This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
What Do Americans Believe In? (Spoiler Alert: "Evolution" And "Ghosts" Are Neck And Neck)
Perhaps it is because the prevalent theme of the past five years has been the ascent of central planning in the name of the Bernanke wealth effect, headed by Saint Ben himself, that has forced Americans to reassess, and moderate, their belief in "conventional" topics such as god, miracles and heaven. According to a new Harris Poll while a strong majority (74%) of U.S. adults do believe in God, this belief is in decline when compared to previous years as just over four in five (82%) expressed a belief in God in 2005, 2007 and 2009.
Also, while majorities also believe in miracles (72%, down from 79% in 2005), heaven (68%, down from 75%), that Jesus is God or the Son of God (68%, down from 72%), the resurrection of Jesus Christ (65%, down from 70%), the survival of the soul after death (64%, down from 69%), the devil, hell (both at 58%, down from 62%) and the Virgin birth (57%, down from 60%), these are all down from previous Harris Polls. Belief in Darwin's theory of evolution, however, while well below levels recorded for belief in God, miracles and heaven, is up in comparison to 2005 findings (47%, up from 42%).
There is good news: the ascent of the mandarin of Marriner Eccles to the pinnacle of Keynesian socio-economic "religion" has also to increased the number of people who believe in Darwin's theory of evolution.... to just under half of all Americans. While well below levels recorded for belief in God, miracles and heaven, is up in comparison to 2005 findings (47%, up from 42%). The bad news is that nearly the same amount of Americans who believe in evolution also believe in ghosts: according to the Harris poll 42% of Americans believe in ghosts, 36% each believe in creationism and UFOs, 29% believe in astrology, 26% believe in witches and 24% believe in reincarnation - that they were once another person.
In summary, this is what Americans believe in:
The list above broken down by generation and political affiliation:
How certain are Americans in the existence of god:
What is the gender of god:
The Bible, the Torah, or the Koran: which book captures the word of god.
Finally, how religious do Americans see themselves as:
Some additional color from Harris:
Generational & political divides
Echo Boomers are less likely than their counterparts in all older generations to express belief in God (64% Echo Boomers, 75% Gen Xers, 81% Baby Boomers, 83% Matures), miracles (65%, 74%, 76% and 78%, respectively), that Jesus is God or the Son of God (58%, 67%, 74% and 75%, respectively) and angels (59%, 71%, 73% and 68%, respectively.
On the other end of the generational spectrum, Matures are far less likely than any other generation to express belief in ghosts (44% Echo Boomers, 46% Gen Xers, 46% Baby Boomers, 24% Matures), witches (27%, 29%, 28% and 18%, respectively) and reincarnation (27%, 25%, 23% and 13%, respectively).
Turning to the political spectrum, Democrats and Independents show similar levels of belief in most of the tested concepts, with Republicans consistently more likely than either group to express belief in those concepts aligned with the Judeo-Christian belief system; Republicans are less likely than either group to express belief in Darwin's theory of evolution (36% Republicans, 52% Democrats, 51% Independents).
Absolute certainty that there is a God down vs. 10 years ago
In a separate line of questioning, focused on Americans' degree of certainty that there is or is not a God, two-thirds of Americans (68%) indicate being either absolutely or somewhat certain that there is a God, while 54% specify being absolutely certain; these figures represent drops of 11 and 12 percentage points, respectively, from 2003 testing, where combined certainty was at 79% and absolute certainty was at 66%.
Meanwhile, combined belief that there is no God (16%) and uncertainty as to whether or not there is a God (also 16%) are both up from 2003 findings (when these levels were 9% and 12%, respectively).
Outside of specific religious samples, the groups most likely to be absolutely certain there is a God include blacks (70%), Republicans (65%), Matures (62%) and Baby Boomers (60%), Southerners (61%) and Midwesterners (58%), and those with a high school education or less (60%).
»
- 35367 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Have you ever lit C4 on fire? Most High Explosives are set off by shock of a small detonation charge and not fire.
What do you know about Structural Steel?
Posts like yours really tempt me to approach the Japanese Government and suggest that they sue the United States, and General Electric, for damages from Fukushima.
Since the Steel used in the WTC must not have been up to ANSI Engineering Standards and since American Steel was also used in construction of the Containment Vessels at Fukushima, and they were constructed at THE SAME TIME, then there is a probability that the steel in the Containment Structures were not up to ANSI Standards...IF YOU BUY THE OFFICIAL STORY.
There were Structural Steel Engineers whom designed that building. There was nothing wrong with the Engineering Specs IF THE MATERIALS USED were up to STANDARDS. The Twin Towers were designed to survive Aircraft Imapcts and the consequential fires.
Either the designs were flawed or the Steel was substandard. If American Mills provided substandard materials to build the Twin Towers then the same steel mills were providing substandard steel for the construction of Fukushima.
It will make an interesting Court Case. Don't you think?
Why yes I have-it is GREAT for heating C-rats.
AND THAT IS MY POINT!!! It burns!!!!!
So, how does it survive the jet fuel fire for hours WITHOUT BURNING and then DETONATE-which additionally requires an UNDAMAGED FUSE AND TRIGGER.
UnTruthserz never explain that part of their phantasy-because it is so obviously impossible!
Because it was not on the floors which were burning??? All Support Structures were blown out, below the sites of the impact, and the Towers collapsed at Freefall.
By the way...New Skyscrapers are prewired for Demolition... The people who build them know that they will become obsolete in the Future.
"Because it was not on the floors which were burning???"
Then you never closely observed the WTC towers collapsing. The collapse began at the point of the fire-PROVING no explosives were involved, as they would have been consumed by the fire.
"New Skyscrapers are prewired for Demolition"
"Prewired"?? REALLY?? Then, that wire and the labor to install it must be on the bid for "New Skyscrapers". I don't think so.
Yoda: Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship.
Even by his own standards, Darwin wouldn't believe his own theory at this point.
(hint - Where are all the transitional forms???)
Thankyou for telling everyone in the thread where you fall, in the survey. Only someone who has no clue about Darwin, or the 150 years after Darwin, would ask the cliche question "where are all the transitional forms." Now, if you want to make progress instead of repeating what someone else said, why not take two years and actually educated yourself about the fact of Evolution.
GG
I agree with you 100% GG.
The depths of willful ignorance and know-nothingism when it comes to evolution (or science in general, or history, or economics, or, fuck, ANYTHING meaningful or real) vs. bible-thumping in the USA is always shocking and depressing to me.
(Go ahead, downvote me all you ignorant Bible-thumpers. I can take it, and in fact welcome it.)
Fact: After 150 years, there are not enough transitional forms in the fossil record.
Fact: Darwin didn't have a clue about the complexity of cellular microbiology.
Fact: Ordered information transmitted through a code only comes from an intelligent transmitter. DNA was written by some intelligence.
Fact: Very few people understand the difference between evolution and natural selection. There are no "facts" about evolution, only theories. Natural selection is easily observed, but it is not evolution.
Fact: Every statement about cosmology is a statement of faith since no one was there when it happened. So who's the biggest religious nut? At least I can put my faith in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and Shannon's Limit.
I wish you only knew just how ignorant such an absurd claim makes you look.
The fossil record, in fact, is FULL of 'transitional forms'! In fact, almost EVERY species in the fossil record is "transitional" between something to something else. But something tells me that for a no-nothing such as yourself, who has obviously not studied biology, genetics or paleontology in the slightest degree, NO amount of 'transitional forms' would be enough for you to claim that biological evolution is the rock-solid fact that it is.
Yep, I've only studied aerospace engineering where you're actually required to show a solution to a problem based on tested physical laws, and then build something to prove it. Not something like paleontology or anthropology where you can dig up some old pig bones and then get a grant to blow smoke up people's asses for 40 years with theories that can't possibly tested by the scientific method.
Challenge - If biological evolution is such a "rock-solid" fact, then repeat the damn experiment.
go to the west side of my hood and you'll see some 'transitional forms'. or porch monkeys as there known round here
Had to explain to my daughter what a porch monkey was, tried to do it w/o laughing, did not succeed. Just ended up pointing out examples on the way to church.
