wow whoever taught u sure did a bang up job... reading yur post makes me sick to my stomach!! i can disprove everything u said that is twisted to fit yur perception of God ... i was raised in a pentecostal home and im not living a lie

This is from the OLD law, Jesus fulfilled the old law and gave us the new law. This no longer holds power over us. Yes it still has pretty much the same laws, the only real big difference is we aren't to judge one another anymore, Jesus has been appointed the judge of all our souls.

I personally haven't found that to be the case. But to each their own.



I totally disagree with your view on this. Lack of proof of one conclusion does not automatically demand that you conclude something else that you also lack any proof of.

Where did you ever come up with that idea? I certainly hope you didn't get that from a college course! I'd ask for my money back.




Well, you seem to be going down that road of jumping to conclusions again. Where did I ever say that I actually "believe" in mysticism?

If you quit jumping to conclusions and actually read what I write you'll suddenly realize that all I have ever been saying is that, as far as I'm concerned, the concept is plausible. That's not the same as saying that I "believe" it to be true.

In fact, I have always confessed to being "agnostic" in terms of the true nature of reality. There has never been a time in my life when I believed that I actually knew what the hell is going on.

If I ever have reason to actually "believe" that strongly about something I will be very pleased about that. The reason being that if I am actually being convinced of something you can bet your sweet bippy that I have really good reasons to come to that conclusion.



I see no reason to discuss science with someone who thinks that they should jump to one unproven conclusion over another just because neither conclusion has been proven.

I'm sorry, but your method of drawing conclusions just makes no scientific sense to me.



No. These are simply both unproven concepts. I personally see no more reason to conclude one over the other. Obviously you feel differently.

The only difference between us is that I respect your right to lean toward you unproven conclusion, but you'd rather make fun of me, and call me 'silly', for leaning toward the other unproven conclusion.

I think it's all a matter of respect. I respect your right to believe that atheism might be a more likely conclusion. You refuse to respect my right to believe that mysticism might be a more likely conclusion.

Neither of us knows the answer. In other words, we are both "Agnostic". (i.e. without knowledge of the true answer)

Yet I'm willing to bet that you're an "Atheist" (someone who thinks they do indeed know what the answer is).

Am I right? Or do you confess to being Agnostic too?

If your claiming to be without knowledge of the final answer, then why make fun of other people who are in the same boat as you but prefer to consider other possible answers to these questions?

I just don't see the merit in making fun of people who consider that atheism may not be the final word. It certainly hasn't been scientifically proven to be the case.



I'm not.

If you say that you believe that atheism is more likely, I'm fine with that. But then you want to make fun of me for not agreeing with your conclusion.

All I'm saying is that I'm not buying your unproven conclusions.

That's not the same as trying to sell you mine.

All I'm seeking is to be 'respected' for considering spirituality as a possibility. And I don't think that's an outrageous request in the least.

And of course, I'm really not concerned about this on an individual basis. I'm really not concerned if "Arcamedees" respects "Abracadabra". I'm more concerned of the larger picture. I don't like to see a world where atheists belittle and make fun of people who hold out the hope or belief that there may be a spiritual essence to life.

Especially when these atheists are pretending like science supports their conclusions, which is simply not true. Our scientific knowledge of the world is not sufficient to draw any such conclusion with any degree of "certainty".



Since when did science become a religion? Since when do people need to have "proof" of what they believe in? If you can't disprove what they believe in, then who are you to say that it's absurd?

Like I say, science has not proven that there cannot be any spiritual essence to reality. It hasn't even come close to doing that. Therefore, for you to "believe" in atheism (a non-spiritual life), you are believing in something that is not 'provable'.

You fail your own criteria for what you demand should be accepted as "believable". You believe in something that's not provable!



I don't piss you off. You piss yourself off. You are in control of your emotions, not me.

I am sitting here typing this entire post in with absolutely no emotional sensations whatsoever. I'm simply addressing your thoughts as best I can. If you are becoming all emotional about that, then who's fault is that?

