The Religion Discussion

[bluesclues]

Still haven't showed how you didn't get zero, but I'm now officially too fed up of asking to care any more.

How does what you have just said show that belief in God is logical?

because it is a valid perspective that is gained from reasoning. not from evidence per se. but from common knowledge and observation. that line of reasoning explains that matter is dead of its own and thus cannot arbitrarily come to form order out of chaos. it requires an author, a sentient form to create order for a purpose. it defined that sentient creator as existing in a pre-material state. meaning.. pure consciousness. the original decider and first actor. this is God. using will to mold the universe into form and order. so that it can impart a bit of the sea of consciousness that is it's existence to inferior lifeforms within the material world it created. the small amount of consciousness imparted to us is referred to as Spirit or soul. each of us has a little and that is why we can will and manipulate matter... our bodies. without it our bodies would not be animated.

the deeper you study the more u understand the logic behind it. and thats why the majority of the world is centred on the idea of God for thousands of years. because that many people see the reasoning that justifies God. billions upon billions of people. but besides that.. our history, our only history begins with our ancestors who gave us all things including science, agriculture and mathematics also gave us mysticism. and attributed it the source of all things. they accessed metaphysical states and documented their findings. they even documented how to access that state and test it for yourself. but its just not an easy thing. so alot of people just give up saying its impossible. because the majority of people are failing to achieve what is set out for us to do.. we have a fox and grapes scenario. "i cant get it its too hard so its fake."

but i dont believe so. i believe in the ancients. that their wisdom and knowledge is very accurate of our world. they defined all these things, including logic. why is it we take everything that the ancients say and have proven through evidence, but the one thing.. mysticism, is rejected. you need to look into ancient cultures and ull see how wise they really were. i mean there are cultures that perfectly identified binary stars which is impossible to see with the naked eye, and only recently have our most powerful telescopes been able to confirm that they were in fact binary. they already knew the earth was round. they knew all the planets were suspended in the "heavens" and could even point out those planets in the sky. even saying which ones were closer and further.. even though the brighter one may be further. where many may assume because it is the brightest it is closest. great accuracy.

thus i have seen the ancients demonstrate their wisdom time and time again. i believe they are telling the truth on all accounts. not just the parts i want to accept. because its obvious they had an unorthodox or simple means of learning so much about the universe and accomplishing such great feats as they have in the wonders of the world. what do you want me to say if they say "beings from another world taught them how to write". what do u want me to say when they say "the God of this world is not confined or constricted by the rules within it?" makes sense to me. hes not physical. hes invisible because again he existed in the pre-material state of pure consciousness. i dont see why that should be considered silly. especially as we dig deeper we find nothing at the quantum level and beyond. so all of matter is made up out of nothing and that's logical. the visible was created out of the invisible. the universe says so. accept it. its logical. thats just part of the logic behind belief of God. but the mystics said it first... thousands of years ago with no telescope and no microscope.. apparently. how did they do it? guess?

[crock101]

Wow....I've been away too long.
Everyone is free to believe whatever they choose ,that does not make them true.
The real problem starts when laws start getting made to protect those beliefs from honest inquiry...it never ends well

[nareshseep]

My god is the one and only true god...all others are false...and this god have no name.. Repent now or face the sword of truth that will kill all unbelievers...

[desifemlove]

Still haven't showed how you didn't get zero, but I'm now officially too fed up of asking to care any more.

How does what you have just said show that belief in God is logical?

because it is a valid perspective that is gained from reasoning. not from evidence per se. but from common knowledge and observation. that line of reasoning explains that matter is dead of its own and thus cannot arbitrarily come to form order out of chaos. it requires an author, a sentient form to create order for a purpose. it defined that sentient creator as existing in a pre-material state. meaning.. pure consciousness. the original decider and first actor. this is God. using will to mold the universe into form and order. so that it can impart a bit of the sea of consciousness that is it's existence to inferior lifeforms within the material world it created. the small amount of consciousness imparted to us is referred to as Spirit or soul. each of us has a little and that is why we can will and manipulate matter... our bodies. without it our bodies would not be animated.

