If religion is a placebo...

[PearlSeeker]

If it is not possible to confirm is the matter true or not, we can think, does it matter?

How can you confirm God is love?

 

[1213]

How can you confirm God is love?

For those who wrote the scripture and for me, God is love. It is possible you don't keep love as your God. Still, if someone says God is love and love exists, then you can't say that God doesn't exist. You could say that you just don't keep love as your God. I have no reason to make you keep love as your God.

 

[PearlSeeker]

For those who wrote the scripture and for me, God is love. It is possible you don't keep love as your God. Still, if someone says God is love and love exists, then you can't say that God doesn't exist. You could say that you just don't keep love as your God. I have no reason to make you keep love as your God.

It is possible you don't keep the Sun as your god. Still, if someone says the Sun is god and the Sun exists, then you can't say that the Sun god doesn't exist. You could say that you just don't keep the Sun as your god.

 

[1213]

It is possible you don't keep the Sun as your god. Still, if someone says the Sun is god and the Sun exists, then you can't say that the Sun god doesn't exist. You could say that you just don't keep the Sun as your god.

Exactly, I wouldn't keep sun as my God. And that is why I think the question of existence of gods is not crucial. What people are willing to keep as their God is the important question.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Not really the same as accepting one's limits though - and that of humans in general - when a fruitless search might be more about wasting one's time and where our limited time could be used more productively.

Wouldn't you find it insulting if someone told you what your "limits" should be, and what they feel you should be doing to be more "productive" with your time?

Ever since my first spiritual experience as a toddler I have been exploring spiritual matters practically my whole life, and find it the most exhilarating and fruitful way to spend my time. I could not limit myself to all the dull do nothing physical things most people do to squander their limited and precious time on this earth.

 

[Ancient Soul]

No. It's just that atheists are a catgory of people who do not recognize religion, religious behavior, or the peer pressure to adopt religious norms as meaningful to them. My own story was that I was like any other kid wanting to have fun, making things, etc. but where it came to going to church I asked questions while none of my peers did. I was 8-9-10 and asking questions why we went to church, what is God, who is Jesus, etc. I was given answrs that did not add up. I kept asking more qustions, and never got any that made sense to me. I simply was not attracted to the groupthink. My Catholic and Baptist cousins were totally absorbed in their religious experiences.

Cognitve psychology has proposed the biological phenomenon of "wired for God", that the vast majority of humans evolved to believe in a social norms even if they are not fatcual or rational. The brains of early humans evolved before language and rules of thought existed. It is estimated about 85% of all humans are "wired for God" which would imply that I am one of the 15%.

That said I have led a life of various pursuits, as a competitive cyclist since 1983. This will be my 40th year. I've been in bands, and starting a new project. I've had numerous businesses over the decades. So I am not empty of meaning, I just did not feel religion as a viable path for meaning.

From what I observe many theists are attracted to religions and religious groups for various reasons. I've watched my sister go from religion to religion seeking truth and inevitably being dissatisfied. To my mind I asked why she sought truth from what others believe, and not from her own path. She always had this notion that others knew something she didn't. I pointed out that religions rely heavily on assumptions, not fact. She could always find a "truth" but upon examination it was always going to be dubious given the assumptions. From what I observed she was looking more for a tribe than truth, and I suspect this motivates many believers. This certainly is supported by the biological mechanisms in early humans that relied on the security of a trusting tribe to survive.

For early humans it was actual survival. Today I think that had become a survival of the ego. The fear that revolves around ego, and how public embarrassment and shame is something many fear, we humans go to many lengths to protect it. Studies show that people are more afraid to speak in public than death. That is amazing. We humans really desire approval by others, and having a tribe assures some degree of safety.

Your starting paragraph brought back memories of my first childhood encounter with "bible study". Where myself and all of the other kids found countless inconsistencies that made no sense and kept on demanding answers until the priest got fed up and told everyone to STOP asking questions, yelling at us that God doesn't like questions!

He then went into having us repeat over and over all the verses on how wrathful God was at those who upset him. Trying to instill FEAR into us. Then he went into all the verses on how God hates all those who think they are wise and LOVES those who are like sheep and using other verses to that effect. And from then on all the other kids just folded and blindly believed all the nonsense.

