Why do religious ones stick with delusions?

Originally posted by Soothfast
Eh? The possibility of being wrong about something always exists; however, I do think Eastern religions, in general, tend to be closer to "what it's all about" than Christianity. An opinion, of course.

Typical.

Eastern "religions" are basically about nothing. There's virtually no substance in much of their writings. It's all mental masturbation and self-justification with no focus on the real.

And yet you claim they are closer to "what it's all about" than a book with a precise focus on how to live one's life and a message of salvation and hope.

You must be some sort of nihilist, and that's why you're drawn to "religions" about nothing. I hope you live long enough to take the long way around your celebration of the self to what is real and true. I pray for an awakening of your soul.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Typical.

Eastern "religions" are basically about nothing. There's virtually no substance in much of their writings. It's all mental masturbation and self-justification with no focus on the real.

And yet you claim they are closer to "what it's all about" than a book with a precise focus on how to live one's life and a message of salvation and hope.
bration of the self to what is real and true. I pray for an awakening of your soul.

Well, look, I'm sure it's all very comfortable living with the notion that there's some Supreme Dictator out there who will tell you what pants to put on and how to part your hair, but I do believe that there is no "absolute" frame of reference for most inquiries, much less a universal one for all inquiries. To believe such a thing limits one's ability to view things from different angles, and leads to mental rigidity and spiritual stagnation. The only constant is change, the only absolute relativism. That no two humans can see eye to eye on anything kind of reinforces that impression for me. This, by the way, is why I think absolutist religious mindsets and rigid political conservatism tend to go hand in hand, and fear of the unknown is one of the motivators.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Sure, just once again ignore the points of the post.

Do you really think that if you don't acknowledge your evasions, nonsensical answers, lies, etc., then they don't exist?

Do you really believe you're all that different from RJHinds?

What problem do you have with me? Perhaps I can correct it.

Originally posted by Soothfast
Well, look, I'm sure it's all very comfortable living with the notion that there's some Supreme Dictator out there who will tell you what pants to put on and how to part your hair, but I do believe that there is no "absolute" frame of reference for most inquiries, much less a universal one for all inquiries. To believe such a thing limits one's ability to ...[text shortened]... al conservatism tend to go hand in hand, and fear of the unknown is one of the motivators.

What he said.

Among the 'nothing' of eastern thought is meditation, yoga and the like proven by medical science to have benefits in many areas of human life, such as controlling internal body processes like heart beats and reducing cortisols (which are bad responses to stress). All of these nothings were not formulated to be religious, they are here and now.

Of course you are free to disdain all of that in your pursuit of your religious goals. I would say, put your cortisol level up against the eastern dudes, see which one is lower.

Originally posted by sonhouse
What he said.

well said? are you insane? look at the glaring stupidity of his portrayal, we are endowed with free will, yet God is a dictator? duh? To believe in a Divine entity limits ones perspectives, huh? does an anchor limit i ships ability to traverse the ocean? In fact it may even be argued that a truly unified perspective of life cannot be achieved without taking the divine into consideration, and here we have someone offering some kind of freedom and on what basis? that a belief in an entity that exists outside the constraints of time is limiting, man you people need to feel your bums to make sure your still alive. Fear of the unkown? The scriptures make it clear that perfect love utterly negates any kind of fear, (but you would have to read it to understand that) infact, the whole assertion is so thoroughly deviod of reason that I had to question your sanity, did he really read the same thing that i just did?

I repeat my assertion that those who froth against scripture (the Bible), do so without having read it or studied it and then make the most preposterous assertions on that basis.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well said? are you insane? look at the glaring stupidity of his portrayal, we are endowed with free will, yet God is a dictator? duh? To believe in a Divine entity limits ones perspectives, huh? does an anchor limit i ships ability to traverse the ocean? In fact it may even be argued that a truly unified perspective of life cannot be achieved with ...[text shortened]... raints of time is limiting, man you people need to feel your bums to make sure your still alive.