the deeper you study the more u understand the logic behind it. and thats why the majority of the world is centred on the idea of God for thousands of years. because that many people see the reasoning that justifies God. billions upon billions of people. but besides that.. our history, our only history begins with our ancestors who gave us all things including science, agriculture and mathematics also gave us mysticism. and attributed it the source of all things. they accessed metaphysical states and documented their findings. they even documented how to access that state and test it for yourself. but its just not an easy thing. so alot of people just give up saying its impossible. because the majority of people are failing to achieve what is set out for us to do.. we have a fox and grapes scenario. "i cant get it its too hard so its fake."

but i dont believe so. i believe in the ancients. that their wisdom and knowledge is very accurate of our world. they defined all these things, including logic. why is it we take everything that the ancients say and have proven through evidence, but the one thing.. mysticism, is rejected. you need to look into ancient cultures and ull see how wise they really were. i mean there are cultures that perfectly identified binary stars which is impossible to see with the naked eye, and only recently have our most powerful telescopes been able to confirm that they were in fact binary. they already knew the earth was round. they knew all the planets were suspended in the "heavens" and could even point out those planets in the sky. even saying which ones were closer and further.. even though the brighter one may be further. where many may assume because it is the brightest it is closest. great accuracy.

thus i have seen the ancients demonstrate their wisdom time and time again. i believe they are telling the truth on all accounts. not just the parts i want to accept. because its obvious they had an unorthodox or simple means of learning so much about the universe and accomplishing such great feats as they have in the wonders of the world. what do you want me to say if they say "beings from another world taught them how to write". what do u want me to say when they say "the God of this world is not confined or constricted by the rules within it?" makes sense to me. hes not physical. hes invisible because again he existed in the pre-material state of pure consciousness. i dont see why that should be considered silly. especially as we dig deeper we find nothing at the quantum level and beyond. so all of matter is made up out of nothing and that's logical. the visible was created out of the invisible. the universe says so. accept it. its logical. thats just part of the logic behind belief of God. but the mystics said it first... thousands of years ago with no telescope and no microscope.. apparently. how did they do it? guess?

- lack of scientific knowledge

- kings, states and governments. try saying God don't exist in ancient Rome, medieval Europe, or in Ottoman and see how far yuh does get...

some ancients who were just as human as you, I and everybody have no more right to wisdom.

[desifemlove]

no u just hope u could run around in circles dodging forever. we past all that.

the standing question now is..

would you say that language is based on logic?

or

do you agree with the statement "language is based on logic"?

taking note that that was pretty obvious.. and u dodged it completely with a set of rambling. regarding the dishonesty.. seems like a case of the pot calling the kettle black because that is the question ive been tryin to ask u for numerous posts and u keep dodging it. so who is dishonest and who keeps dodging and trying to change the topic?

Language is simply for communication using commonly agreed rules. So yes, it uses logic.

[Slartibartfast]

Hmmmmm.... I concur... Language is based on logic but it is NOT a form of logic. Just like The Matrix was based on science but it was not a type of science

[bluesclues]

Hmmmmm.... I concur... Language is based on logic but it is NOT a form of logic. Just like The Matrix was based on science but it was not a type of science

im just showing how different perspectives can shine a light on a truth that was not apparent from a previous perspective. one perspective does not show that language is based on logic.. meaning that from that perspective only assumption can give the statement weight. but from another perspective, reasoning can act as evidence and reveal a logical conclusion.

it is true that though a logical assertion may be valid, it may not actually be occuring in a way that can be tangibly verified. but until that is demonstrated, it stands as a logical possibility. thus saying the existence of God is an illogical assertion would be quite incorrect. because it is founded on logical patterns that can be gleaned through reasoning. using the constructs of language itself. reasoning thus uses evidence of various natures to create logical assertions.

but we always meet up that chicken and egg paradox. whether it be through science or through reasoning. this does not invalidate one or the other. but shows that both are at least equally relevant.

