jump to last post 1-19 of 19 discussions (114 posts)

Are you honest enough to challenge your religious beliefs?

  1. earnestshub profile image86
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    We have a new Australian hubber named "Antecessor"
    I challenge all religious believers to read her hubs, where she provides a very strong case against your beliefs.
    Any one gutsy enough to read her hubs with an open mind? Jeremi perhaps, or one of the other believers with enough intestinal fortitude?

    1. AEvans profile image67
      AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thank you! She certainly does have some interesting theory , many begats genealogy appears to be a little off based on the words of the Bible I can respect her opinions but I do believe there was Mary and Joseph smile

      1. earnestshub profile image86
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry AE, I misled you she is a he. smile

        1. AEvans profile image67
          AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          oops he, lololo oh well from the Avatar it would have been difficult. smile

    2. Jerami profile image74
      Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks for the sudjestion !!  I Read a couple of them.
      One of them has me meditating sad A K A} = putting my brain in nutral and waiting to see what floats.

    3. Davidsonofjesie profile image62
      Davidsonofjesieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If your mind is open to that, I would never read it .

      1. earnestshub profile image86
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Of course not! That is the best way to keep ignorant. Just deny anything is real that you don't want to know! smile

        1. Davidsonofjesie profile image62
          Davidsonofjesieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          thats all you in a nut shell,be like me,not like those stupid christians!!!

          1. earnestshub profile image86
            earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            lol lol lol

            1. Davidsonofjesie profile image62
              Davidsonofjesieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              are all ozzys so narrow minded and hateful earnest?

              1. Pearldiver profile image88
                Pearldiverposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                You will need to address that question to the Osbourne family lol

                Sheesh.... don't you even know that people from Oz are called Aussis?? hmm 

                What barren part of this earth do you come from? lol

                1. tantrum profile image61
                  tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  lol lol lol

                  ha ha ha !!!

                  LOL LOL LOL

              2. earnestshub profile image86
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                We are not hateful. We are not all gullible either!
                Why don't you read and learn? Oh that's right, your bible doesn't allow that does it?
                lol

              3. earnestshub profile image86
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Hate is for the religious. I don't do hate. smile

    4. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Nope.
      But I am honest enough to say I already know the Truth,  and that has set me free;  my mind is not "open" to hogwash.

  2. Sab Oh profile image58
    Sab Ohposted 7 years ago

    roll

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Wow tk! .... deep! smile

      1. Sab Oh profile image58
        Sab Ohposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        What? You don't agree with me? I guess you are not "honest"!


        What logic ~ roll

        1. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Why don't you go read the hub and tell me what your profound thoughts are then? smile

  3. ForkArtJunkie profile image60
    ForkArtJunkieposted 7 years ago

    Wow. I've dedicated my entire life to G-d. Now, after discovering those Hub Pages, I'm a total atheist. I owe it all to you, thanks Earnest.

    Feel better now? smile

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'd feel a bit more empathy if you had read them and posted a sensible reply! lol

      1. ForkArtJunkie profile image60
        ForkArtJunkieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Why would I need your empathy?

        1. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Why would you bother posting?

          1. ForkArtJunkie profile image60
            ForkArtJunkieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I've just as much right to post here as you.

            1. earnestshub profile image86
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Sure you have, I just thought that to post, you needed to say something worth reading. smile

            2. arthriticknee profile image82
              arthritickneeposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Feel free to include some content in your posts

              1. earnestshub profile image86
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                lol

    2. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Never felt bad to start with. That all you got? Hang it up somewhere.

      1. ForkArtJunkie profile image60
        ForkArtJunkieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You remind me of a rabid religious fundamentalist preaching the gospel, however it's the gospel of atheism. In actuality, I am an atheist. However, I do like Christians in general and don't feel the need to try to convert them. But yeah, that's all I got, I'm gonna go hang it up somewhere.

        1. arthriticknee profile image82
          arthritickneeposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I've never met an atheist that goes out trying to convert Christians. The whole idea of not believing in God means you don't have to spread the good word. Most are strongly against being preached to though.

