For the religious people here

[Big T]

Besides mythology and values, what does religion explain?

Meaning. Order. Why things happen.....it's not just mythology and values.

Now then, both "Meaning" and "Order" could be classed as "Values", and "Why things happen" could be classed as "Mythology".
These terms are just two sides to the same coin. To a non-Christian, the whole "God created the universe in 7 days" thing is just as valid as any other creation mythology.

 

[John Uskglass]

Besides mythology and values, what does religion explain?

Meaning. Order. Why things happen.....it's not just mythology and values.

Now then, both "Meaning" and "Order" could be classed as "Values", and "Why things happen" could be classed as "Mythology".
These terms are just two sides to the same coin. To a non-Christian, the whole "God created the universe in 7 days" thing is just as valid as any other creation mythology.

It's "periods" not "days" and the creation "mythology" is, despite some weirdness, more accurate then some people admit.

 

[quietfanatic]

I am also agnostic although my family has gone through a progression over the generations. From Catholic and Jewish to Protestant and finally Agnostic. This is partly because people were always attacking may family as a minority group and also because they were also part of the minority of the intellectual, which seems to have a dislike of organised religion. My inherited beliefs are reinforced by my experience of the world. What does it matter if there is a God anyway. 'It' doesn't do anything. Some of my closest friends are devout christians and their belief in a non-existent God is just as useful as if there is a real one. Belief can be positive for bringing spiritual fulfilment and answers for difficult questions but I think that I am on my own. There are too many disadvantages of religion and what people do in 'God's name' is sometimes terrible. We must accept that we are responcible for our own actions, whether they be good or bad. I retain elements from the useful value systems that shaped my past but see the ritual and blind faith in God as unnecessary.

I have serious problems with the theory of evolution, because it does rest on probabilities to occur and seems too unlikely to me according to the set rules. The possibility of anything happening is minute, as has been said before. But then again the possibilty of the past happening as it did is extremely unlikely. Of course something has to happen so numbers might not always be the right way to study reality. (damn contradictions) Evolution has to be tweaked at least.

Go Luther!

 

[Sander]

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.

This all only tells you one thing:
Your logic is flawed. Human logic does not account for something simply existing without a cause, and it cannot account for something existing infinitely in itself. These, however, are the only two basic ways in which the universe, or god, or something else, can exist according to our logic. Thusly, our current logic system is flawed.
However, the Big Bang has one nice and interesting explanation:
Before the Big Bang there was literally nothing. Meaning that there were also no laws. And if there were no laws, why would nothing NOT do the whole Big Bang thing?
Now there's a nice twist of the mind.

I have serious problems with the theory of evolution, because it does rest on probabilities to occur and seems too unlikely to me according to the set rules. The possibility of anything happening is minute, as has been said before. But then again the possibilty of the past happening as it did is extremely unlikely. Of course something has to happen so numbers might not always be the right way to study reality. (damn contradictions) Evolution has to be tweaked at least.

This is, sadly, a mistake made very often. It seems extremely unlikely that we, as a race, spawned from evolution. It isn't. The chance that we would exist if everything went completely randomly is minute indeed. However, everything did not go completely randomly, since everything evolved step by small step. Meaning that when a new step in the evolution occurs, only one small thing is changed. If you keep everything that has existed up to that point, and only continue with the good, then the chances are not that slim indeed.
One fault underlying the logic mistake of thinking that the chances are to slim is the thinking that evolution has actually provided for the best possible creatures on this earth, or the best possible creatures up to this point: there is nothing saying that that is what has happened.

More answers to creationism and non-evolutionism:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2
(Although the tone is rather annoying, the article has some very valid points. Everyone with questions about evolution should read it.)

 

[Big T]

It's "periods" not "days" and the creation "mythology" is, despite some weirdness, more accurate then some people admit.

Yes, but that was not my point.
I have heard the theory that the seven periods do correspond to seven theoretical stages in the evolution of the Earth (from a scientific POV). It sounds interesting, and there are supposedly other things in various holy books (and other ancient texts) that are disconcertingly similar to modern scientific models/ideas. I've not read much on the subject tho' so I can't really comment further.
Do you have a link or any more info on this CCR? I'd quite like to read up on it.

My original point was that to non Christians, the creation (as in the Bible) is the same as any other myth. This would still hold if one of them were proved (somehow) completely true.

 

[John Uskglass]

Yes, but that was not my point.
I have heard the theory that the seven periods do correspond to seven theoretical stages in the evolution of the Earth (from a scientific POV). It sounds interesting, and there are supposedly other things in various holy books (and other ancient texts) that are disconcertingly similar to modern scientific models/ideas. I've not read much on the subject tho' so I can't really comment further.
Do you have a link or any more info on this CCR? I'd quite like to read up on it.

No, no, to be totally honest. I loose interest in Theology after Aquinas. But I know someone who does...

I'll admit that the creation story's total truth is....doubtful, but I think there is at least some interesting stuff in there, and at least interesting from a anthropological point of view.

My original point was that to non Christians, the creation (as in the Bible) is the same as any other myth. This would still hold if one of them were proved (somehow) completely true.

Yep, it would.
But it's the least crazy IMHO. Especially when you replace "days" with "periods", which is fair, you get something that is'nt total crap. Also, despite what some poeple belive, the Gospels never talk of the world as "flat", they talk of the Tabernacel of the world-which, according to Saint Augustine, could just mean you treat it like a tabernacle.

 

[Paladin Solo]

Dove man, that was so uncalled for.