How are adults talked into believing in fantasy creatures, miracles and magic?

It would be for sure. P)ear pressure is a bitch.
I cannot blame you for picking Jesus over the O T God although I do not see how you can pick one version of God from the bible and reject his father.


Regards
DL
Jesus is as supernatural as you or I. I do not believe in the godhood of Jesus, I said I embrace some of his teachings.
 
I've never met a person without a body. As such, I have no reason to think that a person can exist without one. I have seen inanimate bodies. We usually refer to these people as "dead".

I've never scene a VHF signal without a TV set either. Does that mean it can't exist without it?


Persons are loved or hated, not their bodies. Persons have rights and responsibilities, not their bodies. Persons are smart, courageous, innocent, heroic, or funny, not their bodies. Everyday on an ongoing basis we relate to the coherent psychological complex of feelings and emotions and beliefs and aspirations that is a person. They are NOT just their bodies.
 
I've never scene a VHF signal without a TV set either. Does that mean it can't exist without it?
Stupid analogy. I can turn on many TV sets all tuned to the same signal. Can multiple bodies tune into the same person? No.
I can change channels and pick up another signal if I so desire. Can your body change channels and pick up another person? No.
 
Jesus is as supernatural as you or I. I do not believe in the godhood of Jesus, I said I embrace some of his teachings.

I think that that is a rather low standard.

If you think of his no divorce policy and his forgiveness rules, you will agree that they are both anti-love.
I can debate you on this is you like.

[video=youtube;j4QXOgVfY9k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4QXOgVfY9k&feature=player_embedded[/video]

Regards
DL
 
But without their bodies, they are not.

That doesn't logically follow. If A is not equal to B, then not A is not equal to not B either. IOW, if a body is not the same thing as a person, then a body not existing is not the same as a person not existing.
 
How are adults talked into believing in fantasy creatures, miracles and magic?
If they are not raised with it, there are two main ways:
Self-deception.
Personal experiences.
The former is rather shallow and insincere; it is often defended vigorously, but usually out of insecurity. The latter, however, is often deeply felt and held by those that have experiences that they interpret in a religious, magical, or spiritual manner. The kicker is that, mostly, the latter type aren't wont to defend their beliefs aggressively; they don't get in other peoples' face about it and take offence at disagreement. Because it is deeply felt and personal, and because they're not insecure, they don't feel the need to react with anger.

For example, I believe in multiple gods and in the efficacy of ritual magic. At the same time, I am very much a "I'll believe it when I see it" kind of person; I'm very skeptical about the world around me. I would not believe in the things I do if I had not had repeated personal experiences of those phenomena and corroborated certain details with those of others. But I accept that my personal experiences do not apply to other people necessarily, and I do not insist on such things. I have no intention of trying to convince other people that the gods exist or that magic is real or whatever.
 
If they are not raised with it, there are two main ways:
Self-deception.
Personal experiences.
The former is rather shallow and insincere; it is often defended vigorously, but usually out of insecurity. The latter, however, is often deeply felt and held by those that have experiences that they interpret in a religious, magical, or spiritual manner. The kicker is that, mostly, the latter type aren't wont to defend their beliefs aggressively; they don't get in other peoples' face about it and take offence at disagreement. Because it is deeply felt and personal, and because they're not insecure, they don't feel the need to react with anger.

For example, I believe in multiple gods and in the efficacy of ritual magic. At the same time, I am very much a "I'll believe it when I see it" kind of person; I'm very skeptical about the world around me. I would not believe in the things I do if I had not had repeated personal experiences of those phenomena and corroborated certain details with those of others. But I accept that my personal experiences do not apply to other people necessarily, and I do not insist on such things. I have no intention of trying to convince other people that the gods exist or that magic is real or whatever.

We share the same attitude.

You are bang on in your thoughts of personal experience.

I am a living example of the attitude you say personal experience gives.

I do not hide my anecdotal story of apotheosis but do not argue for it's belief.
After all, I share your "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude and would not insult other people with it by trying to push for belief on an issue where there is no proof.

Regards
DL
 
I have an annoying and habitual penchant for believing magical creatures called "persons" exist. As of yet I haven't found any scientific way of proving they do though. All I ever see of these invisible and intangible "persons" are bodies making various gestures, facial expressions, and sounds that I assume are being created by some inner imperceptible person. If I should dissect a body though I am quite sure I would find no trace of an intending, feeling, perceiving and freely-thinking person inside. All I'd find is great gobs of bloody self-electrifying meat. Am I a fool to believe in the existence of persons? Do I need to go thru some scientific rehab to rid me of this obstinate superstition once and for all?
The story of the brain begins in the ancient oceans.

