A.S.K. your way to proof.

[The Architect Of Fate]

if this is true, then why did Buddhism or Islam take when i set out to test those religions? Remember i started out with my mother as Buddhist.

---

Because you are even more unblessed than the millions of the less unblessed in whom those some what less contemptible creeds did take in happy preference to yours?

Pretty simple, really.     you must be really stupid to not see it.

I love to see Dirch tell Klor he didn't "test" his religion enough and tell all he buddhists who explicitly say they have experienced enlightenment they didn't  test their religion enough . And consider plenty of christians  have converted  to Islam some even having religious experiences that 100% convinced them it's all true  .So why is Dirch special ?

Also because one religion resonated with the voices in his head does not mean just any one would .

[Drich]

Because you are even more unblessed than the millions of the less unblessed in whom those some what less contemptible creeds did take in happy preference to yours?

Pretty simple, really.     you must be really stupid to not see it.

I love to see Dirch tell Klor he didn't "test" his religion enough and tell all he buddhists who explicitly say they have experienced enlightenment they didn't  test their religion enough . And consider plenty of christians  have converted  to Islam some even having religious experiences that 100% convinced them it's all true  .So why is Dirch special ?

Also because one religion resonated with the voices in his head does not mean just any one would .

Again sport religions provide what people are searching for. for Buddhist if they seek enlightenment over God then Buddhism will give him what he is looking for. What i'm saying is Buddhism is not of God. As God is not the only entity setting up religions.

---

if this is true, then why did Buddhism or Islam take when i set out to test those religions? Remember i started out with my mother as Buddhist.

This is what is known as an anecdote. Just because you wound up Christian doesn't mean the experience is typical of those who try it. Did you A/S/K Buddha first? Did he not answer?

Seriously why would I A.s.K buddha? A.s.k. is not apart of Buddhism. For buddhism one must first lear to 'enter the stream.'
which includes:
learning about enlightenment and the unchanging soul which can and does pass from life to life. (which to me was the only appealing part of this religion. and the 5 different types of self denial one must master in a given life to move past the cycle of life and death.

There is no a.s.k.-ing here. life lives are nothing more than a perpetual tests, to show one's devotion to become apart of a higher collective.. Not my thing. as i do not see the point in being forced to repeat the same mistakes over and over because of a personal flaw or to become apart of a greater collective.

Buddhism is to loose your individuality or to put off your core nature to be come apart of something bigger.

If so you did not try long enough or hard enough, eventually you'd have discovered Buddha is real.

it is real you smarties don't get or can't fathom that i do not disregard other religions. that's your thing sport. i know people are not stupid and will see the sham in false or empty religion over time. and if something like this lasts it is because there is a force driving it. But again that force does not have to be God.

This is the same standard you ask of us, to A/S/K for the rest of our lives or we find God, whichever comes first. Why didn't you use that standard with Buddha?

again smart guy because that is not the requirement for Buddhism. it is only a requirement to receive the Holy Spirit, in Christianity. If and when you do decide to test other religions you must first learn what they offer in relation to what they expect from you. Can't cross contaminate one religious experience with another or you will doom yourself to fail.

IE you would not take the Islamic morning and afternoon prayers to Christianity or would not take the lords prayer to Islam.

[Drich]

It would be good if you fixed it , And i couldn't care less about this so called advantage . As i said i'm not playing games .

and if the anaology is not broken? what if it is simply your understanding of the world that will not allow you to see the simplistic for what it is?
put a pin in this we will come back to it when discussing your Einstein remarks.

This assumes my goal is tear something down .Rather than simply pointing something out . If you choose to fix it well good for you .

not an assumption but a critique of your past works, applied to this one.

 look at this discussion. you only tactic is to attack me personally,

Pointing your analogies are bad is not a personnel attack nor is pointing out your seeming love of using them  . You clearly looking at a very different conversation .

example? which analogies?

Einstein seemed to love using unrealistic and confusing analogies to express his ideas (pointing out something about  Einstein's methods not attacking him personally)

This i think is the core of your problem.. Einstein did not use unrealistic or confusing analogies. in fact he is credited in saying: that if one can not explain a concept simply then he himself does not truly understand the subject. I personally take the time to try and use the simplest explanation i possibly can to explain a precept. Or better yet i will take a parable of Christ and modernize it. So as to communicate using an analogy of Christ himself in a modern term or understanding. So again most of my work comes from Christ through the lens of Einstein's words on keeping things simple.

