Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Why did we stop inventing gods?

GreatestIam
Posts: 1,723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 4:13:44 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

Response: Many Gods were invented to compete with the true and only God, who is Allah as explained in Islam. Even today, atheists have many Gods. They call them "scientists".
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 4:33:04 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

Scientology?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 5:17:45 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...
Pretty insightful post. Even Anton Levey recognized the power of religious practice, and invented satanism as a way of worshipping the self as a god. I recognize that the way we "practice" affects outcomes in the physical world, and it's why I feel at liberty to believe in God as a loving maker who wants us to chose to celebrate the gift of life and love ourselves equal to the love we give to others. It is such as simple equation, and offers so much liberty and satisfaction when it is applied.
janesix
Posts: 3,466
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 8:11:46 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
I dont know why we stopped inventing gods, but it is an interesting question.

And why are all the newest gods monotheistic?
foxxhajti
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 7:42:14 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
People in the past, didn't know much about the world and its creation. This lack of knowledge, might have induced the creation of some gods. As science develops, less and less people are starting to believe in newer gods.
"It's interesting to observe that almost all truly worthy men have simple manners, and that simple manners are almost always taken as a sign of little worth" - Giacomo Leopardi

"It is more honorable to be raised to a throne than to be born to one. Fortune bestows the one, merit obtains the other." - Francesco Petrarca

"You too must not count too much on your reality as you feel it today, since like yesterday, it may prove an illusion for you tomorrow." - Luigi Pirandello
graceofgod
Posts: 5,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 1:50:08 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

science and man itself are the new gods...
tarantula
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 2:47:04 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 4:13:44 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

Response: Many Gods were invented to compete with the true and only God, who is Allah as explained in Islam. Even today, atheists have many Gods. They call them "scientists".

HA! HA!
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2016 2:58:18 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

We stopped inventing more Gods after discovering the Gods we invented were incompetent and useless and we became overwhelmed by our stupidity and ignorance and stopped inventing more of the same. But that is only speaking for academia and critical thinking population. The rest are still struggling to find meaning in these past creations and remain confused why divine help is being withheld from them despite their devotion and prayer to end their miserable lives and bring about the end of times.
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 2:19:16 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
How can you look at all the nerds and geeks and have this opinion? Idolatry is rampant in modern society, and like Fatihah even said, there are many who take academic figures as being gods. Look at culture! There are many who have sculpted their entire life's meaning on cultural things. Look at technology! There are many who have made technology their god.

No, a thousand years down the road and the history books will write about the rampant idolatry and the false gods of what we now see as contemporary society.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 6:12:45 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 2:19:16 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
How can you look at all the nerds and geeks and have this opinion? Idolatry is rampant in modern society, and like Fatihah even said, there are many who take academic figures as being gods. Look at culture! There are many who have sculpted their entire life's meaning on cultural things. Look at technology! There are many who have made technology their god.


No, a thousand years down the road and the history books will write about the rampant idolatry and the false gods of what we now see as contemporary society.
And your personal idol won't even make it into the footnotes.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 12:27:19 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 6:12:45 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/15/2016 2:19:16 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
How can you look at all the nerds and geeks and have this opinion? Idolatry is rampant in modern society, and like Fatihah even said, there are many who take academic figures as being gods. Look at culture! There are many who have sculpted their entire life's meaning on cultural things. Look at technology! There are many who have made technology their god.


No, a thousand years down the road and the history books will write about the rampant idolatry and the false gods of what we now see as contemporary society.
And your personal idol won't even make it into the footnotes.

The Eternal God will always Be.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 1:40:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 12:27:19 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 8/15/2016 6:12:45 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/15/2016 2:19:16 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
How can you look at all the nerds and geeks and have this opinion? Idolatry is rampant in modern society, and like Fatihah even said, there are many who take academic figures as being gods. Look at culture! There are many who have sculpted their entire life's meaning on cultural things. Look at technology! There are many who have made technology their god.


No, a thousand years down the road and the history books will write about the rampant idolatry and the false gods of what we now see as contemporary society.
And your personal idol won't even make it into the footnotes.

