When it comes to matters considering the origins and purpose of life,
science alone cannot provide the answers. I may have only a high school
education, but if one has the willingness and energy to read and think, I believe
he qualifies to participate..

My posts speak for themselve.
I claim no authority over anyone, I assert that the Word of God does.

You have obviously abandoned a reasoned and well thought out response
to my arguments and resort now to a rant consisting
only of opinion…. I’ve encountered this before…. Give yourself a day and read
back through your post.
I think you’ll see who’s behaving like the “high schooler”.

The rest of you post is typical Dale blah blah tl;dr. Your entire belief
structure lacks evidence, proof, and logic. It is clear that you will
continue going in circles reciting your same failed logic and beliefs
that has been brainwashed into you. Reciting anything from the bible
does not a good argument make. Use your own words, not someone
elses. Your savior is meaningless to me, your stories have no effect,
so referring to them does nothing. I live in the real world, and use real
facts that you can observe. You have shown you have little understanding
of the world, which can be attributed to your high school education level.
Yet with all your ignorance, you try to claim authority over those who have
made it their career to study such things as philosophy, biology, physics.
You are a child trying to compete with grownups. I can tell you are an
Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist Republican. You and your kind are
obsolete. Your numbers are shrinking as the world becomes better educated.
You are a dying breed doomed to wallow in your own self destruction.

I bid you good day.

God is against killing? Once again Trevor, you are just being argumentative,
it seems even to the extent of sacrificing your credibility.

I will again explain the Holiness nature of God. Most people
can understand it. It basically comes down to this, God and evil cannot
coexist. Evil people ultimately will die by his judgment. It has been a concept
well studied and acknowledged throughout history by those who believe and
those who don’t. If you think deeply about it I’m sure it will make sense.
Believing God exists doesn’t have to be a prerequisite.

I’v also explained many times that there is a difference between the creation
and the Creator. We do not share his nature. We are sinful and while our
acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice shields us from God’s wrath, Our sin nature
remains until we die. Christians are guilty of doing many bad things.
This is the great mystery that seperates Christianity from
all other religions. We cannot earn our way to Him by doing good things, it is
a simple choice to accept the way that He alone has provided.
The Bible teaches that to deny this is the only unforgivable sin.

Trevor, perhaps I have not explained it or mislead you. By accepting my worldview,
which is also to accept a objective standard to determine right and wrong, God’s
Word, does not mean peace, love and unity will result. As I said above the sin
nature of man remains. It does mean however, that as the Bible teaches, Christ will
return and when He does it will this time be with a sword… it also says
there will no longer be any doubt as to who He is “Every knee will bow and every
tongue confess”. Again, He and Evil cannot coexist and in His time I”m afraid,
those who are not “covered” by His work on the cross will suffer for their transgressions.

Euthanasia =/= Violence

Your god is against killing? Really? Is that why he killed
2,270,365+ people in the bible while Satan kills 10? I would
sure hate to believe in such a hypocrite and murderer.

Those people killed by Christians during the Crusades didn’t
want to be killed! They were victims of a belief system that ruled
the day.

Those people killed by Christians in Salem for being witches didn’t
want to be killed! They were victims of a belief system that rule the
day.

You appear to be the only one struggling with this. The laws of Hammurabi
existed before your ten commandments. These were created by man.
They did not need some divine intervention to tell them how to coexist with
each other.

You fail time and again to make a coherent argument. You’re not even
arguing me, you’re trying to argue a set of ideas that I don’t even hold.
Wake up.

Here we go again,
no objective standard, no basis to determine right and wrong!

And by the way, laws are a not always moral to all people (duh).
your statement needs a little deeper contemplation…. Hate to go
there again, but you clearly are strugglying with this….
The victims of the holocause didn’t want to be killed! They were victims of
a belief system that ruled the day… Pretty simple stuff if you spend a
moment with it… Sheesh!

You do not know of which you speak. You hope I find happiness,
as if you assume I am not happy. This could not be further from
the truth. In fact, coming here to discuss these points gives me
great happiness.

By your own logic.

Religion is the death of spirituality.

you have met this “being” you speak of – look in the mirror, and please
quit rejecting yourself.

Deepak is gifted, intelligent man, and he does not need me to defend him.

His views will never harm anyone.

I honestly hope you find some happiness and
quit trying to tear down imaginary dogmas.

I am not the person who will enter into any further baited arguments, so don’t
waste your energy. Just live, breathe, and enjoy the experience.

Love, TARA

I disagree on your statements on proof. The existance of Pluto was an
“accepted” scientific fact. The “proof” argument for it was built upon
accepted evidence at the time. New evidence or technology found fault in
the old evidence or technology and the conclusions were altered.

I’ll pose the same question to you as I have to others.
Do you believe that Antarctica exists? Even though you’ve never
been there (I assume)? If you say yes then you are basing you
conclusion on gathered information that you have “faith” in, no?

I reject you statements about religious beliefs. I submit that without
a theory that involves an intelligent Creator you are MORE dependent on
faith (the belief in something not emperically proven), than I am when it
comes to explaining the origins of life.
If you are interested I will explain my argument.

