Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 176

Thread: Lord and Saviour ?

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    all religion* teaches that we should have faith in something unprovable. this is evil, .
    Unproveable by whom? I can't personally prove that what I learned about molecular science is true. Do I have to be able to prove it directly or can I take someone elses word for it?

    I have faith in the overall goodness of mankind. I can't prove it. Does this make that faith evil?
    "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. Its not" - Dr Suess

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    And you accused me of circular logic? No doubt. If someone wants to use a gun to kill someone a gun is required as well.
    im sorry, can you think of a naturalistic reason to kill and persecute intellectuals and women? it typically takes religion to do that.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    im sorry, can you think of a naturalistic reason to kill and persecute intellectuals and women? it typically takes religion to do that.
    Oh. So its not been done outside of religion? I didn't realize the Soviet persecutions were religiously based

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    Oh. So its not been done outside of religion? I didn't realize the Soviet persecutions were religiously based
    the soviets didn't persecute women and intellectuals for being women and intellectuals, they punished ANYONE who dared defy there politics. kinda a big difference. also, still not a justified reason to persecute anyone, so not a naturalistic reason to persecute women and intellectuals.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    the soviets didn't persecute women and intellectuals for being women and intellectuals, they punished ANYONE who dared defy there politics. kinda a big difference. also, still not a justified reason to persecute anyone, so not a naturalistic reason to persecute women and intellectuals.
    So persecution is evil - I can agree with this one.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    So persecution is evil - I can agree with this one.
    and you didn't need religion to come to that conclusion. and yet, persecution in this country, in every form has come from religion. as has persecution of the jews, muslims, women, intellectuals, Catholics .....

    yet another case of we can make the moral decision on our own, without religion, and the best way to subvert that moral conclusion is with religion .... so why even bother with religion at all? why not skip a step?

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    and you didn't need religion to come to that conclusion. and yet, persecution in this country, in every form has come from religion.
    So persecution in this country has not occured outside of religion? Religion was used to justify slavery (I never denied it was a tool) and it was used by others to fight it (two sided). However slavery was an economic decision not one based on religion No. It did not come from religion.

    Is my statement that persecution is wrong lessened if I use a biblical quote to strengthen it? What if I use a quote of John Stewart Mill?

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    637
    Countries that enforced atheism or tightly regulate any form of religion:

    North Korea
    China during the "Cultural Revolution," rules relaxed in the 70's-80's.
    Cambodia
    Vietnam
    USSR
    Cuba (probably the most religiously tolerant of all the countries on the list)
    Czechoslovakia

    Over a 70 year period, these shining examples of non-religious states don't seem like a big step up from any state with widespread religion and the sciences certainly weren't advanced any faster.

    Atrocities, war, genocide, mass roundups, brain washing etc all still occurred and were tolerated by their onlooking citizenry.

    Lesson: The problem is with the human condition, not religion (generally speaking).
    Last edited by dahoeb; 12-05-2012 at 10:39 PM.
    HARDY HAR HAR!

    And we're just gonna put a happy little bush in the corner right there, and it'll be our little secret. AND IF YOU TELL ANYONE! THAT, THAT BUSH IS THERE! I WILL COME TO YOUR HOUSE! AND I WILL CUT YOU!

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Beaumont,Tx.
    Posts
    1,007

    cockerpunk...simple questions ?

    Do you believe in : (yes or no )

    God ?
    Jesus ?
    Heaven ?
    Angels ?
    Miracles ?
    Devine intervention ?

    The Devil ?
    The Antichrist ?
    Demons ?
    Hell ?

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by dahoeb
    Countries that enforced atheism or tightly regulate any form of religion:

    North Korea
    China during the "Cultural Revolution," rules relaxed in the 70's-80's.
    Cambodia
    Vietnam
    USSR
    Cuba (probably the most religiously tolerant of all the countries on the list)
    Czechoslovakia

    Over a 70 year period, these shining examples of non-religious states don't seem like a big step up from any state with widespread religion and the sciences certainly weren't advanced any faster.

    Atrocities, war, genocide, mass roundups, brain washing etc all still occurred and were tolerated by their onlooking citizenry.

    Lesson: The problem is with the human condition, not religion (generally speaking).
    mandating any religion is the problem. you cannot mandate atheism any more then you can mandate religion, because you cannot regulate what people think and believe. these are not examples of what an atheist state would look like, they are examples of totalitarian dictatorships look like. you can tell because religious totalitarian dictatorships are the exact same way.

    in fact, most of them on that list do have a religion - state or leader worship.

    no where have i advocated or supported the idea of religious controls, or mandated atheism. in fact, the exactly opposite, a faith in humanity, that we can trust ourselves to make good decisions, and have the freedom to make those decisions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flatliner333
    Do you believe in : (yes or no )

    God ?
    Jesus ?
    Heaven ?
    Angels ?
    Miracles ?
    Devine intervention ?

