The Bible is a disgrace to God!!!

[Nick]

Traveler, how did you ever get that 1 neg karma point?

[nogodsforme]

Exactly, Traveler. If god saved JB from her childhood traumas, it must have been god who chose to put her there and who kept her there for so long, right? If JB had not survived, what would that say about god? And then when god had decided that JB had suffered the exact right amount, he rescued her. That's what I call love. Not.

God is good and loving and powerful--yet allows lots of people to suffer so much that they are on the verge of suicide or even kill themselves. And then gets the credit for saving the ones who manage to survive their suffering. How can god have it both ways?

It seems to me that you really have to be kind of crazy to believe that. I would rather see the world as it really is, with a few people doing bad things to each other and lots of people being strong enough to overcome and survive. Well, guess what? The evidence supports my view.

That idea that people can't accomplish great things without a supernatural power is what bugs me so much about other black people being so god-obsessed:

"God never gives us more than we can handle." Until he does. And then we become addicts, go mad or kill ourselves.

"I am so blessed!" Even though my dad is an alcoholic living on the streets, my mother has diabetes and no health care, I am on welfare with three kids, my baby daddy beats me, my sister is on drugs and my brother is in prison.  If that is blessed, god, please curse me instead.

"We could never have survived slavery or defeated Jim Crow or won our civil rights if it had not been for god." Meanwhile babies died from neglect, children were sold from their parents, women were raped by masters, people were maimed, lynched and beaten to death.

If god had the power to solve our problems all along, why did he wait hundreds of years to help?  And who put us in slavery, etc. in the first place? Someone more powerful than god? Or did god change his mind on the slavery bit?

[Nam]

You are being extremely insensitive and disrespectful, Nam. Even if you have suspicions they should remain your own. This is one case where believing and being wrong is better than disbelieving and being wrong.

I am extremely "insensitive" and "disrespectful". Got anything new to add?

Why should my suspicions remain my own? Oh, because they are "insensitive" and "disrespectful", right? Fuck that. People here are "insensitive" and "disrespectful" all the time. Calling them "delusional", or variances of that. Insulting them for what they believe in, etc.,

I'm willing to admit the way I am. When are you?

-Nam

[jaimehlers]

I am extremely "insensitive" and "disrespectful". Got anything new to add?

Why should my suspicions remain my own? Oh, because they are "insensitive" and "disrespectful", right? Fuck that. People here are "insensitive" and "disrespectful" all the time. Calling them "delusional", or variances of that. Insulting them for what they believe in, etc.,

I'm willing to admit the way I am. When are you?

This wasn't directed at me, but it needs a response.

I don't particularly care that you're insensitive and disrespectful.  I can even understand why you're that way, and why you're suspicious of claims like "I've been diagnosed with cancer".  But you only seem suspicious of the claims made by people you don't like.  If an atheist made a similar claim, would you treat them the same way you treat junebug?  Or would you take them at their word?

You don't have any call to be proud of your insensitivity and disrespectfulness if you're only like that towards people you don't like, or who you disagree with.  Because that comes across as at least partially hypocritical.  It means you're using your disagreement or dislike as an excuse to indulge being nasty.

I don't actually know if this is the case.  If it isn't, then you have nothing to worry about.  But if it is, then you probably should spend some time thinking about it.

[nogodsforme]

Yo, Nam. We have no evidence that JB is making up stuff about having cancer. This is different from her delusions about afterlives or magical love gods. She is not saying that she caught horndog clap from with Satan. She didn't say she has leprechaun disease or unicorn fever. People do get cancer. Lots of people. Cancer is real. There is no downside to accepting her at her word on that.

Suppose she really does not have cancer? So what? Even if you don't like her or respect her, it is no skin off your nose to stop with the remarks mocking her about [not] having cancer. Unless you are that attached to your mythical a$$hole persona.[1]


I had to edit this post to get past the younger and more sensitive filter....

1.

If you don't like what I just said, bring it. Name-calling on the internet does not phase me at all. It took the evil Catholic beeyatch forever to get under my skin. I'm a big, mean, black woman with enough years to be your older sister. If I said I had cancer and you responded the way you did to JB, we would be on flame alert/ignore right now.