So I differ with that "wired for God" study. This "bible study" was just pure FEAR mongering brainwashing. I've looked at this over and over and there is no way around it, I'm convinced that most people's minds can EASILY be hijacked by religions. Take a look around the world, most people believe in the predominate religion in their area, usually what they were brainwashed with as a child. And no amount of facts on how faulty they are will have any effect on them.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Wouldn't you find it insulting if someone told you what your "limits" should be, and what they feel you should be doing to be more "productive" with your time?

Ever since my first spiritual experience as a toddler I have been exploring spiritual matters practically my whole life, and find it the most exhilarating and fruitful way to spend my time. I could not limit myself to all the dull do nothing physical things most people do to squander their limited and precious time on this earth.

No insult to accept that one's quest might be fruitless and life might be better spent doing something more worthwhile. All about accepting one's limitations perhaps. My comment was more about recognising what we might be able to achieve over what we might not. Hence why I leave Quantum Physics alone but where I am interested in the latest findings with regards psychology or animal behaviour.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Wouldn't you find it insulting if someone told you what your "limits" should be, and what they feel you should be doing to be more "productive" with your time?

Ever since my first spiritual experience as a toddler I have been exploring spiritual matters practically my whole life, and find it the most exhilarating and fruitful way to spend my time. I could not limit myself to all the dull do nothing physical things most people do to squander their limited and precious time on this earth.

Welcome back Ancient Soul! Long time no see.

 

[Ancient Soul]

No insult to accept that one's quest might be fruitless and life might be better spent doing something more worthwhile. All about accepting one's limitations perhaps. My comment was more about recognising what we might be able to achieve over what we might not. Hence why I leave Quantum Physics alone but where I am interested in the latest findings with regards psychology or animal behaviour.

Deflection.

I was trying to just hint on how insulting your post was. But since you deflected, yes it was insulting in telling the person to accept the "limitations" you felt they should have and what you felt they should be doing instead.

And since you glossed over my other statement without replying, here it is again:

"Ever since my first spiritual experience as a toddler I have been exploring spiritual matters practically my whole life, and find it the most exhilarating and fruitful way to spend my time. I could not limit myself to all the dull do nothing physical things most people do to squander their limited and precious time on this earth."

So go ahead and try telling me how YOU think I should stop and do what YOU think I should be doing instead. Give it your best shot.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Welcome back Ancient Soul! Long time no see.

Likewise! Well not really welcoming you back since "I' was the one that left of a long spell, but I was happy to see you're still here.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Deflection.

I was trying to just hint on how insulting your post was. But since you deflected, yes it was insulting in telling the person to accept the "limitations" you felt they should have and what you felt they should be doing instead.

And since you glossed over my other statement without replying, here it is again:

"Ever since my first spiritual experience as a toddler I have been exploring spiritual matters practically my whole life, and find it the most exhilarating and fruitful way to spend my time. I could not limit myself to all the dull do nothing physical things most people do to squander their limited and precious time on this earth."

So go ahead and try telling me how YOU think I should stop and do what YOU think I should be doing instead. Give it your best shot.

Do as you will - and see my comments as insulting if you like. I'm afraid I just see some things as being rather egocentric, or even selfish - self-improvements of this kind being the main ones - rather than educating oneself in whatever ways are actually available. And such applies to the religious and/or spiritual more than most. But where they so often just create divisions and reliance on some belief they take up.

I was just pointing out my limitations too, as to having the likelihood of obtaining any ultimate answers to existence - particularly when science is unlikely to do so - at least not in my lifetime. And I accept such.

Forgive me for not recognising this - from your posts you seemed to have had a spiritual experience as a child and have followed this up so as to explore spirituality and the existence of the soul. As I'm sure you are aware, mainstream science doesn't recognise any such existence (the soul), although having tried to verify such in many ways, so do you expect me to go against science, when accepting another's personal experiences might not take precedence of this.

I have to take the obvious alternative explanation - as in all similar cases - that whatever you experienced it wasn't the soul but something else. What else do you expect someone who has more respect for science than individual experiences to do?