People do what they want. If they choose to, they think what they want too, truth and facts be damned.
Take that how you wish, you're going to anyway, I found considerable humor in it!
"...then repeat the damn experiment."
GASP! And actually have to PROVE my theory with EVIDENCE and a peer reviewed methodology?!
BIGOT!! ZEALOT!!!
yeah but while the forms were transitioning from one to another there have to have been something left behind as evidence of the transition. A fish didn't turn into an allegator in one day? If evolution has been going on for millions of years there should be some evidence of transition no?
And then of course there's the question, more fundamental of how life arose in the first place, that's the most difficult question for evolution
Exactly, there would have to be billions if not trillions of mutations. The number might even rival Ben's CNTL-P.
Try the science of probably and statistics. Then look at randomness in the natural world and order. Can you tell the difference between a pile of rocks and Stonehenge?
IS TOO! IS TOO! IS TOO! IS TOO! IS TOO! IS TOO!
THE FOSSIL RECORD IS FULL OF TRANSITIONALS, SO THERE!!!
YOU ARE JUST TOO STOOPID.
NEENER; NEENER.
[Note: Not one proof source or link. Yawn.]
akak, you studied biology, genetics?so is evolution the ultimate answer? DNA is what again? DNA at it's core is information, how to build components of a cell up to even a multicell creature. so information via evolution is created? did the information to build a cell come before the DNA or was the "codes" always there? Did Darwin understand DNA? or is his system pre DNA discovery? to me darwin used the limited tools he had, and did an ok job, but his time has passed. the complexity of DNA has made darwin just a figure of history, and very wrong, as DNA (information)comes before the cell. that is the nail in darwin's coffin.
Akak,
Why is this such a big deal with you? I frankly could care less what people believe. Most of my atheist friends don't as well citing visions of the Virgin Mary in a potato quite funny rather than something to reel in anger over. Clinging to religion is just a crutch. Anything can be made into a religion if a fanaticle adherence is the result.
I am not nor will I ever be religious. I do not need it in my life. But I have a believe in an undefineable God because I have experienced something miraculous in my life that no science could ever explain. But i am still a scientist and believe in the scientific method. I am content with this existance and don't need a church to define it for me. But I am acutely aware many have not experienced this and are frightened. Some unscrupulous people in authoritative positions use this to influence them. I feel more pity than anger and don't understand why you wish to denigrate them so. Perhaps there are some that can find true happiness in a structured religious environment. I'm just not one of them. But it doesn't seem right to cast aspersions just for the sake of provocativity. Your anger seems misplaced and smacks of a personal vendetta.
Miffed;-)
Some people are pissed off about things which they don't agree with. However, on this particular issue, I know a very large number of people who are pissed off because of repeated, and often very dishonest attempts (by those claiming to be good Christians nonetheless) using evolution as a point to attack while simultaneously trying to get religious viewpoints to be officially backed by the government. Often this is done with science standards in public education.
IMO, this wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue if the government weren't involved in everything. There'd be a few little tiffs here and there, but, for those who are religious and are fervent deniers of evolution, they have to pay taxes for other people's kids to go to school, and, if they want to avoid public schools for their kids, they have to either homeschool or pay even more for private school. While I think that they are misguided, I understand that I have no right to force them to my beliefs, and I really can understand why that might stick in their craws. (Yes, education is important, but we are sure as hell doing it wrong these days, and I don't know what the best solution is.)
And education is just one area out of many where the government is involved. That means it is just one area out of many where these kinds of fights can become an issue.
I guess this is where I am at a disadvantage. I have never been indoctrinated successfully. I was privileged to be born in a vibrant, intelligent family who loved to debate and question. And this meant everything, nothing sacrosanct. If anyone had a slight inclination toward a strong belief in any person, religion, politician, leader, teacher etc everyone would go on the attack. You had to defend your position with your life. This translated into great difficulty for me in many times in my life. Debating Calvinism at a Presbyterian College got me thrown out. Defying an eminent orthopedic surgeon over a microbiological issue that would have caused patient harm almost got me fired and yes, I was hauled into review board over it. Clinging to anything in my family was considered weakness and a pathetic need for mythological safety.
My children attending Lutheran school through high school. I am not a Lutheran. They taught Lutheran catechism to my children. I had no problem with it. I had willingly enrolled them because the curriculum was stellar. I neither promulgated nor denigrated the Lutheran theology. I let them make their own choice. Neither one of them are Lutherans today. Had they had a deep passion for it I would naturally try to challenge them but they would always be free to make their own choice. I have an innate distrust of government because education is not their aim but indoctrination. ANYTHING taught sanctioned by government is suspect in my view so I refused for my children to participate. This cost me 200k for two children before they got to college. A hefty price but well worth seeing the rewards.
Miffed;-)
I know several otherwise intelligent people who will believe the first thing that they read, or who will only believe the red team or blue team. These are people who produce results when they are in their niche. For some reason, their intelligence shuts off when dealing with things outside of their niche. They don't question what is spoonfed to them, unless it is in their fields. I get onto ZH, and I see financial acronyms that I have to look up on occasion. When I first got hit by a lawsuit by a bank and was trying to understand how banking in general worked, I was looking up a lot of things, and there was a lot of contradictory information. They won't wade that. Maybe I wouldn't have unless forced to. Or rather, probably I wouldn't have until it was too late. At least in my mind, I had to understand how banking worked. Fucking rabbit holes. This stuff is not in their fields. They don't want to think about something new. I'll send them emails with the acronyms spelled out, and things explained. Others, who simply do not want to believe that this time is different, will not put the same mental faculties that they use for their professions towards understanding what I'm saying. Some of them do take note, however, and they tell me "John isn't going to listen. This is very complex, violates his ideological foundation, and he already has too much to do with his own job to understand." Yet I try to simplify it.
I agree el Vaq and have personally seen this myself. Comfort is dangerous simply because it lulls you into tranquility. A tranquil person is often asleep and an asleep person will not say no. I think what really has saved me is just a healthy dose of skepticism,a distrust of authority and being inquisitive. I don't think too many other people have this because I feel alone a lot of the time and only find commonality on ZH. So is this the Land of Misfit Toys?
Miffed;-)
Glad I am not the only one here who sees the value of a Christian day school education, Miffed.I am not here to get up on my soap box and tout the values of the aforementioned, but we also came to the realization it was more than worth some sacrifice to do so instead of the big brother version. Kind of funny, after reading your figure of 200k I thought "that sure seems high". After crunching the numbers, we will surpass that within five years, with two of three still in school. I am guessing that you, as myself, at times thought "wow, those funds would allow us to purchase ____ or go to ____ for a nice long holiday". That said, we remain humbled and thankful for jobs that allow us to send our kids where they attend.
Ours are encouraged to think for themselves and are constantly challenged to do so, rather than just go with the flow. They are also encourged to have friends at the public schools and we instill in them constantly that they are no better than the others, it is simply not tolerated in our house. Here in my area, there is a certain air about (many) families that send children to these private schools(there are probably 10 within 20 miles of me), and this attitude is somewhat reciprocated by those that do not--and understandably so from my observations. I am a Christian, yes, and will admit that our decision for education was somewhat based in that fact- but am not one that considers myself religious in the typical sense nor feel the need to bash or ridicule others for not adhering to my beliefs One can live a life in much larger ways than going to church on Sunday and making sure your picture is in the paper for helping a local charity(not that this is a bad thing at all, but I never see the need to do anything but fly under the radar). Having been a EMT on our squad for 20 years, I get a much larger reward when transporting a sick or injured individual to the ER in the back of the rig where nobody sees or parrots in public what is going on.
There are probably 10 different church denominations in my county, and I am always reminded of the joke that goes something like this.A sailor finds a man on a deserted island and asks him what the three huts are for. The fellow points to one and tells the sailor "that is my house, and the one next to it is where I go to church" When asked what the third hut was for, is told "that is where I used to go to church"
Quasi, yes for us the lutheran school was the only viable option. I did consider home schooling but couldn't see how to manage it working full time. I am very thankful we did it though it was very costly. My 200k quote is rounded off low. We spent 80k just for high school. Grandma helped and for a while we both had two jobs to pull it off without going into debt.
