[GTAvanja]

QUOTE (Robinski @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 17:06)

Anti-theists always bring science into the equation as if it's some anti-god. They say "Look at all this stuff, it just works. It just works without anyone interfering and it's beautiful in its own right." Why would it offend anyone for someone to say that the universe is beautiful and it works perfectly, someone did a real good job on it. It doesn't change the science at all. There doesn't have to be some divide. Faith and science are not incompatible.

The idea of a personal god is completely incompatible with science. We already know that it's impossible for anyone to be all-knowing and all-powerful. It's simple logic, really. Religious people know it too. That's why today you have all of these variations of term god. For example, in naturalistic pantheism. There is no way that you can ever disprove what those guys are saying.
Ironically, religion like everything else, had to evolve in order to survive. So now, for most people god is something completely different from god of Abrahamic religions. He is no longer a personal god who judges people. He is now an unknown force that is responsible for the existence of the universe and everything in it. Maybe not even a self aware force. But they still call it god because they don't want to admit that god doesn't exist. As far as I'm concerned, that's not what god is supposed to be. That's a cowardly cop-out. A way to justify beliefs they know are wrong.

This post has been edited by GTAvanja on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:17

[goin-god]

QUOTE (GTAvanja @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 12:15)

QUOTE (Robinski @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 17:06) Anti-theists always bring science into the equation as if it's some anti-god. They say "Look at all this stuff, it just works. It just works without anyone interfering and it's beautiful in its own right." Why would it offend anyone for someone to say that the universe is beautiful and it works perfectly, someone did a real good job on it. It doesn't change the science at all. There doesn't have to be some divide. Faith and science are not incompatible. The idea of a personal god is completely incompatible with science. We already know that it's impossible for anyone to be all-knowing and all-powerful. It's simple logic, really. Religious people know it too. That's why today you have all of these variations of term god. For example, in naturalistic pantheism. There is no way that you can ever disprove what those guys are saying. Ironically, religion like everything else, had to evolve in order to survive. So now, for most people god is something completely different from god of Abrahamic religions. He is no longer a personal god who judges people. He is now an unknown force that is responsible for the existence of the universe and everything in it. Maybe not even a self aware force. But they still call it god because they don't want to admit that god doesn't exist. As far as I'm concerned, that's not what god is supposed to be. That's a cowardly cop-out. A way to justify beliefs they know are wrong.

Yeah some religious people tell me that too, whatever happened to the "god created the human in his image" phrase?

[SagaciousKJB]

QUOTE (GTAvanja @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 08:05)

QUOTE (PrometheusX @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:54) QUOTE (GTAvanja @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 14:40) I don't know how life began, but I don't pretend to know. If we were having this argument 2000 years ago you'd ask me something like "if god doesn't exist, then where does the rain come from, and the earthquakes, and storms herp-a-derp, durr!" So life just "began" that way, right? for example, the internet you are using right now just began, but you don't know how did it begin, right? I love it how you completely ignored the rest of my post. You just chose one sentence that you think will gain you some credibility. Again, you're making an argument from ignorance (or in Latin argumentum ad ignorantiam just so that you don't think I made that up). I already told you that I don't know how life began. Don't twist my words. Mathematically, god doesn't have to exist. If you say that god created everything, logical question would be 'who created god'. Now, religious people can answer with 'I dunno, lol' or the usual 'god doesn't need a creator'. Well if god doesn't need a creator, why would the universe and life need one? And the way I see it, we already know the universe exists. And we already know life exists. But there is no proof of god. Not a single one. So again, if god for whom there is no evidence doesn't need a creator, why do we need one? In that equation, god is like adding with 0. You can remove him from the equation and still come up with the same result.

So you're familiar with "The Big Bang" theory right? That everyone and everything started from a collection of gases and what not.

So let me ask you this... Where did the gases come from?

Even Science proposes theories where something comes from nothing.

True knowledge exists in knowing you know nothing at all.

[El Zilcho]

Something else which I see as an undermining of religion is how it constantly changes itself to conform to proven scientific and social ideals. Before liberal thinking, homosexuality was a sin. Now, many Christians accept it, despite the fact the Bible states it is wrong. Before scientific evidence Genesis was taken at face value and believed to be the true creation story but as people became learned, and it was shown to be ludicrous story. Once again it was changed to be a non literal representation of creation. If it is simply a story, how come it isn't referred to as that in the Bible itself?

Rather than admit there stories are unsuitable as any form of explanation, they bend their own stone carved rules. At least have the integrity to stick by your age revered beliefs, rather than change them because society has exposed how stupid and backward they are.

