Does science support the existence of God?

[dsade]

actually Luke was a physician, so at least for that time he was not illiterate. Also, what does our understanding of how something happened have to do with its occurrence or not? If I did not believe things that I did not understand, I would seem even more odd than I already am. But I do understand your point (I greatly oversimplified to make a point), in that some events appear to be "normal", while others do not. But understanding has nothing to do with occurrence, though it may influence belief in the occurrence. And the aruguement can be made that many different "ancient" sources tell about the Roman empire, we have archeology, etc., while only the Bible talks about the life of Jesus, but there were Roman historians at that time that do make mention of Jesus, the miracles and the uproar caused in Jerusalem. Unfortunately I do not remember the name of the historian, maybe Pliny the Elder?, I do not know why that name came up, so it is probably incorrect. Since I cannot site it properly it is probably of not much use, but I did want to bring the point up that other ancient texts do make mention of Jesus, and do make reference to His resurrection, even, although not first hand accounts, only by rumor.

Mostly because they are inconsequential. While it is academically fascinating to read about history, and there are lessons to be learned by mistakes described, we are really not "expected" to do anything more (like worship, tithe, etc.)

You bring up something that I did already cover, though, which is hearsay. Direct testimony dies with the direct witness - and then, lacking further evidence, becomes nothing but hearsay, since the witness is not available to evaluate (whether for reliability, contradiction, mental state, etc.)

Would you sentence a man to death based on hearsay?


And another random example here...can anyone list - without contradicting any other accounts in the bible - the exact order and names of those that Jesus appeared to when he was ressurrected?

 

[carpee]

Mostly because they are inconsequential. While it is academically fascinating to read about history, and there are lessons to be learned by mistakes described, we are really not "expected" to do anything more (like worship, tithe, etc.)

You bring up something that I did already cover, though, which is hearsay. Direct testimony dies with the direct witness - and then, lacking further evidence, becomes nothing but hearsay, since the witness is not available to evaluate (whether for reliability, contradiction, mental state, etc.)

Would you sentence a man to death based on hearsay?


And another random example here...can anyone list - without contradicting any other accounts in the bible - the exact order and names of those that Jesus appeared to when he was ressurrected?

I dont want to stir up even more controversy, but you said direct testimony dies with the direct witness. As much as I see where you are coming from in saying that, I must disagree. In the Ancient Near East, which is where all of our history as man comes from in the beginning, all they had was oral tradition. There were no written documents, obviously no tv, radio or anything...so how did people spend there time together? Learning about the stories over and over of their ancestors. These stories were handed down from generation to generation and not documented for a long time.

 

[dsade]

I dont want to stir up even more controversy, but you said direct testimony dies with the direct witness. As much as I see where you are coming from in saying that, I must disagree. In the Ancient Near East, which is where all of our history as man comes from in the beginning, all they had was oral tradition. There were no written documents, obviously no tv, radio or anything...so how did people spend there time together? Learning about the stories over and over of their ancestors. These stories were handed down from generation to generation and not documented for a long time.

Which makes their veracity (truth value) close to zero.


HINT: Play the game "Telephone" sometime. It's a game where you remove all but two people from a room. First person tells a story to 2nd person. 1st person must then shut up while 2nd person retells story to 3rd person. Repeat until story is scarcely even remotely related to the actual story.

 

[isoc]

hearsay is a good point, as is the telephone game, all reasons as to why you cannot take the aspect of faith completely out of any conversation talking about God, which is why this thread, although a good way to put forth ideas, will NEVER come to any conclusive end in everyones mind involved. I put forth a series of possible proofs, and based on the point of view of a non-believer, gaping holes were poked in them. Same can be done from the other side as well. Did Einstein not make the point that all things are relative, and that relativity is based on point of view? If I am on the train traveling 100 miles an hour it appears the land is moving. From the point of view of someone on the train station, it is the train that is moving. Now we all know that truly the train moves, however, in the case of God, not I, Dsade, or anyone else here knows the whole story because this is not just a physical question, but a question of spirit.