          Actually it would be pretty funny... Atheist walks into a Church: Excuse me Ladies and Gentlemen......

          1. thisisoli profile image57
            thisisoliposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Most of the time when I talk to Christians I try to figure out HOW they can believe, not why they believe, I simply do not understand how someone can go through there life believing in something which has no greater realism than any other make believe character.

            I don't often try to convert, but I feel it is important to the future of human kind to understand how otherwise normal people can suffer from worryingly large mass delusions. This is becoming ever more important with the cyclic rise of fundamentalist religious groups coming to prominence yet again.

            1. earnestshub profile image86
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The fundies are a huge problem to world peace. I really do think that the religious feel they are in a corner. In more recent times they have had to back away from so much dogma they are running scared. Demons do not cause disease, we have been to the sky the fairy used to lives in, not a sign! lol

        2. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Well I do not threaten people with eternal damnation for not following the sky fairy, my beliefs don't contain threats of eternal damnation and I don't do hate.
          I have religious friends and family as most have who I get on great with, as I do with many believers here.
          The bronze aged belief system simply gives me the shits smile

          1. TheGlassSpider profile image74
            TheGlassSpiderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Some Christians do not believe that there is a place where God eternally tortures people, you know. smile

            Some Christians realize that there is a difference between the truth about God and the hateful mess religions shove down people's throats. smile

            But thank you for the recommendation; I will check the Hubs out.

  4. Susana S profile image91
    Susana Sposted 7 years ago

    Thanks for bringing this hubber to my attention Earnest smile Some really interesting hubs there, which I'm very eager to read.

    On a personal note, I challenge every belief I have over and over to see at what point it falls or if it does. This approach has served me well smile

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Me too. My field of expertise helps me to see how much bad data is out there. In mechanical things logic is a strong tool to run alongside knowledge and intuition.
      For example, people pay up to $1200 dollars to service late model cars and "tune" them, when they have almost no serviceable item any more, and the engine management takes care of the tuning itself!
      Robbery using peoples ignorance. smile When I show them and explain it to them, they still go and pay $1200 for a job that should be around $200 including parts and time.
      My silly son-inlaw did that with his Lexus. I marked all the service items with an invisible pen, and when he got it back I showed him exactly what he got for 1,200. Nothing but an oil change!
      Religion is like that!

      1. marinealways24 profile image60
        marinealways24posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Except, religion forgets to screw the drain plug back in. lol

        1. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol lol lol

          Try this for a major poke in the eye for the fundies!
          Believe your eyes? sure can! lol
          http://hubpages.com/hub/Unintelligent-D … -Evolution

  5. earnestshub profile image86
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    Why am I not surprised that no fundies have anything to say to refute this?
    lol lol lol

    1. LeslieAdrienne profile image82
      LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Ernest,

      I presume that fundies are believers....but, what does is  mean really or rather why is it used?

      Thanks big_smile

      1. tantrum profile image61
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        FUNDAMENTALISTS

        1. LeslieAdrienne profile image82
          LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks tantrum for not saying "duh".... I appreciate that. smile

      2. earnestshub profile image86
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The term fundy or fundamentalist is used to describe those religionists that believe the bible is literal, then use their interpretations of it to tell others they will rot in hell if they do not believe exactly as they do.The religious forums are full of em!

        1. canadawest99 profile image60
          canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I am not a religious person nor a fundy, but I am intelligent enough to look past all the rhetoric in the bible and just look at the simple message that jesus spoke and that was love respect and help one another.  That is a pretty good message that all of us could benefit from.  10 commandments seem to be pretty good laws too.

          Now I am also intelligent enough to know that 2,000 years ago in the middle east, the people were some of the most superstitious, unenlightened and uneducated and attributed every little thing to a higher power.   Many things we now know today to be natural causes.  Everyone knows that uneducated people are easy to control.  Even today, that region has a habit of using very flowery mythic language to describe everything.  So it follows that the bible was born out of this culture.   It even contradicts itself many times as the people of that time struggle with what is right and wrong.

          Then I look to what science has discovered and there are so many discoveries that contradict the bible, like the age of the earth, etc.

