Angels & Demons
discussion
Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion?
Atheists asking people to give absolute proof that god exists is like people with faith asking atheists to provide absolute proof that he doesn't ... Neither will win That is why it is called faith , they have faith in what they believe but they can't provide an absolute proof , more a best fit theory
The same is true of some science theories that is why they are still theories but we still write books about them and some scientists treat them as truth until they are proved fact , maybe one day the prescience of god will be proved truth , just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it can't happen nearly that we maybe haven't found a way to yet ...
So maybe science and faith can go hand in hand and one day science will prove the existence of god ..... That will totally piss Richard Dawkins off !!!!!
( please let me live to see that day !!!!! )
Hannah wrote: "Atheists asking people to give absolute proof that god exists is like people with faith asking atheists to provide absolute proof that he doesn't ... Neither will win That is why it is called fai..."
Scientist do not tell people they are going to eternal damnation because you don't believe their theories.
And I hope to see the day when science can prove without a doubt that the world did not need a creator, that will totally piss off the Pope!
Drew ironically I would enjoy seeing the pope peed off too I just wish debates about this didn't get so personal But I guess that is the nature of the debate
Also I do not agree with the comment made much earlier about how religion causes most wars .. Admittedly there have been a few but no where near as many as people think
theres no such thing as absolute proof, Hannah, just degrees of it. And the way we show something is supported as true is by providing evidence. So we don't ask for absolute proof at all, we ask for any proof at all. And theists repeatedly fail to provide it, because there isn't any.And you seem to have misunderstood what a theory is. A theory is a set of hypotheses and observations that are supported by large amounts of evidence and data, from which further hypotheses are created. You see, a scientific theory is the strongest form of explanation we ahve for observed phenomenon. Its not simply an idea, its not simply what someone thinks but can't support, it is heavily supported. For example, the fact of evolution (and it is accepted scientific fact, as it can be observed) is explained by the theory of evolution by natural selection, for which there is enough evidence to fill hundreds of museums. The theory of evolution by natural selection has repeatedly been tested, and repeatedly been found to be supported, and so is the best explanation we have for how evolution works.
If one day god is shown to exist, through the production of reliable, empirical evidence, then I will spin on a sixpence, but until then there is no rational reason to accept the claim that any such thing does exist, just as each theist rejects the idea of any god but the one they've been taught to believe in is real. What would you do if someone provided empirical, reliable proof that Odin and his pantheon existed?
Claiming that we don't have evidence of non-existence is a pointless argument, as you don't have proof of non-existence of the thousands of other deities that have been and still are worshipped, or of yetis, or the loch ness monster, or squibbles etc etc. Do you give these things, especially the other deities the same amount of belief and attention you give the one you've been taught to worship?
Hannah wrote: "Drew ironically I would enjoy seeing the pope peed off too I just wish debates about this didn't get so personal But I guess that is the nature of the debate
Also I do not agree with the commen..."
Maybe some wars can't be proven to be started by religion but religion is always a party in them. The Vatican finances wars, and no I can't prove that statement and that's my point, the Vatican can do and cover up anything.
Ty hazel but I do know what a scientific theory is If I was offered evidence of the examples you used above I would do what any rational person would do and evaluate it before passing a judgement on it
I object to the implication that I have been taught to worship anything , please stop thinking I have no mind of my own and that I can't think for myself , I came to my personal beliefs through a lotif reading and thinking, they may not be your beliefs but they are my own
If I had to choose one ( regarding original question ) I don't know , I get the feeling that even if you did away with traditional religion some other faith based practice would take its place as I think parts of human kind would gravitate to some belief system As the traditional religions diminish in the modern world other 'new age' religions spring up , or reform
I apologise for making that assumption, it is the case the majority of the time, but I shouldn't have made that assumption.So, I have to ask, as you seem to have presented a contradiction, how did you come to your beliefs in whatever god it is you believe in? As I can see no rational consideration of the facts that can lead to belief in a god of any sort, as rationality teaches that we should not accept something for which there is no proof. I am genuinely confused here. Which god/s do you follow, and how did you decide to follow that god/ those gods?
BTW the point of my question about Odin, is would you alter your beliefs, and start to follow the Norse pantheon if someone provided proof, and you evaluated the proof and found it to be solid, that they existed, but your god didn't?
