quote:
By the same token, I see scientific theory and scientific fact as two different things.
Well yes, they are 2 different things.
quote:
Theorists accept criticism and are always thinking of new ways and ideas to expand our understanding of ourselves and the worlds around us; the proponents of scientific fact would have us discard everything but the "hard evidence" and consider this existence a cosmic accident easily explained and replicated by laboratory experiments.
This is a common problem people face when trying to deal with scientific issues, and is a big misunderstanding of terminology.
"facts" are out there.
"facts" are not absolute.
Theories are methods used to take those facts and explain the way that they relate to one another and to the natural world. Without facts, there are no theories.
quote:
The Bible tells us God created the world in six days; we can choose to take that at face value (faith/religion) or investigate it further to prove or disprove that (science).
Those are the only two options?
When what we know and can explain scientifically reaches a point that we can no longer currently explain, we must use the bible to fill in the gaps?
There are any number of options, and opt personally to disregard completely what hebrew mythology has to say about creation, in the same way that I dismiss what greek, norse, egyptian, mayan and korean mythologies have to say about it. They all make very interesting reading, and they all express some pretty interesting ideas about the people who wrote them, and about our perceptions of the world we live in.
But they can no more explain the very beginning than science can, and in all reality, they generally do a worse job of explaining it.
quote:
We assume, as mortal men and women, that day = 24 Earth hours.
I would say that any rational individual with serious interest in determining the begining of the universe would make no such assumption, and would be very unlikely to pursue any sort of investigiation into biblical interpretation at all.
quote:
But to God, at that point in His plan day could = 75,000,000 Earth years. Or 5.2 seconds. We don't know for sure, because we have no way of seeing the Universe as God sees it. At least, not yet. Maybe science will create that method - that is what I was driving at, DL-44.
If we were to look at the bible, and try to use logic on something that is clearly illogical, that logic would tell us that if god created the universe, and created day and night, that the 'day' spoken of in his most sacred texts would refer to the day that he created...
But that's a whole different conversation, and one with nothing to do with science
Now, to step back to the far more important point behind this part of the discussion - you are working from an assumption that falls well outside of what we can say is true using this tool that is science: that god exists.
To look forward to a time where science can create a method 'of seeing the Universe as God sees it' takes a huge set of leaps over the fact that there is no scientific evidence that any sort of god or gods actually exist(s). That again is a topic far greater than can be summed up in this thread, but it is essential to realize that the assumption of a god is beyond the scope of science, and to try to harmonize the two - while it is certainly perogative philosophicaly - is beyond the scope of reason.
To compare what we learn through science to what the bible says in any other than an allegorical way is a hopeless and fruitless journey.
Science and religion (or faith, or 'belief systems', or the bible...) are seperate things and will always be.
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 11-27-2006 22:04
You make several excellent points, DL-44, and I admit we've strayed a bit from the topic of the thread. Thanks for getting in the trenches with me on it - I haven't had a good debate on faith vs. science since college.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 11-28-2006 15:31
quote:Now, to step back to the far more important point behind this part of the discussion - you are working from an assumption that falls well outside of what we can say is true using this tool that is science: that god exists.
That is the kernel of it.
Well said DL.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 11-28-2006 18:03
So Dl, are you saying that science assumes that there is no God?
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 11-28-2006 18:25
quote: Gideon said:
So Dl, are you saying that science assumes that there is no God?
I think science takes the stance that until something can be proven scientifically, it should be considered a factor. Just as mathematical theorems don't really work in the ethereal (numbers tend to be concrete things, rather than plucked out of thin air), so too do scientific theories.
IMHO, just as a pen does not immediately know the end result of a writing, science and math do not immediately know the end result of their applications - that is left to the individual weilding the tool.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
So Dl, are you saying that science assumes that there is no God?
I will answer this again for you gideon, even though it is one of those things that I have answered for you many times.
Science does not 'assume' anything about god.
There is no evidence to support there being a god. Therefore any such concept of god or gods have no bearing on science. Should there ever be any evidence of a god or gods, then our understandings will grow, just as they did when cells, atoms, and quarks were discovered.
Be certain of this though: such evidence being found would be far from the end of scientific inquiry. The concept of god does not explain everything, it only adds to the questions...contrary to the 'perfect' explanation that the religious would have us think.
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 11-29-2006 01:20
quote: DL-44 said:
Science does not 'assume' anything about god.
Okay, then do scientists make assumptions about God?
quote: DL-44 said:
There is no evidence to support there being a god.