[Nam]

Yes there is: I enjoy it. This is who I am. Always have been. I don't know why y'all think I will change. I won't. And why? Because I don't care.

I don't like her. I've been up front about that. I still have her on ignore and it doesn't seem to really have an effect because y'all quote her, and say some of the same things i said months ago, now. It validates my position about her more and more. True, I'm more blunt than y'all are but, I don't care about that either.

If you don't like what I just said, bring it.

I don't care.

Name-calling on the internet does not phase me at all.

Nor me.

It took the evil Catholic beeyatch forever to get under my skin. I'm a big, mean, black woman with enough years to be your older sister.

Unless you're in your forties: try again.

If I said I had cancer and you responded the way you did to JB, we would be on flame alert/ignore right now.   

I have no reason not to believe you except that this is the internet, where evidence is lacking unless provided from more than one source.

That sounds familiar.

Either way, I'd believe you over her. Why? Because you have one voice. She seems to have more than one, which is quite evident.

-Nam

[nogodsforme]

Whatever. Be the bad boy on the site. I don't care either. 

But little Nam, I haven't visited the 40's in a long time. I'll give you a hint-- the first president I remember was Kennedy. I may be old enough to be your mama. I have shoes older than you. Come to mama, baby.

[Nam]

This wasn't directed at me, but it needs a response.

I don't particularly care that you're insensitive and disrespectful.  I can even understand why you're that way, and why you're suspicious of claims like "I've been diagnosed with cancer".  But you only seem suspicious of the claims made by people you don't like.  If an atheist made a similar claim, would you treat them the same way you treat junebug?

Okay, explain to me how you go from "people you don't like" to me liking every single "atheist"? I don't get that. Also, if you think I don't like certain atheists here, or elsewhere: you're sadly mistaken. I could name a list of atheists here I don't like but instead, I am going to list one: screwtape. I don't like him. We may agree on some issues, and I may applaud a comment or so once in awhile (I may have applauded Junebug once, who knows?) but I don't like him.

And he probably doesn't like me either. Most people don't. Doesn't mean I can't be friendly with them. Hell, I don't like GamerGirl (former member here sometimes at IGI, I believe) but I've had pleasant conversations just like with screwtape, and others here I really don't care for. I believe I was friendly with Junebug once but she's not looking for that from us, so why give it?

You don't have any call to be proud of your insensitivity and disrespectfulness if you're only like that towards people you don't like, or who you disagree with.  Because that comes across as at least partially hypocritical.  It means you're using your disagreement or dislike as an excuse to indulge being nasty.

Wrong. Why? Because I am also like this with friends and people I care about. Mostly I am friendly with them but if they do or say something that I don't care for, I will berate them. I will say some of the nastiest things ever to them; and if you think I will apologise afterward for it, you're mistaken.

I am who I am. Just like you are who you are, or anyone else here is who they are. But to put your mind at ease: I used to be a lot worse.

I don't actually know if this is the case.  If it isn't, then you have nothing to worry about.  But if it is, then you probably should spend some time thinking about it.

Um, no.

-Nam

[Nam]

Whatever. Be the bad boy on the site. I don't care either. 

But little Nam, I haven't visited the 40's in a long time. I'll give you a hint-- the first president I remember was Kennedy. I may be old enough to be your mama. I have shoes older than you. Come to mama, baby.

You remind me of someone at another website, though she's deeply Christian and apparently friends with Spike Lee. We had an indirect conversation once (me and Spike Lee).

-Nam

[junebug72]

God did not cause my suffering humans did. IMO, God gave my spirit the strength I needed to survive w/o becoming like Nam, hard and cold. 

It really doesn't matter to me anymore if Nam believes I am fighting cancer.  It makes no difference one way or another.  He just says that stuff to get a rise out of me which I do not intend on giving.   I could easily prove I have cancer but that would be stooping to a level I refuse to go. 

Nam made the remark that if someone says something he don't like he will go off and say nasty things yet criticizes me for my self defense which is not nasty at all. I did call him a pu$$y because I thought he was being 1.  Other than that I have been kind. 

