finding a needle in a haystack.

[godBoy]

My theory is this:
I think a person who is sincerely seeking out God will start to develop his characteristics. One of these IMO would be a desire to do what is good and just. When we realise how many times we have done what is bad and unjust, we naturally apologise to 'God'.
A person who is sincere about his search will be defined as:
honest/open before God.
It's my theory that anyone can find God and be with him in heaven.. a buddhist, christian, muslim, hindu, any theist.

So my questions are:
Are there characteristics that 'religous' people share?
Are there major themes that run through the most part of world religions?
If so, then do you think this collaboration of religious ideas could point towards a closer representation of God?

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a person who is sincerely seeking out God will start to develop his characteristics.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is absolutely no evidence for your very first statement. I guess all the other are as meaningless.

[garion888]

[ QUOTE ]
Are there characteristics that 'religous' people share?
Are there major themes that run through the most part of world religions?
If so, then do you think this collaboration of religious ideas could point towards a closer representation of God?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes
Yes
No

[Brom]

[ QUOTE ]

Are there characteristics that 'religous' people share?
Are there major themes that run through the most part of world religions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignorance and stubborness come to mind.

[madnak]

Doesn't this imply that it may be the Buddhist conception of God rather than the Christian conception that is more valid?

Perhaps God takes many forms, but that idea seems opposed to the dogmatism fundamental to most Western religions.

[bocablkr]

Mid,

Is your Avatar a direct rebuttal to Godboy's?

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Are there characteristics that 'religous' people share?
Are there major themes that run through the most part of world religions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignorance and stubborness come to mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dont forget low IQ.

[AceofSpades]

[ QUOTE ]
My theory is this:
I think a person who is sincerely seeking out God will start to develop his characteristics. One of these IMO would be a desire to do what is good and just. When we realise how many times we have done what is bad and unjust, we naturally apologise to 'God'.
A person who is sincere about his search will be defined as:
honest/open before God.
It's my theory that anyone can find God and be with him in heaven.. a buddhist, christian, muslim, hindu, any theist.

So my questions are:
Are there characteristics that 'religous' people share?
Are there major themes that run through the most part of world religions?
If so, then do you think this collaboration of religious ideas could point towards a closer representation of God?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps, I'll rephrase this:

Are there characteristics that a lot of 'poker' people share?

A belief that poker is rigged.

Are there major themes that run through the most part of online poker sites?

The theme that suckouts happen more at that site. That the deck is rigged against them.

If so, then do you think this collaboration of online poker ideas could point towards a closer representation that online poker is rigged?

It is possible but not very likely. When you look at the evidence supplied, it is likely that the evidence that online poker is rigged is combination of a misunderstanding of what is possible, selection bias, and small sample size.

[Trantor]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this imply that it may be the Buddhist conception of God rather than the Christian conception that is more valid?

Perhaps God takes many forms, but that idea seems opposed to the dogmatism fundamental to most Western religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Buddhists are atheists so I would say their concept of God (ie His non-existance) is certainly more valid!

[Mik1w]

This reminds me of The Mummy, where Benny brings out different religious symbols and prays in each language... a nice board perspective. By the way, neither Hinduism or Bhuddism are monotheistic faiths, so I guess they won't find your God.

There is a tested relationship between atheists and IQ; numerous studies have concluded this is positive. Also, without meaning to sound too biased, I believe there is stubbornness and bitterness between religions amongst a hypocritical shared outlook on good and evil. (they just happen to all think the other one is evil)

[hmkpoker]

Hinduism can be classified as monotheistic, monistic or polytheistic. All depends on how you define "God," since "God" is less concrete term in Hinduism.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Mid,

Is your Avatar a direct rebuttal to Godboy's?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Sharkey]

Einstein was not an atheist.

[AceofSpades]

[ QUOTE ]
Einstein was not an atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."
[Albert Einstein,_The World as I See It_]

[Matt R.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Einstein was not an atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."
[Albert Einstein,_The World as I See It_]

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, Einstein was not an atheist. He simply believed in a different kind of God than you are probably thinking of, as evidenced by your quote.

[HLMencken]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Einstein was not an atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."
[Albert Einstein,_The World as I See It_]

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, Einstein was not an atheist. He simply believed in a different kind of God than you are probably thinking of, as evidenced by your quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

But he also certainly wasn't a theist as the term is commonly used, either.

[Sharkey]

The phrase “I cannot conceive of...” is always a refreshing one to hear from a practitioner of the discipline of science.

