Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 101-150 of 12,463

[Will]

Wittystar: "Will-I don't see why organized religion is bad. I think that's about as ridiculous as saying that either religion or science is bad. Not ALL organized religion is bad." I never said all organized religion is bad. I seperated religion into personal spirituality and organized religion, then chose science over organized religion. I think, throughout history, religious organizations have done terrible things in the name of God. I admit that bad things have happened in the name of science, but I had to make a choice. Humans will find ways of doing bad things. Only how they justify it changes.

I am, as I type on my laptop, watching an incredible sunrise. Enjoying the vision of colors and golden streaks blazing across the sky is how I celebrate my spirituality (some call religion). Understanding what makes those colors is science. Attempting to capture the vision is art. Without science, spirituality or art, my life would be incomplete. Having to go to a church and be told how to live; that's the religion I would do without.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Here's a thought...
Exorcism vs psychiatry.
Exorcism is a ritual within a structure of religion, it may or may not work. But the ritual stays the same, shored up by tradition and usage.
Psychiatry is a discipline within the scientific and medical disciplines, it may or may not work. But the treatment will change based on research and effectiveness...sometimes slowly, but change it does getting closer to a reliable treatment.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Lorrie, you seem to be making up your own meanings for words.
For most folk the word atheist means (I'm using a big old Collins for this) "a rejection of belief in god or gods". Religion is "belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny".
And what is "True Christianity"? Which branch?

[Woolgatherer]

without science i could look at the moon and say: wow, i wonder...

[Old-Barbarossa]

Scientists can argue and discuss ideas and theories with the same ref points, ideas evolve, change, and take shape constantly. Scientists may be stuck in one view, but should move as the evidence shows them the way.
The same can rarely be said of religion...even amongst the same sect never mind, for example, Hindu and Christian where the texts are totally different.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Lorrie, would you be happy to live in a world with no science if the religion that was the alternative wasn't Christianity? The majority of posts on this thread seem to assume that Christianity is the default religion, what if it wasn't?
All scientists share ref points (pure maths for example), all religions don't (differing holy books and rituals). This is the point I'm trying to make.

[Heather]

I agree with Lorrie. Religion is man reaching for a God (or two, or none) of his own imagination, Christianity is God reaching for man.

This fact does complicate the discussion.

>>>I am, as I type on my laptop, watching an incredible sunrise. Enjoying the vision of colors and golden streaks blazing across the sky is how I celebrate my spirituality (some call religion).<<<

Will, I'm confused by this statement. It sounds as though you credit your spirit for the sunrise??? I highly doubt that's what you mean, but that's what it sounds like to me when you say enjoying a sunrise celebrates your spirituality instead of mentioning the creator of that sunrise or the sunrise itself. *Is very confused*

[Old-Barbarossa]

Heather, you say "Religion is man reaching for a God (or two, or none) of his own imagination, Christianity is God reaching for man". This sounds like you are being very dismissive regarding the validity of any non-Christian religion.
I find this one of the problems with general discussions over religion, people rarely discuss the idea of "religion", they end up breaking it down into sects (Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism...or even within one type of religion: Presbytarianism, Roman Catholic, Baptist etc)...the dismissive attitude to all non Christians that seems to be expressed above appears to be an example of this.
Scientists on the other hand should be able to discuss and assimilate ideas from each other's fields. A physicist won't sneer at a biochemist and say "that's not real science".

[Heather]

Barbarossa you are correct. I am being very dismissive. I'm sorry. I'll try to explain.

See, the Christians, the Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims, etc, we don't serve the same God. (Even though we have some similarities our gods are completely incompatible with each other.) Since all of us cannot be correct, most of us have to wrong.

Since I believe these other groups don't serve the true God, I tend to unconsciously lump them into the same category as Atheists and Agnostics. To me, serving a false god is no better than serving nobody a.k.a. yourself.

I'm trying not to do that for the sake of the discussion, but it's awfully hard since I often don't realize I've done it again!