Was I ever cognizant over the money we spent! This especially hit hard for me because Mr didn't want children at all and I had talked him into it over many years of persuasion. Looking back, he is glad we did but we both were clueless at the time how much money it would cost. I was fortunate to have chosen a good husband to pilot us well through these financially challenging times! He was fortunate to have a wife who respected his decision to stay out of debt and could live simply and frugally. I am happy you have had the opportunity to have your kids in a Christian school environment. Here in Cali there isn't a social stigma, many people chose the private route. Mainly because our public schools are so pathetically bad for so many reasons.
Best wishes and have a very Merry Christmas!
Miffed;-)
Miffed: Your next miraculous experience will be when you dig up your own gold while fighting grizzly bears.
And yes, you can bring Mr. Miffed...
My dearest angus,
You'd change your tune quickly from miraculous to darn right frigging crazy! I should warn you I get a bit impulsive when angered and any grizzly moving in on my stash or even my coffee would find itself attacked by a couple of pots in hellfire fury! I can see it now. " is you wife insane?!" and Mr Miffed would reply " Welcome to my world"
Kidding aside. The whole adventure would be incredible and damn, I'd love to go!
Miffed;-)
Miffed: We'll just give you some guns and ammo and point you in a direction away from the rest of us. Nobody will dare steal your coffee stash.
I see you are a man after my heart and we will get along just famously!
XOXOX
Miffed;-)
Miffed, you just have to have fun with faith. This is especially true if one travels or lives in disparate cultures where beliefs are heartfelt but cross-culturally contradictory, though in some places one is wise to keep thoughts private. With that in mind....
I believe in an omnipotent god. His name is Zeus.
My path to faith was strewn with opportunistic logic. It began with Pascal’s Wager. I then built a decision tree listing each and every god---I uncovered forty-seven primary gods along with hundreds of lesser gods whom I thought it probably was safe to ignore---who had a decent size following over the course of human history. From each possibility, I drew the path of “belief” and “no belief” and considered the consequences.
Since most gods are afforded omnipotence, I realized that no matter whom I chose as my solution to Pascal, I was at risk of suffering from the malicious impishness or master planning of The One who sends tsunamis rampaging across the Indian Ocean, unleashes the Bubonic Plague, or sadistically hands young children the horrific pain of deadly and untreatable cancer. Thus, early on in the decision process, there was no clear winner. I then had to look into the folklore of each potential candidate to ascertain some sort of risk-reward ratio. Most all of the potential candidates displayed a kind of petty vindictiveness that gives one reason for caution. It even makes one entertain the possibility of being morally superior to any and all of these omnipotents. One of the candidates with a large following has promised to come and visit again, but I figured that in today’s litigious world, should He re-enter in the same manner as His earlier appearance, He is more likely to face charges of sexual harassment and abuse of position than get a holiday named in honor of His arrival. Toss in lack of child support, and He might be looking at a lengthy incarceration. It seemed safe to cross him off and drop the SHIFT key on the pronoun.
In the end, Zeus was selected owing to a combination of regularly evidenced sadism coupled with His apparent predilection for pleasures of the flesh. Thus, the cost for non-belief---which is at the heart of Pascal’s Wager---seemed at least as high as with any other celestial sovereign, but Zeus also offered the possibility of the occasional Bacchanalian good time. At the very least I thought Zeus would overlook it if I ever got caught up in the passion of the moment or poured an extra glass of Barolo. Besides, who doesn’t like a god who evidences such sartorial splendor and cutting edge fashion sense?
Happy Holidays of your chosen belief system. (That kind of lacks a proper festive ring, don't you think?)
I will say Chindit, your reasoning is to be applauded! Having read many apologetics I can't say yours is glaring with fault. I personally bristle with Pascals wager claiming it is lacking in testosterone. Claiming a belief in god given simply the possibility that God actually does exist and assuming gain or loss associated with belief or with unbelief, a rational person should therefore live as though God exists? Why this simply pisses me off! A true omnipotent God would see through this and smite the poor person into oblivion ;-).
I decided to go the opposite route. I demanded proof of God's existance and devised a strictly defined way he could reveal himself to me. I would except no nuance. That I got my demand in the exact way I required forever humbled me and ended my continual belief this world is a pathetic meaningless hell hole of a sham. But I still don't have any definition of what God is or why the world is as it is. I am no closer to an answer and could accept your reasoning Zeus is our true overlord. Perhaps he took a break from cataclysms to have fun toying with a gullible microbiologist.
In reality, I believe in love and laughter. I am hedonistic but loyal. I try not to judge and respect the fact we are all on our unique paths. We are essentially alone. To be alone is to accept death. To accept death is to appreciate life and live it with gusto. At least, that is my way of viewing it. I agree, one does seem to do better if one views it more humorously. A fact the fervent religious fanatics seem to lack.
A Merry Holiday to you and yours as well. It is always a pleasure to read your posts. They remind me of my father who did lean on the side of verbosity and excessive analysis. Though often locked up in his office in deep contemplation, he had an incredibly tender heart.
Miffed;-)
God is the Light. In Him there is no darkness.
If you understand the laws dealing with Light, the Lorentz Transform, then you can understand that He is Omniscient, Omnipresent, and Omnipotent.
When a being is traveling at Light Speed it takes ZERO Time for arrival at the Destination. That being travels absolutely no distance. One can be EVERYWHERE at ONCE as one can manifest at any given time and place within the Physical Universe.
x = xo( 1 - v2/c2)1/2
t = to( 1 - v2/c2)1/2
When v = c then ( 1 - v2/c2)1/2 = 0
Thus t = 0 at v = c and x = 0 at v = c.
Light is also the manifestation of pure Energy.
Light transcends the Physical Universe as well as it is within it.
Happy Bah Humbug, Miffed.
I'm so glad you've graduated to the basics of Special Relativity. But mixing some science with an imaginary product ('God') won't get you far.
Unless you're talking about the time some of my Crew and I went back into time, and took The Voyage Home, to save some whale near San Francisco. My only regret was that I didn't shag that Catherine Hicks chick, with all my god-like powers. But, being an American feminist type, she'd been harder to bed than teenage Mary/Miriam. But hey, can I sell you some Transparent Aluminum?
Kirk out.
And how deep into Relativity shall I go when the basics serve fine for demonstrating my point?
Will you enjoy some of Roger Penrose's musings about Miracles in his book, "The Road To Reality, A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe"?You do know Dr. Penrose, right? He just worked with Hawking for awhile on those Black Holes...
In Chapter 39, titled "Beauty and Miracles", he writes, "The second, namely the irresistable allure of what are frequently termed "miracles", I have only hinted at so far; yet I can vouch from personal experience these can indeed exert a powerful influence on the direction of one's research."
What force is providing that direction, that motion? This is one of the greatest Physicist of the 20th Century writing...When writing of Miracles just who performs them?
Penrose continues, "I am sure that string theory and M-theory have themselves been guided by a great many such miracles...These mirror symetries act like magic, and numbers that had previously seemed to have little to do with one another were found to be the same, such as with the calculations performed by Candelas and his colleagues, as described in SS 31.14. This certainly qualifies as a miracle, in the sense that I am using the term here."
While Penrose does not proclaim a God, as I do, he does have an inate sense that coincidences, unexplainable, happen. That when many coincidences happen together, that the odds of that occurence approaches ZERO which is an impossibility as a result of chance occurence.
If it does not happen as a chance occurence then it happens as designed and planned. At that point one must infer the Designer.
Having a little bit of design is akin to having a girl just a little bit pregnant. Design and Chance are a binary.
Oh...and as for shagging Katherine Hicks...there is another Katherine that I am interested in bedding (She hates her name so she uses another)...she is a Feminist Bitch from Hell, so I can understand. She was my first and...actually...my last love at the present moment. (But I like the challenge.)
What a coincidence, eh?
A most hearty bah Humbug to you my dear Ebenizer! I can almost hear you say it...." I don't deserve this happiness!" my nihilistic friend.
Since you are a local boy, sometime we should do lunch. :-)
Miffed;-)
Perhaps we shall...
