Conquer Club

PLAYER57832 wrote:

porkenbeans wrote: If I remember correctly it was a study that was done at Cornell, I was quoting a phrase they used within the study.

I remember hearing about this study, but if my memory serves me correctly, there were some major problems ... partly in how the study was set up and largely in how their results were interpreted by the wider media.


I, too, would like to see any link you can find. (and I will do my own search, though I am admittedly not as "internet saavy" as most here .. yet.

It was a quote from a larger study that, was, to compare intelligence of humans from various cultures and then determine the difference, ...if any. They used the grade school analogy to show that none of us have even made it to high school yet. Sad truth, but be heartened my friend, the world as a whole is only in the 2nd. grade. At least we seem to be towards the top, but not quite, of this graph.

Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty. People wish to believe that there is a higher purpose for being, because conceding our insignificance is a difficult thing for some people to come to terms with.

porkenbeans wrote: You must understand this, the logic you seek is here.

I'm glad you cleared that up for us

porkenbeans wrote: When I used the tribal terms, I was trying to explain that ''superstition'' has been with us from the begining.

Agreed.

porkenbeans wrote:It didnt just one day all of a sudden die.

That's true and Enlightenment thinking hasn't really done a great job of eradicating it despite three hundred years to try has it?

porkenbeans wrote:It evolved w/ us and is represented in the earths' many, many religions.

Well spoken and with conviction. I still note little specificity here, though. Are we to take this on faith because you say so and you've told us how smart you are?

porkenbeans wrote:Now I have a question for you. Please use some of that logic of yours. If your ''God'' created everything. From every grain of sand on every planet of every solar system of every galaxy, Then why would he need Man to write the Holy Bible for him. If thats not enough logic for you, try this, It says in that bible that the wages of sin is death. Which is not a physical but spiritual death, meaning you go to hell. And Jesus was sent to pay the wages for us. Well, why dose it then say that he rose from that place in hell and now sets at the right hand of the main man. How is that even close to being logical ? He doesnt pay the wages at all. He is not spending eternity in hell. ...Just a 6 day visit.

It seems you'd like to change the subject. Are you uncomfortable with handing my hat on the issues before us? There are lots of them that you seem to be ignoring. You may very well think that about the above tangents, but I'll reserve that right to address them after you've addressed the inconsistencies in your statements. Remember Red Herrings are logical fallicies as well.

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty. People wish to believe that there is a higher purpose for being, because conceding our insignificance is a difficult thing for some people to come to terms with.

YEP.

CrazyAnglican wrote:

porkenbeans wrote: You must understand this, the logic you seek is here.

I'm glad you cleared that up for us

porkenbeans wrote: When I used the tribal terms, I was trying to explain that ''superstition'' has been with us from the begining.

Agreed.

porkenbeans wrote:It didnt just one day all of a sudden die.

That's true and Enlightenment thinking hasn't really done a great job of eradicating it despite three hundred years to try has it?

porkenbeans wrote:It evolved w/ us and is represented in the earths' many, many religions.

Well spoken and with conviction. I still note little specificity here, though. Are we to take this on faith because you say so and you've told us how smart you are?

porkenbeans wrote:Now I have a question for you. Please use some of that logic of yours. If your ''God'' created everything. From every grain of sand on every planet of every solar system of every galaxy, Then why would he need Man to write the Holy Bible for him. If thats not enough logic for you, try this, It says in that bible that the wages of sin is death. Which is not a physical but spiritual death, meaning you go to hell. And Jesus was sent to pay the wages for us. Well, why dose it then say that he rose from that place in hell and now sets at the right hand of the main man. How is that even close to being logical ? He doesnt pay the wages at all. He is not spending eternity in hell. ...Just a 6 day visit.

It seems you'd like to change the subject. Are you uncomfortable with handing my hat on the issues before us? There are lots of them that you seem to be ignoring. You may very well think that about the above tangents, but I'll reserve that right to address them after you've addressed the inconsistencies in your statements. Remember Red Herrings are logical fallicies as well.

