Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 6,501-6,550 of 12,463

[Shirdi]

I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and technology. A life without science would be a life of assumptions, fairy tales and fables. We would still believe that the earth is flat and that the sun revolves around the earth. It would be a life of ignorance and stupidity. On the other hand, let's look at what religion has given us, and all I can come up with us a few very good books of undoubtedly, the fantasy genre, and also a large amount of wars, violence and hostility. Oh and an ability to indoctrinate sensible human beings into being senseless individuals who will go to any limit "in the name of God". Thus, clearly a life without science simply cannot be comprehended, because it's existence is not possible. Whereas a life without religion, would be a lot more peaceful and sensible.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and technology. A lif..."

I wish I could click a 'like' button, Shirdi! Like!

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and technology. A lif..."

Science is only a word for a system humans have for acquiring knowledge. It is not possible to have a world without science unless it was a world with humans as well.

This act of acquiring knowledge could have been called something other than science but the knowledge aquired would be the same.

It could have been possible to have had a world with religion, but that would not have effected or affected the status of God.

[Shirdi]

April the Cheshire Meow wrote: "Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and te..."

Thanks very much, April :) xx

[Shirdi]

cHriS wrote: "Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and te..."

I'm sorry but I do not understand what you mean. But by "science" I mean, all that we have discovered, is through science. Couldn't imagine living a life of ignorance.

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondlscience has provided the human race with kn..."
.

There would be life. Just not as you have come to know it.

[Shanna]

Maria wrote: "But in Matthew 28:19, 20 didn't he also say to "go therefore and make disciples"? And in Matthew 24:14 he said that the "good news would be preached to all the inhabited earth" - that's not keepin..."

A great example of the contradictory nature of the bible. Which do you pick? Which is what god wants?

[Shanna]

cHriS wrote: "Shanna wrote: " m not saying I agree with this, just that I do believe that's what it says.... "

Her ultimate poin..."
But you do acknowledge Jesus, which is more than some do here."

I acknowledge a set of books published together called the bible which claims to report a man called Jesus and his teachings, which christians claim to follow and believe in. And I feel free to use the same books and reported teachings to counter any claims they make, without it being interpreted as my endorsement of the "truth" of the books.
I also acknowledge there is NO evidence for Jesus, none, that meets a reasonable standard anywhere.
I highly recomend

, to clearly explain why none of the supposed sources stand up.

[Shanna]

April the Cheshire Meow wrote: "Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with knowledge and te..."

Yes good reads need a "like" button

[Shirdi]

I couldn't agree more! The Bible does contradict itself in a lot of places. And also, does it really make sense to follow a book as you guidelines to life? I mean, someone might start to claim Harry Potter is a book by which they'd want to live! I see no difference in the two but the fact that the Bible was written ages ago, has more power, and consists of EVEN more fantasy. I guess, its useless to say this, but no offence to Christians.

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Shirdi wrote: "I find it extremely ironic that someone would ask that question. Because without science there wouldn't be a life. Secondly, science has provided the human race with kn..."

Do you think it would a better world if no more money was spend on scientific research until hunger in the world is eradicated? Or is aceptable to allow people to starve?

[cHriS]

Shanna wrote: I highly recomend

, to clearly explain why none of the supposed sources stand up.

..."

I did take a look at this book on Amazon: it only got 3 stars and one of the comments was.....

......This is one of a number of self-published books along these lines that have appeared in recent years and one of several that has been written by a hobbyist who is also an atheist activist.....

The research, I guess the author put into this in no way stands up to the Bible, which is an account of events in history.

I acknowledge the accuracy of the Bible is open to dispute.

[Shirdi]

Well, I never implied that it is acceptable to let people starve. And there are several charities working toward the eradication of it, which is great. But surely money spent on scientific research, is not the sole reason for world hunger! There are other things on which money is spent, and those things are absolutely useless and pointless, if that money was spent on eradicating world hunger, then it would undoubtedly, be easier to do.

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: There are other things on which money is spent,.."

Most of the worlds money is spent on things that have developed from scientific research. We could stop what we call 'progress' and feed the world but that would only be a good idea if we were one of the starving.

[Hazel]

so... we stop funding the scientific research that has so far saved millions of people from starvation, and is still finding new and innovative ways to feed the hungry.... yeah, that makes sense...

[Shanna]

I did take a look at this book on Amazon: it only got 3 stars and one of the comments was.....

......This is one of a number of self-published books along these lines that have appeared in recent years and one of several that has been written by a hobbyist who is also an atheist activist.....

The research, I guess the author put into this in no way stands up to the Bible, which is an account of events in history.

I acknowledge the accuracy of the Bible is open to dispute

Okay, if you count four stars as three in your world.
And if in a total of 27 reveiws of which 18 are 5 star reviews counts as damning, go for it. Can I suggest you actually read it before dismissal.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0557...


And the ratings breakdown here on goodreads
rating % #

5stars 31% 12

4stars 42% 16

3stars 15% 6

2stars 2% 1

1stars 7% 3

89% of people liked it

And if the bible is an account of history then it should be easily proven to be so and it is not, read the book...

