For the religious people here

Kharn said:
So you can not speak of "what are the odds" God would make us to a Christian or other monotheist in the same sense that you can say "what are the odds" evolutionary theory made us to an agnostic/atheist. In one case odds do not exist, in the other odds are infinite.
Click to expand...
Not infinite, just very long.
I do agree tho' that talking about odds is stupid. Particularly when somebody who refutes the fact that there are "odds" for there being a God. (ie: someone who is (devoutly) religious, and will not accept the possibility that they may be wrong)
 
My Thinking

Ah well, this is just my thinking

If really life was created by coincidence, then we're really one lucky lifeform! I'd say that it's not coincidence.

Note that the statement bout that primordial soup and typhoon and 747s is when Earth has formed at the first place! So it's like this:

By coincidence, big-bang happened
By coincidence, our galaxy formed
By coincidence, our solar system formed
By coincidence, Earth formed
By coincidence, Earth support life
By coincidence, all those primordial soup content appeared
By coincidence, and I mean pure luck... Primordial Soup created
and life formed....


AND BY ALL MEAN!!! HOW THEN SIMPLE LIFEFORM COULD BE ENDED AS US HUMAN BEING!!!

Luck is something essential here, and I wont bet on it.

Oh yeah, something else:

Suppose that God didn't exist. Suppose that life was created by pure luck.

who created matter at the first place?
who created physics law, chemistry, etc at the first place?
who created light (and the constant for their travelling speed)?


or in some extreme opinion:
who controls the time?

You might consider this bullshit, but believe me i have read something like this on Al Qur'an.

I almost forget bout it.... But it sounded something like this.

[And God commanded the sky and the earth to separate. "SEPARATE OR ELSE I'LL SEPARATE YOU MYSELF". And Both said "We'll gladly doing it ourself."]

It implies that before that time, sky and earth are united. Some translated this as universe being only as cloud of masses, we never really tell between ground or sky. Then it coagulates, and created Planets, stars, etc...

As it said, God could easily created Earth, but He doesn't need to do that because, based on the law of physics, they will be created anyway.

Ah well, it's just my thinking. And for the Qur'an snoop, sorry for anyone offended. I just have to say it.


Oh yeah, check HarunYahya.org for something about Islam. (and don't forget to select the correct language)
 
Your reasoning leaves us with the classic question: Who created God?

Anyway, there is only one thing that frustrates me when it comes to religion.

* If I am right, as an atheist, no one will ever know when they die.
* If I am wrong (though I think that is very unlikely) there's a chance I will burn in hell or experience something else that would be very uncomfortable.

I wish everyone with the 'wrong' faith (if there is such a thing) would just get to *know* that they were wrong at the brink of their demise. Oh well...
 
Ah well, this is just my thinking

If really life was created by coincidence, then we're really one lucky lifeform! I'd say that it's not coincidence.

Note that the statement bout that primordial soup and typhoon and 747s is when Earth has formed at the first place! So it's like this:

By coincidence, big-bang happened
By coincidence, our galaxy formed
By coincidence, our solar system formed
By coincidence, Earth formed
By coincidence, Earth support life
By coincidence, all those primordial soup content appeared
By coincidence, and I mean pure luck... Primordial Soup created
and life formed....


AND BY ALL MEAN!!! HOW THEN SIMPLE LIFEFORM COULD BE ENDED AS US HUMAN BEING!!!
Click to expand...
1) In reality, from the Big Bang onwards, ANY random universe could've happened.
2) So the possibility of this universe happening is EXACTLY as big as the possibility of anything else happening. (Since those very natural laws were created with the big bang).
So this leads us to
3) You would've said/thought exactly the same thing if you had turned out to be any other random being.
Science DOES explain how we evolved and came into being, and just because you have a feeling that there should be something bigger than us tiny human beings here, does not mean that that is actually logical.

As it said, God could easily created Earth, but He doesn't need to do that because, based on the law of physics, they will be created anyway.
Click to expand...
And now you're contradicting yourself. First you say tha the odds that we exist are minute, so something bigger must exist. And now you say that it's logical, because god didn't need to do anything, because physics did that for him.
Good thinking! [/sarcasm]

Now, lastly, you make another classical mistake:
If the odds that we came into being are so minute, then consider the odds that God came into being? They MUST be even smaller, since that god already created us as well, according to you.
 
@Sander- exactly what I was going to say, but you said it better than I could have.

@Luke- The good/bad thing for atheists is that we WILL know if we're wrong and there's a penalty, just not if we're right :) .