Of course you would say that, being in the depths of your own delusions.

You are by definition refusing to go outside your own religious based box.

That is the gist of what he said.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Of course you would say that, being in the depths of your own delusions.

You are by definition refusing to go outside your own religious based box.

That is the gist of what he said.

not content to portray your ignorance you must now project it on to me, no thanks, keep it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not content to portray your ignorance you must now project it on to me, no thanks, keep it.

Hang on a minute, this is what you said in an earlier post to me when i questioned you again on reading the evolution book -

you see my dear friend, how can i say it without hurting your feelings, please notice the text, , we are counselled to make our minds over and try to perceive what the will of God is, how materialistic publication like that will help me do this, i cannot say.

How does what you say there contradict what sonhouse said here -

You are by definition refusing to go outside your own religious based box.

In that big long debate we had about you refusing to read the book i was going to send you, you admitted you were close minded and here you are trying to portray you're not?!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Hang on a minute, this is what you said in an earlier post to me when i questioned you again on reading the evolution book -

[quote]you see my dear friend, how can i say it without hurting your feelings, please notice the text, , we are counselled to make our minds over and try to perceive what the will of God is, how materialistic publication like th ...[text shortened]... to send you, you admitted you were close minded and here you are trying to portray you're not?!

no i am not trying to portray that i am not, i am questioning the validity that God is a dictator, that belief in a divine element is limiting. Reading a book on pure materialism would do nothing for my spirituality, you yourself could not provide a reason why it would have a positive effect on my spirituality and could find none. I have Darwins own book, which i consult from time to time, its enough for me.

Originally posted by RJHinds
What problem do you have with me? Perhaps I can correct it.

You're just one of many Christian fundamentalists on this forum whose adherence to dogma renders them incapable of reason in regards to their core beliefs and what they perceive as threats to their core beliefs. I could have picked any one of them. The reason I singled you out is that Rajk999 seems to believe himself as being very different from you.

That said, it'd be great if you can correct it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i am not trying to portray that i am not, i am questioning the validity that God is a dictator, that belief in a divine element is limiting. Reading a book on pure materialism would do nothing for my spirituality, you yourself could not provide a reason why it would have a positive effect on my spirituality and could find none. I have Darwins own book, which i consult from time to time, its enough for me.

Even though Darwin had some of the answers but there has been 150 years of solid research on the subject in areas we now know he was wrong?

It sounds to me like you pick his Origin of Species as being the golden bible of evolutionary thought and thus can use it to refute and so keep your particular dogma safe from rational debate.

This is by definition Cognitive dissonance.

Google that term if you want to learn about it.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Even though Darwin had some of the answers but there has been 150 years of solid research on the subject in areas we now know he was wrong?

It sounds to me like you pick his Origin of Species as being the golden bible of evolutionary thought and thus can use it to refute and so keep your particular dogma safe from rational debate.

This is by definition Cognitive dissonance.

Google that term if you want to learn about it.

the basic tenets remain the same, your so called 150 years of solid research have not negated this fact. What seems to you is just that, what seems to you. The matter is clear in my mind, for what you people profess takes a greater leap of faith than it does to believe in an intelligent agency, but you are simply unwilling to admit that it relies on certain unobserved phenomena, scant physical evidence and in most cases scientific dogma (nothing makes sense apart from biology) and on top of all that, even if you are able to state how a mechanism works, it does not say why it does or for what reason, indeed, the why is where spirituality begins, not with the how.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the basic tenets remain the same, your so called 150 years of solid research have not negated this fact. What seems to you is just that, what seems to you. The matter is clear in my mind, for what you people profess takes a greater leap of faith than it does to believe in an intelligent agency, but you are simply unwilling to admit that it relies o ...[text shortened]... why it does or for what reason, indeed, the why is where spirituality begins, not with the how.