The Eternal God will always Be.

Says the bloke who lies about his age.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 2:54:43 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?

The ancients were quite good at inventing new gods. The bible shows that the Jews invented many gods before deciding that god could not be defined and settled for "I am", as the greatest expression of god. "I am" as spoken as a man.

https://www.youtube.com...

Jews, in their oral tradition, gave man the last word in what god and his policies were to be. They accepted that the man they chose as head Rabbi of their Divine council had the power to overrule their written tradition. Man"s words, not an imaginary god, had the final say on policy. Man was supreme and not one of the imaginary gods.

Christianity then changed much of the morals and policies of their newly invented god, Yahweh, and also transferred the power of god to a man. Jesus. Jesus was now placed at the power seat at the right hand of his newly invented god and placed Yahweh in the right hemisphere of the brain, as shown in the art of the day as depicted by Michelangelo in his creation painting in the Vatican.

Islam then invented Allah, and so far, rightfully named him the last god to be invented. Foolish but true to date.

I see that search for a god as a search for the best laws and rules to live life by. After all, we cannot follow an imaginary god and can only follow the laws and rules that those imaginary gods has spoken, recognizing of course, that only a person can speak those laws and rules and that it was really a wise person who was uttering those words.

Gnostic Christians always saw those invented gods, specifically Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, as immoral and not worthy of us and that is why they named those gods as immoral and vile demiurges. This is not to say that those demiurges did not have some good policies but only says that a better god could and should be invented. Gnostic Christianity lost the god wars and was decimated the moment Christianity gained political power which they used to end freedom of religion.

Are immoral demiurges like Yahweh, Jesus and Allah, the best that mankind can come up with?

Why do you think we stopped inventing gods and settled for demonstrably immoral ones?

Regards
DL

P.S. Gods are the opium of the people.
https://www.youtube.com...

We are beginning to grow up as a species. Unfortunately there are those who refuse to mature and let go of their security blankets they inherited from our primitive ancestors so old, outmoded and disproven deities are still used by them to allay their fears and give them an excuse to impose their own personal beliefs on others.
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 3:20:50 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 12:27:19 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 8/15/2016 6:12:45 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/15/2016 2:19:16 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
How can you look at all the nerds and geeks and have this opinion? Idolatry is rampant in modern society, and like Fatihah even said, there are many who take academic figures as being gods. Look at culture! There are many who have sculpted their entire life's meaning on cultural things. Look at technology! There are many who have made technology their god.


No, a thousand years down the road and the history books will write about the rampant idolatry and the false gods of what we now see as contemporary society.
And your personal idol won't even make it into the footnotes.

The Eternal God will always Be.

But not Betty Bigtits, your god.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 3:31:46 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 3:55:19 PM, GreatestIam wrote:
Why did we stop inventing gods?
When you have demonstrable evidence as to what was in the mind of the very first person who introduced the idea of a deity into humanity this question might be something other than a loaded question. And we, as in no one on this site, has invented a God except bulppoop. He invented the God of Manure.
The rest of your post is fodder for your own opinion. That makes it pointless unless you read it yourself to yourself.
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry. Subjective doesn't mean no verifiable. You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists. Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 2:12:30 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.

The fact that no verifiable, factual evidence can be provided and not one of these instances can be repeated under scrutiny and laboratory conditions renders them useless as any kind of evidence. Many people experience hallucinations but that does not mean what they experience is real to anyone but them. It has nothing to do with any myth, that's your department. I simply want facts I can check, verify and potentially falsify to demonstrate unambiguously that what you claim to be true is indeed true. Provide me evidence that would stand up in a criminal court and I'll be happy to agree with you. Until then, nothing you've said has any veracity.
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 4:15:17 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 2:12:30 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.

The fact that no verifiable, factual evidence can be provided and not one of these instances can be repeated under scrutiny and laboratory conditions renders them useless as any kind of evidence. Many people experience hallucinations but that does not mean what they experience is real to anyone but them. It has nothing to do with any myth, that's your department. I simply want facts I can check, verify and potentially falsify to demonstrate unambiguously that what you claim to be true is indeed true. Provide me evidence that would stand up in a criminal court and I'll be happy to agree with you. Until then, nothing you've said has any veracity.