          Lastly, the ultimate test of what you believe comes down to this simple test.   Imagine you are god, the most perfect, powerful and omnipotent creature ever and you get bored and decide to create 'humans'??  Humans - which are possibly some of the most flawed creatures ever to exist and so far beneath a god.   We don't follow his laws no matter how many times he apparently warns us.    Imagine yourself a perfect creator - when you go to the beach to make a sandcastle, do you try to make the most perfect one you can, or do you just slap it together and call it good.   How many times a day do you concern yourself with the lives of microbes?

          1. Tom Cornett profile image57
            Tom Cornettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            "Jesus spoke and that was love respect and help one another.  That is a pretty good message that all of us could benefit from.  10 commandments seem to be pretty good laws too."
            Perfect.  smile

            1. earnestshub profile image86
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I thought the rest of it was pretty good too. Did you read that Tom? smile

              1. calpol25 profile image74
                calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                hello earnest its pinky and the brain here ive taken over the world and woundered how you were doing, I see you have upset one or two lol lol

                1. earnestshub profile image86
                  earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Hello P&B! Nice to see.
                  jeez I'm a poet and didn't know it!
                  I am better now that you are in control! lol

                  1. calpol25 profile image74
                    calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Yeah I have doctor von scratch and sniff on line one he has control of the big red button, tell them not to make me mad NAAAARRRRRFFFF!!!!! lol

              2. Tom Cornett profile image57
                Tom Cornettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Yip...it was all good.  smile

          2. Pandoras Box profile image68
            Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Good thoughts.

          3. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            pardon the cut-in, but if any rational human being accepts 'scientific discovery' as absolute is flawed. No man can measure or determine the age of this planet. They can only design a satisfying idea, tools, measurements in a feeble attempt to explain his own existence. Science is just religion without the 'god' factor. When are people going to wake up to this, same as religion. Both are the same.

            Even if I were a Creator, why would i consider my own creation/sandcastle flawed? Even science looks at it with mouths gaping, in wonder and awe of its parts -still not fully understanding the tiniest particle of it.

            just a good thought...

            1. canadawest99 profile image60
              canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Science is no where near the same religion. Science is created through logical thought, criticism, peer review, tested and retested and continually changing to fit the best we know and happily discarded if it proves to be false.  Not absolute, but the next best thing to it.  That doesn't sound like religion to me.

              If humans are the creation, and I am one of them, yet I can think of millions of flaws that we have and millions of ways to improve the creation and surroundings, then the creator wasn't very good at his job was he?    I should not be able to imagine a more perfect form of the divine creation, yet I can.

              For instance, what is the function of the appendix?  It has none right now, but probably some left over organ from our past.  Why did we need it then and not now?  Why did dozens of human races become extinct? Were they not created as perfect as me?  Does it take many tries for the creator to get it right?   The evidence goes on and on.

              1. earnestshub profile image86
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                As can any reasonable thinker. If we built a car with as many "design faults" it would be called a lemon and withdrawn from the market!

              2. earnestshub profile image86
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I always see the same dumb comments even from intelligent religionists.
                It is very difficult to compare blind faith with evidence, but somehow they see it as the same thing. Very strange indeed! smile

              3. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                You know, if I were a religionista, what a field day one could have with that reply. Good thing I am not.

                first, discarding one robe for another does not make anything more noteworthy or valuable per say. As science has changed its robes many times -not as much as religion, but its catching up in a hurry.

                As for assuming flaws,: under what absolute premise?
                What is the prim that we are using to determine flaw codon, etc etc?

                There is no evidence of fact within logic.
                Because we can or cannot observe the many facets of a thing and conjure a hypothesis, dig holes to unearth relics, doesn't  substantiate a fact or absolute.
                Do they point to the existence (as in the appendix), certainly.

                Who designed the measuring tool?
                Who determined 'this is' or 'is not' evidence or proof?

                I see no reason the creation is flawed or should be.
                Is the creation effected by elements, environment, doctrine, discoveries -or the lack of these, certainly.

                Perhaps that in itself IS the flaw?