    The Devil ?
    The Antichrist ?
    Demons ?
    Hell ?
    none of the above.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 12-06-2012 at 10:27 AM.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    So persecution in this country has not occured outside of religion? Religion was used to justify slavery (I never denied it was a tool) and it was used by others to fight it (two sided). However slavery was an economic decision not one based on religion No. It did not come from religion.

    Is my statement that persecution is wrong lessened if I use a biblical quote to strengthen it? What if I use a quote of John Stewart Mill?
    since i do not recognize authority as the basis of an argument, it is the logic, not the source that is important.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    since i do not recognize authority as the basis of an argument, it is the logic, not the source that is important.
    So if I use an argument based on atheism to hunt down and kill the Jesuits (or others who practice religion as was done in China) by your argument atheism would be evil?

    I have arrived at a beleif in religion through the use of logic and reason - as did Channing in the late 1800s. I do not see it as evil.

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Don' ask questions. It is considered "trolling" in some locations.
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    none of the above.
    I too am an engineer, and I feel that is the reason for most of your beliefs (I am man enough to admit that engineers are defiantly an "off breed"). You don't have to change your stance today. I don't expect you to. All I would suggest is that you keep an open mind about everything. One day you will have a child, and one day you will more than likely change your stance after experiencing a miracle, or some other unexplainable action.

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by MANN
    I too am an engineer, and I feel that is the reason for most of your beliefs (I am man enough to admit that engineers are defiantly an "off breed"). You don't have to change your stance today. I don't expect you to. All I would suggest is that you keep an open mind about everything. One day you will have a child, and one day you will more than likely change your stance after experiencing a miracle, or some other unexplainable action.
    i do have an open mind. and i would say i am an engineer because of my baser beliefs, those we are discussing here, not the other way around. a strict adherence to logic, data, and empiricism as a foundation to solve humanities problems. making up **** and believing in things for which you have no good reason to, doesn't help humanity solve its problems, and certainly does not help in engineering. that is the very definition of a poor engineer.

    subjective experience is not proof of anything, as an engineer you should know that best of all.

    why would having a child change my opinion? it won't but im curious why you'd think that.

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    So if I use an argument based on atheism to hunt down and kill the Jesuits (or others who practice religion as was done in China) by your argument atheism would be evil?

    I have arrived at a beleif in religion through the use of logic and reason - as did Channing in the late 1800s. I do not see it as evil.
    atheism is merely the belief that there is no god, there is no other dogma, ritual, or agreed upon way to live, like there is with religion. how does one get from there is no god, to hunting people down and killing them?

    those middle steps ... those would be the real problem, not the disbelief in a deity. whereas religion is not just the belief in a god, it comes with a whole list of dos, don't and who to kills.

  16. #106
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Don' ask questions. It is considered "trolling" in some locations.
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    a strict adherence to logic, data, and empiricism as a foundation to solve humanities problems. making up **** and believing in things for which you have no good reason to, doesn't help humanity solve its problems, and certainly does not help in engineering. that is the very definition of a poor engineer.
    You are 110% right about all of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    subjective experience is not proof of anything, as an engineer you should know that best of all.
    I couldn't agree more. I dare to say that I can explain any unnatural occurrence/miracle/etc with physics, logic, and math.

    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    why would having a child change my opinion? it won't but im curious why you'd think that.
    It changes your prospective on some aspects of "life". I can't explain it. I have been fortunate enough to stand on the edge of the grand canyon. I cant explain how beautiful it is either. It is just something you have to experience to understand. I know that's a piss poor explanation, but it is what it is.

    "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."

  17. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by MANN
    You are 110% right about all of that.



    I couldn't agree more. I dare to say that I can explain any unnatural occurrence/miracle/etc with physics, logic, and math.

    yet you claim i should experience a miracle and become convinced?