Demanding objective proof of a subjective experience is just plain silly. It's like demanding that we must verify our experience of a beautiful sunset, or that it be dismissed as "meaningless". What kind of an idiot would do that? Even if they can't recognize the beauty of the sunset, themselves, why would they want to invalidate the experience for everyone else?
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 5:22:43 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 4:15:17 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:12:30 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.

The fact that no verifiable, factual evidence can be provided and not one of these instances can be repeated under scrutiny and laboratory conditions renders them useless as any kind of evidence. Many people experience hallucinations but that does not mean what they experience is real to anyone but them. It has nothing to do with any myth, that's your department. I simply want facts I can check, verify and potentially falsify to demonstrate unambiguously that what you claim to be true is indeed true. Provide me evidence that would stand up in a criminal court and I'll be happy to agree with you. Until then, nothing you've said has any veracity.

Demanding objective proof of a subjective experience is just plain silly. It's like demanding that we must verify our experience of a beautiful sunset, or that it be dismissed as "meaningless". What kind of an idiot would do that? Even if they can't recognize the beauty of the sunset, themselves, why would they want to invalidate the experience for everyone else?

Everyone can see sunset and record it in a number of ways. The subjective experience is not in question, it's the object fact that the planet rotated and the sun appeared to move below the horizon. You're recording emptiness and claiming your perception of it is real despite the lack of an anything substantive. Your experience, a million experiences, a hundred millioin, won't put anything on that film or video. That's the difference in the subjective experience of an event and the event itself.
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 5:30:31 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 5:22:43 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 4:15:17 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:12:30 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.

The fact that no verifiable, factual evidence can be provided and not one of these instances can be repeated under scrutiny and laboratory conditions renders them useless as any kind of evidence. Many people experience hallucinations but that does not mean what they experience is real to anyone but them. It has nothing to do with any myth, that's your department. I simply want facts I can check, verify and potentially falsify to demonstrate unambiguously that what you claim to be true is indeed true. Provide me evidence that would stand up in a criminal court and I'll be happy to agree with you. Until then, nothing you've said has any veracity.

Demanding objective proof of a subjective experience is just plain silly. It's like demanding that we must verify our experience of a beautiful sunset, or that it be dismissed as "meaningless". What kind of an idiot would do that? Even if they can't recognize the beauty of the sunset, themselves, why would they want to invalidate the experience for everyone else?

Everyone can see sunset and record it in a number of ways. The subjective experience is not in question, it's the object fact that the planet rotated and the sun appeared to move below the horizon. You're recording emptiness and claiming your perception of it is real despite the lack of an anything substantive. Your experience, a million experiences, a hundred millioin, won't put anything on that film or video. That's the difference in the subjective experience of an event and the event itself.

You missed the whole point. It's not the sunset that matters, it's the experience of beauty one gains from it.

You think the big issue is if God "exists" or not, when that's not the issue at all. The issue is what one gains from holding to the belief that their God exists. No one can know if their God actually exits, or if so, in what way. Not you, not me, not the 'believer'. So the existence of God is a moot question. What is relevant is the result of believing or not believing in the existence of God, and what kind of God one believes in (because that effects the results).

A lot of people get a lot of good out of their belief in God. That is a fact. And since you can't prove their God does not exist, I see no reason for you to contend with them about it. Especially when their belief in God is improving their experience of life. And your lack of belief in God only seems to be making you absurdly self-righteous about what everyone else chooses to believe.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2016 3:12:32 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 5:30:31 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/16/2016 5:22:43 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 4:15:17 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:12:30 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/16/2016 2:08:06 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:34:36 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:05:14 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:47:58 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 8/15/2016 3:39:57 PM, PureX wrote:
We humans don't "invent gods", we perceive/conceive of them, just as we perceive/conceive of everything else. And that god-perception/conception has developed over time just as have so many others. And they are still developing.

