Health and Religion

[BADecker]

One simple example is the field of archaeology. The so-call standard hunter-gathers of 10,000 years ago were not simply that. Göbekli Tepe, which is dated back as far as more than 11,000 years, shows that archaeological science doesn't really have a clue about what the hunter-gatherers of 10,000 years ago were like. There are peoples of the present age that live like the so-called hunter-gatherers of prehistory.

I had never heard of Göbekli Tepe so I read the Wikipedia article on it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

Fascinating history there.

The only thing wrong with the research about Göbekli Tepe is, how old it is. If you simply Google something like "controversial science on the age of the Earth," you will see that there are many scientists that don't go along with the consensus regarding the Earth's age. And, they have listed good reasons. These reasons often apply to far more recent things like the age of Göbekli Tepe, as well.

Then, if you go and check out the papers by scientists who were the ones who set up the age, you will find that they doubted the ages that they agreed on with other scientists. Their agreement was simply something to give science a foundation to keep things in order. Their hope was that sometime science would find and prove the truth.

Well, science has never proven the truth. All the dating systems that are in use are at least a little bit controversial. And their conclusions are often extremely controversial. The fact of the matter is that we don't know how old the Earth is, or how old Göbekli Tepe really is. There are those, myself included, who think Göbekli Tepe is much younger than what has been standardly concluded.

The benefit for the "renegade" scientist, of dating Göbekli Tepe at 11,000 years, shows that science doesn't really know what it is talking about. Either the age is off, or the idea of what hunter-gatherers were like is off. Science is mixed up.

Then, when you add the idea of entropy, and the fact that there was much more oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere in the distant past, more than likely the people of prehistory were way more mentally capable that we are.

[Astargath]

''If you believe your neighbor is hiding a unicorn in his house you are probably insane or suffering the effects of severe chemical psychosis.'' Same applies to your god LOL. You are an atheist on all the other religions.

https://www.nobeliefs.com/comments10.htm

Next time don't go to an hospital when you are sick, just pray ok? Comeback here and tell us how that went, genius.

With one major difference. There's tons of proof all over the place that God exists. But there isn't any proof for unicorns.



EDIT Regarding your link above, there is nothing outside of beliefs. Beliefs always exist. To suggest that they don't is simply another belief. The only thing that exists, is what your religion is... what your beliefs are.

Where is all that proof?? In the other thread where I destroyed it and you can't even argue against my points? LOL. There is a ton or proof that unicorns exist, there are a lot of books and even videos of them, how can you deny their existence?

[Astargath]

You are an atheist on all the other religions.

https://www.nobeliefs.com/comments10.htm

Next time don't go to an hospital when you are sick, just pray ok? Comeback here and tell us how that went, genius.

Your arguments are growing increasingly erratic.

I am not an atheist of other religions. I believe Jews, Christians, and Muslim all worship the same God and most educated practitioners of those faiths would agree with that assertion.

There are differences of opinion on the proper way to worship God and and there are some who falsely invoke God's name to do evil. Error is to be expected in any human attempt to understand the infinite. This is why it is important to build our religious beliefs up from first principles rather then relying solely on organized authority to tell us what to believe.

I don't believe in paganism, the worship of nature, or snake gods but that would make me a heretic from the perspective of those religions not an atheist.

Regarding refusing medical care. I have never advocated anything of the sort. God helps those who help themselves. If you are ill the best strategy is to usually to pray for guidance and healing then start educating yourself on your illness its treatment and your options regarding doctors and seek out the highest quality care possible.

One simple example is the field of archaeology. The so-call standard hunter-gathers of 10,000 years ago were not simply that. Göbekli Tepe, which is dated back as far as more than 11,000 years, shows that archaeological science doesn't really have a clue about what the hunter-gatherers of 10,000 years ago were like. There are peoples of the present age that live like the so-called hunter-gatherers of prehistory.

I had never heard of Göbekli Tepe so I read the Wikipedia article on it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

Fascinating history there.

Yes you are, you don't believe in zeus or thor for example, you are an atheist of those religions. Don't be a hypocrite.

