Btw. When I say yes, I mean she is morally justified in terminating the pregnancy. Hurriedly typed that without editing.
In other words, NO, it is not evil
Reyginus: Lol. I was simply trying to correct his idea on where I'm standing. So tell me, in what way is the man right according to the Christian bible?
Reyginus: Infanticide? No. It is simply killing of a fetus. Now telling me, is killing of a fetus good or bad?
If the mother doesn't want it in her: YES
Reyginus: Yeah. Terminating the creation of God for the glorification of self and not Gos is evil. That's according to the Christian bible. Try Lev 24:17
You said you wouldn't do my work for me, yet you did it for the pastor??
There is a slight difference between your cases and mine. The muslims in your example and the christian in the OP believe themselves to be doing good when they kill. They even broadcast the deeds.
The issue of an absolute Good and Evil, Morality palava, is another whole can of worms that I might get into when I fancy giving myself a headache.
In the case I was discussing though the subject already believes an action to be evil and denounces such action when he sees others doing it, yet he does the same.
If muslims fought against slavery too then they would fit in the case I'm talking about. If they were against war in their rhetoric (maybe they are, I don't know) then they would fit.
No vex as I was likely not clear enough. It's more a major difference, and I recognize and acknowledge that. I was more of debating this
PastorAIO: I don't think that religion in and of itself is a cause of many human evils.
With something like, (as steven weinberg puts it),
oga steve: With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
I agree though, that widens the scope of the discussion a bit. Perhaps we should focus on clowns like that in op
PastorAIO: What other traits of the religious mind might you say you've missed out? I think a couple more have been quite salient over the course of this thread.
Hmmm. Can't say for sure (them sort of plenty, and non immediately stand out to me atm). Very interested in hearing your case please.
Reyginus: Lol. Now you are asking me to do your work for you. I think you should be showing me how his actions are in tandem with that of a Christian according to the bible. Pick any of his many sins and show me.
PastorAIO: I don't think that religion in and of itself is a cause of many human evils.
However I do believe that religion facilitates many evils that lie within man.
The greatest facilitator of all is christianity.
That is why when asked I say that I do practise tenets of christianity but I am not a christian.
I agree about facilitating those with already questionable character, but I would argue the religions themselves also ingrain hypocrisy (among many other ills) into many of their unsuspecting adherents. For instance, many of their tenets, doctrine and what not, are hypocritical, so they're bound to produce adherents that are hypocrites.
consider the average muslim, I'm quite sure, would never accept it just to slave or kill apostates where it not for the fact that he's been conditioned into thinking it's fine by his religion.
they would all concede, at some level, that slavery is fine because uncle mo engaged in it. No exceptions. Not just the ones that are rotten already.
they would all find jihad acceptable as well, of course.
then they'll turn around and tell you they're peaceful. even claim that islam means "peace".....
Note that sure, I can't tell you slavery or jihad is absolutely unacceptable, that would make me just as dogmatic as those I criticize. But they're certainly not acceptable at the low threshold muslims set. Not in most of today's world.
Also, religions like the abrahamics are not the only tool that can program social norms, for sure, but with them we are dealing with what their adherents consider are absolutes.
On another note, I think perhaps historically xtianity takes the cake with regards to facilitating and/or creating folly, but I think Islam is by far the bigger cancer in almost every way in today's world. But that could be just me....of course....
Reyginus: Valid? What exactly did the bible say on this? I think that's what matters.Do you think the bible's command on this is the best? If yes, do we apply it here?
Of course, pick any of his many 'sins' and show me what the Bible has to say on it.
Almost surely a waste of time tho. Very few things are as contradictory as the Bible, and we also have to look at the larger scope of things, not just immediate edicts from the book. In other words, it's not the only thing that matters, albeit it being one of the cardinal. But go ahead, I'll (at least try to) keep an open mind.
Reyginus: No, I don't. I only doubt his understanding.
No vex...time.....
Why do you think his understanding is not valid and yours is??
Btw, do you think he does not consider himself a sinner? His understanding may be more in line with yours than you think. He may be simply looking for redemption, and what better way to please god than to bring his benign justice to those "baby-killers"?
I'll concede you're a pretty cool guy, worrying about us roasting and whatnot in valarya. When are you going to become full blown atheist, I wonder....
