@Curtmungus your honor of being more famous than me is quite deserved. I salute you.
Prime Factor
-
@Field:
Clearly religion exists to give it’s follower’s hope for a better life and/or afterlife. Of course this varies from belief system to belief system. Religion, like governments and nations, can be born from the oppression of the former religion, government, etc., etc. Religious groups that use fear or propaganda have let their power and influence become abusive and need reform or revolution. Again, sounds alot like nations or governments. Why? Because they are all made up of PEOPLE who make mistakes or let power go to their heads. Religions are not imune - even if we think they should be - that’s life. Separating the wrongs in the past from the faithful of today can be and is difficult. Try not to hold it against them. I’ll only hate a man (or woman) who wrongs me. Not what someone in their religion did 500 years ago. This is where some “hate atheism” comes from. Some comes from religious oriented people who DO wrong them. Don’t fall into the trap of hating ALL of that group. Fear of different beliefs that you don’t understand covers the rest.
“Remember fear is the first step towards the darkside. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering…” - Master Yoda.
CC - come out of hiding!!!
Excellent FM. When i go on my rampage, killing people on the street in the name of FinsterniS, then naturally the whole world should be shocked and filled with anger at the daemon FinsterniS. Or pro-life. Or the environment. Or . . . (sub in your religion/politics/ideology here).
And please don’t make me log on everytime i sit at a computer.
and yes, i’m the pro-portuguese, pro-human-removing-aliens, pro-separation-of-anti-federalists, pro-God guest that has been infecting the columns. Stupid computer problems.- CC
-
No, not everytime. Just occasionally…
-
:D
happy FM? :D -
“but it is fair to deduct that it is possible that people may be converted through other means then fear and ego. I know of NO converts due to any of the factors that you mention. Moses merely mentioned an example of a person who was not “brainwashed” or “frightened” into faith.”
My sentiments exactly. When I asked my religious friends at the local Christian Club (and this was only about a year ago) what made them become a part of Christianity, it wasn’t their fear of God or terrible vengeance of God that made them do it, but their love of God. I asked them, “Why do you pay homage to God?” None of their answers were, “Well… if I don’t, it’s off to hell for me!” No, it was because they loved God. There was no need for fire and brimstone. Just faith and devotion.
I think that FinsterniS made too much of a generalization saying that it was fear of damnation and no other important factors as the ones mentioned above. Well, unless this Guest and myself live in this “distorted region” where everything is out of proportion. But to be fair, why don’t we have a poll. Everyone who is of religious faith (Christian fits the case more, though all religions are welcome), please answer if it was:
A) Love of God and the faith of him/her/it that made you religious
B) Fear of Eternal Damnation and Wrath of God that made you religious
C) Love of Yoda that made you religious (hey in UK, Jedi is a religion!)
:wink: -
I’ll only hate a man (or woman) who wrongs me
I’ll only hate an human if he work agaisnt my science, or against my species…
I am tolerant for all those who believe, but only when they don’t start claiming god is the answer, he will send infidel to hell and that there’s physical/rational evidence of his existence. There’s a lot of religious people that can enter this definition, by saying god is an affair of personnal feeling.
-
I’ll only hate a man (or woman) who wrongs me
I’ll only hate an human if he work agaisnt my science, or against my species…
I am tolerant for all those who believe, but only when they don’t start claiming god is the answer, he will send infidel to hell and that there’s physical/rational evidence of his existence. There’s a lot of religious people that can enter this definition, by saying god is an affair of personnal feeling.
so given this, approximately what percent of the world do you hate F? America - roughly 92%, Canada around 82%, Europe in the ~50% range? Something like that?
I’m sorry you are so intolerant of me and my opinion. I am, believe it or not, tolerant of you. I think you need to find love - like the love that Jesus gives. That may take care of some of your anger and hate. Either that, or marijuana. Most of those guys seem pretty happy. -
“like the love that Jesus gives. That may take care of some of your anger and hate. Either that, or marijuana. Most of those guys seem pretty happy.”
:lol: Hahahaha good one! But I question whether Jesus used “stimulants,” he was such a hippie! (Sandals, the hair, the beard, love and peace toward everybody, the white clothes, ect)
-
so given this, approximately what percent of the world do you hate F? America - roughly 92%, Canada around 82%, Europe in the ~50% range? Something like that?
I’m sorry you are so intolerant of me and my opinion. I am, believe it or not, tolerant of you. I think you need to find love - like the love that Jesus gives. That may take care of some of your anger and hate. Either that, or marijuana. Most of those guys seem pretty happy.Either that or marijuana ? the two are the same anyway. And i know i am not the epitome of tolerance but when i say i am intolerent vis-à-vis religion, and i repeat it; it is only for those who are claming religion is scientific, can be logic, et cetera… i don’t care about the majority of the religious people because for most of them this is just a personnal thing, they are not working against science. But the masses is somewhat easy to intimidate, if all scientist were evolutionist, then slowly people would understand, but because of some fanatic that use simplist theory easy to understand, people believe in a very large part creationism is a true thing. Those demagogue are working against science.
