It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religion is the science of defeating logical thinking

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by newworld
 


Speaking of large pantheons of gods and whatnot, I wrote this thread a while back. It deals with a simple premise and if you follow it through, it will attempt to clarify what you speak of.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Look, if a person can't see that we are at least Governed by a high power, they are a fool.
It is as simple as that, in my opinion.

They are an egotistical fool.

I know I have been from God to no god and back to God.
I still feel ashamed of the things I said about him while I was away.

But he understands.

I hope.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by asmall89


What about Ghosts, NDE's and other paranormal phenomenon? Could you explain them as tricks of the brain? Oh sure, but there definitely seems to be a bunch of people who have witnessed something spectacular like those in their lives.




Great post! S for you! just to ad a tid bit to the above; if these are tricks of the brain then someone needs to explain how they happen to groups of people together in the same place at the same time and they all experience this trick? I am not a huge advocate for the paranormal but think about it, that is not logic... And yes there are many unknowns and for a reason, if soemone claims to know it all, they are lying.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by newworld
 


Or what if it was the people and not the beings being "worshipped" making those claims? You must admit we are predisposed to playing such games. Does not necessarily mean that it's "divinely" inspired though. Please allow me to clarify, I strongly believe that what you believe to be true is true, for you. Particularly when it comes down to that journey each of us must take alone *meaning death*. With reality, well, the term consensus reality comes to mind.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by newworld
 


Or what if it was the people and not the beings being "worshipped" making those claims? You must admit we are predisposed to playing such games. Does not necessarily mean that it's "divinely" inspired though. Please allow me to clarify, I strongly believe that what you believe to be true is true, for you. Particularly when it comes down to that journey each of us must take alone *meaning death*. With reality, well, the term consensus reality comes to mind.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


I believe people came up with all deities and the religious texts to explain the reality around as well as form some sort of "community" that was united under a belief system.
Every religion claims to be the one and only religion out there, and that becomes "reality" for those who decide to adhere to the belief.

If there exists some form of creator, and this is a big, hypothetical IF, then I highly doubt any of our religious texts and religions describe him/her/it.
The deity entity probably created and left us to our own devices, probably not caring at all about our existence in our miniature piece of dust we call Earth (compared to the size of Earth with the sun, and how infinitely big the universe seems, I highly doubt a deity would care about those of us living in Earth).



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by newworld
 


I don't view religion in the same way you do at all.
I see religion as an all encompassing sort of philosophy that seeks to understand greater spiritual truth.

I don't buy any one religion and I certainly don't buy into anyone's ramblings about how their way is the only way.

But I don't really expect you to hear what I have to say and actually consider it as I have.

We are already at an impasse, as I outlined in my first post.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by newworld
 


That is if you believe that reality has a starting point.
A creator denotes a starting point and then we get into the wonderfully murky who created the creator of the creator of the creator. Or even in currently most widely accepted cosmological theory the Big Bang *which I think is trash for various reasons*. But I am babbling....


[edit on 30-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by newworld
 


I don't view religion in the same way you do at all.
I see religion as an all encompassing sort of philosophy that seeks to understand greater spiritual truth.

I don't buy any one religion and I certainly don't buy into anyone's ramblings about how their way is the only way.

But I don't really expect you to hear what I have to say and actually consider it as I have.

We are already at an impasse, as I outlined in my first post.


the reason why we won't probably view religions the same way is because I don't believe in spirituality either, and that I view religions are early attempts to form community and control the masses.

Religious texts do have some morals and rules every human should follow, such as not killing or lying, but they also include accounts of genocides done under the name of a god, destruction of those who don't vow down to the "real" deity, and extreme punishments such as death for non-issues such as homosexuality, praising other idols, etc.

Every major religion follows a similar format, save for a few like Buddhism that are mostly peaceful. however, religions have too much of a bloody history of oppression and control behind them that make me not look at religions as useful tools.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Melissa101
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


Kaytagg,

The reason that you are not able to identify their (Christains) thinking as logic is bacause mans logic is not God's logic. God is far more advanced than man and you have yet to be able to see God's logic because you lack understanding not the other way around you have it right but like most theories you just have it backwords. I hope you are one day able to go to that next level above the logic of man so you can look back and say well DUH.... Good luck to ya buddy...


[edit on 30-9-2009 by Melissa101]


How can you know this though?
I just can't grasp what you are trying to say here. How do you know about all this stuff you're saying. There's no proof or evidence to any of this. You already have the belief in God which can't be proven, so naturally the statement above can't be rationalized, as there isn't anything to back it up with.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by newworld
 


Of course, no ideology invalidates human nature. We are a violent species that is constantly seeking to gain control over each other. Thus the abuses in the name of concepts like nationalism, religion and etc.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 



I don't view religion in the same way you do at all.
I see religion as an all encompassing sort of philosophy that seeks to understand greater spiritual truth.



