Origins of god/gods

[Altfish]

Maybe, it's possible. I've had weirder visions. I believe the subconscious mind is capable of creating such experiences.

Exactly, the mind creates them, they are NOT real

 

[atanu]

Since we humans first appeared, the world was surrounded by unexplained phenomena: the rise and set of the sun and moon; the ever-changing weather, including seasons, storms and other natural disasters; as well as other things. Once human intellect reached the point of being able to comprehend time as having a past, present, and future, man realized that they would someday die which was most likely horrific and a quite depressing fact for early humans. The idea that these unexplained phenomena were controlled by possibly sympathetic Spirits, and that their psyche would survive bodily death as an immaterial entity was comforting. Those who were able to buy into this comfort woo-woo would be better able to get on with their harsh and brief lives. Evolution therefore created the first gods. A possible date for these events could be the first anatomically modern humans 150,000 years ago, or maybe the time of the Cro-magnons and the behavioral revolution 40,000 years ago.

As usual the post is replete with assumptions that are taken as facts. Has anyone seen the origin of either this planet or of life-consciousness? Does anyone know the process by which information persists? How do we know that there is a zero state for either life-consciousness or for information-knowledge? Has anyone empirically recorded any personal first party experience? Is there any actual taste of grape other than the inner human experience?

So, when persons such as Vedic seers, Buddha, Christ or countless others tell of their inner experience to dispel the illusive notion rampant in common folks that "I am this body", we can test those words of wise men by personal experimentation.

The unthinking meme is actually the fact that although some claim that empirical data alone matters yet they conclude absence of 'the inner experience' (which is not within the scope of so-called empirical measurement). So, such conclusions of 'absence' (absence of consciousness, absence of soul, absence of god etc.) are themselves not based on empirical data.

So, let the skeptics be true skeptics and conduct their own first party experiments: meditation etc., and obtain first party experience of "I am".

 

[Jollybear]

I guessed wrong? Not all humans that believe in an afterlife find it comforting? You do now the afterlife is very popular right? And there’s many views on it not just the heaven and hell concept you gave above lunkhead?

The concept of an afterlife is widespread throughout most human religions. One of the important purposes of religious belief is to give explanations of, and reassurances about, the world.

You bring up hell and punishment. That’s the Steroetypical Christain notion. There is heaven for the good and righteous and hell for the evil and homosexuals. Heaven is often peaceful and blissful, hell a place for endless torture and torment. The fear of hell is probably a stronger motivator than the promise of heaven at God’s side.

The traditional view in Judaism is that all people remain as disembodied souls until the Messiah comes and raises the dead. Like most religions, however, many many many
other views exist.

For most Hindus, Buddhist, and sheiks, it is generally a recurring cycle of death and rebirth, and not always as a human. You can come back as a god, a demon, or be reborn into any number of other realms. These realms are refffed to as hell’s I believe.

Muslims (males) believe you go to paradise ( were they are presented with scandally clad women)

As I said before, Like most religions, however, many other views exist on were you spend your afterlife.

Of course, not everyone believes in any kind of afterlife. Atheist largely assume that when you're dead, it's over - so live while you can. That’s my motto.

So I’m not ignoring anything. You are tho. Because no matter how many times I answer your question u just ask again albeit it in a different way. And you brought up and others brought up the Christian concept of the after life as if that’s the only concept of an afterlife. Effectively ignoring the many other views that exist.

Good grief. Look man, you havent answered the question and you STILL havent answered the question.

All your doing is ranting on trying to make yourself look informed. I dont care, all i care about right now is you answering my question with a straight answer.

And for your information YES i was well aware of the MANY diverse views on the afterlife. I was quite aware of that WAY before you mentioned it to me.

In this post of yours your trying to say IM saying theres only a limited amount of views on the afterlife, when i for a fact said no such thing. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU have ALLUDED to that very thing by saying anyone who believes in a afterlife does so only for the reason of comfort.

THAT is for a fact incorrect. Yes SOME people believe in a afterlife for comfort reasons only, but not EVERYONE who believes in a afterlife does so for comfort reasons.

So, give me a straight answer, you either speak for all people who believe in a afterlife or you dont, which one is it? If you stick with your "guess" that anyone who believes in a afterlife does so for no other reason but comfort, then YOU SPEAK FOR THEM. Thats speaking for them, aspeasally when one guy already told you his religion is not comforting. And the points about hell, and hindu afterlife punishments, ect.

What, do you just outright reject or sweep those points under the rug and conveniently dont deal with them because it weakens your position?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

@Prometheus85 I wasn't suggesting we end our debate you know, when I said I'd look at your information. I did ask you a question, but if you'd rather not discuss it farther that works for me.