It's framed as a question, but I mean the usual; selfish, self-serving, hypocritical etc
Most religious people seem to think the universe literally revolves around them. they're the stars in a cosmic version of big brother and their actions are good. Only their right is right, and god has ordained them to enforce this right. god perhaps may have mercy on anyone who stands in their way, or exact "fair" judgment by roasting them forever.
With the judeoxtians in particular, the above view is very justifiable. Supremacist ideologies with a god to back you up? Well, that's the end result.
And no, "turn the other cheek" and the likes mitigate nothing. the core itself is rotten once it allows for concepts like hell fire, original sin and, of course, the aforementioned supremacy and selfishness. Let's not even get into the OT.
There are more benign religions than the abrahamics, but you find quite a lot of them have its adherents as the stars of the universe.
Btw, can you unequivocally state that the man wasn't being a true xtian?
nytimes:For Robert Dear, Religion and Rage Before Planned Parenthood Attack
The man she had married professed to be deeply religious. But after more than seven years with Robert L. Dear Jr., Barbara Micheau had come to see life with him as a kind of hell on earth.
By January 1993, she had had enough. In a sworn affidavit as part of her divorce case, Ms. Micheau described Mr. Dear as a serial philanderer and a problem gambler, a man who kicked her, beat her head against the floor and fathered two children with other women while they were together. He found excuses for his transgressions, she said, in his idiosyncratic views on Christian eschatology and the nature of salvation.
“He claims to be a Christian and is extremely evangelistic, but does not follow the Bible in his actions,” Ms. Micheau said in the court document. “He says that as long as he believes he will be saved, he can do whatever he pleases. He is obsessed with the world coming to an end.” Continue reading the main story Related Coverage
On Friday, according to officials, Mr. Dear entered a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, killing three people and wounding nine others with a semiautomatic rifle. The attack, which ended with his surrender to the police after a harrowing nationally televised standoff in the snow-dusted Western city, was a brutally violent and very public chapter in a life story whose details are not fully known.
But in court documents and interviews with people who knew Mr. Dear well, a picture emerges of an angry and occasionally violent man who seemed deeply disturbed and deeply contradictory: He was a man of religious conviction who sinned openly, a man who craved both extreme solitude and near-constant female company, a man who successfully wooed women but, some of them say, also abused them. He frequented marijuana websites, then argued with other posters, often through heated religious screeds.
“Turn to JESUS or burn in hell,” he wrote on one site on Oct. 7, 2005. “WAKE UP SINNERS U CANT SAVE YOURSELF U WILL DIE AN WORMS SHALL EAT YOUR FLESH, NOW YOUR SOUL IS GOING SOMEWHERE.”
A number of people who knew Mr. Dear said he was a staunch abortion opponent. Ms. Micheau, 60, said in a brief interview Tuesday that late in her marriage to Mr. Dear, he told her that he had put glue in the locks of a Planned Parenthood location in Charleston.
“He was very proud of himself that he’d gone over and jammed up their locks with glue so that they couldn’t get in,” she said.
But another ex-wife, Pamela Ross, said that he did not obsess on the subject of abortion. After his arrest, Mr. Dear said “no more baby parts” to investigators, a law enforcement official said.
One person who spoke with him extensively about his religious views said Mr. Dear, who is 57, had praised people who attacked abortion providers, saying they were doing “God’s work.” In 2009, said the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concerns for the privacy of the family, Mr. Dear described as “heroes” members of the Army of God, a loosely organized group of anti-abortion extremists that has claimed responsibility for a number of killings and bombings.
Investigators have only just begun to interview Mr. Dear’s relatives and acquaintances, and are still searching the Internet for his writings. Public information about his early years is limited.
Ms. Ross said Mr. Dear had a college degree. He spent a half-year enrolled at the University of Kentucky, and a year at the University of Louisville, according to officials at the two schools.
In December 1979 he married a woman in Louisville, Ky., listed in court records as Kimberly Ann Dear. They had a child, Matthew, in 1980. Three and a half years later, they separated. Mr. Dear moved to Charleston, S.C., which Ms. Ross said was his birthplace. He took a few fast-food management training jobs before landing a position at Santee Cooper, the South Carolina power company. Mollie Gore, a spokeswoman for the company, said he began work there in September 1984.
Mr. Dear also met the woman who would become his second wife, Barbara Ann Mescher, who now goes by her married name, Barbara Micheau. She met him at a shopping mall while she and a girlfriend were admiring a motorcycle on display. He got her number. They went out.