 

[dsade]

hearsay is a good point, as is the telephone game, all reasons as to why you cannot take the aspect of faith completely out of any conversation talking about God, which is why this thread, although a good way to put forth ideas, will NEVER come to any conclusive end in everyones mind involved. I put forth a series of possible proofs, and based on the point of view of a non-believer, gaping holes were poked in them. Same can be done from the other side as well. Did Einstein not make the point that all things are relative, and that relativity is based on point of view? If I am on the train traveling 100 miles an hour it appears the land is moving. From the point of view of someone on the train station, it is the train that is moving. Now we all know that truly the train moves, however, in the case of God, not I, Dsade, or anyone else here knows the whole story because this is not just a physical question, but a question of spirit.

Correct...which, when it comes to deciding to live a scientific live the concept of god must be rejected as "not enough evidence".

 

[carpee]

not enough evidence?

 

[dsade]

not enough evidence?

Correct. Faith is not valid evidence. Hearsay is not evidence. Warm, fuzzy feelings inside is not evidence.

 

[Trauma1]

Correct. Faith is not valid evidence. Hearsay is not evidence. Warm, fuzzy feelings inside is not evidence.

So you're saying those warm fuzzy feelings i experience while completely inebriated on whiskey are really just a false sense of reality, and completely moot? :laugh:

/D'oh! I guess it's back to the drawing board. :bandit:
//Reality sucks! *retreats back to the land known as honalee* :18:

 

[carpee]

Correct. Faith is not valid evidence. Hearsay is not evidence. Warm, fuzzy feelings inside is not evidence.

I never suggested that faith, hearsay, or warm fuzzy feelings are evidence. the only TANGIBLE evidence I can offer you as the young christian I am is creation. Look at the stars, the vastness of the universe, nature, a sunset...

I can give you somewhat tangible evidence as to why its easier to believe in a creator rather than random chance:

The odds of a single chain of protein of an arbitrary sequence forming randomly
out of the five constituent elements are even greater than those of arranging the atoms in
a particular sequence. As there are 92 natural elements, all distributed at random, the
chance that the five specific elements may randomly come together to form a protein
molecule is about 1 in 10160 (one followed by 160 zeros), a number too large to even
express in words. When multiplied with the probability of producing a specific chain
sequence, the odds become 1 in 10208 (one followed by 208 zeros)! It is practically
impossible for all these chances to have coincided to build even a single molecule of
protein purely by chance, because the amount of matter that must be shaken together to
produce this feat would be millions of times the matter in the observable universe.
Furthermore, for such a chance to occur on earth would require almost infinite time (10243
years!) Indeed, if we assume 500 trillion shakings of matter per second, which
corresponds to the order of magnitude of light frequency (wavelengths between 0.4 and
0.8 microns), we find that the time needed to form, on an average, one such molecule
(degree of asymmetry 0.9) in a material volume equal to that of the earth is about 10243
years.
In the discussion given above, we are considering merely a single protein
molecule. Life in its simplest form (single cell) would require hundreds of millions of
such identical molecules as building blocks. As in the coin drawing example, we can
appreciate that the probability of each copy of molecule arising purely by chance gets
multiplied (compound probability), until we are left with a practical impossibility of life
occurring by chance.

Dr. Ashish Tewari
Indian Institute of Technology
Kanpur, India

 

[dsade]

None of that points to a Christian god at all...none of it. Why not calculate the odds againt a non-created creator suddenly popping this all into existence? It would even be more orders of magnitude greater.

/not getting into the rest of it...too tired...but if you are serious about the truth, you need to do some more reading.

 

[carpee]

the truth as i know it is Jesus Christ. I can spit out scientific babble or pulls verses out of context to try to prove something to you, but really at the end of the day I pray that you can encounter the Living being that He is. He took me out of a life of girls, drugs, and suicidal temptations. No self help book, no earthly creation could've done that. So if nothing else I hope I can be evidence

 

[dsade]

the truth as i know it is Jesus Christ. I can spit out scientific babble or pulls verses out of context to try to prove something to you, but really at the end of the day I pray that you can encounter the Living being that He is. He took me out of a life of girls, drugs, and suicidal temptations. No self help book, no earthly creation could've done that. So if nothing else I hope I can be evidence

and plenty have done that without god.