I do have answers to all of your points. I just wished that you would show me how to do the quote within a quote thing. I could then, like you, take them one by one. And this arguement could continue with greater clearity from my end.

No sweat. I'll pm you.

porkenbeans wrote:

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty. People wish to believe that there is a higher purpose for being, because conceding our insignificance is a difficult thing for some people to come to terms with.

YEP.

This is basiclly true. Well done on wording your post just right. However, you've only managed to provide ONE of many reasons why people accept God. It's different for many Christians but as for myself there were four reasons for my eventual acceptance of God.

1. what you said
2. the overwhelming wisdom of the Bible
3. the prophetic truths of the Bible
4. a requested sign of existence received

I may have missed one, but oh well.

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty.

QFT. although I would say it is easier than accepting the REALITY that life is finite and death certain.

Gregrios wrote:3. the prophetic truths of the Bible

So then, why do christians weep and mourn when someone dies? Shouldn't they be happy? Shouldn't they be throwing a PARTY instead of weeping? After all, these people are going, with utmost certainty, to sit beside your god/jesus/all loved ones who have passed before, correct? If you are so certain, then death should be the BIGGEST milestone in a persons life! Something to be anticipated and look forwarded too with tremendous joy and anticipation! Why do christians not shower the dieing person with messages to pass on to dead relatives? "Tell Grandpa "I love you" for me when you see him!".

For being SO certain and SO confident of a disney-land afterlife, christians act 180 opposite when a person dies.

Backglass wrote:

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty.

QFT. although I would say it is easier than accepting the REALITY that life is finite and death certain.

Gregrios wrote:3. the prophetic truths of the Bible

So then, why do christians weep and mourn when someone dies? Shouldn't they be happy? Shouldn't they be throwing a PARTY instead of weeping? After all, these people are going, with utmost certainty, to sit beside your god/jesus/all loved ones who have passed before, correct? If you are so certain, then death should be the BIGGEST milestone in a persons life! Something to be anticipated and look forwarded too with tremendous joy and anticipation! Why do christians not shower the dieing person with messages to pass on to dead relatives? "Tell Grandpa "I love you" for me when you see him!".

For being SO certain and SO confident of a disney-land afterlife, christians act 180 opposite when a person dies.

You are a very bright and insightful person. I would add this, to your line of thinking. - Religion has been at war with Science since the dawn of mankind. Slowly chipping away at Religion with every ''proveable'' discovery and breakthrough. So, If a person gets sick, his ''faith'' in science, sends him to the doctor. He knows, without a doubt, that his ''salvation'' can be found, ...there. But, when it comes to death, well, Science has not, YET, advance far enough to fix that. He must, I conclude, rely on whats left of that OLD mountain known as Religion. And try as best he can to have ''faith'' and believe with out a doubt that his ''salvation'' can be found at the top of that great old mountain. If you question his belief, on his journey to the top, He will only glance back at you long enough to see if you've found the real salvation of conquering death. I wonder, what they would do, if science came up with a pill that would give immortality. ...Would they take it ?

Backglass wrote:So then, why do christians weep and mourn when someone dies? Shouldn't they be happy? Shouldn't they be throwing a PARTY instead of weeping? After all, these people are going, with utmost certainty, to sit beside your god/jesus/all loved ones who have passed before, correct? If you are so certain, then death should be the BIGGEST milestone in a persons life! Something to be anticipated and look forwarded too with tremendous joy and anticipation! Why do christians not shower the dieing person with messages to pass on to dead relatives? "Tell Grandpa "I love you" for me when you see him!".

For being SO certain and SO confident of a disney-land afterlife, christians act 180 opposite when a person dies.