"And the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters."

[video=youtube;7s0CpRfyYp8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s0CpRfyYp8&feature=youtu.be[/video]

"If the flesh came into being because of spirit, that is a marvel, but if spirit came into being because of the body, that is a marvel of marvels."

And so it was; and so it is; and so it will be; a marvel of marvels. :)
 
Can you describe how you were made to believe in fantasy or imaginary creatures?

Were you an adult at that time or a child?

If a child, could this real phenomena be what caused you to believe?

Probably when we realised that life and reality is not only what we see.
Just look at the Tardigrade. At one point in time if someone were to describe them as real that person would have been viewed as mad, they would have been laughed at and ridiculed...although not by progressives.

Viewing things as you describe in such a rigid manner is to limit oneself to a false reality. If humans were ants this would be normal, we have imaginations and how would we learn new things if we were to live only according to the rules for which you demand we abide by?
 
I think that that is a rather low standard.

If you think of his no divorce policy and his forgiveness rules, you will agree that they are both anti-love.
I can debate you on this is you like.


Regards
DL

Cherry pick much? Jesus was merely a man but in my opinion a progressive man at that time and in that culture. Some of the examples given in the video when juxtaposed with bible verses are laughable to me. I have turned the other cheek in many situations and am altruistic by nature but I m not an idiot. Jesus spoke in metaphors according to his disciples writings, so taking his words so literal is doing his teachings an injustice.Is there really any difference than how fundamentalists view the Bible?

In my humanistic approach to the teachings of Jesus I could use the Lilies of the field along with the kingdom of heaven is at hand and say that he meant that if flowers are so special as to be clothed in all that beauty, then all us (not just some) are as special in the kingdom of heaven and that the kingdom of heaven is now and not some place or future event.
 
The story of the brain begins in the ancient oceans.

"And the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters."

[video=youtube;7s0CpRfyYp8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s0CpRfyYp8&feature=youtu.be[/video]

"If the flesh came into being because of spirit, that is a marvel, but if spirit came into being because of the body, that is a marvel of marvels."

And so it was; and so it is; and so it will be; a marvel of marvels. :)


Excellent talk. I always enjoy your posts. They tend to "open up" instead of "closing off." And that's one movement I like identifying with. Self-moving, emoting, thinking clumps of matter. Who could've anticipated such a marvel evolving from a mere starry abyss!
 
Probably when we realised that life and reality is not only what we see.
Just look at the Tardigrade. At one point in time if someone were to describe them as real that person would have been viewed as mad, they would have been laughed at and ridiculed...although not by progressives.

Viewing things as you describe in such a rigid manner is to limit oneself to a false reality. If humans were ants this would be normal, we have imaginations and how would we learn new things if we were to live only according to the rules for which you demand we abide by?

If he described a Tardigrade, that would mean that he somehow saw it and if he did, he can have other people see it by the same method.

The false reality you say I see I can show others. I can have confirmation.

The reality that is fantasy to some cannot be shown to anyone.

I demand nothing from anyone. I am not in that position.

Regards
DL
 
Cherry pick much? Jesus was merely a man but in my opinion a progressive man at that time and in that culture. Some of the examples given in the video when juxtaposed with bible verses are laughable to me. I have turned the other cheek in many situations and am altruistic by nature but I m not an idiot. Jesus spoke in metaphors according to his disciples writings, so taking his words so literal is doing his teachings an injustice.Is there really any difference than how fundamentalists view the Bible?

In my humanistic approach to the teachings of Jesus I could use the Lilies of the field along with the kingdom of heaven is at hand and say that he meant that if flowers are so special as to be clothed in all that beauty, then all us (not just some) are as special in the kingdom of heaven and that the kingdom of heaven is now and not some place or future event.

I would agree with you.

From that humanistic POV, tell us, is it good to follow Jesus' no divorce policy for people who are not happy within their marriage?

Is it good to deny people the right to find a loving relationship?

That is what Jesus taught with his no divorce policy.

You go ahead and respect that kind of non-humanist thinking.

Regards
DL
 
I would agree with you.

From that humanistic POV, tell us, is it good to follow Jesus' no divorce policy for people who are not happy within their marriage?

Is it good to deny people the right to find a loving relationship?

That is what Jesus taught with his no divorce policy.