[Old-Barbarossa]

Lorrie, you say "much of science wants to do without God even when it points right to his throne. THAT is not true science".
I have yet to read, or hear of any papers that "point right to his throne", can you give any examples?
If there was any evidence in this direction and it was ignored then yes that wouldn't be true science. Even if there were evidence how could it prove which god sat on the throne?
Having said all that, I find the blinkered intolerant attitude as expressed above (in this case the Christian view that they're right and everyone else is wrong) to be reason enough to live in a world without religion. Though I stick by my earlier comment (post 38) that neither science nor religion are the problem, it is people and their interpretation of them.
Now I rest my case, I'm away to slouch back to my cave in wild Connaught...to await the Apocalypse that will no doubt occur when the folks at CERN switch their new toy on again.

[Rhonda]

I really do vote "no religion" including all forms of "spirituality." If you remember, early on in the book (remember the book?) the CERN director says that religion was invented to fill in the gaps of understanding. Science helps us make sense of the world we live in so it is less and less necessary -- if it ever was really necessary -- to construct a religious or non-scientific (not observable) explanation for what we don't understand. Atheists live fully human lives, complete with the full range of human emotions and rich relationships. In fact, they might be more authentic relationships because the interactions and emotions are genuine and directly from the people involved. There is no god-instruction that says I must behave in certain ways. It IS possible have a truly happy, full, liberating life without religion. Science is a wonderful endeavor that shows us every day how amazing is our world and ourselves. Religion is, at its most basic, anti-intellectual and fundamentally at odds with scientific (i.e., observed of our world and its inhabitants) knowledge.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Is it valid to defend a religion by quoting it's own texts? I think that is also a circular arguement.

[Pandora]

Looking at the last few posts I can understand why people opted for science. I'm almost ready to side with them. Who needs the athiests the Christians will kill religion.

I don't believe there is one true god or that one religion has the ultimate truth. My view is that each relgion has a part of the truth. That God is too big and complex to put into one box.

As to Rhonda's arugement that relgion is just bad scinece. No, I don't believe that. Religon is not science and science is not relgion. I do believe in science and it informs my understanding of the world. But, that is not enough. Though I don't understand it completely I know I need religon.

My relgion views of seeing worth in everybody, in knowing there is a mystery about life that I can never fully grasp, that there is higher level that I can call on when thing get so rough this can't be answered with science. Where did you do go during 9/11. I was at my church gathering in the warmth of other humans trying to understand what could not be understood. Also with no sprituality you just made it impossible for any 12 step program to exist. Are you really comfortable with that?


When I thought of this question I went in Sci-fi mode. There were three ways to make such a world:

One invent a time machine and stop suppress what you don't want. To stop science you would have to stop at Anicent Egypt. To stop religon well, I think that puts us into the caveman era.

Two destory civilization and rebuild using only religion or science. Religion - The Stand by Stephen Kind or Nightfall by Isaac Asmiov as examples. Science 1984, The Giver or Brave New World is what I think of.

Three get in a spaceship and find a new planet. Aliens with only logic though as I previous explained are not really human.

This is way for me relgion wins in spite of the Christians.

[Heather]

>>>"Enjoying a sunset is a very good way to connect with your 'spirituality', whatever it may be.

Heather, I don't always think about how God created the world. When I watch the sunset, or something like that, or just sit quietly, I don't always think gratefully about how He made it for me. I just enjoy it, and talk to God. Kind of like prayer."<<<

What exactly are we talking about? As C. S. Lewis pointed out in Mere Christianity; You ARE a spirit, you merely HAVE a body. You have to believe this if you believe in any type of afterlife. I am so confused!

>>>"I don't believe there is one true god or that one religion has the ultimate truth. My view is that each relgion has a part of the truth."<<<

I agree with that. Everyone has at least a glimmer of the truth, but--and this is a big, but--there are some basic principles that have to be believed. You can have a sugar cookie and a chocolate chip cookie and you could truthfully call them both cookies even with their differences, but you can't call a pizza a cookie even though it's round and contains flour. A pizza is a good deal closer to a cookie than a chuck roast is, but it's not a cookie.

>>>"Many people use religion to control people, but that's a human problem, not a religion problem, in my opinion. Bad and/or insecure people find ways to control others no matter what they believe."<<<

Yes, politicians especially. Separation of Church and State was a wonderful thing. I think we need a separation of Science and State as well.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Did a whole chunk of posts just disappear?

[Will]

Heather, you're funny. It's obvious you love your religion and that pleases me. I apologize that we confuse you.

I celebrate my connection to God in me by watching a sunrise (or a sunset) much like I celebrate a birthday by enjoying a cake with candles. My birth didn't create the cake. I don't celebrate who made the cake. I just enjoy the cake.

