The lunacy of organized religion

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Quote from Southpark which kinda sums of the purpose of religion:

Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in
crazy stories that make absolutely no
sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make
it all up, but I have a great life.
and a great family, and I have the Book
of Mormon to thank for that. The truth
is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made
it all up, because what the church teaches
now is loving your family, being nice
and helping people. And even though
people in this town might think that's
stupid, I still choose to believe in
it. All I ever did was try to be your
friend, Stan, but you're so high and
mighty you couldn't look past my religion
and just be my friend back. You've got
a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck
my balls.

My fave episode 😀

Joesph smith was called a prophet...dumb dumb dumb...many people believed joseph dumb dumb dumb

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
''I'm really interested to know what drives people to believe whatever is they do believe.''

1) I'm in Engineering now, so I take a lot of science and math courses, yet I am a believer, simply because I refuse to believe the world created itself out of nothing. I'm a Muslim by the way, the Quran teaches the big bang happend, but God created the small volume that exploded, while scientists just say the big bang happend...ok where did it come from? :S The scientific explanation sounds like to me: The world created itself.

I can't believe that.....there has to have been a higher power, as to what created God, well...I guess we find out when we go to heaven?

2) The concepts in the Quran help me live a better life, like every single thing it condemns, it does so for good reason, because its simply bad for you.

3) No I will not go into it: The Quran has a lot of correlation with science, it says things that are just being discovered now, some people brush them off as coicidences, some believe, I believe in it because there are just too many of them in the Quran and too accurate to be just mere coicidences.

Once again: I won't get into it, if you want to research it, feel free, but I won't discuss it.

4) So, science + quran mix perfectly for me.

5) Believing in something beyond death gives you hope, it gives you direction, it gives you all the answers you need. Instead of going through life asking: What happens when we die? etc etc etc....we have all the answers, whether you agree with it or not is up to you.

6) Living among real Muslims, ones that actually follow the Quran, they are very good people and I put a lot of trust in them, so I know it works when its followed.

Finally...it makes life worth living, I know where we came from, I know why we are here, I know where we are going.

I hope that cleared up some things.....I can't speak for Christians/Jews...but I would imagine they feel the same.

Here is the problem though...the argument is often made, as you made it, that science and religion don't have to be at odds, that they can complement each other. And in many cases that is true. I see no conflict in believing that the creation of the universe and life on earth happened exactly as scientists theorize, but the process was guided by a higher power. After all, if God really exists, he came up with all the physics concepts and laws we use to understand our world. Science can be thought of as simply another way to understand God and what he created.

But there is a problem with this happy little mix between science and religion, areas where they conflict. A religious person accepts certain things on faith, and having done so, cannot judge those things based on evidence. You can't have it both ways, either you have faith or you have reason. The classic example is Gallileo and the Church. His scientific ideas about the behavior of the universe were at odds with the official religious views of the time, and that didn't turn out very well for him, despite the fact that he was right. The more recent debate between evolution and creationism is another example. It's a stupid debate because the two sides are not debating the same thing, one has reason and evidence and the other has faith. And these examples are merely where different people represent faith and reason, the problem is far worse when it is an internal debate. You claim to be a scientist/engineer, but how would you deal with research in an area that contradicts something in your religion? Could you?

In an ideal world, religion would simply fill in the gaps in our understanding of the world. Afterlife related beliefs are a perfect example. Science is probably not going to be able to tell us what, if anything, happens to our consciousness after we die, and religion can fill in the gap. There is a whole area of our existence that is like this, I always find spirituality to be a very apt name for it. It does not deal with our raw physical existence, it deals with a whole different level. Of course religion isn't really like this, for the most part...and that's when you have problems.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
''I'm really interested to know what drives people to believe whatever is they do believe.''

1) I'm in Engineering now, so I take a lot of science and math courses, yet I am a believer, simply because I refuse to believe the world created itself out of nothing. I'm a Muslim by the way, the Quran teaches the big bang happend, but God created the small volume that exploded, while scientists just say the big bang happend...ok where did it come from? :S The scientific explanation sounds like to me: The world created itself.

I can't believe that.....there has to have been a higher power, as to what created God, well...I guess we find out when we go to heaven?

2) The concepts in the Quran help me live a better life, like every single thing it condemns, it does so for good reason, because its simply bad for you.

3) No I will not go into it: The Quran has a lot of correlation with science, it says things that are just being discovered now, some people brush them off as coicidences, some believe, I believe in it because there are just too many of them in the Quran and too accurate to be just mere coicidences.

Once again: I won't get into it, if you want to research it, feel free, but I won't discuss it.

