But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
Indeed our fear of ghosts goblins and things that bump in the nite is doubtless left over from a time when we understood very little about the natural world and imagined it more mysterious and hostile than it is. We overlaid this primitive fear with all kinds of intellectualisms and mythologies but at root religious faith is the same mental process as the cave man cowering in shock and awe at the thunder.
Well, an "understanding" about the natural world is what drives my belief, understanding very little would mean "nothing" so there's no way I could believe "something". The reasons for such beliefs a thousand years ago, was for a thousand years ago. They were wrong, and today man could still be wrong assuming that what was thought a thousand years ago, is actually what "creativity" of the world would be.
If one is going to have a belief that "creativity" happened, one can't cower, awe, and believe that what they don't understand means a creation. If we are not supposed to have an understanding of the natural world around us for a "creativity" to have accured, we are no more knowledgable today, than we were a thousand years ago,....there is no evidence that what was mythically claimed a thousand years ago, is what creation actually would be.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
Indeed our fear of ghosts goblins and things that bump in the nite is doubtless left over from a time when we understood very little about the natural world and imagined it more mysterious and hostile than it is. We overlaid this primitive fear with all kinds of intellectualisms and mythologies but at root religious faith is the same mental process as the cave man cowering in shock and awe at the thunder.
Well, an "understanding" about the natural world is what drives my belief, understanding very little would mean "nothing" so there's no way I could believe "something". The reasons for such beliefs a thousand years ago, was for a thousand years ago. They were wrong, and today man could still be wrong assuming that what was thought a thousand years ago, is actually what "creativity" of the world would be.
If one is going to have a belief that "creativity" happened, one can't cower, awe, and believe that what they don't understand means a creation. If we are not supposed to have an understanding of the natural world around us for a "creativity" to have accured, we are no more knowledgable today, than we were a thousand years ago,....there is no evidence that what was mythically claimed a thousand years ago, is what creation actually would be.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
As for being wrong, well, I've always acknowledged that possibility. The thing is, though, I'm not speculating as you are. I'm simply sticking with the facts and the well-established principles of the scientific method while awaiting further evidence.
But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
As for being wrong, well, I've always acknowledged that possibility. The thing is, though, I'm not speculating as you are. I'm simply sticking with the facts and the well-established principles of the scientific method while awaiting further evidence.
It's indeed obvious,... my post was very clear. Of course you could be just as wrong as the people were a thousand years ago, they think supernatural and you do too. How is it known that what man defines as natural, is not evidence of some sort of natural creativity?
But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
As for being wrong, well, I've always acknowledged that possibility. The thing is, though, I'm not speculating as you are. I'm simply sticking with the facts and the well-established principles of the scientific method while awaiting further evidence.
It's indeed obvious,... my post was very clear. Of course you could be just as wrong as the people were a thousand years ago, they think supernatural and you do too. How is it known that what man defines as natural, is not evidence of some sort of natural creativity?
For instance, I'm hardly likely to be as wrong as someone who lived a thousand years ago about the issues under discussion. There was very little understanding of nature back then. We now have highly successful methods with which to tease out the nature of Nature.
What those methods reveal is that Nature is self-explanatory, consequently, there is simply no need or warrant to postulate any sort of "creativity". We can dismiss the notion as a mere indulgence until advocates of the proposition can advance some evidence that Nature is insufficient to explain itself without a creator.
But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
As for being wrong, well, I've always acknowledged that possibility. The thing is, though, I'm not speculating as you are. I'm simply sticking with the facts and the well-established principles of the scientific method while awaiting further evidence.
It's indeed obvious,... my post was very clear. Of course you could be just as wrong as the people were a thousand years ago, they think supernatural and you do too. How is it known that what man defines as natural, is not evidence of some sort of natural creativity?
I just edited seven posts!! It's a lot easier to just remove them you know! Now come on folks... knock off the personal attacks. The topic is interesting, and a lot of good comments have been made. There's no need to go after each other... go after opinions, NOT those who post them.
Please!
Rangerken, beliefnet community host
Conservative, Libertarian, Life member of the NRA and VFW
But again ... "Religious Faith" Experience - Traditions
HISTORICALLY are Evolutionarily RECENT Developments,
so are "Advanced" Human Characteristics -- NOT "Primitive" ...
In light of the fact that man has been around for a couple of hundred thousand years, the notion of a flat earth at the center of the cosmos is a "recent development" too.
On the other hand, the human propensity for self-delusion is hardly likely to be an "advanced" or recently evolved characteristic of man either.
Religious faith, and the experiences it begets, along with religious tradition are products of man's imagination likely inspired by existential fear and insecurity.
So,..we now understand the world around us,..so what,...why the heck shouldn't we???
I might respond to this if I could make head or tail of it!
That post was VERY CLEAR and obviously,..you KNOW that.
It was about as clear as mud, nicoletate, and not for the first time either.
As I said,....my post was clear, and that's indeed obvious.
Yea right,..too obvious Dude! You have no answer, because you could be just as wrong.
As for being wrong, well, I've always acknowledged that possibility. The thing is, though, I'm not speculating as you are. I'm simply sticking with the facts and the well-established principles of the scientific method while awaiting further evidence.
It's indeed obvious,... my post was very clear. Of course you could be just as wrong as the people were a thousand years ago, they think supernatural and you do too. How is it known that what man defines as natural, is not evidence of some sort of natural creativity?
For My Mother: In Praise of a Life Lived
Chasing an Elusive God
Why Christianity Is Dying But Spirituality Is Thriving?
On the Frontlines
Ray Liotta, Seth Green Join an All-Star Cast in Indie Film ‘The Identical’
A Life of Hope
Habits for a Heart Healthy Lifestyle
Emotional Equations
Are You a Compulsive or Binge Eater?
Faith, Freedom and Rocker John Schlitt
Robert Griffin III: Not the Average Rookie
Green Powders to Add to Your Diet Now
Natural Deodorants That Actually Work
Birth of a Habit
Madly In Love With ME
Is It Love If You're All Cranky When You Give It?
Living A Meaningful Life
"The Bible" a Labor of Love for Famed Producer, Wife
Who Should Be Allowed to Pray for President Obama?