You are evidence of you...and nothing more (a priori...you exist).

truth exists independent of perception...all we can do it try to grasp it. However, if you are calling it "scientific babble" that means you probably don't belong in a thread discussing science...no offence.

Curious...do you lift, take amino acids, protein, creatine, etc....because of the scientific babble? How about if I told you to take Monkey Feces because I FEEL that it would get you hyooge!!

 

[carpee]

haha well there are plenty of supp companies who would love to feed me monkey feces if I would buy it.

Id like to know for you personally, what is it gonna take for you to believe in God?
It seems like ANY thing anyone has to say, scientifically or not, about God existing you are very quick to shoot down...

 

[dsade]

haha well there are plenty of supp companies who would love to feed me monkey feces if I would buy it.

Id like to know for you personally, what is it gonna take for you to believe in God?
It seems like ANY thing anyone has to say, scientifically or not, about God existing you are very quick to shoot down...

As i've said over and over...it would take direct evidence. However, at this point the concept of the god that has been offered is not even consistent in its definition, making the concept itself nonsensical.

I hold claims up to reason - and 100 million people making the same unsupported, fallacious claims changes nothing about the core of the claim.

"I am superman"

Ok, we all know the definition of the classic superman...so are you bulletproof? No? Then you aren't superman.

Same thing here...you want us to buy your brand of god - then describe what you are selling. When you contradict yourself, then you will be called out.

 

[carpee]

what direct evidence specifically.

I'm not trying to sell you a brand of God man. as a matter of fact, i still dont like 99% of churches or preachers because you are right. Hypocrisy. For example most christians these days cant even reconcile the fact that God plagued and destroyed people in the Old Testament, and then all that changes with Jesus?

but I really would like to know for you what do you want for evidence

 

[dsade]

what direct evidence specifically.

I'm not trying to sell you a brand of God man. as a matter of fact, i still dont like 99% of churches or preachers because you are right. Hypocrisy. For example most christians these days cant even reconcile the fact that God plagued and destroyed people in the Old Testament, and then all that changes with Jesus?

but I really would like to know for you what do you want for evidence

They can't reconcile that? Perhaps because god is supposed to be perfect, and changing things (much like the passages about repenting the flood and all that jaz) contradict the characteristic of perfection. It's because it makes no sense.

And your brand of god is the Christian god...one of thousands of competing brands of gods.

Direct evidence....hmm...how about god -appears to each person individually on earth, gives them non-ambiguous expectations about what's expected, then there can be no wars over stupid obscure passages and those that CHOOSE to disobey can then be punished? How about god makes everyone who has ever lost a limb spontaneously regrows it (not mine...I stole that one).

Those would be good starts.

 

[carpee]

and by appearing you mean by sight? and by regrowing limbs you mean healing...

 

[dsade]

and by appearing you mean by sight? and by regrowing limbs you mean healing...

Well, I don't mean faith/hallucination and I don't mean the old "inspiring man to design prosthetics", etc.

Yep...wake up one night with no arms and no legs, next morning..BAM. Hey, you could start with ALL of the soldiers who lost limbs to IEDs.

How about we leave it up to him - nothing that can be dismissed as anomaly. Nothing ambiguous. Should be easy.

 

[B5150]

Correct...which, when it comes to deciding to live a scientific live the concept of god must be rejected as "not enough evidence".

And your brand of god is the Christian god...one of thousands of competing brands of gods.

Evidence? Much of science is as much inconclusive. Which brand of science is the global warming brand?

There are enough holes in scientific theory to rival faith for the leading faith based belief system.

 

[andrew732]

I see a lot of this God must be an unfair God because he punishes the people if they are disobedient, let me ask you this, doesn't everything or action per say come with a consequence good or bad?

 

[dsade]

I see a lot of this God must be an unfair God because he punishes the people if they are disobedient, let me ask you this, doesn't everything or action per say come with a consequence good or bad?

Yeah...if people are being punished for THEIR actions...which leads me back to the example I've used over 10 times now. Tell me why infants are being punished/slaughtered. Tell me why Job's whole family is wasted just so god can win a "bet" that he should already know the outcome of.

Tell me why peoplle are constantly being "cursed" for the actions of their ancestors.

