Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You can choose to question your beliefs, to truly measure them against evidence and to actually analyse the data. You can look at how myths came about, you can think about whether what you see or hear from pastors and preachers is actually real or whether it's subtle brainwashing.
If you choose to really question your belief system you can change what you hold as the truth.
We as humans don't bother doing much analysis about anything. That is why we hold dear to outdated belief systems and that is why we choose to stick with the dogma we know.
One can't simply change overnight, however I know from experience that over time, our mind can evolve and accept new ideas and ultimately a whole new state of mind.
I have experienced a shift to atheism through this very method.
Would you admit that you could be wrong? OR that you could possibly have a change of mind in the future?
Nope, I just disagree that they're mystical immaterial things floating around in the ether. They're a normal physical process of the brain, kind of like digestion is a normal physical process of the stomach. They both have measurable physical effects even though we can't pick up and measure out a pound of mind or digestion.
So even though we can't physically measure the mind or digestion, which means that science actually cannot test it, you believe in it? You believe in the mind and digestion even though we don't have physical proof.
Quote:
Science says the mind can't possibly be explained as a physical process? References to peer reviewed publications, please.
And the soul, spirit, and God cannot be explained as a physical process.
Quote:
So it's not easy and we can't do it now. Doesn't mean it's impossible. What's your point, exactly?
My point is that our scientific abilities are no where near what they will be 50, 100, or even 200 years from now. Just because we cannot find proof for something does not mean that it isn't plausible.
Quote:
This doesn't follow. It's not easy to build a modern computer. Therefore it's more than silicon, copper and electrical responses? Somehow I don't see this line of thinking as convincing. It's just another variety of the god of the gaps - poking and prodding to stuff magical beliefs into the current gaps in our knowledge. That's never been a particularly successful approach in the past and I don't see the prospects getting any better any time soon.
Now how about answering my question - do gods interact with the natural universe, or are the totally absent from it?
Well, I don't believe in a god in the sense say a christian would. I believe in a source or energy that everything is made of. In a sense, we are all "God" or source. So yes, I believe that this source interacts with the natural universe at it's basic level.
My good book? What book is this? My religion doesn't have a book. I am not a Christian or any other modern religion.
Quote:
You...
Demanding "empirical evidence."
The concept of empirical evidence is not limited to atheists.
Quote:
Many is not necessarily most. Don't be easily diverted to false conclusions.
Many still leads people to believe that the majority do this. This is false, the majority of the religious community do not go around preaching and trying to convert the masses.
Quote:
Thank you.
You're Welcome. I don't see the point of forcing people to believe what you do. Allow them to come to the belief themselves and help them if asked is the only way to do it.
EXACTLY! Where's your empirical evidence for the existence of god? You have NONE, or it would be widely known already.
Well, first I don't believe in a God in the modern sense. I believe that we are all connected on a basic level of energy, we are also all connected to everything around us. This basic connection is the source of all life and physical objects.
We can subject the mind to scientific testing. I can test your memory, how fast you can multiply two numbers, I can isolate the mental techniques your mind uses to create depth perception, and many, many more things.
We know the mind exists. Seriously, folks, you need to start reading about neuropsychology. In limited applications, we can even tell when you are lying, by looking solely at your brain activity. The more you know, the more convinced one becomes that our minds are simply a function of our brains.
My good book? What book is this? My religion doesn't have a book. I am not a Christian or any other modern religion.
Then why ask me questions about your faith?
Quote:
The concept of empirical evidence is not limited to atheists.
Demanding empirical evidence is the anithesis of faith.
Quote:
Many still leads people to believe that the majority do this.
Being a nonbeliever, I don't lead anyone to believe anything.
Quote:
This is false, the majority of the religious community do not go around preaching and trying to convert the masses.
But many do.
Quote:
You're Welcome. I don't see the point of forcing people to believe what you do. Allow them to come to the belief themselves and help them if asked is the only way to do it.
So, basically you are saying that we have to provide the proof because our position deviates from the popular opinion?
It would be mitigating the overwhelming dominance of the concept of "God Exists" to call it "popular opinion".
"God Exists" has been sooooooo prolific, for sooooooo long...it can be considered a "Standard of Human Understanding".
So, to answer your question: YES...when "popular opinion" reaches a "saturation point" that is to such a degree that it is considered to be "The Standard"...a position that deviates from that will have to prove itself to be given merit against the long established standard.
Just like Galileo had to PROVE the universe DOES NOT revolve around the Earth, since that concept was in opposition to the "long established standard" that it did...the Atheists will have to PROVE God DOES NOT exist, if they want their concept to be accepted as valid.
BTW...good luck with that. It will be much harder for you than it was for Galileo...since he was right, and you are wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