        2. LeslieAdrienne profile image82
          LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks Ernesthub..... smile

  6. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    being a zealot, not a fungi oops, fun die, oops, fundy, sorry.
    my interpretation of those hubs would be recognized? hmm.

    also, would any religionist point of view be recognized as well?

    FTR, even after reading the scripts, letters, etc, i do not see a rot in hell confirmation -only an option or personal decision, especially from the Hebrew covenant elements. In fact just the opposite of 'cry-fry, 'turn or burn' -live long, live well, live abundantly.

    ah, it's a zealots life...

    { we now return you to 'give us today our daily banter' jeje.
    that would make a great soap opera title for an al jazeera program or a new TBN spot. no? }

  7. bojanglesk8 profile image61
    bojanglesk8posted 7 years ago

    Yes.

  8. marinealways24 profile image60
    marinealways24posted 7 years ago

    Better yet, why do people turn to religions to be governed, isn't there already enough government without religions?

  9. profile image0
    Denno66posted 7 years ago

    What if you have no religion to speak of?

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I think that is called "reality" smile

      1. profile image0
        Denno66posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Dang! That's the word I was looking for.... lol

      2. calpol25 profile image74
        calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I wish i could have been like that some times lol you know how mixed up mine gets me when i talk about it lol smile

        1. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Well you are on target now, and with you in full control of the world we are safe for now! lol
          What will we do tomorrow?

          1. calpol25 profile image74
            calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Lets take over the moon pinky!!!! NAAAAARRRRFFF!!!! lol lol

            1. earnestshub profile image86
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The moon? So we are expanding operations? Goody! lol

              1. calpol25 profile image74
                calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                oh yes!!!!!! lol

  10. donotfear profile image90
    donotfearposted 7 years ago

    Here we go again.......give it a rest, will ya? yikes yikes

  11. Jerami profile image74
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    I was kinda liking   (I feel Texan tonight)  hearing what ya had ta say when ya was being serious about everthang.
      can ya hear tha accent??

  12. Jerami profile image74
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Imagine you are god, the most perfect, powerful and omnipotent creature ever and you get bored and decide to create 'humans'??  Humans - which are possibly some of the most flawed creatures ever to exist.....   

       I'd give them free will to create any heaven or hell or nothing that they wanted to create for themselves; and let them go do it.  If I was a careing god I would look in on them once in a while to see how they are doing.
       I'd mostly let them get themselves out of their own ditches just to teach um a leason.
        But when it come to the end of their roap I'd probably help them out or bring them home.

    1. canadawest99 profile image60
      canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thats a nice thought. Hope its true.

      But if you think of your creation as your child, is that what you would do for them?  I don't know too many parents that are that hands off.

      1. earnestshub profile image86
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I don't know any parents that are that hands off. smile

  13. Disappearinghead profile image85
    Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago

    I've had a look at his hub on the genealogies.

    Hmm. I'm not Jewish so I can't get inside the head of those that wrote the bible to understand the nuances of the Jewish culture. Perhaps TwentyOneDays can confim, but as I understand it the Jewish faith is traced down the maternal line and property inheritances through the paternal line. This would account for the differences.

    Now since names like Tom, Dick and Harry are very common names, then it is obvious that Salathiel and Zorobabel are also common names and their common use in these two familly lines need not imply the same two people.

    Again maybe 21 Days can confirm the practice of using the term 'son-of' to represent grandson, or great grandson etc. Jesus was referred to as Son of David and hence a decendant of David. This will explain gaps in genealogies.

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      OK, thanks for looking. smile I feel sure some believers will have a view on this, and thank you for yours. smile
      I found all of his hubs of interest.

      1. Disappearinghead profile image85
        Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I have noticed that he has a number of hubs refuting creationism. I can't intelligently comment on genetics as I'm a mechanical engineer by background.

        However, I think that he has assumed as many do that Christians are generally creationists. This is'nt true. I like many do not make the mistake of reading Genesis as a blow by blow scientific paper. Suppose the bible said, verily God made a cake and saw that it was good. The rest of the bible might go on to talk about the spiritiual significance of the cake. However, this would tell us nothing about the ingredients, the mixing method, the size of the cake tins, the oven temperature, or the cooking time. For this information I have to look elsewhere.

