Here's one for the religious..

[Ryedo40]

Quite worrying that people still believe in a God in this day and age.

 

Yes, it can be.

 

Religion should be treat with the contempt it deserves,

 

As should any conspiracy theory or ideology.

 

... furthermore, people who take it seriously should be sectioned under the mental health act. Brainwashed idiots.

 

That's a little extreme.

[XXTickerXX]

Ok how can we prove the bible to be true well obviously the first thing would be to pick one up. The bible took 4000 years to complete written by 40 different men one part was written in hebrew which the clergy would call for some reason the ""old testament"" by doing this they make the whole thing invalid because the hebrew has to be tied in with greek scriptures to be able to ascertain the truth of it all and how often would you see a clergyman with a bible anyway.. ok ok proof...first of all the bible is a book of prophecy

all of which has come true. it prophecied the 1st world war Mathew 24 verse 7 would you

look at that and say otherwise. another scripture writen at revalation chapter 11 verse 18

promises that god will bring to ruin those ruining the earth those words were written down

2000 years ago approx how would the writer know those words would come true in his day the only thing that might have been ruined was some castledoor by a battering ram look at our planet today the icecaps are melting playing havoc with weather patterns, today

we send up into the atmosphere thousands of tons of toxic waste that is tearing the protective shield which is above our to shreds the scientists the proper ones are begging the goverments of this world to do something about it before yesterday in some places people are walking about wearing face masks and we can go on so just two of many many prophecies that prove the bible to be true watch out for armageddon

 

 

Can you answer a simple question?

 

After waiting 14 billion years to send "Jesus" why wouldn`t a god wait just a tiny tiny bit longer whilst the video camera was invented?

After all he must have known it was going to be invented because he is god.

 

Or was god just thick.

 

---------- Post added 27-05-2013 at 13:33 ----------

 

Yes, it can be.

 

 

 

As should any conspiracy theory or ideology.

 

 

 

That's a little extreme.

 

I`m not sure it is extreme.

 

If your daughter came home and said "dad i`m pregnant but it must be gods because i`ve never had sex" would you

 

A) Tell her she is an utter liar and find out who the father is.

 

B) Immediately start a cult for the simple minded saying the son of god has arrived and make lots of stories up that can never be proved.

 

I wonder how the CSA would take that story in the present.

[Ryedo40]

I`m not sure it is extreme.

 

If your daughter came home and said "dad i`m pregnant but it must be gods because i`ve never had sex" would you

 

A) Tell her she is an utter liar and find out who the father is.

 

B) Immediately start a cult for the simple minded saying the son of god has arrived and make lots of stories up that can never be proved.

 

I wonder how the CSA would take that story in the present.

 

And if a kid says I believe in Santa or fairies, does that mean we should place the kid in a cage?

 

Most people function quite well in society while holding all sorts of crazy beliefs - some taking them more seriously than others - but I don't think that means they should all be institutionalised.

[PaliRichard]

You've scored low which I did expect because you've described yourself to me previously as an atheist who's more interested in the philosophy than the religious parts of Buddhism. You've also said you have no family history regarding religion. You do seem to have some moderate metamagical thinking when it comes to your perception of reality so perhaps you're exploring this?

 

Having chosen a religion that's outside western culture I would have expected you to score a little higher on the more unsocial categories, but perhaps you've chosen a religion based on the more modern western perspective that it offers community or individuation through association rather than the religious need for sanctuary.

 

Prior to receiving your answers I was expecting you to score in the teens/ early twenties. As you can probably tell, I'm not a psychiatrist and I don't know you well so this is just pop psychology, only you know the real answers here.

 

I was interested to note that one of the two Islamic fundamentalists that were involved in the recent terror attack was described as having OCD on the news the other day

 

I've not said I am more interested in the philosophical than the religious aspects.

 

My practice of Buddhism is actually the opposite of your assessment, not only am I a member of a more strictly traditional school of Buddhism but I actually dislike those groups that have a more western form because I think they entirely miss the point!

 

I don't have a need for sanctuary (but as I've said many times I disagree largely that religious people do have a 'need' for something to believe in) and I think the westernised Buddhist groups offer more of a sanctuary to people than the Eastern ones do.

 

I'm not sure how that qualifies in your Doctors assessments but that's the way I am.

 

---------- Post added 27-05-2013 at 14:43 ----------

 

My mind has been open to religion, and I've heard enough to come to the conclusion that it is nonsense.

 

To answer your question, yes I would rather employ an atheist over a theist.

 

Common sense goes a long way in my book.

 

How do you know an atheist has common sense?

 

By your own admission

I'm not associated with anyone for not believing in something there is no evidence of, I am only an atheist by definition[/Quote]

 

There are many people who are Atheists who have no common sense whatsoever, there are many religious people with buckets full, so your point is slightly contradictory.

 

You would rather employ someone who has been convicted for stealing from their employer (or worse), has a shocking work ethic and shows no signs of remorse than someone who has an exemplary employment record and qualifications coming out of their backside simply because their lack of belief in God means, you assume, that they have more common sense?