Athiests amaze me; Agnostics do too. To not believe or not accept that there is something great and awesome, of higher intelligence and power than humans in the universe is an amazing thing. It may be true, but it's still amazing.

Oh, Heather...Jews, Muslims and Christians worship different Gods? Have you told them that? I don't think they know that. I think they all think they worship the "one true God, the God of Moses and Abraham."

[Aruna]

In recent times, religion has done more harm than good, so I would rather live in a world without religion...I dont need religion to live peacefully, happily.

[Will]

Aruna: In recent times? In recent times, science has become more powerful and potentially more damaging. Religions have supported wars throughout the ages; now, science makes war more damaging. Remember Hiroshima?

"Remember the book?" Speaking of A&D...the premise was based on Jesus' marriage and having a child. Why is that such a threatening idea (not original with Dan Brown, btw) to Christians? I never get that. I think the virgin birth, the resurection of the body, walking on water, etc. are archaic legends of no importance. What was important of Jesus' ministry was his call for love, respect, concern and compassion for others, even our enemies; that's the essence of Christianity isn't it? That Jesus was celebate? What is that?

[Pandora]

Okey can we please clear one thing. Agnostics and athiests are not the same thing. Agnostics which I am do believe there is something out there called God they just don't know how to define it. Athiests say there is no God. They are two very different things.

Heather when I say all relgions have the truth I meant all Chiristian and non Christian. In an ealier thread 129 you said that non Chiristians do not serve the one true god. Well, I was taught to be respectful of everyone's different views of God. As a result in my Church there is both the menorah and the Christmas tree. So, please don't quote me if you don't share this view. If being a cookie means beleving in Jesus Christ we don't agree.

If this sounds angry or bitter it is because I got slammed by a fundamentalist cult once and the scars haven't completely healed.

My point in voting for relgion is despite how difficult and messy it is I just don't see how the human race can developed or be maintain without it. But, I do think we need to learn to co-exist with all religons.

In my mind God is so big and wonderful that he inspired Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohmand, etc. Being a Unitarian Universalist I believe everyone is saved and that means everyone. I also am focused more on how to make a Heaven on Earth rather then getting to Heaven.

PS I do agree with Will it is the message of Jesus (and other leaders) that is important not the details of their lives.

[Heather]

>>>"Oh, Heather...Jews, Muslims and Christians worship different Gods? Have you told them that? I don't think they know that. I think they all think they worship the "one true God, the God of Moses and Abraham."<<<

Yes and no. At first glance it really looks like that, but it just isn't possible. We call our gods by the same name, but they are completely incompatible. Kinda like the way the word "fair" can mean pretty, county fair, or reasonable.

The biggest difference is that Muslims and Jews do not believe Jesus Christ is God. The next difference--this one is closely connected to the first-- Muslims and Jews believe in salvation by works but Christians believe in salvation through the blood of Jesus.

So, if one of us heard another one say he believed in the God of Abraham, we would most likely assume we agreed at first, until we each understood what the other meant by that.

>>>"Remember the book?" Speaking of A&D...the premise was based on Jesus' marriage and having a child. Why is that such a threatening idea (not original with Dan Brown, btw) to Christians? I never get that. I think the virgin birth, the resurection of the body, walking on water, etc. are archaic legends of no importance. What was important of Jesus' ministry was his call for love, respect, concern and compassion for others, even our enemies; that's the essence of Christianity isn't it?"<<<

If Jesus wasn't and isn't God, than there is no point to christianity at all. Our whole faith is grounded in the incarnation (God becoming man) and the resurrection. Millions of christians did not die for a great moral teacher, it would have been smarter to switch to Confucius! He had some great points.

And, if you could forgive me for quoting C. S. Lewis again, "A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to." That was from Mere Christianity.

>>>"In my mind God is so big and wonderful that he inspired Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohmand, etc."<<<

Agreed, except that I believe Jesus is God, not inspired by him.

>>>"Being a Unitarian Universalist I believe everyone is saved and that means everyone. I also am focused more on how to make a Heaven on Earth rather then getting to Heaven."<<<

Saved from what? If you've got a god who doesn't give a fig for what you do or who you worship then you don't really need to be saved, do you?