Clever to be using 'leap of faith', equating science and religion. The reason Darwin's book is outdated has nothing to do with faith.

Indeed, it is you who cling to the leap of faith. You can have no argument against science. You can only spout 2000 year old dogma, which has nothing to do with modern life.

You do not rail against mathematics, astronomy, geology, psychiatry, genomics (unless it supports evolution), volcanology (unless it supports evolution), or any other science (unless it supports evolution).

You seem to have a one trick pony mind.

You refuse to read those despised materialistic books that could set your mind to actually thinking, instead, taking a position dictated by your religious dogma and sticking to it no matter what..... Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's made up, seems to be the modus operandi of your being.

Did you read about cognitive dissonance and it's brothers? Or is that too close to truth for you to bear?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Clever to be using 'leap of faith', equating science and religion. The reason Darwin's book is outdated has nothing to do with faith.

Indeed, it is you who cling to the leap of faith. You can have no argument against science. You can only spout 2000 year old dogma, which has nothing to do with modern life.

You do not rail against mathematics, astrono out cognitive dissonance and it's brothers? Or is that too close to truth for you to bear?

no argument against science? i have no problem with science, i have a problem with scientific dogma and utter and complete postulation, not to mention outright fraud, Ramapithecus, ring any bells, an entire skeletal structure made from a lower jawbone and two teeth, in reality a fraud, so called Lucy, three feet high, originally claimed as a missing link, in actual fact, utterly simian, so dont even try it, you are in exactly the same position, for you are heralding unobserved and non falsifiable beliefs as if they are a panacea for all, when in actual fact, it simply another world view, but worse than that, you have given it a veneer and termed it science when in actual fact the very same scientific data is open to interpretation. The worst part of you base materialists is that you have nothing to offer in a spiritual sense, all you can do is pour scorn on those that do.

I have to laugh at your definition of thinking, as if assimilating material from someone else actually passes as thinking? here a newsflash spanklberger, a computer assimilates material, but it cannot think for itself, you have not thought of anything original, so please refrain from construing assimilating material from a third party source as thinking, its something entirely different and its not a little hypocritical of you to think that reading a materialistic text book leads to original thought. I would not wave like a banner words like truth around if i were in your position, you people are content with what is plausible, not what is actually true. Truth is for the realm of the spiritual, not the base materialist.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no argument against science? i have no problem with science, i have a problem with scientific dogma and utter and complete postulation, not to mention outright fraud, Ramapithecus, ring any bells, an entire skeletal structure made from a lower jawbone and two teeth, in reality a fraud, so called Lucy, three feet high, originally claimed as a missing ...[text shortened]... , not what is actually true. Truth is for the realm of the spiritual, not the base materialist.

You might be surprised at what I have thought all by myself. I am working on a paper on gravitational lenses with independent research by yours truly. I invented a way for independent microscopic examination of a hybrid circuit which had to be held in place. I developed an improved objective lens on a beam analysis machine. I invented a sound synthesizer a long time ago that made incredibly weird sounds, good enough for sci fi backgrounds, I developed a way to turn round piezo pickups into strips usable for musical instrumensts. All that stuff and more the result of my own independent thinking.

So when you accuse a person of not having an independent thought, you should look in the mirror first.
I also have 4 of my 30 original musical compositions on myspace, maybe you already heard them. So I am incapable of original thought?

You are the one without originality, simply mouthing the dogma of other so-called thinkers from long ago.

If you were not religious, how long would you reject evolution? If you somehow became atheist or even agnostic, how would you justify your stance on evolution?

You have no problems with science, only those which refute your dogma. That is the essence of not thinking outside the box.

BTW, here is a Ramapithicus link:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Ramapithecus.aspx

That is real work, not fake in any way.

Perhaps in your delusionary visions you are thinking of Piltdown man? The hoax from over 100 years ago?

http://www.skepdic.com/piltdown.html