[Hazel]

The star rating on GR has 3 stars as "I liked it", and anything above that meaning "oh my word, it was awesome, I want to marry this book and raise pamplets with it", people always seem to miss that, don't they.

Oh, and Shanna, 31+42+15 =88% ;P

[Shanna]

My fault, shouldn't copy and paste and count on their calculations to be correct, (says she, quickly hiding her math report cards :P)

[cHriS]

Shanna wrote: Okay, if you count four stars as three in your world.
And if in a total of 27 reveiws of which 18 are 5 star reviews as damning, go for it can I suggest you actually read it before dismissal.
..."

It's not the star rating that was the issue, but to elaborate a bit on that...... I always look and the middle number as a sort 'can't make up my mind' score.

Books like 'Nailed' are ten a penny; they are saying what the sort of people who read them, want to hear.

For example: Someone who does not believe in a god, buys The God Delusion. The book is confirming what the reader thinks he/she already knows. Of course it will get a high score from that type of reader.

If you are going to give that book any credit then you have to be even handed any give a book like this the same credit.....

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chariots-Gods...

And if the bible is an account of history then it should be easily proven to be so and it is not, read the book...

The Bible has the same importance as any other Historical document.

Wiki:Documents that contain important information about a person, place, or event.

[cHriS]

Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that money today to buy food with.

[Shanna]

It's not the star rating that was the issue, but to elaborate a bit on that...... I always look and the middle number as a sort 'can't make up my mind' score.
Then why did you bring it up, and incorrectly at that?
And I'm sure the reviewers are thrilled you've decided their "It was ok" kind of vote as simply their inability to make up their own minds and not a reflection of their actual opinion of the book!

Books like 'Nailed' are ten a penny; they are saying what the sort of people who read them, want to hear.

For example: Someone who does not believe in a god, buys The God Delusion. The book is confirming what the reader thinks he/she already knows. Of course it will get a high score from that type of reader.

If you are going to give that book any credit then you have to be even handed any give a book like this the same credit.....
So, not at all like religious books then?
Read it then pass judgement. I try to be even handed going into a book and let it lead me, the conclusions I draw do not "have" to be even handed at all. I've read Chariots nothing like Nailed. Read it.

The Bible has the same importance as any other Historical document.

Not really, it is not corroborated, often patently incorrect, proven so by other historical documents, and uniquely adulterated by an untold number of agenda's over time. So as an account history, it is, at best, not reliable, at worst a bad attempt at retrofitting a myth.
But then Nailed doesn't just debunk the bible it debunks Jesus and the other so called references to the historicity of Jesus the apologists love to trot out as proof. Suetonious, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Josephus ect ect. The early founders of christianity Origen, Paul, Apollonius ect ect.

[cerebus]

cHriS wrote: "Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that money today to buy food with."

Why doesn't your all-loving god feed them?

[Ovidiu]

This conversation is soooooooo far away from angels and demons that somebody should put an end to it.

[cerebus]

cHriS wrote: "Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that money today to buy food with."
Why doesn't the catholic church use their vast wealth to feed them instead of using it to live in opulence?

[Shanna]

Ovidiu wrote: "This conversation is soooooooo far away from angels and demons that somebody should put an end to it."

The question was never really about Angels and Demons...

[cerebus]

Ovidiu wrote: "This conversation is soooooooo far away from angels and demons that somebody should put an end to it."
And you get to make that call? I don't think so.....don't like the discussion, don't participate.

[Shanna]

Cerebus wrote: "Ovidiu wrote: "This conversation is soooooooo far away from angels and demons that somebody should put an end to it."
And you get to make that call? I don't think so.....don't like the discussion, ..."

I love people who come in to a "chatting room" and say "Shut up you're all talking about the wrong thing" Would you do it in real life? No...

[cHriS]

Shanna wrote: "at worst a bad attempt at retrofitting a myth.


You have to either believe Jesus was an historical figure or he was a myth, you can't have it both ways.

[Travis]

Shirdi wrote: "Well, I never implied that it is acceptable to let people starve. And there are several charities working toward the eradication of it, which is great. But surely money spent on scientific research..."

There are churches pulling in piles of money, if they stopped building churches and protesting gay marriage, they could buy food for the poor.

[Travis]

cHriS wrote: "Shanna wrote: "at worst a bad attempt at retrofitting a myth.


You have to either believe Jesus was an historical figure or he was a myth, you can't have it both ways."

I vote myth.

[Travis]

Shanna wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "Ovidiu wrote: "This conversation is soooooooo far away from angels and demons that somebody should put an end to it."
And you get to make that call? I don't think so.....don't like ..."

'We can't have all this talking in the chatting room!'

It's like that line from Dr. Strangelove, about not fighting in the war room.

[cHriS]

Travis wrote: There are churches pulling in piles of money, if they stopped building churches and protesting gay marriage, they could buy food for the poor. "

You lost the plot yet again Travis. Do we stop investing money in science and feed the poor was the question.