I can't control your emotions and I take no responsibility for how you control them.

In fact, even if you don't believe in the mystical aspects of the Eastern Mystical and practices, I would highly suggest that you try some of their meditative procedures and exercises anyway. Even as a believer in pure atheism you could still benefit from these meditations and exercises. They will help you control your emotions so that you don't piss yourself off and blame other people for having pissed you off.

I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to send you into a state of emotional turmoil. What would I have to gain from that?

I'm just trying to make a point about how science cannot be used to conclude that reality is non-spiritual anymore than it can be used to conclude the opposite.

That's all.

I girlfriend would be nice, but that's easier said than done. Unless you're suggesting a totally meaningless and unfulfilling encounter. I'm really not interested in that to be perfectly honest about it.

People often misunderstand where I'm coming from.

I'm far more reasonable than you might think.

The only thing I object to when it comes to "atheists" are those who hold out the idea that science supports atheism over mysticism to such an extent that anyone who even considers that mysticism might be true is clearly a moron.

That fact is that science has not shown that atheism should be a conclusion. Nor has it ruled out the Eastern Mystical picture. On the contrary it leaves more than sufficient room for mysticism to be perfectly true.

I think a lot of atheist either over-estimate what science actually knows, or they simply don't understand the Eastern Mystical picture well enough to truly understand why it may very well be true.

I'm not suggesting that science "points" to mysticism. I'm simply saying that it certainly hasn't come close to ruling it out. Therefore to "preach" that science supports a purely atheistic view and that any ideas of mysticism are intellectually "silly" and ungrounded, is simply wrong.

That picture is just not true. Science has not shown that it's "silly" to continue to consider the Eastern Mystical philosophy of life. It's simply false to claim otherwise.

At best atheism and mysticism are running neck-to-neck. (assuming you truly understand what the mystics are actually saying)

I think a large part of the problem may have to do with the simple fact that many people simply don't truly understand the potential of the Eastern Mystical philosophies.

So I'm not trying to "Sell" Eastern Mysticism.

All I'm seeking is to be 'respected' for continuing to consider it as a possibility.

What upsets me is when people act like anything other than atheism is just plain stupid. From my point of view, that's just a little too-overconfident. That's basically religious fanaticism in reverse.

Interresting what morons post in hopes of starting arguments they know they cant win

God didn spring up outta nothin. He always was. Always. Hard 2 imagine for our human minds but that is the truth!

You do realize ur talkin bout customs that took place many yrs ago right? Ah yes u do. Okay then, death does not mean "slice em dice em hang em by their toes" it is a death of the soul it is dying away from God. U have to keep things in context.

It says God is jealous also but doesnt mean jealous like slappin other Gods around! If that were the case He coulda done that already! It means He wants all our attention cause He created us and deserves it. U people make me sick U will see when ur time comes. Then u will be sry U missed the most precious gift life could offer!

I've never been on an acid trip. I passed by the opportunity back in the 60's and early 70's. Now I'm kind of wishing I could experience that before I die. Just to see what it's like.

sounds the same as people who are book smart but yet have no common sense. Do you look under a microscope each time before you wash your hands or do you act on faith that they may be covered in germs? Do you really put them under a microscope to confirm that the germs are in fact truley there?

I don't understand your connection to "my logic". I will however, explain "her" logic and how I applied it.


CeriseRose quoted scripture and got "berated" for it...
"Bravo, you can quote scripture. Now, can you think and say stuff in your own words, with your own viewpoints?"

then she compares CeriseRose to a parrot:

"I have a parrot, and it mimics what I've taught it. Personally, I know it can also say things out of context of how I taught it, so I do know that she thinks."


So, a parrot, which "most" humans know cannot "talk", let alone reason, is "known" to think because it can mimmic sounds it was taught out of context??? And a human "who can read, reason, and apply what he/she has read (quote, repeat, whatever term you want to use...), is somehow less than a parrot?