And tell me why what Adam and Eve did has any relevance whatsoever.


Yep...this god IS an unfair god.

 

[DR.D]

Yeah...if people are being punished for THEIR actions...which leads me back to the example I've used over 10 times now. Tell me why infants are being punished/slaughtered. Tell me why Job's whole family is wasted just so god can win a "bet" that he should already know the outcome of.

Tell me why peoplle are constantly being "cursed" for the actions of their ancestors.

And tell me why what Adam and Eve did has any relevance whatsoever.

It's a test. Life is a character developing assignment. There's a beginning and an end. It's premature to pass judgement until the test is over.

Yep...this god IS an unfair god.

Not sure who told you life was fair, but they lied! I see lots of people with this same misconception of 'entitlement'. Since life is a freebie, what entitlement do you really have to complaint? Just make the best of it.

 

[dsade]

It's a test. Life is a character developing assignment. There's a beginning and an end. It's premature to pass judgement until the test is over.

Where is your evidence that this is a test? That is a judgment that presumes you have special information that deciphers the "meaning of life". Other than Bible info (which is obviously not recognized as a source of evidence), by what means do you have access the the all-knowing conclusion that "this is a test"?

Not sure who told you life was fair, but they lied! I see lots of people with this same misconception of 'entitlement'. Since life is a freebie, what entitlement do you really have to complaint? Just make the best of it.

Probably an extension of the all-merciful, beneficent god creating it all...one would think such a person would not be a cruel prick about life, and make it fair. Apparently not...my mistake...and again, I'll pass on this iteration of god.

 

[dsade]

Evidence? Much of science is as much inconclusive. Which brand of science is the global warming brand?

There are enough holes in scientific theory to rival faith for the leading faith based belief system.

Your are not attacking scientific method (aka science) but one application of the method to suggest a possible conclusion. Observation and radical changing of scientific hypotheses are also part of the scientific method, differentiating it from static religious thought.

 

[DT5]

Religion and science do not mix, no matter how you slice it. One is based on fact or atleast trial and error (science), one is on based on stories and the opiet it provides for the masses (religion).
PERIOD. you can bicker all you want on this. they dont relate. a science man like myself will never give into the lunacy of religion or floating spaghetti monsters, and a religious person will continue to believe in gods and spiritual stories and continually reach for anecdotes to justify or prove them. just how it is. I stopped trying to argue with religous people about science, because all of a sudden they become a biology student with a masters in cell biology, in their minds, but im left trying to explain the most basic concepts to them. I will give them this though...i know nothing about these stories they read or recite, so I myself could be considered just as ignorant. I guess it comes down to what you think is rational in your mind. I think its lunacy to think there is a some spiritual entity controlling earth, making humans, sending people to heaven/hell, etc. Some people think that **** is completely rational though, so more power to them i guess.

I LOVE EVERYONE

 

[DR.D]

Where is your evidence that this is a test? That is a judgment that presumes you have special information that deciphers the "meaning of life". Other than Bible info (which is obviously not recognized as a source of evidence), by what means do you have access the the all-knowing conclusion that "this is a test"?





Probably an extension of the all-merciful, beneficent god creating it all...one would think such a person would not be a cruel prick about life, and make it fair. Apparently not...my mistake...and again, I'll pass on this iteration of god.

Life runs in cycles. There are ups and downs. How can you reap a harvest before you even plant it? How can you have any character development without a challenge to necessitate it? Open your heart!

 

[DR.D]

Religion and science do not mix, no matter how you slice it. One is based on fact or atleast trial and error (science), one is on based on stories and the opiet it provides for the masses (religion).
PERIOD. you can bicker all you want on this. they dont relate. a science man like myself will never give into the lunacy of religion or floating spaghetti monsters, and a religious person will continue to believe in gods and spiritual stories and continually reach for anecdotes to justify or prove them. just how it is. I stopped trying to argue with religous people about science, because all of a sudden they become a biology student with a masters in cell biology, in their minds, but im left trying to explain the most basic concepts to them. I will give them this though...i know nothing about these stories they read or recite, so I myself could be considered just as ignorant. I guess it comes down to what you think is rational in your mind. I think its lunacy to think there is a some spiritual entity controlling earth, making humans, sending people to heaven/hell, etc. Some people think that **** is completely rational though, so more power to them i guess.