Wittystar and Will, Thanks for clearing up that celebrating spirituality part. It sounds like I do the same thing, I just got thrown off by the wording. Sorry. :/

Thanks for letting me talk your ears off! :)

[Will]

Heather: I wrote that I doubt the "resurrection of the body", not the resurrection; that's an entirely different discussion. I accept that Jesus was "the son of God", but I accept that we are all children of God. Our concepts of religion are so different it's almost impossible to communicate, but I'm used to it; I have a strange concept of religion/spirituality. It took my lifetime to acquire it. It works for me; I don't push it on others. I'm glad your religion works for you.

I do, also, admire the teachings of Confucius, but he didn't preach love and compassion. He did teach respect and fairness. Korea was ruled under the teachings of Confucius for hundreds of years in peace and prosperity, with no religion, essentially. [back to the subject:] We ruined that by making it a war zone of competing powers.

[Pandora]

That if there is a heaven beyond Earth then God will find a way to get everyone up there. Even Lucifer eventually. Which is more powerful a God who can only get a few up to Heaven or one who can even transform his own worst enemy?

Would a human father throw his child into a firey pit because he was upset with what the child did? No, so why would a God who is more perfect than a mortal?

I think God is more concern with what I do then who do I pray to. The power of religon for me is the way it can transform a person who is in a living hell to heaven on Earth. To me that is being saved.

I can't believe in a God who is a mirror reflecting my prejudices and my littleness. I need a God who is a window. Who is bigger than me. If I don't like fundamentalists than I must have a God who does. If I am fearful than I need a God who is not afraid. If I hate then I need a God who loves all even what I hate.

Don't mean to belittle your beliefs but, the idea that the Christian way is the only right way is what lead to the Inquistion, Witch burnings, and the Holy Crusdes. Somehow I doubt that is what Jesus wanted. That is why so many people are on this thread what to throw out relgion.

Even the Quaran acknowledges that Christians and Jews are on the right path. If you hope lies in beleving in Chirst fine. I just think that God put Jesus (Christ or not) as one way to get to him. God though is smart enough to have more than one way hence all the faiths.

PS I don't want to get into a debate as to which way is best. I try hard to be accepting of all the different ways to God. It just that for me most of the trouble with relgions starts when one group says only my way or my way is best. I'm the first to admit Unitarian Universalism is not for everyone nor should it be.

[Heather]

I think that the reason that God/Goddess has allowed evil in the world is that we are supposed to overcome adversity and be the best we can be. It seems to me that Earth is an experiment in free will, so we are basically here to show that sentient beings can make decisions and take full responsibility for them.
Pandora, you might be interested in reading The Tale of the Body Thief.. There is a great discussion on God continually learning and Satan hating his job.
Wittystar, you touched on something that a lot of people have been pondering for quite some time. It seems that every culture has some sort of messiah story; what makes it more interesting is that there is a grave in the Kashmir region of India that has hand and footprints that has holes in them much in the way that Jesus was hung on the cross and that one of the Hindu deities, Krishna, actually has the proper pronunciation of Krishtos in some regions.
I'm not so sure I believe in your idea of how to get to heaven, but then my view of the afterlife is a lot different from yours. You see, I believe that we are born, suffer throughout our lives, die, and then regroup with our guardians over what we learned from the joy and sorrow of life. Then we are called back and the cycle begins anew. I also believe that there is no way to "save" someone because everyone is where they need to be and to remove them from their situation may be detrimental to their evolution as a soul.

[Jassimrat]

I think religion and science don't share any common ground. I mean you could have any religion in th world but still be a world renowned scientist. So... my point is that religion just shows what you are induviduallly but science is just there.It is what all of us are as the world''s population.

[Mykee]

I definitely think that science is more important. But hey, I'm an Atheist.

[Aruna]

Will, I am not an Atheist but an Agnostic. I do believe and hope there is a force which is beyond our explanation but I am against organized religion. I come from a strict Hindu family where a discussion of this kind is forbidden but slowly I am moving away from religion only because of my experience not by any historical evidence or statistics.