We all here have a sense of ethic base on what we want to see in the world around us, if you say love is the ultimate goal of humanity then your ethic will turn around that; same thing for me. I believe religion is entraving evolution…
-
We all here have a sense of ethic base on what we want to see in the world around us, if you say love is the ultimate goal of humanity then your ethic will turn around that; same thing for me. I believe religion is entraving evolution…
well, call me a projectionist, but you seem to think evolution and science IS religion.
Evolution is a nifty theory, and there is much physical evidence that may be used to support it, but it is yet unproven. Science - one pillar in my life, also very handy, and generates more curiousity even as i learn it. Still, it is just a tool that we use to explain the physical world around us. It is not the END of the journey, just a way to make the road a little more interesting. Maybe save some lives in the process. But it does nothing for people in providing answers - to life, to that which is unmeasurable, to soothe the questions that we have as we fall asleep at night. It does not remove the fear of death (or public speaking). When you walk in a dark room, you turn on the light. That does not allow you to see beyond the nearest wall. Science is like that. It illuminates places that it may illuminate, but there is a wall that science will not allow us to see beyond. As a scientist, i can accept that. -
@cystic:
We all here have a sense of ethic base on what we want to see in the world around us, if you say love is the ultimate goal of humanity then your ethic will turn around that; same thing for me. I believe religion is entraving evolution…
well, call me a projectionist, but you seem to think evolution and science IS religion.
Evolution is a nifty theory, and there is much physical evidence that may be used to support it, but it is yet unproven. Science - one pillar in my life, also very handy, and generates more curiousity even as i learn it. Still, it is just a tool that we use to explain the physical world around us. It is not the END of the journey, just a way to make the road a little more interesting. Maybe save some lives in the process. But it does nothing for people in providing answers - to life, to that which is unmeasurable, to soothe the questions that we have as we fall asleep at night. It does not remove the fear of death (or public speaking). When you walk in a dark room, you turn on the light. That does not allow you to see beyond the nearest wall. Science is like that. It illuminates places that it may illuminate, but there is a wall that science will not allow us to see beyond. As a scientist, i can accept that.I don’t pray for science, i don’t think it is the source of all answer. It is not a religion for me, it is just a part of life as much as the people around me. Is science a good thing ? I don’t even know… i just want to know, i am curious. The problem is the more i learn, the less i know… I accept the limit of knowledge; and it is very limited. But science itself has no limit, WE have limit, our brain is too weak, we simply cannot be objective, behind our jugement there is always a biological, individual, sociological creature.
About evolution we don’t know HOW it occur; but it really seem to occur. All the argument against Evolutionism are pretty weak… Mostly Young Earth Creationist’s argument… The difficulty with evolutionism is that we are not living very old; and most people only believe what they can see (like it was really clear the earth was not flat, but people believe so even more than 1 000 after it was proven the earth was a sphere (quasi-sphere))
Anyway, Christianism do not answer anything, it do not make us understand why we are here, it do not give us a goal… If christianism cannot be proove with rationality, why not believe in another mythology ? That is just an expression of fantasm… sure i would like to believe in heaven, in eternal love, i would love to; but i would not be honest to myself & to my science.
-
“All the argument against Evolutionism are pretty weak…”
Here’s a question, what do you define evolution to be?
-
Well, again there is not a millions definition… Species change, they evolve, they are not static, they biologicly change over time to perfect themself.
-
Anyway, Christianism do not answer anything, it do not make us understand why we are here, it do not give us a goal… If christianism cannot be proove with rationality, why not believe in another mythology ? That is just an expression of fantasm… sure i would like to believe in heaven, in eternal love, i would love to; but i would not be honest to myself & to my science.
you know i have to take issue with this one. Christianity answers the questions that we honestly seek that science will never answer. Now it may never answer any of your questions, but for millions of Christians, it answers their most important questions. Questions that the Greeks, Romans, Indians, Japanese, Norse, etc. will never answer, never can answer. Certainly the bible is one source of these, but unless you’ve never know Jesus, then you will never know the only answers that REALLY matter. Science points to the here and over there - the measurable, which is nice for some of us. Religion points to the Who, how and why, as well as “what then?”. Science - that entity that you need to be honest to, will not feel jilted if you acknowledge a possibility that there is something else besides her. She is a great gal that way.
-
“Well, again there is not a millions definition… Species change, they evolve, they are not static, they biologicly change over time to perfect themself.”