[MD Marketers]

Hmmmmm.... I concur... Language is based on logic but it is NOT a form of logic. Just like The Matrix was based on science but it was not a type of science

im just showing how different perspectives can shine a light on a truth that was not apparent from a previous perspective. one perspective does not show that language is based on logic.. meaning that from that perspective only assumption can give the statement weight. but from another perspective, reasoning can act as evidence and reveal a logical conclusion.

it is true that though a logical assertion may be valid, it may not actually be occuring in a way that can be tangibly verified. but until that is demonstrated, it stands as a logical possibility. thus saying the existence of God is an illogical assertion would be quite incorrect. because it is founded on logical patterns that can be gleaned through reasoning. using the constructs of language itself. reasoning thus uses evidence of various natures to create logical assertions.

but we always meet up that chicken and egg paradox. whether it be through science or through reasoning. this does not invalidate one or the other. but shows that both are at least equally relevant.

What logical patterns have you found to prove the existence of God?
Can you show us these logical patterns?
Are these patterns so regular that the possibility of them being something other than divine intervention is low?
I assure you if the probability that God exists far exceeds the probability that he doesn't then I will be inclined to believe in his existence.
I would have some choice words for him too.

[BoxEater]

religion is a fabrication made to enslave the mind.....money is a fabrication made to enslave the body......progression of the human intellect cannot stop......from the ages of the caveman wondering what is the moon.......to the day the same humans set foot on the moon......

so to we as a species will evolve and the future will forever remain uncertain.............

[York]

religion is a fabrication made to enslave the mind.....money is a fabrication made to enslave the body......progression of the human intellect cannot stop......from the ages of the caveman wondering what is the moon.......to the day the same humans set foot on the moon......

so to we as a species will evolve and the future will forever remain uncertain.............

when you evolve to free your body, pm me...i will take your money with a smile!

[nareshseep]

The great giant pum pum in the sky gave birth to all that is... and will be,,, Repent now and you will live inside it...

[Slartibartfast]

it is true that though a logical assertion may be valid, it may not actually be occuring in a way that can be tangibly verified. but until that is demonstrated, it stands as a logical possibility. thus saying the existence of God is an illogical assertion would be quite incorrect. because it is founded on logical patterns that can be gleaned through reasoning. using the constructs of language itself. reasoning thus uses evidence of various natures to create logical assertions.

By that logic the non-existence is god is also a possibility and thus saying it is an illogical assertion would also be quite incorrect.

This is why assertions with no proof are irrelevant. They do not prove anything. (Also note that the assertion of the existence of God has been proven illogical. See the post where I destroy tye argument put forth by what Habit considers one of the greatest philosophers to ever walk this earth)

Would you believe me if I said I was God? It is a definite possibility. Would you believe me? If not, why not?

[bluesclues]

On the contrary there is no logical assertion that can be demonstrated through reasoning for the non-existence of God. If there is, please demonstrate it.

U would have to demonstrate areas where it can be seen that sentience develops from non-sentience. Which is illogical. But is what atheists hope for science to assist them in proving.

[Slartibartfast]

Sigh. .. I feel like you are still stuck on the most basic of concepts.

So by your logic it is illogical to say that there is no dragon in Carl Sagan's garage?

Look up that absurd argument and read up on the burden of proof. You are arguing basic points that have been disproven several times before.

[bluesclues]

Sigh. .. I feel like you are still stuck on the most basic of concepts.

So by your logic it is illogical to say that there is no dragon in Carl Sagan's garage?

Look up that absurd argument and read up on the burden of proof. You are arguing basic points that have been disproven several times before.

Ill reiterate. There is logical and fully supported reasoning for all the claims of human possibility by mystical scripts.

There is no reasoning that can show even by gaining from various sources of similar occurences that sentience can arise from inanimate dead objects. It does not happen. Mystical logic begins... logically with asserting that sentience existed previously and created and molded matter to form the universe.

Demonstrate your logic which shows a possible way in which sentience can arise from dead inanimate objects. It has even failed in the lab. With manual construction of a cell or tissue in the lab produces DEAD BOTH. Even though structured they contain no life. Thus it is illogical to believe, or assert that sentience is a product of the assembly of matter in specific ways. Matter also cannot assemble itself into such complex organisms as humans or animals. It requires an assembler, a designer. This designer posesses sentience. And this is logical by all that we have scientifically discerned so far.

[bluefete]

NASA bans the word 'Jesus'

By Todd Starnes Published February 08, 2016 FoxNews.com

The name of Jesus is not welcome in the Johnson Space Center newsletter, according to a complaint filed on behalf of a group of Christians who work for NASA.