        Similarly, if Iwant to understand the creation, I look to things like the fossil record, the distances of stars by red shift, or occasiona mutations in the genes.

        We have to also understand that the purpose of the creation story is to inform man that God was behind it and the the stars, moon, sun etc are not gods to be worshipped as was de rigeur of the pagan tribes of the day. This is where the creation story is distinct from these other belief systems. To talk to the people of Israel in scientific terms would have been meaningless to them.

        1. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I would also have thought the majority of Christians are creationists as they seem dead set against the evidence of evolution. When I look at fossil records, mutations and scientific method I see nothing to support creation, just more proof of evolution.
          My background is also in mechanical engineering by the way. smile

          1. Disappearinghead profile image85
            Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I saw an interview with John Polkinghorn the other week and thought what a breath of fresh air against the diet of creationism from North America. So I looked him up in Wikipedia. He sounds like a pretty intelligent bloke.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne

          2. profile image0
            JeanMeriamposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I actually think it is a very small portion. As I said in a different post I was taught evolution in Catholic school and that the stories of the Bible are mythological teaching guides mixed with legends.

            I had honestly never heard of anyone taking Genesis literally until I moved to a Mennonite town and got on the internet where I was exposed to more American culture. I honestly don't understand what has happend. It has been 25 years since I was taught evolution in school and now people want to go back to the thinking of the dark ages. Makes absolutely no sense. What happened to education?

            1. earnestshub profile image86
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The religious forums are full of those who don't believe in evolution or science! lol

              1. Disappearinghead profile image85
                Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                This is true indeed. However, evolution itself is still basically a theory. In this later of rock I find a fosil that looks similar to this fosil in a lower layer of rock, so evolution concludes one is the ancestor of the other. It ain't necessarily true.

                OK that's a very simplistic argument, but evolution by fluke and chance just gets rather tiresome.

                Now scence is something different. Show me a copper bottomed proven fact, and I'll accept it as true as I'm sue that any right thinking person would.

                1. earnestshub profile image86
                  earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  If only that were true!
                  Masses of empirical evidence, theories tested rigorously by scientific method, psychology, brain chemistry are all fairly believable, testable and challengable.

                  Science does change it's mind in light of newer information, but none of it is even considered by religionists because it does not promote their indoctrinated belief in an invisible unlikely entity that apparently finds their car keys, cures their ills but hates the poor, starving and underprivileged.
                  Not one skein of proof in thousands of years, yet it is "the truth"
                  Religion mocks itself.
                  They would rather believe in a god who is a no show since the beginning of consciousness

                  Religious belief reminds me of people who claim the jeweller stole the jewels out of their watch.They are worth about 10c each, but the facts never get in the way of their belief. smile
                  I have in my entire life never seen a religionist with a mind open enough to pry a new thought in. smile

                  1. canadawest99 profile image60
                    canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    I defend science in most case because its application has given rise to our modern world.  You are typing and reading on an application of science fact right now - the internet.  God didn't create it.  When you talk on the phone, or ride in your car or a plane, thousands of small scientific achievements are being proven over and over again.

                    But on the other hand, science cannot explain everything, including what the very nature of reality is.    The more and more scientists look for a solid universe, the less of it they find and most is empty space including us.

                  2. Disappearinghead profile image85
                    Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Never met a religionist  with an open mind? You don't get out much then.

  14. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    education is failing because most teaching is biased, inadequate.
    As more knowledge is gathered, more documents need changing because they are incorrect, out of date, disputed. The rest is half baked ideology gently poured into the brains of the young. Half of what people are taught is simply to 'get them in & out' and into the dysfunctional global workforce. A few percent go elite and prioritize their learning curve to 'be' something (dr., phd, etc). The ultimate goal of education is economic saturation/captivity.

    sucks really.

    1. canadawest99 profile image60
      canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Evolution covers a lot of bases in our history, but it doesn't fill all the gaps either.  Maybe someday it will but there are still some puzzling facts it doesn't address.