 

[Prometheus85]

Yes thank you, and I will have a look at some of this information. I wonder how materialists would verify though that this process couldn't come from an outside influence? Could they verify that?

Yes they can. Methodological materialism is a defining characteristic of science in the same way that "methodological woodism" is a defining characteristic of carpentry.

Good grief. Look man, you havent answered the question and you STILL havent answered the question.

All your doing is ranting on trying to make yourself look informed. I dont care, all i care about right now is you answering my question with a straight answer.

And for your information YES i was well aware of the MANY diverse views on the afterlife. I was quite aware of that WAY before you mentioned it to me.

In this post of yours your trying to say IM saying theres only a limited amount of views on the afterlife, when i for a fact said no such thing. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU have ALLUDED to that very thing by saying anyone who believes in a afterlife does so only for the reason of comfort.

THAT is for a fact incorrect. Yes SOME people believe in a afterlife for comfort reasons only, but not EVERYONE who believes in a afterlife does so for comfort reasons.

So, give me a straight answer, you either speak for all people who believe in a afterlife or you dont, which one is it? If you stick with your "guess" that anyone who believes in a afterlife does so for no other reason but comfort, then YOU SPEAK FOR THEM. Thats speaking for them, aspeasally when one guy already told you his religion is not comforting. And the points about hell, and hindu afterlife punishments, ect.

What, do you just outright reject or sweep those points under the rug and conveniently dont deal with them because it weakens your position?

To win the debate
Change the subject to something
"That does not. Make. Sense."

Where in my premise did I say I was speaking for everyone???

Remember the premise was about the origins of god/gods and how humans were surrounded by unexplained phenomena: the rise and set of the sun and moon; the ever-changing weather, including seasons, storms and other natural disasters and becoming aware that they will die. So the idea that these unexplained phenomenon was controlled by the supernatural (gods/god/spirits) was comforting to early man.

You asking me to answer your question on do I speak for everyone or them (whoever them may be) is totally Irrelevant to my premise and quite frankly is nothing but
Chewbacca Defense

 

[Prometheus85]

@Prometheus85 I wasn't suggesting we end our debate you know, when I said I'd look at your information. I did ask you a question, but if you'd rather not discuss it farther that works for me.

If you wanna keep going that’s cool. If you wanna call it’s quits that’s cool. Did u read the wiki article?

 

[Prometheus85]

And it’s not just you @Jollybear. Others in this thread have been using the Chewbacca defense. The sad part? It works.

For example budda accusing me of trying to go after religious people (red herring) when that is totally unrelated to the debate.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Yes they can. Methodological materialism is a defining characteristic of science in the same way that "methodological woodism" is a defining characteristic of carpentry.

Right, but that wouldn't explain that what materialists are observing couldn't be an outside-in. That's always been an issue with materialism. The double slit experiment is thought to refute materialism.

 

[Jollybear]

Yes they can. Methodological materialism is a defining characteristic of science in the same way that "methodological woodism" is a defining characteristic of carpentry.



To win the debate
Change the subject to something
"That does not. Make. Sense."

Where in my premise did I say I was speaking for everyone???

Remember the premise was about the origins of god/gods and how humans were surrounded by unexplained phenomena: the rise and set of the sun and moon; the ever-changing weather, including seasons, storms and other natural disasters and becoming aware that they will die. So the idea that these unexplained phenomenon was controlled by the supernatural (gods/god/spirits) was comforting to early man.

You asking me to answer your question on do I speak for everyone or them (whoever them may be) is totally Irrelevant to my premise and quite frankly is nothing but
Chewbacca Defense

For someone who constantly refuses to give a straight answer to a simple question, then goes on pathetic rants, then tells me im the one using a chebacca defence? I think its quite the other way around.

So, you ask me a question of where in your premise you said you speak for everyone. Ok, ill give you a straight answer.

You dont have to say the exact words "i speak for everyone" in order to in fact speak for everyone.

Heres what you said

"So do all human beings find belief in afterlife comforting? I can’t speak for all humans. But I would guess that the ones that believe In a afterlife find it comforting."

That underlined part contradicts your part where you say you dont speak for everyone, because you said that all the ones who believe find it comforting.

And you just spoke again for every early man in this post. Here it is:

"So the idea that these unexplained phenomenon was controlled by the supernatural (gods/god/spirits) was comforting to early man.

So, let me ask you AGAIN. Give me a straight answer. Do ALL humans that happen to believe in God/gods/spirits/afterlife find it comforting OR is there ANYONE amongs those that believe that find it not comforting?