But the above will still come across as insulting or condescending no doubt.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Do as you will - and see my comments as insulting if you like. I'm afraid I just see some things as being rather egocentric, or even selfish - self-improvements of this kind being the main ones - rather than educating oneself in whatever ways are actually available. And such applies to the religious and/or spiritual more than most. But where they so often just create divisions and reliance on some belief they take up.

I was just pointing out my limitations too, as to having the likelihood of obtaining any ultimate answers to existence - particularly when science is unlikely to do so - at least not in my lifetime. And I accept such.

Forgive me for not recognising this - from your posts you seemed to have had a spiritual experience as a child and have followed this up so as to explore spirituality and the existence of the soul. As I'm sure you are aware, mainstream science doesn't recognise any such existence (the soul), although having tried to verify such in many ways, so do you expect me to go against science, when accepting another's personal experiences might not take precedence of this.

I have to take the obvious alternative explanation - as in all similar cases - that whatever you experienced it wasn't the soul but something else. What else do you expect someone who has more respect for science than individual experiences to do?

But the above will still come across as insulting or condescending no doubt.

LOL

You just cannot help but spew out your condescending insults I see.

But the glaring fact remains that you hold steadfast to your belief that you know ALL there is to know about this vast universe, and NOTHING else could POSSIBLY exist. I find that stance terribly sad. Sad because you cannot go around telling everyone what is or is not real based solely upon your limited opinions on what YOU want and don't want them to believe when you have no idea what you are talking about. Also sad because you will find that practically nobody will take you seriously when you go around demanding they all believe in what YOU tell them to believe or not believe in, all because you know nothing about their beliefs or anything much for that matter.

So I'll just have to laugh it off when you tell me my soul doesn't exist just because you don't know, or even want to know, anything about what a soul even is.

 

[osgart]

Just because so many people don't see the objective truths in life does not mean there isn't any.

 

[Mock Turtle]

LOL

You just cannot help but spew out your condescending insults I see.

But the glaring fact remains that you hold steadfast to your belief that you know ALL there is to know about this vast universe, and NOTHING else could POSSIBLY exist. I find that stance terribly sad. Sad because you cannot go around telling everyone what is or is not real based solely upon your limited opinions on what YOU want and don't want them to believe when you have no idea what you are talking about. Also sad because you will find that practically nobody will take you seriously when you go around demanding they all believe in what YOU tell them to believe or not believe in, all because you know nothing about their beliefs or anything much for that matter.

So I'll just have to laugh it off when you tell me my soul doesn't exist just because you don't know, or even want to know, anything about what a soul even is.

Just lower the ad homs. If you can. It is your emotional response that tells more about you and perhaps why you cling to the views you have.

I'm not doing anything that you accuse me of. What I am doing, and always have done, is trying to take the best evidence and going with the probability of such being correct. Unfortunately anecdotal evidence tends to be poor. If souls had been proven to exist this news would be all over the mainstream news, let alone scientific news. Given I have lived for over seven decades without ever seeing such, I would go with my probability assessment being correct. It is a simple fact that mainstream science doesn't accept such a concept other than the colloquial use of such a term.

As to your belief, you apparently will not countenance the fact that any experiences you may have had - and especially as a child - could be mistaken as to how you assessed such. It is of course a problem for every individual who has similar experiences but especially so for a child, who will obviously have much less knowledge and/or experience as to how to interpret such experiences.

I'm not here to persuade you as to what you believe, but I do demand the right to say things as to what I believe concerning such issues. I know that many with religious beliefs of any kind do seem to think their beliefs deserve more respect than any other belief system, but unfortunately many, like myself, do not see such things this way. Your beliefs are often just an aspect of how you approach your life and with whatever you have at your disposal - in the way of rationality and/or non-bias - as we all perhaps hope for.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Just lower the ad homs. If you can. It is your emotional response that tells more about you and perhaps why you cling to the views you have.

I'm not doing anything that you accuse me of. What I am doing, and always have done, is trying to take the best evidence and going with the probability of such being correct. Unfortunately anecdotal evidence tends to be poor. If souls had been proven to exist this news would be all over the mainstream news, let alone scientific news. Given I have lived for over seven decades without ever seeing such, I would go with my probability assessment being correct. It is a simple fact that mainstream science doesn't accept such a concept other than the colloquial use of such a term.

