Sister Fatima

Johnson City, TN

#61 Dec 31, 2012
Just because somebody takes a different road than you, doesnt mean they are lost. Atheists dont have all the answers, but unlike religion, we do not have to pretend we do. Personally, I am okay with saying "I dont know". Why is that so hard for people to say?

I dont know how we got here.
I dont know the meaning of life.
I dont know.

But i'd rather "not know" than believe things that are not true. To propagate untruths is a disservice to humanity. How will we ever know the answers to such questions if "think" we already know?

For example, When people died from the bubonic fever, it was considered to be a curse from God. Had everybody believed it to be true we would have never bothered with microbiology.

Am I making sense?
humble

Southbury, CT

#62 Dec 31, 2012
Sister Fatima wrote:
Just because somebody takes a different road than you, doesnt mean they are lost. Atheists dont have all the answers, but unlike religion, we do not have to pretend we do. Personally, I am okay with saying "I dont know". Why is that so hard for people to say?

I dont know how we got here.
I dont know the meaning of life.
I dont know.

But i'd rather "not know" than believe things that are not true. To propagate untruths is a disservice to humanity. How will we ever know the answers to such questions if "think" we already know?

For example, When people died from the bubonic fever, it was considered to be a curse from God. Had everybody believed it to be true we would have never bothered with microbiology.

Am I making sense?
Of course you're making sense and there's nothing at all wrong with saying "I don't know".. Human error does not know the difference between religious and non religious, it happens to both. Ignorance is also a circumstance of both religious and non religious. We're human beings, whether we believe or not we WILL make mistakes, we WILL get misinformed and we WILL eventually learn (hopefully). It seems that when more is discovered, and more is learned, human arrogance grows and grows to where we think we're higher then ourselves. We start to think of ourselves as "Gods". Then planet Earth slaps us in the face and humbles us with natural disasters that are out of our control. Human beings are control freaks, we fear what we don't (can't) understand.
LOST

Baltimore, MD

#63 Dec 31, 2012
Sister Fatima wrote:
Just because somebody takes a different road than you, doesnt mean they are lost. Atheists dont have all the answers, but unlike religion, we do not have to pretend we do. Personally, I am okay with saying "I dont know". Why is that so hard for people to say?
I dont know how we got here.
I dont know the meaning of life.
I dont know.
But i'd rather "not know" than believe things that are not true. To propagate untruths is a disservice to humanity. How will we ever know the answers to such questions if "think" we already know?
For example, When people died from the bubonic fever, it was considered to be a curse from God. Had everybody believed it to be true we would have never bothered with microbiology.
Am I making sense?
I think it's awesome that we are able to ask questions, and to look for truth (regardless where we think we will find it). The sad part is that we are given things as fact everyday that isn't totally correct or true. Think about the idea of Global Warming, evolution, or a hundred other things that we are told are absolute truths, but lack evidence. Is that not a disservice as well since we are putting forth what we "think" to be true, but we aren't totally for certain. Anyone that professes to know everything (whether religious or non-religious) is certainly someone to be leary of in this world.
humble

Southbury, CT

#64 Dec 31, 2012
LOST wrote:
<quoted text>Or let's look at babies. We are the most advanced animal on this planet, yet we don't become self-sufficient until we are around 15 years old (some of us earlier, some later), yet horses that are obviously less evolved than us are self-sufficient in mere hours. This seems counter intuitive to the evolutionary explination to how we came to be, and that makes me wonder. If we are the end all and be all to evolution on this planet, why are our young the most helpless of basically all baby animals on this planet.
That's definitely something to think about. Maybe it's because we were meant to spend our lives with our children more so then other species. Since we're supposedly the only animals that [understand] death, we find reason for living through our kids and feel as if we live past our years through them. You wouldn't think that evolution would make the babies of its most advanced species so fragile and dependent on its parents would you? Seems our offspring would hit the ground running, be feeding themselves in a few hours, and be totally independent in a few months if evolution was our sole reason for being the elite species doesn't it?
LOST