I LOVE EVERYONE

Are you an atheist?

 

[DT5]

Are you an atheist?

i guess you could say that. i dont classify myself with non-sense or group myself into a category. i just dont subscribe to religion or "gods". i spend my time educating myself on things that exsist. L0l sorry.

 

[dsade]

Are you an atheist?

He loves everyone...clearly he is a promiscuous tramp.

jealous?

 

[B5150]

Your are not attacking scientific method (aka science) but one application of the method to suggest a possible conclusion. Observation and radical changing of scientific hypotheses are also part of the scientific method, differentiating it from static religious thought.

Observation and radical changing of faith hypotheses are also part of the growth of faith (accrument of evidence), differentiating it from static religious thought.

As one commits themselves to obedience to biblical truths and commandments we are more emersed in God's greater reward, greater grace and greater glory. This further enhances our concept and experience of the power and might of our God leaving us change, in some cases, dramatically.

Yes, it is indeed true that people who have "religion" may have static thought, but those with in a deepening relationship with Christ are constantly transformed and are not at all static in thought. For that matter it transforms our limited preconception to greater and deeper understanding.

God loves us enough to accept us where we are and too much to leave us that way.

Those who have sought after him with ALL of their strength, heart AND mind find Him. Those who employ anything less WILL find it inconclusive. They have failed to properly conduct their research. Their report is bogus.

 

[DT5]

Observation and radical changing of faith hypotheses are also part of the growth of faith (accrument of evidence), differentiating it from static religious thought.

As one commits themselves to obedience to biblical truths and commandments we are more emersed in God's greater reward, greater grace and greater glory. This further enhances our concept and experience of the power and might of our God leaving us change, in some cases, dramatically.

Yes, it is indeed true that people who have "religion" may have static thought, but those with in a deepening relationship with Christ are constantly transformed and are not at all static in thought. For that matter it transforms our limited preconception to greater and deeper understanding.

God loves us enough to accept us where we are and too much to leave us that way.

Those who have sought after him with ALL of their strength, heart AND mind find Him. Those who employ anything less WILL find it inconclusive. They have failed to properly conduct their research. Their report is bogus. [/QUOTE]


whatever helps you sleep at night. thats just too easy

 

[carpee]

To really understand both sides, I think everyone needs to realize the viewpoint of both sides. From a scientific viewpoint, Man is what is in focus. But from a christian view, God would be the focus.

 

[samva777]

I disagree

None of that points to a Christian god at all...none of it. Why not calculate the odds againt a non-created creator suddenly popping this all into existence? It would even be more orders of magnitude greater.

/not getting into the rest of it...too tired...but if you are serious about the truth, you need to do some more reading.

Just because you cant deduce something with your 5 senses does not mean it doesnt exist. Dont put to much faith in mans science its rudimentary at best.

I am curious what you believe in , I am getting the impression only what science can prove or disprove is what you beleive in.

 

[B5150]

whatever helps you sleep at night. thats just too easy

It is that easy.

It does not need to be embraced by the brain but rather the heart. Christ did not die to restore the brain condition but rather the heart condition.

 

[DT5]

Just because you cant deduce something with your 5 senses does not mean it doesnt exist. Dont put to much faith in mans science its rudimentary at best.

I am curious what you believe in , I am getting the impression only what science can prove or disprove is what you beleive in.

LOL!
right...science is bullshit and untested, but stories from an old book are FACT!

give me a break. stop trying to justify WHy you think god exsists. You can believe all you want, but dont sit here and try to prove something based on a book. christians have this problem usually. just believe in it, im cool with that...im NOT cool with it when you start getting into this discussion based on stories, anecdotes, "feelings" you have, and other ****...

 

[jumpcannon]

wow religion....now this is a topic that can go on for eternity....read the book angel and demons by dan brown....it really touches the subject of science and religion. excellent book....lots of facts in it. cant say it will prove anything, but creation is beyond what any man can phathom. i believe in having good values and morals. dont need a bible to teach me that. i believe in the mortal man jesus. but i do not believe he parted seas, walked on water, put mud on the eyes of the blind and gave them sight. bible was writen in a very superstitial time. lots of unanswered questions then. but yes there is a creator. good luck with the truth, and as tiny tim would say "god bless everylast one of us!"