I would tend to disagree with this claim.
quote: DL-44 said:
Be certain of this though: such evidence being found would be far from the end
of scientific inquiry. The concept of god does not explain everything, it only
adds to the questions
But I would most certainly agree with this. Facts about God only seem to make Him greater and less comprehensible. They do pose more questions than answers. There are a few answers for the here and now, though. Pretty impressive I think.
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
Okay, then do scientists make assumptions about God?
I am certain that, like all humans, many scientists have some rather varied views of god. If I get the time, I'll track them all down and determine what level of assumption they make about such things
quote: Gideon said:
I would tend to disagree with this claim.
Then by all means - share with us this evidence of gods that seems to have eluded the rest of the world...
quote: Gideon said:
Facts about God...
Except one problem - there aren't any facts about god (see above).
Gideon: I sure hope the scientific community is not biased by some imaginary friend, bed time stories and other beliefs for which there isn't the slightest shred of a proof.
The fact that science can not disprove the existence of god, the flying spaghetti monster, celestial teapots, pink invisible unicorn, trolls, thor, fairies, orcs, ... only means there is nothing to disprove them.
On the other hand there is absolutely nothing to prove their existence either.
No clear conclusion can be drawn.
However from a logic stand, the lack of any proof of their existence makes it almost absolutely certain that these chimeras, as friendly they may be, do not exist.
Faith is blind. It bares no reason. People are free to believe whatever they want, but science is governed by logic and reason.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 11-29-2006 14:19
quote:quote:
DL-44 said:
There is no evidence to support there being a god.
I would tend to disagree with this claim.
Gid, I would be more than interested in your evidence to the contrary. If you disagree and call the lack of evidence to support there being a god a 'claim" - then surely you can refute it. Please present your evidence and facts to the contrary.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 12-01-2006 00:26
I'm slightly confused by your wording Webshamman, but if you are wanting the evidence I have found that proved God exists to me, then I can tell you. However, for everyone reading, this is very personal stuff. I don't really expect these experiences to work for anyone but me, because they have shaped what I believe, and why I believe. God worked these things into my life so I can come to know him. He called me this way. I think you all need to find evidence for yourselves. Especially if you believe there is no God. If you believe that then you had better be pretty darn sure of yourself, because if there is a God, and He does sit in judgement like John claims, then you're screwed.
I don't think there has ever been a time I've questioned there being a God. I think I always knew there was someone or something up there, controlling what is going on down here. And as of yet I haven't met any sane person who doesn't think there is something more to this life than the temporal. It isn't anything mental or logical, just a feeling within me. When I sit quietly I feel like there is more...something more. I watched a movie, called the Incredibles, that really made me think. Why would people envision superheros? Why would we want superpowers? Why do we want to be able to influence the world around us like that? Or have protection like that? Hope? I came to the conclusion that we all have a wanting, a desire for something more deep within us. I always feel a need to belong to something greater than myself. A need to be a part of something that will give my life purpose and meaning.
Well, I was in a deep, dark, depressed state when I was in junior high. I was a mess. Not physically. I was an A B student, had friends and family. I played games and people generally liked me. I was a pacifist and I was a sweet guy. However, underneath I was a wreck. I felt so alone. Empty. I tried video games. No good. I tried food. No good. Books. No good. I tried lust, masturbation, anything to fill me up with happiness. To fill that void within my life. That desire to have a purpose, to be filled up.
Freshman year of my high school, I read a book by Francine Rivers called, "A Voice in the Wind." It was about a Jewish girl, who's family were one of the first Christian families in Jerusalem. It was about her faith in God, when her home, her temple, her holy city, and her family, were all destroyed in a few short weeks. Then she was shipped off to Rome where it was a capital offence to be a Christian. She was tortured and beaten, then ultimately fed to the lions. She was saved by a doctor, horribly disfigured, and in an overall horrible position. The strange thing was that she never lost her hope in God. Never. And God came through for her. He opened the eyes of everyone in her Roman family she was a slave to, and they all accepted Christ's gift of a new life. They all either went to heaven, or had a complete character overhaul. And at the end, she was happy.
When I was half-way through, I thought about my heart, and where I was. I thought about how hard I tried to fill my void, and was never able to fill it. Then I finally turned over in my bed and said, "God, if you are real, if you are truly there, please save me." And things changed.
I started to open up and pray more often, more meaninfully. And when that happened, I became...joyful. I have never been joyful in my entire life! I have been happy, giddy even, but never joyful. It was like I had a hope, a dream that could never be destroyed. I started to learn more about this God that performed miracles in that fictional book I read. I wanted to know if He was truly real.