I will just quote again something:

Science is invalidating miracles one by one. We no longer think demon possession accounts for epilepsy, nor do we believe nature is such that God sends hurricanes on people for their sins, nor do (educated people) go to faith healers instead of doctors for healing, nor do people pray for the sun to stand still, or for axe heads to float, or for people to be raised up from the dead. We know better. Christians no longer cast lots to decide important issues, and certainly would object if our politicians did this, especially if they lost the issue. Educated Christians no longer see dreams as if God was communicating to them, since science has shown that dreams are the result of the rational parts of our brain being asleep. Christians no longer believe that curses and blessings actually change the nature of people and events, and they no longer believe they are irreversible. Science sets the limits for what Christians will pray for. This is no different than science setting the limits for where aliens purportedly come from. That’s right. As soon as science showed us that any present life on planet Mars was impossible, people stopped claiming that aliens came from there! Science has shown so many beliefs to be false that it's fair to say theologians have always been wrong. Why should it be any different in the future?

Fourth, why is it that the God Christians believe in will not allow a scientific test that will show he exists, or that Jesus arose, or that prayer works, or that miracles can occur, or that there is a heaven, or that there is a hell? Why not? I can conceive of such tests. For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe. If God would do miracles today like he did in the past it would be considered strong evidence that the past miracles really could've occurred. If God would "allow" tests about prayer to succeed, that would be considered strong evidence that prayer works.

That's a strong point there, it seems to me that your god is trying to hide from us and trying to make it as hard as possible to prove his existence, for what? So he can send us to hell?
Christians have always been forced to reinterpret the Bible in light of science. Give me one case where it has been the reverse.


And back to all the scientific fuck ups the bible has:

creationism vs. evolution...all of the following have been shown as wrong.

Evolution : Genesis
1) Sun before earth : Earth before sun
2) Dry land before sea : Sea before dry land
3) Atmosphere before sea : Sea before atmosphere
4) Sun before light on earth : Light on earth before sun
5) Stars before earth : Earth before stars
6) Earth at same time as planets : Earth before other planets
7) Sea creatures before land plants : Land plants before sea creatures
Earthworms before starfish : Starfish before earthworms
9) Land animals before trees : Trees before land animals
10) Death before man : Man before death
11) Thorns and thistles before man : Man before thorns and thistles
12) TB pathogens & cancer before man (dinosaurs had TB and cancer) : Man before TB pathogens and cancer
13) Reptiles before birds : Birds before reptiles
14) Land mammals before whales : Whales before land animals
15) Simple plants before fruit trees : Fruit trees before other plants*
16) Insects before mammals : Mammals (cattle) before “creeping things”*
17) Land mammals before bats : Bats before land animals
18) Dinosaurs before birds : Birds before dinosaurs
19) Insects before flowering plants : Flowering plants before insects
20) Sun before plants : Plants before sun
21) Dinosaurs before dolphins : Dolphins before dinosaurs
22) Land reptiles before pterosaurs : Pterosaurs before land reptiles
23) Land insects before flying insects : Flying insects before land insects

[BADecker]

''If you believe your neighbor is hiding a unicorn in his house you are probably insane or suffering the effects of severe chemical psychosis.'' Same applies to your god LOL. You are an atheist on all the other religions.

https://www.nobeliefs.com/comments10.htm

Next time don't go to an hospital when you are sick, just pray ok? Comeback here and tell us how that went, genius.

With one major difference. There's tons of proof all over the place that God exists. But there isn't any proof for unicorns.



EDIT Regarding your link above, there is nothing outside of beliefs. Beliefs always exist. To suggest that they don't is simply another belief. The only thing that exists, is what your religion is... what your beliefs are.

Where is all that proof?? In the other thread where I destroyed it and you can't even argue against my points? LOL. There is a ton or proof that unicorns exist, there are a lot of books and even videos of them, how can you deny their existence?

Except by accident now and again, everything you say comes from one or both of two major standpoints:
1. It comes from your religion, or;
2. It comes from political science speaking... which means that who cares what the truth is? All that counts is who can say it the most, thereby cluttering up the conversation until others fall away out of boredom.