4) So, science + quran mix perfectly for me.

5) Believing in something beyond death gives you hope, it gives you direction, it gives you all the answers you need. Instead of going through life asking: What happens when we die? etc etc etc....we have all the answers, whether you agree with it or not is up to you.

6) Living among real Muslims, ones that actually follow the Quran, they are very good people and I put a lot of trust in them, so I know it works when its followed.

Finally...it makes life worth living, I know where we came from, I know why we are here, I know where we are going.

I hope that cleared up some things.....I can't speak for Christians/Jews...but I would imagine they feel the same.

Here is the problem though...the argument is often made, as you made it, that science and religion don't have to be at odds, that they can complement each other. And in many cases that is true. I see no conflict in believing that the creation of the universe and life on earth happened exactly as scientists theorize, but the process was guided by a higher power. After all, if God really exists, he came up with all the physics concepts and laws we use to understand our world. Science can be thought of as simply another way to understand God and what he created.

But there is a problem with this happy little mix between science and religion, areas where they conflict. A religious person accepts certain things on faith, and having done so, cannot judge those things based on evidence. You can't have it both ways, either you have faith or you have reason. The classic example is Gallileo and the Church. His scientific ideas about the behavior of the universe were at odds with the official religious views of the time, and that didn't turn out very well for him, despite the fact that he was right. The more recent debate between evolution and creationism is another example. It's a stupid debate because the two sides are not debating the same thing, one has reason and evidence and the other has faith. And these examples are merely where different people represent faith and reason, the problem is far worse when it is an internal debate. You claim to be a scientist/engineer, but how would you deal with research in an area that contradicts something in your religion? Could you?

In an ideal world, religion would simply fill in the gaps in our understanding of the world. Afterlife related beliefs are a perfect example. Science is probably not going to be able to tell us what, if anything, happens to our consciousness after we die, and religion can fill in the gap. There is a whole area of our existence that is like this, I always find spirituality to be a very apt name for it. It does not deal with our raw physical existence, it deals with a whole different level. Of course religion isn't really like this, for the most part...and that's when you have problems.

Well give me some scientific issues and I'll try to tell you my position. I am sure the first issue will be evolution, yes I believe in evolution, BUT, only for animals, not for humans. Scientists are still debating the evolution theory, they have not come to the full conclusion and agreement that it has occurred for humans, in school they even teach us not to take it as fact, but as theory.

So you can't expect a religious person to answer his standing on evolution when not all scientists are in full agreement right?

other than that, shoot 🙂 I don't have a problem with anything science has taught me thus far.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
''I'm really interested to know what drives people to believe whatever is they do believe.''

1) I'm in Engineering now, so I take a lot of science and math courses, yet I am a believer, simply because I refuse to believe the world created itself out of nothing. I'm a Muslim by the way, the Quran teaches the big bang happend, but God created the small volume that exploded, while scientists just say the big bang happend...ok where did it come from? :S The scientific explanation sounds like to me: The world created itself.

I can't believe that.....there has to have been a higher power, as to what created God, well...I guess we find out when we go to heaven?

2) The concepts in the Quran help me live a better life, like every single thing it condemns, it does so for good reason, because its simply bad for you.

3) No I will not go into it: The Quran has a lot of correlation with science, it says things that are just being discovered now, some people brush them off as coicidences, some believe, I believe in it because there are just too many of them in the Quran and too accurate to be just mere coicidences.

Once again: I won't get into it, if you want to research it, feel free, but I won't discuss it.

4) So, science + quran mix perfectly for me.

5) Believing in something beyond death gives you hope, it gives you direction, it gives you all the answers you need. Instead of going through life asking: What happens when we die? etc etc etc....we have all the answers, whether you agree with it or not is up to you.

6) Living among real Muslims, ones that actually follow the Quran, they are very good people and I put a lot of trust in them, so I know it works when its followed.

Finally...it makes life worth living, I know where we came from, I know why we are here, I know where we are going.

I hope that cleared up some things.....I can't speak for Christians/Jews...but I would imagine they feel the same.

Here is the problem though...the argument is often made, as you made it, that science and religion don't have to be at odds, that they can complement each other. And in many cases that is true. I see no conflict in believing that the creation of the universe and life on earth happened exactly as scientists theorize, but the process was guided by a higher power. After all, if God really exists, he came up with all the physics concepts and laws we use to understand our world. Science can be thought of as simply another way to understand God and what he created.