Really..?



Look, if a person can't see that we are at least Governed by a high power, they are a fool.
It is as simple as that, in my opinion.

They are an egotistical fool.

I know I have been from God to no god and back to God.
I still feel ashamed of the things I said about him while I was away.

But he understands.

I hope.



I'm sure you will spin it, but the above post reeks of organized religion...





The difference in perspective as well as content between those 2 posts is considerable...feel free to think before you reply.





posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Redneck from Hell
 


It's more of the "god can plug the holes in my argument, because he can do that sort of stuff" arguments.

God has his own logic? Riight. And you know about all this, how? You don't. You can't. Especially if his "logic" were "beyond" your ability to understand. Maybe the god you envision hates your guts for believing in him/her/it. You may think he loves you, but the way gods logic works, if he loves something, then he hates it.

Contradiction? No wheyyyy mannn. It's just god and his funny logic.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
I reiterate:

Kaytagg, what do you think the logicality of taking out possible variables without sufficient reason to do so?



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
reply to post by Redneck from Hell
 


It's more of the "god can plug the holes in my argument, because he can do that sort of stuff" arguments.

God has his own logic? Riight. And you know about all this, how? You don't. You can't. Especially if his "logic" were "beyond" your ability to understand. Maybe the god you envision hates your guts for believing in him/her/it. You may think he loves you, but the way gods logic works, if he loves something, then he hates it.

Contradiction? No wheyyyy mannn. It's just god and his funny logic.


I lol'ed out of my chair. I agree with you 100%, that's the common religious answer "you don't understand god and his plans because we are human and couldn't possibly understand him", it's nonsense and that's why I'm agnostic. Atheism and theism are just two extreme and ignorant and it seems illogical to make such large assumptions and live by it.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
I reiterate:

Kaytagg, what do you think the logicality of taking out possible variables without sufficient reason to do so?


Well logic has nothing to do with reality (sounds crazy, but it's true.)

So if we're purely talking about logic, then this is an exercise in philosophy. If we're talking about the universe, then one requires quantification and measurement.

So when you ask about taking out possible variables without sufficient reason, I have to ask in what context you're referring to.

If it's in the context of a scientific examination, then it's entirely illogical to ignore variables that might affect the experiment (because if they affect the experiment, ignoring them means you can not accurately reproduce the experiment).

If you're talking about logic, and strictly logic, then you need no reason to remove or add variables, and there's nothing wrong with it, because the variables are arbitrary.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Zenlike
 


I'm the same way. Although I typically identify as "atheist" these days, instead of agnostic. Saying I'm agnostic usually leads to an argument I don't want to have, or a misunderstanding of where I stand. Technically, I'm agnostic. I don't see how people can say "I KNOW god doesn't exist." Heck, I don't even know that zeus doesn't exist. i mean, it's possible, right? But for all intents and purposes, I'm an atheist when it comes to zeus and God. But if you really want to argue about it with me, I'll have to concede that I'm agnostic.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
reply to post by Zenlike
 


I'm the same way. Although I typically identify as "atheist" these days, instead of agnostic. Saying I'm agnostic usually leads to an argument I don't want to have, or a misunderstanding of where I stand. Technically, I'm agnostic. I don't see how people can say "I KNOW god doesn't exist." Heck, I don't even know that zeus doesn't exist. i mean, it's possible, right? But for all intents and purposes, I'm an atheist when it comes to zeus and God. But if you really want to argue about it with me, I'll have to concede that I'm agnostic.


I understand what your saying cause I'm the say way, Ive never claimed to be an atheist but basically I don't believe human beings have ever came in to contact by any means with the true god(s).



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


Respectfully. The problem is if you say this:

i mean, it's possible, right?
you are not atheist.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


Well, you are claiming that those who put variables in needlessly are being illogical I was merely asking about how you feel about those that take it out needlessly.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


I don't remembering making that claim..

It does make sense, though, I guess. Why would you add something MORE complex, to explain how complexity exists? That's like saying water is created by more water (somewhere else).. Well where did this other water come from? It was always there, to create the other water.. Okay, how does that line of thinking answer anything? And where is the proof that the other water is eternal? Because I say it is? What kind of argument is that?

That's the same argument theists pose, when talking about creation and the existence of God. It's useless.

I "take god out of the argument" because there's no evidence of god. Most christians claim that you "can not test for god," but that leaves me wondering what use the concept of god is, if you can't prove whether or not it even exists.

Can you tell me if zeus is real or not? No, you can't. Yet I highly doubt you've made your animal sacrifice to zeus today. Maybe you should? It might bring you favor to the gods.

What if you don't make an animal sacrifice? Then you are just as guilty as I am, of "deleting variables" from the equation. Zeus would be very displeased.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join