Let me know. Perhaps after the holidays when, hopefully, I shall return to some semblance of a human? I will look forward to it.;-)
Miffed;-)
Zhmiffed@gmail.com
God is consciousness. And we are all God trying to realize our full potential.
Three weeks ago two of my friends and I went to a ranch in Fredericksburg, Texas, and took what Terence McKenna calls "a heroic dose." Five dried grams. Let me tell you, our third eye was squeegeed quite cleanly. Wow! And I'm glad they're against the law, 'cause you know what happened when I took 'em? I laid in a field of green grass for four hours, going "My God, I love everything." The heavens parted, God looked down and rained gifts of forgiveness onto my being, healing me on every level, psychically, physically, emotionally. And I realized our true nature is spirit, not body, that we are eternal beings, and God's love is unconditional 'n' there's nothing we can ever do to change that. It is only our illusion that we are separate from God, or that we are alone. In fact the reality is we are one with God and He loves us. Now, if that isn't a hazard to this country... Do you see my point? How are we gonna keep building nuclear weapons, you know what I mean? What's gonna happen to the arms industry when we realize we're all one? Ha ha ha ha ha! It's gonna fuck up the economy! The economy that's fake anyway! Ha ha ha! Which would be a real bummer. You know. You can see why the government's cracking down. On the idea of experiencing unconditional love. -Bill Hicks
The problem I have with Pascal's Wager is that it implicitly assumes there is one true god... it falls apart the moment you have to pick between two gods that will both allegedly eternally damn you if you don't believe.
Do you believe me to be an "ignorant Bible Thumper", Akak?
Darwin had no knowledge of the internal structure of the Cell. The information was not available to him. But not to rehash the many problems with the Theory of Evolution...
I just want the atheists who embrace Evolution to be consistent. If there is no Good and Evil, if Nietzsche is correct, if the atheist needs to go "Beyond Good and Evil", then let it be that Darwin's Survival of the Fittest prevail.
Atheists need not be "moralizing" about how just so awful it is that Rabbis suckle infant penis and Priests sodomize Altar Boys.
It is an animal behavior. Since Humans are all animals and evolved then why need there be Good and Evil. The atheist needs to transcend that in order to be consistent. There is nothing wrong with the Alpha Male Chimpanzee sodomizing the subordinates in his group. There is nothing Evil about the Lion killing the Gazelle.
Yet you believe that there is something wrong with an Alpha Male Human suckling an infant's penis? What makes it Evil that a Priest, another Alpha Male of another group, sodomizes an altar boy? If you are a consistent atheist then you need to understand that this is just animal behavior.
Or are you desiring the practice of Ritual, of arbitrary laws that declare it to be wrong? Then we have the ritual of the Court...the ritual of caging the accused, the ritual of killing the accused...RITUAL. That is just completely irrational and just smacks of RELIGION, the RELIGION which you reject and despise.
The Human Being is just an animal. Survival of the Fittest is the only rule of Nature...IF YOU ARE A CONSISTENT AND RATIONAL ATHEIST.
I'd have no problem debating with atheists if they were rational and consistent..
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you do seem to have a problem with those who do not believe as you believe. Rather than a sublime peace, your faith appears to elicit anger and resentment in you. Assuming you are a supporter of the Christian faith, your list of opponents, any of whom can be like akak and upset you, includes everyone from Arians to Zoroastrians, all of whom are as equally convinced of the rightness of their belief system. (The only ones unconvinced go by the name of Agnostic.) You also jump to a false conclusion that humans require some sort of fear of punishment to live nicely amongst each other cooperating toward a peaceful co-existence. Other humans, perhaps those who believe in their own emotional evolution, have come to an agreement as to what constitutes morality and proper behavior, and conversely what falls into the opposite camp, which you might call sin. These other-thinking people call their belief system "civilization". These agreements, or laws, initially may well instill a fear similar to what religions use with the threat of eternal damnation, but eventually most people come to believe that living according to the proverbial "Golden Rule" is simply good manners and a benefit to everyone. Then they teach their children, who teach their children.
Does your particular faith hold a monopoly on good behavior? Perhaps you haven't gotten out much, but if you did you would find good and moral people sprinkled across this planet, yet they do not follow your faith. Many of these good folks are as convinced that they follow the One Truth as you are. Given that there can be, at most, only one One Truth, then billions of morally upright people are following an imaginary god or belief system. Still, they behave morally. Is that not proof that an actual god is not a prerequisite for moral behavior? Now consider that those who are Atheist or Agnostic simply cut out the middleman and go straight to good manners.
"You also jump to a false conclusion that humans require some sort of fear of punishment to live nicely amongst each other cooperating toward a peaceful co-existence."
That is a decent "Strawman Argument". It will not fly here. Just where did I propose that in my argument to Akak? I did not.
It is counterproductive to have a peaceful coexistence. One needs to embrace the concept of Survival of the Fittest. Good and Evil are constructs that will not serve YOU well in the Animal Kingdom.
You need to read Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil" since Good and Evil are Religious Constructs. When you ABANDON the concepts of Good and Evil then you will find true peace as an atheist.
Anything else just smacks of RITUALISTIC RELIGION. It is irrational and inconsistent.
If I may add:
If evolution was a "fact", you wouldn't get human beings. You would have a universe full of Giger's Alien.
Wonderful 50/50 exchange on this topic. I love a free exchange of ideas, but anyone who can understand probs and stats knows that the Darwin Cult requires the most blind faith and denial of scientific fact.
Not an ignorant bible thumper, here.
But I just don't care. Evolution takes millions of years. It is such a slow process, the changes that evolve have not, do not, and will not affect me in a meaningful way.
The scientific explanations are about as meaningful as the magical ones.
I just don't understand why people get so worked up about it. There are more pressing issues to me.
There is a certain amount of adaptation within species, but you're on target with your statement/question. Darwin assumed the cell was essentially a blob of jelly; he had no idea that the structures and processes within a single cell dwarf the complexity of the largest factories or cities ever created by mankind.
Mathematically speaking, it is impossible for DNA and the complexity of the 'simplest' cell to have developed by accident. We are more likely, based on the laws of thermodynamics, to experience DEvolution rather than Evolution. Well, we all have to believe in something, and believing in evolution and 'survival of the fittest' makes it easier to justify abortion, death panels, and other joys inflicted upon mankind by persons such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, to name but a few.
Yet more derp. And, derivative derp at that. You are saying nothing about Evoltuion, but you are merely repeating anti-Evolution folktales that can be picked up in 5 minutes on any website.
Alas, to understand Evolution takes work, and time. It takes study, reading, and lots of it. Just like understanding cosmology, advanced math, or geology, or any other number of subjects that cannot be picked up easily. In other words, materail that your average American has no time for as the next hour of TV programming gets underway.
GG
And I'm a f..king rocket scientist, GG. You're not as smart as you think and you sound like an arrogant bastard.
Between a know-it-all and a rocket scientist, this maybe my best chance to find out.
Which was first: the chicken or the egg?
The Egg.
Phenomena progresses from the simple to the complex, from enthalpy to entropy.
The fertilized egg is more simple as it begins with ONE CELL. The Chicken is composed of many cells and is more complex.
I was just re-reading, but saw fit to comment here. Below I remarked that many among us could benefit from instruction regarding the difference between knowledge and belief.
Many religious types (myself not among them) openly acknowledge faith and belief as the foundation of their religion. Kudos to them.
Many evolutionists insist that these religious types are derps from backwaterfuck county who simply lack the sophistication to comprehend what is fact... (This sentence demonstrates belief, not knowledge, although the learned among us accept this thinking as fact)
The Theory of Evolution requires no less faith to be accepted as truth. There are so many leaps of faith within this theory, that it could be the very reason frogs and kangaroos exist. (See what I did there?) Yet evolutionists insist that this theory be taught as fact. (It is but a belief)
Religion = Belief
Theory of Evolution = Belief
Facts.
I do believe you don't know what you're talking about, and haven't even read Darwin's book.
I have read Darwin's "The Origin of Species", as well as having read the "Holy Bible" (various Christian versions).
It has been some time for either, and I find Darwins musings more believeable and compelling than those of the Bible.