Congradulations Backglass! You've just brought up one of the biggest problems of modern Christianity. I realize what I'm about to say is going to get alot of people upset with me but when has that ever stopped me. Just so it's clear, I'm agreeing with you here. The reason people weep at the passing of loved ones is because they'll never see them again in their lifetime. When you think about it, this is somewhat of a selfish act. When you cry for this reason, it's not for the one who passed but for the one who still lives that is unless you're not very confident in that person's preferred destination. That's a different story but as long as you feel that the dead will reach Heaven then selfishness should be put aside for the joy of an ultimate destination reached. It's alot easier said then done. This in my opinion is where the strength of faith really comes into play. If your faith in God and his word are strong enough then you won't be able to help but be happy for those who get to see Heaven before you do.

Backglass wrote:

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty.

QFT. although I would say it is easier than accepting the REALITY that life is finite and death certain.

Explain what there was before the universe. What there will be after. And how all that could have just sprung from nothing with or without a deity.

When you have a complete and full understanding of these concepts ... then maybe you will have proof there is no God. Until then, believing in God is no less logical than the opposite.

Backglass wrote:

Gregrios wrote:3. the prophetic truths of the Bible

So then, why do christians weep and mourn when someone dies? Shouldn't they be happy? Shouldn't they be throwing a PARTY instead of weeping? After all, these people are going, with utmost certainty, to sit beside your god/jesus/all loved ones who have passed before, correct? If you are so certain, then death should be the BIGGEST milestone in a persons life! Something to be anticipated and look forwarded too with tremendous joy and anticipation! Why do christians not shower the dieing person with messages to pass on to dead relatives? "Tell Grandpa "I love you" for me when you see him!".

We weep for ourselves, not them ... because, no matter how expected, WE are sad not to have our loved one still here. In the case of a child or young adult we also mourn the loss of potential for our world, a family.

.

PLAYER57832 wrote:We know it is selfish, but we cannot help but mourn. And in morning, we appreciate life and what we have more.

Well put but because of this, there's a lack of appreciation for the afterlife.

Gregrios wrote:

Backglass wrote:So then, why do christians weep and mourn when someone dies? Shouldn't they be happy? Shouldn't they be throwing a PARTY instead of weeping? After all, these people are going, with utmost certainty, to sit beside your god/jesus/all loved ones who have passed before, correct? If you are so certain, then death should be the BIGGEST milestone in a persons life! Something to be anticipated and look forwarded too with tremendous joy and anticipation! Why do christians not shower the dieing person with messages to pass on to dead relatives? "Tell Grandpa "I love you" for me when you see him!".

For being SO certain and SO confident of a disney-land afterlife, christians act 180 opposite when a person dies.

Congradulations Backglass! You've just brought up one of the biggest problems of modern Christianity. I realize what I'm about to say is going to get alot of people upset with me but when has that ever stopped me. Just so it's clear, I'm agreeing with you here. The reason people weep at the passing of loved ones is because they'll never see them again in their lifetime. When you think about it, this is somewhat of a selfish act. When you cry for this reason, it's not for the one who passed but for the one who still lives that is unless you're not very confident in that person's preferred destination. That's a different story but as long as you feel that the dead will reach Heaven then selfishness should be put aside for the joy of an ultimate destination reached. It's alot easier said then done. This in my opinion is where the strength of faith really comes into play. If your faith in God and his word are strong enough then you won't be able to help but be happy for those who get to see Heaven before you do.

Would you take the pill or not.

The pill? What pill?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Backglass wrote:

Timminz wrote:Believing in god is just easier than accepting uncertainty.

QFT. although I would say it is easier than accepting the REALITY that life is finite and death certain.

Explain what there was before the universe. What there will be after. And how all that could have just sprung from nothing with or without a deity.

When you have a complete and full understanding of these concepts ... then maybe you will have proof there is no God. Until then, believing in God is no less logical than the opposite.

So by this reasoning, believing that there was an almighty duck that created god who in turn created the universe is just as logical? Or perhaps the chain started with a very wise cheese sandwich that created the aforementioned duck, hmm.