Baltimore, MD

#65 Dec 31, 2012
humble wrote:
<quoted text>
That's definitely something to think about. Maybe it's because we were meant to spend our lives with our children more so then other species. Since we're supposedly the only animals that [understand] death, we find reason for living through our kids and feel as if we live past our years through them. You wouldn't think that evolution would make the babies of its most advanced species so fragile and dependent on its parents would you? Seems our offspring would hit the ground running, be feeding themselves in a few hours, and be totally independent in a few months if evolution was our sole reason for being the elite species doesn't it?
That's exactly where I ended up when I first started looking into that line of questioning, and I've yet to find an answer that disproves the notion that we should be lean, mean, planet ruling machines by the time we were a few weeks old by evolutionary standards. Instead we live shorter lives than many lower level animals, and are unable to be self sustaining for a good portion of that life.
Sister Fatima

Johnson City, TN

#66 Jan 1, 2013
LOST wrote:
<quoted text>
That's exactly where I ended up when I first started looking into that line of questioning, and I've yet to find an answer that disproves the notion that we should be lean, mean, planet ruling machines by the time we were a few weeks old by evolutionary standards. Instead we live shorter lives than many lower level animals, and are unable to be self sustaining for a good portion of that life.
The human species is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.
LOST

Charlotte, NC

#67 Jan 1, 2013
Sister Fatima wrote:
<quoted text>
The human species is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.
So, are you saying that even though we're the most evolved animal on earth, that because we've not been around that long we're less evolved than the lower level animals? That doesn't really flow. Shouldn't we, as the apex of evolution, be capable of our own survival well before what is basically spending 20% of our lives to become self sufficient? Even animals that live in packs have that ability, so it's not even about us being able to protect them as they develop, so why can't we?
Sister Fatima

Johnson City, TN

#68 Jan 1, 2013
LOST wrote:
<quoted text>
So, are you saying that even though we're the most evolved animal on earth, that because we've not been around that long we're less evolved than the lower level animals? That doesn't really flow. Shouldn't we, as the apex of evolution, be capable of our own survival well before what is basically spending 20% of our lives to become self sufficient? Even animals that live in packs have that ability, so it's not even about us being able to protect them as they develop, so why can't we?
Define "most evolved". There is only a fraction of a difference in DNA between us and chimps. The idea that we are deeper thinkers is due to only a few genes. Is that what you mean? Our ability to reason? I wouldnt say we are the apex of evolution either. Only a very self important human would think that.

Like I said, we are a relatively new species on the planet. And we really havent changed that much.
LOST

Charlotte, NC

#69 Jan 1, 2013
Sister Fatima wrote:
<quoted text>
Define "most evolved". There is only a fraction of a difference in DNA between us and chimps. The idea that we are deeper thinkers is due to only a few genes. Is that what you mean? Our ability to reason? I wouldnt say we are the apex of evolution either. Only a very self important human would think that.
Like I said, we are a relatively new species on the planet. And we really havent changed that much.
Most evolved in that we think on higher levels than other animals. We could also be considered the mosr advanced because unlike any other animal/plant on earth, we adapt our surroundings to fit us instead of the other way around. No other animal can fit that bill. That is also why we can be considered the apex, we no longer have a reason to evolve, and therefore would have to be considered the end all and be all to evolution on this planet as we are the ruling species. Once again though, our "evolutionary age" still doesn't explain the question at hand: why are the most successful species on earth's young completly helpless when less evolved animals young are able to be self sufficient so much faster. This is in direct conflict with the survival of the fittest. Also, and this is just a thought, would a prehistoric neanderthal not have abandoned a baby if it seemed defected at birth such as not looking like the parent? Most animals would abandon their young if it seemed unable to blend in with the "group," and it seems that if this were the case when the first human was born, they would have been left to die, and the species wouldn't have survived. Even if hundreds were born over a few hundred years, it is unlikely that they would have been welcomed into the tribe/group/whatever.
Sister Fatima