Likewise, I find it more plausible, and perhaps more suited to the evidence, that DNA has been manipulated by some other intellegent force than that of a God, or happenstance. The Alien banging Mary you mentioned holds at least equal weight with that of Darwin.
Still, not knowing, I do not accept any of these theories as truth or fact. That requires faith.
I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that "transitional forms" is Newspeak for Missing Link. Note, therefore, that for every Missing Link you find, you create two new ones.
I AM GOD. KNEEL BEFORE ME.
And give me your wallet and valuables!!
"Why would God need a starship?"
.
For the lulz.
You will note "lulz" is not mentioned in the commandments.
Because, when you have a starship and the toys, tech, a Holodeck, and weapons that go with it, you ARE God to semi-literate animal herders of "questionable hygiene".
Shit, my 5th grader knows way more than any of the Biblical 'figures' (whether real, exaggerated or contrived), and I don't see you building an altar to them!
Face it, Moses was impressed by a crashed space alien, and some sleazy starship captain shagged some hot teenie and told her she was "Chosen" and "special". Yeah, aren't they all!?
God is Light. In Him there is no darkness. That is to be taken literally. It explains His Omnipotence, His Omnipresence, and his Omniscient being in perfection when you understand the laws of Physical Light.
That's nice, but I can't sleep with the lights on.
LOL
Neither can I...neither can I.
Who in the hell will down arrow you for that ???
What a jerk.
I did. I'm running a test.
LOL
Tom, you're taking on the WRONG guy. I'll talk to you about light (at any level of physics or engineering) till your head explodes. Let's start with my 'Bible'**
Don't mix science with ancient superstition -- which is exactly what you're doing -- unless you're out to confuse the weak-minded and the gullible. In which case I might joion you, if there's money & lifestyle (hot women) in it. ;-)
** https://archive.org/details/PrinciplesOfOptics (Born & Wolf)
or, if you'd like a hardcopy http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Optics-Electromagnetic-Propagation-Inte...
Actually I am not taking on the "WRONG guy". If you can give me more education then I am all ears. I was never shocked when my students became the teacher. It means that I did my job well.
As for lifestyle...I am interested in the Truth. I will not compromise my principles for money or women.
(Actually I cannot blame you as that is where you are at in life. In fact I understand that as, from your perspective, Good and Evil must be abandoned.)
Is that you Barack? Do you visit ZH often? How's the weather in Hawaii, by the way?
The God of what? These polls are idiotic. Most people have quite different ideas of who God is, which is why you find such disagreement amongst 'believers' on things such as creationism, abortion, ghosts, astrology etc. Definitions are everything......
Speaking of definitions, am I the only one who finds it absurd to define "baby boomers" as those born from 1946 to 1964?
First of all, the baby boom was a post-war phenomenon. All the post-war domestic banging and knocking up that was delayed by the war had to have worked its way through the system by around 1956.
Secondly, think back to when you were nine years old, and recall how truly different things were between you and an 18 year old, as well as between you and a newborn child. All three would have grown up in a different environment and have different life experiences. I would not consider someone nine years younger or older than me to be of the same generation, yet somehow 1946 to 1964 is lumped together as one.
Personally, I'd define the baby boom as 1946 to maybe 1957, as anyone born afterward never had to worry about being sent to Vietnam. The next group might be those born from 1958 to 1969, as they'd all have childhood memories of the energy crisis and long lines at the gas stations (the ones that actually had any gas) in 1973 and 1979.
But hey, people have always been arranged into groups by those wishing to advance various narratives.
Stooge: Funny you mention that scenario. To this day I can recall the diviide between us kids that were 14 years old and those who were 17-18 years old. It was two different worlds, separated by fake "status" due to the Alphas being older, wrapped up in a shithole town.
No idea how I've lived so long now. Never lost a fight but do have some scars.
How do you define the word Generation? From Gestation to Reproduction is the classic definition. The difference between 1964 and 1946 is 18.
Eighteen years olds give birth to the next generation. Those born in 1946 were making babies in 1964. They were not making babies in 1957 as they were 11 years old.
It's an academic thing. Generations are about the length of a productive life. So people born on year zero tend to start reproducing in 22 years.
It's a generational thing.
As the Nation has progressed the length of the Generation is increasing. Today, since women are delaying the onset of pregnancy, a Generation is currently defined in the upper 20's
From 1946 to 1964 there were no Birth Control Pills. It was 18 years back then. It is a generational thing.
You can read about it on Wikipedia.
Agreed fourth stooge, mr and I were born 60 and 61. We both were first born. We bristle at being lumped in with boomers as we find little in common. Our life experiences are vastly different. We relate more with the millennials. People are individuals but there always seems to be a need for grouping especially from the government.
Miffed;-)
Yikes! Lets get our Divide and Conquer right!
I believe there are quite a few among us who could use some instruction regarding the difference between knowledge and belief.
Understatement of the (new) century.
God did it
Evolution did it
but how did life arise in the first place? Evolution is what happened after life began, after the first livng cell came into existence. The question (to my mind) is how did that first cell emerge? Some point to the Miller experiment but that doesn't show how. Evolutionists say we don't know at this point, but one day we will find the answer. I don't think it's possible that the first cell just came into existence by materialistic means withoit any outside supernatural force
How did super natural force come into existence?
but you don't believe in supernatural forces?
I have faith I understand you.
The only clue that I have is that I have not got a clue.
All that I "know" is that which I can define. If I cannot define it then I do not know it.
Really it is definitions that sum up what I know.
Everything else is belief. If I have faulty definitions then I will have faulty beliefs.
For instance I might believe that the Universe is 14 Billion Years Old. But can I be mistaken? Yes. What if there is another explanation of the Redshifting of Light than from recession of objects? (There are.)
What if the images which I observe are not objects at all, but merely reflections? (Look in the Mirror. Is that image an object or are you the object and seeing a reflection of the image which you transmit?)
What if the large Telescopes have become nothing more than High Tech Children's Kalideoscopes and everything we observe is an ILLUSION? (That might be the case.)
In fact I believe that it is the case. Can the Redshifting be due to a loss of Intensity, the loss of Energy, from numerous reflections caused by the Gravitational Lens affects from the vast amounts of Dark Matter in the Physical Universe? Is that a possibility? How many images have a one to one correlation to an actual object? Remeber that images are also distorted from the affects of time, the position of where they are manifested upon the fabric of the Space Time Continuum.
Just what do I know to be real? What illusions do I perceive to be real that are merely phantoms, misinterpreted, and I am blind to the reality due to my mistaken beliefs? What do I really know about the Physical Universe? NOT ALL THAT MUCH.
So do you really know the difference between knowledge and belief?
Just because this shit is funny - friend showed this to me tonight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXGljpsidd4 - "sick and twisted" - Knucks, I know you'll dig it. .
And, I witnessed some seriously shitty human behavior today when I went out to get a few things I needed (freezing rain right now turning to lots of snow and I don't have to deal tomorrow if I don't want to). Fucking xmas shoppers I guess, everywhere like zombie retards. . .
Holy fuck, no shit on the Christmas shoppers. I was replacing the flasher relay on a vehicle yesterday and forgot that it was the last Saturday before Christmas. When going up to the parts store to get a new one, holy fucking shit! Everybody probably thought I was the grench, as I'm sure they heard all of the cussing I was doing. Traffic was full fucking retard clusterfuck. It made normal rush hour look tame. But people had to get all of their useless Made in China crap for presents.
By the way...who believes gold is money? Mr. Bernanke, do you have an answer?
Does The God of Scripture need Market Confirmation to exist?
God if you are out there...you are weird. I don't understand why so many atrocities happen on your watch. get your shit together. People are losing faith.
sincerely,
million dollar bonus.
Left to themselves and lacking fear of a higher entity, people commit all sorts of atrocities. That's one major problem with free will, we tend to use it badly. I believe it was John Adams (second president) who said that the US Constitution was made for a religious and moral people, and would not suffice under other conditions. Well, Americans are less and less religious and less and less moral - although political correctness has gained ground based on observations - and that Constitution is now widely disregarded. In the Old Testament, when the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob got tired of being disrespected by the Israelites, he gave them over to dire consequences, such as being exiled to Babylon. Maybe He gave the US the current president for similar reasons?
religious and moral = stupid and obedient
So I see you have no problem with the banksters then. Lloyd, Jamie and company are amoral.