    It changes your prospective on some aspects of "life". I can't explain it. I have been fortunate enough to stand on the edge of the grand canyon. I cant explain how beautiful it is either. It is just something you have to experience to understand.

    this happens when i stare up into the night sky. but it isn't a spiritual moment, its a moment when you realize what is out there, not what you wish was out there. you are looking up, into the vastness of the universe, something 14.5 billion years old. that light you are seeing? the light from another sun, hundred of millions of miles away. in your minds eye you can see and feel the microwave background radiation, you can see Andromeda as it approaches the milky way on its collision course. its a moment when you feel as human as you can, and in that moment, all you can do is try to remember to breath. and then you remember that the atoms in your body, were forged in these stars, what your seeing is lighter elements being forged into heavier elements, and you are observing this, millions of miles away. and those atoms they are forging will be spewed into the universe when the star dies, and from that ... you were born.

    but thats not god, or religion, that is knowledge of the universe. calling it a religious experience is to cheapen it. its a reality experience, when the universe hits you so hard you can only stop and stare.


    "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."
    there are plenty of ways god could prove himself to me. i can list half a dozen if you really want.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    atheism is merely the belief that there is no god, there is no other dogma, ritual, or agreed upon way to live, like there is with religion. how does one get from there is no god, to hunting people down and killing them?

    those middle steps ... those would be the real problem, not the disbelief in a deity. whereas religion is not just the belief in a god, it comes with a whole list of dos, don't and who to kills.
    The middle steps from atheism (or religion) to hunting down and killing people are the problems.

    It is not atheism or religion. Its those pesky middle steps. Christiantiy, in its current practice in the western world, does not come with that list of people to "kills". Your argument is all religion - current Christianity as practiced in the western world falls into that category right?

  19. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    The middle steps from atheism (or religion) to hunting down and killing people are the problems.

    It is not atheism or religion. Its those pesky middle steps. Christiantiy, in its current practice in the western world, does not come with that list of people to "kills". Your argument is all religion - current Christianity as practiced in the western world falls into that category right?
    you don't get it. if religion was merely the belief in a god, then, as much as i disagree with it, it wouldn't be that bad of a deal. the problem is that BY NECESSITY, the belief in a god, comes with everything else. Christianity does very much have a list of kills, look at Africa, Christianity is single handedly ****ing an entire continent of people, and why? so the pope can claim, he is keeping there spirits clean. because there spirits being clean, is more important then them being alive. and why? because the pope says he is protecting life.

    meanwhile, the simple disbelief in a god, does not come with any dogma.

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    you don't get it. if religion was merely the belief in a god, then, as much as i disagree with it, it wouldn't be that bad of a deal. the problem is that BY NECESSITY, the belief in a god, comes with everything else. Christianity does very much have a list of kills, look at Africa, Christianity is single handedly ****ing an entire continent of people, and why? so the pope can claim, he is keeping there spirits clean. because there spirits being clean, is more important then them being alive. and why? because the pope says he is protecting life.

    meanwhile, the simple disbelief in a god, does not come with any dogma.
    Except I can't believe in God and I must accept that religion is "evil".

    No. The beleif in God does not necessarily come with everything else. You cannot for a moment begin to tell me what my belief in God, derived through reason and logic, comes with. You may not tell others who have reached a beleif in God that their beleif is invalid and must be evil.

  21. #111
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Beaumont,Tx.
    Posts
    1,007
    I was commenting just the other day on the story about the NYPD cop who gave the boots to the homeless guy. People were posting saying the homeless guy sold the boots and that the cop was a fool. My point was that it doesnt matter what the guy did with the boots because the cop did a nice thing for him and God saw that. I was reminded of something that had happened to me.

    A while back I was about to fill my truck up with gas and a man on the other side of the pump asked if I could give him some money. He needed just enough gas to get home and could I help him. Instead of giving him money I put the nozzle in his truck and started pumping him some gas. After $5.00 worth he said thank you but I kept on pumping until it got to $30.00. My truck was below empty and I hadn't pumped myself any yet so I started pumping my gas at $30.00. Now ...my truck has a 22 gallon tank and at the time it took $70.00 to fill it up. I stopped pumping at $70.00 like I normaly do because that is all I could afford. Sooo if I only pumped $40.00 in my truck and it takes $70.00 to fill it up why did my fuel guage show a full tank when I started it up...and no it wasnt broke. Matthew 25:40

    Ive got another one for who ever may be interested. Several years back when I was in my twenties my mother was very upset because she had lost a necklace that my father had given her. I was big into church at the time (she was not) so selfishly I said "why dont you pray about it, maybe it will turn up". Two weeks later she called me crying to tell me she had found it. Where did she find it you ask? At the back of her yard with a small fig tree growing up through it...how did that happen?