That explains you almost entirely.

[qwik2learn]

For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe.

Hasty generalization fallacy: this author has failed to consider the full body of evidence, and falsely suggests that the experience of being near-death has no consistency across cultures and is therefore merely a "story". Also, Dr. Ian Stevenson studied reincarnation cases of children across many cultures and concluded that "culture and belief" alone is inadequate, i.e. low explanatory power. Is this author prepared to address the full body of evidence with an open mind? Or is he committed to his "story" explanation regardless of the evidence?

Children’s Experiences.
The NDEs of children, including very young children who are too young to have developed concepts of death, religion, or NDEs, are essentially identical to those of older children and adults. This refutes the possibility that the content of NDEs is produced by preexisting beliefs or cultural conditioning.

Worldwide Consistency.
NDEs appear remarkably consistent around the world, and across many different religions and cultures. NDEs from non-Western countries are incredibly similar to those occurring in people in Western countries.

Carl Becker examined four ways in which NDEs may be considered objective:
1.   Paranormal knowledge that is later verified
2.   The similarity of deathbed events in different cultures
3.   Differences between religious expectations and visionary experiences
4.   Third-party observations of visionary figures, indicating that they were not merely subjective hallucinations.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a07

Chopra presents answers to such questions as: who you meet in the afterlife and how your experience there reflect your present beliefs, expectations, and level of awareness. In the here and now you can shape what happens after you die. Chopra opens up immense new areas of insights where ultimately there is no division between life and death - there is only one continuous creative project.

[Astargath]

For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe.

Hasty generalization fallacy: this author has failed to consider the full body of evidence, and falsely suggests that the experience of being near-death has no consistency across cultures and is therefore merely a "story". Also, Dr. Ian Stevenson studied reincarnation cases of children across many cultures and concluded that "culture and belief" alone is inadequate, i.e. low explanatory power. Is this author prepared to address the full body of evidence with an open mind? Or is he committed to his "story" explanation regardless of the evidence?

Children’s Experiences.
The NDEs of children, including very young children who are too young to have developed concepts of death, religion, or NDEs, are essentially identical to those of older children and adults. This refutes the possibility that the content of NDEs is produced by preexisting beliefs or cultural conditioning.

Worldwide Consistency.
NDEs appear remarkably consistent around the world, and across many different religions and cultures. NDEs from non-Western countries are incredibly similar to those occurring in people in Western countries.

Carl Becker examined four ways in which NDEs may be considered objective:
1.   Paranormal knowledge that is later verified
2.   The similarity of deathbed events in different cultures
3.   Differences between religious expectations and visionary experiences
4.   Third-party observations of visionary figures, indicating that they were not merely subjective hallucinations.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a07

Chopra presents answers to such questions as: who you meet in the afterlife and how your experience there reflect your present beliefs, expectations, and level of awareness. In the here and now you can shape what happens after you die. Chopra opens up immense new areas of insights where ultimately there is no division between life and death - there is only one continuous creative project.

Oh yea Dr Ian Stevenson LUL. Do you have any source that is not a complete fraud?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/pjdg3/ian_stevensons_reincarnation_research/

Give me a break. With Chopra do you mean Deepak Chopra?? https://www.quora.com/I-have-heard-that-physicists-call-Deepak-Chopra%E2%80%99s-claims-%E2%80%9Cwoo-woo%E2%80%9D-What-do-physicists-think-of-Deepak-Chopra-Does-Deepak-really-understand-quantum-physics

He is a total nut job, there is an interview of him debating richard dawkins, you should watch that and have a good laugh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[CoinCube]

"Jordan Bernt Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist, cultural critic, and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. His main areas of study are in abnormal, social, and personality psychology,[1]with a particular interest in the psychology of religious and ideological belief,[2] " (excerpt from Wikipedia)


Jordan Peterson - Why Men Are Bailing Out
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LH16ympCb7Q

Jordan Peterson: Handling Your Darkest Feelings about Existence Itself
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nLRkG7PccPI

Jordan Peterson: The reason modern people can’t see God is that they won’t look low enough
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n2py4aBpmko

Jordan Peterson - Do you believe in God?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VPIh1xQiuI8

[qwik2learn]

For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe.

