A webpage which I think might make any theist reconsider their beliefs

[RyanM]

In the spirit of tit for tat, or more precisely, "If you try to shove your crappy beliefs down my throat, expect turnabout," I present to you believers the following webpage:

The Meaning of Life - Section 4: Theology

After reading it, you may well begin to question your belief system.

That is all. Have a nice day.

 

[wyvrn]

This is flamebait. But my post will be civil. From the link:

The books of every religion record miracles of healing, and other great powers, worked by God or the prophets. The belief in that power underlies and upholds the religion. And the modern-day theologians don't have that power. And they look at science, with doctors who can heal the sick, and physicists who can destroy cities, and engineers who can put people on the Moon, and they see science as a competing religion. Hence the conflict. And yet, there's no such thing as science. Knowing how to make an atom bomb is absolutely no different from knowing how to drop a rock, and it is nothing more to marvel at.

So, yes, there's a real problem here. The problem is that modern-day theologians can't work miracles, and they feel insecure about it - rightly so, if you ask me - so they get upset at the people who can. This is not science's problem.

I figured this out a long time ago. That is why I am currently agnostic. Need more information, in other words.

 

[theNEOone]

well i don't belong to any relgious groups, but that link you gave will hardly cause anyone to question their belief system. do you really think that people (at least those that will be reading that page) think of atomic bombs as some sort of magic? gimme a break. that page makes me feel embarrassed to be agnostic.

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: theNEOone
well i don't belong to any relgious groups, but that link you gave will hardly cause anyone to question their belief system. do you really think that people (at least those that will be reading that page) think of atomic bombs as some sort of magic? gimme a break. that page makes me feel embarrassed to be agnostic.

I expected it to be as convincing as the book presented in the other thread.

No more, no less.

 

[Toasthead]

This guy should try to make some more assumptions. :disgust:

 

[Spac3d]

Knowing how to make an atom bomb is absolutely no different from knowing how to drop a rock, and it is nothing more to marvel at.

That is a retarded example.

 

[wyvrn]

All he is trying to say is science is a label. The label Science does not give or take credibility. Science is not at odds with religion unless religion is false, because science is the summation of things we know to be true. This of course is realizing theories (such as evolutions) are only hypothesis and not truths yet.

Originally posted by: Spac3d

Knowing how to make an atom bomb is absolutely no different from knowing how to drop a rock, and it is nothing more to marvel at.

That is a retarded example.

 

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: theNEOone
well i don't belong to any relgious groups, but that link you gave will hardly cause anyone to question their belief system. do you really think that people (at least those that will be reading that page) think of atomic bombs as some sort of magic? gimme a break. that page makes me feel embarrassed to be agnostic.

I expected it to be as convincing as the book presented in the other thread.

No more, no less.

well, ok. but realize that relgious individuals tend to feel strongly about their beliefs. that being said, you need to formulate an extremely strong argument to be even somewhat convincing. anything less will only fuel the fervent beliefs, because after reading a week argument they tend to believe (more strongly than before) that nobody can ever bring to light any serious objections to their faith.

 

[wyvrn]

Also I find this passage from the link interesting:

Somebody comes up with an incomplete explanation of the Universe that doesn't include God; then, some theologian uses "God" as a sort of spackling paste to fill in the holes, and manages to convince others that that's part of the religion; then, when in due course the quest for knowledge discovers the real explanation, there's this big fight. It happened with astronomy and it happened with human evolution. Would you really want it to happen here?

It seems religions are retreating and what we prove to be true (what is labeled as science) advancing. Anyone have a counter-explanation for this? BTW, I do not believe in or disbelieve in evolution. I need more proof either way. However his example of astronomy is a good one.

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: wyvrn
All he is trying to say is science is a label. The label Science does not give or take credibility. Science is not at odds with religion unless religion is false, because science is the summation of things we know to be true. This of course is realizing theories (such as evolutions) are only hypothesis and not truths yet.

Originally posted by: Spac3d

Knowing how to make an atom bomb is absolutely no different from knowing how to drop a rock, and it is nothing more to marvel at.

That is a retarded example.

Ding ding ding. Someone gets it. ;-)

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: theNEOone
well i don't belong to any relgious groups, but that link you gave will hardly cause anyone to question their belief system. do you really think that people (at least those that will be reading that page) think of atomic bombs as some sort of magic? gimme a break. that page makes me feel embarrassed to be agnostic.

You'd be surprise at all the dumb people in this world. Do you realize how many people still believe earthquakes are acts of God himself? Or that they owe their survival in a plane crash to God... it's as if God believes they're more special than anybody else on that plane, and deserved to be alive, whereas the others didn't. You'd be surprise at how many people blame the Devil for their problems.