He told her that he was divorced, but in the 1993 affidavit, which was also reported in The Post and Courier of Charleston, she said she later learned he was still married. The divorce from his first wife was completed in September 1985, more than a year after he met Ms. Micheau.
Mr. Dear’s lawyer in Colorado did not respond to messages Tuesday.
Mr. Dear married Ms. Micheau three months later, after the divorce came through. They settled in a condominium, and later in a suburban-style house. But soon after, she said, he began to stray. In November 1986, he fathered another child, Andrew, with his first wife, Ms. Micheau said. Then in 1990, Mr. Dear had a child, Taylor, with the woman who would later become his third wife, Ms. Ross. The same year, he and Ms. Micheau had a baby together, Walker.
Ms. Micheau suspected him of other affairs, but there were other problems as well.
In 1989, he left Santee Cooper, where, she said in the affidavit, he “got in trouble a lot and played hooky a lot.” Eventually, he struck out on his own as an “artist’s representative,” selling prints to wholesale art galleries, and driving from gallery to gallery in his truck. Tensions Over Money
But Mr. Dear, she said, racked up debt, and would not help her pay the bills or help clean the house. She said he took trips to Las Vegas and Atlantic City, often losing large sums of money. She said he spent his money on a new motorcycle and on an “expensive gun.” She accused him of dishonesty in his business dealings. And she said he kicked her and pulled her hair “on many occasions,” and noted other times when he hurt her physically.
Money was tight. A 1991 income tax return, filed jointly by the couple, showed their total income as $15,526. In May of that year, according to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, Mr. Dear was arrested and convicted in Charleston for the unlawful carrying of a “long blade knife” and the illegal possession of a loaded gun.
In court records, Mr. Dear admitted to engaging in “various acts of adultery,” and agreed with Ms. Micheau that “certain domestic difficulties developed” between them. In the court file, Mr. Dear did not address the more specific allegations Ms. Micheau made about his behavior.
In 1992, the couple separated. Records obtained from the North Charleston Police Department show that in November of that year, Mr. Dear was arrested as a suspect in a rape case. But the State Law Enforcement Division, which offers criminal records checks to the public, has no record of Mr. Dear’s being convicted of such a crime, meaning it is most likely that the case was dismissed.
According to the police incident report, the woman told the police that a man named Robert approached her at her job at a Sears store in a mall and asked her out on a date. She refused. The man proceeded to call her two or three times a day, she said, “saying he wanted to see her,” according to the report.
On the afternoon of Nov. 29, 1992, the woman said, the man turned up at the front door of her apartment, put a knife to her throat, forced her inside and sexually assaulted her.
The woman’s husband, Craig Melchor, was on a Navy submarine when he got word that his young wife had been attacked at knife point and raped inside their apartment. The suspect, he learned: Robert L. Dear Jr.
“I won’t forget that name,” Mr. Melchor said in an interview.
Mr. Melchor said his wife wanted to see Mr. Dear face his day in court, but the only other witness, another Navy wife, refused to testify and the Melchors were about to move to Seattle.
Prosecutors called them and said: “You’re moving West. The witness you had doesn’t want to be involved,” Mr. Melchor recalled. “And that’s that. I remember. That wasn’t right.”
They went to counseling and rape survivors’ groups, but Mr. Melchor said his wife, who died in 2007, sometimes worried that her attacker would come back and find her. He said they both had to accept that the case was out of their hands.
“We had to let go and let God take care of it,” he said.
According to the police narrative, Mr. Dear acknowledged a sexual liaison with the woman, but said that it was “consensual.”
Ms. Micheau said she did not believe the accusation. In the affidavit, she said she believed her husband had “pursued a sexual relationship” with the “approval” of the woman.
“I tried to stick with him and help him through it, but it has become impossible,” Ms. Micheau said. “He constantly criticizes everyone around him and he is very hard to please. He really does not have any friends. He does not trust anyone. He looks for a way around anything he has to do and spends a lot of time planning revenge.”
She described her husband as a man who “erupts into fury” in seconds. She said he had “emotional problems and needs counseling, which he vehemently opposed many times.”
The divorce was complete in June 1994.
