The Psychology of Totalism and Evolution vs. God

[Dr Fucktard]

Tard,
Can you meet me at the coffee shop on Monday at 10? Do you live in NW? I live in SE but I have some lab work to do at the University so thats not too far out of the way. Let me know if you can make it Monday

I'll be there. We can talk about Jesus. I'll bring a portable confessional, if you'd like..

[GregFL]

On 2004-03-05 18:28:00, glider wrote:



Greg,

You're right that what I sited is suspect at best and I readily admit that all references happened after Jesus's death. But just as theres no real proff of his existence, certainly nothing disproves it either.  I do feel a little vindication however in that the website you sent me to does say "The vast majority of historians and theologians have always believed in the reality of Jesus' life" but that doesn't mean it should be accepted as merely common knowledge...

I'll keep digging :smile:

~John"

Perfect attitude. Keep an open mind. My opinion is that most historians "accept" jesus lived because no one has really questioned it. The only history available is suspect at best.  

I have mixed feelings on whether it is true or a fable and accept that it is too sketchy for me to make an acceptable determination, but in adsence of any evidence of the supernatural, I remain unconvinced that Jesus was any incarnation of God.
Citing a recent example, the rev Sun Moon (moonies) claims to be the son of god. It can be readily demonstrated he exists, but that does nothing to further his supernatural claim;

So, back to the topic, did Jesus actually live?

The honest answer is I don't know and it has not been demonstrated by record of history satisfactory enough to convince me.

[teachback]

Would you guys give it a rest and go read this book, please?

http://freespace.virgin.net/questing.beast/eccarius.htm

Or if you happen to prefer comics:

http://freespace.virgin.net/questing.beast/ctvintro.htm

[Antigen]

Aw hell, Greg, you're right again! I usually pass on religious discussion cause it's usually strident, redundant and boring. But not this time. Thanks for the heads up. But I still say the Seedlings school is probably unrelated to The Seed, despite the trained dog correlation. (retired grayhounds make lousey sniffers).

Don't worry about temptation--as you grow older, it starts avoiding you.  
-- Old Farmer's Almanac

[Carmel]

I always like to point out that when people mention that they dont believe in God...is it that they dont believe in what they have been taught God is?  Or is it not believing in the stripped down, no frills, basic idea of WHAT a "God" is?

See, I dont believe in the Christian God.....nor do I believe in any of the various and sundry forms that "God" takes in different cultures.  

But that doesnt mean I dont believe in "God" per se.  Its interesting to put it these terms and get points of view.

[Dr. Fucktard]

You arwe absolutely right, Carmel. As the Steps say "God as I understand him".

Now God as I understand Him is me, Father Cassion V. M. Newton, Ph. D., D.D., MSA, and God says you need to get Straight!

[Anonymous]

On 2004-03-07 12:06:00, Carmel wrote:

"I always like to point out that when people mention that they dont believe in God...is it that they dont believe in what they have been taught God is?  Or is it not believing in the stripped down, no frills, basic idea of WHAT a "God" is?



See, I dont believe in the Christian God.....nor do I believe in any of the various and sundry forms that "God" takes in different cultures.  



But that doesnt mean I dont believe in "God" per se.  Its interesting to put it these terms and get points of view.



"

People's beliefs and lack of beliefs are all over the board, carmel.

Some people, myself included, have adopted a system of belief that basically says, credible evidence is necessary before I/we choose to believe anything.

I see no compelling evidence of anything supernatural including gods, demons, santa claus, the easter bunny, spirits or ghosts. I stand ready to change or modify my lack of belief when credible evidence is presented to me.  

Problem is, no one seems to offer anything closely resembling evidence. Instead you get suppositions, either/or axioms, and outrage when you suggest evidence is necessary in order to accept the fantastic.

Yawn, yawn, yawn.

[Anonymous]

On 2004-03-07 10:12:00, Antigen wrote:

"Aw hell, Greg, you're right again! I usually pass on religious discussion cause it's usually strident, redundant and boring. But not this time. Thanks for the heads up. But I still say the Seedlings school is probably unrelated to The Seed, despite the trained dog correlation. (retired grayhounds make lousey sniffers).

Don't worry about temptation--as you grow older, it starts avoiding you.  
-- Old Farmer's Almanac

"

Yeah, your right there about the seedling school. Got an email from them.

You know me, I chase them dead ends and beat em to death!

[GregFL]

sorry, last two posts mine, forgot to log in.

[Froderik]

I'm an agnostic. I don't believe, and I don't not believe.

[Dr Fucktard]

Typical wishy-washyness of a druggie.  :exclaim:

[kaydeejaded]

I think in being agnostic....believing that the existience of any ultimate reality is like unknown or unknowable is almost in itself alluding to the fact that there may very well be something out there it is just impossible to classify. So I totally never understood the agnostic thing at all. What was the point? If there is a god we won't know? And we can't know because it is unknowable? I dunno....

At least it is more crediable then an entire text claiming to know it all...like the Bible.

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

A republic is where the sheep get to pick which wolves vote on what to have for dinner.

But in a constitutional republic, voting on dinner is strictly
forbidden.

--A Patriot

[Carmel]

Hmm...well, I suppose needing evidence is vetainly acceptable.  But what would life be without a little mystique.

If I were to meet with God I wouldnt ask him/her to sign a certificate of validation, you know?

Talk about yawn.....

[GregFL]

Certifricate of Validation, eh?  No I don't think that would be necessary. The actual meeting would be fine, so long as it wasn't done in a dream or while otherwise consciously impaired.

Mystique is great Carmel. Fantasy is not my cup of tea...

Now, again, for those that choose to believe for the sake of believing or however they want to phrase it, have at it. But when you enter a conversation when you try to convince those that don't take suppositions and forgone conclusions, be prepared for a alternate opinions. This is where it goes south, people get offended, outraged, bored, or otherwise refuse to engage the conversation.

As far as agnostics go, I find that reasonable. I just think most agnostics haven't given the subject enough thought to formulate a strong opinion, or don't like where the thought takes them and purposely stop thinking about it.

Religion affects us all and I find the topic fascinating. It is a subject that everyone can participate in.

[kaydeejaded]

I also find religion fascinating what else motivates so many people to do so many things, and something with so little actual tangible proof of exsistance. To believe so completely in something, and to do that much and be motivated to kill and conquer and devote your life to it, and not have any solid proof...thats pretty interesting.

Each religion, tons of them, all believe with the same fervor that theirs is the path to redemption each believe they have proof of that but do they..what could be more interesting then that?

I know that our bodies were made to thrive only in pure air, and the scenes in which pure air is found.
-- John Muir