Hasty generalization fallacy: this author has failed to consider the full body of evidence, and falsely suggests that the experience of being near-death has no consistency across cultures and is therefore merely a "story". Also, Dr. Ian Stevenson studied reincarnation cases of children across many cultures and concluded that "culture and belief" alone is inadequate, i.e. low explanatory power. Is this author prepared to address the full body of evidence with an open mind? Or is he committed to his "story" explanation regardless of the evidence?

Children’s Experiences.
The NDEs of children, including very young children who are too young to have developed concepts of death, religion, or NDEs, are essentially identical to those of older children and adults. This refutes the possibility that the content of NDEs is produced by preexisting beliefs or cultural conditioning.

Worldwide Consistency.
NDEs appear remarkably consistent around the world, and across many different religions and cultures. NDEs from non-Western countries are incredibly similar to those occurring in people in Western countries.

Carl Becker examined four ways in which NDEs may be considered objective:
1.   Paranormal knowledge that is later verified
2.   The similarity of deathbed events in different cultures
3.   Differences between religious expectations and visionary experiences
4.   Third-party observations of visionary figures, indicating that they were not merely subjective hallucinations.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a07

Chopra presents answers to such questions as: who you meet in the afterlife and how your experience there reflect your present beliefs, expectations, and level of awareness. In the here and now you can shape what happens after you die. Chopra opens up immense new areas of insights where ultimately there is no division between life and death - there is only one continuous creative project.

Oh yea Dr Ian Stevenson LUL. Do you have any source that is not a complete fraud?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/pjdg3/ian_stevensons_reincarnation_research/

Give me a break. With Chopra do you mean Deepak Chopra?? https://www.quora.com/I-have-heard-that-physicists-call-Deepak-Chopra%E2%80%99s-claims-%E2%80%9Cwoo-woo%E2%80%9D-What-do-physicists-think-of-Deepak-Chopra-Does-Deepak-really-understand-quantum-physics

He is a total nut job, there is an interview of him debating richard dawkins, you should watch that and have a good laugh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You show no ability to evaluate new ideas when presented, you pick and choose your facts so that you can make hasty generalizations without providing any evidence of your own, just like the author you quoted. The fact is that NDE and reincarnation cases have similar features across cultures, your author has chosen to mischaracterize the evidence to suit his agenda. The consistency of these experiences is different from what the author hopes for in his desired proof of the afterlife but the reality of that consistency is ignored. In any case the NDE is a part of being human and was recognized even in ancient times, it is misleading to claim that all.NDE is a mere story when it is factually an experience.
Also, Chopra wrote papers with Hameroff, a briiant QM researcher, so if all.you have is cherry picking and old videos then your argument is totally incomplete.

[Astargath]

For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe.

Hasty generalization fallacy: this author has failed to consider the full body of evidence, and falsely suggests that the experience of being near-death has no consistency across cultures and is therefore merely a "story". Also, Dr. Ian Stevenson studied reincarnation cases of children across many cultures and concluded that "culture and belief" alone is inadequate, i.e. low explanatory power. Is this author prepared to address the full body of evidence with an open mind? Or is he committed to his "story" explanation regardless of the evidence?

Children’s Experiences.
The NDEs of children, including very young children who are too young to have developed concepts of death, religion, or NDEs, are essentially identical to those of older children and adults. This refutes the possibility that the content of NDEs is produced by preexisting beliefs or cultural conditioning.

Worldwide Consistency.
NDEs appear remarkably consistent around the world, and across many different religions and cultures. NDEs from non-Western countries are incredibly similar to those occurring in people in Western countries.

Carl Becker examined four ways in which NDEs may be considered objective:
1.   Paranormal knowledge that is later verified
2.   The similarity of deathbed events in different cultures
3.   Differences between religious expectations and visionary experiences
4.   Third-party observations of visionary figures, indicating that they were not merely subjective hallucinations.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a07

Chopra presents answers to such questions as: who you meet in the afterlife and how your experience there reflect your present beliefs, expectations, and level of awareness. In the here and now you can shape what happens after you die. Chopra opens up immense new areas of insights where ultimately there is no division between life and death - there is only one continuous creative project.