[Heather]

Now what I meant was that you shouldn't try to change someone's religious/spiritual beliefs in the sense of saving. Helping someone who clearly needs or asks for your assistance is a totally different story. If they ask for your help, it is kind of like signing a waver that says you can give all the aid within your power. However, trying to help someone who doesn't want your help is like trying to give someone first aid when you aren't certified to help: it's just not a good idea.
I also don't understand the concept of hell. I believe that we all go to the same afterlife; it's when we come back the next lifetime that we are dealt punishment in the form of adversity.
Life is only easier for you if you work hard to do well and don't hurt anyone. This includes yourself.
Whatever suffering that someone is going through was not caused by the Devil; it was caused by their actions.
Everything comes back three times, meaning if you do a selfless act, you'll get something good coming to you sooner or later; on the other hand, if you do something bad, something bad will come back at some point.
I was raised Catholic and hated the idea of everyone who wasn't Catholic going to Hell. I just never understood it because that would mean that I would never see my mother's side of the family, who were Lutheran.

[Pandora]

For me (non christian) the reason I chose religion is because that is where I believe the concept of the higher reality (for lack of a better word God) was born. I'm not sure the concept of God can be born without religion. As to now you don't have to approach God strictly through a relgious channel but, aren't you though piggybacking on what religion has discovered? If religion was outlaw wouldn't that outlaw God?

Though science is important and very helpful in applying course correction to relgion I don't think science is enough. For me there is a reality (force as Aruna says) that is beyond science abilty to understand or probe. To even have the language to even begin talking about it we need relgion. Think of the monolithe in 2001.

I suppose we have been having a circling arguement. Some think that God (higher reality) is independent of religion but I think God is dependent on religon at least as a framework to approch what is beyond conception. If nothing else religion supplies a language to discuss these concepts.

Even more importatnly without the higher reality how can you have the arts? Story, dance, poetry, theater, paintings, etc. Aren't these all attempts to go beyond reality? To touch upon the share universality.

I still don't understand how a society without religion (higher reality) and only science (logic) can ever have story (methphor). To me religion is to imbedded into the human pysche to ever be gotten rid of.

Heather 146 I see about the book you suggested. As to reincarnation I do agree with Larry from the Razor's Edge that it does seem to make everything fair. Though I'm not sure I can believe it. I have enough trouble getting a grip on this world to worry about the next.

I do agree with Wittystar I'm not clear what you mean by not saveing. I also believe it is our job to make things better for each other. Too much horror has happen because people decided not my problem. My favorite stories are the ones in which people are save - the redemption stories.

Aruna I can understand you what you say by wanting to move away from religion. I was walking on eggshells when I escaped the cult. Even in my UU church (this is not true though of every UU church) of my childhood that refer to God as the G word and Jesus as the J word was almost too much. Even today I can still have problems with that J word especially when it is connected to that C word but, I'm working on it.

Just want to suggest that there are some religions that do welcome questions and love a good debate. Hope you journey well whatever path you choose. :)

PS Glad to have another agnostic on board.

[Heather]

Hi Heather! :)

(call me pianolove if that helps, it's my blogger username)

Will,
>>>"I wrote that I doubt the "resurrection of the body", not the resurrection; that's an entirely different discussion."<<<

Whoops! Sorry about the mix-up, I see that now. Can't believe I missed it before. *smacks head*

>>>"I accept that Jesus was "the son of God", but I accept that we are all children of God."<<<

Well, Jesus not only said he was the Son of God, he also said he was God. I believe we are children of God in a different way, a humbler way. (Hebews 2:9, but I don't know if you believe the bible is the inspired word of God.)

Pandora "Kat",

>>>"Which is more powerful a God who can only get a few up to Heaven or one who can even transform his own worst enemy?"<<<

Or a God who has the power to save and transform Lucifer but owes him nothing?

>>>"Don't mean to belittle your beliefs but, the idea that the Christian way is the only right way is what lead to the Inquistion, Witch burnings, and the Holy Crusdes."<<<

Politicians using christian beliefs to push their own agenda is what leads to that kind of behavior. Authentic hristians don't want kill except in defense of a weaker person whose life is threatend because we are ready for heaven and "bad guys" (for lack of a better title) aren't.

Wittystar,
>>>"Wasn't there a time that Jesus went and preached to other parts of the world? After he died, after the ressurection? I might be thinking of something I've heard in my church."<<<

I'm not seeing that in the Gospels or Acts, all I see is that he spent forty days with the apostles and then was taken up into heaven. There was a time before the resurrection when he sent the disiples out in pairs to preach and cast out demons, maybe that's what your thinking of?