[HLMencken]

[ QUOTE ]
The phrase “I cannot conceive of...” is always a refreshing one to hear from a practitioner of the discipline of science.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, I thought you were just using Einstein as an example of a great thinker who was not an atheist. Now you seem to be ridiculing him for being close-minded. It seems as though you'll accept him for not being able to conceive of a universe without a god, but you'll criticize him for not being able to conceive of a god who punishes as in the Bible. How convenient for your position.

[Sharkey]

What are you talking about?

[madnak]

Buddhists aren't atheists; they believe in many gods.

[chezlaw]

There seems to be no reason why you discount people who try to be rational and be good people. Why do you think belief or some search for it is so important?

I cant think of any reason why god needs belief, though its fairly obvious why religon needs it.

chez

[godBoy]

Why no for the last question?
Is it that you think religion in as evil thing?

[godBoy]

hmmm I guess it's just that the search is so imoprtant to my own life..
Why would a person have a desire to be good/rational if not searching for truth?
Everyone hold beliefs about something, but why? - are they well founded?, true?, how can one truly know?

[ QUOTE ]
I cant think of any reason why god needs belief, though its fairly obvious why religon needs it.

[/ QUOTE ]

God doesn't need belief but desires to be chosen IMO.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
hmmm I guess it's just that the search is so imoprtant to my own life..
Why would a person have a desire to be good/rational if not searching for truth?
Everyone hold beliefs about something, but why? - are they well founded?, true?, how can one truly know?

[ QUOTE ]
I cant think of any reason why god needs belief, though its fairly obvious why religon needs it.

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]
I desire to be good because I have a sense of right and wrong - don't you?

I dont try to be decent because of some fear/reward system or because I'm searching for something. I try to be decent because I care about other people.

[ QUOTE ]
God doesn't need belief but desires to be chosen IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know its your opiniion but you've opened up to people who don't share your opinions. So do you have any rational reasons for excluding those who don't have any belief in god?

chez

[godBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
It is possible but not very likely. When you look at the evidence supplied, it is likely that the evidence that online poker is rigged is combination of a misunderstanding of what is possible, selection bias, and small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

What we have is a massive sample size, selected with no bias..(theists of all backgrounds, IQ's). Since no one can begin to explain creation without god, there is a limit for us to understand what is possible.

[godBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this imply that it may be the Buddhist conception of God rather than the Christian conception that is more valid?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it imply it is more valid?

[godBoy]

[ QUOTE ]
I desire to be good because I have a sense of right and wrong - don't you?

I dont try to be decent because of some fear/reward system or because I'm searching for something. I try to be decent because I care about other people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I do, but I believe it's god given.. Why do have this desire to do what is good? Why do you care for people?

The bible says this is the part of us that is eternal - our spirit.

[ QUOTE ]
So do you have any rational reasons for excluding those who don't have any belief in god?

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't.
I'm interested in why you think it is that there is something in me that woke when I took my faith seriously. This thing that has awoken is a desire to serve, help, grow, work hard, love.. etc. Before this I was much less of a person.

This is why I linked a desire to do good with seeking God. I was not saying that non-believers weren't capable of it, but I sure didn't have it.
God came for the despised and the hated, this would excplain the low IQ's(if that's true).

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I desire to be good because I have a sense of right and wrong - don't you?

I dont try to be decent because of some fear/reward system or because I'm searching for something. I try to be decent because I care about other people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I do, but I believe it's god given.. Why do have this desire to do what is good? Why do you care for people?

The bible says this is the part of us that is eternal - our spirit.

[ QUOTE ]
So do you have any rational reasons for excluding those who don't have any belief in god?

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't.
I'm interested in why you think it is that there is something in me that woke when I took my faith seriously. This thing that has awoken is a desire to serve, help, grow, work hard, love.. etc. Before this I was much less of a person.

This is why I linked a desire to do good with seeking God. I was not saying that non-believers weren't capable of it, but I sure didn't have it.
God came for the despised and the hated, this would excplain the low IQ's(if that's true).

[/ QUOTE ]
Cooperation is fit, caring about people causes cooperation.

Anyway, if you have no reasons why belief is needed to satisfy god (if god exists) then we have no disagreement here.

chez

[madnak]

I think it implies equal validity.