But there is a problem with this happy little mix between science and religion, areas where they conflict. A religious person accepts certain things on faith, and having done so, cannot judge those things based on evidence. You can't have it both ways, either you have faith or you have reason. The classic example is Gallileo and the Church. His scientific ideas about the behavior of the universe were at odds with the official religious views of the time, and that didn't turn out very well for him, despite the fact that he was right. The more recent debate between evolution and creationism is another example. It's a stupid debate because the two sides are not debating the same thing, one has reason and evidence and the other has faith. And these examples are merely where different people represent faith and reason, the problem is far worse when it is an internal debate. You claim to be a scientist/engineer, but how would you deal with research in an area that contradicts something in your religion? Could you?

In an ideal world, religion would simply fill in the gaps in our understanding of the world. Afterlife related beliefs are a perfect example. Science is probably not going to be able to tell us what, if anything, happens to our consciousness after we die, and religion can fill in the gap. There is a whole area of our existence that is like this, I always find spirituality to be a very apt name for it. It does not deal with our raw physical existence, it deals with a whole different level. Of course religion isn't really like this, for the most part...and that's when you have problems.

Well give me some scientific issues and I'll try to tell you my position. I am sure the first issue will be evolution, yes I believe in evolution, BUT, only for animals, not for humans. Scientists are still debating the evolution theory, they have not come to the full conclusion and agreement that it has occurred for humans, in school they even teach us not to take it as fact, but as theory.

So you can't expect a religious person to answer his standing on evolution when not all scientists are in full agreement right?

other than that, shoot 🙂 I don't have a problem with anything science has taught me thus far.

Ah, but evolution is the perfect example in your case. You believe in the concept in general for animals (and anything else non-human I would assume), and are willing to evaluate it based on evidence and reason. As you said, it is not iron clad fact, so being able to evaluate it based on the merits is a good thing. Now how about human evolution? I don't expect a yes/no answer of course, as your pointed out we're not really at that stage yet, but how do you approach thinking about it? If religion tells you that we did NOT evolve, can you really evaluate, on any level, a theory that suggests we did?

Edit: BTW, just to be clear, I don't mean this as any kind of personal attack...I just have trouble with how religion and science intersect. But my religious beliefs don't pose a lot of problems there, I'm interested to see how a fellow engineer deals with it.

 

[CycloWizard]

Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
''I'm really interested to know what drives people to believe whatever is they do believe.''

1) I'm in Engineering now, so I take a lot of science and math courses, yet I am a believer, simply because I refuse to believe the world created itself out of nothing. I'm a Muslim by the way, the Quran teaches the big bang happend, but God created the small volume that exploded, while scientists just say the big bang happend...ok where did it come from? :S The scientific explanation sounds like to me: The world created itself.

I can't believe that.....there has to have been a higher power, as to what created God, well...I guess we find out when we go to heaven?

2) The concepts in the Quran help me live a better life, like every single thing it condemns, it does so for good reason, because its simply bad for you.

3) No I will not go into it: The Quran has a lot of correlation with science, it says things that are just being discovered now, some people brush them off as coicidences, some believe, I believe in it because there are just too many of them in the Quran and too accurate to be just mere coicidences.

Once again: I won't get into it, if you want to research it, feel free, but I won't discuss it.

4) So, science + quran mix perfectly for me.

5) Believing in something beyond death gives you hope, it gives you direction, it gives you all the answers you need. Instead of going through life asking: What happens when we die? etc etc etc....we have all the answers, whether you agree with it or not is up to you.

6) Living among real Muslims, ones that actually follow the Quran, they are very good people and I put a lot of trust in them, so I know it works when its followed.

Finally...it makes life worth living, I know where we came from, I know why we are here, I know where we are going.

I hope that cleared up some things.....I can't speak for Christians/Jews...but I would imagine they feel the same.

Here is the problem though...the argument is often made, as you made it, that science and religion don't have to be at odds, that they can complement each other. And in many cases that is true. I see no conflict in believing that the creation of the universe and life on earth happened exactly as scientists theorize, but the process was guided by a higher power. After all, if God really exists, he came up with all the physics concepts and laws we use to understand our world. Science can be thought of as simply another way to understand God and what he created.

But there is a problem with this happy little mix between science and religion, areas where they conflict. A religious person accepts certain things on faith, and having done so, cannot judge those things based on evidence. You can't have it both ways, either you have faith or you have reason. The classic example is Gallileo and the Church. His scientific ideas about the behavior of the universe were at odds with the official religious views of the time, and that didn't turn out very well for him, despite the fact that he was right. The more recent debate between evolution and creationism is another example. It's a stupid debate because the two sides are not debating the same thing, one has reason and evidence and the other has faith. And these examples are merely where different people represent faith and reason, the problem is far worse when it is an internal debate. You claim to be a scientist/engineer, but how would you deal with research in an area that contradicts something in your religion? Could you?