 

[Jayhawkk]

Did you look at the topic of this thread? This is specifically what they're looking to be discussed... You came into the thread, it isn't like they just walked into your home and beat you over the head with a Bible.

 

[DT5]

wow religion....now this is a topic that can go on for eternity....read the book angel and demons by dan brown....it really touches the subject of science and religion. excellent book....lots of facts in it. cant say it will prove anything, but creation is beyond what any man can phathom. i believe in having good values and morals. dont need a bible to teach me that. i believe in the mortal man jesus. but i do not believe he parted seas, walked on water, put mud on the eyes of the blind and gave them sight. bible was writen in a very superstitial time. lots of unanswered questions then. but yes there is a creator. good luck with the truth, and as tiny tim would say "god bless everylast one of us!"

"wow i wasnt sure, but because you say there is even with no proof or rationalizing, i will believe you."
-How religion got started

 

[dsade]

Did you look at the topic of this thread? This is specifically what they're looking to be discussed... You came into the thread, it isn't like they just walked into your home and beat you over the head with a Bible.

dude...we should put together a pay per view...Bible-Thumping MMA.

"wow, Rick...Tank's New Testament Technique has really improved"

 

[Jayhawkk]

lol

 

[DR.D]

i guess you could say that. i dont classify myself with non-sense or group myself into a category. i just dont subscribe to religion or "gods". i spend my time educating myself on things that exsist. L0l sorry.

Indeed DT5. I don't subscribe to religion or gods either. I'm a scientist by heart and by trade. You seem like a live and let live atheist at least, good for you!

I guess why I asked is because I still don't understand the point in atheism. I mean, if you have proof or even strong suspicion that there's no god, and that has some profound relevance besides just spreading hate, by all means shout it from the roof top! Otherwise, what's the damn point? Who cares, and why would you even care if they cared, ya know?! If you die and your dead and that's that, what's the point in even wasting your words on a god that doesn't exist? Just laugh at all the theist suckers, and walk away smiling knowing you wouldn't give it the time of day like those poor delusional Christians. But as you can see in this thread, atheists actually honor God with more of their time and lip service than many Christians!!

:shrug:
Just sayin', I don't get the whole 'atheist thang'. lol

 

[dsade]

Indeed DT5. I don't subscribe to religion or gods either. I'm a scientist by heart and by trade. You seem like a live and let live atheist at least, good for you!

I guess why I asked is because I still don't understand the point in atheism. I mean, if you have proof or even strong suspicion that there's no god, and that has some profound relevance besides just spreading hate, by all means shout it from the roof top! Otherwise, what's the damn point? Who cares, and why would you even care if they cared, ya know?! If you die and your dead and that's that, what's the point in even wasting your words on a god that doesn't exist? Just laugh at all the theist suckers, and walk away smiling knowing you wouldn't give it the time of day like those poor delusional Christians. But as you can see in this thread, atheists actually honor God with more of their time and lip service than many Christians!!

:shrug:
Just sayin', I don't get the whole 'atheist thang'. lol

Perhaps because the religious attempt to undermine the intellectual development of innocents by convincing them to accept faulty (or false) means of attaining knowledge, resulting in an overall stupidification of the world in general.

Not to mention trying to push the fraud of ID as science into the school system, ban books, etc.

 

[somewhatgifted]

I think typically someone who has taken a position of being anti anything is a person frustrated by the inability to find easy, clear or consistent answers. Such a question of the existence of god is neither easy nor clear to many. If youve been made a sucker before you will take a position of the glass being half empty and expect others to prove their point or to sell an idea to you. This comes from being reluctant as fear casues hesitation and hesitation causes your worst fears to come true. The fact of the matter with an atheist is truth and reality are completly and utterly subjective. So if you say god exists then it does, if you say it doesnt then it doesnt. Every thinking breathing being on this planet chooses what truth and reality really are to them, so to be athiest to me is to deny sufficient evidence of the existence of god.