The JSC Praise & Worship Club was directed by NASA attorneys to refrain from using the name ‘Jesus’ in club announcements that appeared in a Space Center newsletter.

Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch – a must-read for Conservatives!

“It was shocking to all of us and very frustrating,” NASA engineer Sophia Smith told me. “NASA has a long history of respecting religious speech. Why wouldn’t they allow us to put the name Jesus in the announcement about our club?”

Liberty Institute, one of the nation’s largest religious liberty law firms, threatened to file a federal lawsuit unless NASA apologizes and stops censoring the name ‘Jesus’.

The JSC Today newsletter is distributed electronically and includes a number of Space Center events – from salsa dancing lessons to soccer camp.

NASA issued a statement late Monday – that did not refute Liberty Institute’s charge.

“NASA does not prohibit the use of any specific religious names in employee newsletters or other internal communications. The agency allows a host of employee-led civic, professional, religious and other organizations to meet on NASA property on employee’s own time. Consistent with federal law, NASA attempts to balance employee’s rights to freely exercise religious beliefs with its obligation to ensure there is no government endorsement of religion. We believe in and encourage open and diverse dialogue among our employees and across the agency.”

Since 2001, employees had gathered during their lunch hour to pray and sing and read the Bible. There had been no censorship issues until last year.

Liberty Institute attorney Jeremy Dys told me the club had placed an announcement in the Space Center’s newsletter – announcing the theme of their meeting, “Jesus is our life.”

Following is the complete posting that appeared in the May 28, 2015 edition of JSC Today:

Join with the praise and worship band “Allied with the Lord” for a refreshing set of spring praise and worship songs on Thursday, June 4, from 11:15 a.m. to noon in Building 57, Room 106. (The theme for this session will be “Jesus is our life!”) Prayer partners will be available for anyone who has need. All JSC civil servants and contractors are welcome.

“Soon after that, the legal department called the organizers and told them they could not use the name Jesus in their announcements,” Dys told me. “They said, no Jesus.”

Click here to get the Todd Starnes Podcast – indepth interviews with conservative newsmakers!

The club’s leadership was told that “NASA would be censoring all future club announcements that featured the name, ‘Jesus’,” Liberty Institute alleged in its complaint letter.

NASA’s legal department explained that including the name ‘Jesus’ within the club’s announcement made that announcement “sectarian” or “denominational.”

They also alleged such announcements would cause NASA to violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Dys said the club organizers offered to provide a disclaimer, notifying readers that the announcement was private speech and was not endorsed by NASA or any other government agency. However, that offer was rejected as “insufficient.”

“The club members knew right away that NASA was censoring them and they were not comfortable with that,” Dys told me.

And so began a long process to resolve the matter.

“The bottom line is that NASA should not be censoring this club just because they use the name ‘Jesus’ in an employee advertisement,” Dys told me. “That is blatant religious discrimination.”

And NASA’s behavior is quite frankly baffling.

On Christmas Eve, 1968 – the crew of Apollo 8 read the Creation story as they orbited the moon. Astronauts Jim Lovell, Frank Borman and Bill Anders took turns reading from the Book of Genesis.

NASA defended the astronauts after atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair filed a federal lawsuit. The Supreme Court dismissed the suit due to lack of jurisdiction.

And astronaut Buzz Aldrin received communion on the lunar surface during the 1969 Apollo 11 mission.

“NASA should continue its tradition of protecting the great religious expression of its employees,” Dys told me.

I’m not quite sure why NASA is getting all worked up over a group of scientists and engineers who want to worship Jesus.

If they can worship the Almighty in Outer Space, they ought to be able to worship Him back on Earth.

After all, He is the Maker of Heaven and Earth.

Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

[crock101]

Religious people aren't necessarily all insane ,but they do seem to share some of the same traits as the mentally deranged .having Conversations with imaginary friends is not normal nor is it a sign of a healthy mental state.

[Habit7]

Religious people aren't necessarily all insane ,but they do seem to share some of the same traits as the mentally deranged .having Conversations with imaginary friends is not normal nor is it a sign of a healthy mental state.

As an atheist, you have no reference for an objective normal mental state.

