We're born with a belief in the supernatural, says scientist

Asiaprod

Here is an interesting piece that appears in today's Daily Telegraph.

We're born with a belief in the supernatural, says scientist?Reports by Roger Highfield and Nic Fleming
Religions will continue to thrive despite the rise of science and rationality because we are all born with a tendency to believe in the supernatural, according to research published yesterday.
"Magical thinking" is hard-wired into our brains, according to Prof Bruce Hood, of the University of Bristol, speaking at the British Association's annual festival in Norwich. Prof Hood challenged the assumption of Prof Richard Dawkins and other "ultra rationalists" that belief in the supernatural was spread by religions in gullible minds.
"Rather, religions may simply capitalise on a natural bias to assume the existence of supernatural forces," he said.
advertisement
"It is pointless to get people to abandon their belief systems because they operate at such a fundamental level that no amount of rational evidence or counter evidence is going to be taken on board to get people to abandon these ideas."
Prof Hood said religion would persist because people were not going to evolve a more rational mind.
He has carried out studies to show how the brains of even young babies organise sensory information, supply what is missing and use the information to generate theories about the world.
In adulthood, the visual centres of the brain still fill in details that are not there, as shown in common visual illusions such as the blind spot, for example. Equally, the "intuitive reasoning" of childhood persists too. "Intuitive reasoning observed in children explains many aspects of adult magical beliefs," he said.
The mind is programmed to see coincidences as significant and to think that inanimate objects have minds.
"We see faces wherever we look, whether in the clouds or on Mars," he said. "We think that cars are vindictive and computers nasty when they don't behave properly." Prof Hood has studied attachment objects — blankets, soft toys and so on — which children are unwilling to part with even if they are promised a copy.
"They are frightened the integrity of the object will be violated," he said.
When he offered adults the chance to duplicate a wedding ring, down to the last atom, most of them would, like the children, prefer the original.
"We think there is something unique which defines artefacts which we associate with somebody we love."
Prof Hood has investigated the flip side of this attachment to inanimate objects by asking audiences whether they would wear a cardigan that supposedly belonged to Fred West, the mass murderer.
"The audience will in general wear a cardigan for £20 but not when I tell them it belonged to a murderer." Many feel that the cardigan was contaminated with evil. "That is irrational," he said.
Another example of an intuitive theory underpinning adult supernatural beliefs can be found in the common assumption that we can detect someone staring at us even though we cannot see them. In 1898 the psychologist Edward Titchener said 90 per cent of his students believed they could detect the unseen gaze of others.
"The belief is still so common that most people are unaware it is controversial."
We may all recognise the fantastical nature of ghosts, fairies, and wizards in the world of Harry Potter, but other, equally magical beliefs are so common that most adults assume that supernatural phenomena — those that cannot be explained by natural laws — are real.

5uspect

Asiaprod wrote:

Prof Hood challenged the assumption of Prof Richard Dawkins and other "ultra rationalists" that belief in the supernatural was spread by religions in gullible minds.
"Rather, religions may simply capitalise on a natural bias to assume the existence of supernatural forces," he said.

Harldy gullible, in retrospect yes, but there would be good evolutionary reasons to hold supernatural ideas. The idea of the tendency to believe being hardwired into us is nothing new, Dawkins himself uses the idea of a brain being calibrated in Unweaving the Rainbow. Unfortunately the full chapter isn't here, but from my own copy:

"As A Darwinian I want to to suggest that our williingness to be impressed at apparently uncanny coincidence (which is a case of our willingness to see pattern where there is none) is related to the typical population size of our anscestors. [goes on to discuss small groups where relatively small concidences are "gasped at" more readily]
Nowadays our catchment area is large especially because of [...] mass medai circulation. [Which allows the most outlandish and improbable coincidences to spread easily to the entire population] But I am now conjecturing, our brains are calibrated by ancestoral natural selection to expect a much nore modest level of concidence, calibrated under small village conditions.
[...]
I guess that there may be another, particular effect pushing in the same direction. I suspectthat our livesare richer in experiences per hour than were ancestoral lives. [...] We read books and magazines, we watch television, we travel [easily] to new places. [...] The number of faces we see, the number of different situations we are exposed to , the number of separate things that happen to us, is much greater than for our village ancestors."