Here is a wiki page of his most popular analogies, without these dumbed down versions of his theories i would say 20% of the world Might be in a position to take his raw data and convert that to something they truly understand. Which brings us back to your problem. You see yourself as a standard of some sorts. you took t upon yourself to claim Einstein analogies were bad and overly complicated. The world at large does not agree. the world says his analogies are not only good be exceedingly simple and quite easy to understand given the scope of the nature of the subject matter. This means your judgement your knowledge base and your personal world view is over inflated. IE you are not in a position to judge an analogy good or bad for anyone but yourself. again your failure to recognize the genius in the simplicity of Einstein's work with analogies is absolute proof of this. yet here you are with the expertise of a true dunning-Kruger master making a judgement on a world renowned literal super genius, and then move to apply this same judgement to me.
Thank you i guess? as your bad seems to mean good for the rest of the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%2...xperiments

Einstein was a stupid moron who used shit analogies to push his retarded nonsense because he was a fucking jew (personnel attack )

nice antisemitism..
Where are you hypocrites who want me to be kicked for portraying myself as Korean but let antisemitic remarks like this go? if you guys let this racial remark go, then know you are truly fake virtusignaling scum.



 so again why have me fix you only viable means of attack?

It would be good if you fixed it. I don't care about attacking at least not in this case .

not true as demonstrated it is all you have as you do not seem to be intelligent enough to speak topically. look at your last 5 posts to me. how much of what you said is about me and how much is of the actual topic? The primary body of your work are all personal attacks. without them you would have nothing to say topically. (again do not appear to be intelligent enough to have a non ad hom discussion.)

Sorry "Sport" 

Pointing out the shortfall that you make poor analogies is not  complaining it's pointing something out ,And i said no TACTICAL purpose .You can point out a fact without tactical reason but merely to point out the fact out and  doing so repeatedly is not bitching .So all you have done is quote a definition that doesn't apply to my comment.

To make the example apply to my comment 

They pointed out the food was undercooked .Then they pointed out the bills print wasn't legible.

Let's compare 

Sangula  pointed out Dirch makes terrible analogies that are ineffectual 

So to sum up my notifications to you pointing out the fact you make bad analogies is itself a point and a purpose .Even if i'm not doing it in some tactical ends .

So no tut tut to you

Are you serious? If you "under-cooked" analogy was what you consider to be a good analogy then i concede the whole argument.. my analogies are NOTHING like that, the mirror opposite infact. which means if you judged your mess good then mine have to be 'bad.'

but this is the bad by the standard of a admitted/proven antisemitic hate monger who can even see through his hate to give Albert Einstein his due. in fact he placed me in the same category as Einstein as far as my ability to provide a similar type analogy.

i'll take it.

---

This is what is known as an anecdote. Just because you wound up Christian doesn't mean the experience is typical of those who try it. Did you A/S/K Buddha first? Did he not answer? If so you did not try long enough or hard enough, eventually you'd have discovered Buddha is real.

This is the same standard you ask of us, to A/S/K for the rest of our lives or we find God, whichever comes first. Why didn't you use that standard with Buddha?

One does not "try out" religions. 
Yet another example of how fucked up this fool is. 
If one does try-outs, then it's neither about faith or religion. 
Not only is this ignoramus not a Christian, he's not even a theist. 
He's an opportunist.

1

Is that how high can you count ? 
Oh wait, you can go up to 5 now. 
Great. 
Now you can start spelling lessons. 


I'm sure his Jebus is real pleased with his work here, insulting those he wants to convert.
Good going.

2 and 3

[Bucky Ball]

No converts today I see.
Just more insults at those he wants to convince that his way of life is better. What a great plan.

"I know, I'll go insult non-believers. That's it. That's my plan. It's a great plan".

We see an angry, rather stupid, uneducated, delusional, unhappy old guy, with nothing to do, who gets his rocks off pretending he's a religionist.
No one with an actual business would be SO bad at targeted marketing.