This is why the bible is a disgrace.  It has made it much harder for people to believe in God.

[ThatZenoGuy]

So this "god" of yours let you get sick and suffer due to humans?

To quote The Hulk.

Puny god.

[jaimehlers]

Okay, explain to me how you go from "people you don't like" to me liking every single "atheist"? I don't get that. Also, if you think I don't like certain atheists here, or elsewhere: you're sadly mistaken. I could name a list of atheists here I don't like but instead, I am going to list one: screwtape. I don't like him. We may agree on some issues, and I may applaud a comment or so once in awhile (I may have applauded Junebug once, who knows?) but I don't like him.

And he probably doesn't like me either. Most people don't. Doesn't mean I can't be friendly with them. Hell, I don't like GamerGirl (former member here sometimes at IGI, I believe) but I've had pleasant conversations just like with screwtape, and others here I really don't care for. I believe I was friendly with Junebug once but she's not looking for that from us, so why give it?

So, in other words, you're quite capable of being friendly with people you don't like or don't care for.  So, why?  If you don't like them, why bother being friendly with them?

Wrong. Why? Because I am also like this with friends and people I care about. Mostly I am friendly with them but if they do or say something that I don't care for, I will berate them. I will say some of the nastiest things ever to them; and if you think I will apologise afterward for it, you're mistaken.

So, you're nasty to friends, and after you're done being nasty, you expect them to not care about the way you acted, without even a pro forma apology?  In other words, you dish out crap to them whenever you feel like it (and apparently, expect them to just take it, because if they respond, you'll dish out more), but you aren't willing to take anything from them without dishing out more of the same in return.  Sure seems like hypocrisy to me, because you expect other people to just take whatever you dish out, and if they retaliate in kind, you dish out more.  It's always other people who have to back off.

I am who I am. Just like you are who you are, or anyone else here is who they are. But to put your mind at ease: I used to be a lot worse.

That doesn't put my mind at ease - it makes me wonder just how anyone ever put up with you in the first place.

Um, no.

Well, I have better things to do than waste my time talking with someone who apparently thinks other people are the only ones who have to change.  Have a nice life.

[median]

God did not cause my suffering humans did. IMO, God gave my spirit the strength I needed to survive w/o becoming like Nam, hard and cold. 

It really doesn't matter to me anymore if Nam believes I am fighting cancer.  It makes no difference one way or another.  He just says that stuff to get a rise out of me which I do not intend on giving.   I could easily prove I have cancer but that would be stooping to a level I refuse to go. 

Nam made the remark that if someone says something he don't like he will go off and say nasty things yet criticizes me for my self defense which is not nasty at all. I did call him a pu$$y because I thought he was being 1.  Other than that I have been kind. 

This is why the bible is a disgrace.  It has made it much harder for people to believe in God.

Personally, I have no problem believing (for the sake of discussion) that you are battling cancer. My aunt, my step mom, and myself have battled cancer and survived. Where was this 'God'? The same place as unicorns, fairies, and martians (nowhere). People who trust in a belief in God (which is all in their head) do not fair any better than people who do not. Just do a little research (disinterested shall we?) and you will see. This is why my friend Sean suffered with Leukemia for over a year (praying to "God") and still died. There is simply no good reason to believe this stuff. It is in fact WISHFUL THINKING and attempting to spin or rationalize it any other way is just personal dishonesty.


p.s. - The statement that the bible has made is "much harder" for people to believe in God is absurd on the whole. The bible is the cause of people's belief in God! Have you looked around lately? Just walk into a church and start talking to people, and ultimately you will find them reverting back to "the Word of God" as their foundation for belief.

[nogodsforme]

God did not cause my suffering humans did. IMO, God gave my spirit the strength I needed to survive w/o becoming like Nam, hard and cold. 

It really doesn't matter to me anymore if Nam believes I am fighting cancer.  It makes no difference one way or another.  He just says that stuff to get a rise out of me which I do not intend on giving.   I could easily prove I have cancer but that would be stooping to a level I refuse to go. 