      For instance, humans have been around for about 3 million years.  Even our primate ancestors have only been here a short time, maybe 10 million years.  That is just a fraction of time compared to many current day species.  Dolphins, whales, alligators go back almost 100 million years or so.  Dinosaurs themselves ruled the planet unchallenged for 10s of millions of years and these species lived when the earth was under enormous changes.  The last few million years have been relatively stable unless you lived where the ice sheets were.

      Yet in a very short time, without a lot of environmental stress, we rapidly developed an advanced intelligence above all those species.     Why?   Maybe we had an outside influence somewhere along the line.  Maybe we are the product of some sort of creation process (gene splicing from an intergalactic race) and our own evolution.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Again, i ask, politely, by what measuring tool can we determine 'how long' as in 10 million years?

        If accurate, it would mean that humans took 9,997,990 years to reach this particular volume or evolution, in their ability to design such mechanics, measuring tools AND still have such basic elemental issues regarding the planet they live on as well as civility, disease, etc.
        doesn't seem a fair assumption.

        1. Disappearinghead profile image85
          Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Good point well presented.

          You see that's the bizare thing that just doesn't fit. Followers of Richard Dawkins will extol the superiority of modern man because we have reached a nirvana of enligtenment; cast off the bronze age religions; and discovered a wolrd of science that allows us to explain how it all came to be. We marvel at our technology and amuse ourselves that we would be as gods to the ancients.

          Still this new post-religious thinking can't address the fundamental issues of greed, poverty, crime, self obsession, war, famine, pestilence.........etc, etc, ad nausium.

          1. earnestshub profile image86
            earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            There is a good reason for all of that. It is called the human condition. Getting rid of religion will not fix it either, but a good psychotherapist goes a long way towards fixing some of the insanity, as does a change in brain chemistry.

          2. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            indeed, as i have been scolded in other forums for saying this:

            science has become the new religion, or better still returned to his wife, the ism {theism} calling it the age of enlightenment, through a different set of tools. Especially quantum theories. You would think you were in an artificial intelligent yoga center.

            Let's not forget, before the mid 19th century, men were still throwing rocks at each other, today they are throwing grenades.
            I am curious to see where this new age philosophy will go and how far it will get with the present global situation.

            Will it be a fast but short lived dynamo or hang around for centuries like theism has? one can only wonder.

            { side bar: some good friends @ Berkley predict technology will reach its peak by 2050, after that it is anyone's guess. }

            1. Disappearinghead profile image85
              Disappearingheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              With reference to your side bar, haven't we been here before? In the 19th century the US government considered pulling out of the patent sponsoring game because they believed that everything that could be invented had been invented.

              1. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                they have. And like i told my friend Morse, even if man managed to control quantum - psyche, to the point of transcending A to B with just a single press of a key, someone would invest and sell it like any other good marketing firm would. We all laughed and just kept eating our lobster claws and sipping Petit Syrah. so it goes.

            2. canadawest99 profile image60
              canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              21, those people you see on TV exploiting quantum theory to sell now new age spiritualism are modern day hucksters.  They have taken elements of quantum theory and twisted it.   

              Any self respecting reputable scientist will clearly admit that quantum theory has produced some strange results that are open to interpretation, but I don't think any would go so far as some of these people and create present day concepts of spirituality.   Authors like Deepak Chopra have made that leap and have made lots of $$$ doing it too.

              Quantum theory has shown there is some weirdness out there that we cannot totally see, feel or maybe even comprehend.

              1. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                no doubt.
                you'll have to forgive me, but i don't watch much TV, probably a total of an hour a week { cuz my son likes mickey mouse & handy manny cartoons. lol. }

                i agree about the exploitation. But this is what "the ism" does to the original principles of life -exploitation of one another, but also the mind and even heart of humanity.

        2. canadawest99 profile image60
          canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The tool to measure timescale is taken from the building blocks of the universe itself - carbon dating.   

          And modern humans took 3 million years to reach this point.   Our ability influence the environment and our own evolution if you will is only about a few hundred years old.