[Mister Agenda]

I love to see Dirch tell Klor he didn't "test" his religion enough and tell all he buddhists who explicitly say they have experienced enlightenment they didn't  test their religion enough . And consider plenty of christians  have converted  to Islam some even having religious experiences that 100% convinced them it's all true  .So why is Dirch special ?

Also because one religion resonated with the voices in his head does not mean just any one would .

Again sport religions provide what people are searching for. for Buddhist if they seek enlightenment over God then Buddhism will give him what he is looking for. What i'm saying is Buddhism is not of God. As God is not the only entity setting up religions.

---

This is what is known as an anecdote. Just because you wound up Christian doesn't mean the experience is typical of those who try it. Did you A/S/K Buddha first? Did he not answer?

Seriously why would I A.s.K buddha? A.s.k. is not apart of Buddhism. For buddhism one must first lear to 'enter the stream.'
which includes:
learning about enlightenment and the unchanging soul which can and does pass from life to life. (which to me was the only appealing part of this religion. and the 5 different types of self denial one must master in a given life to move past the cycle of life and death.

There is no a.s.k.-ing here. life lives are nothing more than a perpetual tests, to show one's devotion to become apart of a higher collective.. Not my thing. as i do not see the point in being forced to repeat the same mistakes over and over because of a personal flaw or to become apart of a greater collective.

Buddhism is to loose your individuality or to put off your core nature to be come apart of something bigger.

If so you did not try long enough or hard enough, eventually you'd have discovered Buddha is real.

it is real you smarties don't get or can't fathom that i do not disregard other religions. that's your thing sport. i know people are not stupid and will see the sham in false or empty religion over time. and if something like this lasts it is because there is a force driving it. But again that force does not have to be God.

This is the same standard you ask of us, to A/S/K for the rest of our lives or we find God, whichever comes first. Why didn't you use that standard with Buddha?

again smart guy because that is not the requirement for Buddhism. it is only a requirement to receive the Holy Spirit, in Christianity. If and when you do decide to test other religions you must first learn what they offer in relation to what they expect from you. Can't cross contaminate one religious experience with another or you will doom yourself to fail.

IE you would not take the Islamic morning and afternoon prayers to Christianity or would not take the lords prayer to Islam.

So only in Christianity are you expected to use the method of convincing yourself it's true. Because if they try hard enough long enough, most people can convince themselves almost anything is true, and that's what your method amounts to.

[Bucky Ball]

If and when you do decide to test other religions you must first learn what they offer in relation to what they expect from you. 

So basically it's a deal. A business deal. 
What do you get, and how much do you have to put out. 
Uh huh. 
And this guy says he's here to clarify Christianity for us. 

[The Architect Of Fate]

And if the anaology is not broken? what if it is simply your understanding of the world that will not allow you to see the simplistic for what it is?
put a pin in this we will come back to it when discussing your Einstein remarks.

No your analogies are bad and no i understand them well enough, And oh dear when we get to the Einstein stuff
 (thank goodness i had coffee before responding to this )

not an assumption but a critique of your past works, applied to this one.

No it's an assumption .One born of your faulty impressions of my work .As the rest of this will show

example? which analogies?

Why bother? Reading this response i can only assume you either don't take this seriously or are being obtuse by intent .So why should i dig back through your comments and subject myself to more dreck . Hell the only reason i'm making this response is because i refuse to let the narrative be yours .After this post i'm done .

This i think is the core of your problem.. Einstein did not use unrealistic or confusing analogies. in fact he is credited in saying: that if one can not explain a concept simply then he himself does not truly understand the subject. I personally take the time to try and use the simplest explanation i possibly can to explain a precept. Or better yet i will take a parable of Christ and modernize it. So as to communicate using an analogy of Christ himself in a modern term or understanding. So again most of my work comes from Christ through the lens of Einstein's words on keeping things simple.