Nam made the remark that if someone says something he don't like he will go off and say nasty things yet criticizes me for my self defense which is not nasty at all. I did call him a pu$$y because I thought he was being 1.  Other than that I have been kind. 

This is why the bible is a disgrace.  It has made it much harder for people to believe in God.

Did you read my post, JB? I agree that it was human beings who hurt you.  If there had been a human being in your life who loved you, and knew about your suffering, do you think they would have let your pain go on until you were about to give up in despair? I don't think so. If they had loved you, and had the power to help you, they would have saved you. Immediately. Don't you agree?

But you maintain that god saved you, eventually, because he loved you. So, why did this god who loved you let people hurt you for so long? Did this god not know about your suffering, not have the power to help, or did this god just not care? And why is it that this god seems to prevent other people from going through what you suffered? Does this god like some people more than others?

Given that people are what they are, what is to stop people from doing more bad things to each other in the afterlife as well? How will god prevent them from being mean again? And, if he has the ability to prevent mean behavior in the afterlife, why not just prevent it now? Why allow people to make others suffer? If he could fix things in the afterlife so people don't suffer, there is no need for suffering at all, now is there?

Bring on the convoluted contradictory mysterious ways.

[Nam]

Jaime,

Why is a hunter friendly with its prey? Answer that, and you have your answer.

Second: wrong. You don't like my response, walk away. Oh, but I could walk away too but it's more interesting not to.

Third: I ask that all the time. Most of their answers are: "I see the good in you", "just be more like you write[1]", you know repetitive shit like that. My aunt told me today she found a T-shirt in one of her catalogs that said, "I am who I am. Don't like it--too bad", I was the first person she thought of when seeing that. She was going to get it for me but she knows I don't wear t-shirts.

I'm not willing to change because I have already changed--why change more? Then I won't even know who I am. Fuck that.

-Nam

1.	in concern to my poems

[Zankuu]

This isn't The Most Dangerous Game, Nam. You're using a keyboard to exchange words with people, not a scoped rifle to trophy hunt. You passive-aggressively told a cancer patient she should have cried herself to death. It probably takes the cake for the most insensitive thing I've read on this forum. Posters shouldn't have to just accept it and walk away; we should all be held accountable for what we type. Again, you passive-aggressively told a cancer patient she should have cried herself to death. That doesn't register as fucked up to you?

[Nam]

I'm not using a keyboard.

What's "The Most Dangerous Game"?

Yes, it registers as "fucked up", and I think I slightly denoted that but I've also have noted in the past I'm indifferent to peoples feelings. That's not something I can change. That's like telling a schizophrenic, or a sociopath to stop being those things--they are those things: they can't help it. Sure they could take medication to suppress those things but they still are those things.

I am indifferent to people, live with it: I do.


-Nam

[Azdgari]

Have you considered seeking medication for your mental illness then, Nam?

[Nam]

Have you considered seeking medication for your mental illness then, Nam?

No. I used to be a drug addict in the mid 1990's. I don't want to go down that route again. I rarely, very rarely, even take aspirin.

-Nam

[Zankuu]

What's "The Most Dangerous Game"?

A great book with a pretty decent film adaptation from the 30's. You'd probably dig it.

Yes, it registers as "fucked up", and I think I slightly denoted that but I've also have noted in the past I'm indifferent to peoples feelings. That's not something I can change. That's like telling a schizophrenic, or a sociopath to stop being those things--they are those things: they can't help it. Sure they could take medication to suppress those things but they still are those things.

That's no excuse to be cruel to people, Nam. If you think of something hurtful to type you don't have to type it. Even you have a filter. Use it in sensitive cases like junebug. Set religion aside and what you're left with it a struggling human being. I find myself agreeing with you quite often because we have similar beliefs concerning religion. And you can be humorous at times. But man, do try and use an intuitive filter on the things you type. Telling a cancer patient you'd rather her be dead is too fucking much.

And the schizophrenics I've met don't define themselves by their illness, they get help for it.

[junebug72]

Nogods,

It's all about freewill.  I would rather have choice as to be controlled.  God does not control us but you are right we would be better if God did.  That would not be our success it would be God's and God's alone.  Nothing for the human race to be proud of.  It's really not that complicated.  W/o freewill we are puppets.