 

[Prometheus85]

For someone who constantly refuses to give a straight answer to a simple question, then goes on pathetic rants, then tells me im the one using a chebacca defence? I think its quite the other way around.

So, you ask me a question of where in your premise you said you speak for everyone. Ok, ill give you a straight answer.

You dont have to say the exact words "i speak for everyone" in order to in fact speak for everyone.

Heres what you said

"So do all human beings find belief in afterlife comforting? I can’t speak for all humans. But I would guess that the ones that believe In a afterlife find it comforting."

That underlined part contradicts your part where you say you dont speak for everyone, because you said that all the ones who believe find it comforting.

And you just spoke again for every early man in this post. Here it is:

"So the idea that these unexplained phenomenon was controlled by the supernatural (gods/god/spirits) was comforting to early man.

So, let me ask you AGAIN. Give me a straight answer. Do ALL humans that happen to believe in God/gods/spirits/afterlife find it comforting OR is there ANYONE amongs those that believe that find it not comforting?

No matter what i say your gonna continue to come back with nonsensical arguments. Im done with this thread.

As the spanish proverb goes. If you can't convince them, try to confound them.

 

[Jollybear]

No matter what i say your gonna continue to come back with nonsensical arguments. Im done with this thread.

As the spanish proverb goes. If you can't convince them, try to confound them.

Well, you have done neither convincing or confounding me.

And still not giving a straight answer. I wonder why.

I have a theory as to why.

 

[Prometheus85]

Well, you have done neither convincing or confounding me.

And still not giving a straight answer. I wonder why.

I have a theory as to why.

Actually the proverd was meant to describe you debate tactics lol

If you can’t convince me to say I speak for everyone, try and and confound me.

Aka Chewbacca defense.

 

[Prometheus85]

For someone who constantly refuses to give a straight answer to a simple question, then goes on pathetic rants, then tells me im the one using a chebacca defence? I think its quite the other way around.

So, you ask me a question of where in your premise you said you speak for everyone. Ok, ill give you a straight answer.

You dont have to say the exact words "i speak for everyone" in order to in fact speak for everyone.

Heres what you said

"So do all human beings find belief in afterlife comforting? I can’t speak for all humans. But I would guess that the ones that believe In a afterlife find it comforting."

That underlined part contradicts your part where you say you dont speak for everyone, because you said that all the ones who believe find it comforting.

And you just spoke again for every early man in this post. Here it is:

"So the idea that these unexplained phenomenon was controlled by the supernatural (gods/god/spirits) was comforting to early man.

So, let me ask you AGAIN. Give me a straight answer. Do ALL humans that happen to believe in God/gods/spirits/afterlife find it comforting OR is there ANYONE amongs those that believe that find it not comforting?

"So do all human beings find belief in afterlife comforting? I can’t speak for all humans. But I would guess that the ones that believe In a afterlife find it comforting."

Yes i said that. I was confused on what u were asking me, because what you were asking had nothing to do with my original premise. But I answered anyway and apparently that wasn’t enough for you.

Someone on a previous thread called u out on that as well.

 

[Jollybear]

Actually the proverd was meant to describe you debate tactics lol

If you can’t convince me to say I speak for everyone, try and and confound me.

Aka Chewbacca defense.

Actually your wrong. Im not trying to convince you to say you speak for everyone, nor am i trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting (aka, the facts).

What im trying to convince you to say is what you ACTUALLY THINK. That means im trying to get you to give me a straight answer to my question to what you actually think.

Does EVERYONE amongs believers in God/gods/afterlife believe for the reason of comfort alone, or is there SOME amongs the believers that do not find comfort in it?

Just give a straight answer to what you think and keep it consistent.

Straight answer would look like this:

All believers do so for comfort alone.

Or

Some believers do not find it comforting.

Come on, why such odd hesitation to give a straight answer?

 

[Jollybear]

"So do all human beings find belief in afterlife comforting? I can’t speak for all humans. But I would guess that the ones that believe In a afterlife find it comforting."

Yes i said that. I was confused on what u were asking me, because what you were asking had nothing to do with my original premise. But I answered anyway and apparently that wasn’t enough for you.

Someone on a previous thread called u out on that as well.

What are you talking about man?

My question that ive been repeatedly keep asking you over and over throughout the thread and you havent given a straight answer on as of yet has EVERYTHING to do with the subject wer talking about.

 

[Prometheus85]

Actually your wrong. Im not trying to convince you to say you speak for everyone, nor am i trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting (aka, the facts).

What im trying to convince you to say is what you ACTUALLY THINK. That means im trying to get you to give me a straight answer to my question to what you actually think.