When humans lived in relatively isolated tribes, their god-concepts were more individualized because of the isolation. As humans began to interact with other tribes more, they became aware of other god-concepts, and adopted some of each other's ideas. New god-concepts developed that could include whole groups of previously individualized concepts as human interaction and it's politics also gained in scope. Some of these conglomerate god-cencepts (religions, at this point) got too big and began splitting into smaller aberrant factions, again. And so on.

And it's still going on, today. We didn't stop "inventing gods" because we didn't invent them to begin with. The god-concept has been developing along with the rest of our intellectual understanding of existence. The perception of "spirit" has been with us from the beginning. And we've simply been perceiving and conceiving of it in different ways depending on our cultural circumstances. We still are.

There is no evidence of 'spirit' or 'soul'. Your statement is meaningless.

There is no physical evidence of it apart from our subjective experience of it. But then that's also true of love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, and many other similar subjective human experiences . These experiences are not "meaningless" just because you haven't recognized them, or because you don't appreciate them in whatever degree you can recognize them.

Love, beauty, justice, joy, fear, desire, etc. are verifiable via monitoring of the brain and body chemistry.

Every meaningful idea has a physiological component. We could identify the physiology of a prayer to God just as easily as we could identify the physiology of love for a child.

Subjective doesn't mean verifiable.

Subjective experiences do not need to be verified, they're self-evident.

You cannot produce one fact or one method to support your assertion that anything 'spiritual' exists.

The experience of disembodied "spirit" has happened to billions of human beings currently living, and all throughout human history. The evidence of this is overwhelming. And no one who has had such an experience needs any 'verification'.

Until you can, your entire belief structure rests on a baseless assertion that you declare is truth.

The fact that you have not had such an experience in no way invalidates the personal experiences of billions of other people. And sitting there like a petulant child, demanding that all humanity verify their subjective personal experiences according to your own absurd veneration of the myth of 'objective reality', is ridiculous.

The fact that no verifiable, factual evidence can be provided and not one of these instances can be repeated under scrutiny and laboratory conditions renders them useless as any kind of evidence. Many people experience hallucinations but that does not mean what they experience is real to anyone but them. It has nothing to do with any myth, that's your department. I simply want facts I can check, verify and potentially falsify to demonstrate unambiguously that what you claim to be true is indeed true. Provide me evidence that would stand up in a criminal court and I'll be happy to agree with you. Until then, nothing you've said has any veracity.

Demanding objective proof of a subjective experience is just plain silly. It's like demanding that we must verify our experience of a beautiful sunset, or that it be dismissed as "meaningless". What kind of an idiot would do that? Even if they can't recognize the beauty of the sunset, themselves, why would they want to invalidate the experience for everyone else?

Everyone can see sunset and record it in a number of ways. The subjective experience is not in question, it's the object fact that the planet rotated and the sun appeared to move below the horizon. You're recording emptiness and claiming your perception of it is real despite the lack of an anything substantive. Your experience, a million experiences, a hundred millioin, won't put anything on that film or video. That's the difference in the subjective experience of an event and the event itself.

You missed the whole point. It's not the sunset that matters, it's the experience of beauty one gains from it.

You think the big issue is if God "exists" or not, when that's not the issue at all. The issue is what one gains from holding to the belief that their God exists. No one can know if their God actually exits, or if so, in what way. Not you, not me, not the 'believer'. So the existence of God is a moot question. What is relevant is the result of believing or not believing in the existence of God, and what kind of God one believes in (because that effects the results).

A lot of people get a lot of good out of their belief in God. That is a fact. And since you can't prove their God does not exist, I see no reason for you to contend with them about it. Especially when their belief in God is improving their experience of life. And your lack of belief in God only seems to be making you absurdly self-righteous about what everyone else chooses to believe.

Unfortunately lots of people decide it's ok to slaughter other people out of love for their god. If thinking that all that death shouldn't happen makes me 'self-righteous' then I am guilty as charged. Now, if you can guarantee me that no believer will attempt to make what he believes the law of the land I'll never mention it again. What? Can't do that? Well, there you go.