In an ideal world, religion would simply fill in the gaps in our understanding of the world. Afterlife related beliefs are a perfect example. Science is probably not going to be able to tell us what, if anything, happens to our consciousness after we die, and religion can fill in the gap. There is a whole area of our existence that is like this, I always find spirituality to be a very apt name for it. It does not deal with our raw physical existence, it deals with a whole different level. Of course religion isn't really like this, for the most part...and that's when you have problems.

Well give me some scientific issues and I'll try to tell you my position. I am sure the first issue will be evolution, yes I believe in evolution, BUT, only for animals, not for humans. Scientists are still debating the evolution theory, they have not come to the full conclusion and agreement that it has occurred for humans, in school they even teach us not to take it as fact, but as theory.

So you can't expect a religious person to answer his standing on evolution when not all scientists are in full agreement right?

other than that, shoot 🙂 I don't have a problem with anything science has taught me thus far.

Ah, but evolution is the perfect example in your case. You believe in the concept in general for animals (and anything else non-human I would assume), and are willing to evaluate it based on evidence and reason. As you said, it is not iron clad fact, so being able to evaluate it based on the merits is a good thing. Now how about human evolution? I don't expect a yes/no answer of course, as your pointed out we're not really at that stage yet, but how do you approach thinking about it? If religion tells you that we did NOT evolve, can you really evaluate, on any level, a theory that suggests we did?

Edit: BTW, just to be clear, I don't mean this as any kind of personal attack...I just have trouble with how religion and science intersect. But my religious beliefs don't pose a lot of problems there, I'm interested to see how a fellow engineer deals with it.

I would evaluate it with an open mind, but if it turns out to be true, then I guess my religion is wrong. So until evolution is proven to be right without a doubt....

 

[MicroChrome]

I higly doubt the answers to questions will be answerd here...

I'd vist the Joseph Campbell Foundation website... They have their own forum website that you will probably find answers to your questions...

http://www.jcf.org/forum/viewforum.php?forum=28


God without Religion: Questioning Centuries of Accepted Truths (Hardcover)
Read the above book amazon sells it for 16 bucks...

 

[JEDIYoda]

badeeeb badeeb ba dats all folks!

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

What if there isn't something greater than us? Imagine if once we die we cease to exist, no spirit or anything moving on, we just die and thats it. That idea isn't very pleasing to anyone. Would it be weak to make up stories and explanations of our existance that try and make it seem like we are somehow special, that we have some magic man in the sky that created us and will ensure our existance after death?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

Okay, so how did the world occur?

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

Okay, so how did the world occur?

We don't know 🙂 We got a pretty good idea, but within those first few million years we are absolutely clueless ~ Then again 100 years ago we were probably clueless on MOST its history. And even today the history of the earth is changing constantly. In the early 90s we thought we had human lineage figured out, and then here comes stuff like Neanderthals mixing with humans and an entirely new species of humans in Indonesia. Give us 100 years and I'm sure the story will change more. I doubt it will ever be fully complete, but it will give us a pretty good idea. I remember talking to my Physics professor who is a die hard aethist and the best he comes up is trying to pass off extremely controversial theories of what happened. I'm sure we will learn more and more in the future, but I don't see how any of it discounts scripture; when you can find things in scripture that contradicts science let me know 😉

As an engineer also (of the Biomedical variety to boot, so I get to see how the body functions at the same time) I am amazed with how accurate scripture can be. Talk to an aetheist one hundred years ago and the "Crazy Muslim claiming that the world started from a single point and grows ever faster" was someone to be ignored...now it is accepted as fact 😉
I think scripture contains simplifacations of the actualy situation. The big bang is infinitely more complex than that, but that is what the basic essence boils down to. That "Drop" of semen from Humans is said to have contained part of life the entire time, yet it wasn't till the 20th century we figured out the real role of semen; before then we had crazy theories that the baby was already implanted in the mother but the semen "activates" the birth, or that a miniture human existed wrapped in the semen and it just went straight to the uterus to plant itself....

I know it might sound weird, but I agree with Meoom 😉 And CkGunslinger is right on the mark as well, especially his last paragraph

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
What if there isn't something greater than us? Imagine if once we die we cease to exist, no spirit or anything moving on, we just die and thats it. That idea isn't very pleasing to anyone. Would it be weak to make up stories and explanations of our existance that try and make it seem like we are somehow special, that we have some magic man in the sky that created us and will ensure our existance after death?