By the summer of 1995, Mr. Dear had moved to Walterboro, about an hour west of Charleston, taking up residence in a double-wide trailer on a secluded one-lane road, Winding Creek Drive, that cut through the woods. Ms. Micheau complained in court documents that Mr. Dear would not tell her exactly where he lived, which concerned her because he had visitation rights with their son, Walker.
Eventually, Mr. Dear married his third wife, who today goes by Pamela Ross. They lived in the double-wide trailer, raising Taylor, their son, and Ms. Ross’s child from a previous marriage. Walker spent time there as well.
Ms. Ross struck a different tone in describing Mr. Dear. She said he had often taken her and the boys out shopping or visiting Lowcountry attractions in Hilton Head and Charleston. She said he believed strongly in the Bible, but did not seem overly zealous. He was against abortion, she said, but not obsessively so: “It was never really a topic of discussion,” she said.
A police incident report shows that in 1997, she told the police that he had locked her out of her home and that he had “hit her and pushed her out the window” when she tried to climb in. He also shoved her to the ground, she said. The report said she did not want to file charges.
In the interview, Ms. Ross said Mr. Dear would quickly apologize after doing something wrong. Still, the relationship fizzled, for reasons she did not discuss. According to court records, the couple’s divorce went through in November 2001.
In 2005, John Hood moved to Winding Creek Drive from the Catskills region of New York and became Mr. Dear’s newest neighbor. Mr. Hood described Mr. Dear as eccentric: He liked to sit on a deck in his underwear and drink his coffee. He sometimes drove an old unlicensed Volkswagen Beetle up and down the rutted road. Mr. Hood said that the neighbors on the other side of Mr. Dear had erected a wooden fence because they sometimes saw Mr. Dear skinny-dipping in a pool.
“I didn’t make a point to get to know him,” Mr. Hood, 68, said in an interview.
The two men did interact when Mr. Hood put his pickup up for sale. Mr. Dear paid cash for it. At one point, when Mr. Dear was visiting his neighbor’s property, he suggested that Mr. Hood put a metal roof on his house “because the government satellites can see through your roof.” Homes in the Mountains
Eventually, Mr. Dear moved to North Carolina, keeping two homes near Asheville in a stretch of the Blue Ridge Mountains. One was a musty and weathered trailer in Swannanoa, from which he ran a business called S Prints Mountain Art Prints. The other was a yellow cabin along a steep gravel road.
At the cabin, in Black Mountain, he rarely spoke with his neighbors. When he did, it was usually because of a dispute over how he cared for animals or how fast he drove an all-terrain vehicle along the single-lane road, where children play freely and dogs roam and yelp.
In the small community, his scowl stood out.
“I know everyone on the road better than I ever knew him,” said Kara McNerney, who has lived on the street for more than 16 years.
Online, Mr. Dear appeared to lead a different sort of life. Though to his neighbors he was a recluse, he posted frequently to a web forum dedicated to cannabis and joined an adult dating site called SexyAds in the fall of 2005 and the winter of 2006.
On SexyAds, a poster using his email address and photo said he was looking for a discreet relationship and was interested in spanking. On the cannabis forum, he said he was looking for women to “party,” and rarely wrote about using the drug.
Instead, he was far more likely to write brief and emphatic messages about Jesus Christ — usually in caps lock, the online equivalent of yelling — or to post sparsely worded solicitations for female companionship in North and South Carolina. “savannah sexy women wanted. i love to party, tall, aries, male,” he wrote in August 2005.
He argued with users of the site who disagreed with his religious posts, deriding them as “slaves” and “demons” who would suffer at the end of the world. On Oct. 7, 2005, he wrote, “Every knee shall bow an every tongue will confess that JESUS IS LORD.”
Around seven years ago, Mr. Dear began dating a woman named Stephanie Bragg. For reasons that remain unclear, they moved last year to Hartsel, Colo., a hamlet perched about 65 miles west of Colorado Springs. Ringed by mountains, Hartsel calls itself the Heart of Colorado.
But Mr. Dear, it seemed, did not want to be at the heart of anything. He plunked a white trailer marked with a small cross onto five acres of empty scrub land he had bought for $6,000 and lived in near isolation with Ms. Bragg, rarely saying a word or waving hello to his new neighbors.
The move was not welcomed by some in Ms. Bragg’s family. Her former stepmother, Patricia Stutts, said Ms. Bragg’s father had expressed concern about his daughter, who is 13 years younger than Mr. Dear, moving out West with him.