He goes onto suggest that we ay be able to recalibrate our brains to be less "gullible". This new research doesn't contradict Dawkins at really, Dawkins argues that we are all susceptable to see patterns where there are none - that is why we survived.

Zombrex

That article makes a lot of sense. How do people think religion appeared in society in the first place?

Religion is a reflection of human nature. It is silly to ignore that fact.

btw, very interesting about the murderers coat and people not wanting to wear it. I have to say the thought of that even makes my rational mind uneasy.

Schuhart

we are all born with a tendency to believe in the supernatural

That's right, blame the parents.

The only problem I have with this sort of determinist approach, is that it seems to leave no space for logic to overcome the obstacles placed by inhereted beliefs. If the simple ability of a case to convince could be overcome by hardwiring in the brain, we'd hardly be posting here as we'd all be Catholics or whatever we were born into.

I don't doubt that the inherited social structure and the values that go with it is a big obstacle to be overcome - how long would it take before you'd stop celebrating Christmas? But simply working the fecking thing out does, eventually, have an impact.

Funsterdelux

Its probably a bit like/is instinct, like in nature, a protection mechanism,

Then we've got children, whos minds are like sponges, they take in a lot of crap when growing up, into their heads that is.

5uspect

I get the idea of our brains being optimised for a particular type of thought. But I rather Dawkins idea of "calibration" to the idea of "hardwired". Hardwired seems too simplistic - if we remove this section of the brain do we get an atheist?

It has been shown that ideas about morality can be affected by brain damage but applying to this to religion seems asomething of a stretch.

bonkey

It seems to me that the guy is arguing that we have the capability for irrational thought....and then says that this equates to a hardwired belief in the supernatural.

I'm not sure I follow the jump.

Zombrex

Schuhart wrote:

The only problem I have with this sort of determinist approach, is that it seems to leave no space for logic to overcome the obstacles placed by inhereted beliefs.

Why do you say that?

Is the atheist forum and the science forum and the skeptics forum (and atheism, science and skepticism in the outside world) not evidence that there is space for logic and higher reasoning to over come inate inbuild evolutionary insticts?

We are not ruled by our instincts, we haven't been for hundreds of thousands of years. They infulence our behaviour, as do a lot of things, and some people have more power over them than others. But I know of no human being that is controlled completely by their instincts.

Schuhart

But I know of no human being that is controlled completely by their instincts.

This is pretty much what I'm saying.

The point I'm making is if a someone, as in the article reference above, says 'I've got the reason people cling on to religion - its because their brains are physically set up that way' it actually just poses a question. Why do people leave religion behind, if our brains are wired for religion? This suggests to me one of these possibilities:

1. Most people are wired for religion, but some are not. However, this then raises a further question. What is then the thing that causes variations in religous wiring? Because that thing is then the determinant of religion - not the wiring.

2. People are wired for religion, but the wiring is weak so it can be overcome by other factors - reason, education whatever. This, again, suggests that the wiring is not important and what determines religious belief is social rather than physical.

3. Wiring is simply irrelevant. Religion is a product of society and, if anything, represents attempts by people to make the best sense they could of the world around them. However, socially acquired traits are hard to shift so a child raised in the expectation that there is a deity keeping a personal eye on them and a promise of eternal life will find that belief hard to shift, particularly if there is no immediate reason to question it.

At present, I'm tending towards point 3. on this one.

5uspect

I'd go with no. 2 there, but I'd word it differently.

People accept what they're told by trustworthy elders or parents as they are generally offering good advice for survival - truth is unimportant at this basic level. Something like a raindance is obviously incorrect advice but if rain occurs anyway then the advice is "good", a false positive.

Consider any social animal, there is a threshold of fear of others that must be overcome for their groups to exist. If this behaviour is totally social, i.e. learned then it would have to be learned every generation again and again. However if there is a tendency for memes or genes or some evolutionary process to make this behaviour "hard wired" to some minor extent this will give an advantage to a group.