I don't think there is suffering in the afterlife because there is no need for it.  There will be no hunger, no pain, no dying, no money needed, we will just all be completely satisfied infinitely.  Our only worry, if you can call it that, will be what star or planet to visit today!!!  It is a reward for suffering through this life, IMO.

There were humans all around and they just let it happen.  I'm not saying God physically saved me I'm saying God spiritually saved me because I asked.  I gave my suffering to God and it was dealt with.  My spirit was strengthened!!!

In that "Chicken Soup" book I read many survivors were asked would you do it again and unanimously all agreed they would not care to go through cancer again but they wouldn't change who they became because of it.  Bad experiences can make us stronger, better human beings or it can make a- holes it is a choice! 

Now the way I see it I don't hurt anybody with my beliefs and I don't really understand the animosity towards me here.  Even Nam's cruel ways aren't as bad as some religious beliefs.  At least he just wants me dead not burning in hell.  I hate religion I respect the atheist for sticking it to religion.  I just wish you could see as clear as I do that religion is not God!!

Median,

I'm sure people believed in God before the bible.  The bible is what ancient folk thought about God. A lot has happened since then that proves the bible is not the word of God.  People cling to it.  I don't know why.  Pressure from society.  Even here on an atheist website I can't be accepted as what I am I have to be religious; I have to be a Christian. 

Peace and Joy,
JB

[junebug72]

Angus and Alexis,

Wow you had to go back to February to find something to smite.  Well I'm certainly not going to start a whiny thread about it.  It wasn't my best argument.  I have learned a lot since then.  There's a couple of old posts I would smite myself for but I'm too busy posting new ones.  Maybe you could do me the favor and search them out for me.  Thanks.

JB

[Strawman]

I've never told anyone this before but when I was around 16/17 and going through a period of distress I had a couple of auditory hallucinations and basically invented my own demi-god named Aruul. I can't remember what Aruul said to me but it was in a voice that was not my own and seemed to come from all around me. Oh, I do vaguely remember one that was something like, "The soul is cleansed in the rivers of the mind.", there were only four or five of them but they were all kind of poetic like that and all "came to me" within a few nights of each other while I was lying in bed. I remember struggling to stop myself just thinking up something and pretending it was Aruul. I would even say little pseudo prayers to Aruul, simple things like "please help me rest" if I couldn't sleep or "give me energy" if I was feeling washed out. And you know what, most of the time it worked.
I was already a staunch atheist at that time but the experience, the hallucinations in particular, had such a profound effect on me that I still fell back to asking Aruul for help up to about a year later.

I was not raised in any religion, yet when I felt helpless and alone I created the basis of my own original religion spontaneously. I don't believe there is anything supernatural to it, but I do think that something significant happened, I think I somehow tapped into my subconscious and a way to self-medicate. Aruul was little more than an imaginary friend, but I think he helped me to feel at ease and that I could regain control of my life.

I have no idea where the name came from, I have looked it up online and found nothing close to it.

[Add Homonym]

while I was lying in bed.

Say no more. Know what I mean? Say no more. Say no more. A nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat, eh?

I think a lot of people experience things in bed, due to a semi dream state.

[ThatZenoGuy]

Wow you had to go back to February to find something to smite.

I enjoy lurking, you would be surprised how long i have read off this site.

Well I'm certainly not going to start a whiny thread about it.

Indeed, that would be childish.

It wasn't my best argument.  I have learned a lot since then.

What would your stance on staving children and god be now?

There's a couple of old posts I would smite myself for but I'm too busy posting new ones.  Maybe you could do me the favor and search them out for me.  Thanks.

If I find any, will do ;P.

[Nam]

What's "The Most Dangerous Game"?

A great book with a pretty decent film adaptation from the 30's. You'd probably dig it.

Yes, it registers as "fucked up", and I think I slightly denoted that but I've also have noted in the past I'm indifferent to peoples feelings. That's not something I can change. That's like telling a schizophrenic, or a sociopath to stop being those things--they are those things: they can't help it. Sure they could take medication to suppress those things but they still are those things.