Or this...
Job 13:15 "Though he slay me, I will hope in him;
yet I will argue my ways to his face."
i would have loved to seen the romans feed those fucking jews and christians to lions hahahaha
Percentage of people who believe in God seems higher than that to me, but then i do hang out with black republican high school drop outs.
But what does it mean when people say they believe in God? Solf-described Christians range from those who accept the Bible as written, to those who consider Christianity a cafeteria - I'll keep believing those parts I like, but will ignore other parts -, through to those who 'believe' in Christmas and the Easter Bunny. Which of those will match the 'luke warm' description in the Book of Revelation and be spit out? I won't try to address what others claiming to believe in 'God' mean, since Jews have a wide range of beliefs and Muslims believe in a God far different than do Christians.
It's almost a meaningless question to ask, "do you believe in God".
http://truththeory.com/2013/10/14/there-is-still-hope-for-humanity/ God is actually "good." Good people. It's up to us.
Does "belief in God" include or exclude blind faith in The Obamessiah?
I'm pretty sure that belief in the Obamessiah has fallen a lot more than 8%.
I'm pretty sure GOD is on your side AKAK. If not? I'll give him a reminder!
yes. and materialism.
I think they covered religion pretty well in the Zeitgeist movie; here's the excerpt;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY
that part of the zeitgeist movie shows that whoever made it did not do any scholarly research at all and is quite ignorant of the historical record.
That was one of the most intellectually dishonest and shallow movies that I ever watched. Of course the silver lining is that I had a wonderful opportunity to put that into the atheist's face that wanted me to watch it.
After watching I started to tell him. He refused to listen. I holered at him that if I took one hour of my time to watch that nonsense then he was disrespectful for not yielding one hour of his time.
I pointed out every flaw and demonstrated his irrationality.
It was garbage but I made lemonaide out of the lemons.
Yes I love the atheist. I love exposing just how irrational that they are. It is funny to watch their face.
They use a club.
I prefer my rapier, my epe. Engarde si vous plait?
believe brutal realities.
you have or will be anally raped.
you are goyim.
you are nothing
you will not be assimilated.
you will be crushed asset stripped then terminated.
the injections have been given,the water and air dosed.
fuckishima mossad broken.
satanists prevail.
cern saturn contact made
time is torn and slipping.
away now no warriors left to put up a fight for hue man.
just toy town keyboard junkies raging against the jew ish machine.
Limerick King tryouts Fail......
good try even tho it has your usual tribal slant. Must be new Xmas carol for the anti-tribal clan!
Our current circumstances pretty much prove that facts have little relavence to what we believe. The Fact is, people believe whatever creates the rationalization allowing them to do what they THINK they NEED to do, or simply just sleep at night. Until we accept that WE are ultimately responsible for the world we have created, we will be forever lost. Our freedom is defined by what we are willing to do to preserve it. The willingness to borrow money to buy a Chinese TV defines it as well.
We are the smartest of the hominids.
We don’t like the idea of death so we created God and religion.
Not for us the ignominious death of hamsters and budgerigars.
We who were created in God’s image will live forever in paradise.
Everlasting life …. Just like everlasting QE.
Have faith!
What could possibly go wrong?
The Big Bang?
Interestingly there is no mention of a “Big bang” 13.7 billion years ago in the scriptures. Neither is there any mention of “Dark matter” or “Dark Energy”, which theoretically leads to the “Big Rip” where the increasing speed of the expansion of the universe (driven by “Dark Energy”) ultimately strips apart atoms themselves, including presumably any remaining physical pages of the scriptures.
The only important question to be addressed now is whether the expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet will prove stronger even than “Dark Energy” and bring forward the timetable of universal disaster.
In the beginning God said, "Let there be light."
What existed at the time of the Primordial Egg?
The Book of Revelation, speaking of the End, said that the Heavens shall be ripped apart. (The Big Rip???)
What gibberish are you writing?
You have not even read the book, have you?
And, Prometheus stole it for those inferior beings : Mankind!
God never forgave him nor the slimy mankind breed who benefitted from this treason although they were clones made in his image (selon Genesis); except for the titful ones, round bottomed, who were made from N°1 clone's rib!
So by that reasoning women were not even godlike in form ...which explains why the bearded ones love to hit them with their shoes.
One day, in the House of Wisdom of Baghdad where the slimy Caliph had created a place of learning for people to study the treatise of Man's greatest specimen, Aristotle, a learned who believed God was all enlightening-- all the while he learned about Math and astronomy with prowess of which he was very proud-- asked a humble woman who cleaned the floor of that impeccable house what her thoughts were about God and Wisdom.
She said to him : You know about the how and I know about the howless. She became the first Soufi learned; a spiritual belief in journey not in destination and a true agnostic.
Somewhow she speaks volumes to my mindset, as in her own way she was a true daughter of Buddha who never espoused DOGMA in religious spirituality. Metaphysics stays a journey into unknown beyond our comprehension.
That is the key when you stare into the sun; your eyes stay shut, and you live it with your inner senses, which are specific to you and unique (until a false Shaman says they are not yours but of the Maker, but this for his own personal power)!
My response was for one who claimed that which he knew not. The first manifestation after the Big Bang was that of Light. It must have been as we will not have known of the event as it is the Light which reveals Truth.
Then he also spewed the misunderstanding that the Last Book does not reveal the Great Rip.
Before making claims it is best that one knows about that which they are claiming? Would you agree?
As for the chambermaid and her humble wisdom I liken her to an uninformed child, much like those that the Christ spoke about when He said, "Unless you are like one of these you will not see the Kingdom of Heaven."
In arrogance one has all of the answers whereas in humility one seeks those answers which they may find. The child is a seeker.
May you always have the mind of a child and may my mind always be as one of those.
The Big Banged; just look at Africa.
Did we create the concept of Gods or did someone do it for us? Utopia, collectivism or any other vision of perfection that relies on a "higher power" ? Promoted by those who are either themselves or representatives of the higher power?
What a simplistic and blissful state of ignorance you have!
http://www.amazon.com/Proof-Heaven-Neurosurgeons-Journey-Afterlife/dp/1451695195
If there is no God of Scripture then there is no transcendental "wrongs". There is only inconveniences...But nobody here, (religious or non-religious or irreligious) acts like that. The Fed and the rulers are wrong, conspiracies are wrong, inappropriate control is wrong and on and on. We all act as if there are transcendental transgressions. But really, if there is no God of Scripture then to that person everything should be, "Meh!"
If there is no God of Scripture then there is no transcendental "wrongs". Bullshit!
Do you need a God to tell you to care? I don't. Maybe I'm a stronger person than you.
Your syllogistic reasoning is the ONLY reasoning that supports a God. (If this is true...well then THIS MUST be true!) Flawed to say the least.
There are no Gods and you can not show me any evidence to the contrary. Just interpretations of stars passed down for generations then blown out of all proportion with the help of the gubermint. And nobody ever had any balls to say religion is fraud.
What is "Faith" - To believe in something despite there being no evidence it is true.
If you are going to demand proof then our whole economic system may be at risk. Reality has no place in society. Have you learned nothing here?
So we shouldn't audit the fed? I'm confused here.
Please provide definitive proof that there is no God. I'll wait......
Please provide definitive proof that there are no unicorns or fairies.
I'll wait ....
It would be foolish to make such assertions wouldn't it...........
Oh they is real for sure! I seen them on the healthcare.gov website!
It's the mattering place to be.
Anywhere else would be virtually nothing.
Hi Angus.
Cheers Yen!
Ah, nice try.
When one claims to be a scientific thinker while simultaneously insisting that God does not exist, then one can only make that claim on the basis of a peer reviewed, published and repeated experiment with an accepted methodology. Otherwise, they are not a "true" scientist. That is the contradiction of the "scientists" in this thread.
The faithful, on the other hand, make no such claims. They freely state they have faith, and their Godly experiencies are at least in part based in that faith, i.e. it just "makes sense" or "they know it's true". They embody no inherant contradiction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VffZ2sSZ30M
Here you go. Turn up the volume, grab the popcorn and watch the children cry.
