turning back.

Kaufmann addressed all those points of National Geographic article and more  

"As Arthur Brooks of Syracuse University recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “if you picked 100 unrelated politically liberal adults at random, you would find that they had, between them, 147 children. If you picked 100 conservatives, you would find 208 kids. That’s a ‘fertility gap’ of 41 per cent. Given that about 80 per cent of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents, this gap translates into lots more little Republicans than little Democrats to vote in future elections."

Yes, from secular point of view you can argue, that non-believers can through apostacy of believers postpone their demographic demise by cannibalizing existing denominations. As has happened in eastern Europe during communism. But you wont solve fundamental problem of self replacement through fertility and you also lack any sort of fail safe (if we discount state terror) to stop returning individuals to their respective faiths.


Did I just catch you writing about "faith"?  

Time will tell if we became extinct or not, we have to have faith that the people on the planet will overpass his diferences and work together for the species.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160422-atheism-agnostic-secular-nones-rising-religion/

I guess if this continues we will see what happens. Either the human species will become extinct or they will procreate and continue to live on.

Time will tell.

Alright.

We can use statistics, we can use socio-economic studies, we can even ask people on the street. Stats, you can pick ANY developed region or country in the world and compare. I can guarantee you, that there isnt developed place where atheists would be atleast able to replace their own population (2.1 children per woman), fertility differences within groups of same socio-economic standing largely reflects how much individuals of said groups rely on faith and moral compass that comes with it. Nominal income or race cannnot explain difference in the rates of reproduction.

Your description of evolutionary process is correct. Stronger thrive and pass on genetic information, while the weak remove themselves from the gene pool. It can and is aswell used to evaluate cultures, private bussiness and ideologies.

What if absense of faith is a sign of weakness putting its adherents at vast disadvantage?

Mr. Kaufmann, author of the article is professor of politology at University of London. Hardly someone we could call religious fundamentalist.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/breedingforgod

Firstly, I do not believe I am totally experienced, or intellectually articulate enough to answer, however, I will give you my thoughts on this.

Firstly, as an atheists this does not mean that I have an emphasis on materialism. I simply do not believe in a celestial being or religious being. I

I believe that natural selection is the ability for nature to develop and change the natural resources within it. An example of this is bacteria. It changes and adapts dependent on it's host. If a Doctor gives you an antibiotic course of treatment, and you choose to cease taking them before completing the course, you are effectively helping create stronger bacteria. The bacteria is able to develop it's immunity to the antibiotics as a result of your choice to not continue with the treatment.

To me, this effect through time is therefore part of the evolution process. The changes to the process by which organisms change over time as a result of changes in heritable physical or behavioral traits.

Re-productively, I do not think atheism nor theism can have any impact on extinction. People will question things .... who/what/when/where/why...... they simply place their faith in an answer which is right for them.

Thank you Stats,

for timely and cultivated response. And rest assured, that I indeed do not seek to "make you believe", if you understand why protestants fought for freedom of conscience, then you know similar actions would be tantamount to heresy, depriving you the free will we were all born with.

First, let me address the Crusades. Then after that I have a question for you, that I hope you will think about. Dont feel compelled to answer it, if you do not want to. Just think, thats all I will ask.

Crusades in Christianity, like Jihad in Islam had originally noble creed. For years pilgrims to Holy land aswell as locals of all faiths were victims of bandits, of rape and murder. Crusades were reaction, call to arms to all Gods children to restore dignity and faith into final resting place of Jesus Christ, of Moses, of all the great witnesses of the past. Yet at that time, western Christianity was firmly in the clutches of Catholic Church, which for the purpuse of power refused to separate matter and spirit (did you know that celibate was created only to prevent property of Church to be ransacked by offspring of clerics?). In essence, some of the crusaders become the very men they came to punish. As they turned from their faith to materialism and profit. Duke Bohemond going as far as leaving rest of the pilgrims while he and his men scaled walls of Antioch, carving new kingdom in the region overnight forgetting completely the purpose they were marching to Holy Land.

You can see the same mistakes happen over and over again, even in the "humanitarian" wars our compatriots wage today. Without keeping spiritualism and materialism apart, the latter consumes the first in the minds of Men of flesh and blood.

Reformation sought with some success to do this. To return to earlier, uncorrupted form of Faith. Most importantly sowing seed of both freedom of speech and separation of church and state as a way to limit corruption. Something we westerners today, take for granted.

Sidenote: Please, keep in mind, that Jews, Christians and Muslims do not talk about their gods they are all people of the book and always refer to the one God. Even, if they may have vastly different practice and refer to Him by different names.

Now, for my question addressed to you.

Why, if atheism by its emphasis upon materialism is the answer, does natural selection discriminates against its adherents all over the world? It always did, as we can see on example of Greco-Roman world, its existence dependant upon tolerance of believers and apostacy. From reproduction point of view, atheism is recipe for extinction.

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.