    I only post in this thread because of Matthew 10:33 "but whoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

  22. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    One of the problems with this quest that CP is on to deem all religion evil is summed up by asking a question:

    Why is it wrong to kill another man?

    You may not cite religion. Further you may not cite any philosophical theory - the reason being is if that religion is "evil" for its lists of do's and don'ts and claim of "natural authority" so are those. That is to say if we cite Mill's work woth the harm thereom and principle of autonomy we are giving those principles authority over our actions.

    Edit: When you denounce religion as inherently evil because it provides answers to such questions how do you avoid the replacement receiving the same label? Because you like the replacement better? Seems rather egotistical to me
    Last edited by Lohman446; 12-06-2012 at 01:45 PM.

  23. #113
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    Except I can't believe in God and I must accept that religion is "evil".

    No. The beleif in God does not necessarily come with everything else. You cannot for a moment begin to tell me what my belief in God, derived through reason and logic, comes with. You may not tell others who have reached a beleif in God that their beleif is invalid and must be evil.
    please show me a religion that only believes in god. nothing else at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flatliner333
    I only post in this thread because of Matthew 10:33 "but whoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
    And you worship this guy? and look to him for moral guidance? sounds more like a dick to me then a deity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    One of the problems with this quest that CP is on to deem all religion evil is summed up by asking a question:

    Why is it wrong to kill another man?

    You may not cite religion. Further you may not cite any philosophical theory - the reason being is if that religion is "evil" for its lists of do's and don'ts and claim of "natural authority" so are those. That is to say if we cite Mill's work woth the harm thereom and principle of autonomy we are giving those principles authority over our actions.
    pretty easy. and you again misunderstand my authority point. i can reference whomever i want, as long as its there reasoning i am referencing, not saying "because mills said this, you have to believe it"

    but no matter, here are some naturalistic reasons to not murder:

    1. life is rare. intelligent life is very rare indeed. destroying life without the express purpose of preserving life is wrong
    2. i don't want to be killed, so why would i kill?
    3. the idea of killing nauseates me. probably because killing unjustly does not serve an evolutionary purpose to the survival of the species
    4. a life is potential, a great potential. a great ability to make the world around us better. and the only justification to end that potential, is to not kill unless the person being killed would have caused greater harm

    there are more if you need them. and not only have i naturalistically come to the conclusion that murder is wrong, i have also delineated when killing is justified.




    so are you going to tell me the only reason you don't go on a killing spree is god? i would hope that isn't the case.

  24. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    pretty easy. and you again misunderstand my authority point. i can reference whomever i want, as long as its there reasoning i am referencing, not saying "because mills said this, you have to believe it"

    but no matter, here are some naturalistic reasons to not murder:

    1. life is rare. intelligent life is very rare indeed. destroying life without the express purpose of preserving life is wrong
    2. i don't want to be killed, so why would i kill?
    3. the idea of killing nauseates me. probably because killing unjustly does not serve an evolutionary purpose to the survival of the species
    4. a life is potential, a great potential. a great ability to make the world around us better. and the only justification to end that potential, is to not kill unless

    there are more if you need them. and not only have i naturalistically come to the conclusion that murder is wrong, i have also delineated when killing is justified.




    so are you going to tell me the only reason you don't go on a killing spree is god? i would hope that isn't the case.
    If it is human reasoning then that gives you the conclusion of what is right and wrong what keeps the evil label from being applied to it? We surely are not going to argue that human reasoning is infallible are we?

    I'm not arguing that all religion is right. Nor would I argue that those lists of do's and don'ts are right. However there is a major difference in being inaccurate and being evil.

  25. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    If it is human reasoning then that gives you the conclusion of what is right and wrong what keeps the evil label from being applied to it? We surely are not going to argue that human reasoning is infallible are we?

    I'm not arguing that all religion is right. Nor would I argue that those lists of do's and don'ts are right. However there is a major difference in being inaccurate and being evil.
    i didn't claim human reasoning is infallible. but i believe that given accurate information, human reasoning is the best we have.

    and what a bunch of bronze age men though was right and wrong might have been the best they could come up with then, but we can do better. a lot better. and to repress this ability to reason, by adhering to bronze age morals? ridiculous.

    so again, i'd like to ask, is the only reason you don't kill people god?

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    i didn't claim human reasoning is infallible. but i believe that given accurate information, human reasoning is the best we have.

    and what a bunch of bronze age men though was right and wrong might have been the best they could come up with then, but we can do better. a lot better. and to repress this ability to reason, by adhering to bronze age morals? ridiculous.

    so again, i'd like to ask, is the only reason you don't kill people god?
    No. I don't kill people because I have an inherent belief doing so is wrong. I can attempt to explain that beleif and point to various philosophical theories or religions but in the end there is part of my being that accepts it as wrong. Oddly enough emprical testing designed to find this and label it as something more the neurological impulses have failed.