Its ok ... A lot of people do follow religion from childhood I read a lot ... ( no surprise since I am here ) .. And I read a lot of religious texts , and science texts ( formats last theorem is one of my fav books .. If you haven't read it I totally recommend it .. Simon Singh is a genius .. Sorry off track )
I read a lot of the bible texts , but I read a lot of historical stuff to do with the history of the bible and what historically can be proved about the bible ( whether you believe he was the son of god or not ... The history books do have a lotif corroboration about some of the events ) ..
Then I weighed up the ideas and came to my best fit idea which I was happy with
There is a lot in the bible which I can't understand and that is why I am no biblical scholar , I don't have all the answers .. Just the ones that best fit my theory ! :)
fair enough, it works for you, and doesn't hurt anyone, then yeah, whatever floats your boat.BTW, I was at a talk given by Simon Singh not so long ago, about alternative medicine. Really good talk. The guys really cool. One of the things that hurts is that I walked past a 2nd hand book shop, and formats last theorum was on the shelf outside the shop, going for about £2, and even that cheap, I couldn't afford to get it *cries*
Drew you have been all about the give me proof give me proof .. Now you are throwing Wars are financed by the Vatican but I can't prove it !!!!!!
Ok the Vatican proved that the tooth fairy is real but I can't prove it as it is a cover up !!
Faith is a very personal thing , I don't push my faith on others and no I can't prove god exists he may very well not at all and I am totally wrong .... God will I be pissed !!!!!
But I do get angry when people throw out comments on either side actually about science or religion
Like : without religion there would be no morals , science is all about total fact absolutely .. I don't think the lines are that clearly defined , it is a total grey area
And you have to get hold of his book , I literally bit my fingernails off reading it , his book on code breaking is brilliant too
Drew wrote: "Your answer is a cop-out, you can't give proof so instead you give a bs reply about belief. ."So the issue has changed now that you have seen that I do, and have answer the questions. It is my reply that you don't like, and I will go further.... you don't understand how belief works.
You and everyone else knows that there is no proof that will satisfy the athiests here, that there is a God. But you all still churn out the same old rhetoric about proof and in your case a tooth fairy.
Its about time you lot got real, admit that you do not understand the belief thing, and move the conversation on.
Drew wrote: Maybe some wars can't be proven to be started by religion but religion is always a party in them ..."It is a known fact that the majority of wars are fought over land. It may look good on this site to suggest that religion is a cause........ but you would be wrong.
Hannah wrote: "Drew you have been all about the give me proof give me proof .. Now you are throwing Wars are financed by the Vatican but I can't prove it !!!!!!"
It can't be proven because all their documents are locked up and no one, and I mean no one, is able to get their hands on them. The Vatican is really a country all to its own, allowing it to make its own rules. The Vatican is basically ran by the Free-Masons and the Mafia.
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: Maybe some wars can't be proven to be started by religion but religion is always a party in them ..."It is a known fact that the majority of wars are fought over land. It may look goo..."
I would be right
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: "Your answer is a cop-out, you can't give proof so instead you give a bs reply about belief. ."So the issue has changed now that you have seen that I do, and have answer the questions..."
That was not an answer, belief is exactly what it is, a premise based on feelings rather than proof.
Cerebus wrote: "Travis wrote: "Hope the uniform comes with a cape. ""No capes!""
just like you don't get into 'Matrix', 'Incredibles' left me cold and I'm a comic geek.
One of Pixar's rare stumbles.
Drew wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: "Your answer is a cop-out, you can't give proof so instead you give a bs reply about belief. ."So the issue has changed now that you have seen that I do, and have answer..."
Try thinking beyond proof.
As for 'locked up in the Vatican' and ' run by the mafia.
If you are so keen on proof, prove that the mafia run the Vatican.
Other wise you are beginning to sound like a poor version of Gary.
Well, i reckon i got a tacit answer. And it appears to be "no"
Sorry hazel I missed the bit on the end , like I said if someone one day provided proof that the Norse god was real and all the evidence pointed to that then yes I guess I would If you are given proof that something exists I know there are some people that can still go ... No I still think this ... But I am not one of them
To expand on Hannah's aswer; The great thing about science is that it is a process by which views change based on evidence, instead of changing evidence based on views. So, yes, if tomorrow there were irrefuttable evidence to the existence of the Norse God then, I would change my view to accept the existence of supernatural deities. This, however, does not imply that I would be complelled to worship it.
Luis wrote: "To expand on Hannah's aswer; The great thing about science is that it is a process by which views change based on evidence, instead of changing evidence based on views. So, yes, if tomorrow ther..."