>>>"It may not be in other churches, I'm not sure, but maybe Muhhamed and all those people WERE Jesus, just by a different name? That would explain why there are similar teachings and a little bit of truth in every religion."<<<

The only problem with that, in my mind, is that Jesus said he was God but Mohammed said Jesus was only a prophet and that he (Mohammed) was the greatest and last of the prophets. So I don't really see how they could be the same person.

But I do believe that the manger to the cross scene was not the only time God walked the earth. He had lunch with Abraham (Genesis 18) and he was with Shadrach Meshach and Abednego in the fiery furnace (Daniel 3).

Heather, (I love your name!)

>>>" I think that the reason that God/Goddess has allowed evil in the world is that we are supposed to overcome adversity and be the best we can be."<<<

Best according to who? Hitler thought he was doing the best for his country, the Jews didn't.

<<<"I was raised Catholic and hated the idea of everyone who wasn't Catholic going to Hell. I just never understood it because that would mean that I would never see my mother's side of the family, who were Lutheran."<<<

Did you reject that because you had evidence that was meaningful to you or because you didn't want it to be true?

Heather/pianolove

[Old-Barbarossa]

Anyone commenting on the Christian devil/Satan/Lucifer read the book of Job? Any comments?

[Ross]

Well a world without science...wouldn't really exist at all. However I'm guessing you meant more of "a world without scientific inquiry" which is possible, but somewhat less appealing as we'd still be living in trees or in caves if that were the case.

A humanity without religion would also be lacking something, because like it or not people have always had a tendency to speculate about things not known, so it'd be unusual if people didn't speculate about things they don't know about (even though people sometimes take such speculation a bit too seriously and start, shall we say, vehemently believing it, as seen in this thread).

That being said historical trends show that as civilization progresses and people start looking at scientific inquiry and not taking things for granted, religion has gotten less and less relevant in our society, and today in most of the first world countries, and in many of the most prosperous parts of the United States people live without religion just fine, and arguably better, than places where religious practices are widespread.

Thus I think we'd be much better off in a world that had scientific inquiry and not much religious practices (or a world where speculation is reserved for speculative fiction or mythology rather than having it declared as absolute unquestioning truth), because the alternative is far worse.

[Margaret]

How can one not believe there is no God? What would happen to this world if God had not created it to begin with? You for one would not be here, nor would any of us. Yes, you need both religion and science to go together, but you also need to have a great understands of what is taking place. Do you read the bible? If not try it sometimes. It will open your eyes to want is taking place in our world today.

[Northern]

(Barbarossa said: As the English speaking world is nominally Christian, why are the days of the week named after Germanic pagan gods? The months changed their names to the Roman ones we use now, but the days stayed...)

Probably the same reason Christmas, Mother's Day, Easter, and New year's are all rehashed Ancient Pagan Rites and festivals.

[Northern]

Thinker wrote: But has 'God' not instructed us to 'tend' and 'keep' his 'garden'? "

He also said that He "will bring to ruin those ruining the Earth." Revelation 11:18

[Heather]

Good point, Barbarossa.

Pianolove

[Old-Barbarossa]

Northern: regarding Easter check out the etymology of the word, spring festival named after a fertility goddess. In most other languages this festival is named after the passion of JC, yet in English it's still named after a horny old Anglosaxon deity.
Sorry...a bit off message there.
Saw a recent doc on BBC with Prof Brian Cox, one of the CERN chaps. Very interesting stuff, and well presented. http://www.apolloschildren.com/brian/)
Must get back to the cave...the flint won't knap itself you know...

[Northern]

Barbarossa wrote: "Northern: regarding Easter check out the etymology of the word, spring festival named after a fertility goddess. In most other languages this festival is named after the passion of JC, yet in Engli..."

I was more referring to the symbols and activities associated with Easter than the actual name, i.e. Bunnies and Eggs(Both fertility symbols.) That is interesting though, I didn't realize other languages had abandoned the "Easter" title.

That CERN interview looks really good, I'll bookmark it for later.

[Northern]

Heather wrote:The only problem with that, in my mind, is that Jesus said he was God but Mohammed said Jesus was only a prophet and that he (Mohammed) was the greatest and last of the prophets. So I don't really see how they could be the same person.

Technically, Jesus never said he was, or was even equal to God.
Philippians 2:6
John 20:17
Mark 10:18, among others.

[essex]

Apparently no one on here knows the definition of the word 'agnostic' so I will post the definition.

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

Agnostics do not believe anything, they are undecided.

So no "Kat" you are not an agnostic, not even fucking close.

[Will]

oops! Kevin may get reported.

Agnostics doubt there is a God. Athiests are certain there is no God. Both amaze me. I'm probably almost an agnostic, since I doubt that much of what is taught about God is correct. I don't accept the Bible as the absolute perfect, divinely inspired word of God. I doubt almost everything. I doubt that mankind ever got anything perfect, including the Bible. I doubt that God wrote the Ten Commandments. I doubt that Jesus' words were reported correctly. to me, all that is not important. I believe in the idea of loving one another and doing good to and for one another. I don't believe in Satan. I do believe there is evil. I believe that according to the laws of our physical existence, for all things, there is a void of that same thing--polar opposites, psotive and negative forces. Light vs. darkness; heat vs. cold, etc. I don't need to personify evil into Satan or God into personages to worship for me to work at being good, forgiving and loving. But I do believe that there is God in ALL things/beings. I don't doubt that.

[Heather]

>>>"Technically, Jesus never said he was, or was even equal to God.
Philippians 2:6
John 20:17
Mark 10:18, among others."<<<

Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

What is robbery? Robbery is, according to webster.com,
1 a (1): to take something away from by force : steal from (2): to take personal property from by violence or threat b (1): to remove valuables without right from (a place) (2): to take the contents of (a receptacle) c: to take away as loot : steal
2 a: to deprive of something due, expected, or desired b: to withhold unjustly or injuriously

So, if Jesus did not consider it robbery, it must have been his rightful position to be equal with God.

John 20:17 says "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to:] my God, and your God." Seems to me like God the Son is talking about God the Father.

Mark 10:18, "And Jesus said unto him, 'Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God." I think Jesus is actually emphasizing here that he is God. I think this because there are many passages dealing with Jesus' goodness. Such as,

"Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God." Mark 1:24

"But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 1 Peter 1:19

Here is where John says Jesus is God, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:1-3. Compare that with Genesis 1:1

And here is where Jesus speaks for himself, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake." John 14:6-11

pianolove

[Heather]

>>>"Pianolove, I didn't know that about Mohammed. I don't even know when he lived. If it was after the resurrection, he may have been right at least about the 'last' part. Are you sure Mohammed said Jesus was ONLY a prophet, or did he just say Jesus was a prophet(which is true, along with all the other things He is)?"<<<

Wittystar,

Yes, Mohammed came after Jesus.

Here is an Islamic site talking about Jesus.
http://islambyquestions.net/Prophets/...

That's just about all I know about that detail, never having actually read the Quran.

Pianolove

[Heather]

Wittystar, I am finally back and can answer your question. It is no problem that you like to ask question; it is inquisitiveness that keeps my faith in the human race going.It really is open to interpretation; however, I can say that if you rape someone you are not guaranteed to get raped yourself. You would just have considerably more pain than you would had you not done it. Suffering is not always induced by karma, but rather the lack of fixing what is causing the suffering is the problem. In many cases of good people having bad things happen to them is caused by something that happened to them in another lifetime. Say someone is assaulted in another life, and that person doesn't fix it, either by healing themselves emotionally and spiritually or by forgiveness for what happened. Said person could wind up with a similar event occurring through the next few lifetimes until it is finally healed and released.
Pianolove, what I meant was that when I was going to cadechism as a young girl, the instructors would tell us that the only way to get into heaven was to become a Catholic. The very idea appalled me even at ten years old because that meant that half my family would be burning in Hell no matter what good they did in the world. To me, it doesn't matter what religion you have or what you worship that gets you into heaven, but rather the way you lived your life.

[Will]

Yes, for there to be good, (unfortuneately) there must be evil. I don't give evil any power, as darkness or cold have no power; they are the absence of power. You can freeze to death for lack of heat, so it can be damaging, but it is the absence of love and goodness that damages where goodness does not prevail.

I don't believe we burn in Hell. I believe the seperation from goodness is Hell. I believe the connection to goodness is Heaven.

The question: God exists "IN" all things? I should have written. God "IS" all things, but that provokes a different discussion. The power that runs and directs all things in our universe come from God's power and it is there for all of us to use and enjoy, or choose not to receive the benefit. We often choose to not connect to the goodness.