“He told me Stephanie had gone to Colorado, and was living off the grid and had to go into town to make phone calls,” Ms. Stutts said. “He was very disturbed by it.”
A close relative of Ms. Bragg’s, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of concerns about privacy for Ms. Bragg’s family, said that Mr. Dear “always kept to himself, was a tad strange,” but that he seemed to treat Ms. Bragg well. He paid for their trips to visit family in the Carolinas and would “buy the presents and such.”
The relative said Mr. Dear and Ms. Bragg were “very religious, read the Bible often and are always talking about Scripture.” He had not shown signs of being violent, the relative said.
The relative, who spoke with Ms. Bragg in recent days, also said that before the shooting, Mr. Dear reportedly “wasn’t sleeping at all,” and had “been talking about the Devil getting in his head and such.”
The relative said Ms. Bragg had been hospitalized since a week before Thanksgiving, with an infection and pancreatitis. Mr. Dear visited her every day until the day of the shooting.
“She says she can’t believe he was capable of such things, and I think that’s what’s upsetting her most,” the relative said about Ms. Bragg. “He believed he was doing God’s will, and I’m sure he probably wanted to die in the process of carrying out what I’m sure he thought was right.”
Ajibolatao: undeniable What more miracles do u want? God should come down himself to tell u that he his God? Flowers blooms when azan (Muslims call to up prayer) is being recited. it was posted on YouTube by CNN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgeCCZRaY_Q. What of the mosques (not 1 but many) which were the only standing structures after a devastated tsunami in Indonesia 2004. And u are still looking for undeniable miracle? Do your research well. There is no second chance once we are gone. God has given us enough chances now. it's all left to us.
I honestly don't know if you're a troll or serious.....
rickfreeman: And one more thing. . . I DON'T misunderstand Hawking* . . . I'm not some blind religious follower who jumps to attack every claim. . . I prefer to examine things objectively myself. What I don't know, I don't know.
Yes, you are. Lemme repeat myself, as well as fix in an omitted word or two
me: Just note he does not consider his philosophy as fact. Nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.
rickfreeman: There's no 'hard data' supporting the theory of the multiverse (an infinite number of universes parallel to ours exists with every single imaginable outcome happening on each of them) . . .
there is hard data supporting the reasoning behind proposing the multiverse, even if not hard data supporting the actual existence of a multiverse. I won't go into a lecture here, no time or money, but again, see quantum weirdness for example. Eg, issues like causality at that level and cat's like shroedingers' being both alive and dead at the same time. Multiverse is a viable way to explain these phenomena. For more abstract support from a different field entirely, see string theory (which is a hypothesis, just to be clear). So the ideas remain scientific, very much so.
rickfreeman: The only reason why some scientists agree with him is because so far, the theory hasn't broken any physical laws CURRENTLY KNOWN to man. . . just like his latest theory of white holes existing on the other side of black holes. . .
to be clear, multiverse ideas did not originate from him. Anyways, it is not the only reason, but is is of course a good reason to encourage one to at least be openminded and amendable to the idea
See?
Now, do you know just how many physical laws would need to be broken in order to allow for a bush around your waist to stop a bullet?
See?
rickfreeman: I'm not interesting in spending my life proving the existence of my soul, because I don't know how to do that. . . prayers for recognition have shown me coming events sometimes, based on my current actions, with warnings to continue or stop, depending on the outcome. That must sound veryyy ridiculous to you as well, and I won't blame you at all, because I and not you, experienced this.
rickfreeman: Just to think that you'd be saying a different story if Hawking actually decided to visit Africa, see things for himself, and then dedicate his life to try to find a rational explanation for them.
If Hawkins did that, and claimed he were being scientific or factual, I would doubt all his previous discoveries. As would most sane people.
And when you insunuate science is an oyinbo thing, you insult the black man. Abi are you telling me that we are incapable of simple things like reasoning objectively??
rickfreeman: Just because you haven't seen it happen doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Yes it does. Just as I'm sure there's no toothfairy or santa giving kids presents.
It simply doesn't happen.
rickfreeman: It'd be different if I just read it in a book. . .. I've actually seen this happen in real life. You keep mentioning the fact that they can 'be repeated over and over again' like as if people who perform these stunts can't perform them over and over again. . . What excuse do you want to give? That they are mere illusions? When we actually loaded the gun ourselves? And the same gun was used on a nearby animal which the impact from the bullet killed instantly? lol. If they are illusions maybe you should come and show me how its done, so I can do the same tricks at birthday parties. . .