Every night I would read the Bible, searching for Him, searching for something that would show Him to me. And every night I would find something...something about Him. His miracles, His faithfulness, His devotion. Something about me. It was almost magical how closely a book that was compiled almost 2000 years ago, and written older than that, would fit exactly with me life now. So I continued reading, learning, and being filled up by some sort of presence...I couldn't quite put my finger on.
I no longer liked video games. Not because they weren't fun, but because I felt like I didn't need them anymore. Life like it is now is plenty enough for me. And then I started losing my interest in lust. That battle is slow and long, but I don't want women anymore like I used to. I used to idolize women. I don't anymore. I used to be mean and angry a lot. Now I am kind, I love those around me. Not because I am told to, but because this thing living inside me does.
Now I know why I changed. It is because of the Holy Spirit within me. It is so strange to see it work...so strange to see what happens. Just like what happened to the apostles. They recieved the Holy Spirit, and became completely changed men. They no longer cared about their lives before Jesus Christ. They were ready to die for Him. Paul even said he was happy to die! Just because they would have the promise fulfilled of seeing Jesus Christ again. I look forward to that with great hope.
You see, it is all about hope. Hope that the prophesies laid out in the Bible will come true. The ones about the Jewish people are already almost to fruition. The ones about the Jews before the Church have come to pass, now I am waiting on the one last week. It is coming soon. The Jews have already made preparations for their holy temple. The church of Jesus Christ, as discombobulated as it is, has been ready for a while. There's only so many more people out there who haven't heard the Gospel. Only a few peoples left who haven't heard of Jesus Christ's death, and resurrection for our redemption into God's kingdom. I can't wait to be there on that day and see God. To see Him, and to dance and sing for Him. To hug Jesus. To meet the Christians of old times. The ones who died for their belief in God.
I have found my proof of the existance of God. Have you found yours? Do you know for certain that God does or does not exist? If you don't, you need to find out now. Because the time is coming that we are all going to have to stand before Him someday. The time for decision is now. Because there may not be a tomorrow.
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 12-01-2006 00:32
And Poi, I've never seen a troll. Logically, I don't believe they exist. I have some friends who have seen ghosts, and I trust them. Thus, I believe there are ghosts. Or something that would make them think so. I have never touched one, nor felt its presence. I have felt the presence of God. I have seen God's Hand in my life. I have felt the presence of demons. I have been attacked by them before. Might even be attacked now. I don't believe in something blindly Poi. I'm no idiot. I have to have a lot of proof for me to believe anything. Took me a long time to believe the apostles were right about God. I'm still trying to figure out exactly what I believe about what some of these preachers are telling me. But I do know that God sent His son here to die for me. And I do know that I can trust what He said. That is enough for me.
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
From: The Land of one Headlight on. Insane since: May 2001
posted 12-01-2006 01:18
quote:And as of yet I haven't met any sane person who doesn't think there is something more to this life than the temporal.
May be one of your best yet Gideon.
___________________________________________________________________________
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying that I approved of it." Mark Twain
quote:Especially if you believe there is no God. If you believe that then you had better be pretty darn sure of yourself, because if there is a God, and He does sit in judgement like John claims, then you're screwed.
I'm pretty darn sure I'd rather live fully the only life I have than live in fear of a "God". If there is a God and he wants to punish me for living MY life, then screw him!
quote:I have found my proof of the existance of God. Have you found yours? Do you know for certain that God does or does not exist? If you don't, you need to find out now. Because the time is coming that we are all going to have to stand before Him someday. The time for decision is now. Because there may not be a tomorrow.
Right. So basically you have absolutely no rationnal proof of the existence of your imaginary friend. We're back to square one. Of course if those 'proofs', as you call them, are enough for you believe, then be it but these are nowhere near to scientific proof.
I personally have make my mind. Thanks but no thanks.
But I do know that God sent His son here to die for me. And I do know that I can trust what He said.
I'm sorry....I thought we were talking about evidence here
It's no surprise to anyone that when you say you have evidence, and you are asked for it, you turn instead to "you better be ready" and "you better be sure of yourself". You realize that right - that it's no surprise to anyone?
~shrug~
As I said: there is no evidence for the existence of gods, and no cause for science to look for gods, and so stories of gods have no bearing on science.
Should that change, then science will address such things as gods. Until some form of evidence can be proffered by those who feel it exists, there's not much point in even discussing how gods fit into science. It is purely in the realm of personal belief.