Conversely "believing" doesnt really require facts as facts are only information that is true today to the best of our limited knowledge and limited undersrtanding. Language in itself is very primitive and to include the variables of human intent, bias and emotional trauma make one thing certain.... If your looking for the truth you need only look into the mirror.

What was once a fact has now been disproven, what we knew yesterday we know more today so god, life, truth and happyness are more than words they are perspectives. From these perspectives you may at times choose to belive something from a gentle nudge (god, intuition, randomness, who knows really) and you only need to the patience to wait for science to come along and use words to explain how you were right all along.

Strength and faith require going with what is true and meaningfull to you and knowing that to dream, wish and hope are more important than to be right. Truly quest for answers you have to look in the eyes of people, in the sky, ground, dirt and planet you have to speak and listen and constantly grow. To be christian, athiest, muslim that to me is a form of segregation. This implies and slowing or stalling of growth as if one had found the truth or vehicle to finding it in one place.

This potential is very limited and unlikely since religions arent meant to live your life for you but rather to give you a different set of eye glasses to view it from.
You cannot write any amout of information on paper and give all the answers so by this decree no ONE religion is correct completely but rather different slices of the same pie.

This brings us back to the inital point that it is up to you to look, and it matters not where you look but rather that your intention is set on the greatest parts of life and living.

This is called god to some people.

Seek and you shall find.

If life sucks and there is not point to it and there is no god than noone will convince you otherwise.

If your life is full of joy, splendor, love, peace, happiness, gratitude you will not focus so much on the details or which book to read or what line to stand in with the predetermined clothing or mannerisms. You will shy away from argumentative conversations, pride and prejudice and accept all people and ideologies as equal as they are made one and the same as you.

It is better to be loving than to be right and by this you will have found the truth.

 

[thesinner]

Perhaps because the religious attempt to undermine the intellectual development of innocents by convincing them to accept faulty (or false) means of attaining knowledge, resulting in an overall stupidification of the world in general.

Not to mention trying to push the fraud of ID as science into the school system, ban books, etc.

Don't confuse the religious with fundamentalists. There's a difference between someone who believes in the idea that existence was derived from a source that's yet to be completely defined (God, Allah, etc.) and a crazy person's interpretation of a series of books written by mystery people, skimmed over by theologians (where they were either dismissed or canonized), and later translated and retranslated so many times that half the passages could be viable candidates for a Nova-Award.

A person who thinks a Harry Potter book is the work of the devil, which so much as touching the book will equate to an afterlife of eternal damnation, and lobbies to have it banned from the local school system is not an example of being religious. It's an example of cultural intolerance with the subsectors of our own society. Take that group, and put them in the storage bin, right next to white supremacy groups and Halley Bop Cults.

 

[dsade]

Don't confuse the religious with fundamentalists. There's a difference between someone who believes in the idea that existence was derived from a source that's yet to be completely defined (God, Allah, etc.) and a crazy person's interpretation of a series of books written by mystery people, skimmed over by theologians (where they were either dismissed or canonized), and later translated and retranslated so many times that half the passages could be viable candidates for a Nova-Award.

A person who thinks a Harry Potter book is the work of the devil, which so much as touching the book will equate to an afterlife of eternal damnation, and lobbies to have it banned from the local school system is not an example of being religious. It's an example of cultural intolerance with the subsectors of our own society. Take that group, and put them in the storage bin, right next to white supremacy groups and Halley Bop Cults.

my point....what modes of thought cripple critical thinkng and lead to fundamentalists able to get past the bs detctors and gain ground in peoples' minds?

It isn't scientfic thought.

 

[Jayhawkk]

and a crazy person's interpretation of a series of books written by mystery people, skimmed over by theologians (where they were either dismissed or canonized), and later translated and retranslated so many times that half the passages could be viable candidates for a Nova-Award.

I think that a discussion can be held between two people with different beliefs without resorting to these types of generalizations and insults to those who may hold a religious belief.

 

[thesinner]

Indeed DT5. I don't subscribe to religion or gods either. I'm a scientist by heart and by trade. You seem like a live and let live atheist at least, good for you!