Here is a wiki page of his most popular analogies, without these dumbed down versions of his theories i would say 20% of the world Might be in a position to take his raw data and convert that to something they truly understand. Which brings us back to your problem. You see yourself as a standard of some sorts. you took t upon yourself to claim Einstein analogies were bad and overly complicated. The world at large does not agree. the world says his analogies are not only good be exceedingly simple and quite easy to understand given the scope of the nature of the subject matter. This means your judgement your knowledge base and your personal world view is over inflated. IE you are not in a position to judge an analogy good or bad for anyone but yourself. again your failure to recognize the genius in the simplicity of Einstein's work with analogies is absolute proof of this. yet here you are with the expertise of a true dunning-Kruger master making a judgement on a world renowned literal super genius, and then move to apply this same judgement to me.
Thank you i guess? as your bad seems to mean good for the rest of the world.

Seriously how did you not get what i was doing ? I wasn't  making actually truth statement about Einstein i could have used anyone in my example .I was pointing out the difference between a personnel attack and a pointing out bad methodology because you accused  of personnel attacks . Though as a critique to myself i could have used quotation marks or explained that .But considering i have done this plenty without having to do that  so i didn't see a reason too .So you have written a long post that completely missed my point ,And no your Analogies aren't simple they are bad and not even close to Einstein or any other actual thinker

 nice antisemitism..
Where are you hypocrites who want me to be kicked for portraying myself as Korean but let antisemitic remarks like this go? if you guys let this racial remark go, then know you are truly fake virtusignaling scum.

I wasn't making an antisemitic comment i was giving an example of what a personnel attack on Einstein would look like .I imagine everyone else got that .

so again why have me fix you only viable means of attack?

I already answered this .This wasn't an attack .

not true as demonstrated it is all you have as you do not seem to be intelligent enough to speak topically. look at your last 5 posts to me. how much of what you said is about me and how much is of the actual topic? The primary body of your work are all personal attacks. without them you would have nothing to say topically. (again do not appear to be intelligent enough to have a non ad hom discussion.)

Actually at least in this series of comments i made no personnel attacks . All my comments have been about your methodology not you .

Are you serious? If you "under-cooked" analogy was what you consider to be a good analogy then i concede the whole argument.. my analogies are NOTHING like that, the mirror opposite infact. which means if you judged your mess good then mine have to be 'bad.'

That wasn't one of your analogies nor was i comparing it to one . I was taking the dictionary example you provided and modifying it to show the difference between what i was doing and your accusation of "bitching "

but this is the bad by the standard of a admitted/proven antisemitic hate monger who can even see through his hate to give Albert Einstein his due. in fact he placed me in the same category as Einstein as far as my ability to provide a similar type analogy.

Sigh as opposed to a guy who can't tell the difference a legitimate Antisemitic attack and giving  (a fictional ) example of what an Anti Semitic(personnel attack ) attack would look like  . As oppose to a guy who can't see a (fictional) comment on Einstein and thinks via that fictional comment i think he's on par with Einstein 

i'll take it. Great

Yes i'm sure your ego loved that .Too bad it's not what i said .


So to sum up you misunderstood  or intentionally misrepresented everything i wrote .Awesome 



And as my last response to you before go on ignore for a while for wasting my time 

Again sport religions provide what people are searching for.

Religion isn't a choose your own adventure book .It has very real metaphysical and  consequences many of which a totally incompatible .One of you is wrong and the other is right , And you have no means of telling a Buddhist you got it right .

 for Buddhist if they seek enlightenment over God then Buddhism will give him what he is looking for. What i'm saying is Buddhism is not of God. As God is not the only entity setting up religions.

Yup and you no way of telling him god is right (or your interpretation of god) is right and his enlightenment which contradicts many of your Christian beliefs is wrong because via personnel enlightenment he has as much proof as you do .Same goes for Muslims who would look at your story and declare you deceived and declare their experience the truth ,And you have no means to object as they have same evidence you do for a totally incompatible doctrine .

So there's nothing  you have said here a member of another religion couldn't throwback in your face with equal justification in favor of their specific exclusive doctrine .

[Drich]

No converts today I see.
Just more insults at those he wants to convince that his way of life is better. What a great plan.

"I know, I'll go insult non-believers. That's it. That's my plan. It's a great plan".

We see an angry, rather stupid, uneducated, delusional, unhappy old guy, with nothing to do, who gets his rocks off pretending he's a religionist.
No one with an actual business would be SO bad at targeted marketing.