I wonder what you'd have said about those Europeans that used to catch bullets with their teeth then claim it was some jazz or whatnot. You'd worship them?
there are many ways such cheap tricks can be performed. Indeed, much better one could be achieved (see my personal favorite, Derren Brown, if that's the sort of stuff that impresses you). You could also be mistaken about what you saw, or you could simply be lying. Bottom line, before I can accept such nonsense, I would factor in human folly. A well documented phenomenon, unlike the laws of physics breaking down because of some spirit powahd grass. Even the finest igbo no get that kind powah.
rickfreeman: Its VERY possible that the people performing these stunts know what they're doing but don't understand the mechanisms behind them. You probably would've continued to ignore that the intuition exists until science released data showing how making decisions due to some 'warm and fuzzy' feeling , showing corresponding brain patterns, usually turned out to be right. This is what spirituality has called the intuition for like forever. But because science hadn't understood it yet, people like you chose to dismiss the claims completely.
What in the world are you on about? You think science never recognized intuition?
this is like claiming that I reject consciousness because we don't fully know how it works yet. Where from??
And it.is.not.possible!!! Very simple. Unless, of course, the laws of physics don't apply to you or your grass
rickfreeman: AS FOR ME I DON'T even really care about all these, they're not beneficial to the development of my soul (I know, you don't believe in the soul). . . Like we learn in Buddhism. . . you don't need to acknowledge the existence of God to live in accordance with His Laws. . .my goal in life is to show love to everyone on earth. (NB I never said I was a Buddhist, I detest organised religion).
Careful. At least you don't say you detest followers of organized religion, as there's scant difference between you to be honest. Only difference seems to be you seem to be more cognizant of the folly your beliefs entail.....
rickfreeman: Of course you can ridicule my goal too, after all, you don't believe in the Law of Karma, thereby you probably see no standard for morality/ethics and therefore no reason to show love (I might be wrong about you) . . . even though Newton has stated the physical manifestation of the Law of Karma I.e the third law of mechanics, about equal and opposite reaction. . . .
How does laws of mechanics = Karma?
rickfreeman: I'm not on earth to justify and prove everything there is to prove. . . Of what gain would that be to me after my departure? Besides, the human race has done more harm to this earth than good when they turn out being wrong . . . NOTICE I'M CHANGING MY TONE not because I want to back down from anything I said earlier, I still stand my ground, but because you refuse to completely read my posts and respond to everything I type, picking only a select few to respond to, like your continuous pressure for me to explain the use of spiritual means to render the effect of bullets useless. My answer to that is that I DONT KNOW HOW, but I've seen it done so I won't dismiss it as impossible. A million years from now a brilliant scientist might come up with a connection between the soul and the body in SCIENTIFIC TERMS. I can't wait that long. All I'm here to do is to help and share love. . . try to do good on earth. It gives me a 'warm and fuzzy' feeling
Che, what is this soul you're on about? If it can be studied by science, then it's natural. Follows physical laws.....
If these 'souls' follow physical laws, then I suppose there's no jazz involved in their workings, correct?
And are you happy now? I've now addressed your full post, or about as much I can manage. If I were being thorough, I'd end up writing a book.,,
rickfreeman: even the greatest scientists like Steven hawking look at things from a philosophical point of view. . . I don't know why it its so hard to look at things concerning the spiritual with the same point of view. . . of course, reading the books like the bible or hearing experiences like juju sound like mere cartoon network tales, because they are reported the same way the authors experienced them without providing any rational explanation for how a God who created a physical world would make His supposed Son violate physical laws, thereby making Him seem imperfect. Its our duty, as humans searching for truth to experience these phenomena ourselves, and continue to seek for explanations as to how they could've been possible. Steven Hawking's belief that somewhere, in another universe parallel to ours, there might be another version of me who is probably a professional IndecentStar (because he claims that there are infinite parallel universes with all possible outcomes existing) sounds as ridiculous as the tale that a man touched a gourd of water and turned it to wine. This doesn't mean that they're both stupid and impossible. . . after all, it was widely believed that the earth was flat until scientists finally reasoned that it couldn't be possibly flat because of a variety of reasons. . . like wise, if a probably uneducated person from the future went to the moon with some companions and started experiencing zero gravity, he would've thought he was flying. . . imagine that person for some reason landed among people from ancient Rome and told their greatest scientists, like Aristotle and Plato. . . how ridiculous would they sound. . . .until years later, Newton understood what gravity was. . . then some more years later. . Neil Armstrong landed on the moon and actually experienced it. If you truly read everything, you'll understand that what in trying to say is that we should not dismiss claims simply because they sound ridiculous to us at the time. If we are truly interested in being enlightened, the best we can do is to strive and search for truth. You talked about feeling 'warm and fuzzy' . . . Thank God your science has finally been able to correlate certain brain patterns in the subconscious region of the brain to making right long term decisions. . . this is what spirituality has called the intuition for so long. You subconsciously make a decision because you just feel that its right. Now science is searching for how this is possible. I hope they find their answer.
You seriously misunderstand Hawkins, I don't even know where to begin.
Just note he does consider philosophy as fact, nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.
Sounds ridiculous, multiverses, no? But that is what being openminded is. Accepting the possibilities provided there are justifiable reasons to accept them.
Now, once again, what exactly is the justification for your belief that tying grass around your waist can make you repel bullets? Why do you take such a claim seriously??
rickfreeman: please reread my post. personal experiences are not to be proven to others, but to be shared. To either strengthen or question your beliefs. It seems you read my posts in a hurry to reply me and don't notice these things Ive been saying over and over again. Even science that you hold so dearly, most of what you've learned are from the experiences of these scientists. You didn't perform the experiments yourself. The ones you were able to perform, simple ones like jumping up and then feeling gravitational pull making you fall back to earth strengthened your conviction that their theories are right: they sound logical and you yourself were able to perform the same experiment so you have no doubt that it is valid.
I have not personally performed most of the experiments and doubts always remain to a degree (though often negligible), but the bolded sounds about right. If I had the resources I could verify any of the claims made by science. their results also tend to support each other, building sound, rational frameworks; the theories of evolution, gravity, whatever. Overwhelming amounts of data and phenomena back them up.
Not so much someone claiming a bush tied around his waist stopped a bullet
My point is this - being openminded does not equate to not being critical. It does not mean you should turn your brain off. If you were being fair, you should have a consistent criteria by which you evaluate ideas and claims, not just arbitrarily dismiss some and approve of others because they make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Now, when you put on that thinking cap you'll note that personal experience accounts for virtually f-all. Essentially why in courts physical evidence trumps hearsay and whatnot. Humans are well capable of folly. Natural laws? Not so much.
the scientists you speak of had personal experiences, true, but those experiences can be verified by anyone anywhere in the world, provided they had the means, no? Not so much claims of juju. they are in no way similar as far objecvity and verifiability are concerned, so why do you want us to take such claims seriously?? If one is willing to accept such a nonsensical claim, then one might as well accept that a man walked on water or a donkey spoke to a jew in some desert a few thousand years ago, no?
that said it is a free world. Provided your beliefs are benign why should you really bother with what others think? I just find it weird that you expect us to entertain ideas like juju and reincarnation.
rickfreeman: if you read the post to the end, you'll see after that i said 'if you haven't experienced it maybe you should try to if you're seriously seeking for knowledge' or something like that. I assumed he would've, as a Nigerian, but I also gave room for the possibility that he hasnt, which also seems to be the case with you. If he eventually experiences it and comes up with a explanation for it, I'll be glad to listen to it. I can learn something new. But as for me, I have PERSONALLY experienced the use of black magic. Also, if you read further, you'll see that I said that I cant prove my convictions because I experienced them myself and I cant explain it to someone else. Read my analogy of the guitar school. Each person needs to have his own personal experiences. I claimed to be convinced that they are real to ME because of what I have experienced. Have you ever heard about the story of the blind men who touched an elephant and were asked to describe it? One touched the tail and thought it was a very thin animal with hair at the end. Another touched the body and thought it was a giant animal with rough skin. Another touched the tusks and thought it was a strong bodied animal with pointed ends. None of them were wrong, they each spoke based on their own experiences. They are all blind, and in the dark . . . the best they can do is to share what they have learned with each other. ONLY the elephant itself knows how exactly it is.
Why do you give so much credence to "personal experience"?