You could rephrase your post as "Assuming there is no god," which means any such stories would be inherently false. However, that assumption is questionable at best IMO, and hardly an axim on which to base the answer to your question. I don't make up stories regarding how things came about, just recognize that I can't explain how they came about. After all, why does the exact manner in which these things came about matter? Fundamentalists might argue that it does, but I disagree.

Originally posted by: Tab
Okay, so how did the world occur?

I don't claim to know the details, but I would tend to agree with the current scientific trend leaning towards the Big Bang and subsequent events. This single event, signalling the beginning of our universe, also indicates to me that there was something to instigate it. Many atheist philosophers, given that the universe has not always been and started from a single event, have agreed with me and changed their stance on the existence of a deity.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: hscorpio
What if there isn't something greater than us? Imagine if once we die we cease to exist, no spirit or anything moving on, we just die and thats it. That idea isn't very pleasing to anyone. Would it be weak to make up stories and explanations of our existance that try and make it seem like we are somehow special, that we have some magic man in the sky that created us and will ensure our existance after death?

You could rephrase your post as "Assuming there is no god," which means any such stories would be inherently false. However, that assumption is questionable at best IMO, and hardly an axim on which to base the answer to your question. I don't make up stories regarding how things came about, just recognize that I can't explain how they came about. After all, why does the exact manner in which these things came about matter? Fundamentalists might argue that it does, but I disagree.

Originally posted by: Tab
Okay, so how did the world occur?

I don't claim to know the details, but I would tend to agree with the current scientific trend leaning towards the Big Bang and subsequent events. This single event, signalling the beginning of our universe, also indicates to me that there was something to instigate it. Many atheist philosophers, given that the universe has not always been and started from a single event, have agreed with me and changed their stance on the existence of a deity.

Yeah but where did the deity come from? If we can all agree that the big bang did not just happen, then how can we say for certain that the existence of a deity can just happen without a beggining?

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99
Yeah but where did the deity come from? If we can all agree that the big bang did not just happen, then how can we say for certain that the existence of a deity can just happen without a beggining?

Nothing is certain. Thinking that there is or is not a deity - both are beliefs. Both are based on faith.

 

[Bumrush99]

My personal views on the matter have changed significantly, starting in my early teenage years. I came from a very strict household that never questioned the existance of God or the traditional customs that the religion taught us to observe. Slowly but surely, I began to question everything about religion, especially after my younger sister was catastrophically hurt in a car accident and paralyzed for life. People of faith kept telling me that her accident was the result of the will of God, that everything happens for a reason and that fate caused her to have such bad luck. Her condition is one that requires constant care and the emotional toll that it took on my family was tremendous. After absorbing everything in, I realized that my sister was sitting in a wheelchair for one simple reason- We are animals, like all other animals in the animal kingdom. If you crack your neck and break your spine you will no longer have the ability to walk. There is no magical reason for tragedy. People do not get cancer because God wants to prove something.

To me, religion answers questions for people that do not have the ability to accept certain things, and answers questions that we have no answers for. How did we get here? What is our purpose? These are questions that we may never answer, and religion provides a simplistic approach towards explaining them. I choose to answer, "There are some things we may never know"

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99
My personal views on the matter have changed significantly, starting in my early teenage years. I came from a very strict household that never questioned the existance of God or the traditional customs that the religion taught us to observe. Slowly but surely, I began to question everything about religion, especially after my younger sister was catastrophically hurt in a car accident and paralyzed for life. People of faith kept telling me that her accident was the result of the will of God, that everything happens for a reason and that fate caused her to have such bad luck. Her condition is one that requires constant care and the emotional toll that it took on my family was tremendous. After absorbing everything in, I realized that my sister was sitting in a wheelchair for one simple reason- We are animals, like all other animals in the animal kingdom. If you crack your neck and break your spine you will no longer have the ability to walk. There is no magical reason for tragedy. People do not get cancer because God wants to prove something.

Unquestioned faith is not really faith at all. Such events as you describe make us question our faith, to be sure, but there are many other possible conclusions that may be reached. Struggles that arise in your life can serve to kill your faith or make it stronger, depending on how you deal with them. Note, however, that simply because you endure struggles speaks nothing to whether or not there is, indeed, a higher power (at least from my perspective).

To me, religion answers questions for people that do not have the ability to accept certain things, and answers questions that we have no answers for. How did we get here? What is our purpose? These are questions that we may never answer, and religion provides a simplistic approach towards explaining them. I choose to answer, "There are some things we may never know"

Religion does not answer these questions in and of itself. However, it can guide you to seek out the answers to these questions. The guidance is in the governing axioms of the religion.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

what does complexity have to do with a diety? You don't believe that complexity can come into being on its own?