Anyway, this problem (structured slightly differently) has been given the formalized name of Pascal's wager, which says for that reason it is more practical to believe in God. I'm going to do a slight thread derail because I've always had problems with it, but never had a chance to talk about it. It implies that there is no cost in forcing oneself into believing in something you wouldn't have believed in other wise, which by just looking at the other threads around these forums, there certainly are. Also, the seemingly unlimited benefit in believing and being 'right' is completely balanced out by the infinite equally likely alternative possibilities. So I am maximizing my expected utility by not believing a religion. From what I've seen, using scientific rationality to justify religion in any way always backfires.
 
And, obviously, Pascal's wager leaves other religions unconsidered as well. Just think about: What will probably be worse, not believing in any relgiion, or believing in the WRONG religion?
 
Heh, that reminds me...

Assuming he does exist, what does god frown more at?
Scenario A= You,having lived as a devoted atheist, arrive for judgement and with a shrug you say "Well, i was wrong. What now?"

or Scenario B where you have been a "Just-in-case" believer and loudly exclaim your faith?

mmm vodka
 
Mad Larkin said:
or Scenario B where you have been a "Just-in-case" believer and loudly exclaim your faith?
Click to expand...
Yeah, if God is omnipotent, then He would know that you were "Faking It" anyway.

IIRC,in Christianity non-believers go to limbo, people who believe in false gods go to hell. So you are probably better off being agnostic than the wrong religion.
 
Science and Religion are not necessarily seperate means of exploring the same thing.
Click to expand...

Good point Welsh, one I've often wondered about myself.

Look at your early western (I'm not well versed in mideast and eastern) scientists, many were monks, and religious men. Consider Gregor Mendell, the quiet little guy that spent his time working with bean plants and started our basic understanding of genetics.

Your early monasteries were the repositories of knowledge in the good old days, those wishing to get an education traveled there to learn to read and write. The Catholic church was one of the main reasons the printing press was invented, to distribute holy texts to the masses (well and sell indulgences, but I'm not touching that one today).

The problem is, some people look at scientific discoveries as disproving the existence of God. How? The Big Bang does not disprove the existence of God, evolution doesn't either, looking at the big picture and the development of life over the centuries (provided you accept those two doctrines, personally I'm still looking at the evidence) would seem to suggest a guiding force. On the other hand you have people like me who look at what little I can understand of of Quantum physics and atomic matter and say how much greater is God than I assumed, he can do all this.

BTW, my main problem with the Big Bang theory is that one of the the most fundamental concepts they teach you in science class is that "life comes from life". EXCEPT 4 billion years ago when abiogenesis happened to occur. Someone mentioned that the Big Bang essentially set up the rules of our universe (this is my admittedly sleepy understanding of the statement, correct me if I'm wrong) life didn't appear for a long time after the planets had cooled. How then, if the rules defining our universe were already in place did abiogenesis occur? That I would call a miracle.

On original topic:

How did I come to my beliefs? Originally I was raised in a Christian home, in a very religious area (aha they claim its environment, not so you assumptionist ; ) Later in life I examined my beliefs and strayed a bit, but as life went on events in my life (most too personal to post here I'm afraid) that were a little too strange to be conincidental, led me back to my faith. God has worked in my life, changed me for the better in many ways, and I've seen him work wonders in other's lives.
 
The problem is, some people look at scientific discoveries as disproving the existence of God.
Click to expand...
Scientific theories should not be used to disprove the existence of God, because the burden of proof is on the believers. They are useful for rebuking the "evidence" that there is one, or the claims that certain things happened specifically in a certain way.
BTW, my main problem with the Big Bang theory is that one of the the most fundamental concepts they teach you in science class is that "life comes from life". EXCEPT 4 billion years ago when abiogenesis happened to occur. Someone mentioned that the Big Bang essentially set up the rules of our universe (this is my admittedly sleepy understanding of the statement, correct me if I'm wrong) life didn't appear for a long time after the planets had cooled. How then, if the rules defining our universe were already in place did abiogenesis occur?
Click to expand...
I don't see what the problem is. The definition of abiogenesis is the creation of life from non-living matter. Because you mentioned it, I assume you agree that this likely happened. But, just because the "rules" made it possible for it to happen, doesn't mean that it had to have happened from the very start.
 
