Is being Religious a part of being Successful

You've obviously don't know too many Jewish ones.

 

Because the owner never dies. A family trust that never vests. Couple hundred years of compounding.

 

Nothing I can find after googling that, supports your first contention. But then again, maybe I just know more sophisticated atheists than you do?

 

I find it interesting that investors that buys with their calculators would bet their lives that God does not exist. Please see below for how a rational being should base their decision (potentially an eternity ):
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia

 

I missed this one, yes, true, but I think I do not get as many concessions.....certainly do not have people handing me money.

 

Your avatar....halloween?? Love it

 

I'll be going to do a tour of the Shrines of Capitalism in Oz shortly. Canberra Mint, Financial Strip in Melbourne, Sydney's ASX & the Rooty Hill RSL Pokie Lounge.

 

Life is too short to be too serious. Work hard, play even harder

 

Well said sir!

Whether you believe in religion or not, I personally believe there are natural laws that are immutable and religion is one way of respecting, learning and placing your own belief in those laws. For me the evidence of a creator is everywhere and even in the markets which are FAR MORE mathematically 'organised' in to mathematical growth patterns than the public realise.

The basic natural law for me is.... "Sow what you wish to reap!" or to put it another way....."To have something in abundance in your own life, you need to first give it away. The very act of giving what you desire is creating the personal experience of possessing it in abundance and sets the natural law of reflection back to you in motion."

 

I was actually thinking of going to Church in Atlanta because I desperately needed a framer and could not find one. This is where everyone networks.

At the end of the day I did not go, I am not a religious person and I am not a particularly good singer and my partner flat out refused to come along...

Anyway..... God Bless America

 

Im genuinely curious as to how you can use mathematics, by definition a factually based scirence with no room for opinions, to support a religious point of view which is the exact opposite. Because if you believe in maths then you should In science and therefore in evolution

 

Also, if looking at it mathematically, there are hundreds of diftrent religions or variances of religions and I believe dozens or maybe in the hundreds of different interpretations of just Christianity and the Bible alone, mathematically the odds of the one you follow being the correct one, regardless of which religion or denomination, and every one else being wrong, AND science and the non believers being wrong, is minute.

I don't think mathematically it can be argued the above is incorrect as a broad picture point of view.

Now.im not very religious but not an atheist and have no issue with any religion or people of strong faith, I just disagree with absolutes being stated about something that is clearly impossible to genuinely claim and prove

 

I think Oprah is a religion

 

So much in Science complements religious belief systems. They are not mutually exclusive, far from it. For example, I believe that some great power or force, larger than us humans, designed and created the universe as we know it. It doesn't bother me which method was used - dark hole, evolution, big bang etc. Creationists are one group within modern religions - they can be recognised as opposing Evolution theories such as Darwin's. I understand several scientists have disproved his theories too.

I see on Facebook this week (highly reputable sciency institution - not) that the new AI robot in Saudi Arabia wants to have a baby. Good luck to it's programmers. I am currently reading Dr Karl's latest book, chapter 3 is about creating an artificial uterus. It isn't going well.

Can Science replicate all of Creation? I dont "get" absolutes either.

 

The key word is you believe. Not it has been proven without a doubt based on sound, measurable analysis

You're kind of proving my point here

Also, if it all.started with Adam and eve and there is no such thing as evolution then how did we get all the different races with such distinctively different features, skin colour etc?

How could the kids of 2 people from the same ethnic group go on to have incestuous kids of wildly differing colours, DNA, etc?

And how can any religion prove that their teachings re the origins of humans are correct and other religions are wrong

Again the only difference is who believes religion a over religion b

 

Agree with this ^^^^^.

I was raised in an Irish Catholic home and to me it seemed more cultural than religious. Its the same in the sates when it comes to religion, for the most part.

At 28 I had a "born again" experience and then reexamined the whole deal at around 40. Im probably best described as an open agnostic.

Religion and Christianity does have its place I reckon but it does fill your head with a load of crap you would be better of with out. Well thats my firsthand experience.

 

I don't see anything in evolution that disproves a God. Certainly, it rules out any literal interpretations of the book of genesis, but that's not the same question.

 

Same point here. Does God exist and did we all come from Adam and Eve, are both totally different questions.

The catholic church have been pretty accepting of evolution for quite some time. Pope Bolsters Church's Support For Scientific View of Evolution

 

And which god?
Pascal's Wager sounds more like blackmail to me. How about just being a decent human being, no need to blindly believe in anything without evidence.

 

Well let's say he didn't last long did he?
Anyway to his points which really aren't points,
"Many criticisms have explained that the wager has been used as a supposed theory of the necessity to believe, although that was never Pascal's intention. As Laurent Thirouin writes:

The celebrity of fragment 418 has been established at the price of a mutilation. By titling this text "the wager", readers have been fixated only on one part of Pascal's reasoning. It doesn't conclude with a QED at the end of the mathematical part. The unbeliever who had provoked this long analysis to counter his previous objection ("Maybe I bet too much") is still not ready to join the apologist on the side of faith. He put forward two new objections, undermining the foundations of the wager: the impossibility to know, and the obligation of playing.

To be put at the beginning of Pascal's planned book, the wager was meant to show that logical reasoning cannot support faith or lack thereof,

We have to accept reality and accept the reaction of the libertine when he rejects arguments he is unable to counter. The conclusion is evident: if men believe or refuse to believe, it is not how some believers sometimes say and most unbelievers claim, because their own reason justifies the position they have adopted. Belief in God doesn't depend upon rational evidence, not matter which ones.

Pascal's intended book was precisely to find other ways to establish the value of faith, an apology for the Christian faith."

It's certainly an interesting use of game theory which I find intellectually stimulating as an Economists about how a rational being should play a game. There are many ways that people become Christians, whether it's through the historical recollections of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus which even most Historians can't deny that he existed - hell (excuse my pun) the bible is a more detailed account of any public figures I've ever seen who people know to exist; the spiritual experience; creation; intelligent design; morality and what Jesus has done for us at the Cross. I don't see what's wrong with turning to God when you're scared that you'll live an eternity in hell - indeed people who are God fearing are praised in the bible if you search for it in Google. It's like finding out that if you don't stop eating fast food everyday you'll live a very short life, so you turn your life around. Likewise, people become Christians, obey God because that's seen as one way of loving God. It's really got nothing to do with being a decent human but about your relationship with God.

Indeed there appears to be many Gods depending on your religion but Christians in general have one God. Just think about which is more powerful, the one God that can do it all, or the thousands of other Gods required just to do what the one God can do?

BTW I'm not preaching at you, I just can't stand back while you talk bad about the faith. Without Christians GST, or personal tax would need to be much higher to pay for welfare etc. There is a church in every community, come back to me when there is a non-faith organisation that does that in every community.

In summary, I'm not gunna force people to believe something if they are not open to it but me personally as a rational being faced with either an eternity in Heaven or Hell, another 60 or so years is a very short price to pay and to be honest I don't think I'm giving up too much anyway - life is already long enough so I can't imagine an eternity!