"I'm spiritual but not religious." Help me out y'all. What does this mean?

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,409
Reputation
-34,322
Daps
617,936
Reppin
The Deep State
I too have experienced and seen far too much for anyone to tell me God isn't real. You have the foundation at least.

Take baby steps and start now. If you don't, you never will. If your life really revolves around selling people coke and having sex with cute bytches, that's a good place to start.

God's not real though.
 

Poitier

My Words Law
Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
69,412
Reputation
15,439
Daps
246,376
God is real. He isn't incorporeal, though. And he isn't something other than you. God = a person with agency over their reality. That's all.
 

86\*/98

Chef Will Equilibrar Òkùnkùn
Supporter
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
11,234
Reputation
3,613
Daps
39,559
Reppin
Sparking blunts in the shade.
When I used to say I'm spiritual, it meant, I believed in god, felt I had a personal relationship with him but didn't fukk with religion at all.

Now, I'm just agnostic.
 

Greenstrings

All Star
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
1,829
Reputation
470
Daps
3,660
If you god interacts with the world, we can measure that interaction. Correct?
You see this is why I don't argue with religious people about the veracity of their beliefs.

Superficially this is a perfectly valid empirically sound statement, but then you consider the fact that we still have no idea how big the universe is or whether or not it is infinite or whether or not the laws that govern the known universe are themselves universal and ultimately most religious folk are happy for their god to exist in the unknown.This is why god of the gaps fails to be a useful argument in the face of faith.

There are always going to be gaps and there are always going to be people that choose to fill those gaps with 'the supernatural', the rabbit hole of scientific enquiry never bottoms out and even as it encroaches on territory once held by faith and religion, because the logic of faith is circular and has a powerful confirmation bias it never completely wins out..

Human beings are capable of and often defer to rational modes of thinking but are by no means inherently rational. Until you understand this you'll keep banging your head against that same brick wall.
 

Poitier

My Words Law
Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
69,412
Reputation
15,439
Daps
246,376
Napoleon is a smart dude but he feels the need to flaunt it and put down others to feel superior.

You see this is why I don't argue with religious people about the veracity of their beliefs.

Superficially this is a perfectly valid empirically sound statement, but then you consider the fact that we still have no idea how big the universe is or whether or not it is infinite or whether or not the laws that govern the known universe are themselves universal and ultimately most religious folk are happy for their god to exist in the unknown.This is why god of the gaps fails to be a useful argument in the face of faith.

There are always going to be gaps and there are always going to be people that choose to fill those gaps with 'the supernatural', the rabbit hole of scientific enquiry never bottoms out and even as it encroaches on territory once held by faith and religion, because the logic of faith is circular and has a powerful confirmation bias it never completely wins out..

Human beings are capable of and often defer to rational modes of thinking but are by no means inherently rational. Until you understand this you'll keep banging your head against that same brick wall.

Humans are emotional creatures. Never rational.

Logics crowning achievement so far has been Post Modernism. It's as circular as faith. Life itself is circular.

Reminds me of this book. Which I recommend everyone should read.

cov-ubik-v-200.jpg
 
Top