I think that everyone missing the point of the One God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
If you buy into the first book/chapter in any of their religious writings, you'll buy into whatever follows. E.g.,
In the case of the book Genesis, if you believe in the whole super-bully God and 'Sin' business, you'll believe in Sin alleviators/forgivers, and the middlemen that go with it. After all that...
Fiat currency, QE, etc are child's play.
What if the original word(Elohim) for God(El) in the orginal Genesis was mistranslated from a plural meaning(Elohim) to a singular meaning(El and then YHWH) in later versions? Now lets ask was that mistranslation accidental or intentional...hmmm?
I may have the words in parentheses spelled wrong above, but have read several authors** who insist that the original Genesis intended the meaning as plural Gods and not a singular God. Also that these ancient Hebrew Gods were the same as the Gods of the Sumerians.
One explanation for that change that I've seen is that it was done because in their evolution the Hebrews moved from polytheism to monotheism over time. The texts were then edited by later writers to reflect that evolution.
Anyone else know anything of this?
**One book in particular I can cite on this is The Shining Ones by Christian and Barbara Joy O'Brien.
The Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah broke apart from one another before the exile into Babylon and subsequent 70 Year enslavement. Thus there were two Oral Traditions. One was from the Kingdom of Judah and the other was from the Kingdom of Israel. The Babylonians seized Jerusalem and enslaved the Israelites and Jews, taking most of them into Captivity into Modern Day Iraq to serve as slaves for the next 70 years.
The first scroll to be penned was the Book of Job. During the 70 Year captivity many other books were penned. Genesis was an adaptation of the Babaylonian Creation Epic, the Elumna Elish, and the Flood Epic orginated in Babylon.
But the two Kingdoms, the Kingdom of Judah, and the Kingdom of Israel, had different scribes and different records. Thus they wrote the Histories a little different as well.
The Kingdom of Judah called God YHWH (Note (YHudaH Judah) and the Kingdom of Israel called him Elohim (Note Ish Ra EL.)
After the reunification of the Jews and Israelites after 70 Years of Babylonian Slavery the Priests got together and decided to mesh the books together in a Recognizable Storyline. That is why you read of Adam's first wife in Genesis 1 and Eve in Genesis 2. That is why there was one pair of Animals taken into the ark in Genesis 6 and Seven Pair of Clean and Two Pair of Unclean taken into the ark in Genesis 7.
When you understand how the Pentateuch was put together then it makes much better sense.
Hmm, interesting. And did you know that before Muhammad came along, each of the many (hundreds) of Arabic tribes who came to worship at the Black Meteorite rock ('Kaaba'), had their OWN god? He merely succeeded in uniting the tribes (into a much larger political and military entity). Clearly they all needed a much Bigger, Stronger and Wiser God than they had before. They all bought into the "upgrade".
This then is a clear case of each tribal Shaman ensuring his own lifestyle by being the intermediary of some invisible/imaginary entity. And a Tribal merger is like any CORPORATE MERGER... like in any corporate merger, there is "Harmonization" and "Re-Alignment" that results: The top guys on each side will find a job/position -- with a few taken out -- and the rest of the underlings have to adapt to the new Core Values and new Mission Statement.
People may sugar-coated a turd, but a sugar-coated turd is still a turd.
Without God, all things are equally permissible.
"Do you need a God to tell you to care? I don't. Maybe I'm a stronger person than you."
Or, maybe you're weaker-because you insist on clinging to your view that you care while claiming to there exists no ultimate right or wrong.
If there is no God then caring is counterproductive.
Since Humans are all just animals then there need be no outrage when "injustices" are done. You will find PEACE and have NO CARES about the "injustices" as you know that it is just normal and Natural Behavior of any animal spiecies. It is, after all, Survival of the Fittest.
Since you promote atheism you may want to read Friedrich Nietzsche's, "Beyond Good and Evil". One of my atheist friends finds great peace in reading that book. He lives by the precepts and is at least consistent and rational about that. He takes great pride in his RATIONAL APPROACH.
He does not get upset at all when the TSA plays with a Six Year Old's crotch. He does not get upset with people dying in Wars needlessly. Nothing much upsets him at all...unless it happens to him. He is at peace with the World...totally. (Actually I don't know how nothing upsets him. He just says that he gets his peace from understanding that there is no such thing as Good and Evil.)
Then you will find out that in order to be RATIONALLY CONSISTENT you must ABANDON any notions of Good and Evil. Good and Evil are just constructs of RELIGION.
Notions of Good and Evil will just not serve YOU well in the Animal Kingdom. It leads to IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR, as yours, which just smacks of RELIGION.
Although I approve of your notion attributed to good and evil I would like to point out that these notions existed before the three Abrahamic revelations. Hammurabi's code and the Aryan Vedas like the Tales of Troy show that the Book of Moses were preceded by the spring of moral concepts before the TEn commandments were formulated, as that is now historically dated +/- 100 years.
The Greek philosopher's thread precedes the birth of Jesus; so Socrates and Plato defined good and evil from a rational perspective and the book of the jungle was already obsolete when Greek civilization flourished.
Form a moral and ethical viewpoint, modern man is more Greek than creationist in his mindset. No comparison on that. We know what good and bad are without the books of revelation and the causality of it is clearly defined; the crime of crimes being hubris and the four cardinal virtues clearly established by Plato/Aristotle.
Rationality is therfore not antinomic with notion of good and evil; quite the contrary. One can be agnostic and ethical.
Personally I do not ascribe to the abandonment of Good and Evil. I believe that preceded all of History and are constructs in the Creator's Eternal Mind. I believe that we have these as inherent to our own being from the day that we first breath. I do not believe Good and Evil to be prescient within the Animal Kingdom.
But setting my personal beliefs aside...
Rejection of the Creator needs to lead the atheist to declare themselves as an equal to the Animal in that Death is the finality and that the Spirit does not transcend the Temporal Realm. So there is nothing special about being a Human Being as there is no Spirit in the atheist viewpoint.
It follows that "Morals" are just constructts of preferences by Societies and people, through learned behaviors rather than an enlightenment of a Spirit.
If this is the case, that there is no Creator, then the concepts of Good and Evil are just as mythical as the Creator. To reject one part of the "myth" while accepting another part of the "myth" is just a Religious action.
Atheists are not exclusive to this irrationality. Many Muslims, Christians and Jews do not believe or accept the teachings of their Religion in the entirety. They pick and choose what is valid and declare other parts to be invalid. This is the cause of the many factions and offshoots of Religions today.
But if one abandons the idea of the Creator then one need embrace the Natural Laws of the Animal Kingdom and reject that any behavior can be labeled as Good or Evil.
They can prefer to act benevolently toward one another. I know many ethical atheists.
They can prefer to act malevolently toward one another. I know many unethical atheists. (Again this is not exclusive to atheists...)
But the point is that they will sit and judge Animal Behavior, such as sucking Infant's Penis, and Sodomizing Altar Boys, as an Evil Scourge.
If they truly have abandoned God then they need to abandon notions of Good and Evil as well since they correlate to the myth, are coinherent to the "myth".
They need to understand that it is just Animal Behavior and not different from any other Animal Behavior. That is consistent because the entire "myth" is rejected. They need to understand that when they declare what they do not like as "Evil" that it is not the case. It is just a matter of their preference.
Stealing, Killing, Raping, molesting, enslavement and assaulting are not Evil. All animals do it and they do it to their own as well as to other species.
If that is the case then why are some atheists so shocked when Humans do to other Humans if Humans are just Animals? Humans just belong to the Animal Kingdom, after all.
It is an irrational stance that smacks of a Religion which they supposedly abandoned. That is an inherent hypocrisy which needs to be exposed.
Of course if one does believe in Divine Guidance and Revelation of the difference between Good and Evil then it is consistent to label Good Actions as Good and Evil Actions as Evil.
I am just looking for some consistent, rational behavior from the atheist. I can debate that.
"Rationality is therfore not antinomic with notion of good and evil; quite the contrary. One can be agnostic and ethical."