What I`m asking is why do you add another chain of complexity? Instead of saying "I don`t know where the universe came from", you say "the universe came from an even more complex being, i don`t know where that being came from"

If any of you true believers would tell me, that you would choose, NOT to take the pill, ...I would say, fine, You go to your eternity, and I'll go to mine. But I suspect, that, those deciding not to take it, would be VERY, VERY, VERY ...few.

Gregrios wrote:The pill? What pill?

It would be much easier if you read along with the thread. insted of cluttering the conversation, you could simply scroll back and read.

Ok, I see what you're talking about.

It depends on if in this fantasy world of yours, God exists or not. If God doesn't exist while there's an immortality pill, then of course I would, duh. If God does exist while there's this pill, then it would be a no without question.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:

So by this reasoning, believing that there was an almighty duck that created god who in turn created the universe is just as logical? Or perhaps the chain started with a very wise cheese sandwich that created the aforementioned duck, hmm.

What I`m asking is why do you add another chain of complexity? Instead of saying "I don`t know where the universe came from", you say "the universe came from an even more complex being, i don`t know where that being came from"

You have your answer, we have ours. I believe ours more logical.

As to the duck/cheese sandwich/ snake/ spaghettie monstor, etc ... been there done that. I don't object to others beliefs, only their claims that mine are illogical.

P.S. belief = not proveable to anyone else.

Gregrios wrote:Ok, I see what you're talking about. First, I've got to know if in this fantasy world of yours, God exists along with the immortality pill.

The pill can be viewed as metaphoricle if you wish. As long as science keeps giving you its benifits you are most willing to take them. But, in the next breath you lock step with your religion to keep up the never ending fight against the truth. And the truth is, We will, eventually, solve the death problem. It may be in 10 years. It may be in a 1,000. But medical science will indeed be the ones that learn the ''TRUTH''. ...as they always have. So I ask you, ...would you take the ''Pill''. ...or not ?

I believe you've already got my answer but in case you missed it, it's still no.

porkenbeans wrote:I The less intellegent, among the human race, are followers of the mingy, (superstition). Its plain and simple. Science, NOT mingy, (religion) has brought us out of the dark. Where as, Religion, (mingy) has clung on hard to maintain itself.

A TRULY initelligent person must be able to look beyond what is poveable. In the past, this included such "crazy" ideas as creating a vehicle that would go underwater or up to the moon, serums to fight off diseases like small pox. It includes the insanity of reaching Everest's peak or sailing around the world. Sometimes it includes creating entire fully imaginary worlds... and sometimes it involves intense speculation about what is "out there" in the realm of the completely unproveable, such as God.

You don' t have to like or agree with all the answers, but you should at least acknowledge that folks can be thinking and intelligent .... and still disagree with you on this "God"/"Religion" thing.

Gregrios wrote:I believe you've already got my answer but in case you missed it, it's still no.

I dont believe you. Your arguement is backed into the corner. If you choose to take the pill, you are admitting that you dont really believe in god. You and I both know very well, that, All but the most craziest of you cult followers, Will indeed take the pill.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

porkenbeans wrote:I The less intellegent, among the human race, are followers of the mingy, (superstition). Its plain and simple. Science, NOT mingy, (religion) has brought us out of the dark. Where as, Religion, (mingy) has clung on hard to maintain itself.

A TRULY initelligent person must be able to look beyond what is poveable. In the past, this included such "crazy" ideas as creating a vehicle that would go underwater or up to the moon, serums to fight off diseases like small pox. It includes the insanity of reaching Everest's peak or sailing around the world. Sometimes it includes creating entire fully imaginary worlds... and sometimes it involves intense speculation about what is "out there" in the realm of the completely unproveable, such as God.

You don' t have to like or agree with all the answers, but you should at least acknowledge that folks can be thinking and intelligent .... and still disagree with you on this "God"/"Religion" thing.

Why dont you use that int. of yours and answer the pill question.