Does EVERYONE amongs believers in God/gods/afterlife believe for the reason of comfort alone, or is there SOME amongs the believers that do not find comfort in it?

Just give a straight answer to what you think and keep it consistent.

Straight answer would look like this:

All believers do so for comfort alone.

Or

Some believers do not find it comforting.

Come on, why such odd hesitation to give a straight answer?

Your trying to convince me

And I’m not answering your question because it has nothing to do with my original premise. It’s irrelevant and Nonsensical.

What are you talking about man?

My question that ive been repeatedly keep asking you over and over throughout the thread and you havent given a straight answer on as of yet has EVERYTHING to do with the subject wer talking about.

No it doesn’t. Go Reread my premise and show me were it’s says I’m speaking for everyone and people believe in afterlife for comfort. I’ll wait

 

[Prometheus85]

Actually your wrong. Im not trying to convince you to say you speak for everyone, nor am i trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting (aka, the facts).

What im trying to convince you to say is what you ACTUALLY THINK. That means im trying to get you to give me a straight answer to my question to what you actually think.

Does EVERYONE amongs believers in God/gods/afterlife believe for the reason of comfort alone, or is there SOME amongs the believers that do not find comfort in it?

Just give a straight answer to what you think and keep it consistent.

Straight answer would look like this:

All believers do so for comfort alone.

Or

Some believers do not find it comforting.

Come on, why such odd hesitation to give a straight answer?

1st you say, (I’m trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting) (aka, the facts).

Then you say this, (What im trying to convince you to say is what you ACTUALLY THINK. That means im trying to get you to give me a straight answer to my question to what you actually think.)

Which one is it? Are u trying to convince me to say some people believe for reason that are not comforting (aka,the facts)

Or are u trying to convince me to say what I ACTUALLY THINK?

None of which has anything to do with my OP. This is what I mean by nonsensical arguments.

Forget the fact that u should never try to argue to convince someone of something.

Go kick rocks jollybear

 

[Jollybear]

Your trying to convince me

And I’m not answering your question because it has nothing to do with my original premise. It’s irrelevant and Nonsensical.



No it doesn’t. Go Reread my premise and show me were it’s says I’m speaking for everyone and people believe in afterlife for comfort. I’ll wait

All ive been trying to do is convince you to answer my question.

And what is this, some kind of joke or something? Really, my question has nothing to do with the opening thread? How can you actually intelligently say that?

You want me to qoute in your opening post where you said people who believe do so for comfort?

Sure. Why? I havent a clue.

But, ok.....

"The idea that these unexplained phenomena were controlled by possibly sympathetic Spirits, and that their psyche would survive bodily death as an immaterial entity was comforting.Those who were able to buy into this comfort woo-woo would be better able to get on with their harsh and brief lives. "

Need i say more?

Now, be fair and answer straight.

Did you mean by this that ALL believers in God/gods/afterlife believe ONLY for comfort? Or do SOME people who believe NOT find it comforting?

Stop wasting so much time and just answer the dam question.

 

[Jollybear]

1st you say, (I’m trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting) (aka, the facts).

Then you say this, (What im trying to convince you to say is what you ACTUALLY THINK. That means im trying to get you to give me a straight answer to my question to what you actually think.)

Which one is it? Are u trying to convince me to say some people believe for reason that are not comforting (aka,the facts)

Or are u trying to convince me to say what I ACTUALLY THINK?

None of which has anything to do with my OP. This is what I mean by nonsensical arguments.

Forget the fact that u should never try to argue to convince someone of something.

Go kick rocks jollybear

You misqouted me. Thats not what i said. You did that deleberately didnt you?

Heres my qoute, DO NOT CHANGE IT AGAIN

"Im not trying to convince you to say you speak for everyone, nor am i trying to convince you to say some people believe for reasons that are not comforting (aka, the facts)."

 

[Prometheus85]

All ive been trying to do is convince you to answer my question.

And what is this, some kind of joke or something? Really, my question has nothing to do with the opening thread? How can you actually intelligently say that?

You want me to qoute in your opening post where you said people who believe do so for comfort?

Sure. Why? I havent a clue.

But, ok.....

"The idea that these unexplained phenomena were controlled by possibly sympathetic Spirits, and that their psyche would survive bodily death as an immaterial entity was comforting.Those who were able to buy into this comfort woo-woo would be better able to get on with their harsh and brief lives. "

Need i say more?

Now, be fair and answer straight.

Did you mean by this that ALL believers in God/gods/afterlife believe ONLY for comfort? Or do SOME people who believe NOT find it comforting?

Stop wasting so much time and just answer the dam question.

As usual you remove words form it’s sorounding matter In order to distort its meaning. I’m done