That's no excuse to be cruel to people, Nam. If you think of something hurtful to type you don't have to type it. Even you have a filter. Use it in sensitive cases like junebug. Set religion aside and what you're left with it a struggling human being. I find myself agreeing with you quite often because we have similar beliefs concerning religion. And you can be humorous at times. But man, do try and use an intuitive filter on the things you type. Telling a cancer patient you'd rather her be dead is too fucking much.

And the schizophrenics I've met don't define themselves by their illness, they get help for it.

I only have a filter for people who do not consistently beg to be belittled, ridiculed, insulted, and demeaned.

-Nam

[median]

Median,

I'm sure people believed in God before the bible.  The bible is what ancient folk thought about God. A lot has happened since then that proves the bible is not the word of God.  People cling to it.  I don't know why.  Pressure from society.  Even here on an atheist website I can't be accepted as what I am I have to be religious; I have to be a Christian. 

Peace and Joy,
JB

This has nothing to do with the subjects we have been discussing! I have asked you, multiple times, for this "disinterested study" you have done - and still you provide nothing except irrational argument (aka - "I feel it, therefore God" or "I can't think of another way we got here, so therefore God..."). I'm sorry, but your reasoning is just fallacious (and that is not an opinion, it's just as much of a fact as mathematics is). Why is that? Why do you keep using irrational arguments to support your beliefs?


Do you even care whether or not your beliefs are true?

[junebug72]

Median,

I'm sure people believed in God before the bible.  The bible is what ancient folk thought about God. A lot has happened since then that proves the bible is not the word of God.  People cling to it.  I don't know why.  Pressure from society.  Even here on an atheist website I can't be accepted as what I am I have to be religious; I have to be a Christian. 

Peace and Joy,
JB

This has nothing to do with the subjects we have been discussing! I have asked you, multiple times, for this "disinterested study" you have done - and still you provide nothing except irrational argument (aka - "I feel it, therefore God" or "I can't think of another way we got here, so therefore God..."). I'm sorry, but your reasoning is just fallacious (and that is not an opinion, it's just as much of a fact as mathematics is). Why is that? Why do you keep using irrational arguments to support your beliefs?


Do you even care whether or not your beliefs are true?

I do not concede that my arguments are irrational.  They are certainly irrational to you I get that.  I gave you the short list of "disinterested" study and that's all I'm willing to give.  You're talking about picking through the last 25 years of my life and that's too much!!! 

Let's talk about feeling.  So if I feel pain is that not proof something is there, broken or infected?  If I feel happiness is it real or a delusion?  I feel my spirit in the same way I feel a pin prick.  It is not an emotion it is a physical feeling.  There is no way for you to dispute what I feel.  You can not believe it and that's ok.  My brain says it's rational to believe I am connected to a higher spirit.  It is my right as a human to explore my own thoughts and perceive things the way the brain I've been given analyzes and processes them. 

Yes I care if it's true but not as much as you.

I think I should also point out you have two tiny phrases out of tens of thousands of words and say I'm irrational.  You have not put my complete belief out there that you even understand what I'm saying.  Until I know you understand my beliefs I do not except your opinion that it's irrational seriously.  The second phrase in your opinion has been retracted.  I already admitted  it was weak so quit throwing it out there.   I know I could be wrong I hope I'm right I don't see anything irrational about that.  I would define irrational as thinking I knew some truth that is impossible to know.  You are the irrational one. 

[median]

I do not concede that my arguments are irrational.  They are certainly irrational to you I get that.  I gave you the short list of "disinterested" study and that's all I'm willing to give.  You're talking about picking through the last 25 years of my life and that's too much!!! 

Let's talk about feeling.  So if I feel pain is that not proof something is there, broken or infected?  If I feel happiness is it real or a delusion?  I feel my spirit in the same way I feel a pin prick.  It is not an emotion it is a physical feeling.  There is no way for you to dispute what I feel.  You can not believe it and that's ok.  My brain says it's rational to believe I am connected to a higher spirit.  It is my right as a human to explore my own thoughts and perceive things the way the brain I've been given analyzes and processes them. 