4

---

Again sport religions provide what people are searching for. for Buddhist if they seek enlightenment over God then Buddhism will give him what he is looking for. What i'm saying is Buddhism is not of God. As God is not the only entity setting up religions.

---

Seriously why would I A.s.K buddha? A.s.k. is not apart of Buddhism. For buddhism one must first lear to 'enter the stream.'
which includes:
learning about enlightenment and the unchanging soul which can and does pass from life to life. (which to me was the only appealing part of this religion. and the 5 different types of self denial one must master in a given life to move past the cycle of life and death.

There is no a.s.k.-ing here. life lives are nothing more than a perpetual tests, to show one's devotion to become apart of a higher collective.. Not my thing. as i do not see the point in being forced to repeat the same mistakes over and over because of a personal flaw or to become apart of a greater collective.

Buddhism is to loose your individuality or to put off your core nature to be come apart of something bigger.
it is real you smarties don't get or can't fathom that i do not disregard other religions. that's your thing sport. i know people are not stupid and will see the sham in false or empty religion over time. and if something like this lasts it is because there is a force driving it. But again that force does not have to be God.

again smart guy because that is not the requirement for Buddhism. it is only a requirement to receive the Holy Spirit, in Christianity. If and when you do decide to test other religions you must first learn what they offer in relation to what they expect from you. Can't cross contaminate one religious experience with another or you will doom yourself to fail.

IE you would not take the Islamic morning and afternoon prayers to Christianity or would not take the lords prayer to Islam.

So only in Christianity are you expected to use the method of convincing yourself it's true. Because if they try hard enough long enough, most people can convince themselves almost anything is true, and that's what your method amounts to.

like you being convinced that most people can convince themselves as you have that anything can be true.

if this were true then why are we not still worshiping anubus thor or zuse? that's right "reasons.. "

people are not a stupid as you need them to be in order to justify your dismissal. this is the reason for failed religions. if people believe there is something there powering or fueling belief.

only 4% of you represent the world's population/people who think like you do. why is that? what is the most likly answer? That's right you 4% are simply smarter than everyone else who make nothing up out of thin air.

---

If and when you do decide to test other religions you must first learn what they offer in relation to what they expect from you. 

So basically it's a deal. A business deal. 

if you were ever to choose a wife would you then see it as a business deal as well?
what about a friend?
have you ever decided that a friend isn't really a friend and he/she is just using you and you end the relationship?

Same process sport. you decide whether or not on one level or another if a person is compatible. here you are doing the same with a system of belief. or are you just a lemming made to follow the one infront of you hell or high water?

What do you get,

I 'got' a one on one relationship with God, the promise of eternal salvation and my undeserved prosperous life, and an over all contentment with the roll i have been assigned to.

and how much do you have to put out. 

Love neighbor as self which for me= to help people like you with the truth of God's word, and to love God with all of my being= turn from a love of sin, and do what i can/understand to live as best i can in service to God..

Uh huh. 
And this guy says he's here to clarify Christianity for us. 

you assumed no answer or a complicated one?

what is so hard to understand the golden rules?
Love God with all your being
love neighbor as yourself?

---

And if the anaology is not broken? what if it is simply your understanding of the world that will not allow you to see the simplistic for what it is?
put a pin in this we will come back to it when discussing your Einstein remarks.

No your analogies are bad and no i understand them well enough, And oh dear when we get to the Einstein stuff
 (thank goodness i had coffee before responding to this )

not an assumption but a critique of your past works, applied to this one.

No it's an assumption .One born of your faulty impressions of my work .As the rest of this will show

example? which analogies?

Why bother? Reading this response i can only assume you either don't take this seriously or are being obtuse by intent .So why should i dig back through your comments and subject myself to more dreck . Hell the only reason i'm making this response is because i refuse to let the narrative be yours .After this post i'm done .

This i think is the core of your problem.. Einstein did not use unrealistic or confusing analogies. in fact he is credited in saying: that if one can not explain a concept simply then he himself does not truly understand the subject. I personally take the time to try and use the simplest explanation i possibly can to explain a precept. Or better yet i will take a parable of Christ and modernize it. So as to communicate using an analogy of Christ himself in a modern term or understanding. So again most of my work comes from Christ through the lens of Einstein's words on keeping things simple.