You go ahead and respect that kind of non-humanist thinking.

Regards
DL

I did say I embrace some of his teachings.:confused: Why are you stuck on the divorce issue? Hell, for all I know this may have been an improvement from the then current laws on divorce. He may have taught this way to protect the women economically speaking:shrug:(That's for you LG)

I personally will not stay in a bad relationship and divorce laws be damned.
 
Who could've anticipated such a marvel evolving from a mere starry abyss!

Ah, rest and motion; the dance of the universe…the essence of God.

Magical Realist said:
I always enjoy your posts.

Ditto! :)

Greatest I am said:
Can you describe how you were made to believe in fantasy or imaginary creatures?

Were you an adult at that time or a child?

“Princess Alice is Watching You”

Although perhaps, it is not “Princess Alice” who is watching you, but “Queen Alice,” through the looking-glass of self-awareness, the self as it is viewed by others. All pawns long to be queens, do they not? Childhood is a magical time, when we are still part of the natural world, rather than a performer on the world’s mirror stage. Our innate empathy becomes corrupted by artificial social conventions, don’t cha’ think?

We all tell ourselves stories to make sense of life.

In fact, the interpretation of coincidences often leads to supernatural claims and contributes to fatalism.

Carl Jung’s: Synchronicity
Paul Kammerer’s: Law of Seriality
Arthur Koestler’s: The Roots of Coincidence

“The Jung-Pauli theory of "synchronicity", conceived by a physicist and a psychologist, both eminent in their fields, represents perhaps the most radical departure from the world-view of mechanistic science in our time. Yet they had a precursor, whose ideas had a considerable influence on Jung: the Austrian biologist Paul Kammerer, a wild genius who committed suicide in 1926, at the age of forty-five.”
~Arthur Koestler


Human behavior is odd, that's for sure. :D
 
@ Greatest I am / Opening Post,
I also have rejected the notion of anything being able to breach the limits of nature and physics.
No miracles allowed in my theology.

It sounds like you have defined the limits of nature and physics. That is very Enlightened of you.

Notice under my name is the caption, "Finally we know everything". This is because it is absolutely true. We will never again find anything about nature/physics surprising to us.

I know some idiots thought the world was flat, and others deemed radio waves as heresy, but that was history, and history never repeats itself.

Kudos for defining reality for us. Perhaps even write it in a book so we can stop researching altogether.

Someone...
rejected the notion of anything being able to breach the limits of nature and physics
two hundred years ago would need to view my cellphone as a miracle beyond miracles if I unveiled even 1% of its functionality.

Maybe in two hundred years we can look back and say you were 100% correct and we do know everything now.
 
I did say I embrace some of his teachings.:confused: Why are you stuck on the divorce issue? Hell, for all I know this may have been an improvement from the then current laws on divorce. He may have taught this way to protect the women economically speaking:shrug:(That's for you LG)

I personally will not stay in a bad relationship and divorce laws be damned.

Neither would I and that is why Jesus' divorce law is not moral or good.

You go ahead and cherry pick his laws if you are a Christian but I have looked at them all and find little value in most of his sayings.

Regards
DL
 
Ah, rest and motion; the dance of the universe…the essence of God.



Ditto! :)



Although perhaps, it is not “Princess Alice” who is watching you, but “Queen Alice,” through the looking-glass of self-awareness, the self as it is viewed by others. All pawns long to be queens, do they not? Childhood is a magical time, when we are still part of the natural world, rather than a performer on the world’s mirror stage. Our innate empathy becomes corrupted by artificial social conventions, don’t cha’ think?

We all tell ourselves stories to make sense of life.

In fact, the interpretation of coincidences often leads to supernatural claims and contributes to fatalism.

Carl Jung’s: Synchronicity
Paul Kammerer’s: Law of Seriality
Arthur Koestler’s: The Roots of Coincidence

“The Jung-Pauli theory of "synchronicity", conceived by a physicist and a psychologist, both eminent in their fields, represents perhaps the most radical departure from the world-view of mechanistic science in our time. Yet they had a precursor, whose ideas had a considerable influence on Jung: the Austrian biologist Paul Kammerer, a wild genius who committed suicide in 1926, at the age of forty-five.”
~Arthur Koestler


Human behavior is odd, that's for sure. :D


Indeed, and in this case, churches are taking full advantage of a human characteristic for mind control.

And your taxes help subsidise those same immoral tax exempt churches.

Regards
DL
 
Back
Top