[godBoy]

No, it's what desiraable outcomes come from each faith that should favour one more highly.
christians are taught to judge people by their fruit.. what they produce, their actions.
I think this is a good way to test religion.
You look at the people... now this is hard because it is so easy to see a minority.
If you picked up a paper - you could beleive that priests are petophiles and islamists are terrorists... Personal encounter with people of different faiths helps you to understand their faiths teachings...

[madnak]

Buddhists, Taoists, etc seem like pretty good people to me.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
Einstein was not an atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, he was. In public, he used the word "God" as a metaphor for the Universe. Please read this link and then dispute it if you can - http://skeptically.org/thinkersonreligion/id8.html

[Sharkey]

"I want to know how God created the world.” - Albert Einstein

[Case Closed]

godboy,

I did not read your post. But they did do this on a mythbusters and it was pretty sweet. I am sure that watching that episode will help you out if you need to find a needle in a haystack.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I cant think of any reason why god needs belief, though its fairly obvious why religon needs it.

[/ QUOTE ]

God doesn't need belief but desires to be chosen IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's the other way around. We (some of us, anyway) need to believe. I read about some research into this (evolved need for belief), I'll see if I can find a link.

edit:http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_print.html#rees

JESSE BERING
Psychologist, University of Arkansas

Science will never silence God

With each meticulous turn of the screw in science, with each tightening up of our understanding of the natural world, we pull more taut the straps over God's muzzle. From botany to bioengineering, from physics to psychology, what is science really but true Revelation — and what is Revelation but the negation of God? It is a humble pursuit we scientists engage in: racing to reality. Many of us suffer the harsh glare of the American theocracy, whose heart still beats loud and strong in this new year of the 21st century. We bravely favor truth, in all its wondrous, amoral, and 'meaningless' complexity over the singularly destructive Truth born of the trembling minds of our ancestors. But my dangerous idea, I fear, is that no matter how far our thoughts shall vault into the eternal sky of scientific progress, no matter how dazzling the effects of this progress, God will always bite through his muzzle and banish us from the starry night of humanistic ideals.

Science is an endless series of binding and rebinding his breath; there will never be a day when God does not speak for the majority. There will never be a day even when he does not whisper in the most godless of scientists' ears. This is because God is not an idea, nor a cultural invention, not an 'opiate of the masses' or any such thing; God is a way of thinking that was rendered permanent by natural selection.

As scientists, we must toil and labor and toil again to silence God, but ultimately this is like cutting off our ears to hear more clearly. God too is a biological appendage; until we acknowledge this fact for what it is, until we rear our children with this knowledge, he will continue to howl his discontent for all of time.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Bering

JESSE BERING is a Reader in psychology and Assistant Director of the Institute of Cognition and Culture at the Queen’s University, Belfast.

A cognitive scientist, he studies the intuitive mental processes underlying people’s religious beliefs and general existential concerns. His ground-breaking research has begun to reveal that human beings are innately dualistic (e.g., through his work on children’s belief in the afterlife), that we naturally conceptualize our individual lives as having a special purpose (i.e., the folk concept of destiny), and that our minds appear designed by natural selection to see messages or ‘signs’ in unexpected events (e.g., traumas, misfortunes, and ironic autobiographical occurrences). His unique scientific approach to these classically philosophical areas has been called “experimental atheism” by some.

Currently one of the youngest Readers in the UK, Bering’s work has been featured on NPR, BBC-Radio 4, American Scientist and various other public science outlets.

http://www.uark.edu/depts/psyc/fbering.html

[godBoy]

I saw it,
Are you suggesting i push religious people into a big water wheel to see which ones float..
Or burn a big pile and sift the ashes??

[godBoy]

I'd talk to them and see what makes them tick.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
"I want to know how God created the world.” - Albert Einstein

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you honestly read the site or just post some of his quotes? I use the word god sometimes and I am an absolute atheist.

[AceofSpades]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is possible but not very likely. When you look at the evidence supplied, it is likely that the evidence that online poker is rigged is combination of a misunderstanding of what is possible, selection bias, and small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

What we have is a massive sample size, selected with no bias..(theists of all backgrounds, IQ's). Since no one can begin to explain creation without god, there is a limit for us to understand what is possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look at it this way, adding up the numbers of hands "poker is rigged" have played will surely give a massive sample size. But the individual sample size is too small to get an accurate picture. Of course the individuals are interpreting that data not from the overall picture but from the small individual sample size.

I would argue that the bias is not intentional, but from outside influence (being taught, friends, family: "online poker is rigged, that is the truth") and then selection bias resulting from our natural human tendency to remember the hands that support the position and forget the others that don't support it.