Here is a wiki page of his most popular analogies, without these dumbed down versions of his theories i would say 20% of the world Might be in a position to take his raw data and convert that to something they truly understand. Which brings us back to your problem. You see yourself as a standard of some sorts. you took t upon yourself to claim Einstein analogies were bad and overly complicated. The world at large does not agree. the world says his analogies are not only good be exceedingly simple and quite easy to understand given the scope of the nature of the subject matter. This means your judgement your knowledge base and your personal world view is over inflated. IE you are not in a position to judge an analogy good or bad for anyone but yourself. again your failure to recognize the genius in the simplicity of Einstein's work with analogies is absolute proof of this. yet here you are with the expertise of a true dunning-Kruger master making a judgement on a world renowned literal super genius, and then move to apply this same judgement to me.
Thank you i guess? as your bad seems to mean good for the rest of the world.

Seriously how did you not get what i was doing ? I wasn't  making actually truth statement about Einstein i could have used anyone in my example .I was pointing out the difference between a personnel attack and a pointing out bad methodology because you accused  of personnel attacks . Though as a critique to myself i could have used quotation marks or explained that .But considering i have done this plenty without having to do that  so i didn't see a reason too .So you have written a long post that completely missed my point ,And no your Analogies aren't simple they are bad and not even close to Einstein or any other actual thinker

 nice antisemitism..
Where are you hypocrites who want me to be kicked for portraying myself as Korean but let antisemitic remarks like this go? if you guys let this racial remark go, then know you are truly fake virtusignaling scum.

I wasn't making an antisemitic comment i was giving an example of what a personnel attack on Einstein would look like .I imagine everyone else got that .

so again why have me fix you only viable means of attack?

I already answered this .This wasn't an attack .

not true as demonstrated it is all you have as you do not seem to be intelligent enough to speak topically. look at your last 5 posts to me. how much of what you said is about me and how much is of the actual topic? The primary body of your work are all personal attacks. without them you would have nothing to say topically. (again do not appear to be intelligent enough to have a non ad hom discussion.)

Actually at least in this series of comments i made no personnel attacks . All my comments have been about your methodology not you .

Are you serious? If you "under-cooked" analogy was what you consider to be a good analogy then i concede the whole argument.. my analogies are NOTHING like that, the mirror opposite infact. which means if you judged your mess good then mine have to be 'bad.'

That wasn't one of your analogies nor was i comparing it to one . I was taking the dictionary example you provided and modifying it to show the difference between what i was doing and your accusation of "bitching "

but this is the bad by the standard of a admitted/proven antisemitic hate monger who can even see through his hate to give Albert Einstein his due. in fact he placed me in the same category as Einstein as far as my ability to provide a similar type analogy.

Sigh as opposed to a guy who can't tell the difference a legitimate Antisemitic attack and giving  (a fictional ) example of what an Anti Semitic(personnel attack ) attack would look like  . As oppose to a guy who can't see a (fictional) comment on Einstein and thinks via that fictional comment i think he's on par with Einstein 

i'll take it. Great

Yes i'm sure your ego loved that .Too bad it's not what i said .


So to sum up you misunderstood  or intentionally misrepresented everything i wrote .Awesome 



And as my last response to you before go on ignore for a while for wasting my time 

Again sport religions provide what people are searching for.

Religion isn't a choose your own adventure book .It has very real metaphysical and  consequences many of which a totally incompatible .One of you is wrong and the other is right , And you have no means of telling a Buddhist you got it right .

 for Buddhist if they seek enlightenment over God then Buddhism will give him what he is looking for. What i'm saying is Buddhism is not of God. As God is not the only entity setting up religions.

Yup and you no way of telling him god is right (or your interpretation of god) is right and his enlightenment which contradicts many of your Christian beliefs is wrong because via personnel enlightenment he has as much proof as you do .Same goes for Muslims who would look at your story and declare you deceived and declare their experience the truth ,And you have no means to object as they have same evidence you do for a totally incompatible doctrine .

So there's nothing  you have said here a member of another religion couldn't throwback in your face with equal justification in favor of their specific exclusive doctrine .

if you can not provide an example or proof/context then there is no further point to continue this discussion.