Is believing that the world popped into existence with no causal nature greater than it, a normal mental state?

[brainchild]

Just for the record atheist are not a group like Christians, Muslims, cub scouts etc. Therefore there is no shared belief where creation etc is concerned. None of us really know how the universe came to be, just because a story (and I say story because theories are actually accompanied by some sort of data, evidence etc) was put forward and some people chose to believe it in all its ridiculous splendor, that does not make them right or sane for that matter.

[bluefete]

Until atheists / scientists can tell me what caused the Big Bang, I will kepebelieving in God.

[Habit7]

Just for the record atheist are not a group like

They are a group, and for you to reference them as a group refutes what you are saying. They are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins. In the same way theists are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins.

[meccalli]

Until atheists / scientists can tell me what caused the Big Bang, I will kepebelieving in God.

If only they could prove that fairy tale of a big bang occurring in the first instance, yet alone what was its origin.
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantu ... verse.html

[bluesclues]

Religious people aren't necessarily all insane ,but they do seem to share some of the same traits as the mentally deranged .having Conversations with imaginary friends is not normal nor is it a sign of a healthy mental state.

unfortunately for the point you were hoping to make, your statement is also not scientifically founded. in fact.. ppl who have imaginary friends and talk to themselves may be smarter than those who do not.. according to science.

http://www.businessinsider.com/talking- ... ter-2012-4

http://www.lifehack.org/334241/why-peop ... scientists

[brainchild]

Just for the record atheist are not a group like

They are a group, and for you to reference them as a group refutes what you are saying. They are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins. In the same way theists are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins.

Atheist simply means you don't believe in god...that's the only similarity. I have met many atheist with varying views on creation morals etc. So I was jus saying that you can't automatically assume that once a person is an atheist they believe in the big bang.
Also I don't know where u saw me reference them as a group.

[Habit7]

Just for the record atheist are not a group like

They are a group, and for you to reference them as a group refutes what you are saying. They are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins. In the same way theists are grouped by their theological view, not their view on origins.

Atheist simply means you don't believe in god...that's the only similarity. I have met many atheist with varying views on creation morals etc. So I was jus saying that you can't automatically assume that once a person is an atheist they believe in the big bang.
Also I don't know where u saw me reference them as a group.

I never said all atheists believe in the Big Bang, I never even mentioned the Big Bang.

[brainchild]

My statement was actually a reply to bluefete concerning the big bang

[Slartibartfast]

Mystical logic begins... logically with asserting that sentience existed previously and created and molded matter to form the universe.

And what warrants this beginning assertion upon which all mysticism is based?

You just made my point for me. Mysticism is founded upon an unwarranted assertion.

[crock101]

I find it wonderful that people of one religious denomination can see the crazy things in other people's religion while being completely blind to the crazy things in their own religion.The level of hypocrisy is mind boggling.
The mental delusions of one person is no more fact when a group shares the delusion.
Astrologers aren't taken seriously in the modern world, simply because it is clear that that are frauds , when you say to me that you believe in astrology you immediately get laughed at .
When you say to me that you believe in talking donkeys,talking snakes, flying monkeys,flying horses and Jewish zombies who magically turn to crackers , you have left me no choice but hold my belly as I roll on the ground laughing.
I have heard the stories and I have chosen not to subscribe to them and that single decision classifies me as an atheist.
You deserve the same respect of any other charlatan in society.

[Habit7]

If the evidence suggests that it was aliens who seeded life on earth I would go with it ,as long as the evidence was sound ,whether I liked the idea or not.

You are already open to the improbable, aren't you being hypocritical?

[bluesclues]

Mystical logic begins... logically with asserting that sentience existed previously and created and molded matter to form the universe.

And what warrants this beginning assertion upon which all mysticism is based?

You just made my point for me. Mysticism is founded upon an unwarranted assertion.

Well for one... they were actually around in the beginning... and these are the documentations they left for us.

U must recognize how weak your personal opinion or testimony would be.

James saw a man commit a murder on marley street in a black trench coat. You were in a bar 5000 miles away watching football when it happened yet you are able to tell that james is lying. Whose report should the police take? Yours? From a rumshop stool chair point of view?