No really support, more attempt to make it comparable with Religion. Not really rediculous given apparently almost the entire world doesn't follow Athiesm/Agnosticism, and thus that it would merely be an eventful thing.
I'm misinterpreting the findings? The conclusion of the snippet you gave was this: Scientists have so far identified about 20 hard-wired, evolved "adaptations" as the building blocks of religion. Like attachment, they are mechanisms that underlie human interactions: Brain-imaging studies at the National Institutes of Health showed that when test subjects were read statements about religion and asked to agree or disagree, the same brain networks that process human social behavior — our ability to negotiate relationships with others — were engaged. This is just fantasy. One cannot even be said to "understand" anything without language. We have no method of internal self-communication complex enough to conceptualize the idea of God other than language. Things beyond material existence, beyond basic sensory perception, couldn't be "considered" (not that anything really can) without language, without a means of treating the mind and the brain separately. Self-dialogue cannot exist without dialogue. The invisible is imperceptible to those incapable of communicating beyond what their basic senses can relay to a glorified audio/visual/kinesthetic processor. So you post it out of pure antagonism towards those who think differently than you? Who does it prove anything to? Science isn't bulletproof, it has no stranglehold on objective reality. All philosophies accept some basic unprovable premises in order to remain internally consistent. That's the very definition of faith, isn't it?
And what's so confusing about that? Are you saying the results don't make sense? The snippet you quoted reinforces my interpretation of my earlier quote. It's saying that humans think they are talking to God in their heads; or some sort of pseudo 'feeling' I suppose it could be construed to mean... using the same functions that they use when they talk to friends. Dialogue can't exist without dialogue.... duh... but self communication and thought processes can still exist without language. The concept of God does not require words to think of.. its so very simple... a feeling of elation and happiness when viewing something "magical"... it is very realistic to suppose that someone created everything just for human or some other very simplistic approach. I talked to my father about this, he think without words most of the time he says... he has a masters degree in economics... why would you deny something like this that is clearly a fabrication of your delusion.[/quote] Ah yes... the sixth sense! Whatever man, your arguments make less and less sense... You have no doubt. That's what is infuriating. You classify what God is, what he does, his intentions being fundamentally good, etc., etc., but maybe the creator of the universe was much more evil. You don't know anything about God.... if he does exist... and neither do I. Edit: Oh, and can we stop doing these enormous quote trees? They take a lot of edits to look even presentable...
If a God existed, why are there so many different religions, many of which believe in multipls Gods? Why would God punish anyone for not believing in Him
I'm sure matt would be able to inform you better than I, but I believe the idea behind it is that before revealing truth through Jesus it was acceptable to believe in a different deity as long as you lived a good life. Just as Jews wouldn't be cast into Hell (mind you we're discussing Protestant Christianity here) unless they denied Jesus after death. Or something like that.
He's sooo lonely up there in Heaven....i mean he designed it specifically for us, but no one goes there because he's got HELL for us!
Oh that's right, there's no HELL or SATAN...... i remember now, but wait..........where do us non believers go to get punished????
I enjoy spectating these debates. Mainly to see stuff like this happens, when the "logical and practical Atheists" act immature when debated the "close minded and uneducated Theist".
The most tragic figure in the Bible(my Bible) is God himself. Time and time again he sets an attainable expectation for people, and in time, they spurn Him and he punishes and then gives mercy to them for their transgression. To sumarize, people believe, good things happen and God goes off to leave them to keep believing. People stop believing and bad things happen so that God comes back. Second, as visual creatures, anything we can't see isn't there and so we can't possibly believe in something that we can't comprehend, which would be God, as only a deity could be existing on all levels, times, and posess no filters of the Universe, but without direct proof, but thousands of years of scripture, people stop belief.
He made a pretty logical conclusion to it, however there were some errors, like he completely left out String Theory. As well at one point he almost mentioned asked "what made the laws of physics" but he left that subject quickly.
He made a pretty logical conclusion to it, however there were some errors, like he completely left out String Theory. As well at one point he almost mentioned asked "what made the laws of physics" but he left that subject quickly.[/quote:mkwfc4im] Do you go to Oxford?
Do you go to Oxford?[/quote:1563z0ts] No, it's just some basic stuff I learned from my brother and the special.
Do you go to Oxford?[/quote:3b5yvq1e] No, it's just some basic stuff I learned from my brother and the special.[/quote:3b5yvq1e] Older Brother?