[Mister Agenda]

So only in Christianity are you expected to use the method of convincing yourself it's true. Because if they try hard enough long enough, most people can convince themselves almost anything is true, and that's what your method amounts to.

like you being convinced that most people can convince themselves as you have that anything can be true.

if this were true then why are we not still worshiping anubus thor or zuse? that's right "reasons.. "

people are not a stupid as you need them to be in order to justify your dismissal. this is the reason for failed religions. if people believe there is something there powering or fueling belief.

only 4% of you represent the world's population/people who think like you do. why is that? what is the most likly answer? That's right you 4% are simply smarter than everyone else who make nothing up out of thin air.

It's a fact that most people can convince themselves of something they want to believe if they try hard enough, long enough. I didn't put any effort at all into not believing, I just had a moment when I realized I didn't believe anymore.

Greek religion arguably extends back to Neolithic times; but certainly extends back as far as the 8th Century BCE until it was suppressed by the Christians around the 300s AD. It's time on earth (not counting modern revivals) was at least 1,100 years, probably over 5,000. The 'reasons' were Christians stamping it out once they got temporal power. That's been the death of many religions. Vedic Hinduism goes back to 3300 BCE and is still a major world religion. Is that evidence that Hinduism is the true religion?

It doesn't take stupidity, it only takes motivation. Do you think stupidity is the explanation for 1100 years or more of Greek polytheism? They believed something was there that fueled their belief.

There are 200 million 'convinced atheists' just in China, the low end of broad estimates put us at 500 million worldwide; mostly in Asia, the Pacific, and Europe; the least in North Africa and the Middle East. You might want to update your figure to 6.7% of the world's population. That's about as many atheists as Buddhists. Not to mention, as you know because it's been pointed out to you so many times, argument ad populum is a logical fallacy, if you conclusion is true, that can't be the reason it's true. There was a time when 99% of the world's population believed the earth was flat, the 99% was just wrong and the 1% were just the first to figure it out.

[The Architect Of Fate]

like you being convinced that most people can convince themselves as you have that anything can be true.

if this were true then why are we not still worshiping anubus thor or zuse? that's right "reasons.. "

people are not a stupid as you need them to be in order to justify your dismissal. this is the reason for failed religions. if people believe there is something there powering or fueling belief.

only 4% of you represent the world's population/people who think like you do. why is that? what is the most likly answer? That's right you 4% are simply smarter than everyone else who make nothing up out of thin air.

It's a fact that most people can convince themselves of something they want to believe if they try hard enough, long enough. I didn't put any effort at all into not believing, I just had a moment when I realized I didn't believe anymore.

Greek religion arguably extends back to Neolithic times; but certainly extends back as far as the 8th Century BCE until it was suppressed by the Christians around the 300s AD. It's time on earth (not counting modern revivals) was at least 1,100 years, probably over 5,000. The 'reasons' were Christians stamping it out once they got temporal power. That's been the death of many religions. Vedic Hinduism goes back to 3300 BCE and is still a major world religion. Is that evidence that Hinduism is the true religion?

It doesn't take stupidity, it only takes motivation. Do you think stupidity is the explanation for 1100 years or more of Greek polytheism? They believed something was there that fueled their belief.

There are 200 million 'convinced atheists' just in China, the low end of broad estimates put us at 500 million worldwide; mostly in Asia, the Pacific, and Europe; the least in North Africa and the Middle East. You might want to update your figure to 6.7% of the world's population. That's about as many atheists as Buddhists. Not to mention, as you know because it's been pointed out to you so many times, argument ad populum is a logical fallacy, if you conclusion is true, that can't be the reason it's true. There was a time when 99% of the world's population believed the earth was flat, the 99% was just wrong and the 1% were just the first to figure it out.

Not to mention 

1. Yes people can deceive themselves into believing anything and people can hold idea's that seem true 

2. People believed in dead gods as surely as people now believe in modern gods and for the same reasons .It's pure hubris to think of all dead religions yours doctrine  is the only one that's "based on something accurate  " or that something is just as false as what they believed .

3. Stupid no. wrong yes .

4.I never claimed to be smarter one can be stupid and still be right or still have better reason for rejection then acceptance .The percentage of the people doesn't matter as their still just people