So I think there is a tendency for belief to be hardwired in people although hardwired to too strong a description. I too wouldn't like the idea of wearing Fred Wests clothes, something in me says NO WAY! This however doesn't mean that there is a tendency to believe religion over any other idea. Its more to do with conforming with the group.

We as humans are able to examine our impulses and instincts, we can, as Dawkins puts it, re-calibrate our brains.

lostexpectation

so there still saying its all just a mind-trick, a function of our imagination useful at times until we figure what is actually happening

CatStevens

Hi Asiaprod
Thank you for posting this
Subhanallah yesterday I read some thing like that: human beings have the recognition of the one true God imprinted on their souls as a part of their very nature with which they are created. In the seventh chapter of the Qur'an (Al-A'raaf, verses 172-173),God explained that when He created Adam He caused all of Adam's descentants to come into existence and He took a pledge from them saying: "'Am I not your Lord?' To which they all replied, 'Yes, we testify to it.'" Thus, every child is born with a natural belief in God and an in-born inclination to worship Him alone. This in-born belief and inclination is called in Arabic the "Fitrah". The Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon him said, "Each child is born in a state of Fitrah. Then his parents make him a Jew, Christian or a Zoroastrian."

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

('God spot ' is found in brain)
By: Steve Connor
Science Correspondent
LA Times, Wednesday 29 October 1997

SCIENTISTS believed they have discovered a '' God module '' in the brain which could be responsible for man's evolutionary instinct to believe in religion. A study of epileptics who are known to have profoundly spiritual experience has located a circuit of nerves in the front of the brain which appears to become electrically active when they think about God. The scientists said that although the research and its conclusion are preliminary, initial results suggest that the phenomenon of religious belief is '' hard-wired '' into the brain. Epileptic patients who suffer from seizures of the brain's frontal lobe said they frequently experience intense mystical episodes and often become obsessed with religious spiritually. A team of neuroscientists from the University of California at San Diego said the most intriguing explanation is that the seizure causes an over-stimulation of the nerves in a part of the brain dubbed the ''God module''. '' They may be dedicated neural machinery in the temporal lobes concerned with religion. This may have evolved to impose order and stability on society. '' the team reported at a conference last week The results indicate that whether a person believes in a religion or even in. God may depend on how enhanced is this part of the brain's electrical, the scientists said Dr. Vilayanur Ramachandran, head of the research team, said the study involved comparing epileptic patients with normal people and a group who said they were intensely religious. Electrical monitors on their skin – a standard test for activity – in the brain's temporal lobes – showed that the epileptics and they deeply religious displayed a similar response when shown words invoking spiritual belief. Evolutionary scientists have suggested that belief in God, which is a common trait found in human societies around the world and throughout history, may be built into the brain's complex encourage co-operation between individuals. If the research is correct and a ''God module'' exists, then it might suggest that individuals who are atheists could have a differently configured neural circuit. A spoken for Richard Harries, the Bishop of Oxford, said whether there is a ''God module'' is a question for scientists, not theologians. ''It would not be surprising if God had created us with a physical facility for belief,'' he said.!

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

5uspect

But his parents also make him a muslim. Whats the difference?

Zulu

First post. Nice.

CatStevens

5uspect

5uspect wrote:

But his parents also make him a muslim. Whats the difference?

The difference is Islam is the True religion of God (According to the Qur'aan) or in other words it is that true natural belief in God which every child born with, but parents make their child Christian or whatever, The Arabic word "Islam" means the submission or surrender of one's will to the only true God, known in Arabic as "Allah". One who submits his will to God is termed in Arabic a "Muslim". The religion of Islam is not named after a person or people, nor was it decided by a later generation of man, as in the case of Christianity which was named after Jesus Christ ,Buddhism after Gautama Buddha, Islam (submission to the will of God) is the religion which was given to Adam , the first man and the first prophet of God, and it was the religion of all the prophets sent by Allah to mankind.

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

So are you suggesting that an orphan will automatically believe in Allah?

Zulu

...and while I'm here: since Allah created us all in all our variations, didn't he then also create all other religions? And seen as he has created all religions, aren't all equally valid?