{{edit - so as not to ignore the personal side of your post -
quote: Gideon said:
I came to the conclusion that we all have a wanting, a desire for something more deep within us. I always feel a need to belong to something greater than myself. A need to be a part of something that will give my life purpose and meaning.
Well, I was in a deep, dark, depressed state when I was in junior high. I was a mess. Not physically. I was an A B student, had friends and family. I played games and people generally liked me. I was a pacifist and I was a sweet guy. However, underneath I was a wreck. I felt so alone. Empty. I tried video games. No good. I tried food. No good. Books. No good. I tried lust, masturbation, anything to fill me up with happiness. To fill that void within my life. That desire to have a purpose, to be filled up.
This is what I call the 'god hole'.
Not everyone has a 'god hole'.
To those of us without a 'god hole', having people explain to us how great god is, and how we obviously need 'god' too, and how peachy and wonderful everything is with god (and how we 'better be ready' and 'better be sure'), is about the same as having the heroin addict explain to you just how beautiful life is with heroin, and how ugly the world is without it, and how everybody just needs to get high and the world will be a wonderful place.
Have you ever experienced that? It's a pretty fair analogy...
I'm comfortable without my needle, thank you very much
From: The Land of one Headlight on. Insane since: May 2001
posted 12-01-2006 04:55
Isn't there something about 'opiate of the masses' ? =)
___________________________________________________________________________
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying that I approved of it." Mark Twain
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 12-01-2006 06:23
quote: poi said:
If there is a God and he wants to punish me for living MY life, then screw him!
God doesn't want to punish you for living your life. That is why He died for you. He's taking your punishment for all the bad things you have done in your life. All the times you have hurt Him, all the times you have hurt someone else, all the times you have hurt yourself. He wants to take the blame! He wants you to be able to get off scotch free! Why don't you want to let Him?
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
From: rooted on planet Mars, *I mean Earth* Insane since: May 2004
posted 12-01-2006 06:29
quote: DL-44 said:
It's no surprise to anyone that when you say you have evidence, and you are
asked for it, you turn instead to "you better be ready" and "you better be sure
of yourself". You realize that right - that it's no surprise to anyone?
When asked for evidence, I gave you my evidence. My evidence is enough for me to believe that God does exist.
And hey, you should be sure of what is going to happen to you. If the eternal cost is as it is said to be, and the eternal rewards are what they are said to be, don't you want to be sure?
BTW, do you have evidence that God doesn't exist?
"For reason is a property of God's...moreover, there is nothing He does not wish to be investigated and understood by reason." ~Tertullian de paenitentia Carthaginian Historian 2nd century AD
quote: Gideon said:
When asked for evidence, I gave you my evidence. My evidence is enough for me to believe that God does exist. And hey, you should be sure of what is going to happen to you. If the eternal cost is as it is said to be, and the eternal rewards are what they are said to be, don't you want to be sure?BTW, do you have evidence that God doesn't exist?
Ok, this all goes very directly to the subjects that we have gone over to a ridiculous extent already in the past, and I don't have the time or energy to pull out all the explanations for you yet again, Gideon.
Your questions are absurd, and I've explained why already. Your 'evidence' is quite obviously not relevant scientifically, and science is clearly what we are talking about here.
If you've got something new to add rather than spewing the same nonsense that many people have already answered you on hundreds of times, let;s hear it. Otherwise....why are you bothering to say this all again?
quote:God doesn't want to punish you for living your life. That is why He died for you. He's taking your punishment for all the bad things you have done in your life. All the times you have hurt Him, all the times you have hurt someone else, all the times you have hurt yourself. He wants to take the blame! He wants you to be able to get off scotch free! Why don't you want to let Him?
As DL-44 worded it, I don't have a god hole. I'm a grown up, I can take care of myself. I don't need an imaginary friend.
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-01-2006 16:42
quote: DL-44 said:
Science does not 'assume' anything about god.
There is no evidence to support there being a god. Therefore any such concept of god or gods have no bearing on science. Should there ever be any evidence of a god or gods, then our understandings will grow, just as they did when cells, atoms, and quarks were discovered.
Be certain of this though: such evidence being found would be far from the end of scientific inquiry. The concept of god does not explain everything, it only adds to the questions...
quote: poi said:
I'm a grown up, I can take care of myself. I don't need an imaginary friend.
These two statements seem to contradict one another, yet both of you are standing in defense of science. DL seems to propose that the concept of God is just like the concept of evolution: a tool to suggest a possible history for our species. poi, on the other hand, chalks any concept of a god or gods up with the boogeyman and Santa Claus.
I don't presume to know more or less about God and I am certainly no scholar of science. And yet it seems to me that DL & poi are not unlike two different denominations of Christianity: saying the same thing two different ways.
And like some Christian denominations, they defend their faith with a ferocity that can be frightening to behold. But, as I've said, no Darwinists have knocked on my door at 4 a.m.
Yet.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
These two statements seem to contradict one another, yet both of you are standing in defense of science. DL seems to propose that the concept of God is just like the concept of evolution: a tool to suggest a possible history for our species. poi, on the other hand, chalks any concept of a god or gods up with the boogeyman and Santa Claus.
Whoa, back up a second
The statement from me that you quoted was a very basic statement in regard to science: it makes no assumptions about (insert subject here).
Poi stated a personal opinion. You will find similar opinions expressed by me above as well.
The point being, "science" does not make an assumption about whether something exists. If there is evidence, or something to suggest that evidence might be found, then ways are developed to find, express, and evaluate that evidence.
As there is no evidence of god that anyone has been able to offer, science by definition has no reason to take it into account.
As it stands, the question of whether or not god exists is entirely immaterial. We evaluate the evidence before us, and if you wish to take a philosophical view which explains how your deity fits into that - anyone is welcome. However, it must be understood that such groups of thought *are* philosophical and not scientific.
I do not in any way consider any god or gods to be a valid explanation of....anything.
quote:And yet it seems to me that DL & poi are not unlike two different denominations of Christianity: saying the same thing two different ways.And like some Christian denominations, they defend their faith with a ferocity that can be frightening to behold.
Again: facts. Evidence.
This is not 'faith' and it is not 'doctrine'.
Science is not a religion. Period.
Science represents what we know; what we understand. It does not claim to be the 'final answer'. By its very nature it evolves as we learn.
This is very different from religion which sets an answer and then forces everything to fit.
*Please* understand the very important distinction.
I have no 'faith' to defend. I will fight against mythology and floklore being disguised as science. I will not fight against the furthering of our scientific knowledge, whether that challenges evolution or not.
And please - there is much more to evolution than Darwin. Let's stop making this a "darwinist" issue.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 12-01-2006 17:17
quote:These two statements seem to contradict one another, yet both of you are standing in defense of science. DL seems to propose that the concept of God is just like the concept of evolution: a tool to suggest a possible history for our species. poi, on the other hand, chalks any concept of a god or gods up with the boogeyman and Santa Claus.
Then you need to go back and read exactly what they posted, because you have failed to understand what they both posted.
Nowhere has DL "proposed" that the concept of God is like the fact of evolution at all.
poi's views are his own - as are anyone elses, for that matter. He draws his own conclusions, but nowhere does he state as a fact that Science has determined that there is no God.
quote:And yet it seems to me that DL & poi are not unlike two different denominations of Christianity: saying the same thing two different ways.
Then you need to brush up on your Science more. Then you will see that DL and poi are nowhere near to being like denominations of Christianity, for they are not saying the same thing in different ways.
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-01-2006 17:24
quote: DL-44 said:
I will fight against mythology and floklore being disguised as science. I will not fight against the furthering of our scientific knowledge, whether that challenges evolution or not.
So, hypothetically speaking, if evidence were uncovered that pointed towards the existence of a creative directive force (to be dubbed 'God' by countless masses), you would consider that there is something more to the story than mere stories?
As an aside, I am sure that you file the gospels & epistles of the New Testament as 'stories' rather than 'evidence' despite their being first-hand eyewitness accounts.
quote: DL-44 said:
And please - there is much more to evolution than Darwin. Let's stop making this a "darwinist" issue.
Fair enough - I stand corrected. The nub of my jist, however, is that not all Christians get rude and intrusive with their faith - I certainly would not expect coldly rational human scientific creatures to act as such, regardless of which scientific theory they have weighed to be the most likely.
Which brings me to the subject of "the God hole". Some people have it, some don't; by the same token, some are autistic, some aren't; some are gay, some are bisexual, some are hetero. Is "the God hole" genetic? If so, will the scientific community seek it out to study, catalogue and eliminate it? Is it a learned behavioral hole? If so, will we begin indoctrinating our children against it? What are your opinions?
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
So, hypothetically speaking, if evidence were uncovered that pointed towards the existence of a creative directive force (to be dubbed 'God' by countless masses), you would consider that there is something more to the story than mere stories?
That is not a logical progression.