  15. profile image0
    philip carey 61posted 7 years ago

    I'm interested in understanding what motivates one to spend so much time arguing with the believers in God?

    Is it a desire to rid the world of fallacy? Is it the excitement of the debate? Is it a sort of irritation or intolerance with 'stupidity"? Is it for altruistic reasons--to make the world a better place? I mean, do  you think the world be a better place without religion, and you view this as one way to achieve that goal? Is it for personal reasons, because it's just feels good to point out one's view is superior to another's? is it an ego feed?  Why not just let the misguided be lost, if that's how you view them? Is there some genuine level of caring, of correcting their wrong views?

    How does it make you feel when you engage in the debate?

    What drives you to do it?

    I ask this of those with the atheist views, since it's fairly well understood why the religious types like to engage in debate.

    Anxious to hear.

    1. canadawest99 profile image60
      canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I don't spend a lot of time debating with people of faith, but my curiosity comes from how people can live their entire lives relying on technology which has been created by scientific research, and then totally suspend their beliefs to follow something to which there is almost no evidence for.   

      I mean science is all are around you, your electricity, your roads, your car, your computer, then they say evolution is nonsense?  Is electricity nonsense?   Sounds like that scientific principle works pretty good.

      I mean if I went and told you that you could fly off the edge of a building by flapping your arms, would you believe me?    There is no evidence it will work, but lots that it won't work.

      1. profile image0
        philip carey 61posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It sounds like you're saying it's motivated by a sort of curiosity in your case? Anyone else?

    2. qwark profile image61
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Phillip:
      Why do you use the word debate?
      Debate; "to discuss a question by considering opposed arguments"
      Only a "FOOL" would debate religion!
      Debating religion is naught but an exercise in futility!
      Debating requires argument. To win an argument one must provide proofs. The argument can never be won. Neither side can produce what is necessary to win!
      So pls, use instead of debate: discuss, chat, hub, converse etc.,etc.
      Try to be conversationally correct...lolol

      1. profile image0
        philip carey 61posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Okay, discuss religion. Back to my question. What motivates you to discuss it?

  16. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    funny you should mention Deepak Chopra..

    I have a copy of Fritjof Capra's Tao of Physics, first released in the early `70s, maybe late 60s -just around the time modern science was really taking off, the computer age entering in, etc.

    Some of his notions then pointed to this very thing, from quantum mechanics to quark symmetries as being the new Koan ( Eastern Mysticism ). Again the "ism".
    Interesting enough, much of his theories are now considered mainstream 'new age' applications, minus the "Aquarius" influence.

    {
    my only concern is where science will lead us -because at the moment it is the leader. will it be new metallic 'golden calves' or a vision of an all together obscure quantum Babylon.
    }

    1. canadawest99 profile image60
      canadawest99posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know if science will ever solve it all.  Maybe our universe is just too complicated and mysterious for us to understand.    There are elements of quantum physics that start to really blur the line with fantasy, like being able to be in 2 places at once.   Even some of the math is so far beyond the normal person it might as well read like a fairy tale.

      I guess all I want at the end of the day is for the human race to use our heads and question everything and not ignore evidence or lack of evidence.

      Oh yeah, and world peace too.

  17. pylos26 profile image76
    pylos26posted 7 years ago

    Hi Earnestshub…a blind hog finds an acorn every once in a while…and Antesessor is a gem…thanks a bunch for the tip…pylos…

    Ps.   Almost as interesting as yourself.

    1. earnestshub profile image86
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thank you pylos, you obviously read the hubs. Most religious followers read nothing that may upset their "beliefs"

      I still contend that the reason they post endless threads is best explained by the reality that their sub-conscious will not accept their "truth" so they have to pump it so that they never have to do any self examination, observe scientific method or live in a real world. smile
      I also contend that if any of them upped their access to serotonin their beliefs would vanish when they saw that the source of their belief is a fear of death. smile

  18. earnestshub profile image86
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    Really simple for me to answer that.
    I do not like hate filled bulls**t.
    It does not have to be religion either. I believe we are all entitled to denounce lies, hate and fairy tales that cause hurt and damage to others. smile
    The only thing religion "contributes" that is tangible is the sexual abuse of children.