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

So are you suggesting that an orphan will automatically believe in Allah?

He will not find any difficulties in doing so,'cause this is his nature.

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

...and while I'm here: since Allah created us all in all our variations, didn't he then also create all other religions? And seen as he has created all religions, aren't all equally valid?

No. People (His creators) invented other religions and some corrupted His original message by adding and changing.

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

pH

CatStevens wrote:

No. People (His creators) invented other religions and some corrupted His original message by adding and changing.

How can you tell the difference between an invented religion and a true one?

Asiaprod

Welcome CatStevens, I have all your namesake's records.
I have a question for you, if as you say people created religions, and I don't dispute this:), in your opinion, which religion that the people created most closely follows your own.

lostexpectation

CatStevens wrote:

Islam (submission to the will of God) is the religion which was given to Adam , the first man and the first prophet of God, and it was the religion of all the prophets sent by Allah to mankind.

that's news to me

CatStevens

pH

pH wrote:

How can you tell the difference between an invented religion and a true one?

You can know that, ''investigation'',e.g: Buddha was a reformer who introduced a number of humanistic principles in the religion of India. He did not claim to be God, nor did he suggest to his followers that he be an object of worship. Yet today some Buddhists who are to be found outside of India have taken him to be God and they prostrate themselves to idols made in their perception of his likeness

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

Asiaprod

Asiaprod wrote:

Welcome CatStevens

Thanks

Asiaprod wrote:

I have all your namesake's records.

All!! WoW

Asiaprod wrote:

which religion that the people created most closely follows your own.

you know dear, I didn't look at all religions but you will find many similar teachings and verses in Judiasm and Christianity 'cause the lord of the Torah and Gospel is Allah but ppl corruoted the word of God by adding, deleting and changing His word.:(
For example in the Bible Jesus has never claimed to be God, but Christians interpret the verse in a way which makes him clamed so, there are number of verses which proves that he wasn't God Just as we believe he was a prophet and a Muslim

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

5uspect

CatStevens wrote:

People (His creators) invented other religions and some corrupted His original message by adding and changing.

Once again, how is Islam any different to any other religion other than your claim that it is the "pure" religion? I can claim that the pink unicorn faith is the true faith but that doesn't make it true.

All religions claim that their god is the one true god, and that their rules must be followed in order to get into heaven etc. Islam is really the late comer to the big three monothesistic religions, its claims are no more valid or true.

CatStevens

lostexpectation

lostexpectation wrote:

that's news to me

BTW I quoted that from ''The True Religion'' by Bilal Philips

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Asiaprod

CatStevens wrote:

Yet today some Buddhists who are to be found outside of India have taken him to be God and they prostrate themselves to idols made in their perception of his likeness

Ah, I suspect you have looked at images of, or even seen first hand, these things without understanding what exactly IS going on. Thats the terrible thing about jumping to conclusions, it blocks the mind from ever seeing the truth.

Tar.Aldarion

"It is pointless to get people to abandon their belief systems because they operate at such a fundamental level that no amount of rational evidence or counter evidence is going to be taken on board to get people to abandon these ideas."

Oh...reeeaallllly?


Anyway, I disagree with a lot of what he said.
I first heard of this two years ago, from America. Daily Telegraph is a bit slow then!

The concepts of a benevolent shepherd, a universal plan, an afterlife, or just desserts, ease the pain of being a human; these lovely thoughts make us feel content. We have a lot of fear.
Also, some people would have high ethical yearnings for the world, in theory religion would have been a good way for this and would also bring communities together. Good for teh producer sa nd for teh partakers for different reasons. Anyway, A retributive, human-like deity meting out justice doesn't have a role in our best explanations of the logic of morality.

I would say that maybe some parts of evolutionary psychology are correct, maybe we are born with this fear due to it. Likewise EP could explain an irrational high fear of snakes compared to other animals etc, and our sweet tooth. Biochemistry has established that sugar is packed with calories, and therefore could have prevented starvation in an era which food sources were unpredictable, this could be a plausible sign of EP?
But something being plausible does not make it right, hmm...
Whether we be born with a genetic fear or belief isn't really possible to prove and it may depend on ancestors etcetera. May be stronger in some than others, may not exist at all.