Oh yea Dr Ian Stevenson LUL. Do you have any source that is not a complete fraud?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/pjdg3/ian_stevensons_reincarnation_research/

Give me a break. With Chopra do you mean Deepak Chopra?? https://www.quora.com/I-have-heard-that-physicists-call-Deepak-Chopra%E2%80%99s-claims-%E2%80%9Cwoo-woo%E2%80%9D-What-do-physicists-think-of-Deepak-Chopra-Does-Deepak-really-understand-quantum-physics

He is a total nut job, there is an interview of him debating richard dawkins, you should watch that and have a good laugh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You show no ability to evaluate new ideas when presented, you pick and choose your facts so that you can make hasty generalizations without providing any evidence of your own, just like the author you quoted. The fact is that NDE and reincarnation cases have similar features across cultures, your author has chosen to mischaracterize the evidence to suit his agenda. The consistency of these experiences is different from what the author hopes for in his desired proof of the afterlife but the reality of that consistency is ignored. In any case the NDE is a part of being human and was recognized even in ancient times, it is misleading to claim that all.NDE is a mere story when it is factually an experience.
Also, Chopra wrote papers with Hameroff, a briiant QM researcher, so if all.you have is cherry picking and old videos then your argument is totally incomplete.

''The fact is that NDE and reincarnation cases have similar features across cultures'' Thats a fact? ROFL. ''my author'' I posted several sources, I don't know what you mean by my author. Ian Stevenson is a known fraud. Somehow you believe what he says after I presented evidence that he is a fraud, gets to show who is the guy who has an agenda here. You never research against your own, small, small sources. I can find hundreds of different sources pointing out that Ian Stevenson is a fraud and didn't perform the experiments how he should have, yet you will still believe him because that's what you do, you believe these nut jobs for some reason.

You always talk about research and you never do it. Google is there for you, you just need to type: Deepak chopra fraud or Ian Stevenson fraud.

[jputra635]

health depends on it heredity and immunity. From the way of life also depends. But the fact that it depends on religion, personally I have serious doubts

[CoinCube]

You always talk about research and you never do it. Google is there for you, you just need to type: Deepak chopra fraud or Ian Stevenson fraud.

Yes I think we know how you find your "answers" to religious questions Astargath. You might run into problems, however, if your source of wisdom ever fails to deliver.

What will you do when you can't find a ready prepackaged response? Oh wait we already know.

obviously since no one else said anything about what he says because no one cares since he is wrong, why don't you just admit that he is wrong?

*clap clap* A system that provides a ready answer to every conceivable question.

The Astargath method.

[Astargath]

You always talk about research and you never do it. Google is there for you, you just need to type: Deepak chopra fraud or Ian Stevenson fraud.

Yes I think we know how you find your "answers" to religious questions Astargath. You might run into problems, however, if your source of wisdom ever fails to deliver.

What will you do when you can't find a ready prepackaged response? Oh wait we already know.

obviously since no one else said anything about what he says because no one cares since he is wrong, why don't you just admit that he is wrong?

*clap clap* A system that provides a ready answer to every conceivable question.

The Astargath method.

Or ignoring arguments like you did with mine about your retarded book. You are not different than badecker, just another blind follower of your cult. Go worship your stupid book.

[BADecker]

I was never any good at sports. Wny not? Because I always felt sorry for the opposite team when they were losing. And, of course, since I didn't want my team to lose, I decided not to be in sports.

You guys go fight with Astargath. I feel too sorry for him because he is losing all the time, and much of the time doesn't even realize it.

 

[CryptoPushkin]

Yes, I believe there is a religion of health, if you are very deeply convinced to be healthy, you will end up being healthy. Faith in being healthy helps being healty.

[Astargath]

I was never any good at sports. Wny not? Because I always felt sorry for the opposite team when they were losing. And, of course, since I didn't want my team to lose, I decided not to be in sports.