See, the problem with evolution is that it’s its own worse enemy, not religion. Most non-scientists seem to be quite confused about precise definitions of biological evolution. Such confusion is due in large part to the inability of scientists to communicate effectively to the general public and also to confusion among scientists themselves about how to define such an term. When discussing evolution it is important to distinguish between the existence of evolution and various theories about the mechanism of evolution. And when referring to the existence of evolution it is important to have a clear definition in mind. What exactly do biologists mean when they say that they have observed evolution or that humans and chimps have evolved from a common ancestor? Your own definition was pretty weak being a Evolutionist. Even most religious persons believe animals change over time, so that isn’t the problem. What about species changing from one to another? Also, we’re not sure that animals perfect themselves over time. Maybe over their particular environment.
-
you know i have to take issue with this one. Christianity answers the questions that we honestly seek that science will never answer. Now it may never answer any of your questions, but for millions of Christians, it answers their most important questions. Questions that the Greeks, Romans, Indians, Japanese, Norse, etc. will never answer, never can answer.
Woooooo…. That is very arrogant, very dogmatic. Like your religion was the good one, the other religion cannot answer thing your religion can…
That is not historicly valid. Polytheist was very strong, it answer all the things christianism was answering, it was only less superficial, there was a lot of gods, and people were praying for the gods they think was appopriate for them.
it was just not as beautiful as christianism, not as rigid, and they do not menace people. Also polytheist do not make such promise as eternal love, eternal happiness and thing like that. You clearly lack objectivity… Like i ask, if this is just a question of faith, without any logic, then why X religion is better than Y ?
Certainly the bible is one source of these, but unless you’ve never know Jesus, then you will never know the only answers that REALLY matter. Science points to the here and over there - the measurable, which is nice for some of us. Religion points to the Who, how and why, as well as “what then?”.
Religion point to nothing science or philosophy cannot, it only make it very simple so anyone can understand.
Why do we exist ? Religion do not answer to that better than Philosophy. The only difference is that philosophy at least is base on something…
Science - that entity that you need to be honest to, will not feel jilted if you acknowledge a possibility that there is something else besides her. She is a great gal that way.
Science is a tool of the human mind. You admit god was not logical, so closing my eyes will eventually make me “honest” ? I will not admit something that is illogical like the believe in god. Christianism is pure arrogance, pure lack of vision, like the world needed to be created by something alive, something intelligent, that is a pure projection of ourself, god act like us, he IS us.
Not a little fanatic to believe in somethign without an argument ?
-
See, the problem with evolution is that it’s its own worse enemy, not religion. Most non-scientists seem to be quite confused about precise definitions of biological evolution. Such confusion is due in large part to the inability of scientists to communicate effectively to the general public and also to confusion among scientists themselves about how to define such an term. When discussing evolution it is important to distinguish between the existence of evolution and various theories about the mechanism of evolution.
You are right on some point; Evolution is it’s worse enemy IN FACE OF THE PUBLIC. But in reality the different opinion on the mechanism of evolutionism is part of a normal process in science; theory appear, disappear, they chance, they evolve, that is all normal in science. Also evolution is a pretty young theory… give it time.
The problem is that creationism does not have so much divergence. Sure there is young earth creationism (the worse of all), the old earth creationism… but they do not chance, they have a theory base on their little bible and they do not chance (if they do; very slightly). They only try to “attack” evolutionism. They also try to convince the common, that will be too happy to believe in a theory they can easily understand (people have an hard time understanding everything is not necessarly breed by something intelligent)
Evolutionism is a very complex thing, far beyond my skill and even far beyond the understanding of the current scientist… it will take time to understand it.
-
Creationism is a weak theory (at least from what I read of it), but intelligent design is pretty convincing if you compare it with evolutionary theory.
-
@TG:
Creationism is a weak theory (at least from what I read of it), but intelligent design is pretty convincing if you compare it with evolutionary theory.
…. because our mind is limited and we cannot understand that a design DO NOT need an intelligent designer, that is a good exemple of projection. Also evolutionay theory are often reduce by Theist so they can be easily attacked.
http://humanists.net/avijit/article/god_design_argument_avijit.htm
I don’t really use the same kind of argumentation as the guy above but i don’t see any fallacious argument in it either.
-
Hmmm… I have to say that that article you posted was quite a good read. :o It’ll help my supporting argument against that whole “watchmakers” story that my history teacher often tries to “brainwash” my class with. 8) I have studied about the Wave Function Theory about two years ago and it does hold some weight to those who believe in that our “waves” spread out across parallel universes (our what we call the 10th Wave Dimension), though of course cannot be proven and the chances of this happening (ie being a part of another universe) are quite small. Our technology has not progress far enough to reach these parallel universes (say through connecting wormholes), so this theory will remain of course a theory for some time. And as you would say it, it has yet to be verified mathematically (although a lot can happen in 2 years, so I might be wrong) that indeed this small wave existence (as compared to the uniqueness of this universe) can be found in other universes. Therefore, we cannot be certain that the “beginning of our universe doesn’t have a cause.”
-
Even if it had a cause (probable), there is no reason to believe it was an intelligent cause, but a lot of reason to believe there was no intelligence behind it…
Suggested Topics