Your "right" to explore your thoughts has nothing to do with this discussion (this is a Red Herring fallacy). It is your interpretation that is in question. I have noted at least two logical fallacies you have attempted to use to bolster your belief in a God, spirit, afterlife, etc (here and elsewhere - including your debate with Anfauglir). Those are the Argument from Ignorance/Incredulity fallacy and Begging the Question fallacy (among others). Looking at nature/life and saying, "It's evidence of God!" is not evidence of God (anymore than it is evidence of invisible magic pink flying unicorns, blarks, aliens, Krishna, Zeus, or Pegasus). By your attempted definition of evidence every-thing is evidence of what you are trying to call "God" (including horrific atrocities) which makes your definition unusable for separating fact from fiction. You need specific evidence that cannot be multi-interpreted - not vague generalities. This is why we have the scientific method - to weed out bad interpretations and faulty thinking.

Now, earlier you said this:

I have said here a few times I will change my mind if proven irrational.

It's time to change your mind then and modify your belief (if you are honest enough to do so). Diagnosing a feeling, and then calling it "spirit" doesn't make it so (anymore than Christians claiming they feel Jesus/the Holy Spirit is a correct interpretation). Furthermore, (as you already admitted above) feelings like pain or happiness are physical properties - and those properties derive from a physical brain, and there is no good reason to think they are anything more than that. If you think they are (and you think your interpretation is the correct one) then the burden of proof is on you to 1) define the term "spirit", "God", etc in a meaningful way (i.e. - a way that has explanatory power) and 2) demonstrate it's existence (without using logically fallacious arguments). See Occam's Razor as well.

Btw, have you ever had a "feeling" about something (anything) only to later realize your feeling was mistaken, misinterpreted, or based upon a false assumption? Feelings (aka emotions) are notoriously unreliable for determining reality from fiction - which is why they need to be put it check by demonstrable evidence and sound reasoning.

Yes I care if it's true but not as much as you.

The amount that I care whether or not my beliefs are true is enough to avoid logical fallacies (fallacious arguments) and confirmation bias. So, you don't care about those things then? If you do, then stop using logically fallacious arguments as you have done in the past. Instead, modify your belief to fit the evidence - not the other way around as you have been doing. More importantly, admit when you don't know things (aka - admit your ignorance) when you don't have sound reasons.

I think I should also point out you have two tiny phrases out of tens of thousands of words and say I'm irrational.  You have not put my complete belief out there that you even understand what I'm saying.  Until I know you understand my beliefs I do not except your opinion that it's irrational seriously. 

This is yet another logical fallacy (called The Fallacy of Division). Strike 4. I do not need to know your "whole belief" (i.e. - all your beliefs or reasons) in order to point out the logical fallacies you keep trying to use in your arguments (the constituent parts of your beliefs) - as two fallacious arguments do not make a sound argument. Furthermore, I have NOT just taken "two tiny phrases". I have read many of your statements regarding your beliefs on WWGHAF and I have pointed out the specific logical fallacies that you continually try to use. For truths sake, take a Logic 100 course at your local community college or watch some YouTube videos on logic, b/c thus far your arguments for God, a "spirit", and the afterlife are irrational. 

The second phrase in your opinion has been retracted.  I already admitted  it was weak so quit throwing it out there.   I know I could be wrong I hope I'm right I don't see anything irrational about that.  I would define irrational as thinking I knew some truth that is impossible to know.  You are the irrational one.

You clearly do not know what "rational" means - as your definition doesn't come anywhere near it's actual terms. So this statement just demonstrates your ignorance on the subject. Furthermore, your saying I'm irrational doesn't make it so. You need to demonstrate it. Rationality has to do with the validity and soundness of arguments (proper reasoning in accordance with logic) and any child can learn what rationality is by taking any basic junior college course on logic or watching a few basic logic videos on YouTube (which clearly you have done neither). So this notion that you want to discuss reason, when clearly you don't even know what proper reasoning looks like, is quite ignorant of you to say. 


ra·tio·nal  adjective  ra-sh?-n^?l[1]

: based on facts or reason and not on emotions or feelings

1.	http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rational?show=0&t=1381774560