You guys go fight with Astargath. I feel too sorry for him because he is losing all the time, and much of the time doesn't even realize it.

 

''
Because Christianity is a religion of faith, many Bible scholars say we should avoid proving any of it.

By entering the movements of the stars and planets into a computer, NASA has found that the lost day of Joshua in Joshua 10:13, and the shorter period of time in 2 Kings 20:9–11 that were supposed to be discrepancies in the movements of the stars and planets.

One site is https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/nasa-found-joshuas-missing-day/.

Science is starting to prove that the Bible is accurate.''


Yea badecker, we can all see how you are winning by posting a link that says ''arguments to avoid'' which is exactly the argument you are using, I don't even need to prove you wrong, you prove yourself wrong hahaha.

[aesma]

Actually, because my faith in God isn't perfect in this life, I DO have a touch of atheism. In similar ways you have much faith in God, even though you try to deny it. It is inherent in both of us.

Turn, now, while you have the chance, to strengthen the little faith in God that you DO have... so that you can be saved in the resurrection

Just like participating in a religion might make one's faith grow, not participating in one make it weaker. That's my experience at least.

I didn't have much faith to begin with, but when I stopped attending church entirely, it just vanished. And I don't miss it one bit.

[BADecker]

I was never any good at sports. Wny not? Because I always felt sorry for the opposite team when they were losing. And, of course, since I didn't want my team to lose, I decided not to be in sports.

You guys go fight with Astargath. I feel too sorry for him because he is losing all the time, and much of the time doesn't even realize it.

 

''
Because Christianity is a religion of faith, many Bible scholars say we should avoid proving any of it.

By entering the movements of the stars and planets into a computer, NASA has found that the lost day of Joshua in Joshua 10:13, and the shorter period of time in 2 Kings 20:9–11 that were supposed to be discrepancies in the movements of the stars and planets.

One site is https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/nasa-found-joshuas-missing-day/.

Science is starting to prove that the Bible is accurate.''


Yea badecker, we can all see how you are winning by posting a link that says ''arguments to avoid'' which is exactly the argument you are using, I don't even need to prove you wrong, you prove yourself wrong hahaha.

You don't even get it, do you? One time I play your game, and you jump right on it in attack. Keep it up, Dufus. You attack yourself way more than you could ever think to attack me. And you don't even realize it.

[hartonosusilo]

Actually, because my faith in God isn't perfect in this life, I DO have a touch of atheism. In similar ways you have much faith in God, even though you try to deny it. It is inherent in both of us.

Turn, now, while you have the chance, to strengthen the little faith in God that you DO have... so that you can be saved in the resurrection

Just like participating in a religion might make one's faith grow, not participating in one make it weaker. That's my experience at least.

I didn't have much faith to begin with, but when I stopped attending church entirely, it just vanished. And I don't miss it one bit.

I don't know why you're having the really negative view on the religion, religion is leading us , the human , to the better living way not strong or weak side.

[Astargath]

I was never any good at sports. Wny not? Because I always felt sorry for the opposite team when they were losing. And, of course, since I didn't want my team to lose, I decided not to be in sports.

You guys go fight with Astargath. I feel too sorry for him because he is losing all the time, and much of the time doesn't even realize it.

 

''
Because Christianity is a religion of faith, many Bible scholars say we should avoid proving any of it.

By entering the movements of the stars and planets into a computer, NASA has found that the lost day of Joshua in Joshua 10:13, and the shorter period of time in 2 Kings 20:9–11 that were supposed to be discrepancies in the movements of the stars and planets.

One site is https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/nasa-found-joshuas-missing-day/.

Science is starting to prove that the Bible is accurate.''


Yea badecker, we can all see how you are winning by posting a link that says ''arguments to avoid'' which is exactly the argument you are using, I don't even need to prove you wrong, you prove yourself wrong hahaha.

You don't even get it, do you? One time I play your game, and you jump right on it in attack. Keep it up, Dufus. You attack yourself way more than you could ever think to attack me. And you don't even realize it.