    1. profile image0
      philip carey 61posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Is all religion hate filled bullshit? Does it all contribute to sexual abuse of children? Or most of it, some of it?

      Was Mother Teresa involved in "hate filled bullshit"?, sexual abuse of children?

      You say you hate untruth, basically?

      1. earnestshub profile image86
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mother Teresa was not a religion. She was an individual.
        I don't hate anyone.
        All religion, or more accurately ALMOST all religion come from the same sources, over a billion rely on the bible. A hate filled tome on a par with the quoran which makes up most of the rest.

        1. profile image0
          philip carey 61posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Would you agree that at least some people, such as Mother Teresa, can do good work, even though they say the motivation behind that good work is a doctrine that is "hate filled and contributes to the sexual abuse of children?"

          Is it possible that good work/meaningful lives can be based on a flawed doctrine?

          1. Jerami profile image74
            Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I think that people such as Mother Teresa does good works due to their relationship with the maker, despite flawed doctrin.

            The flawed doctrin produces as much good fruit as it does flawed fruit.
              Just like the news at 10;00  just the bad stuff gets talked about.

          2. earnestshub profile image86
            earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Not really, no I do not.
            Those who do would have to ignore most of their own doctrine, otherwise what would they do with the hate intolerance and fear of the OT and the quoran that they are forced to follow under fear of hell and threats of damnation?

            1. profile image0
              philip carey 61posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              So, someone like Mother Teresa (or others who do good works, etc.) are ignoring most of their own doctrine?

              What parts are they basing their good works on, in this "hate filled tome"?

              Could it be that SOME parts are not hate filled? Can one base one's life on those parts, or emphasize them over the other parts? I heard Desmond Tutu speak once. He's another example. The goodness that emanated from that man was palpable. How does one reconcile that with the "hate filled tome", as you call it, on which he bases his life and works?  Are both of them choosing to embrace certain parts and shelve others? Is it possible that religion itself is just doctrine, but how one relates to that doctrine can vary from person to person? Could the same book(s) cause one to be an intolerant fundamentalist and another to be something quite different, and better? Are they both Christians? How does one define a Christian, anyway? What are the key features?

              (I agree, by the way, that there is a healthy dose of psychotic hateful God stuff in the Bible, and even more in the Qur'an. My concept of God is not at all that. It's a bit more subtle, more along the lines of the Rabbi Harold Kushner's view.)

              But I do go on. Good discussion.

  19. earnestshub profile image86
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    So, someone like Mother Teresa (or others who do good works, etc.) are ignoring most of their own doctrine?

    Self evidently, yes.

    What parts are they basing their good works on, in this "hate filled tome"?

    Selective bits of the NT

    Could it be that SOME parts are not hate filled? Can one base one's life on those parts, or emphasize them over the other parts?
    Sure, I guess they must.

    I heard Desmond Tutu speak once. He's another example. The goodness that emanated from that man was palpable.
    Agreed.
    How does one reconcile that with the "hate filled tome", as you call it, on which he bases his life and works?
    I have no idea at all.
    Are both of them choosing to embrace certain parts and shelve others? Absolutely!
    Is it possible that religion itself is just doctrine, but how one relates to that doctrine can vary from person to person?

    No, the doctine leaves no wriggle room at all.

    Could the same book(s) cause one to be an intolerant fundamentalist and another to be something quite different, and better?

    Not unless they pick bits of doctrine and ignore the rest.

    Are they both Christians? How does one define a Christian, anyway? What are the key features?

    A belief in the son of the hate filled insane entity of the OT without acknowledgement the evil of it, and the impossible connection as being that god and the "good"son of that despotic entity.
    god.
    (I agree, by the way, that there is a healthy dose of psychotic hateful God stuff in the Bible, and even more in the Qur'an. My concept of God is not at all that. It's a bit more subtle, more along the lines of the Rabbi Harold Kushner's view.)

    But I do go on. Good discussion.
    Thank you for the discussion. smile

 
working