    Empircal testing designed to prove the existence of a soul has largely failed (those that have yelled "Eureka" in the past had methological errors). Those that have attempted to prove the negative have found the same problem that proving a negative brings to the table every time - it is nearly impossible.

    Religion does not deny the right of conscious and reason to man. The institutions that attempt to stay in power may attempt to do so but that is not the fault of religion that is the fault of those who would use it for power - those pesky middle steps again.

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohman446
    No. I don't kill people because I have an inherent belief doing so is wrong. I can attempt to explain that beleif and point to various philosophical theories or religions but in the end there is part of my being that accepts it as wrong. Oddly enough emprical testing designed to find this and label it as something more the neurological impulses have failed.

    Empircal testing designed to prove the existence of a soul has largely failed (those that have yelled "Eureka" in the past had methological errors). Those that have attempted to prove the negative have found the same problem that proving a negative brings to the table every time - it is nearly impossible.

    Religion does not deny the right of conscious and reason to man. The institutions that attempt to stay in power may attempt to do so but that is not the fault of religion that is the fault of those who would use it for power - those pesky middle steps again.
    and yet it does deny reason to man. religion is by its very definition irrational, as in, not rational.

  28. #118
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk

    in fact, most of them on that list do have a religion - state or leader worship. Exactly, I was going to lead into that until you rudely beat me to it.......

    no where have i advocated or supported the idea of religious controls, or mandated atheism. in fact, the exactly opposite, a faith in humanity, that we can trust ourselves to make good decisions, and have the freedom to make those decisions. Yeup, no major disagreements.
    Everyone has a God and religion, whether it be a deity, the government or science. Everyone has something that is looked at to outline why things are the way they are and how they should be.

    Arguing with an atheist is not much different than a Christian arguing with a Muslim, two people arguing about which belief system is better or more right. Christians and some other major religions believe that science can be the tool of God, while atheists seem more apt to replace God with science.

    I think it's ironic how the more aggressive atheists sound no different (in tone) than equally aggressive (insert major religion here) when advocating their "religion".

    Just some musings.....

  29. #119
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    and yet it does deny reason to man. religion is by its very definition irrational, as in, not rational.
    So scientists who also may be religious aren't reasonable?

    There's countless instances where perfectly well reasoned people who were worked in the sciences also happened to be religious.

    I don't know where this "mutually exclusive attitude" comes from, though I'm sure you've tried to explain it over the past 329 pages of this thread...

    As far as the rationality of it religion, that's an opinion. Just because you can't prove it, doesn't mean it's disproven.

    I recently read an interesting article about a group of scientists trying to conduct experiments to see if we live in a simulated universe, the Matrix style. They were able to find evidence that we don't, but admitted that it's impossible disprove because the simulation may be too perfect. We just need a little faith that we don't live in a giant computer I guess. I think this has a lot of parallels to the arguments between atheists and religion today.
    Last edited by dahoeb; 12-06-2012 at 02:33 PM. Reason: Just a lil to supplement

  30. #120
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by dahoeb
    Everyone has a God and religion, whether it be a deity, the government or science. Everyone has something that is looked at to outline why things are the way they are and how they should be.

    Arguing with an atheist is not much different than a Christian arguing with a Muslim, two people arguing about which belief system is better or more right. Christians and some other major religions believe that science can be the tool of God, while atheists seem more apt to replace God with science.

    I think it's ironic how the more aggressive atheists sound no different (in tone) than equally aggressive (insert major religion here) when advocating their "religion".

    Just some musings.....
    everyone has a philosophy, yes, but a religion? no. religion is a matter of faith, there are many philosophies that do not include, or outright object to faith.

    Quote Originally Posted by dahoeb
    So scientists who also may be religious aren't reasonable?

    There's countless instances where perfectly well reasoned people who were worked in the sciences also happened to be religious.

    I don't know where this "mutually exclusive attitude" comes from, though I'm sure you've tried to explain it over the past 329 pages of this thread...
    yeah, there are. and yes, on the topic of religion they are just as unreasonable as anyone else who believes things without reason.

    yes, living a life where you accept reason and evidence to form your worldview, and living a life believing things which you can have no reason to believe, yes, those are mutually exclusive.

    but, people are hypocrites, it happens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •