<p>We live in 10 dimensions. Nothing “is” anything. Nothing is “anything.” Nothing is nothing. Whatever we say, it means nothing. Even nothing means nothing. The intelligence of aliens who created us compared to ours is like our intelligence compared to that of an amoeba.</p>
<p>^ Finally decent thought.</p>
<p>When you guys look down at religious people, and think that they are dumb, try imagining someone looking down at you the same way, and telling you things you don’t get. Apparently, you won’t understand what I have just said - same way religious fanatics do not understand when they are explained ‘stuff’ of yours.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…I don’t think you understood anything I wrote. I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but if I understand you I was making the same basic point. I’d be the last to suggest that the physical world is the “real” world. That’s simply the imagined realm within time and space that life uses to experience itself as seemingly separate outside of the absolute reality of ultimate unity.</p>
<p>“but you do assign some form of legitimacy to Jesus as the messiah. Which means you believe something with essentially no proof whatsoever, other than a vague internal notion that it “feels right.””</p>
<p>Out of curiosity…
Has anyone here actually researched the apologetic branch of Christianity? We keep saying “no proof,” “no proof,” etc, but have we actually looked?</p>
<p>Call me mentally ill if you want, but… God bless you guys! :D</p>
<p>Give me one justification for believe in the Christian god that isn’t reducible to a blind leap of faith which could be used as an argument for belief in any other god.</p>
<p>A single reason.</p>
<p>Well, if now we’re debating why one particular theism is better than any other, I guess faith is a bit of a prerequisite. However, something to consider: the existence of a man named Jesus Christ of Nazareth is an historical fact. Now, believe what you will about what he did or didn’t do (miracles, etc.) but you still have to decide (as some other religious believer, I suppose) what to say about him. Islam acknowledges his existence, but claims that He wasn’t divine, just another prophet of God. Along those lines.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I’m perfectly aware that our perceptions aren’t necessarily true. I just don’t think it matters much. If, for example, the world is really just a complex computer program, I don’t see that I should be living any differently than I am now. The laws of physics would be programmed into the computer just as we believe they are in the real world. It’s not like we can somehow escape the program or bend spoons by concentrating hard enough. I know that if I stab myself, I’ll feel pain - does it matter if the knife doesn’t really exists? For us, the program IS our reality.</p>
<p>
So you’re a hypocrite?</p>
<p>only mormons, scientologists, fundamentalist muslims, fundamentalist christians, those people in texas who every year there is some occurrence where i see the words incest, polygamy 15 year old, cult - and wonder why the hell doesn’t the government shut these loonies down, all cults. </p>
<p>All other people, religious or not, are mentally stable. except those that aren’t.</p>
<p>"Give me one justification for believe in the Christian god that isn’t reducible to a blind leap of faith which could be used as an argument for belief in any other god.</p>
<p>A single reason."</p>
<p>What do you mean by “reducible to a blind leap of faith”? If I said historical evidence, the Bible’s many authors yet same doctrine, the witnesses, the time between the copies we have today and the original manuscripts, modern day miracles spoken in Christ not another, references to Christ in the Old Testament, and the accuracy of the modern translation, you could still claim it is not enough. There would still be a margin of faith, as there is with nearly everything (even atheism). That leaves one with a simple choice: will one have faith in the “most justifiable” by human reason (who said human reason is best?) or never use faith and be completely open minded all of one’s days, never knowing stability. I’m open to hearing new ideas, but I cannot and I will not sway from that which I have seen and known most conceivable. I have yet to see anything more. Here I stand. Say whatever you will.</p>
<p>StellaNova, did I ever say that you need to live differently?</p>
<p>Nick, what is the problem with not-fundamental mormons? If you don’t want to have more than 1 wife, you think it’s correct to tell others what to do?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just because you don’t understand a scientific concept doesn’t mean it’s as baseless as believing that an invisible man in the sky once turned people into pillars of salt. </p>
<p>Yes, it’s true that some (maybe most) scientific ideas are so complex that 99% of the world’s population has to pretty much blindly believe that such concepts are truthful, but the fact is that science was meticulously constructed by humans, and is in a ceaseless process of renewal by humans. False ideas do not stand, and birth and rebirth is constant in science. In contrast, religion is stagnant, uncritical, and is wholly dependent on old texts by questionably reliable sources.</p>
<p>I believe that there are gaps in our understand of life that may be filled by religion. But I think it’s utter stupidity and arrogance to take a concept like religion, that only continues to exist b/c it’s unprovable (just like the flying spaghetti monster), and make it the crux of monumentally consequential things such as holy wars, racial superiority, justification of atrocities, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s interesting that you use these two examples. I’ve witnessed old ladies in their 70s bend thick bars of steel. It’s all very scientific, just knowing how to mentally focus the ambient energy of the force that is around us and through us. They were barely putting any muscle strength on the steel and certainly didn’t have the strength to bend steel that thick with their arms (I tried and couldn’t make it budge, and I am significantly younger, larger, and stronger than them).</p>
<p>I’ve also witnessed people who had elevated themselves to a state of consciousness whereby they stabbed themselves and felt no pain and released no blood.</p>
<p>I’ve even stared into the eyes of a man whose eyes literally started glowing a bright white as he accurately spoke of the deep insecurities within me (even though I’d only met him about 30 minutes earlier). Then the glow faded and he stood up and made some tea. That man, in particular, eminated an energy of love that I can only imagine is a glimmer of what masters such as Christ, Krishna, and others demonstrated that compelled so many and created so much fear in so many others. Consider that these “messiahs” just became, through trial and error, masters of physics. </p>
<p>Jesus disappears from the Bible until he’s 30. What was he doing? A great deal of evidence suggests he was wandering in the East, learning ancient spiritual ways. That Jesus, to me, is far more compelling. Then again, I find Batman who spent years mastering his craft intriguing and Superman who descended and took on the model of Moses rather boring. </p>
<p>I think the most important thing we humans can do - whether we are scientific or spiritual in focus - is be humble and open to the possibility that we really don’t know much of anything yet. I mean, we still use oil and haven’t even stepped foot on one planet besides our own. We are children.</p>
<p>to the OP: please prove your implicit assertion that religious people believe in things that don’t exist; until then your question is loaded.</p>
<p>also, define “mental illness”</p>
<p>
</p>
<ul>
<li>an immortal soul</li>
<li>angels</li>
<li>demons that possess people</li>
<li>somebody who resurrected after three days and could perform magic</li>
</ul>
<p>oh somebody two thousand years ago decided this was all true? hell yeah, better believe in it. it’s not like it’s just vague notions of spirituality and an outdated moral structure constructed and imposed on me by society. </p>
<p>maybe you should read some bultmann or von harnack or just some basic academic theology/history, will give you much more credibility for your opinions</p>
<p>like what others have said, discussing these things are beyond the scope of human beings…</p>
<p>a milli, if you’re not even going to give serious thought to other people’s opinions and beliefs, then why did you bother creating this thread. All you’re doing is bashing some 85% of the world’s population (Britannica). </p>
<p>By the way… Christianity denounced the notion of “being possessed;” it’s not a “vague notion,” because an entire book describes it in explicitly stated detail; morality can’t be outdated because it is (at its best) universal (what is “good” now is “good” in the future, what changes is our interpretation of morality); and it is not imposed onto you by society. </p>
<p>maybe you should study religion more, will allow you to produce well thought out arguments.</p>
<p>Science bases it’s findings on belief. On belief that you can trust your fingers, when you feel it’s ‘hot’, on belief that you can trust your eyes, when you see ‘black’, and so on. And you can call it systematic as much as you want, problem is that the BASE relies on human senses and comprehension (see above).</p>
<p>Yes, religious people are mentally ill.</p>
<p>I didn’t go through the whole thread, but has anyone ever said the word “■■■■■” in here before? Just curious.</p>
<p>Not really. Many people just grew up in a religious family or place and they were naturally brainwashed. As with this case, they are not mentally ill but only brainwashed.</p>
<p>However, some people were atheists but converted to some sort of religion when they are 20 or even 30 something. I believe they are mentally ill. Most of them are deeply desperate and unable to find solutions in their real lives.</p>