[Heather]

That's very interesting that you say that God is all things. In my spiritual group, we sometimes close seminars by telling each other "the god in me salutes the god in you" followed by a hug as a method of reiterating the idea of being prototypes of ourselves instead of nitpicking at our imperfections.

[Heather]

>>>[Philipians 2:6] "This could also mean that it is alright to become equal to God (We ARE commanded to become perfect like They are perfect, can't remember the scripture, but if so, then we are commanded to become like Them, too). We are all created in God's image, so it CAN be taken this way."<<<

Wittystar, you refer to God as "they". Where does the bible do that?

Yes, we are commanded to be perfect, but have you ever heard of a perfect human besides Jesus? Since Adam we've all been under the curse.

O.K. I'm going to look at the whole passage, and not just a single verse. Pilipians 2:5-10 says, Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. There are a few things I notice here. 1. Jesus was already in the form of God. He wasn't aspiring to be like God, he was. 2. Such a position was not robbery. 3. He humbled himself to become a man. That means he was originally in a higher position than man is, and in order to become man he left it. 4a. Someday every knee will bow to him and every tongue will proclaim him Lord. 4b. God the Father is pleased with that even though he has said over and over again that no only God is to be worshiped. See these, (Exodus 20:3; 23:24,32,and 33; 34:14) (Deutoromony 5:6-10) (2 Samuel 7:22) (2 Chronicles 7:19-22) (Psalms 97:9) In Revelation 19:10 John begins to worship an angel and is rebuked, "And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it:] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

Read these verses and let me know what you think.
Isaiah 9:6
Jeremiah 23:5,6
John 1:1-18
John 10:33

Let me know what you think about Exodus 3:14 "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. and "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.", John 8:58

>>>"I still wonder if there wasn't something confused. Like Will said, nothing man-made is perfect. Maybe names got confused at certain times. Maybe Muhammed was simply another prophet, or something. Maybe he wasn't. I don't know."<<<

Or what about Matthew 24:4, and 5? "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Pianolove

[Heather]

>>>"I doubt almost everything. I doubt that mankind ever got anything perfect, including the Bible."<<<

I doubt mankind ever got anything perfect either. At least, not on its own. But if the God who created this incredibly intricate universe wanted to give us a message, it couldn't be too hard for him to give it accurately and preserve it through history--could it?

>>>"Pianolove, what I meant was that when I was going to cadechism as a young girl, the instructors would tell us that the only way to get into heaven was to become a Catholic. The very idea appalled me even at ten years old because that meant that half my family would be burning in Hell no matter what good they did in the world. To me, it doesn't matter what religion you have or what you worship that gets you into heaven, but rather the way you lived your life."<<<

Well, I certainly don't think all non-catholics will burn in Hell. I'm protestant!

But, I do want to know what brought you to reject that besides the fact that you didn't like it. I can say I don't like a spherical earth all day long, I can truely believe with all my heart the earth is flat, but my faith doesn't change the shape of the earth.

>>>" God "IS" all things"<<<

I guess God according to you is limited. I believe God is greater than all matter, infinite in fact.

>>>" That's very interesting that you say that God is all things. In my spiritual group, we sometimes close seminars by telling each other "the god in me salutes the god in you" followed by a hug as a method of reiterating the idea of being prototypes of ourselves instead of nitpicking at our imperfections."<<<

Is the same God in each of you, or are you each your own God?

Pianolove

[Dave]

Both can exist coherently

[Will]

Dave: That both can exist is obvious, but the coherence, or lack of coherence, often mystifies me.

Heather: I love the Bible. I love reading the Bible. I love the stories, the lessons, the imperfections of the players, especially
King David, but it often contradicts itself. A perfect work would be much more coherent. (see, David?)

I can just imagine my editor scribbling red marks all over the Bible with notes like: "not credible", "contradicts earlier passage", "needs to be rethought", etc.

I don't want to change the Bible, don't misunderstand. I think it's a great book. I think it's a great mystery that speaks to many people in many different ways. I still don't think it is perfect, and if it were, it's still open to many interpretations and those interpretations would be imperfect.

Despite humanities' contribution, I will say that I accept that the universe is perfect, in some coherence that escapes me.

[Seth]

Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Religion is a method for defining truth and understanding spirituality. Science seeks to explain the natural world. It does not seek to prove or disprove the existence of God or the supernatural.