 

Do you not think that might be a slight reflection on your own common sense?

 

---------- Post added 27-05-2013 at 15:01 ----------

 

Ok how can we prove the bible to be true well obviously the first thing would be to pick one up[/Quote]

 

I have, did you see my assessment of original sin on the other thread, it's an interesting read. How do you interpret the Genesis account?

 

The bible took 4000 years to complete written by 40 different men one part was written in hebrew which the clergy would call for some reason the ""old testament"" by doing this they make the whole thing invalid because the hebrew has to be tied in with greek scriptures to be able to ascertain the truth of it all and how often would you see a clergyman with a bible anyway[/Quote]

 

So you can provide evidence of the '40 different men'? Historically verifiable contemporary data that they existed?

 

ok ok proof...first of all the bible is a book of prophecy

all of which has come true. it prophecied the 1st world war Mathew 24 verse 7 would you

look at that and say otherwise. another scripture writen at revalation chapter 11 verse 18

promises that god will bring to ruin those ruining the earth those words were written down

2000 years ago approx how would the writer know those words would come true in his day the only thing that might have been ruined was some castledoor by a battering ram look at our planet today the icecaps are melting playing havoc with weather patterns, today

we send up into the atmosphere thousands of tons of toxic waste that is tearing the protective shield which is above our to shreds the scientists the proper ones are begging the goverments of this world to do something about it before yesterday in some places people are walking about wearing face masks and we can go on so just two of many many prophecies that prove the bible to be true watch out for Armageddon[/Quote]

 

Matthew 24:7

 

7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places[/Quote]

 

The first world war? Really?

 

You would have to be really, really, reading into that to get the first world war, even in hindsight.

 

There is nothing in that specific to the first world war (and I may be wrong but I don't recall famines or earthquakes caused by the war).

 

Revelation 11:18

 

18 The nations were angry,

and your wrath has come.

The time has come for judging the dead,

and for rewarding your servants the prophets

and your people who revere your name,

both great and small—

and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”[/Quote]

 

Again, nothing specific in there about man made destruction of the Earth.

 

In fact, let's look at it more closely

for destroying those who destroy the earth[/Quote]

 

Would suggest if your interpretation is correct then the only ones who will be saved will be those very, very few tribal groups who have had no contact with nations who utilize such technology (and the Bible) - in other words, the only people, according to your 'prophesy' who will be saved are those who haven't heard the 'word' of God. Seems a bit odd that he would save only those who hadn't heard is word.

 

If that's your best evidence, a couple of lines wildly misinterpreted then I think we can safely assume that particular God is no threat to us at all.

[Jabroni]

 

How do you know an atheist has common sense?

 

By your own admission

 

There are many people who are Atheists who have no common sense whatsoever, there are many religious people with buckets full, so your point is slightly contradictory.

 

You would rather employ someone who has been convicted for stealing from their employer (or worse), has a shocking work ethic and shows no signs of remorse than someone who has an exemplary employment record and qualifications coming out of their backside simply because their lack of belief in God means, you assume, that they have more common sense?

 

Do you not think that might be a slight reflection on your own common sense?

 

 

We'll have to disagree on that one, I'll never accept that a person who believes in ancient, fictional literature over Science has more common sense.

 

The information is out there, yet they are too ignorant to accept they are wrong, instead they are always bending parameters to try and make things fit within their Ideology.

 

And no, I would not rather employ a thief either, you are doing what they do, bending the parameters to try and make me look like a bigot. Sorry, I'm not having that.

 

I have been short and concise withe my posts on the subject, because to be quite honest, I have been involved in very long debates on this issue elsewhere and it always seems to go in the same direction.

 

People can be academically gifted and still lack common sense, it really depends on the role of the job which one of those things is the most useful. There is just too many variables, but I stand by what I said: Religious people lack good common sense on the basis that their beliefs are a complete fabrication, another description would be deluded.

 

---------- Post added 27-05-2013 at 15:28 ----------

 

Yes, it can be.

 

 

 

As should any conspiracy theory or ideology.

 

 

 

That's a little extreme.

 

Not as extreme as some of their ideologies, at least there is an argument for sectioning some of them, where as there is no argument from the deluded religious extremists, they are just brainwashed. I think some of the more benign followers of religion are victims of their own environments and upbringing, perhaps a proper education on religion with facts and falsities presented and studied should be introduced into schools, faith schools should be banned in my opinion.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Jabroni

[PaliRichard]

We'll have to disagree on that one, I'll never accept that a person who believes in ancient, fictional literature over Science has more common sense[/Quote]

 

That's your choice.

 

The information is out there, yet they are too ignorant to accept they are wrong, instead they are always bending parameters to try and make things fit within their Ideology[/Quote]

 

They don't always do that, that's an assumption.

 

And no, I would not rather employ a thief either, you are doing what they do, bending the parameters to try and make me look like a bigot. Sorry, I'm not having that[/Quote]

 

I'm not bending any parameters. An atheist is someone who lacks belief in God, you said Atheists had more common sense and you would employ them over the religious. Many people who lack belief in God are dishonest. Maybe you should try wording things better or maybe you should try thinking about what you're saying. Don't get upset with me because what you've said doesn't make sense.