Johnson City, TN

#70 Jan 1, 2013
LOST wrote:
<quoted text>
Most evolved in that we think on higher levels than other animals. We could also be considered the mosr advanced because unlike any other animal/plant on earth, we adapt our surroundings to fit us instead of the other way around. No other animal can fit that bill. That is also why we can be considered the apex, we no longer have a reason to evolve, and therefore would have to be considered the end all and be all to evolution on this planet as we are the ruling species. Once again though, our "evolutionary age" still doesn't explain the question at hand: why are the most successful species on earth's young completly helpless when less evolved animals young are able to be self sufficient so much faster. This is in direct conflict with the survival of the fittest. Also, and this is just a thought, would a prehistoric neanderthal not have abandoned a baby if it seemed defected at birth such as not looking like the parent? Most animals would abandon their young if it seemed unable to blend in with the "group," and it seems that if this were the case when the first human was born, they would have been left to die, and the species wouldn't have survived. Even if hundreds were born over a few hundred years, it is unlikely that they would have been welcomed into the tribe/group/whatever.
It would behoove you to take some basic college classes with regard to primate evolution, anatomy, and physiology.

I can tell you are a deep thinker; you probably belong in a classroom somewhere.:)
Save the Liver

Cumming, GA

#71 Jan 1, 2013
Yeah, to be dissected possibly.
LOST

Chattanooga, TN

#72 Jan 2, 2013
Save the Liver wrote:
Yeah, to be dissected possibly.
Why so much anger? Is it not ok to have differing opinions where both sides make valid points? That's what our world needs, checks and balances without getting up in arms when someone thinks differently.
LOST

Chattanooga, TN

#73 Jan 2, 2013
Sister Fatima wrote:
<quoted text>
It would behoove you to take some basic college classes with regard to primate evolution, anatomy, and physiology.
I can tell you are a deep thinker; you probably belong in a classroom somewhere.:)
I'll take that as a compliment.:-)

I've never been one to just take things at face value, and I think it is very important that we look for answers (regardless of WHERE we look, we need to look none-the-less). I will look into more information when it comes to primates, anatomy, etc. That way if I ever get into a deep discussion like this in the future, I'll be able to more eloquently and accurately present my POV.

Best wishes to you this new year.
truth

Charlotte, NC

#74 Jan 2, 2013
This wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you think a phrase can only be used once and can't be applied to anything else? Wow, that's dumb. I was just using a commonly known phrase to say this...I'll break it down for you...
What kind of sick, demented God would be "all powerful" and yet do NOTHING while children starve, babies are raped, and elderly people (many of whom have been faithful to the church and God) lay and suffer for months or even years while they're eaten with cancer? You call that a loving God? Who in the hell wants to be a member of that twisted club?
Furthermore, have you ever noticed how children usually follow the same religion as their parents? Coincidence? I highly doubt it! What if you're born into a family that isn't religious at all? There are MANY, MANY religions...not just Christianity. Of course, Christians believe you have to accept "The Lord, Jesus Christ" in order to claim your spot in Heaven....but Muslims, Hindu, etc, etc, etc, are all EQUALLY convinced that THEIR religion is THE religion. Does a child born into a home of no religion just play eenie meenie miney moe and hope they land on "THE" religion that will save a seat in Heaven? When you aren't born to a mother and father who believe in brainwashing then you take a look around at all the religions and they are equally far fetched.
I'll leave you with another quote.
"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Again, you have no concept of Biblical free will. You also view life and death on a "finality" basis. God does not. Our time here is but a vapor to the true infinity of life after we are done here. All pain, suffering, and death are the result of sin committed by man's Freewill. He warned us from day one that our choices would affect generations. He has appointed a day when sin will be destroyed. However, until that point, all of the things you describe are the result of humanity's choices. Could He step in? Certainly, but He promised He wouldn't until the appointed time. Again, it wouldn't be free will if He were interfering in the choices being made.
Girl