I have heard (and believe) the the Market is one of the most impossibly complex things in the world, did god create the market? The fact that you can twist the facts to support you prior beliefs really isn't that strong an arguement for someone that isn't you.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: hscorpio
What if there isn't something greater than us? Imagine if once we die we cease to exist, no spirit or anything moving on, we just die and thats it. That idea isn't very pleasing to anyone. Would it be weak to make up stories and explanations of our existance that try and make it seem like we are somehow special, that we have some magic man in the sky that created us and will ensure our existance after death?

You could rephrase your post as "Assuming there is no god," which means any such stories would be inherently false. However, that assumption is questionable at best IMO, and hardly an axim on which to base the answer to your question. I don't make up stories regarding how things came about, just recognize that I can't explain how they came about. After all, why does the exact manner in which these things came about matter? Fundamentalists might argue that it does, but I disagree.

Originally posted by: Tab
Okay, so how did the world occur?

I don't claim to know the details, but I would tend to agree with the current scientific trend leaning towards the Big Bang and subsequent events. This single event, signalling the beginning of our universe, also indicates to me that there was something to instigate it. Many atheist philosophers, given that the universe has not always been and started from a single event, have agreed with me and changed their stance on the existence of a deity.

so how did the diety come into being?

 

[judasmachine]

I know several business men who don't believe a lick of it, and only go cause it's good for business. Their wives though buy it hook line and sinker. Most of their kids pay it lip service, but don't care. It's becoming a political movement, and not a religious order. Even the Catholic Church has recently admitted that most of the Old Testament stories are just stories. The neofascist (aka corporatists) uses this fanaticism to forward their political agenda. Fewer and fewer are actually believing what they are preaching, god knows they don't practice it.

Christianity in particular (as it's all I have personal experiance with), is a pauper's religion, yet it's the elites that push it. These people only carry their own interest in mind, and use the "turn the other cheek" message to cow it's puppets.

Beware when it's Caesar that says, "Give unto Caeser."

 

[Whaspe]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Maybe it has been a gradual awakening or revelation that has occured throughout the years, but lately I just can't help but notice how incredibly stupid people get about religion. I'm also realizing how modern religion simply does not hold up to my own standards anymore, and my view of most mainstream religions is that they are nothing more than mythology. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions of people who are hoodwinked and indoctrinated into these religions which are based upon thousand year old texts who accuracy can never be determined.

I wonder how and why religion has been left largely unevolved. It seems to me that religion would have to adapt to the culture and times in order to stay relevant in people's lives. However, it seems like it is doing precisely the opposite. People cling to these mythological beliefs, while thumbing their noses at proven scientific data that has been the fruitless efforts of thousands of scientists.

What the hell is the point of even having an organized religion anymore? If your faith is your personal relationship between yourself and whatever you believe to be God(s), then why do you need other people telling you what to believe?

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Most people forget that science as we know it evolved out of an inquistive desire to understand more behind the nature of our universe; the universe that a God created. A large number of the founding fathers of science (Western civilization) where Christians and firm believers in a higher power. So why did they meet such opposition from the established church of their day? I think mainly because the established church held control over their subjects relying on the general lack of inquisitiveness/education in the population.
Fast forward into the world as we know it and what's changed. Well, we teach our children their ABC's and that 1+1=2 and with this knowledge condemn history and religion. But have we really changed? This article in the latest issue of Cell brings up some very good points. No wonder science is being challenged with Intelligent Design. This being said, I strongly believe in the existence of a God and that our physical laws governing our lives were created by him. But what kind of a God would he be if he was continually forced to intervene in the progression of his creation. Personally, I think it absurd that any of the miracles described in the Bible would contradict the physical/chemical laws of nature. Organized religion for the inquisitive beleiver is required just as much as the scientific community is required by the inquisitive scientist. The problem I think, is that religious organizations are rather susceptible to being hijacked for personal or political agenda's (the same can be said with science). If we adopt a science curriculum such as the one Dr Alberts suggests, we may be able to eleviate this conundrum.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

CycloWizard, the problem with modern religions is exactly what you have stated above. The fact that some religions "require interactions with others to ensure incorrect notions or actions are avoided", is precisely how people become indoctrinated and brainwashed in many cases. It stifles freedom of thought and forces people to follow the status quo in order to be a part of the religion.

