• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What do we replace religion with?[W:675]

It doesn’t cost money to be happy....but many people are unhappy. Mostly, IMHO, due to want. While there are many reasons people are unhappy, mental illness aside and despite the linked alternative view below, I think people most are unhappy because they feel they are not getting enough of something. Usually material crap, but it could also be a suitable mate (e.g. InCels) or unsatisfying occupation.

An alternative view: https://medium.com/the-mission/8-causes-of-modern-unhappiness-a78164dd1ec0


I’m more inclined to believe happiness is found along these lines: https://hackspirit.com/5-causes-suffering-according-buddhism-ultimate-way-overcome/

The science of happiness is covered by positive psychology:

https://ppc.sas.upenn.edu/

In general they claim that, neither extremes of: rich-poor, superhealthy (i.e., athletes) - ill, beautiful - ugly = bring happiness. Money only makes people happy when rising from the extreme (i.e., "do not know whether I will eat tomorrow") poor to more stable access to goods, and then the influence of money on happiness drops.
 
Re: What do we replace religion with?


You don't expect him to actually answer do you?

Sure, why not.

I do not think his position is much in religion as much as it may be about awareness and higher consciousness. Higher consciousness can be achieved with meditation (EEG waves skyrocket in such a state), which may imply that they take in more of life per each milisecond in such states compared to when not.
 
Re: What do we replace religion with?

Sure, why not.

I do not think his position is much in religion as much as it may be about awareness and higher consciousness. Higher consciousness can be achieved with meditation (EEG waves skyrocket in such a state), which may imply that they take in more of life per each milisecond in such states compared to when not.

You have not engaged with him mch then. You will, I expect change your view.
 
Stop lying.

It is you who constantly tells us Athiests what we think/believe. Stop it. It is offensive and utterly dishonest.

Atheists don't believe in God (whatever it is that God is - IF God is). Nobody needs to put those words into the mouths of atheists - they've said so themselves. That's why they refer to themselves as "atheists" in the first place.


OM
 
It proves nothing to an atheist. As a Christian, I find it compelling that the gospel was written 2000 years ago, when Christ was teaching his way. He prophesied that there would be many false prophets the closer we came to the end of days. I believe it was much more than a good guess.

Don't overlook the fact that the Bible (including, but not limited to words attributed to Yehoshua) was very specific that "the end of days" would occur at some point before the conclusion of the 1st century CE. It didn't happen.


OM
 
Atheists don't believe in God (whatever it is that God is - IF God is). Nobody needs to put those words into the mouths of atheists - they've said so themselves. That's why they refer to themselves as "atheists" in the first place.


OM

Yes.

But that is different to claiming to know god does not exist.

I understand you might not like it to be a different statement but is s. Very different.
 
Yes.

But that is different to claiming to know god does not exist.

I understand you might not like it to be a different statement but is s. Very different.

A) "I believe that God exists".
B) "I don't know whether or not God exists".
C) "I don't believe that God exists".

Both A) and C) involve certainty; belief in something which can neither be proven, nor disproven.


OM
 
A) "I believe that God exists".
B) "I don't know whether or not God exists".
C) "I don't believe that God exists".

Both A) and C) involve certainty; belief in something which can neither be proven, nor disproven.


OM

And the general athiest position is B.

That is: I have no belief that God exists.
 
The science of happiness is covered by positive psychology:

https://ppc.sas.upenn.edu/

In general they claim that, neither extremes of: rich-poor, superhealthy (i.e., athletes) - ill, beautiful - ugly = bring happiness. Money only makes people happy when rising from the extreme (i.e., "do not know whether I will eat tomorrow") poor to more stable access to goods, and then the influence of money on happiness drops.

Looks good to me.
 
No you are lying yet again.

And yet I - among others who have also pointed out the obvious - am not. You can accuse me of lying, but the distinction is quite obvious. Here, allow me to simplify it further:

A) Conviction; certainty.
B) Does not proclaim to know for certain, one way or the other.
C) Conviction; certainty.


Ask yourself a simple question... Are you certain that God does not exist?
Here's another question... Is it possible that God may exist?


OM
 
Don't overlook the fact that the Bible (including, but not limited to words attributed to Yehoshua) was very specific that "the end of days" would occur at some point before the conclusion of the 1st century CE. It didn't happen.

That's what some believed. I don't believe Jesus taught that the world would conclude by the end of the 1st century CE.

In reality Jesus and the Bible provided a number of benchmarks that had to occur first, including the Gospel being preached to the whole world, the third Jewish Temple, the appearance of the antichrist, etc.
 
Last edited:
That's what some believed. I don't believe Jesus taught that the world would conclude by the end of the 1st century CE.

In reality Jesus and the Bible provided a number of benchmarks that had to occur first, including the Gospel being preached to the whole world, the third Jewish Temple, the appearance of the antichrist, etc.