Your early monasteries were the repositories of knowledge in the good old days, those wishing to get an education traveled there to learn to read and write. The Catholic church was one of the main reasons the printing press was invented, to distribute holy texts to the masses (well and sell indulgences, but I'm not touching that one today).
Click to expand...
ARGH! Historical ignorance.
A) The masses couldn't read.
B) Let alone read Latin.
C) The Catholic Church was wholly opposed to translating the bible (remember Luther?).
so:
D) Your statement is false.
The problem is, some people look at scientific discoveries as disproving the existence of God. How? The Big Bang does not disprove the existence of God, evolution doesn't either, looking at the big picture and the development of life over the centuries (provided you accept those two doctrines, personally I'm still looking at the evidence) would seem to suggest a guiding force. On the other hand you have people like me who look at what little I can understand of of Quantum physics and atomic matter and say how much greater is God than I assumed, he can do all this.
Click to expand...
They see science as a threat to religion, and some scientists see religion as a threat to science. The two perpetuate eachother.

BTW, my main problem with the Big Bang theory is that one of the the most fundamental concepts they teach you in science class is that "life comes from life". EXCEPT 4 billion years ago when abiogenesis happened to occur. Someone mentioned that the Big Bang essentially set up the rules of our universe (this is my admittedly sleepy understanding of the statement, correct me if I'm wrong) life didn't appear for a long time after the planets had cooled. How then, if the rules defining our universe were already in place did abiogenesis occur? That I would call a miracle.
Click to expand...
Then how would you explain god? That he just "was"? Then why would this not be possible? :P
There are several explanations, one of the more interesting ones is that there was nothing, and because there is nothing, there are no rules to tell nothing to do or not do something. So the universe could be created.
Then, under the right influences and with a bit of luck, the simplest of simple life could appear. Miniature single-celled organisms, consisting of just a couple of molecules chained together. Evolution then explains the rest. There really is no reason to think that it's false, you know.
 
Good news in education-

THe bible thumpers got in the ass- religion and schools don't mix!

Court upholds Bible class ban
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 Posted: 1:12 PM EDT (1712 GMT)


CHATTANOOGA, Tennessee (AP) -- A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that argued weekly Bible classes are unconstitutional in the public schools of Rhea County, the same county where the "Scopes Monkey Trial" pitted creationists against evolutionists 79 years ago.

A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati agreed Monday with a February 2002 ruling by U.S. District Judge R. Allan Edgar of Chattanooga.

Edgar ruled that the Bible Education Ministry program in Rhea County violated the First Amendment's clause calling for separation of church and state.

The 30-minute classes were held weekly for about 800 students in kindergarten through fifth grade at the county's three elementary schools. Parental consent was not required and students were allowed to participate in alternative activities if they objected to the classes.

Rhea County superintendent Sue Porter said Monday that school board members would likely discuss whether to appeal the latest ruling at their Thursday night meeting. Bible classes had been offered in Rhea County for 51 years.

"I'm disappointed, not surprised though," Porter said.

The appeals judges ruled that although school officials contended that the classes were value-driven, teaching responsibility and positive morals, they were "also teaching the Bible as religious truth."

The county's city of Dayton, about 35 miles northwest of Chattanooga, is where orator and presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan and the lawyer Clarence Darrow squared off in the courtroom during the 1925 prosecution of teacher John T. Scopes for teaching evolution in the public schools instead of the biblical story of creation.
Click to expand...

So if you want to go to school and get a religious education, go to fucking Pakistan for a Madrasa.
 
welsh said:
Good news in education-
THe bible thumpers got in the ass- religion and schools don't mix!
<snip>
Click to expand...
So if you want to go to school and get a religious education, go to fucking Pakistan for a Madrasa.
Click to expand...
Good!
There's been alot of guff recently over here on how British schools can't supply a decent religious education to muslims, despite most schools being non-religious nowadays. They should ban all religious schools, if parents want to peddle religion onto their kids, then it should be done at home or in sunday school (and it's equivalents in other religions). Many Islamic children go to a class (?) at their local mosque for that kind of thing, it doesn't need to be brought into schools.
 
Personally, I have great deal of trouble understanding the concept of God.
The problem is, the simplest of all, and that I’ve been asking since someone first told me about God:

If God is the creator and created everything… how was he created? Did he create himself? How could he?

And that’s about the same question that I make about the Big-Bang. So there’s this whole bunch of energy accumulated, right? But, since in science (to my knowledge) nothing is born and nothing dies, only transformed… from were did this energy came from? How was it formed?

But of course that I’m, as a human being, stupid and only think I can understand what happens around me.
 
Meaning? Is that not something one has to learn from oneself?

Order? From which church? I know the Pope has said that Catholicism is not an democracy, so are you saying a heirarchical monolithic order?

Why things happen? Are you saying religion is better than science?

Are you willing to accept superstition and the supernatural over empirical causal relationships?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top