If a blind man claimed he personally touched a mammoths balls while he was holidaying on the moon, would you believe him?
rickfreeman: man, this is the same problem with religion!! STOP taking things out of context!!! Like seriously!! the second statement you quoted was me referring to things we see in Nigeria everyday, like people using voodoo for money, people who are able to manipulate nature to their own personal advantage. Or would you say as a Nigerian that voodoo and black magic and the likes are just fairytales? Maybe you haven't personally experienced it then. The first statement u quoted was me talking about experiences of me that strengthened my conviction that I have a soul. PERSONAL experiences that I cant prove to you!
Nothing is out of context here.
I ask again, how do you determine the validity of a claim? Simple reason being, the exact same reason you think I would reject your belief in souls is the same reason I reject your voodoo; you can't prove they exist......
Yes, juju is 'just fairytales', and blatantly so... How can I experience what isn't real??
Why do you claim with certainty they're real? How do you vet what is valid and what is not?
BETATRON: the soul can be proved by it effects in the human,just like electricity and gravity can be proved by there effect on a bulb and a falling body respectively
-Dream is one of the effect of the soul on the humans
rickfreeman: if you read further, you will see that i also stated that i cant prove its right, but because of my own personal experiences, I am convinced that they exist. Its a waste of time and energy trying to explain your own personal experiences to someone else. Its one thing to be convinced about something, its another to be able to prove that its right.
As you can't prove these things exist, then you shouldn't be making statements like these
rickfreeman: If you're a Nigerian you cannot deny the fact that these things exist
rickfreeman: let me start by asking this question, u can answer or add yours, but let's respect each other please does the fact that you don't understand a concept mean that its wrong?
No. It also doesn't mean it's right either.
But firstly, how do you determine a concept's validity?
For instance, how do prove these 'souls' you've mentioned exist?
Anything other than missionary for the sole purpose of recreation is SIN
And even at that, it is my understanding that in the OT days people used to spit in buckets then a stork would deliver the little bundle of joy the next day. You had to have been born a jew though. No need for gross sex. Good times.
Do not mind the satanist. He will lead you astray.
FOLYKAZE: Sorry dude, I comprehend the term atheism.
Maybe if you read the OP gently and comprehensively, you will see the angle I am driving at.
Atheism is disbelieve in God. This is all athesm is about.
The question now is what is God?
how can you tell me there is no water in mars when you dont know what water is?
How can you tell me a soup is salty when you didnt taste from it?
How can someone that claim there is no god turn around to ask me what is god again?
This rhetoric questions from dalaman, gayjesus and frank317 who only want to save face because they obviously dont know what they are saying.
You cant tell us something dont exist when you dont even know what that something is.
Just like atheism, I expect much explanation on what you guys mean by God. I know God mean lot of things to different religion. I think I have engaged you on that when you were confusing theism with monotheism. You made the mistake of defining the God in atheism as supreme monotheistic God.
This thread is opened because another atheist define God in the context of atheism as personal God. If we should agree with him, what happen to non-personal or impersonal God?
Does that mean definition of atheism is disbelieve in personal God? What happens to impersonal God? Do you believe or disbelieve it too? Reasons.
This is a very simple question. You guys can share likes and throw insults but pls answer the simple question begging for simple answer.
Johnydon22 defined the God in atheism context as personal God. What then is his stand and other atheists on impersonal God?
"Do you believe pigs can fly?"
"No"
"Do you believe piglets fly?"
"......"
Youve been told repeatedly, time and again, on this thread as well, what god is by at least tens of atheists over a few years now, yet you still insist we have not been clear. That is rude, brah, so no indignation please
Your obtuseness is also why I won't expatiate on the example I give above. Even if it's simplistic, you will fail to comprehend the most basic things and produce totally unnecessary and inane points into the conversation
DeepSight: If this is the case then whats wrong with a belief in God?
Papa, it's quite simple. It's that it's not the only magani that can keep them, rather you, sane
In fact, there are various far less harmful and benign tonics very readily available. So much so that relying on this one is nothing short of being reckless and endangering everyone around.
You have Ebola? A cure exists that is immediate, effective and available? No, I'll just use that concoction great grandpapa used to make. Never mind that its never been actually been effectively shown to work, it gets me high.
And please continue to pretend that we give a toss about believers that can keep it in their pants. Also, you are not one of those, so please don't pretend to be one
Christianity Etc › Re: The Religious Mind? by wiegraf(op): 10:39pm On Dec 13, 2015
will these potatoes help my tumbi grow