I don’t believe in any religion, but I do think there is a reason us humans propagate these myths
and delusions. Psychologically, we depend on answering, solving and investigating our
reality. It is our driving force, really. Even Atheists ponder philosophically, or else science would
mean nothing to them. To include the mathematician scenario you illustrated, remember, a few
years ago, it was “scientific fact” that Pluto was a planet in our solar system! So, “proof” can
change.

The thing I think people find hard to understand or even conceive is we have created the
universe we live in. We created science and the means in which we measure it. Numbers are not
natural things, they are human concepts that can change as we learn more.

I don’t have the answers, but I don’t think “Faith” makes any difference in where we go when we
die or how we evolved (or didn’t). I do think it will be interesting to see where quantum physics
will lead us. Especially when it comes to determining what “conciousness” really is and where
it comes from. That is where my “faith” lies.

Enjoy the discussion!

For you though… That last statement is a real laugher..T
he one on defending their belief system?? Soooo, do you really think that is logical?
You are losing your mind listening to this lunacy. Any belief system should be
defensible! Would a mathematician expect anyone to believe his formula if
he could not write a proff for it??
This is crazy!

Their not who they say they are!

How do you know, Deepak Chopra, that what you say is the Truth?

Any one who thinks Chopra has Truth, please tell me how you know.

How do you know?

Do you have any empirical evidence? If so, please tell me.

Just tell me how you know what he says is Truth?

For the record, I don’t mean to imply directly or indirectly that you your
worldview has anything in common with Hitler’s. My point is that without
the objective standard to make moral judgments, we do not have the tool
(objective standard) to argue against these kinds of behaviors.

For some reason you are making my point into a religious one while it
doesn’t need to be. People, regardless of their religion are capable of doing bad
things. Just because they believe in a set of rules does not mean they
chose to play by them all the time. I admit that I am guilty of that as well.
Slavery in this country was first justified by Christians, then later repudiated
Christians.

I need to correct your statements. I said that in Hitler’s mind,
he was doing what he thought was good. This was to point
out that most “bad guys” don’t consider themselves evil. They
think what they are doing is good. It’s basic psychology.

This has NOTHING to do with mine or Deepak’s ‘world view.’
It is factual information based on empirical evidence. You should
try it sometime.

Hitler was raised Catholic, so there goes your argument.

Hitler didn’t share my ‘world views.’

As I pointed out previously, but you ignored, the group of people
that most closely share my beliefs are Buddhists. Go ahead, tell
me what violent and self destructive people they are compared to
your loving Christians. You sir, are a hypocrite.

You have drawn a logical and reasonable conclusion, assuming you are
correct in that there exists no objective measure of right and wrong.
I commend you for that. However, you have explained for
all the readers my point that this is a dangerous and destructive
worldview that must be exposed.

Trevor, I plead with you to take a step back and really think about what
you are admitting to! For the sake of humanity?

That’s because you are not using your claimed “critical thinking”
and “logic.” You can not back up your claim that the bible is
the word god with any empirical evidence or facts. The Fact is,
you are basing all of your beliefs on Faith. You are taking someone
else’s word that what you believe is the word of god.

Not good enough.

Dale said: “It proves that I am not the only “nut in the tree”.”

This I agree with.

You mentioned that the bible is a best seller as some sort of proof
of legitimacy. If you want to go that route, the Muslim Koran is also
a best seller, and has been around ‘a long time’. So what?

Again, provide evidence for how Deepak’s world view is destructive.
Baseless claims is all you offer.

This is a problem with semantics that was clearly lost on him and
you. Let me spell this out for you. He attempted to use the words
“belief” and “believe” interchangeably. This is where he is wrong.

In this context, “belief” was being used in the noun form:

be⋅lief
 
–noun

a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.

Now, in this context, “believe” was used in its verb form:

be⋅lieve

–verb

to have confidence in the truth of (a positive assertion)

Now, let me word this in a way that you might understand:

“You said that [religious faith] was a cover-up for insecurity,
do you [find that to be true?]”

Class time is over. Now do you see what a fool that guy was,
and those that cheered for him? It doesn’t take a college education
to understand this. This is Elementary School vocabulary.

I think you owe everyone here an apology for wasting our time with
your lack of knowledge and baseless insults.

I know that Deepak’s has no merit simply because it doesn’t
leave home plate from reason and logic. This I’ve also tried to
explain to you to no avail.

I will repost this excerpt from a writer who was at the debat on
Satan. It proves that I am not the only “nut in the tree”.

“You said that belief was a cover-up for insecurity, do you believe that?”
Chopra answered, “Yes” to outbursts of laughter and applause. The joke
was totally lost on him…for someone with such a higher enlightenment
I would have expected more, but he repeatedly looked silly and revealed
the incredible short comings of his philosophical worldview.

Like I’ve said in the past the Bible has been attacked, and investigated
throughout history and it still is a best seller, why? I’m sure you would say
it is a curious phenomenon or something like that. But it is obviously not
so easy to discredit. Deepak’s worldview on the other hand and is easily
discredited by the simple answer he made at the debate. I am simply trying
to shine the light on this. As I have already explained, his views are destructive
and must be refuted.

“What gives your “views” their authority?”

You can’t honestly say God, because you and I both know,
you don’t really know. You’ve never met this being. All you’re
doing is taking someones word for it.

“How does one decide which has merit and which
does not?”

You decide.