The potential existence of such a force, and the huge number of very different stories about different incarnations of what could be said to personify that force, are *extremely* different things, with gobs of things in between.
I don't think it is possible to equate all of the different belief systems closely enough to say that any such 'force' could be equally called 'god' and cover all the bases.
If evidence were uncovered, we would have to see where the evidence leads us. That is the way of things
quote: Gothmatum said:
As an aside, I am sure that you file the gospels & epistles of the
New Testament as 'stories' rather than 'evidence' despite their being
first-hand eyewitness accounts.
This is a subject worthy of its own thread, and indeed, there are many very long threads here already devoted to it.
In short: nonsense. At best, the earliest of the gospels was written 70+ years after the alleged crucifixion. There are countless discrepancies between the various gospels.
More importantly: how does a story which claims that there were eyewitnesses relate to there actually being eyewitnesses? This is an argument very often touted by the christian apologists as 'irrefutable evidence'. The story claims that hundreds of people witness an event, so these witnesses, claimed to exist within the story, are somehow evidence that the story is true? Talk about circular references! =)
quote:
Which brings me to the subject of "the God hole". Some people have it, some don't; by the same token, some are autistic, some aren't; some are gay, some are bisexual, some are hetero. Is "the God hole" genetic? If so, will the scientific community seek it out to study, catalogue and eliminate it? Is it a learned behavioral hole? If so, will we begin indoctrinating our children against it? What are your opinions?
For my personal view, I will leave it at this for now: I don't have a strong opinion as to the origin or nature of such a hole. It is very apparent in many people, as can be seen by simple observation. I refer to it as 'god' related only because god seems to be the subject which makes people very adamantly tell other people that they must also need what they themselves need...
As for 'eliminating' such a gene - yikes. Now we're on a different topic altogether.
However, as far as 'indoctrinating' against it, that is hardly necessary. All we need to do is to *stop* indoctrinating our children into religions.... =)
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-01-2006 18:28
quote: DL-44 said:
More importantly: how does a story which claims that there were eyewitnesses relate to there actually being eyewitnesses? This is an argument very often touted by the christian apologists as 'irrefutable evidence'. The story claims that hundreds of people witness an event, so these witnesses, claimed to exist within the story, are somehow evidence that the story is true? Talk about circular references! =)
This is an excellent point. In other events, such as a car accident, eyewitnesses only help peice together evidence already given. And what evidence is there of these events?
Other than the continued existence of the Church, of course, but that's the subject of another thread.
quote: DL-44 said:
As for 'eliminating' such a gene - yikes. Now we're on a different topic altogether.
+1
quote: DL-44 said:However, as far as 'indoctrinating' against it, that is hardly necessary. All we need to do is to *stop* indoctrinating our children into religions.... =)
What about not indoctrinating our children into *one* religion? What if people could be more (and I apologize in advance for the use of this word) 'pantheistic' about their children's education?
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
What about not indoctrinating our children into *one* religion? What if people could be more (and I apologize in advance for the use of this word) 'pantheistic' about their children's education?
to me, that's kind of like 'should I expose my child to one street drug, or to many of them?'
quote: Gothmatum said:
This is an excellent point. In other events, such as a car accident, eyewitnesses only help peice together evidence already given. And what evidence is there of these events?
While that point is enough for me, this situation is more striking - we don't have witnesses of an event for which there is no evidence, we have a story, which *claims* there are witnesses (for which there is no evidence) of an event for which there is no evidence...
From: The Land of one Headlight on. Insane since: May 2001
posted 12-01-2006 20:22
The problem I have with pantheism is that it starts with the assumption of a god and that, god is all and all is god.
I personally don't know any believers who willingly would expose their young children to other religious notions let alone instruction that wasn't in strict compliance with their particular brand of religion.
All ism's are perpetuated on get'em while they're young.
___________________________________________________________________________
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying that I approved of it." Mark Twain
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-01-2006 21:02
quote: NoJive said:
All ism's are perpetuated on get'em while they're young.
So be careful... call it 'evolutionary theory'... not 'evolutionism' or 'Darwinism'... wouldn't want people thinking any sort of indoctrination is going on...
I just want to clarify and say clearly that I am not proposing everyone should believe exactly what I believe, nor that what I believe fully explains everything or that it will work for you, like some late-night car-wash-in-a-spray-bottle salesman (and some televangelists are equally as annoying). Frankly, I don't think everything should be explained... where, then, would the minds and imaginations and (yes, I'll say it) faiths of mankind go?