Changing views based evidence, suggests that the evidence was flawed to start with.
Changing evidence based on views suggests that some views differ and so the evidence is not conclusive.
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: "Your answer is a cop-out, you can't give proof so instead you give a bs reply about belief. ."So the issue has changed now that you have seen that I do, an..."
But I believe all these things about the Vatican, according to you that's all the proof I need.
And you are fine to believe that drew but you have to admit it is slightly hypocritical to be constantly demanding proof of others for their belief when you have none to back up your own
Drew wrote: " But I believe all these things about the Vatican, according to you that's all the proof I need."
You seem confused. A few pages back you said that there was no god. Even Dawkins did not make that claim.
Hannah wrote: "And you are fine to believe that drew but you have to admit it is slightly hypocritical to be constantly demanding proof of others for their belief when you have none to back up your own"The point that I was trying to make was that just because you believe something doesn't make it proof, apparently that went over you and cs heads. I DO NOT consider my beliefs enough proof, I want hard facts before I consider anything a truth.
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: " But I believe all these things about the Vatican, according to you that's all the proof I need."
You seem confused. A few pages back you said that there was no god. Even Dawkins did..."
I'm not confused although it seems you are, what does my statement "there is no god" have to do with my comments about my beliefs about the Vatican and how a belief in something doesn't qualify as proof.
Drew, I hope that in your attack on religion you don't think that you are representing science.If that is the case then you are doing science -meaning knowledge- and scientific study -the pursuit of knowedge- a great dis-service with your moronic assertions of insular ideas based on hear-say and mis-informed speculation. Your ignorance is the very antithesis of science.
I ask please, with utter sincerity, take your frustrations elsewhere.. convert them into art or some such constructive pursuit... and if you really wish to continue embarrassing yourself, do not do so under the banner of science.
"In Scandinavian folklore trolls tend to be very big, hairy, stupid, and slow to act. Any human with courage and presence of mind can outwit a troll, and those whose faith is strong can even challenge them to mortal combat. [...]After the integration of Christianity into Scandinavian folklore, trolls developed a hatred of church-bells and the smell of Christians."
Dovregubben must be very proud.
Simon wrote: "Drew, I hope that in your attack on religion you don't think that you are representing science.If that is the case then you are doing science -meaning knowledge- and scientific study -the pursuit..."
Simon, you are a tool. You obviously missed the point I was making. Belief in something is not proof, yet many religious people feel that belief and faith is enough proof that a god exists. I have to consider you a troll, you get on here and attack me obviously to try and get an emotional response from me, guess what, it didn't work. Please go find that hole that you crawled out of and leave the important conversations to the big boys.
I know that you will ask for it, so here is some evidence(not proof) about my comments on the Vatican.http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/20...
http://www.time.com/time/world/articl...
There is also a great episode of Brad Meltzer's Decoded about the whole ordeal.
I'm not claiming any of this as definitive proof, I'm just laying down the evidence available.
Drew wrote: what does my statement "there is no god" have to do with my comments about my beliefs about the Vatican ..."It was just to illustrate the possible cconfusion.
By you saying that there is 'no god' would suggest that you have proof of this.
Belief.............An example.........
A close female member of your family,(wife, daughter, sister, mother) told you in confidence that the young man across the street who has been a neighbour for many years raped her a few days ago.
Some months later you were told by the police that there was not enough evidence to bring the case to court and so the case was being closed.
To what degree, if any, would you would you believe her?
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: what does my statement "there is no god" have to do with my comments about my beliefs about the Vatican ..."It was just to illustrate the possible cconfusion.
By you saying that there..."
That is my opinion based on the fact that there is no proof of a god. No one here has ever said that you cannot have the opinion that god exists. You seem to be stuck on the idea that I have to have proof that a god does not exist, yet I'm being logical in saying that I need proof that a god exists before I'm going to give my undying devotion and worship to said god. You are being illogical in saying that proof is not needed.
cHriS wrote: "Belief.............An example.........
A close female member of your family,(wife, daughter, sister, mother) told you in confidence that the young man across the street who has been a neighbour ..."
I would tell her that I believed her but in the back of my mind I would still want proof before I condemn a man. Perhaps this man angered her and she made up this story to get even, plenty of women have done that before. Maybe she consented to having sex with him but later was embarrassed, if there is no evidence, how could I be sure. How was there no evidence, did she not get checked out with a rape kit?