Don't overlook the context of what was meant by "the whole world". That was everything between Tarshish and the Indus Valley, and from Egypt to Colchis.


OM
 
It proves nothing to an atheist. As a Christian, I find it compelling that the gospel was written 2000 years ago, when Christ was teaching his way. He prophesied that there would be many false prophets the closer we came to the end of days. I believe it was much more than a good guess.

Mark 8:38 "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels." 9:1 And He was saying to them, "Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."

It's a bit late. All of those standing there tasted death.
 
Don't overlook the context of what was meant by "the whole world". That was everything between Tarshish and the Indus Valley, and from Egypt to Colchis.

Well, Jesus being God incarnate in scripture, I think he had a broader perspective of what the 'whole world' would look like in the latter days. :)
 
Well, Jesus being God incarnate in scripture, I think he had a broader perspective of what the 'whole world' would look like in the latter days. :)

However, the authors of the New Testament did not.


OM
 
Mark 8:38 "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels." 9:1 And He was saying to them, "Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."

It's a bit late. All of those standing there tasted death.

Yours is yet another example of how skeptics like yourself FAIL to do your due-diligence and really study the scriptures. Here's why your "bit late" conclusion fails:

Mark 9:1 notes, "Until they have seen the kingdom of God come with power;"

First, what is the Kingdom of God? Romans 14:17 answers that: "For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." It is also Jesus being seen in a Kingdom appearance (more on that later).

When did it come with power? In Acts 1:8: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

So, the power would come by virtue of the Holy Spirit. When did that happen?

It (the power) happened in Acts chapter two, verses 1-4: "When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

After that, Act 5:12 notes the miracles and power of the disciples: "And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people."

But when did some of the disciples see Jesus coming in his kingdom?

"It is that Jesus’ Transfiguration occurs next in the synoptists’ accounts (Mt 17.1-8; Mk 9.2-8; Lk 9.28-36a). Jesus took Peter, James, and John “up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white. Suddenly there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him” (Mt 17.1-3). From a literary perspective, it seems pretty obvious that all three synoptists intended for their readers to understand that Jesus referred to his upcoming Transfiguration when he said some disciples would see him coming in his kingdom before they die."

Did Jesus? Disciples See ?the Son of Man Coming in his Kingdom?? | Kermit Zarley
 
However, the authors of the New Testament did not.


OM

"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."

That seems clear.
 
And yet I - among others who have also pointed out the obvious - am not. You can accuse me of lying, but the distinction is quite obvious. Here, allow me to simplify it further:

A) Conviction; certainty.
B) Does not proclaim to know for certain, one way or the other.
C) Conviction; certainty.


Ask yourself a simple question... Are you certain that God does not exist?
Here's another question... Is it possible that God may exist?


OM

You, like I, are right on point here in this discussion of what Theism, Agnosticism, and Atheism are... It's very straight-forward stuff...
 

Thank you for proving my point; for you have invoked the same emphasis. During the "Pentecost", it was written that the Apostles spoke in languages of "every nation under heaven", yet incredibly understood each other. In that part of the world, "every nation under heaven" was every nation under the Roman empire, of which the Greek language was a primary component. There were at least 4 languages in use, and many learned men knew them all.


OM
 
"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."

That seems clear.

Precisely. Here's a comprehensive listing, which leaves it in no uncertain terms.

"I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."
Matthew 16:28

"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.."
Matthew 24:30-36

"Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words.
Paul's 1st letter to the Thessalonians, explaining to them what to expect, Chapter 4, verses 13 thru 18


"for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, "Peace and safety," destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled. For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. But since we belong to the day, let us be self-controlled, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him. Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
Paul's 1st letter to the Thessalonians (Chapter 5, verses 2-11) urging them to be on guard at all times, because he expected the second coming to happen within their lifetimes.


Yehoshua's "Second Coming" was originally prophecied to occur during the 1st millennium CE. However, nagging problems began to surface once those whose "lifetimes" had passed on. The Church began exerting itself as the sole authority, and began re-interpreting the Scriptures beyond context. Significant Christians within the Church have since prophecied the "Second Coming" on the following dates throughout history:

About 90 CE, 2nd Century, 365, 375 to 400, 500, 968, 992 , January 1st 1000, May 1000, 1005-1006, 1033, 1147, 1179, 1205, 1284, 1346 and later, 1496, 1524, 1533, 1669, 1689, 1736, 1792, 1794, 1830, 1832, March 21st 1843, October 22nd 1844, June 27th 1850, 1856, 1890, 1891, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975 and 1994.

Seems they're still waiting. I suggest Christians pick up their Bibles, and begin reading them as they were intended to be read (instead of read into) - as that of letters between authors and their specific recipients.

Context is a wonderful thing.


OM
 
Back
Top Bottom