Jonesborough, TN

#75 Jan 2, 2013
I don't think any of us know why we are here on this large ball in the universe. One thing I do believe is that we are taught fear and terror of death while we are young. I personally learned the terror through religion.
This

Kingsport, TN

#76 Jan 2, 2013
truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, you have no concept of Biblical free will. You also view life and death on a "finality" basis. God does not. Our time here is but a vapor to the true infinity of life after we are done here. All pain, suffering, and death are the result of sin committed by man's Freewill. He warned us from day one that our choices would affect generations. He has appointed a day when sin will be destroyed. However, until that point, all of the things you describe are the result of humanity's choices. Could He step in? Certainly, but He promised He wouldn't until the appointed time. Again, it wouldn't be free will if He were interfering in the choices being made.
Having no concept of something and not believing something are two different things.

I am very educated. I have no trouble understanding something as simple as the concept of free will.

At the same time, I am too educated to believe that a magic man in the sky created the world.

If you choose to believe that then fine. I'm not trying to change your mind.

I'm also not insisting that you must not understand how ridiculous the concept is. I accept that people have been brainwashed since birth and they come to actually believe these things. More power to you.
speedy bongzalez

Southbury, CT

#77 Jan 2, 2013
Girl wrote:
I don't think any of us know why we are here on this large ball in the universe. One thing I do believe is that we are taught fear and terror of death while we are young. I personally learned the terror through religion.
Why does the concept of an after life scare you?
speedy bongzalez

Southbury, CT

#78 Jan 2, 2013
This wrote:
<quoted text>Having no concept of something and not believing something are two different things.

I am very educated. I have no trouble understanding something as simple as the concept of free will.

At the same time, I am too educated to believe that a magic man in the sky created the world.

If you choose to believe that then fine. I'm not trying to change your mind.

I'm also not insisting that you must not understand how ridiculous the concept is. I accept that people have been brainwashed since birth and they come to actually believe these things. More power to you.
So you believe you're educated to the point that 93.5% of the worlds population is religiously brainwashed and a lower intellect then you?
humble

Southbury, CT

#79 Jan 2, 2013
This wrote:
<quoted text>Having no concept of something and not believing something are two different things.

I am very educated. I have no trouble understanding something as simple as the concept of free will.

At the same time, I am too educated to believe that a magic man in the sky created the world.

If you choose to believe that then fine. I'm not trying to change your mind.

I'm also not insisting that you must not understand how ridiculous the concept is. I accept that people have been brainwashed since birth and they come to actually believe these things. More power to you.
Once again this discussion turns into a "I'm smarter then you" match. Do you realize how much time and money it takes to obtain an education as a theologian? Look up tuition prices at Emanuel School of Religion at Milligan. To suggest that you're smarter then theologian scholars is arrogant beyond my belief. You just more or less said that "You're too smart to understand".. Lol, do you not see the irony in that statement?
LOST

Baltimore, MD

#80 Jan 3, 2013
humble wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again this discussion turns into a "I'm smarter then you" match. Do you realize how much time and money it takes to obtain an education as a theologian? Look up tuition prices at Emanuel School of Religion at Milligan. To suggest that you're smarter then theologian scholars is arrogant beyond my belief. You just more or less said that "You're too smart to understand".. Lol, do you not see the irony in that statement?
Ouch!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Johnson City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
LGBT and now Q? 5 hr Really 81
Eldridge and Meredith caught by JCP Fri Pete 108
Gary Phillips Construction (Sep '14) Fri Concerned 15
Etsu nursing Fri Nurse ratchet57 3
Aundrea Kearney Fri Wondering87 1
NutriMost - New Diet Scam (May '14) Fri Michelle 1,478
Misty McCracken Fri Lynn 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Johnson City Mortgages