As to your belief, you apparently will not countenance the fact that any experiences you may have had - and especially as a child - could be mistaken as to how you assessed such. It is of course a problem for every individual who has similar experiences but especially so for a child, who will obviously have much less knowledge and/or experience as to how to interpret such experiences.

I'm not here to persuade you as to what you believe, but I do demand the right to say things as to what I believe concerning such issues. I know that many with religious beliefs of any kind do seem to think their beliefs deserve more respect than any other belief system, but unfortunately many, like myself, do not see such things this way. Your beliefs are often just an aspect of how you approach your life and with whatever you have at your disposal - in the way of rationality and/or non-bias - as we all perhaps hope for.

Sorry, but coming from a platform of ignorance always makes me LAUGH when atheists try telling me they THEY know ALL there is to know, and NOTHING else could possible exist. So boring. Yet they spew out the same old, same old, know nothing nonsense trying to insult everyone who knows more than they do, trying to drag them down to the atheistic know-nothing level.

When you can bring ABSOLUTE PROOF that God does not exist or on any other spiritual matter, then come back and we can dance. Otherwise stop trying to convince me into believing nothing exists because you don't know about it, just plain don't want to know about it, or is beyond your limited comprehension. Because you bring nothing to the discussion with your round and round know nothing replies over, and over, and over... YAWN.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Sorry, but coming from a platform of ignorance always makes me LAUGH when atheists try telling me they THEY know ALL there is to know, and NOTHING else could possible exist. So boring. Yet they spew out the same old, same old, know nothing nonsense trying to insult everyone who knows more than they do, trying to drag them down to the atheistic know-nothing level.

When you can bring ABSOLUTE PROOF that God does not exist or on any other spiritual matter, then come back and we can dance. Otherwise stop trying to convince me into believing nothing exists because you don't know about it, just plain don't want to know about it, or is beyond your limited comprehension. Because you being nothing to the discussion with your round and round know nothing replies over, and over, and over... YAWN.

I see your problem. You can't read or take in information properly.

Please quote where I have ever said I know anything, let alone everything on any particular subject. You might notice that I am agnostic as well as mostly being an atheist. I don't know if there is a God or not, and hence my position - which I accept since apparently science can't answer this question. But you apparently expect me to accept any answers coming from religions - which so often disagree?

You apparently can't accept that you might be wrong, so tough. Mostly we all can't know that we are right or wrong and some of us just go with the probabilities - since it makes more sense.

PS Some advice - the CAPS-LOCK writing tends to make you look like a petulant teenager. And so sorry if this is the case.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

... what is the real medicine?

What do you think?

Faith and trust in life.

Whether through code, a divine consciousness or anything else.


Humbly
Hermit

 

[Twilight Hue]

Bible tells God is love. And atheist says God doesn't exist. How could atheist then have love?

Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God, and knows God. He who doesn’t love doesn’t know God, for God is love......and he who remains in love remains in God, and God remains in him.
1. John 4:7-8,16

Bible dosent apply to atheist. Therefore love still applies without the Bible.

 

[Ancient Soul]

How can you confirm God is love?

When you exist as just your soul, it automatically "reads" the energy of all the other entities, including when God makes his presence known, and his love energy is overpowering. It takes a LOT of practice to filter it down and take in what he's trying to impart to me.

 

[CG Didymus]

As I know it sure can help. As long as you believe it to be true. After you have no reason to believe (you realize it was a placebo) it doesn't work anymore.

That's an interesting thought. If the placebo effect is real, which it is, and if it works, which it does, then perhaps we can harness that without having to drink the bathwater of religion

This is as far as I've read, so I don't know what's been said. But I agree with what both of you are saying.

If each religion is a separate pill, and is claimed to be the remedy, they all work... for those that believe they are the real thing. But they all fail to work if not believed in. To overly simplify religions, if they were meant to get people to obey rules and be nice to one another, how would we get people to actually do that? Some religions say there is an invisible God that is watching and will punish the person that does not obey. It kind of works... If people believe. It's just that there's so much "bathwater" that goes along with believing in that invisible God.