264 replies to this topic

[sockopen]

Huge gravedig but still an interesting topic regardless;

I believe in sciences, I think religion was developed as a way of explaining the 'unexplainable'. The further back you go, the more ridiculous religion gets, and of course, the further technology and sciences continue to progress, we will reveal the ridiculousness of modern religions, as we have in the past.

[Raui]

Please avoid grave digging although I know how sometimes things just happen and you do.

I belive in science for the record.

[elryo]

C.

there just two different views of looking at our own existance.

[Cataliste]

Science ftw. Faith is for people who can't handle what happens in life.

[Sweeney]

If a tree falls in the forest, but no one hear it, didn't it still fall?

Lolz.
Try this one instead, muppet:
If a tree falls in the forest, and noone is around to hear it, did it still make a sound?

[fruglemonkey]

Faith was a concept cobbled up by a few romans to cobble up the cracks in christianity.

"You don't understand how jesus could've ressurected himself? Go and pray! You obviously don't have enough faith."

[otherworld]

I jsut dont get how religion can be preferred over science.

Science is factual with evidence to support it.

Religion isn't, there is no proof of any of it happening.

[Cataliste]

Mmm well I'm definitely a supporter of science over religion but I believe religion has a place. My beliefs about 'God' are:
There is some form of God, but 'he' has no control nor power on Earth or the universe. The reason I believe in a god is simply because of science ironically. Energy law says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed only converted, so what the bloody hell *started* energy if it can't be created. What started the Big bang? Some higher form in my opinion had to exist before anything else existed. However I believe a god simply... started the ball rolling if that makes sense. From there our universe has evolved and developed completely separately from any higher intervention.
Like I've always assumed, people still use religion to explain the gaps in knowledge that is either impossible or impossible with technology we have now to know (questions like what existed before the universe existed).

To believe that God controls many or all events on Earth is far to disgusting for me to imagine because of the sheer amount of unnecessary suffering that goes on. I understand feeling pain because it warns and tells us something is hurting us. I understand grief as well because that is necessary for a person to move on with their own life. But there is so many horrible things that 'God' does nothing to stop happening that I simply REFUSE to believe in someone who allows that unnecessary suffering to go on so continually.

RE: Suffering.

Most individuals of the Christian pesuation like to write this off as "testing" someone. Something God does, apparently for kicks. So, if there IS even a God, I refuse to submit and praise worship to such a evil entity.

[Jewbert]

That's an interesting view. I can't remember the exact term that it was called, but it's a very common one.

Do you mean agnostic??

[fruglemonkey]

Alias, may I ask you a question?

Is there any proof or evidence that proves the christian god?

[LastI]

I believe in a combination of Religion and Science, Science being the less prominent meaning to me.

I'm a Christian, I believe that we were here for a purpose, and theres no theory for "evolution" thats ever going to change my mind, I however believe that the Earth HAS evolved since God created it, continents shifting, etc, but I refuse to believe that Science is ever going to have a real answer to where we came from, how we came to be, etc. But I believe that God gives scientists the power to understand and comprehend how His creation acts, and the knowledge is taught to us through school. God gave them the minds and the genius to solve the most difficult parts of his creation, but I'll never believe them in any part of anything to do with evolution, or such.

[Sweeney]

I believe in a combination of Religion and Science, Science being the less prominent meaning to me.

I'm a Christian, I believe that we were here for a purpose, and theres no theory for "evolution" thats ever going to change my mind, I however believe that the Earth HAS evolved since God created it, continents shifting, etc, but I refuse to believe that Science is ever going to have a real answer to where we came from, how we came to be, etc. But I believe that God gives scientists the power to understand and comprehend how His creation acts, and the knowledge is taught to us through school. God gave them the minds and the genius to solve the most difficult parts of his creation, but I'll never believe them in any part of anything to do with evolution, or such.

Ok, now you really are spouting bollocks.