I don't believe we are born with a built in belief at all, maybe we are born with a fear and a survival instinct. I would say it is survival instinct and we need to feel like there is more.
All I can go on is my mind and intuitive psychology.
Yet, for all I know, 'the mind', and 'soul' do not exist at all, and would be the same for everybody at the fundamental level. With the advancement of neuroscience is is quite possible we are nothing more than machines, biological machines. I think that is probably what we are, a nice ole' programme.
Religion has obvious practical effects for producers. When it comes to the consumers, there are possible emotional adaptations in our desire for health, love and success, possible cognitive adaptations in our intuitive psychology, and many aspects of our experience that seem to provide evidence for souls. Put these together and you get an appeal to a mysterious world of souls to bring about our fondest wishes.

To sum it up, I have been randomly writing things down as I think and go off on hundreds of tangents. It will be interesting for me to read this when I hit post quick reply.

CatStevens

5uspect

5uspect wrote:

Once again, how is Islam any different to any other religion.

It depends on the other religion which we compare, i.e. Islam calls to worship the creator only not the creatures e.g. Jesus, Jesus himself said:
(John 17:3)And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee (i.e. the father) the only true God yet they worship Jesus?
there are other ways to know whether this or that religion is true or not by you know I don't want to elaborate 'cause I think it is off topic, I can go on if it OK

5uspect wrote:

I can claim that the pink unicorn faith is the true faith but that doesn't make it true.All religions claim that their god is the one true god, and that their rules must be followed in order to get into heaven etc..

very true, so the one who claims something should prove it, as for my 2 or three first posts in this thread I was commenting on the Article from an Islamic perspective, that's it:)

5uspect wrote:

Islam is really the late comer to the big three monothesistic religions, its claims are no more valid or true.

let me tell ya what hapened, Allah created Adam, in the beginning all ppl worshipped God but later some of them started to make idols and they worshipped them, So Allah sent prophet to them to get them back,
Allah stated in Quraan:2:136: say (O Muslims), '' we believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and to [the offspring of the twelve sons of Jacob] and that which has been given to Moses (i.e.Torah) and Jesus (i.e. Gospel), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to him we have submitted (in Islam).''Accordingly, Jesus and Moses are prophets of Allah and the Gospel and the Torah have been revealed to them from Allah. What happened was that all of these prophets (before Muhammad) were not well received by the majority of the people, for instance they started tampering with the teachings of Moses and Jesus peace be upon them, corrupting the Word of God, That is why Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) to bring all of mankind back to the true belief and to worship one God, without partners or intermediaries.And He promised to guard His last Message from corruption
Examples:
[NIV]Matthew: 15: 3:
And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? … 6: … Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition....9:...their teaching are but rules taught by men.

Jeremiah 8. 4-8… declares the LORD Almighty.' 4 "Say to them, 'This is what the LORD says:" 'When men fall down, do they not get up? When a man turns away, does he not return? 5 Why then have these people turned away? Why does Jerusalem always turn away? They cling to deceit; they refuse to return.6 I have listened attentively, but they do not say what is right. No one repents of his wickedness, saying, "What have I done?" Each pursues his own course like a horse charging into battle. 7 Even the stork in the sky knows her appointed seasons, and the dove, the swift and the thrush observe the time of their migration. But my people do not know the requirements of the LORD. 8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?9 The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have?

Jeremiah6. 10:To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? Their ears are closed so they cannot hear. The word of the LORD is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it.

Jeremiah14. 14 Then the LORD said to me, "The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds. 15 Therefore, this is what the LORD says about the prophets who are prophesying in my name: I did not send them

Jeremiah23.36 But you must not mention 'the oracle of the LORD ' again, because every man's own word becomes his oracle and so you distort the words of the living God, the LORD Almighty, our God.

