Short list of recommended scriptural readings

Again, you are proving yourself to be a fucking moron by conflating religion and the belief that there is something more to existence than what is in front of your nose.

If you were more than semi-literate, you'd have read that I'm not religious. Thanks for, once again, dodging the hard questions and simply proving you're just another hater.

1. Calm down.

2. Whatever. Replace "religion" with "theism." The fact is that you're arguing for a divine source of morality.

3. Lol.
 
Wow. I get dozens of replies a day on here. Just repeat the question.
Why? You've already proved you're a cut'n'runner...and not bright enough to back click a conversation. In short, you're too fucking lazy and stupid to have a conversation with OR you're a liar.
 
1. Calm down.

2. Whatever. Replace "religion" with "theism." The fact is that you're arguing for a divine source of morality.

3. Lol.
1. I'm calm enough to recognize a liar when I see one.

2. Thanks for proving you're too stupid to see the difference.

3. LOL
 
Get over yourself. Either repeat the question or stop being a bitch.
Thank you for proving me correct, dumbass.

You already answered the main question: You're a meat robot who someone can shoot in the back of the head and it doesn't mean anything.
 
You can't accept that this life is all there is. Be a man.
You're free to think you're just a worthless piece of meat of no more value alive than dead. You're free to believe there is nothing beyond the mortal universe, that the Universe just magically popped into existence and will eventually die for reasons that don't pique your curiosity. I believe there is a mystery there. One worth exploring.
 
You can't accept that this life is all there is. Be a man.

The master said, "We do not yet understand life, how could we understand death?" -> Confucious as quoted in the Analects

I don't think you have to be a bible thumper to be able to appreciate some of the texts in the OP. Niels Bohr, Erwin Schoedinger, and Henry David Thoreau were interested in Indian and Chinese religious wisdom.
Reading and reflecting on the Dhammapada and the Daodejing changed my life in ways that are measurable. And I am agnostic.
 
The master said, "We do not yet understand life, how could we understand death?" -> Confucious as quoted in the Analects

I don't think you have to be a bible thumper to be able to appreciate some of the texts in the OP. Niels Bohr, Erwin Schoedinger, and Henry David Thoreau were interested in Indian and Chinese religious wisdom.
Reading the Dhammapada and the Daodejing changed my life in ways that are measurable. And I am agnostic
'Murica is wearing blinders and believes he's 100% correct even though there is not a shred of proof about his beliefs.
 
'Murica is wearing blinders and believes he's 100% correct even though there is not a shred of proof about his beliefs.

An eternal soul in the Christian-Platonic tradition sounds unrealistic.

But I also think it's premature to declare we have achieved omniscience and understand everything about life and death.
 
An eternal soul in the Christian-Platonic tradition sounds unrealistic.

But I also think it's premature to declare we have achieved omniscience and understand everything about life and death.
Since everything seem evolve into more advanced intelligent, simply doing the equivalent of stepping through a door and remaining the same doesn't make sense to me. Losing one's individuality to become part of something greater would be a more logical advancement.
 
You're free to think you're just a worthless piece of meat of no more value alive than dead. You're free to believe there is nothing beyond the mortal universe, that the Universe just magically popped into existence and will eventually die for reasons that don't pique your curiosity. I believe there is a mystery there. One worth exploring.

The universe is full of mystery. But there are no gods or fairies behind the scenes.
 
The universe is full of mystery. But there are no gods or fairies behind the scenes.
Again, you have a habit of stating your opinion as fact. You never made it higher than the bottom level of management....if that high. The Peter Principle in action.

Arthur C. Clarke's Three Laws:

  1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
  2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
  3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
 
Again, you have a habit of stating your opinion as fact. You never made it higher than the bottom level of management....if that high. The Peter Principle in action.

Arthur C. Clarke's Three Laws:

  1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
  2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
  3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

You're nonsensical. It's also ironic that you're quoting my own relative at me. (Yeah, I'm actually related to Arthur Clarke.)
 
So why is it my responsibility to prove that your deity doesn't exist?
It's not, son. That's why I know you have a propensity to leap to conclusions.

I hope you are under 35 because, for a militant atheist, your behavior would be within normal parameters. If you are older, then you have a problem with the severity increasing depending on your age.
 
Back
Top