EDIT: Similar post to vanja's previous one further up.

This post has been edited by El Zilcho on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:30

[Craig]

I think this would be better suited in D&D (for now).

[K^2]

QUOTE (PrometheusX @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 10:27)

Oh I forgot, I still have thousands more if you want.

Not if they are based on the same level of sheer ignorance. You forgot that there are hundreds of billions of stars up there? Wow. Just, wow.

[PrometheusX]

QUOTE (K^2 @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:29)

QUOTE (PrometheusX @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 10:27) Oh I forgot, I still have thousands more if you want. Not if they are based on the same level of sheer ignorance. You forgot that there are hundreds of billions of stars up there? Wow. Just, wow.

Obviously you didn't understand. I was giving an example about something, it isn't necessary that everything I talk about is about planets and stars.

[Robinski]

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:26)

Something else which I see as an undermining of religion is how it constantly changes itself to conform to proven scientific and social ideals. Before liberal thinking, homosexuality was a sin. Now, many Christians accept it, despite the fact the Bible states it is wrong. Before scientific evidence Genesis was taken at face value and believed to be the true creation story but as people became learned, and it was shown to be ludicrous story. Once again it was changed to be a non literal representation of creation. If it is simply a story, how come it isn't referred to as that in the Bible itself? Rather than admit there stories are unsuitable as any form of explanation, they bend their own stone carved rules. At least have the integrity to stick by your age revered beliefs, rather than change them because society has exposed how stupid and backward they are. EDIT: Similar post to vanja's previous one further up.

Think of it like science (Blasphemy!). Science establishes an idea of how the world works that everyone agrees on until it can be proved wrong when new evidence comes to light. Religion should work the same way. The Bible is not the word of God, it is man's interpretation of God's word as best he can decipher it. As new ideas and thinking come to the forefront religion will change the agreed ideas as needed to move closer to what the true word of God is. Of course, this means that you have to accept that ancient scripture is just that: out dated and made my man. Contrary to what most antitheists on the internet believe, most Christians realise this and do not take the word of the Bible as law.

I don't interpret it as hypocrisy. That would be like calling science hypocritical because it once believed that thalidomide was safe for pregnant women and then changed its mind. I think of it like this: science changes to try and figure out the true way the universe works. Religion changes to try and get closer to figuring out God's true message.

This post has been edited by Robinski on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:35

[Warlord.]

Another question out of curiosity for any atheists.

Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion?

[El Zilcho]

QUOTE (Robinski @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:33)

I don't interpret it as hypocrisy. That would be like calling science hypocritical because it once believed that thalidomide was safe for pregnant women and then changed its mind. I think of it like this: science changes to try and figure out the true way the universe works. Religion changes to try and get closer to figuring out God's true message.

But it is hypocrisy. Religion has always claimed to have answers for the questions ancient and modern man wanted to know. Now that something which actually makes sense arises to disprove these theories religion changes itself to fit in to a secular/sceptical environment. Religion has never been open to adapting or even listening to alternate ideas and moving with the times, and as such is why it called anything against the word of God heresy. If religion was open to change from the beginning I could understand your point. But it has always been, fingers-in-ears-blah-blah-blah-not-listening. Therefore, it is hypocritic it should adapt to modern ideals, as it is selling out it's own pillars of truth just to reach acceptance.

@ Warlord. - I would allow worship freely, but not educate children in schools with it. I would allow free speech, worship but not allow conversion of young people to something so irrational through institutionalised lying.

This post has been edited by El Zilcho on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 15:41

[goin-god]

QUOTE (Warlord. @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 12:37)

Another question out of curiosity for any atheists. Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion?

Concentration camps.

Nothing, I would even make all relegions available in every single country. And one should be free to choose one, or not.
Noone should be forced a relegion when they are born.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Warlord. @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:37)

Another question out of curiosity for any atheists. Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion?

Leave them to it, basically. Though I'd enforce a secular society, with public expressions of faith banned. Religion should be about personal spirituality, not shouting from the rooftops at anyone who cares to listen.

[K^2]

QUOTE (PrometheusX @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 11:32)

Obviously you didn't understand. I was giving an example about something, it isn't necessary that everything I talk about is about planets and stars.

Giving an example that's clearly wrong and telling me that you got more where it came from is still not that impressive.

[Icarus]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 09:50)

QUOTE (Warlord. @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:37) Another question out of curiosity for any atheists. Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion? Leave them to it, basically. Though I'd enforce a secular society, with public expressions of faith banned. Religion should be about personal spirituality, not shouting from the rooftops at anyone who cares to listen.