Pretty terrible example really though.
Drew wrote:You are being illogical in saying that proof is not needed. .."
There are something we are never going to know about, maybe the next generations will find answers but that does not help us. There may or may-not be a god. I might be 95% certain there is and you may be 95% certain there is no god. And thats the best we can do.
The athiests here are always asking for proof of a god but if they are certain there is no god why ask for proof....... what is their objective is asking for this non existent proof.
If someone can be 100% certain that there is no god, how did they reach that conclusion?
Drew wrote: "cHriS wrote: Pretty terrible example really though..."Yes, I had others but this seemed the most powerful. Of course it's not the 'example' were are debating here(although a rape issue is headline news in the Uk at the moment), it is the belief.
You were honest in your reply, but that could suggest that you were not close enough to the woman in question. There are many, I guess, who would not doubt the woman in question.
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: "cHriS wrote: Pretty terrible example really though..."Yes, I had others but this seemed the most powerful. Of course it's not the 'example' were are debating here(although a rape iss..."
It doesn't matter how close I am, I realize that some women make up stories and just because you think you know someone doesn't mean that you know what they are capable of doing. That's something I learned a long time ago, anyone is capable of anything, you just never know.
Seriously though cs, we've gotten off topic.
Drew wrote: we've gotten off topic. ..."
Belief is still part of the topic.
cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: we've gotten off topic. ..."
Belief is still part of the topic."
I'm talking about the example you gave, the topic is religion and science not rape.
Hannah wrote: "Sorry hazel I missed the bit on the end , like I said if someone one day provided proof that the Norse god was real and all the evidence pointed to that then yes I guess I would If you are given ..."
thanks for that reply, its a brilliant answer, and one I wish other theists would give. Such a shame that its rarely the case that they do give that answer. Much respect to you. Though between you and me, I wasn't actually referring to any questions I asked you when I said I seem to have a tacit "no". Sorry if you thought I was talking about you. I still appreciate the answer though :D
Drew wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Drew wrote: we've gotten off topic. ..."
Belief is still part of the topic."
I'm talking about the example you gave, the topic is religion and science not rape."
I am trying to show that 'belief' is not unique to religion,
we all sometimes have to believe in something or someone regardless of evidence. Trust can sometimes be a form of belief.
My example is just that, an example, I am sure there are better examples.
Lol it's ok hazel ... And thank you , I think we all have different beliefs and that they all have the right to be valued as that individual beliefs , whether we believe in them or not . I have to admit I find some of the new age religions to be a bit wacky but if others want to put their faith in them who am I to argue . My stance will always be that man does not have all the answers at any given time so why should we be arrogant and say that another's belief is defiantly wrong. instead of their is or is no god , it should be there is probably or probably not a god .
No Drew it didn't go over my head but if you want to imply that it is a belief and not a stated fact try using the words I believe ...You did not say I BELIEVE the Vatican is run by free masons and the mafia
You said the Vatican IS run by the mafia and the Freemasons
Saying it IS is stating a fact , not a belief.... So please do not come back and say that I didn't understand what you wrote I did ..... I don't think you understood what you wrote though ... Try going back and reading it again dear
Btw thank you for the Vatican conspiracy theory ... Mum mum has studied the history of the Vatican for the past 50 years and she thought it the best laugh she has had in ages
Hannah wrote: "No Drew it didn't go over my head but if you want to imply that it is a belief and not a stated fact try using the words I believe ...You did not say I BELIEVE the Vatican is run by free masons a..."
You still missed my point, believers in God talk about God's existence as if it was fact, as if it was a forgone conclusion, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Now you know how we who do not believe in God think when you act this way.
Hannah wrote: "Btw thank you for the Vatican conspiracy theory ... Mum mum has studied the history of the Vatican for the past 50 years and she thought it the best laugh she has had in ages"Kind of an ambiguous statement Hannah, I could take that as she was laughing at me or laughing because the Vatican was implicated in this scandal. What were her thoughts on it?
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Vector Calculus (other topics)The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Kurzweil (other topics)Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Drew wrote: Isabelle asked "how could we have existed without the prescence of science"
I did answer her comment about the prescence of gravity, and then ..."
This pertains to you so-called answer that you gave to Travis's question about giving proof of a god. Your answer is a cop-out, you can't give proof so instead you give a bs reply about belief. Belief is not proof of God cs, kids believe in the Tooth Fairy but their belief doesn't make it real.