I've had a personal experience that "shades in the blank places" in my life, and in my case that's taken the form of a largely-Presbyterian view of Christianity. It's just what works for me. It's like driving a car - I might like driving a Jeep, but that isn't to say I'm going to hate you for driving a Ford. It still gets you from A to B.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
From: The Land of one Headlight on. Insane since: May 2001
posted 12-01-2006 21:36
quote: Gothmatum said:
So be careful... call it 'evolutionary theory'... not 'evolutionism' or 'Darwinism'
<lol> Yes, as I was writing that I thought I should include religious but..... =)
quote: Gothmatum said:
It's just what works for me
Yes... well that's what it's all about isn't it. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but would you agree that your largely-Presbyterian view...while not answering all your questions does provide you a certain level of comfort? That may not be the correct word but I think you know what I mean.
As for your driving analogy. I'd rather push a chev than drive a ford. =)
___________________________________________________________________________
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying that I approved of it." Mark Twain
It's like driving a car - I might like driving a Jeep, but that isn't to say I'm going to hate you for driving a Ford. It still gets you from A to B.
Which is all fine and dandy - everyone is free to believe whatever they like.
But again - what we're talking about here is science - facts, evidence, and how the facts and evidence interact with us. Evolution is not an alternate religious belief, and it is not "just a theory" in the manner that someone sitting and thinking "gee, I think maybe..*this* is how it works..." is a "theory". To qualify in scientific terms as a theory requires that it be supported by evidence and facts. It will not someday "graduate" to a fact or a law. Evolution is a fact. It happens. We've observed it. We *know* that it does happen. We don't know all the details. THere is plenty still to learn.
How that effects your 'life view' is up to you. But your life view, and my life view, have no bearing on the facts and the evidence, and won't change the fact that evolution happens. No matter what you drive or where you go in it
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-04-2006 15:42
quote: NoJive said:
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but would you agree that your largely-Presbyterian view...while not answering all your questions does provide you a certain level of comfort?
I can't deny there is a 'security blanket' feel to religion. However, the way I see it, humanity is still a young race, and the universe around is quite dark and mysterious, not unlike our bedrooms when we are little. As we grow and explore, we find there is nothing to fear, but until we reach that maturity we use a little light to throw back the darkness. Until we, as a race, can look behind all the bookshelves and open all the closets of this existence, there will be unknowns, and we have a choice: believe in something greater than ourselves, or believe this is it.
There's a certain logic to this, actually.
If this life is all there is, and we believe in God, it won't make a lick of difference.
If this life is all there is, and we don't believe in God, it still won't matter.
If there is a life after this, and we don't believe in God, we become lost and/or damned.
If there is a life after this, and we believe in God, we have access to Paradise.
Do what you will, but I will err on the side of potential salvation, thanks very much.
JMO.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
If there is a life after this, and we don't believe in God, we become lost and/or damned.
Again, this is not a logical progression.
If there is an after life, it still doesn't neccisarily mean there is a god.
If there is a god, that still leaves the door wide open - do you ahve any idea how many gods we've created? =)
quote: Gothmatum said:
Do what you will, but I will err on the side of potential salvation, thanks very much.
To push the above point further - how can you be sure you've erred on the side of salvation? How many different paths to salvation are there according to the different religions?
I'd sure hate to die having pissed off Odin, or having failed to follow the proper laws of islam, or not having sacrificed the proper type of animal at the proper time, and so on...
That aside, and giving, for a moment, the christian view the benefit of the doubt, I still find it extremely hard to beleive that 'god' would accept people into his arms who followed his rules just to cover their ass...
I'd like to think he wouldn't let people off on a technicality
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-04-2006 17:45
quote: DL-44 said:
If there is a god, that still leaves the door wide open - do you ahve any idea how many gods we've created? =) ... How many different paths to salvation are there according to the different religions? I'd sure hate to die having pissed off Odin, or having failed to follow the proper laws of islam, or not having sacrificed the proper type of animal at the proper time, and so on...That aside, and giving, for a moment, the christian view the benefit of the doubt, I still find it extremely hard to beleive that 'god' would accept people into his arms who followed his rules just to cover their ass...I'd like to think he wouldn't let people off on a technicality.
I've been avoiding using biblical quotes, but I do remember Christ at one point saying "In my Father's house, there are many rooms." He also said he was the one way to the Father - I interpret this to mean that he provides us with a direct conduit to God. It's like hooking your workstation directly to the T3 line rather than going through the switch, hub, router and server.