Your trying to have things both ways, and modern religions just don't work this way and I think even you can admit to this. I agree that seeking those who are more enlightened than we are for guidance IS a good thing, but at some point it is up to each and every human being to make their own choices as to what path of spirituality they want to take. Also, guidance can come from any human being and it does not have to come solely from your priest/bishop/etc. That is the problem with many religions, they claim to be the only source of truth and fool their followers into believing this. This is why I am heavily against those that baptize their childrens early on and indoctrinate them into their religions without giving their children the chance to form their own views and spirituality.

And for the record, the Bible/Quran/etc. ARE mythological books. If you are trying to look at either of these texts as some sort of historical or sceintific truth then you aren't using them as they were intended. They are purposeful only to provide the readers with guidance and morals and should not be taken literally. I realize that many take offense to the word myth, as if it discredits the Bible, Quran, or any other religious text. I don't think it does at all. These books are myths in the sense that none of these stories can be proven to be accurate in any way, shape, or form. For example, the idea that Jesus is the son of God IS a myth as far as I'm concerned.

A side question I have for Christians in particular is why do you always pray to Jesus instead of God? If Jesus is God.....or something God created, then wouldn't it make more sense to pray directly to God instead of Jesus? I think it has to do with early Christians personalizing their notion of God and making him exclusive to their religion, but of course I'm most likely wrong on this.

 

[Future Shock]

I'm amazed by this thread - it's been remarkably civil.

What I am not amazed by is the lack of human understanding that is evidenced by so many forum members, possibly because so many of us have such strong left-brain skills as we are predominantly techies. So let me expound...

IMHO, Religion exists because people:

1) Want to believe that they don't die
2) Want to BELONG - usually to a group, and usually to a group that enables them to feel slightly superiour to their bretheren
3) Want to CONTROL - take any random group of humans, and there is always a small but vocal minority that feel they MUST be in control of others.

The first two are reasons why people seek out religion - it satisfies some basic human social needs. There is, IMHO, absolutely nothing wrong with either of those two reasons to join an organized religion, especially if you are honest to yourself as to your reasons for wanting to join, and realize that you are setting yourself up to gaming yourself. But if it makes you feel better, then I have nothing against it...

It's the LAST reason, #3, that is highly interesting. There will always be people that want to be politicians, managers, CEOs - leaders. Some of them do this because they know that those in control live the best (usually), others just have a deep seated need for power and control in their psyche. Whenever someone needs to be in control, they need to form a hierarchy - either in business, politics or, you guessed it: religion.

Hierarchies in business can only offer you interesting work and/or compensation. Hierarchies in politics can only offer their followers a better life - on this earth. But religious leaders, mindful of points 1 & 2, can offer their followers both immortality, and a profound sense of belonging and even superiority - "OURS is the only true religion - all others will burn and rot for eternity!" Sound familiar?

The problem with this is of course that leaders of heirarchies are ALWAYS trying to expand their hierarchy. And a heirarchy that isn't growing is usually in the process of failing. So religious leaders are trying to expand their flocks - evangelizing, missionary work, etc. Nowadays it's advertising, 24x7 satellite religious shows, you name it. But the message is always the same - "I have items #1 and #2, for real, unlike that guy down the street in the black smock."

As someone has pointed out, a "true religion" can't be seen adjusting it's folklore to be in accordance with modern understanding - otherwise it couldn't be "true". So this folklore becomes out of step with modern understanding. These hierarchy leaders are, in many cases, powerful and wealthy - so quick, let's try to subjugate modern understanding! We can pay to set up Intelligent Design institutes. We can pay for the support of school board elections for members who may help us change the curriculum. Ad infinitum...

And of course, what happens when these religions have saturated the human race? Why then, they MUST come into conflict, so that the leaders of each can expand their position. They will try to outbreed each other, they will fight for territorial control - and they will even convince politicans to take that fight to the political level if they can, and fight a political war over a religious agenda.

And that's where we are -except now the modern understandings are coming up faster and faster, and the churches are fighting dirtier and dirtier to delay or prevent a mass-understanding that their "true religion" folklore is just that - folklore. And the organized religions are coming increasingly into conflict to try to amass as much territory under themselves as possible, except we WILL soon have religious militias with nuclear or biological weapons.

I believe that the future of the human race will be fought out over the next two centuries, and these two issues will be at the heart of all that happens...

Future Shock

 

[Whaspe]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Truth is independent of time. Accordingly, any religion whose core beliefs changed with time could not be a true religion. While the subtleties of a religion might change with time, the essence cannot. I feel incredibly sorry for the tens of millions who think that the world as we know it occurred simply by chance.