I guess why I asked is because I still don't understand the point in atheism. I mean, if you have proof or even strong suspicion that there's no god, and that has some profound relevance besides just spreading hate, by all means shout it from the roof top! Otherwise, what's the damn point? Who cares, and why would you even care if they cared, ya know?! If you die and your dead and that's that, what's the point in even wasting your words on a god that doesn't exist? Just laugh at all the theist suckers, and walk away smiling knowing you wouldn't give it the time of day like those poor delusional Christians. But as you can see in this thread, atheists actually honor God with more of their time and lip service than many Christians!!

:shrug:
Just sayin', I don't get the whole 'atheist thang'. lol

I think a lot of people might say they are atheist, but oftentimes are not. Most are usually altruists. The idea that everything was created through some divine power could have happened, but there's not enough evidence to prove such a phenomenon through a logical system, such as the scientific method.

I recently saw Norm MacDonald at a comedy club, and one of his monologues was about Christianity vs. Religion. As he put it:

Proof that God Exists: 0
Proof that God doesn't exist: 0

So it's a tie. In the event of a tie, your next choice is too weigh out the pro's and con's of your decision.

How does this affect my lifestyle.

Atheism: You just kinda do your own thing.

Christianity: You go to church at least once a week. You've got these things called "sins". Well, you're not supposed to do those, but if I make a mistake, hey we're only human. If you can truly feel remorse, you can ask for forgiveness and everything is still sorta cool.

Well, what happens when I die?

Atheism: You die, and they bury you. You just kinda hang there in the dirt..... forever.

Christianity: Well when you die, if you were good, you go to heaven and it's this paradise and a lot of your old friends and relatives who've passed will be there. If you were bad, however, you go to hell, where you are cast into a lake of fire and tortured for the rest of eternity.

So, if you choose to be an atheist, when you die, you will either rot in the dirt for the rest of eternity or you will burn and be tortured in hell for the rest of eternity. 2 choices, 2 outcomes: it's a 50/50 chance.

 

[dsade]

I think a lot of people might say they are atheist, but oftentimes are not. Most are usually altruists. The idea that everything was created through some divine power could have happened, but there's not enough evidence to prove such a phenomenon through a logical system, such as the scientific method.

I recently saw Norm MacDonald at a comedy club, and one of his monologues was about Christianity vs. Religion. As he put it:

Proof that God Exists: 0
Proof that God doesn't exist: 0

So it's a tie. In the event of a tie, your next choice is too weigh out the pro's and con's of your decision.

How does this affect my lifestyle.

Atheism: You just kinda do your own thing.

Christianity: You go to church at least once a week. You've got these things called "sins". Well, you're not supposed to do those, but if I make a mistake, hey we're only human. If you can truly feel remorse, you can ask for forgiveness and everything is still sorta cool.

Well, what happens when I die?

Atheism: You die, and they bury you. You just kinda hang there in the dirt..... forever.

Christianity: Well when you die, if you were good, you go to heaven and it's this paradise and a lot of your old friends and relatives who've passed will be there. If you were bad, however, you go to hell, where you are cast into a lake of fire and tortured for the rest of eternity.

So, if you choose to be an atheist, when you die, you will either rot in the dirt for the rest of eternity or you will burn and be tortured in hell for the rest of eternity. 2 choices, 2 outcomes: it's a 50/50 chance.

Pascal's wager...that discounts the other 1000s of religions possible in the world...the choosing of which, IF christianity is correct, entails eternal torture for being a heretic. An extension of the Falsce Dichotomy fallacy.

 

[dsade]

Gifted...I like the entire "truth is completely subjective" apologist stuff. As a matter of fact, I feel that my raging tuberculosis is not contagious...and since my truth is just as valid, I'll be sure and cough all over your food. I'm sure you won't mind.

 

[thesinner]

my point....what modes of thought cripple critical thinkng and lead to fundamentalists able to get past the bs detctors and gain ground in peoples' minds?

It isn't scientfic thought.

The fact of the matter is, many people just prefer to follow.

If I tell you something, you have 2 options: take my word for it, or prove me wrong. Going back to DR.D's first post of the thread( i.e. thermodynamics), which one takes less effort, and which one do you think the followers of this particular group are taking?