As for my quoted scripture, I loathe quoting scripture except to counter improperly quoted scripture. I did however quote that verse as I knew quoting scripture pizzes her off a bit and I was fairly sure noone would touch that one else be labeled a "fool".

The "penalty" for speaking in the ears of a fool is that they would despise my words, not really a penalty if you ask me. And it wasn't a "rule" by any means.

Matthew was a mortal man my friend.




Sure, I see the pantheistic "god" of the Eastern Mystics every day, I experience being that "god" as well.

However, I haven't seen hide nor hair of any male-chauvinistic God who would have me stoning people to death on his behalf for not worshiping him.

Nope, I've never seen anything even remotely close to a God like you describe.

I haven't seen any talking burning bushes either.

You think a parrot can think??? You think a parrot can talk???


By your own logic, so can CeriseRose, so what's your problem???


Proverbs 23:9
Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words.

I think in all fairness you need to consider the following:

A lot of religious people are scared to death of the thought of atheism. It's a thought that they can't even begin to bear to imagine.

As you well know, their religions is truly absurd and filled with contradictions and utterly unwise baloney. Don't think for one second that they are fully aware of this!

They are on their last nerve trying to "cling to their faith", they don't need you coming along pointing out the obvious and making them face these things head on.

That's why they become so angry so quickly. They know it's baloney, but the alternative "in their mind" is atheism which they aren't even about to consider. For them the thought of atheism is worse than than hell. At least with a belief in heaven and hell they can pretend that they have a shot at heaven. With atheism they don't have a shot at anything but dying!

So when you confront their beliefs you are stepping on their last nerve. A nerve they really don't need anyone to stand on. They're already clinging to their faith on a thread.

And you're threatening to snip that thread away and send them into a free-fall that can only land in atheism (as far as they are concerned).

For them it's either the Biblical God, or atheism. And since they can't face atheism, all they have to cling to is the Bible.

Try to understand their predicament. They're literally scared of "death".

Yes, I would not argue with that assessment in the least.

Couldn't you already tell that from my posts in the religion forums?



It says it's for "Agnostics" too.

I've always confessed to ultimately being agnostic. I wish I could claim to actually know something.

I would be tickled pink if that were the case!

dont like pie lol

That's probably true, but when was the last time you met a follower of the Abrahamic Religious that followed the 10 commandments?

Most of the Abrahamic religions fight with each other. The Christian crusaders didn't seem to think much of the commandment that says, "Thou shalt not kill", nor did the Christians who tortured and burned witches.

Also, there are many religions throughout the world that teach equivalent, or better, moral values. The Wiccan's for example simply say, "Do as ye will but harm none". There you go. A very simple guideline that, if followed, would result in world peace.

In fact, if "God" is supposed to be "all-wise" the Wiccan decree seems far wiser than having "Ten Commandments" don't you think?

After all, in one simple statement everything is automatically covered. Harm none. That's wiser than having to break it up into ten different commandments.

So if we all become Wiccans the world would be a super fantastic place to live.

You see, that argument will work with almost any religion in principle.

one last thing if everyone followed the 10 commandments and no one can deny this this world would actually be a place to live in if understand what im saying ,we definitley wouldnt be where we are we would be further

your a moron no offense but i havent seen anyone twist the word of god to such an extent ,whats even worse you prolly believe scientist that a big bang theroy or another one of there imagined philosophys.

its absoulutley impossible for there to be no GOD , we didnt jus spring up out of no where and ne so called theroy on a scientific level is even more absurd and blasphemy.

I feel sorry for ppl like you ,you obviously havent read the bible and if you did you should read it again , Jesus was killed not suicide wheather he offered his life or not does not constitute it as suicide as he didnt not take his own life (ya get it )and as for ur term hut dwellers we still are there jus wooden now
from the trees to the animals and everything in between for you to say there is no good is to deny your own exsistence I can tell what you are about without even havin to meet you and my friend like most you will find out the hard way then it will only be to late
also for such and old so called "myth" it sure has alot of truth in it it spoke of the future long before it arrived and so much more