You believe that the scienists are given the genius to understand the most difficult parts of God's acts, yet you don't believe the answers they produce?
Surely that's some sort of blasphemy, some form of denying the word of God?

[fruglemonkey]

>.> Still no reply from Alias about evidence of god...

Anyway, how do we know that WE were the only people created by god? How do we know he hasn't made another race on a far off planet? How do religious people know that their beliefs are correct? How do you, the religious people, know that what your worshipping and praying is actually what god wantS?

[h20polo2080]

science science science!!! science offers tangible proof of the existance of things. religion merely offers common beliefs taht many people invest in.

[LastI]

Ok, now you really are spouting bollocks.

You believe that the scienists are given the genius to understand the most difficult parts of God's acts, yet you don't believe the answers they produce?
Surely that's some sort of blasphemy, some form of denying the word of God?

No, not at all. I'm not going to turn this into a religious war. But what I said was God gave people the minds that they have to interpret some of the most difficult things, but evolution is really mans way of trying to solve what they cant explain without religion.

And no its not blasphemy to say that God gave them the ability to do what they do.

[fruglemonkey]

We'll I definently can't list it all here, as there's way too much to do so. But I will edit this post later and add some stuff.

...

The soul... I'd say that our concience and our soul are the same...

[Sweeney]

No, not at all. I'm not going to turn this into a religious war. But what I said was God gave people the minds that they have to interpret some of the most difficult things, but evolution is really mans way of trying to solve what they cant explain without religion.

And no its not blasphemy to say that God gave them the ability to do what they do.

That's because religion is an entirely unsatisfactory explanation for anything.

You sound like you'd be happier for people to die of asthma than recieve medicine, simply because virology and bacteriology are man's way of explaining the ague.
Better to let them die because God has clearly determined them for death, and to save them would be to go against His will.

[3ntropy]

That's not true. It has a better explanation for how the world started than current science offers. Actually we're walking on complete subjectivity right now, but oh well

That's true. If anyone seriously relies on Carbon Dating as evidence that the world is millions of years old then they're fooling themselves. When Mt. Saint Helens erupted scientists did carbon dating on some of the remains and it said the newly formed rock structures dating to millions of years.

Also, Carbon Dating relies on the ASSUMPTION that the carbon in the air has NEVER changed over these MILLIONS of years. The same people that believe this are saying that Global Warming is harming our atmosphere and chaning all the chemicals, including carbon, if I'm not mistaken

[Sweeney]

Noone does rely on Carbon Dating to determine the age of the Earth

[3ntropy]

Noone does rely on Carbon Dating to determine the age of the Earth

Alot of scientists do. That and geological columns, which are faulty as well, the Mt. Saint Helens incident created what looked like millions of years of stratus layers in a matter of minutes.

Edited by 3ntropy, 20 June 2007 - 09:44 AM.

[Sweeney]

Alot of scientists do. That and geological columns, which are faulty as well, the Mt. Saint Helens incident created what looked like millions of years of stratus layers in a matter of minutes.

I think you'll find you're actually mistaken
But there we are.

[3ntropy]

I think you'll find you're actually mistaken
But there we are.

If you could point out what I'm mistaken about...that would help.

[Sweeney]

*sigh*
Well, if people actually made an effort, and didn't base all their ideas on pop-science and propagandist literature designed to defame the theories, perhaps I wouldn't have to.

The age of the Earth is based on radiometric dating of meteorite samples. Absolutely no carbon involved whatsoever. Zirconium, Aluminium and Calcium are the commonest.

As for interpretation of geologic features, I believe the last notable scientist to do that was Theophrastus.

[Pedro Ramone]

C...

That's why... erm... I don't know. xD

[Ives]

Science and spirituality. Science when you look at stuff in the bigger picture, spirituality if you are an individual. Religion is trying to organize individual beliefs. Everyone will view a 1000 page book differently. If you want to go to church, fine, but if you want to have a real relationship with your god of choice be more of an individual.