This.

Basically, religion wouldn't dictate laws (like Sharia) and people of religious convictions wouldn't be persecuted for their beliefs (like Albanians under Enver Hoxha) - I would try and find the happy medium. The government would abide by the principles of secularity, but the people would be free to have religious beliefs or none; the choice would be theirs.

[GTAvanja]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 17:50)

QUOTE (Warlord. @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:37) Another question out of curiosity for any atheists. Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion? Leave them to it, basically. Though I'd enforce a secular society, with public expressions of faith banned. Religion should be about personal spirituality, not shouting from the rooftops at anyone who cares to listen.

Exactly. And I would never allow creation to be thought in schools.

Those retards in Texas seem to be hellbent on doing that. What the f*ck is wrong with them? Imagine an entire country wanting their kids to learn lies and bullsh*t, and electing as their leaders people who believe in that bullsh*t the most. Kinda makes you wanna bomb the f*ckin' place with napalm, doesn't it?

QUOTE (SagaciousKJB)

So you're familiar with "The Big Bang" theory right?  That everyone and everything started from a collection of gases and what not. So let me ask you this...  Where did the gases come from? Even Science proposes theories where something comes from nothing. True knowledge exists in knowing you know nothing at all.

As I said, I don't pretend to know. I'm only proposing a possibility. There is a theory about The Big Bang that states how the big bang happened a lot of times in the past. Every time our universe started shrinking. And every time it happened, the universe had different characteristics. The ones it now has, according to that theory, allow it to expand forever, and to never shrink again. I think that's interesting.
There are also theories about multiple universes in something a lot bigger than a universe. According to that theory we are just one in god knows how many universes.

Now my question is, with all those theories and possibilities, how can anyone say that their god exists, and they know exactly what's gonna happen to us when we die. That amount of ignorance and arrogance necessary to say something like that makes me very upset. We are meaningless, petty and insignificant. Nothing happens when we die. Life is just another phenomenon in the universe. A spectacular one, but it's no more special than a black hole for example, or a pulsar. Pulsars are great!

This post has been edited by GTAvanja on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 18:42

[Icarus]

QUOTE (GTAvanja @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 12:31)

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 17:50) QUOTE (Warlord. @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:37) Another question out of curiosity for any atheists. Let's say you ruled the world. What would you do to religion and people who adhere to a religion? Leave them to it, basically. Though I'd enforce a secular society, with public expressions of faith banned. Religion should be about personal spirituality, not shouting from the rooftops at anyone who cares to listen. Exactly. And I would never allow creation to be thought in schools.

That should never have been allowed in the first place. To quote Superintendent Chalmers from The Simpsons: "Thank the Lord? That sounded like a prayer. A prayer. A prayer in a public school! God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion!"

Simply put: the classroom is for science and the church is for creationism and all that hokey-poke - don't let the two overlap... ever.

[Username482]

I believe in god.However these stories abut Jesus,prophets ...etc..I just can't think about it.I believe there is a god cause there's no logic if there isn't.But still if there's a god who created him? :s But ok...Anyway I don't have anything against anyone,it doesnt matter if he's christian,muslim...etc.No point to hate if we have same god I guess..

[goin-god]

QUOTE (Username482 @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:04)

I believe there is a god cause there's no logic if there isn't.

How is there no logic?

[El Zilcho]

QUOTE (goin-god @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 19:08)

QUOTE (Username482 @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:04) I believe there is a god cause there's no logic if there isn't. How is there no logic?

Believing in a God is an infantile response to mysteries. Like tugging on an adult's clothes when you were 3.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (goin-god @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 20:08)

QUOTE (Username482 @ Monday, Aug 29 2011, 16:04) I believe there is a god cause there's no logic if there isn't. How is there no logic?

This. Surely our understanding of evolution, the elements, and just about every discipline of science teaches us that, besides what goes on inside our minds and what we project on the outside world, absolutely nothing is logical? The only things that could be deemed "logical" in the natural world are based entirely on survival instinct rather than a higher consciousness and rationality of one's actions. Logic implies choice, the choice to make decisions based on rationalising possible outcomes, on being able to predict the likely, on understanding and self-awareness. How does this existing in our species signify the existence of a deity?

Logic is speculative, individual, relative and based almost entirely on one's perspective, upbringing, society, experience, conditioning and mental state. It's a human construct and nothing more.

This post has been edited by sivispacem on Monday, Aug 29 2011, 19:19