Ye ye, just admit that you fucked up badly and move on, you are only making yourself look even more pathetic. I will still post the link whenever you say something about science to show everyone how you do your ''research''

[Jeremiesaranza]

Religion and IQ

High IQ is usually regarded by those that possess it as an unmitigated good. Those gifted with superior intellect are not only smarter, they are statistically more likely to be taller, healthier, and more athletic than average. In his 1920 study on high IQ children Lewis Terman noted that despite these advantages high IQ is not always beneficial. He found that the very brightest often grew up maladjusted in some way suffering from anxiety, depression, personality disorder, or nervous breakdowns.

In Mensa Magazine Bruce G Charlton posited three fundamental disadvantages of high IQ .

Charlton’s triad:
1)   Socialism
2)   Atheism
3)   Reduced Fertility

Charlton argued that IQ is associated with a tendency to embrace socialism, a rejection of religious teachings, and ultimately a declining fertility. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate Charlton’s triad in the context of religion and health. Specifically we will look closely at the potential health effects of atheism.

Religion Health and Wellbeing

Is the lack of religion bad for your health? In a large survey of over 600,000 people Frank Newport and colleagues showed that the very religious not only report higher levels of overall wellbeing they are also more likely to have healthy eating and exercise habits.



Every religion reported superior wellbeing to that of atheist but the largest differences were found in the Mormons and the Jews. These are minority religions each comprising about 1.7% of the US population. Examining these two groups will help us better understand the impact of religion on human health.

Mormon Demographics

Demographically Mormons differ greatly from society at large. Nearly two thirds of Mormons 66% are married compared with just over half 48% of the general population. Mormons have large families with a fertility rate of 3.4 children per woman double that of atheists.



Mormons may also have some immunity the detrimental effect IQ on fertility. In the general population increasing income (highly correlated with IQ) is associated with both declining fertility and declining religious commitment. In Mormons the reverse is true. Mormon fertility is positively correlated with income and Mormons with higher levels of formal education tend to be more religiously committed.

On multiple religious measures Mormons stand out for having exceptionally high levels of religious commitment. More than nine-in-ten Mormons report a belief in God and that the Bible is the word of God. Mormons are also very observant in their religious practices with more than eight-in-ten praying daily. Mormons strongly support a strict interpretation of their faith and the preservation of traditional beliefs and practices.

Are these demographic differences actually due to the Mormon religion? How can we be confident these are not just population level differences that happen to correlate with religion? To better answer lets take a look at Jewish demographics.

Jewish Demographics

Unlike Mormons who are a young religion and can be looked at as a single group Judaism is one of the oldest religions and has splintered into many subgroups. There are many different branches of Judaism each with unique features. These branches can mostly be grouped into 5 major categories. From most conservative to most liberal these are Ultra-Orthodox, Modern Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and Secular Jews.

Orthodox Jews believe their sacred scriptures the Torah is the word of God and should be studied and followed. Their customs and behavior is guided by observance of halakhah (Jewish Law). Conservative Jews acknowledge that Jewish writings come from God, but believe that the Law should adapt, absorbing aspects of the predominant culture while remaining true to Judaism's values. Reform Judaism does not hold that the Torah was written by God. The movement accepts the critical theory of Biblical authorship: that the Bible was written by separate sources and redacted together. Reform Jews do not believe in observance of commandments as such, but they retain much of the values and ethics of Judaism. Secular Jews do not affiliate with any major religious group they may or may not believe in God. A more detailed description of these difference can be read here.

When people think of the Jews they often think of famous figures like Allen Greenspan or presidential candidate Bernie Sanders both secular Jews. Secular Jews are often liberal, democratic voters. Orthodox Jews on the other hand tend to be socially conservative, and are more likely to be republican voters.

The Jews as a group are incredibly smart. They consistently rank highest in the world on IQ studies significantly higher than even Asians who are their nearest competitors. If Charlton’s triad of IQ disadvantages is correct then the Jews should be particularly susceptible. Is this the case?