Yes we could use church money or we could go around to Travis's home and raid his piggy bank but that was not the point of the question.

[Travis]

cHriS wrote: "Travis wrote: There are churches pulling in piles of money, if they stopped building churches and protesting gay marriage, they could buy food for the poor. "

You lost the plot yet again Travis. D..."

So, on a science vs religion message board, you are getting snotty because I mentioned religion?
maybe you should have added a disclaimer to the question.

besides, you can't raid my piggy bank, I spent all my change on cheap liquor and cheaper women.

[Shirdi]

Cerebus wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that money today to buy ..."

So so true, Cerebus! If there were a God, there wouldn't be any starving people, would there?

[Travis]

Shirdi wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that mon..."

Does amuse me that the people with the omnipotent guy on their side keep demanding that science needs to get its act together and fix stuff.
Maybe science could fix everything, if it didn't have to stop every five minutes to explain how it works to people that don't believe in it.

[cHriS]

Travis wrote: So, on a science vs religion message board, you are getting snotty because I mentioned relig."

Not at all. But it does seem that nothing can be talked about without getting a poke at religion, or to evade a question relating to science

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cHriS wrote: "Starving people do not have the time to wait until the funding for scientific research has produced better ways to feed them.

They would rather, I guess have that mon..."

So if there is a god then it's gods fault for not feeding the people on earth. So us humans are off the hook. Unless you are right and there is no god then America should take the blame.

[Shirdi]

To be honest, Scientists do not claim that they are all-powerful, that they can solve everything, and that they should be worshipped. So why is it expected of the to solve every problem. It's "God" that claims to be the omnipotent, omni-belevolent and what not. So, well, why is there still so much of violence, hatred and hostility?

[Shirdi]

To sum it up, If I Were God, I'd Say Sorry'

[cHriS]

Shirdi wrote: ". So, well, why is there still so much of violence, hatred and hostility? ..."


I would be interested to hear the answer to that myself, from those who do not believe there is a god; and what part science plays in it.

[Shirdi]

cHriS wrote: "Shirdi wrote: ". So, well, why is there still so much of violence, hatred and hostility? ..."


I would be interested to hear the answer to that myself, from those who do not believe there is a god..."

I do not believe science plays a very big part at all! What does play a part, in fact, the biggest part, would be corrupt politicians. I think it would be safe to say that most under developed countries have dishonest and corrupt politicians and government officials who prevent the fund going to the right places and into their pockets instead. I can't think of science playing a part in this at all. if you believe the amount of funds that go into scientific research, is unfair, then you should perhaps look at the amount of money that goes into providing people with benefits, homeless shelters and such.

[Travis]

cHriS wrote: "Travis wrote: So, on a science vs religion message board, you are getting snotty because I mentioned relig."

Not at all. But it does seem that nothing can be talked about without getting a poke at..."

Evading a question you also have a problem with...?

here we go again.

[Travis]

Shirdi wrote: "To be honest, Scientists do not claim that they are all-powerful, that they can solve everything, and that they should be worshipped. So why is it expected of the to solve every problem. It's "God..."

science can only solve problems if applied correctly by people.
We are unfortunately the flaw in the equation, as well as the possible solution.

[Reem]

Heather wrote: "I know this may seem a bit weird, but I believe that science and religion go have in hand. In my mind, science explains religion and they together form societal networks. It is when you get extremi..."
I so agree with you Heather. I believe that one can not exist without the other in our human minds. There is no scientific accounting for miracles that occur. This is not to say that science may not explain it at a later date, at which point there will be other miracles that we cannot explain.

[Travis]

Reem wrote: "Heather wrote: "I know this may seem a bit weird, but I believe that science and religion go have in hand. In my mind, science explains religion and they together form societal networks. It is when..."


If science can explain it how is it a miracle?

[Shirdi]

Travis wrote: "Reem wrote: "Heather wrote: "I know this may seem a bit weird, but I believe that science and religion go have in hand. In my mind, science explains religion and they together form societal network..."

Very true :)

[Betty]

Religion.

[Shanna]

cHriS wrote: "Shanna wrote: "at worst a bad attempt at retrofitting a myth.


You have to either believe Jesus was an historical figure or he was a myth, you can't have it both ways."

You seem to under the impression that I have a dissonance here. I don't, Jesus is no more a historical person than say Dumbledore or Sauron or Heracles. I'm not sure how I confused you on that point.

[Shanna]

Reem wrote: "I so agree with you Heather. I believe that one can not exist without the other in our human minds. There is no scientific accounting for miracles that occur. This is not to say that science may not explain it at a later date, at which point there will be other miracles that we cannot explain"

To reiterate Travis, if science can explain it how is it a miracle?
What miracles do you suppose are "real" Miracles? Because most of them are just statistics.

[cHriS]

Shanna wrote: " , Jesus is no more a historical person than say Dumbledore or Sauron or Heracles ..."

.......... and your evidence for this is reading books like Nailed while ridiculing the Bible.

I can understand the atheist view that Jesus was just a run of the mill prophet but denial of his existence is laughable.