Quraan: 2:85: … Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest?
Quraan:… inspite of the fact that a party of them used to hear the Word of Allah, then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it?...Know they not that Allah knows what they conceal and what they reveal, … then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, this is from Allah, … Woe to them for what their hands have written…

Accordingly, Allah told us that the Torah and the gospel have been corrupted; therefor Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) Quraan: 15:9: Verily, We , it is We who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. Quraan) and surely We will guard it (from corruption).

For Muslims the Qur’an is the last but not the only holy book revealed by Allah to mankind through His messengers. It is, however, the only holy book which remained intact from the time of its revelation until the present time. No addition, deletion, or interpolation found its way into the Qur’an.
Quraan: 27:76: Verily, this Quraan narrates to the Children of Israel most of that in which they differ.
Matthew; 21: 43: Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

...but Adam never existed.

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

...but Adam never existed.

proof?
Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

CatStevens wrote:

Zulu
proof?

How about you prove he did?
I can't prove the boogieman dosen't exist either, but thankfully the onus of proof lies with you proving Adam existence. Nice try though.

Schuhart

CatStevens wrote:

let me tell ya what hapened

I’m getting a vision. A voice is telling me you used to post as T-1111111111111.

Its says you are unlikely ever to appreciate that claiming God sent an Angel to dictate a book to a prophet seems just as unlikely as God fathering a child.

Its says you won’t even figure out that some atheists (okay, the atheist chosen as the mediator of this message) can respect the fact that Christians at least don’t try to deny the historical origins of the New Testament, but find the reluctance to subject the Quran to the same scrutiny by its adherents as tantamount to an admission of defeat.

It says this lack of moral courage at the heart of Islam will ultimately be its undoing, as people are not stupid. Sorry, the voice was coughing. It meant people are not that stupid.

Now, unfortunately I have to go as the voice wants to fly me over to Jerusalem and then up to Heaven where I’ll have a grand chat with Moses, Jesus and any of the other prophets that might be around. I’ll let you know how I get on. Maybe you could write it all down for me.

robindch

> No addition, deletion, or interpolation found its way into the Qur’an.

According to islamic historians, yes, that's what happened. According to conventional historians, though, the book languaished in a variety of forms for a long period, before one specific version became sufficiently popular that all other versions had to be destroyed. It's identical to what happened with the text of the bible.

Wibbs is our local expert on early islamic history. Though (s)he seems to be off on holiday at the moment.

> let me tell ya what hapened, Allah created Adam,

Um, do you have any evidence for this which is more substantial than in some books written a very long time ago?

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

How about you prove he did?

maybe we should discuss about God's existence first, what do you think
Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

Schuhart

Schuhart wrote:

I’m getting a vision. A voice is telling me you used to post as T-1111111111111.

I will answer such a q for The 1st and the last time: No

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

CatStevens wrote:

maybe we should discuss about God's existence first, what do you think

I think you shouldn't try to hijack this thread. If you wish to discuss God's existence - start another thread and I'll happily discuss.

CatStevens

robindch

robindch wrote:

According to islamic historians, yes, that's what happened. According to conventional historians, though, the book languaished in a variety of forms for a long period, before one specific version became sufficiently popular that all other versions had to be destroyed.

Whoa, btw I studied this, I can smell a huge misunderstanding, anyway, you can read more on that topic.

robindch wrote:

Um, do you have any evidence for this which is more substantial than in some books written a very long time ago?

As I said to one of the members here, I think to discuss this we have to discuss God's existence first

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

I think you shouldn't try to hijack this thread. If you wish to discuss God's existence - start another thread and I'll happily discuss.

yep, that's why I asked ya so and didn't give my reply.
Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

ScumLord

I've mentioned this part of the brain before, I think it's a useful tool that the brain can call on. I don't think it's fair to say religion is based purely in human fears of life and death. Religion to me is more about recognising how great the universe is, being thankful for being part of it and curious about how it came to be. Spiritual thinking has been corrupted by restricting how we can think about the how and why but that doesn't mean it can't be used in a modern way. I don't think we'll be able to send messages telepathically or anything but you could probably change your emotional state and gain control over autonomic reflexes like Tibetan monks can.