If that's your conclusion, then you are, IMHO, missing the previous posters point.
His point, I believe, is that without God, all systems of "morality" are equally valid. Cannibalism, incest, murder, etc. have all been moral in some societies at some point. Without God, there is no such thing as a TRUE right or wrong, just an accepted right or wrong.
this is historically not true. Why does a deity have to sanctify human value systems and notions of justice?
When divine laws, specifically engraved in holy books of God, allow you to stone to death or cut off a thief's hands or impale the heretic, that did not make them any more sacred than human logic and republican justice!
God's existence brought nothing to this debate; on the contrary the holy Inquisition and the Crusade debased GOD beyond repair; whence the Reform.
Where is the TRUE right or wrong there?
The greek philosophers established a golden rule that defines man's free will and moral code based on one principle : the golden rule; aka do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That phrase was a greek invention; not Christian.
Greek philosophy defined all the basic rules of good conduct. God's laws were in no way more comprehensive; and also subject to interpretation by his Vicar-- (once the church was organized sociopolitically)-- by Popes as history proves.
Why don't you read the Republic by Plato..good starting point.
Tribal customs and laws; aka Vedic teachings created non rational "morality" based on caste and blood line; their "golden" rules were not universal, whereas the greek ones were. Socrates cast that in stone for the ages : justice, one of those four cardinals, had to be same for victor as for vanquished. Hegemonial law, and later christian king's law, Papally sanctified human construct, has always defied that Platonic logic.
still missing the point you are.
I believe you are missing his point.
The world is full of religions, both monotheist and polytheist. All claim to represent the One Truth. Since there cannot be multiple absolute truths, then at best all but one are false and adherents are following a god or gods who absolutely do not exist, and following founders who were either liars or batshit crazy. Despite the falsity of their belief systems, many followers of the false faiths behave with good manners. That suggests a god is not a necessary input for humans to behave in a socially constructive manner. Aristotle's Golden Rule seems to be a belief at which the majority of humans arrive without any input from some omnipotent being. Whether you believe that without gods all "moral" system are equivalent is irrelevant, because humans inherently tend to organize themselves in societies where the majority evidence "good manners" and do not resort to "cannibalism, murder, incest", etc. That is the empirical evidence, and it is achieved without falling back on the teachings of Krishna, Christ, Buddha, Mohammed, Moroni or Bokonon, who all came late to the game after societies had already organized themselves around "good manners".
Still, as one group's Messiah might say, "If you like your religion, you can keep your religion". Conversely, if you lose your "faith" and begin to behave as if all actions are morally equivalent, civilized society will put you in your place. It's the "human" thing to do.
chindit13 replied, "Whether you believe that without gods all "moral" system are equivalent is irrelevant, because humans inherently tend to organize themselves in societies where the majority evidence "good manners" and do not resort to "cannibalism, murder, incest", etc. That is the empirical evidence,..."
Really? It is the Empirical Evidence??? What world are you living in?
Did the Greek Empire fall due to debauchery and dishonesty?
Did the Roman Empire fall due to debauchery and dishonsty?
Did the Egyptian Empire fall due to debauchery and dishonesty?
Just how many ancient civilizations still exist today???
ergo ad infinitum...
What empirical evidence are you writing about???
No. Civilizations are born, they rise, they become corrupted, then they die. That is the Animal Kingdom at work. For only brief times are cooperative behaviors present. When societies adopt that then they flourish.
But they become corrupted,,,JUST LIKE THE PRESENT ORDER.
There is a Direct Corelation with the Spiritual Awareness of a Society and the propensity for abundant growth. When the Society abandons God then it subsequentially falls. Of course I will write that as the Civilization falters the rate of growth of Spiritual Abandonment amongst the population increases. This can be due to famine, pestillence, or other Natural Catastrophes. But if there is a Spiritual Awareness then Societies can be cohesive, suffer through the bad times, and emerge once again. But after the abandonment of the Spiritual there is no liklihood that a Society will be able to weather the Natural Storm.
I do not care what society, or what God is worshipped, or whether it is Israel, the Greeks, the Ottomans, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Aztecs, the Mayans, or the Chinese, which abandons God. When they abandon the search for the Spiritual Truth then collapse soon follows. That is the Historical Record, the Empirical Evidence.
Without God, without the spirit, we are just animals.
If the "word of God" includes instructions on how you deal with your slaves, then it is clear such "word of God" has zero moral authority....
Secular Humanism is alive and real...
The Atheist needs to abandon "right" and "wrong"..."good" and "evil"...in order to be consistent, rational and find peace.
Good and Evil are RELIGIOUS CONSTRUCTS. They do not serve you well in the Animal Kingdom.
There is no difference, whatsoever, between an Alpha Male Chimpanzee sodomizing one of his group, no matter what age, and a Human sodomizing an Eight Year old boy. These are Natural Behaviors. It is not right. It is not wrong. It is Natural and something to be expected as Humans are just Animals.
Now you may not like it. Or you may like it. But just because you like it or do not like it does not mean that it is right or wrong. There is no such thing as right or wrong if you are an atheist. It is just a matter of preferences.
(I do not like it. I believe that it is wrong. But I also believe in God, Right and Wrong, and other concepts that is pertaining to that.)
It is an Natural Behavior. If there is no God then Humans are just animals. Why expect anything different from them?
Expecting a different behavior is just irrational and SMACKS OF RITUALISTIC RELIGION. (Of course I will ascribe to that. At least I am consistent. But what do I know?)
You need to read Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil" and apply the principles to your very own life. Then you will be at peace when you read of Animal Behavior and understand that Humans are animals. That way you will be rationally consistent.
Do I need to start quoting Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil"?
Geez. You make such a big deal out of nothing. It is just Animal Behavior. You are just dead after living here. You are just like every other animal and there is nothing special about you whatsoever. Enjoy life. Eat, drink and be merry for tommorrow we die.
It is just like my atheist friend said. You can act as long as you are willing to pay the consequences. Nothing that you can do is ever wrong.
@ Dan The Man: Thank you for proving my point. Even to debate is to prove the God of Scripture. Believing in Logic, Morality and Science ALL are consistent with The God of Scripture. How can things that are transcendental, immaterial etc. exist in YOUR Worldivew? You called "Bullshit!" using Logic (my statement of belief is not the same as your statement of belief)...Why do you assume Logic when you haven't proven Logic (Is there universal agreement on what Logic is among Logicians for example?)? Logic, Morality and Science are the "Fundamentals" by which we all know God exists. Have a look @ Romans 1:20-21
"20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, nhave been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,7 in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they obecame futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened."
EVERYONE cares in some fashion and it is interesting that it seems you are trying to shame me (Transcendental Morality, I OUGHT to believe a certain way) but like Logic I doubt you have reflected adequately on your situation and will keep using it. "To be incosistent is to engage in the nature of lying." Question: Why doesn't your incosnsistency push you to resolve it. If you have resolved it I would love to hear about it. If not then keep on deceiving yourself. No skin off my back. We could all take a step forward by ceasing to think that people who disagree with us are either Ignorant, Stoopid or Evil.
Check out this vid on Ted Talks Kathryn Schultz: On Being Wrong. If you're strong enough...;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88
WRONG! You have never lived in a world that wasn't conditioned by moral teaching. Growing up, you were in fact conditioned by parents, grandparents, teachers, friends etc. And even if EVERY single one of them was secular atheist, they too were conditioned by the people who raised them, and by societal norms. In some cases, you learned your morals from disgust at the poor examples around you. If you really believed your statement, then in your view, every child born into the world should just be allowed to take every thing they desire, and they'll grow up to great moral people. LMAO! We all are familiar with the spoiled rotten child.
The bible says that there was a time God let every man do what was right in his own eyes and the result was constant evil. Genesis 6:5 Now let's suppose that you're some special moral case, like Noah, trying to do good although the masses around you are constantly engaged in evil. If that's the case, then you are doomed to be overwhelmed by the tyranny of the majority.
No, man needs an external objective standard of morality, or survival of the fittest mandates an inevitable race to the bottom.
Audacity17,
Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? Cuz' if you are disagreeing then the first word of your post actually supports my position.
Regards...
DARPA dreams?