American Jewish Fertility by Religious Current

Religious Sect	Average No. of Children per Woman
Ultra-Orthodox	6.72
Modern Orthodox	3.39
Conservative	1.74
Reform	1.36
Secular	1.29

As Jews leave orthodoxy it appears their fertility plummets. The Ultra-Orthodox are a group who are similar to the Amish in that they have partially separated themselves from the outside world choosing to live in isolated communities. They have a fertility rate of 6.72 which is similar to Amish fertility rates . Modern Orthodox Jews strictly adhere to their faith but simultaneously advocate engaging with the outside world especially higher education. The Modern Orthodox fertility rate 3.39 is nearly identical to that of Mormons. The Modern Orthodox have a similar philosophy to that of Mormons in that they advocate engaging with the outside world as much as possible while maintaining strict adherence to their religious code. As Jews move away from their historic religious tradition their fertility plummets. Secular Jews have a shockingly low fertility of 1.29 among the lowest in the world. For the Jews it appears the detrimental effects of high IQ are very real and that traditional religion offers some protection.

Toxicity of the Modern World

In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley envisioned a future where the masses were rendered infertile and controlled with pleasure and drugs. Is that the world we live in now? Anyone over that age of 25 may not realize how far traditional courtship and dating has been undermined by modernity. The tinder generation is being conditioned to swipe right on their onscreen app and meet up later for random sexual gratification. This phenomena has been described by Vanity Fair as nothing less than a dating apocalypse.

In Colorado long acting implantable contraceptives which a render women infertile for up to 10 years and require a doctor’s visit to remove have been implanted in 26% of young women age 15-24 as of 2013.

In 2015 an advisory body to the US Department of Health and Human Services recommended that Medicaid examine how often doctors are using “most effective” or “moderately effective” contraception. Only contraception deemed “highly effective” or “moderately effective” (Long acting implantable or long acting injections) would be included in the proposed measurement. Doctor’s with a low percentage of young patients using such contraception would presumably be rated as giving lower quality care.

We appear to be living in a “Utopia” of declining fitness and capability. An age of existential exhaustion manifested by an ageing, hedonistic society characterized by declining marriage, and near zero children.

Sin is the Situation

Sin is the situation where how we feel is ultimate human reality, and how we feel is known to be contingent and means nothing.
Sin is to embrace this nothingness as reality, to propagandize that nothingness is reality, to denigrate anything which saves us from nothingness.
*
And that is the reason we need to be ‘saved’.
And this is the reason why we cannot save ourselves.
We need to be saved from nothingness, and from those who brainwash us into a belief in nothingness, and from ourselves who propagate that reality is nothingness.
*
Sin is to embrace nothingness

Modern society is a mechanism for inculcating bad habits, especially the habit of seeking instant pleasure, intoxications and distractions; a habit of regarding ourselves as passive recipients for ‘entertainment’. A devout life is not so much about a flash of understanding but is mostly a matter of using insights into truth in building-up good habits; and this can be influenced by our will. A devout life enables one to build these habits and most importantly successfully pass them on to our children.

Whatever sense we make of this world, whatever value we place upon our lives and relationships, whatever meaning we ultimately give to our joys and agonies, must necessarily be a gesture of faith. Whether we consider the whole a product of impersonal cosmic forces, a malevolent deity, or a benevolent god, depends not on the evidence, but on what we choose, deliberately and consciously to conclude from that evidence… If we decide to leave the questions unanswered, that is a choice; if we waver in our answer that too is a choice: but whatever choice we make, we make it at our peril.

What we choose to embrace, to be responsive to, is the purest reflection of who we are and what we love. That is why faith, the choice to believe, is, in the final analysis, an action that is positively laden with moral significance.

In the end you must make a choice:

Wallow in the degradation of modernity

Or

Celebrate purity of the human spirit

Your choice is one that echoes through time influencing not only your life but the lives of your children and grandchildren as well.
Choose Wisely


See Religion and Progress for more.



Edit: It is clear that a few posters were angered by the original title of this post. As the goal of this post is not to attack or denigrate but to inform and share knowledge I have selected a new and less inflammatory title.

Both it is really important about your health and religion you should aware of your health,health is very important today because the high cost of hospitalization and medicines,also religion to you should be have a faith for god attending mass during Sunday praying and give thanks for what god has given to you on your daily life