Catstevens is the old testament universal to the big 3 religions? I always thought it was and that the Jewish religion is more or less still going off the old testament, Christians got the bible V.2 and Muslims work off the Quran. Are the ten commandments universal? I think it was a Muslim in the Christian forum that said they that's all wrong.

I just can't take these books as fact based on the time period they where writen in. These people didn't understand the world they lived in and where prone to fantisy. At the same time I do think their valuible books and are an attempt by the peole of the time to explain the world they lived in and find a better way to live in it. They did use the greatest thinking machines in the universe (unless there are smarter Aliens out there) I have faith in that and considering what they didn't know those books are very interesting.

5uspect

CatStevens wrote:

...the one who claims something should prove it, as for my 2 or three first posts in this thread I was commenting on the Article from an Islamic perspective, that's it:)

I appreciate that you believe these things but you have to admit there is no proof that any of it is true. All your proselytizing means nothing other than you found these ideas in a book. There is nothing to suggest, other then your blind faith, that anything in this book or indeed any book it factual. If the book suggested an experiment that could be performed which would result in an observation that couldn't be explained in another way (falsified) then It can be accepted, until a better explanation comes along. All you have shown us so far is that you are willing to follow your religion blindly rather than question your faith. I think the research that shows that we are "hardwired" to believe has received another data point.

CatStevens

Hi ScumLord

ScumLord wrote:

Catstevens is the old testament universal to the big 3 religions? I always thought it was and that the Jewish religion is more or less still going off the old testament, Christians got the bible V.2 and Muslims work off the Quran. Are the ten commandments universal?

What I know is what I said in one of my posts in this thread, before all ppl worshipped God, but when some ppl started to worship idols God sent to them prophets and messengers to bring them back, I will quote what I've posted

Allah stated in Quraan:2:136: say (O Muslims), '' we believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and to [the offspring of the twelve sons of Jacob] and that which has been given to Moses (i.e.Torah) and Jesus (i.e. Gospel), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to him we have submitted (in Islam).''Accordingly, Jesus and Moses are prophets of Allah and the Gospel and the Torah have been revealed to them from Allah. What happened was that all of these prophets (before Muhammad) were not well received by the majority of the people, for instance they started tampering with the teachings of Moses and Jesus peace be upon them, corrupting the Word of God, That is why Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) to bring all of mankind back to the true belief and to worship one God, without partners or intermediaries.And He promised to guard His last Message from corruption
Examples:
[NIV]Matthew: 15: 3:
And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? … 6: … Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition....9:...their teaching are but rules taught by men.

Jeremiah 8. 4-8… declares the LORD Almighty.' 4 "Say to them, 'This is what the LORD says:" 'When men fall down, do they not get up? When a man turns away, does he not return? 5 Why then have these people turned away? Why does Jerusalem always turn away? They cling to deceit; they refuse to return.6 I have listened attentively, but they do not say what is right. No one repents of his wickedness, saying, "What have I done?" Each pursues his own course like a horse charging into battle. 7 Even the stork in the sky knows her appointed seasons, and the dove, the swift and the thrush observe the time of their migration. But my people do not know the requirements of the LORD. 8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?9 The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have?

Jeremiah6. 10:To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? Their ears are closed so they cannot hear. The word of the LORD is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it.

Jeremiah14. 14 Then the LORD said to me, "The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds. 15 Therefore, this is what the LORD says about the prophets who are prophesying in my name: I did not send them

Jeremiah23.36 But you must not mention 'the oracle of the LORD ' again, because every man's own word becomes his oracle and so you distort the words of the living God, the LORD Almighty, our God.

Quraan: 2:85: … Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest?
Quraan:… inspite of the fact that a party of them used to hear the Word of Allah, then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it?...Know they not that Allah knows what they conceal and what they reveal, … then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, this is from Allah, … Woe to them for what their hands have written…

Accordingly, Allah told us that the Torah and the gospel have been corrupted; therefor Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) Quraan: 15:9: Verily, We , it is We who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. Quraan) and surely We will guard it (from corruption).