That said, what's not to say that some of those "many rooms" aren't set aside for others? Some people are perfectly fine holding their god or gods at an arm's length, or interacting with them on a physical basis in the form of trees or animals. I certainly don't see the Divine setting up a lean-to in the middle of nowhere; more like a huge stretch of seafront property, with rock cliffs and caves (props to Neil Gaiman for the imagery there), rolling green fields and a lush forest or two, and a big city with a massive keep in the middle. "A mighty fortress is our God" and all that, considering there's been open rebellion in Heaven before.
I'm soapboxing and I apologize. But what I'm driving at is that there may well be more than one manifestation of Paradise, just as there is more than one manifestation of God - Jesus Christ is Allah is YHWH is...
Well, I could go on, but I think you get the idea. ~_^ It's all from one source, though we narrow-visioned mortals shoehorn the Divine into our perceptions in whatever way works best for us. I don't think it's so much that "we create God in our own image"; rather, we slap a face we can relate to on God so there's some familiarity... it makes things easier for those of us without cosmic-level perceptions and powers.
But as I've said, Jesus Christ is the only one I know of in the mainstream who invites us to remove the mask from God and see the Divine for what it really is. And to do that we can't look to Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson or James Dobson or Donald Wildmon... we need to look past the Religious Reich... deep within ourselves are the answers we seek, gifted to us from the Divine since birth and there for our discovery, be it through religion or meditation or philosophy or science. Only once we've chosen a path and followed it into ourselves and overcome our fears and doubts do we realize that each of us, every one, is just a peice of the Divine, and fully entitled to be truly something great.
Again, JMO.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
While I can appreciate your view, and I do get your points, I think you miss mine.
You are talking about this one way, this one thing, this one path....
You do allude to the idea that "this = that = the other"
But the problem is - the different religions have *vastly* different ways of acheiving 'paradise', and so to say that you are 'erring on the side of salvation' just doesn't work. You are erring on one of many potential avenues of salvation - one which may be very very wrong. There is every bit as much probability of a religion other than that based on christ being 'the one', in which case you are as screwed as a nonbeleiver.
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-04-2006 21:02
That is a very good point, DL, and it hasn't been completely lost on me; I just hope that the 'paradise parole board' looks at things like behavior and intention rather than simply belief. I do my best to treat my fellow man (or woman) with respect regardless of what they believe in, and I do my best to make the world I live in a better place; others (read: the Religious Reich) spout Christian dogma but don white hoods and burn down health clinics. A heaven where I have to share bunk space with John Wayne Gacey and members of the KKK might not be worth pursuing after all...
But that goes into the weight of truth vs. the weight of rhetoric, which is another topic entirely. Thanks for clarifying, DL, and I hope I've made myself clear to you as well!
My idea really is that this = that = the other, and if more people realized that, we'd have less people killing each other in the name of God. Sometimes I think maybe the Buddhists have it right: self-barbeque in the square when that happens.
'Defender of the Faith': What in God's name are you doing?!?
Immolating Buddhist: Making you deal with your $#!+.
(Thank you, Robin Williams.)
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
Gothmatum: To second DL-44, and at the risk of repeating myself, make sure you get the correct answer to your salvation problem.
quote:Until we, as a race, can look behind all the bookshelves and open all the closets of this existence, there will be unknowns, and we have a choice: believe in something greater than ourselves, or believe this is it.
One doesn't need to be religious to realize there is a lot of things greater than him/herself. Also having questions is not reason enough to invent answers. Answers must be seeked, not made up.
From: A place surrounded by turkeys Insane since: Jul 2006
posted 12-04-2006 21:45
quote: poi said:
One doesn't need to be religious to realize there is a lot of things greater than him/herself. Also having questions is not reason enough to invent answers. Answers must be seeked, not made up.
I wouldn't call myself religious - not with the way I think up sarcastic comebacks to the minister's sermons and squirm in the pews when I'm tired. I want a place of my own so I can get out of my church. And I'm not talking about buying a timeshare. If these idiots have enough money to televise their 'miracle sessions' and send poor idea-starved brainwashed kids door-to-door, don't they have enough to feed the poor, clothe and educate our kids and take care of our elderly with respect? Nah, who would think of that?
Finding answers within oneself is not the same as inventing them. Sometimes it takes a great deal of introspection to make a personal breakthrough, be it towards or away from a measure of faith or the veracity of an idea. Believe me, I spent enough time in solitude during my stint as a patient at UPMC's mental health institution to tell you that for certain.
And it's "sought", poi, not "seeked." FYI sought is the correct past tense of the word seek AFAIK.
~~~
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
posted 11-27-2006 21:53