 

I have been short and concise withe my posts on the subject, because to be quite honest, I have been involved in very long debates on this issue elsewhere and it always seems to go in the same direction[/Quote]

 

Don't get involved then.

 

People can be academically gifted and still lack common sense, it really depends on the role of the job which one of those things is the most useful. There is just too many variables, but I stand by what I said: Religious people lack good common sense on the basis that their beliefs are a complete fabrication, another description would be deluded.

 

Religious people are no more lacking in common sense than many Atheists - you're starting to sound desperate now. OK then - what job, specifically do you think an Atheist (let's assume they aren't a lazy thief) would be better suited to? Baring in mind we're basing this solely on one having a belief in God and the other not and ignoring all other skill sets.

[Jabroni]

With what, should human consciousness be explored?

 

I see things in a similar way; over indulgence in religious concepts is the opposite of spirituality, kind-heartedness, self-awareness (all of which are non-conceptual).

 

Truth cannot be taught, it is not to be found in books ... it's in you.

 

 

I honestly think human consciousness is a journey of self exploration, as you say it isn't healthy for certain things to be forced on us, the one place we should have true freedom is in our own minds.

 

People set out on on paths of exploration in different ways, you've got the people who like to spend time alone and meditate, people who like to research and educate themselves, then there is people who explore with psychedelics to unlock parts of the mind (see Joe Rogan DMT)

 

Many different ways... It's all down to you.

[Cavegirl]

I've not said I am more interested in the philosophical than the religious aspects.

 

My practice of Buddhism is actually the opposite of your assessment, not only am I a member of a more strictly traditional school of Buddhism but I actually dislike those groups that have a more western form because I think they entirely miss the point!

 

I don't have a need for sanctuary (but as I've said many times I disagree largely that religious people do have a 'need' for something to believe in) and I think the westernised Buddhist groups offer more of a sanctuary to people than the Eastern ones do.

 

I'm not sure how that qualifies in your Doctors assessments but that's the way I am.

 

My apologies, you did state in fact that you follow a Buddhist code, which forms a path that is backed by philosophy, but you don't really study the philosophy. It's difficult however, to see any metamagical basis to this code - it seems to be mostly codes of abstainments as you've described it- hence why I saw you as more philosophical than religious. Do you engage with daily rituals at all- cleansing, food prep etc? If so do they aid your thinking process or would you rely mainly upon meditation for this?

 

I never actually said you were part of a westernised Buddhist group, in fact I said you'd selected a religion outside westernised culture.

 

I never said people with the schizotypal trait had a 'need' to believe, the trait simply gives them the ability to believe to a greater or lesser degree. I said they had a need to share anxiety in a thoughtful ritualised sanctuary (or 'sanctified') space.

[Jabroni]

That's your choice.

 

 

 

They don't always do that, that's an assumption.

 

 

 

I'm not bending any parameters. An atheist is someone who lacks belief in God, you said Atheists had more common sense and you would employ them over the religious. Many people who lack belief in God are dishonest. Maybe you should try wording things better or maybe you should try thinking about what you're saying. Don't get upset with me because what you've said doesn't make sense.

 

 

 

Don't get involved then.

 

 

 

Religious people are no more lacking in common sense than many Atheists - you're starting to sound desperate now. OK then - what job, specifically do you think an Atheist (let's assume they aren't a lazy thief) would be better suited to? Baring in mind we're basing this solely on one having a belief in God and the other not and ignoring all other skill sets.

 

 

My bold 1) "Many people who lack belief in God are dishonest. "

 

Indeed, whereas you fail to mention that ALL people who believe in God are dishonest in some respect. (this, of course, fits your agenda)

 

"Maybe you should try wording things better or maybe you should try thinking about what you're saying"

 

Likewise.

 

My bold 2)

 

"Religious people are no more lacking in common sense than many Atheists"

Well, apart from the obvious point that they believe in a load of scientifically debunked old nonsense.

 

"you're starting to sound desperate now."

 

If you say so, oh enlightened one. Don't lose any sleep will you? I won't.

 

"OK then - what job, specifically do you think an Atheist (let's assume they aren't a lazy thief) would be better suited to? Baring in mind we're basing this solely on one having a belief in God and the other not and ignoring all other skill sets."

 

Religious education for one.

[Ryedo40]

I never said people with the schizotypal trait had a 'need' to believe, the trait simply gives them the ability to believe to a greater or lesser degree. I said they had a need to share anxiety in a thoughtful ritualised sanctuary (or 'sanctified') space.

 

I guess my opinion doesn't really matter, but I agree. I think the schizotypal trait found in most people leaves them prone to believe in all-sorts of crazy and irrational things(not just religion). I think holding those beliefs can cause anxiety or stress, and sharing or reacting to those beliefs helps alleviate the stress caused. e.g. conspiracy theorists have a need to spread the conspiracy because it helps alleviate the anxiety by giving them a sense of having the situation under control. I think religion and ritual pretty much function the same.