For Muslims the Qur’an is the last but not the only holy book revealed by Allah to mankind through His messengers. It is, however, the only holy book which remained intact from the time of its revelation until the present time. No addition, deletion, or interpolation found its way into the Qur’an.
Quraan: 27:76: Verily, this Quraan narrates to the Children of Israel most of that in which they differ.
Matthew; 21: 43: Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

As for the ten commandments they can be found in islam as I read that but not sure if all of them can be found I didn't read the entire article,Islam is a universal religion Accordingly the 10 commandments should be so, I can quote it but you know I will take off the topic by doing so.

ScumLord wrote:

I just can't take these books as fact based on the time period they where writen in.

so after 3 centuries we shouldn't take the current books as fact based on the time period they where writen in!!!!

ScumLord wrote:

These people didn't understand the world they lived in and where prone to fantisy. At the same time I do think their valuible books and are an attempt by the peole of the time to explain the world they lived in and find a better way to live in it. They did use the greatest thinking machines in the universe (unless there are smarter Aliens out there) I have faith in that and considering what they didn't know those books are very interesting.

That's what you think anyway, theories

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

5uspect

5uspect wrote:

you have to admit there is no proof that any of it is true.

No, I admit it is true and there is proof, as for proof every person may has its own proof, like many has their own experience which provd something to them bla bla bla

5uspect wrote:

All you have shown us so far is that you are willing to follow your religion blindly rather than question your faith..

Dear let me tell ya something, I was only commenting from an islamic perspective, I wasn't trying to prove anything or to show how I follow my religion or whatsoeva.

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

CatStevens wrote:

No, I admit it is true and there is proof, as for proof every person may has its own proof, like many has their own experience which provd something to them bla bla bla ...

where is this proof that you speak of?

You still haven't started another thread, btw, don't you think this thread has been hijacked enough?

Zombrex

CatStevens wrote:

No, I admit it is true and there is proof, as for proof every person may has its own proof, like many has their own experience which provd something to them bla bla bla

Then that isn't proof.

If I have a "feeling" that God exists that might be God talking to me, or it might be a chemical pathway mis-firing in my brain. A lot of druggies claim to experience God when under the infulence of certain drugs, which would imply that the feeling religous people interprate is God talking to them personally is actually just a by product of the way the brain works.

There is no actual proof God exists. All the old explinations of the way the universe works that were originally attributed to God have now been discovered to be natural systems. The only thing religous people have left is their own personal feelings on the matter, and as the OP article shows, our brains are pre-dispossed to interpretating the universe around the idea of a god.

You seem to believe you have a person connection to your god. But then so did a lot of others who believed in a different religion. Joan of Ark wages wars against the English in the name of Jesus Christ because she believed he spoke directly to her. You might claim she was mad, but then a mad person doesn't know they are mad. You could be equally mad

robindch

Here's the official deity FAQ:

http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

CatStevens

Zulu

Zulu wrote:

where is this proof that you speak of?

I still didn't speack about it.

Zulu wrote:

You still haven't started another thread

you do it, and I will come

Zulu wrote:

btw, don't you think this thread has been hijacked enough?

I'm replying or do ya want me to ignore their posts

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

CatStevens

Wicknight

Wicknight wrote:

Then that isn't proof.

I didn't give any yet

Wicknight wrote:

If I have a "feeling" that God exists that might be God talking to me, or it might be a chemical pathway mis-firing in my brain. A lot of druggies claim to experience God when under the infulence of certain drugs, which would imply that the feeling religous people interprate is God talking to them personally is actually just a by product of the way the brain works.

Dear when I said experience it doesn't mean such or the like experience only

Wicknight wrote:

now been discovered to be natural systems.

Any proofs BTW many times scientists say something today and change their mind tomorrow

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens

Zulu

CatStevens wrote:

I still didn't speack about it.

Excuse me? Here - let me remind you:

CatStevens wrote:

No, I admit it is true and there is proof,

You say there is proof - care to provide it?

CatStevens

robindch wrote:

Here's the official deity FAQ:
http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

http://www.harunyahya.com/
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_atheism.php
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_darwinism.php
http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/
http://www.evolutiondocumentary.com/
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/

Peace & Love
Yours Sincerely
CatStevens