 

[Jzero]

In the spirit of "Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?" I ask you:
Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: Jzero
In the spirit of "Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?" I ask you:
Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?

I will tell you my brother!

God came to me, and he said, "Thou shalt createth a new thread, to propagate the truth that I do not exist!"

And then I realized I was talking to myself, but it still sounded like a good idea.

 

[brigden]

I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: brigden
I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

I don't believe in evolution. I accept it as the most plausible theory currently presented, seeing as how there really aren't any other sufficiently convincing ones backed by evidence and intelligent hypothesis.

 

[SagaLore]

That site is full of fluff.

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: brigden
I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

I don't believe in evolution. I accept it as the most plausible theory currently presented, seeing as how there really aren't any other sufficiently convincing ones backed by evidence and intelligent hypothesis.

Why don't you believe it? Because you can't see how a chimpanzee is related to a human being? I'm certain you don't understand the intricacies of nuclear fission, but I'm equally certain you believe in atom bombs.

 

[Jmmsbnd007]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
That site is full of fluff.

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: brigden
I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

I don't believe in evolution. I accept it as the most plausible theory currently presented, seeing as how there really aren't any other sufficiently convincing ones backed by evidence and intelligent hypothesis.

Why don't you believe it? Because you can't see how a chimpanzee is related to a human being? I'm certain you don't understand the intricacies of nuclear fission, but I'm equally certain you believe in atom bombs.

lol. You misunderstood me.

I specifically don't "believe" in evolution because I don't believe in "believing" something. If that makes any sense. To put it simply, I try to avoid the word "believe" because it has certain connotations I wish I eschew.

I find evolution to be the best theory to explain man's evolution from nothingness to sentience. Is that more clear?

 

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: brigden
I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

I don't believe in evolution. I accept it as the most plausible theory currently presented, seeing as how there really aren't any other sufficiently convincing ones backed by evidence and intelligent hypothesis.

Why don't you believe it? Because you can't see how a chimpanzee is related to a human being? I'm certain you don't understand the intricacies of nuclear fission, but I'm equally certain you believe in atom bombs.

umm, no need to attack him. he gave a perfectly good explanation. in all its entirety, the THEORY of evolution, still has some holes, as he pointed out. i accept evolution, but i also acknowledge the fact that the theory is not yet complete. revisions and reconsiderations are made daily. go to your school library and search all the research articles and journals dedicated to evolutionary biology and you'll understand what i'm talking about.

 

[RyanM]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
That site is full of fluff.

How so? Examples?

The few times I found him wandering off topic, I was pleased enough by his ideas there that I didn't mind as much.

Personally, my favorite section is 4.2. That one is wonderful.

 

[atom]

Yeah, but there are some people in the world that do understand things like nuclear fission. And they can explicitly see and quantify those results. Can't say the same for evolution.

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: brigden
I'm agnostic when it comes to God, but I simply can't believe people still don't "believe" in evolution.

I don't believe in evolution. I accept it as the most plausible theory currently presented, seeing as how there really aren't any other sufficiently convincing ones backed by evidence and intelligent hypothesis.

Why don't you believe it? Because you can't see how a chimpanzee is related to a human being? I'm certain you don't understand the intricacies of nuclear fission, but I'm equally certain you believe in atom bombs.

lol. You misunderstood me.

I specifically don't "believe" in evolution because I don't believe in "believing" something. If that makes any sense. To put it simply, I try to avoid the word "believe" because it has certain connotations I wish I eschew.

I find evolution to be the best theory to explain man's evolution from nothingness to sentience. Is that more clear?

I appreciate your reluctance to commit fully to believing in something. I am often like that myself.

I tend to view the creation of life and evolution as two seperate things. I can see how Creature Z evolves from Creature A, but how life got their in the first place is a wonderful mystery.

 

[wyvrn]

Bingo. Evolution is the puzzle missing pieces. Nuclear Fission is a completed puzzle that some people just don't understand. Evolution may or may not be true, we simply don't have the evidence either way to say yet.

Originally posted by: atom
Yeah, but there are some people in the world that do understand things like nuclear fission. And they can explicitly see and quantify those results. Can't say the same for evolution.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: MachFive

Originally posted by: Jzero
In the spirit of "Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?" I ask you:
Why create a new thread instead of replying to the existing thread?

I will tell you my brother!

God came to me, and he said, "Thou shalt createth a new thread, to propagate the truth that I do not exist!"

And then I realized I was talking to myself, but it still sounded like a good idea.

If you're God, why would you want theists to reconsider believing in you?
You silly deities....