The utility of organized religion is readily seen by considering religion as a practice. A practice is an ethical construction requiring (among other things) interaction with others to ensure that incorrect notions or actions are avoided, as no one person can hope to construct everything that is right and wrong on his/her own in a single lifetime. Nor can one be sure that what he perceives is right is truly right without this interaction (though I'm sure Moonbeam will disagree with me here, though I know that this is true at least of myself). Multiple perspectives always lead to a clearer picture of the truth, just as you require multiple points to triangulate a position using radar. You just don't have enough information from where you sit.

I'm just at odds here trying to figure out why so many people put so much importance in these thousand year old myths, over things like proven scientific data. I'm not trying to flame or attack any religion, I'm just trying to understand. The more I hear these arguments about things like the attack on Christmas, the more I feel like our country is headed in the completely wrong direction.

Things are not myth simply because you declare them as such. Some things are true, whether or not you believe in them. You simply select the scientific data that you deem supportive of your position and attempt to use it to disqualify a large section of organized religions (read: fundamentalists). Not all organized religions are fundamentalist in nature, though you seek to paint them all in this way.

For me, I see nature as the scientific data in favor of a deity. The innate complexity and order of nature becomes more and more apparent the more and more I study it. I see these things and speculate that the probability of it all happening simply by chance is infinitesimal at best, less than zero at worst. The miracles that I have seen, heard of, read about, and felt are perhaps more important data in this search.

Many claim that religion is only a crutch for the weak; I couldn't disagree more. I think it takes a lot more to admit that you are not the end-all, be-all and that something out there is greater than you. I think that most (if not all) religions have some bits of truth in them, though some have more than others. In the end, I don't see one religion determining your eternal fate, but your individual relationship. The religion you select may play a major role in nurturing said relationship, though it is not necessarily the definitive card in your hand.

CycloWizard, the problem with modern religions is exactly what you have stated above. The fact that some religions "require interactions with others to ensure incorrect notions or actions are avoided", is precisely how people become indoctrinated and brainwashed in many cases. It stifles freedom of thought and forces people to follow the status quo in order to be a part of the religion.

Your trying to have things both ways, and modern religions just don't work this way and I think even you can admit to this. I agree that seeking those who are more enlightened than we are for guidance IS a good thing, but at some point it is up to each and every human being to make their own choices as to what path of spirituality they want to take. Also, guidance can come from any human being and it does not have to come solely from your priest/bishop/etc. That is the problem with many religions, they claim to be the only source of truth and fool their followers into believing this. This is why I am heavily against those that baptize their childrens early on and indoctrinate them into their religions without giving their children the chance to form their own views and spirituality.

And for the record, the Bible/Quran/etc. ARE mythological books. If you are trying to look at either of these texts as some sort of historical or sceintific truth then you aren't using them as they were intended. They are purposeful only to provide the readers with guidance and morals and should not be taken literally. I realize that many take offense to the word myth, as if it discredits the Bible, Quran, or any other religious text. I don't think it does at all. These books are myths in the sense that none of these stories can be proven to be accurate in any way, shape, or form. For example, the idea that Jesus is the son of God IS a myth as far as I'm concerned.

A side question I have for Christians in particular is why do you always pray to Jesus instead of God? If Jesus is God.....or something God created, then wouldn't it make more sense to pray directly to God instead of Jesus? I think it has to do with early Christians personalizing their notion of God and making him exclusive to their religion, but of course I'm most likely wrong on this.

So by the bolded statement I take it you don't think too highly of science? You're grasping Sudheer Anne... your entire argument mocks the concept that created this forum.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
what does complexity have to do with a diety? You don't believe that complexity can come into being on its own?

Left unto themselves, things tend towards disorder. This is the second law of thermodynamics - that entropy always increases. Thus, no, complexity does not typically arise of its own accord. However, that's not all that I said. I said the mixture of complexity and order that we observe in nature is a compelling argument.

I have heard (and believe) the the Market is one of the most impossibly complex things in the world, did god create the market?

Simply because something is complex doesn't imply divine creation. However, it does imply creation by something other than random chance, as all observations teach us that things tend towards disorder without guidance. Humans created the market.

The fact that you can twist the facts to support you prior beliefs really isn't that strong an arguement for someone that isn't you.

How do you know what my prior beliefs were? How am I twisting anything to support them? My beliefs are a result of my observations, not the other way around.

so how did the diety come into being?

I don't know.

Originally posted by: Whaspe
Personally, I think it absurd that any of the miracles described in the Bible would contradict the physical/chemical laws of nature.

What kind of miracle would it be if it did not?

 

[JEDIYoda]

I believe that the future of the human race will be fought out over the next two centuries, and these two issues will be at the heart of all that happens...

I just love non commital beliefs!!